X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now
Ripoff Report | George W. Review - Washington D.C., Nationwide
Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #154773

Complaint Review: George W. Bush - Washington D.C. Nationwide

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Tupper Lake New York
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • George W. Bush Washington Avenue Nationwide U.S.A.

George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington District of Columbia

*Consumer Comment: 'OIL'RAQ...

*Consumer Comment: Kentucky voted for mccain

*Consumer Comment: Kentucky voted for mccain

*Consumer Comment: Kentucky voted for mccain

*Consumer Comment: Kentucky voted for mccain

*Consumer Comment: Get over it

*Consumer Comment: I see no mature adults on this site

*Consumer Comment: Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

*Consumer Comment: Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

*Consumer Comment: Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

*Consumer Comment: Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

*Consumer Comment: Bush promised the samething

*Consumer Comment: All presidents go back on there promises

*Consumer Comment: For Misty...

*Consumer Comment: WALL STREET WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HIKE IN GAS PRICES -

*Consumer Comment: ~ Stop Hating on Obama ~

*Consumer Comment: Thanx God for President Bus who kept us safe for over 7 years.... and now for Clinton and Obama

*Consumer Comment: Praise Bush!!!

*Consumer Comment: For the benefit of truth!

*Consumer Comment: OMG!! I Cannot Believe How Many Fooled Morons Exist!!

*Consumer Comment: I PITY YOU !

*Consumer Comment: I PITY YOU !

*Consumer Comment: I PITY YOU !

*Consumer Comment: he is gone now but the damage was done

*Consumer Comment: Bush Is gone

*Consumer Comment: Charles is gone?

*Consumer Comment: Gone, but not forgotten!

*Consumer Comment: The republicans had control for 6 years

*Consumer Comment: sheesh - a bunch of nuts here.

*Consumer Comment: Bush caused the recession

*Consumer Comment: Bush intervention depresses gasoline and oil prices

*Consumer Comment: no more bush family

*Consumer Comment: Be specific Charlie

*Consumer Comment: Bush betrayed us the american citizens

*Consumer Comment: What happened to "Change"?

*Consumer Comment: I am not ashamed

*Consumer Comment: Bush Is scum

*Consumer Comment: Our PRESIDENT !

*Consumer Suggestion: Misinformation and Ignorance Abounds

*Consumer Comment: Bush was born with a silver spoon in his a*s

*Consumer Comment: Bush is no dictator...he did what he could with what he had!

*Consumer Comment: You obviously are one of those who believes that Bush was behind 911 too........

*Consumer Comment: Ohmigoodness!

*Consumer Comment: Get a Life!

*Consumer Comment: Get a Life!

*Consumer Comment: Get a Life!

*Consumer Comment: Get a Life!

*Consumer Comment: DOwn with the loser!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*Consumer Comment: Please name the impeachable crime

*Consumer Suggestion: Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

*Consumer Suggestion: Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

*Consumer Suggestion: Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

*Consumer Suggestion: Democrats in Congress

*Consumer Comment: On What Planet Have You Been Living?

*Consumer Comment: On What Planet Have You Been Living?

*Consumer Comment: On What Planet Have You Been Living?

*Consumer Comment: Dont Blame Bush for Everything

*Consumer Comment: Dont Blame Bush for Everything

*Consumer Comment: Dont Blame Bush for Everything

*Consumer Comment: Dont Blame Bush for Everything

*Consumer Comment: I think its unfair

*Consumer Comment: Robert strikes again

*Consumer Comment: HOLY MOLY!!!!

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: Wow, where do I start?...

*Consumer Comment: This person is speaking in ignorance

*Consumer Comment: This guy has no knowledge of the industry

*Consumer Comment: This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

*Consumer Comment: This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

*Consumer Comment: This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

*Consumer Comment: Hilary & Bill are the crooks

*Consumer Comment: To robert you can say what ever you like

*Consumer Comment: To robert

*Consumer Comment: Sure Charles

*Consumer Comment: To patrick... republican's set clinton up they were after him from day 1

*Consumer Comment: Can't let this one pass by.

*Consumer Comment: Clinton did have a surplus

*Consumer Comment: That's smart Vote For Obama

*Consumer Suggestion: Solution Vote for Obama or Hillary

*Consumer Comment: shgeesh

*Consumer Comment: I am done with this thread

*Consumer Comment: Charles You prove My Point Again

*Consumer Comment: To john

*Consumer Comment: Bush Veto Record

*Consumer Comment: Charles, Answer some Questions

*Consumer Comment: i am not embarassed

*Consumer Comment: John strikes again

*Consumer Comment: You amuse me

*Consumer Comment: 'I am not embarassment'

*Consumer Comment: Here We Go Again

*Consumer Comment: I am not embarassment

*Consumer Comment: Give examples...be specific

*Consumer Comment: To robert

*Consumer Comment: I cannot stop laughing!!!!

*Consumer Comment: So mccain will make our lives even harder

*Consumer Comment: Right Wing politicians have been pulling bait & switch scams on the middle and lower classes

*Consumer Comment: Charles, Why can't you answer the Question?

*Consumer Comment: There is no high demand for oil

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: Charles, What Veto?

*Consumer Comment: To john

*Consumer Comment: To sed

*Consumer Comment: Charles think about what you are saying

*Consumer Comment: Get Real

*Consumer Comment: Get Real

*Consumer Comment: Get Real

*Consumer Comment: Get Real

*Consumer Comment: Stop wasting time.

*Consumer Comment: Charles your knowledge is lacking, and your post above lacks integrity! Where wery u in 1974?

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: update

*Consumer Comment: Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

*Consumer Comment: Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

*Consumer Comment: Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

*Consumer Comment: Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

*Consumer Comment: Traditional Republicans, traditional democrats, excepting FDR, an oil war, and less jobs for sure

*Consumer Comment: People wanted change they got change

*Consumer Comment: To patrick

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Charles,

*Consumer Comment: To Cirrusnarea

*Consumer Comment: Immature, irrelevant, and unconvincing troll ripoff report.

*Consumer Comment: Do you honestly believe George W bush is regulating the gas prices at your local gas station?

*Consumer Comment: Look in the mirror before you criticize.

*Consumer Comment: I do not believe anything the oil companies say

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are amazing

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are amazing

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are amazing

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are amazing

*Consumer Comment: Tony, are you really as big of a moron as this post makes you sound?

*Consumer Comment: While BUSH is bad, what have YOU done?

*Consumer Suggestion: PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS

*Consumer Comment: are you really after terrorist?

*Consumer Comment: Dirtydawg, american politics is the biggest ripoff around!!!!

*Consumer Comment: I would rather be DEAD than be a liberal, socialist DEMOCRAT!!

*Author of original report: Bush and cronies destroying America with corporate agenda!

*Consumer Comment: Bush is no great leader

*Consumer Comment: Regarding George W. Bush

*Consumer Comment: you have got to be kidding!

*Consumer Comment: Bush is a Horrible President

*Consumer Comment: You can't make a horse drink water

*Consumer Comment: You can't make a horse drink water

*Consumer Comment: You can't make a horse drink water

*Consumer Comment: You can't make a horse drink water

*Consumer Comment: Lets all ignore bush fans

*Consumer Suggestion: Are you kidding? Bush did not steal the election.

*Consumer Comment: Give it up bush fans

*Consumer Comment: The original poster of this complaint is insane.

*Consumer Comment: Republicans never cared for the troops

*Consumer Comment: YOU elected?

*Consumer Comment: Good Going Charles

*Consumer Comment: I will never again vote in a election

*Consumer Comment: Ew! thats just GROSS!

*Consumer Comment: Ew! thats just GROSS!

*Consumer Comment: Ew! thats just GROSS!

*Consumer Comment: I'll look it up Josh

*Consumer Comment: no one robert?

*Consumer Comment: Kate in Toledo - Isn't it odd...

*Consumer Comment: You're almost on target

*Consumer Comment: Spin? Your kidding right?

*Consumer Comment: Look at Walter Reed

*Consumer Comment: Yaaaaawn

*Consumer Comment: Pegged! Again!

*Consumer Comment: We are the Bosses, these people are the employees of the United States.

*Consumer Comment: I'm an employee too, or a boss because I live in the USA.

*Consumer Comment: And a couple more issues, Ben

*Consumer Comment: Try and use an anaolgy that makes sense

*Consumer Comment: I knew you could not do it

*Consumer Comment: Ok...this is easy Robert.......

*Consumer Comment: I'll have to make this so easy, a Caveman can understand it

*Consumer Comment: Booo h*o! John

*Consumer Comment: Booo h*o! John

*Consumer Comment: Booo h*o! John

*Consumer Comment: Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

*Consumer Comment: Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

*Consumer Comment: Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

*Consumer Comment: Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

*Consumer Comment: Oh Robert... same shnook as always.

*Consumer Comment: John u hate anyone who does not like bush

*Consumer Comment: Samuel, Complain about your own country

*Consumer Comment: Samuel, Complain about your own country

*Consumer Comment: Samuel, Complain about your own country

*Consumer Comment: Samuel, Complain about your own country

*Consumer Comment: What my Grandpa always told me when I was a kid.

*Consumer Comment: George Bush is the New Hitler Reborn

*Consumer Comment: Only you, Ben

*Consumer Comment: Meds? you have to be kidding! Oh where to start......

*Consumer Comment: I can name one thing he's done, Charles...

*Consumer Comment: Please name one good thing bush has done

*Consumer Comment: "They drew first blood"

*Consumer Comment: "They drew first blood"

*Consumer Comment: "They drew first blood"

*Consumer Comment: "They drew first blood"

*Consumer Comment: Will is a hard right republican

*Consumer Comment: People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

*Consumer Comment: People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

*Consumer Comment: People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

*Consumer Comment: People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

*Consumer Comment: What a bunch of morons!

*Consumer Comment: Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

*Consumer Comment: Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

*Consumer Comment: Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

*Consumer Comment: Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

*Consumer Comment: bush etc

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are afraid of truth

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are afraid of truth

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are afraid of truth

*Consumer Comment: Liberals are afraid of truth

*Consumer Suggestion: Keep Laughing Katherine

*Consumer Comment: Where are all the republicans now??

*Consumer Comment: Where are all the republicans now??

*Consumer Comment: Where are all the republicans now??

*Consumer Comment: Where are all the republicans now??

*Consumer Suggestion: Richard Nixon, The Sequel! Don't like it? Vote! I did...

*Consumer Comment: This is the funniest quote ever

*Consumer Comment: This is the funniest quote ever

*Consumer Comment: This is the funniest quote ever

*Consumer Comment: This is the funniest quote ever

*Consumer Suggestion: People are watching the Movies

*Consumer Comment: To our friend up north.

*Consumer Comment: Talk about a waste...

*Consumer Suggestion: It is not Democrat Verses Republican!

*Consumer Comment: Go back to the Asylum

*Consumer Comment: Not a GWB fan, but I must say...

*Consumer Comment: Wow

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles... you have it right!

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles... you have it right!

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles... you have it right!

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles I have to agree with you!

*Consumer Comment: When republicans ask for your vote just say no

*Consumer Comment: When republicans ask for your vote just say no

*Consumer Comment: When republicans ask for your vote just say no

*Consumer Comment: When republicans ask for your vote just say no

*Consumer Suggestion: & so your point is?

*Consumer Comment: A couple comments on recent posts.

*Consumer Comment: Is there a conspiracy theory from the "kook fringe" you do NOT subscribe to?

*Consumer Suggestion: Iraq is today more dangerous than it ever has been

*Consumer Comment: More conspiracy nuttiness from James

*Consumer Suggestion: I don't worry about Robert.

*Consumer Comment: Narrow minded.......to say the least

*Consumer Comment: A mind is a terrible thing to waste, Chip

*Consumer Comment: Educate Yourself Robert

*Consumer Comment: He's baaaa-ack!

*Consumer Comment: He's baaaa-ack!

*Consumer Suggestion: If you want proof... just go to the Links. You were Scammed by 911

*Consumer Comment: I Swore

*Consumer Suggestion: Yeah, Let's let A CANADIAN Tell Us What's Right

*Consumer Comment: Americans don't get fooled again! These voting machines have no checks on them, no paper trail, easily changeable results, open to viruses.

*Consumer Suggestion: Typical

*Consumer Comment: Lets get to the REAL issue on Bush

*Consumer Comment: Just remember this...

*Consumer Suggestion: Simple Terms

*Consumer Suggestion: Simple Terms

*Consumer Suggestion: Simple Terms

*Consumer Comment: To Chip

*Consumer Comment: To Chip

*Consumer Comment: To Chip

*Consumer Comment: To Chip

*Consumer Comment: You people are way too passionate about things you have no control over.

*Consumer Comment: James, keep posting your thoughts!

*Consumer Comment: just ignore the bush fans

*Consumer Comment: **Not a Political Forum - Products and Services ONLY!

*Consumer Comment: No WMD's in Iraq? How WRONG you Left-Wingers are

*Consumer Comment: To John in White, Ga.

*Consumer Comment: STOP, LOOK & LISTEN

*Consumer Comment: FACTS

*Consumer Comment: For you Bush supporters

*Consumer Suggestion: Answer some Questions, Chip

*Consumer Comment: To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

*Consumer Comment: To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

*Consumer Comment: To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

*Consumer Comment: To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

*Consumer Comment: Bush's Family Wealth Came From the n**i Regime

*Consumer Comment: A Democrat Tells the Truth _

*Consumer Comment: Bush needs to be destroyed!

*Consumer Comment: Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

*Consumer Comment: Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

*Consumer Comment: Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

*Consumer Suggestion: G.W.Bush needs Ousted from the Big House !!!!!!

*Consumer Comment: James appears to be stricken YET AGAIN with another bout of the Brown-Bottle Flu...

*Consumer Comment: "B."-fore you make assumptions, you should consider....

*Consumer Comment: Bush is the Anti-Christ and Vera is the flying NUN!

*Consumer Comment: More.. Invasion of the Vera!...

*Consumer Comment: Oh stop Vera.....sheesh!

*Consumer Comment: Finally got a free moment to get on....

*Consumer Comment: Give me a break from the sanctimonious anti-government BS

*Consumer Comment: Read my lips... N. O. W. M. D.

*Consumer Comment: I liked his rebuttal

*Consumer Comment: Let's get back on track, shall we?

*Consumer Comment: Let's get back on track, shall we?

*Consumer Comment: Let's get back on track, shall we?

*Consumer Comment: Let's get back on track, shall we?

*Consumer Comment: your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

*Consumer Comment: your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

*Consumer Comment: your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

*Consumer Comment: your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

*Consumer Comment: If we had finished the job in 1990, AlQuada would have withered and died.

*Consumer Comment: What price, victory?

*Consumer Comment: What are you ranting about?

*Consumer Comment: Do you fail to see or wish not to believe?

*Consumer Comment: James, someone should throw you a full padded jacket!

*Consumer Comment: I know this is meaningless

*Author of original report: I stand by my post!

*Consumer Comment: Your no Marine

*Consumer Comment: DNC talking points... mind NUMB... must eat d'oh nuts

*Consumer Comment: Dissing the disinformtion.

*Consumer Comment: Why dont you tell me Robert?

*Consumer Comment: Oh Robert.....you just cant see the difference between your personal vendetta for me....and the subject in general.....

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: So many stupid people

*Consumer Suggestion: Can't you guys let it go????

*Consumer Comment: You are wrong as always, Ben.

*Consumer Comment: Here we go again

*Consumer Comment: And the "logic" continues.......

*Consumer Comment: Powell was a failure from the gitgo

*Consumer Comment: Vera, stop playing the victim, you're not a child anymore.

*Consumer Comment: It makes you wonder why...

*Consumer Suggestion: Let us not forget the little people.

*Consumer Comment: I AGREE WITH JAMES!

*Consumer Comment: Here is the Cliff's Notes version of this novel

*Consumer Comment: Even......MORE.....Robert-logic

*Consumer Comment: S'cuze me.... had to make time for this one....

*Consumer Comment: Tsk, Tsk, Tskk....as usual, the point is COMPLETELY missed.

*Consumer Comment: Robert, perhaps if you quit spinning for a sec, you wouldn't be so dizzy.

*Consumer Comment: Russian Roulette anyone?

*Consumer Comment: Russian Roulette anyone?

*Consumer Comment: Russian Roulette anyone?

*Consumer Comment: Christianity in chains?

*Consumer Comment: More Robert logic.........

*Consumer Comment: Another perfect example of Robert logic.....

*Consumer Comment: The dense, just get more dense

*Consumer Comment: Robert, sorry, I don't have time to "play dumb" for your amusement.

*Consumer Comment: Space...the final frontier...and plenty of it between your ears, Ben

*Consumer Comment: Dear John.. I've tried to avoid Robert for months. He tracks me down on any thread I dare post

*Consumer Comment: I agree. Enough is enough guys. Put the stick down, the horse has been dead for months.

*Consumer Comment: Words have meanings, and it's time you learned that

*Consumer Suggestion: Why don't you all grow up?????

*Consumer Comment: All people! Looking for information on Post! reward of 1,000.00

*Consumer Comment: And the smoke screen continues..

*Consumer Comment: No Mr.Grissom....I admitted nothing.

*Consumer Comment: The 70K came directly from you, Robert.

*Consumer Comment: Vera and Repubs! You are toast now!

*Consumer Comment: Vera and Repubs! You are toast now!

*Consumer Comment: That space/time continuum still confounds Ben

*Consumer Comment: The ultimate twist... and end game!

*Consumer Comment: This contortion of reality has to end!

*Consumer Comment: How did ONE school turn into 70,000 schools? Put down the pipe, please.

*Consumer Comment: Just the facts, Robert.

*Consumer Comment: You are right about the Christians. They aren't interested in your head. They are interested in provoking a global biological and thermonuclear war, just to prove there is a God who will save them

*Consumer Comment: One at a time, please

*Consumer Comment: You have given nothing...

*Consumer Comment: Perhaps this analogy will be more to your liking

*Consumer Comment: Zarqwho?

*Consumer Comment: Speaking of trolls...

*Consumer Comment: Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

*Consumer Comment: Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

*Consumer Comment: Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

*Consumer Comment: Certainly, a Cut Above the Rest

*Consumer Comment: Bennie the Bass

*Consumer Comment: Numbers do mean things

*Consumer Comment: I have always known Robert and Vera's rants were just that... rants

*Consumer Comment: Debunking this circular 'debate'

*Consumer Comment: It has gone too far

*Consumer Comment: James......bah... dont worry about Vera, shes been long since trounced

*Consumer Comment: I am reminded of a story...

*Consumer Comment: you should have kept your mouth shut about my mother b***h

*Consumer Comment: Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

*Consumer Comment: Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

*Consumer Comment: Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

*Consumer Comment: One final time for you Ben

*Consumer Comment: And where does the link go.........

*Consumer Comment: just a thought

*Consumer Comment: just a thought

*Consumer Comment: just a thought

*Consumer Comment: Numbers? Robert?......they still add to.......ONE!

*Consumer Comment: Ah, poor little Prince of Tupper....I'd bet you're the life of the party, at Sunmount.

*Consumer Comment: Vera, Vera, Vera- The Holy roller Republican!

*Consumer Comment: Well, technically....

*Consumer Comment: I am truly done with you Ben

*Consumer Comment: Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

*Consumer Comment: Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

*Consumer Comment: Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

*Consumer Comment: Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

*Consumer Comment: Poor ben...still has trouble with numbers

*Consumer Comment: WHAT?!?! Now its all over the place again!?

*Consumer Comment: Awww.... poor James Fails To Reallize....

*Author of original report: I need to comment on Bush and the foolish Democrats that are allowing illegal immigrants to stay in this country

*Consumer Comment: Twisting, twisting, twisting the night away

*Consumer Comment: "Day One" has BEN done....Quit hitting the "Snooze" button. Time for a NEW DAY! :D

*Consumer Comment: And.....back to the original claim!

*Consumer Comment: Twisting the night away....

*Consumer Comment: Oh great....the next excuse.....

*Consumer Comment: Denial of fact doesn't equal the disappearence of fact; in short, wish all you want, it's not going away.

*Consumer Comment: As far as proof goes, there is no proof on either side.

*Consumer Comment: No Grey Areas Bush's big business is destroying the true American way of Life.

*Consumer Comment: Yes Ben, you want proof

*Consumer Comment: I know what you are thinking...

*Consumer Comment: Still waiting Vera, and nice tangent again Robert.

*Consumer Comment: Isnt it better that we save lives now than lose billions of people later.

*Consumer Comment: Damon?I'm still waiting for you to ?Let me know about meself?

*Consumer Comment: Focus? You mean smokescreen and blur

*Consumer Comment: Let you know about yourself

*Consumer Comment: Here is Ben's thought process

*Consumer Comment: You might ask yourself that same question, Damon.

*Consumer Comment: The self-righteous one

*Consumer Comment: Speaking of Dodging...

*Consumer Comment: Any way you slice it......

*Consumer Comment: Any way you slice it......

*Consumer Comment: Any way you slice it......

*Consumer Comment: More niwittery from Ben

*Consumer Comment: Nicole, you must be a Republican.

*Consumer Comment: Who would have though

*Consumer Comment: People need to listen to themselves

*Consumer Comment: Ohh, and a quick not about something else....

*Consumer Comment: To the Prince(ss) of Chides...

*Consumer Comment: Robert you still havent answered for the 160,000!!!

*Consumer Comment: More spin from Ben

*Consumer Comment: So true i am glad someone brough this out

*Consumer Comment: Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

*Consumer Comment: Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

*Consumer Comment: Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

*Consumer Comment: Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

*Consumer Comment: economics 1001 failed

*Consumer Comment: Right back at ya......

*Consumer Comment: Robert face it... you got caught.

*Consumer Comment: The Republicans won, alright.

*Consumer Comment: all republicans did was cheat

*Consumer Comment: good hell

*Consumer Comment: Third time's the charm.

*Consumer Comment: You need therapy Charles

*Consumer Comment: D go spew your hatred somewhere else

*Consumer Comment: D go spew your hatred somewhere else

*Consumer Comment: To Charles--You are 100% WRONG!

*Consumer Comment: d- you are so mean spritied

*Consumer Comment: d- you are so mean spritied

*Consumer Comment: d- you are so mean spritied

*Consumer Comment: Last time for the idiot Ben.

*Consumer Comment: Round and round we go...

*Consumer Comment: You see what i mean

*Consumer Comment: Oh puh-leaze.....6 years on and still looking to blame Clinton?

*Consumer Comment: Charles, you hypocritical tool

*Consumer Comment: Spin, spin away Ben

*Consumer Comment: Spin, spin away Ben

*Consumer Comment: Spin, spin away Ben

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles, Please respond - As a christian, do you hold it against democrats because they are for abortion?

*Consumer Comment: Can bush fans be more civil & respectful

*Consumer Comment: Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

*Consumer Comment: Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

*Consumer Comment: Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

*Consumer Comment: Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

*Consumer Comment: you & the rest of the bush fans come from the party of lies

*Consumer Comment: Ignore bush fans - mentally right wing bush nut, don't blame bush for anything its all democrats fault

*Consumer Comment: More reading comprehension lessons for Ben.

*Consumer Comment: President Bush not responsible for higher oil prices!

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles, You are mean-spirited

*Consumer Comment: Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

*Consumer Comment: Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

*Consumer Comment: Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

*Consumer Comment: Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

*Consumer Comment: Liberalism is a mental disorder

*Consumer Comment: One more time about the numbers, Benjo...

*Consumer Comment: It's easy Ben

*Consumer Comment: More Robert-logic

*Consumer Comment: Ben is off the deep end now

*Consumer Comment: Patrick's latest rant. Which is the same rant heard many times by the Bush lobby - Either way....I'll still take the b*****b.

*Consumer Comment: Why did bush offer retaliation

*Consumer Comment: Charles, Charles, Charles....

*Consumer Comment: Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

*Consumer Comment: Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

*Consumer Comment: Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

*Consumer Comment: Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

*Consumer Comment: Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

*Consumer Comment: Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

*Consumer Comment: Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

*Consumer Suggestion: Sick of the BS. I like most, was a huge Bush supporter.

*Consumer Comment: "Robert-Logic"

*Consumer Comment: Ignore the bush fans

*Consumer Comment: Who cares

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: My Company tis of thee

*Consumer Comment: No argument there B

*Consumer Comment: Sorry, Ben & Robert, but you're both wrong!

*Consumer Comment: Let's all see if we can see who's zooming who?

*Consumer Comment: Anwar? - The Bush administration repeatedly displays contempt for personal liberties. The Bush administration has wasted thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in a war of many circumstances and reasons, but primarily about oil.

*Consumer Comment: Patrick, Patrick...And you are one to talk?

*Consumer Comment: To the two James, one in New York and the other in Canada!

*Consumer Comment: Fairy height 911

*Consumer Comment: Concerning f911

*Consumer Comment: Everyone--watch "Farenheit 911"

*Consumer Suggestion: I'm serious man!

*Consumer Comment: You have to love these guys

*Consumer Suggestion: Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

*Consumer Suggestion: Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

*Consumer Suggestion: Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

*Consumer Suggestion: Republicanism is a mental illness.

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles, You all have Al Franken????

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles, You all have Al Franken????

*Consumer Comment: Hannity republicans offical mascot

*Consumer Comment: George Bush....he is in line for the "balance".

*Consumer Suggestion: Park your Car in front of the White House !!!

*Consumer Comment: George Bush and 9/11

*Consumer Suggestion: Secret Oil Meetings !!!!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush is making a profit on gas prices!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush is making a profit on gas prices!

*Consumer Comment: I see you took a day off for "four-twenty", Jim....

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: George Walker Bush -Killing for wealth!

*Consumer Comment: A Republican Speaks Out!!!

*Consumer Comment: What HUGE profits?

*Consumer Suggestion: Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

*Consumer Suggestion: Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

*Consumer Suggestion: Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

*Consumer Suggestion: Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

*Consumer Comment: I'd love to see the "stats" you speak of

*Consumer Comment: Democracy as a valuable commodity

*Consumer Comment: Rip-off in Texas

*Consumer Comment: Charles has made yet ANOTHER fine point!

*Consumer Comment: stupid younger generantion that voted bush in office

*Consumer Suggestion: National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

*Consumer Suggestion: National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

*Consumer Suggestion: National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

*Consumer Suggestion: National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

*Consumer Comment: Sad Day's of Bush

*Consumer Comment: we just have to agree with anything republicans do it is a crime know if we say anything bad about bush

*Consumer Comment: Why should the united states keep letting illegal immigrates stay in america

*Consumer Comment: Guy Get your facts Straight

*Consumer Comment: Bush supporters are retaliating agaisnt us

*Consumer Suggestion: How about the Secetary of Labor and others !!!!

*Consumer Suggestion: It gets better and better...

*Consumer Comment: Research before you speak

*UPDATE Employee: Semper Fidelis

*Consumer Comment: war for oil?

*Consumer Comment: war for oil?

*Consumer Comment: war for oil?

*Consumer Suggestion: did anyone ever pay attention to this?

*Consumer Comment: A GA resident who totally agrees

*Consumer Comment: Republicans have no feelings toward people

*Consumer Comment: Hello, John. You raise good points...

*Consumer Suggestion: The Democrats are no Better

*Consumer Suggestion: The Democrats are no Better

*Consumer Suggestion: The Democrats are no Better

*Consumer Suggestion: The Democrats are no Better

*Consumer Comment: I can understand why you'd think I'm falling....

*Consumer Comment: Your falling for everything!

*Consumer Suggestion: Republican "Jugheads" !!!

*Consumer Comment: To Jeremy

*Consumer Comment: I've said it before....

*Consumer Comment: I've said it before....

*Consumer Comment: I've said it before....

*Consumer Comment: I've said it before....

*Consumer Suggestion: New evidence - I spent a year in Iraq during this war and would do it over again in a heartbeat.

*Consumer Comment: Democrats should blast cheney for his derogatory remarks who cares what cheneys sas democrats don't need to take cheneys s**t

*Consumer Comment: Sheesh, Vera. Pick a party, grab a beer and grow a sense of humor . Vote Democrat!

*Consumer Comment: Awwww...someone thinks they have a wit! How cute...

*Consumer Comment: You might be a Republican...

*Consumer Comment: To many ignorant bush supporters on this forum

*Consumer Suggestion: Stop the hate!

*Consumer Comment: Typical of an uneducated populace

*Consumer Comment: I just loved this... My Fellow Americans

*Consumer Comment: Gee, Guy. That poll meant alot...about NOTHING!

*Consumer Comment: To John in Halifax, PA

*Consumer Comment: The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

*Consumer Comment: The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

*Consumer Comment: The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

*Consumer Comment: The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

*Consumer Suggestion: Check out the FACTS!

*Consumer Comment: It's like discovering you have a spot on your shirt at a restaurant...

*Consumer Comment: I have a dream too

*Author of original report: horrified to see that some people are blinded by Bush and his use of 9/11 as an excuse to invade ANY nation

*Consumer Comment: Ladies and Gentlemen, the Anti-Christ

*Consumer Comment: Cuius est solum, ejus est usque ad caelum et ad inferos.

*Consumer Comment: Hello, Robert of Dallas; it's always a pleasure...

*Consumer Comment: Are you brave enough, Vera, to crawl out of your safe rut and look around for the truth or will you remain a brainwashed zombie?

*Consumer Comment: Never discuss who you vote for

*Consumer Comment: It's another fine mess...

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles, I am truly sorry you have had a rough life

*Consumer Comment: What good freedom

*Consumer Comment: Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

*Consumer Comment: Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

*Consumer Comment: Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

*Consumer Comment: B you have been ripped to shreds by everyone here

*Consumer Suggestion: To Mary From Duluth

*Consumer Suggestion: To Mary From Duluth

*Consumer Suggestion: To Mary From Duluth

*Consumer Suggestion: To Mary From Duluth

*Consumer Comment: Bunch of Liberal Babies in Here!!!

*Consumer Suggestion: I Want My $200k Back, Bush!

*Consumer Suggestion: I fully agree!

*Consumer Comment: This'n's a Monster....but I haven't posted in a while so....

*Consumer Comment: the only NON-Left leaning media is FoxNews. They have more than one side.

*Consumer Comment: Signing off Mates!

*Consumer Comment: Welcome to Troll City.

*Consumer Comment: Excuse me Sir Liam of London, Europe, United Kingdom

*Consumer Comment: and back to you Melvin

*Consumer Comment: Response ti Liam

*Consumer Comment: Response ti Liam

*Consumer Comment: Response ti Liam

*Consumer Comment: Response ti Liam

*Consumer Comment: Ashley of Grayslake - try and convince other idiotic Americans to impeach George Bush

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

*Consumer Comment: To Mr B from Denver

*Consumer Comment: Why does Bill Clinton keep rising up when Monica is nowhere to be seen at Rip-off Report? Forget WMDs and focus on MPGs! Bush-o-nomics rules.

*Consumer Comment: To Katherine

*Consumer Comment: To Katherine

*Consumer Comment: To Katherine

*Consumer Comment: To Katherine

*Consumer Comment: What damage?

*Consumer Suggestion: GEORGE W. BUSH IS A MORON BUT ONLY CAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT ..You may have been "suckered" into having him as President the first time, but then ya buncha schmucks VOTED him in the second time.

*Consumer Comment: Robert's Religion.

*Consumer Comment: That's very extreme "B"

*Consumer Comment: Make the states pay the debt

*Consumer Comment: Response to "B"

*Consumer Comment: Response to "B"

*Consumer Comment: Response to "B"

*Consumer Comment: For B: President John F.Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

*Consumer Comment: Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

*Consumer Comment: Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

*Consumer Comment: Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

*Consumer Comment: Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

*Consumer Comment: Cutting the purse strings.

*Consumer Suggestion: Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

*Consumer Suggestion: Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

*Consumer Suggestion: Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

*Consumer Suggestion: Charles why so much hatred?

*Consumer Comment: Bush the biggest piece of trash president america has ever had

*Consumer Comment: Here we go again

*Consumer Comment: Here we go again

*Consumer Comment: Here we go again

*Consumer Comment: Where do you draw the line?

*Consumer Comment: One More Thing James...

*Consumer Comment: Good Post, Vera

*Consumer Comment: Wrongo, Bongo!

*Consumer Comment: Wrong as always James

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush and the USA Government is too POWERFUL!

*Consumer Comment: I found another great quote

*Consumer Comment: The Court should be politically neutral?

*Consumer Comment: SCOTUS does not have line item approval

*Consumer Comment: Try again B, this time in English

*Consumer Comment: The taxing behavior of the US Congress.

*Consumer Comment: Here's a novel idea "B" - How about having the US Constitution strictly followed. There's a whacky thought!

*Consumer Comment: Answer to "unusual paragraph"

*Consumer Comment: I don't know how anyone could lie about the Clintons

*Consumer Comment: just for fun

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, your news about "Spygate" is completely bogus.

*Consumer Comment: Well I'll "B." Darned!

*Consumer Comment: I didn't know anyone could lie about the Clintons

*Consumer Comment: Just curious, Robert, not yellow?

*Consumer Comment: He's 'B'a-aack! LOL

*Consumer Comment: The Civil Rights Act of 1964

*Consumer Comment: Just curious "B"...

*Consumer Comment: Hillary exposed!

*Consumer Comment: what is there to say about a president who openly proclaims himself to be above the law and beyond the confines of the Constitution?

*Consumer Comment: Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

*Consumer Comment: Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

*Consumer Comment: Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

*Consumer Comment: Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

*Consumer Comment: School's "in"

*Consumer Comment: One more thing Benjo

*Consumer Comment: I knew he couldn't last a week

*Consumer Comment: "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King

*Consumer Comment: No Shawn, I don't think you "missed it at first read."

*Consumer Comment: The pot calling the kettle black...

*Consumer Comment: Ummmm ....No..... This case was big news in your hometown and took up alot of time and resources from the County budget fighting it.

*Consumer Comment: Anyone want to place bets that Ben will really go away?

*Consumer Comment: Where have all the moderates gone??

*Consumer Comment: Where have all the moderates gone??

*Consumer Comment: Where have all the moderates gone??

*Consumer Comment: Where have all the moderates gone??

*Consumer Comment: coward.

*Consumer Comment: Been away a while... lots to read. And lookee here!

*Consumer Comment: Maybe you could lie some more Benjo

*Consumer Comment: Sorry folks.....one last time......

*Consumer Comment: Robert, your pathetic.....

*Consumer Comment: A correction:

*Consumer Comment: James, such reasoned arguments are difficult to contest, but . . .

*Consumer Comment: Vera & Shawn: I appreciate your candor.

*Consumer Comment: This one is for the records folks. Grab a beer and get ready to read!

*Consumer Comment: Eat your honey --- ten million bears just CAN'T be wrong!

*Consumer Comment: Libertarian eh?

*Consumer Comment: Libertarian eh?

*Consumer Comment: Libertarian eh?

*Consumer Comment: Libertarian eh?

*Consumer Comment: Republicans-Dumb asses

*Consumer Comment: You disbelievers or deceivers F OFF!

*Consumer Comment: My two cents.

*Consumer Suggestion: Help me impeach Bush: Sign the petition!

*Consumer Comment: Way to go Nick!

*Consumer Comment: Oops! A quick response has turned into an editorial !

*Consumer Comment: Two Byrds, One Stone...

*Consumer Suggestion: Can any right wing nuts talk common sense?

*Consumer Comment: People, Bush is a Hitler wannabe, he loves wealth, and POWER!

*Consumer Comment: Did you know . . .

*Consumer Comment: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

*Consumer Comment: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

*Consumer Comment: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

*Consumer Comment: Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

*Consumer Comment: Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

*Consumer Comment: Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

*Consumer Comment: Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

*Consumer Comment: This is getting out of hand.

*Consumer Comment: D'you suppose, that little Bennie is a millionaire like Aeropostale?

*Consumer Comment: This goes back to my "inane comment" post

*Consumer Comment: The only logical response to Ben . . .

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, YOU and VERA made the statements. Where is the proof behind them?

*Consumer Comment: amzing post from the twilight zone

*Consumer Comment: I hate it when I get "sucked back in", but . . . lol

*Consumer Comment: You never cease to amaze me, Ben

*Consumer Comment: Where? Where? Where?

*Consumer Comment: Whatever.

*Consumer Comment: Unh-UNH, Honey....!

*Consumer Comment: Where Shawn? ....for the 90th time ....where??

*Consumer Comment: Ok point for point.......

*Consumer Comment: Ben - proof that you're a liar is in your own vitriol! (sorry, another 'longun' - anyone care for a coffee?)

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben you sir are a hypocritre

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, Iraq, Al-Quada, ...where is the proof?

*Consumer Suggestion: Wrong Forum

*Consumer Comment: Ok Shawn... If you can get past your homophobe views. Here, I'll tell "your" truth..

*Consumer Comment: Either Ben's a mindreader, or my wife has him "pegged" lol

*Consumer Comment: Ah yes. the hypocrite.. continues...

*Consumer Comment: Holidays turn me into an insomniac!!

*Consumer Comment: Sigh... just when you think it's safe to get back into the water again...

*Consumer Comment: Whatever.

*Consumer Comment: Whatever.

*Consumer Comment: Whatever.

*Consumer Comment: Whatever.

*Consumer Suggestion: Yep u keep on honoring those troops Patrick

*Consumer Comment: Thank you Vera.

*Consumer Comment: Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

*Consumer Comment: Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

*Consumer Comment: Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

*Consumer Comment: Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

*Consumer Comment: Patrick---I couldn't agree more.

*Consumer Comment: This is for Ben, Shawn and Vera. ..you three have hijacked this thread for long enough

*Consumer Comment: One more question to add, Ben

*Consumer Comment: Yes, it's Almost the same, but I'm not going to write two separate responses for the same B.S. spin! O.K. Ben . . . you win!

*Consumer Comment: Nahh-ah! Try again. :D

*Consumer Comment: Here's something else you'll claim you're too busy to read, Princess.

*Consumer Comment: My letter to the Editor of Army Times Publication

*Consumer Comment: Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

*Consumer Comment: Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

*Consumer Comment: Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

*Consumer Comment: Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

*Consumer Comment: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

*Consumer Comment: Wow! another edition of Encyclopedia Stupidia!!

*Consumer Comment: Canadunce James

*Consumer Comment: Man, I hate it when I can't sleep!

*Consumer Comment: More diatribe from Report number 165478

*Consumer Comment: Bush the Dictator... with PROOF! Just for Vera and Shawn......so they can see how it is done.......

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok for all you lost causes:

*Consumer Comment: T.L. James . . . do you ever research??

*Consumer Suggestion: What is at stake

*Consumer Suggestion: What is at stake

*Consumer Suggestion: What is at stake

*Consumer Comment: Bush supporters are at All time low!

*Consumer Comment: Let's put this back where it belongs(Post Number 154773)

*Consumer Comment: I bet mine's longer than yours . . . get your mind outta the gutter!

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, you should know better than to make that challenge.

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Lara consider the fleecing of an entire nation

*Consumer Comment: Misquoth the raven, "Evermore!"

*Consumer Comment: Quick Point

*Consumer Comment: And another classic dodge by Vera.......

*Consumer Comment: Still waiting for you to back up your lies "Tweet!"

*Consumer Comment: Oo-oo-ooh! A "James" I LIKE!

*Consumer Comment: Yo! Dum-dums! (That's you James 'n James)

*Consumer Comment: To the James twins.

*Consumer Suggestion: You had your chance

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Brother.

*Consumer Comment: This is for the James' Gang...

*Consumer Comment: Sadaam is on Trial by Iraqi's

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush should be impeached!

*Consumer Suggestion: Suddam is in a Kangaroo Court!

*Consumer Comment: In response to some of Ben's past boo-h*o-ing

*Consumer Comment: The Bush Ripoff?

*Consumer Comment: Here is reality.... no one to blame but ourselves in regards to the current BS state affairs in this country

*Consumer Comment: The troll is baaaaack!

*Consumer Comment: Wheeee! Ben's latest PABLUM is out!

*Consumer Comment: Ooh! James and his Girlfriend are back!

*Consumer Suggestion: Are you Guyz outta yer minds"

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera, Tweety, Show me your true self!

*Consumer Comment: A Question . . .

*Consumer Comment: Another thing Vera......

*Consumer Comment: OK Vera...I'll do something you cant do.. answer some simple questions..

*Consumer Comment: I'll try this again, as my last 2 haven't posted - Help! I've been ripped off!! lol

*Consumer Comment: constitution?

*Consumer Comment: Talk abot'cher fun on a bun!

*Consumer Comment: to B in Denver

*Consumer Comment: Your brain is a tiny sample of WMD.

*Consumer Comment: Just for example, here's a tiny sample from a large list of WMDs that have been found in Iraq but suppressed by the elitest left wing media.

*Consumer Comment: WMD were found in 2003, inside your head.

*Consumer Comment: Bush lovers are either super rich or retarded!

*Consumer Comment: Hey Canada... You still suck!!!

*Consumer Comment: WMDs WERE found in 2003, shortly after we went into Iraq.

*Consumer Comment: Still waiting.....

*Consumer Comment: Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

*Consumer Comment: Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

*Consumer Comment: Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

*Consumer Comment: Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

*Consumer Comment: yooo-h*o, hey boo h*o. . .

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

*Consumer Comment: Too bad... so sad... AGAIN!

*Consumer Comment: your sorry a*s that religion was the root cause of the dark ages

*Consumer Comment: Ben, you and your posts are laughable, to say the least!!

*Consumer Comment: This is classic hypocritical right wing mantra......

*Consumer Comment: Shawn

*Consumer Comment: When is ME, not ME?

*Consumer Comment: Oh the humanity!

*Consumer Comment: Vera, If your scared of answering honest questions, then that tells us something

*Consumer Comment: First...and then...

*Consumer Comment: "To all 'PEACEFULL' People!"...JIM BEAMs another dry heave in our direction....

*Consumer Comment: Still haven't moved on . . . good! 'Cause here's my 2 cents! lol

*Consumer Comment: Can't always get what'cha want....

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush- Bush is an Adolf Hitler want to be!

*Consumer Comment: A side note about the questions.....

*Consumer Comment: A side note about the questions.....

*Consumer Comment: A side note about the questions.....

*Consumer Comment: Ok Vera lets be fair......

*Consumer Comment: Ok Vera lets be fair......

*Consumer Comment: Ok Vera lets be fair......

*Consumer Comment: Bush and his religious cronies are out to make this country into something even more vile than the Taliban in Afganistan

*Consumer Comment: "The U.S. Stole Alaska"

*Consumer Comment: Just to set the facts straight

*Consumer Comment: Just to set the facts straight

*Consumer Comment: Just to set the facts straight

*Consumer Comment: Just to set the facts straight

*Consumer Comment: Vera.....you just dont learn....or listen... do you?

*Consumer Comment: Jon's website...

*Consumer Comment: A little sensitive are we?

*Consumer Comment: A little sensitive are we?

*Consumer Comment: A little sensitive are we?

*Consumer Comment: Speaking of low ratings...

*Consumer Comment: Gee Jon, why wouldn't any of us "right" thinkers want to read your link?

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: George W. Bush- Ratings at ALL time LOW!!!!!

*Consumer Comment: I finally understand why people see gay marriage as an attack on the institution.

*Consumer Comment: B, Thanx for interesting reading throughout

*Consumer Comment: jummpst hmmmoooold aawwwn ooon mnut!

*Consumer Comment: "If only" and "I believe"

*Consumer Comment: To those who served....

*Consumer Comment: Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

*Consumer Comment: Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

*Consumer Comment: Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

*Consumer Comment: Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

*Consumer Comment: ummm ben . . . all I did was point out an inconsistency in your own writings

*Consumer Comment: Must... goad... Shawn...

*Consumer Comment: Yet another heavy sigh...but wait....! Is that a light...

*Consumer Comment: A challenge Shawn.....

*Consumer Comment: A challenge Shawn.....

*Consumer Comment: A challenge Shawn.....

*Consumer Comment: A challenge Shawn.....

*Consumer Comment: And finally......

*Consumer Comment: Vera....

*Consumer Comment: Vera....

*Consumer Comment: Vera....

*Consumer Comment: Vera....

*Consumer Comment: How the government has gradually stolen your rights and Americans haven't even noticed! Big Brother LOVES this bunch!!

*Consumer Comment: Happy 230th Marines!

*Consumer Suggestion: Basically this is getting "Old & Tired"

*Consumer Comment: P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

*Consumer Comment: P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

*Consumer Comment: P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

*Consumer Comment: round and round and round we go

*Consumer Comment: round and round and round we go

*Consumer Comment: round and round and round we go

*Consumer Comment: round and round and round we go

*Consumer Comment: The hand....

*Consumer Comment: Ok...and back to Bush......

*Consumer Comment: Bush and the future (lack of) Civil Rights.....

*Consumer Comment: You have shown nothing but Roberts post Vera...

*Consumer Comment: PLease, please, PLEASE can we get back on topic?

*Consumer Comment: Charlene, welcome!

*Consumer Comment: Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

*Consumer Comment: Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

*Consumer Comment: Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

*Consumer Comment: James, please learn to count. ..They make wild accusations and the press gives it a pass.

*Consumer Comment: Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

*Consumer Comment: Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

*Consumer Comment: Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

*Consumer Comment: Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

*Consumer Comment: Man, I've had gas with more talent...

*Consumer Comment: Man, I've had gas with more talent...

*Consumer Comment: Man, I've had gas with more talent...

*Consumer Comment: Man, I've had gas with more talent...

*Consumer Comment: Bush cheated his way into office.

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera & Robert

*Consumer Comment: Josef Goebbels had the right idea

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Brother....James simply can't get away from his own hypocrisy...

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, I just don't understand some of your responses.

*Consumer Comment: Oh Vera....how you twist away....

*Consumer Comment: A quick note to 'B'

*Consumer Suggestion: Well B, you certainly cover the same subjects I do... in a different light.

*Consumer Comment: Shawn on KBR, Newsmax, Religion, and Drugs.

*Consumer Comment: Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

*Consumer Comment: Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

*Consumer Comment: Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

*Consumer Comment: Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

*Consumer Suggestion: And again... the longest post award goes to...

*Consumer Comment: Yo, c'mere fishy

*Consumer Comment: By my troth...

*Consumer Comment: By my troth...

*Consumer Comment: By my troth...

*Consumer Comment: By my troth...

*Consumer Comment: Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

*Consumer Comment: Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

*Consumer Comment: Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

*Consumer Comment: Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

*Consumer Comment: Bush- Very Low Ratings

*Consumer Comment: Bush- Very Low Ratings

*Consumer Comment: Bush- Very Low Ratings

*Consumer Comment: George Walker Bush-Worse President in History! The United States is being HIJACKED to provide for the wealthy, while our troops die!!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

*Consumer Comment: Nice Firebrand preaching there Vera...

*Consumer Comment: he's an even bigger hypocrite and scumbag than anyone ever thought

*Consumer Comment: Speaking of specials...

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Sorry Robert... did ya miss the song?

*Consumer Comment: please cut this thread off

*Consumer Comment: "Special"? James? My posts are directed at anyone who cares to read them

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, more on Iraq, etc. plus an extra heapin' helping of slime

*Consumer Comment: Here's something to ponder

*Consumer Comment: The dead one is showing "the squirm"

*Consumer Comment: The dead one is showing "the squirm"

*Consumer Comment: The dead one is showing "the squirm"

*Consumer Comment: The dead one is showing "the squirm"

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

*Consumer Comment: I am INSPIRED (for about fifteen minutes)! Canadian Shill-Billy!

*Consumer Comment: Excellent link, Robert of Florida!

*Consumer Comment: All 'spin' aside, . . .

*Consumer Comment: Religion, religion, everywhere! It is part of it all.

*Consumer Suggestion: Sure Robert... I will go look at more of your evidence...

*Consumer Comment: Don't be such a Gore Loser, Jim of Tupper! :D

*Consumer Comment: A "2 for 1" special!

*Consumer Comment: Enough, with the religion crap already!

*Consumer Comment: Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

*Consumer Comment: Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

*Consumer Comment: Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera get's off topic & just runs with it! - forget the "billions of dollars" that the government could rake in from the legalization of drugs people are gonna use anyway

*Consumer Comment: An extra note......for the reason challenged Vera....

*Consumer Comment: How? Where? What?

*Consumer Comment: How? Where? What?

*Consumer Comment: How? Where? What?

*Consumer Comment: How? Where? What?

*Consumer Comment: Here are some articles I found....

*Consumer Comment: And we "look away, look away, look away---" from the topic AGAIN. Thanks, James.

*Consumer Suggestion: Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

*Consumer Suggestion: Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

*Consumer Suggestion: Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

*Consumer Suggestion: Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

*Consumer Suggestion: Well thanks B... a very intelligent Post.

*Consumer Comment: George Walker Bush= loser

*Consumer Comment: We are not a perfect society, but we are a model for so many others

*Consumer Comment: Another big sigh....

*Consumer Comment: To Robert and others who claim Halliburton is the ONLY company who can do the job.

*Consumer Comment: More of the same...tells everyone how we need to stay on-topic, then attacks with more stupidity--which is totally off-topic. Way to Go, Cap'n Canuck!

*Consumer Suggestion: Watch em sqirm people... watch em sqirm!

*Consumer Comment: I wonder why someone in Canada gives a rat's a*s about what happens in my Government.

*Consumer Suggestion: Again Ben I am on your side

*Consumer Comment: Don't worry, be happy . . .

*Consumer Comment: Don't worry, be happy . . .

*Consumer Comment: Don't worry, be happy . . .

*Consumer Comment: I wish I had more time . . .

*Consumer Suggestion: Back with the "I need proof again"... turn on the T,V.

*Consumer Comment: James.....

*Consumer Comment: And the award for most topic changes goes to . . .

*Consumer Comment: Time for a little "comic relief". The Perfect Plan.

*Consumer Comment: If you're not gonna defend it, then don't bring it up

*Consumer Comment: Here I am Vera.. you religous freaking zealot

*Consumer Suggestion: Greg... I certainly agree with you

*Consumer Comment: Patrick, I Agree

*Consumer Comment: What a joke....Oh, Cana-DUH! Where have you Ben?

*Consumer Comment: Some days, it's just too easy! :D

*Consumer Comment: Jesus (no pun intended), can we get back on topic?

*Consumer Suggestion: Since you are so "adamant" on talking about the bible on this thread... I will include the paper I wrote here:

*Consumer Comment: George Walker Bush has made the rules more tightened!

*Consumer Comment: Bush's Ship is quickly sinking!

*Consumer Comment: Back to the Original.. Lies, lies, and more lies from the folks who said they were going to restore integrity

*Consumer Comment: A word to the "non-existant"

*Consumer Comment: The truth shall set you free

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera;

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera;

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera;

*Consumer Comment: Vera keeps spinning.....

*Consumer Comment: Hunh? Oh.

*Consumer Suggestion: & to "B' personally

*Consumer Suggestion: Well "B" I will leave you & Ben to the religeous end of this thread

*Consumer Comment: Ignore this Idiot

*Consumer Comment: Google is a wonderful thing.

*Consumer Comment: Religion is an important aspect of any discussion of Bush!

*Consumer Comment: Vera

*Consumer Suggestion: Go find a blog site...you are all full of hot air

*Consumer Comment: The pot calling the kettle black

*Consumer Suggestion: Ben... if you are gonna handle all 3 of these morons...

*Consumer Comment: Very interesting post Robert

*Consumer Comment: Holy Cow!

*Consumer Comment: More Vera.....

*Consumer Comment: Another wonderful Vera quote...

*Consumer Comment: Your a liar Vera

*Consumer Comment: Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

*Consumer Comment: Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

*Consumer Comment: Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

*Consumer Comment: Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

*Consumer Comment: Ohmighosh! Now I understand!

*Consumer Comment: James and Rebecca

*Consumer Comment: Phish ain't bitin

*Consumer Suggestion: You just don't get it either of you... do you?

*Consumer Comment: well thought out, but too bias

*Consumer Comment: Bennie, I swear you're so narrow-minded, that if you fell on a pin, it'd blind you in both eyes....

*Consumer Comment: Fear sells

*Consumer Comment: Ok Vera.....lets tear you down. Quote by quote.

*Consumer Comment: Be careful, you might learn something!

*Consumer Comment: Tsk-tsk-tsk...."...and those that have eyes, they will not see..."

*Consumer Comment: FEAR SELLS

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera & Shawn, you are meant for one another.

*Consumer Suggestion: Well finally Vera comes out with an intelligent post!

*Consumer Comment: Awww.... Boo-h*o For You!

*Consumer Comment: I won't support anti-American liars any longer

*Consumer Comment: Vera, You have it figured out, HUH?? ..Bush is sinking

*Consumer Comment: Here's something that might be of interest to the reading populace.

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera are you really nuts?

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera are you really nuts?

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera are you really nuts?

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera are you really nuts?

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn I don't need such a long post.

*Consumer Comment: Bless America

*Consumer Comment: I hate to break my own word, but i feel compelled to respond...

*Consumer Comment: You spin me right 'round baby right 'round...

*Consumer Suggestion: Speaking of long post's Vera...

*Consumer Comment: Vera.... Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much.

*Consumer Comment: Don't worry, "B." happy now!

*Consumer Comment: Liar?

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn, don't put that pencil down yet.

*Consumer Comment: That was a long one Shawn, but worth the read.

*Consumer Comment: I think this is a little more factual James

*Consumer Comment: Vera, sorry, the veil of self righteous indignation doesn't wear well

*Consumer Comment: I'm hurt!

*Consumer Comment: Shawn, your 'Kerry' memo is a fake! A rip-off!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok Shawn... so now I have to be your teacher.

*Consumer Comment: guess Canada will just have to invade the U.S. by itself

*Consumer Suggestion: Well John...

*Consumer Suggestion: Well John...

*Consumer Suggestion: Well John...

*Consumer Suggestion: Well John...

*Consumer Comment: Bush supporters are NAIVE!

*Consumer Suggestion: President Bush owes us a plan for success in Iraq. A plan with real milestones, not one with a litany of slogans.

*Consumer Suggestion: I did give a solution Vera

*Consumer Suggestion: James in Canada What gives you the right?

*Consumer Comment: Vera

*Consumer Comment: Vera

*Consumer Comment: Vera

*Consumer Comment: Vera

*Consumer Suggestion: Something written by a "Smart American"

*Consumer Comment: if you can't present hard, factual evidence that supports your claim, then shut up and let the grown-ups talk.

*Consumer Comment: Hey James, at least you're good joke material!

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera you don't have to remind me

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Shawn... I hope you were trying to show where Bush is an absolute fraud, as that is the proof you posted.

*Consumer Suggestion: James... although I agree with you

*Consumer Comment: Let the man speak!

*Consumer Comment: You have only your own half wit remarks to blame

*Consumer Comment: James needs to take a Ba'ath. the Big Wind from Up North

*Consumer Comment: From "Anybody but Bush" to "Anybody but God". Give me a break.

*Consumer Comment: Crude, crude everywhere and not a drop of gas to burn!! Oil companies + politics = broke Americans!

*Consumer Comment: Oh, great, here's another one

*Consumer Comment: Bush needs to be IMPEACHED!!! He is a KILLER!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

*Consumer Suggestion: Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

*Consumer Suggestion: Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

*Consumer Suggestion: Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

*Consumer Suggestion: Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

*Consumer Comment: Why so defensive?

*Consumer Comment: Nice, I present facts, you spin it into a personal attack...typical

*Consumer Comment: Vera Vera Vera.....

*Consumer Comment: The Grand Juries are in, Bush & Cheney have been indicted... waiting for major media announcement

*Consumer Comment: Vera, the magnitude of your patriotism is amazing

*Consumer Comment: My nominations.

*Consumer Comment: Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

*Consumer Comment: Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

*Consumer Comment: Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

*Consumer Comment: Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

*Consumer Comment: Once again...Blahh-Blahh-Blahh and no facts.

*Consumer Comment: Harriet Miers - another Bush rip-off?

*Consumer Suggestion: My two cents

*Consumer Suggestion: It's the most idiotic posts contest!

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok guys I don't have all the facts in front of me... but...

*Consumer Comment: Ben from Cali Was right on Point...But...

*Consumer Comment: Jason? Spin?

*Consumer Comment: Jason? Spin?

*Consumer Comment: Jason? Spin?

*Consumer Comment: Jason? Spin?

*Consumer Comment: Your lips keep moving, but all I hear is "Blahh..Blahh..Blahh..."

*Consumer Comment: Just my thoughts

*Consumer Comment: Just my thoughts

*Consumer Comment: Dateline: Kabul, Afghanistan

*Consumer Comment: Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

*Consumer Comment: Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

*Consumer Comment: Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

*Consumer Comment: Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

*Consumer Suggestion: Hey Jon .. come back to these posts in a year, two years, 3 years from now & see who was right

*Consumer Comment: Ben, Forget about Vera and her underlings.

*Consumer Comment: How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

*Consumer Comment: How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

*Consumer Comment: How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

*Consumer Comment: How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

*Consumer Comment: Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

*Consumer Comment: Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

*Consumer Comment: Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

*Consumer Comment: h*o, Boy!!

*Consumer Comment: My thoughts are exactly that

*Consumer Suggestion: For your information Vera

*Consumer Comment: The Iraq war...... an equation...

*Consumer Comment: The Iraq war...... an equation...

*Consumer Comment: The Iraq war...... an equation...

*Consumer Comment: The Iraq war...... an equation...

*Consumer Suggestion: Forceing anyone to do anything against their will is barbaric to say the least.

*Consumer Comment: James is delusional as always

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn & B

*Consumer Comment: Well B, you and James are the only two who can't seem to read

*Consumer Comment: Poor James....

*Consumer Comment: Poor James....

*Consumer Comment: Poor James....

*Consumer Comment: Poor James....

*Consumer Comment: hee hee hee

*Consumer Comment: The Two Main Reasons Why 9/11 Took Place (My opinion)

*Consumer Suggestion: Then what is your suggestion?? You all b***h and moan and do everything but come up with a viable solution.

*Consumer Comment: Get real....

*Consumer Comment: UNSCR687 does not authorize any military response

*Consumer Comment: James you're dilusional!

*Consumer Suggestion: Hey B. I don't think Nuclear Bombs in the Middle East going off is really an issue.

*Consumer Comment: Good one "B"

*Consumer Suggestion: You sure do your research Shawn, but still you say nothing about Iraq. Not a d**n word!

*Consumer Suggestion: Well as usual....

*Consumer Comment: A little background on UNSC resolutions

*Consumer Comment: Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

*Consumer Comment: Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

*Consumer Comment: Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

*Consumer Comment: Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

*Consumer Comment: Oh, Brother... give 'em facts, and they claim boredom...

*Consumer Comment: The Most Realistic Post So Far

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera calling the kettle black!

*Consumer Comment: Hey Genius!

*Consumer Comment: Hey Genius!

*Consumer Comment: ARE YOU FOR REAL???????

*Consumer Suggestion: Vera ..you take the cake!

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Liam

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Liam

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Liam

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Liam

*Consumer Comment: Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

*Consumer Comment: Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

*Consumer Comment: Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

*Consumer Comment: Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

*Consumer Comment: LINING POCKETS, NOT LEVEES

*Consumer Comment: Yet another response to the Disinformatzia....

*Consumer Comment: Take a look at yourselves

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn & Robert The USA was not about to be invaded!

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn & Robert The USA was not about to be invaded!

*Consumer Comment: Typical James, Read enough to support you then stop

*Consumer Suggestion: Is this your proof Robert?

*Consumer Suggestion: Stay abreast of the news folks

*Consumer Comment: James and James Go to United Nations Security Council Resolution

*Consumer Comment: Good one Daniel

*Consumer Suggestion: Wow... I can only listen but so much.

*Consumer Suggestion: Your forgetting one thing Shawn

*Consumer Comment: "The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

*Consumer Comment: "The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

*Consumer Comment: "The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

*Consumer Comment: "The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

*Consumer Comment: War on Iraq is not entireley illegal

*Consumer Suggestion: Here we go continueing the spin

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Gee... & People Call Me Lost!

*Consumer Comment: Google link works

*Consumer Comment: We all are intitled to our beliefs, Right or Wrong!

*Consumer Comment: My God, what a TOOL....

*Consumer Comment: You got me, but that don't change the facts!

*Consumer Comment: I've been ripped off

*Consumer Suggestion: Well Vera lets count your supporters shall we?

*Consumer Comment: To our chest-beating (Legends In Their Own Minds) friends....

*Consumer Suggestion: USA starts minding its own business & then the terrorists will do the same.

*Consumer Suggestion: Hey Jon

*Consumer Comment: Ignorance is Bliss

*Consumer Comment: It's Reallty Pretty Simple - Every action he has taken specifically benefits the rich & wealthy in this and other nations.

*Consumer Suggestion: Facts are not really relevant

*Consumer Comment: Wow! I've been away a while, and LOOK...!

*Consumer Comment: You're getting boring now

*Consumer Suggestion: However you are repeating yourself. We moved on to Sheehan!

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert

*Consumer Suggestion: Micheal from Bountiful

*Consumer Suggestion: James they attack before we invaded

*Consumer Comment: Bush needs to be IMPEACHED!!

*Consumer Suggestion: Shawn & Robert & Craig

*Consumer Comment: Putting people in jail?

*Consumer Comment: Putting people in jail?

*Consumer Comment: Putting people in jail?

*Consumer Comment: Maybe vaporizing some of their holy land will keep them in their caves for a while.

*Consumer Comment: REALITY CHECK

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert, Throwing people in jail to attempt to silence them? Come on, I thought your worst President for pulling tricks like that was Nixon!

*Consumer Comment: Are you trying to be serious James?

*Consumer Comment: James, stop PLEASE!!!

*Consumer Comment: town full of computer owning unemployed rednecks?

*Consumer Suggestion: everyone thought he had WMD - Terrorist are like the old southern ractist, they're raised to hate

*Consumer Comment: Do you ever read what you write before posting it?

*Consumer Comment: Not one person's statement/s are 100% correct

*Consumer Suggestion: & to you John;

*Consumer Comment: James, you need to learn about International Law and what a CEASE-FIRE is

*Consumer Suggestion: Well I could forgive John;

*Consumer Comment: James, Do you put all your faith in Polls?

*Consumer Comment: That's the best one yet, James!

*Consumer Comment: Both parties are guilty of the same thing- stereotyping to the extreme

*Consumer Suggestion: For those that trust Bush & Fox News

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh Robert... about N. Korea;

*Consumer Suggestion: For once Vera you make some points

*Consumer Comment: Okay Finnigan let's begin again...

*Consumer Comment: Right! Liberalism IS a Mental Disorder.

*Consumer Suggestion: your tax dollars that are paying towards your own destruction.

*Consumer Comment: James, you haven't proved anything...

*Consumer Suggestion: I personally am Conservative & if I lived in the States I would most likely be Republican. However I could not back George Bush! He has been ripping off the American people since his first election

*Consumer Comment: Original Topic Lost in the FLAMES

*Consumer Suggestion: And to Vera;

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert I posted proof of what is true

*Consumer Comment: George W. Bush has always liked killing!!

*Consumer Comment: Five posts in succession! A personal best for James!

*Consumer Comment: I'll try this again - Every single point you try to make gets easier to disprove

*Consumer Suggestion: About Isreal

*Consumer Suggestion: As far as Robert's Proof Goes....

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert, You are the only one on this thread that still believes Iraq had WMD's Now all I ask is for proof.

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh & B... about 911

*Consumer Comment: seriously misinformed

*Consumer Comment: James: For Your Eyes Only

*Consumer Suggestion: Ok B, you have points

*Consumer Comment: Planes, subs, WMD and tact

*Consumer Suggestion: Now if you are a little bit curios

*Consumer Suggestion: Hey B. If you ever thought you got by me, you were mistaken.

*Consumer Comment: James, your slip is showing

*Consumer Comment: Yea, though I walk through the valley of pollution and war, I will find no exit, for thou art in office.

*Consumer Suggestion: & for you Patrick, Back to the discussion. WMD's & the fact that the USA is illegally in Iraq & causing terrorism.

*Consumer Comment: Unbelievable attitude.

*Consumer Suggestion: Well I sure have lots to respond to...

*Consumer Comment: Aww, shucks, Vera

*Consumer Comment: Buy a map everyone!

*Consumer Comment: For more yuks about our friend in the Great White North.

*Consumer Comment: Things that make ya go "hmmmmmmh"....

*Consumer Comment: Typical Defense of the Bushites

*Consumer Comment: Here ya go B

*Consumer Suggestion: Not much new here... still sitting on the edge of my seat.

*Consumer Comment: Loose ends for Calgary James & Florida Robert

*Consumer Comment: See what I mean?

*Consumer Comment: i hope it is worth it.

*Consumer Comment: Good Grief!

*Consumer Comment: "Semper viglio, paratus, et fidelis...." By golly!

*Consumer Suggestion: Gee Robert from Florida... is that the best you can do?

*Consumer Comment: I'll take that challenge ..Please explain Bush's poor attempt at humor when he joked about not finding WMD's under a podium at a black tie dinner attended by "The Have's".

*Consumer Suggestion: Proof you guys!

*Consumer Suggestion: Gee "B" & I was praising your intelligence

*Consumer Comment: Sorry Greg, you are mistaken

*Consumer Suggestion: Gee another "smart American"

*Consumer Comment: Bushites, Please Explain....

*Consumer Suggestion: Wow... a lot of garbage, with 1 smart person injecting

*Consumer Comment: James, James, James - Nobody complains about the other 150+ countries who are delinquent, just if the US is overdue.

*Consumer Comment: Allah, be praised! I now understand.

*Consumer Comment: To Bush supporters: Are your offspring in war?

*Consumer Comment: Little do ye know

*Consumer Comment: Whoa, its flyin' so thick I can't even see the point anymore

*Consumer Comment: I found James' book of "facts"

*Consumer Comment: Can you EVER be correct James?

*Consumer Comment: Someone should feel sorry for me? Why? Do I have a relative in Canada I don't know about?

*Consumer Comment: Here's to the Canadian education system!

*Consumer Suggestion: Horray Beth Quinn!

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert from Florida - Why shouldn't "every Country" in the World have a seat in the UN, & equally pay for it's upkeep

*Consumer Comment: seditionist pig

*Consumer Comment: Too funny

*Consumer Comment: Oh Really?...Just the facts please!

*Consumer Comment: George is worst natural disaster to hit country

*Consumer Comment: Wow James! Now it's trucks.

*Consumer Comment: Wow James! Now it's trucks.

*Consumer Comment: Wow James! Now it's trucks.

*Consumer Comment: Wow James! Now it's trucks.

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert from Florida

*Consumer Suggestion: Oh & poor Dear Vera... 100% of your post only bashes "with no evidence given"

*Consumer Comment: Ackk. You're boring me now, James.... now, you just sound more like a loon.

*Consumer Suggestion: Umm... Robert from Florida ..Better go back to the books there Robert!

*Consumer Comment: I can't Understand your accent. Try talking AROUND the turd.

*Consumer Suggestion: As for you Vera...

*Consumer Comment: More false information from James

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert from Florida

*Consumer Comment: For the idiot James in Canada.

*Consumer Comment: My God your daft

*Consumer Comment: Robert from Dallas

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert from Florida

*Consumer Comment: Okay Sheeple of the United States

*Consumer Comment: Okay Sheeple of the United States

*Consumer Comment: Okay Sheeple of the United States

*Consumer Comment: Okay Sheeple of the United States

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert from Florida

*Consumer Comment: From Robert TX to Robert FL..... what part of "not endorsing" do you not understand?

*Consumer Comment: Now, there's a serious interview for ya

*Consumer Suggestion: As a matter of fact... Just look at the end of Clinton's talk

*Consumer Suggestion: Good for Clinton!

*Consumer Comment: Excuse me Robert in Texas

*Consumer Comment: NEWS FLASH: How a former President sees what Bush is doing to America. This country will be ka-trillions of dollars in debt when Bush is through with it.

*Consumer Comment: James, you just get dumber with every post.

*Consumer Suggestion: Say Ben... good post! I don't know how these Religeous Zealots have gotten in the drivers seat of the Republican Party!

*Consumer Suggestion: Robert & Patrick... 2 peas in a pod!

*Consumer Comment: James, Stop! You are getting goofier with every post. What are you smoking?

*Consumer Comment: To James in Calgary.

*Consumer Suggestion: It is about money! However you do not have to make anyone do anything to call him a "terrorist".

*Consumer Suggestion: James, Calm down! - The war in Iraq is a "loosing battle" & that is it!

*Consumer Suggestion: James, Calm down!

*Consumer Comment: Who gave the United States the authority to rule the world?????

*Consumer Comment: Huh, it is so funny that George Bush Jr. was a drunk!

*Consumer Suggestion: Clinton left with the "highest popularity rating" of any President

*Consumer Suggestion: Once again.....its that "God" thing again......

*Consumer Comment: Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

*Consumer Comment: Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

*Consumer Comment: Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

*Consumer Comment: Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

*Consumer Suggestion: The fact is "Dear Patrick", that the USA has never really done anybody any real favors!

*Consumer Comment: Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

*Consumer Comment: Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

*Consumer Comment: Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

*Consumer Suggestion: I bring up the past, as you people "down south" have such a misguided "Propaganda system" that you go on believing, that you have been the "saviors of the world" & that you continue to be, as you invade, Vietnam, Nicarauga, Iraq, Afganistan.. who's next!

*Consumer Suggestion: Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

*Consumer Suggestion: Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

*Consumer Suggestion: Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

*Consumer Suggestion: Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

*Consumer Comment: I applaud the ones who recognize the truth! ..WAR is ALL about Big Business, making millions and billions on our troops deaths

*Consumer Comment: As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

*Consumer Comment: As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

*Consumer Comment: As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

*Consumer Comment: As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

*Consumer Suggestion: Good Job "B"!

*Consumer Comment: Yes, I do have much to say...and wait! Heres More!

*Consumer Comment: Bush supporters unable to offer any coherent evidence he is not a rip-off!

*Consumer Comment: I've been silent up to now

*Consumer Suggestion: They bend and twist to every little special interest group that comes along

*Consumer Suggestion: To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

*Consumer Suggestion: To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

*Consumer Suggestion: To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

*Consumer Suggestion: To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

*Consumer Comment: You didn't ask, but here's my take....

*Consumer Suggestion: Yes Stacey, we could all do that...

*Consumer Comment: More hate spewing from the liberals

*Consumer Suggestion: Black and White?

*Consumer Comment: Missing the BIG picture.

*Consumer Comment: REBECCA, OBVIOUSLY NO ONE IS "HOLDING BACK"

*Consumer Comment: Coming Up on 2020 - TOMORROW! Friday, Sept. 9, at 10 p.m. ET ,,,DEAD WRONG! ...Colin Powell the president's point man, see him tell how he was DUPED! ..another Republican lie that killed American innocent Americans!

*Consumer Comment: Bush

*Consumer Comment: Your argument about oil is rediculous.

*Consumer Comment: You pathetic Moron

*Consumer Suggestion: I can't believe how stupid some of you people are.

*Consumer Comment: Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing.

*Consumer Comment: Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing.

*Consumer Comment: I know why Bush was elected now!!!

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: You foolish people believe what you want! Bush-pig will be soon gone and My Lady Hillary Clinton will be the new president.

*Consumer Comment: Yes, this belongs in Ripoffreport!

*Consumer Comment: you have the nerve to call Republicans stupid

*Consumer Comment: WHINE, WHINE, GET OVER IT!

*Consumer Comment: Steal the election?

*Consumer Comment: Isn't it odd

*Consumer Comment: Bush the Elder sanctioned genocide...Clinton took care of it!

*Consumer Comment: a conservative NOT bitching about the bj

*Consumer Comment: most "liberals" are the most intolerant people I know

*Consumer Comment: Blind Trust

*Consumer Comment: Sherri- California- are you willing to go to Iraq?

*Consumer Comment: the f head you are referring to...

*Consumer Comment: We are a Capitalist Society

*Consumer Suggestion: Attacks?...since 9/11??

*Author of original report: To all you dumb idiots that support dumb Bush. Watch the CNN feature on this liar called DEAD WRONG!

*Consumer Comment: Serious Lack of Leadership II

*Consumer Comment: If we just wanted the oil...

*Consumer Comment: I also find it funny that people are blaming Hurricane Katrina on Bush. Dummies, the morons that are in charge on Louisiana have only themselves to blame for that fiasco.

*Consumer Comment: Bush Lied; Thousands Died

*Consumer Comment: I think I would run on the "America First" platform, not the "Nuke the World" platform.

*Consumer Comment: I totally agree!

*Consumer Comment: Remembering this is a Consumer rip-off forum...

*Consumer Suggestion: Conservative moaning

*Consumer Comment: how many terrorist attacks have happened in America since 9/11? Bush is doing great!

*Consumer Comment: For Steph in IL. I am pro-Bush, and I fully support our troops around the world

*Consumer Comment: Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

*Consumer Comment: Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

*Consumer Comment: Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

*Consumer Comment: Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

*Consumer Suggestion: Commies? CNN?

*Consumer Suggestion: Commies? CNN?

*Consumer Suggestion: Commies? CNN?

*Consumer Suggestion: Commies? CNN?

*Consumer Suggestion: Liberals prove it again

*Consumer Suggestion: Liberals prove it again

*Consumer Suggestion: Liberals prove it again

*Consumer Suggestion: Liberals prove it again

*Consumer Comment: fair enough

*Consumer Comment: fair enough

*Consumer Comment: fair enough

*Consumer Comment: fair enough

*Consumer Suggestion: Funny....I thought.......

*Consumer Suggestion: Funny....I thought.......

*Consumer Suggestion: Funny....I thought.......

*Consumer Suggestion: Funny....I thought.......

*Consumer Comment: LMAO - The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president

*Consumer Comment: LMAO - The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president

*Consumer Comment: Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

*Consumer Comment: Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

*Consumer Comment: Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

*Consumer Comment: getting out of hand

*Consumer Comment: getting out of hand

*Consumer Comment: getting out of hand

*Consumer Suggestion: sure, blame the other side.

*Consumer Comment: How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

*Consumer Comment: How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

*Consumer Comment: How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

*Author of original report: Members of Bush Administration needed to replace a lightbulb

*Consumer Comment: Whee! Some of you almost get it! As G.W. would say "We are making real progress now".

*Consumer Comment: not your president?

*Consumer Comment: Bush-whacked brain dead people; tell it to New Orleans! "King George", in all his incompetence, lets people die while he fiddles.

*Consumer Suggestion: Remember

*Consumer Comment: The Communist News Network (CNN)

*Consumer Comment: Can any Liberals speak civillaly?

*Consumer Comment: Once again James..... how shallow the gene pool is in Tupper Lake

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Click here now..

George Walker Bush:



This poor excuse of a president has taken the huge surplus President Clinton gave us and has put us in the red-meaning the hole. He got us in a war 6 months after stealing the election and claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, of course, that was untrue. Yet we still keep losing troops to this day and he still incists we stay in the war to keep America Strong.

Well I think this Dictator is an a**hole, war monger. Bush I hear you are needing troops soon? Hey why not send your daughters?
They are old enough for draft.

James
Tupper Lake, New York
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 08/23/2005 11:29 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/george-w-bush/nationwide/george-w-bush-ripoff-bush-is-a-repulsive-president-who-lied-to-invade-a-sovereign-nation-154773. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author
1429Consumer
4Employee/Owner

#1433 Consumer Comment

'OIL'RAQ...

AUTHOR: Karl - (USA)

POSTED: Thursday, July 09, 2015

can be typed in at this site. Just type in- 'OIL'RAQ, and read the related Ripoff Reports for important information. Thank you.

"Knowledge is power."

POWER TO THE PEOPLE

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1432 Consumer Comment

Kentucky voted for mccain

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 17, 2009

I still can't believe mccain Is going to run In 2012. He will be 80 years old. He has been rejected In 3 elections. Why does he put himself threw this. He was with bush all the way.


This country could not take anymore of the republicans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1431 Consumer Comment

Kentucky voted for mccain

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 17, 2009

I still can't believe mccain Is going to run In 2012. He will be 80 years old. He has been rejected In 3 elections. Why does he put himself threw this. He was with bush all the way.


This country could not take anymore of the republicans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1430 Consumer Comment

Kentucky voted for mccain

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 17, 2009

I still can't believe mccain Is going to run In 2012. He will be 80 years old. He has been rejected In 3 elections. Why does he put himself threw this. He was with bush all the way.


This country could not take anymore of the republicans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1429 Consumer Comment

Kentucky voted for mccain

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 17, 2009

I still can't believe mccain Is going to run In 2012. He will be 80 years old. He has been rejected In 3 elections. Why does he put himself threw this. He was with bush all the way.


This country could not take anymore of the republicans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1428 Consumer Comment

Get over it

AUTHOR: Deb - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 17, 2009

This is a site to report companies that rip-off consumers. Stop drinking the kool-aid and get a life. I don't like the current president, but you don't see me filing a rip-off report. If you constantly live in the past you might not see what's in your future.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1427 Consumer Comment

I see no mature adults on this site

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

I see no mature adults on this site, only big babies like your typical high school bullies.


And businesses who don't like being exposed on this site.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1426 Consumer Comment

Bush promised the samething

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

Bush promised the samething. Bush said the "The terrorist responsible would be punished". The real terrorist who did this evil deed was bin ladin, I don't care how his name Is spelled.

I hated saddam hussien to, but he wasn't behind 09/11/2001. Bin ladin Is laughing @ us the stupid americans. So bin ladin will never be brought to justice.

Thank's alot bush for going back on your promise to get bin laden. What did we ever do to bin laden, to get him to hate us nothing. He hates the united states.

Because we have the most freedon, we are not completely free though. People have to work & obey laws. But we still have more freedom the any other countries.

They also kill q***r's In other countries. They would not allowed q***r marriage In any other country.

But sense people are tolerating q***r marriage, & more people are turning agaisnt god.

He Is not helping us or protecting us like he used to.

I believe god sent hurricane katrinia, but that still didn't make people turn from there wicked ways.

God Is telling us something threw these bad storms.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1425 Consumer Comment

Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

When are you finally going to sell the computer and pay all the people/companies you owe money to deadbeat?

'All presidents go back on there promises'

>> So what? This isn't news.

'All presidents go back on there promises.'

>> We heard you the first time.

'So these mccain lovers don't have the right to punish or condom him.'

>> What is this babble suppose to mean?

'Bush went back on every single promise he made, during his run for president.'

>> And yet, you can not name one that he did.

'Know look where this country Is today.'

>> What? You mean with scumbags like you posting fraudulent reports and stealing our tax money instead of going out and getting a job you leech?


'Bush has ruined this country, these mccain lovers & palin lovers are bitter & pissed cause they lost!.'

>> And yet you again have not one fact to back anything you say up.


'Republican's will never get a chance to destroy this country ever again, so there bitterness bitching & moaning will not help them get elected.'

>> No one has destroyed it to begin with so why are you lying?


'When the republican's lose there power, that hate It.'

>> And you have proof of this where?

Perhaps you should focus more on these topics:

- How can you afford a vehicle to go out and cause accidents in if you allegedly have no money?
- How can you afford the exorbitant insurance from the accidents you cause in the vehicle you shouldn't be able to afford if you have no money as you claim in the collection report?
- How can you have any credit card at all if you have no money like you claim in all the collection reports you crap in?
- How can you afford a computer to perpetrate your fraud with if you have no money like you claim in the collection reports you pollute?
- How can you afford an internet connection to perpetrate your fraud if you allegedly have no money as you claim?
- How can you afford an attorney for all these alleged lawsuits you claim to be filing if you have no money like you claim?
- Why did you get a cellphone you knew you couldn't afford when you have no money as you claim?
- Why haven't you paid the people you have owed money to for a long time?
- How can you be buying your panties and dresses off QVC if you have no money?
- When are you going to apologize for lying to Steve as was proven about allegedly not being on some sort of meds? Or are you not on meds? Which is the lie?
- When are you finally going to leave us like you promised in your fraudulent schneider report so that isn't also one of your many lies?
- When are you finally going to answer the legitimate questions asked of you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1424 Consumer Comment

Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

When are you finally going to sell the computer and pay all the people/companies you owe money to deadbeat?

'All presidents go back on there promises'

>> So what? This isn't news.

'All presidents go back on there promises.'

>> We heard you the first time.

'So these mccain lovers don't have the right to punish or condom him.'

>> What is this babble suppose to mean?

'Bush went back on every single promise he made, during his run for president.'

>> And yet, you can not name one that he did.

'Know look where this country Is today.'

>> What? You mean with scumbags like you posting fraudulent reports and stealing our tax money instead of going out and getting a job you leech?


'Bush has ruined this country, these mccain lovers & palin lovers are bitter & pissed cause they lost!.'

>> And yet you again have not one fact to back anything you say up.


'Republican's will never get a chance to destroy this country ever again, so there bitterness bitching & moaning will not help them get elected.'

>> No one has destroyed it to begin with so why are you lying?


'When the republican's lose there power, that hate It.'

>> And you have proof of this where?

Perhaps you should focus more on these topics:

- How can you afford a vehicle to go out and cause accidents in if you allegedly have no money?
- How can you afford the exorbitant insurance from the accidents you cause in the vehicle you shouldn't be able to afford if you have no money as you claim in the collection report?
- How can you have any credit card at all if you have no money like you claim in all the collection reports you crap in?
- How can you afford a computer to perpetrate your fraud with if you have no money like you claim in the collection reports you pollute?
- How can you afford an internet connection to perpetrate your fraud if you allegedly have no money as you claim?
- How can you afford an attorney for all these alleged lawsuits you claim to be filing if you have no money like you claim?
- Why did you get a cellphone you knew you couldn't afford when you have no money as you claim?
- Why haven't you paid the people you have owed money to for a long time?
- How can you be buying your panties and dresses off QVC if you have no money?
- When are you going to apologize for lying to Steve as was proven about allegedly not being on some sort of meds? Or are you not on meds? Which is the lie?
- When are you finally going to leave us like you promised in your fraudulent schneider report so that isn't also one of your many lies?
- When are you finally going to answer the legitimate questions asked of you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1423 Consumer Comment

Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

When are you finally going to sell the computer and pay all the people/companies you owe money to deadbeat?

'All presidents go back on there promises'

>> So what? This isn't news.

'All presidents go back on there promises.'

>> We heard you the first time.

'So these mccain lovers don't have the right to punish or condom him.'

>> What is this babble suppose to mean?

'Bush went back on every single promise he made, during his run for president.'

>> And yet, you can not name one that he did.

'Know look where this country Is today.'

>> What? You mean with scumbags like you posting fraudulent reports and stealing our tax money instead of going out and getting a job you leech?


'Bush has ruined this country, these mccain lovers & palin lovers are bitter & pissed cause they lost!.'

>> And yet you again have not one fact to back anything you say up.


'Republican's will never get a chance to destroy this country ever again, so there bitterness bitching & moaning will not help them get elected.'

>> No one has destroyed it to begin with so why are you lying?


'When the republican's lose there power, that hate It.'

>> And you have proof of this where?

Perhaps you should focus more on these topics:

- How can you afford a vehicle to go out and cause accidents in if you allegedly have no money?
- How can you afford the exorbitant insurance from the accidents you cause in the vehicle you shouldn't be able to afford if you have no money as you claim in the collection report?
- How can you have any credit card at all if you have no money like you claim in all the collection reports you crap in?
- How can you afford a computer to perpetrate your fraud with if you have no money like you claim in the collection reports you pollute?
- How can you afford an internet connection to perpetrate your fraud if you allegedly have no money as you claim?
- How can you afford an attorney for all these alleged lawsuits you claim to be filing if you have no money like you claim?
- Why did you get a cellphone you knew you couldn't afford when you have no money as you claim?
- Why haven't you paid the people you have owed money to for a long time?
- How can you be buying your panties and dresses off QVC if you have no money?
- When are you going to apologize for lying to Steve as was proven about allegedly not being on some sort of meds? Or are you not on meds? Which is the lie?
- When are you finally going to leave us like you promised in your fraudulent schneider report so that isn't also one of your many lies?
- When are you finally going to answer the legitimate questions asked of you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1422 Consumer Comment

Why xdo you keep pretending to know what you are talking about? Leave this type of discussion for the adults deadbeat.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

When are you finally going to sell the computer and pay all the people/companies you owe money to deadbeat?

'All presidents go back on there promises'

>> So what? This isn't news.

'All presidents go back on there promises.'

>> We heard you the first time.

'So these mccain lovers don't have the right to punish or condom him.'

>> What is this babble suppose to mean?

'Bush went back on every single promise he made, during his run for president.'

>> And yet, you can not name one that he did.

'Know look where this country Is today.'

>> What? You mean with scumbags like you posting fraudulent reports and stealing our tax money instead of going out and getting a job you leech?


'Bush has ruined this country, these mccain lovers & palin lovers are bitter & pissed cause they lost!.'

>> And yet you again have not one fact to back anything you say up.


'Republican's will never get a chance to destroy this country ever again, so there bitterness bitching & moaning will not help them get elected.'

>> No one has destroyed it to begin with so why are you lying?


'When the republican's lose there power, that hate It.'

>> And you have proof of this where?

Perhaps you should focus more on these topics:

- How can you afford a vehicle to go out and cause accidents in if you allegedly have no money?
- How can you afford the exorbitant insurance from the accidents you cause in the vehicle you shouldn't be able to afford if you have no money as you claim in the collection report?
- How can you have any credit card at all if you have no money like you claim in all the collection reports you crap in?
- How can you afford a computer to perpetrate your fraud with if you have no money like you claim in the collection reports you pollute?
- How can you afford an internet connection to perpetrate your fraud if you allegedly have no money as you claim?
- How can you afford an attorney for all these alleged lawsuits you claim to be filing if you have no money like you claim?
- Why did you get a cellphone you knew you couldn't afford when you have no money as you claim?
- Why haven't you paid the people you have owed money to for a long time?
- How can you be buying your panties and dresses off QVC if you have no money?
- When are you going to apologize for lying to Steve as was proven about allegedly not being on some sort of meds? Or are you not on meds? Which is the lie?
- When are you finally going to leave us like you promised in your fraudulent schneider report so that isn't also one of your many lies?
- When are you finally going to answer the legitimate questions asked of you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1421 Consumer Comment

All presidents go back on there promises

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 03, 2009

All presidents go back on there promises. So these mccain lovers don't have the right to punish or condom him. Bush went back on every single promise he made, during his run for president. Know look where this country Is today.


Bush has ruined this country, these mccain lovers & palin lovers are bitter & pissed cause they lost!.


Republican's will never get a chance to destroy this country ever again, so there bitterness bitching & moaning will not help them get elected.


When the republican's lose there power, that hate It.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1420 Consumer Comment

For Misty...

AUTHOR: Striderq - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Well, I for one consider him black because that is how he identifies himself. If he presented himself as bi-racial then I would consider him that. But the Liberals demanded that everyone get to self indentify and that everyone else had to accept them as that self indentification. So since he identifies himself as black/African-American then that's what we should consider him as. Now for a question. Since you want people to stop hating on Obama, do you also want people to stop hating on Bush? Only seems fair to me. Or is it that you only want people to stop hating your choice? Any politician will be liked/loved/adored/revered by the people that support his/her party and disliked/hated/dispised by people from the other party. This is the way politics works. It's an us versus them. The best thing we Americans could do is start electing polticians for their views and stands than for the party letter behind their name. I'm registered as a Republican but I support and vote for the person who most closely holds the views that I do. If I have a problem with a poltician it's because of what she/he does/does not do, not because of their party.

But come on folks: This thread is over 4 years old. Bush is no longer President and can not run again. Can't we all just let this thread die and find a better one to post on??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1419 Consumer Comment

WALL STREET WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HIKE IN GAS PRICES -

AUTHOR: Laurie - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 20, 2009

During the period the prices went through the roof - the press was claiming it was due to oil shortages - I knew then what I know now - there was NO OIL SHORTAGE - it was the Commodity Futures Markets that falsely raised the price per barrel.

It was the commodity markets - and WALL STREET that raised the PER BARREL PRICE because it was making them money.

Fact of the matter - WALL STREET was not supposed to be in commodities market at all - but they all thought if they all started buying OIL FUTURES at inflated rates, it would make BIG MONEY FOR THEM,

I guess no one noticed that when the economy crashed because of WALL STREET and BANKS buying and selling mortgage backed debts - the OIL PRICES per barrel went down again. WALL STREET PULLED OUT OF THE COMMODITIES MARKET!

THIS WAS EXPLAINED ON THE NEWS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR - but no one pays attention to the news anymore.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1418 Consumer Comment

~ Stop Hating on Obama ~

AUTHOR: Misty - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 20, 2009

For all of you out there that is slandering Obama need to really take a look at this whole situation. All of the previous presidents were what? WHITE, and now that a 1/2 breed; bi-racial individual that YOU ALL is considering him BLACK. WHY??????? His Mother was White so why don't people look at that factor first of all. Now that we have this bi-racial individual in the White House, lots of people are saying how much of a p***k up he is. Come on, people.

GET REAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Give him a chance and stop being such JACK ASSES. He's only been in office for less than 6 months and Bush starting phucking up since day 1.

Being African American, it's still hard for a man and/or woman. RACISM STILL EXISTS for all of you out there that doesn't. I see these stickers on the back of peoples' cars saying "NO_OBAMA". Why? He's in there now so stop being a a*****e and deal with it. He never had a chance from jump street because of his race. If you people would stop being so d**n racist and give this man a chance, it may benefit you. If we had McCain in the White House, do you think he would be trying or attempting to draw our troops out of a nonsense war? I don't think so!

And this goes to Tom, you must not have a life to do all of that d**n typing and posting. What does all of that nonsense information proves? Who cares about the people who failed College Exams and such and became a successful actor/actress. You must be a McCain old a*s supporter and upset because Obama swept the electorial votes over him. I know you will probably read this and call me out my name and post some other nonsense BS either about me or OUR PRESIDENT. GO RIGHT AHEAD IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1417 Consumer Comment

Thanx God for President Bus who kept us safe for over 7 years.... and now for Clinton and Obama

AUTHOR: Tom - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 25, 2009

To all of you, this was all forwarded to me; altho' I agree with it, I did not know just how evil, self serving and power hungry these two were.

God help us if Hitlery ever gets to be President. Here are some facts about that lying power hungry b***h and her husband. I am passing this on to all of the people who hate the Clinton's as much as I do and also to the naive and uninformed who do NOT know or pretend not to know how bad they were/are for this country. Read the facts and weep and then hide in shame you democrats and Clinton lovers.

********
Thank you Bill Clinton for all you have done For, I'm sorry excuse me, To this country

A friend recently saw a bumper sticker that said, "Thank me, I voted for Clinton-Gore." He sat down, reflected on that, and then sent his " Thank you " for what Clinton had done for this country, specifically:

1. Thank you for introducing us to Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broderick. Did I leave anyone out?

2. Thank you for teaching my 8 year old about oral sex. I had really planned to wait until they were older to discuss it with them, but now they know more about it than I did as a senior in college.

3. Thank you for showing us that having sex in the work place (especially the White House) and on the job is OK as long as the receiving person doesn't consider Fellatio (ORAL stimulation of the p***s) a sex act. It
is enlightening to find out that a sexual act is not really sexual, if one of the people, involved, does not believe the act to be sexual.

4. Thank you for reintroducing the concept of impeachment to a new generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie "Wag the Dog" is real.

5. Thank you for making Jimmy Carter look competent, Gerald Ford look graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful, and John Kennedy look moral.

6. Thank you for the 73 House and Senate witnesses who have pled the 5th Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid testifying about your Democratic campaign fund raising.

7. Thank you, for the 19 charges, 8 convictions, and 4 imprisonment's from the Whitewater "mess" and the 55 criminal charges and 32 criminal convictions (so far) in the other "Clinton" scandals.

8. Thank you also for reducing our military by half and putting our country in jeopardy, "gutting" much of our foreign policy, and flying all over the world on "vacations" carefully disguised as necessary trips.

9. Thank you, also, for "finding" millions of dollars--- I really didn't need it in the first place, and I can't think of a more well deserving group of recipients for my hard-earned dollars than jet fuel for all of your globe-trotting. I understand you, the family and your cronies have logged in more time aboard Air Force One than any other administration.

10. Now that you've left the White House, Thank you for the 140 pardons of convicted felons and indicted felons-in-exile. We will love to have them rejoin society.

11. Thank you also for stealing the White House silverware and all of the other items you stole from the Whitehouse that belong to the people and taxpayers of this country. I'm sure that Laura Bush didn't like the pattern anyway. Also, enjoy the housewarming gifts you've received from your "friends,"

12. Thank you to you and your staff in the West Wing of the White House for vandalizing and destroying government property on the way out. I also appreciate your stealing all of that excess weight (China, silverware, linen, towels, ash trays, soap, pens, magnetic compass, flight manuals, etc.) out of Air Force 1. The weight savings means burning less fuel, thus less tax dollars spent on jet fuel. Thank you!

13. Also, please ensure that Hillary enjoys the $8 million dollar advance for her upcoming "tell-all" book and you, Bill, the $10 million advance for your memoirs. Who says crime doesn't pay! What a gal Hillary is!! What a guy you are!!

14. The last and most important point - Thank you for forcing Israel to let Mohammed Atta go free. Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners." However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammed Atta was freed and eventually thanked the U.S. by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. Thanks again Bill. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports. Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth about what you did? What a guy you are!!

Thank you Bill Clinton for all you have done For, I'm sorry excuse me, To this country

If you agree that the American public must be made aware of these facts, pass this on. God bless America and everyone in it except the two Clintons who are both crooks, thieves and liars.

PS: Please pass along a special Thank you to Al Gore for "inventing" the Internet, without which I would not be able to send this wonderful factual e-mail.

Can you believe there are still naive Americans out there who like Bill Clinton and would vote for him again!! Worse yet - God Forbid, someday that crook Hillary is running for President and these same nave people will vote for her too !!
God Help this country if that ever happens.

God Bless America
***********************************************************************************************************

The Clinton Legacy in summary

From an article in The Progressive Review

RECORDS SET - This is factual
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad

THANK YOU once again "Slick Willy" for spending our taxes so wisely and frugally.



SINCERELY, a US Citizen.

***********************************************************************************************************
..and if you think Hillary is any better - read this !!

By Cdr. Hamilton McWhorter USN (ret)
Gold Star Mothers is an organization made up of women whose sons were killed in military combat during service in the United States armed forces. Recently a delegation of New York State Gold Star Mothers made a trip to Washington, DC, to discuss various concerns with their elected representatives. According to published reports, there was only one politician who refused to meet with these ladies. Can you guess which politician that might be? Was it New York Senator Charles Schumer? Nope, he met with them. Try again. Do you know anyone serving in the Senate who has never showed anything but contempt for our military? Do you happen to know the name of any politician in Washington who's husband once wrote of his loathing for the military? Now you're getting warm! You got it! None other than the Queen b***h herself, Hillary Rotten Clinton. She refused repeated requests to meet with the Gold Star Mothers. Now, please don't tell me you're surprised. This woman wants to be president of the United States --- and there is a huge percentage of voters who are eager and stupid enough to help her achieve that goal. May you sleep in peace always...and please...hug or thank a Veteran for that privilege. Think about this one !!!

Don't forget, our girl, Hillary Rotten Clinton, as a New York Senator, now comes under this fancy congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan. It's common knowledge that, in order for her to establish NY state residency, they purchased a million+ dollar house in upscale Chappaqua, NY. Makes sense. Now, they are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense. Here is where it becomes interesting. The mortgage payments hover at about $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra residency had to be built within the acreage in order to house the Secret Service agents. The Clinton's now charge the Secret Service $10,000 monthly rent for the use of said Secret Service residence and that rent is just about equal to their mortgage payment, meaning that we, the tax payers, are paying the Clinton's mortgage, their transportation, their safety and security, their 12 man staff, and it's all perfectly legal.

THANK YOU once again "Slick Willy" for spending our taxes so wisely and frugally.

***********************************************************************************************************

A little political review, a time to think & remember... from a Navy man...

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000:
President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel:
Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel:
Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000:
Clinton promised that those responsible! would be hunted down and punished.

After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors:
Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
(He did bomb an aspirin factory).

Maybe if Clinton had kept his promises, the people above and the 3,000 people in New York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.

AN INTERESTING QUESTION: This question was raised on a Philly radio call-in show. Without casting stones, it is a legitimate question. There are two men, both extremely wealthy. One develops relatively cheap software and gives billions of dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism. That being the case, why was it that the Clinton administration, the eight years Slick Willy was in office, spent more money chasing down Bill Gates rather than Osama Bin Laden?

THINK ABOUT IT!
It is a strange turn of events. Hillary gets $8 Million for remembering all the details for her forthcoming memoirs. Bill gets about $12 Million for remembering all of the details for his memoirs yet to be written. All of this from two people, while under oath, being unable to recall anything about past events during the 8 years they were in office!

P. S. DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN Please forward this to as many people as you can!

We don't want this woman for President.
*********************************************************************************************
Do we really want two faced Democrats running this country ?? Depending on if it is a political year or not, they change their stories like someone else would change their underwear daily. They are all against the current President for going to war and said there were no weapons of mass destruction and forgot that Saddam used nerve gas on his own people, the Kurds. Read what they all said before Bush did go to war.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

Sincerely,
Cmdr Hamilton McWhorter
USN (ret)

Remember:
The Alamo
Pearl Harbor
9-11-01
The Clinton Years
All Truly American Disasters! Let's not have another disaster by electing Hillary and BILL again.
**************************************************************************************************
From Dennis Miller

ALL THE RHETORIC ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD HAVE GONE TO WAR AGAINST IRAQ HAS GOT MY INSANE LITTLE BRAIN SPINNING LIKE A ROULETTE WHEEL. I ENJOY READING OPINIONS FROM BOTH SIDES BUT I HAVE DETECTED A HINT OF CONFUSION FROM SOME OF YOU.

AS I WAS READING THE PAPER RECENTLY, I WAS REMINDED OF THE BEST ADVICE SOMEONE EVER GAVE ME. HE TOLD ME ABOUT THE KISS METHOD (KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID!) SO, WITH THIS AS A THEME, I'D LIKE TO APPLY THIS THEORY FOR THOSE WHO DON'T QUITE GET IT. MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN SIMPLIFY THINGS A BIT AND RECOGNIZE A FEW IMPORTANT FACTS.

HERE ARE 10 THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN VOICING AN OPINION ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE:

1) BETWEEN PRESIDENT BUSH AND SADDAM HUSSEIN ... HUSSEIN WAS THE BAD GUY.

2) IF YOU HAVE FAITH IN THE UNITED NATIONS TO DO THE RIGHT THING KEEP THIS IN MIND, THEY HAVE LIBYA HEADING THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND IRAQ HEADING THE GLOBAL DISARMAMENT COMMITTEE. DO YOUR OWN MATH HERE

3) IF YOU USE GOOGLE SEARCH AND TYPE IN "FRENCH MILITARY VICTORIES," YOUR REPLY WILL BE "DID YOU MEAN FRENCH MILITARY DEFEATS?"

4) IF YOUR ONLY ANTI-WAR SLOGAN IS "NO WAR FOR OIL," SUE YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR ALLOWING YOU TO SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS AND ROBBING YOU OF THE EDUCATION YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT GET.

5. SADDAM AND BIN LADEN DID NOT SEEK UNITED NATIONS APPROVAL BEFORE THEY TRIED TO KILL AS MANY OF US AS POSSIBLE ON 9/11.

6) DESPITE COMMON BELIEF, MARTIN SHEEN IS NOT THE PRESIDENT. HE PLAYS ONE ON T.V.

7) EVEN IF YOU ARE ANTI-WAR, YOU ARE STILL AN "INFIDEL!" AND BIN LADEN WANTS YOU DEAD, TOO.

8) IF YOU BELIEVE IN A "VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY" BUT NOT IN THE DANGER THAT SADDAM HUSSEIN AND BIN LADEN POSED, QUIT LISTENING TO THE BIASED MEDIA. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME, IF EVER, THAT THE MEDIA HAS BROADCAST OR PRINTED ALL (OR EVEN ANY) OF THE GOOD THINGS ACCOMPLISHED IN IRAQ SINCE THE COALITION WENT IN TO LIBERATE THEM ?

9) WE ARE NOT TRYING TO OCCUPY IRAQ, WE ARE TRYING TO LIBERATE THEM LIKE WE DID FOR FRANCE - NOTICE HOW QUICKLY FRANCE FORGOT.

10) WHETHER YOU ARE FOR MILITARY ACTION OR AGAINST IT, OUR YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN OVERSEAS ARE FIGHTING FOR US TO DEFEND OUR RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT. WE ALL NEED TO SUPPORT THEM WITHOUT RESERVATION.

*******************************************************************************


>Who is smarter ?
>The Hollywood group is at it again. Holding anti-war rallies, screaming about the Bush Administration, running ads in major newspapers, defaming the President and his Cabinet every chance they get, to anyone and everyone who will listen. They publicly defile them and call them names like "stupid", "morons", and "idiots". Jessica Lange went so far as to tell a crowd in Spain that she hates President Bush and is embarrassed to be an American. so - no one is making her stay and we won't miss her when she leaves.
>
>So, just how ignorant are these people who are running the country? Let's look at the biographies of these "stupid", "ignorant," "moronic" leaders, and then at the celebrities who are castigating them:
>
President George W. Bush: Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He served as an F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard. He began his career in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy industry until 1986. He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with 53.5 percent of the vote. In a historic re-election victory, he became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year terms on November 3, 1998, winning 68.6 percent of the vote. In 1998, Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent of the Negro vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of women. He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern Republican other that Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo. (Someone began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any other President. If you believed it, you might want to go to URBANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth.)
>
Vice President d**k Cheney earned a B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966, both in political science. Two years later, he won an American Political Science Association congressional fellowship. One of Vice President Cheney's primary duties is to share with individuals, members of Congress and foreign leaders, President Bush's vision to strengthen our economy, secure our homeland and win the War on Terrorism. In his official role as President of the Senate, Vice President Cheney regularly goes to Capital Hill to meet with Senators and members of the House of Representatives to work on the Administration's legislative goals. In his travels as Vice President, he has seen first hand the great demands the war on terrorism is placing on the men and women of our military, and he is proud of the tremendous job they are doing for the United States of America.

Secretary of State Colin Powell was educated in the New York City public schools, graduating from the City College of New York (CCNY), where he earned a Bachelor's Degree in geology. He also participated in
>ROTC at CCNY and received a commission as an Army second lieutenant upon graduation in June 1958. His further academic achievements include a Master of Business Administration Degree from George Washington University. Secretary Powell is the recipient of numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations. Secretary Powell's civilian awards include two Presidential Medals of Freedom,the President's Citizens Medal, the Congressional Gold Medal, the Secretary of State Distinguished Service Medal, and the Secretary of Energy Distinguished Service Medal. Several schools and other institutions have been named in
>his honor and he holds honorary degrees from universities and colleges across the country.
>
>Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: attended Princeton University on Scholarship (AB, 1954) and served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as a Naval pilot; Congressional Assistant to Rep. Robert Griffin (R-MI), 1957-59; U.S. Representative, Illinois, 1962-69; Assistant to the President, Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director of the Cost of Living Council, 1969-74; U.S. Ambassador to NATO, 1973-74; head of Presidential Transition Team, 1974; Assistant to the President, Director of White House Office of
>Operations, White House Chief of Staff, 1974-77; Secretary of Defense, 1975-77.

Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge was raised in a working class family in veterans' public housing in Erie. He earned a scholarship to Harvard, graduating with honors in 1967. After his first year at The
>Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the U.S. Army, where he served as an infantry staff sergeant in Vietnam,earning the Bronze Star for Valor. After returning to Pennsylvania, he earned his Law Degree and was in private practice before becoming Assistant District Attorney in Erie County. He was elected to Congress in 1982. He was the first enlisted Vietnam combat veteran elected to the U.S. House, and was overwhelmingly re-elected six times.

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice earned her Bachelor's Degree in Political Science, c*m Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master's from the University of Notre Dame in
>1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. (Note: Rice enrolled at the University of Denver at the age of 15, graduating at 19 with a Bachelor's Degree in
>Political Science (c*m Laude). She earned a Master's Degree at the University of Notre Dame and a Doctorate from the University of Denver's Graduate School of International Studies. Both of her advanced degrees are also in Political Science.) She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre Dame in 1995. At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000 Republican National Conventions. From 1989 through March 1991, the period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender
>Integrated Training in the Military. She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the
>International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco Symphony Board of Governors. She was a Founding Board member of the Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. In addition, her past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica Corporation, Hewlett-Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Rand Corporation, the National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco. Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama. She resides in Washington, D.C.
>
So who are these celebrities? What is their education? What is their experience in affairs of State or in National Security? While I will defend to the death their right to express their opinions, I think that if they
are going to call into question the intelligence of our leaders, we should also have all the facts on their educations and background:

Our Hollywood Heroes ? (I'll take John Wayne any day over any of these uninformed self-righteous idiots)
>Barbra Streisand: Completed high school. Career: Singing and acting
>
>Cher: Dropped out of school in 9th grade. Career: Singing and acting
>
Martin Sheen: Flunked exam to enter University of Dayton. Career: Acting
>
>Jessica Lange: Dropped out of college mid-freshman year. Career: Acting
>
>Alec Baldwin: Dropped out of George Washington U. after scandal. Career: Acting
>
>Julia Roberts: Completed high school. Career: Acting
>
>Sean Penn: Completed High school. Career: Acting
>
>Susan Sarandon: Degree in Drama from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Career: Acting
>
>Ed Asner: Completed High school. Career: Acting
>
>George Clooney: Dropped out of University of Kentucky Career: Acting
>
>Michael Moore: Dropped out first year University of Michigan. Career: Movie Director
>
>Sarah Jessica Parker: Completed High School. Career: Acting
>
>Jennifer Anniston: Completed High School. Career: Acting
>
>Mike Farrell: Completed High school. Career: Acting
>
>Janeane Garofelo: Dropped out of College. Career: Stand up comedienne
>
>Larry Hagman: Attended Bard College for one year. Career: Acting

Total cumulative experience or education in politics or world affairs for all of the celebreties = ZERO DAYS !!

Yup They ALL must know what they are talking about !!
>
>While comparing the education and experience of these two groups, we should also remember that President Bush and his cabinet are briefed daily, even hourly, on the War on Terror and threats to our security. They are privy to information gathered around the world concerning the Middle East, the threats to America, the intentions of terrorists and terrorist-supporting governments. They are in constant communication with the CIA, the FBI, Interpol, NATO, The United Nations, our own military, and that of our allies around the world.

We cannot simply believe that we have full knowledge of the threats because we watch CNN - Get Real !! We cannot believe that we are in any way as informed as our leaders. These celebrities have no intelligence-gathering agents, no fact-finding groups, no insight into the minds of those who would destroy our country. They only have a deep seated hatred for all things Republican and that hatred precludes what is best for this country. By nature, and no one knows quite why, the Hollywood elitists detest Conservative views and anything that supports or uplifts the United States of America.

The silence from the Left was deafening when Bill Clinton (the worst President we have ever had and one who would have been impeached. The only thing that stopped that from happening was the democrats were the majority and stopped vote for impeachment) bombed a pharmaceutical factory outside of Khartoum, or when he attacked the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 and 1999. Why Not ? He bombed Serbia itself to get Slobodan Milosevic out of Kosovo, and not a single peace rally was held. Why Not ? When our Rangers were ambushed in Somalia and 18 young American lives were lost, that cowardly Clinton was more worried about his future historical image and pulled our troops out instead of avenging their deaths and cleaning out that rats nest. Not a peep was heard from Hollywood. Why Not ?

Yet now, after our nation has been attacked on its own soil, after 3,000 Americans were killed by freedom-hating terrorists while going about their routine lives, they want to hold rallies against the war. Why? Because an honest, God-fearing Republican sits in the White House. Another irony is that in 1987, when Ronald Reagan was in office, the Hollywood group aligned themselves with disarmament groups like SANE, FREEZE and PEACE ACTION, urging our own government to disarm and freeze the manufacturing of any further nuclear weapons, in order to promote world peace. It is curious that now, even after we have heard all the evidence that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and used them on The Kurds, and was very close to obtaining nuclear weapons (as is Iran); their was no cry from this group for HIM to disarm. Why Not ? They believe we should have left him alone in his quest for these weapons of mass destruction, even though it is certain that these deadly weapons will eventually be used against us in our own cities. It is not a question of IF they will use them, but When !!

So why the hype out of Hollywood? Could these celebrities believe that since they draw such astronomical salaries, they are entitled to also determine the course of our Nation? That they can make viable decisions concerning war and peace? Did Michael Moore have the backing of the Nation when he recently thanked France, on our behalf, for being a "good enough friend to tell us we were wrong"? I know for certain that Fat a*s Moore was not speaking for me. Why would France help us get terrorists out of Iraq when in WW II they would not even help us get Germany out of France. !!. It has also been proven that they along with Russia, Kofi Onan as well as many other individuals were all on The Take from Saddam Hussein with the Oil For Food program. No wonder they voted against going to war against him, they were all getting very rich at the cost of peoples lives.

Does Sean Penn fancy himself a Diplomat, in going to Iraq when we are just weeks away from war? Does he believe that his High School Diploma gives him the knowledge (and the right) to go to a country that is controlled by a maniacal dictator, and speak on behalf of the American people? Or is it the fact that he pulls in more money per year than the average American worker will see in a lifetime? Does his bank account give him clout? The ultimate irony is that many of these celebrities have made a shambles of their own lives, with drug abuse, alcoholism, numerous marriages and divorces, scrapes with the law, publicized temper tantrums, etc. How dare they pretend to know what is best for an entire nation! What is even more bizarre is how many people in this country will listen and accept their views, simply because they liked them in a certain movie, or have fond memories of an old television sitcom!

It is time for us, as citizens of the United States, to educate ourselves about the world around us and not be like sheep by automatically believing everything you see reported in the media or hear from these cocaine using celebrities. If future generations are going to enjoy the freedoms that our forefathers bequeathed us, if they are ever to know peace in their own country and their world, to live without fear of terrorism striking in their own cities; we must assure that this nation remains strong. We must make certain that those who would destroy us are made aware of the severe consequences that will befall them. Yes, it is a wonderful dream to sit down with dictators and terrorists and join hands, singing Cumbaya and talking of world peace. But that is not real world. If we believe that mere talk will work, we are bigger idiots than the murderous tyrants are killers.

We did not stop Adolf Hitler from taking over the entire continent of Europe or the Japanese from taking over the far east by simply talking to them. We sent our best and brightest, with the strength and determination that this Country is known for, and defeated the n**i regime.

President John F. Kennedy did not stop the Soviet ships from unloading their nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 with mere words. He stopped them with action, and threat of immediate war if the ships did not turn around. We did not end the Cold War with conferences. It ended with the strong belief of President Ronald Reagan... PEACE through STRENGTH.

These same Hollywood celebrities are the ones who still like Slick Willy Clinton after all the lying he did to the American public and after he and his wife stole from and looted the White House when they left office. It is quite obvious from their actions and statements that these lowly educated celebrities have no idea what they are talking about.

Thank God for President Bush and his strength and courage to do what he did. I also wonder why these celebrities and the rest of the protesters around the world have forgotten that Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction, he used them on his own people, The Kurds, by killing thousands of them with biological agents.
Let's continue to kick a*s in Iraq and if we have to, go into Syria, Iran and yes even North Korea to stop these murderous tyrants.

\\************ Obama - Socialism & Total Governemnt control *************

He has screwed up thiscountry more in 100 days than any other President did in their term. He wants to give more of my taxpayer $$ to the lazy SOB's already on welfare and he has the gonads to call it Spread the wealth. This from a sneaky lying smooth talking inept a*s who never did anything in my state of Illinois except participate in the corruption. This also from a Senator who received over $900,000 in graft money from the Fannie Mae/Freddiec Mac issues and then he blames BUSH - GIVE ME A BREAK. Go back to Africa where you were born, you are not eligible or qualified to be President. You are NOT my President and never will be.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1416 Consumer Comment

Praise Bush!!!

AUTHOR: Inspector - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 20, 2009

I don't need a reason to attack when I personally lost friends in the WTC. Weapons of mass destruction, who cares! Iraq has been known to harbor terrorists and protect them from capture. And what we DID FIND will not be released to the general public (Need to know). I also don't care who gets rich off the spoils of Iraq, as long as it's America or Americans. We are a war based ecomony and someone always benefits. Don't like it? Then don't live here.

I served in Kosovo, desert storm, and operation Iraqi freedom. It's about time someone stood up for US and let the world know that we will not take it. If we cannot find the real culprits then set an example for those who will protect them.

Take your bleeding heart somewhere else.

A Soldier

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1415 Consumer Comment

For the benefit of truth!

AUTHOR: Sherry - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 19, 2009

I am wondering just how many of these supposed statements, allegations, accusations, or so-called facts would stand up under "true" scrutiny! While I do not agree with a lot of the emotional rhetoric, nor the "highly" improper means of some of the people here who have contributed their opinion, I do agree that a "legal" investigation (of the people) should be expedited; not for revenge, but for justification of the "true" facts. I do not have all of the facts. I do not believe that ANY of you fine people do either. I do believe that we as the AMERICAN people DESERVE the TRUTH no matter how defining it may be!

Many of you need to go back and re-read the posting/rebuttal policy of RIP-OFF REPORT. I am one of those so-called anti-war Christians--- I am also pro-war depending on the reason for war. The Bible says 'not to be angry with your brother (anyone) WITHOUT a cause'. If you read the Bible, you will find that it is FULL of war stories! To be angry with our brother without a cause is AS murder in God's eyes. I'm not going to go into the 'probability dynamics' of war--- I am just going to state that not all Christians USE God as an agenda to get away with things. I DO HAVE AN OPINION TOO--- even though, I am a God-fearing man. Christians are NOT perfect--- we are just forgiven!

As Christians, we are taught not to speak evil of 'dignitaries'. Being a true dignitary entails being (not acting) dignified. Lies only lead to more lies and ultimately--- CONFUSION! What would you say is the state of our great country now??? God IS NOT the author of confusion! Our LEADERS are responsible for our well-being UNDER GOD! The OFFICE is ordained of God--- not necessarily the person filling it! I DO NOT know for a fact that George W. Bush, Jr. is evil. I ONLY KNOW to trust what I DON'T HEAR or SEE--- my instincts, insight, inner-perception, a gut feeling, intuition, my inner-man, spirit, Spirit of God, higher power. Call it what you will. I only know that I sense evil--- NO MATTER the person, or HOW godly they may or may not APPEAR to the world. SOMETHING IS AMISS WITH THE G.W. BUSH ADMINISTRATION--- AND I AIN'T GOING BY WHAT I'VE SEEN OR HEARD!!! You can say I'm off my rocker, not dealing with a FULL deck, etc. The truth is--- something is terribly WRONG and the proof WILL BE KNOWN BY EVERYONE--- sooner or later...

Further--- there are generally 2 types of Christians: Those who watch and report and those who ACT. I do BOTH! I am a Christian who ISN'T going to sit idly by and NOT say or do anything about it! Just as there were some of you who stated very adamantly, 'If you didn't vote, then you don't have an opinion!' To you, I could say, as concerning GOD ISSUES--- 'If you haven't ever lived for him, then I can't listen to you!' That would be putting the shoe on the other foot, now--- wouldn't it??

I ain't gonna bad-mouth you personally. I am going to tell you again just as you have told countless others who have been reading these posts and rebuttals--- WAIT AND SEE. What does it matter whose opinion is correct? No matter--- we ALL were affected! The TRUTH is out there, and sometimes it's right in our OWN backyard!

david

Waco, Texas (NOT the HOME of David Koresh)--- In case you didn't hear correctly.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1414 Consumer Comment

OMG!! I Cannot Believe How Many Fooled Morons Exist!!

AUTHOR: Ronny48 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 17, 2009

If you think for ONE MINUTE that George Bush is a good guy.... You can consider yourself a LOST MORON!!! And YOU NEED HELP!!!

But I will say that it is not just Bush, Mostly, Bush is used as the scape-goat for those behind him. Cheney was the monster of a lot of crap going on and then you've got the elitists - big corporation and secret government behind them.

Frankly, our presidents are simply called TOOLS. Tools of the big corporations and the eletists behind the them.

And now we have Obama as the New scape-goat. His plan to boost the economy is BOGUS!!
You watch... it won't do ANYTHING for the American people. It is another scam by the people behind him, so that the bigger, more powerful people can do the things they feel they need to do.

Just like he said, this money will go to corporations to create jobs. Corporations, meaning BIG companies. Not the small businesses that this Country was built on. So you watch... there will be very few jobs to come from this and the big Corps will have more money to do their evil deeds.

People... DO YOUR RESEARCH!!! Don't sit around like some MORON couch-patato watching the mind-control boob-tube!! I know there are MANY morons who watch tv and think our news is perfect and beautiful and dead-on correct... but you've got another thing coming!!

It's really a crying shame... how many ignorant morons with no back-bone exist on this planet today. Those who do take the time to dig in and find out the REAL truth will find freedom within.

Good luck to all you lost people.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1413 Consumer Comment

I PITY YOU !

AUTHOR: Joy R. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 01, 2009

I feel so sorry for all of you who have such hatred in your hearts/souls ( if you have any ) and live with that bitterness and blackness in your lives every day. I will pray for you, so that you may find peace.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1412 Consumer Comment

I PITY YOU !

AUTHOR: Joy R. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 01, 2009

I feel so sorry for all of you who have such hatred in your hearts/souls ( if you have any ) and live with that bitterness and blackness in your lives every day. I will pray for you, so that you may find peace.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1411 Consumer Comment

I PITY YOU !

AUTHOR: Joy R. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 01, 2009

I feel so sorry for all of you who have such hatred in your hearts/souls ( if you have any ) and live with that bitterness and blackness in your lives every day. I will pray for you, so that you may find peace.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1410 Consumer Comment

he is gone now but the damage was done

AUTHOR: Mike - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 23, 2009

yeah bush is gone now yet the damage was done but if there was one thing I would say to bush in his departure it would be--I hope the pretzel wins the second time around, you s****.>

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1409 Consumer Comment

Bush Is gone

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 22, 2009

Bush Is gone but we be still paying the price because of bush because of the stupid people who voted him In 2004. It didn't suprise me bush didn't stop the election & declared himself king george w bush.

Well his supporters the republican people was calling him king george which we don't allow that here In america. George washington our first president did not want to be called king.

Because of england. I thought look @ all those stupid people In texas cheering for that dumb neck george w bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1408 Consumer Comment

Charles is gone?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 21, 2009

"Gone, but not forgotten!
Finally, the biggest embarrassment to our nation and its citizens is now gone. Unfortunately, we will all be paying the price for his truly unrivaled level of incompetence, crass, criminally, arrogance, stupidity and greed for a very long time."

I'm betting he'll still be around.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1407 Consumer Comment

Gone, but not forgotten!

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Finally, the biggest embarrassment to our nation and its citizens is now gone. Unfortunately, we will all be paying the price for his truly unrivaled level of incompetence, crass, criminally, arrogance, stupidity and greed for a very long time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1406 Consumer Comment

The republicans had control for 6 years

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 14, 2009

The problems where already happening when the republicans still had control over congress. The democrats tried to pass bills but bush veto everything.

Bush Is a b*****d along with his republicans In congress who voted agaisnt healthcare. Bush just wants everyone to die. Democrats can't do anything cause bush veto everything.

So you can blame bush. These republican voters b***h & moan & blame congress for everything when the republicans had 6 years before this mess got out of control to do anything about It.

So don't blame all this on the democrats when they tried to pass bills to help us & bush veto everything, which many of you republican voters will always blame democrats.

Not your republicans for this mess.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1405 Consumer Comment

sheesh - a bunch of nuts here.

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 14, 2009

1ST off- democrats had control of congress since 2006 and is responsible for at least part of the recession..

Yes bush should be blamed for how he handled IRAQ... though Afgan was handled ok (per it being a 2001 similar to our PearlHarbor).

Other than the post socalled' mission accomplish' I was also ok with IRAQ, but after that it was badly mismanaged.

lets remember somem details.

the socalled balanced budge by clinton was done by GOP Congress...not Clinton.

Also, on the mortgage meltdown, that was at least in recent years almost all democratic failure (though initially it was both parties).
Failure in that the specifically blocked reforms that would have kept the meltdown from even happening.

In my opinion they helped engineer the meltdown knowning that people would blame bush or gop for it despite not being in power since 2006.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1404 Consumer Comment

Bush caused the recession

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 05, 2008

Bush caused the recession funny how It happend before bush leaves office. The people who voted for him are paying the price for voting for him. And people still support him.

While bush lives comfortably & with his retirement from being president everyone else Is suffering. Hey john from georgia. Georgia will soon be In a recession for being stupid again voting for another crooked republican.

Why can't republicans realize they are unwanted for all the trouble they have caused & the republicans have caused this recession like they did In the 1930s.

And greedy employers are the cause of It to buy abusing there powers & wrongfully firing employees.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1403 Consumer Comment

Bush intervention depresses gasoline and oil prices

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 27, 2008

Thank heaven President Bush caved in to Speaker Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Harry Reid and some of the more strident Democrats this year...when he drained our Strategic Petroleum Reserve according to their demands.

Since July '08 crude oil prices have then declined 65% and gasoline prices have declined more than 50% !!




Oh-oh, he didn't, you say ? You mean he actually kept the US Petroleum Reserve intact for genuine emergencies ? He really did resist the mob ?

Didn't know such an unpopular politician could have that much courage and integrity, much less the wisdom of the marketplace.

Wow !

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1402 Consumer Comment

no more bush family

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 26, 2008

No more bush family bush has done everything he can to wreck this country, republicans have proved they don't care about this country. All they do Is public corruption, mess up the economy.

Abuse the middle class people why do you think they are so many bad businesses out today taking advantage of us & abusing us.

Republicans don't love america & bush & his republican cronies have proved they don't care about us or the country, republicans are mobsters, frauds embezzlers they prove they are corrupt.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1401 Consumer Comment

Be specific Charlie

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 23, 2008

"Obama hasn't been sworn in yet."

I am stunned you know that. The way people call the shop expceting car repairs to be FREE, shows many do not. It also shows how Obama got elected.

"Buy the way robert calling me 'chuckles' doesn't bother me."

Yes it does.

"One of the posters started calling me chuckles & got everyone including you started calling me It."

It's a term of endearment Charles. We actually like you. If we didn't, we'd just ignore you.

"I am happy the republicans got defeated after 8 long years of losing jobs for nothing."

What job did you lose? You've never had a job.

"9/11/2001 Is the main reason what helped get democrats elected, republicans didn't get 12 years this time."

The attacks of 9/11 are the reason Bush got reelected. The economic downturn is the reason the Dems took the win this time.

"Bush is alot like hoover the stock market had problems when hoover was president cause he didn't give a rats a*s about the poor or middle class people, we are suffering because of another republican president."

Show me in the US Constitution where it says anything about the Federal Government propping up Wall Street, or doing anything at all for the rich, poor, or middle class. Be specific. I want Article numbers, and paragraphs.

"The stock market Is In trouble just like back In hoover days, hoover & bush betrayed us the american people."

The economy went down because the Carter administration created a monster called the Community Reinvestment Act. It was passed by the Democrat controlled House and Senate and signed into law by Carter. It was then reinforced by the Clinton administration by the Democrat controlled House and Senate to require Banks make at least 5% of their loans to people who they know cannot qualify under proper banking regulations. When the housing bubble popped, property values went down. When people who cannot afford their homes get foreclosed on, the values decline even more. This created a staggering debtload for the investors who just saw their assets disappear. This caused the avalanche and banks/investment houses went under. Did anyone notice the Credit Unions were not affected by this issue? The Republicans warned about this issue in 2000. The Democrats in control ignored them.

In reality Charles, the worst thing the Feds can do is to prop the banks up. They should be allowed to fail. It's a normal business cycle. The weak die, the strong survive. They just wasted 350Billion dollars on the "bailout". This is in addition to the 300Billion dollars wasted in July for the same reason. That's 650Billion so far, and the Treasury Secretary has said "oops". The Democrat controlled Congress agreed it did nothing. What it did is devalue the dollar even more, and increase the debt.

Now the UAW wants a bailout. This one has nothing at all to do with the automakers. This bailout is 100% for the United Auto Workers Union. If the Big 3 file for Bankruptcy protection, the labor contracts will be voided. In a state with 10% unemployment, the Big 3 could rightfully place ads for new assemblyline workers at 1/4 the wages they pay now(averaging $78.35 per hour...that's $130,000 per year). There would be a half million applicants in line. The Big 3 could even save money by moving their plants to right to work states, as the other car makers currently have done. The UAW says if the bailout isn't done...and even the Democrat controlled Congress admits it would only extend the inevitable to March 2009...115,000 workers would be unemployed. They claim this would be devastating to the US economy. Hmmm. Citigroup has fired 53,000 employees during the last few months and yet that has not devaststed anything. Add the hundereds of thousands from other companies who have cut back, and yet, ONLY losing the UAW workers will devastate the economy. The only economy that would disrupt is the UAW's. The Big 3 need to be allowed to fail, as the banks should be. This is the reason bankruptcy laws were written.

For the record Charles, FDR did NOT do anything to help us out of the Depression. While it was the money tightening policies of Hoover that deepened our part of the world wide recession into a depression, FDR only exacerbated the problem with his programs. WW2 brought us out of it. Another issue is the fact the depression was an isolated one. The drought caused food shortages(again world wide), and prices went up accordingly. Inflation plus lack of expansive capital caused the Depression. The 3 most expensive car makers could not keep up with demand...Auburn, Cord, Duesenberg...and yacht building was going on at a much higher rate. The wealthy could not expand their businesses due to tightened credit, so jobs were not created. They still spent money as they always do. Those who had jobs had to prove their worth, or be let go...just like today. My grandfather sold cheese for Kraft. He made a great living. Others didn't. I prove my worth every day, which is why I have a good job, even as others lose theirs.

Obama is about to take the helm of a sinking ship. Congress is rearranging the deck chairs. The National Debt is well over 10Trillion dollars. THAT is insane. There is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund. There is no money in the Treasury. It's all just smoke and mirrors. More money is spent each year on welfare programs than on defense...the ONLY expense actually allowed by the US Constitution, other than the minimal cost of running the Government(which is less than 300Million dollars per year).

The ONLY thing that will help this economy is for the US Constitution to be strictly adhered to. That means NO MORE welfare programs of any type. No more spending that isn't properly authorized. The US Constitution is very clear on what the Treasury can be spent on. YOU are not among the qualified items.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1400 Consumer Comment

Bush betrayed us the american citizens

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008

Obama hasn't been sworn in yet. Buy the way robert calling me "chuckles" doesn't bother me.

One of the posters started calling me chuckles & got everyone including you started calling me It.

I am happy the republicans got defeated after 8 long years of losing jobs for nothing.

9/11/2001 Is the main reason what helped get democrats elected, republicans didn't get 12 years this time.

Bush is alot like hoover the stock market had problems when hoover was president cause he didn't give a rats a*s about the poor or middle class people, we are suffering because of another republican president.

The stock market Is In trouble just like back In hoover days, hoover & bush betrayed us the american people.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1399 Consumer Comment

What happened to "Change"?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008

"The last time we was In recession economy turmoil was when hoover was president."

Wrong. There have been many recessions since the Depression. In fact, there was one during Bill Clinton's Presidency...in 1997. One of the worst was at the end of Jimmy Carter's reign of horror. Anyone else remember 21% mortgage rates? In fact, every decade has one. Recessions are world-wide. They are not limited to the USA.

"Bush vetoed healthcare bill he doesn't care who lives or dies or who dies of starvation."

Please show me where providing healthcare is allowed by our Constitution. While you are at it, show me where it requires me to feed you.

"They refuse to see the truth they just want to support there guy no matter what the wrongs bush did."

What did he do wrong? Be specific, and make sure you have the US Constitution to verify your complaints.

"A pastor Is not suppose to bring politics In a worship service,..."

WOW!!! I'll just assume you feel the same way about Jeremiah Wright...the Preacher Obama and his family went to for 20 years for spiritual leadership.

"This country will never be the same from how bush/cheney & the bush fans from what they have done."

I have no idea what this last sentence means. It's as meaningless as most.

My question is...What happened to CHANGE? So far, Obama has named just about everyone from Bill Clinton's staff to head up his Cabinet, and added a few more Washington Insiders to the list. Is this "CHANGE"? It looks like the same old-same old to me. Then again, when you elect someone to be President who has ZERO days running ANYTHING, it's hard to imagine him having anyone on a list of his own.

Good luck Chuckles. You'll need it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1398 Consumer Comment

I am not ashamed

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008

The last time we was In recession economy turmoil was when hoover was president. These bush supporters kill me we should be ashamed well I am not ashamed look @ what bush has done to the middle class people.

Bush vetoed healthcare bill he doesn't care who lives or dies or who dies of starvation. They refuse to see the truth they just want to support there guy no matter what the wrongs bush did.

I do not care how many people are agaisnt me, well the people have there choice If they want a divided country. That was wrong for that pastor from North Carolina to tell people who do not support bush to get out.

A pastor Is not suppose to bring politics In a worship service, the bush fans was turning this country into a dictatorship country.

This country will never be the same from how bush/cheney & the bush fans from what they have done.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1397 Consumer Comment

Bush Is scum

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 22, 2008

Bush Is scum & will always be scum. Just look @ what he has done to the middle class people. Bush has nearly ruined us, bush Is a war monger all he cares about Is killing.

Anyone who still defends him Is an idiot blind & a moron. They are blind to what bush has done to his own citizens & to this country. I don't care what people think bush Is scum.

I love to here the bush & mccain supporters whine & complain Its sweet music to my ears, the republicans didn't get 12 years this time. Things are already working out gas Is under $2.00 $1.85 In my area.

Bush the warmonger & cheney has completely divded this country something republicans love to do these bush fans make me sick!. Bush and cheney are scum.

That will be the happiest day of my life to see bush gone from the white house nomore bushs. People sure made a huge mistake buy voting for him & they voted for him again In 2004.

Look @ all the suffering bush has caused the middle class people & all of this financial mess we are In today almost 9 years later when bush leaves office. Bush don't care.

Bush never cared for america, he will have the lowest approval rating ever. Bush Is scum I do not care how many people are agaisnt me cause I hate bush!.


Bush never kepted to any of his promises!.

Mccain/palin would betray this country for sure & us the same way bush has betrayed us he betrayed the middle class people for sure. Down with bush.

Its sweet music listening to the bush supporters cry about obama, know they can sit in chatrooms & complain to each other.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1396 Consumer Comment

Our PRESIDENT !

AUTHOR: Hurdy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 21, 2008

As a response to 'James', Our President, George Walker Bush is a Humble, Great Man, and has certainly been active in Saving you from Peril, --- though you don't understand his integrity! The Statement you have made is WRONG, and you should be ashamed of you're self for the ignorance you've demonstrated with your inappropriate language !

I, for one American, have upheld him in Prayer and Deed, and, after all, HE IS our President until 1/20/09, and, though I did NOT vote for the President Elect, I'll surely hold Him up in Prayer and Deed, as well, ---- knowing that He has a Crisis that NO ONE president could have caused or prevented, and I hope for a better day for us all, and just possibly we can get on, with-out harsh WRONG criticism.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1395 Consumer Suggestion

Misinformation and Ignorance Abounds

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 15, 2008

Your complete lack of accurate information and ad hominem attacks demonstrate your ignorance of the situation you are addressing.

The 2000 election was not stolen. Multiple third party agencies have conducted their own investigations and confirmed this. Further, the only evidence of dienfranchisement found were in absentee ballots, many of which were from voters serving in the military overseas who overwhelmingly vote republican.

Iraq was invaded under the auspices of four separate UN mandates which were never adhered to. The weapons of mass destruction allegations were made by British Intelligence and later substantiated with the discovery of 1.77 Metric tons of weapons grade fissile material.

President Clinton's "surplus" was a projection that assumed the Tech Bubble would never burst and that congressional spending would remain static. Neither came to pass.

Crude oil prices are determined by a world wide free market, not any one country or certainly not by any one president. Futures speculators ran up prices with the assistance, witting or not, of the media. Gasoline prices are determined by oil prices and supply and demand, hence the run up in costs. The number one benficiary of higher prices is the government in the form of taxation. Further, were it not for alarmist rhetoric from the environmental movement, domestic oil exploration would be at much higher levels than today greatly reducing or eliminating US dependence on foreign oil imports.

Please do a little research before you regurgitate incorrect facts and outright vitriole in the future. Who knows, you just might learn something.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1394 Consumer Comment

Bush was born with a silver spoon in his a*s

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 10, 2008

Why Is It these bad banks and bad insurance companies get to be bailed out of trouble we don't matter as consumers.

We get screwed while these banks & insurance companies who defraud us out of fair settlements gets big money & nothing for us.

Bush approved this bailout, bush was born with a sliver spoon in his a*s he has no idea what its like to live on a fixed income. He disgust's me.

They where some sore losers from the mccain supporters well its there fault they shouldn't be so stupid in who they vote for, republicans hate america.

This country will take alot of years to recover what bush/cheney has done to it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1393 Consumer Comment

Bush is no dictator...he did what he could with what he had!

AUTHOR: Ladeda - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Bush is not the villain in our current economic and foreign situations. He responded to the issues that were brought to America...911...terrorism came knocking at our door only 9 mos. after he took office! What would you have him do...lay down and accept these crazy, killing machines into our society so that we are afraid to leave our homes, go to church, shop or even go to work! We had to respond to these lunatics in a way that said, "Not in our country" and he gave the military the power to do so. I thank God that Bush was president when all of this stuff first happened, if it had been Al Gore we'd all be wearing turbans right now, because he wouldn't have had the gumption to stand up to these terrorists! I support Bush fully on the decisions he has made (although not alone)!

As for the "surplus" from Clinton's presidency...take a look back. Reagan and Bush helped to set-up the surplus that Clinton was given credit for. It didn't just miracoulsy happen overnight during Clinton's administration. Our economy was growing stronger when Bush Sr. was in office and yes Clinton did keep it going, but he cannot take all of the credit!

I think that people should stop and consider all of what could have happened if Bush would have waited to send troops to Iraq and Afghanistan...we could be in much deeper trouble here in America...we're keeping the fighting on foreign soil and that makes most of America feel safer. I do have deep compassion for the troops who have to leave their families and who are defending not only our country but others as well. They are heroes and should be held in the highest regard! I am sorry for the families who have lost loved ones in these wars, but I know that deep down in their hearts they know that had their sons and daughters not believed in what their missions stood for, they would not have signed up for the military services and so many would not still be re-upping their commissions.

Please think about the things that you have written about Bush. There may come a day that we as Americans don't have the freedoms that we have now, even with high fuel prices and some of the other uncomfortable economic issues that we are dealing with. We may not be free to come and go as we please or to say what we want to say...these are the freedoms that Bush has been fighting for and we should thank him for that! We have to keep a strong and united attitude or we may end-up in a "Saddam Hussein" environment here in America...please think again and appreciate what we have and will have again!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1392 Consumer Comment

You obviously are one of those who believes that Bush was behind 911 too........

AUTHOR: New England - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 11, 2008

Your accusations against the President are without a single ounce of fact, and you most assuredly have NOT been to "ground zero", ever. Well, I was there, less than 48 hours after our country was ATTACKED, and some one that I went to Church with for almost 10 years was MURDERED. I stood there as the bodies of guiltless American citizens, CIVILIANS, were carried from the rubble.

Iraq war about oil? The Bush family profiting by it? Look again, pal. The Bush family dumped their oil interests many years ago. And it was not like the owned an oil company, they, like thousands of others around the world, just happened to have purchased stock in some oil companies as an investment.

No, the war in Iraq is about doing what 'a' previous President didn't have the guts to do when AMERICANS on board and AMERICAN Navy vessel were BOMBED and murdered, and "that" President did...NOTHING. When our ground troops were sleeping, and yet another (proven) Islamic fanatic drove through the barricades in Beriut and MURDERED many of them, just because they were Americans...and that same "President" did.....NOTHING. And what about the previous bombings here in AMERICA, that NOTHING was done about.

Are you really foolish enough to believe that if we keep doing nothing that everyone will just leave us alone? Funny, I think that is exactly what most of Europe was thinking when a little man with a screwey moustach systematically TOOK OVER almost an entire continent...his name as Adolf Hitler. Or are you going to tell us that the HOLOCAUST never happened?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1391 Consumer Comment

Ohmigoodness!

AUTHOR: Marcia - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 26, 2008

What kind of an idiot uses this forum to spout political hate speech and conspiracy theories.

I would suggest that the individual who started this is much more evidentiary of what is wrong with this country than ANY President: Even Jimmy Carter.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1390 Consumer Comment

Get a Life!

AUTHOR: Barnzie3 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Oh, by the way, I didn't see you say anything about Monica smoking Bill's cigar?

Or Jimmy Carter's regime letting our military fall apart from lack of money. By the way, our military was the laughing stock of the world as we drove around in trucks that were falling apart with no brakes or windows while even the poorest of nations were driving Mercedes Benz. Thank God for Ronald Reagan!

There was a lot more I was going to write, but I didn't want to bad mouth all the democrats for just one that has something missing upstairs. I hope you feel better and don't stop taking your meds. Obviously you're off them now!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1389 Consumer Comment

Get a Life!

AUTHOR: Barnzie3 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Oh, by the way, I didn't see you say anything about Monica smoking Bill's cigar?

Or Jimmy Carter's regime letting our military fall apart from lack of money. By the way, our military was the laughing stock of the world as we drove around in trucks that were falling apart with no brakes or windows while even the poorest of nations were driving Mercedes Benz. Thank God for Ronald Reagan!

There was a lot more I was going to write, but I didn't want to bad mouth all the democrats for just one that has something missing upstairs. I hope you feel better and don't stop taking your meds. Obviously you're off them now!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1388 Consumer Comment

Get a Life!

AUTHOR: Barnzie3 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Oh, by the way, I didn't see you say anything about Monica smoking Bill's cigar?

Or Jimmy Carter's regime letting our military fall apart from lack of money. By the way, our military was the laughing stock of the world as we drove around in trucks that were falling apart with no brakes or windows while even the poorest of nations were driving Mercedes Benz. Thank God for Ronald Reagan!

There was a lot more I was going to write, but I didn't want to bad mouth all the democrats for just one that has something missing upstairs. I hope you feel better and don't stop taking your meds. Obviously you're off them now!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1387 Consumer Comment

Get a Life!

AUTHOR: Barnzie3 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Oh, by the way, I didn't see you say anything about Monica smoking Bill's cigar?

Or Jimmy Carter's regime letting our military fall apart from lack of money. By the way, our military was the laughing stock of the world as we drove around in trucks that were falling apart with no brakes or windows while even the poorest of nations were driving Mercedes Benz. Thank God for Ronald Reagan!

There was a lot more I was going to write, but I didn't want to bad mouth all the democrats for just one that has something missing upstairs. I hope you feel better and don't stop taking your meds. Obviously you're off them now!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1386 Consumer Comment

DOwn with the loser!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AUTHOR: Jasonfato - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 14, 2008

I for one cant wait til BUSH leaves office. Maybe, just maybe we can start repairing the damage this worthless @$$hole has done!!!!!!!!!!

It is a d**n shame we have people here in our own country that dont have a roof over their heads or food to feed their family, but we can send BILLIONS of dollars of aid all around the world to countrys that dont even want our help!!!!!!!!!! Give me a d**n break!!!!

Everyday our troops are being killed fighting a war that we shouldnt have started in the first place. I support our troops, but I dont support that lame a*s BUSH family decision to send them over there!!!!! Come on BUSH send your daughters over there to fight.. You ask other parents to send their children over there to fight and not return... Instead we have to see you and your wife spend Hundreds of Thousands of dollars on a d**n wedding for one of the tramps!!!!! We have people that cant even eat and your spending our tax payer money on a wedding for your little w***e!!!!!! YOU MAKE ME SICK!!!

Clinton was no saint, but he was a hell of alot better than BUSH! When Clinton was in office we:
1. Owed no one anything!!!! Our deficit was $0000000000000 when in history has
that ever happened??????
2. We where paying less than $2 a gallon for gas..... The only people getting rich
right now from gas being so high are the oil companies & THE BUSH FAMILY!!!!!!
3. Our unemployement rate was less than 2%.... Now we have a nation wide
unemployement rate of 5.7%.. As soon as Bush took office it went from
3.8% to nearly 6% in less than 1 1/2 years!!!!
4. Our Consumer Price index was alot more stable.... It is now the most erratic it
has been in history... THANKS FOR NOTHING BUSH!
5. We exported more than we import...... We are now importing nearly 3% of
everything we use.........
6. We had control of the illegal immigrant problem.... It is now out of control and
BUSH wants to allow more to come in and take our jobs!!!!!

THANK YOU BUSH FOR %&*KING UP THIS COUNTRY!!! Thank god your time is over!!!!!!!!! BUCK FUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1385 Consumer Comment

Please name the impeachable crime

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 29, 2008

Name it. In order for an impeachment to be brought forward, a crime must have been committed.

In Johnson's case, it was his lack of regard to the US Constitution, and his total disrespect of Congress. He appointed cabinet members without their approval. He also helped foster discontent among the former Confederate States. Johnson was not convicted, and served his term.

Nixon was impeached over the cover up of the Watergate incident. He resigned rather than bring further shame to the Country.

And then there's Clinton. He subordinated perjury from his staff members to conceal his behaviour in office. It had NOTHING to do with his affair. It had to do with his total lack of decorum while in office. The Paula Jones issue, the Kathleen Willey issue, the Vince Foster issue, the Webster hubble issue, the Whitewater/Rose Law Firm issues, the list goes on and on. In short, the actual charges were:

Article 1: Perjury before Independent Counsel Ken Starr's grand jury.
Article 2: Perjury in the Paula Jones civil case.
Article 3: Obstruction of Justice related to the Jones case.
Article 4: Abuse of Power by making perjurious statements to Congress in his answers to the 81 questions posed by the Judiciary Committee.

He was not convicted, and served out his term.
About two hours after his acquittal, President Clinton made a brief appearance in the White House Rose Garden and stated: ''Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility, bringing this process to a conclusion, I want to say again to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and on the American people."

Even he knew he was a scumbag.

Now, list the actual crime you think Bush can be charged with. Remember, all of his intelligence information was confirmed by the same Congress you think can convict him. I guess they'll all have to be tossed out. I'm for that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1384 Consumer Suggestion

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

AUTHOR: Anonymous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 26, 2008

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

Keep calling Rep. John Conyers and Rep. Nancy Pelosi re impeachment.

Then call your Attorney General of your state and tell him to contact author Vince Bugliosi (former prosecutor) who wrote the newly-released book:

THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER

and tell them to start investigations now for the arrest and trying of bush for murder the minute he gets out of office... this includes some others around him, too. Arrest the MINUTE he gets out, otherwise he'll go to Paraguay where he's purchased property there, live there, and cannot by Paraguay law, be extradited for trial.

Amen. THANK you Vince Bugliosi!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1383 Consumer Suggestion

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

AUTHOR: Anonymous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 26, 2008

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

Keep calling Rep. John Conyers and Rep. Nancy Pelosi re impeachment.

Then call your Attorney General of your state and tell him to contact author Vince Bugliosi (former prosecutor) who wrote the newly-released book:

THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER

and tell them to start investigations now for the arrest and trying of bush for murder the minute he gets out of office... this includes some others around him, too. Arrest the MINUTE he gets out, otherwise he'll go to Paraguay where he's purchased property there, live there, and cannot by Paraguay law, be extradited for trial.

Amen. THANK you Vince Bugliosi!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1382 Consumer Suggestion

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

AUTHOR: Anonymous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 26, 2008

Let's IMPEACH; then let's try George W. Bush for Murder--as prosecutor/author Bugliosi writes!

Keep calling Rep. John Conyers and Rep. Nancy Pelosi re impeachment.

Then call your Attorney General of your state and tell him to contact author Vince Bugliosi (former prosecutor) who wrote the newly-released book:

THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER

and tell them to start investigations now for the arrest and trying of bush for murder the minute he gets out of office... this includes some others around him, too. Arrest the MINUTE he gets out, otherwise he'll go to Paraguay where he's purchased property there, live there, and cannot by Paraguay law, be extradited for trial.

Amen. THANK you Vince Bugliosi!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1381 Consumer Suggestion

Democrats in Congress

AUTHOR: District Manager - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Well, we've had a Democrat Congress for two years now. The results:

1. Highest gas prices in history.
2. Largest amount of bankruptcies.
3. Biggest amount of foreclosures.
4. We're still in the war that all of those slick Dems supposed were going to end immediately.

If you don't like high gas prices, ask your Congressman, or any Democrat, what are THEY doing to address this situation??? [answer- nothing!]

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1380 Consumer Comment

On What Planet Have You Been Living?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 20, 2008

I simply can't believe the fact that there are still people here who refuse to accept reality. How can anyone, especially those who at least appear to possess an understanding of the English language not realize that they have been completely bamboozled? The entire Bush family has a very long and well documented history of being less than ethical at best. This so-called president is at best, an extreme embarrassment to himself and to this Nation. BTW: Anyone who has bought, or still buys into his distorted view of reality should be embarrased as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1379 Consumer Comment

On What Planet Have You Been Living?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 20, 2008

I simply can't believe the fact that there are still people here who refuse to accept reality. How can anyone, especially those who at least appear to possess an understanding of the English language not realize that they have been completely bamboozled? The entire Bush family has a very long and well documented history of being less than ethical at best. This so-called president is at best, an extreme embarrassment to himself and to this Nation. BTW: Anyone who has bought, or still buys into his distorted view of reality should be embarrased as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1378 Consumer Comment

On What Planet Have You Been Living?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 20, 2008

I simply can't believe the fact that there are still people here who refuse to accept reality. How can anyone, especially those who at least appear to possess an understanding of the English language not realize that they have been completely bamboozled? The entire Bush family has a very long and well documented history of being less than ethical at best. This so-called president is at best, an extreme embarrassment to himself and to this Nation. BTW: Anyone who has bought, or still buys into his distorted view of reality should be embarrased as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1377 Consumer Comment

Dont Blame Bush for Everything

AUTHOR: Bill Mouro - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 13, 2008

President Bush has no real control over what other country's charge for oil. War or no War. This has been coming for some time, regardless of who is the President. The middle east would love to bury us. They know oil will ruin our economy and due to our dependence we will have to pay the piper. Not enough exploring in our own country to find the oil we need to be less dependent. Seems a great deal of others would rather pay 4.00 to 5.00 dollars a gallon than search for oil to support our needs, all in the name of conservation we cant have it both ways. Cheap oil and no dependence. Why Blame President Bush for years before President Bush, President Clinton we have imported over 60% of our oil from a oil rich nations, and why do they have oil. Not because of war, but because the US helped them find there oil, when those country's where nothing but sand. Years ago. We have not built a refinery in many many years we cant keep up with the demand as far as refining our own oil. Again a group of people
have been against that. Again we can't have it both ways. There is oil in this Great Country of ours if others would allow the proper research for oil. our dependence would be reduced a great deal. And the advent of other energy sources will help as well.
Clean coal is one way to go, we have plenty of coal, that can be used, again a certain group of people wont allow that. Hopefully the high cost of fuel and heating oil will indicate the need to obtain and utilize our own oil and build new refinery's. to meet the demand. We are at a loss without the progress in our own country. Time is catching up with us. The early 70s should have really started our own exploration of oil and as mentioned, more refinery's, and other sources of energy here In the USA.
Blame our lovely congress over the past 30 years. Not President Bush or any other former President.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1376 Consumer Comment

Dont Blame Bush for Everything

AUTHOR: Bill Mouro - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 13, 2008

President Bush has no real control over what other country's charge for oil. War or no War. This has been coming for some time, regardless of who is the President. The middle east would love to bury us. They know oil will ruin our economy and due to our dependence we will have to pay the piper. Not enough exploring in our own country to find the oil we need to be less dependent. Seems a great deal of others would rather pay 4.00 to 5.00 dollars a gallon than search for oil to support our needs, all in the name of conservation we cant have it both ways. Cheap oil and no dependence. Why Blame President Bush for years before President Bush, President Clinton we have imported over 60% of our oil from a oil rich nations, and why do they have oil. Not because of war, but because the US helped them find there oil, when those country's where nothing but sand. Years ago. We have not built a refinery in many many years we cant keep up with the demand as far as refining our own oil. Again a group of people
have been against that. Again we can't have it both ways. There is oil in this Great Country of ours if others would allow the proper research for oil. our dependence would be reduced a great deal. And the advent of other energy sources will help as well.
Clean coal is one way to go, we have plenty of coal, that can be used, again a certain group of people wont allow that. Hopefully the high cost of fuel and heating oil will indicate the need to obtain and utilize our own oil and build new refinery's. to meet the demand. We are at a loss without the progress in our own country. Time is catching up with us. The early 70s should have really started our own exploration of oil and as mentioned, more refinery's, and other sources of energy here In the USA.
Blame our lovely congress over the past 30 years. Not President Bush or any other former President.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1375 Consumer Comment

Dont Blame Bush for Everything

AUTHOR: Bill Mouro - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 13, 2008

President Bush has no real control over what other country's charge for oil. War or no War. This has been coming for some time, regardless of who is the President. The middle east would love to bury us. They know oil will ruin our economy and due to our dependence we will have to pay the piper. Not enough exploring in our own country to find the oil we need to be less dependent. Seems a great deal of others would rather pay 4.00 to 5.00 dollars a gallon than search for oil to support our needs, all in the name of conservation we cant have it both ways. Cheap oil and no dependence. Why Blame President Bush for years before President Bush, President Clinton we have imported over 60% of our oil from a oil rich nations, and why do they have oil. Not because of war, but because the US helped them find there oil, when those country's where nothing but sand. Years ago. We have not built a refinery in many many years we cant keep up with the demand as far as refining our own oil. Again a group of people
have been against that. Again we can't have it both ways. There is oil in this Great Country of ours if others would allow the proper research for oil. our dependence would be reduced a great deal. And the advent of other energy sources will help as well.
Clean coal is one way to go, we have plenty of coal, that can be used, again a certain group of people wont allow that. Hopefully the high cost of fuel and heating oil will indicate the need to obtain and utilize our own oil and build new refinery's. to meet the demand. We are at a loss without the progress in our own country. Time is catching up with us. The early 70s should have really started our own exploration of oil and as mentioned, more refinery's, and other sources of energy here In the USA.
Blame our lovely congress over the past 30 years. Not President Bush or any other former President.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1374 Consumer Comment

Dont Blame Bush for Everything

AUTHOR: Bill Mouro - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 13, 2008

President Bush has no real control over what other country's charge for oil. War or no War. This has been coming for some time, regardless of who is the President. The middle east would love to bury us. They know oil will ruin our economy and due to our dependence we will have to pay the piper. Not enough exploring in our own country to find the oil we need to be less dependent. Seems a great deal of others would rather pay 4.00 to 5.00 dollars a gallon than search for oil to support our needs, all in the name of conservation we cant have it both ways. Cheap oil and no dependence. Why Blame President Bush for years before President Bush, President Clinton we have imported over 60% of our oil from a oil rich nations, and why do they have oil. Not because of war, but because the US helped them find there oil, when those country's where nothing but sand. Years ago. We have not built a refinery in many many years we cant keep up with the demand as far as refining our own oil. Again a group of people
have been against that. Again we can't have it both ways. There is oil in this Great Country of ours if others would allow the proper research for oil. our dependence would be reduced a great deal. And the advent of other energy sources will help as well.
Clean coal is one way to go, we have plenty of coal, that can be used, again a certain group of people wont allow that. Hopefully the high cost of fuel and heating oil will indicate the need to obtain and utilize our own oil and build new refinery's. to meet the demand. We are at a loss without the progress in our own country. Time is catching up with us. The early 70s should have really started our own exploration of oil and as mentioned, more refinery's, and other sources of energy here In the USA.
Blame our lovely congress over the past 30 years. Not President Bush or any other former President.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1373 Consumer Comment

I think its unfair

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 12, 2008

I think its unfair for people who come to this website & don't even know you & say slanderous things about you, they go to great links to protect these bad businesses. Then you get called a scammer & lied about.

People have always lied about me sense I reported bad businesses & how they how treated me, you have to put with being accused of everything sense you had the guts to report bad businesses, cause they don't like being exposed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1372 Consumer Comment

Robert strikes again

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 12, 2008

No robert I am not the scammer you just don't like it cause we are fighting back agaisnt bad businesses. You can call me anything you like its not true, its amazing how people like robert can lie about you & they don't know you.


They can accuse & say whatever they want about me, but people who lie about people like robert or who ever he is it will always come back to them.

Nothing what people say on this site about me is not true, then I get accused of being a scammer which is not true. I got to a where I don't care what people say anymore cause they don't know me. The truth is they are really the scammers.


And robert can say whatever he wants about me, It doesn't bother me. He doesn't like it cause people report bad businesses. So he accuse me & other posters of being scammers.

He knows he can be held libel for slander & defamation of character but he continues to tell his lies. I will continue the fight & report bad businesses I come across he can say I am a scammer or anything he wants.


I am not the scammer these bad businesses are the scammers.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1371 Consumer Comment

HOLY MOLY!!!!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 10, 2008

"I can't believe people still defend bush. People voted him in & they got what they deserve. But the rest of us have to suffer worse then they do."

What suffering have you endured? You mooch off of both the US taxpayers, and you Mommy.

"Bush gave tax breaks to the upper class & higher income people, made there lives easier. And & bush didn't give us jack s**t, except made our lives miserable & harder."

You have to actually have a JOB to get a tax break. In fact, everyone got the exact same rate reduction. It comes as no surprise that someone with a 40% rate will get a larger total amount reduced than someone paying 15%. Since you have no JOB, you get no tax break. This is because you pay no taxes!

"Sense the republicans got in power, we have had an epidemic of bad businesses, scammers businesses defrauding us."

Really? Name them. The ones who made the news in the early years of Bush's Presidency were ALL from the corruption and paper shuffling that was done during the Clinton years.

"Us consumers must do everything we can do expose these scammers & crooks. But we have to put up with people defending & protecting these bad businesses."

The only scammers I know of are you and your "slip and fall" Mommy.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1370 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 10, 2008

I can't believe people still defend bush. People voted him in & they got what they deserve. But the rest of us have to suffer worse then they do.

Bush gave tax breaks to the upper class & higher income people, made there lives easier. And & bush didn't give us jack s**t, except made our lives miserable & harder.

Sense the republicans got in power, we have had an epidemic of bad businesses, scammers businesses defrauding us.

Us consumers must do everything we can do expose these scammers & crooks. But we have to put up with people defending & protecting these bad businesses.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1369 Consumer Comment

Wow, where do I start?...

AUTHOR: Striderq - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 09, 2008

It's almost inconceivable with everything happening in Tupper Lake that you have the time to post on anything national/international. Or should I say drone on for three years.
I would just suggest one thing James. Take a couple of deep breathes, relax, go lie in a jucuzzi for a couple of hours. Then it's time for some serious thinking. I mean, it's almost January 2009. When Bush is no longer in office. What are you going to whine & moan about then?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1368 Consumer Comment

This person is speaking in ignorance

AUTHOR: Dwayne - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 08, 2008

As much as we would all like to blame the President for the high prices at the pump, he is not too blame.

In-fact, the U.S. was not, and still does not purchase oil from Iraq.

The ingorant liittle political cartoon you have created is an insult to intellectual people everywhere.

George W. Bush has a laundry list of flaws that are his own. If you want to berate the President of our country, kindly choose one of those flaws than to create one of your own out of ignorance.

God Bless America and its citizens! (even those like this guy that just dont know).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1367 Consumer Comment

This guy has no knowledge of the industry

AUTHOR: Donsmith - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 06, 2008

If you noticed on the news today, there are riots in India over gas prices. That's because the emperor has no clothes. All the Middle Eastern counties that belong to OPEC don't have as much oil as they say. When it's gone, that's it, no industry. So, there's more demand than supply. That is the market force. You pay more for a gallon of Milk than you do for a gallon of gas. Bush finished a war, if you knew anything, the first war was ended with a cease fire agreement. He violated the cease fire. He had to take care of the situation, as they knew how to make WMD's and were affiliated with terrorist countries. Just think, what if Bill Clinton would've took care of Saddam when he was weak and it would've been easy? What if Clinton would've done it well before Iran got close to having a nuclear weapon? So, go back and drink your booze and learn something about how the world works in business.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1366 Consumer Comment

This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

AUTHOR: Dontbotherme - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 05, 2008

You really should have the facts, and not be an ignorant, brain-dead liberal parroting the nonsense of your greedy masters in the communist/democretin party.
I don't know why the site would publish such trash.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1365 Consumer Comment

This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

AUTHOR: Dontbotherme - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 05, 2008

You really should have the facts, and not be an ignorant, brain-dead liberal parroting the nonsense of your greedy masters in the communist/democretin party.
I don't know why the site would publish such trash.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1364 Consumer Comment

This Democretin is insane, and very uneducated!

AUTHOR: Dontbotherme - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 05, 2008

You really should have the facts, and not be an ignorant, brain-dead liberal parroting the nonsense of your greedy masters in the communist/democretin party.
I don't know why the site would publish such trash.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1363 Consumer Comment

Hilary & Bill are the crooks

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 30, 2008

They considered themselves above the law as proven by all the contraversarys around them...and the fact that they have been proven guilty on the worst of them.

Bush while inept is nowhere the crook that the Clintons or even FDR were.

FDR lied a whole lot more than any president before or since to the american people and even is the only one of two to consider disolving the constitution in reality.

FDR came within 3 hours of deciding to declare nationwide martial law to fight the depression... Lincoln only disabled habiasa corpus (??) ..

The fact that FDR even considered it and pondered it for more than a few minutes, is proof enough that he was as crooked as you can get.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1362 Consumer Comment

To robert you can say what ever you like

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 27, 2008

To robert you can say what ever you like, even try to slander me but I am not worried you do not know my situation. You also do not know me I know the truth & that is all that matters.

People have gone far has to write a false complaint agaisnt me but that doesn't scare me either. But your last comment crossed the line & is completely false.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1361 Consumer Comment

To robert

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 27, 2008

To robert I do not care if you or anyone else believes my complaints, no I do not fraud the infurance companies they try to fraud us, I hope you know what slander is cause you or anyone else on this site can be held lible for anything u say.

I am not worried I know the truth I really don't care anymore what people say on this site they will lie about you & accuse you of everything. Also if you get hurt on the job robert bye the way the employer accepted responsibilty.

You just can't stand it if I say anything, its amazing how people like you get away with lying about people you don't even know on this site. Of course people have to blame me for everything & make up lies about me.

What you say don't bother me people have tried there best to lie about me, even to go has far to write a false complaint about me. Well people have always said false things about me.

But what you said robert takes the cake I could careless what people believe, you are just saying it to get people agaisnt me.

When people post complaints to this website people are subject to this, people telling lies like u robert, I don't care what you or anyone else thinks or says.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1360 Consumer Comment

Sure Charles

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 25, 2008

The evil Republicans made Clinton lie about everything, subordinate perjury from others, and have multiple affairs. Yep, the Republicans made him pardon tax cheats, felons, and even went so far as to make his Attorney shoot himself in the head with an inoperable pistol and lay in the supine position on the ground(with no trace of blood anywhere near him).

Yep, the Republicans made him trade in a real estate scam(Whitewater) that bilked millions from all of the investors, while his dutiful wife(now running for President) handled the coverup of the scandal through her lawfirm.

Yes Charles, the Republicans did all that to him. That poor innocent chap.

As for you...both you and your Mommy are Insurance Fraudsters. How is it she can "slip and fall" in two states, while employed as a nurse? I would think her training would allow her to recognize danger. Of course, so did the Unemployment and Workmen's Compensation Boards in GA and AL, which is why they all rejected her frivolous claims. Then there's your attempt at scamming Progressive and GEICO with your driving skills. I still love how you think the cops have no authority on the parking lot of a gas station. You're amazing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1359 Consumer Comment

To patrick... republican's set clinton up they were after him from day 1

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 23, 2008

To patrick I really do not care if you or anyone else believes my complaints, you do not know the situation. I always come out ahead no matter how much crap people give to me on this site.

Yall went has far to write a false complaint about me you know who the person is chris, my complaints are not false which nothing chris said about me was true he don't even know me like you or anyone else knows me.

And yes patrick I am not the only one who think's the republican's set clinton up they were after him from day 1.

Again patrick I do not care who believes my complaints.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1358 Consumer Comment

Can't let this one pass by.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 22, 2008

Charles,

You just said:

"Besides clinton having the that affair which the republicans where behind it all he still was a good president."

You have GOT to be kidding me! Even you are not stupid enough to believe that the Republicans were behind Clinton having an affair with Monica Lewinski. Please tell me that's not the case!

I've seen some pretty far-fetched statements from you in the past, but this takes the cake.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1357 Consumer Comment

Clinton did have a surplus

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 22, 2008

I don't care what these bush fans say, I don't ever remember gas being $3.00 a gallon when clinton was in office. Besides clinton having the that affair which the republicans where behind it all he still was a good president.

The republicans tried getting him all they can even tried to impeach him, but congress acquitted, of course bush fans will not admit clinton gave this country a surplus.


Look how the bush fans give bush credit & defend him, after what he has done wrong.

Bush is probally friends with bin laden because why would bush invite them, to this country before the 9/11 attacks. Its very strange how the terrorist where able to get away with this murdering those innocent people.


We all wonder how they got away with it, how is it these evil terrorist are allowed to hijack planes to begin with.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1356 Consumer Comment

That's smart Vote For Obama

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 22, 2008

Obama says the first thing he will do is withdraw from Iraq. That will hand Iraq to Iran and Al Qaeda to use as a staging area to attack Israel. Baraack must be a Jew Hater because he is obviously refusing to protect them.

Then he will sit down with Iran and talk to them without pre conditions. What that will do is tell the rest of the world that we don't care about them and we endorse what Iran and other terrorists are doing. No wonder the terrorist groups are endorsing Obama. He is on their side.

Bill clinton having a surplus is a load of crap. He cooked the books. The economy was on the way down as he was leaving and he knew it. Anyone who thinks Bill Clinton handed a strong economy off to Bush is just another Clinton Kool-Aid drinker.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1355 Consumer Suggestion

Solution Vote for Obama or Hillary

AUTHOR: Arlene - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 21, 2008

George W. Bush, who yes yes yes yes yes, he stole the last election with the help of Diebold and also stole the previous election is gauging our gas.

He is stealing from us plenty. If you don't remember, he is an ex-failed oil man.
He tried doing the J.R. Ewing thing but failed misserably. And now with the help of his saudi friends is stealing blindly from us.

Solution vote for Obama or Hilary. Well it looks Obama will be the Democratic winner. So vote for Obama.

Don't be fooled and reasearch the past well before speaking. Bill Clinton left this country with a surplus. Bush has bankrupt this country.


An ameba would be a better president than this vile, fidel castro wanna be Bush.
He is an assasin just like Fidel. He hates the Jewish people because most all vote democrat.

McCain is a volatile person. As senator wrote an immigration bill that now is denying ever doing and gets furious when they ask him. Has a lot of residual from his pow days. We do not need another wacko in the White House.

And no matter what they say that he and Bush hate each other, McCain will continue Bush's irresponssible policies until WWIII is here and we will all be obliterated.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1354 Consumer Comment

shgeesh

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 15, 2008

1. Bush didnt lie... he was lied to
Both congress & bush were lied to.... Bush & Congress based their views on what they were both told.

Only a fool thinks bush lied.

2. katrina failures are all over the place.. but the top blame belongs to the then governor as she is the one who blocked federal help initially until bush overrode federal & state laws that usually block a president.
Note: No federal assistance can be given till the governor requests it.

3. Besides what about the dictator Clinton and her husband.
The socalled surplus had more to do with Clinton doing nothing but sex instead of his job, and letting his wife nearly destroy our country with nationalized health care.

Besises most of Clintons surplus was a leftover from Reagan times.
Note: it takes 4-6 years for nonwar economic affects to show up.
Ie; what a president does (excluding war related) doesnt really do much till 2nd term or later.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1353 Consumer Comment

I am done with this thread

AUTHOR: Anonymous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 15, 2008

How can the democrats do anything bush has vetoed every bill instead like all bush fans you want to continue to argue when we don't agree with you. Of course bush fans will always blame democrats.

I am not upset @ the demcorats I am upset @ bush though, they are more people agaisnt bush john. Its you bush fans who attack people who don't agree with you.

I am not going to argue anymore bush fans are blind to bush bush, they think they are the only people who knows everything, & if we don't agree with them they attack & result in name calling.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1352 Consumer Comment

Charles You prove My Point Again

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 15, 2008

You refuse to get mad when your Democrat Congressmen don't attempt to deliver on their promises. Instead you attack anyone who disagrees with you.

Charles, you and Obama will be very happy together. You are going to get to pay more taxes, still have high fuel prices, you and your family will be unsafe, Illegal immigration will become the Norm.

Let's put these winning policies in.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1351 Consumer Comment

To john

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 10, 2008

Bush will not let democrats get out of iraq he keeps veto everything, let me point this out to you it is you & your bush friends who picks on people you result in name calling & abusive insults if we don't support bush.

They have called us traitors cause we didn't vote or support bush. I don't like obama but I will vote for him. But for know my vote is for hillary.

Obama is just say anything to get himself elected he has not won yet. Hillary will be the best chance to take on mccain she won senator & did not take crap from the republican idiot she was running agaisnt.

But I am predicting if they pick obama we will lose I have already accepted mccain will win to be president so I just don't care anymore who wins or loses.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1350 Consumer Comment

Bush Veto Record

AUTHOR: The Patriot - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 10, 2008

This is to the person who said Bush didn't veto any bills because the democratic congress hasn't done anything.

By the way, Dems control the House but not the Senate. The Senate is 50/50 plus 2 alternates. So whatever the dems do in the House either doesn't pass the Senate or Bush vetoes.

Below is a list of Bush vetoes since last July. There were 11 vetoes, I have 9 here.

1. July 19, 2006: Vetoed H.R. 810, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, a bill to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Override attempt failed in House, 235-193 (286 needed).

2. May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of, H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110-28 with the President's approval.

3. June 20, 2007: Vetoed S. 5, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.

4. October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 ("SCHIP"). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).

5. November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110-114 over President's veto.
6. November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).

7. December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007[18]. Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).

8. December 28, 2007: Pocket Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008[19]

9. March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[20] [21]. Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.

To those who are so hateful, check the facts.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1349 Consumer Comment

Charles, Answer some Questions

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Charles:
I have asked you some simple questions and instead of answering we hear how much you hate Bush. Try again.

Are you upset at your Democratic congress that guaranteed you they would lower gas prices in 2006 if you elected them and they have done NOTHING? Bush is unable to veto a bill because Nancy Pelosi has not introduced one to vote on.

Please explain how the 4.00 Gas is all George Bush's fault?

Why are you not upset that the DEMOCRATS have made no attempt to get out of IRAQ?

How about some answers charles instead of attacking the people who ask you the questions

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1348 Consumer Comment

i am not embarassed

AUTHOR: Pad - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 03, 2008

you remind me of a flower,,,,,,,,,,,,,, a blooming idiot. you liberals are all the same. when a democrat is president with republician congress its the president that gets the glory. but if a republican president with a democrat congress its the congress gets the glory and the president gets all the blame. but heaven forbid if someone says something about a democrat president oh my momma have mercy liberals have a one track mind. and there blooming. its the liberals that has run this country into the ground. and hey liberels remember when clinton did his so called investagation when gas hit 3 bucks a gallon when he was in office and clinton said there is nothing wrong with what the oil companys are charging its ok to make over 300% profit. yeah thats right clinton not bush or the republican congress but liberals dont remember the bad stuff

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1347 Consumer Comment

John strikes again

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 02, 2008

I am not embarassed.

I apologize for the misspelled word everyone makes mistakes when typing.

One question john how am I stealing oxygen yet another lie & abusive comment

from john.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1346 Consumer Comment

You amuse me

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 02, 2008

"Look @ how many people who have gotten introuble if you say anything bad about bush, remember that high school kid who turned his teacher for speaking agaisnt bush?."

High School is not supposed to be for indoctrination Charles. That teacher was spewing his idiocy in a math class. If he wanted to teach politics, he should have changed his teaching credentials to Poli-Sci.

"If this isn't dictatorship robert then what do you call it dan rather losed his job because of bush I am not embarassed what I say because I don't care what people think."

Dan Rather lost his job because he tried to use fraudulent information to sway an election. Apparantly you do care what people think. Bush did not fire him, CBS did.

"People are ridculed who speak agaisnt bush calling us tratiors cause we didn't vote for him, bush fans & republicans are trying to turn america into a dictatorship counrty."

Again, be specific. What laws have been passed to allow Bush to rule with dictatorial powers? Be specific.

"We are not allowed to say anything agaisnt bush even if he is wrong, everyone has said bush wants to be a dictator. Why do you think we arent allowed to speak agaisnt bush without being ridculed from the bush fans."

and yet, you speak out against him constantly. How are you able to do this if you cannot do this?

"Karl rove should be put in prision. I guess bush fans like paying $4.00 for gas today. My state of alabama is messed up because it is run buy republicans. They have a big billboard sign telling us vote republican, I tell them screw them."

What crime has Karl Rove committed that would impose a prison sentence? The price of oil is controlled by the free market. It is a traded commodity on the world market. The oil companies average about 9% profit, or roughly 30 cents/gallon. State and Federal taxes account for about 60 cents/gallon. Who's reaping the big money from that gallon of gas? The oil company that produced it after spending billions of dollars to aquire it, or the Governments that just hold out their hands...one with a gun forcing the companies to pay?

"I will never vote republican."

I cannot understand why you are allowed to vote at all.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1345 Consumer Comment

'I am not embarassment'

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 02, 2008

Ha. Yet another lie and misspelled word. Please stop stealing our oxygen. Thanks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1344 Consumer Comment

Here We Go Again

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 01, 2008

ok no wmd found.Iraq a Soreign nation?A selfish tyrant,murdering his own people.With chemical weapons,Saddam murdered many people.A haven for terrorists to train and haven for Iranian terrorists.Every terrorist in the world should be exterminated.I don't want those terrorists coming back over here murdering our people.We should go anywhere these terrorists hide and do away with them.

On 9/11,Innocent people died We were attacked. the terrorists started it.As an American it made my blood boil in anger.We need to fight on.Justice for those folks who died deserve it Justice must be served for the victims of this tragedy.
Our military will win the war They are the best.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1343 Consumer Comment

I am not embarassment

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 01, 2008

Look @ how many people who have gotten introuble if you say anything bad about bush, remember that high school kid who turned his teacher for speaking agaisnt bush?.

If this isn't dictatorship robert then what do you call it dan rather losed his job because of bush I am not embarassed what I say because I don't care what people think.

People are ridculed who speak agaisnt bush calling us tratiors cause we didn't vote for him, bush fans & republicans are trying to turn america into a dictatorship counrty.

We are not allowed to say anything agaisnt bush even if he is wrong, everyone has said bush wants to be a dictator. Why do you think we arent allowed to speak agaisnt bush without being ridculed from the bush fans.

Karl rove should be put in prision. I guess bush fans like paying $4.00 for gas today. My state of alabama is messed up because it is run buy republicans. They have a big billboard sign telling us vote republican, I tell them screw them.

I will never vote republican.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1342 Consumer Comment

Give examples...be specific

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 01, 2008

"Do you enjoy this sort of thing?, insulting people & embarassing them on this site. Well nothing you say bothers me you like to keep arguements going like most bush fans."

If you are embarrassed by what you say, do not say it.

"We will not put up with bush trying to be a dictator, & trying to turn america into a dictatorship country we has as americans cannot let this happen. Everyone gets introuble if they do not agree with bush & cheney this is dictatorship."

How do equate a representative republic with a dictatorship? Do you understand the differences between the two? Name one thing Bush has done that has not been approved by Congress, which is run by the Democrats, who all hate him.

"Bush would (love) to be a dictator controlling everything we do or say, this is not how a president should treat us. Mccain would be worse."

Again, be specific and name one thing Bush has done that would give you the impression he wants to be a dictator.

"I don't like obama but if he wins the democrat party nomination I will vote for him I will not vote for mccain."

Huh? YOU would vote for a black man? The same black man who has been keeping whitey down all these years? Say it aint so.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1341 Consumer Comment

To robert

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 01, 2008

Do you enjoy this sort of thing?, insulting people & embarassing them on this site. Well nothing you say bothers me you like to keep arguements going like most bush fans.

We will not put up with bush trying to be a dictator, & trying to turn america into a dictatorship country we has as americans cannot let this happen. Everyone gets introuble if they do not agree with bush & cheney this is dictatorship.

Bush would (love) to be a dictator controlling everything we do or say, this is not how a president should treat us. Mccain would be worse.

I don't like obama but if he wins the democrat party nomination I will vote for him I will not vote for mccain.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1340 Consumer Comment

I cannot stop laughing!!!!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 29, 2008

"So mccain will make our lives even harder. These bush fans amaze us they say democrats are full of hatred they are the ones who is full of hatred."

And yet, it's Obama who is now trying desperately to distance himself from his Pastor, the same Pastor he said was his guide and mentor last week. Amazing how he just now heard the hate and bigotry his mentor has been spewing for over 20 years, while he sat in the front row of the Church.

"People do not need to make the same mistake they did in 2000, bush has made the lives for the middle class people & poor like hell mccain will make it even harder for us to live."

Hey Charles...you would need to have a JOB in order to begin qualifying for the middle class. You have no JOB, so you do not qualify.

"I still don't know how I have survied."

My eyes are watering over this one. ASK YOUR MOMMY!!!! She pays for everything, you mooch. If she would ever shoo you away from her nipple, you may end up seeing what life really is like.

"The democrats can't do anything cause bush has vetoed every single bill."

Name one. Bush is a better big spender than Ted Kennedy.

"The republicans make our lives miserable, but we aren't suppose to say anything about it."

What EXACTLY have the evil Republicans done to you? Be specific.

"Republicans aren't turning america into dictatorship country."

I wish. Hopefully it'll be a Militaristic one, and all the bums and other dead weight will be tossed into labor camps.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1339 Consumer Comment

So mccain will make our lives even harder

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 29, 2008

So mccain will make our lives even harder. These bush fans amaze us they say democrats are full of hatred they are the ones who is full of hatred.

People do not need to make the same mistake they did in 2000, bush has made the lives for the middle class people & poor like hell mccain will make it even harder for us to live.

I still don't know how I have survied. The democrats can't do anything cause bush has vetoed every single bill. The republicans make our lives miserable, but we aren't suppose to say anything about it.

Republicans aren't turning america into dictatorship country.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1338 Consumer Comment

Right Wing politicians have been pulling bait & switch scams on the middle and lower classes

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

Yes...Bush is horrible...but he is a symptom of a much larger problem of the corporate takeover of our government....This didn't happen overnight with the election of Bush...it's been building gradually as Right Wing politicians have been pulling bait & switch scams on the middle and lower classes over alleged "values" issues...The truth is that they don't give a rat's a## about the poor and the middle classes...These are simply people to be manipulated into voting against their own economic interests.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1337 Consumer Comment

Charles, Why can't you answer the Question?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

I asked you a very straightforward question. what is Nancy Pelosi's plan and why hasn't she even presented it? Instead, you attack president Bush. Why don't you quit spewing hatred towards anyone that soes not agree with you and have a rational discussion?

Again Charles, what is this great plan? She hasn't even responded to the suggestion that they lower or suspend the Government Taxes on gas to give us all some relief. She won't take that suggestion because it came from John McCain.

Charles, instead of telling me how much you HATE everybody answer some questions like a rational person.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1336 Consumer Comment

There is no high demand for oil

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

There is no high demand for oil or there is no gas shortage, they are price gouging us. Funny bushs last year & yet the gas is $4.00 in some areas its $3.59 in my area.

Well when the gas prices are high it makes our life harder, its even harder for people who make min wage. Gas has never been this the gas companies see the big $ coming in so they keep it high its all about money not about high demand for oil.

People can't even fill there cars only have to drive around with a half of tank of gas.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1335 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

We all know the bush fans will not admit about what bad things bush or the republican congress have done, then they blame democrats for everything. Bush has veto every single bill the democrats gave to him.


Of course you will deny that john like most bush fans so don't blame the democrats for doing nothing, they can't as long bush is president. There will be a democrat next year for president to clean up the mess bush left behind.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1334 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

We all know the bush fans will not admit about what bad things bush or the republican congress have done, then they blame democrats for everything. Bush has veto every single bill the democrats gave to him.


Of course you will deny that john like most bush fans so don't blame the democrats for doing nothing, they can't as long bush is president. There will be a democrat next year for president to clean up the mess bush left behind.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1333 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

We all know the bush fans will not admit about what bad things bush or the republican congress have done, then they blame democrats for everything. Bush has veto every single bill the democrats gave to him.


Of course you will deny that john like most bush fans so don't blame the democrats for doing nothing, they can't as long bush is president. There will be a democrat next year for president to clean up the mess bush left behind.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1332 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

We all know the bush fans will not admit about what bad things bush or the republican congress have done, then they blame democrats for everything. Bush has veto every single bill the democrats gave to him.


Of course you will deny that john like most bush fans so don't blame the democrats for doing nothing, they can't as long bush is president. There will be a democrat next year for president to clean up the mess bush left behind.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1331 Consumer Comment

Charles, What Veto?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 28, 2008

We were talking about Nancy Pelosi's promise to lower gas prices.
In order for you to say that the reason is because Bush vetoed it please submit proof. In order for Bush to veto anything they need to submit the bill first. How can you possibly say it is Bush's fault when the do-nothing Democratic congress has not even started on a bill? Again Charles, Your democrats lied to you and made false promises so that YOU would be dumb enough to think they would take care of you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1330 Consumer Comment

To john

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 25, 2008

This is to you john. It is cause bush vetos everything of course you bush fans will not admit any wrong bush has done, the republicans are the real liars. But you bush fans will defend any wrong bush has done.

Bush stole the surplus clinton gave this country You bush fans are really amazing giving all the republicans credit they don't deserve. Bush is nothing but a bully to get what he wants.

The bush admit are nothing but liars then you accuse democrats of being liars, how can the democrats do anything john if bush vetos everything, I am not going to argue with you anymore on this.

The republicans punish us middle class people you need to think about what you say, I am sure you will come back telling me how democrats are such liars. When infact its the republicans who are the real liars.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1329 Consumer Comment

To sed

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 25, 2008

You bush fans are really amazing giving all the republicans credit they don't deserve. The republican's did not give the united states a surplus clinton did you just hate him cause he was a democrat, also the republicans did not give a d**n about us middle class working people.

When republicans are in power there is corrupution they want everything for themsevles & ship american jobs overseas. Republicans don't deserve any credit you can deny all you want that clinton didn't give us a surplus & bush squander it.

Bush is nothing but a bully which most republicans are, I would not trust mccain.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1328 Consumer Comment

Charles think about what you are saying

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 25, 2008

Charles:
You say that electing democrats will fix our problems. Why hasn't your democratec congress not done ANYTHING they promised since they were elected. Nancy Pelosi PROMISED the American People that they woul lower the Gas Priced ans that they have a great plan. It is 2 years later and she refuses to even say what that plan was? Do you really want people that LIE direct to your face to be elected?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1327 Consumer Comment

Get Real

AUTHOR: Sed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 24, 2008

The President of the US does not control the money of the US Congres does. Bill Clinton did not give us a surplus the Republican congress did. George Bush did not squander the surplus the Republican and now Democratic congress did. As far as oil prices the government could remove the tax. A hefty portion of the price of a gallon of gas is government tax. The demand for oil is high and in a free market economy that is what drives the price of oil.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1326 Consumer Comment

Get Real

AUTHOR: Sed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 24, 2008

The President of the US does not control the money of the US Congres does. Bill Clinton did not give us a surplus the Republican congress did. George Bush did not squander the surplus the Republican and now Democratic congress did. As far as oil prices the government could remove the tax. A hefty portion of the price of a gallon of gas is government tax. The demand for oil is high and in a free market economy that is what drives the price of oil.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1325 Consumer Comment

Get Real

AUTHOR: Sed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 24, 2008

The President of the US does not control the money of the US Congres does. Bill Clinton did not give us a surplus the Republican congress did. George Bush did not squander the surplus the Republican and now Democratic congress did. As far as oil prices the government could remove the tax. A hefty portion of the price of a gallon of gas is government tax. The demand for oil is high and in a free market economy that is what drives the price of oil.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1324 Consumer Comment

Get Real

AUTHOR: Sed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 24, 2008

The President of the US does not control the money of the US Congres does. Bill Clinton did not give us a surplus the Republican congress did. George Bush did not squander the surplus the Republican and now Democratic congress did. As far as oil prices the government could remove the tax. A hefty portion of the price of a gallon of gas is government tax. The demand for oil is high and in a free market economy that is what drives the price of oil.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1323 Consumer Comment

Stop wasting time.

AUTHOR: Taken4thousands - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Everyone on here, since the begining of this post, is worthless. I came across this post and read most of it. If you are so passionate about your opinions, go out and do something about it. Wasting your time expressing yourself on a website that has nothing to do with the topic you are writing about is pathetic.

Bush does suck, but what are you going to about it.

The countries economical situation sucks, but what are you going to do about it.

Go out and do something worth doing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1322 Consumer Comment

Charles your knowledge is lacking, and your post above lacks integrity! Where wery u in 1974?

AUTHOR: Justice Once And For All - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, March 27, 2008

Charles, you say that there was an attempt at impeaching Mr. Clinton. There was. May I remind you that Mr. Nixon, a Republican resigned under the threat of impeachment.

After he had just ended the Viet Nam War. The Watergate coverup. He did in fact conspire to cover up the Watergate investigation, and clearly had overstepped and interfered in government law.

Now, as for Mr. Clinton. There is always prosperity after a war, and he got a lot of undue credit after the Gulf War ended. Any President would have been successful, once the Gulf War ended, economicly. He also betrayed healthcare reforms he promised, and embraced the Corporate community agendas.

I assure you that Mr. Clinton's admission of "the cigar incident" under the desk of the oval office with Monica Lewinsky, fifty years from now, will be a topic of jokes, indignation, immorality, and people by that time unless they review newstapes of the time won't even believe a President admitted to committing this crazy, kinky, almost unbelievable act in the White House Oval Office, almost unbelievable ten years later. What was he thinking, the act it self is ........I cannot put into words the absurdity of it.

Your post showed a lack of historical knowledge.

I'll give you Mr. Bush remains a disaster President for the working and middle class, as we lose jobs, become poorer, as a result of his domestic machinations.

However there has been no other domestic terror acts on American soil sinCe the disaster in NYC. The anthrax murders remain unsolved.

I will reserve judgment on one thing though.......REMEMBER 9/11.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1321 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 25, 2008

All bush supporter's are stupid there is more corruption today then ever before. All bush & the republican's have caused is a divided country people agaisnt each other & fighting amoung the citizens of the united state's.


Bush even denied relief to the american prisoners in the 1980's he denied them money for there pain & suffering he would not allow them to sue the other country who kepted them captive for month's.


It make's you wonder why bush wouldn't not let these people sue for there damange's he denied it & how can these bush moron's say bush is a good president.


You see how these bush moron supporter's talk hateful to people this is why I dislike republican's. Republican's are dishonest people, & yet if they do anything wrong they don't get impeached or kicked out like how they tried to impeach clinton.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1320 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 25, 2008

All bush supporter's are stupid there is more corruption today then ever before. All bush & the republican's have caused is a divided country people agaisnt each other & fighting amoung the citizens of the united state's.


Bush even denied relief to the american prisoners in the 1980's he denied them money for there pain & suffering he would not allow them to sue the other country who kepted them captive for month's.


It make's you wonder why bush wouldn't not let these people sue for there damange's he denied it & how can these bush moron's say bush is a good president.


You see how these bush moron supporter's talk hateful to people this is why I dislike republican's. Republican's are dishonest people, & yet if they do anything wrong they don't get impeached or kicked out like how they tried to impeach clinton.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1319 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 25, 2008

All bush supporter's are stupid there is more corruption today then ever before. All bush & the republican's have caused is a divided country people agaisnt each other & fighting amoung the citizens of the united state's.


Bush even denied relief to the american prisoners in the 1980's he denied them money for there pain & suffering he would not allow them to sue the other country who kepted them captive for month's.


It make's you wonder why bush wouldn't not let these people sue for there damange's he denied it & how can these bush moron's say bush is a good president.


You see how these bush moron supporter's talk hateful to people this is why I dislike republican's. Republican's are dishonest people, & yet if they do anything wrong they don't get impeached or kicked out like how they tried to impeach clinton.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1318 Consumer Comment

update

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 25, 2008

All bush supporter's are stupid there is more corruption today then ever before. All bush & the republican's have caused is a divided country people agaisnt each other & fighting amoung the citizens of the united state's.


Bush even denied relief to the american prisoners in the 1980's he denied them money for there pain & suffering he would not allow them to sue the other country who kepted them captive for month's.


It make's you wonder why bush wouldn't not let these people sue for there damange's he denied it & how can these bush moron's say bush is a good president.


You see how these bush moron supporter's talk hateful to people this is why I dislike republican's. Republican's are dishonest people, & yet if they do anything wrong they don't get impeached or kicked out like how they tried to impeach clinton.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1317 Consumer Comment

Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

AUTHOR: Toby - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 24, 2008

I read a few of the comments about this subject. All the talk about if the President is doing a good job or bad job won't change the war or the gas prices. Talk is like the wind, it can be hear today and gone tomorrow. People talk so much about a subject that people tend to forget what the subject matter was about. When he was put in office we as a nation have to take the good with the bad. None of the comment about this subject are going to change anything in the world so tell me what is the point of all of these comments. If we want to change the world we need to start caring more about our fellow man. Now that would greatly change the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1316 Consumer Comment

Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

AUTHOR: Toby - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 24, 2008

I read a few of the comments about this subject. All the talk about if the President is doing a good job or bad job won't change the war or the gas prices. Talk is like the wind, it can be hear today and gone tomorrow. People talk so much about a subject that people tend to forget what the subject matter was about. When he was put in office we as a nation have to take the good with the bad. None of the comment about this subject are going to change anything in the world so tell me what is the point of all of these comments. If we want to change the world we need to start caring more about our fellow man. Now that would greatly change the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1315 Consumer Comment

Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

AUTHOR: Toby - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 24, 2008

I read a few of the comments about this subject. All the talk about if the President is doing a good job or bad job won't change the war or the gas prices. Talk is like the wind, it can be hear today and gone tomorrow. People talk so much about a subject that people tend to forget what the subject matter was about. When he was put in office we as a nation have to take the good with the bad. None of the comment about this subject are going to change anything in the world so tell me what is the point of all of these comments. If we want to change the world we need to start caring more about our fellow man. Now that would greatly change the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1314 Consumer Comment

Talking about this isn't going to solve the problem

AUTHOR: Toby - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 24, 2008

I read a few of the comments about this subject. All the talk about if the President is doing a good job or bad job won't change the war or the gas prices. Talk is like the wind, it can be hear today and gone tomorrow. People talk so much about a subject that people tend to forget what the subject matter was about. When he was put in office we as a nation have to take the good with the bad. None of the comment about this subject are going to change anything in the world so tell me what is the point of all of these comments. If we want to change the world we need to start caring more about our fellow man. Now that would greatly change the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1313 Consumer Comment

Traditional Republicans, traditional democrats, excepting FDR, an oil war, and less jobs for sure

AUTHOR: Justice Once And For All - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 23, 2008

Democrats as Presidents have traditionally been domestic oriented. Republican Presidents in the last century have been internationally oriented.

As of this writing electricity has not been restored in Iraq. Security, for the average citizen has not been restored in Iraq. School, social programs, medical and business institutions have not been stabilized in Iraq. The only industry that has been completely restored, and stabilized in Iraq, has been the oil industry.

Also a decision had been made that American military power would be demonstrated, no matter what, after 9/11, it would be shown to the world that the US. could remove any government if it wanted. Mr. Quadafi immediately started changing his tone, and rhetoric in the middle east, and has since become very silent, anyone notice?

Surprised, none of the secret reasons for this war have been mentioned. One was to insure that oil would flow, from Iraq, and Saddam Hussein, who had planned to blockade the Gulf of Hormuz to slowly cut off oil to the west, would be unsuccessful, thus the only restored institution in Iraq as of now, is the oil industry.
I believe in 1956 France and England declared war on Egypt for attempting the same thing in the Suez canal, and the US brokered a peace when Russia threatened to inteervene. There will be western troops in the mideast, as long as the west is dependent on oil. No U.S. President will allow for a cutoff of oil, from the mideast. Notice the rumblings of war re American backed Colombia and anti-American oil rich Venezuela lately? Oil war on the horizon? Has it ever happened before. When Japan was at war w/China, their main source of oil was the Dutch West Indies. When Holland fell to German occupation, the U.S. cut oil exports to Japan, as surrogate for Holland, these little nasty secrets of history.

Israel was bleeding. Remember picking up the newspaper from 99-01, headlines almost daily: "bomb kills 24 in Israeli nightclub, suicide bomber blows himself up on Tel Aviv bus, tourists slaughtered at Israeli beach. You no longer see these headlines. Sadaam Hussein was financing that campaign, giving the family of any suicide bomber in Israel $25,00-$50,000.

Can't be made too public, or obvious, wouldn't want it to look like the U.S. was intervening in the middle east militarily. Hmmm wonder if Israel was threatening to use nuclear retaliation-- don't know, it has been speculated.

Bush domesticly for the average working American man? A disaster. Out sourceing, tax breaks for corp.'s, disappearing pensions, oh, it might continue, in case you read about it in next year or so, friend of mine, married Phillipino girl. Lives in Manilla. Announced there recently, land given to J.P. Morgan Chase for free. Chase to be moving auto finance, and treasury dept there from Tampa, and Lake Mary Fl, in next year or so, won't you love to hear from someone in the Phillipines about your late car payment (apologies to Philipinos, political issue, great people), yeah domesticly Mr. Bush a disaster.

Internationally- Remember 9/11 - It remains to be seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1312 Consumer Comment

People wanted change they got change

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, March 20, 2008

When people want bush to be president they wanted change. Well they got change 9/11/01 happend we have a new war businesses are more corrupt, they are more dishonest people scam's thieve's.


So when people wanted change they got what they wanted. Gas is know $3.00 because of the war in iraq, foreclosure is @ a all time high people are losing there home's & living on the street's. So we all got change when they wanted republican's in office.


But if they vote for mccain I can't imagine what the next 4 year's will be.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1311 Consumer Comment

To patrick

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Sorry to say this patrick, but we do not want another republican in the white house for the next 4 year's bush has screwed everything up so bad for the american people why would people elect another republican.


Nobody want's mccain in office he has a hateful attuide like bush does, republican's do not care for american's. They are bad people in both parties but it's not fair to say that democrat's do bad thing's without holding republican's accountable for there action's.


Republican's do not get introuble for anything they try to get every democrat introuble, republican's sweap it under the rug. Like that gay republican senator looking for men in bathroom & he said clintion was nasty.


Also patrick it is not up to bush to say republican's will still have the white house it is up to us the american people, it is not up to bush nor the republican's to make us vote for him & to have republican's for governor in every state.


I do not trust republican's gas is $3.19 & there is corruption all over the country in the history of the united state's. Businesses are more corrput government agencie's will not help people instead our government has mistreated us.


The republican's punish the middle class & poor people bush has destroyed everything this country has stood for. Bush get's angry if we don't agree with him so he punishes us.


Nobody want's mccain in office he is another bush wanna be, but let people vote for mccain they will suffer the consquenses like we have for the last 8 year's.


I could care less if people hate me cause I don't support bush that is my right has an american citizen. Mccain has people brainwashed just like bush had.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1310 Consumer Comment

Sorry Charles,

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 19, 2008

but McCain is going to get elected as the next President of the United States. And he will not do it by "cheating" like everyone said Bush did (at least Al was then able to go out and make his "movie"). And the war on terror will continue.

Does this mean we'll have the joy of listening to you continue to whine and complain about how the Republicans are ruining your life?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1309 Consumer Comment

To Cirrusnarea

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 19, 2008

This is to Cirrusnarea the editor of this site does not remove report's so you will have no luck. First of all we have just has much right to our opinion has you bush fan's, this isn't dictatorship country opinion.


Your people continue to bash our former president bill clinton but we are not allowed to say anything about bush why should we be afraid to speak out, people like you should not be allowed to vote you do not know what you are doing.


We are sick of our right's being violated & bush has violated everyone one of them. I'll be glad when bush leave's office nobody want's mccain to be president either he is another bush wanna be, we can't take anymore suffering another 4 year's.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1308 Consumer Comment

Immature, irrelevant, and unconvincing troll ripoff report.

AUTHOR: Cirrusnarea - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 18, 2008

I have notified ripoff report about this this post and hopefully it will be removed. I urge all other readers of this 'ripoff report' to do the same.

This website, www.ripoffreport.com is meant to give consumers a voice and report business who have scammed us, not to self-righteously spout our political opinions. At the very least if this person was going to use this website to give his political opinions, he could have been more professional about it. Instead we have a very short post, and a silly comic that offers no evidence of any of the claims.

I'm sure this author is of the persuasion that 9/11 was an inside job, and no doubt believes the jews are responsible. Funny how the KKK types have so much courage to spout their hate speech online.

Email ripoff report and report this inappropriate 'ripoff report.'

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1307 Consumer Comment

Do you honestly believe George W bush is regulating the gas prices at your local gas station?

AUTHOR: Tamie - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 27, 2008

I cannot wait for Bush to be out of office just so these nut job, conspiracy theorists will have to look for someone new, maybe Obama to terrorize. It just makes no sense. soon it will be over.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1306 Consumer Comment

Look in the mirror before you criticize.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Dude:

I took the liberty of revising your comments because you obviously do not have a firm grasp on the English language just yet. I figured you had a great grip on the subject of Economics and Foreign Policy; so, I wanted to ensure you were well rounded. Below are just a few of my suggestions, however, I did not revise the content of your argument; even though I found it to be the most asinine comment on this thread.

Anything within the brackets is either a deletion or addition; happy reading!

I do not believe anything the oil companies say
These [B]ush fan's never learn to quit with the[ir] lies & insult[]s. I[] do not believe
[anything] they say[;] why did the gas prices mysterious raise after bush became
president[?] [G]as has never been this high[,] the oil companies are lying. I[] do not believe any of the[ir] lies when they raise the gas cause they are making billion[]s. Gas prices, before the war[,] w[ere] $1.05 in my area []now the gas has tripled[.] It [i]s []now $2.92 [and] has gotten to $3.00 in my area. People, who drive diesel vehicle[]s ha[ve] to pay more [] for diesel fuel [which] is over $3.00[.] I am glad I don't have to drive diesel vehicle[]s. Trucker[]s ha[ve] to pay more but companies[] pay for the[ir] driver[]s fuel[; however,] [i]f you are an owner operat[o]r you pay for your own fuel. Soon, trucking companies will be a thing of the past[,] because [] the oil companies [and] the high gas prices the oil companies[] are stealing from us []. Soon, the railroad industry will take over the trucking industry [and] many driver[]s will be out of the[ir] job[]s because of these greedy oil companies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1305 Consumer Comment

I do not believe anything the oil companies say

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 26, 2008

These bush fan's never learn to quit with there lies & insult's. I, do not believe

nothing they say why did the gas prices mysterious raise after bush became

president, gas has never been this high the oil companies are lying. I, do not

believe any of there lies when they raise the gas cause they are making billion's.

Gas prices, before the war was $1.05 in my area know the gas has trippled It Is

Know $2.92 It has gotten to $3.00 in my area. People, who drive diesel vehicle's

has to pay more then for regular gas price for diesel fuel is over $3.00, I am glad

I don't have to drive diesel vehicle's. Trucker's has to pay more but companies,

pay for there driver's fuel If you are an owner operater you pay for your own fuel.

Soon, trucking companies will be a thing of the past because of the oil companies

& the high gas prices the oil companies, are stealing from us & also trucking

companies. Soon, the railroad industry will take over the trucking industry & many

driver's will be out of there job's because of these greedy oil companies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1304 Consumer Comment

Liberals are amazing

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 26, 2008

I can't believe a post like this created all this. For the umptenth time, the stockpiling and building of WOMD was gathered by domestic and foreign intel...not Bush. Believe it or not, Dems went along with this as well, not just Bush and Republicans. Al Queda is capable of building nukes, as well as chemical weapons...but to libs, who cares right. Let's just sit back and call on our national guards, while an enemy like no other, who would kill our women and children in the name of islam plans attacks.

And for the many people who say eff Bush, we need a Dem in the office. So does it matter to you if he/she is qualified? I'm a registered Republican, but I will vote for whoever is most qualified. To libs, I don't think you really care. You just don't want to see a Republican in office. That's completly moronic and dangerous. Yeah, we all know Dems don't want to work with Republicans, we are basically a-holes. Being close-minded is foolish, and if Hillary gets elected, we're all effed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1303 Consumer Comment

Liberals are amazing

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 26, 2008

I can't believe a post like this created all this. For the umptenth time, the stockpiling and building of WOMD was gathered by domestic and foreign intel...not Bush. Believe it or not, Dems went along with this as well, not just Bush and Republicans. Al Queda is capable of building nukes, as well as chemical weapons...but to libs, who cares right. Let's just sit back and call on our national guards, while an enemy like no other, who would kill our women and children in the name of islam plans attacks.

And for the many people who say eff Bush, we need a Dem in the office. So does it matter to you if he/she is qualified? I'm a registered Republican, but I will vote for whoever is most qualified. To libs, I don't think you really care. You just don't want to see a Republican in office. That's completly moronic and dangerous. Yeah, we all know Dems don't want to work with Republicans, we are basically a-holes. Being close-minded is foolish, and if Hillary gets elected, we're all effed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1302 Consumer Comment

Liberals are amazing

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 26, 2008

I can't believe a post like this created all this. For the umptenth time, the stockpiling and building of WOMD was gathered by domestic and foreign intel...not Bush. Believe it or not, Dems went along with this as well, not just Bush and Republicans. Al Queda is capable of building nukes, as well as chemical weapons...but to libs, who cares right. Let's just sit back and call on our national guards, while an enemy like no other, who would kill our women and children in the name of islam plans attacks.

And for the many people who say eff Bush, we need a Dem in the office. So does it matter to you if he/she is qualified? I'm a registered Republican, but I will vote for whoever is most qualified. To libs, I don't think you really care. You just don't want to see a Republican in office. That's completly moronic and dangerous. Yeah, we all know Dems don't want to work with Republicans, we are basically a-holes. Being close-minded is foolish, and if Hillary gets elected, we're all effed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1301 Consumer Comment

Liberals are amazing

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 26, 2008

I can't believe a post like this created all this. For the umptenth time, the stockpiling and building of WOMD was gathered by domestic and foreign intel...not Bush. Believe it or not, Dems went along with this as well, not just Bush and Republicans. Al Queda is capable of building nukes, as well as chemical weapons...but to libs, who cares right. Let's just sit back and call on our national guards, while an enemy like no other, who would kill our women and children in the name of islam plans attacks.

And for the many people who say eff Bush, we need a Dem in the office. So does it matter to you if he/she is qualified? I'm a registered Republican, but I will vote for whoever is most qualified. To libs, I don't think you really care. You just don't want to see a Republican in office. That's completly moronic and dangerous. Yeah, we all know Dems don't want to work with Republicans, we are basically a-holes. Being close-minded is foolish, and if Hillary gets elected, we're all effed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1300 Consumer Comment

Tony, are you really as big of a moron as this post makes you sound?

AUTHOR: Travisj - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 19, 2008

Well Tony you must be another one of those liberal people that think bush drove up the fuel cost, WRONG... The fuel prices are up but that is not by just one mans hand. The prices of fuel are not governed by the president, You mainly looking for someone to blame so lets blame Bush for all like most ignorant people do in this country. If people do research and open their eyes they would see the truth about why fuel costs are so high. Ever wondered why gas stations change names so often and why all the stations prices are so close together, Well it is simple they are all working closely together in a kind of network so that there is no competition between the fuel companies. They do this so they have complete control over their market and it can not be deregulated by the government because if no fuel company is unhappy then there will be no reports filed with the FTC and there will be no government mandating or regulating of the price of fuel. Take a look at the following info: http://www.eia.doe.gov/
also please take a look at this site and get a feeling about The
"The Federal Excise Tax on Gasoline and the Highway Trust Fund"
http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Transportation/trans-24.cfm?&CFID=8539261&CFTOKEN=71797464#_1_1

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1299 Consumer Comment

While BUSH is bad, what have YOU done?

AUTHOR: M - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 06, 2008

Bush was bad before we let him get elected. we let him remain elected. We didn't protest enough. "We the people" have done nothing but complain. While yes, I agree with you...Bush is bad, in fact the worst we could have ever imagined, but what have WE done?

We are allowed to peacefully assemble, so why didn't we? Oh yeah, I forgot for asecond...we were all working extra hours for less pay paying more for everything than ever before and we were too exhausted to have time for such crucially important thinsg like properly protesting what has become a most corrupt government.

Bush is just the poster child when the system is to blame. We have become subjects of the Military Indutrial Complex. We have allowed too much for too long and perhaps it is time that we all DO MORE to assure this corruption ends with this murderous regime otherwise known as the BUSH.

If we elect it again, it is we the people who are to blame. We should have pushed harder to have him indicted for his crimes during Election 2000! Eight years later, here we are: in a mess we will never see the end of. We let a greedy leader lead us to the m iddle of the middle east where we are just kicking up sand in a duststorm & allowing murder and torture for oil that ironically costs far more than ever before.

SOLUTION: Make lobbying illegal. Make WAR mongers responsible for their crimes. And when it isn't right: protest peacefully until the problem is resolved entirely.

We allowed America to rear her ugly side yet again by allowing capitolism and hypocritical,religious misled liars to take us to review how we continue to repeat our history again & again. We have done nothing. Telling people how bad Bush was going to be before he was "elected" in 2000 fell on deaf ears because of IDIOCRACY within our own people who chose to fall for religious murderers time and time again.

Stand for nothing, fall for anything. Half of America fell so hard because none of us stood up long enough! Who is to blame??? WE ARE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1298 Consumer Suggestion

PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS

AUTHOR: Garry - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 30, 2007

In the mid 70,s OPEC started to show their greed. America has oil reserves as great and greater than the middle east. America has oil wells off the left coast that have been ready to pump oil sense the mid 60's but have yet to pump a drop. There hasn't been a refinery built in 35 years yet these tree huggers and save the whale enviormental brain dead expect these old refinerys to make 40 different blends of fuel.

Now being George Bush has done everything in his power to open these reserves and these wells and at the same time these socialist, tree hugging, save the whale, baby killing dim-0-crats have blocked him at every turn. They have also blocked any new nuclear plants in the United States.

How you can stick the blame on George Bush is beyond reason. Try instead of believing every word a Democrat says, or for that matter any elected tyrant, try a few simple web searches because you know what they say, "the truth will set you free". The worst place to get truth is from a party whose only agenda is slander and lies. Blaming Bush without one piece of fact to back it up you must be a Democrat whose vote is bought and paid for with money of the hard working in this country.

Tell me if the democratic party told it's voters manure was ice cream how many would smile while they ate it? How many would go back for seconds?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1297 Consumer Comment

are you really after terrorist?

AUTHOR: Gq - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 27, 2007

i have a question to all the religious Bush supporters. Before 9/11 what was the deadliest act of terrorism on US soil?????? for those who cant remember that far back, the Oklahoma city bombing.

who committed this act???? a Christian paramilitary anti-govt group.

If you are so tuff on terrorism and terrorist why wasn't the entire organization rounded up and jailed or executed by the same religious people and republicans who blame the entire muslim or arabic people for 9/11? why wasn't there this witch hunt for all those supposed 'americans' who killed our own? and why are you satisfied that only a handful of people were ever prosecuted for this act?

after oklahoma city i did not hear these same religious republicans crying for the destruction to any and all people associated with Timothy Mcveigh. the same way they blame all muslim and arabic people as evil terrorist. or is home grown american terrorism more acceptable? I guess its ok for americans to kill other innocent americans in a terrorist act?

i know republicans were not in office at the time of the bombing, so please don't use that as an excuse. my point is that most those of the republican religious right believe most, if not all, of the muslim world hate the US and are responsible for the acts of a few. thus giving the us the right to make war and kill anyone we suspect or believe to be remotely connected to terrorism!
with that same line of thought why weren't you guys leading the way to root out all the supposed christian paramilitary anti-govt groups in this country?

one could only imagine the response if that same attack was proven to be the work of a few muslims. we would round up every arab, muslim or not,whether they were born in this country or not, and kill them, jail them, put them in concentrations camp, and deport them.

why the hypocracy in this country?

fyi. im not muslim, so don't go there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1296 Consumer Comment

Dirtydawg, american politics is the biggest ripoff around!!!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, December 24, 2007

Dirtydawg,

Temper, temper my naive little guy whos making money. Do you work for Halliburton, KBR, or any part of the Bush regime? I find it funny that you stick up for Bush even after all the lies, manipulation, deaths, billions of dollars spent for a war that can't and won't be won as well as giving this country the biggest debt in recent administrations. Oh, did I mention the liberties that this administration has taken from its people or how secretive this administration has been with its own policies with executive privledges. You mentioned that you thank Bush for not allowing another terrorist attack to happen and preventing thousands of deaths. Do you not count the thousands of soldiers that died and continue to die as deaths of americans? Do you actually think we will win this war? Do you see america leaving Iraq? I don't on both counts and would like to know what you think of the U.S. Embassy that Halliburton built in Baghdad thats 16 football fields long and cost american taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, huh? Oh why haven't we captured Osama Bin Ladden? I say because Bush isn't trying to and geesh do you really believe its that hard to find one man who hides in caves??? Get real dude!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1295 Consumer Comment

I would rather be DEAD than be a liberal, socialist DEMOCRAT!!

AUTHOR: Dirtydawg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 23, 2007

I thought the RipOff Report was for consumer issues, not politics. Can we please get back to making and saving money? After all, this is STILL the United States of America where people are free to make as much or as little money as they wish!

Oh, and thank you, President Bush, for us NOT having another terrorist attack on our homeland since 9/11 and thus killing thousands more Americans. We have been free to live and make money and complain, piss and moan on the Internet! ;-)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1294 Consumer Comment

Bush is no great leader

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, December 17, 2007

Bush is no great leader bush knows how to cover up everything like how republicans do when they are inpower. Bush is far from honest bush loves people like you to defend him this is why bush has lasted this long. I just ignore these comments from the bush fans bush is a bad leader. these bush fans are not pushing there beliefs on or trying to force me to support bush which is what they have been doing ever sense bush has been president!. I agree bush is a horrible president.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1293 Author of original report

Bush and cronies destroying America with corporate agenda!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, December 17, 2007

To all the sheeple who like Bush:
Here is a small list of Bush failures:he either lied or had faulty intelligence to get us into a bullshit war of which had nothing to do with 9/11, let the leader of that country be executed, let his corporate oil buddies raise the prices of gas/fuel to unspeakable costs to this date, almost started another war (Iran) with faulty intelligence or he lied to americans again, imited bankruptcy for average person but lets major companies declare bankruptcy, allowed C.I.A. Agents name to leaked and there were no consequences to that action, pardoned Scooter Libby a known crook and Cheney advisor, was involved with Kenneth Lay and the billion dollar Enron scandal, no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, Bush Sr. was Vice-President during time in which Iran/contra affair went down when U.S. sold arms/missles to Iran, Bush has allowed secret overseas prisons, allowed people to be held without charge or representation, torture, illegal spying on americans e-mails, phones, mail) which is in violation of the constitution, tried to give immunity to telecom companies for there role in spying on americans, had most executive signing priviledges in which he can be declared a dictator with no oversight, has taken away more rights of american citizens than any other president in history through the patriot act, protect america act, military commision act, homegrown terrorism act, John Warner defense authorization act, etc. and Bush has done this thus restricting americans rights while maintaining total secrecy and no oversight to its actions. The executive banch has never been this powerful in the history of the United States and this is a very dangerous slope towards dictatorship.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1292 Consumer Comment

Regarding George W. Bush

AUTHOR: Frank - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 12, 2007

George W. Bush was fairly elected. If he wasn't elected, he would not have lasted in office. Saddam Hussein was a tyrannical and abusive head authority in Iraq and justice was served by the United States entering Iraq by declaring war on the then Iraqi Government. Saddam Hussein was held responsible for abuses of power and a trial found him guilty of such. The mass graves reported throughout Iraq testify also that he needed to be taken out of power. Furthermore, the Iraqi government had multiple opportunities to peaceably settle the disputes we had with them but chose to follow a course of anti-American conduct and don't forget that celebratory paintings of September 11th were decorating the interior walls of Iraq's head government buildings. This war is not about oil. If it was we would have all the oil and anyone else's oil that we want.

George W. Bush is a great leader. He is an honest man who has positive intentions for all of The United States of America. George Bush's efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq are paying off and although the media may feed into negative reports whenever possible (as negativism sells more news), like him or not, the facts will continue to demonstrate that George W. Bush is a great President in a time where it is popular to hate and scapegoat without due research.

You submitted a visual illustration of George W. Bush with fabricated sentence bubbles coming from each one's mouth but very importantly, YOU MADE UP THE LINES just as YOU MADE UP WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE about him. This is not what TRUTH is about, and you should not have posted such a report on Ripoff Report because what you say is not a TRUE account but rather imagined just as your visual illustrations have added.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1291 Consumer Comment

you have got to be kidding!

AUTHOR: Realist69 - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 01, 2007

I truley don't beleive you feel that way. A soverign nation is a government within a government within a single country or state, like an indian reservation. No other president has had as many issues in a term....War iraq, war in afganistan, 911, New Orleans, all the other hurricains,and a resession.
There is no way President Bush can regulate gas prices, the market does. It's the seller like the president of Venesuela.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1290 Consumer Comment

Bush is a Horrible President

AUTHOR: Josh - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 16, 2007

I am middle of the road, not republican and not democrat, although I agree with democrats on more issues than republicans. Bush is a president that does not care
for people. He cares for big business only! He privatized Medicare, now costs have skyrocketed and senior citizens are having to earn extra money at a part time job just to be able to pay for their medicine. What a loser! He also allowed companies to lighten up on OSHA laws and other safety regulations to help them save money, at the expense of employees safety and work environments. What a complete idiot! He changed the bankruptcy laws for individuals to put a halt to the abusive Bankruptcies, but still allows businesses to file complete bankruptcy (I know a case where a 59 year old employee had his pension robbed by the company, they went out of business, filed Bankruptcy and did not have to pay back the pensions to their employees)! He denied Free healthcare to thousands of children probably to preserve the tax cuts he gave to big corporations that didn't need them. Finally, he provided a big tax break for the big oil companies and even the Tobacco Companies. Think of this also, when was the first major hike in gas prices?
Early summer of 2001. When did Bush come into office? Something is not right here. Get this loser out of office and bring in a Democrat such as Joe Biden, because himself and other democrats are the only ones who will take seriously the mess that Bush has made!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1289 Consumer Comment

You can't make a horse drink water

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 25, 2007

You can't make a horse drink water, you can't have a peaceful debate without the bush fans insulting the other party & calling them names then they accuse us of name calling.

You can't mate a horse drink water & the bush fans are the horse stubborn refuse to listen that bush is bad! if u want bush & the republicans, to revoke our rights then continue to vote republican.

Bush is take healthcare away from the middleclass & poor people & kids who really need healthcare this proves once again bush does not care about the middle class or the poor people.

Bush wants to take away all our benefits & give to his rich people & the poor get poorer, why do u think they are so many americans walking city streets asking money from strangers & playing music for money!.

We live in a cruel society when republicans are in power! u can't make a horse drink water u can't force bush fans to believe anything else they think they are right & everyone else is wrong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1288 Consumer Comment

You can't make a horse drink water

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 25, 2007

You can't make a horse drink water, you can't have a peaceful debate without the bush fans insulting the other party & calling them names then they accuse us of name calling.

You can't mate a horse drink water & the bush fans are the horse stubborn refuse to listen that bush is bad! if u want bush & the republicans, to revoke our rights then continue to vote republican.

Bush is take healthcare away from the middleclass & poor people & kids who really need healthcare this proves once again bush does not care about the middle class or the poor people.

Bush wants to take away all our benefits & give to his rich people & the poor get poorer, why do u think they are so many americans walking city streets asking money from strangers & playing music for money!.

We live in a cruel society when republicans are in power! u can't make a horse drink water u can't force bush fans to believe anything else they think they are right & everyone else is wrong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1287 Consumer Comment

You can't make a horse drink water

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 25, 2007

You can't make a horse drink water, you can't have a peaceful debate without the bush fans insulting the other party & calling them names then they accuse us of name calling.

You can't mate a horse drink water & the bush fans are the horse stubborn refuse to listen that bush is bad! if u want bush & the republicans, to revoke our rights then continue to vote republican.

Bush is take healthcare away from the middleclass & poor people & kids who really need healthcare this proves once again bush does not care about the middle class or the poor people.

Bush wants to take away all our benefits & give to his rich people & the poor get poorer, why do u think they are so many americans walking city streets asking money from strangers & playing music for money!.

We live in a cruel society when republicans are in power! u can't make a horse drink water u can't force bush fans to believe anything else they think they are right & everyone else is wrong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1286 Consumer Comment

You can't make a horse drink water

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 25, 2007

You can't make a horse drink water, you can't have a peaceful debate without the bush fans insulting the other party & calling them names then they accuse us of name calling.

You can't mate a horse drink water & the bush fans are the horse stubborn refuse to listen that bush is bad! if u want bush & the republicans, to revoke our rights then continue to vote republican.

Bush is take healthcare away from the middleclass & poor people & kids who really need healthcare this proves once again bush does not care about the middle class or the poor people.

Bush wants to take away all our benefits & give to his rich people & the poor get poorer, why do u think they are so many americans walking city streets asking money from strangers & playing music for money!.

We live in a cruel society when republicans are in power! u can't make a horse drink water u can't force bush fans to believe anything else they think they are right & everyone else is wrong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1285 Consumer Comment

Lets all ignore bush fans

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 17, 2007

From, the point lets all ignore bush fans they refuse to have a peaceful debate & continue to insult & call us names & tell us we are wrong, its two years before the election so they are starting what they did before the democrats won the

election last year. Its, time to get this country back on track before bush ruined it & the republican party, why do u think we voted for democrats in 2006. Next, year we would elect a democrat president to get this country back on

track & clean up bush's & the republicans mess they have caused us!, & have caused other countries to hate us cause of bush. People, just had to have bush

in office & look @ what it is costing us our freedom!.

Why, do u think that so many americans are in poverty & walking city streets asking for money from strangers, thanks to bush & the republican cause they don't care! about the middle class or the poor people!.

People, just had to have republicans in office & look @ what it is costing us today our freedom & our rights! has american citizens!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1284 Consumer Suggestion

Are you kidding? Bush did not steal the election.

AUTHOR: Tom - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 11, 2007

1. Bush did not steal the election. You may want to catch up on the current events after your 7-year coma. Al Gore lost the popular vote as well as the electoral vote and it is clearly documented by an independent firm.

2. If we were there for oil wouldn't we take it and lower our prices? Where is your reasoning on this comment?

3. If Al (Snore) Gore had won, which he did not in any way, we would all be learning Arabic and the Koran. Gore is a weak, whiney, crybaby who has obviously lost his mind since losing the election in 2000.

4. Yes, George Bush is a liar and has made a lot of mistakes, but he is our president and if he doesn't do whatever is necessary to stop the terrorists than life as we know it will be under attack for decades to come.

5. We've already spent over 250 Billion Dollars in the war on terror. The smart move would be in my opinion would be to spend the next 250 Billion to withdrawal all of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and use those troops to build fences on our borders and to guard those borders in an attempt to stop illegals from entering. We should also legalize racial and religious profiling and thoroughly check every person coming into our country from any country, or ethnic background that is know for terrorism. Once we stop them from entering, we can start weeding out the terrorists that are already in our country. This is America. It's our country and if the people from other countries don't like it they can go back to where they came from, but they came here because their countries suck and don't want to go back to living in their own oppressed, filthy, dictatorships that treat people like animals. If America is so bad, why are they flocking here like their countries are on fire? The only people who are opposed to profiling are those who have something to hide. I welcome being searched, questioned, or delayed at the airport if it means the terrorists won't be able to board our planes and use them as weapons against us like they did 6 years ago today.

If you are a Muslim who disagrees with terrorism, speak out against it. If you are silent it's the same as condoning terrorism and that's why most non-Muslims hate all Muslims, because they can't tell who is and is not a terrorist. It's up to the good ones to save themselves and if they don't speak out against terrorism, they will end up suffering the same fate as the radical Muslims.

It's time to put political correctness to rest permanently! It's un-American not to be able to say what's on your mind and as long as no physical harm comes to anyone, words although hurtful, don't blow up children or buildings in the name of some giant superman in the sky known as Allah.

Think about this for one minute. Throughout time almost every war was fought because of religious differences. Who's God is the real god? The answer for all of you who aren't sure, or think your God / Allah is the all-knowing Supreme Being is you are all wrong. There's no God! Science has proven that life began with the big bang and took billions of years to develop from a combination of molecular and chemical changes combined with energy from the sun. There is no supreme being and there is no magic wand and there is no heaven or hell and there is no gift of 72 Virgins for martyrs. This also goes for the Christians. The Catholic church is just as guilty throughout the ages of using their false God and Jesus to manipulate people in order to control the entire planet through fear of loss of going to heaven. It's all bullshit! Jesus wasn't even considered the Son of God until 300 years after his death and that lie was conjured up by the Catholic religion leaders in order to gain more power. Do your homework in the world of religion and science. All gods are fake and were conjured up by men that want to take your money and do nothing for it. It's a scam!!

A final thought. I have been reading this website for at least 6 years and it's incredible how many posting come from Tupper Lake, New York. In the hundreds of posts from Tupper Lake, New York I can count on 1 hand how many had anything intelligent to say. Their water must be severely contaminated with heavy metals, or arsenic, or something that would cause such unintelligent postings all from one town.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1283 Consumer Comment

Give it up bush fans

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 01, 2007

Give, it up bush fans this is why everyone hates republicans yes bush did lie to us he used 9/11/2001 to invade iraq look @ the mess the country is in america made a good choice to vote democrats, next year we will vote a democrat for president


to get this country back on track from how bush has ruined everything. Keep, living in your dream world bush is the greatest president in the history bush is a war monger all republicans are, I will never vote republican I will always vote democrat!.


I, will not join the military I will not die for bush or be injuried for the rest of my life for bush u think bush cares, about our dying soldiers in iraq no he doesnt.


I, support the troops I do not support this war nor do I support bush bush does not deserve any credit & he does not deserve respect.


No, republicans deserve respect.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1282 Consumer Comment

The original poster of this complaint is insane.

AUTHOR: The Amb Scam - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 31, 2007

First, President George Bush did NOT lie. He went on the best intelligence available at the time. As a direct comparison, President Clinton DID lie when, on national television, he claimed that he "did not have sexual relations with that woman.

The definition of the word lie is "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood." This is not what Bush did in 2003 nor is it what President Clinton did on February 17th, 1998 when he stated "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton made this bold claim at the Pentagon.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/18/iraq.political.analysis/

Second, the war in Iraq had nothing to do with the rise in prices for several reasons.

First, Iraq only represents 5% - 8% of US oil imports.
Second, the fact that China's economy has been growing at an average rate of 10% for the past 8 years obviously had nothing to do with it. I mean come on, why would the most powerful manufacturing economy in the world need more oil? I mean, it's not all for the gas is it? I wonder where all those hydrocarbon based plastics such as those found in cd's, computers, tv's and other items comes from anyway? I'm sure that the rise in the prices for oil has nothing to do with the simple economic fact of supply and demand (more demand with a non-increase in supply causes prices to go up) and has everything to do with some secret cabal-istic agreement that Bush made with the Saudi's to cripple his own country.

You are, as the saying goes, a tool.

Now, as to your tired, sad and utterly pathetic complaint that he stole the election. I have but one question for you. Who started the lawsuits? I'll help you with that one. It was Team Gore. And what did Team Gore want? He wanted a manual hand count of the ballots in Florida while forcing the voting board to ignore the overseas ballots. This was a very sneaky ploy by Team Gore. The recount they wanted was specific. Team Gore only wanted the hand count done in a few Florida counties that, oddly enough, were mostly Democrat. Unfortunately, Florida law required that if a manual hand recount be done then the entire state be recounted. Also, there is this little sticking point about Constitutional requirements. Also, Team Gore tried to get the overseas ballots thrown out since they knew that the majority of overseas ballots came from the military and that the military was most Republican.

Now, about that little "surplus" you were talking about. I'm assuming you are referring to that little pile of unspent cash that was supposed to go to our intelligence agencies and military. Is that the surplus that you were talking about? It's funny when you think about it. Clinton refuses to properly fund the CIA so that they would be able to keep their Middle East spy networks open. Clinton refuses to properly fund the military so they will have the equipment they need should the need arise. Clinton fails to treat the first WTC bombing in 1993 as an act of terrorism and instead labels it a criminal act, basically leaving it to the NYPD to solve. Clinton pulls us out of Somalia after we faced losses brought on by his refusal to give our military commanders on the ground the materials that they said were needed thereby giving Bin Laden further proof that we were a paper tiger.

10 times 10 times 10 times 10. Clinton is at the root cause of every major screw up, blunder and catastrophe this country has faced in the past 18 years and somehow it all get's placed at Bush's feet. What's even more amazing is the fact that you utterly ignore the fact the our economy is the strongest it has ever been and is being driven by actual industry and not a fleeting tech bubble. We have the lowest rate of homelessness, crime and unemployment in probably 50 years and again that is ignored. American volunteerism is at an all time high and yet, again, not one single piece of praise for Bush.

As for your utterly silly and vapid comment about the weapons of mass destruction I'll simply point to my Clinton quote above and the accompanying link. In case you want to read more of the "lies" that the Democrats made while Clinton was in office I suggest you head over to Glenn Becks rather informative little site. The url is:

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml

Why not try to think for yourself just once, turn off the Al Franken and formulate your own idea based on multiple sources of information?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1281 Consumer Comment

Republicans never cared for the troops

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 06, 2007

Republicans, never cared for the troops the republicans always took their vacations to & the bush fans never said anything about that!, democrats do care & support the troops we do not support this war!. So, dont had us that democrats dont support the troops republicans never did, anything for them!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1280 Consumer Comment

YOU elected?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 06, 2007

"Remember these are the people YOU elected." - James

Funny how when Bush "won" in 2000 (by a slim dubious margin...slim...slim!...SLIM!) it was the "Nation" that elected him. After his election to dare be against his opinion or the opinion of his administration was to be a "traitor". A TRAITOR to the nation for daring to oppose a man not even elected by a "vast" majority of its citizens. The same happened in 2004. Not as dubious as the previous election, but by a slim margin. Very slim for a presidential election for this country. Maybe not rare, but certainly uncommon.

For someone that barely gained power, its hard for me to consider anyone that disagrees with him as being a "traitor".

I love how the neo-cons "flip-flop" on the idea of just what is being a "true American", and a "traitor". The best is this use of "oh your hurting our troops".

When Bush BARELY gained office, to disagree with him was against the entire nations will!

When the democrates vote on something in Congress suddenly reality comes back and the neo-cons rally about how the "liberals" BARELY won a majority, and thus, dont really relfect the nations "will". Totally ignoring the fact that for the last 7 years their actions have BARELY reflected the nations "will".

Is it "Ive been elected therefore I represent 100% of the people....because I got elected..regardless of what the election numbers were"?

Seems the road only goes one way for the neo-cons.

If we were to apply the same rules they have to the current situation, they would be the traitors.

This trip by Pelosi to Syria is a good example. Has everyone forgot that we do have an embassy in Syria? Has everyone forgot that its not "uncommon" for members of congress to travel to other nations to "talk". Has everyone forgot that this has been a common practise with civilized nations for hundreds of years, if not thousands? Has everyone forgot that we are NOT at war with Syria (yet!).

Funny how nobody mentions that just about every two weeks someone high ranking from the U.S. embassy meets with someone high ranking from Syria, in Syria. Hmmmm?

We always have been talking to Syria. As long as we have an embassy there, we always will. On a regular basis. When a congressman (woman) goes there, its just more high profile. Was anything different this time? Did we offer something different? No. Big deal. What it did do was upstage poor ol'Bush. Nothing more. Its a joke to bash Pelosi, or the Demos in general, for something thats always been going on in the first place.

Now the "flip flop" sets in.

Lets see.

Too go against Bush is "bad" because he got "elected" (regardless of by how slim).

But to go against Pelosi going to Syria for a "talk" is "bad"...even tho she too got "elected".

Remember...this was all about....

"Remember these are the people YOU elected." ---James


Yup....they got "elected"....you are obviously against them. Are you a "traitor"?

Im just using neo-con rules here.

Its all very confusing how to follow the neo-con agenda. With the election in '06, these people got elected, but to be for them, I'm anti-american, dont support my troops, yadda yadda yadda.

But to go against the Bush administration, which "got elected", I'm anti-american, dont support my troops, yadda yadda yadda.

Now personally I dont support the Democrats or the Republicans. But I will counter what I believe to be untrue. I think both parties are exactly that, "parties". Both do some good, both do some evil. I fundamentaly agree that this 2 party system is flawed. But hey, what do we have. Not claiming defeat here. Just being realistic. This is what we HAVE. I will do what I can as a meager single citizen to vote accordingly, and hope it does something better for the future. For what that is worth, so be it.

This country was founded on Freedom. Not money. Both parties are guilty in my book of forgetting, and abusing that. That pretty much trounces any comment about "pork spending". Anyone that dares bring up the subject in this day and age is a moron. Both parties are evil to the core when it comes to that.

Want to argue?

Ill be happy to bash you with the exact same formula...."elected". They got "elected". Push harder and I'll use your own neo-con formula of "elected=100%-will of the nation...too oppose is to be a traitor".

All wrong....all nieve....all fatal.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1279 Consumer Comment

Good Going Charles

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 05, 2007

Make sure that you don't vote. That is one less vote for the democrats. Are you really happy with what the Democrats are doing? With their stance on the war and Pork Barrel Spending they are denying our troops what they need. If they do not want to fun the war then why don't they just say so instead of hiding behind a crap bill that will never pass. And instead of taking care of our troops they are on VACATION when they should be working on a bill to support our troops. They can still be against the war and support the troops. Their actions are hurting our troops and in the long run will cause more to die and be injured. Remember these are the people YOU elected.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1278 Consumer Comment

I will never again vote in a election

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 03, 2007

I, will never again vote in a election after the outcome from the 2000-2004 elections & all the ugly remarks from the bush fans on this website, why do u think we have so many bad businessess taken advantage of innocent victims u guessed it republicans!. The, reason why people voted democrat was because of the outcome from the 2000-2004 elections know democrats are inpower over congress, & the senate. I, was proud to vote in the last two elections but I will never again vote in any election due to the outcomes from the 2000-2004 elections & from the ugly & nasty comments from the bush fans, who say we have no right to disagree with bush!. Well, we got news for the we have the right to disagree with bush & do not to support this war!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1277 Consumer Comment

Ew! thats just GROSS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 01, 2007

Oh Robert, you just cant stop with the smoke screen and lies can you....

"None of the "hundreds" were turned away from American Medical Services, which is what Ben is attempting to claim." ---Robert

No Robert, once again, you lie. I never said it in the context your using and you know it. Another twist and avoidance of the real subject at hand. Typical.

I have repeatedly mentioned how people "cant get" healthcare due to "cost". In essence its the same thing as being turned away. If you cant afford it...YOU HAVE BEEN TURNED AWAY.

Your trying to dillute the issue by saying I meant hospitals were simply turning people away at random. Show me where I even remotely hinted at that.

You cant.

Also its "millions". Not "hundreds". MILLIONS of people in this country do not have ACCESS to HEALTHCARE due to FINANCIAL restraints. Financial restraints that are outrageous, overpriced, or just too d**n hard to obtain from BS red tape.

Even you, sit there and quote..."If India and Indochina are supplying this service, you can be sure it's due to price, not superior quality."

Thanks Robert for once again proving everything I have been saying.

Now there is your point from a previous post...

"EVERYONE pays. If you can't afford to be sick, stop eating fatburgers, smoking, drinking alcohol, using illicit drugs, and skydiving sans parachute."

EW! Robert! Thats just gross!

So lets get this down. You think that everyone that cant afford healthcare is sick because of there own fault?? BS!
You also basically saying "if you cant afford it...tough s**t".

I bet if Terry Schiavo's family was poor and couldnt afford the healthcare she received for years, you would be singing a different tune. Most likely spontainiously combusting from inner turmoil due to being such a hypocrite. Bah, I doubt she would have lived that long anyway. She would have died soon after she fell ill.....from "fatburgers"....because she was poor.

I love how you neo-cons (spare me the "I'm a Libertarian" crap....you have defended Bush and his policies to the core for over a year...your a neo-con..deal with it) have such a double standard. On one side you rally for the end of abortion because "it kills babies", then on the other your absolutely happy to let someone die because they simply dont cut it on your business balance sheet. Make more people (by force), and let the ones deemed "financially unworthy" die or suffer.

What a wonderful thing you have discovered Robert.

Life and death...... now a capitalist venture.

Maybe soon we will have the $99 two kidney transplant special someday. Like the brake job cons you defend so passionately. Dont expect to actually GET those two kidneys tho. And dont expect Robert to shed a tear if you die on the opperating table because in his eyes "its your own fault".

Thats just gross.

You are the Ann Coulter of Rip Off Report.

This administration has destroyed this country by making life, death, and war a permanent national industry for one purpose....money. And only for the very few.

Peoples physical, and mental health should never be in the hands of Wall Street......EVER. Nor should our freedoms. Not everyone has a vote there. We do with our government. It may not be perfect. But I would rather have an imperfect "something", than nothing at all. Capitalism will have a role in fixing this, but now without severe control. When life, death, or just plain human suffering, are the issue, too much is at stake to slip up. Capitalism run amok is hardly the cure.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1276 Consumer Comment

Ew! thats just GROSS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 01, 2007

Oh Robert, you just cant stop with the smoke screen and lies can you....

"None of the "hundreds" were turned away from American Medical Services, which is what Ben is attempting to claim." ---Robert

No Robert, once again, you lie. I never said it in the context your using and you know it. Another twist and avoidance of the real subject at hand. Typical.

I have repeatedly mentioned how people "cant get" healthcare due to "cost". In essence its the same thing as being turned away. If you cant afford it...YOU HAVE BEEN TURNED AWAY.

Your trying to dillute the issue by saying I meant hospitals were simply turning people away at random. Show me where I even remotely hinted at that.

You cant.

Also its "millions". Not "hundreds". MILLIONS of people in this country do not have ACCESS to HEALTHCARE due to FINANCIAL restraints. Financial restraints that are outrageous, overpriced, or just too d**n hard to obtain from BS red tape.

Even you, sit there and quote..."If India and Indochina are supplying this service, you can be sure it's due to price, not superior quality."

Thanks Robert for once again proving everything I have been saying.

Now there is your point from a previous post...

"EVERYONE pays. If you can't afford to be sick, stop eating fatburgers, smoking, drinking alcohol, using illicit drugs, and skydiving sans parachute."

EW! Robert! Thats just gross!

So lets get this down. You think that everyone that cant afford healthcare is sick because of there own fault?? BS!
You also basically saying "if you cant afford it...tough s**t".

I bet if Terry Schiavo's family was poor and couldnt afford the healthcare she received for years, you would be singing a different tune. Most likely spontainiously combusting from inner turmoil due to being such a hypocrite. Bah, I doubt she would have lived that long anyway. She would have died soon after she fell ill.....from "fatburgers"....because she was poor.

I love how you neo-cons (spare me the "I'm a Libertarian" crap....you have defended Bush and his policies to the core for over a year...your a neo-con..deal with it) have such a double standard. On one side you rally for the end of abortion because "it kills babies", then on the other your absolutely happy to let someone die because they simply dont cut it on your business balance sheet. Make more people (by force), and let the ones deemed "financially unworthy" die or suffer.

What a wonderful thing you have discovered Robert.

Life and death...... now a capitalist venture.

Maybe soon we will have the $99 two kidney transplant special someday. Like the brake job cons you defend so passionately. Dont expect to actually GET those two kidneys tho. And dont expect Robert to shed a tear if you die on the opperating table because in his eyes "its your own fault".

Thats just gross.

You are the Ann Coulter of Rip Off Report.

This administration has destroyed this country by making life, death, and war a permanent national industry for one purpose....money. And only for the very few.

Peoples physical, and mental health should never be in the hands of Wall Street......EVER. Nor should our freedoms. Not everyone has a vote there. We do with our government. It may not be perfect. But I would rather have an imperfect "something", than nothing at all. Capitalism will have a role in fixing this, but now without severe control. When life, death, or just plain human suffering, are the issue, too much is at stake to slip up. Capitalism run amok is hardly the cure.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1275 Consumer Comment

Ew! thats just GROSS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 01, 2007

Oh Robert, you just cant stop with the smoke screen and lies can you....

"None of the "hundreds" were turned away from American Medical Services, which is what Ben is attempting to claim." ---Robert

No Robert, once again, you lie. I never said it in the context your using and you know it. Another twist and avoidance of the real subject at hand. Typical.

I have repeatedly mentioned how people "cant get" healthcare due to "cost". In essence its the same thing as being turned away. If you cant afford it...YOU HAVE BEEN TURNED AWAY.

Your trying to dillute the issue by saying I meant hospitals were simply turning people away at random. Show me where I even remotely hinted at that.

You cant.

Also its "millions". Not "hundreds". MILLIONS of people in this country do not have ACCESS to HEALTHCARE due to FINANCIAL restraints. Financial restraints that are outrageous, overpriced, or just too d**n hard to obtain from BS red tape.

Even you, sit there and quote..."If India and Indochina are supplying this service, you can be sure it's due to price, not superior quality."

Thanks Robert for once again proving everything I have been saying.

Now there is your point from a previous post...

"EVERYONE pays. If you can't afford to be sick, stop eating fatburgers, smoking, drinking alcohol, using illicit drugs, and skydiving sans parachute."

EW! Robert! Thats just gross!

So lets get this down. You think that everyone that cant afford healthcare is sick because of there own fault?? BS!
You also basically saying "if you cant afford it...tough s**t".

I bet if Terry Schiavo's family was poor and couldnt afford the healthcare she received for years, you would be singing a different tune. Most likely spontainiously combusting from inner turmoil due to being such a hypocrite. Bah, I doubt she would have lived that long anyway. She would have died soon after she fell ill.....from "fatburgers"....because she was poor.

I love how you neo-cons (spare me the "I'm a Libertarian" crap....you have defended Bush and his policies to the core for over a year...your a neo-con..deal with it) have such a double standard. On one side you rally for the end of abortion because "it kills babies", then on the other your absolutely happy to let someone die because they simply dont cut it on your business balance sheet. Make more people (by force), and let the ones deemed "financially unworthy" die or suffer.

What a wonderful thing you have discovered Robert.

Life and death...... now a capitalist venture.

Maybe soon we will have the $99 two kidney transplant special someday. Like the brake job cons you defend so passionately. Dont expect to actually GET those two kidneys tho. And dont expect Robert to shed a tear if you die on the opperating table because in his eyes "its your own fault".

Thats just gross.

You are the Ann Coulter of Rip Off Report.

This administration has destroyed this country by making life, death, and war a permanent national industry for one purpose....money. And only for the very few.

Peoples physical, and mental health should never be in the hands of Wall Street......EVER. Nor should our freedoms. Not everyone has a vote there. We do with our government. It may not be perfect. But I would rather have an imperfect "something", than nothing at all. Capitalism will have a role in fixing this, but now without severe control. When life, death, or just plain human suffering, are the issue, too much is at stake to slip up. Capitalism run amok is hardly the cure.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1274 Consumer Comment

I'll look it up Josh

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 28, 2007

I am not scared of truth...no matter where I find it.

If it's like you say, then it still is merely a drop in a very large bucket. Hundreds of thousands, nay...MILLIONS, every year come here each year for medical treatment.

If India and Indochina are supplying this service, you can be sure it's due to price, not superior quality. Guess where the majority of "customer service" phone lines are? It's not because the people know the area. It's price...say CHEAP.

None of the "hundreds" were turned away from American Medical Services, which is what Ben is attempting to claim. NOBODY is turned away. If one hospital closes due to the lack of funding, another takes up the slack. Get rid of the waste-oids and derelicts who clog up the system, make everyone pay their OWN bill, and the system will be fixed permanently.

I want a new 2008 Challenger when they come out. If I am unwilling to pony up the capital to pay the price locally, I will check around to see if I can find one CHEAPer elsewhere.

That's exactly what those "hundreds" are doing. I'll wait with breathless anticipation for their ROR's about the botched surgeries.

Hundreds, vs millions. Do the math.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1273 Consumer Comment

no one robert?

AUTHOR: Josh - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 27, 2007

robert, about 99% of everything you have ever posted has been completley accurate, but hundreds of americans each year leave the country to seek medical operations from outside countries. I wouldnt have believed it either, but i just saw a dateline report about this exact issue a week or two ago. India is the biggest provider, indo china is close behind. I'm sure you could look it up, but you probably wont.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1272 Consumer Comment

Kate in Toledo - Isn't it odd...

AUTHOR: Evan - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 23, 2007

That appealing to history/tradition is a major logical fallacy, and that WWII has nothing to do with the present state of affairs? Isn't it odd that repetition (anaphora), makes you feel smart and persuasive? Isn't it odd that, head to head in an argument, all you have to fall back on is talking points? I sure think it's odd.

However, I agree with you that this war is not solely about oil. It is partially over CONTROL of oil - mainly preventing China and Russia from accessing the supply. It is also about a vendetta. It is also about creating a distraction from the honest to God, real-life terroristic policies of this oligarchy under which we currently live.

Maybe if you didn't live in a s**t state with s**t brains, you could come to terms with reality. Keep getting fatter and poorer as these God-fearing republicans keep screwing you over. GO MUDHENS!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1271 Consumer Comment

You're almost on target

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 18, 2007

Try adjusting your windage 2 clicks right, and add 1 click elevation. This should put you in the black.

The VA is not the result of a left-wing conspiracy. It is the result of being run by the Federal Government...an entity that is not known for it's efficient handling of affairs. The point is, having the Feds run the entire healthcare system will result in more of the same, not make it better. Did the screeners at any airport get better and more efficient when the Feds took over? Case closed.

I agree with you on freedom being what founded this country. What freedom of choice will you have when the Feds run the system? Hillarycare was going to make personal choice a crime. The Doctor would be imprisoned, and the patient would be heavily fined. Don't believe it? Look it up.

In fact, Hillary has repeatedly said we ned to stop worrying about individual rights, and be concerned only with the good of the whole. She's a good little Marxist.

Want to know how to FIX the system? I'll tell you.

1-EVERYONE pays. If you can't afford to be sick, stop eating fatburgers, smoking, drinking alcohol, using illicit drugs, and skydiving sans parachute. There was atime when stupidity killed you. Carlos Mencia has it right when he says "there are too many stupid people, and nothing left to eat them". Ron White can back that up with "you can't fix stupid". Bring back dinosaurs.(Yes, I know they died out millions of years before we showed up on the scene...but you know the stupid people would have to go out and look at what the screaming was all about).

2-ILLEGAL immigrants get NOTHING from the system at all. Build a giant trebuchet and launch them back across the border by the busload. Adams, Jefferson, et al never envisioned people being here ILLEGALLY being granted any "rights" to US tax money, and services. They assumed ILLEGALs would be deported.

3-Start using common sense(that ugly term again). Stop wasting everyone's time when you can go to CVS and buy some cough medicine, or Tylenol. You'd be astonished how many people are in the ER waiting room for crap like that. Go to any military hospital and see the same thing. It's all about that "entitlement" mentality.

4-STOP voting for the people who are currently in office. Try voting for what's good for the FREEDOMS this country originally had, instead of what's good for your "entitlement". I vote Libertarian every time one is on the ballot.

Any more questions?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1270 Consumer Comment

Spin? Your kidding right?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 17, 2007

"So now you claim these people won't be able to access healthcare in the future. That's a whole bunch different than saying they cannot access it right now.

Good spin Ben. And it's much easier than actually answering the question, isn't it?" -- Robert

Spin? SPIN!? Uh whos spinning here Robert. I complain that Health care in this country is SICK. I think I have pointed out that its on many MANY levels. Typical smoke screen, and real SPIN by you to zero in on "oh you cant access healthcare now..blah blah blah".

Good grief Robert! Healthcare in its current form is ILL get it. Now, later, same diff bud! Even you mentioned that hospitals are closing, and proof that they are is that people CANT AFFORD IT. Why, because its SICK! The current system does not work.

ITS NOT WORKING...GET IT?

Where do you think it will be on this current path eh? You yourself provided all the proof needed that things need to be done on many levels. THANKS! Its just ironic that you cant even see how you hung yourself!

I think we both agree that hospitals closing is a "bad thing". Do you have a plan to fix it? Does anyone you support in a position to actually do something have a plan to fix it? Most on your end of the spectrum act like you, and pretend "all is well", yet spew forth this info. Not even realizing that info is proof something needs to be done. The big problem is the only fixes your end of the spectrum provide are pathetic "maximize profit for corporate officers" attitude. Not even their basic core employees see any gain from the insane bonuses and salaries these shnooks see.

I cant believe that we are even having this argument at this level. On one side you sit there and give a bunch of facts. Bolstering everthing I've said about how pathetic the trend in healthcare is in the country. Then still defend against the only effort to fix it. The only reason you dont want to fix it is because, quite simply..."you just dont like the person that proposed it".

"For those of you so bent on having Hillarycare take care of your medical needs, just look at any VA clinic(not the hospitals), "free clinic", or Walter Reed Medical Center(not the only bad one, nor even an abnormality...just the one closest to the Beltway)." ----Robert

Uh, Robert? What part of how the VA hospitals have been handled or managed has Sen.Clinton been in charge of? Just a question here, but are you trying to say that the problems at Walter Reed were a political, democratic party based error? I'd like to see your info on that. As far as I'm concerned it was typical buracratic bullshit, and both parties should be ashamed. The government as a whole should be ashamed. But if you really want to pass out blame....who the hell do you think has been running the whole show for the last 6 years????! Wasnt the demos bud! Unless you want to claim that all the problems at VA hospitals happened since the November elections.

Sure.

Whatever.

Spin? Not me robert. Spin can be called another thing.......

SMOKE......as in SMOKE SCREEN.

And your the king of that.

This country was founded on Freedom. Not money.

Sit and spin on that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1269 Consumer Comment

Look at Walter Reed

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 14, 2007

For those of you so bent on having Hillarycare take care of your medical needs, just look at any VA clinic(not the hospitals), "free clinic", or Walter Reed Medical Center(not the only bad one, nor even an abnormality...just the one closest to the Beltway).

THAT is your future.

Ask a Canadian why they cross the border to get medical treatment. Ask ANY foreign National why he/she comes to this Country for treatment. How many Americans go elsewhere to get medical care? NONE!!!!!

That's what the police call a CLUE.

Get it? Probably not...and that's the truly sad part.

I'm still waiting for you to explain why you get upset about a joke about FREE medicine, while thinking FREE healthcare is perfectly fine. If you are upset about having to PAY for someone else's prescriptions(the small cost of healthcare), why are you okay with paying for everyone else's actual treatment(the large cost of healthcare)?

I guess that answer will be included with the verifiable name of the only person on the planet who is incapable of recieving treatment in the USA.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1268 Consumer Comment

Yaaaaawn

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 06, 2007

So now you claim these people won't be able to access healthcare in the future. That's a whole bunch different than saying they cannot access it right now.

Good spin Ben. And it's much easier than actually answering the question, isn't it?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1267 Consumer Comment

Pegged! Again!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 04, 2007

Robert your comments are a joke. Nobody is going to fall for it again.

"You live in California. Your State has dozens of Public Hospitals closing each year because of this issue." ---Robert

Right here even you admit that the current system of healthcare is...BROKEN.

Your excuse that "everyone has access" just because some laws say "they have to provide healtcare" doesnt show our system is working by a long shot.

Whats going to happen when those hospitals close? Eh? Guess some people wont have "ACCESS" now will they?

Also, once again, you zero in on a single word and rant and rave about it. This time is "access" and "affordability". This is just as pathetic as your attack on me when I said my county had "about a million" people in it. You came up with a number of 930,000 and blasted me saying I was lying, I was wrong, etc. Blah blah blah. 930K?? About a million? same diff bud.

ABOUT A MILLION ABOUT A MILLION ABOUT A MILLION

AFFORDABLE...ACCESS....AFFORDABLE...ACCESS

Cough! Choke! Oh the smoke you put out!

I even mentioned you were going to try a stunt like this again. And there you go. Your easy to predict Robert.

So spout all you want about how healthcare is "fine" in this country. Just because some law says they "have to treat you" doesnt mean the system is good.

You want ONE NAME now? What a pathetic smoke screen.

Once again.....EVERYONE THAT CANT AFFORD IT. That includes those that have to fill out your "little form" when they have an emergency.

You think thats a good system? Eh? You said it yourself that hospitals are closing. Getting stuck with the tab when people CANT PAY! So you can see....someone needs to pay. And if they cant...SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS....like hospitals going out of business.

Once again Robert only you can equate closing hospitals as a decent healthcare system. Twisted!

Smoke screen away bud. Nobody is falling for it or your little rants and twists based on single words.

Healthcare in this country needs help. All your facts and figures just go to boslter that fact. Thanks for hanging yourself.


PEGGED! Again!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1266 Consumer Comment

We are the Bosses, these people are the employees of the United States.

AUTHOR: Jeremy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 04, 2007

Look at the whole picture, Sorry but come again?

All I have seen here is people bagging on different presidents, but no real constructive comments.

It is in my estimation, that most presidents especially George Bush and Bill Clinton, have been utter failures and work towards dogmatic and very buffoon oriented agendas.

I have a sense, that every political leader in the past 10 years....besides possibly Al Gore, has been a self-serving idiot.

A n**i if you will. One that is serving their special agendas and not anyone else.....

I have a great concern that the Catholic Church, the orthodox Catholic Church may be behind a great deal of naughty end time prophecy garbage and may be responsible for all this religious idiocy.....

http://www.arcticbeacon.com

Like I say it is just a mounting but very prominent concern....and I believe it needs to be exposed, I don't believe we need religion out there now.

Not in the way we have come to know religion...what it appears to me, is that a rather buffoonish group has been controlling these idiots for years.

And this is why every President since Kennedy, or possibly before him with Eisenhower, has been an utter failure and disgrace.

These men are ripoffs and deserving of the chopping block. Just like these companies out there, they are no more deserving of anyone's support. I tell you this with a very constructive vocal view....

All the politicians are liars, are idiots, and are serving these buffoons agenda....and if Al Gore is not one of them he is going to have to fight to prove it. Too many liars and criminals spoil the flavor of a so called "american sundry"

Now you can catch my drift if you check history....there's been something wrong in the head with all these men, through every century, leading back to Abraham Lincoln. Bunch of idiots deserving of utmost contempt.

Regards
Jeremy, Saint George Utah
United States USA

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1265 Consumer Comment

I'm an employee too, or a boss because I live in the USA.

AUTHOR: Jeremy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 04, 2007

Sorry but come again?

All I have seen here is people bagging on different presidents, but no real constructive comments.

It is in my estimation, that most presidents especially George Bush and Bill Clinton, have been utter failures and work towards dogmatic and very buffoon oriented agendas.

I have a sense, that every political leader in the past 10 years....besides possibly Al Gore, has been a self-serving idiot.

A n**i if you will. One that is serving their special agendas and not anyone else.....

I have a great concern that the Catholic Church, the orthodox Catholic Church may be behind a great deal of naughty end time prophecy garbage and may be responsible for all this religious idiocy.....

http://www.arcticbeacon.com

Like I say it is just a mounting but very prominent concern....and I believe it needs to be exposed, I don't believe we need religion out there now.

Not in the way we have come to know religion...what it appears to me, is that a rather buffoonish group has been controlling these idiots for years.

And this is why every President since Kennedy, or possibly before him with Eisenhower, has been an utter failure and disgrace.

These men are ripoffs and deserving of the chopping block. Just like these companies out there, they are no more deserving of anyone's support. I tell you this with a very constructive vocal view....

All the politicians are liars, are idiots, and are serving these buffoons agenda....and if Al Gore is not one of them he is going to have to fight to prove it. Too many liars and criminals spoil the flavor of a so called "american sundry"

Now you can catch my drift if you check history....there's been something wrong in the head with all these men, through every century, leading back to Abraham Lincoln. Bunch of idiots deserving of utmost contempt.

Regards
Jeremy, Saint George Utah

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1264 Consumer Comment

Try and use an anaolgy that makes sense

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 03, 2007

There are no Federal or State Laws requiring anyone to give you a car, so your anaolgy falls flat. There are Laws that require ALL Hspitals, Public and Private, to provide you with emergency health services. Private Hospitals can then send you to a Public Hospital, where they must treat you until you are healthy again.

You also used someone else's poor attempt at goading me by stating I claim to be the owner-operator of a Tires Plus, or a part store. As I told that person, post the link to the report. I looked through the 1st 45 reports about TP, and could not find it. Post the link, or admit you just follow like a sheep, anything that is claimed without proof.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1263 Consumer Comment

I knew you could not do it

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 03, 2007

I asked you to name ONE person, who does not have access to healthcare in this Country. You gave a long winded sermon about being able to afford it.

Yawn!

Answer the question.

Again, NOBODY has to actually PAY anything. You can go to the Public Hospital(County owned) and be treated for FREE! Are you telling me that FREE is unaffordable to the poor? The truly poor have Medicare/Medicaid. At least the Hospital gets something for it's efforts when that option is used. For the ones who don't qualify for those programs, ALL Public Hospitals have the obligation to treat you. If you cannot pay, you simply fill out a form asking for relief. It is granted in ALL cases.

You live in California. Your State has dozens of Public Hospitals closing each year because of this issue. Here's how it breaks down, Ben:

** Emergency Care in California
Overwhelmed, Underfunded and in Peril

The California Chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians


Emergency Departments in US

1998-1998 loss of 1,128 ERs

Number of ED visits increased 15% since 1990

By 1998 1 out of 5 people had at least one ED visit


Emergency Departments in California

310 hospitals with EDs in California - 1999

(OSHPOD data, excluding standby EDs)

Serving nearly 10 million Californians per year

3000 Emergency Physicians + several thousand on-call back up physicians

ERs are safety net for health care system

Federal law requires emergency treatment for all patients. No market place dynamics.

1999 1990

Comprehensive 9 7

Basic 301 332

Stand-By 47 68

Total 357 407



Hospitals & ER Closures in California

Decreased Number of ERs:

12% decline in number of EDs from 1990 1999

407 to 357

19 closed since 1995; 9 in 1999/2000

LA: 20% of all hospitals in past 20 years

Increased ER Utilization:

8.4 to 9.4 million : 1990 1999

Increased urgent and critical visits 1990-1999

58% to 65%

Decreased non-urgent visits by 6%





ER Overcrowding & Ambulance Diversion

WHY are ERs OVERCROWDED?

1. Decreased Capacity (hospitals closed)

2. Increased Volume (more patients)

3. Multifactorial Causes: increased complexity of patients, in-patient hospital bed shortage, nursing shortage, on-call specialist shortage, increased need for transfers



Bypass/ Diversion

Definition: Ambulance can't go to closest ER;

must shop for ER that has a bed

Suspension of Diversion, Round Robin Diversion = when all area ERs are full, they all must accept any patient, regardless of capability

Bypass/ Diversion November 2000

San Diego: 12/20 hospitals on bypass more than 20% of the month

Grossmont 38%; Kaiser 35%; Alvarado 35%; Sharp Chula Vista 30%;

UCSD 28%; Mercy 23%

Orange County: Nearly double total bypass hours from 1999 2000

Nov 2000 Mean = 53 hours; Nov 1999 Mean = 27 hours

FVHMC and Mission Hospital = 19% of Nov on diversion

Sacramento: Nov 2000 nearly double diversion than previous months

Round Robin Hours Nov, 2000 = 150+; Jan Oct = 56-76 hours

UCDMC = 42% of Nov on diversion

Los Angeles: Nov 2000 Data

72 hospitals total

33 > 20% of month on bypass = > 144 hours = 46% of hospitals

6 > 50% bypass = >375 hours

47 > 100 hours of bypass = 14%of the month = 65% of hospitals

Alameda County: incomplete data, not available



Patient Consequences

Preventable Deaths & Disabilities

AT LEAST 5 KNOWN DEATHS IN WAITING ROOMS

BECAUSE OF NO BED IN THE ED

Patients waiting for respirators

ICU patients held in ER for days

Long waiting room times

Prolonged pain and suffering

Patient Dissatisfaction

Violence in the ED



On Call Specialist Crisis

Definition:

the doctor you need for your emergency is not available

Survey Results:

Serious problem for 60% of hospitals

Hospital payments for on call services: $100 million/ year (informal hospital data)

Insurance Status does not matter

The Impact

System: ER closures & transfers: domino effect

Patients: preventable deaths and disabilities



Financial Murder: Why are ERs Going Broke?

$400 million losses/year in uncompensated care

$317 millon hospital/ $100 million physician

1. Unfunded Federal Mandate to see and treat all patients

(COBRA/ EMTALA)


2. Increased Uninsured

22% Californians; > 7 million

70,000 more uninsured per month

EMS fund does not meet cost of delivering care

3. No Pay/ Underpayment by HMO

No incentive to pay

30,000 unpaid claims to DHS in 3 years

$112 million/ year loss from commercial HMO

23% payment by Medi-Cal HMO IF paid at all

4. Under funding of System

California is 47th for Medicare reimbursement



Medi-Cal Managed Care Saga

Under funded

No pay, slow pay, low pay

Fraud and abuse to provider

Court Room Experience

DHS Appeals Process



Unfair Payment Practices- Down Coding Examples

28 yo F with Tylenol overdose

Bill = $325; Paid $20.90

10 month old with Febrile Seizure

Bill = $223; Paid $20.90

38 yo with kidney stone

Bill = $231; Paid $16.77

84 yo with acute heart attack

Bill = $288.75; Paid $70

Unconscious patient need life support

Bill = $740.25; Paid $117.32





SOURCES

ER Overcrowding Spreads into Crisis Territory. LA Times. May 14, 2001. Jane Allen

Emergency Room Demand outstrips supply; patients potentially at risk. Center for studying health system change. May 9, 2001

Emergency Room Diversions: A symptom of hospitals under stress. Center for studying health system change. May 2001.

US Emergency Health Safety Net Unraveling. New York Times. Alan Elsner. May 9, 2001

Trend Watch AHA March 2001, Vol 3 No 1

As ER visits climb, hospitals react. The Philadelphia Inquirer. March 16, 2001

Valley ERs packed, but not by flu. The Fresno Bee. Barbara Anderson. March 2001.

Patients bypassing primary doctors for emergency care. AMNews. Leigh Page. Feb 12, 2001

Struggling to Stay Aflota, Save lives in ERs Chaos. Jan 22, 2001. Mark Morocco.

Doctors say emergency rooms ailing. Statewide loss put at $400 million per year. San Diego Union Tribune. Cheryl Clark. January 19, 2001

State Urged to Intervene in Hospitals' Urgent Care. LA Times. Jan 18, 2001. 3rd page. Jennifer Warren.

Hospitals divert patients to other emergency rooms. San Diego Union Tribune. Cheryl Clark Jan 15, 2001

New trauma center eases little burden. Emergency rooms still rack up costs. Kathy Robertson. Sacramento Business Journal. Jan 5, 2001

Emergency rooms struggle with crowding ambulances sometimes directed away from the nearest hospital. USA Today. Julie Appleby. Jan 4, 2001

Sutter swats frustrated doctors on their way out. Sacramento Business Journal. Kathy Roberson. January 5, 2001

Emergency room crisis worsening. Boston Globe. Dec 25, 2000. Larry Tye.

Emergency Crews Worry as Hospitals Say No Vacancy. New York Times. December 17, 2000. Carey Goldberg.

ER Crisis.USA Today. Feb 4, 2000. Front Page. Julie Appleby.

The saga of general hospital: a real life soap opera. EMN. Anne Scheck. Feb 2000.

Critical Condition. Time. Daniel Eisenberg. Jan 31, 2000.

EMS Commission Report. Jan 26, 2000. Issues impacting Hospital Diversion and EMS Systems. www.emsa.ca.gov/hospcrwdrpt.htm

Overcrowding in the Nation's Emergency Departments: Complex Causes and Disturbing Effects. Derlet and Richards. Annals of Emergency Medicine. Jan 2000; 35:1.

LA Times. Page 3. Feb 15, 2000. Treating an Emergency Care Crisis. Miguel Bustillo.

LA Times. Jun 1, 1999. ER Patients Lose In Specialists' Rebellion

USA Today. Feb 4, 2000. Page 6. Deaths lead to debate in California Laws aimed at hospital closure, consolidations. Julie Appleby.

AMNews. Geri Aston. Feb 21, 2000. Medicare HMO Spending.

Irvin and Fox. Annals of Emergency Medicine. March 2000; 35:3: 287. Reimbursement Impact of Medicaid Managed Care Organizations Replacing Standard Medicaid

Health Care Financing Administration Form 64 and 2082 1998 (Medicaid reimbursement)

Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured 1998

Closing Time. California leads the nation in hospital closures. Nurse Week. May 17, 1999.

On Call Task Force Survey 1999: California Medical Association, California Healthcare Association, and California Chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians

Another 84 Hospitals are closing this years, and we are only 3 months into it. I used California ONLY, Ben for your benefit. Let me guess...you are now going to say you don't know where California is, or accuse me of baiting you with it. I used California because it is the most populated State, and is a good reference of what is wrong/right in our Country. This issue is happening everywhere, but not because anyone was denied medical treatment. It is happening because NOBODY is denied.

Now, answer the question. One person....name ONE person who cannot get medical treatment in this Country. Give me a verifiable name...so someone can investigate for the benefit of that person, and find out why several Federal and State Laws were violated, by refusing to treat him/her. There are enough Attorneys who read these threads, to be able to help this ONE person get compensation for the violation of their civil rights.

One name, Ben.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1262 Consumer Comment

Ok...this is easy Robert.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 03, 2007

"Name ONE person who can be verified as having NO ACCESS to healthcare services in this Country."


Lets make it easy so "a caveman can understand it"..........

EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO CANT AFFORD IT.

There...... done.

Your argument is pathetic Robert. What your basically saying is that "healthcare exists...thus everyone has it".

Its not that simple.

You can equate that to saying "Everyone has access to a $400,000 Porsche automobile".

Yes Robert, EVERYONE HAS access to a half million dollar cars....Not everyone can afford it.

Everyone has access to housing...not everyone can afford it.

Everyone has access to food...not everyone can afford it.

Your argument is laughable.

Once again you twist and contort. This time your smoke screen is narrowing in on one word again. The line of "access". I distinctly mentioned "AFFORDABLE" several times. That is the key here. That is the problem with our healtcare Robert. Its not that it doesnt exist. Its that its costs, and the hell people are put through these days to get it are out of control. If a person cant AFFORD something then that can equate to "NO ACCESS". Get it?

I think your going to be hard pressed to show me a report that says EVERYONE is covered in this country. They may have "access", in your definition of the word, but they are far from covered.

Lets not forget that I sell products for the healthcare industry. It pisses me off to see prices jacked up just because its getting used for "medical purposes".

Let me give you some examples......

Pregnancy Test: $20 to buy on your own at the drug store. $60-$100 for you to see your doctor and have him run the test. My company buys them in boxes of 20....for $25 a box!!! My average price to the doctors, and resource labs is around $1.75 each. You do the math. I'm making my profit, that I think is fair. I have no problem with someone making a profit for a decent service at a decent price. But look where the real money is going eh?

Strep test: Only a doctor can do it, but its just about as simple as a pregnancy test. Same method. Different sample taking. $80-$120 to run if you go see a doctor (and you have too!). I buy them for $17.50 for a box of 20. Once again you do the math.

My company mainly sells bigger instruments. Many interface with computers. Until recently, most were Mac oriented. Over the past 4-5 years, PC's have become more common. When one of these instruments is sold, the computer is usually included unless the doctor already has one set up with other instruments.
Now would you care to explain why my medical suppliers charge $8000-$10000 for those PC's? Hmmmm? The exact same PC's that I can run down to Fry's or CompUSA, or even build on my own for less than $1k??? I'll tell you why Robert. Because the healthcare industry has gone nuts in this country. Prices are out of reality. Just because someone says it for medical purposes, suddenly the pricing is as if it were made of gold.

Sometimes its the doctor that ramps up the price. Sometimes it the manufacturer (common). Sometimes its the sales rep companies LIKE mine. Sometimes its just the way the healthcare providers screw with the billing (most common of all).

One thing for sure, its not MINE! I havent fallen into this greed fiasco the rest of corporate America has. I do fine, my company does fine, my employees do fine (with healthcare!), my customers do fine.

Now I could cutback on my employees bennys. I could start charging "list" for all my products to my customers. I could actually buy those computers and pass the cost on to my customers with a nice fat markup based on the percentage. Instead of running to Fry's and building one ourselves for the instrument at 1/8th the cost. Saving the doctor thousands.

I could potentially double or triple my income.....

....and afford that $400,000 Porsche I was talking about earlier.

But I'm sorry Robert, I'm not like you, I wouldnt be able to sleep at night if I did that.

I think I live very well. I didnt have to screw anyone to get where I am. I dont intend to screw anyone to maintain it.

When/if the day comes that someone gets around to fixing this mess, I know my company will be fine as well. The structure of the company doesnt require massive overpricing to maintain itself.

Healthcare in this country is ill Robert. If you cant afford it....do you really have "access"?

NO.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1261 Consumer Comment

And a couple more issues, Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 03, 2007

Since you are against FREE meds, like I joked about for Charles, how do justify having the taxpayers foot the entire bill for healthcare? I like you Ben, I really do. You always manage to stay on both sides of the issue. Good work.

And what is this missive you claim I posted as an "owner-operator"? That was brought up in a TP thread by an equally vapid individual. I challenged her to post the link to it, but she never could. You give it a try. I looked at more than 45 of them, from start to finish, and couldn't find it. YOU post the link.

You won't though. You can't. It never happened. You take what someone else claimed, and accepted it as the truth, without ever doing any fact-checking.

You're a sad, strange, little man.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1260 Consumer Comment

I'll have to make this so easy, a Caveman can understand it

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 02, 2007

Ben, I own a NAPA AutoCare Center. It isn a repair facility. The only parts I sell, are the ones I install.

I cannot think of a single person in this Country(legal or not) who does not have full, and complete access to healthcare. Can you? Of course not. Just because I carry no health insurance, does not equate to my lacking healthcare. I pay my Doctor out of my pocket. It works amazingly well, and Libs like you cannot stand to hear of it. I also use the VA, Ben. I have a service related injury, so I can always go there. As is always the case with Socialized Medicine, the wait is long, so I usually opt for the Civilian route. Guess what? I did it when I was Active Duty too.

You're pathetic. Name ONE person who can be verified as having NO ACCESS to healthcare services in this Country. Go for it. Maybe they cannot get that sex change operation for FREE, or the Boob job, or other elective surgery, but NOBODY is denied full medical treatment. In California, dozens of Hospitals are closing because of this FACT. They must treat the poor, even if it means eating the cost.

Nice try Ben. Try again.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1259 Consumer Comment

Booo h*o! John

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Oh boo h*o John.

So what if Hillary wont make her full 6 years. She made a "promise". Bah! Many candidates hold other jobs and "leave" them for a higher post.

Lets see if I can find one....

Hmmm...

How about GWB! He got elected for a second 4 YEAR TERM to be governor of Texas in 1998!!

Hmmmmm...didnt he get elected in 2000 to be prez?? Poor old Texas got abandoned...BOOO h*o!

Your argument is worthless.

I can name a zillion demos and republicans that have done, or are in the process of doing that. And if your upset that you believed a politician and they broke their promise...you only have yourself to blame. Doesnt matter where they sit on the political spectrum. The are all still politicians. They ALL break promises.

READ MY LIPS: "NO NEW TAXES" (remember that one?! I'll leave you to figure out who said that.)

Besides I never said I was putting my "faith" in Hillary. I stuck to the issue of HEALTH CARE.

If the republicans wish to tackle the subject honestly. I'm game. But I dont see that happening from their end of the spectrum. I do from the demos. Simple enough.

Got a better plan?.....we're listening!

Wait we havent even SEEN Hillary's plan have we. Kinda jumping the gun arnt you? Oh I forgot, its not the health care your bashing....its just Hillary in general.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1258 Consumer Comment

Booo h*o! John

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Oh boo h*o John.

So what if Hillary wont make her full 6 years. She made a "promise". Bah! Many candidates hold other jobs and "leave" them for a higher post.

Lets see if I can find one....

Hmmm...

How about GWB! He got elected for a second 4 YEAR TERM to be governor of Texas in 1998!!

Hmmmmm...didnt he get elected in 2000 to be prez?? Poor old Texas got abandoned...BOOO h*o!

Your argument is worthless.

I can name a zillion demos and republicans that have done, or are in the process of doing that. And if your upset that you believed a politician and they broke their promise...you only have yourself to blame. Doesnt matter where they sit on the political spectrum. The are all still politicians. They ALL break promises.

READ MY LIPS: "NO NEW TAXES" (remember that one?! I'll leave you to figure out who said that.)

Besides I never said I was putting my "faith" in Hillary. I stuck to the issue of HEALTH CARE.

If the republicans wish to tackle the subject honestly. I'm game. But I dont see that happening from their end of the spectrum. I do from the demos. Simple enough.

Got a better plan?.....we're listening!

Wait we havent even SEEN Hillary's plan have we. Kinda jumping the gun arnt you? Oh I forgot, its not the health care your bashing....its just Hillary in general.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1257 Consumer Comment

Booo h*o! John

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Oh boo h*o John.

So what if Hillary wont make her full 6 years. She made a "promise". Bah! Many candidates hold other jobs and "leave" them for a higher post.

Lets see if I can find one....

Hmmm...

How about GWB! He got elected for a second 4 YEAR TERM to be governor of Texas in 1998!!

Hmmmmm...didnt he get elected in 2000 to be prez?? Poor old Texas got abandoned...BOOO h*o!

Your argument is worthless.

I can name a zillion demos and republicans that have done, or are in the process of doing that. And if your upset that you believed a politician and they broke their promise...you only have yourself to blame. Doesnt matter where they sit on the political spectrum. The are all still politicians. They ALL break promises.

READ MY LIPS: "NO NEW TAXES" (remember that one?! I'll leave you to figure out who said that.)

Besides I never said I was putting my "faith" in Hillary. I stuck to the issue of HEALTH CARE.

If the republicans wish to tackle the subject honestly. I'm game. But I dont see that happening from their end of the spectrum. I do from the demos. Simple enough.

Got a better plan?.....we're listening!

Wait we havent even SEEN Hillary's plan have we. Kinda jumping the gun arnt you? Oh I forgot, its not the health care your bashing....its just Hillary in general.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1256 Consumer Comment

Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Last year she made a promise to the voters of New York that she will serve them as Senator for the full 6 year term. The only way she will do that now is if she loses the presidential bid. Even if she does lose she is basically taking a year and a half break because she will be too busy campaigning around the country to have any impact in the Senate. I feel that ANY candidate that is sitting in the House or Senate should at least temporarily step down. The country suffers as a whole when the Senators and congressmen are absent so often. I'm surprised more democrats don't agree with this especially because 2 Democratic Senators are going to be absent a lot and the majority is so slim right now.

I also didn't know that she had the authority to tell all the other candidates what is off limits as far as debating. She is telling this to the Democrats as well as the Republicans so I am not Democrat Bashing as you put it Charles.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1255 Consumer Comment

Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Last year she made a promise to the voters of New York that she will serve them as Senator for the full 6 year term. The only way she will do that now is if she loses the presidential bid. Even if she does lose she is basically taking a year and a half break because she will be too busy campaigning around the country to have any impact in the Senate. I feel that ANY candidate that is sitting in the House or Senate should at least temporarily step down. The country suffers as a whole when the Senators and congressmen are absent so often. I'm surprised more democrats don't agree with this especially because 2 Democratic Senators are going to be absent a lot and the majority is so slim right now.

I also didn't know that she had the authority to tell all the other candidates what is off limits as far as debating. She is telling this to the Democrats as well as the Republicans so I am not Democrat Bashing as you put it Charles.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1254 Consumer Comment

Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Last year she made a promise to the voters of New York that she will serve them as Senator for the full 6 year term. The only way she will do that now is if she loses the presidential bid. Even if she does lose she is basically taking a year and a half break because she will be too busy campaigning around the country to have any impact in the Senate. I feel that ANY candidate that is sitting in the House or Senate should at least temporarily step down. The country suffers as a whole when the Senators and congressmen are absent so often. I'm surprised more democrats don't agree with this especially because 2 Democratic Senators are going to be absent a lot and the majority is so slim right now.

I also didn't know that she had the authority to tell all the other candidates what is off limits as far as debating. She is telling this to the Democrats as well as the Republicans so I am not Democrat Bashing as you put it Charles.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1253 Consumer Comment

Yeah Put all your Faith in Hillary

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Last year she made a promise to the voters of New York that she will serve them as Senator for the full 6 year term. The only way she will do that now is if she loses the presidential bid. Even if she does lose she is basically taking a year and a half break because she will be too busy campaigning around the country to have any impact in the Senate. I feel that ANY candidate that is sitting in the House or Senate should at least temporarily step down. The country suffers as a whole when the Senators and congressmen are absent so often. I'm surprised more democrats don't agree with this especially because 2 Democratic Senators are going to be absent a lot and the majority is so slim right now.

I also didn't know that she had the authority to tell all the other candidates what is off limits as far as debating. She is telling this to the Democrats as well as the Republicans so I am not Democrat Bashing as you put it Charles.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1252 Consumer Comment

John u hate anyone who does not like bush

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 27, 2007

John, u hate everyone who does not like bush or support him why should we support bush look @ the mess he has created, their is no need of bush continuing this war!. People, will hold celebration parties the day bush & cheney leave office americans will never vote for another bush, to be president!. Rudy, will not win cause bush has ruined it for all republicans!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1251 Consumer Comment

Oh Robert... same shnook as always.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 27, 2007

"Get ready for Hillarycare, Ben. She and her Lapdog attempted it in the early 90's. She'll do it again with an agreeable Congress." -- Robert.

Good. We need it.

Cant be any worse than Bush's little war.

At least I can find plenty of people with lacking or no health care.

Hows that search for WMD's going by the way?

Bet I can find people lacking in healthcare in this country faster than you can find WMD's in Iraq.

How making healthcare available and affordable for all, is a bad thing, when starting a war over something that doesnt exist anymore is a good thing is beyond me.

Only you, Robert, can believe that sort of logic.

Maybe Hillary will make a big bloated government office that really doesnt help. But we will never know till someone tries. One thing for sure...SOMETHING needs to be done. This is something that NEEDS to be done! If the demos can or cannot do it remains to be seen. Everything takes risks. And this is a risk I would rather take or have taken than this pathetic war in Iraq which has nothing to do with terrorists. Or at least it didnt until we MADE IT THAT WAY. Thanks to Bush and his oil cronies. Obviously a risk THEY took, and lost, on our dime. Do you think they will feel the financial pinch because of this war? HA! People like you and I will. The average Joes will. The families of the dead soldiers will. The injured soldiers will. We gained nothing from this joke in Iraq but a big price tag and even more terror around the globe. At least some sort of decent healthcare would go to US. In whatever shape or form it may be.

I took a break from this site for awhile. I come back, and your plastered around more than ever! Good grief man, your a joke on this site. Your like that "Peter from Pony Alabama" guy. Everyone has you pegged and has your number. I love the one where you posted that you were "owner operator". When it wasnt even a NAPA site. Guess you own all sorts of things now eh? Bilking people on brake jobs is paying well these days I guess. Oh wait, I forgot, you really work at a car "parts" place. Not a "repair" shop.

Your as famous as Tupper Lake! You get around more than the Tupper posts as well.


PEGGED! (again!)

What a shnook.

Robert-logic....gotta love it...maybe for the Colbert Report. Actually Colbert makes more sense. And hes joking! You seriously believe this garbarge!

Next you will be telling us about how the Constitution protects our right to bear arms "against our own government" again. After all you always need a smoke screen to deflect the subject at hand. Perhaps you would like to banter about the population of gumballs in Kansas City according to the census eh? Or argue that you found one black gumball in with zillions of other colors so the entire states supply is tainted? How the one black gumball is indoctrinating the entire race of gumballs to be black.

Put on your tinfoil hat and go join the Montana Milita ya putz. Science always needs more samples of cavemen to study.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1250 Consumer Comment

Samuel, Complain about your own country

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 19, 2007

Samuel:

You write like yyou are in the US but according to your post you are from Canada. Which is it? Why are you bashing the US like that and you aren'r even from here. I didn't know the US taxed Canadians?

I also do not appreciate your language and i am surprised it got by the editors. don'r comment unless you can respond like a DECENT Human Being.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1249 Consumer Comment

Samuel, Complain about your own country

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 19, 2007

Samuel:

You write like yyou are in the US but according to your post you are from Canada. Which is it? Why are you bashing the US like that and you aren'r even from here. I didn't know the US taxed Canadians?

I also do not appreciate your language and i am surprised it got by the editors. don'r comment unless you can respond like a DECENT Human Being.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1248 Consumer Comment

Samuel, Complain about your own country

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 19, 2007

Samuel:

You write like yyou are in the US but according to your post you are from Canada. Which is it? Why are you bashing the US like that and you aren'r even from here. I didn't know the US taxed Canadians?

I also do not appreciate your language and i am surprised it got by the editors. don'r comment unless you can respond like a DECENT Human Being.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1247 Consumer Comment

Samuel, Complain about your own country

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 19, 2007

Samuel:

You write like yyou are in the US but according to your post you are from Canada. Which is it? Why are you bashing the US like that and you aren'r even from here. I didn't know the US taxed Canadians?

I also do not appreciate your language and i am surprised it got by the editors. don'r comment unless you can respond like a DECENT Human Being.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1246 Consumer Comment

What my Grandpa always told me when I was a kid.

AUTHOR: Scott - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 18, 2007

I was ready to make a response to the ridiculous comments made, but then I remebered what Grandpa always said" Never argue with a drunk or a fool."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1245 Consumer Comment

George Bush is the New Hitler Reborn

AUTHOR: Samuel - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 14, 2007

I am not a political person but from what I have read and researched George Bush is partners with and just as bad as the people he claims to be hunted down.

example: Bin Ladin supposedly sends his people to fly planes into WTT.

George Bush agreed to demolish the WTT trade center with innocent Americans inside. Along with the financial investigations building which was the third building to fall in 911. Many people do not know that. His family was being investigated for financial fraud with the Saudis who by the way own 7% of America and are related to Bin.

See they both are willing to sacrifice their own people to prove a point and win an imaginary war.

Hitler at least protected his people and went after different nations. Now don't get me wrong I am not defending Hitler in any way just using him to prove a point.

What happened to Katrina he wants to spend A trillion dollars on a war and can't help his own people when in need. All you Bush supporters would think a lot differently is you were one of the victims of Hurricane Katrina. It just does not make sense. The reason why The USA could not get the oil out of Iraq is because the people who owned it would rather blow it up than watch The Bushes get richer off their labor.

As of today USA is at war with:

Iraq
Afghanistan
Iran
North Korea

Who's next?

We are approaching World War 3 All it takes is that fat f**k Korean guy to get agitated or some f**k face with enough money and power to prove a point.

Why is it that USA is the only country in history to use a Nuclear weapon on people, but now they want to govern it's use and technology to the world. They even want to govern space. The united states wants to govern how people can go into space to.

Right now the government tells you how to:

1. Spend your own money (taxes)
2. How to drive (toll routes speed limits, no lefts rights etc..)
3. How to manage your land Imagine I buy a house I pay land taxes on it but if I want to renovate it or add a tree on my front lawn I need to ask the f**king government and pay them in order to receive a permit to do it WTF?
4. this list can go on forever.
5. taxes was brought in the pay for World War 1 and 2 and the government promised our grandparents back then that after the war they would abolish taxes. Now 60 odd years later we are still paying for it. The Government saw that the money was too sweet to give up so decade after decade family after family takes over sucks as much of our money as they can and then moves on after they are all a couple billion dollars richer.

Listen People i am not trying to say bin Ladin, George Bush, or the Fat short North Korean guy is right they are all f**ked up and in similar ways. They play with our lives like they are playing a game of Command and Conquer. (love that game)Honestly this s**t needs to stop. We need to rally together as one body to stop this s**t. Yes Bush does good to balance all the evil in his life. So what is it going to take? We are all in the same boat we get up go to work pay bills watch movies and are blinded by material and non-material riches while they cash in everyday, every minute, every second.

When are the poor working class people of this planet going to stand up and say we are worth more than 5 dollars an hour or 60 cents a day. Together we do not need Bush or all these companies but they need you, us. If one voted how would bush be elected? If no one went to work how would General Motors build cars, How would Google make money if no one searched for s**t?

All I am asking you to do as an individual, as a family, as group or as a citizen of earth is just think about it. Sit back and think about it.

There is a lot more out there just look up at the sky at night at all the stars. Our sun is huge and all those stars are like our sun if not bigger and brighter and there planets revolving around those stars. Some with life some without life. That's the s**t we need to be prepared for oil ain't s**t, money ain't s**t, diamonds ain't s**t.

We all bleed red blood no one on this planet has blood that is a color other than red we all feel pain and need oxygen. So why do we let money, facial color, sex, weight, skills and just about every thing else separate us.

I am sorry my post is all over the place but I haven't even begun to voice my opinion on even 1% of all the s**t that is going on out there.

What do we do humankind is so f**ked up we treat our women like s**t(the bearers of life, the key to our existence)and our planet which sustains our life even worse.

All I am saying is we need to start treating each other better. That's the number issue that needs to be addressed. And this is coming from someone who has lived life at 23 years old. I've been shot twice, stabbed, graduated from University, arrested and jailed on many accounts. The only thing I have not done is had a kid and bought a house. I got a good job two cars (1978 Porsche 924 and A Range Rover) and the sexiest super model girlfriend. Some times you have to sit back and enjoy the simple things and times in life before they are gone cause once you loose it it's gone.

So do your thing make money cause unfortunately money makes the world go round and treat people especially women and your life just may take a change for the liking.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1244 Consumer Comment

Only you, Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 09, 2007

Only you could take my retort for Charles as a serious comment.

I know nothing is FREE. DUH!!!!! I've been preaching that mantra all along.

Try looking up the word SARCASM in a dictionary. It may help. Also, try looking into obtaining a sense of humour. That will most definitely help you.

As a self avowed Liberal, you of all people should be living under the belief that Government is here to help you, and the meds are FREE. Or have you joined the 5% of us who pay 80% of the taxes in this country? I'm guessing you have. It doesn't take much to join the club.

Get ready for Hillarycare, Ben. She and her Lapdog attempted it in the early 90's. She'll do it again with an agreeable Congress.

I can't wait to see you at either the Republican Convention, or the Libertarian Convention. Everyone leaves the Dems once they have to pay taxes, unless they can make a living as a Politician or Race-Pimp.

BTW, read all of Charles' missives and tell me he doesn't need an increase in his Meds...FREE or not.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1243 Consumer Comment

Meds? you have to be kidding! Oh where to start......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Oh Robert...

"He made your medications much cheaper for you to pay for."

Sure he did. Basically he created a huge government operation that is nothing but a huge money pipeline for our tax money to goto the big med makers. The republican's little "gift" to the big pharmaceutical companies. There is where someone was subsidised Robert. The companies got it. The "people" got a big red tape nightmare. Not to mention it squashed any chance for decent and cheaper generics.

Bush just gave his cronies more money and hid it in a plan the people really needed, using their tax money in a nasty inefficient maner. Even our senior citizens are disgusted that the AARP was bullied into this scam.

The "people" got their meds alright. Bare bones and totally monopolized.

The the fat cats at the big pharmaceutical companies got the windfall in the form of a fat government check. Not to mention the nice umbrella from any "real" competition.

Typical, take money from 95% of the people and give it to the top 5% under some ruse they are trying to help. While actually only making themselves fatter and giving out a bare bones and inferior deal. Keeping the lions share for themselves. Tying up the rest of us in their little red tape nightmare. To busy "dealing with it" to bother to put a stop to it.

One more scam. One more joke. One more social, global, economic disaster that our children will pay for dearly in the years to come. The Bush list grows by leaps and bounds every day. The man has done NO GOOD for this country. In debt after a record surplus. Fighting the wrong wars in the wrong places for the wrong reasons, while ignoring the ones that actually attacked us. Diverting more and more of the average Joe's money to a little group of private buddies.

He's a shnook!

The proof isnt in the posts this time Robert. Nothing you or I can say will ever prove either of us right or wrong in this forum.

The proof is now in history itself. Look at the world. Its a mess thanks to this retard.

Gee Wiz thanks Mr. President, everything else is forgotten....you made my meds cheaper! NOT!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1242 Consumer Comment

I can name one thing he's done, Charles...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 18, 2007

He made your medications much cheaper for you to pay for. While I don't subscribe to the theory of Government subsidies, the mere fact that YOU will be able to afford heavier doses, sits well with me.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1241 Consumer Comment

Please name one good thing bush has done

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Please, name one good thing george w. bush has done besides caused hardships like his republican cronies!, has caused for the middle class & poor people!. Please, name one good thing bush & the republicans have done the republicans, have done nothing good for us! bush has not either!. Bush, has done no good things neither has republicans all they have done Is treat us middle class people & poor people badly!, & caused nothing but hardship. I, have to disagree respectfully bush has done no good things please name one good thing bush has done!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1240 Consumer Comment

"They drew first blood"

AUTHOR: Christopher - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

That's right "They drew first blood." Let's not forget what has happened to get us where we are now. James, can you buy gasoline? I can to. You know what that gives us in common? We are incredibly more fortunate than most of the worlds population. I do believe it was former President Clinton that left President Bush an Islamic extremist to deal with. The price of gas went up when those Passenger crashed into those civilian (except the Pentagon) buildings.
Bush didn't start this war...it started September 11,2001. He didn't start it but I pray He ends it. The kind of HATE you are spewing out of your mouth is exactly what fuels Islamic extremists here and around the world. I'm not nieve enough to believe that, lie or not we're fighting there and not here. That's Good isn't it? There are some very good things that President Bush has done. He's also done what He said would do and stuck to His word. Sure, He's made mistakes. I can't think of any. But I'm sure there's something. Why President Clinton even did some good things. Again, I can't think of any but I know He did something worthwhile. James it was wars that right or wrong were fought and the outcome was that people like you and me can say exactly what we think. That's the 1st Amendment to the constitution of the United Sates of America not the Constitution of the united arab emerites

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1239 Consumer Comment

"They drew first blood"

AUTHOR: Christopher - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

That's right "They drew first blood." Let's not forget what has happened to get us where we are now. James, can you buy gasoline? I can to. You know what that gives us in common? We are incredibly more fortunate than most of the worlds population. I do believe it was former President Clinton that left President Bush an Islamic extremist to deal with. The price of gas went up when those Passenger crashed into those civilian (except the Pentagon) buildings.
Bush didn't start this war...it started September 11,2001. He didn't start it but I pray He ends it. The kind of HATE you are spewing out of your mouth is exactly what fuels Islamic extremists here and around the world. I'm not nieve enough to believe that, lie or not we're fighting there and not here. That's Good isn't it? There are some very good things that President Bush has done. He's also done what He said would do and stuck to His word. Sure, He's made mistakes. I can't think of any. But I'm sure there's something. Why President Clinton even did some good things. Again, I can't think of any but I know He did something worthwhile. James it was wars that right or wrong were fought and the outcome was that people like you and me can say exactly what we think. That's the 1st Amendment to the constitution of the United Sates of America not the Constitution of the united arab emerites

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1238 Consumer Comment

"They drew first blood"

AUTHOR: Christopher - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

That's right "They drew first blood." Let's not forget what has happened to get us where we are now. James, can you buy gasoline? I can to. You know what that gives us in common? We are incredibly more fortunate than most of the worlds population. I do believe it was former President Clinton that left President Bush an Islamic extremist to deal with. The price of gas went up when those Passenger crashed into those civilian (except the Pentagon) buildings.
Bush didn't start this war...it started September 11,2001. He didn't start it but I pray He ends it. The kind of HATE you are spewing out of your mouth is exactly what fuels Islamic extremists here and around the world. I'm not nieve enough to believe that, lie or not we're fighting there and not here. That's Good isn't it? There are some very good things that President Bush has done. He's also done what He said would do and stuck to His word. Sure, He's made mistakes. I can't think of any. But I'm sure there's something. Why President Clinton even did some good things. Again, I can't think of any but I know He did something worthwhile. James it was wars that right or wrong were fought and the outcome was that people like you and me can say exactly what we think. That's the 1st Amendment to the constitution of the United Sates of America not the Constitution of the united arab emerites

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1237 Consumer Comment

"They drew first blood"

AUTHOR: Christopher - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

That's right "They drew first blood." Let's not forget what has happened to get us where we are now. James, can you buy gasoline? I can to. You know what that gives us in common? We are incredibly more fortunate than most of the worlds population. I do believe it was former President Clinton that left President Bush an Islamic extremist to deal with. The price of gas went up when those Passenger crashed into those civilian (except the Pentagon) buildings.
Bush didn't start this war...it started September 11,2001. He didn't start it but I pray He ends it. The kind of HATE you are spewing out of your mouth is exactly what fuels Islamic extremists here and around the world. I'm not nieve enough to believe that, lie or not we're fighting there and not here. That's Good isn't it? There are some very good things that President Bush has done. He's also done what He said would do and stuck to His word. Sure, He's made mistakes. I can't think of any. But I'm sure there's something. Why President Clinton even did some good things. Again, I can't think of any but I know He did something worthwhile. James it was wars that right or wrong were fought and the outcome was that people like you and me can say exactly what we think. That's the 1st Amendment to the constitution of the United Sates of America not the Constitution of the united arab emerites

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1236 Consumer Comment

Will is a hard right republican

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Will, is a hard right republican whos only intended to put people down who are not republicans or bush lovers!, why do you think republicans where voted out cause they where being treated so badly!. So, you say I am a democrat supporter you darn right! will!, I am not going to listen to anymore of your put downs sense when is it a crime to be a democrat!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1235 Consumer Comment

People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

AUTHOR: Anyoumous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Who, do they think they are they can come to this website & insult us & abuse us bush Is the most ignorant president we have ever had, then again most republicans are ignorant!. I, can't believe how many people bush has fooled then we have to put up with the insults & abuse from, the bush fans which we have been putting up with sense bush has been president!. People, are tired of being treated badll from republicans they have no right to treat us like nothing!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1234 Consumer Comment

People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

AUTHOR: Anyoumous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Who, do they think they are they can come to this website & insult us & abuse us bush Is the most ignorant president we have ever had, then again most republicans are ignorant!. I, can't believe how many people bush has fooled then we have to put up with the insults & abuse from, the bush fans which we have been putting up with sense bush has been president!. People, are tired of being treated badll from republicans they have no right to treat us like nothing!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1233 Consumer Comment

People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

AUTHOR: Anyoumous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Who, do they think they are they can come to this website & insult us & abuse us bush Is the most ignorant president we have ever had, then again most republicans are ignorant!. I, can't believe how many people bush has fooled then we have to put up with the insults & abuse from, the bush fans which we have been putting up with sense bush has been president!. People, are tired of being treated badll from republicans they have no right to treat us like nothing!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1232 Consumer Comment

People are tired of being treated badly from republicans they have no right to treat us like we are nothing

AUTHOR: Anyoumous - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Who, do they think they are they can come to this website & insult us & abuse us bush Is the most ignorant president we have ever had, then again most republicans are ignorant!. I, can't believe how many people bush has fooled then we have to put up with the insults & abuse from, the bush fans which we have been putting up with sense bush has been president!. People, are tired of being treated badll from republicans they have no right to treat us like nothing!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1231 Consumer Comment

What a bunch of morons!

AUTHOR: Will - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

There must not be a lot to do up in Tupperware Lake but to screw around and bash Bush. Let's break your facts down a little shall we?
One- No WMDs? How in the world do you think Saddam killed all of those Kurds back in the 80's? You bet he had them. Not only that, but our troops found secret hidden caches recently that our so called friends did not want us to find. Why? The boxes were marked "Made in Germany" and "Made in France".

Two- No ties to terror? You bet Iraq had ties to terrorism. Saddam even funded family members for some of those terrorists. Not only that, but he had training camps in his back yard. Remember that? Oh yeah. You don't cause Bubba was getting a hummer in the White House. You remember that though I bet. Bubba blew a few up during the same time.

Three- Bush did not steal the election. He won fair and square. Remember the Electoral College? Of course not because your news comes from ABC, CBS, NBC, Micheal Moore and that butch Billary Clinton. What a great group to get info from.
Four- Had Gore won, we would be getting all of our information right now from Al-Jazero TV and complaining in Arabic!!! Dwell on this one for a while!

Five- War for oil? What a bunch of morons. Had we really gone in for oil, then why is gas still over 10 cents per gallon? Because we did not go in for oil.

Six- Bush does not get rich from this. You and Sheehan and all of the others bleeding heart liberals, STOP DRINKING THE KOOL-AID! It taints your IQ. There is no more connections to Haliburtin from Bush or Cheney. Remember Harry Reid benefitted from Haliburtin as well? Did not know this. Oh yeah. Micheal Moore did not tell you this.

Seven- Ever talked to a member of the service? Who is still active? Who served in Iraq? No? Well I have and they are all bummed that the public does not know all of the good we have gone there. Mainstream Hollyweird media only focuses on the negative and never the positive. Did you know more kinds go to school now because of us? Before the kids were homeschooled by radicals. That would taint you just a bit. Did you also know that women are no longer treated worse than dogs? Oh yeah. Billary did not say so. It is true. Did you know more people have running water and electricity? No? Did not see that during that last acid laced kool aid session.

Say what you want about Bush, but know this and know this well. You, your family and friends sleep very well at night thanks to Bush and those who walk that line for freedom. Not Clooney, or that Streistand, or even Billary. Hell, Ted Kennedy can now enjoy his Makers Mark in peace and not have to shout allah before each shot.

I sugest you get your info from other blogs besides the huffingtom post. I know I mis-spelled some words in here. This was done n purpose!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1230 Consumer Comment

Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

AUTHOR: Ken - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 07, 2007

Of all the rebuttals I read none should really be here or this topic. Since Bush really rip-offed no one. Since 1979 Reagon along with other figures have constantly been in the light such as Donald Rumsfield, d**k Cheney, The Haliburton Comapany among others. You can search the real faq's online. It basically started with Reagon trying to help Iraq with loans and things and the food for oil program. But Pakistan cut off the pipelines up that way and Iran cut off the pipelines thier way. Greed they wanted part of the action. Iran was also making accusations that Iraq was using chemical warfare against thier troops. They all have common denominators which point to those involved. This has been on going with Iraq a long time. It was an embarrasment to America and to cover-up is a natural human process. Bottom line is when Iraq invaded Kuwait they were looking for an alternative route to port the war so they were guilty of corruption. But they had backers and Saddam needed to be silenced before the real truth came out. Hence forth end of story, mission accomplished. Those involved will never tell so the real story went to the grave to forever leave us guessing. But you can bet those thier since Reagon took office no the truth. As to the 9-11 attacks. Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa. But now he has blood on his hands and not enough investigation was done to find the guilty of the 9-11 attacks. He went into Iraq with misguided information. But I'm sure in the end those guilty will get thier proper justice. The hand and power of god is strong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1229 Consumer Comment

Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

AUTHOR: Ken - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 07, 2007

Of all the rebuttals I read none should really be here or this topic. Since Bush really rip-offed no one. Since 1979 Reagon along with other figures have constantly been in the light such as Donald Rumsfield, d**k Cheney, The Haliburton Comapany among others. You can search the real faq's online. It basically started with Reagon trying to help Iraq with loans and things and the food for oil program. But Pakistan cut off the pipelines up that way and Iran cut off the pipelines thier way. Greed they wanted part of the action. Iran was also making accusations that Iraq was using chemical warfare against thier troops. They all have common denominators which point to those involved. This has been on going with Iraq a long time. It was an embarrasment to America and to cover-up is a natural human process. Bottom line is when Iraq invaded Kuwait they were looking for an alternative route to port the war so they were guilty of corruption. But they had backers and Saddam needed to be silenced before the real truth came out. Hence forth end of story, mission accomplished. Those involved will never tell so the real story went to the grave to forever leave us guessing. But you can bet those thier since Reagon took office no the truth. As to the 9-11 attacks. Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa. But now he has blood on his hands and not enough investigation was done to find the guilty of the 9-11 attacks. He went into Iraq with misguided information. But I'm sure in the end those guilty will get thier proper justice. The hand and power of god is strong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1228 Consumer Comment

Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

AUTHOR: Ken - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 07, 2007

Of all the rebuttals I read none should really be here or this topic. Since Bush really rip-offed no one. Since 1979 Reagon along with other figures have constantly been in the light such as Donald Rumsfield, d**k Cheney, The Haliburton Comapany among others. You can search the real faq's online. It basically started with Reagon trying to help Iraq with loans and things and the food for oil program. But Pakistan cut off the pipelines up that way and Iran cut off the pipelines thier way. Greed they wanted part of the action. Iran was also making accusations that Iraq was using chemical warfare against thier troops. They all have common denominators which point to those involved. This has been on going with Iraq a long time. It was an embarrasment to America and to cover-up is a natural human process. Bottom line is when Iraq invaded Kuwait they were looking for an alternative route to port the war so they were guilty of corruption. But they had backers and Saddam needed to be silenced before the real truth came out. Hence forth end of story, mission accomplished. Those involved will never tell so the real story went to the grave to forever leave us guessing. But you can bet those thier since Reagon took office no the truth. As to the 9-11 attacks. Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa. But now he has blood on his hands and not enough investigation was done to find the guilty of the 9-11 attacks. He went into Iraq with misguided information. But I'm sure in the end those guilty will get thier proper justice. The hand and power of god is strong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1227 Consumer Comment

Total Nonsense... Get the facts.... Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa.

AUTHOR: Ken - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 07, 2007

Of all the rebuttals I read none should really be here or this topic. Since Bush really rip-offed no one. Since 1979 Reagon along with other figures have constantly been in the light such as Donald Rumsfield, d**k Cheney, The Haliburton Comapany among others. You can search the real faq's online. It basically started with Reagon trying to help Iraq with loans and things and the food for oil program. But Pakistan cut off the pipelines up that way and Iran cut off the pipelines thier way. Greed they wanted part of the action. Iran was also making accusations that Iraq was using chemical warfare against thier troops. They all have common denominators which point to those involved. This has been on going with Iraq a long time. It was an embarrasment to America and to cover-up is a natural human process. Bottom line is when Iraq invaded Kuwait they were looking for an alternative route to port the war so they were guilty of corruption. But they had backers and Saddam needed to be silenced before the real truth came out. Hence forth end of story, mission accomplished. Those involved will never tell so the real story went to the grave to forever leave us guessing. But you can bet those thier since Reagon took office no the truth. As to the 9-11 attacks. Bush's only crime was being the most ignorant president in the history of Usa. But now he has blood on his hands and not enough investigation was done to find the guilty of the 9-11 attacks. He went into Iraq with misguided information. But I'm sure in the end those guilty will get thier proper justice. The hand and power of god is strong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1226 Consumer Comment

bush etc

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

Prices - with the sole exception of:

Lincoln - per Civil War
FDR - per depression & WWII
Nixon - per pricecontrols

No president in history can control energy prices like the democrats always try to claim.

As far as rippoff - Clintion & Carter both were bigger ripoffs - Especially Carter & Mondale since the helicopter crash was more their fault than the military - Military required 3 more months to prepare but were ordered to go too soon.

Plus the so called Clinton Surplus was actually leftover surplus that was a direct cause of Reagan policies..

Plus lets not forget that Clinton jobs were in reality fake 'workprogram' jobs that disappeared quickly.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1225 Consumer Comment

Liberals are afraid of truth

AUTHOR: Sarah - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

I am a Republican (fully supporting President Bush). Oh, and I'm also not rich and white!

I didn't have a chance to read all the posts on this thread, but feel that there is something important to say.



To Ted in Dallas, you have to be kidding if you want us to watch something put out by the Communist News Network. That network is so full of liberals that there's no way to give news in a fair manner.

You said, "The Republicans went after Clinton for getting a little under the desk, that was none of anyone business." That became our business when he did that in the Oval Office. You'd be right if it had been done in the privacy of our own home. And, he made it worse by lying about it. Republicans didn't go after him. He behaved in an unacceptable manner in the Oval Office and received what he should have (though I think he should have been removed from office). Keep in mind that there were Democrats that sided with Republicans on this matter.

Michael Moore is a jackass as is evidenced in the following article:

"Sgt. Peter Damon, a National Guardsman from Middleborough, is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation," according to the lawsuit filed in Suffolk Superior Court last week.
Damon, 33, claims that Moore never asked for his consent to use a clip from an interview Damon did with NBC's "Nightly News."

He lost his arms when a tire on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and another reservist were servicing the aircraft on the ground. Another reservist was killed in the explosion.

In his interview with NBC, Damon was asked about a new painkiller the military was using on wounded veterans. He claims in his lawsuit that the way Moore used the film clip in "Fahrenheit 9/11" - Moore's scathing 2004 documentary criticizing the Bush administration and the war in Iraq - makes him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort" when he was actually complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that comes with the injury he suffered.

In the movie, Damon is shown lying on a gurney, with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels likes he's "being crushed in a vise."

"But they (the painkillers) do a lot to help it," he says. "And they take a lot of the edge off of it."

Damon is shown shortly after U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., is speaking about the Bush administration and says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."

Damon contends that Moore's positioning of the clip just after the congressman's comments makes him appear as if he feels like he was "left behind" by the Bush administration and the military.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

He said that, while at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering from his wounds, he had surgery and physical therapy, learned to use prosthetics and live independently. He also said that Homes For Our Troops, a not-for-profit group, built him a house with handicapped accessibility.

"The work creates a substantially fictionalized and falsified implication as a wounded serviceman who was left behind when Plaintiff was not left behind but supported, financially and emotionally, by the active assistance of the President, the United States and his family, friends, acquaintances and community," Damon says in his lawsuit.

Moore did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday. A message was left for Moore at a personal number in New York and with HarperCollins, publisher of Moore's 2002 book, "Stupid White Men...And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!"

A spokesman for Miramax Film Corp., also named as a defendant, did not immediately return a call.


Damon did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.
"It's upsetting to him because he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

Damon is seeking $75 million in damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation. His wife is suing for an additional $10 million in damages because of the mental distress caused to her husband, Lynch said."

Last I heard, Hillary Clinton was pro-war in Iraq.

Terrorism has gotten more and more extreme. We're fighting now so that those of us that aren't Muslims won't be killed as infidels. All those Hollywood types are so anti-war and anti-Bush. They'd be among the first to go because of their immorality.

I'd be killed as an infidel, too because I won't deny my Christ. Think they wouldn't kill non-Muslims? They kill each other for being the wrong kind of Muslim.

One of the problems with liberals is that they are threatened by people with morals. President Bush may have had problems in his past with alcohol and that sort of thing. He has not kept it secret. He is also not keeping secret that he has been prayerful about this situation. Just because you liberals thing it's wrong to mention God doesn't mean that our President can't believe and pray to Him.

To James in Tupper Lake. I've read too many posts from your town to think you're not a few fries short of a happy meal.

To Sandra in Tampa. I appreciate the bravery of your son. It's people like him that keep our country safe.

I have tried to keep away from the name-calling that is so rampant in this thread, and belive me, there were plenty that came to mind. As has been mentioned before, bear in mind that nobody is perfect; even the President. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's a bad president. In my humble opinion, he's the best one we've ever had.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1224 Consumer Comment

Liberals are afraid of truth

AUTHOR: Sarah - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

I am a Republican (fully supporting President Bush). Oh, and I'm also not rich and white!

I didn't have a chance to read all the posts on this thread, but feel that there is something important to say.



To Ted in Dallas, you have to be kidding if you want us to watch something put out by the Communist News Network. That network is so full of liberals that there's no way to give news in a fair manner.

You said, "The Republicans went after Clinton for getting a little under the desk, that was none of anyone business." That became our business when he did that in the Oval Office. You'd be right if it had been done in the privacy of our own home. And, he made it worse by lying about it. Republicans didn't go after him. He behaved in an unacceptable manner in the Oval Office and received what he should have (though I think he should have been removed from office). Keep in mind that there were Democrats that sided with Republicans on this matter.

Michael Moore is a jackass as is evidenced in the following article:

"Sgt. Peter Damon, a National Guardsman from Middleborough, is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation," according to the lawsuit filed in Suffolk Superior Court last week.
Damon, 33, claims that Moore never asked for his consent to use a clip from an interview Damon did with NBC's "Nightly News."

He lost his arms when a tire on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and another reservist were servicing the aircraft on the ground. Another reservist was killed in the explosion.

In his interview with NBC, Damon was asked about a new painkiller the military was using on wounded veterans. He claims in his lawsuit that the way Moore used the film clip in "Fahrenheit 9/11" - Moore's scathing 2004 documentary criticizing the Bush administration and the war in Iraq - makes him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort" when he was actually complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that comes with the injury he suffered.

In the movie, Damon is shown lying on a gurney, with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels likes he's "being crushed in a vise."

"But they (the painkillers) do a lot to help it," he says. "And they take a lot of the edge off of it."

Damon is shown shortly after U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., is speaking about the Bush administration and says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."

Damon contends that Moore's positioning of the clip just after the congressman's comments makes him appear as if he feels like he was "left behind" by the Bush administration and the military.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

He said that, while at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering from his wounds, he had surgery and physical therapy, learned to use prosthetics and live independently. He also said that Homes For Our Troops, a not-for-profit group, built him a house with handicapped accessibility.

"The work creates a substantially fictionalized and falsified implication as a wounded serviceman who was left behind when Plaintiff was not left behind but supported, financially and emotionally, by the active assistance of the President, the United States and his family, friends, acquaintances and community," Damon says in his lawsuit.

Moore did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday. A message was left for Moore at a personal number in New York and with HarperCollins, publisher of Moore's 2002 book, "Stupid White Men...And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!"

A spokesman for Miramax Film Corp., also named as a defendant, did not immediately return a call.


Damon did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.
"It's upsetting to him because he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

Damon is seeking $75 million in damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation. His wife is suing for an additional $10 million in damages because of the mental distress caused to her husband, Lynch said."

Last I heard, Hillary Clinton was pro-war in Iraq.

Terrorism has gotten more and more extreme. We're fighting now so that those of us that aren't Muslims won't be killed as infidels. All those Hollywood types are so anti-war and anti-Bush. They'd be among the first to go because of their immorality.

I'd be killed as an infidel, too because I won't deny my Christ. Think they wouldn't kill non-Muslims? They kill each other for being the wrong kind of Muslim.

One of the problems with liberals is that they are threatened by people with morals. President Bush may have had problems in his past with alcohol and that sort of thing. He has not kept it secret. He is also not keeping secret that he has been prayerful about this situation. Just because you liberals thing it's wrong to mention God doesn't mean that our President can't believe and pray to Him.

To James in Tupper Lake. I've read too many posts from your town to think you're not a few fries short of a happy meal.

To Sandra in Tampa. I appreciate the bravery of your son. It's people like him that keep our country safe.

I have tried to keep away from the name-calling that is so rampant in this thread, and belive me, there were plenty that came to mind. As has been mentioned before, bear in mind that nobody is perfect; even the President. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's a bad president. In my humble opinion, he's the best one we've ever had.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1223 Consumer Comment

Liberals are afraid of truth

AUTHOR: Sarah - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

I am a Republican (fully supporting President Bush). Oh, and I'm also not rich and white!

I didn't have a chance to read all the posts on this thread, but feel that there is something important to say.



To Ted in Dallas, you have to be kidding if you want us to watch something put out by the Communist News Network. That network is so full of liberals that there's no way to give news in a fair manner.

You said, "The Republicans went after Clinton for getting a little under the desk, that was none of anyone business." That became our business when he did that in the Oval Office. You'd be right if it had been done in the privacy of our own home. And, he made it worse by lying about it. Republicans didn't go after him. He behaved in an unacceptable manner in the Oval Office and received what he should have (though I think he should have been removed from office). Keep in mind that there were Democrats that sided with Republicans on this matter.

Michael Moore is a jackass as is evidenced in the following article:

"Sgt. Peter Damon, a National Guardsman from Middleborough, is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation," according to the lawsuit filed in Suffolk Superior Court last week.
Damon, 33, claims that Moore never asked for his consent to use a clip from an interview Damon did with NBC's "Nightly News."

He lost his arms when a tire on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and another reservist were servicing the aircraft on the ground. Another reservist was killed in the explosion.

In his interview with NBC, Damon was asked about a new painkiller the military was using on wounded veterans. He claims in his lawsuit that the way Moore used the film clip in "Fahrenheit 9/11" - Moore's scathing 2004 documentary criticizing the Bush administration and the war in Iraq - makes him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort" when he was actually complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that comes with the injury he suffered.

In the movie, Damon is shown lying on a gurney, with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels likes he's "being crushed in a vise."

"But they (the painkillers) do a lot to help it," he says. "And they take a lot of the edge off of it."

Damon is shown shortly after U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., is speaking about the Bush administration and says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."

Damon contends that Moore's positioning of the clip just after the congressman's comments makes him appear as if he feels like he was "left behind" by the Bush administration and the military.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

He said that, while at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering from his wounds, he had surgery and physical therapy, learned to use prosthetics and live independently. He also said that Homes For Our Troops, a not-for-profit group, built him a house with handicapped accessibility.

"The work creates a substantially fictionalized and falsified implication as a wounded serviceman who was left behind when Plaintiff was not left behind but supported, financially and emotionally, by the active assistance of the President, the United States and his family, friends, acquaintances and community," Damon says in his lawsuit.

Moore did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday. A message was left for Moore at a personal number in New York and with HarperCollins, publisher of Moore's 2002 book, "Stupid White Men...And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!"

A spokesman for Miramax Film Corp., also named as a defendant, did not immediately return a call.


Damon did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.
"It's upsetting to him because he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

Damon is seeking $75 million in damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation. His wife is suing for an additional $10 million in damages because of the mental distress caused to her husband, Lynch said."

Last I heard, Hillary Clinton was pro-war in Iraq.

Terrorism has gotten more and more extreme. We're fighting now so that those of us that aren't Muslims won't be killed as infidels. All those Hollywood types are so anti-war and anti-Bush. They'd be among the first to go because of their immorality.

I'd be killed as an infidel, too because I won't deny my Christ. Think they wouldn't kill non-Muslims? They kill each other for being the wrong kind of Muslim.

One of the problems with liberals is that they are threatened by people with morals. President Bush may have had problems in his past with alcohol and that sort of thing. He has not kept it secret. He is also not keeping secret that he has been prayerful about this situation. Just because you liberals thing it's wrong to mention God doesn't mean that our President can't believe and pray to Him.

To James in Tupper Lake. I've read too many posts from your town to think you're not a few fries short of a happy meal.

To Sandra in Tampa. I appreciate the bravery of your son. It's people like him that keep our country safe.

I have tried to keep away from the name-calling that is so rampant in this thread, and belive me, there were plenty that came to mind. As has been mentioned before, bear in mind that nobody is perfect; even the President. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's a bad president. In my humble opinion, he's the best one we've ever had.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1222 Consumer Comment

Liberals are afraid of truth

AUTHOR: Sarah - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

I am a Republican (fully supporting President Bush). Oh, and I'm also not rich and white!

I didn't have a chance to read all the posts on this thread, but feel that there is something important to say.



To Ted in Dallas, you have to be kidding if you want us to watch something put out by the Communist News Network. That network is so full of liberals that there's no way to give news in a fair manner.

You said, "The Republicans went after Clinton for getting a little under the desk, that was none of anyone business." That became our business when he did that in the Oval Office. You'd be right if it had been done in the privacy of our own home. And, he made it worse by lying about it. Republicans didn't go after him. He behaved in an unacceptable manner in the Oval Office and received what he should have (though I think he should have been removed from office). Keep in mind that there were Democrats that sided with Republicans on this matter.

Michael Moore is a jackass as is evidenced in the following article:

"Sgt. Peter Damon, a National Guardsman from Middleborough, is asking for damages because of "loss of reputation, emotional distress, embarrassment, and personal humiliation," according to the lawsuit filed in Suffolk Superior Court last week.
Damon, 33, claims that Moore never asked for his consent to use a clip from an interview Damon did with NBC's "Nightly News."

He lost his arms when a tire on a Black Hawk helicopter exploded while he and another reservist were servicing the aircraft on the ground. Another reservist was killed in the explosion.

In his interview with NBC, Damon was asked about a new painkiller the military was using on wounded veterans. He claims in his lawsuit that the way Moore used the film clip in "Fahrenheit 9/11" - Moore's scathing 2004 documentary criticizing the Bush administration and the war in Iraq - makes him appear to "voice a complaint about the war effort" when he was actually complaining about "the excruciating type of pain" that comes with the injury he suffered.

In the movie, Damon is shown lying on a gurney, with his wounds bandaged. He says he feels likes he's "being crushed in a vise."

"But they (the painkillers) do a lot to help it," he says. "And they take a lot of the edge off of it."

Damon is shown shortly after U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., is speaking about the Bush administration and says, "You know, they say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."

Damon contends that Moore's positioning of the clip just after the congressman's comments makes him appear as if he feels like he was "left behind" by the Bush administration and the military.

In his lawsuit, Damon says he "agrees with and supports the President and the United States' war effort, and he was not left behind."

He said that, while at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering from his wounds, he had surgery and physical therapy, learned to use prosthetics and live independently. He also said that Homes For Our Troops, a not-for-profit group, built him a house with handicapped accessibility.

"The work creates a substantially fictionalized and falsified implication as a wounded serviceman who was left behind when Plaintiff was not left behind but supported, financially and emotionally, by the active assistance of the President, the United States and his family, friends, acquaintances and community," Damon says in his lawsuit.

Moore did not immediately return calls seeking comment Wednesday. A message was left for Moore at a personal number in New York and with HarperCollins, publisher of Moore's 2002 book, "Stupid White Men...And Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation!"

A spokesman for Miramax Film Corp., also named as a defendant, did not immediately return a call.


Damon did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.
"It's upsetting to him because he's lived his life supportive of his government, he's been a patriot, he's been a soldier, and he's now being portrayed in a movie that is the antithesis of all of that," Damon's lawyer, Dennis Lynch, said.

Damon is seeking $75 million in damages for emotional distress and loss of reputation. His wife is suing for an additional $10 million in damages because of the mental distress caused to her husband, Lynch said."

Last I heard, Hillary Clinton was pro-war in Iraq.

Terrorism has gotten more and more extreme. We're fighting now so that those of us that aren't Muslims won't be killed as infidels. All those Hollywood types are so anti-war and anti-Bush. They'd be among the first to go because of their immorality.

I'd be killed as an infidel, too because I won't deny my Christ. Think they wouldn't kill non-Muslims? They kill each other for being the wrong kind of Muslim.

One of the problems with liberals is that they are threatened by people with morals. President Bush may have had problems in his past with alcohol and that sort of thing. He has not kept it secret. He is also not keeping secret that he has been prayerful about this situation. Just because you liberals thing it's wrong to mention God doesn't mean that our President can't believe and pray to Him.

To James in Tupper Lake. I've read too many posts from your town to think you're not a few fries short of a happy meal.

To Sandra in Tampa. I appreciate the bravery of your son. It's people like him that keep our country safe.

I have tried to keep away from the name-calling that is so rampant in this thread, and belive me, there were plenty that came to mind. As has been mentioned before, bear in mind that nobody is perfect; even the President. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's a bad president. In my humble opinion, he's the best one we've ever had.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1221 Consumer Suggestion

Keep Laughing Katherine

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 15, 2006

The reason you are not hearing from the REPUBS is because they are letting the Democrats hang themselves. Namcy Pelosi is already contradicting herself and she isn't even in control yet.

She says they will not pursue impeachment yet other Democrats say they will. She says she will implement ALL the 9-11 commission findings - Now maybe not.

She says this will be the most ethical congress ever and then nominates John Murtha and Alcie Hastings for committee positions.

The republicans can stay quiet and watch because the Dems are going to do it to themselves.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1220 Consumer Comment

Where are all the republicans now??

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 14, 2006

I find it so hysterical, now that the November 7th elections are over and the people have screamed "NO MORE", where are all of the high and mighty republicans? I have scanned through all the bull crap posted here from the past year or so and I can only laugh that the last responses from these loud mouth losers are absent since 11/7! Vote out as many incumbents as we can from here on out.

The one thing that is still amazing to me that a crook like William Jefferson, D-LA can win a re-election after being under federal investigation for over a year, yet re-elected. Even though we all KNOW who re-elected him and they are NOT the working people of the New Orleans area. They are the ones with their hands out. What a croc. Signed, Still Embarrassed to be from Louisiana and hoping to do better...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1219 Consumer Comment

Where are all the republicans now??

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 14, 2006

I find it so hysterical, now that the November 7th elections are over and the people have screamed "NO MORE", where are all of the high and mighty republicans? I have scanned through all the bull crap posted here from the past year or so and I can only laugh that the last responses from these loud mouth losers are absent since 11/7! Vote out as many incumbents as we can from here on out.

The one thing that is still amazing to me that a crook like William Jefferson, D-LA can win a re-election after being under federal investigation for over a year, yet re-elected. Even though we all KNOW who re-elected him and they are NOT the working people of the New Orleans area. They are the ones with their hands out. What a croc. Signed, Still Embarrassed to be from Louisiana and hoping to do better...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1218 Consumer Comment

Where are all the republicans now??

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 14, 2006

I find it so hysterical, now that the November 7th elections are over and the people have screamed "NO MORE", where are all of the high and mighty republicans? I have scanned through all the bull crap posted here from the past year or so and I can only laugh that the last responses from these loud mouth losers are absent since 11/7! Vote out as many incumbents as we can from here on out.

The one thing that is still amazing to me that a crook like William Jefferson, D-LA can win a re-election after being under federal investigation for over a year, yet re-elected. Even though we all KNOW who re-elected him and they are NOT the working people of the New Orleans area. They are the ones with their hands out. What a croc. Signed, Still Embarrassed to be from Louisiana and hoping to do better...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1217 Consumer Comment

Where are all the republicans now??

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 14, 2006

I find it so hysterical, now that the November 7th elections are over and the people have screamed "NO MORE", where are all of the high and mighty republicans? I have scanned through all the bull crap posted here from the past year or so and I can only laugh that the last responses from these loud mouth losers are absent since 11/7! Vote out as many incumbents as we can from here on out.

The one thing that is still amazing to me that a crook like William Jefferson, D-LA can win a re-election after being under federal investigation for over a year, yet re-elected. Even though we all KNOW who re-elected him and they are NOT the working people of the New Orleans area. They are the ones with their hands out. What a croc. Signed, Still Embarrassed to be from Louisiana and hoping to do better...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1216 Consumer Suggestion

Richard Nixon, The Sequel! Don't like it? Vote! I did...

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Probably a lot of people who responded to this weren't even born when Richard M. Nixon " Tricky d**k" Nixon was President.

I wouldn't have responded to this because as far as I am concerned ALL POLITICIANS LIE and Democrats and Republicans are just two different LABELS for the SAME vial of poison!

Nixon had George H.W. Bush as his CIA director and we all know what the CIA is famous for...

Even back then, they had their fascist dreams of a NEW WORLD ORDER or ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. Check it out!

And from Infoplease, here is a little background on one of the most evil men to ever hold a public office:

"Running for Congress in California as a Republican in 1946, Nixon defeated Rep. Jerry Voorhis. As a member of the House Un-American Activities Committee, he made a name as an investigator of Alger Hiss, a former high State Department official, who was later jailed for perjury. In 1950, Nixon defeated Rep. Helen Gahagan Douglas, a Democrat, for the Senate. He was criticized for portraying her as a Communist dupe.

(THIS RED SCARE WAS FOMENTED BY A SENATOR McCARTHY WHO HAD HIS OWN AGENDA! GOOGLE HIM AND SEE HOW REPUTABLE HE WAS!)

"Nixon's anti-Communism ideals, his Western roots, and his youth figured into his selection in 1952 to run for vice president on the ticket headed by Dwight D. Eisenhower. Demands for Nixon's withdrawal followed disclosure that California "businessmen" ( I UNDERSTAND THESE WERE MEMBERS OF VARIOUS ORGANIZED CRIME GROUPS AND UNDERWRITERS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER!) had paid some of his Senate office expenses. His televised rebuttal, known as the Checkers speech (named for a cocker spaniel given to the Nixons), brought him support from the public and from Eisenhower.( IRONIC, BECAUSE HE LIED LIKE A DOG BUT THAT NIXON ********AWAYS DID!) The ticket won easily in 1952 and again in 1956.

Eisenhower gave Nixon substantive assignments, including missions to 56 countries. In Moscow in 1959, Nixon won acclaim for his defense of U.S. interests in an impromptu kitchen debate with Soviet premier Nikita S. Khrushchev. ( HE HOOKED UP WITH THE KGB AND MADE CONNECTIONS WITH THE RUSSIAN 'MAFIA' TOO. HE WAS WORSE THAN ANYTHING CLINTON WAS ALLEGED TO HAVE DONE DURING HIS DAYS IN THE USSR!)

Nixon lost the 1960 race for the presidency to John F. Kennedy. ( NIXON DROPPED THE BALL ON A DEAL HE ALLEGEDLY MADE WITH A GROUP OF "BUSINESSMEN" IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS SO THEY WENT WITH JOE KENNEDY SR.'S DEAL INSTEAD AND THAT"S THE REAL STORY OF WHAT DECIDED THAT CLOSE ELECTION.)

In 1962, Nixon failed in a bid for California's governorship and seemed to be finished as a national candidate. He became a Wall Street lawyer, but kept his " old party ties" and developed "new ones" through constant travels to speak for Republicans.
( EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT HITLER WAS FINISHED AS A POLITICIAN TOO WHEN HIS BEERHALL PUTSCH IN MUNICH FAILED BUT THEY THOUGHT WRONG! I WONDER IF THE SAME PEOPLE WHO FINANCED HITLER --AND SOME VERY INTERESTING REVELATIONS THAT TURNED OUT TO BE --WERE THE SAME INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS AND FINANCIAL INTERESTS WHO BACKED NIXON YEARS LATER....)

Nixon won the 1968 Republican presidential nomination after a shrewd primary campaign, then made Gov. Spiro T. Agnew of Maryland his surprise choice for vice president. In the election, they "edged out" the Democratic ticket headed by Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey by 510,314 votes out of 73,212,065 cast.
(WITH SUBSTANTIAL BACKING FROM ORGANIZED CRIME AND A LOT OF CROOKED BALLOT BOX RIGGING!)

Committed to winding down the U.S. role in the Vietnamese War, Nixon pursued Vietnamizationtraining and equipping South Vietnamese to do their own fighting. American ground combat forces in Vietnam fell steadily from 540,000 when Nixon took office to none in 1973 when the military draft was ended. But there was heavy continuing use of U.S. air power. ( AND MANY POWS WERE LEFT BEHIND IN VIETNAM AND DIED IN CAPTIVITY! STILL THERE TODAY!)

Nixon improved relations with Moscow and reopened the long-closed door to mainland China ( SO THAT THE NEW WORLD ORDER COULD USE THEIR SLAVE LABOR FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND TAKE CHEAP ORGANS FROM PRISONERS FOR TRANSPLANTS!) with "a good-will trip" there in Feb. 1972. In May of that same year, he visited Moscow and signed agreements on arms limitation and trade expansion and approved plans for a joint U.S.Soviet space mission in 1975.

Inflation was a campaign issue for Nixon, but he failed to master it as president. On Aug. 15, 1971, with unemployment edging up, Nixon abruptly announced a new economic policy: a 90-day wage-price freeze, stimulative tax cuts, a temporary 10% tariff, and spending cuts. A second phase, imposing guidelines on wage, price, and rent boosts, was announced Oct. 7.
( THE UNEMPLOYMENT WAS SO BAD THEY HAD TO USE PRICE CONTROLS OR THIS ENTIRE US ECONOMY WOULD HAVE COLLAPSED, AT LEAST THE ECONOMY IN SOME OF THE SOUTHERN UNITED STATES WOULD HAVE.NIXON WAS SO BUSY MINDING THE STORE FOR HIS NEW WORLD ORDER MASTERS THAT HE TOTALLY FAILED TO TAKE CARE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THE ECONOMIC MATTERS THAT MATTER MOST --JOBS, HOMES, AFFORDABLE GASOLINE AND MAINTAINING A GOOD STANDARD OF LIVING! YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE HOW BAD IT WAS IN SOME PLACES!)

The economy responded" in time for the 1972 campaign," in which Nixon played up his foreign-policy achievements. Played down was the burglary on June 17, 1972, of Democratic national headquarters in the Watergate apartment complex in Washington. The NixonAgnew reelection campaign cost a record $60 million and swamped the Democratic ticket headed by Sen. George McGovern of South Dakota with a plurality of 17,999,528 out of 77,718,554 votes. Only Massachusetts, with 14 electoral votes, and the District of Columbia, with 3, went for McGovern.
( THE DEMOCRATS WEREN'T THE ONLY PEOPLE HE WAS SYING ON. HE WAS USING ALL SORTS OF AGENCIES TO SPY ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. HE LET THE FBI AND CIA SEND IN AGENT PROVACATEURS TO THE ANTI WAR DEMONSTRATIONS TO CAUSE VIOLENCE AND TROUBLE AND TO GET THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE REALLY AGAINST THE WAR AND MAKE SURE THEY WERE BLACKLISTED FOR EMPLOYMENT,ETC. BY PUTTING ALL SORTS OF LIES IN FBI FILES. HE WAS A TYRANT AND HE WIPES HIS BUTT ON THE US CONSITUTION. HE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH SPYING ON THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE IT PROBABLY PROVES MY CONTENTION THAT THEY ARE FOR THE SAME THING AS REPUBLICANS, JUST DIFFERENT LABELS. SO HE WAS SPYING ON MORE PEOPLE JUST LIKE HIM!)

In Jan. 1973, hints of a cover-up emerged at the trial of six men found guilty of the Watergate burglary. With a Senate investigation under way, Nixon announced on April 30 the resignations of his top aides, H. R. Haldeman and John D. Ehrlichman, and the dismissal of White House counsel John Dean III. Dean was the star witness at televised Senate hearings that exposed both a White House cover-up of Watergate and massive illegalities in Republican fund-raising in 1972.

The hearings also disclosed that Nixon had routinely tape-recorded his office meetings and telephone conversations.

On Oct. 10, 1973, Agnew resigned as vice president, then pleaded no-contest to a negotiated federal charge of evading income taxes on alleged bribes. Two days later, Nixon nominated the House minority leader, Rep. Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, as the new vice president. Congress confirmed Ford on Dec. 6, 1973.
(AGNEW WAS IN WITH THE ORGANIZED CRIME FAMILIES ON THE EAST COAST! HE WAS ALWAYS DIRTY. WAS GERALD FORD IN WITH THE DETROIT ORGANIZED CRIME FAMILY ALSO? CHECK IT OUT.)

In June 1974, Nixon visited Israel and four Arab nations. Then he met in Moscow with Soviet leader Leonid I. Brezhnev and reached preliminary nuclear arms limitation agreements.

But, in the month after his return, Watergate ended the Nixon regime. On July 24 the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to surrender subpoenaed tapes. On July 30, the Judiciary Committee referred three impeachment articles to the full membership. On Aug. 5, Nixon bowed to the Supreme Court and released tapes showing he halted an FBI probe of the Watergate burglary six days after it occurred. It was in effect an admission of obstruction of justice, and impeachment appeared inevitable.

Nixon resigned on Aug. 9, 1974, the first president ever to do so. A month later, President Ford issued an unconditional pardon for any offenses Nixon might have committed as president, thus forestalling possible prosecution.

( THEY HAD TO GET RID OF HIM BECAUSE HE WAS WORKING TO ELIMINATE OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNITY AND MAKE US A PART OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER! GEORGE H.W. BUSH -- WHO IS RELATED TO THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY --- AND HENRY KISSINGER, A JEWISH n**i, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, RICHARD CHENEY () OUR PRESENT VICE PRESIDENT) AND A FEW OTHER FAMILIAR FACES THAT ARE APPEARING IN THE PRESENT BUSH CABINET ALSO PLAYED A HUGE PART IN THIS MONSTER'S PRESIDENCY. THIS MAN WAS PLOTTING AGAINST OUR COUNTRY, OUR VERY WAY OF LIFE! HE WAS NOTHING BUT A CRIMINAL AND HE HAD TO GO! NOTICE THE DIRTY DEALING WHEN PRESIDENT FORD PARDONED HIM!!)

He died on April 22, 1994, in New York City of a massive stroke.

WHY DIDN'T HE STAY IN CA IF THEY LOVED HIM SO MUCH BACK THERE?

THE MAN WAS WANTING TO BE ANOTHER HITLER-- OR THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE BACK THEN!

Cabinet Members Under Nixon
Secretary of State
William P. Rogers, 1969
Henry A. Kissinger, 1973
Secretary of the Treasury
David M. Kennedy, 1969
John B. Connally, 1971
George P. Shultz, 1972
William E. Simon, 1974
Secretary of Defense
Melvin R. Laird, 1969
Elliot L. Richardson, 1973
James R. Schlesinger, 1973
Attorney General
John N. Mitchell, 1969 ( HUGE CROOK!)
Richard G. Kleindienst, 1972
Elliot L. Richardson, 1973
William B. Saxbe, 1974
Postmaster General
William M. Blount, 1969
Secretary of the Interior
Walter J. Hickel, 1969
Rogers C. B. Morton, 1971
Secretary of Agriculture
Clifford M. Hardin, 1969
Earl L. Butz, 1971
Secretary of Commerce
Maurice H. Stans, 1969
Peter G. Peterson, 1972
Frederick B. Dent, 1973
Secretary of Labor
George P. Shultz, 1969
James D. Hodgson, 1970
Peter J. Brennan, 1973
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Robert H. Finch, 1969
Elliot L. Richardson, 1970
Caspar W. Weinberger, 1973
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development George Romney, 1969
James T. Lynn, 1973
Secretary of Transportation
John A. Volpe, 1969
Claude S. Brinegar, 1973

GOOGLE THESE NAMES AND DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1215 Consumer Comment

This is the funniest quote ever

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

"There is nothing in them that can be reasonably disputed."

From the guy who believes the USA provided Germany's weapons during WW2, and that U-Boats operated in the Great Lakes.

Keep up the good work James. You make my day complete.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1214 Consumer Comment

This is the funniest quote ever

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

"There is nothing in them that can be reasonably disputed."

From the guy who believes the USA provided Germany's weapons during WW2, and that U-Boats operated in the Great Lakes.

Keep up the good work James. You make my day complete.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1213 Consumer Comment

This is the funniest quote ever

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

"There is nothing in them that can be reasonably disputed."

From the guy who believes the USA provided Germany's weapons during WW2, and that U-Boats operated in the Great Lakes.

Keep up the good work James. You make my day complete.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1212 Consumer Comment

This is the funniest quote ever

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

"There is nothing in them that can be reasonably disputed."

From the guy who believes the USA provided Germany's weapons during WW2, and that U-Boats operated in the Great Lakes.

Keep up the good work James. You make my day complete.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1211 Consumer Suggestion

People are watching the Movies

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 07, 2006

The Polls say that most Americans biggest issue is "Corruption". The Movies are making headway. Effect!

Google Search People:

911 Mysteries

Terror Storm

See how you have been conned! There is nothing in them that can be reasonably disputed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1210 Consumer Comment

To our friend up north.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Jim,

Do you believe everything you read on the internet? If so, then you are more naive than you claim us to be. To think that any sitting President would orchestrate something such as 9/11 simply for his own personal gain is just ludicrous. Do you really think GWB would risk being found out about murdering over 3000 innocent civilians just to turn a buck, or oust a dictator? I seriously doubt it. I'm sure most of those "movies" are just like the crap from Michael Mooron. All they are intended to do is stir up trouble.

Why not just go back to the GC&T reports? I'd love to continue to prove you wrong on those reports. Or did Craig fire you for your comments?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1209 Consumer Comment

Talk about a waste...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 06, 2006

"Anyone who would want to twist Kerry's words in any way to be "putting down the troops" is not worth my time to listen to them!

Talking about "twisting peoples words"!"

Uh huh. Let's go to the transcript...

-"You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."-John Kerry

This is just more of the same, from the Senator. In reality, he simply said what most Democraps truly believe. He's been on a tangent against the US Military for the past 35 years. Words have meanings, and this guy knew what he was saying.

He claims it was a "botched joke" about the President's intelligence. Okay, where's the joke? Bush went to Yale, and then The Harvard School of Business. He got a BA in History, and an MBA. John Kerry got a BA in Poli-Sci. Ask anyone, a BA in Poli-Sci is one step up from a Phys Ed degree. Show up at all, and you pass.

President Bush held a more difficult class schedule, and was a "C" student. Kerry took an easier class schedule, and was a"D" student. Bush scored higher on his SAT's, and has a much better education, than Kerry.

So, those being the FACTS of this case, where is the joke?

I cannot wait for tomorrow's results. Will you promise to go away if the Democraps don't win big? For the record, the House has always averaged a 29 seat LOSS during the 6th year election of a sitting two-term President, since FDR took office. Even the Democraps don't plan on gaining that many seats. I wonder why?

Ask John Kerry.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1208 Consumer Suggestion

It is not Democrat Verses Republican!

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, November 06, 2006

This has nothing to do with Democrat verses Republican & I wish you guys would wake up & see that!

It has to deal with a conn! A conn on 911 & something you gobbled up to get you to fight in the Middle East!

This is all crap! Totally crap that has no essence & no reality backing it up!

Saddam never had WMD's & he never killed 600,000 innocent Iraqi's!

The only WMD's he ever had were given to him by the USA to take out Iran! Saddam refused to take out Iran & that is where the trouble started!

I don't care less if the Editor here wants to take out my links to 911 Mysteries, that you can get on a google search anyway... or if he wants to take out my link to "Terror Storm" which you can also get on a Google search.

You Americans have been "ripped off"! Totally lied to! Go watch the videos! It is total crap you have been fed!

Now you can go "on & on" about Democrat & Republican... but neither party believes is outright lies & crap that you have swallowed!

It's all right here on the internet! Just do a google search & look! Screw your Left or Right frame of mind & who might be the person in that pigeon hole... Democrat or Republican... you have been conned!

911 was an inside job! There is more evidence that it was than you could possibly point to that it wasn't & the fact is that it is all there for you to see on a "google search"!

Movies! Full Length Movies for free. Start with 911 Mysteries & then go on! They are all easy to see.

From that to "Loose Change" to "Terror Storm" you can see it all for free by going to Google & typing in that heading.

All there from YouTube to Google Videos... it is all there for you to see before you vote!

You have been conned! Plain & simple! You have been "ripped off" & go see the truth!

Please do it before you vote!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1207 Consumer Comment

Go back to the Asylum

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 06, 2006

"These idiots are picking out pieces of crap that have nothing to do with the issue, but they hang on that as "their fact"!

Like when you spun this thread into WW2 conspiracy theory nonsense? Like when you changed the subject every time your "facts" were flamed as idiocy?

"They can call you "Canadian" or they can dispute n**i Subs destroying Canadian supply ships to Britain during WWII."

Again, NOBODY disputed that. We pointed out you were WRONG about U-Boats operating within the Great Lakes. In order to do that amazing feat, either a COASTAL boat would have had to make a cross-Atlantic voyage(impossible), or the boat would have to remain surfaced for days at a time in plain view of everyone going up the river(also impossible). The mere fact that NO U-Boat EVER operated within the Lakes, should suffice, but not according to your Kook Fringe Conspiracy Theory.

"They can dispute WMD's & the like, & they have no real issue when dealing with what we know now... like:


9/11 Mysteries (video)

Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Recut)

9/11: A Conversation with Jim Fetzer (video)"

More of the same. You find a few lunatics that make idiotic claims, with no real evidence, and you decide they are correct, while hard evidence is obviously wrong.

It would be funny, if it wasn't so sad. I suppose it's a good thing you live in Canaduh. Down here, you'd be eaten alive by everyone from the age of 5, and up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1206 Consumer Comment

Not a GWB fan, but I must say...

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 05, 2006

...I do commend him on his persistence to find and capture Saddam Hussein. Although our country has been polarized on many issues, I think we all can sit back and enjoy the justice served in the sentencing of this evil animal. Within 30 days I hope we can rejoice in this coward's hanging (in hopes they deny his request for a firing squad). Michael, I like your entry. Clinton is too full of himself to even begin to tell any truth. Imagine if our judicial system laid down executions this fast, would we have to relinquish our hard earned money to build more prisons? Saddam ROT IN HELL!!!

Truly,

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1205 Consumer Comment

Wow

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 04, 2006

Ok I have been listening to this same mindless drivel for the last 6 years more or less and a few thinks though many haven't mentioned because they were the bigger men I will point out at least one because I am tired of all the Bill Clinton hero worship on this thing and saying that he tryed to have him killed realy anoyed me. President Clinton within the year before the election had the chance to have Osama in custody he was offered him on a silver platter by a small country that had captured him and offered him up... However clinton said to let him go because he didn't want to deal with the extradition when he would be out of office in just a few months witch ever way the election went. Do I think Bush is the best president in the last 30 years no not in the least however he is a better choice than what else we had up. Second I understand completly why the American people reelected him myself included Once we were in the war it was best to keep the defence the same. just like in any battle. It is clasic stratigy straight out of the art of war. Which way will I vote in the next election ... that is hard to say I will vote for whoever I think is the better canadate. Who knows Maby I will even vote for Hilliary...Yea right lol the other choice would have to look REAL BAD lol. I know how she got elected in the first place and I was not happy with it. But that is neither here nor there. But in my Opinion I wish we had given Bill the office he wanted in the first place and that Hillary had been visiting him in his office on 9/11/01 I think we in NY would have been better off but oh well coulda shoulda woulda. I do not like to ramble and I have been rambling long enough now so I wish you all well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1204 Consumer Suggestion

Charles... you have it right!

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, November 03, 2006

Isn't it nice Charles when you can come back over a year later & prove all the things you said?

These idiots are picking out pieces of crap that have nothing to do with the issue, but they hang on that as "their fact"!

They speak nothing "over a year later" about how they were right, as they were not so.

They pick on stuff that has nothing to do with the issue, as they have no disputes.

They can call you "Canadian" or they can dispute n**i Subs destroying Canadian supply ships to Britain during WWII. They can dispute WMD's & the like, & they have no real issue when dealing with what we know now... like:


9/11 Mysteries (video)

Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Recut)

9/11: A Conversation with Jim Fetzer (video)

Yet what they will do is to pick up on where you work or what you do & if they can find you in any way to be mistaken & then they will whitewash it all with their philosophy... which makes no sense in the first place... over a year ago & way more less now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1203 Consumer Suggestion

Charles... you have it right!

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, November 03, 2006

Isn't it nice Charles when you can come back over a year later & prove all the things you said?

These idiots are picking out pieces of crap that have nothing to do with the issue, but they hang on that as "their fact"!

They speak nothing "over a year later" about how they were right, as they were not so.

They pick on stuff that has nothing to do with the issue, as they have no disputes.

They can call you "Canadian" or they can dispute n**i Subs destroying Canadian supply ships to Britain during WWII. They can dispute WMD's & the like, & they have no real issue when dealing with what we know now... like:


9/11 Mysteries (video)

Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Recut)

9/11: A Conversation with Jim Fetzer (video)

Yet what they will do is to pick up on where you work or what you do & if they can find you in any way to be mistaken & then they will whitewash it all with their philosophy... which makes no sense in the first place... over a year ago & way more less now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1202 Consumer Suggestion

Charles... you have it right!

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, November 03, 2006

Isn't it nice Charles when you can come back over a year later & prove all the things you said?

These idiots are picking out pieces of crap that have nothing to do with the issue, but they hang on that as "their fact"!

They speak nothing "over a year later" about how they were right, as they were not so.

They pick on stuff that has nothing to do with the issue, as they have no disputes.

They can call you "Canadian" or they can dispute n**i Subs destroying Canadian supply ships to Britain during WWII. They can dispute WMD's & the like, & they have no real issue when dealing with what we know now... like:


9/11 Mysteries (video)

Loose Change, 2nd Edition (Recut)

9/11: A Conversation with Jim Fetzer (video)

Yet what they will do is to pick up on where you work or what you do & if they can find you in any way to be mistaken & then they will whitewash it all with their philosophy... which makes no sense in the first place... over a year ago & way more less now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1201 Consumer Suggestion

Charles I have to agree with you!

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, November 03, 2006

Charles;

Anyone who would want to twist Kerry's words in any way to be "putting down the troops" is not worth my time to listen to them!

Talking about "twisting peoples words"! Now I am no great fan of Kerry. I am no great fan of Alex Jones either!

Yet both of them make points. If I am not mistaken, Alex Jones is Republican & I have issues with him!

Yet I am not Republican, but Conservative. I do not agree with all Democrats say. Yet I do know for sure what I do not agree with about some Republicans say like Robert... or...

I do share a video made by Alex Jones in my blogs...
He does have points more than I can dis- agree with:

I may agree with him on some of the things he says & this video is one that I agree mostly with.
(( link redacted by ROR))

I do not agree fully with Alex Jones. I don't believe a "One World Government" is achievable in this generations lifetime.

I don't believe Free Trade in North America is a bad thing, but more the reverse.

I don't believe that putting up video cameras in "high crime area's" does anything but lower crime in those area's.

I don't believe that arming everyone in the USA is a good thing. Instead I believe the reason why the USA has the highest murder rate in the World is because of the amount of the available & legal, along with illegal guns the populace has at their disposal.

Some people "in my opinion" go off the deep end. Yet I do see some truth in what he says, & this thing on 911 is just part of it.

Yet if everyone went along with Alex Jones, nobody would pay income tax, nor would they obey speed limits, everyone would carry guns & we would have total anarchy.

Now I do believe that people should not be hypocrites. I don't believe you should join the Armed Forces & kill innocent Iraqi's if they understand the basis for the war is completely a conn.

I don't believe that people should keep their jobs in Government, or in the Police Force if they understand that they are contributing to a cover up.

I think teachers in schools should be able to teach both sides of topics. I believe that there should be a separation between Church & State. I think there are more important things we should all be concentrating on like "Global Warming" as being our biggest threat of the future.

Yet the Movie "Terror Storm" does bring out a lot of the truth. Some of the things brought out are very much true. I know that 911 was a farce, as it should be obvious. I don't believe Al Qaeda would find it in their interest to hijack a bunch of planes using liquid explosives & blow them up on their way to the USA with people from all over the World in them. I don't believe Saddam was just some "Evil Tyrant" who was a threat to anyone, even comparable to George Bush.

Somewhere there must be a "middle ground". Not the ground where we believe all Government is bad. Not the ground where we believe that everything is a Conspiracy. Not the ground where we are afraid to drink water because it is fluoridated. Not the ground where Wicca is filled with evil Witches who rip children's hearts out.

Yet also not the ground where we should all believe our Government as if it is part of the hand of God. Not the ground where we all should be Patriotic & against the new "evil" today which might be Communism, or World Terrorism.

In my mind, you should be content to allow people to live different lifestyles on their own land. Your Country has laws that you agree with & some you don't... well fine. Try to change the ones you don't like & keep the ones you do. Yet when you cross the line is where you go involve yourself in the laws of other Countries & attempt to force your culture on others.

As Jesus said "Remove the splinter out of your eye, before you remove the log from someone else's".

As far as I am concerned, the West has no right to be involved in the Middle East, other than for trade reasons, but not to control. I don't think any form of thinking or any Religion has all the answers or more than just a few of some. I think we need more acceptance of other cultures & less judging going on, except for with things that directly involve us in our own towns & cities.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1200 Consumer Comment

When republicans ask for your vote just say no

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

When, republicans ask for your vote on 11/07/2006 just say NO! I will not let what happen what republicans said about kerrys comments monday sway me from voting democrat!. Republicans, have been doing this 6 long years its time to say no to them!. I, just ignore republicans radio messages & I throw away their mail they send to me!, nobody can change my mind I will vote democrat on 11/07/2006, democrats will regain control don't let the republicans make you think different!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1199 Consumer Comment

When republicans ask for your vote just say no

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

When, republicans ask for your vote on 11/07/2006 just say NO! I will not let what happen what republicans said about kerrys comments monday sway me from voting democrat!. Republicans, have been doing this 6 long years its time to say no to them!. I, just ignore republicans radio messages & I throw away their mail they send to me!, nobody can change my mind I will vote democrat on 11/07/2006, democrats will regain control don't let the republicans make you think different!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1198 Consumer Comment

When republicans ask for your vote just say no

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

When, republicans ask for your vote on 11/07/2006 just say NO! I will not let what happen what republicans said about kerrys comments monday sway me from voting democrat!. Republicans, have been doing this 6 long years its time to say no to them!. I, just ignore republicans radio messages & I throw away their mail they send to me!, nobody can change my mind I will vote democrat on 11/07/2006, democrats will regain control don't let the republicans make you think different!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1197 Consumer Comment

When republicans ask for your vote just say no

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

When, republicans ask for your vote on 11/07/2006 just say NO! I will not let what happen what republicans said about kerrys comments monday sway me from voting democrat!. Republicans, have been doing this 6 long years its time to say no to them!. I, just ignore republicans radio messages & I throw away their mail they send to me!, nobody can change my mind I will vote democrat on 11/07/2006, democrats will regain control don't let the republicans make you think different!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1196 Consumer Suggestion

& so your point is?

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

Patrick;

I don't see anything "Canadian" in the statement:

Terrorist attacks have happened "All over the World" since 911 in Countries who do allow the main stream media to report & if anyone wants an example of what does not get reported, I simply suggest you do a "google search" on 911 Mysteries to watch the Movie I mentioned to get a little taste.

I do see Canadians being affected by all of this in many ways. Do Canadians have to be "stupid enough" to fight by America's side when the whole war was about WMD's that never existed?

You agree with Robert because I am Canadian? Yes that sure makes sense Patrick. About as much sense as Robert makes thinking "Republican" equals Bush.

Hell Patrick... I actually cannot see anything in your post that is on subject at all. Can anyone else?

I hope people who would like to stay on subject will do a google search for 911 Mysteries & watch the movie. That should be on subject.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1195 Consumer Comment

A couple comments on recent posts.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

Ben - Can you provide a source that says Canada has ever had committed troops in Iraq? Everything I saw says Canada refused to ever send troops to Iraq in support of the war effort. There were a few reports about mercenaries, and Canadian citizens serving in the US armed forces, but that was all I could find. SO, on this I agree with Robert. What right does Jim have to whine about the war?

Jim - Is this the same "James" who has posted to this report before? You know, the guy who works for Great Cars & Trucks? The guy who went on about n**i subs up the river in Canada? About how Canada had the first supersonic jet fighter? Well, how bout it Jimmy?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1194 Consumer Comment

Is there a conspiracy theory from the "kook fringe" you do NOT subscribe to?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 02, 2006

"Iraq is today more dangerous than it ever has been"-False. It is only dangerous in a very small part of the country. The Kurds enjoy peace for the 1st time in over 30 years. The only problem areas are the FEW that are terrorist controlled, and supported by the radical Imams.

"Iraq is today more dangerous than it ever has been. With over 60% Unemployment & people who used to live in homes, living in tents."-False. Housing construction is higher than in the previous 15 years. Unemployment is also lower than during the previous pre-war years. Now, you don't have to be part of the Ba'ath Party to have a job.

"The only increase in power has been to the US owned companies & the US bases, but the average Iraqi is still in the dark."-False. Prewar capabilities was at 4400Kv. Current capability is 10000Kv. Usage may be lower(4200Kv), but the capability is more than double. Rolling blackouts are common(as they always have been) while new sections are brought online, and equipment is upgraded. The EXACT same thing happens in California. Tell me Cali is worse off now, than before we took it.

"After 5 years, the USA has not even been able to get Oil Production up to pre-war levels."-Hard to say. Production is actually up, but your friends' constant attacks on the transportation of the product, is preventing it from being sold. Nice. Your heroes are really helping the Iraqi people.

"Terrorist attacks began with Anthrax after 911, & for that which has not been reported (as usual) there have been enough scares that billions have been spent on prevention & false scares."-False. There never was any anthrax worth talking about. One envelope of a mild strain(can be cured with a shot from a Doctor) was found. Try not to be so vapid.

"Meanwhile the borders are as porous as ever, if not worse & the security levels of the Ports are so low that less than 20% of the Containers are even being checked."-True. And yet, not ONE attack has happened. We can thank the current administration for that.

"Terrorist attacks have happened "All over the World" since 911 in Countries who do allow the main stream media to report & if anyone wants an example of what does not get reported, I simply suggest you do a "google search" on 911 Mysteries to watch the Movie I mentioned to get a little taste."-True. They have happened everywhere, yet NONE against American citizens, nor it's properties. The only ones being targetted with success, are the ones who give in(Spain, France). The ones who fight back, are either not attacked, or the attacks are foiled(England).

"The whole premise for the War was a fallacy as a Majority of Americans understand & it's futility is being proven out by the present polls, along with the new "real poll" that will be voted on Nov 7th."-False. After John Kerry let slip what ALL Democraps really think of the Military, and in turn, the US Citizen in general, do not be surprised if the Reps win, and win BIG. I notice you took a vacation after the MAJORITY of your Countrymen decided they wanted to be part of the Pro-America Team, and threw out your previous group of pantywearing bedwetters. Rubber rooms, and white jackets, perhaps?

"There is not an informed American in the USA that does not now understand that Iraq had no WMD's & it is generally acknowledged in both Iraq & America that Iraq was safer & had a better economy under Saddam."-False. There was no economy under Saddam. The only safe people were Ba'ath Party members. Women weren't safe. The hundreds of thousands of people found in mass graves weren't. The tens of thousands who were gassed sure weren't.

"Except Robert. Robert is also the only one who would not watch the Movie 911 Mysteries as found on google, simply because he is not interested in truth in any way. He is only interested in being Republican & I guess that means "uninformed" as he obviously cannot see the truth staring him right in the face."-False. I looked it up. It's just more of the same bilge you've been drinking for years...like how we gave n**i Germany all of it's weapons during the war. The fact that we produced NONE of their weapons is meaningless to you. Of course, you still think there are U-Boats wandering around the lakes.

Up your meds.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1193 Consumer Suggestion

Iraq is today more dangerous than it ever has been

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Iraq is today more dangerous than it ever has been. With over 60% Unemployment & people who used to live in homes, living in tents.

The only increase in power has been to the US owned companies & the US bases, but the average Iraqi is still in the dark.

After 5 years, the USA has not even been able to get Oil Production up to pre-war levels.

Terrorist attacks began with Anthrax after 911, & for that which has not been reported (as usual) there have been enough scares that billions have been spent on prevention & false scares.

Meanwhile the borders are as porous as ever, if not worse & the security levels of the Ports are so low that less than 20% of the Containers are even being checked.

Terrorist attacks have happened "All over the World" since 911 in Countries who do allow the main stream media to report & if anyone wants an example of what does not get reported, I simply suggest you do a "google search" on 911 Mysteries to watch the Movie I mentioned to get a little taste.

The whole premise for the War was a fallacy as a Majority of Americans understand & it's futility is being proven out by the present polls, along with the new "real poll" that will be voted on Nov 7th.

There is not an informed American in the USA that does not now understand that Iraq had no WMD's & it is generally acknowledged in both Iraq & America that Iraq was safer & had a better economy under Saddam.

Except Robert. Robert is also the only one who would not watch the Movie 911 Mysteries as found on google, simply because he is not interested in truth in any way. He is only interested in being Republican & I guess that means "uninformed" as he obviously cannot see the truth staring him right in the face.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1192 Consumer Comment

More conspiracy nuttiness from James

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 01, 2006

I'll give it to you sweet, short, and straight to the point.

During the 90's, American citizens, and property worldwide, were attacked over 300 times. Hundreds dead, and thousands wounded, not to mention the monetary cost, and collateral damage to foreign workers, etc.

The attacks of 9/11 were the last of the attacks that were carried out. Bin Laden et al expected more of the same lack of concern, as they had gotten from the previous 300+ attacks.

Instead, we had a President who didn't believe in knocking on doors, and presenting warrants for arrest. He took the fight right back to them. Eliminated two tyrannical Governments, freed tens of millions of people, ended mass graves, rape rooms(brought to you by that peaceful religion of Islam), and wholesale torture(no, naked pyramid is NOT torture to anyone except idiots and Democraps). More people in both Countries have running water, and electricity, than before their Governments were tossed aside. The only people there who hate us are the remnants of the Taliban, and the Terrorists.

As of today, there has not been a single attack on ANY American citizen, or property, ANYWHERE on this planet, since 9/11/2001(no James, battle casualties do NOT count, as people do actually die in war).

As for the WMD's, some were found, and the Iraqi's in charge of the programs admit they were still there just before the bombs started falling. The ONLY people who dispute the facts are the mainstream media, who has no reason to report on anything that will help the guy who beat their last two losers. An ABC News memo states they are to show Dems as good, and Reps as bad. A new study shows 90% of all political coverage is presented to show Dems in a favorable light, and Reps in a negative. How about reporting the better than 10:1 body count the Terrorists are absorbing. They'll run out of bodies long before we run out of ammo. Nope, CNN will show a video of a Soldier getting killed by a sniper(amazing how they get these vids, eh?), but won't show how the Terrorists shoot children in the back, use women as shields, hide in Hospitals, etc. Tell me there is no bias.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1191 Consumer Suggestion

I don't worry about Robert.

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Robert had his head stuck in the mud over a year ago thinking Saddam had WMD's. Hell he was sure of it!

Now he thinks the world is safer since the "War on Terrorism" began.

He turns a "blind eye" to the liberties you have lost. He turns a "blind eye" to the billions spent & all the dead bodies.

He turns a "blind eye" to the fact that the war in Iraq was dumb from the beginning, as I stated over a year ago. Now even Republicans can see it as a total failure... but not Robert.

Yet to heck with it being a failure, the premise for going there & into Afghanistan was a fallacy in the first place, as pointed out in this Movie:

9/11 Mysteries (video)

(( link redacted by ROR))

I bet you that Robert will not watch it, as he does not want to expand his mind. He will not admit now that the war was a dumb idea, nor will he want to present himself with proof that its whole premacy was merely a lie.

He believes what he sees & please don't take him to a Magic show! If you do, you will have him shopping stores for rabbits that hide in hats.

Yet for the rest of you, watch the movie. Then go vote this time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1190 Consumer Comment

Narrow minded.......to say the least

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 27, 2006

""Anyone who lets someone from a foreign country tell us what the right thing to do is nute. Why would anyone allow a Canadian who is making unproven and unfounded accuasations tell us how to vote should probably not vote at all."" -- American Moron

With the world the way it is and the things that are going on right now...this comment makes me ashamed to be an American.

This person has every right to speak his mind. Canada is in this "war" right now. They have lost countrymen. They fight in this "war on terror" with us. Just because this "war" is being run by an idiot from our country (Bush), doesnt mean that the other countries stuck in this mess with us dont have the right to speak out.

The complete stupidity of how the Bush administration has handled this makes it justifiable in my eyes for anyone to speak out about our elections. If our leaders are to lead a free world, then the free world has a right to speak about them any way they see fit.

Its still a free world right?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1189 Consumer Comment

A mind is a terrible thing to waste, Chip

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 27, 2006

Try reading the stuff James of Canaduh has written. It belongs in an episode of "Science Mystery Theatre".

Go to the other threads related to the Govt, and you'll see what I am talking about.

BTW, I don't believe anything my Govt says about anything. I believe what I see.

You Libs claim we were NEVER attacked during the 8 years of clinton. That is a crock on a grand scale. We were attacked monthly, and in some months daily, to the tune of over 300 seperate attacks during that 8 years. The WTC was attacked in '93, with dozens killed, and dozens more wounded. The USS Cole was attacked, with more than a dozen killed, and dozens more wounded. The Khobar Towers(military housing) was attacked, same thing. The Embassies all over the world were attacked, same thing. Clinton did nothing. Osama himself admitted in a video he never anticipated we would retaliate after the 9/11 attacks. He said he expected more of the same, as the previous 8 years. We haven't been attacked ANYWHERE, since that fateful day.

Get it?

P.S.-I personally think Bin Laden is either dead, or captured. He has bad kidneys, and medical treatment is required. That'm my own conspiracy theory...but one that at least has some factual basis behind it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1188 Consumer Comment

Educate Yourself Robert

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 26, 2006

James raises many valid points. There are as many unanswered questions -- if not more -- than there are questions that have been sufficiently answered, including, but not limited to, irregular stock trades of United and American stock on 9/6 and 9/10 -- the profits of which are still being held in an account held by the NYSE, unclaimed by unknown trader(s).

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but if you believe everything you are told or that you read in the media, then you're showing your ignorance.

Critical thought is a wonderful thing, my friend. You should try it.

By the way, since when does a person who has an opinion different from yours belong in an "asylum?" After all, the patriots of the American Revolution had a different opinion than King George, right? If you're such a modern-day American patriot, then surely you would understand that a difference of opinion and critical thought is what this country was founded on, right?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1187 Consumer Comment

He's baaaa-ack!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 26, 2006

I see James of Canaduh has been let out of the asylum.

Maybe the towers were brought down by a U-Boat, eh James?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1186 Consumer Comment

He's baaaa-ack!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 26, 2006

I see James of Canaduh has been let out of the asylum.

Maybe the towers were brought down by a U-Boat, eh James?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1185 Consumer Suggestion

If you want proof... just go to the Links. You were Scammed by 911

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 25, 2006

All Rory O'Connor articles
About Webfeeds
September 13, 2006 07:34 PM

Now that all the books have been published and promoted; the Hollywood films have all opened (and closed); all the radio and television commentaries and commemorative specials have been broadcast; all the dramas (and the so-called "docudramas") and even a handful of reality-based, actual "documentaries" have aired and been argued over, ad infinitum and ad nauseum, on the web and in the blogosphere...at long last, and after all has been said (but so little really has been done) where do we find ourselves? And where do we go from here, on the long, confusing, circuitous and still ever-painful path from 9/11?

To answer that question, we first must come to understand truly what happened in and to America five years ago, how it happened, and - most important - why. Yet the plethora of attack-related media that has exploded onto our public consciousness in the run-up to the fifth "anniversary" of the terror attacks has done nothing to help us understand any of it. Yes, books have been sold, theatres filled, ratings raised, circulations increased, reputations enhanced - but I repeat: nothing has been done to help us understand.

This, despite the obvious talents of directors like Paul Greengrass of United 93 and Oliver Stone of World Trade Center; despite the literary investigations of reporters like Peter (Triple Cross) Lance and Lawrence (The Looming Tower) Wright; or the vivid recollections of Kristin (Wake-up Call) Breitweiser and the self-serving apologia (Without Precedent) of Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton; despite the National Geographic Channel's eviscerated version of Lance's book; despite Court TV's documentary embrace of On Native Soil, based on the discredited 9/11 Commission report; despite Spike TV's ode to metalworkers and millions of downloads of Loose Change; despite CBS's re-run of the same French documentary it aired years ago; and yes! despite ABC's cretinous and much-discussed docudrama The Path to 9/11 - despite it all, all the bluster, all the recriminations, all the posturing, all the politics and all the media attention, attention still must be paid.

Attention - first to the families, our touchstones who suffered more than any and who still seek deliverance from that suffering in their unending search for the truth of what happened. Attention next to the many questions about 9/11 that remain unanswered - questions large and small, new and old; such as why the Pentagon held back so much information about air defense deficiencies from the 9/11 commission that Chairmen Kean and Hamilton came close to asking the Justice Department to launch a criminal investigation; such as why the dozens of pre-attack warnings pouring into Washington were ignored; such as why the Able Danger intelligence program, which purportedly uncovered evidence of five active Al Qaeda cells and identified four of the eventual hijackers months before the attacks, was ignored and closed down; such as why Osama bin Laden was allowed to escape from Afghanistan when cornered in Tora Bora; such as why evidence of Pakistani intelligence involvement in the 9/11 plot has been ignored and covered up.

Attention fully paid, then, to "press for truth" (the title of another 9/11-related documentary I am an executive producer of) about what actually happened, how it happened, and who helped make it happen - as a means of finally approaching the reality of why it happened - and perhaps in the course of that search, ensuring that it can never happen again.

A logical starting point, and something that some family members spoke out for at a recent press conference in Washington, DC, is to support calls for a new, reopened, and non-partisan investigation. There is little doubt that that the 9/11 commission report has become the Warren commission report of our time - a fatally flawed official examination that ended up raising more questions than it answered, owing to a toxic brew of politics, partisanship, personal agendas and presidential obstruction. Chairman Thomas Kean's recent paid involvement with ABC's fictitious "historical" docudrama is but the latest reminder that the 9/11 tragedy has yet to be investigated fully or fairly - or in a NON-partisan (as opposed to BI-partisan!) manner.

Both Kean and his Democratic Party counterpart Lee Hamilton now acknowledge that the Pentagon didn't play straight with them, and that they and their fellow commissioners bowed to political pressure when they didn't fully question New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani about his management decisions and emergency responses. Other commissioners complained repeatedly about White House obstacles put in their path - yet the commissioners chose to issue their report nonetheless, even in the face of staff objections that there wasn't enough time to follow all leads.

The commissioners also allowed the president and vice president to testify together (and not under oath) and went along with other administration demands, such as the one that only a minority of the commissioners could see a minority of the documents requested - and even then had to vet their notes with the White House before sharing them with the full Commission! So Kean's paid advisory role to the discredited ABC miniseries is best understood as just the latest evidence of his shattered credibility - and that of his commission as well.

At the risk of stating the obvious, let me conclude by noting that we can never move beyond 9/11 until we obtain a fuller understanding of the events of that day and what underlies them. And until we have a complete, thorough and non-partisan investigation, that will never happen. We must continue to "press for truth" in connection with the events of September 11, 2001 - for we still don't know the true "path to 9/11" and until we do, we can never find the path from 9/11.

There is plenty of proof:

Here are the hijackers:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers_flt_77.html

Here is a movie explaining all:

9/11 Mysteries (video)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003

What does an expert say about the Pentegon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsn4JA450iA&mode=related&search

There is more, but you had better know some of this before you vote.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1184 Consumer Comment

I Swore

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 25, 2006

I would not keep this thread going, but...

To the poster who thinks I'm affiliated with the DNC. I'm not. I'm a regular guy from America's heartland who is able to think for himself -- something that Americans once prided themselves on. I voted for the FIRST TIME in 2004 because I was so outraged by the state of affairs in this country. I voted for Kerry because change was needed. Too bad a slight majority in this country can't or won't form an independent, critical thought, and/or are too easily scared that they bought Bush's "Stay the Course" Iraq mantra.

The fact is, Clinton tried to KILL Bin Laden. He failed, but at least he found the guy and tried. Bush can't even find him. He's just too busy in Iraq and Afghanistan, and trying to amend the constitution to prohibit gay marriage -- way more important issues than finding the guy who attacked America on a scale larger than Pearl Harbor. And let's not go into the lies around justifying the war in Iraq, and Halliburton's NO BID contracts. WMDs in Iraq? Sure, there were chemical weapons that hussein used AGAINST HIS OWN PEOPLE, and had no intentions of using them against America. Hussein was NOT CONNECTED to Bin Laden. Oh, and by the way, the chemical weapons were so old that they had lost the vast majority of their efficacy IF USED. If you still think Iraq is about terrorists, then you need your head examined. We invaded Iraq. Iraq was NO THREAT. We are the terrorists in Iraq. Try and get it.

Bush will be remembered as one of the worst, if not THE WORST, president in our nation's history. Years from now, people will wonder aloud how they fell for his deceit, just like post-n**i Germany did. But by then it will be too late.

Go ahead, and support a party that lies, cheats, divides, rejects accountability, and values the protection of one of its own -- a pedophile -- over the safety of our children. Be very proud of that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1183 Consumer Suggestion

Yeah, Let's let A CANADIAN Tell Us What's Right

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Anyone who lets someone from a foreign country tell us what the right thing to do is nute. Why would anyone allow a Canadian who is making unproven and unfounded accuasations tell us how to vote should probably not vote at all.
This moron thinks he is such an expert and claims thath he is all knowing and has nothing to substantiate his remarks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1182 Consumer Comment

Americans don't get fooled again! These voting machines have no checks on them, no paper trail, easily changeable results, open to viruses.

AUTHOR: Jim - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Now it is your turn to Vote his "Money Supply" away!

Stolen Elections. The 911 Conn. The War in Iraq. ................Afghanistan.


Americans don't get fooled again! These voting machines have no checks on them, no paper trail, easily changeable results, open to viruses. It is a conn that already got Bush twice into the President's chair! If that was all, you might just have the right to be a "little upset"!

Yet 911 was a total setup & can be seen for what it was & is in this MOVIE:

9/11 Mysteries (video)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003

The War in Iraq is a "total failure" even if there was a good reason for going in (in the first place) which there wasn't! So Saddam was a bad man? What right does the USA have to decide what Countries Leaders are good or bad, & then simply invade who they want & set up a Government for them?

It might not even be as bad, if your own Administration was not a "total lie" from the inception of it, to what it has done since stealing power. What you need to do is to clean your own house before you start cleaning others.

Afghanistan is worse in a lot of ways. Simply because this Administration has even been able to conn NATO which loses it's creditability now in the World because of these obvious lies.

All over the World people have woken up to see the truth for what it is. It is now time for the American People to put a stop to this!

My advise would be to vote "anti Incumbent" Democrat or Republican... simply clean house! Whoever is running as an incumbent , if they were smart enough not to fall for this crap you have all been fed, they still did nothing about it! They allowed you to be lied to & they allowed this Administration to get away with things that are "Illegal, Immoral & Unjust"!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1181 Consumer Suggestion

Typical

AUTHOR: Brian - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 07, 2006

Typical for a liberal to put anti Bush rhetoric on a site that has nothing to do with politics. Thank you for turning a site that is supposed to help consumer into your little blog to show your ignorance. You are the reason Bush was elected for a second term.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1180 Consumer Comment

Lets get to the REAL issue on Bush

AUTHOR: Cecilia - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 23, 2006

I don't criticize anyone for being republicans or democrats or independents. That is your right as an American citizen. But oil is one problem we do have today, now that gas prices are falling to a great price we have to say ?why now?? well the house is in some need of serious votes? they need all the brownie points they can get right now.

This is off the subject but needs to be rendered. Our oil is a problem, but another problem is the Leader of our country. I have researched the researchers and 9/11 was a total inside job?. Now here our boys are over their fighting and being killed over the politician's greedy pockets?. He is not a dictator. Yet. He would love to own this world. In my opinion, if it won't benefit him, then he doesn't even try. He isn't far from a Hitler. Now if they actually change our constitution like they are trying to do now to get Schwarzenegger in the presidency, then we have a huge problem? not to mention that the bush family ancestors worked for the n**i's so did Arnolds. People are going to open their eyes one day and see the wrong we are going through and wonder why it went as far as it did. Wake up America? we have to stand up to keep this a free country, a country I love and believe in. This country isn't made to be controlled by anyone but the American people, that is why we vote. I would never vote for Bush or his followers again? If given the chance he would take over the world?

Look online for yourself, research it all? Alex Jones 9/11 police states, Loose change? these men have done their research and prove it all to you. I am not wrong about this? you need the facts and you need to keep an open mind on what is really going on in our country.

www.infowars.com they will give you facts. ( Clinton might have been a womanizer but that is between his wife and him, Nobody talks about the affair that Bush senior had, who cares about that? Clinton was a great president, with heart and character)!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1179 Consumer Comment

Just remember this...

AUTHOR: Todd - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 21, 2006

I quickly breezed through these posts and have a few things to add..

Everyone who blames Bush for the current state of affairs had better get their heads out of their collective posteriors.

When 9/11 happened, Bush was in office only 8 months. Clinton was in for 8 YEARS and didn't do anything to stop bin Laden. If 'Pretty Boy' Al would have been elected, we probably wouldn't have even gone to the middle east and guess what...where do you think all of those terrorists would be...RIGHT HERE blowing this country to pieces!

We are in Iraq right now to get democracy firmly planted because militant Islam is on the rise and it ain't slowin' down for nuttin'! If we don't get a foothold now, you can be assured that one day soon, radical Islam will take over the entire Muslim world and then they are coming for us.

Look at the Iraq war as a summer picnic in your backyard. The US is the picnic table w/ the food on it and the bugs are the terrorists. If you put a bug zapper far away from the picnic table, you keep the bugs away, hence, the war keeping the wacko terrorists over there instead of here. Yes, we've lost a lot of soldiers, but if it were happening here, you'd be losing a whole lot more. And don't blame the war to get oil...have we taken any yet...no.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1178 Consumer Suggestion

Simple Terms

AUTHOR: R - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

I am hoping that one day all this crap goes away. Think in these terms. 9/11 happens regardless of who won in 2000. There are religious zealots out there regardless of who won in 2000. They would still kill you regardless of who won in 2000. This group of people will not rest until they feel they have "won". The problem...they can never "win" so do we deal with this prehistoric behavior forever. Come on people, it is as simple as cheering for your team or the other.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1177 Consumer Suggestion

Simple Terms

AUTHOR: R - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

I am hoping that one day all this crap goes away. Think in these terms. 9/11 happens regardless of who won in 2000. There are religious zealots out there regardless of who won in 2000. They would still kill you regardless of who won in 2000. This group of people will not rest until they feel they have "won". The problem...they can never "win" so do we deal with this prehistoric behavior forever. Come on people, it is as simple as cheering for your team or the other.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1176 Consumer Suggestion

Simple Terms

AUTHOR: R - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

I am hoping that one day all this crap goes away. Think in these terms. 9/11 happens regardless of who won in 2000. There are religious zealots out there regardless of who won in 2000. They would still kill you regardless of who won in 2000. This group of people will not rest until they feel they have "won". The problem...they can never "win" so do we deal with this prehistoric behavior forever. Come on people, it is as simple as cheering for your team or the other.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1175 Consumer Comment

To Chip

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

You say that you were not name calling? What is saying that supporters of Bush live in a trailer and lack the skills in independent thinking? Why don't you just call the stupid?????? You noit only will admit where your from and who you really are you are also a bold face LIAR.....

You refuse to respond to the fact that the democrats admitted in the media that they do not and will not support any president or republican program as long as Bush is in office because they hate him so much. Are you really going to tell me that this is good for the country? They lied and said that social security is not a problem and they refused to come up with a solution or sit down and hammer out an agreement. The fact that there is a majoority republican is not enough if all the democrats unify there are not enough votes to pass anything.

Pull yuour head out of the ground and tell us your position in the DNC since you won't admit who you are and where you are from. All you are doing is spewing Uncle Howard's rhetoric....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1174 Consumer Comment

To Chip

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

You say that you were not name calling? What is saying that supporters of Bush live in a trailer and lack the skills in independent thinking? Why don't you just call the stupid?????? You noit only will admit where your from and who you really are you are also a bold face LIAR.....

You refuse to respond to the fact that the democrats admitted in the media that they do not and will not support any president or republican program as long as Bush is in office because they hate him so much. Are you really going to tell me that this is good for the country? They lied and said that social security is not a problem and they refused to come up with a solution or sit down and hammer out an agreement. The fact that there is a majoority republican is not enough if all the democrats unify there are not enough votes to pass anything.

Pull yuour head out of the ground and tell us your position in the DNC since you won't admit who you are and where you are from. All you are doing is spewing Uncle Howard's rhetoric....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1173 Consumer Comment

To Chip

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

You say that you were not name calling? What is saying that supporters of Bush live in a trailer and lack the skills in independent thinking? Why don't you just call the stupid?????? You noit only will admit where your from and who you really are you are also a bold face LIAR.....

You refuse to respond to the fact that the democrats admitted in the media that they do not and will not support any president or republican program as long as Bush is in office because they hate him so much. Are you really going to tell me that this is good for the country? They lied and said that social security is not a problem and they refused to come up with a solution or sit down and hammer out an agreement. The fact that there is a majoority republican is not enough if all the democrats unify there are not enough votes to pass anything.

Pull yuour head out of the ground and tell us your position in the DNC since you won't admit who you are and where you are from. All you are doing is spewing Uncle Howard's rhetoric....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1172 Consumer Comment

To Chip

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 07, 2006

You say that you were not name calling? What is saying that supporters of Bush live in a trailer and lack the skills in independent thinking? Why don't you just call the stupid?????? You noit only will admit where your from and who you really are you are also a bold face LIAR.....

You refuse to respond to the fact that the democrats admitted in the media that they do not and will not support any president or republican program as long as Bush is in office because they hate him so much. Are you really going to tell me that this is good for the country? They lied and said that social security is not a problem and they refused to come up with a solution or sit down and hammer out an agreement. The fact that there is a majoority republican is not enough if all the democrats unify there are not enough votes to pass anything.

Pull yuour head out of the ground and tell us your position in the DNC since you won't admit who you are and where you are from. All you are doing is spewing Uncle Howard's rhetoric....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1171 Consumer Comment

You people are way too passionate about things you have no control over.

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Form your own opinions instead of letting someone manipulate your thoughts by telling one side of a story. I was watching the news a while back and saw a reporter doing the news from a canoe. She was covering a storm (dont remember if it was Katrina) and coming off like it was the end of the world. A few seconds later some guys walked behind her and the water was maybe 2 inches deep. Cant even believe what you see on the news much less what they tell you. Dem or Rep, dont form an opinion without research. We all know politicians lie. Always have, always will. Cant control it. Political affiliation aside, you're an idiot if you let someone form your opinions. I'm not necessarily a Bush supporter yet I think Michael Moore is one of the biggest dumbass hipocrites I've ever seen. Tries to force feed you his bullshit like all liberals. Pray to your god, pay your bills and take a nap.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1170 Consumer Comment

James, keep posting your thoughts!

AUTHOR: Private - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

James,

I love your post and the photos, keep up the good work.

Yes, I am aware that there are people who say that the Rip-Off site is for services and companies. However, more and more people are posting political protest letters on this site.

If you think about it, complaining about the US Federal Government is just like posting complaints about Dead-Beat Fathers, Adulterers, or Ex-Spouses. Maybe this is why Ed the Editor of this site has categories under Federal Government.

If you would like to read what I posted search for MSNBC on this site or you can just search msnbc ripoff.

In closing: Most US Citizens do not know that we can petition our government and file a grievance that is our right and the problem is the government no longer listens to us.

Heck it is not like Bush and the Republicans won by a huge landslide and they don't have a mandate from us voters!

Keep posting your letters James and don't listen to people like Charles. Just keep in mind that Big Brother is watching and watch out for the IT Wally's of this world!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1169 Consumer Comment

just ignore the bush fans

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Of course bush fans are going to say this, I suggest we ignore them but they refuse to be ignored we can discuss anything regardless if it is for business!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1168 Consumer Comment

**Not a Political Forum - Products and Services ONLY!

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

RipoffReport.com is meant to be for products and services, not politics! I suggest taking these discussions to one of hundreds of politics boards on the internet, or calling in to cable TV shows!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1167 Consumer Comment

No WMD's in Iraq? How WRONG you Left-Wingers are

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

WASHINGTON ? The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

source - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

This war has never been about OIL.That is the response the foolish give.Get your facts straight. As in other wars, this war is also about defeating the BAD people who want to hurt/kill the good people.If you are against this war then you should move to another country and show your ignorance there rather than here. LORD it is sad that ignorant people such as those who oppose this war are actually walking among us in this free society of ours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1166 Consumer Comment

To John in White, Ga.

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 06, 2006

I didn't call anyone names. I was speaking to two things.

First and foremost, as Wendy well-articulated, Americans have GOT TO STOP accepting what is being spoon-fed to them. Just because Bush says something, or you read something in a 'national magazine,' doesn't mean it's true. Where is everyone's ability to THINK CRITICALLY? When did this nation become so LAZY and COMPLACENT? When are people going to relaize that they can be DUPED if they allow it? Look at what's going on around you...I don't care what the hell Bush says. Are your finances any better than they were 9 years ago? Is the world safer than it was 9 years ago? Is America safer than it was 9 years ago? Are the government's finances any better? How about inflation? Education? Social Security? Pensions? Healthcare costs? All of these issues -- IMPORTANT issues facing the nation -- are swept under the rug while the mornon-in-chief 1) attacks 2 sovereign nations that were NO THREAT to the US (but now are bigger terrorist training grounds than ever before, funded by poppy production in Afghanistan that has exploded in the last 3 years), spends BILLIONS of DOLLARS that could've been spent on Social Security reform, education, or other things to benefit the American people, and, lastly, let's not forget the LOSS OF LIFE and the destruction of the ENVIRONMENT as a result of these senseless wars while -- and most important -- OSAMA (the REAL terrorist) roams freely...plotting and planning his next stunt; and 2) brings such irrelevant issues as GAY MARRIAGE and FLAG BURNING before the American people.

John -- I don't care what you've read. Look at what the hell is going on around you. The problem with Americans today is that they are too lazy to do their own DUE DILIGENCE. They are fine with being told what to do and what to think. This is my point. Bush knows this. He uses this psychology.

On the subject of psychology, the other thing I am speaking about is that Bush supporters seem to me to subscribe to the theory of "If I support 'em, I'll BECOME them." Bush wants people to think that if they support him, they'll become members of the club...the fraternity. Sadly, it will not ever happen. The only members of the club are the few that have already been admitted.

I am not name-calling. I'm stating an opinion that, if researched, could verry well be proven to be a fact.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1165 Consumer Comment

STOP, LOOK & LISTEN

AUTHOR: Wendy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 05, 2006

I'm in a state of "shock & awe" reading through these posts. Was it Stalin or Lenin who said, "We will destroy you from within." We're not meant to agree on everything. But, aren't we even civilized enough to try to see the other perspective, or are we so TV-trained that we're incapable of forming an original thought of our own unless we're spoon-fed the values, principles, and "facts" that we will choose to say are the absolute reality of any given situation? No wonder we are outraged when we encounter individuals who disagree with us. They are wrong; ignorant, because we know the truth.

And, as evidenced in these postings,this is enough to reduce us into a rage of of name-calling, breast-beating authorial assault. What vocabularies we have! Challenge yourselves for the sake of this country, of which I am sure we are all proud, no matter how we choose to express it. Try to converse without using the words liberal, conservative, left, right, Democrat, Republican and many of the other words that were used so loosely that only bring on negativity. What can possibly be gained by that? If this country does not get out of the muck and mire of blaming and lying, pointing the finger at each other.

The blame game has got to stop, not only in government, but in corporations, multi-media, small business, families, and most of importantly, the individual. If we do not take responsibility for ourselves and start working TOGETHER for positive improvements for our nation, I'm afraid we are quite capable of sabotaging our efforts much as the Romans did. If you have ever read "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," it is frightening to watch our nation parallel the same decline. Read it.

And please, when it comes to these political issues, like they used to teach in Debate. thoroughly research the other point of view before coming to the table. There is nothing worse than seeing someone clamor on about something they obviously know nothing about;it's sad. Remember the quote: It's better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and confirm it. Personally, I want the great, proud, honest America of integrity that the world used to admire, not despise. We can do it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1164 Consumer Comment

FACTS

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 04, 2006

To the worthless piece of trash who stopped his behavior to post the oft repeated and long time ago proven to be a lie or at at least at best a half truth.

Prescott Bush was involved with a business that made some dealings with the Nazis long before WW2 and long after he was connected to it.

The terror loving democratics hero Ted Killer Kennedy's FATHER AND BROTHERS are heavily responsible for us staying out of WW2 until 1941 because destroying the Jews helped their businesses.

There's 2 sides in this.

Bush and the US

Or

Democrats and Bin Laden

And it's the democrats and their appeasement policies that have made it so.

You either hate Bush and America or hate Bin Laden and Al Queda. There is no choice. The democrats have made it clear if they get power they will allow Bin Laden to do whatever he wants just like Clinton did from 92-00.

If you diagree with Bush it's one thing but you hate spewing dems are the ones who make it clear the choice is between Bush and Bin Laden. Not Bush and Dems. But Bush and Bin Laden.

If the dems win:

Get ready to go for a fitting for your burqa women! The democrats will let the islamic scum take over our country.

Well democrats like to women so the men must be happy that if the dems take over then that will be considered honorable. Heck they installed a sexual predator in the WH from 92-00.

Disagreement is one thing. Hate spewing is another.

Remember everyone the democrats are getting lots of money from the ACLU who only spends time deciding which to give more support to Al Queda or Nambla.

Since liberal men are all wimpy limp wristed whiny brats no wonder they hate Bush. They hate women so they would hate a man with a name like that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1163 Consumer Comment

For you Bush supporters

AUTHOR: Joustin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 03, 2006

George Bush has started an ill-timed and disastrous war under false pretenses by lying to the American people and to the Congress; he has run a budget surplus into a severe deficit; he has consistently and unconscionably favored the wealthy and corporations over the rights and needs of the population; he has destroyed trust and confidence in, and good will toward, the United States around the globe; he has ignored global warming, to the world's detriment; he has wantonly broken our treaty obligations; he has condoned torture of prisoners; he has attempted to create a theocracy in the United States; he has appointed incompetent cronies to positions of vital national importance.

Now, would one of you Bush supporters please give him a blow job so we can impeach him?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1162 Consumer Suggestion

Answer some Questions, Chip

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 01, 2006

The opposition to George Bush admitted in a national magazine tha the only reason they block any move the repuublicans try is because they hate them. They have admitted that they would not come to a table and negotiote a solution tot the Social Security issue because they HATE Republicans and even though they admmit there is a problem they refuse to try to fix it.

Are these the people that you want to run this country? It came out recently that this so called outing of the CIA agent was done by her own husband and a writer. What so you all say??/ FREE PASS......

Do you really believe that the democrats are going to do this country any better.

Please notice that I am refraining from calling you any names like you so easily call people who don't agree with you. You probably are some young kid who doesn't know what you are talking about because you are not giving where you really are from because someone may recognize you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1161 Consumer Comment

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 31, 2006

Amen, Cheryl...

I was not going to jump into this, but alas...

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis. We know that you are just a tool for Bush and his merry men to robotically vomit their talking points which, anyone with a half-way respectable IQ knows, are lies. We know that life has been unkind to you, that you live in a trailer, that you lack an education, that you were picked on as a kid, are easy to scare, and that by supporting "kick your a*s" Bush you are in some way getting back at all the people whom you feel wronged or otherwise oppressed you. We also know that you think all Republicans are wealthy and powerful, and that by supporting them, people will think you are too (your trailer is just a temporary dwelling while your estate is being renovated, right?), or that, magically, you will actually become wealthy and powerful. When Bush leaves office, and a respectable America finally emerges, you will know that you willingly allowed Bush to rape and use you, like a cheap w***e, and that he never cared about you or your interests. And, your self-esteem will tank to new lows when you realize how easily duped you were into believing Bush's deceit.

I am just as American as anyone else. There is nowhere else on this planet I would rather live. Not buying the bullsh*t Bush has been selling does not make me a traitor. It just means that I'm smart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1160 Consumer Comment

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 31, 2006

Amen, Cheryl...

I was not going to jump into this, but alas...

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis. We know that you are just a tool for Bush and his merry men to robotically vomit their talking points which, anyone with a half-way respectable IQ knows, are lies. We know that life has been unkind to you, that you live in a trailer, that you lack an education, that you were picked on as a kid, are easy to scare, and that by supporting "kick your a*s" Bush you are in some way getting back at all the people whom you feel wronged or otherwise oppressed you. We also know that you think all Republicans are wealthy and powerful, and that by supporting them, people will think you are too (your trailer is just a temporary dwelling while your estate is being renovated, right?), or that, magically, you will actually become wealthy and powerful. When Bush leaves office, and a respectable America finally emerges, you will know that you willingly allowed Bush to rape and use you, like a cheap w***e, and that he never cared about you or your interests. And, your self-esteem will tank to new lows when you realize how easily duped you were into believing Bush's deceit.

I am just as American as anyone else. There is nowhere else on this planet I would rather live. Not buying the bullsh*t Bush has been selling does not make me a traitor. It just means that I'm smart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1159 Consumer Comment

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 31, 2006

Amen, Cheryl...

I was not going to jump into this, but alas...

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis. We know that you are just a tool for Bush and his merry men to robotically vomit their talking points which, anyone with a half-way respectable IQ knows, are lies. We know that life has been unkind to you, that you live in a trailer, that you lack an education, that you were picked on as a kid, are easy to scare, and that by supporting "kick your a*s" Bush you are in some way getting back at all the people whom you feel wronged or otherwise oppressed you. We also know that you think all Republicans are wealthy and powerful, and that by supporting them, people will think you are too (your trailer is just a temporary dwelling while your estate is being renovated, right?), or that, magically, you will actually become wealthy and powerful. When Bush leaves office, and a respectable America finally emerges, you will know that you willingly allowed Bush to rape and use you, like a cheap w***e, and that he never cared about you or your interests. And, your self-esteem will tank to new lows when you realize how easily duped you were into believing Bush's deceit.

I am just as American as anyone else. There is nowhere else on this planet I would rather live. Not buying the bullsh*t Bush has been selling does not make me a traitor. It just means that I'm smart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1158 Consumer Comment

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis.

AUTHOR: Chip - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 31, 2006

Amen, Cheryl...

I was not going to jump into this, but alas...

To those who support Bush: We know you lack the skills of independent thinking and critical analysis. We know that you are just a tool for Bush and his merry men to robotically vomit their talking points which, anyone with a half-way respectable IQ knows, are lies. We know that life has been unkind to you, that you live in a trailer, that you lack an education, that you were picked on as a kid, are easy to scare, and that by supporting "kick your a*s" Bush you are in some way getting back at all the people whom you feel wronged or otherwise oppressed you. We also know that you think all Republicans are wealthy and powerful, and that by supporting them, people will think you are too (your trailer is just a temporary dwelling while your estate is being renovated, right?), or that, magically, you will actually become wealthy and powerful. When Bush leaves office, and a respectable America finally emerges, you will know that you willingly allowed Bush to rape and use you, like a cheap w***e, and that he never cared about you or your interests. And, your self-esteem will tank to new lows when you realize how easily duped you were into believing Bush's deceit.

I am just as American as anyone else. There is nowhere else on this planet I would rather live. Not buying the bullsh*t Bush has been selling does not make me a traitor. It just means that I'm smart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1157 Consumer Comment

Bush's Family Wealth Came From the n**i Regime

AUTHOR: Cheryl - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 30, 2006

It's all documented that Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush's wealth came from Hitler's n**i regime, through a company similar to Halliburton in the United States today called Farber.

The Bush's initial wealth came by being traitor's to America. The Bush's are an evil, dark, secret society family who are deliberately trying to destroy America under these props of terrorism they manufactuer in order through a shadow government.

There is a hidden arm, a few very evil people high up in American government who are manipulating things behind the scenes. Bush is one of their puppets. They have turned our country into a huge debtor nation in a matter of 6 years, gotten us into a never ending war with Iraq that they are profitting from through Haliburton no bid contracts in the billions.

For those Americans who still cling to Bush as a good man, you are truly poisonous vines, choking the life out of our culture. In denial, you are as evil as those people in n**i Germany who stood by Hitler, only you are more evil because Hitler forced people to follow him. You prove yourselves as the biggest idiots of the world by supporting this war criminal President. You can't think for yourselves as your skulls were hallowed out and emptied a long time ago. Now you are nothing but conduits for a corrupt, criminal government. That's what the n**i's wanted in their citizens, and that is what you people have become who still support this criminal President and his lying, corrupt regime.

Anyone who supports Bush at this point in history is an American retard, or a greedy business person who wishes to profit somehow from his corrupt, war criminal administration.

As for stealing the election - true. However, I must say that JFK's father had his son elected with his money that made the difference in a tight race with Nixon. JFK's father stole the 1961 election with his cash and influence.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1156 Consumer Comment

A Democrat Tells the Truth _

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Nancy Pelosi in a Time Interview finally is admitting the truth. As the leading democrat in the House she insists all the Democrats strictly vote on Party lines and never compromise or work with Republicans. She admits that they were so against the president that they refused to admit the plan was in trouble because that is what the president said. In other words, they put at risk the future of all of us to score a few political points.

Do you democrats really want leaders that refuse to listen to the people or do anything that would be good for America because it may mean they agree with the Republicans? Are these really the people that you want in office? If a Democrat votes against party line they will then get the wrath of Nancy Pelosi..........

Wake up democrats and vote in leaders that will follow the will of the American People and not for their own political gain.......

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1155 Consumer Comment

Bush needs to be destroyed!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, July 19, 2006

To All Poor and Middle Class People:

Bush needs to be stripped of ALL power and be made to walk naked in the streets of an American City so ALL world people see him as the weak pathetic p***y he is. I dare Bush to face a real crisis like John Fitzgerald Kennedy did. Both Bush's are a slap in the face of JFK. I admire John Kennedy as he was a strong man and so was his brother Bobby! The USA Gov't also saw they were powerful and than destroyed them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1154 Consumer Comment

Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, July 17, 2006

Vera,

Even though I promised a review of your "facts", I would have been content to let the whole affair blow over, as the thread seemed to be returning to its original topic. But you and Ben seem to be intent on making it your own little mutual hate zone. Even after reading your ridiculous screed of 6/28, "Finally got a free moment to get on....", I figured what the heck, after my posting, you deserve the last word. But here you are, two weeks later, during which I have said nothing to provoke you, attacking me and trying to put words in my mouth. So "B" it. I have no control. You have forced me to respond. From the top, then...

You say you've wanted this BS over for quite some time. Right. All you have to do is STFU and it will all be a bad memory. I assume you haven't raised your daughter to believe she has no responsibility for her reaction to other people calling her names? I zing you and Robert because I would have thought the two of you to have the more mature point of view. Doesn't mean I exclude Ben, I just thought he was the least likely show a positive response. I'm a stone's throw from Martinez, and tomorrow I'll be paying his town a visit. Believe me, if I had a stone to throw and knew where to aim it... LOL!

You accuse me of a "Remarkable demonstration of that infamous Liberal perception on your part; create distance, delete info, present modified version of the truth that completely occludes the original point and misses the mark." Right back at you, V. Your "explanation" is a prime example of your attempts to obfuscate the obvious. Here is what you posted:

"Thomas More Law Center recently filed a lawsuit due to the promotion of Islam in California schools, yet most Americans don't realize this is a nationwide issue. 'Assume you are a Muslim soldier...' a textbook exercise, is being defended by its publisher, Houghton Mifflin. Their textbook 'Across the Centuries' has been purchased by school districts all over the nation, including Jose Padilla/Abdullah Al Muhajir's old elementary school in Chicago, which has been using it for years. Jose Padilla is the American who converted to Islam and was accused of plotting to employ a dirty bomb.

"John Walker Lindh was in elementary school in California when Houghton Mifflin was the ONLY California approved and funded textbook in use. Reports often reflect John's devotion to Islam at the age of 16, but the Associated Press reported in Dec. of 2001 that by the age of 15 John Walker was already patterning his life after the Qu'ran, making decisions based upon the dictates of Islam, showing his interest developed prior to his high school years. What precipitated his choices? Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam to young impressionable minds?"

This is the kind of intellectually dishonest crap NewsMax writers spew on a daily basis. Assuming the facts are true (I have no way of proving or disproving, for instance, that Padilla's school EVER used the textbook), then technically each individual sentence is true. However, as Robert is fond of saying, words mean something, and the way these sentences are strung together is a sham. The mention of Padilla's elementary school using the textbook is obviously a disingenuous attempt to imply his terrorist activities were linked to his having studied that textbook. Otherwise, why even mention him in connection with it?

The second paragraph tells us Lindh was in elementary school when "Houghton Mifflin", not necessarily "Centuries", was the only textbook in use. Unlikely, as it is only a two-year course, and irrelevant because it was approved for Jr. High/Middle School, not elementary. The obvious question, did he actually ever use the textbook, remains unanswered. Though it does not CLAIM Lindh was influenced by the textbook, the last sentence further implies it, "Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam...?" The answer to both these questions is probably no, because Lindh himself, his parents, and close friends have all said his first exposure to Islam was his interest in a film about Malcolm X.

The worst is the ugly underbelly these arguments expose. Promoting the irrational fear that our schools are turning our children into terrorists, and the thinly veiled religious discrimination inherent in the idea that exposure to Islam leads to terrorism. The truth is that even if this textbook were responsible for Lindh's interest in Islam, in over ten years of this textbook's use in the CA schools, we would have but one instance where it influenced a future terrorist, if you can, indeed really call Lindh a terrorist. Your arguments sound just like the arguments the anti-gun people spout, they at least have some statistics to back up their claims.

In that same post, you made the absurd statement, "Clinton's signature of "Religious expression in public school" paved the way to secure finances for other religious "education" aka proselytizing." In the first place, this wasn't something Clinton "signed", he directed that it be checked for accuracy, published, and distributed to school administrators. It is a summary of court decisions regarding "separation" issues that apply to public schools, nothing more. I can see why you and your "sources" would like to discredit it, though; it belies most of the victimization statements you cling to. "Can't wear a cross to school," "Can't pray in school," "Can't read the bible in school," "Better not even MENTION the name of Jesus in class," all exposed as hysterical fabrication by this document.

It is laughable, really, that you and your ilk scream bloody murder whenever anyone brings up the "separation of church and state," but then demand that principle be applied, and in spades, whenever the government does something you don't like. Get over it! Religion is an important part of cultural history, and it is important that students learn about it. If you don't like it, tell your local school boards, but by your own interpretation of the Constitution, you have no say, and no right to dictate, whatever the people in California want to teach their children.

As for "Liberal Spin" in the Padilla case, none is needed, the important facts speak for themselves. The government's case against him gives a whole new meaning to the term revolving charge account. He is a US citizen who has been stripped of his 5th and 6th amendment rights by a President who holds himself to be above the law and beyond the constitution. What more needs to be said?

> Funny thing is, "B.", you're gonna swear this never happened? Everyone else is hallucinating but you and Bennie?

Nice try. Talk about distortion. I'm not going to swear to anything. I'm not the one spreading fairy tales and presenting them as fact. That would fall squarely in your court, and your fellow minions of fear and intolerance. My position all along has been that we don't have enough facts to know what happened. I lend more credence to the opposite camp, because I question the motivation of the participants, not because there are any overwhelming facts. The only thing we KNOW is that the parents of 3 children are making extreme claims that a teacher tried to indoctrinate their kids into Islam, and that those claims are refuted by the teacher, the school, and the state of California. I'm sorry you can't distinguish the difference between rhetoric and fact, and that you would rather blindly parrot the lies of those who agree with you than seek the truth. But your desperate belief in these fairy tales does not make them any more real, and their are no FACTS to back up those claims. You ask why the lawsuits. I'd say its as politically motivated as the lawsuit to take the words "under God" out of the pledge, which seems to be the "few words" you have chosen to portray as the "opposition's agenda", since you mention them just about every time you decide to slam the "liberals".

> And just so we get the facts straight:
>
>Saying "Under God" in the Pledge is religious indoctrination being "forced" on students, and a CLEAR violation of separation of Church and State.
>
>But saying "allahu ackbar" ("god is great") and "Allah has power over all things", while learning the Five Pillars and being instructed that "The Kaaba, 'originally built by Adam, was later rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ismail.' " (That is Islamic belief, not verifiable history.), is NOT proselytization.
>
>Right. Gotcha.

And just so we get the facts straight, I have never said anything to indicate that I favor either the position that "under God" is religious indoctrination, or the position that real religious indoctrination in the schools is OK. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm as big an idiot in the opposite direction.

The fact that your supposed teaching of the Kaaba story is not verifiable history completely misses the point, This is Social Studies, not Verifiable History 101. The whole point is to learn what the different cultures believed and what effects those beliefs had on their own and other cultures, not to validate or impugn the veracity of those beliefs.

Up to your knees? Vera, its been over your head for months. And referring to me as the "Self-imposed moderator of all that's fair on ROR" is really rich coming from you. Check your own hi-beams before flashing your lights at another.

As to your closing salvo on Clinton, as usual another cheap shot. Maybe I can put this particular one to rest for good. Probably not, but I'll at least set the record straight for a moment. You'll probably continue to make the claim, you'll just stop posting the so-called evidence.

Boston Globe - To the Editor, "Bush military role less than glorious" - Nov. 12, 2002 by writer John Hamilton of Dedham.
B>> Another impeccable source, a letter to the editor. I'd definitely accept this one at face value. LOL!

Compared to Bill Clinton's 'military record', George W. Bush looks like Sgt. York!

Here are the facts:

* Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service Number # 3 26 46 228.
B>> I love this one! Like any of us had the choice to refuse the "contractual conditions of registering for the draft." Yuk!

* Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968

* Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969

B>> Oops, missed one. Bill Clinton interviews with Colonel Holmes for a slot in the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas on July 17, 1969. Holmes accepts him into the program, but he will not be able to start until fall of 1970. Holmes notifies the draft board of the arrangement, and with permission from Willard Hawkins, the state Selective Service director, they agree to rescind Clinton's induction notice and change his classification to 1-D.

* Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the military
B>> This is false, the draft board had already agreed to rescind his induction notice.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969 under authority of Colonel E. Holmes. Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.
B>> This is merely the date the board officially processed the paperwork. Clinton did not sign any enlistment papers, in fact he would not be eligible to actually sign up for the program until the fall 1970 term.

* Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.
B>> Again, this was not a 'duty station', and he was not scheduled to begin ROTC until the following year. Obviously the author also does not understand the difference between the Reserves, a military enlistment, and ROTC, a college scholarship program. He seems to believe they are interchangeable.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) 'registrant who has failed to report..remain liable for induction'.
B>> Clinton was reclassified 1-A at his own request. As noted above, his previous induction notice was rescinded. There is no legal theory under which he is at odds with the Military Selective Service Act of 1967, or any other law.

* Bill Clinton's birthdate lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction, is INELIGIBLE!
B>> Again, same crackpot theory, same brick wall. Clinton was not under orders to report for induction.

* Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

* Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive from justice.

* Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977 from Carter.

* Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President.
B>> Total BS. Clinton violated no laws. Further, he obviously could not have been a felon at the time Carter granted amnesty, since he was never indicted, much less convicted of any crime. And as the author's previous bullets show, it wasn't because he was hard to find.

All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws and various books that have been published and have gone unrefuted by Clinton.
B>> And the pitted brain pan of John Hamilton.

Sitting next to me as I write this letter, is a copy of SHEET 8 - SELECTIVE SERVICE CLASSIFICATION RECORD - HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, on which is the name of Bill Clinton and 29 other registrants. Columns 7 & 8 of SHEET 8, are blank for Bill Clinton.
B>> OMG! Can this be true??!!?? Oddly, I have a copy of SHEET 5 - NIMH PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION RECORD - BETHESDA, MARYLAND, on which is the name of John Hamilton and 16 other residents. Columns 4 & 9 of SHEET 5 are blank for John Hamilton.

There is no determination of status for Bill Clinton, for either military or civilian occupation, that would fulfill his obligation as a Selective Service Registrant.
B>> Yes, I daresay 8 years of service as Commander in Chief of the entire US military doesn't even come close to fulfilling that obligation.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1153 Consumer Comment

Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, July 17, 2006

Vera,

Even though I promised a review of your "facts", I would have been content to let the whole affair blow over, as the thread seemed to be returning to its original topic. But you and Ben seem to be intent on making it your own little mutual hate zone. Even after reading your ridiculous screed of 6/28, "Finally got a free moment to get on....", I figured what the heck, after my posting, you deserve the last word. But here you are, two weeks later, during which I have said nothing to provoke you, attacking me and trying to put words in my mouth. So "B" it. I have no control. You have forced me to respond. From the top, then...

You say you've wanted this BS over for quite some time. Right. All you have to do is STFU and it will all be a bad memory. I assume you haven't raised your daughter to believe she has no responsibility for her reaction to other people calling her names? I zing you and Robert because I would have thought the two of you to have the more mature point of view. Doesn't mean I exclude Ben, I just thought he was the least likely show a positive response. I'm a stone's throw from Martinez, and tomorrow I'll be paying his town a visit. Believe me, if I had a stone to throw and knew where to aim it... LOL!

You accuse me of a "Remarkable demonstration of that infamous Liberal perception on your part; create distance, delete info, present modified version of the truth that completely occludes the original point and misses the mark." Right back at you, V. Your "explanation" is a prime example of your attempts to obfuscate the obvious. Here is what you posted:

"Thomas More Law Center recently filed a lawsuit due to the promotion of Islam in California schools, yet most Americans don't realize this is a nationwide issue. 'Assume you are a Muslim soldier...' a textbook exercise, is being defended by its publisher, Houghton Mifflin. Their textbook 'Across the Centuries' has been purchased by school districts all over the nation, including Jose Padilla/Abdullah Al Muhajir's old elementary school in Chicago, which has been using it for years. Jose Padilla is the American who converted to Islam and was accused of plotting to employ a dirty bomb.

"John Walker Lindh was in elementary school in California when Houghton Mifflin was the ONLY California approved and funded textbook in use. Reports often reflect John's devotion to Islam at the age of 16, but the Associated Press reported in Dec. of 2001 that by the age of 15 John Walker was already patterning his life after the Qu'ran, making decisions based upon the dictates of Islam, showing his interest developed prior to his high school years. What precipitated his choices? Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam to young impressionable minds?"

This is the kind of intellectually dishonest crap NewsMax writers spew on a daily basis. Assuming the facts are true (I have no way of proving or disproving, for instance, that Padilla's school EVER used the textbook), then technically each individual sentence is true. However, as Robert is fond of saying, words mean something, and the way these sentences are strung together is a sham. The mention of Padilla's elementary school using the textbook is obviously a disingenuous attempt to imply his terrorist activities were linked to his having studied that textbook. Otherwise, why even mention him in connection with it?

The second paragraph tells us Lindh was in elementary school when "Houghton Mifflin", not necessarily "Centuries", was the only textbook in use. Unlikely, as it is only a two-year course, and irrelevant because it was approved for Jr. High/Middle School, not elementary. The obvious question, did he actually ever use the textbook, remains unanswered. Though it does not CLAIM Lindh was influenced by the textbook, the last sentence further implies it, "Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam...?" The answer to both these questions is probably no, because Lindh himself, his parents, and close friends have all said his first exposure to Islam was his interest in a film about Malcolm X.

The worst is the ugly underbelly these arguments expose. Promoting the irrational fear that our schools are turning our children into terrorists, and the thinly veiled religious discrimination inherent in the idea that exposure to Islam leads to terrorism. The truth is that even if this textbook were responsible for Lindh's interest in Islam, in over ten years of this textbook's use in the CA schools, we would have but one instance where it influenced a future terrorist, if you can, indeed really call Lindh a terrorist. Your arguments sound just like the arguments the anti-gun people spout, they at least have some statistics to back up their claims.

In that same post, you made the absurd statement, "Clinton's signature of "Religious expression in public school" paved the way to secure finances for other religious "education" aka proselytizing." In the first place, this wasn't something Clinton "signed", he directed that it be checked for accuracy, published, and distributed to school administrators. It is a summary of court decisions regarding "separation" issues that apply to public schools, nothing more. I can see why you and your "sources" would like to discredit it, though; it belies most of the victimization statements you cling to. "Can't wear a cross to school," "Can't pray in school," "Can't read the bible in school," "Better not even MENTION the name of Jesus in class," all exposed as hysterical fabrication by this document.

It is laughable, really, that you and your ilk scream bloody murder whenever anyone brings up the "separation of church and state," but then demand that principle be applied, and in spades, whenever the government does something you don't like. Get over it! Religion is an important part of cultural history, and it is important that students learn about it. If you don't like it, tell your local school boards, but by your own interpretation of the Constitution, you have no say, and no right to dictate, whatever the people in California want to teach their children.

As for "Liberal Spin" in the Padilla case, none is needed, the important facts speak for themselves. The government's case against him gives a whole new meaning to the term revolving charge account. He is a US citizen who has been stripped of his 5th and 6th amendment rights by a President who holds himself to be above the law and beyond the constitution. What more needs to be said?

> Funny thing is, "B.", you're gonna swear this never happened? Everyone else is hallucinating but you and Bennie?

Nice try. Talk about distortion. I'm not going to swear to anything. I'm not the one spreading fairy tales and presenting them as fact. That would fall squarely in your court, and your fellow minions of fear and intolerance. My position all along has been that we don't have enough facts to know what happened. I lend more credence to the opposite camp, because I question the motivation of the participants, not because there are any overwhelming facts. The only thing we KNOW is that the parents of 3 children are making extreme claims that a teacher tried to indoctrinate their kids into Islam, and that those claims are refuted by the teacher, the school, and the state of California. I'm sorry you can't distinguish the difference between rhetoric and fact, and that you would rather blindly parrot the lies of those who agree with you than seek the truth. But your desperate belief in these fairy tales does not make them any more real, and their are no FACTS to back up those claims. You ask why the lawsuits. I'd say its as politically motivated as the lawsuit to take the words "under God" out of the pledge, which seems to be the "few words" you have chosen to portray as the "opposition's agenda", since you mention them just about every time you decide to slam the "liberals".

> And just so we get the facts straight:
>
>Saying "Under God" in the Pledge is religious indoctrination being "forced" on students, and a CLEAR violation of separation of Church and State.
>
>But saying "allahu ackbar" ("god is great") and "Allah has power over all things", while learning the Five Pillars and being instructed that "The Kaaba, 'originally built by Adam, was later rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ismail.' " (That is Islamic belief, not verifiable history.), is NOT proselytization.
>
>Right. Gotcha.

And just so we get the facts straight, I have never said anything to indicate that I favor either the position that "under God" is religious indoctrination, or the position that real religious indoctrination in the schools is OK. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm as big an idiot in the opposite direction.

The fact that your supposed teaching of the Kaaba story is not verifiable history completely misses the point, This is Social Studies, not Verifiable History 101. The whole point is to learn what the different cultures believed and what effects those beliefs had on their own and other cultures, not to validate or impugn the veracity of those beliefs.

Up to your knees? Vera, its been over your head for months. And referring to me as the "Self-imposed moderator of all that's fair on ROR" is really rich coming from you. Check your own hi-beams before flashing your lights at another.

As to your closing salvo on Clinton, as usual another cheap shot. Maybe I can put this particular one to rest for good. Probably not, but I'll at least set the record straight for a moment. You'll probably continue to make the claim, you'll just stop posting the so-called evidence.

Boston Globe - To the Editor, "Bush military role less than glorious" - Nov. 12, 2002 by writer John Hamilton of Dedham.
B>> Another impeccable source, a letter to the editor. I'd definitely accept this one at face value. LOL!

Compared to Bill Clinton's 'military record', George W. Bush looks like Sgt. York!

Here are the facts:

* Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service Number # 3 26 46 228.
B>> I love this one! Like any of us had the choice to refuse the "contractual conditions of registering for the draft." Yuk!

* Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968

* Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969

B>> Oops, missed one. Bill Clinton interviews with Colonel Holmes for a slot in the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas on July 17, 1969. Holmes accepts him into the program, but he will not be able to start until fall of 1970. Holmes notifies the draft board of the arrangement, and with permission from Willard Hawkins, the state Selective Service director, they agree to rescind Clinton's induction notice and change his classification to 1-D.

* Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the military
B>> This is false, the draft board had already agreed to rescind his induction notice.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969 under authority of Colonel E. Holmes. Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.
B>> This is merely the date the board officially processed the paperwork. Clinton did not sign any enlistment papers, in fact he would not be eligible to actually sign up for the program until the fall 1970 term.

* Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.
B>> Again, this was not a 'duty station', and he was not scheduled to begin ROTC until the following year. Obviously the author also does not understand the difference between the Reserves, a military enlistment, and ROTC, a college scholarship program. He seems to believe they are interchangeable.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) 'registrant who has failed to report..remain liable for induction'.
B>> Clinton was reclassified 1-A at his own request. As noted above, his previous induction notice was rescinded. There is no legal theory under which he is at odds with the Military Selective Service Act of 1967, or any other law.

* Bill Clinton's birthdate lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction, is INELIGIBLE!
B>> Again, same crackpot theory, same brick wall. Clinton was not under orders to report for induction.

* Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

* Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive from justice.

* Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977 from Carter.

* Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President.
B>> Total BS. Clinton violated no laws. Further, he obviously could not have been a felon at the time Carter granted amnesty, since he was never indicted, much less convicted of any crime. And as the author's previous bullets show, it wasn't because he was hard to find.

All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws and various books that have been published and have gone unrefuted by Clinton.
B>> And the pitted brain pan of John Hamilton.

Sitting next to me as I write this letter, is a copy of SHEET 8 - SELECTIVE SERVICE CLASSIFICATION RECORD - HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, on which is the name of Bill Clinton and 29 other registrants. Columns 7 & 8 of SHEET 8, are blank for Bill Clinton.
B>> OMG! Can this be true??!!?? Oddly, I have a copy of SHEET 5 - NIMH PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION RECORD - BETHESDA, MARYLAND, on which is the name of John Hamilton and 16 other residents. Columns 4 & 9 of SHEET 5 are blank for John Hamilton.

There is no determination of status for Bill Clinton, for either military or civilian occupation, that would fulfill his obligation as a Selective Service Registrant.
B>> Yes, I daresay 8 years of service as Commander in Chief of the entire US military doesn't even come close to fulfilling that obligation.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1152 Consumer Comment

Vera, just STFU and it will all go away

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, July 17, 2006

Vera,

Even though I promised a review of your "facts", I would have been content to let the whole affair blow over, as the thread seemed to be returning to its original topic. But you and Ben seem to be intent on making it your own little mutual hate zone. Even after reading your ridiculous screed of 6/28, "Finally got a free moment to get on....", I figured what the heck, after my posting, you deserve the last word. But here you are, two weeks later, during which I have said nothing to provoke you, attacking me and trying to put words in my mouth. So "B" it. I have no control. You have forced me to respond. From the top, then...

You say you've wanted this BS over for quite some time. Right. All you have to do is STFU and it will all be a bad memory. I assume you haven't raised your daughter to believe she has no responsibility for her reaction to other people calling her names? I zing you and Robert because I would have thought the two of you to have the more mature point of view. Doesn't mean I exclude Ben, I just thought he was the least likely show a positive response. I'm a stone's throw from Martinez, and tomorrow I'll be paying his town a visit. Believe me, if I had a stone to throw and knew where to aim it... LOL!

You accuse me of a "Remarkable demonstration of that infamous Liberal perception on your part; create distance, delete info, present modified version of the truth that completely occludes the original point and misses the mark." Right back at you, V. Your "explanation" is a prime example of your attempts to obfuscate the obvious. Here is what you posted:

"Thomas More Law Center recently filed a lawsuit due to the promotion of Islam in California schools, yet most Americans don't realize this is a nationwide issue. 'Assume you are a Muslim soldier...' a textbook exercise, is being defended by its publisher, Houghton Mifflin. Their textbook 'Across the Centuries' has been purchased by school districts all over the nation, including Jose Padilla/Abdullah Al Muhajir's old elementary school in Chicago, which has been using it for years. Jose Padilla is the American who converted to Islam and was accused of plotting to employ a dirty bomb.

"John Walker Lindh was in elementary school in California when Houghton Mifflin was the ONLY California approved and funded textbook in use. Reports often reflect John's devotion to Islam at the age of 16, but the Associated Press reported in Dec. of 2001 that by the age of 15 John Walker was already patterning his life after the Qu'ran, making decisions based upon the dictates of Islam, showing his interest developed prior to his high school years. What precipitated his choices? Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam to young impressionable minds?"

This is the kind of intellectually dishonest crap NewsMax writers spew on a daily basis. Assuming the facts are true (I have no way of proving or disproving, for instance, that Padilla's school EVER used the textbook), then technically each individual sentence is true. However, as Robert is fond of saying, words mean something, and the way these sentences are strung together is a sham. The mention of Padilla's elementary school using the textbook is obviously a disingenuous attempt to imply his terrorist activities were linked to his having studied that textbook. Otherwise, why even mention him in connection with it?

The second paragraph tells us Lindh was in elementary school when "Houghton Mifflin", not necessarily "Centuries", was the only textbook in use. Unlikely, as it is only a two-year course, and irrelevant because it was approved for Jr. High/Middle School, not elementary. The obvious question, did he actually ever use the textbook, remains unanswered. Though it does not CLAIM Lindh was influenced by the textbook, the last sentence further implies it, "Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam...?" The answer to both these questions is probably no, because Lindh himself, his parents, and close friends have all said his first exposure to Islam was his interest in a film about Malcolm X.

The worst is the ugly underbelly these arguments expose. Promoting the irrational fear that our schools are turning our children into terrorists, and the thinly veiled religious discrimination inherent in the idea that exposure to Islam leads to terrorism. The truth is that even if this textbook were responsible for Lindh's interest in Islam, in over ten years of this textbook's use in the CA schools, we would have but one instance where it influenced a future terrorist, if you can, indeed really call Lindh a terrorist. Your arguments sound just like the arguments the anti-gun people spout, they at least have some statistics to back up their claims.

In that same post, you made the absurd statement, "Clinton's signature of "Religious expression in public school" paved the way to secure finances for other religious "education" aka proselytizing." In the first place, this wasn't something Clinton "signed", he directed that it be checked for accuracy, published, and distributed to school administrators. It is a summary of court decisions regarding "separation" issues that apply to public schools, nothing more. I can see why you and your "sources" would like to discredit it, though; it belies most of the victimization statements you cling to. "Can't wear a cross to school," "Can't pray in school," "Can't read the bible in school," "Better not even MENTION the name of Jesus in class," all exposed as hysterical fabrication by this document.

It is laughable, really, that you and your ilk scream bloody murder whenever anyone brings up the "separation of church and state," but then demand that principle be applied, and in spades, whenever the government does something you don't like. Get over it! Religion is an important part of cultural history, and it is important that students learn about it. If you don't like it, tell your local school boards, but by your own interpretation of the Constitution, you have no say, and no right to dictate, whatever the people in California want to teach their children.

As for "Liberal Spin" in the Padilla case, none is needed, the important facts speak for themselves. The government's case against him gives a whole new meaning to the term revolving charge account. He is a US citizen who has been stripped of his 5th and 6th amendment rights by a President who holds himself to be above the law and beyond the constitution. What more needs to be said?

> Funny thing is, "B.", you're gonna swear this never happened? Everyone else is hallucinating but you and Bennie?

Nice try. Talk about distortion. I'm not going to swear to anything. I'm not the one spreading fairy tales and presenting them as fact. That would fall squarely in your court, and your fellow minions of fear and intolerance. My position all along has been that we don't have enough facts to know what happened. I lend more credence to the opposite camp, because I question the motivation of the participants, not because there are any overwhelming facts. The only thing we KNOW is that the parents of 3 children are making extreme claims that a teacher tried to indoctrinate their kids into Islam, and that those claims are refuted by the teacher, the school, and the state of California. I'm sorry you can't distinguish the difference between rhetoric and fact, and that you would rather blindly parrot the lies of those who agree with you than seek the truth. But your desperate belief in these fairy tales does not make them any more real, and their are no FACTS to back up those claims. You ask why the lawsuits. I'd say its as politically motivated as the lawsuit to take the words "under God" out of the pledge, which seems to be the "few words" you have chosen to portray as the "opposition's agenda", since you mention them just about every time you decide to slam the "liberals".

> And just so we get the facts straight:
>
>Saying "Under God" in the Pledge is religious indoctrination being "forced" on students, and a CLEAR violation of separation of Church and State.
>
>But saying "allahu ackbar" ("god is great") and "Allah has power over all things", while learning the Five Pillars and being instructed that "The Kaaba, 'originally built by Adam, was later rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ismail.' " (That is Islamic belief, not verifiable history.), is NOT proselytization.
>
>Right. Gotcha.

And just so we get the facts straight, I have never said anything to indicate that I favor either the position that "under God" is religious indoctrination, or the position that real religious indoctrination in the schools is OK. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm as big an idiot in the opposite direction.

The fact that your supposed teaching of the Kaaba story is not verifiable history completely misses the point, This is Social Studies, not Verifiable History 101. The whole point is to learn what the different cultures believed and what effects those beliefs had on their own and other cultures, not to validate or impugn the veracity of those beliefs.

Up to your knees? Vera, its been over your head for months. And referring to me as the "Self-imposed moderator of all that's fair on ROR" is really rich coming from you. Check your own hi-beams before flashing your lights at another.

As to your closing salvo on Clinton, as usual another cheap shot. Maybe I can put this particular one to rest for good. Probably not, but I'll at least set the record straight for a moment. You'll probably continue to make the claim, you'll just stop posting the so-called evidence.

Boston Globe - To the Editor, "Bush military role less than glorious" - Nov. 12, 2002 by writer John Hamilton of Dedham.
B>> Another impeccable source, a letter to the editor. I'd definitely accept this one at face value. LOL!

Compared to Bill Clinton's 'military record', George W. Bush looks like Sgt. York!

Here are the facts:

* Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service Number # 3 26 46 228.
B>> I love this one! Like any of us had the choice to refuse the "contractual conditions of registering for the draft." Yuk!

* Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968

* Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969

B>> Oops, missed one. Bill Clinton interviews with Colonel Holmes for a slot in the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas on July 17, 1969. Holmes accepts him into the program, but he will not be able to start until fall of 1970. Holmes notifies the draft board of the arrangement, and with permission from Willard Hawkins, the state Selective Service director, they agree to rescind Clinton's induction notice and change his classification to 1-D.

* Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the military
B>> This is false, the draft board had already agreed to rescind his induction notice.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969 under authority of Colonel E. Holmes. Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.
B>> This is merely the date the board officially processed the paperwork. Clinton did not sign any enlistment papers, in fact he would not be eligible to actually sign up for the program until the fall 1970 term.

* Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.
B>> Again, this was not a 'duty station', and he was not scheduled to begin ROTC until the following year. Obviously the author also does not understand the difference between the Reserves, a military enlistment, and ROTC, a college scholarship program. He seems to believe they are interchangeable.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) 'registrant who has failed to report..remain liable for induction'.
B>> Clinton was reclassified 1-A at his own request. As noted above, his previous induction notice was rescinded. There is no legal theory under which he is at odds with the Military Selective Service Act of 1967, or any other law.

* Bill Clinton's birthdate lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction, is INELIGIBLE!
B>> Again, same crackpot theory, same brick wall. Clinton was not under orders to report for induction.

* Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

* Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive from justice.

* Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977 from Carter.

* Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President.
B>> Total BS. Clinton violated no laws. Further, he obviously could not have been a felon at the time Carter granted amnesty, since he was never indicted, much less convicted of any crime. And as the author's previous bullets show, it wasn't because he was hard to find.

All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws and various books that have been published and have gone unrefuted by Clinton.
B>> And the pitted brain pan of John Hamilton.

Sitting next to me as I write this letter, is a copy of SHEET 8 - SELECTIVE SERVICE CLASSIFICATION RECORD - HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, on which is the name of Bill Clinton and 29 other registrants. Columns 7 & 8 of SHEET 8, are blank for Bill Clinton.
B>> OMG! Can this be true??!!?? Oddly, I have a copy of SHEET 5 - NIMH PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION RECORD - BETHESDA, MARYLAND, on which is the name of John Hamilton and 16 other residents. Columns 4 & 9 of SHEET 5 are blank for John Hamilton.

There is no determination of status for Bill Clinton, for either military or civilian occupation, that would fulfill his obligation as a Selective Service Registrant.
B>> Yes, I daresay 8 years of service as Commander in Chief of the entire US military doesn't even come close to fulfilling that obligation.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1151 Consumer Suggestion

G.W.Bush needs Ousted from the Big House !!!!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Its become Quite Obvious now, that George W Bush and his personel White House Cronies,, need to be Ousted and Removed from the White House !!!!!!

Along with his side Corrupt Side Kicks, d**k (Richard) Cheney, Donald Rumsfield, Condom Rice, and the rest of the Deadbeat Bastards that are sitting on their Lazy 2 faced asses and doing absoletely NOTHING, to acknowledge the current Fuel Crisis in this country and how Big Oil Corporations are gouging us at the pumps !!!

Kinda of haed to tell them to quit doing that, whem, in Fact, the Big Oil Corporations were Heavy Campaign Contributors for the Bush / Cheney Election campaign !!!!

Can't bite the hand that feeds ya,,,, no matter how corrupt they are !!! Well, NOW,, were all seeing just how the great Pay-Back works,,,were paying for it at the Pumps, and this Winter, when those Natural Gas Bills and home heating Oil Bills come rolling in, to the tune of,, $800.00-$1000.00 a Month or more this Winter,,, to have heat in your house,, you'll be having to take out loans just to heat your house!!!!

Meanwhile, those Corrupt Politicians are getting Sweet Deals on their Bills at Reduced Rates,, because,, they're politicians who are helping to make the Big Oil Companies Executives and share holders mega-rich & Wealthy !!!!!

Yes, you the Sleepy Eyed, Lame American, who has forgot how to stand up for yourself and your Rights,,and forgot how to Protest and Demonstrate, are going to be paying dearly at the Pumps for your Fuel & Gasoline, at anywhere from $4.00 to $5.00 dollars a Gallon and beyond !!!! Know Why ??????

Because, we in America have been so Dumbed Down by Corrupt Government and the Big Corrupt Corporations, that try to control the people , we have forgotton that this is a Free Country !!!! Back in the 1970s, during the "FAKE" Oil Crisis, we Protested with signs on our cars and demonstrated outside Capitols, and the Truckers went on strike and blocked Roads and Interstates and we all "Stuck-Together",,,

Then again back in 79,, same thing,, UNITY !!! Remember Farm Aid , and all the Tractors and Combines that rolled across America to the State Capitols and the White House to Protest and Demonstrate,,, thats how Farm Aid came to be, and with help of Willie Nelson !!!!

But NO, I don't expect any of you Red Blooded Americans, to Remember any of that Important stuff,, NO,, but I bet many of you Remember what was on TV the other nite, or, when your next TV show will be on, or the next ball game,,the price of your last 6 pack of Beer,,,

Maybe you'll Rembember this,, there were those who fought for this country in many wars in the past,, and it wasn't so we could end up like this in this shape with a White House and Congress and Pentagon full of Criminals and Crooks,, who decieve th American Public and other Nations around the World !!!

Bet they'd be turning over in their Graves right about now,, if they could see just how we've allowed ourselves to be this Dumbed Down and turned into a Bunch of Candy Asses, that won't stand up to the Corrupt Powers that be !!!!!!! One More thing,,,, 'Just Where is Ol' Osama-Bin Laden" anyway ????? G.W.B ????????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1150 Consumer Comment

James appears to be stricken YET AGAIN with another bout of the Brown-Bottle Flu...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Wow, Jimmy....you can afford a snake? How well do those keep in a 1958 AirStream trailer? Gee, d'you do your shopping off the Sword Gallery on those Television Shop Channels, too?

I didn't know Rent-A-Center sold snakes...or are you having a relative stay for a visit? You couldn't possibly have a snake...snakes don't like the fumes of alcohol, so your presence alone might send the poor beast writhing in misery.

Nahh-nahh...just goofin' on you, Lames...I wouldn't want to insult any reptiles out there, assuming that they'd even stoop to being members of your brood.

Get over yourself.
If you put half the energy into developing interpersonal skills better than "get in my Pinto, b***h" maybe you'd be worth the effort to even address, beyond an insult.

In the meantime, you've tried this "attitude" of yours on other women in other Reports, and were laughed at for the impotent little retard you are. This circumstance must not be all that new to you.

"Do not reply to me again,"

Why? You gonna make another fruitless and futile threat on my life? Or will your "reward" go up to "a thousand dollars and thirty-seven cents"? Yawn. To anyone who takes him up on the offer, be smarter than your Boss: Get It In Cash! ROTFLMAO!

"I just want to have a good little chat with you man to woman!"

Well, I'll let you know if I ever pop up in your area...I'll bring the "woman" (that would be, meself), and make sure to give you advance notice, so's you can find you a man to bring, Kay?

"People who pray and believe in religion only do so because they are afraid of death and want to believe in an after-life."

Uh-hunh. And drinking makes you so very smart and sexy, smoking pot makes you cool, and twenty K a year makes you a wealthy dude, in TupperVille!
Believe what you want about me....just bear in mind that I know you don't mind being wrong about the way things work. ;)

...I almost pity you, for how utterly stupid you are. (And I AM laughing AT you, not WITH you. I am nothing, if not honest.)

And by the way...what's a "wicked with"?
Is that a really awesome side dish? A really bad one?

Mmmmmmduhhhhhhhh....

I'm still curious...are you EVER gonna provide the meat to back up your nonsense claims in your "Report"? Or is the above a fair assessment of your researching skills?

Oh, goody; another spleen with a mouth.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1149 Consumer Comment

"B."-fore you make assumptions, you should consider....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, July 10, 2006

....Heaven knows, I've made this mistake myself, and it's embarrassing enough. I've wanted this bullshit over for quite some time meself.

Some other things I found, but forgot to respond to, originally...

"B." Said:

"Vera is the only one who has continued to provide any "information" in this "debate", and all of it is lunatic far-right fear mongering rhetoric that she can't possibly back up. For example, she states that Jose Padilla's elementary school used this same text, Across the Centuries, in an attempt to indict the text for "producing" a terrorist."

I never mentioned Jose Padilla being a student at the time "Across The Centuries" was given as text in California...he didn't even attend school in California. Remarkable demonstration of that infamous Liberal perception on your part; create distance, delete info, present modified version of the truth that completely occludes the original point and misses the mark.

My comment was:

"Their textbook 'Across the Centuries' has been purchased by school districts all over the nation, including Jose Padilla/Abdullah Al Muhajir's old elementary school in Chicago, which has been using it for years. Jose Padilla is the American who converted to Islam and was accused of plotting to employ a dirty bomb."

See, there's my reference to Jose Padilla, who was ALSO an American born terrorist who embraced Islam. Not an indictment. And yeah, he's a goddamn traitor, too, just like five of those seven dogs who publicly swore to mount a "ground war with America, and kill as many devils as possible". Entrapment, my a*s...they were looking for a member of Al Qaeda when they found the agent. The fact that they couldn't tell the difference between a good actor and the real thing lies with them. The agent was obviously even convincing enough to the Illegal who was helping the cowards out! (And how did the one fella who was in the United States illegally find the other members who aligned themselves with him? Couldn't that, too, be construed as "entrapment"? But that's another issue...and like so many others, I'm sure it's awaiting the Liberal Spin to make American Law Enforcement look as negative as possible.)

I never said that Jose Padilla was a product of California's Schools, or even influenced by "Across the Centuries". See, I'm not accusing this one text book alone, OR California Schools of being the exclusive purveyors of the doctrines of Islam; I simply do not think ANY religion should be passed off, in ANY form. (And that includes "mock spells" and "practice incantations" for Wiccan observances, or cold water dips for the Buddhists, as examples...or even teaching a kid how to lift their hands in prayer or bow in supplication to God, Gods, or Goddesses.) That's something that should be introduced by the parent(s) and at their discretion. Make no mistake...I don't think the Public School system makes a good surrogate, when it comes to matters of the conscience and soul.

I did make a point to also mention...

"John Walker Lindh was in elementary school in California when Houghton Mifflin was the ONLY California approved and funded textbook in use. Reports often reflect John's devotion to Islam at the age of 16, but the Associated Press reported in Dec. of 2001 that by the age of 15 John Walker was already patterning his life after the Qu'ran, making decisions based upon the dictates of Islam, showing his interest developed prior to his high school years. What precipitated his choices? Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam to young impressionable minds?

"You remember John Walker Lindh, don't you? A California dude who loved Hip-Hop, pretended to be black, and was also known as "Jihad Johnny"...originally from Washington, he moved to California in his youth, and became a convert to Islam after having seen that aggrandizing garbage about "Malcolm X". He's also identified as "The American Taliban". (In a big way, he had a lot to do with the world becoming aware of the Across the Century Text.)"

Other than me, it was Robert who also mentioned Jose Padilla, when he Rebuttaled a link provided by Jon of San Diego.

It went something like this:
"Let's see...it refers to the Bush family as ?gangsters', and has a petition to free Jose Padilla, also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir."

I know how Liberals like to take a few words from a statement and make it look like it's the opposition's "agenda".

Funny thing is, "B.", you're gonna swear this never happened? Everyone else is hallucinating but you and Bennie?

Why the law suits? Why the supposed "ruling" by the Ninth Circuit? I hope with all my heart that it gets re-heard, and ruled accordingly, as it SHOULD be. Not just because "I want it that way", but because NO religion belongs in a Public School.

And just so we get the facts straight:

Saying "Under God" in the Pledge is religious indoctrination being "forced" on students, and a CLEAR violation of separation of Church and State.

But saying "allahu ackbar" ("god is great") and "Allah has power over all things", while learning the Five Pillars and being instructed that "The Kaaba, 'originally built by Adam, was later rebuilt by Abraham and his son Ismail.' " (That is Islamic belief, not verifiable history.), is NOT proselytization.

Right. Gotcha.

Y'might wanna wear galoshes?it's getting thick in here from all this Liberal bullshit?.better yet, try waders?it got deeper than my knees long ago.

Oh, and since I've got an extra minute, let's play "Pick the Vic".

Big daddy "B."---Self-imposed moderator of all that's fair on ROR---claims that "Vera needs to stop playing the victim; she's not a child anymore." You should share that sagely wit with Ben, who is the sole reason this quarrel started (and re-started!) in the first place. I had hoped it would have ended after I gave the d**n articles, as Bennie-Poo had once mooed, "Just present the article, Vera! It'd make your case legit!" When he said that, I knew he was lying?and apparently, I was correct to not take him at his word.

I initially responded to Ben with two whole sentences, after he had made various slings at anyone who dares have anything allied with a Christian (or Religious) faith. Neither of these sentences attacked his family, Ben himself, or anything of that nature. Ben's rebuttals were habitually sprinkled with terms like "Zealot" "Right-Wing Religious Nut" "Religious Nut Job?), and such, and for a few weeks I never even made comment to any of it. (Lately, he's taken to accusing Robert, who had openly stated he is atheist?of being a "Religious Nut" in hopes that Robert's non-belief is as fragile as his own. So accusing anyone of "having religion" is apparently a great insult to Ben. So you go ahead, and tell me he's a well-adjusted little acheist, all secure and confident.)

But of course, I'm supposed to remain silent while Ben gets to air his mooing and braying, as long as it agrees with yours. In fact, it was Ben who was first to call my parenting into question, by alleging---with no more knowledge than what he assumes to be correct, as his apparent angst against all things Religious In Nature leads him---that I'd somehow force my Stepsons to go to Church.

But when Robert brings in negative aspects of Ben's personal life, you have to chime up "how very Vera of you".

Yet here we are, and I've never used your moniker as a negative identifier against someone else. And it's not a matter of finding flaw?there is much you and I disagree on. However, I have always tried to make it clear that I have a certain level of respect---as you had shown me same, primarily. What makes now any different than then? I'm just as sick to death of this pathetic argument as you are, I'd wager; but I'm keeping it between those involved, unlike someone who created this whole debacle over a response between two other people by butting in.

Ben hee-haws:

"Sorry John that you have to see this rant. I've tried to avoid Robert for months. He tracks me down on any thread I dare post. I left this thread months ago because of the exact reasons you mention." (Wah! "On any thread I dare post!" Sniffle! Back of hand placed against a furrowed brow as I roll my eyes upward and lean back for dramatic flourish!)

Never mind the fact that it's been exclusively YOU who brings up the whole ?Islam in California Schools? in EVERY circumstance, on EVERY post you go to, right? Or should we just chalk it right up next to how YOU went to a Report on Pat Benatar and singled Robert out, telling him to suck a fat baby's p***s? (Yeah..."avoidance", clearly!)

Man, you sure show your support for homosexuality, calling people "fruits" and insinuating same-sex-acts on men (and against children, no less!) with all the vitriol and hatred of a Klansman talking about blacks. I'm sure the Rainbow League is grateful...keep up the good work. What a tolerant bunch we have! (Yeah, this appears in another post...it's worth it to keep examples of Ben's stupidity in the limelight.)

Gee, where's the "stop playing the victim card" here? Oh, I know! I had suggested that meself a few MONTHS back, but no one needs to listen and obey anyone but the Almighty Liberals, as their presence is the only thing that dictates reason, and is worthy of being obeyed. Is it now the vogue because it's being used against me?

---Another big "neigh":
"It got off the President and our country in general."

And to think! We have you to thank for it. All hail the King of Trolls?bow your head, get down on your kneezes, you're now in the land of the Living Sleazes. Tip your crown, Ben, say howdy to the masses! You're the King of the Liberal Dumb Asses.

How sad, that he can't get more loving attention form the flesh and blood people that surround him at home?but I suspect, that even these have lives they'd just as well not include him as a part of.


Here's something I found about Clinton's military history.

Boston Globe - To the Editor, "Bush military role less than glorious" - Nov. 12, 2002 by writer John Hamilton of Dedham.

Compared to Bill Clinton's 'military record', George W. Bush looks like Sgt. York!

Here are the facts:

* Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service Number # 3 26 46 228.

* Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968

* Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969

* Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the military

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969 under authority of Colonel E. Holmes. Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.

* Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.

* Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) 'registrant who has failed to report..remain liable for induction'.

* Bill Clinton's birthdate lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction, is INELIGIBLE!

* Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

* Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive from justice.

* Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977 from Carter.

* Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President.

All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws and various books that have been published and have gone unrefuted by Clinton.

Sitting next to me as I write this letter, is a copy of SHEET 8 - SELECTIVE SERVICE CLASSIFICATION RECORD - HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSAS, on which is the name of Bill Clinton and 29 other registrants. Columns 7 & 8 of SHEET 8, are blank for Bill Clinton.

There is no determination of status for Bill Clinton, for either military or civilian occupation, that would fulfill his obligation as a Selective Service Registrant.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1148 Consumer Comment

Bush is the Anti-Christ and Vera is the flying NUN!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, July 08, 2006

Readers:

George Walker Bush is a worthless President and drunk who says he doesn't have the authority to put a cap on the oil/gas prices but if he can't even stop companies from gouging(screwing)people than what good is he??? The American President is supposed to be the most powerful person in the world. Today the President is nothing more than a spokesman for big business and government. I will tell you right now that the last real President was John F. Kennedy and look what happend to him, and don't tell me Oswald killed him because that is just non-sense. Kennedy didn't do two things, one he didn't go to WAR, second he didn't listen to big business and governments ways.

Vera baby, as for you my furry little rat I am done wasting my time on your stupid religous a*s so I need to put you in a cage with my pet python so she may put you to sleep for good. Do not reply to me again, I am sick of your religous rantings. People who pray and believe in religion only do so because they are afraid of death and want to believe in an after-life. So without further a do, I bid farewell to Vera as my snake sqeezes the air out of her lungs and slowly eats her whole. Hooray! the wicked with is gone!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1147 Consumer Comment

More.. Invasion of the Vera!...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, July 04, 2006

Vera,

Your outright denial of any facts is just absolutely amazing. One of these days when I have much more time and I am really really freaking bored I will repost links to all the threads both you and Robert have been on spilling this complete fabrication of reality. Your excuse of "the editor wont let me post links" wont work at all since its all going to come from this site.

The constant "oh he started it, continued it, and followed me here!!....rally my christian soldiers!" garbage is so 80's Jerry Falwell its sick!

I shall repeat.....the proof is in the posts.

Who came first, who came last, who attacked who, how they attacked them, what proof they had (if any!), and how they backed up their position in general.

I'm not even going to go into details over each of your bogus points, off the subject rants, and .....complete....outright.....lies.

To do so would be just doing exactly what "B chided" me about. Falling into your same circle of false drivel to avoid ever answering for your comments and statements. I will admit. I do like your "Frankenstien" comment. Its perfect....since you were the Dr. that created this monster in the first place. Or are you going to say that it was I who made the evil Islam in CA schools comment? Bah, I bet you will fall on the old "hes attacking me because I'm a woman thing eh? (hell that was one outta the blue....even for you Vera! Nice smoke you have in your smoke screen machine!)


Sooooo lets get back to reality shall we. Now that this whole Islam in CA schools thing has been trounced....completely. (unless someone...anyone can show something...anything beyond a simple single middleschool....in some BFE part of the state)


Lets take this latest one from Vera......since its BACK (finally!) to Bush, but will most likely bring out the "oooooh they are persecuting we poor....poor..Christians" from her.........


"""I find it especially galling that you and Ben fuss about what a bad thing having a Christian-Based Faith is (and make retarded claims based on a joke, or the fact that our President has mentioned that he prays or that God speaks to him in his heart), but it's okay for a teacher, paid by the Taxes that are supposed to fund a Public School, to teach kids about another religion."""----Vera


I will not speak for "B", but I have never said anything about being against the Christian "faith" or any "faith" for that matter. What I have said is that I am against being forced into, and being judged by.....a faith. And I...am an athiest. Nothing more. YOU twisted it into an attack on Christians only Dr. Vera Von Frankenstien!!

Most importantly.......I am totally against a "Christian-Based-Government". I am against any "RELIGION BASED GOVERNMENT".

Bush has made it clear that he thinks we are a "Christian-Country"....period. Thats my opinion.....PERIOD. I base this on his statments, and his actions. I feel that you think the same way. (regardless of your sex dearest honey bun!)

Your entire comment about Islam in CA schools was just proof of that. Make yourself look like the persecuted one to devert attention from your plans to persecute others.


But sticking to Bush...really....this one comment hits home Dr.Frankenstein......

"""fact that our President has mentioned that he prays or that God speaks to him in his heart""""

Vera, Robert, Whoever...for the billionth time.........

IF YOUR RELIGIOUS....AND YOU FEEL IT MAKES YOU A BETTER PERSON.....MORE POWER TOO YOU.....ITS ....YOUR....BUSINESS.....

BUT DONT FORCE YOUR BUSINESS IN OTHERS PEOPLES FACES IF THEY HAVE NOT, AND ARE NOT, DOING ANY HARM TO YOU OR OTHERS.

The problem with Bush IS NOT that he prays to god, be it Christian or otherwise.

The problem with Bush IS NOT that he feels a god speaks to him "in his heart".

If these make a person feel better about themselves, others, or life in general then I have no problem with it whatsoever.

But not when its forced on others. And especially not when its under some pathetic ruse like "only with faith does one have morals" garbage.

The thing that I find scary about Bush....my opinion......was pointed out so perfectly by former Secretary of State Albright on (silly as it was....but honest!) the Colbert Report from Comedy Central. She mentioned how every single president from Washington to Bush Jr. has mentioned "god" and "faith" as part of their being. None have ever wavered. All were Christian in one form or another.

But only Bush Jr. has ever said repeatedly.......


God WANTED me to be President.


That attitude, and the fundamentalist CHRISTIAN attitude running rampant breaking down our separations between church and state, making it hostile for all other religions and those who choose no religion, or even those with moderate views of the dominant religion.....is what scares me most.

I'm not worried about some measly culture course in any one religion. I'm worried that people wont be able to get ANY culture lesson except those sanctioned by the state. A state run like a near theocracy. With a flat out tyranny of the majority. However slim that majority may be.

But that is happening, and it is "Christianity" that is the "tyranny of the majority". Thats what IS happening in THIS country. Right here in my face. With Bush at point, in the highest office, with the most powerful pickaxe tearing down our balance of equality and tolerance.

So everyone.....please excuse me if I ignore Iraq, Afganistan, Al-Queda, and Osama.

When the world is the way it is, and information can be spread so easily...along with misinformation....It bothers me to know that outright bogus comments like "EEEKK!! ISLAM IN CA SCHOOLS!!!" are made as an attempt at propaganda. Propaganda to incite insecurity when there is NO insecurity.

Stupid things like that start wars. In hearts, minds, and our streets. OUR streets! Not Iraq, Afganistan, or some other BFE part of the world.

Take about 35 Veras, and a handful of Roberts holed up like David Koresh at Waco, let the dimwits at the FBI and ATF forget to kill the coax with the cable internet. A few hours of this BS "save us poor persecuted Christians!!" emails, blog posts etc. And every freaking nutcase Koresh, and Pat Robertson from Ruby Ridge to the local, soon to be bombed, Planned Parenthood clinc will come out of the woodwork!! (thank the powers that be Koresh DIDNT have the internet at the time!! Oklahoma City would have been a wasteland!!)

We have these kinds of attacks on our own soil all the time. Based on what? Fundamentalist CHRISTIANS.

So once again....everyone.....

Please...oh...soo sorry.....if you feel offended that I dont think Iraq was such an important place to go.

And be.

Right now.

Things have been going on long before 9/11 Where innocent lives have been lost. They were not Muslim. They were not from another country. They had/have no oil. (other than the Bush family on some of their Texas holdings)





Shall I get into the 6 million+....

(ESTIMATED!!!...Robert! Dont get into a numbers tizzy and start asking me to show proof how far it is to my local INS office or something stupid along those lines. We all know you have the best smoke machine. No need to keep showing it off.)

...invaders from other countries that are here illegally. Remember...the ones Bush wants to ignore and just let stay.

I'd say that would be second on my list next to this home grown fundamentalist Christain garbage.

So...Vera can you tell me (not like I havent asked before...but you never answer)......

Just what is it, or what combination of things do you think that we non-christian (including non-christians...and non-faith.....well just everyone non-christian should be clear enough!!)heathens are taking away from you?? Or are you just aggrivated that we exist at all?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1146 Consumer Comment

Oh stop Vera.....sheesh!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, July 03, 2006

Vera,

That last post has to be your most pathetic.

You say we dont like your "facts"?

You have shown....NONE!

Then you go on to say I am the only one keeping this "Islam in CA schools alive"?

Get real!

As I have already explained many times...I left....then was hunted down on a Circuit City site by Robert....when I mentioned a little formula just as Robert does to me about who/what/where and used it as an EXAMPLE just like ROBERT did to ME about this Islam thing....ROBERT went off and has not ceased.....THEN YOU SHOWED UP ABOUT IT...ON THE CIRCUIT CITY THREAD!!

Now "B" has stated many times she is no ally of mine. Yet Robert has even gone as far as saying we were the same person at one point. And now your saying shes taking my place??

Once again...GET REAL!

Then on you go abou this "Islam thing" again. When I havent even been here for over a week. And you STILL havent even shown proof. (of course you always say you have....then suddenly changed your story like Robert and said "we cant post links cuz Ed the Editor wont let us....boo h*o!")

Now your going back to your "oh we poor persecuted Christians" thing again!!????

Thats what started it in the first place!....NOT ME!!!

When you pulled out this "oh we poor persecuted Christians" garbage the first time is the same point on this site that you made your outrageous claim of "SEE! they are forcing Islam in California schools" BS to bolster it!!!!!

Go back to worrying about "Islam being forced on our children Vera.

Go back to worrying about gays getting the right to marry.

Let real people in the country with brains worry about the real issues like Iraq, Bush, etc.

Your priorities are obviously all out of wack and completely without anything to back them up.


P.S. I really love that line you made to "B" about not liking your "proof" and "facts". Little hint there Vera, you need to SHOW SOME FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE ANY DECISION ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. Whats your excuse going to be this time? A. I already showed you (which we cant find) or B. Ed wont let me post the link (which everyone else seems able to do)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1145 Consumer Comment

Finally got a free moment to get on....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 28, 2006

So you want to be my chum, eh?

Not particularly. Your "neutrality" appears to be in a strangely constant state of malleability. I don't know what to make of it. Are we like the calico cat and the gingham dog, or would we be fast friends?" A bit of both, I thinkor not.

Here, fishy, I've got a nice spot for you right in the center of the cove.

Nuthin' fishy about this gal; for one, I'm willing to learn from my missteps, but I have to be shown in a solid or provable way. For two, I bathe. Y'want fishy, go to the women's' bath houses at some local beach [shuddering!Maybe you could take a trip to Tupper and James could show you the yummiest ones.]...Lord knows, it's why I wouldn't use em!

Not that I was doing so in that instance, but you would find it utterly backward of me to reach out to my enemy with friendship?

Not anymore than I would suggest one reach out to civility and decency by being nasty and judgmental. But I was more alluding to the fact that you had previously commented to the effect that Ben's comments were "the height of absurdity." However, I did go back and re-read your original comment, and realize that I may have spoken more hastily than I should; I had initially read your post under (what I thought was) a severe time-limit, and didn't take the proper time to process its meaning before I had Rebuttaled.

Now to me, backward would be closing one's eyes to the light of reason, clinging blindly to rapidly sinking fables, and calling this faith. Funny how people's notions about words differ.

Funny how people's admonitions differ, too. I vaguely recall in one post how you suggested that I demonstrate enough compassion, as a person of faith should be ready to "minister" when someone "cries out for the opportunity to witness". Incidentally, I don't call a belief system that's stood for over two thousand years a rapidly sinking fable.

And what makes placing one's reliance on the "current best guess" a more noble practice? You have your gods, and I have mine.

My chides' for Ben's outlandish statements stand.

Well they should.

You make your own share of outlandish statements.

I feel differently, but you're welcome to your critique.

One that you seem particularly fond of lately is the one that Clinton was the only prez to be a pardoned felon, and an exemption was made for him to be the only prez who hasn't served in the military.

Actually, wouldn't that title be better placed on this whole "Muslim Taught in California Schools" Frankenstein, rather than me reciting an old dig that I use to pick on Clinton (And by extension, his worshippers)?

Now, I've warned you several times that most of your info on ol' BJ is incorrect. How funny that you choose for your 'favorite' one that has absolutely no truth in it at all. Zero.

Well, If I am wrongand I never said it wasn't possible, it's just less likely for me than that same honor resting at the feet of James or Ben---then so be it; teach me and show me where I'm wrong and do it with the class I have come to show a shred of respect to you for having. And I notice that no one (on the left side) has really jumped to the defense of the WRONG info that was given alluding to the false allegations made regarding Bush's Military record. Or that we're in this whole war over a Bush ploy to make himself and his friends rich (the basic original burp of this whole d**n Report!). How about that whole Bush stole the election---TWICE! crap?

As far as "warning someone that most of the info on ol' BJ is incorrect", I believe your one comment to me was to the tune of "If you can show me that Clinton was worse than Nixon, I'll leave you be." And I did show you instances where Clinton makes Nixon look like a Choir Boy.

There is not and never has been a requirement that the president have military service. It doesn't even make sense; that would require the VP, every member of congress, and every cabinet member to have military service, since all are potentially in line for succession.

Excuse mebut I never said that every member of Congress or Cabinet, etcetera had to have a military term; only the President, that I knew of. (I can assume that it would also imply that the Vice President would as well, in the possibility that he'd have to serve as President, if something unfortunate would keep the President from fulfilling his duty.)

Not that it will stop you from using this example. Like many conservatives, you never let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good sounding argument.

I see that this same logic works for you (or any liberal and many Democrats), also.
Again, where's all this ire about the bullshit claims made against Bush? I've mentioned ad nauseum that I'm not his biggest fan; I have specified that I don't agree that everything he does is golden. I do believe that we went to war for good reasons (and last I heard, September is NINE months from January, not six, James; that's why we write a numerical date as 9-11 in the case of SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH. It was AFTER the Ninth Month (and the attacks) began, that we went to war in Iraq. Just so you know.), and that if certain events were handled differently in the past, that things wouldn't be the way they are today.

All that aside, we have had an impact on some of the evil that came from there (Saddam, Moussassoui, Zarqawi). I hope to one day hear that they've found the rotting remains (or a fresh kill, preferably as miserable and as gory as possible) of Bin Laden. Or maybe, that he'll be found alive and held in a New York prison, where he will be sodomized (objects are optional) and beaten daily.

In addition, while I'm not the keenest on the way things are handled in the media, I think it's still a worthwhile effort to support the Troops. More important than demonizing the President. Even worse, over the price of gas.

Like when it was pointed out that Janet Reno had no agenda to teach masturbation to school children. You just dropped her name and continue to make the claim, that b***h that tried to insert masturbation as a subject in health.'

Actually, I believe I mentioned that I appreciated the correction. A rose by any other name would smell just as sweetand it doesn't change the fact that it happened. Check it outthe civil liberal was even surprised that I wasn't nasty with him. And why should I be..? I was in error, and acknowledged it.

As for my saying that you and Robbie boi have offered any valid points or proof on this issue, lol, I think not. If I even hinted at such a thing, I was just trying to be nice.

Hmmmmmmhhharen't you a little too smug just to be nice? What happened to reaching out to an enemy with friendship? Is the concept of friendship such a spectre that it's more a matter of believing in ghosts to you? Is the act of friendship--as well as its respective attempts--only extended to fellow liberal Acolytes? If it ain't real, keep your nice to yourself. Too many fakers and takers in this world, iffen y'ask me.

Actually, I believe I tried to point out to you when you first posted this story, that the source was suspect, and it was probably more spin than fact. As for proof, you have provided none, nada, zilch, zippo.

You'd be the last person I'd truly suspect of that damnable selective blindness, B.. But you yourself admit that you stopped reading the he-said-she-said missives between Ben and I long ago. Oh, and also, I re-iterate; my proof is as valid to me as yours is to you. Just because you don't like my sources or beliefs doesn't mean they're completely worthless.

I'm simply pointing out the FACT that the 3 of you have been trolling each other in circles for the past several months. Its going nowhere and really needs to stop. Does anybody reading this disagree? Can I get a witness?

And I gladly agree that this had previously and has currently been dragged on far longer than it should have. Perhaps if it wasn't resuscitated and regurgitated on multiple Reports and their associated Rebuttals, it would have been left here to stay. With the exception of Report number 154773 here (and it ended when Ben left!), each and every instance of Islam in California schools mentioned in other Reports is exclusively the result of Ben's doing.

Apparently, there's a lot happening that you don't, or won't, see. Perhaps the reason there's no outrage is WE DON'T BELIEVE IT HAPPENED. And the only people shoving Islam in MY face are you and the folks who write and read your "news" sources. And I'm not talking about the ones that slant or shade the news, but the ones who make it up as they go along.

You mean like the liberal media, worst of all, the New York Times?
And you're welcome to believe that. Just because it's not important enough to you in your belief (or lack thereof), doesn't mean it's not important to me in mine. I don't agree that it's just nothing.

ROFLMFAO! Funny how you start the paragraph NOT being a victim, but end up with that same ol' "Christianity in Chains" victim mentality.

[Funny how it's a "Cultural Enrichment Encounter" for one religion (Like Islam), and "Proselytization" for another (like Christianity).] I'm not claiming to be a victim, as you've led yourself to believe; I'm pointing out that I'm willing to stand up for what I believe, whether it's popular or not. Care or don't, believe it or not, that choice lies with you. I am indifferent.

Where do you see me trying to play the victim's role here? I asked a valid question, and like so many others, you evaded and turned to point at me. Sadly, I will clarify. Again. (Not that it'll bring anything forward, because I suspect another chide is coming my way.) I find it especially galling that you and Ben fuss about what a bad thing having a Christian-Based Faith is (and make retarded claims based on a joke, or the fact that our President has mentioned that he prays or that God speaks to him in his heart), but it's okay for a teacher, paid by the Taxes that are supposed to fund a Public School, to teach kids about another religion. Where's the Separation of Church and State Crowd when you need em?

Again; I do not want any religion to be a spoon-fed, State guided lesson in any Public School, in any stateOhio, California, Maine, Maryland Florida, or ANYwhere. If we give the State or Government any means or right to control who we desire to worship (or to worship at all), we surrender one of the most precious controls of ourselves the most ill-fitted for the job. This is something that was pointed out in a letter written to the Danbury Baptist Committee by one of the Founding Fathers and I, too, embrace that belief.

Perhaps you can explain something I've been wondering about for awhile. Why is it that the only way most "contemporary" Christians can "defend their position" is by twisting and distorting the truth? Must not be much of a position if you ask me. And do they really think they are, indeed, defending anything, rather than just stroking their own egos?

Why don't you ask the liberal media for the answer to that one? I feel they are far more qualified, as they seem pretty adept at making up the news as they go along, creating lies and gossip and calling it reality. It is a fact because it's what you want to hear. You knowthe exact same you and yours are accusing me of doing, but it's because it conflicts with the s**t you're being fed, so that makes it bad and wrong.

Speaking on must not be much of a position if you ask me, the same could be said for a person who gets all pissed off and fired up simply because someone mentions God, yet this same uses the name God and Christ, or Good Lord as modifiers or emphasis when badmouthing others.

The point I was trying to make is that some are called to be strippers for Christ and some are called to be vicious attack dogs. You go where your calling leads you.

I'm a reptile personand like the Church fundraising Car Wash, many are called, but few are hosin'. I'm not here looking for converts, as I'm not a very good example of what people should perceive as a good Christian. But then again, I've never once tried to convince anyone I'm a saint.

On the other hand, you have never managed to prove yourself right, at least not on this issue.

Well, if what I have provided in my Megagrams of writ isn't enough, feel free to research for yourself. I found several sources (and mentioned them here), figuring that it was enough; you want more, Ben wants more, find it for yourselves.

Because you knew that anyone going to that report to find info on Circuit City would really want to read 7 pages of you ranting at and about Ben; they would otherwise walk away feeling incomplete.

First of all, it's five pagesnumbers can be your friends! How about that!---and who are you to decide what others do? If they want to read it, fine, if they don't, fine. I think it's up to the reader and not you to determine what is to be done.

You had no desire to pursue Ben, yet there you are.

He [Ben] wants to pick a fight behind my back, I'll turn and fight there too. I know I have provided truthful, solid information. Ben is too goddamn lazy to read it, so he simply denies its existence. Just about as sensible as the way Ben not only went to a different Report and stalked Robert, called him out, distracted from the subject specifically to attack Robert, he also openly admitted to trying to find Robert outside of the Internet and these Reports (in yet still another Report!). Now what would you suppose the reason is for that? Crank phone calls, nasty surprises in the mail?

Ben started it, and he alone is responsible for keeping it going. We all know the best way to get rid of a troll is to feed it regularly in as many different locations as possible.

I can easagree that it was Ben who started it. I imagine there's a reason he's dragging this dumb quarrel everywhere, and I'm sure you're right in your sarcasm as to his intent.

Yes, you posted some very alarmist articles that are pure BS and, furthermore, offer no PROOF of anything.

A matter of your opinion. See my previous comments regarding how I feel about my sources being as valid to me as yours are to you.

Coupled with some very selective cut and paste from the STUDY GUIDES that accompany the textbook.

Selective how? I went for the course section that dealt mainly with Islam and its subject matter. Let's review.

So let's look at "Across the Century", Bennie. (from: [add the 'dubyas'!] eduplace.com/ss/hmss/7/laag/99/3.2.html)
Here's the study-guide.

Where did I say it wasn't a study guide, B.? Actually, I believe I even mentioned that it was a study guide. More specifically, it is the study guide for the book, Across The Centuries, which was the text in question and the one I specifically referred to. Just so you know it, a study guide is the template from which a teacher guides the class in its course of study, hence the term, Study Guide; it is intended to mirror the text, for one, and it is the viewpoint from which the material is to be dished up to the students.

And thank you, for providing information that's just as scathing about some texts trying to introduce Christianityit only lends credibility to the neutral nature of a good source. In a similar fashion, I have repeatedly stated that I do not wish to have ANY form of religion taught in public schools; I believe that a person should choose their direction as their spirit and their heart leads, be that choice Muslim, Christian, atheist, or even if they choose to be gay. I really could care less as to what others believeit's when they try to attack what I believe and force me to change, or call me narrow minded because my beliefs differ from theirs and I won't see things their way.

Something else I thought I'd regurgitate, as I never had as many issues with Clinton until I came to this board and started researching him.

Prior to President Bush taking office, during the Clinton administration, the Calif. Dept. of Education would only fund Houghton Mifflin's "Across the Centuries." With California's endorsement, this textbook has been gaining ground nationwide. In the October 30, 2000 issue, Forbes magazine observed that Delaine Eastin, California's superintendent of public instruction, "sought and received campaign contributions from textbook publishers." Unbelievably "Across the Centuries" had California's exclusive endorsement these past 11 years.

"Clinton's signature of "Religious expression in public school" paved the way to secure finances for other religious "education" aka proselytizing.'

And I'll bet you'd never think I'd find another way to tie Clinton into this sorta thing, didja?; D

You have provided little in the way of fact, certainly no GLARING fact.

Sigh. Your opinion. The only difference is that I'm somehow wronger because you and yours don't like what I choose to read.

Can we get a consensus here? If I log all the reports the three of you have rebutted, can I declare one of you to be the winner and put an end to it all?

Funny, I thought that was a matter of each person's personal choice and self-governmentI was willing to let it go long ago, until I found it being used on other Reports.

Yawn! More of the I'm a victim. I have no control over my own actions.' mentality.

What.did I vote Democrat or suddenly turn into a liberal? [Looking myself over, hugging my ribs and feeling for a wind-up key on my back.] Whew! Nope. Thank God. Yawn! More of your opinion.

But how can I aspire to bask in the glory of The Great Minds of the RipOffReports?

This is, of course, a far cry from your initial charge that they were forced to worship Allah and play a Jihad game.

Well, truthfully, I used the more dramatic terms (in my own commentary) to mimic the feigned paranoid tones of Ben's Bush said he wants to be a dictator over America! He wants it to be a theocracy because he said he prays! Aside from that, I printed the article and what's in the article is there.

Well, Vera, I think I'll start another rebuttal, and go back and take a look at the "facts" you've posted, and we'll see if they amount to anything.

You go ahead and do that. You're not the first one to call me a liar, and I doubt that you'll be the last. We all know how you'll make sure it pans outmuch like Dan Rather's document on Bush's military record, it's geared to be steered in a direction you'll want. After all, anything that's wrong, but seeks to further what the liberals want, will never make the news according to the Big Three. It's only newsworthy if it seeks to bash Republicans, Conservatives, or anyone the Liberals don't like. Bush is bad because he's had friendly dealings with the main family of Bin Laden (who have disowned Osama more than twenty years ago), but Carter can go smoke on Castro's Havana with Cindy She-Hag (who hasn't even taken the time from her grandstanding to give her precious son a lousy headstone to mark his grave). And they're heroes.

I'm sure that Ben's just as happy as can be, now that you're gonna fight in his place. Speaking of feeding trolls as often as possible, and in as many different places as possiblenow you're even guarding his bridge and collecting his goats for him. How nice.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1144 Consumer Comment

Give me a break from the sanctimonious anti-government BS

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 28, 2006

You speak of the freedom of dignity, yet you want to feel good for giving some poor schmuck who's down on his luck the crumbs from your table. Or worse, consign him to beg from the church who will only help him if he's 'moral' enough. Your personal devil, BJ Clinton, tried to transform the federal welfare system from a hand out to a hand up, but the Republican Congress refused. He did wring one concession out of them - a 5 year cap on benefits. Which means that since shortly before Bush took office, most of the people on welfare are on the state dole, not the federal.

You think you shouldn't be punished for success, but you want to punich Kennedy, Kerry, and Turner for theirs? Give ME a break!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1143 Consumer Comment

Read my lips... N. O. W. M. D.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 28, 2006

OK, one more time for the deaf, dumb, and blind boy. What does the M stand for in WMD? These shells, discarded remnants of the Iran/Iraq war found scattered around Iraq, have not been capable of MASS destruction for at least 10 years. The Sarin has decomposed, and the Mustard turned to jelly. Would I want my kid to play with them? Hell no, Mustard is still Mustard even if its not in a dispersible form, and the components of Sarin, while probably less dangerous as a nerve agent than one of your farts, would still be poisonous if swallowed. So, no WMD, just some old discarded artillery rounds. I could do more damage with a gallon of bleach and a gallon of ammonia.

I struggled through the Saddam Dossier on your "fair and balanced" website. My God, this is even worse than the stuff they air. LOL! We have this guy whose major 'claim to fame' is that he worked as a civilian shift supervisor for an ISG translation sweatshop in Qatar. He is analyzing for us the translation of the disjoint passages from a notebook that belonged to someone we know nothing about. Toward the end, its like listening to one of those JFK conspiracy theorists. If we consider these passages from some unsubstantiated documents that were 'leaked' to a reporter, in conjunction with passages from some other documents, and assume this, and take that for granted, then it becomes obvious that Saddam and Usama were working hand in hand on the edge of the sand.

If these notes are to be believed at all, the only thing they clearly show is that some bad guys from Pakistan met with some guys from Iraq to request Iraq's assistance in mediating the conflict in Afghanistan, and to propose several grandiose plans for future cooperative efforts. The Iraqis are mostly interested in eliciting Pakistan's support in the Security Council.

No, I think I'll have to go with the opinions recently expressed by several currently active senior analysts, and that of the 9/11 commission, all of whom have access to ALL of the intel gathered.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1142 Consumer Comment

I liked his rebuttal

AUTHOR: Dan - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Yes Cuba is great in the winter but under the liberals utopian philosophy even better (for them not me). Lead by power control and a sheep hearder of humans. That is NOT AMERICA!!! Big Government taking care of you from womb to tomb is NOT THE AMERICAN WAY!!! Working for the government to get crumbs from their table???? What are you liberals thinking? I work to for my family to enjoy the freedom of expression the freedom of dignity, If my son or daughter fails sometimes well I encourage them to try again. I like the freedom to fail or succeed. If I find success then no way should I be punished but if I fail then no way should some government guy bail me out with others money. My fault time to try again. Guess what? In numberous times of failer I AM SUCCEEDING!!! and not on government bailing me out with taxes on the working man. Is John Kerry hurting? Ted Kennady has he gave his money to the poor? Ted Turner is he broke from his charity? Oh just a few examples of hypocrocy many more out there. GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1141 Consumer Comment

Let's get back on track, shall we?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 26, 2006

Out of respect for Ed's rules, I will only copy and paste the info, and tell you where to find it. Of course, this same trick confounds some individuals, as it is so easy to see where the info is actually from.

Use FoxNews, and look for the Saddam Dossier. You will find a page that contains:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > WORLD
"Saddam Dossier" Archive
Was Saddam Regime a Broker for Terror Alliances?
June 26, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 23, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 16, 2006
Terror Links to Saddam's Inner Circle
June 12, 2006
Documenting Saddam's Link to Terror
June 11, 2006

For the mentally impaired, the actual link is http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,146,00.html.

If ED zaps the link, it's simply because he is enforcing his own rules. Some of us understand that.

I know some of you will immediately disregard anything FoxNews has to offer, because they are not the overt mouthpieces for the DNC, like all the other news channels and networks. Amazing at best. One channel out of about 12 has BOTH liberals AND conservatives(fair and balanced), and the libs get all fired up about the "slant" FoxNews puts out there. Riiiiight.

They say the same about talk radio. As long as the people could only get one side(the liberal spin), everything was great. Now they suck hind-tit in every ratings poll there is. Is Air America still on? Are they still stealing money from the Boys Club to pay stations to air their drivel? So sad.

As for WMD's. They found them. You may wish to ignore them since the 500 artillery shells filled with Mustard and Sarin are pre gulf War, and degraded, but answer this honestly. Would you want your child playing with them? Would you want them buried in your backyard? No? Is it because the stuff is still dangerous? DUH! The French still dig up unexploded shells from WW1 and use full MOPP gear to handle them. After 90 years, the stuff is still dangerous.

Of course, I gave the info on the WMD's they found a long time ago. It's feels so good to be right all the time. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1140 Consumer Comment

Let's get back on track, shall we?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 26, 2006

Out of respect for Ed's rules, I will only copy and paste the info, and tell you where to find it. Of course, this same trick confounds some individuals, as it is so easy to see where the info is actually from.

Use FoxNews, and look for the Saddam Dossier. You will find a page that contains:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > WORLD
"Saddam Dossier" Archive
Was Saddam Regime a Broker for Terror Alliances?
June 26, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 23, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 16, 2006
Terror Links to Saddam's Inner Circle
June 12, 2006
Documenting Saddam's Link to Terror
June 11, 2006

For the mentally impaired, the actual link is http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,146,00.html.

If ED zaps the link, it's simply because he is enforcing his own rules. Some of us understand that.

I know some of you will immediately disregard anything FoxNews has to offer, because they are not the overt mouthpieces for the DNC, like all the other news channels and networks. Amazing at best. One channel out of about 12 has BOTH liberals AND conservatives(fair and balanced), and the libs get all fired up about the "slant" FoxNews puts out there. Riiiiight.

They say the same about talk radio. As long as the people could only get one side(the liberal spin), everything was great. Now they suck hind-tit in every ratings poll there is. Is Air America still on? Are they still stealing money from the Boys Club to pay stations to air their drivel? So sad.

As for WMD's. They found them. You may wish to ignore them since the 500 artillery shells filled with Mustard and Sarin are pre gulf War, and degraded, but answer this honestly. Would you want your child playing with them? Would you want them buried in your backyard? No? Is it because the stuff is still dangerous? DUH! The French still dig up unexploded shells from WW1 and use full MOPP gear to handle them. After 90 years, the stuff is still dangerous.

Of course, I gave the info on the WMD's they found a long time ago. It's feels so good to be right all the time. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1139 Consumer Comment

Let's get back on track, shall we?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 26, 2006

Out of respect for Ed's rules, I will only copy and paste the info, and tell you where to find it. Of course, this same trick confounds some individuals, as it is so easy to see where the info is actually from.

Use FoxNews, and look for the Saddam Dossier. You will find a page that contains:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > WORLD
"Saddam Dossier" Archive
Was Saddam Regime a Broker for Terror Alliances?
June 26, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 23, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 16, 2006
Terror Links to Saddam's Inner Circle
June 12, 2006
Documenting Saddam's Link to Terror
June 11, 2006

For the mentally impaired, the actual link is http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,146,00.html.

If ED zaps the link, it's simply because he is enforcing his own rules. Some of us understand that.

I know some of you will immediately disregard anything FoxNews has to offer, because they are not the overt mouthpieces for the DNC, like all the other news channels and networks. Amazing at best. One channel out of about 12 has BOTH liberals AND conservatives(fair and balanced), and the libs get all fired up about the "slant" FoxNews puts out there. Riiiiight.

They say the same about talk radio. As long as the people could only get one side(the liberal spin), everything was great. Now they suck hind-tit in every ratings poll there is. Is Air America still on? Are they still stealing money from the Boys Club to pay stations to air their drivel? So sad.

As for WMD's. They found them. You may wish to ignore them since the 500 artillery shells filled with Mustard and Sarin are pre gulf War, and degraded, but answer this honestly. Would you want your child playing with them? Would you want them buried in your backyard? No? Is it because the stuff is still dangerous? DUH! The French still dig up unexploded shells from WW1 and use full MOPP gear to handle them. After 90 years, the stuff is still dangerous.

Of course, I gave the info on the WMD's they found a long time ago. It's feels so good to be right all the time. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1138 Consumer Comment

Let's get back on track, shall we?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 26, 2006

Out of respect for Ed's rules, I will only copy and paste the info, and tell you where to find it. Of course, this same trick confounds some individuals, as it is so easy to see where the info is actually from.

Use FoxNews, and look for the Saddam Dossier. You will find a page that contains:

FOXNEWS.COM HOME > WORLD
"Saddam Dossier" Archive
Was Saddam Regime a Broker for Terror Alliances?
June 26, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 23, 2006
Documents Support Saddam-Taliban Connection
June 16, 2006
Terror Links to Saddam's Inner Circle
June 12, 2006
Documenting Saddam's Link to Terror
June 11, 2006

For the mentally impaired, the actual link is http://www.foxnews.com/column_archive/0,2976,146,00.html.

If ED zaps the link, it's simply because he is enforcing his own rules. Some of us understand that.

I know some of you will immediately disregard anything FoxNews has to offer, because they are not the overt mouthpieces for the DNC, like all the other news channels and networks. Amazing at best. One channel out of about 12 has BOTH liberals AND conservatives(fair and balanced), and the libs get all fired up about the "slant" FoxNews puts out there. Riiiiight.

They say the same about talk radio. As long as the people could only get one side(the liberal spin), everything was great. Now they suck hind-tit in every ratings poll there is. Is Air America still on? Are they still stealing money from the Boys Club to pay stations to air their drivel? So sad.

As for WMD's. They found them. You may wish to ignore them since the 500 artillery shells filled with Mustard and Sarin are pre gulf War, and degraded, but answer this honestly. Would you want your child playing with them? Would you want them buried in your backyard? No? Is it because the stuff is still dangerous? DUH! The French still dig up unexploded shells from WW1 and use full MOPP gear to handle them. After 90 years, the stuff is still dangerous.

Of course, I gave the info on the WMD's they found a long time ago. It's feels so good to be right all the time. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1137 Consumer Comment

your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 25, 2006

Robert

thanks for the latest report from Spincity.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. As usual, however, your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale.

Am I reading your position correctly? Are you suggesting that our government's primary focus in international policy should be the (stated) opinion of a ragtag band of murderers? Having disparaged Clinton for acting without Congressional approval in Bosnia, you now claim Bush Sr. should have done the same in Iraq? And he should have made this momentous decision based, not on the mandate of the US Constitution, but on the opinion of a 3rd world thug he was probably only marginally aware of? Apparently you and your terrorist buddies can't fathom that our goal was to liberate Kuwait, not to destroy Iraq. We kicked their butt, there is no question, we were victorious.

Why you would put any faith in al Qaeda's propaganda in the first place, is beyond me. Perhaps because this claim resonates so well with your own personal philosophy; if we don't kill everyone and destroy everything in sight, we are weak. What did you and your buddies expect us to do about the Cole? Mow down everything that moved in Aden? Nuke Yemen? Operation Infinite Reach wasn't a sufficient show of force in response to the embassy bombings? And you'll have to explain how our continued pressure on Iraq and our presence in the Yugoslav area displayed our weak, "cut and run" posture. No, I imagine the 9-11 attacks would have taken place whatever our perceived military posture. Like the first attack on the WTC, the only weakness considered was the disorganization associated with a new President's first year in office.

Al Qaeda graduated from freedom fighters to international terrorists because King Fahd refused Osama bin Laden's offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Iraq, deciding instead to enlist the assistance of the infidel Americans. I don't see how occupying Iraq would have lessened their popularity or support, if anything it would have increased. Bin Laden began his training camps in Sudan, and expanded the operation in Afghanistan. This had nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq, so there is no reason to assume that deposing him would have affected al Qaeda in any negative way. The intelligence community has admitted there was probably no connection between Saddam and Osama, and no training camps in Iraq, which is not surprising considering the enmity between the two men.

Under Saddam's regime, Iraqi support for "Palestinian" causes actually decreased. He didn't care about their conflict. Like the few missiles he lobbed at Israel during the Gulf War, the paltry $10K he gave the families of suicide bombers was his way of "paying his dues". His way of saying that even though he wouldn't let the religious wackos tell him how to run his country, he was still part of the team. Even when he increased the amount to $25K in 2002 (and he didn't have time to pay many of those), it was peanuts compared to the support they receive from Syria and Lebannon, through Hezbollah and Hamas.

According to the intel Colin Powell presented to the UN Security Council, Zarqawi was running a terrorist camp in the northern no-fly zone. The same intel said he had his leg amputated in a Baghdad hospital, though obviously not at the time we invaded. Now we have a dead Zarqawi with both legs intact. Whoopsie! His organization was not affiliated with al Qaeda until after we invaded Iraq. Kinda like those bad guys crossing into Iraq, AFTER we invaded Iraq, which I'll have to admit was after we invaded Afghanistan. The last I checked, no specific information had been released concerning what was on either of the captured Zarqawi laptops. Since you apparently have an inside source, you will have to tell us all about the MONEY connection. LOL! It does make for interesting conjecture, though, that the house he was in was blasted to rubble but Zarqawi and his laptop were recovered intact. Maybe he was hiding in a "spider hole".

I will agree with you on one thing. Given the choice between GW and Jeb, I'd definitely vote for the latter. He has done nothing but good for Florida, if you can ignore little things like election fraud and that whole Schaivo fiasco.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1136 Consumer Comment

your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 25, 2006

Robert

thanks for the latest report from Spincity.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. As usual, however, your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale.

Am I reading your position correctly? Are you suggesting that our government's primary focus in international policy should be the (stated) opinion of a ragtag band of murderers? Having disparaged Clinton for acting without Congressional approval in Bosnia, you now claim Bush Sr. should have done the same in Iraq? And he should have made this momentous decision based, not on the mandate of the US Constitution, but on the opinion of a 3rd world thug he was probably only marginally aware of? Apparently you and your terrorist buddies can't fathom that our goal was to liberate Kuwait, not to destroy Iraq. We kicked their butt, there is no question, we were victorious.

Why you would put any faith in al Qaeda's propaganda in the first place, is beyond me. Perhaps because this claim resonates so well with your own personal philosophy; if we don't kill everyone and destroy everything in sight, we are weak. What did you and your buddies expect us to do about the Cole? Mow down everything that moved in Aden? Nuke Yemen? Operation Infinite Reach wasn't a sufficient show of force in response to the embassy bombings? And you'll have to explain how our continued pressure on Iraq and our presence in the Yugoslav area displayed our weak, "cut and run" posture. No, I imagine the 9-11 attacks would have taken place whatever our perceived military posture. Like the first attack on the WTC, the only weakness considered was the disorganization associated with a new President's first year in office.

Al Qaeda graduated from freedom fighters to international terrorists because King Fahd refused Osama bin Laden's offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Iraq, deciding instead to enlist the assistance of the infidel Americans. I don't see how occupying Iraq would have lessened their popularity or support, if anything it would have increased. Bin Laden began his training camps in Sudan, and expanded the operation in Afghanistan. This had nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq, so there is no reason to assume that deposing him would have affected al Qaeda in any negative way. The intelligence community has admitted there was probably no connection between Saddam and Osama, and no training camps in Iraq, which is not surprising considering the enmity between the two men.

Under Saddam's regime, Iraqi support for "Palestinian" causes actually decreased. He didn't care about their conflict. Like the few missiles he lobbed at Israel during the Gulf War, the paltry $10K he gave the families of suicide bombers was his way of "paying his dues". His way of saying that even though he wouldn't let the religious wackos tell him how to run his country, he was still part of the team. Even when he increased the amount to $25K in 2002 (and he didn't have time to pay many of those), it was peanuts compared to the support they receive from Syria and Lebannon, through Hezbollah and Hamas.

According to the intel Colin Powell presented to the UN Security Council, Zarqawi was running a terrorist camp in the northern no-fly zone. The same intel said he had his leg amputated in a Baghdad hospital, though obviously not at the time we invaded. Now we have a dead Zarqawi with both legs intact. Whoopsie! His organization was not affiliated with al Qaeda until after we invaded Iraq. Kinda like those bad guys crossing into Iraq, AFTER we invaded Iraq, which I'll have to admit was after we invaded Afghanistan. The last I checked, no specific information had been released concerning what was on either of the captured Zarqawi laptops. Since you apparently have an inside source, you will have to tell us all about the MONEY connection. LOL! It does make for interesting conjecture, though, that the house he was in was blasted to rubble but Zarqawi and his laptop were recovered intact. Maybe he was hiding in a "spider hole".

I will agree with you on one thing. Given the choice between GW and Jeb, I'd definitely vote for the latter. He has done nothing but good for Florida, if you can ignore little things like election fraud and that whole Schaivo fiasco.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1135 Consumer Comment

your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 25, 2006

Robert

thanks for the latest report from Spincity.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. As usual, however, your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale.

Am I reading your position correctly? Are you suggesting that our government's primary focus in international policy should be the (stated) opinion of a ragtag band of murderers? Having disparaged Clinton for acting without Congressional approval in Bosnia, you now claim Bush Sr. should have done the same in Iraq? And he should have made this momentous decision based, not on the mandate of the US Constitution, but on the opinion of a 3rd world thug he was probably only marginally aware of? Apparently you and your terrorist buddies can't fathom that our goal was to liberate Kuwait, not to destroy Iraq. We kicked their butt, there is no question, we were victorious.

Why you would put any faith in al Qaeda's propaganda in the first place, is beyond me. Perhaps because this claim resonates so well with your own personal philosophy; if we don't kill everyone and destroy everything in sight, we are weak. What did you and your buddies expect us to do about the Cole? Mow down everything that moved in Aden? Nuke Yemen? Operation Infinite Reach wasn't a sufficient show of force in response to the embassy bombings? And you'll have to explain how our continued pressure on Iraq and our presence in the Yugoslav area displayed our weak, "cut and run" posture. No, I imagine the 9-11 attacks would have taken place whatever our perceived military posture. Like the first attack on the WTC, the only weakness considered was the disorganization associated with a new President's first year in office.

Al Qaeda graduated from freedom fighters to international terrorists because King Fahd refused Osama bin Laden's offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Iraq, deciding instead to enlist the assistance of the infidel Americans. I don't see how occupying Iraq would have lessened their popularity or support, if anything it would have increased. Bin Laden began his training camps in Sudan, and expanded the operation in Afghanistan. This had nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq, so there is no reason to assume that deposing him would have affected al Qaeda in any negative way. The intelligence community has admitted there was probably no connection between Saddam and Osama, and no training camps in Iraq, which is not surprising considering the enmity between the two men.

Under Saddam's regime, Iraqi support for "Palestinian" causes actually decreased. He didn't care about their conflict. Like the few missiles he lobbed at Israel during the Gulf War, the paltry $10K he gave the families of suicide bombers was his way of "paying his dues". His way of saying that even though he wouldn't let the religious wackos tell him how to run his country, he was still part of the team. Even when he increased the amount to $25K in 2002 (and he didn't have time to pay many of those), it was peanuts compared to the support they receive from Syria and Lebannon, through Hezbollah and Hamas.

According to the intel Colin Powell presented to the UN Security Council, Zarqawi was running a terrorist camp in the northern no-fly zone. The same intel said he had his leg amputated in a Baghdad hospital, though obviously not at the time we invaded. Now we have a dead Zarqawi with both legs intact. Whoopsie! His organization was not affiliated with al Qaeda until after we invaded Iraq. Kinda like those bad guys crossing into Iraq, AFTER we invaded Iraq, which I'll have to admit was after we invaded Afghanistan. The last I checked, no specific information had been released concerning what was on either of the captured Zarqawi laptops. Since you apparently have an inside source, you will have to tell us all about the MONEY connection. LOL! It does make for interesting conjecture, though, that the house he was in was blasted to rubble but Zarqawi and his laptop were recovered intact. Maybe he was hiding in a "spider hole".

I will agree with you on one thing. Given the choice between GW and Jeb, I'd definitely vote for the latter. He has done nothing but good for Florida, if you can ignore little things like election fraud and that whole Schaivo fiasco.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1134 Consumer Comment

your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 25, 2006

Robert

thanks for the latest report from Spincity.

Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. As usual, however, your supposed facts and reasoning (or lack thereof) are pure spin, approaching zero on the credibility scale.

Am I reading your position correctly? Are you suggesting that our government's primary focus in international policy should be the (stated) opinion of a ragtag band of murderers? Having disparaged Clinton for acting without Congressional approval in Bosnia, you now claim Bush Sr. should have done the same in Iraq? And he should have made this momentous decision based, not on the mandate of the US Constitution, but on the opinion of a 3rd world thug he was probably only marginally aware of? Apparently you and your terrorist buddies can't fathom that our goal was to liberate Kuwait, not to destroy Iraq. We kicked their butt, there is no question, we were victorious.

Why you would put any faith in al Qaeda's propaganda in the first place, is beyond me. Perhaps because this claim resonates so well with your own personal philosophy; if we don't kill everyone and destroy everything in sight, we are weak. What did you and your buddies expect us to do about the Cole? Mow down everything that moved in Aden? Nuke Yemen? Operation Infinite Reach wasn't a sufficient show of force in response to the embassy bombings? And you'll have to explain how our continued pressure on Iraq and our presence in the Yugoslav area displayed our weak, "cut and run" posture. No, I imagine the 9-11 attacks would have taken place whatever our perceived military posture. Like the first attack on the WTC, the only weakness considered was the disorganization associated with a new President's first year in office.

Al Qaeda graduated from freedom fighters to international terrorists because King Fahd refused Osama bin Laden's offer to defend Saudi Arabia from Iraq, deciding instead to enlist the assistance of the infidel Americans. I don't see how occupying Iraq would have lessened their popularity or support, if anything it would have increased. Bin Laden began his training camps in Sudan, and expanded the operation in Afghanistan. This had nothing to do with Saddam or Iraq, so there is no reason to assume that deposing him would have affected al Qaeda in any negative way. The intelligence community has admitted there was probably no connection between Saddam and Osama, and no training camps in Iraq, which is not surprising considering the enmity between the two men.

Under Saddam's regime, Iraqi support for "Palestinian" causes actually decreased. He didn't care about their conflict. Like the few missiles he lobbed at Israel during the Gulf War, the paltry $10K he gave the families of suicide bombers was his way of "paying his dues". His way of saying that even though he wouldn't let the religious wackos tell him how to run his country, he was still part of the team. Even when he increased the amount to $25K in 2002 (and he didn't have time to pay many of those), it was peanuts compared to the support they receive from Syria and Lebannon, through Hezbollah and Hamas.

According to the intel Colin Powell presented to the UN Security Council, Zarqawi was running a terrorist camp in the northern no-fly zone. The same intel said he had his leg amputated in a Baghdad hospital, though obviously not at the time we invaded. Now we have a dead Zarqawi with both legs intact. Whoopsie! His organization was not affiliated with al Qaeda until after we invaded Iraq. Kinda like those bad guys crossing into Iraq, AFTER we invaded Iraq, which I'll have to admit was after we invaded Afghanistan. The last I checked, no specific information had been released concerning what was on either of the captured Zarqawi laptops. Since you apparently have an inside source, you will have to tell us all about the MONEY connection. LOL! It does make for interesting conjecture, though, that the house he was in was blasted to rubble but Zarqawi and his laptop were recovered intact. Maybe he was hiding in a "spider hole".

I will agree with you on one thing. Given the choice between GW and Jeb, I'd definitely vote for the latter. He has done nothing but good for Florida, if you can ignore little things like election fraud and that whole Schaivo fiasco.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1133 Consumer Comment

If we had finished the job in 1990, AlQuada would have withered and died.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 24, 2006

Nope

AlQuada claims it attacked us because we always cut and run, instead of finishing the job. We did it when we allowed that cease-fire, that Iraq NEVER abided by. We did it when the USS Cole was attacked. We did it when our embassies were attacked. We did it in Somalia. And on and on.

If we had finished the job in 1990, AlQuada would have withered and died. The Palestinians were getting their terror money from Hussein. No Hussein, no money. He was giving them $25K per blast. That's real money to them. AlQuada used Iraq as a training ground, and their formerly living leader IN Iraq was living there. He was in the Hospital there when we took Baghdad. The laptop we got from Zarqawi shows the MONEY connection. The current supply of bad guys crossed into Iraq after we took Afghanistan. AlQuada seems to keep very good records. So much for the theory that there's no connection between Hussein and AlQuada.

If Bush Sr hadn't stopped short of victory, we'd be much better off today.

The real shame is, with GW being such a total F-Up, other than his willingness to fight the terrorists, his brother Jeb will probably never have a chance to be President. He is the best of the bunch in that family. He's done nothing but good for Florida. Too bad.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1132 Consumer Comment

What price, victory?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 24, 2006

While NSD 54 appears to demonstrate Bush Sr.'s agreement to the limits of the conflict, perhaps more germane is PL 102-1, Congress' authorization for the President to use military force. Section 2a authorizes the President, "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677."

Clearly, this authorization did not include the pursuit of "victory", as Robert perceives it. Once Kuwait was liberated, the President's authority ended. If he had pursued Saddam further, he would have been subject to impeachment. Further, he would have unnecessarily put our armed forces at increased risk. It is likely they would have met increased guerilla and military resistance, including the possibility of intensive chemical and bio attacks. Victory is rarely a certainty.

Finally, he would have placed us in much the same position his son has placed us in now, spending billions of dollars trying to maintain peace against escalating tribal violence. And al Qaeda would still have been funded, and the Palestinian suicide bombers would still have been funded.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1131 Consumer Comment

What are you ranting about?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 23, 2006

I was on Active Duty in the Marines from 82-91. When did YOU serve Damon?

Don't ask, don't tell? Is that something that affected you? It had nothing to do with me. I got out before Slick Willie started feminizing the military. When I was in, we had homosexuals in the military, they just had enough sense to shut up about it. Fire teams, squads, platoons, companies, etc are bonded units that have got to have a relationship that is unbreakable. Having anyone in the unit that is "different", will weaken the unit. When did YOU serve?

For the record, Bush Sr was useless. I still regret voting for him in 1988. I remember him to this day with his "read my lips" speech. There is a reason he was considered a wimp. Caving in to the Dems in Congress was one reason. Trying to make nice with our enemies was another. He started all that kinder, gentler, machine gun hand nonsense. It's that type of thinking that has us bogged down trying to decide whether to shoot or not. Here's a clue...if they wera anything other than the same uniform you have on, they MIGHT be the enemy.

Again, and get someone to help you with this...you DON'T stop when you are within 24 hours of VICTORY. Bush Sr stopped the war at the request of Colin Powell. Ask general Schwartzkopf. Get someone to read you his book.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1130 Consumer Comment

Do you fail to see or wish not to believe?

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 22, 2006

Robert, the truth hurts. Now I would suppose that it would be considerate of me to leave you cowering in your corner, and don't beat a "man" while he is down. I challenge you, come with some substance. I am not interested in engaging in a pissing match, so come with the goods son. I wish not to repeat myself, you either take a look at the "National Security Directive 54 of January 15, 1991" yourself, or just accept the d**n truth as it is. BTW, the document is signed by George Bush Sr himself (if you have the patience to read through it's entirety).

I ask, did you serve for the United States of America? Yet, you show to be analogous the battles engaged by our honorable men and women with those of games played by overpaid athletes, let me inform you, this is no game. I don't know who I loathe more, a terrorist or a supposed "citizen of the United States" who does not respect the sacrifices made by Military men and women daily and claims that they wore a uniform in honor. Robert, your deplorable!

It is CLEAR, you know nothing about me; THANK GOD, we'll keep it that way. "Don't ask, don't tell", sounds familiar Robert? If you served: Public Law 103-160, Section 654, Title 10; is the possible reason you were discharged. Ah, this may explain your discontent for Colin Powell, for he was the brain-child behind this policy.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1129 Consumer Comment

James, someone should throw you a full padded jacket!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 22, 2006

James,

I have no quarrel with your comments on Bush. He is definitely a bad actor. But your recent advocacy of stalking and murdering those who don't share that point of view, leads me to believe the only metal you should be around is lithium. Did you forget to take yours again today?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1128 Consumer Comment

I know this is meaningless

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 22, 2006

Damon, you are an a**. Colin Poweell went to Bush Sr, and cried a river about how we were killing too many Iraqi troops, and how bad it looked. Boo h*o.

Pay real close attention. We were 30 miles from VICTORY. Bush Sr ordered the halt because Powell asked him to. Powell was the equivalent of george Marshall in WW2. That means, if Marshall had decided to stop at the Rhine River, we never would have gone into Germany. After all, we pushed the Wehrmacht back into Germany. Powell was only worried about how our lopsided victory would look to the press. I thought it looked great...burning trucks and cars everywhere. The only Iraqi troops that continued to be shot at, were the ones who refused to disarm. The ones who threw their weapons down, were NOT targeted. Powell was never even near the Gulf. He saw what you did.

I'll assume you believe a football game should end if the score is fun to fun. After all, we wouldn't want to have a clear winner, would we? Again, if Powell hadn't been such a wuss, we wouldn't be there fighting right now. And, Hussein couldn't have used his WMD's against his people in 1991, could he? AlQuada also wouldn't have had it's funding, nor would the Paelestinian suicide bombers, would they?

You keep on thinking Powell is a great guy. I rank him right there along with Clinton, and his brilliance in Somalia. We pulled out there because we would have looked bad overpowering the Warlords running that place too. You should learn more about how people think. In the Arab countries, stopping short of victory was seen as weakness. It was the same in Somalia. Bin Laden has even stated that reason for attacking us. He figured we'd just turn tail again.

Nothing you have to say to me is of any meaning. I served...you didn't.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1127 Author of original report

I stand by my post!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

To ALL Who Oppose Me!

I say tough s**t! I speak the truth no matter who it hurts. Bush has screwed this country up so bad it will take a Democrat 16 years to fix it. Bush has lied all through his term! Re-read this post to see some of the lies. Gas prices remain very high, in fact the highest in history. We are continually losing troops for a profit war. Bush has lied to American People from the start, and I am glad to see that Jeb Bush will never have a s****.>

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1126 Consumer Comment

Your no Marine

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Robert, I hear you like to pull prevaricated stories out your a** and call it fact?

You want to pin the responsibilities of the Iraq conflicts on Colin Powell? May I suggest you take a gander at good ol'George Bush Sr's "National Security Directive 54 of January 15, 1991".

We continually hear that America's involvement in the Middle-East has nothing to do with oil. The very first two sentences of the first paragraph plainly states: "Access to Persian Gulf oil and the security of key friendly states in the area are vital to U.S. national security. Consistent with NSD 26 of October 2, 1989 and NSD 45 of August 20, 1990, and as a matter of long standing policy, the United States remains committed to defending it's vital interests in the region, if necessary through the use of military force, against any power with interests inimical to our own." So for those who still feel that our "interest" over in Iraq has nothing to do with oil, it is spelled out in this NSD 54. I ask also, why would GWB stray away from the course set forth by his daddy?

In paragraph 2 and 3 of this NSD 54, respectively, Bush Sr outlines his authorization of military action. The important facts are that the authorizations were designed to bring Iraq's withdrawal from Kuwait, restore Kuwait's legitimate government, protect the lives of American citizens abroad, and promote the security and stability of the Persian Gulf.

Bush Sr also states that in order to achieve the purposes previously mentioned, U.S. and coalition forces intent should be: a.) the defense of Saudi Arabia and the other GCC states against attack; b.) preclude Iraqi launch of ballistic missiles against neighboring states and friendly forces; c.) destroy Iraq's chemical, biological, and nuclear capabilities; d.) destroy Iraq's command, control, and communications capabilities; e.) eliminate the Republican Guards as an effective fighting force; f.) conduct operations designed to drive Iraq's forces from Kuwait, break the will of Iraqi forces, discourage Iraqi use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, encourage defection of Iraqi forces, and weaken Iraqi popular support for the current government.

In paragraph 4, regarding the missions of paragraph 2 and 3, Bush Sr affirms his goals: a.) minimizing U.S. and coalition casualties and; b.) reduce collateral damage incident to military attacks, taking special precautions to minimize civilian casualties and damage to non-military economic infrastructure, energy-related facilities, and religious states. Finally, in paragraph 12 Bush Sr concludes: "Military operations will come to an end only when I have determined that the objectives set forth in paragraph 2 above have been met."

Again, how is it that Colin Powell ended the Gulf War? According to the provisions set forth by Bush Sr and apparent military success, on Feb 27, 1991; Kuwait City was declared liberated, President Bush and his advisors decided to halt the war.

Once the advisors are briefed with the Commander and Chief's commission (NSD 54), it then becomes the responsibility of everyone (from lets say your lieutenant general to your squad leader) to relay this objective in order to be successful. Obviously, the occupation was a complete success. Colin Powell did nothing but adhere to the request of the TOP Commander, at that time, George Bush Sr.

Nothing I mentioned of or printed in the NSD 54 indicated that U.S. and coalition forces were to annihilate enemy forces. Yet you claim, "the whole point of battle is to cause the enemy to take massive casualties." Okay, in the video games you play.

Robert, it is a d**n shame that I had to explain this to you, considering the fact that you declare your affiliation with the Marines. I believe your resentment for Colin Powell is either one of two things (possibly both).
1.) You could have never been, at least, a quarter of a soldier as Powell was, so your envious.
2.) We all still realize Florida is part of the south, and for some, things haven't changed. So there are some who "wear their feelings on their sleeve"(i.e. swastika) or continue to make absurd comments on public forums such as ror, trying to maintain anonymity and buying time to have their pearly white sheets (which happen to have those dreaded two holes) bask in the Florida heat.

Robert, I doubt you served for this country and you should be held for treason anytime you use the motto Semper Fi.

Again, watch what you say about a fellow service man!

GOD BLESSES!!!

(I tried to post this earlier, apologize if you see it twice)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1125 Consumer Comment

DNC talking points... mind NUMB... must eat d'oh nuts

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Dan,

You say your mind is numb, yes? Maybe because you're still focused on the RNC talking points from 2, 6, and 10 years ago. Sorry no one clued you in, but they don't matter anymore. You can't kick Kerry for being a free market capitalist, sucking the life out of the middle class and the poor. I mean, that's the kind of guy you right wingers want for a hero, right? Long live capitalism! And, dude, Clinton hasn't been President for 6 years! Let 'em go! Be free!

Welcome to today! Your "its always somebody else's fault, stupid lefties can't think for themselves" attitude is perfect, and you have a couple of the RNC talking points down pat:
1. Peg everything to some random inflation factor so people won't notice they can't afford as much.
2. "Socialist" Security is the thing that's ruining our great nation.

But here's a couple you missed:
3. The thing that's ruining our great nation (aside from SS) is them d**n queers who want to get married and destroy our society.
4. Pay no attention to those war dead behing the curtain! We need to focus on all the potential murders of innocent, unborn children.
5. Our kids aren't allowed to pray or wear crosses, but ISLAM IS INVADING OUR CLASSROOMS!

There's more, but I don't want to overtax your mind all at once.

That Cuba thing sounds sweet! I'll bet Havana's lovely in the winter. Oh, but wait, I forgot. Its a good country for stashing our illegal POW, but Castro, unlike all the other communist and other dictators we're in bed with, is a real sleaze ball. So I guess I'll have to decline your offer.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1124 Consumer Comment

Dissing the disinformtion.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Robert,

I had no idea Bush Sr. was such a wimp that he would let ol' Superior Forces Powell b***h slap him into making such an obvious and stupendous mistake. Hmmm... I wonder if he might have weighed other factors that you aren't considering.

Please, spare us the "FILK" that starts out, "Come and listen to my story 'bout a rat named Ben." So, Ben's a troll who can't argue to save his soul. Thank you. I think we all figured that out months ago. For some reason your account omits the fact that you are every bit the troll Ben is, twist and dissemble as much as he does, possibly more. Your BS is a bit more coherent, but I'm not entirely convinced that's a point in your favor. You certainly have no moral high ground.

I don't know why you even bother to post this article; whether its from IBD, WSJ, UTNE, National Review, or even the Kiplinger letter, its still a BLATANT piece of spin and disinformation. The first sentence is a dead giveaway, "Education: In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran." Why is it that 3/5 of the conservative authored articles on this subject open with a similar lie, and then continue on to completely demolish the very idea of journalism? Is this some neocon doublespeak for, "This arcticle is pure BS but if I hype it enough 30% of you will believe it, and if you repeat it enough maybe it will take on a life of its own?"

Let's be clear, the 9th Circuit didn't rule that anything was "OK", much less forcing kids to worship Allah, or any of the other alarmist claims this author makes. A panel, not the entire court, on 10/19/05, delivered an unpublished opinion on the appeal. This means it may not be cited as a basis for law in other cases, in other words this was a technical ruling not based on the merits of the case. A PDF of the actual document can be found at ca9.uscourts.gov/coa/memdispo.nsf/pdfview/111705/$File/04-15032.PDF. Don't forget the dubyas.

The opinion, minus the legal citations, is as follows:
1. The Byron Union School District's (District) Islam program did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Islam program activities were not overt religious exercises' that raise Establishment Clause concerns.
2. The district court did not err in determining that the District and individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity from suit because they did not violate a constitutional right, let alone a clearly-established one.
3. The district court did not err in determining that the Dupee plaintiffs had no standing. The Dupees' claims were speculative and relied on conjecture that the Dupee children might be assigned to a teacher using the Islam program at a future date.

Again, I'm not sure why you post the review of INTO ISLAM, since it isn't on the list of approved materials posted on the California Education website. Do you have some other reason to believe it is being used in the California schools? You say that Arizona rejected it, but offer no reason to support your alarmist statement that its the whole country. Or is that part of your '1 is a fluke, 1 more is a panic attack' style of math? BP I really don't understand this mentality. If there is really a problem, or a potential problem, why is it that noone can present the information available, separate from their fears about what it may mean or may become, so that we may all discuss it and attempt to arrive at some consensus?

Anyway, this gives us an opportunity to examine The Textbook League's reviewing style. The reviewer begins by repeatedly indoctrinating us to the idea that this is a truly horrible text, using terms like "fake", "fraud", "insidiously", "brazen deceit", and ... "woo-woo." He dings the authors for making untestable statements. He then launches into several hair-splitting examples of why the religion is not self consistent and its internal beliefs are not historically accurate. Along the way, he sets up several "straw man" arguments, which he uses to attribute specific vile thoughts and motivations to the authors. Contrary to his own admonishment, he offers absolutely no foundation for these accusations, nor does he give us any reason to believe he has any insight whatever into their thinking. The paragraph on the deceit of "claiming" that Ramadan is in the ninth month of the lunar calendar is hilarious. Methinks this guy has been smoking his own woo-woo.

Why do I get the feeling this guy doesn't understand that we aren't trying to teach children the equivalent of a four year college divinity degree in a couple of years? Why is it so hard for some people to understand its not about the religion, its about the people, their stories, their culture, and how it all ties together? Does it matter if there are a few inaccuracies? Probably, but does it matter a great deal? Is it more important to get every detail and nuance "just right", or for the kids to learn and remember a framework they can plug information into later in life?

Just for fun, here is The Textbook League's review of Ancient Days, the sixth grade companion to Across the Centuries. The reviewing style seems quite similar, but now Christianity is the focus of his ire rather than Islam. Somehow I have the feeling that many of the people cheering the review you posted will be jeering this one. Funny, too, how he focuses only on the module on Christianity, while completely ignoring the other half dozen religions discussed in this text.


A Message of Ancient Days Houghton Mifflin Company 1999
(This is the first book in a two-book series called Houghton Mifflin
Social Studies. The series was developed for sale in California.)

Fake "history" of Jesus and Christianity In chapter 10 of A Message of Ancient Days, students find a message of fundamentalist claptrap. In a long section titled "The Life of Jesus," New Testament stories are presented as if they were items of history, the Jesus of legend is depicted as a real person, the distinction between the Jesus of history and the Jesus of legend is rigorously concealed, and historical scholarship is entirely ignored. The section is a fraud from beginning to end.

Like many other displays of fundamentalist propaganda, Houghton Mifflin's material contains deceitful claims that have been contrived to hide the New Testament's internal contradictions and other absurdities. For example:

"The story of the life, deeds and teachings of Jesus is told in the New Testament." That false claim is obviously intended to make students believe that the New Testament is a coherent, unitary document from which a single story ("the" story) of Jesus can be extracted. In truth, the tales of Jesus in the New Testament can't be fused into a single story because those tales are laden with conflicting claims.

"According to the New Testament, an angel appeared to a woman named Mary in the city of Nazareth about 2,000 years ago. The angel told her that she would have a child. The angel told Mary to name the child Jesus." In truth, that story appears only in the third book of the New Testament, the Gospel of St. Luke: An angel appears to Mary, tells her that she will be impregnated supernaturally, predicts that she will bear a son, and instructs her to call the son Jesus. The first book of the New Testament, the Gospel of St. Matthew, has a story about an angelic annunciation, but the story in Matthew is radically different from the one in Luke. In Matthew, Mary is already pregnant when the angel appears, and the angel delivers his prediction and his instruction to Mary's husband, not to Mary herself. The New Testament's two other gospels -- the Gospel of St. Mark and the Gospel of St. John -- have no stories whatever about the origin of Jesus or the origin of his name.

"Mary and her husband Joseph were Jews, and when Jesus was born they raised him as a Jew." The casual phrase "when Jesus was born" is not explained, and three crucial facts are concealed. The first fact is that no one knows when Jesus was born. The second is that only two of the New Testament's gospels purport to tell when Jesus was born. The third is that those two gospels flatly contradict one another. The Gospel of St. Matthew says that Jesus was born in Judaea in the days of King Herod, but the Gospel of St. Luke says that Jesus was born when a Roman governor was carrying out a "taxing" or census in Judaea. Those claims cannot be reconciled. The first Roman census in Judaea was conducted in AD 6, when the Romans made Judaea a province of their empire -- and King Herod was long gone by then. Herod had died in 5 or 4 BC.

"The New Testament says that the body of Jesus was placed in a tomb of solid rock. Three days later, however, a woman returned to the tomb and found it empty." That is a lie. Here is the truth: Among the canonical gospels, only the Gospel of St. John ascribes the discovery of the empty tomb to one person. The other canonical gospels tell contradictory stories in which the discovery of the empty tomb is attributed to two persons or more. Further, the four accounts disagree about the circumstances of that discovery. In Mark, Luke and John, the various discoverers go to the tomb and find that the great stone which covered the tomb's door has been removed. Then they encounter various supernatural figures who reveal that Jesus is alive again. (In Mark, this revelation is imparted by a lone man. In Luke, by a pair of men. In John, by an apparition of Jesus himself.) Now look at the Gospel of St. Matthew: In Matthew, the great stone is still in place when the discoverers arrive, but a helpful angel descends from heaven (amid an earthquake!), rolls the stone away, and declares that Jesus has risen.

Here is another grossly deceitful item from Houghton Mifflin's text: "The Gospels say that after his crucifixion Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples. This event [sic] is called the Resurrection. It convinced the disciples that Jesus was the Son of God." And now here are the essential facts that students need to know about the resurrection stories in the gospels of the New Testament: The early Christians had many stories in which Jesus, after his death, visited people who had been his friends during the last years of his life. Such stories existed before the New Testament was assembled. Some Christians took the stories literally, so they concluded that the dead Jesus had experienced a physical resurrection and had become a living man again. Other Christians, however, rejected this literalism and asserted that the resurrection stories were metaphorical, or were products of illusions, or were fictions that reflected theological misconceptions. Those conflicting views engendered a political battle that split the Christian church apart during the 2nd century. The battle was won, eventually, by the literalists. The literalists took control of the church, installed their beliefs as orthodoxies, and proceeded to canonize certain narratives which stated flatly that Jesus had risen from the dead and then had appeared to some of his followers. By the way: The earliest specimens of the Gospel of St. Mark have no stories in which Jesus makes post mortem appearances. The canonical Gospel of St. Mark that we read in the New Testament is a later version, rigged to include episodes in which Jesus makes some post mortem visitations and issues some instructions and prophecies.

Students should also learn that narratives pertaining to Jesus's resurrection appear not only in the four canonical gospels but also in another unit of the New Testament, St. Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. And students should know that the resurrection stories in the canonical gospels are inconsistent with each other and are grossly different from the claims made in Paul's letter.

The fundamentalist preachers who wrote Houghton Mifflin's section about "The Life of Jesus" have continually used distortion, selective omission, weaseling, and outright lying to delude and indoctrinate students. As I have said, the section is a fraud from beginning to end.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1123 Consumer Comment

Why dont you tell me Robert?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

"Tell us all again, how KNOWING something happened first hand, isn't the proof you want." -Robert

Why dont you tell me how if/when, I/ME/Ben knew or not about it, is proof?

I'm only one person, in a state of millions.

How did the "proof" completely hinge on IF/WHEN I personally knew about it?

If I DID, or DIDNT......wont change the facts.

And any attempt to alter those facts based on when/if Ben knew about it just makes you look like a fool.


If by some bizzare form of reasoning this were even remotely true then you have alot of work on your hands Robert. You need to get a tally of everyone that lives in the state. As well as everyone in my town, and county. When and if they knew about it. And IF they know where the school board is.

Etc.

Etc.

You will need to subject everyone here in this state equally on all the smoke screen points you have subjected me too.

P.S. I am flattered that you think I have so much power in this state of so many. That what I personally know or dont know is the basis for so many other peoples lives.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1122 Consumer Comment

Oh Robert.....you just cant see the difference between your personal vendetta for me....and the subject in general.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Robert....


I have posted plenty of links.

Maybe you should take it up with Ed, not me. I dont have a problem with getting my links posted. Why should I take anything up with him when I'm not the one with the problem posting links to anything!!!?

On the "3 week crash course in Islam" I dont still dont see it. You have shown nothing but dodges since the beginning. Now you think that by saying "oh they have culture courses in California" it bolsters Vera's claim of a "3 week crash course" thats forced on California students??? Get real.

When I was in Elementary school we had a thing called "Indian camp" where we studied the Miwok Indians. They were one of the many native tribes from around here. The main purpose was not to teach us just the "Miwok", but to teach about Indians in general. I would hardly call it a exercise to make us INTO Indians. No more than a simple culture course in Islam would make me a Muslim.

Still with all your smoke screens, it was only ONE school in the Byron/Brentwood area. The courts got involved because of a few panic mongering parents (honestly...the article only implies....one family that griped). What a waste of time and tax payer money. I would find any school anywhere in the county highly suspect if they totally ignored the role of Islam, and the Arabic world on our civilization. Just as I would for other cultures and events that molded our civilization. I would want my children schooled in the truth, and all of it. Not sheltered by fear as you seem to want yours.

Perhaps this ONE school, and the ONE teacher that took this "teach them all of it" mentality too far......PERHAPS. But I will have to side with the judge in this case........

Get over it.


On the Napa auto BS.....

As I have stated plenty of times before (and you just ignore)........

I used "Napa Auto Repair".....

Then I used "Napa Auto Center"......

Then I used "Napa Auto".......

ALL had the same number of shops listed, same names, same everything. A bunch of "Napa Auto Parts" and one....."Bob Grissoms Napa Auto Repair".

IT WAS AN EXAMPLE ROBERT!

An example that if I took VAGUE information, and just made up the rest like you do....as in.....

Robert said he is in "REPAIR"....I only see ONE "REPAIR" shop....its owners name is "BOB"....."BOB" is sometimes used for "ROBERT".......therefore it MUST be Roberts shop.

Yes its pathetic Robert, and nothing that will hold in a court of law. Thus why I used it as an EXAMPLE.

Now lets see how you used that system first....as FACT instead of an example......


Ben lives in Martinez California.....I want to make him look bad....since this is the same state and even county as this one school I'm trying to make look like many with a bogus crash course in Islam.....I will accuse him of not knowing it happened....and I will call it his backyard.....I will even accuse him of not knowing where the school board is because Martinez is the county seat....thus I can prove that he was unaware....and since he alone was unaware.....the story must be true completely on every point.


Vague...inaccurate....and the gaps filled in by YOU, Robert, not the facts.


I think it was completely trounced when the truth about where the school board really is came out. Something that both of us didnt know! Did it prove you or I right or wrong? Of course not!! Where the school board resides in my county had NOTHING to do with the validity of the issue. But you certainly tried to make it a clincher! Didnt you! As if the whole subject was going to be proven by where the school boards phisical location was going to prove your story "fact"?? You have to be kidding me!

Now when you look at those two scenarios in a formula like that, you can see who reached...and who REALLY REALLY REALLY reached for that CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.

I did a simple search in Yahoo! yellow pages with a name and city name. You went all over the place!

Months this has gone on. Months of new and more outrageous dodges. Many even come full circle as if you had forgotten you used them again.


In the end its the same deal I have put forth every time. I have never wavered. Why do you have so many angles when I only have one.......and that being......

ONE SCHOOL.....Period.

Yet you have come up with all sorts of angles. This "boo h*o I cant post links!" is just the latest in a loooooong string of excuses.

Matter of fact the whole reason this subject of Islam returned is because I used that "Napa Auto".......EXAMPLE!!!....which you have then dragged out the whole Islam thing again. Why? Because its not about the "Islam subject" at all is it Robert....its about this personal vendetta against me you have had for months!

Once again.....


Whatever you think you have on me will never change the "facts" of the case about Islam....it was ONE school.

Whatever you think you have on me will never change the fact that it was...ONE SCHOOL.

Whatever you think you have on me will never change the fact that it was...ONE SCHOOL.

ONE SCHOOL.

UNO SCHOOL.

A SCHOOL.

SCHOOL.

Singular.......SCHOOL!

Continue your personal vendetta for all I care. It has been, it is, and always will be.......


ONE SCHOOL.


As the "ultra-liberal" judge said.....GET OVER IT!

Now why dont you call that judge up and tell him "Your honor, I have found a person by the name of Ben that lives in Martinez, I have circumstantial evidence that he didnt know about this one schoool, thus I want you to make it illegal, and verify that it is a "3 week crash course in Islam" in many schools. Because you see your Honor, I think everything in your state should be based on IF/WHEN this one person in Martinez knew about it based on circumstantial evidence.".

I think if it was a liberal, or conservative judge....he would laugh you out of his courtroom.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1121 REBUTTAL Individual responds

So many stupid people

AUTHOR: Dan - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

I am so amazed at the stupidity of people. They bash our presidentusing the same old talking points that the DNC puts up. No mind of their own just mind numb robots of the left.Lately non offer any solutions. Gas is still a deal given inflation. The Government rips us of more then any oil companies daily but yet they go on. I have yet to debate any of these people that do not spew the same old lines and talking points. MIND NUMB YES!! Most voted for a man that would have finished destroying our nation after all the Clintons did and still the ramble on. Kerry is a Communist interested in hiking your taxes, taking away your freedoms and creating more socialist programs such as socialist Security what a joke. You never will get back what you put in or close. All you do is give power to the brokers of this. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY AND GO TO CUBA if you don't appreciate what our great country gives. Bashing Bush is a loser game so keep it up and we on the right win.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1120 Consumer Suggestion

Can't you guys let it go????

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 21, 2006

This is really getting old. Can't you two just let it go and respectfully agree to disagree? You two keep repeating the same arguments and keep attacking each other.
Why don't you two meet in a chat room and have it out once and for all......

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1119 Consumer Comment

You are wrong as always, Ben.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 20, 2006

"Ok Robert, I knew you would throw out a another smoke screen. This one about the editor nixing all of your links is the next I guess. Funny how this is your "latest" excuse. Funny how after all these months you never mentioned that before. Funny how you seem to come up with different reasons months after the fact. Funny how you could never mention them when they first "started". Funny how this is another excuse, after many of them, to avoid reality. If this was the real reason you have no proof of your claims, then why all the other excuses??

Little late bud. As usual. Your smoke is not thick enough to hide it at all this time.

The editor seems to let me post some links. If your link is to a news source he doesnt seem to have a problem with it. Of course if your link is to some other, bizzare place....he does. He allowed plenty of links when we got into it about my Grandfather, and McCarthy. He has let me post many links on many subjects. All verifiable news sources or links to things of public record. He even let me post the census page. Seems you couldnt even do that.

Are your links off the wall, religious nut case sites?

Most likely."

Let's see, there's no smoke over here. Must be from that pipe your toking on.

This is what ED put in place of what I actually posted: "Try looking for me using napaonline. or just use Store Locatorto find me."

I put the website in there, and I never said use Store Locator. I am NOT a store. I am a Napa AutoCare Center. You would use THAT locator, not the one for a Store.

You see, Ben...ED does EDit the posts. He also deletes links to sites that have everything to do with the discussion at hand. Pay attention to his rule:
"The reason why we have removed links, e-mail address or phone numbers from this report is because people have, in the past, attempted the following, ...all too often.

Posting LINKS

Many times links to unknown web sites will cause your pc to freeze up and /or cause you to get a computer virus, virtually rendering your computer useless. Most of the time, this is the work of a Company or an Individual who has been reported. Many Government links are no better than the BBB and are just a waste of time, giving you false hope..."

Gee, Ben. Maybe you should tell ED he doesn't know what he's doing. It looks to me, like he's following his own policy.

You still want "proof"?

I'll give it to you again.

"I was well aware it happened."-Ben 4/13/06

Tell us all again, how KNOWING something happened first hand, isn't the proof you want.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1118 Consumer Comment

Here we go again

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 19, 2006

This is from Investors Business Daily. This is the online equivalent to the Wall Street Journal.

"Teaching Johnny About Islam
Posted 5/19/2006

Education: In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran. Yup, the same court that found the phrase "under God" unconstitutional now endorses Islamic catechism in public school.

In a recent federal decision that got surprisingly little press, even from conservative talk radio, California's 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it's OK to put public-school kids through Muslim role-playing exercises, including:

Reciting aloud Muslim prayers that begin with "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . ."

Memorizing the Muslim profession of faith: "Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger."

Chanting "Praise be to Allah" in response to teacher prompts.

Professing as "true" the Muslim belief that "The Holy Quran is God's word."

Giving up candy and TV to demonstrate Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting.

Designing prayer rugs, taking an Arabic name and essentially "becoming a Muslim" for two full weeks.

Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam.

But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture."

So the parents appealed. Unfortunately, the most left-wing court in the land got their case. The 9th Circuit, which previously ruled in favor of an atheist who filed suit against the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, upheld the lower court ruling.

The decision is a major victory for the multiculturalists and Islamic apologists in California and across the country who've never met a culture or religion they didn't like with the exception of Western civilization and Christianity. They are legally in the clear to indoctrinate kids into the "peaceful" and "tolerant" religion of Islam, while continuing to denigrate Judeo-Christian values.

In the California course on world religions, Christianity is not presented equally. It's covered in just two days and doesn't involve kids in any role-playing activities. But kids do get a good dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting history of its persecution of other peoples. In contrast, Islam gets a pass from critical review. Even jihad is presented as an "internal personal struggle to do one's best to resist temptation," and not holy war.

The ed consultant's name is Susan L. Douglass. No, she's not a Christian scholar. She's a devout Muslim activist on the Saudi government payroll, according to an investigation by Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington." He found that for years Douglass taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy just outside Washington, D.C. Her husband still teaches there.

So what? By infiltrating our public school system, the Saudis hope to make Islam more widely accepted while converting impressionable American youth to their radical cause. Recall that John Walker Lindh, the "American Taliban," was a product of the California school system. What's next, field trips to Mecca?

This case is critical not just to our culture but our national security. It should be brought before the Supreme Court, which has outlawed prayer in school. Let's see what it says about practicing Islam in class. It will be a good test for the bench's two new conservative justices."

It turns out it wasn't just one school. It's EVERY school in California. Go to the California Education website. They list the book in question as "Across the Centuries", and is the standard textbook for History in ALL California Middle Schhols. Not just ONE, but ALL of them. You really should have stopped before you started this Ben.

How about this one. It's from The Textbook League, a group of educators who review the California State Education textbooks for errors, etc. They just love another of the books you guys use. For the record, Arizona already threw this next book out of it's schools. You see, it's not just California, it's the whole d**n country. See Ben, we're not really picking on you alone. Of course, people from other states don't deny this crap is happening in their state. Just you.

"INTO ISLAM: An Introduction to the History of Islam
2004. 107 pages. ISBN: 1-57336-074-0. Interaction Publishers, Inc. (DBA "Interact"),
5937 Darwin Court, Suite 106, Carlsbad, California 92008.
Another Manual, Another Fraud
William J. Bennetta
In 1991 Interaction Publishers, Inc., doing business under the name "Interact," published a curriculum manual called ISLAM: A Simulation of Islamic History and Culture, 610-1100 and began to sell it to history teachers in grades 6 through 12. The manual was a fraud. It was a religious-indoctrination device, contrived by Interact and two Muslim organizations, and the "history" that it purveyed was both false and vicious.
Interact now is marketing a new curriculum manual -- titled INTO ISLAM: An Introduction to the History of Islam -- that is a derivative of ISLAM: A Simulation. The new manual is aimed at the same audience of teachers, is freighted with material recycled from ISLAM: A Simulation, and is another fraud.

Some Comparisons
In a review that I wrote for The Textbook Letter [see note 1, below], I advanced this description of Interact's earlier product:

ISLAM: A Simulation has no educational purpose, and it can serve no educational function. From beginning to end, it is nothing but a Muslim religious publication, produced by writers who seek to exploit classroom teachers for propagating Islam.
From beginning to end, ISLAM: A Simulation directs teachers to deceive their students and to boost Islam by disseminating lies and by falsifying history. From beginning to end, ISLAM: A Simulation requires teachers to indoctrinate their students by feeding them servings of "information" in which historical facts are insidiously intermixed with Muslim myths and Muslim woo-woo. From beginning to end, ISLAM: A Simulation directs teachers to present facts, myths and woo-woo as equivalent, equipotent items. From beginning to end, ISLAM: A Simulation requires teachers and students alike to abandon rationality, to shun analytical thinking, and to embrace the view that any claim about anything -- no matter how fatuous the claim may be -- must be accepted as true.

And near the end of my report I said:


Page for page and ounce for ounce, ISLAM: A Simulation is the most malignant product that I have seen during all my years as a reviewer . . . . I assert that any teacher who would have anything to do with ISLAM: A Simulation should be fired before the day is out. ISLAM: A Simulation has no place in any legitimate school, and neither does any teacher who is so ignorant and so stupid that he cannot recognize Interact's manual of rubbish for what it is.
I now recommend the speedy sacking of any teacher who is dumb enough to be gulled by Interact's new creation, INTO ISLAM. In INTO ISLAM, Interact's writers again show themselves to be charlatans, and they again mount sustained displays of trickery. In INTO ISLAM they again disseminate fake "information," they again practice brazen deceit by intermixing historical facts with Muslim myths and Muslim woo-woo, and they again strive to turn teachers into agents who will promote Islam in history classes and will subject students to Islamic indoctrination.

The most noteworthy difference between INTO ISLAM and ISLAM: A Simulation is this: The lesson plans in INTO ISLAM are not rigged around simulations. The core of ISLAM: A Simulation was a series of lessons that required the teacher to preach Muslim doctrines and required the students to "simulate becoming Muslims" by wearing "Islamic" clothing, by parroting Muslim superstitions as if those superstitions were facts, by making religious banners, by fashioning prayer rugs, and so forth. The lessons that are provided to the teacher in INTO ISLAM don't require that students pretend to be Muslims, so many of these lessons are not as outrageous or as blatantly crazy as were the analogous lessons in ISLAM: A Simulation.

Even so, INTO ISLAM contains plenty of Muslim preaching and religious propaganda, much of which appears in "essays" that the teacher must distribute to students. Essay #2, for example, abounds with propaganda that incorporates various claims derived from the Muslim foundation myth (i.e., the Muslim myth that purportedly describes how Islam originated). Interact's writers falsely present those claims -- which include statements about Muhammad's early life [note 2] and about his legendary initial meeting with the angel Gabriel -- as historical facts. Indeed, Essay #2 imparts to students the "fact" that Gabriel told Muhammad to warn the inhabitants of Mecca against the worshiping of idols, the "fact" that Muhammad shared with other people the revelations that Gabriel had provided, and the "fact" that Muhammad continued to receive supernatural revelations till he died, in 632. In Essay #2, Interact's writers demonstrate anew their devotion to the indoctrination strategy that pervaded ISLAM: A Simulation. Their strategy is to turn students into true believers by turning them into fools -- fools who will believe anything, will never ask for evidence, and will not apprehend the difference between a statement that can be tested against evidence and a statement that cannot.

The writers dispense more propaganda in Essay #3, and some of it is exorbitantly phony. For example:


[Muhammad's] words established the Muslim belief that all Arabs are descended from one famous monotheistic ancestor, Abraham. According to Muslim tradition, Abraham's son Ismail had 12 sons. These sons founded 12 tribes of desert nomads. Thus, according to the teachings of Islam, all Arabs really belong to one family.
Now here is the truth: No matter what "words" Muhammad may have uttered, the "Muslim belief" which the Interact writers have described was imported into Islam from Judaism. It revolves around two figures -- Abraham (or Avraham) and Ishmael (or Yishmael) -- who had appeared, many centuries before Muhammad's time, in the Hebrew Bible's Book of Genesis. The name Ismail is a transliteration of an Arabic variant of Ishmael, but we needn't dwell on this quirk of nomenclature. What is important to us here is that Interact's writers have entirely concealed the literary history of the figures Abraham and Ismail, and they have created the false impression that the story of Abraham, Ismail and Ismail's twelve sons was originated by Muhammad. (Incidentally: While Muslims may like to say that Abraham was "monotheistic," he was not. The Book of Genesis doesn't portray Abraham as a monotheist and doesn't provide support for attempts to transform him into one. The Hebrew Bible's first suggestions of monotheism occur in the Book of Exodus, not in the Book of Genesis, and they are linked to the character Moses.)

In their next paragraph the Interact writers retail the Muslim belief that "Abraham rebuilt the Ka'bah," but they refuse to touch this obvious question: If Abraham rebuilt it, what person had erected it in the first place? The answer, according to Muslim lore, is that the Ka'bah had been erected by the first man -- Adam. But Adam is another figure whom the Muslims have borrowed from the myths in the Hebrew Bible's Book of Genesis, and Interact's writers have flatly refused to mention him.

By their meretricious handling of Abraham and their sinking of Adam, Interact's writers have shown that they are unwilling to acknowledge Islam's mythological debt to Judaism. Still, these writers want to say something which will loosely connect Islam to Judaism -- and to Christianity too -- because Muslim propagandists who operate in the United States invariably try to project the impression that Islam is cordial to those two other religions. Here is what the Interact writers bring forth:


Abraham is also a patriarch in Judaism and Christianity. . . . All three religions share some common history and beliefs and honor the same prophets.
Those statements cry out for amplification and explanation, but the writers provide none at all. They plainly do not want students to know that the mythic roots of Islam, like the mythic roots of Christianity, lie in Judaism; so they refuse to explicate how the similarities among those religions arose.

Later in Essay #3, the Interact writers uncork these "facts" about the inception of the Koran:

[Muhammad] spoke the words of his revelations and others wrote down what he said. His collected revelations form the Qur'an, the holy book of Islam.
That image of Muhammad declaiming "his revelations" to a crew of stenographers is another item taken from the Muslim foundation myth, and we've seen it before -- in ISLAM: A Simulation, in Houghton Mifflin's middle-school text Across the Centuries [note 3], and in other publications that boost Islam and indoctrinate students. Across the Centuries even declares that Muhammad's companions recited his utterances "in his presence" (presumably so that he could check and verify them), and that "By the time of his death, all the revelations had been compiled into one collection, the Qur'an."

All that stuff is superstition and fable. There is no evidence that any Koranic scripture existed, in any form, until decades after Muhammad died, and the earliest known versions of the Koran differ from the canonical version that Muslims use today. The canonical version arose through a process of literary evolution, during which the Koran's structure and its language and even its alphabet were altered [note 4].

Near the end of Essay #3, Interact's writers deliver a double-whammy. They again present as historical fact an untestable claim about supernatural "revelations," and they combine that claim with a slippery misrepresentation of Ramadan:


Ramadan is the ninth month of the Muslim lunar calendar. It was at that time of year that Prophet Muhammad received his first revelations from God.
That reference to Ramadan as a "time of year" will surely lead students to infer that Ramadan occurs at some fixed time within the period that Americans call a year. The students' inference will be false. The period that Americans call a year is measured by the Gregorian calendar, has 365 days, and is a close approximation of the solar year -- the period in which Earth completes one revolution around the Sun. The Muslims' lunar year, however, is not a close approximation of the solar year: It is about eleven days shorter. As a result, the Muslims' year continually drifts backward with respect to the solar year. In any given solar year, Ramadan occurs earlier than it did in the previous solar year -- and as the solar years roll by, Ramadan slowly migrates backward through the four seasons.

A Common Tactic
In their previous manual, ISLAM: A Simulation, the Interact writers purported to describe Islam and the Arabic world during the time from Muhammad's day until 1100. In INTO ISLAM, they purport to tell about Islam and the Arabic world during the time from Muhammad's day until 1258. So the writers again have chosen to deal with a span of only a few centuries -- a few centuries from the period when Islamic civilization was flourishing and the Arabic world was enjoying its heyday. Muslim propagandists commonly favor this tactic, because it enables them to engage in gross distortion: They can tell about the intellectual vivacity that was a feature of Islamic societies in medieval times, but they can avoid acknowledging that the Arabic world later stagnated, lost its intellectual vigor, rejected natural science, fell far behind the West in intellectual affairs, and eventually produced the societies that characterize the Arabic Middle East today -- societies that are sumps of institutionalized ignorance and backwardness [note 5].
Accordingly, INTO ISLAM has lessons that require students to learn and tell about medieval Muslim achievements in science, in mathematics, in medicine and in other fields -- but nowhere is there any lesson that will help students to understand that Islam today is associated not with intellectual inquiry and intellectual innovation but with intellectual stasis and the repression of intellectual endeavors [note 6]. Nowhere in INTO ISLAM is there a lesson that will equip students to comprehend what Tariq Ali meant when, in his recent book The Clash of Fundamentalisms [note 7], he wrote:


What I want to know is why there is never a single Muslim name when the Nobel Prizes for Physics and Chemistry are announced each year. Are intelligence, talent and inspiration absent from Muslim genes? They never were in the past. What explains the rigor mortis?
The subtitle of INTO ISLAM declares that this product is An Introduction to the History of Islam. It is no such thing. It is a few centuries' worth of grotesque pseudohistory, intended for delivery to students by incompetent and gullible teachers.

Notes


See "Page for Page, This Is the Most Malignant Product That I've Seen During All My Years as a Reviewer" in TTL, Vol. 11, No. 4. [return to text]

The Muslim foundation myth notwithstanding, practically nothing is known about Muhammad's life before he set himself up as a prophet. Even the claim that he was born and reared in Mecca is unsupported by evidence. [return to text]

See the article "Houghton Mifflin's Islamic Connection" in TTL, Vol. 11, No. 3. [return to text]

See The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book, a collection of scholarly articles edited by Ibn Warraq. It was published in 1998 by Prometheus Books (Amherst, New York). See also Toby Lester's article "What Is the Koran?" in The Atlantic Monthly, January 1999. See also "Radical New Views of Islam and the Origins of the Koran," by Alexander Stille, in The New York Times, 2 March 2002. [return to text]

The rejection of natural science was an especially potent factor in the Islamic world's decline. See the chapter "Social and Cultural Barriers" in Bernard Lewis's book What Went Wrong? (issued by Oxford University Press (New York City) in 2002). [return to text]

See Barbara Crossette's article "Study Warns of Stagnation in Arab Societies" in The New York Times, 2 July 2002. See also: "Rote Schooling in Saudi Arabia Leaves Students Ill-Suited to Work," by Howard Schneider, in The Washington Post, 12 June 1999; and "A Grim Arab Survey of Rights and Education," by the Associated Press, in The New York Times, 21 October 2003. [return to text]

The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads and Modernity, published in 2002 by Verso (New York City). [return to text]


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

William J. Bennetta is a professional editor, a fellow of the California Academy of Sciences, the president of The Textbook League, and the editor of The Textbook Letter. He writes often about the propagation of quackery, false "science" and false "history" in schoolbooks."

I think that should do it. Turn on your spin-o-rama Ben, and let it whirl.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1117 Consumer Comment

And the "logic" continues.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 19, 2006

Ok Robert, I knew you would throw out a another smoke screen. This one about the editor nixing all of your links is the next I guess. Funny how this is your "latest" excuse. Funny how after all these months you never mentioned that before. Funny how you seem to come up with different reasons months after the fact. Funny how you could never mention them when they first "started". Funny how this is another excuse, after many of them, to avoid reality. If this was the real reason you have no proof of your claims, then why all the other excuses??

Little late bud. As usual. Your smoke is not thick enough to hide it at all this time.

The editor seems to let me post some links. If your link is to a news source he doesnt seem to have a problem with it. Of course if your link is to some other, bizzare place....he does. He allowed plenty of links when we got into it about my Grandfather, and McCarthy. He has let me post many links on many subjects. All verifiable news sources or links to things of public record. He even let me post the census page. Seems you couldnt even do that.

Are your links off the wall, religious nut case sites?

Most likely.


Continue to attack me personally all you want Robert. The subject is not me. Its a comment about Islam in CA schools. Nothing you think you have on me will ever change the fact that it was only.......


.....one school.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1116 Consumer Comment

Powell was a failure from the gitgo

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 18, 2006

If it wasn't for Colin Powell, we would not have needed to go back into Iraq. HE is the one who started whining and crying to Bush Sr about how mean we were killing everything that moved on the "Highway of Death" during the Gulf War.

We were 30 miles outside Baghdad when the order to halt came. Shwartzkopf was livid. Why in the hell, do you stop when the enemy is all but eliminated?

If he had been in charge in 1945, we'd have never crossed the Rhine.

Powell may have been a fine soldier at one time, but he is seriously lacking when it comes to understanding when the battle is over. I was taught the same thing every Marine, Soldier, Seaman, and Airman is taught. The battle is over, when the enemy is vanquished. That means eliminated.

You don't stop because the enemy is taking massive casualties. The whole point of battle is to CAUSE the enemy to take massive casualties.

General Patton said it best:"Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country. You win by making the other poor dumb b*****d die for his."

If Colin Powell had just shut the hell up on that fateful day, and let us WIN(instead of that idiotic cease-fire, that was never adhered to by Iraq), we would have won within 24 hours and been done with that region.

Do you still think he's a team player? Who's team is he on?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1115 Consumer Comment

Vera, stop playing the victim, you're not a child anymore.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 18, 2006

Vera: 6/8/2006 (Speaking of trolls...) > "B.", how can such an educated person be so utterly backward? Now Ben, whom you once stated yourself was deserving of your chides for making outlandish statements, has gone from "chump" to "chum" in as little as two Rebuttals. Where once you yourself had said that both Robert and I offered valid points and provided proof, you now stand accusing us of being the trolls.

So you want to be my chum, eh? Here, fishy, I've got a nice spot for you right in the center of the cove. Not that I was doing so in that instance, but you would find it utterly backward of me to reach out to my enemy with friendship? Now to me, backward would be closing one's eyes to the light of reason, clinging blindly to rapidly sinking fables, and calling this faith. Funny how people's notions about words differ.

My "chides" for Ben's outlandish statements stand. You make your own share of outlandish statements. One that you seem particularly fond of lately is the one that Clinton was the only prez to be a pardoned felon, and an exemption was made for him to be the only prez who hasn't served in the military. Now, I've warned you several times that most of your info on ol' BJ is incorrect. How funny that you choose for your 'favorite' one that has absolutely no truth in it at all. Zero.

There is not and never has been a requirement that the president have military service. It doesn't even make sense; that would require the VP, every member of congress, and every cabinet member to have military service, since all are potentially in line for succession. Many of the early presidents did not (like Robbie's fav, James Madison). As I recall, in the period following Teddy Roosevelt's term, no president had military service until after Franklin Roosevelt's death, about 35 years. And the pardon is pure BS, based apparently on the claim that Carter's blanket pardon for draft deserters applied to Clinton. It is simply not true. He may have "gamed" the system, but nothing he did was illegal. He was never AWOL. When the draft lottery was held, he was classified as 1A, and his birthdate drew a number in the 300's, so he was never drafted. Consider yourself "chided". Not that it will stop you from using this example. Like many conservatives, you never let a little thing like the truth get in the way of a good sounding argument. Like when it was pointed out that Janet Reno had no agenda to teach masturbation to school children. You just dropped her name and continue to make the claim, "that b***h that tried to insert masturbation as a subject in health."

As for my saying that you and Robbie boi have offered any valid points or proof on this issue, lol, I think not. If I even hinted at such a thing, I was just trying to be nice. Actually, I believe I tried to point out to you when you first posted this story, that the source was suspect, and it was probably more spin than fact. As for proof, you have provided none, nada, zilch, zippo. Your "points" are so corroded and mis-gapped, the only way you're getting any combustion at all is by injecting pure methane, and charging the walls with massive amounts of static. And its not that I'm accusing (ladies & gentlemen of the jury, these cretins...) you, I'm simply pointing out the FACT that the 3 of you have been trolling each other in circles for the past several months. Its going nowhere and really needs to stop. Does anybody reading this disagree? Can I get a witness?

V> And suddenly, Ben is capable of clear and concise thoughts? I have yet to see that happen, except maybe for the fact that he's still doing the same hair-splitting he's always been doing. THAT'S the only "clarity"...CLEARLY he's gonna just be a stubborn a*s. Nothing "concise" about that. I still wonder why, if Ben doesn't want ANY religion taught in ANY public schools, why no outrage over making the kids bow and pray to "Allah, the compassionate, the Creator"? And yet he sees fit to goad a fight on Christianity, PLUS bite off MORE than he can chew when he gets a fight he wasn't prepared for. Make no mistake, Folks....Islam is being shoved in your face; but it's supposd to be alright, as long as we don't bring up Christianity.

Apparently, there's a lot happening that you don't, or won't, see. Perhaps the reason there's no outrage is WE DON'T BELIEVE IT HAPPENED. Its kinda hard to work up a good lather over nothing, well for some of us, anyway. And the only people shoving Islam in MY face are you and the folks who write and read your "news" sources. And I'm not talking about the ones that slant or shade the news, but the ones who make it up as they go along.

V> Do I feel as I am a "victim" here? Not really. I'm a big enough kid to defend myself and my position quite well. And I don't give a tinker's d**n if anyone likes it. And I don't give a s**t if you agree or disagree with my beliefs, be they Christian, Buddhist, or none at all. Funny how it's a "Cultural Enrichment Encounter" for one religion, and "Proselytization" for another.

ROFLMFAO! Funny how you start the paragraph NOT being a victim, but end up with that same ol' "Christianity in Chains" victim mentality. Perhaps you can explain something I've been wondering about for awhile. Why is it that the only way most "contemporary" Christians can "defend their position" is by twisting and distorting the truth? Must not be much of a position if you ask me. And do they really think they are, indeed, defending anything, rather than just stroking their own egos? Not that I'm suggesting this applies to you, necessarily, but perhaps something to think about guarding against.

V> "Stripper for Christ"? Not in this or any lifetime. Ben isn't singling me out because I'm a woman, he's trolled for a Christian and now he's mad because he got one he can't shake.

The point I was trying to make is that some are called to be strippers for Christ and some are called to be vicious attack dogs. You go where your calling leads you.

V> You can go ahead and use every lame attempt at logic you want, Bennie...you still have never managed to prove me wrong. Not one single time. My posture in what I know and believe is STILL unshaken. You can feel free to use the usual poor excuse "I don't have to prove you wrong, Vera...you've made an a*s out of yourself plenty of times here." fall-back. Losrd knows, you can't touch this, so you're gonna try the old "baffle 'em with bullshit" routine.

On the other hand, you have never managed to prove yourself right, at least not on this issue.

V> Regarding the Circuit City Reports, I went there to let Ben know he shouldn't be dragging this fight everywhere, and to give a background to anyone interested in the source of our little quarrel reasons as to its nature. If you don't like it, mayhaps you should convince your little "Chum" that it would have been wise not to seek new Reports to smear others on, and keep the argument where it belonged. No one "Left me hanging". I made my statement and left with no intent to return.

Well, sure. Because my short admonishment to Ben, and the fact that he and Robert brought the argument back here, wasn't enough. Because my posting of the number for this report wasn't enough. Because you knew that anyone going to that report to find info on Circuit City would really want to read 7 pages of you ranting at and about Ben; they would otherwise walk away feeling incomplete. Sure, I understand. And I'm sorry if I implied that Ben left you hanging, clearly you did that all on your own.

V> As I had said; I had no desire to pursue Ben to the Circuit City Reports...he's gotta be King Cretin somewhere...it might as well be there. He even tried to bring this nonsense up in another Report...but had the good sense to not mention specific names and the subject's depth. For once, a smart move. He wants to pick a fight behind my back, I'll turn and fight there too. I know I have provided truthful, solid information. Ben is too goddamn lazy to read it, so he simply denies its existence.

You had no desire to pursue Ben, yet there you are. Magically transported against your will and forced to write a seven page he said / she said novella. Ben started it, and he alone is responsible for keeping it going. We all know the best way to get rid of a troll is to feed it regularly in as many different locations as possible.

V> Ben, regarding that "Precious Link", and how I "finally learned to cut and paste"? Try again, Princess; that link is supposed to lead you back to this very page, and I even took the time to mention the very POSTS that contain the specific info, BY NAME, used with permission from the VERY TEXTBOOK USED in the RESPECTIVE SchoolS. Cut and pated from the very site of the textbook company, Houghton-Mifflin. Have the balls to read the info I have provided in BOTH posts....there's LOTS of it, which is why the Rebuttals are so long. If you don't want to read the information I have provided, then just accepth the GLARING FACT that you are wrong, and move on.

Yes, you posted some very alarmist articles that are pure BS and, furthermore, offer no PROOF of anything. Coupled with some very selective cut and paste from the STUDY GUIDES that accompany the textbook. You have provided little in the way of fact, certainly no GLARING fact.

V> Obviously it's a reality issue with you, Benjo...you refuse to grasp it. You should just stick to logging all the innumerable Reports you've Rebuttaled---as clearly, you have the time to respond to many.

Can we get a consensus here? If I log all the reports the three of you have rebutted, can I declare one of you to be the winner and put an end to it all?

V> To Damon, I appreciate that you have taken the time to clarify my point to James. I couldn't have said the "paraphrased part" any better. Perhaps hearing it from someone who's not in total agreement with me might help the point sink in. My inent has been from the beginning, to simply carry a healthy debate here; had there never been the attempt to drag this fight into numerous other posts, I would have happily left it here.

V> Not so with some others, like Ben, Charles, and James. But it's only "Trolling" if I defend myself from some juvenile who seeks to carry a fight he knows he's lost from board to board (sort of like how Ben jumped Robert's case for no reason, other than to tell him to "suck a fat baby's p***s" over on the Pat Benatar Report, then proceeded to make the topic purely about arguments he's losing with Robert on OTHER Reports.) in hopes to get some kind of backing from others.

Yawn! More of the "I'm a victim. I have no control over my own actions." mentality.

V> The real irony here is that this has gotten WAY bigger than it should have, and we have Ben's stupidity to thank for it, regarding that FACT that Islam WAS being taought as part of PUBLIC SCHOOL in AT LEAST THREE California Schools: Byron, Brentwood, and Covina.

Well, certainly, since California law requires using this textbook, Islam is most likely being taught in all California Middle Schools, or at least being taught about. This is, of course, a far cry from your initial charge that they were forced to worship Allah and play a Jihad game. I do agree its gotten way bigger than it should have, but we disagree as to who deserves the thanks.

V> On these facts I will stand solidly (in addition to my many other beliefs), and have never changed that stance by a hair's breadth. I don't intend to, either.

There you go about your solid facts again. Well, Vera, I think I'll start another rebuttal, and go back and take a look at the "facts" you've posted, and we'll see if they amount to anything.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1114 Consumer Comment

It makes you wonder why...

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 18, 2006

George W's most qualified appointees defected from his position amidst the turmoil that has and is continuing to develop in Iraq.

Robert, you made mention of Colin Powell being "a team player" while Bush was fortunate enough to have Powell as his Secretary of State? I say, he is one who could have lead the "team", considering the fact that he is alot more qualified to be our Commander and Chief.

Check the resume..."Powell served two tours of duty in Vietnam, and as a battalion commander in Korea. He later commanded the 2nd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) and V Corps, United States Army in Europe, and was Commander in Chief of Forces Command, headquartered at Fort McPherson, Georgia. General Powell was the 12th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 1, 1989 until September 30, 1993, serving under both President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton."(lucidcafe)

Consider this also, and as a former Marine you can appreciate this...Powell has been the recipient of the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, Bronze Star Medal, and the Purple Heart.
"His civilian awards include the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Congressional Gold Medal, and an honorary knighthood (Knight Commander of the Bath) from the Queen of England. He retired from the U.S. Army in 1993."(lucidcafe)

These amongst many other accomplishments, clearly, seperate him from mention with George W.

Who wants to be "lead" on a "team" when you know you are more qualified then it's "leader". Also, one may question the intent of Colin Powell and why he left, possibly he knows more then he cares to mention?

Robert, watch what you say about a fellow service man.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1113 Consumer Suggestion

Let us not forget the little people.

AUTHOR: L. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 17, 2006

Do not get me started on GWB! I will never stop!

GWB is continuing his Daddy's war. And the rich, keep on getting richer and the poor middle class...God knows what the future holds for us?

Maybe being evicted for not having enough money to make the rent? Not being able to make enough money because our jobs are being outsourced?

One of my neighbors is being taken to court because she cannot pay the rent, but where I live, there is no real dirt cheap, apartments, anywhere. What is a person supposed to do? Work ten jobs just to live comfortably?

One little middle class American's two cents.




L.Mora

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1112 Consumer Comment

I AGREE WITH JAMES!

AUTHOR: L. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 17, 2006

I agree with James! I love your picture of GWB! He has been doing a lot of shaking hands with the enemies, as well as, with the Devil.

Just because a man is elected The President of the United States, does NOT mean that he is doing the right thing and just because I think that this war was unnecessary, does not mean that I, or anyone for that matter, is a communist, if we do not agree with the President.

I really wish people would stop thinking that! I am an American, an angry one!

The next time you are on a long line at the gas pump, sitting in your car, in the unbearable heat, just think of one good thing that GWB has done. I have come up with, Zero!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1111 Consumer Comment

Here is the Cliff's Notes version of this novel

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 17, 2006

Vera made a claim back in October 2005.

Ben vehemently denied it ever happened, and demanded proof of what Vera said.

Vera and I provided ample links(ED deletes nearly all links as is his stated policy), and included verbatim statements from the people invoved, with the location of where to find this information.

Ben spent eight months denying the existence of evidence.

After eight months of denial, Ben admitted to knowing it happened all along.

In Ben's mind, if someone else doesn't provide "proof", then it must not have happened. You must keep in mind, Ben will disregard all evidence you provide as "proof", while never telling you what he will accept as proof. The mere fact he KNEW it happened, isn't "proof" according to Ben.

There's a song hat comes to mind by Michael Jackson. It was about a rat. The rat was named Ben.

End of story.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1110 Consumer Comment

Even......MORE.....Robert-logic

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 16, 2006

"""We already gave you the other two schools. Well, actually, YOU gave us one(Brentwood)(I notice that's where your teacher buddies live...coincidence?), and Vera and I gave you the school in Covina. Three equals SOME. Your story gets worse and worse each time you try to retell it.""""" ---Robert


I GAVE YOU THE SCHOOL?

Please Robert, show me where I even gave a school by name? Show me. I challenge you.

I have done nothing but switch back and forth between "Brentwood" and "Byron" because the article (the ONLY article!) on the matter switches as well. It cant even get its towns right. And as it has been explained several times, both of these towns obviously use the SAME schools for all of their children.

Now this entire thing about MORE schools with this "Crash course" you speak of is just pathetic. Do you actually expect everyone to believe that because ONE school there in......BYRON/BRENTWOOD automatically means ALL THE SCHOOLS IN BYRON/BRENTWOOD had the "crash course"??????

Now your really reaching!

So, once again, I ask......

Please give the informaition (links..whatever) about this school in Covina. You have given a name but I can find nothing about it. I am not denying that it MAY be out there. I just cant find it as you say you have. So...honestly...please supply it.

And.....

Show me how suddenly ALL of the schools in the BYRON/BRENTWOOD area are guilty of this "crash course in Islam". Just because these towns have more than one school doesnt mean all of them had it. And your twisting into "Ben gave us the other one" when I have never even given a name other than the TOWNS THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE USED is nothing but that.....a twist.

Do you really think everyone that reads this is stupid enough to fall for something so completely bogus?? Do you really expect that just because you found the names of OTHER schools in BYRON/BRENTWOOD, that they automatically had the same course?? Riiiight! Me mentioning...A TOWN....does not constitute the sudden creation of a SCHOOL with a course on Islam. I just mentioned a town...the same town the article mentions...as it fliped and flopped between them talking about....ONE SCHOOL...a SINGLE MIDDLE SCHOOL. SERVING.....BYRON/BRENTWOOD.

I think you really have a challenge on your hands now. We need proof that I gave a school name, and proof now that these other few schools in the BYRON/BRENTWOOD area had the same "crash course".

Of course what we most likely will see is Robert put up another smoke screen, twist/contort/lie etc. about where school boards reside again.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1109 Consumer Comment

S'cuze me.... had to make time for this one....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 16, 2006

B. Of Denver

Anyway, here's the problem I have with this whole religion in schools / Christianity in chains thesis, as presented by you uptight theocratic religious types.

To hear you talk like that, you'd think there was a touch o' Ben behind the B..

But then again, you once said this, too...

?I think you're fighting a losing battle, my friend. Vera is exceptionally good at appearing dispassionate in her passionate defense of her position. You, on the other hand, like Shawn and James, appear to get wilder and more speculative as your passion increases. She appears to have calmly reasoned ideas, and you look like a kook.?

And this...

Ben, You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide. And now, you try to use the (oh, my, how surprising) fact that she's not willing to play by your rules as evidence that her arguments are without merit, and that she has something to hide. I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong by coming up with something even more absurd.

So I guess it's just ?my turn?, or something?and that's fine. I don't agree with you a hundred percent, and I'm not the chief member of the Bush fan club, but I do love to tango.

The basic premise seems to be that anytime society does something that offends your personal sensibilities, it has a religious aspect...

Not really. My issue with Ben isn't that he's an atheist, it's because he's a deceitful a*****e, and he's trying to get me to conform to some shape he can't fit himself. If it were for atheists alone, why do I not have issue with you or with Robert (if I'm in error in assuming that you're an atheist, it's only because your commentary regarding religion and God having the snide undertones that leads me in this postulation.)? Why not others here that give appearance to have beliefs different than mine?

...therefore it is an attack on Christianity and your religious beliefs deserve equal time.

I didn't respond to this as an ?attack on Christianity? as a whole; I respond according to the hypocrisy I've observed here and on other posts. You see, originally, it was my ?constant mention of GOD...God This and God That...? and how ?President bush is trying to turn this Nation into a Theocracy because he mentions God, prays to God, and says God speaks to him.? Which has changed into various subforms, by the way, evolving you might say, as each aspect of his babble becomes apparent for the thready, baseless logic he's notorious for.

Yet, you can count on both your hands and your tootsies how many times Ben uses God as a commentary thrust, a derogatory term, and so on; guilty of the very thing he's slinging me for. But that's okay, because he is the tantric, disagreeable twittering dipshit he is. Do as I say, not as I do. This whole bull crap fight has been breathed back into existence because Bennie-Poo decided to take it someplace it didn't belong, and got caught.

This self-justifies your Christian as victim position, but it is irrational.

What I have trouble finding rationale in, is the fact that it's okay to call it Culture Study if it's Islam, and ?Proselytization? if it's even remotely Christian-Like. It's not some supposed, far-fetched ?theory?...it's as real to me as Ben's rectum's importance is to him. As James' machismo is to James.

?Take, for example, your position on "equal time" for Creationism. Absurd.?

And I'm sure that's much of what they said regarding the teaching of evolution, but some saw fit to give it space to grow, and there have been just as many holes knocked into evolution as there has into Christianity---most likely, more, as even the great Anthony Flew saw possibility in ?intelligent design?.

?Science, including evolution theory, is not being taught as a religious doctrine, and it is not a conscious attempt to undermine your beliefs. There is no "Church of Science" with a competing theology.?

Well, there's no Church, because it's being paid for by our taxes, for some person to stand in front of our kids and teach them that everything they believe is a lie, and eliminate their right to gather and pray at a public school. And look at all the good it's done for society.


If you wanted to petition your school boards to strengthen the message that science theories that presents our "current best guess", that many of the things they are being taught may be proven wrong later, etc., there's not a heckuvalot the ACLU could say about it. But when you demand equal time, on a supposed religious basis, to offer a 'competing' religious viewpoint, the court should turn you down every time. God help us if they don't, it will open the door to every flat earth, sun revolves around the earth, stars are little lights hung by God in the sky, rainbow is God's covenant, crackpot 'competing' religious viewpoint men can imagine. And if Creationism or some form of ID does one day become part of mainstream scientific theory, it will still take several years for it to percolate into mainstream education; this is unfortunately the nature of science education.

The same applies to cultural history. I think that any study of history should come with the repeated caveat that it is the current best understanding of a puzzle we are still piecing together, that there is a real difficulty in positively identifying the motivations of peoples living even a few hundred years ago. And if, in fact, some teachers are instructing their students to recite Islamic prayers, or Christian or any other prayers for that matter, or to bow to or worship any gods, they should be stopped and a warning sent out to others that this will not be tolerated.?

And here, you and I agree. In my last Rebuttal, I stated that I didn't want ANY religion taught in PUBLIC school. And I stand by this. Not only does it create problems regarding the tax-exempt status of Churches (it would be a conflict, as schools are supported by tax dollars), it's a subject too easy to taint by the possibility of the instructors' personal religious affiliation. This would change from class to class, year to year, and kids would be even more confused than they are now.

?Does this mean I agree with the absurd notion that every religion touched on in a textbook should receive the same number of pages, the same number of "nice" references, the same number of passages that agree with their religious doctrine? No, nor do I subscribe to the ridiculous notion that dressing up, adopting culture specific names, planning a trip to Mecca, fasting, or any other non-doctrinal teaching method is cause for alarm.?

We differ there, then. If the teachers want to introduce Islam, they can do it under non-tax subsidized circumstances, and with parental consent. But most importantly, they shouldn't do it in ANY public school atmosphere. In short, if Christianity presented in a NEUTRAL or ANY light (besides negative, or presented through the eyes of Islam) is unwelcome, so too should ANY religion.

Again, the focus is on understanding the culture, and the contribution of various religions to that culture, not on strict teaching of the doctrine of those religions.?

Sure. Bowing and praying ?llah the Compassionate, and Creator? is essential to ANY Culture Study. Whatever.

?My niece's son is in 4th or 5th grade in California. They have his class "imagining" they are working their passage from Europe to the US in the late 1800s. They went so far as to take them out on a ship & had their parents secretly write period-specific letters to them. I guess we should be alarmed that they are indoctrinating him to be an illegal immigrant??

If that's your view, then maybe it is, to you. Others may or may not agree.

Likewise, there are some things that society has an interest in teaching our children that are not "traditional" 3 Rs educational material, many of which might offend the religious sensibilities of some parents. But they are not religious in nature, and so do not demand equal time.

The three ?Rs? don't require students to dress up, pray, or fast for the sake of numbers or grammar; there is no need for supplication on the student's part for the sake of this.

Here's something about Excelsior Middle School you won't find in any of the reports, but you can discover by reading their web page and relevant county records. They have had a problem with student violence, particularly directed at Muslim students after the invasion of Iraq. At a time when the county was cutting back, due to funding, on their police liaison program, they funded a new position at Excelsior to help design programs, teach students, and provide a permanent deterrent presence. Against that backdrop, I would say the community had a special interest in minimizing the friction and promoting understanding between the cultures, and it is no great surprise that this teacher went a little overboard in the role-playing department.

Apples and oranges. We're not talking about showing kids how the Muslims believe for the sake of easing tension. And I agree that it's a good idea to let students know that hate crimes of any nature are intolerable, without having to make converts.

There are also health issues that seem to rile you, like teaching that condoms help prevent the transmission of STDs and unwanted pregnancy. Sorry, but that's just common sense. I'm sure you talk with your daughter about sex, but for many students the school is their only source of good information. And let's be frank, you've talked about the dogs, er... boys, sniffing around your door; if your daughter should, God forbid, decide to have sex with one of them, wouldn't you rather he have the good sense to wear a condom??

I've talked to her about what to expect regarding her maturing body, and the possibility of getting involved with a young man sexually; I've discussed this with her extensively, and told her about what to expect regarding her education (even used many of the current educational models). I've talked to her regarding homosexuality and a few other aspects of curiosity or difference. She understands that homosexuality is a choice (I can see you and Ben ?Yeah, she probably told her it was an ?abomination' and other religious-nut terms!?), has friends whom are homosexual and bi-sexual, and I don't give her any flack about her choices. Granted, not everyone has the option of a parent who's willing to go to some (or any) length to help clear the air, but that doesn't mean I should throw mine to the ?System? and let her try to sort it out.

And I just love the depictions of sex-ed and social problems teachers as godless, soulless monsters who are out to convert our children into homosexual orgy seekers. PUHlease! I'm sure there may be some out there who fit that description to one degree or another, but my experience is that most have or have had children of their own, and are only interested in helping these kids through a difficult time.?

And then you have kids like Ben, who try to shove homosexuality down our throats like bitter medicine, and then turn around and call other people by derogatory homosexual terms. Maybe you should try the fruit flavored brand of your medicine Ben. Make it more palatable.

I welcome you to show me exactly where I have stated that health and sex-ed teachers are these mindless, hissing monsters lacking a soul.

They want to teach them having sex is not an essential part of being a teenager...

Unh-hunh. And there's no pressure about sex among peers, while the kids are in school. But what their friends don't do, we have everything from commercials to videogames and music completely contradicting any good the schools might be trying to do. You yourself admit that there are many kids who don't have the benefit of an attentive parent?and the majority of these are baby sat by the telly or left to fend for themselves on the streets. There's more pressure teaching kids that make babies to ?get rid of the problem? by clinical means, drugs, or in the case of many a young male, simply run away and deny, deny, deny.

...how to avoid uncomfortable situations, how to deal with situations they may find themselves in, how to avoid date rape, some guidelines if they do become sexually active, etc. So, yeah, your daughter may have to sit through a class where the teacher tells the queers that they have as much right to feel proud of themselves as anyone else, and that everyone should respect them. I hope such horrific hate speech doesn't destroy her brain cells. But she'll also sit through the class where the college girl tells how much more difficult her life has been since having a child in high school, which may be that little bit of added reinforcement that keeps her from making a bad non-decision. And who knows, maybe she'll decide the guy who isn't afraid to tell the whole class he plans to save himself for marriage is pretty courageous, and kinda cute, instead of hangin with the bad boys tokin a j behind the gym.

Preaching to the choir. You have a strange misconception of what I believe, and I'm not sure as to whether it's what you haven't read, or I haven't mentioned it. I am aware that trying to ?un-do? what's been done is not possible, as we've had generations of error, junk science, misrepresented beliefs, and as we know, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. My real point has been all along that if we were to educate, and teach students their RESPONSIBILITIES more than just their rights, there's be a lot less of that victim mentality that I have mentioned several times before. Abstinence is not the only method, as for some, experimentation had began long before instructions were given. However, it does remain the best method in matters of the will.

In all these cases, you should make yourself aware of what the school is teaching your kids, and then teach them where your views differ.?

Done and done.

I have very little sympathy for a group of people who go ballistic at the mere thought that someone might be teaching their children a tiny bit of someone else's religion, but jump at the chance to impose their own religion on other people's children.?

One, I don't want anyone's sympathy. It's overrated, and to me, worthless.
And two, I never once suggested that Creationism and/or Christianity be the ONLY thing taught; I specified that it should, if religion (like Islam) is to be ?played with? in public schools (like it WAS in California), that it be given EQUALLY NEUTRAL presentation. Not just the Crusades, the Inquisition, The Salem Witch Trials, and whatever other negative views Christianity is associated with. It produces too many people like Ben, full of bitterness and vitriol.

How would you recommend we institute prayer in the schools?

A mere moment of silence. Not led or forced by any other hand.

?What about the atheists??

Let em play with their Blueberries, or write in their day-planners, or whatever.

Do we have a day where everybody chants, "I am a self-actualized human being who does not need to rely on fairy tale gods for my strengths and morality?" Yeah, right.

No, because in this ACLU-Whitewashed and Politically Correct World, that might hurt someone's feelings...and we don't want the Thought-Police to get their sirens hot.

The state has no interest in propagating your religious doctrine, or any other.

I disagree, simply...and it appears you disagree with me, and that's fine. I believe that Government will do all it can to grow as big as it can, be it Democrat or Republican. This is why I refuse to affiliate with either of those two parties. They aren't what they used to be?and they are sorely needed to be.

The philosophy of the classroom in one generation, will be the philosophy of the Government in the next.'

And that whole Christian as victim thing seems kinda whiny and hollow.

So is blowing months of time on a thread whining ?No proof! No Proof!? when it had been not only given, but even given according to the initial request, and that ?It'd make your case legit if you gave the article?. The simple fact is that Ben is a liar, he's lazy, cannot honor his own invective, and yet he insists that I, and those who even allude that I might be correct have no honor. It should have ended long ago, but Ben doesn't like it when he's proven wrong with MEGAGRAMS of information, and obviously, he's incapable of being the adult he thinks he is and letting it go.

Nope, he's just gonna try and re-hash it where he feels safest, and then react with outrage when he gets caught with his hands in his pants like a naughty little boy.

Sort of like how James has to create another post about Bush to cry for attention he's not getting here. Boo-h*o for You Two.

Be back in another week or so, iffen I feel like it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1108 Consumer Comment

Tsk, Tsk, Tskk....as usual, the point is COMPLETELY missed.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 16, 2006

And again, and again, and again...

This whole subject was started by.....VERA.

Try again, Retardo Mentalblock. This whole "Report" is the brainchild of our favorite pet inbreed, James "Jethro" of Tupper. He obviously has no life and no popularity in his own hometown, so he's seeking Internet notoriety.

Big whoop. You can threaten my life on the Internet, James...how pathetic. Even offering a thousand dollar reward, too. Wouldn't that money be better spent on improving personality? Why don't you donate it to EDitor...lord knows you've been the chief waste of his Internet space.

"So I find it odd that we should bow out for her. Shes the real fear monger here and its pretty obvious why she is staying silent now.?

Wrongo, Princess...it's your constant denial of facts that makes me limit my time on this post. I could just simply copy and paste a prepared post, but your need to re-warp, loop, and re-spew is just making it too much fun for me. So I keep my commentary consistent, simply re-arranging that which I have already said. A while back you asked for ONE school??just one? and said, ?Post the article, Vera?it'll make your case legit!? And I not only provided all that you have asked for---in spades---you refuse its existence by taking the lazy route through denial. It's there, Doll. And it's a lot more real than Big Bad James of Tupper's threats on my personal safety.

Oh, and by the way, James...YAWN. And while you're at it, UP YOURS.

So why my silence? Simple...it's summer, I have a life, and a Family, and a lot of work to do. Your constant denial because you're not man enough to live by your own rules has become much less entertaining, but I do like to stop back and watch James get all spun into a fury, and watch you choke on your own vomit.

?This thread where VERA made the stupid comment to bash California as a smoke screen to defend her other pathetic rants......?

Sorry you're such a delusional drip, Ben?.but California was but ONE selection in a group of examplesin a Rebuttal I had made---and get this----when I WAS SPEAKING TO ?B.?. Not to you. It was YOU who chose to take that ONE example and blow it into this load of crap, and continued to beat a dead horse by refusing to accept the possibility that it could be (and is) a reality.

?This thread where VERA still remains silent and refuses to back her claims.?

Been there, done it. YOUR denial is what keeps this going.

?I find it very hard to continue a logical political discussion in any form when you have people sitting there spouting whatever they feel and calling it "fact" without one shred of proof.?

I know, but you just won't shut up, will you?

?It was the reason I left.?

More like, you ran out of rhetoric, and tried to drag the fight into a safer arena?got found out, and it re-animated this current quarrel. Look at the dates, Ben. It's all right here. Just like the solid info I have already provided, that you refuse to read and deny the existence of.

And for your edification, "B.", I wasn't the one who came here to debate Christianity; I came here to insert my opinion, used quotes from the Founding Fathers (which includes the proper noun "God")---people Ben has already claimed he has such respect for. Ben was pissing and whining about "Religious Nuts" and "Zealots" a while before I was here, continued a while after I was here, and I responded with TWO sentences, which, like the whole Islam in California SchoolS issue, it was BEN who decided to take all the attention away from James of Tupper by turning it into the Subject.

I believe that I have said that I never wanted religion of ANY stripe taught as lessons in ANY public schools. That way NO ONE'S religious toes are being stepped on, and Churches can retain a tax-exempt status. Not just the Christian ones, but all of 'em.

You've given me too much diatribe to address in the amount of time I've got to work here....perhaps later I'll get the rest. Hope to see you then.

And James, nice way to handle yourself. Keep up the good work of being lame...I love the laughs! :D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1107 Consumer Comment

Robert, perhaps if you quit spinning for a sec, you wouldn't be so dizzy.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 16, 2006

Ah, grasshopper,

I see you have returned, clutching bits of cloud wisps to hide your nakedness. But I can see you have come for further reduction of your credibility. Assume the position, and let the lesson begin.

Well, I guess we'll have to split the point on Michael Powell. You didn't know he had stepped down over a year ago, and I didn't know he had stepped out of the closet. ROFLMFAO! "I am a registered Democrat." Mimicking Nixon's "I am not a crook?" LOL. Better put down that crack pipe before watching the news, boi! Those evil numbers are ganging up on you again. When Clinton appointed him to the commission (yes, he was already on the commission when Bush made him chairman) there were already 3 Democrats. By law, the commission may not have more than 3 members from any political party. Ergo, Powell may have been a Republican, may have been a member of the Communist Party, but he was certainly not a registered Democrat. And it still has nothing to do with the fact that the neocons are the ones carrying high the twin torches of censorship and legislating morality.

Obviously, you were smokin some seriously bad crack when you did your "amazing" search engine "research" on Byron. There is nothing on the Contra Costa website that identifies Byron as incorporated. Whatever you thought you saw must have been a pipe dream. Its irrelevant anyway, what matters is the census considers it to be unincorporated, a Census Designated Place (CDP) that may or may not bear any resemblance to anything the locals consider to be town boundaries. Its nice that everything is neat and tidy for you folks in North Carolina, but, as the school board should have convinced you, you cannot project the facets of your situation onto the rest of the world with any expectation of accuracy.

The fact is, in this situation the boundaries do not align at all, and your persistence in equating things in one area named Byron with those in another, just because they have the same name is inaccurate. What do you want me to say? That, by your lights, the 9K people the census reports living in the Discovery Bay CDP don't know where they live because they have Byron mailing addresses? That because Discovery Bay (home to the Elementary School of the same name)has nearly 10 times the population of Byron, the school district should be named Discovery Bay Union? That the people in the Mountain House School District in Alameda County don't know where they live because they have a Byron address, and the kids from Byron USD who go there are going to the wrong school?

And the people in the eastern parts of Brentwood who have Byron addresses must be complete freaks. Whatever, if you can't see it, you can't see it. However you try to spin it, there is only one school in the area that has been accused of preaching instead of teaching Islam to its students, and that is Excelsior Middle School.

Alas, I am but a lowly programmer/analyst. How can I expect my humble experience working with government accounting systems to rival the insight of the Master mechanic and his advanced mathematical knowledge that allows him to add 2+2? Ah, Grasshopper, this humble servant will attempt this lesson one last time. If you cannot grasp the falling paper, I fear you will never wear the symbol of the twin dragon. What is the sound of one fist clenching? Grasshopper, at the end of the lesson you must explain the meaning of the parable found at the bottom of the "Estimates" page, accessible from the main census page; "These estimates are used in federal funding allocations..."

To begin with, there never is an actual figure. They never actually survey 100% of the population. Then there are data entry errors and various categories of errors people make when answering the questions. Then, by the time they compile and publish the data, there is an additional margin of error from data drift, the changes in the population they are trying to count. With each passing year the actual population drifts further from these numbers, rendering them less and less accurate. The annual "estimates" basically measure the amount of that drift. They survey a small percentage of the populace and collect birth & death, and other municipal records to serve as checks for their trend calculations. This is not as accurate as the original method of counting, but is always less of an error than the drift.

You ask, "Are you seriously trying to compare something that happened in the "dark ages" of mankind to current events?" Can you get it through that thick skull of yours that those are the cultures they are studying? The Spanish Inquisition is at least a period that is covered in their text. The events of the past few years have no bearing. And I'll ask again, what do you hope to accomplish by projecting the deeds of a few bad actors onto the entire culture? Another Columbine massacre?

And thanks for that parting example of more Robert-logic. "Ben is a zoodle. B thinks all zoodles are zips. Therefore B is a zoodle or a zonk." Sheesh! Wot a boid brain!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1106 Consumer Comment

Russian Roulette anyone?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/

And now...

"He says that I am lying because I stated my friends living in Brentwood know nothing about Veras statement about a....
"3 week crash course in Islam in some California schools"
When I asked them, just as Robert bashes me about "knowing" about it...there response was this.....
"Huh? It was one school, what other schools? What are you talking about?"
Thus...they knew about....one school. Not SOME schools."-Ben 6/15/06

First, they said it(singular) must be a private religious school, now they knew it was ONE, not some. I'm getting dizzy watching that whirling dervish named Ben, spin around changing his story.

We already gave you the other two schools. Well, actually, YOU gave us one(Brentwood)(I notice that's where your teacher buddies live...coincidence?), and Vera and I gave you the school in Covina. Three equals SOME. Your story gets worse and worse each time you try to retell it.

I hope you're wearing a helmet. With all that spinning you're doing, you'll either drill through the Earth's mantle, or fly off into space.

Either way, use oxygen. Good luck.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1105 Consumer Comment

Russian Roulette anyone?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/

And now...

"He says that I am lying because I stated my friends living in Brentwood know nothing about Veras statement about a....
"3 week crash course in Islam in some California schools"
When I asked them, just as Robert bashes me about "knowing" about it...there response was this.....
"Huh? It was one school, what other schools? What are you talking about?"
Thus...they knew about....one school. Not SOME schools."-Ben 6/15/06

First, they said it(singular) must be a private religious school, now they knew it was ONE, not some. I'm getting dizzy watching that whirling dervish named Ben, spin around changing his story.

We already gave you the other two schools. Well, actually, YOU gave us one(Brentwood)(I notice that's where your teacher buddies live...coincidence?), and Vera and I gave you the school in Covina. Three equals SOME. Your story gets worse and worse each time you try to retell it.

I hope you're wearing a helmet. With all that spinning you're doing, you'll either drill through the Earth's mantle, or fly off into space.

Either way, use oxygen. Good luck.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1104 Consumer Comment

Russian Roulette anyone?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/

And now...

"He says that I am lying because I stated my friends living in Brentwood know nothing about Veras statement about a....
"3 week crash course in Islam in some California schools"
When I asked them, just as Robert bashes me about "knowing" about it...there response was this.....
"Huh? It was one school, what other schools? What are you talking about?"
Thus...they knew about....one school. Not SOME schools."-Ben 6/15/06

First, they said it(singular) must be a private religious school, now they knew it was ONE, not some. I'm getting dizzy watching that whirling dervish named Ben, spin around changing his story.

We already gave you the other two schools. Well, actually, YOU gave us one(Brentwood)(I notice that's where your teacher buddies live...coincidence?), and Vera and I gave you the school in Covina. Three equals SOME. Your story gets worse and worse each time you try to retell it.

I hope you're wearing a helmet. With all that spinning you're doing, you'll either drill through the Earth's mantle, or fly off into space.

Either way, use oxygen. Good luck.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1103 Consumer Comment

Christianity in chains?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

Vera,

Hi, how are you? I B fine. Hope you're feeling Tweetilicious! Now, I know Christian martyrs don't get any virgins, but just supposin'... What would YOU do with 72 virgins? There's cooking, cleaning, painting, mowing, dishes... See, I'm already running out of options. But I have vast faith in the creative power of the female spirit. 8P

Anyway, here's the problem I have with this whole religion in schools / Christianity in chains thesis, as presented by you uptight theocratic religious types. The basic premise seems to be that anytime society does something that offends your personal sensibilities, it has a religious aspect, therefore it is an attack on Christianity and your religious beliefs deserve equal time. This self-justifies your Christian as victim position, but it is irrational. Take, for example, your position on "equal time" for Creationism. Absurd. Science, including evolution theory, is not being taught as a religious doctrine, and it is not a conscious attempt to undermine your beliefs. There is no "Church of Science" with a competing theology. If you wanted to petition your school boards to strengthen the message that science is not perfect, does not provide all the answers, is a collection of observations and theories that presents our "current best guess", that many of the things they are being taught may be proven wrong later, etc., there's not a heckuvalot the ACLU could say about it. But when you demand equal time, on a supposed religious basis, to offer a 'competing' religious viewpoint, the court should turn you down every time. God help us if they don't, it will open the door to every flat earth, sun revolves around the earth, stars are little lights hung by God in the sky, rainbow is God's covenant, crackpot 'competing' religious viewpoint men can imagine. And if Creationism or some form of ID does one day become part of mainstream scientific theory, it will still take several years for it to percolate into mainstream education; this is unfortunately the nature of science education.

The same applies to cultural history. I think that any study of history should come with the repeated caveat that it is the current best understanding of a puzzle we are still piecing together, that there is a real difficulty in positively identifying the motivations of peoples living even a few hundred years ago. And if, in fact, some teachers are instructing their students to recite Islamic prayers, or Christian or any other prayers for that matter, or to bow to or worship any gods, they should be stopped and a warning sent out to others that this will not be tolerated. Does this mean I agree with the absurd notion that every religion touched on in a textbook should receive the same number of pages, the same number of "nice" references, the same number of passages that agree with their religious doctrine? No, nor do I subscribe to the ridiculous notion that dressing up, adopting culture specific names, planning a trip to Mecca, fasting, or any other non-doctrinal teaching method is cause for alarm. Again, the focus is on understanding the culture, and the contribution of various religions to that culture, not on strict teaching of the doctrine of those religions. My niece's son is in 4th or 5th grade in California. They have his class "imagining" they are working their passage from Europe to the US in the late 1800s. They went so far as to take them out on a ship & had their parents secretly write period-specific letters to them. I guess we should be alarmed that they are indoctrinating him to be an illegal immigrant?

Likewise, there are some things that society has an interest in teaching our children that are not "traditional" 3 Rs educational material, many of which might offend the religious sensibilities of some parents. But they are not religious in nature, and so do not demand equal time. Here's something about Excelsior Middle School you won't find in any of the reports, but you can discover by reading their web page and relevant county records. They have had a problem with student violence, particularly directed at Muslim students after the invasion of Iraq. At a time when the county was cutting back, due to funding, on their police liaison program, they funded a new position at Excelsior to help design programs, teach students, and provide a permanent deterrent presence. Against that backdrop, I would say the community had a special interest in minimizing the friction and promoting understanding between the cultures, and it is no great surprise that this teacher went a little overboard in the role-playing department.

There are also health issues that seem to rile you, like teaching that condoms help prevent the transmission of STDs and unwanted pregnancy. Sorry, but that's just common sense. I'm sure you talk with your daughter about sex, but for many students the school is their only source of good information. And let's be frank, you've talked about the dogs, er... boys, sniffing around your door; if your daughter should, God forbid, decide to have sex with one of them, wouldn't you rather he have the good sense to wear a condom? And I just love the depictions of sex-ed and social problems teachers as godless, soulless monsters who are out to convert our children into homosexual orgy seekers. PUHlease! I'm sure there may be some out there who fit that description to one degree or another, but my experience is that most have or have had children of their own, and are only interested in helping these kids through a difficult time. They want to teach them having sex is not an essential part of being a teenager, how to avoid uncomfortable situations, how to deal with situations they may find themselves in, how to avoid date rape, some guidelines if they do become sexually active, etc. So, yeah, your daughter may have to sit through a class where the teacher tells the queers that they have as much right to feel proud of themselves as anyone else, and that everyone should respect them. I hope such horrific hate speech doesn't destroy her brain cells. But she'll also sit through the class where the college girl tells how much more difficult her life has been since having a child in high school, which may be that little bit of added reinforcement that keeps her from making a bad non-decision. And who knows, maybe she'll decide the guy who isn't afraid to tell the whole class he plans to save himself for marriage is pretty courageous, and kinda cute, instead of hangin with the bad boys tokin a j behind the gym. Anyway, I seem to be rambling on here, the point is we have a societal interest in keeping these kids from being wrecked on the shoals of life that supercedes your religious belief in "abstinence only", and your neighbor's reluctance to talk about such things, and all those parents who just don't care. You don't get a vote just because it interferes with your religious views.

In all these cases, you should make yourself aware of what the school is teaching your kids, and then teach them where your views differ. Sure, that makes life more difficult; hopefully you weren't suffering the misconception it was going to be easy. I have very little sympathy for a group of people who go ballistic at the mere thought that someone might be teaching their children a tiny bit of someone else's religion, but jump at the chance to impose their own religion on other people's children. How would you recommend we institute prayer in the schools? Alternate between religions? One day we pray to Allah, the next to Yaweh, the next to Hecate and Astarte? What about the atheists? Do we have a day where everybody chants, "I am a self-actualized human being who does not need to rely on fairy tale gods for my strengths and morality?" Yeah, right. The state has no interest in propagating your religious doctrine, or any other. And that whole Christian as victim thing seems kinda whiny and hollow.

Well, I have to get ready for our dinner date. I had hoped to address some of the specific points in your last megagram. Maybe tomorrow morning.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1102 Consumer Comment

More Robert logic.........

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"""How about the proof of you KNOWING it happened? How about the proof of you knowing it happened, and still tried to deny it did. I especially like your latest spin. You didn't know it happened, because you moved to Martinez a few years ago. But, in April, you admitted you knew all about it, all along. That timeline thing again."""""----Robert

Once again....how does this prove one way or another about the subject at hand? How does when/if Ben knew PROVE that Vera's statment is fact?

It doesnt.

But more important is how you can justify that last paragraph from you, bashing away that "Ben knew" after months of saying "Ben didnt even know!!!". Flip flop....flip flop....flip flop. Sheesh if your going to cloud the discussion with subject that have nothing to do with the topic, you would think you could make up your mind.

Oh and since we are on the subject of "where the school board is for the county"......I NEVER KNEW. Not until B was kind enough to do the research and put it up in her last post did I find out it was in Pleasent Hill. Interesting!

Thats right Robert. I didnt know where it was. I assumed...JUST LIKE YOU that it was in Martinez all these years since it was the county seat. Thats right Robert, now you have your ultimate fuel for your fire. Here Ben is, admitting he never knew where the "school board" was for the county. You got it....bash away Robert! Have fun. This is the first time EVER I have EVER mentioned what I knew about its location (although you would like to say I did mention it before....NOT!). Honestly why would I have a need too know? I mean lets get real, I spent several years in the ORINDA SCHOOL DISTRICT, which was HQ'd in the mothballed Pine Grove elementary school in ORINDA. I guess that would fall under the Contra Costa County School Board. But unless I had a NEED to interact with it, I never needed.....TOO KNOW!!! Thus...I didnt. And I never commented on it till now.

Thanks B for the info on Pleasent Hill. I'll admit, I was a bit surprised.

Of course....I still have no reason to interact with the "school board", and most likely will never need go there.

Oh and Robert, when/where/if I knew of CCC's "school board" location....will never change the fact that it was still only .........

ONE SCHOOL that had an Islam course.

Have fun! Im sure you will see this as some sort of smoke screen...."SEE!! Ben didnt even know where his school board was!! He thought it was Martinez...JUST LIKE ME!!....so thats my PROOF THAT ISLAM IS TAKING OVER CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS!!!".

Um....sure...whatever you say Robbie. Riiiight!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1101 Consumer Comment

Another perfect example of Robert logic.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

Another simple example of Robert logic.....

He says that I am lying because I stated my friends living in Brentwood know nothing about Veras statement about a....

"3 week crash course in Islam in some California schools"

When I asked them, just as Robert bashes me about "knowing" about it...there response was this.....

"Huh? It was one school, what other schools? What are you talking about?"


Thus...they knew about....one school. Not SOME schools.

My statement stands.

Refill on that smoke machine again Robbie.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1100 Consumer Comment

The dense, just get more dense

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"I list some "evils" committed by Christianity and the US. You pick a couple and claim your supposed lack of knowledge about them invalidates my entire argument. Like you never heard of, say, the Spanish Inquisition."

Are you seriously trying to compare something that happened in the "dark ages" of mankind to current events? They thought Earth was flat back then, and that we were the center of the universe also. Most of us got smarter, apparently some didn't.

"A brief recap:
There is no incorporated town or city named Byron. The "Byron" zip code spans parts of Contra Costa and Alameda counties, and parts of several school districts. Some kids in the "Byron" school district attend school in adjacent school districts; the reverse is probably also true, but I didn't get that far in my research. You are relating apples to oranges and coming up with fruit salad. Oh, and btw, just where is this "official" Byron website you find so informative?"

That will be big news to the people who live in Byron. Apparently, they don't know where they live, and their adresses are all wrong. My home of record(legal residence) is Hubert NC. It's not "incorporated" either. But, we have our own zip code, and town boundaries. I guess we don't know what we're doing either. We also have an Elementary School, with a Hubert adress. Byron has it's own school district...Byron Union. Amazing what one can find when he/she uses a search engine. Try typing Byron California and hitting enter. Going to the Contra Costa Government website, it appears Byron IS an incorporated town. Seems your info is seriously bad.

"On the census numbers, you are just displaying your ignorance. Nearly everyone uses the more accurate figures that you refer to as "guesstimates". Why? Duh, because they're more accurate. I've worked on city, county and state programs. I've never worked on the federal programs, but I've had to work with the federal agencies to make sure the local programs were "speaking the same language", and not comparing apples to oranges. You are just wrong on this one, get over it already. The irony is, the schools you're talking about get their funding from actual attendance records, not census numbers."

Really? I'm sure that's big news to the Governments, Federal, State, and Local. They all use the Census figures. They use the OFFICIAL ones, not estimates. How is an estimate more accurate than an actual figure. You obviously went to a Government School. When I went to school, 2+2=4. I guess now it equals something, just not sure of the exact number.

"And, as Ben points out, you keep trying to cloud the issue with all these subthemes, like the location of the CC Times and the school board. I can find an office for the Times in Walnut Creek, but not one in Martinez. Not that it matters, the most popular paper in Martinez is the San Francisco Chronicle. And I looked up the Contra Costa school board, which you've spent months telling us all how stupid Ben is for not knowing its in Martinez. How stupid are you, then, for not knowing its in Pleasant Hill, not Martinez? And as long as we're working on your credibility, how about your statement that Michael Powell, son of Colin Powell, is the head of the FCC, and a Democrat, oh, I'm sorry, that was "DEMOCRAT". HaHaHaHaHa! Its been, what, about a year and a half since he resigned that post, and he was never a "DEMOCRAT". LOL, where DO you come up with this stuff? Or did you just ASSume that since Clinton appointed him, he HAD to be a Democrat?"

Ben claimed to NOT know anything about the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper he finally admitted to knowing about. I'm sure he'll claim to have never heard of the LA Times, or the San Fran Chronicle too. As for the School Board issue, tep...you got me. In every other county in this country, the Board of Education is among the County Government buildings. Apparently not so in Contra Costa. Wow! You win ONE! You get one point. Michael Powell IS a Democrat. He made that statement himself on TV. I think it was O'Reilly, but I cannot be sure. I do know the words "I am a registered Democrat" when I hear them though. He got the job only because GW Bush still thought Colin Powell was a team player at that time. Actually, Bush appointed him to the Chair position, not Clinton. You lose a point.

So, to surmise...Ben admitted to knowing all about the issue, while constantly denying it ever happened. Ben is a LIAR. B considers Ben to be a truthful individual, therefore B is also a LIAR, or just hopelessly misguided.

Birds of a feather...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1099 Consumer Comment

Robert, sorry, I don't have time to "play dumb" for your amusement.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

Robert,

You came up with the analogy that 1 or 2 folks are easy to feed, but 70K is a problem, IN RELATION TO THE NUMBER OF SCHOOLS "PREACHING" ISLAM. Once again, I prove your inability to relate numbers to reality, by plugging YOUR NUMBERS back into the original "equation". Not surprisingly, you lack the wit to follow this.

You list a host of "evils" committed by followers of Islam throughout the ages. I point out your error in blaming the entire culture for the acts of a few, and the stupidity of teaching our kids their friends are rapists and murderers. You claim you lack the wit to follow my logic.

I list some "evils" committed by Christianity and the US. You pick a couple and claim your supposed lack of knowledge about them invalidates my entire argument. Like you never heard of, say, the Spanish Inquisition?

Again, Robert, your alleged inadequacies only serve to undermine your own credibility; they do nothing to dispute my arguments.

And apparently we can add reading comprehension to your list of mental infirmities. I have already addressed the census numbers and the Byron schools in other posts. Still you persist in the same lame, tired, and completely incorrect arguments, without so much as a feeble attempt to show you are doing anything but blowing smoke out your a*s.

A brief recap:
There is no incorporated town or city named Byron. The "Byron" zip code spans parts of Contra Costa and Alameda counties, and parts of several school districts. Some kids in the "Byron" school district attend school in adjacent school districts; the reverse is probably also true, but I didn't get that far in my research. You are relating apples to oranges and coming up with fruit salad. Oh, and btw, just where is this "official" Byron website you find so informative?

On the census numbers, you are just displaying your ignorance. Nearly everyone uses the more accurate figures that you refer to as "guesstimates". Why? Duh, because they're more accurate. I've worked on city, county and state programs. I've never worked on the federal programs, but I've had to work with the federal agencies to make sure the local programs were "speaking the same language", and not comparing apples to oranges. You are just wrong on this one, get over it already. The irony is, the schools you're talking about get their funding from actual attendance records, not census numbers.


And, as Ben points out, you keep trying to cloud the issue with all these subthemes, like the location of the CC Times and the school board. I can find an office for the Times in Walnut Creek, but not one in Martinez. Not that it matters, the most popular paper in Martinez is the San Francisco Chronicle. And I looked up the Contra Costa school board, which you've spent months telling us all how stupid Ben is for not knowing its in Martinez. How stupid are you, then, for not knowing its in Pleasant Hill, not Martinez? And as long as we're working on your credibility, how about your statement that Michael Powell, son of Colin Powell, is the head of the FCC, and a Democrat, oh, I'm sorry, that was "DEMOCRAT". HaHaHaHaHa! Its been, what, about a year and a half since he resigned that post, and he was never a "DEMOCRAT". LOL, where DO you come up with this stuff? Or did you just ASSume that since Clinton appointed him, he HAD to be a Democrat?

Robert, your credibility is so low, its beginning to look like you're the sock puppet, and James is the master, rather than the other way around.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1098 Consumer Comment

Space...the final frontier...and plenty of it between your ears, Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 15, 2006

"Now Robert tracked me down on a Circuit City thread and continued his little personal vendetta regardless of the original subject of that thread. I made a post there about his name being "Mr.Grissom" as an EXAMPLE of tactics he used on this Islam subject. I explained that if his tactics were genuine, then he was.... Mr.Grissom. I was using his exact same methods of research and bloating it out into something it wasnt.... AS AN EXAMPLE. Now when he finally came out and asked "why are you calling me Mr.Grissom", I responded with "well this is the same angle you used about this Islam in CA thing". Ever since then Robert has bashed and contorted away. For several weeks if not months he continued until even VERA showed up on the Circuit City thread to help him in his personal attack."

FACTUALLY, YOU started it in that CC report(ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff177628.htm), not me.

"Robert....Mr.Grissom..... you are one in the same....or you are a liar.

I took the same amount of info you gave and ran with it like you did with me. Only difference is that I dont call it "fact" like you do Robert.

A simple Yahoo yellow pages search in Jacksonville FL yields numerous NAPA parts centers....and only ONE repair shop. Run by a Mr.Grissom.

Now if you are not Mr.Grissom.... then by your own form of detective work, you are a LIAR. Either you are him, or your nothing but a parts plucker at one of the parts centers.

Just as you ran with this BS "Islam in CA schools", pulling up vague and incomplete evidence to some huge grand conspirecy, I did the same to you. (although a yellow pages listing is a little more reliable than some small pathetic right-wing religious nut web page)

Just using your own medicine on you there Robert.

How does it feel?

YES or NO answers ONLY! (another bit of your own medicine for you!)"-Ben 4/11/06

First, my last name is not Grissom. Second, NAPA AutoCAre Centers are not classified as "repair shops". There 40 of us in DuVal County. Third, you wanted a yes/no answer to a question that required anything BUT a yes/no. Try looking for me using napaonline. or just use Store Locatorto find me. You won't though, because it's sooooo difficult for you. The question still remains... why are you so interested in finding me? You and Wally make such a cute couple, I wouldn't want to interfere.

You really do have trouble with that timeline thing don't you?

"I was well aware it happened."-Ben 4/13/06

This is when Ben first admitted he knew all about the Islam issue. He just wanted us to show proof of something he already KNEW happened. How pathetic can you be? Make a claim that I know to be true, and I won't deny it ever happened. I'll acknowledge it and move on.

"I find it very hard to continue a logical political discussion in any form when you have people sitting there spouting whatever they feel and calling it "fact" without one shred of proof."

How about the proof of you KNOWING it happened? How about the proof of you knowing it happened, and still tried to deny it did. I especially like your latest spin. You didn't know it happened, because you moved to Martinez a few years ago. But, in April, you admitted you knew all about it, all along. That timeline thing again.

As an aside, you say you lived in the LA area before moving to Martinez. Covina is 20 miles away, and would be newsworthy for the Times, and the TV and radio media in LA. Therefore, you also knew about the Royal Oak Middle School teaching it to the children. This is just so easy.

BTW, I don't fault you for moving to Martinez. I went there once as a truck driver. Very pretty area, and the people were nice too. Great weather when I was there.

The funniest part of that CC thread is how you think I am all these other people, and you rage against Leticia for doing nothing more than asking you a direct question. Does your venom ever deplete?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1097 Consumer Comment

Dear John.. I've tried to avoid Robert for months. He tracks me down on any thread I dare post

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Sorry John that you have to see this rant. I've tried to avoid Robert for months. He tracks me down on any thread I dare post. I left this thread months ago because of the exact reasons you mention. It got off the President and our country in general.

This whole subject was started by.....VERA. So I find it odd that we should bow out for her. Shes the real fear monger here and its pretty obvious why she is staying silent now.

Now Robert tracked me down on a Circuit City thread and continued his little personal vendetta regardless of the original subject of that thread. I made a post there about his name being "Mr.Grissom" as an EXAMPLE of tactics he used on this Islam subject. I explained that if his tactics were genuine, then he was....Mr.Grissom. I was using his exact same methods of research and bloating it out into something it wasnt....AS AN EXAMPLE. Now when he finally came out and asked "why are you calling me Mr.Grissom", I responded with "well this is the same angle you used about this Islam in CA thing". Ever since then Robert has bashed and contorted away. For several weeks if not months he continued until even VERA showed up on the Circuit City thread to help him in his personal attack.

It was that point that I said "enough" and came back to this thread.

This thread where VERA made the stupid comment to bash California as a smoke screen to defend her other pathetic rants......

This thread where VERA still resides......

This thread where VERA still remains silent and refuses to back her claims.

I find it very hard to continue a logical political discussion in any form when you have people sitting there spouting whatever they feel and calling it "fact" without one shred of proof.

It was the reason I left.

And now you have my reason for comming back. As for continuing this particular subject...I'm sorry. But as you can see if I were to say...nothing....it would open me to more attack since both Vera and Robert take "silence" as a way of contorting facts even further.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1096 Consumer Comment

I agree. Enough is enough guys. Put the stick down, the horse has been dead for months.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 14, 2006

I agree with John. Enough is enough guys. Put the stick down, the horse has been dead for months.

A few weeks ago, I posted a whole bunch of links to several Google search results for "Islam taught in California schools". But that post never made it through (I did not even copy the full links, left off the www. on each). Oh well.

Most of them had to do with the "blown out of proportion news story" about Intermediate-Excelsior School in Byron, where students were allegedly being "indoctrinated" into the Islamic faith.

There were also some hits from the sites "Snopes" and "Truthorfiction", stating that although the news report did make it around in circulation, people were making a big fuss over nothing.

A few of the other hits said things like this was standard in all California schools, and that this was also taught in schools nationwide. However, I never saw anything that mentioned any other specific schools other than the one in Byron.

The course they refer to is located in the book "Across the Centuries" in the "History of Culture" section. This book is distributed to public schools nationwide by Houghton-Mifflin.

Now, there are those that say this book was written by pro-Islamic groups, and that they portray Christianity in a poor light. If you ask me, I say that there is no religion today that does not have skeletons in their closets.

OK, so can we now put this argument to rest please? Quite frankly, I'm getting very tired of it. I almost wish Canaduh James would return and inject some of his twisted history.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1095 Consumer Comment

Words have meanings, and it's time you learned that

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 14, 2006

B- What are you talking about?

"You blame ME for the failure of YOUR numbers.
You claim you are unable to follow simple logic.
You claim you know nothing of history.
You claim you know nothing of the world around you."

My numbers are accurate. I got them from the same places Ben got his. Mine are the numbers used by EVERY Government Agency for everything. You know, the numbers that actually count for something. Ben likes using guesstimates.

I can follow a straight line of logic very well. It's that twisting spin-o-rama that you and Ben use that is difficult to follow. How you got 70K SCHOOLS, from 70K people, still baffles me.

Show me one instance where I said I know nothing of history. I am the one who had to correct James, and others, for their lack of knowledge.

Again, show me where I ever said I know nothing about the world around me. Ben is the one who claims he doesn't know anything, from his newspaper, to where his County Government is located.

Ben- I'll amuse myself with your statements.

"So if you want to belive that "ben didnt know" or as I have said....."I knew about....ONE...not your statewide forcing BS"......."

"FINE! Belive what you want....think that I never knew about this ONE school for all I care!"

If that doesn't say "I, Ben from Martinez California KNEW all about the school in question all along", I don't know what does.

"1. You have no real facts whatsover to back this claim of "Islam being forced in California SchoolS"...plural. So you need to make up subjects that dont have any bearing on the subject as a smoke screen to aviod this obvious fact.

2. You think that by personally attacking me will somehow prove that Islam is being forced in California schools.


Personally attack me all you want. If you succeed or not will not ever change the true fact of the matter........IT WAS ONLY ONE SCHOOL."

Again, Ben admits it happened, while claiming children aren't forced to do it. Kids who don't do it, are flunked. I guess they are forced to take tests too, using that theory. Pass or fail.

"Now as far as my friends that LIVE IN Brentwood, they were well aware of this ONE incident, and really dont care about it."

That's very interesting. At first you made this statement:

"There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/05

So which statement is the LIE? The one you made first, or the one you make now? Considering you now admit you knew about it all along, I'll guess you were LIEING all along.

"The Byron School District currently instructs more than 1,475 students in three schools. Please choose one of the schools pictured below for more detailed information:"

This is from the Byron, California website. Notice it says BYRON, not Brentwood? The adress for the Middle school in question is:
14301 Byron Highway
Byron, CA 94514

Again, notice it is in Byron?

How about the Elementary school?
1700 Willow Lake Road
Byron, CA 94514
Hmmm, it's also in Byron, not Brentwood.

And finally, the other Elementary school.
40 Newbury Lane
Byron, CA 94514

It seems they are ALL in Byron. Again, Byron has a population of approximately 916 people, but educated more than 1475 children. But Ben, you said they all go to Brentwood. That seems to be another LIE from you.

"The Brentwood Union School District serves Kindergarten through 8th grade students with an enrollment of approximately 7,300 students. Presently there are seven K-5 elementary campuses and three 6-8 middle schools. Brentwood is a growing district with an annual growth of 500-700 new students. The district is extremely proud of the attractive and well-maintained school campuses and orderly classes. Parents, staff and the community provide solid support to the healthy educational environment of children."

It appears Brentwood has their own school system, completely seperate from the Byron system. How odd. Wait, no it isn't. BTW, I got that info from the Brentwood California website.

And, I gave the school in Byron, YOU gave the one in Brentwood. That equals TWO. Vera offered the one in Covina, and I named it. All of this very easy to find...just use any search engine.

Your claims are getting so easy to dismiss as false, it's hardly worth the effort to do so anymore. First you say you were getting married to a Kindergarten teacher(about a year ago), now you claim to have married her years ago, and she's not a teacher. Try and keep your story straight.

I think riding the spin-o-rama has really done a number on you. Did you get the pun?

Take care Ben, and "B". I still think you're the same person. The pretzel like logic paths, the mutual admiration for yourself, and just plain errors in interpretation of the English language have convinced me of that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1094 Consumer Suggestion

Why don't you all grow up?????

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Why can't Ben and Robert just drop it. Obviously thay have quit talking about the president ot the courrent situation in the country and choose to just argue with each other instead. Why don't the two of you go into a chat room and have it out and quit these rants you are posting here. You both are repeating the same things over and over and it is really getting boring. How about a constructive discussion and let others get a word in edgewise.

If you both keep wanting to attacke each other why don't you set up the Ben and Robert report. Then people who care about your rants like Vera and B can go there and read them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1093 Consumer Comment

All people! Looking for information on Post! reward of 1,000.00

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 14, 2006

All people!

I am offering reward of 1,000.00 towards information leading to Vera the tweet Ohio!
I will base this on the proof of her being the one I am after, she has posted on ripoffreport.com.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1092 Consumer Comment

And the smoke screen continues..

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 13, 2006

More of your smoke screen Robert.......

This brings me to another issue. If your teaching friends know nothing about this, should they even have jobs teaching? I think not, considering they don't seem to know the School Board's curriculum.--Robert

What is so important about the "School Board" when we are only talking about ONE school? Most of my "teaching friends" are from the LA/Orange county area. Why would they care about ONE school over 400 miles away? Unless...your trying to make it look like a....STATEWIDE ISSUE...EH? Hmmmmmmm! Care to flip-flop again?!

Do they know where the Board of Education is? I ask that only because you still claim you don't. That's very odd, especially considering you claim to be married to a teacher.""""

Once again, I'm sure they are VERY familiar with WHERE the school board is......in THEIR COUNTIES. As for my wife, she hasnt been in teaching since WE moved back from the LA area in 2002.....WHERE SHE TAUGHT AS WELL. She works for me at my company that I took over when I moved back up here. A move she obviously came with me on.

So once again....why would they care about ONE SCHOOL 400 MILES AWAY? Now as far as my friends that LIVE IN Brentwood, they were well aware of this ONE incident, and really dont care about it. I'm sure they are well aware also of where the school board is. But it doesnt matter in regards to this subject. Who cars WHERE the school board is! We are only talking about ONE SCHOOL...not the school board for the entire county! Which has MANY SUB-SCHOOL DISTRICTS!

And about this "I still claim"....where did I ever say I DIDNT KNOW WHERE THE SCHOOL BOARD IS???? I may have just ignored your question about IF I knew because it.....DOESNT MATTER!!....ITS ONE OF YOUR SMOKE SCREENS!! WHY BOTHER! I didnt make any claim one way or the other about WHERE IT WAS or if I KNEW!

*cough!*cough!*wheez!*....so much smoke...hard...to...breath.....

"""""Of course, you also claim you don't know the name of your newspaper, or anything else about where you live. Very unusual indeed.""""" ---Robert

Really? I am familiar with the Contra Costa Times. WHERE this paper is physically printed, I'm not sure. This is another tangent of yours that DOESNT MATTER. Now when I asked you about it, it was before you mentioned it by name. What you did mention was "IN YOUR TOWN" meaning....MARTINEZ where I live. That IS my TOWN.

There is only one itty bitty paper here as I mentioned before. Its NOT a county paper and just for locals. Yes, I do admit, I dont recall the name, nor do I care. The only time I have ever interacted with it was when my sister was starting her business back in the early 90's for posting her busines name. Its all people seem to use it for. So, yes, I am NOT familiar with the LOCAL MARTINEZ paper.

I doubt many are, regardless of where they live. Never denied it, never will. And I didnt even bother looking on the net to get the name for you....because I DONT CARE! For some reason you think that Martinez is some massive city in this county. Its not. Its pretty small compared to the average in this county. It just HAPPENS to be the county seat! Nothing more! Just because a newspaper is called the "Conta Costa Times" doesnt mean its automatically printed in the county seat! Hell! Is Sacramento the largest city in California?? Not by a loooooong shot!

I know in the East, and midwest many times the demographics come out where the county seat is the largest town/city in the county. That is NOT the case here. You read WAAAAAAAAAY too much into this "Ben is from Martinez" thing. I grew up in Orinda bud. Lived there from 1976-1990. Moved to LA, and moved back to this COUNTY in 2002. I moved to Walnut Creek first. And moved to Martinez in 2003. BIG DEAL!

Suddenly you expect anyone that has lived in this little town, that happens to be the county seat, for about 2-3 years is supposed to know every d**n issue from big to small?? Just because its the "county seat"?? Get real! Thats like asking someone that has only lived in Atlanta,GA for 3 years to name what year CNN made it their HQ! (which would be a far bigger story than....ONE SCHOOL with a Islam course!)

Once again you take vague responses, or lack of responses to mean far greater things, if not completely twist them into something that doesnt exist at all.


These 3 comments only prove two things.....

1. You have no real facts whatsover to back this claim of "Islam being forced in California SchoolS"...plural. So you need to make up subjects that dont have any bearing on the subject as a smoke screen to aviod this obvious fact.

2. You think that by personally attacking me will somehow prove that Islam is being forced in California schools.


Personally attack me all you want. If you succeed or not will not ever change the true fact of the matter........IT WAS ONLY ONE SCHOOL.


Time for your smoke machine to get a refill by now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1091 Consumer Comment

No Mr.Grissom....I admitted nothing.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Here, Ben finally admits he knew all about it...all along. This is where that cradibilty issue rears it's ugly head Ben. You have none. If someone made a claim about something that happened close to where I live, I wouldn't try to deny it happened. I would step up and tell the truth about it. You, on the other hand, denied it ever happened, even going so far as to try and have us show proof of your own spin. YOU were the only one who ever made it out to be anything more than it was. By doing so, you got your way. You created a scenario for which we gleefully researched the facts, and came up with even more than the original one I provided. All the while, you continued to deny it ever happened, or in your own words...just go back to your post from 10/20/05. That's the point in time where you loaded your pistol. The point at which you pulled your trigger is 6/11/06, when you finally admitted, after many months of constant denial, that YOU were a liar, and knew all about it."""""----Robert


Gee wiz! Robert!! You have managed to contradict yourself several times in one paragraph!!!

I admitted NOTHING Robert!

You use this comment of mine...."There is NO NO NO such thing" all to often. Right after you showed Vera's original BS comment?!?!?! She clearly said "some" meaning more than ONE. You have clearly shown that you can flip-flop over and over on that. Thank you Robert. Your flip-flop is over. Now it its fact proven once again by YOU that it was intended to be MORE THAN ONE. Then you go on to bash my comment??? Your kidding right? I still stand by my statement......

NO NO NO SUCH THING.

You have shown ONE SCHOOL. Not many....not even....SOME.

There is NO NO NO NO NO such thing.

Now on to this admitting "I knew". I have done nothing of the sort. What I did do is say.....

If I did or didnt know....DOESNT MATTER! Its still ONE SCHOOL IN EITHER SCENARIO!.....PERIOD.

So you can BELIEVE...what you want about WHEN...I knew. It still doesnt change the fact that Vera's comment was out of line with the facts. One school...is one school. No bizzare math, or spouting about population numbers will EVER change that.

I gave the scenario of if YOU were right and I didnt know (which is BS and I commented as such in the last post!) and if you were wrong (which IS the case). Either way......

ITS STILL ONE SCHOOL!!!

Now after you sit there and say "Ben finally admits he knew all about it...all along" you follow with "You, on the other hand, denied it ever happened".

GOOD LORD MAN! Your INSANE!

Your contradicting yourself in the same paragraphs now!

This could go on and on. Just as there is NO NO NO NO "3 week crash course...IN SOME CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS!"

SOME SCHOOLS....

IS more than ONE SCHOOL.

You have flip flopped back and forth that it was "ben who said statewide" back to "it was statewide" to it was "some" to it was "many" to it was "statwide" again only to follow in this last paragraph.....AGAIN with......."YOU were the only one who ever made it out to be anything more than it was.".

You just cant make up your mind can you??

Now this line take the cake.....


"""You created a scenario for which we gleefully researched the facts, and came up with even more than the original one I provided.""""

I did!!!???? Where!!!??????

Only thing I did was switch between calling it "Byron" and "Brentwood". Why you ask?......

BECAUSE THE ONLY STORY ON THE SUBJECT THAT ANYONE EVER PRODUCED MENTIONES THAT THE STORY HAPPENED.....IN BYRON.....THEN LATER IN THE ARTICLE....IN BRENTWOOD......REFERING TOO......THE SAME SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get it!? Even the story itself about this ONE school couldnt get the town right. And honestly I think B explained it very well........

BECAUSE BYRON REALLY BUSES ITS STUDENTS TO BRENTWOOD.....JUST DOWN THE STREET!!!!! ITS THE SAME SCHOOL!!!

This is the most blatant twist and contortion of reality you could ever do. Just because the article goes back and forth refering THE ONE SCHOOL by mentioning Byron, and Brentwood at the same time.....YOU THINK ITS TWO SCHOOLS!!!

Your a joke!

Re-read the article Robert. Then look at a map. Then go find those wonderful pages you SAY you really research. You will find in the article that its ONE middle school.....ONLY! The article just HAPPENS to mention both towns because the school SERVES THEM BOTH.

I went to a high school in Orinda. It served ALL of Orinda, and for a few unlucky students that lived closer to it than their regular school from Moraga. Does that make my highschool now TWO??? NO! Its still.....ONE SCHOOL! On the regsiter it will mention....Orinda residents and some (very few because Moraga DOES have a high school of its own....just on one far end) Moraga residents. Only someone out to twist the facts would try and use this as a way to make it look like my high school was actually 2 schools.

Its the same scenario your trying to pull. A middle school that serves BYRON AND BRENTWOOD. Suddenly becomes.....TWO SCHOOLS. Ya right!

Oh ya! I forgot, you were trying to say that it was ME who made this distinction. Once again....YA RIIIIIIGHT! Sure it was.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1090 Consumer Comment

The 70K came directly from you, Robert.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Robert,

You blame ME for the failure of YOUR numbers.
You claim you are unable to follow simple logic.
You claim you know nothing of history.
You claim you know nothing of the world around you.

You gather these inadequacies about you like a cloak, and challenge MY credibility, because I will not join in your absolute character assassination of Ben.
How pathetic.

And then, I see, you are attacking Ben yet again. I don't know why you bother to selectively quote him, since your conclusions can't be logically deduced or inferred from those quotes. Perhaps it isn't only numbers you can't understand, but anything which requires logical thought. And then you attack his family; how very Vera of you, she'll turn you into a good Christian in no time. Unless the two of you are really the same. You do follow the same logic, or lack thereof. But no, I think her arguing that there are more than one, while you're arguing only one, is a little too subtle for someone like you. And finally, you ramble off again into questions that are completely irrelevant.

No, Robert, I think it is YOUR credibility that is at issue here. Do you really expect us to believe these are the actions of a mature man who runs his own business? More likely a 14 yr. old with nothing better to do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1089 Consumer Comment

Vera and Repubs! You are toast now!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 13, 2006

The Democrats will prevail! Vera, I will not die till I am near you, I swear! I will seek you till hell frezes over! I will seek till I meet you! Vera, you will never be free of me!!!!!!!!!!!!
Vera, I will die after your dead so sacrifice yourself!
I ask your sacrifice?
If not, it will happen eventually

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1088 Consumer Comment

Vera and Repubs! You are toast now!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 13, 2006

The Democrats will prevail! Vera, I will not die till I am near you, I swear! I will seek you till hell frezes over! I will seek till I meet you! Vera, you will never be free of me!!!!!!!!!!!!
Vera, I will die after your dead so sacrifice yourself!
I ask your sacrifice?
If not, it will happen eventually

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1087 Consumer Comment

That space/time continuum still confounds Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, June 12, 2006

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade)."-Vera 10/20/05

"There is NO such thing. Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much.

There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/05

"You DID mention it was ONE school now in your last post. But in the orginal you made it out to be a standard for all CA schools. Twist and contort...and outright LIE."-Ben 10/25/05

Ben now makes the initial claim about it being a statewide issue, while trying to say Vera made the claim. Her actual claim is from 10/20/05.

"First off, NONE OF THIS "WHAT BEN KNEW AND WHEN" MEANS NOTHING TO THE SUBJECT AT HAND!

Somehow for months now you seem to defend your insistance of this widespread forcing of Islam in California schools by bashing ME personally on IF or WHEN I knew......ABOUT ONE SCHOOL!!

Thats not the way to prop up your facts Robert!

Ok...lets just say...in a made up scenario (which is exactly what you think...and have made up!) that BEN DIDNT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Ok with that in mind......

IT STILL DOESNT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT WAS ONLY........ONE....ONE......ONE SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!

Get it!

So if you want to belive that "ben didnt know" or as I have said....."I knew about....ONE...not your statewide forcing BS"......."-Ben 06/11/06

Here, Ben finally admits he knew all about it...all along. This is where that cradibilty issue rears it's ugly head Ben. You have none. If someone made a claim about something that happened close to where I live, I wouldn't try to deny it happened. I would step up and tell the truth about it. You, on the other hand, denied it ever happened, even going so far as to try and have us show proof of your own spin. YOU were the only one who ever made it out to be anything more than it was. By doing so, you got your way. You created a scenario for which we gleefully researched the facts, and came up with even more than the original one I provided. All the while, you continued to deny it ever happened, or in your own words...just go back to your post from 10/20/05. That's the point in time where you loaded your pistol. The point at which you pulled your trigger is 6/11/06, when you finally admitted, after many months of constant denial, that YOU were a liar, and knew all about it.

This brings me to another issue. If your teaching friends know nothing about this, should they even have jobs teaching? I think not, considering they don't seem to know the School Board's curriculum.

Do they know where the Board of Education is? I ask that only because you still claim you don't. That's very odd, especially considering you claim to be married to a teacher.

Of course, you also claim you don't know the name of your newspaper, or anything else about where you live. Very unusual indeed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1086 Consumer Comment

The ultimate twist... and end game!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 11, 2006

"NOBODY concerns themselves over ONE, except Ben." ---Robert

All of this....because Vera, and Robert wanted to put the fear Islam into us. They attempt to make a single school look like its going to spread Islam all across the nation. Then Robert has the gall to actually say something as stupid as this!?

Uh, Robert, apparently its not I who concerns themselves about ONE. Its you and Vera.

It was the two of you concerned about this ONE being actually many with no proof whatsoever.

Its been the two of you concerned about this ONE since this whole subject began.

I have been the one to say...."IT WAS ONLY ONE!....you have got to be kidding me!!! Your worried about that??".

Hardly the attitude of someone "concerned" about.....ONE.

How many times did I say "we here in my county and state dont seem to CONCERNED about it....WHY ARE YOU HAVING SUCH A HISSY FIT ABOUT IT??"

Robert, you are just a flat out liar. How you can even deny it shows how insane and blind you are. Your flip flops and blatant contortions are so obvious a 4 year old could spot them.

Now let it go. I could have a more intelligent conversation with a jellyfish than a sub-lifeform like yourself.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1085 Consumer Comment

This contortion of reality has to end!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 11, 2006

Robert.....

Ok now we have moved from population numbers to what newspapers had what and where those newspapers are located.

This is a joke...and your the butt end of it.


First off, NONE OF THIS "WHAT BEN KNEW AND WHEN" MEANS NOTHING TO THE SUBJECT AT HAND!

Somehow for months now you seem to defend your insistance of this widespread forcing of Islam in California schools by bashing ME personally on IF or WHEN I knew......ABOUT ONE SCHOOL!!

Thats not the way to prop up your facts Robert!

Ok...lets just say...in a made up scenario (which is exactly what you think...and have made up!) that BEN DIDNT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Ok with that in mind......

IT STILL DOESNT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT WAS ONLY........ONE....ONE......ONE SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!


Get it!

So if you want to belive that "ben didnt know" or as I have said....."I knew about....ONE...not your statewide forcing BS".......

....YOU GO RIGHT AHEAD.

Either way....you still have only ONE SCHOOL....and your the biggest lying sack of garbage on this site.

To even hint and continuing this line, as a way to prove there were more than one....IS BS...PERIOD.


The facts remain the same....IS IT ONE...OR MANY.

We have seen.......ONE.

You have no credibility Robert. Even if you did manage to find evidence and be completely right....which you never will since it doesnt exist, your credibility is completely hosed just for the extent you have twisted this to avoid the basic and easily identifiable subject at hand. Along with the sheer amount of time you have wasted in doing this massive smoke screen.


FINE! Belive what you want....think that I never knew about this ONE school for all I care!

ITS STILL ONLY ONE SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When Ben knew, and when about it...or what the population of Mars is......WILL NEVER CHANGE THAT FACT! The simple same fact that will always trump your lie!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1084 Consumer Comment

How did ONE school turn into 70,000 schools? Put down the pipe, please.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, June 11, 2006

How did ONE school turn into 70,000 schools? Put down the pipe, please.

"Great comments on teaching Islam, there, Robert. Let's generalize the acts of a few onto the entire culture. Let's convince 12 and 13 year old kids their friends and neighbors are rapists and murderers, complete with graphic detail. Is it your goal to provide the KKK with a new generation of inductees?"

I cannot even begin to see any logic behind this whole paragraph, so let's move on.

"While we're vilifying Islam, we should be sure to teach them about Christianity. Teach them that their religious leaders will rape and sodomize them. Warn them that they will be imprisoned or killed for deviant behavior. Explain that they may be selected for a special baptismal service wherein, if they do not drown, they will be hanged. And we should tell them about this great Christian nation, with its great Christian leaders. The only nation to practice nuclear terrorism. A nation that routinely attacks countries and peoples to further its political and economic agenda. A nation that fires missiles into populated areas, and drops chemicals on civilian populations that attach to their skin and burn them alive. A nation that supplies biological and chemical weapons to terrorist states, and provides funding for terrorists and insurrections. "Pretend you are a soldier at Mai Lai. Write a short essay describing how you might feel while murdering innocent women and children.""

What Christian country imprisons or kills it's people for NOT being Christian? Name ONE(there's that number again). Countries based on Judeo-Christian beliefs imprison those who have committed crimes against other citizens ONLY. Nuclear terrorism? What does that mean. The only country ever to be attacked with a nuke is Japan, and that was only to end the war and SAVE millions of lives. I am not sorry about this, but I would rather kill them, than us. BTW, that's how you win wars. You kill more of them, than they kill of you. We won that war, in case you forgot. Mai Lai was an abberation. The soldiers involved were ALL punished. The Vietnamese who committed more atrocities on a daily basis were applauded by their leaders. So much for your analogy.

"You are right about the Christians. They aren't interested in your head. They are interested in provoking a global biological and thermonuclear war, just to prove there is a God who will save them... but not you. Well, not all of them, just the ones who are fueling the neocon takeover of the Republican Party, the ones that have the ear of your President and half your Congress. You know, the same bunch that publishes most of the pure BS you and Vera are regurgitating as fact, the ones that are fighting feverishly to get Creationism, prayer (Christian only, thank you), and bible study into the public schools. The people who want to control what you read, watch on tv, who you have sex with, and how you do it. Yeah, they don't bother me, either."

What nuclear war? What biological war? What are you talking about? The people who censor what you see on TV, and hear on the radio are the FCC. The FCC is headed by Michael Powell, a DEMOCRAT! Conservatives do NOT believe in censorship. Ashcroft was tossed because of his LIBERAL views. That's right. LIBERALS are the ones who believe you should only have freedom of speech, if you say what the LIBERALS want to hear. Colleges and Universities are all creating speech codes. These are ALL run by LIBERALS, and the codes are designed to eliminate any speech that may offend someone.

Nothing in this diatribe of yours made sense, which again makes me believe "B" is just a nom de plume for Ben. Seeing as how you are also the only one who continually tries to equate Ben with logic and reason, I stand by this remark.

Your credibilty is about the same as his.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1083 Consumer Comment

Just the facts, Robert.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 10, 2006

Robert,

If the three of you are going to make the rest of us bear witness to your little flame war, the least you can do is get your facts straight. You put words in Ben's mouth. You twist things he has said to make it look like he said something else. You make statements that he doesn't respond to and then state as fact your inference as to what that lack of response means. And it isn't Ben that's twisting the numbers. For example, let's look at the paragraph from your first post:

"The real point is this. Ben gets fired up if a kid says the Pledge of Allegiance. The TWO words "under God" send him into a dither, and he proclaims the kids are being FORCED to follow Christianity. When the kids are praying to Allah(that's God in Arabic), recite lines from the Quoran(that's the Islamic Bible), and adopt Muslim names and dresscodes, suddenly NOTHING is being FORCED on the kids. It instantly becomes "culture". The Pledge of Allegiance to this Country is FORCE, but pretending you are among those this Country is currently at war with is not."

I don't recall Ben ever getting "fired up" on this issue; in fact, I don't believe he's ever stated his position on it. He has responded several times when Vera brought it up, calmly asking her why, if she is not trying to force Christianity in the schools, this issue is such a big deal to her, why would she care if the words "under God" were removed. Again with the Islam stuff, I don't recall Ben ever saying he would agree with these alleged practices, rather that he sees no conclusive evidence that they ever happened, and his leaning is toward the side that says they didn't. Since the science teacher who made the allegations said things that make me doubt her veracity, I tend to agree with this position. BTW, they are not pretending to be "among those this Country is currently at war with", they are pretending to be people living 1500 years ago.

I'm not targeting you alone on this; Vera and Ben are spewing their own brands of BS. I'm sure there are others who have followed this "debate" from the beginning who also recognize how utterly absurd this has become. Its not like you have actually been discussing the issue, the comments you made in your first post are, I think, the first original thought I've seen on the issue since December. And though I disagreed with them, I am not trying to chill that discussion, just my 2 cents. I would, however, love to see a chill on this he said, you said, you're a liar, you're an idiot conversation. Clearly, none of you is going to 'win', and none of you is going to have the definitive last word. Maybe you and Ben could be gentlemen, and let Vera have the last word; I'm sure she really, really wants to, really bad.

As to Ben's credibility, I'd have to say that while not everything he says is nutty, he spews enough REALLY goofy stuff, his credibility is way down there. But your credibility, and Vera's, are sinking fast.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1082 Consumer Comment

You are right about the Christians. They aren't interested in your head. They are interested in provoking a global biological and thermonuclear war, just to prove there is a God who will save them

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 10, 2006

Get real, Robert!

As I've said before, all you're cooking is the numbers. So, extrapolating from your gastronomical projections, should we issue the following alert through the Civil Defense warning system? "ALERT! THIS IS NOT A TEST! A teacher in CA may have gone too far 4 years ago! And maybe it happened in 2 or even 3 schools! PANIC! NOW! If we don't take drastic action immediately, all of a sudden, it will happen in SEVENTY THOUSAND schools!"

I suggest you move, change your phone number, and avoid making friends to minimize the possibility of a culinary disaster. Or you could buy 5 loaves of bread and two fish, and invite GWB to address the crowd.

Great comments on teaching Islam, there, Robert. Let's generalize the acts of a few onto the entire culture. Let's convince 12 and 13 year old kids their friends and neighbors are rapists and murderers, complete with graphic detail. Is it your goal to provide the KKK with a new generation of inductees?

While we're vilifying Islam, we should be sure to teach them about Christianity. Teach them that their religious leaders will rape and sodomize them. Warn them that they will be imprisoned or killed for deviant behavior. Explain that they may be selected for a special baptismal service wherein, if they do not drown, they will be hanged. And we should tell them about this great Christian nation, with its great Christian leaders. The only nation to practice nuclear terrorism. A nation that routinely attacks countries and peoples to further its political and economic agenda. A nation that fires missiles into populated areas, and drops chemicals on civilian populations that attach to their skin and burn them alive. A nation that supplies biological and chemical weapons to terrorist states, and provides funding for terrorists and insurrections. "Pretend you are a soldier at Mai Lai. Write a short essay describing how you might feel while murdering innocent women and children."

You are right about the Christians. They aren't interested in your head. They are interested in provoking a global biological and thermonuclear war, just to prove there is a God who will save them... but not you. Well, not all of them, just the ones who are fueling the neocon takeover of the Republican Party, the ones that have the ear of your President and half your Congress. You know, the same bunch that publishes most of the pure BS you and Vera are regurgitating as fact, the ones that are fighting feverishly to get Creationism, prayer (Christian only, thank you), and bible study into the public schools. The people who want to control what you read, watch on tv, who you have sex with, and how you do it. Yeah, they don't bother me, either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1081 Consumer Comment

One at a time, please

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, June 10, 2006

No, Ben. You continually claimed you had no idea what we were talking about. You also claimed you have no idea about how to search for information. You still deny it happened.

I named Byron, YOU named Brentwood. That equals TWO. Wait, numbers don't mean anything to you.

The name of your Newspaper is "The Contra Costa Times". I found that by doing a GOOGLE SEARCH. You can find it by looking in your driveway.

"Royal Oak Middle School"-5/27/06
That's the name of the school I gave you in Covina.

I got my population numbers from the same link you got your estimates. I also got them from your State, and County, and City websites. I already told you that.

All you have to do is admit it happened, and it will drop. It's very simple. Just admit you were not telling the truth, then or now, and it will all go away.

Really, do you think anyone believes you don't even know the name of your own newspaper? That crap about not knowing where the Board of Education is was funny enough. You twisting of numbers is just sad. And, your claims of not having a clue about how to enter a few words into a search engine are pathetic.

Would anyone else like to make the claim that Ben possesses credibilty?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1080 Consumer Comment

You have given nothing...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 09, 2006

"He couldn't even find his own town, or the newspaper in it. I gave the name of ONE school, while Ben gave the name of ONE more. "

I did? I couldnt?

Are you kidding!!?

You have given nothing Robert...BUT ONE SCHOOL!

What second school!

And please...tell me where I even NAMED A SCHOOL!

And whats this about a newspaper in my home town?!

I live in Martinez! WHAT NEWSPAPER!

(I think there is a little itty bitty one.....that people use for fictitious name postings)

What school in Covina? You never mentioned any name!

Good lord you lie, twist and contort!

And puh-leaze....since you wish to continue on this population number rant....explain how and where you found your numbers since you say my link to the census page is worthless (if not a lie) and yours (that you have never given a link too)is so much better.

Now we are up to three schools at least Robert. After many flip flops on "oh we didnt mean it that way" back to "yes we did and it was many".

We have ONE school.......

Name the others!

Show me the info!

Or just DROP IT AND SHUT UP.....you liar!

This entire subject is just stupid beyond extream until you can simply back up your statements without your smoke screen. Drop the population rant. You obviously have no clue as to the demographics of this county, let alone where newspapers are, and what they have printed. And certainly have NO FACTS whatsoever on what they ever printed about this ONE SCHOOL.

Nothing you say is worth commenting on any further until you.....

NAME THE SCHOOLS....plural.

NAME THE SCHOOLS....plural.

NAME THE SCHOOLS.

Get it.

All this could be over if you would just show your sources....period!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1079 Consumer Comment

Perhaps this analogy will be more to your liking

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 09, 2006

I am cooking dinner. ONE of my friends calls, and I invite him over. Now I am making dinner for TWO. No big deal.

All of a sudden, SEVENTY THOUSAND people show up. NOW, it's a big deal.

NOBODY concerns themselves over ONE, except Ben.

If this took place at ONE school only, nobody would care either. It would be considered an anamoly. IT happened at at least TWO schools in Ben's own County(he still won't admit it happened, or that the Board of Education is in his town), and at least ONE more in Cali, that ANYONE can find with a Google search. In fact, it is happening at many schools, in many states.

The real point is this. Ben gets fired up if a kid says the Pledge of Allegiance. The TWO words "under God" send him into a dither, and he proclaims the kids are being FORCED to follow Christianity. When the kids are praying to Allah(that's God in Arabic), recite lines from the Quoran(that's the Islamic Bible), and adopt Muslim names and dresscodes, suddenly NOTHING is being FORCED on the kids. It instantly becomes "culture". The Pledge of Allegiance to this Country is FORCE, but pretending you are among those this Country is currently at war with is not.

The Principal of the school in Brentwood called Christianity a "myth", but Islam is "culture". Fine, I personally believe ALL religions are based on myths.

If the kids are going to be taught the "culture" of Islam, teach them the REAL Islam. Show them how to cut off kidnapped victims heads with dull knives. Teach them how to kill and maim people who have nothing to do with your insane interpretations of religious dogma. Teach them that with the exception of Tim McVeigh, ALL terrorist activity in the past 30+ tears have been BY Muslims. Teach them that there are over 100 shooting wars on the planet, and Muslims are on one side of every single one. In nearly ALL cases, Muslims are the aggressors. Teach them that Islam translates directly to "submission", and the Quoran teaches it's followers there are only two things allowed for non-believers...DEATH, or conversion. Teach them that in Islamic countries, the NON-believers pay a special tax for being anything other than Muslim. Teach the kids ALL the great things about Islamic cultures. How about rape? Teach the kids about the rape-rooms. That's show the kids how good women have it in Muslim culture. Can't get the man to do what you want in business, or confess to a crime he didn't commit? Just grab his wife or daughter(s), and send in a platoon of human filth to gang-rape them in front of him. If the female(s)dies, oh well. Or stoning to death. That's another great cultural treat they can find there. Want to get a divorce? Nah, not allowed in Islamic countries...just have the man accuse the woman of some issue that's against Islam, have her killed by the locals for being a heretic, and them the man can remarry. Teach the kids ALL of the culture id you're going to teach ANY of it.

The worst thing I have to fear from Christians, is them standing on the street corner yelling at me for not going to Church. When they knock on my door, I don't have to worry about whether my head will still be attached to my neck when they leave.

I say keep ALL religion out of the Government Schools.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1078 Consumer Comment

Zarqwho?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 09, 2006

I never thought I'd find someone's death to be a joyous event, but... Hail merry and braise cheeses! Ding Dong the merry-o, SING IT HIGH, sing it low, let them know the wicked terrorist is dead! He's gone where the shahid go, below, belo---schreeeeeeeeeeeeeecch. Well, that gets old in a hurry. If there is any justice, Zarqawi has just begun an eternity with a bevy of virgins, all of whom plan to remain virgins for eternity, who will tease him mercilessly then jeer at his pathetic display of manhood.

Jon,

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I'm not the man for the job. While I enjoy debate and I'm good at planning, there are so many skills crucial to the job that I lack, not the least of which are the energy, patience, and persistence to put up with that much BS long enough to accomplish anything. But, I'll be in California the latter part of July and some of August; maybe we could meet on the steps of the capitol with Ben and Shawn, if he's still around, and any others who want to join in, and stage a sit-in to protest the placement of inorganic robots in positions of authority. We can claim it is civil OBEDIENCE of the 1st law of robotics, "A robot may not harm a human being, or, THROUGH INACTION, ALLOW A HUMAN BEING TO COME TO HARM." It won't accomplish anything, but if we can come up with a clever 10-second soundbite, it will probably be picked up by most of the local and national media.

As to my party affiliations, I was raised a Democrat, at a time when that meant something. When I became an adult, I wanted to join the party of armed, patriotic scientists, nurses, and hospice workers who believe the government should in most cases fairly address the needs of the largest number of citizens, without regard to influence, wealth, race, creed, sexual orientation, etc. Hey, I was young! Even back then, I realized that the Democrapes and Reptilicans were headed in the wrong direction, and the rest were mostly a collection of lunatics and limited issue freakshows. I chose the "Independent" party as being most representative of our nation's history and ambitions, and I've never regretted my decision.

Robert,

Forget what I said about numbers wanting to be your friend. They obviously never will be. Your arbitrary distinctions between numbers and percentages are just that - arbitrary and meaningless. You describe percentages and then scream at us that they are NUMBERS, and the worst part is that you don't even see it. Or will you truly attempt to argue that a jury would find a discrepancy of $500 out of $50 mil to be the exact equivalent of $500 out of $1K? And your inference that these numbers were anything other than of minor importance to these trials is completely disingenuous. Hell, Martha Stewart's case wasn't even about the numbers, every charge against her was for impeding a federal investigation. No, you carefully pick numbers that will make your arguments SEEM more valid, but they are not. In fact, your arguments are so spin-sided, I get a strong feeling Robert is just long for James (no affront intended, James).

Your argument about Ben's imaginary audit is both true and false. Reported figures and calculations would have to be accurate, and I see no way anyone could even begin to argue them as percentages. However, if he had, say, some obscure method of accounting that involved percentages, as long as he could demonstrate that it was applied consistently from year to year and favored neither gains nor losses, the agent would have little choice but to accept it

Let's see what I can do about the [un]importance of 1. The military found 1 terrorist to be important enough to drop 1 extra bomb to make sure they didn't have an error of 1. In the collapse of the WTC, 1 man "rode" the collapsing floors to safety. He may not have been important statistically, but he was certainly of paramount importance to his family and friends, as was every other 1 of the people who lived or died that day. And what was the importance of the 1 error the terrorists made, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania? I hate to think what a difference 1 might make during brain surgery. How might our lives be different if there had been an error in the 2nd shot that hit JFK? And world history was probably completely changed by the error of killing 1 Jew.

I have to give you 1 point (as unimportant as 1 point may be) for producing the most succinct synopsis of this whole "school debate", but it is the synopsis you would like others to believe, and bears only passing resemblance to the truth. In the first place, Ben has alluded to only 1 school, he just can't remember whether its Byron or Brentwood. [Its Byron, Ben!] This school (Excelsior Middle School) may have crossed the line, depending on whose version of events you believe, the school's, or that of the teacher who is pissed off that she can't teach Creationism in her science class. Two parents filed a lawsuit, and two courts have now ruled the teacher did NOT cross the line. You and Vera have named a school in Covina. The only controversy there is that a teacher sent home a permission slip to have his students voluntarily fast. No prayer, no Koranic verses. I have yet to see an argument that even, however foolishly, tries to convince me this equates to religious indoctrination. Both of these incidents occurred in 2002, and were most likely reactionary to the events of the time. So, you have presented 1 school that MAY have crossed the line, period.

Vera is the only one who has continued to provide any "information" in this "debate", and all of it is lunatic far-right fear mongering rhetoric that she can't possibly back up. For example, she states that Jose Padilla's elementary school used this same text, Across the Centuries, in an attempt to indict the text for "producing" a terrorist. Aside from the brass balls of using the poster child for this administration's abuse of our civil rights as the token terrorist, it doesn't take a math whiz to realize the lunacy in this argument. Jose Padilla was born in 1970, the text was first published in 1991, making him at least 21 when his elementary school began using it. BTW, this is an example of the proper way to use numbers to dispute an argument.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1077 Consumer Comment

Speaking of trolls...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 08, 2006

I see my absence has bought out a bumper crop of accusations, defamatory remarks, and, well, just plain bs.

To James, the Troll who started it all...

Piss off.

You're so terribly offended that I made a comment alluding to your Mother. Big deal. Too bad Mom never got to see her boy grow up, and move on from having Microsoft Testicles. Apparently, the "Great Tampon" CAN get under your skin, and I do represent enough of an issue to you that you had the time to make your little threats---and than add something clever like "Uh, DUH, that wasn't a threat" afterward.

Too bad it isn't mutual.

And I've told you; what you see is what you get; I'd be the exact same to your face as I am here. Bring it on, Junior. I've said it before; self defense would leave you very sorry.

And don't try the whole "You dissed my Moms" bit. First of all, it's ultra-lame when a white hick tries to sound like a "black dude", and secondly, what I have said to you even at my worst is pretty mild (and CERTAINLY more intelligent and original!)compared to that which you have said to and about others---and the parents of other people here on RipOffReports. The worst I've said regarding your Mother might be an Oedipus Complex...and that's on You. But if you need to justify your sense of abandonment by making me the villain, fine. It's poor solace on the nights you'll spend grieving. How sad that you still take the time from your schedule of pity-phishing and binge-drinking to render your lame little verbal tirades on the RipOffReports. A multi-taking griever. Enjoy.

Moving on...

"B.", how can such an educated person be so utterly backward? Now Ben, whom you once stated yourself was deserving of your chides for making outlandish statements, has gone from "chump" to "chum" in as little as two Rebuttals. Where once you yourself had said that both Robert and I offered valid points and provided proof, you now stand accusing us of being the trolls.

And suddenly, Ben is capable of clear and concise thoughts? I have yet to see that happen, except maybe for the fact that he's still doing the same hair-splitting he's always been doing. THAT'S the only "clarity"...CLEARLY he's gonna just be a stubborn a*s. Nothing "concise" about that. I still wonder why, if Ben doesn't want ANY religion taught in ANY public schools, why no outrage over making the kids bow and pray to "Allah, the compassionate, the Creator"? And yet he sees fit to goad a fight on Christianity, PLUS bite off MORE than he can chew when he gets a fight he wasn't prepared for. Make no mistake, Folks....Islam is being shoved in your face; but it's supposd to be alright, as long as we don't bring up Christianity.

Do I feel as I am a "victim" here? Not really. I'm a big enough kid to defend myself and my position quite well. And I don't give a tinker's d**n if anyone likes it. And I don't give a s**t if you agree or disagree with my beliefs, be they Christian, Buddhist, or none at all. Funny how it's a "Cultural Enrichment Encounter" for one religion, and "Proselytization" for another.

"Stripper for Christ"? Not in this or any lifetime. Ben isn't singling me out because I'm a woman, he's trolled for a Christian and now he's mad because he got one he can't shake.

You can go ahead and use every lame attempt at logic you want, Bennie...you still have never managed to prove me wrong. Not one single time. My posture in what I know and believe is STILL unshaken. You can feel free to use the usual poor excuse "I don't have to prove you wrong, Vera...you've made an a*s out of yourself plenty of times here." fall-back. Losrd knows, you can't touch this, so you're gonna try the old "baffle 'em with bullshit" routine.

Regarding the Circuit City Reports, I went there to let Ben know he shouldn't be dragging this fight everywhere, and to give a background to anyone interested in the source of our little quarrel reasons as to its nature. If you don't like it, mayhaps you should convince your little "Chum" that it would have been wise not to seek new Reports to smear others on, and keep the argument where it belonged. No one "Left me hanging". I made my statement and left with no intent to return.

As I had said; I had no desire to pursue Ben to the Circuit City Reports...he's gotta be King Cretin somewhere...it might as well be there. He even tried to bring this nonsense up in another Report...but had the good sense to not mention specific names and the subject's depth. For once, a smart move. He wants to pick a fight behind my back, I'll turn and fight there too. I know I have provided truthful, solid information. Ben is too goddamn lazy to read it, so he simply denies its existence.

Ben, regarding that "Precious Link", and how I "finally learned to cut and paste"? Try again, Princess; that link is supposed to lead you back to this very page, and I even took the time to mention the very POSTS that contain the specific info, BY NAME, used with permission from the VERY TEXTBOOK USED in the RESPECTIVE SchoolS. Cut and pated from the very site of the textbook company, Houghton-Mifflin. Have the balls to read the info I have provided in BOTH posts....there's LOTS of it, which is why the Rebuttals are so long. If you don't want to read the information I have provided, then just accepth the GLARING FACT that you are wrong, and move on.

Obviously it's a reality issue with you, Benjo...you refuse to grasp it. You should just stick to logging all the innumerable Reports you've Rebuttaled---as clearly, you have the time to respond to many.

To Damon, I appreciate that you have taken the time to clarify my point to James. I couldn't have said the "paraphrased part" any better. Perhaps hearing it from someone who's not in total agreement with me might help the point sink in. My inent has been from the beginning, to simply carry a healthy debate here; had there never been the attempt to drag this fight into numerous other posts, I would have happily left it here.

Not so with some others, like Ben, Charles, and James. But it's only "Trolling" if I defend myself from some juvenile who seeks to carry a fight he knows he's lost from board to board (sort of like how Ben jumped Robert's case for no reason, other than to tell him to "suck a fat baby's p***s" over on the Pat Benatar Report, then proceeded to make the topic purely about arguments he's losing with Robert on OTHER Reports.) in hopes to get some kind of backing from others.

The real irony here is that this has gotten WAY bigger than it should have, and we have Ben's stupidity to thank for it, regarding that FACT that Islam WAS being taought as part of PUBLIC SCHOOL in AT LEAST THREE California Schools: Byron, Brentwood, and Covina.

On these facts I will stand solidly (in addition to my many other beliefs), and have never changed that stance by a hair's breadth. I don't intend to, either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1076 Consumer Comment

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 08, 2006

I vowed that I would not look at this post again, but a recent turn in world affairs made me decide it was worth another look. The topic covers everything from soup to nuts now, so why not throw in another little something.

Short and sweet, but one to ponder...

Bush and Company tagged Osama bin Laden as the perpetrator of 9/11 within hours of the terror strikes.

The "coalition forces" have since nabbed Saddam, killed his sons, and "al-Zarqawi the Beheader" has gone to his seventy-two virgins just hours ago.

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"? Can't find him?? "Intelligence breakdown?? He is a six-foot-two-inch tall man on dialysis hiding in the midst of very short people. He would stick out like a zit.

Could it be the cushy financial links between the Bush family and the bin Ladens dating back many, many years? Hmmm...maybe BushCo is just not looking too hard???

Any thoughts?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1075 Consumer Comment

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 08, 2006

I vowed that I would not look at this post again, but a recent turn in world affairs made me decide it was worth another look. The topic covers everything from soup to nuts now, so why not throw in another little something.

Short and sweet, but one to ponder...

Bush and Company tagged Osama bin Laden as the perpetrator of 9/11 within hours of the terror strikes.

The "coalition forces" have since nabbed Saddam, killed his sons, and "al-Zarqawi the Beheader" has gone to his seventy-two virgins just hours ago.

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"? Can't find him?? "Intelligence breakdown?? He is a six-foot-two-inch tall man on dialysis hiding in the midst of very short people. He would stick out like a zit.

Could it be the cushy financial links between the Bush family and the bin Ladens dating back many, many years? Hmmm...maybe BushCo is just not looking too hard???

Any thoughts?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1074 Consumer Comment

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 08, 2006

I vowed that I would not look at this post again, but a recent turn in world affairs made me decide it was worth another look. The topic covers everything from soup to nuts now, so why not throw in another little something.

Short and sweet, but one to ponder...

Bush and Company tagged Osama bin Laden as the perpetrator of 9/11 within hours of the terror strikes.

The "coalition forces" have since nabbed Saddam, killed his sons, and "al-Zarqawi the Beheader" has gone to his seventy-two virgins just hours ago.

Why is it that almost everybody is seeing justice and dying EXCEPT "bin Laden the Master Mind"? Can't find him?? "Intelligence breakdown?? He is a six-foot-two-inch tall man on dialysis hiding in the midst of very short people. He would stick out like a zit.

Could it be the cushy financial links between the Bush family and the bin Ladens dating back many, many years? Hmmm...maybe BushCo is just not looking too hard???

Any thoughts?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1073 Consumer Comment

Certainly, a Cut Above the Rest

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 07, 2006

B from Colorado:

I really have no interest in knowing what political party you are affiliated with, or that of anyone else for that matter. I'm sure that if for some reason I did need to know it won't too difficult to discover. By the way, my comments here are in no way meant to be critical of your beliefs, writings and/or thoughts in anyway. In fact, I'm quite impressed with your candor, as well as your rapier wit, and your well advanced reasoning ability. I have no basis to believe that you would ever choose to do so? but, if for some strange and unknown reason you ever choose to run for any form of public office, especially if it's opposed by the currently well entrenched mindless hacks and funhouse rejects, the self-indulgent, self-serving spineless trolls. You would unquestionably have my support, as well as my vote!

Thanks!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1072 Consumer Comment

Bennie the Bass

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Ben, did I say chump? Sorry, I meant chum. Now Vera and Robert don't have to do a thing to make you look foolish. They can just sit back and quietly reveal you for the Bass you are - a Bass in a shark tank. Thanks for being there for me, chum.

Now, someone was prattling on about Gore and Kennedy being heavily invested in oil. A quick look at their financial disclosure statements shows that to be a big fib, but it got me thinking. As long as we're entertaining absurd amendments to the Constitution, how about one to get the power brokers out of the government?

The amendment would define "elected federal representative" as someone elected by the people FOR the people. It would set maximum income and net worth figures that are based on income levels for the average citizen. Anyone exceeding those figures in any of the last ten years could not run for the office.

We could also throw in some campaign reform. The money in the Presidential Campaign Fund, that comes from the little box you check on your income tax return, would become the Election Campaign Fund. It would be split equally between all candidates running for office. And that would be it, no individual contributions, no PAC advertisements. This would not apply to persons or organizations wishing to provide a private forum for a candidate to speak, however anyone providing a public forum (eg. tv, radio, internet, mass circulation magazines and newspapers) would have to offer equal time to opposing candidates.

With this amendment, "Big Oil" Bush, "BJ" Clinton, DeLay, Kennedy, Gore, and a host of other problems would never have been elected in the first place.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1071 Consumer Comment

Numbers do mean things

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Martha Stewart went to prison because of her NUMBERS. She was off by $50,000. That was less than 1% of her total income. The IRS, and the jury didn't care about percentages though. They cared about the NUMBER...50K. 70K is even larger than 50K. If she was off by ONE, she'd have been let go. If she was off by ONE, no charges would have been filed.

Ken Lay, Jeffrey Skilling, et al, are going to prison. The NUMBERS are what are doing them in. The NUMBERS are small percentages of the total wealth these guys amassed, and just a fraction of what Enron was worth. They are going to prison for a loooooong time because of the actual NUMBERS.

Only you and Ben care about being off by ONE. Nobody else does.

Like I said, I'd love to sit in on an IRS audit of Ben's finances. He'd spew bilge about percentages, while the agent would concern himself with NUMBERS.

We gave you links. We gave you the info needed to find what was out there. Ben couldn't even find his own County, town, or school system. The Board of Education is in his own town, and he can't find it. He couldn't even find his own town, or the newspaper in it. I gave the name of ONE school, while Ben gave the name of ONE more. That equals TWO. Vera gave Covina, and I named the Covina school. How is it we can find this stuff, but BEN cannot?

Ben even went so far as to claim the kids in Byron go to school somewhere else, when in fact, the kids from outlying communities go to Byron. There are more kids in the Byron schools, than there are people who LIVE in Byron. More of that NUMBERS issue.

Ben has no credibility, and I get a strong feeling "B" is just short for Ben. Nobody else has ever tried to associate Ben and sane, rational thought. So far, he has been unable to complile anything short of "mental" in any of his posts.

Onto another topic, from long ago. Where is James of Canaduh? With 17 TERRORISTS arrested in his own country, I would imagine he'd be trying to explain it. They were arrested with the employment of actual law enforcement measures, instigated by the new PM. Amazing how it ALWAYS takes a Conservative to go after the bad guys. Being Canadian, they naturally screwed it all up though. They had 3 times the amount of Fertilizer, Timothy Mc Veigh used, and planned on blowing up meaningless targets. They argued so much amongst themselves, they got caught. And we're supposed to believe Canada can win a war.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1070 Consumer Comment

I have always known Robert and Vera's rants were just that... rants

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Yes.. its done.. thanks B and.. Mr.Grissom

Yes B, its done. Although I will have to disagree with me being a "chump". I have always known Robert and Vera's rants were just that...rants. And their intention was to just aggrivate. Nothing more. I just felt compelled to not let them continue. I stuck to one subject and let them wander all over reality....and other demensions to show just how foolish they were. After all, I'm only using a few minutes of my lunch hour for this. They obviously have far more time.

I really feel compelled to answer Roberts latest "questions". Since these were just too funny too pass up......let us begin....and finally end this.......

"Don't you just love people who demand a link to something, then claim that's not good enough?" ---Robert

Well Robert, that would be sort of true. Unfortunately.....you have yet to give a link beyond one that only mentiones...ONE SCHOOL! I cant make a comment, one way or another.....on NOTHING! Give a link, and then we shall see if its good enough.

"Don't you just love people who then claim they are unable to find anything at all?" ---Robert

Another Robbie-lie. As stated many times Robert, I HAVE SEEN WHAT YOU....SAY too look at. I used a search engine loooooong before you even showed on this thread trying to see what VERA was talking about. I have seen your info......and your info is ONE SCHOOL. So yes, I found it. But its not multiple....its one. Mentioned it waaaay back then, mentioned it in my last post, mentioning it now. Never said anything about "unable to find anything at all" other than this BS about multiple schools. Of THAT...I have found NOTHING.

"Don't you just love people who then complain because you don't provide them with the information they seek...namely something proving THEIR side of the argument?" -----Robert

Well finally! Thank you Robert! I think you just pointed out that the only info out there.....proves it was only one school! Basically you just said "if I show you MY info, it will prove you right...so I'm not going to do it!".

This subject is dead.

Next rant, and following smoke screen please! Let this particular hijack of reality by the Bushy lemmings end. You have a date with a cliff....remember? This was NOT it. We were just giving you directions to the top. Your going to do the leap yourself, if you havent already.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1069 Consumer Comment

Debunking this circular 'debate'

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 02, 2006

Ben, Vera, Robert,

In keeping with Vera's master-baiter theme, I suppose we could term your menage a trois a circle jerk; the 3 of you are jerking each other around so fast, its hard to tell who is leaving the bait and who is switching the bait. The round is over, we get it, alright? Vera and Robert have proven themselves to be the master trolls and flamers, and Ben is just a chump. They can whip up a sustained firestorm of lies, misdirection, and invective, and I'm sorry, Ben, but much as you might want to be 'the big troll', you obviously don't possess the innate deceit and viciousness to 'rise' to their level.

"Wait a minute," I can hear Vera 'saying,' "I'm the victim here! Ben is the big, bad troll who thinks he can take advantage of me because I'm a woman. I just HAVE to prove that isn't so, whatever it takes." Uh huh. I'm sure that people going to the CC report are going to think just that, after reading your 7-page rant against Ben, posted nearly two weeks after that conversation has ended, which you conclude with the suggestion that HE take HIS rant elsewhere. And then he just went away and left you with your arse hanging out; you got the last word, sweetie, and that word is TROLL. And some of those people will come here, out of curiosity, to see what its all about. They'll see you dumping all over a deaf guy for having the temerity to point out the irony of your rant. They'll scroll through page after page of your screed, ripping and slashing anyone who challenges your position as the dominant alpha female attack dog for Christ. Not quite as exotic as being a stripper for Christ. And only the most sadistic will find your repeated posting of the link to this report as humorous as you obviously do; most will just cry troll.

OK, you guys have got to stop abusing the numbers. They want to be your friends, but you have to treat them with a modicum of respect. I suppose my background makes me a little more sensitive than most, but it is literally painful for me to watch the way you torture the poor things. Please stop! Robert, I'm sure you have an excellent facility for calculation, but you so obviously have no idea how to use numbers to model reality, you really shouldn't even try. This began when Ben compared Byron's population of 'about 500' with Contra Costa's population of 'about a million'. Now try to understand this; that was the perfect abstraction of what he was trying to convey, a conversational relativity of population size. No matter how much more precise the numbers are that you present, they are less accurate in this context, because they only distract from the reader's ability to visualize the ratio.

Robert, your entire argument that your error of one is less than the 70K error you assign to Ben is spurious. They are two different kinds of errors, there is no comparison. And even if we could compare them, it would be the ratio of the number of errors to the sample size that would be important, not the number of errors alone. In this case, as I understand your argument, your error of 1 in 2 would be 50%, or 1 in 3 at 33%, whereas Ben's is just over 7%. You would lose. Furthermore, even if the specific numbers were relevant, Ben's are more accurate than yours; your bold assertion that the "factual" numbers from 2000 are more useful than the "estimated" numbers from 2005 is just silly. The numbers were not "factual" when they were gathered. The best you can say is that, for the year they were gathered, their deviation from a perfect count is probably less that the deviation of an "estimated" count in any other given year. By the time the census figures are released, they are probably as far off the mark as the estimated figures are after a few months. Sorry, Robert, the truth is the only raw census figures ANYBODY uses after that first year are those annual "estimated" figures. To quote from the census page, "These estimates are used in federal funding allocations, as denominators for vital rates and per capita time series, as survey controls, and in monitoring recent demographic changes." Anyway, as far as the funding for the schools you are talking about, the bulk of it is based on actual attendance figures, not census figures.

Finally, your comparisons of 'things Byron' don't make any sense because you're comparing different things with the same name. Byron is not an incorporated city or township, the population figures are for a 2.5 square mile area that makes some sense to the census folks. The Byron Union school district is an obviously larger area, which probably contains all of the census designated place that they name Byron. I can't find exact maps for any of this stuff. Some of the middle school students in the Byron Union school district attend a middle school in the Brentwood Union school district which has a Brentwood mailing address, some apparently attend a K-8 school in Alameda County which has a Byron mailing address, and some attend the Excelsior Middle School at issue, which is probably not in the CDP named Byron, but has a Byron mailing address. And for anyone wondering, apparently all of the 9-12 students are bussed to Brentwood.

Ben, Ben, Ben... You have a wonderful talent, when addressing the issues, of stripping away the BS and presenting your point of view coherently and lucidly. You do not have to address each piddling datum as I do in my linear mode of thinking, your presentation somehow implies all of it, while wiping away that which is unimportant. But, as I've said before, you don't do so well swapping tit for tat with the liars and abusers. So my advice would be to maintain your higher vantage point and show us your vision of the whole enchilada. Leave those of us less poetically gifted to duke it out in the trenches and decide whether one is the loneliest number.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1068 Consumer Comment

It has gone too far

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 02, 2006

James,

It is funny how you choose to disrespect Vera by calling her out of her name and when it is thrown at your face, you want to go on the attack. Your responses in each thread you involve yourself in, in my opinion, leaves yourself open for any type of scrutiny you receive. I understand you lost your mother, I am sorry for that, but I am sure she instilled at least an inkling of value, at least respect towards women.

I take it you know nothing of Vera and she of you, so why take it so personally? If what you offer to Vera is not a threat and you would just want to communicate with her, why not leave it on rippoff?

Vera wrote (and I paraphrase) that she becomes nasty towards some people because she feels she has to defend herself. Boy, and this is a situation it which I can understand that comment.

Of all the worries in the World, if rippoff elicits this type of reaction from you, then maybe find another hobby.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1067 Consumer Comment

James......bah... dont worry about Vera, shes been long since trounced

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 02, 2006

James,

Chill man! Vera and Robert have both made themselves look like complete fools all over this site. Dont worry about having to hunt anyone down. The outrageous claims and accusations they throw out like candy, yet are completely inable to back up, have made our case for us. The constant smoke screens and blatant dodges of reality to avoid making good are also good examples of their character. Hell, the both of them are now only able to throw out feeble name calling and nothing more. As if calling someone a name is going to prove their "claims".

Simple Vera and Robert-logic....."Your and a*s therefore everything I say is true....and I need to show now more info about it".

What a joke they are.

If you want a good joke go look at all the times Robert has posted on thread ranging from here, to Circuit City, to Just Brakes, to Pat Benatar, etc! Then watch how they squirm when they try to say others hunted them down. (I really like Vera's little attempted drive-by shooting like a street thug bashing me, about this Islam thing, and trying to say I hijacked a Circuit City thread while she is doing it at that exact moment! ON A CIRCUIT CITY THREAD!...classic!)

If you really want to hunt anyone down, dont bother. The NSA and some ticked off little hacker in college will do the work for you. Its only a matter of time before someone hacks the NSA sites and makes everything they have been gathering public on some blog, and it makes the news. Lets see how these people flip flop then on the whole spying issue. Watch how they sit there and defend Bush like a lemming headed for that cliff.....until they go over the cliff with him. Their outcry of "foul" will be loud, and hypocritical to the end.


In the end, Robert and Vera have done all our work for us.

They have nothing to go on except their own anger.

They have been so completely shamed by their actions and statements that the only recourse they have is to call names and nothing more.

Feeble, pathetic, and a complete waste.

These are some of the most pathetic human beings I have ever had the displeasure of "meeting". Their only purpose left on this site is to insult. Dont take thier feeble insults to heart. If you want to continue to engage them, do as I do. Stick to a single subject, and hound them to back it up, until they fall back on their usual smoke screen of name calling and insults.

Its all they have. All they can do.

You have one little housewife who most likely has never been more than 50 miles from her home and a typical bottom feeding auto mechanic that defends bait-and-switch advertising, and obviously just sits in his office all day, every day, jerking around on this website while bitching at his employees to bilk customers more.

Hardly two people to get all in a tizzy over.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1066 Consumer Comment

I am reminded of a story...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, June 02, 2006

Don't you just love people who demand a link to something, then claim that's not good enough?

Don't you just love people who then claim they are unable to find anything at all?

Don't you just love people who then complain because you don't provide them with the information they seek...namely something proving THEIR side of the argument?

There are none so blind, as they who will not see.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1065 Consumer Comment

you should have kept your mouth shut about my mother b***h

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 01, 2006

Vera,

Boy, you should have kept your mouth shut about my mother b***h as she just died recently. Are you ALL talk and if you aren't please indulge me with how I may come face to face with you. I see you are tough on the computer but how about in person? You can bring anyone you wish and I will still meet with you, tough a*s!!!! You should have never dissed my mother now I will be searching for you my dear Vera! I will use the freedom of information act or web detective but I will meet up with you and we can have a good chat! Tah Tah!!!!! I am not threatening you by the way, I just want to have a good little chat with you man to woman!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1064 Consumer Comment

Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 01, 2006

Yes Robert you are done. These last quotes from you are proof of that......

""""Absolutely NOTHING you have to say about ANYTHING means more than spit to me. I give you the numbers provided by your own County, State, and Towns, and you change them to fit your needs. You use made up "estimates", while I use FACTS.

I am truly unimpressed with how you Liberals claim nobody is "forcing" Islam on the kids in school, yet God Forbid someone say the Pledge of Allegiance in class. Then suddenly it's being "forced" on kids. Yep, saying "under God" is FORCING children to recite a Christian belief, while praying to Allah and reciting passages from the Quoran is just a class about culture.

You're just an a*s. There are no other words to describe you...other than liar, scoundrel, conman, Jabroni.....""""""


Once again you have shown that you a liar to the core. You have made this personal since the beginning. Your only angle is to attack me in general and never show anything to back up your claim. I will NOT do the searching for you to back up your faulty claim. It simply doesnt exist. I have used a search engine Robert. And I have seen what you have seen. I have seen you and Vera's lie.

I have seen only one school.

I have seen you say it was I who claimed many, only to see you come back months later and say it was many again sill lacking any information to back your claim.

I have seen you use population numbers for towns, counties, and states without showing anything more than saying it "was from the census" yet never showing WHERE on the census page you found it. Yet I HAVE ALWAYS GIVEN THE LINK. And now you call them "false"? Are you kidding?!!?!? It was the census page! The same one you claimed to use. If your accusation is correct then the info you SAY is for 2000 is just as false as the ESTIMATE that it gives for 2004!!!


Besides, as I stated in my previous post. Its not about population numbers Robert. Its about your claim of Islam in CA schools.

So rant all you want about whos numbers are correct or not. The only number that matters is that ONE SCHOOL.

Once again in your last post that you simply cannot show the info, and continue on this "population" rant.

You are the conman Robert. I fail to see I how I or anyone can be considered one when all that has been asked all these months is.....SHOW US THE INFO.

If you have it...fine. Show it.

As someone said in another thread about us..."Ben has your number Robert".

Yes, I do. And your number is....one. You have shown nothing more. Your dodging, lies, and outright inability to back up any claim you make is proof of that. You have gone back and forth with your numbers since the beginning. Numbers that had nothing to do with if Islam was being "forced" in one school or any.

Go back to ripping people off on brake shoes Mr.Grissom. Your nothing but a snake oil salesman. And a pretty bad one at that. I will have to give you credit tho. You didnt fall into the real trap of posting your info. Because if you did, it would have been obvious of the sham.

The proof is in the posts, and your lack of info in them. As well as your ver abundant info on completely worthless data that does nothing to bolster your fraud. It was a smoke screen....period.

A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school. A smoke screen to aviod admitting....your a liar.

I got your number Robert, you can be quiet now. Your number...is one.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1063 Consumer Comment

Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 01, 2006

Yes Robert you are done. These last quotes from you are proof of that......

""""Absolutely NOTHING you have to say about ANYTHING means more than spit to me. I give you the numbers provided by your own County, State, and Towns, and you change them to fit your needs. You use made up "estimates", while I use FACTS.

I am truly unimpressed with how you Liberals claim nobody is "forcing" Islam on the kids in school, yet God Forbid someone say the Pledge of Allegiance in class. Then suddenly it's being "forced" on kids. Yep, saying "under God" is FORCING children to recite a Christian belief, while praying to Allah and reciting passages from the Quoran is just a class about culture.

You're just an a*s. There are no other words to describe you...other than liar, scoundrel, conman, Jabroni.....""""""


Once again you have shown that you a liar to the core. You have made this personal since the beginning. Your only angle is to attack me in general and never show anything to back up your claim. I will NOT do the searching for you to back up your faulty claim. It simply doesnt exist. I have used a search engine Robert. And I have seen what you have seen. I have seen you and Vera's lie.

I have seen only one school.

I have seen you say it was I who claimed many, only to see you come back months later and say it was many again sill lacking any information to back your claim.

I have seen you use population numbers for towns, counties, and states without showing anything more than saying it "was from the census" yet never showing WHERE on the census page you found it. Yet I HAVE ALWAYS GIVEN THE LINK. And now you call them "false"? Are you kidding?!!?!? It was the census page! The same one you claimed to use. If your accusation is correct then the info you SAY is for 2000 is just as false as the ESTIMATE that it gives for 2004!!!


Besides, as I stated in my previous post. Its not about population numbers Robert. Its about your claim of Islam in CA schools.

So rant all you want about whos numbers are correct or not. The only number that matters is that ONE SCHOOL.

Once again in your last post that you simply cannot show the info, and continue on this "population" rant.

You are the conman Robert. I fail to see I how I or anyone can be considered one when all that has been asked all these months is.....SHOW US THE INFO.

If you have it...fine. Show it.

As someone said in another thread about us..."Ben has your number Robert".

Yes, I do. And your number is....one. You have shown nothing more. Your dodging, lies, and outright inability to back up any claim you make is proof of that. You have gone back and forth with your numbers since the beginning. Numbers that had nothing to do with if Islam was being "forced" in one school or any.

Go back to ripping people off on brake shoes Mr.Grissom. Your nothing but a snake oil salesman. And a pretty bad one at that. I will have to give you credit tho. You didnt fall into the real trap of posting your info. Because if you did, it would have been obvious of the sham.

The proof is in the posts, and your lack of info in them. As well as your ver abundant info on completely worthless data that does nothing to bolster your fraud. It was a smoke screen....period.

A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school. A smoke screen to aviod admitting....your a liar.

I got your number Robert, you can be quiet now. Your number...is one.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1062 Consumer Comment

Robert.. yes you are done. A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, June 01, 2006

Yes Robert you are done. These last quotes from you are proof of that......

""""Absolutely NOTHING you have to say about ANYTHING means more than spit to me. I give you the numbers provided by your own County, State, and Towns, and you change them to fit your needs. You use made up "estimates", while I use FACTS.

I am truly unimpressed with how you Liberals claim nobody is "forcing" Islam on the kids in school, yet God Forbid someone say the Pledge of Allegiance in class. Then suddenly it's being "forced" on kids. Yep, saying "under God" is FORCING children to recite a Christian belief, while praying to Allah and reciting passages from the Quoran is just a class about culture.

You're just an a*s. There are no other words to describe you...other than liar, scoundrel, conman, Jabroni.....""""""


Once again you have shown that you a liar to the core. You have made this personal since the beginning. Your only angle is to attack me in general and never show anything to back up your claim. I will NOT do the searching for you to back up your faulty claim. It simply doesnt exist. I have used a search engine Robert. And I have seen what you have seen. I have seen you and Vera's lie.

I have seen only one school.

I have seen you say it was I who claimed many, only to see you come back months later and say it was many again sill lacking any information to back your claim.

I have seen you use population numbers for towns, counties, and states without showing anything more than saying it "was from the census" yet never showing WHERE on the census page you found it. Yet I HAVE ALWAYS GIVEN THE LINK. And now you call them "false"? Are you kidding?!!?!? It was the census page! The same one you claimed to use. If your accusation is correct then the info you SAY is for 2000 is just as false as the ESTIMATE that it gives for 2004!!!


Besides, as I stated in my previous post. Its not about population numbers Robert. Its about your claim of Islam in CA schools.

So rant all you want about whos numbers are correct or not. The only number that matters is that ONE SCHOOL.

Once again in your last post that you simply cannot show the info, and continue on this "population" rant.

You are the conman Robert. I fail to see I how I or anyone can be considered one when all that has been asked all these months is.....SHOW US THE INFO.

If you have it...fine. Show it.

As someone said in another thread about us..."Ben has your number Robert".

Yes, I do. And your number is....one. You have shown nothing more. Your dodging, lies, and outright inability to back up any claim you make is proof of that. You have gone back and forth with your numbers since the beginning. Numbers that had nothing to do with if Islam was being "forced" in one school or any.

Go back to ripping people off on brake shoes Mr.Grissom. Your nothing but a snake oil salesman. And a pretty bad one at that. I will have to give you credit tho. You didnt fall into the real trap of posting your info. Because if you did, it would have been obvious of the sham.

The proof is in the posts, and your lack of info in them. As well as your ver abundant info on completely worthless data that does nothing to bolster your fraud. It was a smoke screen....period.

A smoke screen to avoid giving that non-existant info on more than one school. A smoke screen to aviod admitting....your a liar.

I got your number Robert, you can be quiet now. Your number...is one.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1061 Consumer Comment

One final time for you Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Here's how you use a search engine. Type the words (name a town/county/state) AND Islam in school, then hit enter. Watch how it works.

My HOMETOWN is Hubert, NC. It's in Onslow Copunty. I WORK in Jacksonville, Fl. It's in DuVal County. I am a resident of NC, not Fl. This is not difficult either.

Absolutely NOTHING you have to say about ANYTHING means more than spit to me. I give you the numbers provided by your own County, State, and Towns, and you change them to fit your needs. You use made up "estimates", while I use FACTS.

I am truly unimpressed with how you Liberals claim nobody is "forcing" Islam on the kids in school, yet God Forbid someone say the Pledge of Allegiance in class. Then suddenly it's being "forced" on kids. Yep, saying "under God" is FORCING children to recite a Christian belief, while praying to Allah and reciting passages from the Quoran is just a class about culture.

You're just an a*s. There are no other words to describe you...other than liar, scoundrel, conman, Jabroni.....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1060 Consumer Comment

And where does the link go.........

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Vera finally learned how to cut and paste!


YAY!

But this was the link she gave.......

badbusinessbureau.com/rebuttalform.asp?id=154773


Where does it go you ask? Does it have the info needed....NO! Of course not!


It leads to the login screen of rip-off-report!

What is so freaking hard about just PUTTING THE SOURCE....(NOT WHERE YOU "CLAIMED" on a previous post on rip-off-report which is what I assume you intended) of your information??

Sorry Vera, that was not the "precious" link or info needed. You need to give the source, link, info, article, something! Dont just give us another post. Certainly the "login screen" for this site is not it either.

If you dont have the info (which I doubt you do since....the statewide thing...NEVER HAPPENED!) then admit it and move on. If you have it, enlighten us. Put it in one nice post so people dont have to wade through your constant religious quips, and outright insults about putting things in our anus.

JUST POST THE INFO!

Every day you delay shows that your claims have no merit.

Try again!

Toodles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1059 Consumer Comment

just a thought

AUTHOR: Amber - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

my boyfriend is fighting over there now, so a part of me is biased against this whole war due to him being there. We can fight and argue all day long over this issue but nothing will change. I don't agree with some of the reasons that we are there, but there are some good reasons why we are there also. I have had way too many talks about this war with friends, family and even complete strangers and most of them actually believe that we should bring them home. There are anti-war rally's going on everyday around here. I dont think that George Bush is all to blame in this, there are many other people in congress who have helped him with this, so how can this war totally lie on his shoulders?? put yourself in someone's shoes for just one day and what decisions would you make?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1058 Consumer Comment

just a thought

AUTHOR: Amber - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

my boyfriend is fighting over there now, so a part of me is biased against this whole war due to him being there. We can fight and argue all day long over this issue but nothing will change. I don't agree with some of the reasons that we are there, but there are some good reasons why we are there also. I have had way too many talks about this war with friends, family and even complete strangers and most of them actually believe that we should bring them home. There are anti-war rally's going on everyday around here. I dont think that George Bush is all to blame in this, there are many other people in congress who have helped him with this, so how can this war totally lie on his shoulders?? put yourself in someone's shoes for just one day and what decisions would you make?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1057 Consumer Comment

just a thought

AUTHOR: Amber - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

my boyfriend is fighting over there now, so a part of me is biased against this whole war due to him being there. We can fight and argue all day long over this issue but nothing will change. I don't agree with some of the reasons that we are there, but there are some good reasons why we are there also. I have had way too many talks about this war with friends, family and even complete strangers and most of them actually believe that we should bring them home. There are anti-war rally's going on everyday around here. I dont think that George Bush is all to blame in this, there are many other people in congress who have helped him with this, so how can this war totally lie on his shoulders?? put yourself in someone's shoes for just one day and what decisions would you make?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1056 Consumer Comment

Numbers? Robert?......they still add to.......ONE!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Robert,

We can sit here till the Earth stops rotating listening to you dodge away and make excuses.

Now your latest quote Robert.....

"""Once again, you admit numbers mean nothing to you. I would really love to sit in on an IRS audit of your finances. Tell them numbers don't mean anything""""


Robert, numbers were not the question at hand. Other than the "number of schools". The subject was "Islam in CA schools". Now you can banter all you want about population numbers. That simply is NOT the subject here. Vera made a statment that Islam courses are being "forced" upon children in California as a statewide issue. You have failed to show the sources of this claim. Matter of fact you have even gone back on your own statements about "who" said it was more than one. For months you stated that it was ONLY I who mentioned more than one, then you go off and do it again. Whats up with that? If anyone has totally fudged numbers here its you with your "I have 150k" then "I have about the same as you and yours is 930k" in your county in Florida. But that whole subject is moot like the rest of the smoke screen you put up.

The subject still remains.....where is your source for more than that one school in the Bryon/Brentwood area? And what "other" schools?

And now, where is this info on the school in Covina. (which is the ONLY other town, city, hamlet, or trailer park you have mentioned....EVER!)

The subject and question is NOT.....

What is the population of Byron?

Its NOT....

What is the population of Brentwood?

Its NOT....

What is the population of Contra Costa County?

Its NOT....

Where does Ben live in regards to Brentwood/Byron?

Its NOT.....

How many schools are in the Brentwood/Byron area?

Its NOT.....

How many schools are in Contra Costa County?

Its NOT.....

Who knew about the Bryon/Brentwood schools course in Islam, and when?


WHAT THE QUESTIONS ARE.......


WHAT OTHER SCHOOLS? AND WHERE IS YOUR SOURCE FOR THOSE OTHER SCHOOLS?


You have given info (twisted at best) about ONE middle school in the Byron/Brentwood area. And even then it was nothing more than a feeble article written by religious panic mongers hyping over the subject and making a mountain out of a mole hill. Long since over, and long since forgotten by the people it really affects (meaning the people of that town!....not the entire state!). And even the article only mentions....ONE family raised a beef about it!

Play with your "numbers" all you want. The only numbers that matter are the number you claim, and the number that is reality and has information backing it up.

You have claimed many, if not statewide. We have seen only information regarding.....ONE. A middle school in Byron/Brentwood area. And there is a serious question as to just WHAT that course was. The Christian Right would have you belive its some state sanctioned indoctrination into Islam. I think the majority just think of it as a culture course. And the fact that the rest of reality has long since moved on is proof of that.

How ever far the little "court case" was over it....in that ONE school.......it was a massive waste of taxpayer money. Who should I be upset at over it? I'll blame that nit picking little family of Christian zealots that wasted our tax money.

Gee wiz, maybe my parents should have raised a fuss when we had "Indian Camp" when I was in 3rd grade teaching native American cultures. Or how about when I was "forced" to read the book of Job in High school. Nobody b**ched then, nobody should have b**ched in Byron/Brentwood. What a waste. And so is your smoke screen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1055 Consumer Comment

Ah, poor little Prince of Tupper....I'd bet you're the life of the party, at Sunmount.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Except, most likely, even the clients at the local ha-ha-hotel wouldnt have much of anything to do with you. Laughingly, I'll bet you still sit and wonder why you can't seem to find "a deep and meaningful one-night relationship". (That is, one that doesn't require heavy sedation, followed by propping the body.)

You need to quit calling me by your Mother's Nickname; I couldn't be interested in you, romantically or otherwise. Is that what the boys at the Bar call you? Or are you fondly recalling a prison stint? Either way, there's mention of your photovoyerism on the clients of Sunmount mentioned on other Reports...some of which you even allude to.

You'll have to look it up for yourself, my little Bunghole Bandit....as like I've said before, you've bought out the trash in Tupper Lake, and pretty much spent far more time than I can afford, Rebuttaling these Reports. Happily, I don't have the fifteen minutes of fame you're grasping at, nor do I wish it. You can go ahead with your delusions of Grandeur, thinking you're a Big Bad Man on the RipOffReports. Lord knows, I'm sure it's no reality, in Tupper or anywhere else. Of course, I'm sure you miss working at Sunmount...I can imagine that for your types, it's hard to be away from Family. ;)

As far as "beng a man's equal", it never ceases to amaze me that you'd completely miss specific and obvious statements, made by meself, that express contrary. As I have said, women and men are opposite enough to compliment each other...if you quit keeping it in the Family (and among the males), you'd understand that.

But then again, I have to remember the kind I'm dealing with. You're a special brand of stupid, James; both illiterate and nonsensical, not to mention beligerent enough to beat yourself up in your own Report. So much for "Soon my lady Hillary will bePresident, and...". Yep. A special brand of stupid altogether. You're worth your weight in s**t, Kid. Find a farmer.

You're not even on the same block as "my league". Quit wasting my time.

So yeah, let's get back on track here.
Where's the proof I've been asking for, in regard to how we're in the war for oil, and to make Bush and his cronies rich, SPCIFICALLY? Maybe someday, you'll find something from Mike Moore-On more concrete than his little shlockumentary.

Ah, if only his information were as thick and solid as the plaque in his arteries...or as dense as the thickness of your skull, Mike Moore-On might have a leg to stand on.

As always, you disappoint on all counts.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1054 Consumer Comment

Vera, Vera, Vera- The Holy roller Republican!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Vera,

Geesh, you crack me up! Vera you are about as smart as a client at Sunmount and as far as that crap you were spouting off about me, let's see some REAL EVIDENCE b***h. Vera you coudln't get under my skin if you tried, as you are merely a female and I disregard females like yourself as unimportant. Women like yourself have always tried to equal us men and although few women have accomplished that feat, we are still the dominant ones. I don't see any women Presidents in the history of the USA.

I would like to change gears and get back to Bush as now I see the Supreme court with majority under Bush appointment, has put a gag on whistleblowers in the Government so they are no longer protected under the 1st Ammendment(free speech). Bush doesn't want the corruption leaked or reported any longer. This just shows that our rights are diminishing very quickly. People will get sick of how big the Government is getting and how corrupt they are and will strike back. I don't think the people will allow our liberties and democratic processes to be disassembled by some idiot President working for major corporations and money men."The bigger the lie, the more people that will believe it" thats Bush's motto! Till next time Vera POO!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1053 Consumer Comment

Well, technically....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

If you want a good example of "Panic Mongering", I can point you to a totally out of context quip made as a joke by Bush that had a certain someone thinking that Bush wanted to make the United States a dictatorship. (Theory was never proven.)

And there's a REALLY half-baked crackpot theory out there that Bush is trying to make the US follow under theocratic rule. (Like the last, this theory was never proven, either. Sort of seems to be the prevailing trend.)

And yet, none of these geniuses seem to be able to get past the Bush Bashing and the high-geared demoralization of the Troops long enough to offer a decent and viable solution that'll actually fix anything.

You can't even get these dipwads to read the information in front of them. They close their eyes, and to them, it doesn't exist. Oh, well. It's been given...perhaps enough Rebuttals denying it will distance it enough, but copying and pasting it is easy.

Here's your precious link,Ben:

badbusinessbureau.com/rebuttalform.asp?id=154773

Start with "Here are some articles I found" then look for the really long post that actually contains text from the very books used.

And while I'm on that note, you can go ahead and fantasize that I've somehow changed my position all you want....you don't seem too burdened by being a liar...but I do welcome you to feel free to prove to me exactly where I've altered or backed down from my position on this. You see, I still maintain that there were more than one schoolS in California; never once did I say that there was only one school. I do believe that I had said, "One two or twenty doesn't change the fact that it's still there..." or to that effect. I started with, "Hell, in California, SOME schools..." and I stick to that. You don't have to agree, Pudd'n...but you cannot deny it.

Just as Jihad Johnny, a fine example of the California School System. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1052 Consumer Comment

I am truly done with you Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Once again, you admit numbers mean nothing to you. I would really love to sit in on an IRS audit of your finances. Tell them numbers don't mean anything.

Again, type the name of the school AND Islam to get the info you won't accept.

You are truly beyond help, as you have shown yourself once again, to be a brick wall against all logic and coherent thought.

Good luck in your little world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1051 Consumer Comment

Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Robert, another quote of yours.....


Get it, Ben? The Principal for the Byron School admits it IS a Statewide issue now. The "State Adopted" textbook is used STATEWIDE. Good job, Ben. Instead of leaving it alone, or just admitting it happened, you continue to give us fuel for the fire.

I was happy thinking it was just ONE school. YOU fed me the name of a SECOND one, and just keep rolling the ball along. Way to go. You're the best one on OUR team. Now, we KNOW it IS a California Statewide issue. It seems other states are getting into the act too, but this was about YOUR State, and more to the point, YOUR County. So far, nothing you have said makes sense, and none of your numbers add up."""""

Ok the principal "admits it IS a Statewide issue now". NO! Only YOU have stated this about "Islam" what the principal stated is nothing more than "we broke none of California's rules on teaching".

As I have stated many times, you have only shown that your a panic monger. To be honest I see nothing wrong with the way Byron/Brentwood have handled this. Even the ONE feeble source that you gave from that Christian site even stated that "apparently one family thinks so!" when it asked "do you have a problem with teaching ABOUT Islam in CA schoolS" (still a play with words since the subject is about ONE school....not multiple SCHOOLS).

Now so far you have shown ONE school, you still maintain that it was more than one (after flip floping for months between "we didnt mean it that way" to "we did mean it that way").

In the end Robert you can sit here and banter all you want about population numbers, they dont matter. The subject is still the same......HOW MANY SCHOOLS. You have only shown that ONE school had a course ABOUT Islam.....NOT indoctrinating INTO Islam. And it was done as a course on understanding culture. It was also done AS THE PRINCIPAL STATED.....WITHIN THE RULES CALIFORNIA SET UP FOR ITS EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS.

Your twist is to say that, because the "Principal" of ONE school said "we followed the rules"....suddenly there is statewide mandated forced INTO Islam course. NO! She simply said "we followed the rules"....nothing more.


Not stop trying to discredit me, since I am NOT the subject of this. Its your sources to MORE THAN ONE SCHOOL. You have failed miserably in that regard.


And once again I ask.....where did the subject of Covina come into this? I am unaware of anything in Covina. Please enlighten me. Enlighten us! (somehow I just KNEW you would try and use my comment about how far I lived from Covina!....let me guess, this will be your next dodge to avoid showing your source again??).

The only other article I can find on the web other than the few from Christian panic monger sites that references ANY other city or school, is one for the School District of Oakland. Which is a complete farce. Because the entire article is IDENTICAL to the ONLY ONE about the Bryon/Brentwood issue. They just changed the name from Bryon to Oakland, and added a fake "school administrator" of which there is NOTHING about her in any other report from ANYWHERE. They even forgot to change the county, still listing "Oakland" in "Contra Costa". When Oakland is in Alameda county! Thus fake, a fraud, and basically trying to get "christians" worked up into a frenzy like you and Vera have on the subject. They did the same thing you two do by avoiding any sources and just plainly say...."here in this school...they did this....and we believe its wrong to have a statewide program for this" yet NEVER SHOW THEIR SOURCE. Why? Because if they did it would show just how much BS their entire argument is.

Toodles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1050 Consumer Comment

Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Robert, another quote of yours.....


Get it, Ben? The Principal for the Byron School admits it IS a Statewide issue now. The "State Adopted" textbook is used STATEWIDE. Good job, Ben. Instead of leaving it alone, or just admitting it happened, you continue to give us fuel for the fire.

I was happy thinking it was just ONE school. YOU fed me the name of a SECOND one, and just keep rolling the ball along. Way to go. You're the best one on OUR team. Now, we KNOW it IS a California Statewide issue. It seems other states are getting into the act too, but this was about YOUR State, and more to the point, YOUR County. So far, nothing you have said makes sense, and none of your numbers add up."""""

Ok the principal "admits it IS a Statewide issue now". NO! Only YOU have stated this about "Islam" what the principal stated is nothing more than "we broke none of California's rules on teaching".

As I have stated many times, you have only shown that your a panic monger. To be honest I see nothing wrong with the way Byron/Brentwood have handled this. Even the ONE feeble source that you gave from that Christian site even stated that "apparently one family thinks so!" when it asked "do you have a problem with teaching ABOUT Islam in CA schoolS" (still a play with words since the subject is about ONE school....not multiple SCHOOLS).

Now so far you have shown ONE school, you still maintain that it was more than one (after flip floping for months between "we didnt mean it that way" to "we did mean it that way").

In the end Robert you can sit here and banter all you want about population numbers, they dont matter. The subject is still the same......HOW MANY SCHOOLS. You have only shown that ONE school had a course ABOUT Islam.....NOT indoctrinating INTO Islam. And it was done as a course on understanding culture. It was also done AS THE PRINCIPAL STATED.....WITHIN THE RULES CALIFORNIA SET UP FOR ITS EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS.

Your twist is to say that, because the "Principal" of ONE school said "we followed the rules"....suddenly there is statewide mandated forced INTO Islam course. NO! She simply said "we followed the rules"....nothing more.


Not stop trying to discredit me, since I am NOT the subject of this. Its your sources to MORE THAN ONE SCHOOL. You have failed miserably in that regard.


And once again I ask.....where did the subject of Covina come into this? I am unaware of anything in Covina. Please enlighten me. Enlighten us! (somehow I just KNEW you would try and use my comment about how far I lived from Covina!....let me guess, this will be your next dodge to avoid showing your source again??).

The only other article I can find on the web other than the few from Christian panic monger sites that references ANY other city or school, is one for the School District of Oakland. Which is a complete farce. Because the entire article is IDENTICAL to the ONLY ONE about the Bryon/Brentwood issue. They just changed the name from Bryon to Oakland, and added a fake "school administrator" of which there is NOTHING about her in any other report from ANYWHERE. They even forgot to change the county, still listing "Oakland" in "Contra Costa". When Oakland is in Alameda county! Thus fake, a fraud, and basically trying to get "christians" worked up into a frenzy like you and Vera have on the subject. They did the same thing you two do by avoiding any sources and just plainly say...."here in this school...they did this....and we believe its wrong to have a statewide program for this" yet NEVER SHOW THEIR SOURCE. Why? Because if they did it would show just how much BS their entire argument is.

Toodles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1049 Consumer Comment

Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Robert, another quote of yours.....


Get it, Ben? The Principal for the Byron School admits it IS a Statewide issue now. The "State Adopted" textbook is used STATEWIDE. Good job, Ben. Instead of leaving it alone, or just admitting it happened, you continue to give us fuel for the fire.

I was happy thinking it was just ONE school. YOU fed me the name of a SECOND one, and just keep rolling the ball along. Way to go. You're the best one on OUR team. Now, we KNOW it IS a California Statewide issue. It seems other states are getting into the act too, but this was about YOUR State, and more to the point, YOUR County. So far, nothing you have said makes sense, and none of your numbers add up."""""

Ok the principal "admits it IS a Statewide issue now". NO! Only YOU have stated this about "Islam" what the principal stated is nothing more than "we broke none of California's rules on teaching".

As I have stated many times, you have only shown that your a panic monger. To be honest I see nothing wrong with the way Byron/Brentwood have handled this. Even the ONE feeble source that you gave from that Christian site even stated that "apparently one family thinks so!" when it asked "do you have a problem with teaching ABOUT Islam in CA schoolS" (still a play with words since the subject is about ONE school....not multiple SCHOOLS).

Now so far you have shown ONE school, you still maintain that it was more than one (after flip floping for months between "we didnt mean it that way" to "we did mean it that way").

In the end Robert you can sit here and banter all you want about population numbers, they dont matter. The subject is still the same......HOW MANY SCHOOLS. You have only shown that ONE school had a course ABOUT Islam.....NOT indoctrinating INTO Islam. And it was done as a course on understanding culture. It was also done AS THE PRINCIPAL STATED.....WITHIN THE RULES CALIFORNIA SET UP FOR ITS EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS.

Your twist is to say that, because the "Principal" of ONE school said "we followed the rules"....suddenly there is statewide mandated forced INTO Islam course. NO! She simply said "we followed the rules"....nothing more.


Not stop trying to discredit me, since I am NOT the subject of this. Its your sources to MORE THAN ONE SCHOOL. You have failed miserably in that regard.


And once again I ask.....where did the subject of Covina come into this? I am unaware of anything in Covina. Please enlighten me. Enlighten us! (somehow I just KNEW you would try and use my comment about how far I lived from Covina!....let me guess, this will be your next dodge to avoid showing your source again??).

The only other article I can find on the web other than the few from Christian panic monger sites that references ANY other city or school, is one for the School District of Oakland. Which is a complete farce. Because the entire article is IDENTICAL to the ONLY ONE about the Bryon/Brentwood issue. They just changed the name from Bryon to Oakland, and added a fake "school administrator" of which there is NOTHING about her in any other report from ANYWHERE. They even forgot to change the county, still listing "Oakland" in "Contra Costa". When Oakland is in Alameda county! Thus fake, a fraud, and basically trying to get "christians" worked up into a frenzy like you and Vera have on the subject. They did the same thing you two do by avoiding any sources and just plainly say...."here in this school...they did this....and we believe its wrong to have a statewide program for this" yet NEVER SHOW THEIR SOURCE. Why? Because if they did it would show just how much BS their entire argument is.

Toodles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1048 Consumer Comment

Still you have shown NOTHING beyond ONE school!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Robert, another quote of yours.....


Get it, Ben? The Principal for the Byron School admits it IS a Statewide issue now. The "State Adopted" textbook is used STATEWIDE. Good job, Ben. Instead of leaving it alone, or just admitting it happened, you continue to give us fuel for the fire.

I was happy thinking it was just ONE school. YOU fed me the name of a SECOND one, and just keep rolling the ball along. Way to go. You're the best one on OUR team. Now, we KNOW it IS a California Statewide issue. It seems other states are getting into the act too, but this was about YOUR State, and more to the point, YOUR County. So far, nothing you have said makes sense, and none of your numbers add up."""""

Ok the principal "admits it IS a Statewide issue now". NO! Only YOU have stated this about "Islam" what the principal stated is nothing more than "we broke none of California's rules on teaching".

As I have stated many times, you have only shown that your a panic monger. To be honest I see nothing wrong with the way Byron/Brentwood have handled this. Even the ONE feeble source that you gave from that Christian site even stated that "apparently one family thinks so!" when it asked "do you have a problem with teaching ABOUT Islam in CA schoolS" (still a play with words since the subject is about ONE school....not multiple SCHOOLS).

Now so far you have shown ONE school, you still maintain that it was more than one (after flip floping for months between "we didnt mean it that way" to "we did mean it that way").

In the end Robert you can sit here and banter all you want about population numbers, they dont matter. The subject is still the same......HOW MANY SCHOOLS. You have only shown that ONE school had a course ABOUT Islam.....NOT indoctrinating INTO Islam. And it was done as a course on understanding culture. It was also done AS THE PRINCIPAL STATED.....WITHIN THE RULES CALIFORNIA SET UP FOR ITS EDUCATIONAL STANDARDS.

Your twist is to say that, because the "Principal" of ONE school said "we followed the rules"....suddenly there is statewide mandated forced INTO Islam course. NO! She simply said "we followed the rules"....nothing more.


Not stop trying to discredit me, since I am NOT the subject of this. Its your sources to MORE THAN ONE SCHOOL. You have failed miserably in that regard.


And once again I ask.....where did the subject of Covina come into this? I am unaware of anything in Covina. Please enlighten me. Enlighten us! (somehow I just KNEW you would try and use my comment about how far I lived from Covina!....let me guess, this will be your next dodge to avoid showing your source again??).

The only other article I can find on the web other than the few from Christian panic monger sites that references ANY other city or school, is one for the School District of Oakland. Which is a complete farce. Because the entire article is IDENTICAL to the ONLY ONE about the Bryon/Brentwood issue. They just changed the name from Bryon to Oakland, and added a fake "school administrator" of which there is NOTHING about her in any other report from ANYWHERE. They even forgot to change the county, still listing "Oakland" in "Contra Costa". When Oakland is in Alameda county! Thus fake, a fraud, and basically trying to get "christians" worked up into a frenzy like you and Vera have on the subject. They did the same thing you two do by avoiding any sources and just plainly say...."here in this school...they did this....and we believe its wrong to have a statewide program for this" yet NEVER SHOW THEIR SOURCE. Why? Because if they did it would show just how much BS their entire argument is.

Toodles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1047 Consumer Comment

Poor ben...still has trouble with numbers

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 27, 2006

I gave the correct population count for Byron. As always, Ben has screwed them up. Here are the numbers I got from YOUR County's website:Byron, California-Population (year 2000): 916
Males: 516 (56.3%), Females: 400 (43.7%). These are the same numbers I used previously.

As for the link to the site, try this: Type the name of your County into the search bar and hit enter.

You now claim Byron has no schools. That's big news to Byron, since they list 3 on their website, including the middle school
(Excelsior School
14301 Byron Highway
Byron, CA 94514) that was teaching Islam. Need the link to that one? Type Byron Ca into the search bar and hit enter. The fun part of it is this. According to the Byron site, there are more kids going to school there, than there are total population. This means kids from surrounding areas go to Byron, not the other way around, as Ben claims. You're just so much fun.

Are you really this stupid, Ben?

And again, YOU gave us the name of Brentwood.

How about this little piece from your own newspaper, Ben. It's called the Contra Costa Times.
-...quarters are of Asian descent. And students have helped reflect their diversity in the classroom. There is a prayer rug from Mecca and a woven plate used in India which students brought from home.

"It's more of a world culture than world history," Clement said. The diversity helps in teaching the curriculum, which recently covered Islam. "Because it's so diverse, (the students) are more accepting of different cultures. There is a connection between the cultures we teach and the cultures we come from.""

Seems they're doing it in ANOTHER school in your County. How far are you from Covina? Royal Oak Middle Schhol there was doing it too.

Here's an excerpt from truthorfiction about the Byron case, just one among many in California apparently:
"In an interview with Nancy Castro, the principal of the schools in Byron, she stated to ANS that the Islam course (hidden within History of Cultures) reflects California (educational) Standards that meet State requirements.

When asked about the intensity of the Islamic course, Castro stated that the course is not religion, but Ancient Culture and History. And, she pointed out, the text is a State Adopted textbook. We do not endorse any religion, we just make students aware.

She stated that the textbook is now in use throughout California. When asked if she would allow Christianity to be taught the same way that Islam is taught, Castro stammered before saying that Christianity is already taught in the History and Culture class, which, she said, actually starts in the 6th grade.

She said that this class started a year ago. The Christianity that is taught is brief, taught as a myth, and strictly negative. This is how it is portrayed in the textbook.""

Get it, Ben? The Principal for the Byron School admits it IS a Statewide issue now. The "State Adopted" textbook is used STATEWIDE. Good job, Ben. Instead of leaving it alone, or just admitting it happened, you continue to give us fuel for the fire.

I was happy thinking it was just ONE school. YOU fed me the name of a SECOND one, and just keep rolling the ball along. Way to go. You're the best one on OUR team. Now, we KNOW it IS a California Statewide issue. It seems other states are getting into the act too, but this was about YOUR State, and more to the point, YOUR County. So far, nothing you have said makes sense, and none of your numbers add up.

Do you really think you can win, when you cannot even keep your story straight from one post to another? Every time you post, you just feed us more ammo to use against you. This is where the 5th Ammendment would be helpful to you.

Here's a thought. Since YOU brought up the whole "Statewide Issue" thing, how about YOU proving it's not. With your amazing skills, you'll be helping us out in no time at all.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1046 Consumer Comment

WHAT?!?! Now its all over the place again!?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 27, 2006

"More specifically, in the COUNTY SEAT of where Islam was being included as "cultural enrichment" read: "State Funded Religion Lessons" in Islam. Perhaps you've heard of it? Its local areas include Byron, Brentwood, and Covina---THREE---As in MORE THAN ONE school, and therefore SCHOOLS" ----Vera

Ok Vera, once again this is what you SAY! Now where did you get this info?!

Why cant you just show the source?

Oh, and Vera, the little "mapzit" you call Byron is a town with a population of 500 (that number comes from ROBERT!!). Do you think that a town of less than 600 has a school. No. They all bus to Brentwood about 2 miles away. Thus its still....ONE SCHOOL. Now this thing about Covina is a new twist. Please by all means show me the info on this school in Covina.

You have both sat there for months and just SAY......."ISLAM IN CA SCHOOLS"....."SEE THERE BYRON...BRENTWOOD!"......"SEE NOW COVINA!".....yet where is the source? Where is the proof of this.

So far its just your word. Nothing more. You have yet to post ONE link. Only Robert has and it only said......ONE SCHOOL. In Brentwood (which serves Byron!), and you have twisted that simple little fact into TWO schools.

And all this after you both tried to say "oh we didnt mean it that way!". Now you do?!?

You can SAY I twist things all you want, but I have never wavered. JUST SHOW YOUR SOURCE!

The two of you have been all over the freaking place with your comments. Now your even back on this County Seat BS??

GOOD LORD! CANT YOU JUST GIVE US ALL THE SOURCE AND BE DONE WITH IT!? SUPPORT YOUR ACCUSATIONS!

P.S.......Covina is about 450 miles away from my county. But something tells me Robert will attack that number as a dodge, and you Vera will try and say it was "in my backyard"?

Show your source....or shut up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1045 Consumer Comment

Awww.... poor James Fails To Reallize....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 27, 2006

That even as a "Great Tampon" (Is that your best? How pathetic.), I'm willing to bet I've gotten more warm hugs than he has, PLUS, unlike James, I can at least serve a useful purpose (even if only used once, I'd still be further ahead than James!). Boo-h*o for you!

Also, like any good "tampon", I can see I've managed to get under your skin, James...and that's good as far as I'm concerned. At least I'm great at some good service. Just yet another opportunity for me to be better than you at something else.

You do know, by the way, that you're not supposed to shove tampons in the back door, right? I don't think it's appropriate for even your species, if you represent the male end of the demographic.

Once again, you're trying to have a battle of brains with a person that has you severely outmatched....you're too accustomed to hanging out with the fine folks residing at Sunmont (the ones you were taking secret photographs of), so you need to develop a little better foundation behind your rants.

Now you're braying about a miliary appointee. You do know, that the President of the very Country you live in is supposed to have a stint of service in the Military? The only President who didn't was CLINTON (He's also the only PARDONED FELON to sit in theoffice of the most powerful Country on Earth!)! Is that silence I hear from the Democrap Camp? What a shocker!

Like everyone else who's observed you pitching a fuss, I, too, wonder what solutions you have to offer, and what proof you have to back up your bullshit. Give us a plan of action that's well-thought out and accordingly projected, or just stop your boo-hooing and bleating (Plus Farting!).

Once again, Weenie Of The Bottle...put up or shut up. We all know you won't do either. You like any attention, positive or negative....since you can't get a date, obviously, you drink a Fifth of Charming and Witty, then post, perhaps while smoking a bowl of Rock Star.

Let me be the first to clue you up: your posts are nothing of the above terms, former or latter. Your thought process comes off with all the flow and elegance of a s**t-flinging simian demanding jelly beans.

I'm not like the people you surround yourself with; I have self-esteem and a good sense of self enough to come back at you or anyone bolt for bolt and better. As always, you fail in yet another attempt to rise to the challenge, let alone to appear witty or strong. Mules are stubborn...not to mention, the mascot of the Democratic Party! What an a*s!

Like everyone else here, still waiting for point or proof.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1044 Author of original report

I need to comment on Bush and the foolish Democrats that are allowing illegal immigrants to stay in this country

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 26, 2006

I find it very funny that we have "Vera the great tampon" and her "merry band of Republicans" taunting the Democratic Party and supporters. I guess the truth hurts about Bush(the drunk)and his cronies in the Republican Party. First of all I need to comment on Bush and the foolish Democrats that are allowing illegal immigrants to stay in this country and allowing them to work and gain citizenship in this country after they have broken the law by illegally entering this country. The illegals need to have their asses arrested and than thrown out. I also believe we need alot more security at ALL of our borders. We need to stop the illegal immigration. I am a United States citizen and I will be heard whether people like it or not. I will continue to insist Bush is THE WORST PRESIDENT ever, I say Democratic Johnson is second worst President. Ummh, let's see, Bush went to war 6 months after taking office and invaded a sovereign nation for profit, Bush deceived the citizens of wmd, Bush spies on citizens-phone records, e-mails, and secretly wiretaps without court orders, Oh, does IRAN/Contra remind you of anything? USA provided arms to Iran to fight Iraq and the USA provided arms to the Taliban to fight Russia during Carter/Reagan years. It is our leaders fault for the situation today. Do research on history. Look up the ACLU and file complaint for illegal wiretaps and invasion of privacy. They are gathering support to file charges! Check out the website and file your complaints! Time to take the country BACK!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1043 Consumer Comment

Twisting, twisting, twisting the night away

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 25, 2006

One more time Ben. YOU said it was a statewide issue. WE said it was some schools.

I said it was Byron. YOU said it was Brentwood. Let's go to the tape...

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creation?that the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)"-Vera 10/20/05

"There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!"-Ben 10/20/05

"I believe the story was Brentwood, not Byron. Both of those towns are waaaay out on the delta and on the very fringe of the county. Hell, Byron's only claim to fame was the childrens jail that I can remember. As for their exact populations....I REALLY DONT CARE. It doesnt matter! What does matter is that this whole BS about Islam being forced on kids in CA schools is just hype and BS. Sheesh both these towns were nothing more than pimples till the late 80's when the last big housing boom hit here. And even after that most of those track homes stayed unused because the housing market tanked for a few years."-Ben 4/28/06

Once again, Ben has bit himself in the a*s. It's difficult to do, but he's gotten very adept at doing it. Words suck, don't they? They especially do when you cannot keep the same lie going, eh Ben? It really sucks when they're printed for all to see, and go back and get verbatim.

"GREAT!

Show me!

Let us continue with the simple question I asked so many months ago that you and Vera seem to never be able to answer. Consider this day one again."

WE did answer that question. So did YOU. YOU even gave us the name of one, while admitting the other.

You're just too much fun.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1042 Consumer Comment

"Day One" has BEN done....Quit hitting the "Snooze" button. Time for a NEW DAY! :D

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 24, 2006

So no, we aren't at "day one".

Your questions have been answered, Ben. If you don't want to read my LONG rebuttals, then quit asking me for that which I have already thoroughly provided in past instances.

Oh, and yes...my vision IS keenly fixed, right where it needs to be; on some little pustule out in MapZit, California.

More specifically, in the COUNTY SEAT of where Islam was being included as "cultural enrichment" read: "State Funded Religion Lessons" in Islam. Perhaps you've heard of it? Its local areas include Byron, Brentwood, and Covina---THREE---As in MORE THAN ONE school, and therefore SCHOOLS.

You want the data, you'll find it in the posts I've presented beforehand. If you won't read them, then quit demading me to simplify further that which you wouldn't read anyway.

So be prepared to see more of this post, when you try the old "Bawk-Bawk--Chicken!" calls:

"Ben, if the proof I have provided is too much for your little attention span and your miniscule mind, then quit bothering me.

"Denial of fact doesn't equal the disappearance of fact; in short, wish all you want, it's not going away.

"I've provided huge posts of nothing but proof from good sources (complete with links and actual text from the very book used). You can go ahead and disagree...it's all right here, and there's nothing you can do about it. You're wrong, and, as an added bonus, we (Robert, Shawn, and I, to name a few) have shown the world that reads these Reports what a little troll you are, and how futile your mind is. I can rest content in that fact, and feel that your opinion (more like "o-SPINion") is completly devoid of worth. Which is another thing that's been proven.

"So up yours, Princess---maybe if you use both hands, you'll actually find your head!

"And incidentally, you still have given NO proof, absolutely NONE, to support a SINGLE THING you've alleged. So like your theories, it's all dust in the wind.

"Your first date must have been your mouth...you seem to be deeply in love with it, as you sure like to ride it a lot."

I saved it on my PC just for you! Hope you'll enjoy seeing it more often, as I can sleep soundly at night knowing that I have indeed proven my point.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1041 Consumer Comment

And.....back to the original claim!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 24, 2006

"No, Ben. We said it was being forced in SOME California Schools." -Robert

Ok now after numerous posts over the last several months (even on Circuit City threads!), where you tried to use the excuse that "we didnt mean it that way", NOW your going back!?

Ok Robert lets start this ALL OVER AGAIN!.......

Show me that other schools? Show me the OTHER SCHOOLS! You have shown ONE!

After months of your defense saying that you only meant the one school, and the it was I who blew it out of proportion into "some" if not "many", here we are......back to more than one.

GREAT!

Show me!

Let us continue with the simple question I asked so many months ago that you and Vera seem to never be able to answer. Consider this day one again.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1040 Consumer Comment

Twisting the night away....

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 19, 2006

You must love that song.
""Right Ben. YOU demand WE show proof of YOUR claims. THAT is the entire point."

Oh great, we have gone from one excuse to another for months. NOW I am the one that made the claim that Islam is being forced in CA schools???"

No, Ben. We said it was being forced in SOME California Schools. You denied it ever happened at even ONE. YOU also demanded we show proof that it was a statewide issue. As always, YOU spin what is said, and deny making the insane statements that spew from your keyboard. WE did show proof of it happening...right in your own County. I named ONE school, YOU named another. Great stuff there.

I stand by my statement. YOU demand we show proof of what YOU say.

"I showed you several links to several articles written in the early 60's that were ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE 50's under McCarthy's little tirade. I already trumped your whole argument on that "the 60's came before the 50's thing". Its a little late to go back on it now. Its a little hard to make an article BEFORE an event happened...thus the article was written AFTER it happened...get it. Do we have to explain again that 60 comes after 50? (somebody must have gotten some seriously bad grades in math with that belief Robert!)"

Actually, I was an excellent student. I took college prep classes all the way through High School, and was going to be an Art Major, with a Math Minor.

What you showed, was some obscure name in asome obscure link about something that happened in the 60's. As you now admit, McCarthy died in the 50's, so that alone should trounce your argument. But noooooooooo. Not in Ben's Bizarro World. Something that happened during a period of time, a decade after your arch-enemy died, MUST have been because of the Senator.

Try letting this FACT sink into that skull of yours. SENATORS do NOT sit on HOUSE Committees. McCarthy was a SENATOR. His Committee ONLY looked at High Ranking Government Officials...NOBODY else. If your Grandfather was blacklisted by anyone, it would have been because of two things.

ONE-He was a Communist. Believe it or not, they were the enemy at one point in history. Newsflash for you Ben! We won.

TWO-The House Committe on Un-American Activites would have been the ones looking at College Professors. Another Newsflash for you Ben! The House of Representatives has ZERO Senators in it. There are also NO SENATORS on ANY if it's Committees.

FACT-Senator McCarthy had NOTHING to do with your Grandfather. I have asked you to scan and post ANYTHING with both your Grandfather's name, and the Senator's signature on it. YOU will not, because you cannot. It NEVER happened.

Let's twist again...like we did last summer. Let's twist again...like we did last year! ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1039 Consumer Comment

Oh great....the next excuse.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 19, 2006

"Right Ben. YOU demand WE show proof of YOUR claims. THAT is the entire point."


Oh great, we have gone from one excuse to another for months. NOW I am the one that made the claim that Islam is being forced in CA schools???


Thats the biggest twist yet Robert!

I dont think I even need to say more about that. Its fairly obvious who made the claim, and who showed anything to back it up.

Next excuse please!

And as far as my grandfather is concerned, your twisting just as hard. I showed you several links to several articles written in the early 60's that were ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE 50's under McCarthy's little tirade. I already trumped your whole argument on that "the 60's came before the 50's thing". Its a little late to go back on it now. Its a little hard to make an article BEFORE an event happened...thus the article was written AFTER it happened...get it. Do we have to explain again that 60 comes after 50? (somebody must have gotten some seriously bad grades in math with that belief Robert!)

P.S. I'm still waiting for you to show where McCarthy was a hero! Dodge away!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1038 Consumer Comment

Denial of fact doesn't equal the disappearence of fact; in short, wish all you want, it's not going away.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 19, 2006

Ben, if the proof I have provided is too much for your little attention span and your miniscule mind, then quit bothering me.

Denial of fact doesn't equal the disappearence of fact; in short, wish all you want, it's not going away.

I've provided huge posts of nothing but proof from good sources (complete with links and actual text from the very book used). You can go ahead and disagree...it's all right here, and there's nothing you can do about it. You're wrong, and, as an added bonus, we (Robert, Shawn, and I, to name a few) have shown the world that reads these Reports what a little troll you are, and how futile your mind is. I can rest content in that fact, and feel that your opinion (more like "o-SPINion) is completly devoid of worth. Which is another thing that's been proven.

So up yours, Princess---maybe if you use both hands, you'll actually find your head!

And incidentally, you still have given NO proof, absolutely NONE, to support a SINGLE THING you've alleged. So like your theories, it's all dust in the wind.

Your first date must have been your mouth...you seem to be deeply in love with it, as you sure like to ride it a lot.

Damon....nice way of calling someone a "b***h" in an offhand and polite way. Just your opinion, and you're entitled to it.

I don't care if you're legally deaf---that's of no consequence to the quality of the thoughts in your mind and the character of your heart. Shame on you for even bringing that into the discussion, as it strikes no bearing with me what so ever in how I view you, other than your apparent need to play the sympathy card.

As to what God, Gods or Godess(es) you worship, fine; pardon me for assuming you were a Christian; your context led me to believe as such.

And yet again, as this is the THIRD time I have asked this, what is it that I have necessarily said that you disagree with? Do you have a point in you direct addressment of me, that pertains to the subjects I have discussed?

Please address that only, as the rest of it is nothing more than worthless piffle. (Right up there with the assessment that women are the most intelligent creatures on Earth. Neither gender is superior---that's why there are two separate sexes. Each made to compliment, edify, and support the other. Either gender is still only half of the equation.) You are still welcome to reserve your opinion for submission upon request.

I know I have an ego.
I do not care if you like it or not.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1037 Consumer Comment

As far as proof goes, there is no proof on either side.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

No one ever changes opinions on politcal issues until some particular issue has a direct impact on their own lives. Arguing and name calling isn't going to turn Conservatives into Liberals, or vice versa.

As far as proof goes, there is no proof on either side. The truth always lies in whatever the individual is already inclined to believe.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1036 Consumer Comment

No Grey Areas Bush's big business is destroying the true American way of Life.

AUTHOR: La Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

Saudi Arabian terrorist attacked America, Bush invades Iraq. The Saudi Oil minister last week on CNN said that he has a surplus that would supply the oil needs of the entire world, and that oil per barrel should sell for 45 dollars but the Big Oil Companies in America will not buy the surplus, they like the 68 per barrel and 5 dollar projected gallon price for gasoline. Soon, big oil will buy and burn all the corn fields so that ethanol cannot be produced, next, they will buy electric plants and shut them down so you electric hybrid users will pay an estimated same as the rest of us.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1035 Consumer Comment

Yes Ben, you want proof

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

"You say I'll demand proof? Of what? The only thing I have demanded proof of is what I have been asking for, for months"

Right Ben. YOU demand WE show proof of YOUR claims. THAT is the entire point.

You never provided proof of anything, about anything. If you cannot look up the name of your own County in a search engine, I feel sorry for you.

Your Grandfather? You gave a name that appeared 10 years after the Senator had died. I guess he came back from the dead to persecute your family. Of course, the FACT still remains, McCarthy had NOTHING to do with anyone who wasn't a high ranking US Government official. Those were the ONLY people his committee looked at. Your complaint is with The House Committee on Un-American Activities. Since McCarthy was a Senator, he was NOT on the House Committee.

The rest of your rants are just as meaningless, and devoid of factual information.

You talk about twisting and spinning. You're going to drill through the core of the earth with all you do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1034 Consumer Comment

I know what you are thinking...

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

...won't this jerk just leave me be? I will, just wanted to point out a few crucial points. Regardless of all of our lack of importance on ripoff, I will still not call you out of your name. I will never and have never used a derogatory word toward a woman (the most intelligent beings on Earth). B*#$h, has never crossed my mind.

You mentioned something to the effect about my mouth being more dominate than my brain? I wish, being legally deaf makes it alot harder to verbalize to others how I really feel, I use typing as my avenue.

Fellow Christian? Why would you assume that I make such a claim? I could say "GOD" and believe my "GOD" also "BLESSES" without you knowing my belief. If you are of Christ, I feel the love.

You know, if anything, pride is a b*#$h; truly,
I am finished with this matter. Although, it seems the subject matter has been twisted and altered from the original post, so I just contributed my deviation.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1033 Consumer Comment

Still waiting Vera, and nice tangent again Robert.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

Im still waiting Vera for your source, and your info.

All I have seen is another attack by you against me, and now someone new (no surprise!) with a loooooooooong post.

You just cant seem to take 15 seconds out of your obvious hours of effort to post anything can you?

And Robert, I really dont see where this "earth is round" thing comes up at any time. Another wonderful dodge on some obscure tangent I guess?

You say I'll demand proof? Of what? The only thing I have demanded proof of is what I have been asking for, for months!

Of course I could go off on all of the "proofs" you demanded of me......yet never could show your own!

Like when you demanded proof of my Grandfather......which I gave. And you couldnt show one shred of proof for your "good" senator McCarthy.

Shall I go on?

How about your demand for proof of my counties population....which I gave. And you STILL havent shown where you got yours. You SAID you got it from a place, but have yet to give the link.

Shall I go on?

I'll stop here. I am eager to see how you will use this "earth is round not flat" thing to try and discredit me, and just dodge. Since I never brought up anything about it.

Twist, dodge, contort away!


Oh well, I guess that was your intent. I guess this McCarthy thing will now be your latest argument to re-kindle. Along with the population of my county again.

I never will see your sources for this "Islam in California schoolS". Will I? Just more obscure subjects to try and avoid making good on your comments and "facts" eh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1032 Consumer Comment

Isnt it better that we save lives now than lose billions of people later.

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 18, 2006

Whatever one might say about bush or clinton, one thing is for sure:


If we dont go after terrorism now...it will be WWIII anyway.

Isnt it better that we save lives now than lose billions of people later.

You all know as well as anybody that the next world war will be middle east versus all others.

Its only what country will be on what side then.

By taking out Iraq, we at least removed 1 link in the potential nuclear future.

Saddam did have WMD, the fact that we havent found it, is actually totally irrelevant.

Btw, bush didnt lie, CIA & others did.

If you insist on saying bush lied, then so did Kerry & others, who actually did have the exact same information.

Congress (a select few) have always been privy to many topsecret details since the 60's, and even before, ever since they gained enough power to micromanage the other branchs by virue of legislation and 'admin' work.

BTw, Clinton had no surplus.
Especially when one relizes that the jobs created were mostly fake min. wage jobs that disappeared during his 2nd term.

Besides, most economic successs can be credited to a previous president or to ones 1st term (exceptions: Lincoln,FDR,NIXON,REAGAN).

Lincoln - due to civilwar.
FDR - WWII and his excessive terms.
Nixon - wage/price controls (very short term value).

Reagan - due to the real jobs gained here.
His failure was in controlling congressional spending.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1031 Consumer Comment

Damon?I'm still waiting for you to ?Let me know about meself?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Is your whole goal to point out to me that I have an ego? I ride around on a "high horse"?

Or do you actually have some point that you disagree with me on, regarding anything I've said, or are you simply intent to tell me I have a big head?

Isn't it funny, how a gal is a "egotistical maniac", or a "b***h", if she won't let herself get pushed around by others because she's secure in herself?

Next, you'll be calling me a bra-burning Feminazi. Whatever.

"You obviously have some care Vera, you responded to me."

Would it also be obvious, that that whole "You mean nothing to me" jazz is also stuff and nonsense? Yet here we are, multiple responses in. That is, the same could be said of you. More so, in that you took the time to actually post a whole Rebuttal dedicated to letting me know about your opinion, which has naught to do with anything I've raised relevant to this Report.

As for my responding to you, well, when someone takes the time to make an effort to presume they can teach me something about myself, I'll gladly turn and pay attention to them---after all, they might just actually enlighten me. But your attempt, as has that of many others, failed to impress me beyond the more blasso indeed, I felt it compulsory to take the time to correct you.

"You ask my purpose? Well, I actually started a thread regarding..."

Actually, I was inquiring as to your purpose on this specific Report, as you had originally inquired of me.

"I have a family to support and thus work for a living..."

Ah, your ignorance is showing. Hence, I'm still waiting for you to teach me something regarding meself. And you say I have an ego. ;)

"I cannot monitor ripoff 24/7 like you have the luxury of doing."

Once again, see above. And maybe you can tell me, what's the difference, if you've responded, created, and "Rebuttaled" innumerable Reports here, it's all the same, isn't it? A little more time than we'd like to admit to, spent whiling away time on the RipoffReports....this is my little sinful pleasure, and it gives me insight into the mindset of others. Not to mention, it gives me great examples on how to address people on this subject in a social context.

And honestly, I've met some really cool people here! :D

Besides...have you bothered to consider the whole space-time thing? Or do you not notice that most of my commentaries are in the later part of the day? (Well, there's that whole winter-season thing, too, and the fact that work for me is slow in the Winter months here in the MidWest...so there may be a few Rebuttals I've made during the earlier part of the day. But, oh well! What, did you wake up one morning and suddenly realize the world owes you an explanation?)

And I'll bet this surprises you: I'm just as much a smartass in "real time", or social circumstances as I am right here! What you see is what you get, Dahlin'.

"There are many times you refer to people you may address at the time by their assumed name; however, later in the post it becomes "punk, jackass" or whatever choice word you have for them."

Okay...and your point is...? Look...I give what I get. My delivery isn't your cup of tea. So what?

Like I said; ignorance. Read the whole thing, and any other Reports it refers you to. Then feel free to come back and make an INFORMED contribution. Merely telling me I have a fair amount of "self esteem" and it's annoying is just stating the obvious (and worthless). I am dismayed, in that folks open their mouths to judge without knowing the nature of the person they attack. Amusingly, you yourself even recognize that I have "wit". Funny stuff.

"It is possible "GOD BLESSES!!!" is just "huff and smoke" to you, at this point you have no understanding sister. I have been through hell and high water, so I live by this saying. Vera, I do pray for you."

Y'know, reverse psychology doesn't seem to have the weight or value it used to. Don't you think?

Remember the trauma only in that it leads you to rejoice in the victory; where you've been isn't as important as where you're headed with it. Roots and wings.

Incidentally...what gives you the impression that I am unfamiliar with the misery of negative circumstance, or the power of God's blessing? Why do you assume my epiphany is somehow lesser than yours? You speak on circumstances you are utterly ignorant of.

And YOU say I have the "ego". Might want to pray for more than just MY poor unfortunate soul...I'm not the one professing to be a 'better Christian' because I think someone else is wrong for having the personal fortitude to speak out against a person whose double-standards and personal agendas seek to circumvent the rights of others. All in the name of "tolerance", Brother.

But at any rate, I won't disparage your right as a fellow Christian to intercede on my behalf, and for that I thank you. I need all the prayers I can get. While you're at it, may the same God that blesses both of us grant you clarity.

"Vera, I am sure you are a wonderful person (if wit indicates). This is all anyone has to go on here, so on ripoff, you mean nothing to me."

You assume that your opinion actually means something to me. I merely address an ignoramus who seeks to somehow tether my right to speak out against someone who accuses me erroneously. Perhaps I'm not the one here whose mouth is more dominant than their brain...or do you just see in me that which you resent in yourself?

"I wish not to distract from the subject of the original post anymore than I have..."

Yet here we are, more than one exchange in.

"P.S.- The butt out option? Don't see it offered."

Au contraire. It was in my just-previous Rebuttal. Whatever the case, do you have something to offer regarding the subject, or any of the other topics to contribute to? If not, my invitation for you to feel free to ignore my presence still stands.

Vocatus atque, non vocatus Deus aderit.
That am true.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1030 Consumer Comment

Focus? You mean smokescreen and blur

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Vera you state....

"No, my focus is keenly tuned where it needs to be."

Well your "focus" apparently is everyone elses blur.

You can put up the effort to make a claim, then make up very loooooooong posts, and never once back up your claim.

Instead of making a 15 paragraph long post why cant you just post ONE link (or maybe two since we need more than one school!) and end this discussion once and for all?

If you cant do that, then I dont see why I should listen to you, Robert, or anyone else when they demand my sources of infomation. I think everyone should have the same "right" you think you have. I think everyone here can just start calling their opinions fact. If someone demands proof....forget it. Vera doesnt have too, why should anyone else?

Toodles!.......hon!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1029 Consumer Comment

Let you know about yourself

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 17, 2006

You obviously have some care Vera, you responded to me. You ask my purpose? Well, I actually started a thread regarding my experience with Primerica. Since then, I have visited several other threads of interest whenever I have time. I have a family to support and thus work for a living, I cannot monitor ripoff 24/7 like you have the luxury of doing.

Yes, it was a rhetorical question, never expected your response. There are many times you refer to people you may address at the time by their assumed name; however, later in the post it becomes "punk, jackass" or whatever choice word you have for them. In saying this, am I not justified in saying you appear as a shallow, self-aggrandizing and egomaniacal? Don't worry, I have learned to swim.

It is possible "GOD BLESSES!!!" is just "huff and smoke" to you, at this point you have no understanding sister. I have been through hell and high water, so I live by this saying. Vera, I do pray for you.

Vera, I am sure you are a wonderful person (if wit indicates). This is all anyone has to go on here, so on ripoff, you mean nothing to me. I wish not to distract from the subject of the original post anymore than I have; however, I just wanted to give you a little jolt while you continue on you highhorse.

P.S.- The butt out option? Don't see it offered.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1028 Consumer Comment

Here is Ben's thought process

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Most of us know the earth is a sphere. Just to be different, Ben will claim it is flat.

Now, Ben will demand the rest of us provide "proof" it is flat.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1027 Consumer Comment

You might ask yourself that same question, Damon.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 16, 2006

"Shallow? Vera, we'll now place the definition of this word under your name."

And well you should, as being "shallow" is beneath me. I also find it frustrating that others would fail to see that at least I could provide genuine information to support my perspective. You don't have to agree with my sources, for me to find them valid.

And just because I don't fit into your little box, you have no business calling me the "shallow" one. You want shallow? Don't try to remove the speck from my eye while you have a two-by-four hanging out of yours. Your little "calling out" to me here only serves to discredit any point you intended to make.

"As you continue to disparage others..."
Why don't you back read the history of this little quarrel before you cast judgments? You'll see that mine is the position of defense...but better yet, forget it; why the hell would you want to muck things up with facts?

"...and continue your egomaniacal rants,..."

"Egomaniacal rants?" WL. Vent your spleen where it applies to subject, Kid.

"....what is your purpose on ripoff?"

What exactly, it the purpose behind your presence here---specifically with your latest diatribe?

"You claim Ben is a "self-aggrandizer"? Wow, and you must be looking at the mirror when you say this?"

No, my focus is keenly tuned where it needs to be. But thanks for trying.

"If the GOD we believe is this omniscient and omnipotent being, then regardless of the outcome of anything of this Universe (rather it seems man created or not of this Earth), then any result must be of his will?...only GOD knows."

Care to express the actual meaning of this scrambled Easter egg? Your final sentence seems to render this rhetorical; yet you are expecting me to answer? Or am I not the only thing you're trying to shove into a box? Is that whole "God Blesses!" Tag-line you end your Rebuttals with just huff and smoke?

In the meantime, my comment was directed at "B." regarding the series of events leading to the unfortunate end of the Titanic. If you do a little digging--actually, just type "RMS Titanic" into your browser's Search bar, and you'll see what I was remarking on.

In the meantime, however, I notice you've failed to see, that while you're welcome to Rebuttal my commentary, you're equally welcome to butt out, if you don't want to either disprove my information, or somehow contribute to the discussion.

Too bad, though, there are many Reports you've contributed to where I fully agree with you; but since I had nothing to really offer, or certain circumstances didn't apply to me, I respectfully remained silent. You see, I'm usually not nasty to a person until they feel inclined to try and feed me a ration of crap, and are fool enough to not expect a return volley.

And I warrant you this: my acridity towards certain of this board (with only ONE exception!) is well earned. Do I care if you agree? NO. Do I care if you care? No. You wanna see where I'm referencing from (most likely, you'll say no)? Read this whole Report from start 'til current.

If you don't want to, that's fine; just don't bug me, then.

And yeah, God Blesses--

That are true.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1026 Consumer Comment

The self-righteous one

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Shallow? Vera, we'll now place the definition of this word under your name. As you continue to disparage others and continue your egomaniacal rants, what is your purpose on ripoff? You claim Ben is a "self-aggrandizer"? Wow, and you must be looking at the mirror when you say this? "B" from DenCo actually has a point. If the GOD we believe is this omniscient and omnipotent being, then regardless of the outcome of anything of this Universe (rather it seems man created or not of this Earth), then any result must be of his will?...only GOD knows.

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1025 Consumer Comment

Speaking of Dodging...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 15, 2006

Dodging it by denying it has always been the way you cope with it, Ben.

Ah, me. Well, at least you're consistent.

And it's clear that you're gonna just keep dodging the obvious to achieve some level of personal success for yourself; by denying, you can either keep attention on yourself (which is where you want it, as obviously you were denied this much in life, apparently), or, you can frustrate people into just giving up and ignoring you. This will enable your need to feel self-satisfaction by "getting the last word in".

Thereby allowing you to drag this little tiff with you everywhere you go. Mighty shallow victory, Chum...but you're good with shallow. It does personify who you are, in your constant quest to add yet another stanza to your chant of self-righteousness, and extend your mantra of tolerance by just one more chorus. Self-Aggrandizing: The Canon of the Liberal.

I'm still waiting for you to show me proof of all the accusations YOU'VE made (especially those regarding myself!)...because you haven't yet. You see, according to you, the support offered by using another's Rebuttal isn't valid, so you're not allowed to say "you gave me all the answers" you're not allowed to plagiarize me and say "I won't do the work for you". Besides, how else do you think you're gonna keep me from showing you what a sorry little turd you are?

Also, you have to come up with your own proof that's understandable as it is; no out-of-context quips or Ben-Twittery and Spin permitted.

Better yet, prove to me that I'm wrong---using something other than just your opinion, circle-talk, and distractions.

Or, you could just do the whole world a favor and keep that stinking gash under your nose closed. After all, you've never shown anything really concrete regarding ol' Gran'dad on the other Report.

Shaken down for what it is, you haven't proven a d**n thing, even by your own standards. So you could never, ever prove anything, by mine (here's a chance for you to just give up, right?).

Color me not surprised.

Just so you know, Robert has on a few occasions mentioned that he's not a Florida Native, as such; he refers to his home state as North Carolina (see the FEMA Report, where he mentions having lived first in NC). Also, I think it's funny that even if he's totally polluted, Robert makes more sense with what he posted than you have in your latest. You really should address that Tourette's Syndrome of yours, Princess.

Also, as I have stated MANY, MANY times before (your natural brilliance must just be screening it out!) my comment on Islam in California schoolS (which yes, I have proven, and in some part, your admission that it happened in Brentwood was a nice addendum!) was in a post that was written in response to "B." of Denver Colorado. not "BEN" of Mapzit, which is a part of the state of California---you know the area...they tried to indoctrinate the local children into the Muslim religion. :)

Funny how that works out, isn't it? If I mention "God" in quotes from the Founding Fathers of our Country, or if Bush says "I believe God speaks to me, personally", or has the occasional consult with Pat Robertson, we're trying to "turn or burn" the masses, to proselytize the populace of the United States. Maybe your Pap did teach you how to pick your fights...was he a little troll like you, too?

(Also, I haven't heard a complaint about how Bill Clinton had Jesse Jackson as a "spiritual consultant"...go fig! But not Pat Robertson! No!!)

Yet the Nationally Syndicated Publishing company (Houghton-Mifflin, as per my links and text provides) can make textbooks for California Schools that's geared and intended to present Islam as a "spiritual choice"---and present "Christianity through the eyes of Islam" (Look into the Sixth Grade text! I provided a link you'll just deny or not bother with)---but where's the outrage for this? I know...it's selective!

In YOUR HOME STATE, in YOUR COUNTY, they can teach kids of non-Islam religions--or of no religion at all, like the atheists---to commit blasphemy, and that's okay. But if I say "God" and if Bush says, "I pray", and I live in Toledo Ohio (which, I don't know if you know it, but Toledo, Ohio is not a part of California! SO my "bantering about God" doesn't affect you in the slightest!) I'm a bad person and Ben the atheist (and a d**n poor example of an atheist, to boot---as you've mentioned "God" as often as I have!) is gonna make it his personal battle to try and bring me to my knees!

Better recognize, punk...it ain't gonna happen. I'm still ten feet tall and bulletproof, and have never once retracted, withered, or weakened in my stance. I'm not all broken down and reduced to picking fights on petty s**t, or denying that REAL proof has been presented. Easy enough, it simply hasn't in reference to you, or either James, or even Charles.

So no, Jackass, I didn't try to "attack you" by accusing the whole state of California for forcing children to learn about Islam. As everyone here has seen, and some have said: "Vera mentioned Islam in Schools in a response to a question by 'B.'" But you go ahead and split hairs because you don't have anything else to offer on an argument. Certainly not a point, let alone any tangible facts!

Oh, and "B." while I can certainly support that a collision with nature/God's work (an iceberg) sunk the Titanic (it is my opinion that there were a culmination of factors, more human error than an "act of God"), I can also add that the Ark was constructed by those who obeyed His word and followed His instructions. The crew on board the Titanic ignored repeated warnings about ice and icebergs; Noah and his family got the message loud and clear. ;)

And I cannot remember who it was who said it, but a remark was made the day the Titanic left port: "Even God Himself couldn't sink Her."

Even Greek mythology supports that you're a fool to thumb your nose at God (or Gods, as there were several of 'em).

"Just sayin'." :P

Stay blessed!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1024 Consumer Comment

Any way you slice it......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 15, 2006

Any way you want to slice it Robert, its all still obvious what your intent is.

You and Vera used this subject to attack me, my state, and generally tried to make it look like it was some statewide conspirecy if not nationwide to bring down or beat down Christians.

You failed.


Vera brought this subject up.....and has never shown her source. I asked and asked, then demanded. She never would.

You Robert, finally gave A link. But the source mentioned nothing other than ONE school. Not the statewide issue that Vera implied and continued to imply it was.

For months you avoided giving any other source, any other information.

Months later, on a completely different thread the subject came up again (another thread YOU hunted me down).

Still you maintained that it was larger than one school. Still you refused to show anything to verify that idea.

You dodged over and over. Each time it was a new angle.

First it was that just because I refused to agree with your flawed idea, that "I didnt know it ever happened". This was your first angle that you dodged with for months. Over and over I asked...."show me more than one school". Yet your only reply was this feeble attempt to discredit me with "see he didnt even know it happened!". Bogus to the end there Robert.

Then it was the fact that I am living in Marinez, CA. The same county as this ONE incident. This further fueled your fire to attack. But now your angle was "its in your own backyard!". All the while....I still asked "what other schools?". Never wavered...never changed.

Then your excuse was this pathetic twist on population numbers. Over and over still I asked "show me more than one school". You continued with "your numbers are wrong...you used a 2004 estimate". And "I have 150,000 in my county" and "I have the same as you in your county". And "your county has 930,000 in it". Once again you show your complete inability to JUST POST A LINK. You havent even posted the place on the census site for your 2000 numbers! After I did for my 2004 numbers over and over Dodge dodge dodge dodge....and more dodge.

Now we are back on this thread. I still maintain my question "show me more than one school". Then you throw this angle of "we never meant it that way....we didnt mean more than one school". After you have been saying the complete opposite for almost a year!!

Then Vera shows up and basically shoots you in the foot by still maintaining that its far more widespread than that ONE school in Byron, Brentwood, wherever!

Then you GO BACK to saying it was more than one school again!!

Any way you slice it, this little bogus BS that you and Vera are trying to foist on everyone has fallen flat completely.

Now your latest excuse is still on the census garbage. Your trying to say that you were talking about 2 different counties??? Are you kidding me!??

Just as you were late with the "oh we didnt mean it that way", then why didnt you mention this before?

Ill tell you why......because you DIDNT mean 2 different counties. Your numbers were just BS and now this is your........

.....LATEST DODGE!


Soooooo now that we are back to the "its widespread" and "it happened in more than one school"........

Please by all means Vera, Robert.....SHOW ME THE OTHER SCHOOLS!!!

Spare me the "look he didnt know!".

Spare me the "your county has this, my county has that".

Spare me the "look he lives in the same county as that ONE school...so therefore it must be many".

Spare me the "your numbers are estimates...mine are real...but I will never post the link"

Spare me the "we didnt mean more than one school".

Spare me the "I live here...but I'm typing from there"

Spare me the "Byron...Brentwood...Jacksonville...Martinez"

Spare me all the dodging.

Spare me all the excuses.

Just show where this is some widespread issue across California if not the nation. Show me how this was a legitimate claim to spread fear.

Show me the one thing I have been asking for from the beginning...and have never wavered from yet gotten all these excuses for.

SHOW ME.....SHOW US......OR SHUT UP!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1023 Consumer Comment

Any way you slice it......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 15, 2006

Any way you want to slice it Robert, its all still obvious what your intent is.

You and Vera used this subject to attack me, my state, and generally tried to make it look like it was some statewide conspirecy if not nationwide to bring down or beat down Christians.

You failed.


Vera brought this subject up.....and has never shown her source. I asked and asked, then demanded. She never would.

You Robert, finally gave A link. But the source mentioned nothing other than ONE school. Not the statewide issue that Vera implied and continued to imply it was.

For months you avoided giving any other source, any other information.

Months later, on a completely different thread the subject came up again (another thread YOU hunted me down).

Still you maintained that it was larger than one school. Still you refused to show anything to verify that idea.

You dodged over and over. Each time it was a new angle.

First it was that just because I refused to agree with your flawed idea, that "I didnt know it ever happened". This was your first angle that you dodged with for months. Over and over I asked...."show me more than one school". Yet your only reply was this feeble attempt to discredit me with "see he didnt even know it happened!". Bogus to the end there Robert.

Then it was the fact that I am living in Marinez, CA. The same county as this ONE incident. This further fueled your fire to attack. But now your angle was "its in your own backyard!". All the while....I still asked "what other schools?". Never wavered...never changed.

Then your excuse was this pathetic twist on population numbers. Over and over still I asked "show me more than one school". You continued with "your numbers are wrong...you used a 2004 estimate". And "I have 150,000 in my county" and "I have the same as you in your county". And "your county has 930,000 in it". Once again you show your complete inability to JUST POST A LINK. You havent even posted the place on the census site for your 2000 numbers! After I did for my 2004 numbers over and over Dodge dodge dodge dodge....and more dodge.

Now we are back on this thread. I still maintain my question "show me more than one school". Then you throw this angle of "we never meant it that way....we didnt mean more than one school". After you have been saying the complete opposite for almost a year!!

Then Vera shows up and basically shoots you in the foot by still maintaining that its far more widespread than that ONE school in Byron, Brentwood, wherever!

Then you GO BACK to saying it was more than one school again!!

Any way you slice it, this little bogus BS that you and Vera are trying to foist on everyone has fallen flat completely.

Now your latest excuse is still on the census garbage. Your trying to say that you were talking about 2 different counties??? Are you kidding me!??

Just as you were late with the "oh we didnt mean it that way", then why didnt you mention this before?

Ill tell you why......because you DIDNT mean 2 different counties. Your numbers were just BS and now this is your........

.....LATEST DODGE!


Soooooo now that we are back to the "its widespread" and "it happened in more than one school"........

Please by all means Vera, Robert.....SHOW ME THE OTHER SCHOOLS!!!

Spare me the "look he didnt know!".

Spare me the "your county has this, my county has that".

Spare me the "look he lives in the same county as that ONE school...so therefore it must be many".

Spare me the "your numbers are estimates...mine are real...but I will never post the link"

Spare me the "we didnt mean more than one school".

Spare me the "I live here...but I'm typing from there"

Spare me the "Byron...Brentwood...Jacksonville...Martinez"

Spare me all the dodging.

Spare me all the excuses.

Just show where this is some widespread issue across California if not the nation. Show me how this was a legitimate claim to spread fear.

Show me the one thing I have been asking for from the beginning...and have never wavered from yet gotten all these excuses for.

SHOW ME.....SHOW US......OR SHUT UP!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1022 Consumer Comment

Any way you slice it......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 15, 2006

Any way you want to slice it Robert, its all still obvious what your intent is.

You and Vera used this subject to attack me, my state, and generally tried to make it look like it was some statewide conspirecy if not nationwide to bring down or beat down Christians.

You failed.


Vera brought this subject up.....and has never shown her source. I asked and asked, then demanded. She never would.

You Robert, finally gave A link. But the source mentioned nothing other than ONE school. Not the statewide issue that Vera implied and continued to imply it was.

For months you avoided giving any other source, any other information.

Months later, on a completely different thread the subject came up again (another thread YOU hunted me down).

Still you maintained that it was larger than one school. Still you refused to show anything to verify that idea.

You dodged over and over. Each time it was a new angle.

First it was that just because I refused to agree with your flawed idea, that "I didnt know it ever happened". This was your first angle that you dodged with for months. Over and over I asked...."show me more than one school". Yet your only reply was this feeble attempt to discredit me with "see he didnt even know it happened!". Bogus to the end there Robert.

Then it was the fact that I am living in Marinez, CA. The same county as this ONE incident. This further fueled your fire to attack. But now your angle was "its in your own backyard!". All the while....I still asked "what other schools?". Never wavered...never changed.

Then your excuse was this pathetic twist on population numbers. Over and over still I asked "show me more than one school". You continued with "your numbers are wrong...you used a 2004 estimate". And "I have 150,000 in my county" and "I have the same as you in your county". And "your county has 930,000 in it". Once again you show your complete inability to JUST POST A LINK. You havent even posted the place on the census site for your 2000 numbers! After I did for my 2004 numbers over and over Dodge dodge dodge dodge....and more dodge.

Now we are back on this thread. I still maintain my question "show me more than one school". Then you throw this angle of "we never meant it that way....we didnt mean more than one school". After you have been saying the complete opposite for almost a year!!

Then Vera shows up and basically shoots you in the foot by still maintaining that its far more widespread than that ONE school in Byron, Brentwood, wherever!

Then you GO BACK to saying it was more than one school again!!

Any way you slice it, this little bogus BS that you and Vera are trying to foist on everyone has fallen flat completely.

Now your latest excuse is still on the census garbage. Your trying to say that you were talking about 2 different counties??? Are you kidding me!??

Just as you were late with the "oh we didnt mean it that way", then why didnt you mention this before?

Ill tell you why......because you DIDNT mean 2 different counties. Your numbers were just BS and now this is your........

.....LATEST DODGE!


Soooooo now that we are back to the "its widespread" and "it happened in more than one school"........

Please by all means Vera, Robert.....SHOW ME THE OTHER SCHOOLS!!!

Spare me the "look he didnt know!".

Spare me the "your county has this, my county has that".

Spare me the "look he lives in the same county as that ONE school...so therefore it must be many".

Spare me the "your numbers are estimates...mine are real...but I will never post the link"

Spare me the "we didnt mean more than one school".

Spare me the "I live here...but I'm typing from there"

Spare me the "Byron...Brentwood...Jacksonville...Martinez"

Spare me all the dodging.

Spare me all the excuses.

Just show where this is some widespread issue across California if not the nation. Show me how this was a legitimate claim to spread fear.

Show me the one thing I have been asking for from the beginning...and have never wavered from yet gotten all these excuses for.

SHOW ME.....SHOW US......OR SHUT UP!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1021 Consumer Comment

More niwittery from Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 14, 2006

My hometown County is Onslow COunty, NC. The County I currently live in is Duval, Fl. Onslow has 150K. Duval has roughly 850K. Whyb is this so diff8icult for you. I have already told you I live in one County, and go back HOME to another in ANOTHER state.

I am drunk as a skunk right now, but still use more good brain cells tyhan youi do Benjo.

Use whatever numbers you want to, MINE are still acurrate. YOU gave me the name of the school in Brentwood, so stop trying to require "proof" of it. YOU gave it, so that's that. I gave Byron. YOU gave Brentwood. It turns out rentwood WAS a good hit. Sucks to be you.

Get a grip, Benjo.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1020 Consumer Comment

Nicole, you must be a Republican.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 14, 2006

Only a Republican would present this selectively skewed collection of information, dis-information, and outright lies as the only pertinent information available and demand an immediate vote on that basis. Only a Republican would accord a boat from a fairy tale the same status as a documented real world event. Only a Republican would attempt to convict the entire Congress based on rumor and innuendo. LOL!

Let's see, just off the top of my head...
Beethoven was the first sibling, not the last, and was born in a time when infant mortality was the rule rather than the exception.
Churchill was not 'kicked' out of office twice, probably frequently slept till noon because he worked till 2 or 3 in the morning, and while he may have been a heavy drinker, did not consume a quart of whiskey every evening.
Hitler was decorated, but not as a war hero, was not strictly a vegetarian, and probably did not cheat on his wife because he wasn't married. And speaking of Hitler, what if his mother had been advised to have an abortion?

As for Congress, let me say that I also have been directly or indirectly accused or arrested for any of a number of things, including inappropriate humor. Odd that this same list has been appearing in emails and on the 'net since the late 90s and yet the numbers haven't changed as the members of Congress have.

I guess the moral of this story is don't beleive everything you read - especially on the internet.

Oh, and the God that protected the ark from harm is probably the same one that slammed the Titanic into an iceberg. Just sayin'.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1019 Consumer Comment

Who would have though

AUTHOR: Nicole - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 13, 2006

Question 1:
If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?

Read the next question before looking at the
response for this one.

Question 2:
It is time to elect a new world leader, and only
your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three candidates.

Candidate A.
Associates with crooked politicians, and consults
with astrologist. He's had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B.
He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until
noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of
whiskey every evening.

Candidate C
He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian,
doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.

Which of these candidates would be our choice?
Decide first... no peeking, then scroll down for the response.

-------------
Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.

And, by the way, on your answer to the abortion
question: If you said YES, you just killed
Beethoven.

Pretty interesting isn't it? Makes a person think
before judging someone.
Wait till you see the end of this note! Keep
reading..

Never be afraid to try something new.
Remember: Amateurs...built the ark.
Professionals...built the Titanic

And Finally, can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 500 employees and has the following statistics:

* 29 have been accused of spousal abuse
* 7 have been arrested for fraud
* 19 have been accused of writing bad checks
* 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at
least 2 businesses
* 3 have done time for assault
* 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
* 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
* 8 have been arrested for shoplifting
* 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
* 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the
last year...

Can you guess which organization this is?

Give up yet?


It's the 535 members of the United States Congress.
The same group that crank out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1018 Consumer Comment

People need to listen to themselves

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 13, 2006

People need to listen to themselves, people tell me if you spew your hatred you will get the same type treatment back!, i have not spew hatred or evil its the bush fans themselves then they have the nerve to judge us!. Bush fans tell, me to accept the same type treatment that i dish out apparantely they cannot take what they dish out!, bush fans are not being so civil themselves then they accuse us of not being civil!. They sure have, some nerve telling us that if people spew their hatred toward me they can accept to get the same type treatment back! because bush fans are the only ones insulting people & calling people names, & spewing their hatred toward people who don't agree with them or oppose bush. The only way, us democrats is to respond with kindness because of their hatred & evil!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1017 Consumer Comment

Ohh, and a quick not about something else....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 13, 2006

Y'gotta love it when an atheist uses a phrase like ?Good Lord!? to open a sentence. But alas, there's still yet more to correct you on, Captain Stinky.

"Good lord, the town only has 500 people and you think Islam is going to take over our education system?? Because one class tried to OFFER (not FORCE as you have led to believe in later posts) a course (not "crash course") in Islam (not terrorism...as I assume was your end intention to portray)????"

Y'know Boo-h*o, for a fella who claims he's married to a teacher, you have got to be your "significant other's" greatest embarrassment. Obviously it's not your great intellect that rang the wedding bells, was it?

So now you're telling me that Brentwood only has about five hundred people living in it...?

As of the census of 2000, there were 23,302 people, 7,497 households, and 6,125 families residing in the city.

Or was it Byron?

Almost a thousand. As of the census of 2000, there were 916 people, 286 households, and 203 families residing in the CDP. That's almost double of five hundred.

But in Covina, y'gotta bigger number. As of the 2000 census, the city had a total population of 46,837.

And As I've said before, in the past twenty years, any attacks on America have been perpetrated by Muslims; all Muslims are not terroists, but for the most part, all the terrorists have been Muslims. So you can take your "assume" and shove it up the first three letters of that word that pertains to you.

These are the three areas that I've found evidence of Islam being taught in California SchoolS(as provided in my last Response...yeah, a lengthy one, isn't it? Ah, well, "snippets" and "quotes" could never satisfy that deep down need for data quite like a bunch of good old fashioned research could!).

"But if you intend to just sit back and answer for each one of my statements, then do so with some real responses instead of "you p***k" and "whatever you say hon!"."

You left out "vapid" and "little" to go with "p***k". And I stand by that.
Again, no worse than what you've called me.

And just as a note....I don't need literacy lessons or the ethics of writing from the likes of you. You barely know how to use the minimal portion of the English language you do manage to vomit onto the Reports.

And besides...it'll be a long, cold day in hell before I'll take my writing instructions from some poor little kept man (teacher's pet) selling lab supplies from his computer in "MapZit California" as you claim your little 'Burg is so tiny.

"Those have to be the most feeble comebacks for a political thread ever."

Nahh...an even better example of "feeble" would be ANYTHING written by a "Ben?Martinez, California".

Your whole line of thinking and logic (and I use the terms loosely!) are the personification of "feeble", "bitter", and "petty". Hence, my copious use of these as modifiers in reference to you. :)

"You never have anything to add except outright insults, questioning of peoples sexual preference, or just some sly rude...."honey!" at the end"

Hmmmmm......where did I bring your "sexual preference" into this, Princess?
Are we still mooing about your perpetual desire to discuss all things homosexual? Spare me.

Or are you trying to exert some level of control over my writing yet again? Do the world a favor: dry up.

As the old saying goes:
"Don't start nothin',
Won't be nothin'."

Oh, and just 'coz I'm curious...

What the hell does any of that other off-topic blather on the Circuit City Report have to do with anything? I mean, speaking of "tangents", that is?

After all, a guy named "Eric" of Palo Alto was the original Poster, and you step in to pick fights with others and call them "Trolls" ('Dodge away, little Troll?lather, rinse, repeat!').

On 4/6/2006 you start in on the Cross-Posting, singling out Robert.

"(now your in "advertising" Mr.Grissom? I thought it was "auto repair".....I'll add that to the list of dubious comments you make. Your list is getting really looooooong!)"

Never mind the fact that Robert's first comment to you was something like: "Ben, I can almost agree with you" On 2/23/2006, Robert says, "In fact, I have even stated that I believe their website should be more user friendly."

After watching you talk down to others, in that snide and acerbic manner we have all come to recognize as your personal style---along with your incessant misuse of certain words and your twittery, limp-wristed "Oh, no you DIDN'T!" Attitude, no one (not even the ladies) sees fit to address you civilly.

"Sorry folks....I'll put more faith in the zillions of posts before I put faith in 4 knuckleheads only here to get their jollies by insulting people!"

That's Rich. I suppose you believe everything Charles wrote, then? After all, he's got DOZENS of Reports, Rebuttals, and Posts on here!
I trust you included yourself in this gaggle of folks who gets their "jollies" by picking on others?

Man...then trolling and stalking must really make a damp spot on the BVDs, eh, Shnookums?

Just so you know, I have only been to three Circuit City Stores here in Toledo, and one store in Florida. I've bought Cel Phones, and Videocams, and to be more "on-point", all the stores I've seen are pretty much exactly alike in their layout. When you purchase a high-dollar item, you are normally required to go get it at Customer service Counter.

Guess what?

On a group of large boards, right behind the counter, is their Policy, and the Reps all explained to me what the policy was about before I asked them (the main exception being the Cel phones, as these were handled by the Dude in the Kiosk within the store---but he explained the policy for the phones, as they weren't necessarily Circuit City's sale.

So really, it was the nf the Original Poster. It's easy to understand...he was probably eager to get his purchase, and had his plans in mind more than policy.

"I KNOW consumers can make mistakes. I KNOW business can make mistakes. EVERYONE CAN!"

Don't you mean, "Everyone but ME?' After all?as far as you seem to be concerned, there's no one that can achieve the level of perfection that is Ben.

"But for some odd reason the very few of you seem to think that Circuit City is completely incapable of dropping the ball....... ever."

Funny, I hadn't seen a single post by a single person that says anything even remotely similar to this allegation.

But I know that's never stopped you from presenting your "version" of what you see others as having said! After all, of the "many" times I was supposed to have said specific things, you haven't provided one single instance of it TO DATE. Not one time, of ANY circumstance.

But of course, in YOUR mind, they're real, so they must be real, right?

Seen any "ghosts" lately?

I want to believe! (Whistling tune from "X-Files")

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1016 Consumer Comment

To the Prince(ss) of Chides...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 12, 2006

Okay, Darlin' you wanna tango? Let's rock.

4/11/2006
Ben's comment on a CIRCUIT CITY board, when questioned by Robert of Jacksonville, Florida:

"Robert....Mr.Grissom.....you are one in the same....or you are a liar. I took the same amount of info you gave and ran with it like you did with me. A simple Yahoo yellow pages search in Jacksonville FL yields numerous NAPA parts centers....and only ONE repair shop. Run by a Mr.Grissom.

"Now if you are not Mr.Grissom....then by your own form of detective work, you are a LIAR. Either you are him...

"Just as you ran with this BS "Islam in CA schools", pulling up vague and incomplete evidence to some huge grand conspirecy,"

Now there's three things to cover here; one, the fact that Ben's got lots of spare time on his hands to play Sammy the Stalker, and two, the date this particular post is made available predates anything I've posted on that particular board. And it was simply to step in and let Benny-Boo-h*o know I was wise to him trying to carry this over to another thread (yet again). You sure have a penchant for pettiness, "honey"...and an a*s-load of anger issues. Mommy must be SO proud. (D'you have a tissue?)

Oh, and thing three? Over half of that post is consumed by anything BUT the topic, thanks to our favorite little troll, here. The person who had originally posted about CIRCUIT CITY, not about Bennie from PettyTroll Junction, or any of his many issues, had long since abandoned it (As per another person's statement there). Oddly, this seems to be the fate of any Report he opens his oral sphincter on. Isn't that strange?

I won't even get into the fact that he was the first to attack Robert on some other Reports...let alone that anytime he finds Robert on another Report, he tries to bring up stuff from this, and other Reports where he's been trounced repeatedly.

Apparently it hasn't quite sunk in to this little lepton's head that most normal folks see his grasp on reality so tenuous, his thought process such a travesty, that they feel compelled to respond to his blather. Either that, or he's achieved the status of Magna Troll---Summa c*m Troller---the Grand Poobah of Trolls. Troller Emeritus?

Whichever the case, the sheer magnitude of Ben's incorrectness, blatant deception, and complete mis-information is such that people who actually have more knowledge on the given subject have to keep the more gullible folks on the other Reports from believing that Ben offers reality-based advice.

So yeah, Princess...the proof IS in the posts. And I still maintain that it was more than one school...here's something else that'll tickle you, Pookles: I also maintain that it's going on in more than ONE state, Oklahoma notwithstanding. As far as proof, there's Byron, as has been offered, and there's also Brentwood---as you have offered yourself. Of course, the Brentwood source is a little questionable, as the place that it comes from has trouble with his perception of reality.

Add Royal Oak Intermediate School in Covina, California to the list.

"At Royal Oak Intermediate School in Covina, California, students in Len Cesene's seventh grade history class fasted last week to celebrate the Muslim holy month of Ramadan." (From Free Republic)

Again, I ask you; if it only happened in your own little corner of Podunkville, then why use a National Publishing Syndicate, like Houghton-Mifflin?

I don't hide or deny the information I've presented is true, and I don't have to rave and spin things out of control and show that I've lost my temper, as you have.

And as far as my snide nicknames for you? Well, I'll have to admit, that it's not as classy as telling someone they're a Jihadist, or that they can shove something up their "uptight, theocratic, religious t**t" or whatever. I mean, personally, you really can't get that deep under my skin. I've done the "survivalist" gig, and I know how to deal with the chiggers and mites that try to penetrate my armor.

So face it...to me, you're no threat. And you can go ahead and believe there's no proof offered. I know you need to cling to anything you can, so you can have your little state of denial.

My God, it must suck to be you. How terribly sad.

Oh, and speaking of "God", did you know you've mentioned the name "God" with same or greater frequency as meself? From the start, ANY mention of religion (as an arguing point) has been presented by YOU, and no one else. And you're calling me a "Religious Nut"! Aww, are you trying to hurt my feelings? Try harder!

No---wait; I'd have to actually respect you, in order for you to hurt my feelings, so I guess you really can't. 'Nother boo-h*o for Bennie! And by the bye, Darling...I don't really have any phobias of petty little creatures like you. Like that of cockroaches, I simply have to accept your existence as an unfortunate fact of life. Your constant need to rehash the Islam argument in just about every Report you post on, and all the work that you you've undertaken to track Robert as closely as you have, serves to show that you're the one who's paranoid and phobic.

And if you want me to take it "elsewhere" (something I've suggested you do from the start---nice plagiarizing!), then you have to learn to address it where it is, rather than taking it "everywhere" you go. And as much as you post, Lord knows, you must be an expert at knowing how to time your Rebuttals so they'll post as soon as possible. Just like Charles, you've got some multiple posts spanning five in a row and greater! Ah, well...I guess everybody's gotta be a "somebody" somewhere?

Here's a quip from Omar Ahmad, Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). You know, Ben, as you're so fond of seeing little excerpts of speeches as some kind of "proof". (July 4, 1998, Tri-Valley Herald/San Ramon Valley Herald Newspaper titled "American Muslim Leader Urges Faithful To Spread Islam's Message")
President & CEO of Silicon Expert Technologies, he is a Palestinian who grew up in a refugee camp in Jordan.
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant...The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth,"

Hmmmhh...I wonder, if this guy is an grdid he not take an oath when he became a U.S. citizen to swear allegiance to the United States?

Doesn't it go something like this...?

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

Just so you know, that comment about Islam "becoming dominant" was intended in the context it was written; it's not a joke or an off-the-cuff comment made to generate a laugh (like Bush's "dictator" comment). It is to be understood as it is presented. In fact, if you bother to sniff out the actual article itself, Ahmad refers to any non-Islam faiths as "the wrong side". You'd love him...he's as closed-minded and open mouthed as you are, Ben.

But I'll bet that doesn't sound like a "theocracy" to you and yours, hunh? Better start teaching your family about the Arabic language...or is your "school-teacher beddie bump" already doing that for us, starting with her little kindergartners?
As vicious as your apparent defense of Cali schools appears to be (after all, by your own writ, you seem to hang out with mostly school faculty---yet your grasp on grammar and spelling is so inferior!), one would think you're taking this a bit personally.
But, since you seem to be "Stuck on Stupid", and claim links are the only 'real' things out there, have a gander at what I found on a website called "The Textbook League", at:
(you provide the 'dubyas'!) textbookleague.org/113centu.htm

A Postscript from that link reads: "Across the Centuries has been adopted for use in the public schools of California -- so we again have seen how the California State Board of Education, during its textbook-adoption proceedings, protects the interests of big schoolbook companies while it scorns the interests of students and (if need be) spurns the law of the land. Houghton Mifflin and the Council on Islamic Education have friends in Sacramento, and those friends are as corrupt as they can be."

Notice that the use of the "S" at the end of "Schools" does mean "more than one" Bennie. Apparently, you're just splitting hairs for the sake of doing so.

Onward 'Muslim Soldiers'....
(Used with permission, from Blessed Cause.)
"Thomas More Law Center recently filed a lawsuit due to the promotion of Islam in California schools, yet most Americans don't realize this is a nationwide issue. 'Assume you are a Muslim soldier...' a textbook exercise, is being defended by its publisher, Houghton Mifflin. Their textbook 'Across the Centuries' has been purchased by school districts all over the nation, including Jose Padilla/Abdullah Al Muhajir's old elementary school in Chicago, which has been using it for years. Jose Padilla is the American who converted to Islam and was accused of plotting to employ a dirty bomb.

"John Walker Lindh was in elementary school in California when Houghton Mifflin was the ONLY California approved and funded textbook in use. Reports often reflect John's devotion to Islam at the age of 16, but the Associated Press reported in Dec. of 2001 that by the age of 15 John Walker was already patterning his life after the Qu'ran, making decisions based upon the dictates of Islam, showing his interest developed prior to his high school years. What precipitated his choices? Could it be a textbook which glorifies and emphasizes Islam to young impressionable minds?"

You remember John Walker Lindh, don't you? A California dude who loved Hip-Hop, pretended to be black, and was also known as "Jihad Johnny"...originally from Washington, he moved to California in his youth, and became a convert to Islam after having seen that aggrandizing garbage about "Malcolm X". He's also identified as "The American Taliban". (In a big way, he had a lot to do with the world becoming aware of the Across the Century Text.)

So let's look at "Across the Century", Bennie. (from: [add the 'dubyas'!] eduplace.com/ss/hmss/7/laag/99/3.2.html)
Here's the study-guide.

Houghton Mifflin Social Studies (You may download, print, and make copies of Lesson at a Glance pages for use in your classroom, provided that you include the copyright notice shown below on all such copies. Copyright ? 1999 Houghton Mifflin Company. All Rights Reserved.) Well, this isn't a classroom, but it is intended to edify the masses.

Lesson at a Glance Outline

Chapter 3, Lesson 2: Muhammad and Islam (pp. 58-64)

I. The Life of the Prophet

A. In A.D. 610, Muhammad had a vision of the angel Gabriel, in which he received messages from God. He and his followers came to believe that he was the last messenger in a long line of prophets sent by God.
B. When Muhammad began to preach in Mecca, he taught monotheism, the belief in only one God.
C. Muhammad named the new faith Islam, which means "submission" to Allah (God). Believers in Islam are called Muslims.
D. Some people in Mecca resented Muhammad, forcing him and his followers to migrate to Medina. Eight years later, Muhammad and his Muslim army marched to Mecca and the city surrendered.

II. The Teachings of Islam

A. Muslims believe that the Qu'ran is the word of Allah, completing the earlier revelations of Old Testament prophets and Jesus.
B. Islam has close ties to Judaism and Christianity, sharing many prophets and holy people described in the Bible.
C. Muslims accept five basic duties, called the Five Pillars of Islam. These include belief in one God, praying five times a day, giving alms to the poor, fasting during Ramadan, and the Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca.

III. Islam as a Way of Life

A. The Sunna, or guiding rules for Islam, includes not only the Five Pillars of Islam, but many additional moral standards that a Muslim must live by in everyday life.
B. The Islamic term, jihad, means "to struggle." The Qur'an and Sunna only allow jihad as a means to defend against aggression and persecution.
C. The Sunna also sets guidelines for the treatment of women.

Check for Understanding (Lesson Two) [Critical to any good brainwashing, as even you have indicated in your earliest false accusations of me and "my religion"!]

Have students work in pairs to create a chart reviewing key teachings and beliefs of Islam. Encourage students to include explanations about how these beliefs affect the everyday life of Muslims.

Have students create a story map chronicling events in the life of Muhammad, including his trip to Mount Hira, his teaching in Mecca and emigration to Medina, and his eventual return to Mecca.
________________________
Let the candy-coating of the "Religion of (rest in) Pieces" begin! Allahu Ackbar!
________________________

Chapter 3, Lesson 3: Early Islam (pp. 65-68)

I. The First Caliph

A. When Muhammad died in A.D. 632, his advisers chose a caliph, or successor.
B. The first caliph was Muhammad's father-in-law, Abu Bakr. As caliph, he acted as the administrator and military leader of the Muslims.

II. The Next Two Caliphs

A. To succeed him as caliph, Abu Bakr appointed Umar, one of Muhammad's long-time friends and advisers. Umar's armies conquered more lands in the name of Allah.
B. Uthman, who succeeded Umar as caliph, also expanded the Muslim empire, conquering Persia and other areas.

III. Early Political Division

A. When Uthman was murdered, the resulting struggle for power caused a civil war in the Muslim empire.
B. Eventually, Muslims split into two groups. The Shiites believe that only members of Muhammad's family could be his successors. The Sunnis believe that the election of caliphs was valid.
C. Today, Sunnis make up more than 80 percent of Muslims.


Check for Understanding (Lesson Three)

Have students research the lives of one of the early caliphs. Then have them write a report on the conflicts and changes that occurred during their subject's time in office.

Have students work in small groups to create skits dramatizing the events in Abu Bakr's succession as caliph or the events leading up to the division of the Muslims into two groups.

Check for Understanding (Lesson One ?Desert Bloom, Caravan Cities?)

Have students write journal entries as if they are pilgrims journeying to Mecca. Be sure students mention their reasons for visiting Mecca and include descriptions of the desert and the city.

Have students create a mural showing life in an Arabian city during the 500s. Encourage students to show traders and pilgrims in the mural.
(Copyright ? 1999 Houghton Mifflin Company. All Rights Reserved.)
___________________

It's even suggested, as an example, to point out mosques and centers of Islamic Study in the local areas, just in case the children might be interested in a little "extra curricular" activity. Isn't that nice?

There are a couple other chapters that even further expound on Muslim teachings, but since I've offered the direct link, you can feel free to go see for yourself---not that you will---but you're welcome to do so.

The first mention of the Christians closest to the chapters presented, depict Christians in a negative light; how "They [Muslims] developed a thriving cultural center in Cordoba, but by the late 1000s, Christian forces from the north began to push the Muslims south. In 1492, the last of the Muslims was driven out of Spain."

I thought you'd enjoy that, so I included it. ;) After all, you've done nothing but say that every woe in the world is the result of "Christian Religious Nuts/Right-Wing Jihadists". And yet we have the nice Left-Wing Socialist Sweethearts like you, living in a State whose Muslim population grows by leaps and bounds annually, telling others how we need to be more like yourselves. No thanks, Moppet.

Tell me what kinds of discussion a statement like this would inspire: "Ask students how they think that the church's values would affect daily life of the common people, the nobles, and the kings. Remind them of some church leaders' focus on the acquisition of wealth and power, and ask them to think of other organizations in which leaders and their followers might have different goals and concerns."

Seems a fairly harmless structure, but it's very implicating, in my (not-so-) humble opinion. I'm curious as to how you're gonna twist the story to render this innocent.

Regarding your "Crusades", as per this 'Tome...

"Between 1096 and 1270, European Christians fought a series of wars to retake the Holy Land from the Muslims."

"The crusades were Christian religious wars against Muslims in the Holy Land during the period between 1096 and 1270."

"Pope Urban urged the Christian Western Europeans to go to war against the Muslims for three reasons: to win the Holy Land from the Muslims, to reunite the Western and Eastern Christians under his rule, and to stop the knights from fighting among themselves."

"The Crusades had several negative effects on Europe, as some crusaders were only interested in killing Muslims and Jews and thieving."

(Copyright ? 1999 Houghton Mifflin Company. All Rights Reserved.)

Not a very positive way the lesson offers things, but hey, it isn't all this lesson offers.

And in this series of lessons, kids can pick to be either a "Crusader-Knight" (who the hell wants to be the ?bad guy?? Or they can be an "Islamic Soldier".

Aside from that, where are the lessons that teach kids to "Dress up like a Biblical Prophet", or "See the world through the eyes of the Apostle Paul"? Why are Islamic doctrines being taught as though they are a fact, but there is NOTHING about the Christian Faith?

You know the answer as well as I do...and your denial is as egregious as the most stalwart approval. Silence is acceptance, Bennie?.and if your tender "belief system" is offended at my mere mention of God, why doesn't it veritably prickle at the thought of "Allah"---and don't try that pathetic "I'm under attack" nonsense...YOU are the one who's dragging this everywhere you go...9-11 and ANY form of "conversion at sword point" is a much more realistic version of an attack. But they're doing it in the very way you claim the Christians are---sneaking it into school (where your tax-dollars pay for it!), and candy coating it for the young and just plain gullible.

But do''t worry...the Same Publisher was nice enough to vilify the Christians and the Jews in the Sixth-Grade Text, also offered in California Schools.

Let's see your precious California SchoolS (as in MORE THAN ONE!) show what the REAL Islam is about. How Women are nothing more than property, how even children get parts of their bodies lopped off for stealing a piece of fruit, and let these tender hearts see what a real stoning death is like. Let them see how women aren't allowed to get an education, and how they are severely beaten for something as innocent as reading. Paint the windows of the girls' rooms black, and cover them in burkhas in 110-degree heat. And let's not forget that your little teacher couldn't support your a*s anymore, because women aren't allowed to work outside the home. That means YOU would have to provide the monies that afford you the privilege of living in one of the most expensive states in the Union.

Some more to gnaw on...

"Prior to President Bush taking office, during the Clinton administration, the Calif. Dept. of Education would only fund Houghton Mifflin's "Across the Centuries." With California's endorsement, this textbook has been gaining ground nationwide. In the October 30, 2000 issue, Forbes magazine observed that Delaine Eastin, California's superintendent of public instruction, "sought and received campaign contributions from textbook publishers." Unbelievably "Across the Centuries" had California's exclusive endorsement these past 11 years.

"Clinton's signature of "Religious expression in public school" paved the way to secure finances for other religious "education" aka proselytizing."

And I'll bet you'd never think I'd find another way to tie Clinton into this sorta thing, didja? ; D

And speaking of Clinton yet again: if the person you're having sex with isn't willing and you have to use coercion or force to make them submit, what is that sex act defined as...by law?

Very good...it's called ?rape?. Sugar coat that, and suck on it.

Now...as before, I've done my homework...and, as usual, in such a better style and class than you ever could. So enjoy, Princess; I've given you all the info you could want, right down to the very pages of the textbook itself. (Experience tells me, however, that you'll just rave and spit that it's somehow inefficient or ineffectual...go ahead on...facts are what they are. Even if you wouldn't recognize truth or fact if they bit you on either side of your faces.)

And let me guess: you'll call this one 'too long to read", right? Or will you just read it and deny you ever read it, claim it doesn't exist, or whatever other coping mechanism your OCD can spin up? Hey, whatever you have to do to make yourself feel good enough to sleep at night.

"Now here I am Vera. YOU leave the Circuit City thread alone."

And what are YOU gonna do, if I don"t? I guess you should be more careful about trying to talk smack about other people on other Reports. Sooner or later, it'll follow the footsteps of your thought process and bite you on the a*s. So learn to be a smart li'l boy, and keep my name outta your mouth. How petty that you have to hide and attack in secret places of your own comfort. Who else do we know who institutes that particular fighting style?

"Me a stalker?"

Yep. What else do you call a person who tries to find out the personal information of someone he's obsessed with?

"PROOF IS IN THE POSTS."

That it is, Princess. And that alone gives me great joy, as it proves that you are a liar, a Troll, a stalker, a spinner, a hypocrite, pathetic, petty, bitter, and possessive of even less credibility than James (Canada or Tupper), or Charles.

Best of all, your knowledge and exploitation of the RipOffReports best serves to prove that your supposed business couldn't be thriving too well, in that you have enough spare time on your hands to Troll and harass others on this forum alone...I can only imagine that any other time is spent in chat rooms or in similar pursuits.

"THE DATES. THE TIMES."

Indeed; dates and times are exceptional proof that we can also add "plagiarist" to your list of ROR ?skillz?.

"Face it, its been what? Almost a year?"

LOL...nice try. Goes back to the whole "Dates and times" thing. You'll have a year, official next November second. That's the date the whole "Articles" post I put up was submitted. You know the one...it's two articles that highlight the very thing you are currently denying, admitting, affirming, regretting, and denying again. The first mention of Islam in Cali schools goes back to late October.

But we wouldn't want to muddy up the waters running through that hydrocephalic head of yours with anything like facts now, would we?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1015 Consumer Comment

Robert you still havent answered for the 160,000!!!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

Robert....lets quote you....again.....

"I just love how YOU cannot keep your numbers straight. MY numbers never changed, except to go from TWO, to ONE. In reality, it was TWO schools. Guess what Benjo? YOU gave me the other school in YOUR County...Brentwood. Way to go sport!

You keep changing the population numbers, and who gave them. I give the numbers from the US Census from 200(the last one done), your own County website(I love how you claim you cannot find the site), and the Califonis site. Let me guess, you also cannot find California in a search engine."

OHHHHHHHH! NOW....its two! WOW! Care to show that info as well Robert? (nevermind...you have yet to show any link beyond that ONE school...you never will)

Your numbers never change?!

Where did you come up with the 930k? I gave my link....why cant you?

Yes last census was in 2000. I gave the CENSUS page with an estimate for 2004. Its now 2006. So any way you slice it....BOTH OUR NUMBERS ARE ESTIMATES.

Its all moot anyways since my comment was "we have ABOUT a million". Yet here you are saying that its 160k then 930k then its a 2000 estimate which is better than my 2004 estimate. And I, ME, BEN has been the ONLY one to post the link to the census site.

Your constant dodging of this little math error from 160k to 930k is pretty obvious Robert. Also so is the entire fact of you constantly badgering about the population of a COUNTY when it was just A SCHOOL. In other words this entire rant is nothing but a dodge from the real issue of "ISLAM IN CA SCHOOLS". Which even Vera herself has now chimed in with it happened to SOME...meaning more than ONE. And now YOU yourself are bantering that its more than ONE again. After the last month of trying to say "we didnt mean it that way". Now your going to say "we did mean it that way".


I have never changed the numbers. My first comment was "about a million". You pounced and said that I have about the same as you which you claimed was 160k. Then I gave the CENSUS PAGE (I gave the link....more than once...same one...never changed as you claim...never wavered) with the 2004 estimate wich put it at just over one million. Since then you have attacked non-stop, never showing your link (when I have) and now my county has gone from your original 160k to 930k.

You are the one that changes his numbers Robert.

You are the one that has not given any source other than "its on the county website...or the census" (Give the link...i would like to see EXACTLY where you got your 160k as well!). I gave a link....why cant you?

Now this "I love how you claim you cannot find the site" is just BS. I never said anything of the sort. I am waiting for you to give the exact link. Since I know if I were to look it up myself that would give you the next angle to say "oh...that wasnt where I got my info" and bash again.


Now show the link for where MORE than one school had this "Islam in CA schools" BS.

Show the link for where you get your 160k AND the 930K for my county and explain why your 930k is better than my "about a million" in 2006. 6 years after the 2000 census. And explain how 160k is the same as 930k.

Show me how the population of my county has anything to do with this "Islam in CA schools".

Make up your mind if its going to be "oh we didnt mean it to be more than one school" or "we meant it to be more than one school".

DO this or just SHUT UP!

Show your info as you have demanded of me. I have shown mine.

Stop dodging and creating new tangents in a pathetic attempt to dodge the bogus info you give on a daily basis.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1014 Consumer Comment

More spin from Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

I just love how YOU cannot keep your numbers straight. MY numbers never changed, except to go from TWO, to ONE. In reality, it was TWO schools. Guess what Benjo? YOU gave me the other school in YOUR County...Brentwood. Way to go sport!

You keep changing the population numbers, and who gave them. I give the numbers from the US Census from 200(the last one done), your own County website(I love how you claim you cannot find the site), and the Califonis site. Let me guess, you also cannot find California in a search engine.

You get bested by everyone using your own words, and that's the best part. Every time you post, you contradict either yourself, or try to twist what others have said into a pretzel. Remember when you decided I thought Oklahoma was in California? Too funny, Ben. You must keep them in stitches at the PTA meetings.

Vera zaps you with her amazing skills of using your own words against you, along with direct correlations to the space/time continuum, and you get so flustered, you start making up crazy posts again. Here's a clue...nobody is going to help you. When we post an link, you don't like it, so it must be wrong. When we post the article to read, you don't like it, so it must be wrong. When we tell you how to find it yourself, you say we haven't offered any proof.

I'm going to my house in NC tomorrow. I'll be back Tuesday. Maybe during this time, you can get your numbers straight, and figure out that YOURS are wrong, while MINE are not. MINE are the ACTUAL numbers used by City, County, State, and Federal Governments. YOURS are ESTIMATES used by NOBODY.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1013 Consumer Comment

So true i am glad someone brough this out

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

When, clinton won the republicans bitched & moaned for 8 years & attacked him from every angle & know when we moan about bush or oppose bush we belong in jail, but republicans never got clinton. Know we are just doing what the republicans did for 8 years bitched & bickered about clintin winning & they made a promise they would give clinton a hard time so they kepted to that promise, & almost got him impeached i am glad someone brought this out the reasons why republicans whined about clinton because he helped us middle class & poor people out & he gave us a break unlike bush & he made sure our civil rights wasn't violated like they are know!. We, didn't have to pay $2 for gas, so for the republicans bitching & moaning for cliton winning we are giving bush a hardtime & bush fans due to the gas being $2 me & my mom & grandparents had to cut out our vactions going to flordia to disney, epcot, & space center, so as everybody else had to cut their summer vactions for the $2 gas. In flordia gas is $2.80 along with motel & food bills we cannot afford the high gas with the motel bill & food bill & gas bill, so flordia will lose alot of money sense familys cannot take their vactions & disney will lose their money to. Last, year will be my last time going to flordia for vaction people have to sacrifice everything for the high gas!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1012 Consumer Comment

Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

To end this whole debate about Vera's little religion phobia.....here are her EXACT WORDS......

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creation?that the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)"

Never has she given the exact source for her information. She vaguely gives a "I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves".

So we have the word "some" and "California". Still to this day Vera maintains that angle. Some is definately MORE than one. Some is at least TWO, but implies even more.

Now we have Robert who is the only person to actually post a link to a site with this "info" and even that "info" doesnt jive with what Vera said. I'm not going to even bother with trying anymore to get either of these two paranoid freaks to make good on thier claim. Its obvious they never will.

Vera has even gone over to the Circuit City website and stirred this up...AGAIN...then had the gall to say..."leave the Circuit City people in peace. Well right back at you Vera. If you look at the dates I returned to this moronic thread several days if not a week before you HUNTED me down on the Circuit City site.

Even on the Circuit City site she still maintains this "islam in CA schoolS" (notice the S...as in plural). Even after Robert has tried to backtrack and say that "wasnt what we meant". Well once again......

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

Now it wasnt SOME schools, it was one school. They TRIED to offer it, and got shot down, then the story went away (at least for the majority of people in the universe!).

Robert has tried to sway away from the original issue by bringing up populations of entire counties, and even his own. All have been shown to be wrong.

So far we have heard 160,000 in his county which he says is the same as mine.

Then he says its 930k for mine right after saying his was 160k.

Even in an earlier post he stated that this whole incident happened in Byron with HIS numbers of Byron population being 400-500 (dont remember exactly but it was well below 1000). Now this is probably true. But it seems odd that Vera would get all fired up about SOME schools (untrue!) pushing courses in Islam and ranting, hiding from reality, and just generally dodging the real facts, when even the SCHOOL IN QUESTION HAS TO BE ONE OF THE SMALLEST IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY OF.....(here is the kicker for Robert to rant and dodge and deflect on...).....ABOUT ONE MILLION!

Good lord, the town only has 500 people and you think Islam is going to take over our education system?? Because one class tried to OFFER (not FORCE as you have led to believe in later posts) a course (not "crash course") in Islam (not terrorism...as I assume was your end intention to portray)????

Now here I am Vera. YOU leave the Circuit City thread alone.

Me a stalker?

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS.

THE DATES.

THE TIMES.

Face it, its been what? Almost a year? And you still maintain that it was in more than just that little tiny school. You have said it many times here, and once again on a Circuit City thread. And by doing so you just shot Robert in the foot. You just proved that YES you DID mean it that way! Matter of fact, now its several states eh?

Now if you can answer for this honestly, without twists, or just outright violating what was really said and meant, by all means do so. But if you intend to just sit back and answer for each one of my statements, then do so with some real responses instead of "you p***k" and "whatever you say hon!". Those have to be the most feeble comebacks for a political thread ever. You never have anything to add except outright insults, questioning of peoples sexual preference, or just some sly rude...."honey!" at the end.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1011 Consumer Comment

Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

To end this whole debate about Vera's little religion phobia.....here are her EXACT WORDS......

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creation?that the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)"

Never has she given the exact source for her information. She vaguely gives a "I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves".

So we have the word "some" and "California". Still to this day Vera maintains that angle. Some is definately MORE than one. Some is at least TWO, but implies even more.

Now we have Robert who is the only person to actually post a link to a site with this "info" and even that "info" doesnt jive with what Vera said. I'm not going to even bother with trying anymore to get either of these two paranoid freaks to make good on thier claim. Its obvious they never will.

Vera has even gone over to the Circuit City website and stirred this up...AGAIN...then had the gall to say..."leave the Circuit City people in peace. Well right back at you Vera. If you look at the dates I returned to this moronic thread several days if not a week before you HUNTED me down on the Circuit City site.

Even on the Circuit City site she still maintains this "islam in CA schoolS" (notice the S...as in plural). Even after Robert has tried to backtrack and say that "wasnt what we meant". Well once again......

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

Now it wasnt SOME schools, it was one school. They TRIED to offer it, and got shot down, then the story went away (at least for the majority of people in the universe!).

Robert has tried to sway away from the original issue by bringing up populations of entire counties, and even his own. All have been shown to be wrong.

So far we have heard 160,000 in his county which he says is the same as mine.

Then he says its 930k for mine right after saying his was 160k.

Even in an earlier post he stated that this whole incident happened in Byron with HIS numbers of Byron population being 400-500 (dont remember exactly but it was well below 1000). Now this is probably true. But it seems odd that Vera would get all fired up about SOME schools (untrue!) pushing courses in Islam and ranting, hiding from reality, and just generally dodging the real facts, when even the SCHOOL IN QUESTION HAS TO BE ONE OF THE SMALLEST IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY OF.....(here is the kicker for Robert to rant and dodge and deflect on...).....ABOUT ONE MILLION!

Good lord, the town only has 500 people and you think Islam is going to take over our education system?? Because one class tried to OFFER (not FORCE as you have led to believe in later posts) a course (not "crash course") in Islam (not terrorism...as I assume was your end intention to portray)????

Now here I am Vera. YOU leave the Circuit City thread alone.

Me a stalker?

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS.

THE DATES.

THE TIMES.

Face it, its been what? Almost a year? And you still maintain that it was in more than just that little tiny school. You have said it many times here, and once again on a Circuit City thread. And by doing so you just shot Robert in the foot. You just proved that YES you DID mean it that way! Matter of fact, now its several states eh?

Now if you can answer for this honestly, without twists, or just outright violating what was really said and meant, by all means do so. But if you intend to just sit back and answer for each one of my statements, then do so with some real responses instead of "you p***k" and "whatever you say hon!". Those have to be the most feeble comebacks for a political thread ever. You never have anything to add except outright insults, questioning of peoples sexual preference, or just some sly rude...."honey!" at the end.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1010 Consumer Comment

Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

To end this whole debate about Vera's little religion phobia.....here are her EXACT WORDS......

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creation?that the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)"

Never has she given the exact source for her information. She vaguely gives a "I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves".

So we have the word "some" and "California". Still to this day Vera maintains that angle. Some is definately MORE than one. Some is at least TWO, but implies even more.

Now we have Robert who is the only person to actually post a link to a site with this "info" and even that "info" doesnt jive with what Vera said. I'm not going to even bother with trying anymore to get either of these two paranoid freaks to make good on thier claim. Its obvious they never will.

Vera has even gone over to the Circuit City website and stirred this up...AGAIN...then had the gall to say..."leave the Circuit City people in peace. Well right back at you Vera. If you look at the dates I returned to this moronic thread several days if not a week before you HUNTED me down on the Circuit City site.

Even on the Circuit City site she still maintains this "islam in CA schoolS" (notice the S...as in plural). Even after Robert has tried to backtrack and say that "wasnt what we meant". Well once again......

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

Now it wasnt SOME schools, it was one school. They TRIED to offer it, and got shot down, then the story went away (at least for the majority of people in the universe!).

Robert has tried to sway away from the original issue by bringing up populations of entire counties, and even his own. All have been shown to be wrong.

So far we have heard 160,000 in his county which he says is the same as mine.

Then he says its 930k for mine right after saying his was 160k.

Even in an earlier post he stated that this whole incident happened in Byron with HIS numbers of Byron population being 400-500 (dont remember exactly but it was well below 1000). Now this is probably true. But it seems odd that Vera would get all fired up about SOME schools (untrue!) pushing courses in Islam and ranting, hiding from reality, and just generally dodging the real facts, when even the SCHOOL IN QUESTION HAS TO BE ONE OF THE SMALLEST IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY OF.....(here is the kicker for Robert to rant and dodge and deflect on...).....ABOUT ONE MILLION!

Good lord, the town only has 500 people and you think Islam is going to take over our education system?? Because one class tried to OFFER (not FORCE as you have led to believe in later posts) a course (not "crash course") in Islam (not terrorism...as I assume was your end intention to portray)????

Now here I am Vera. YOU leave the Circuit City thread alone.

Me a stalker?

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS.

THE DATES.

THE TIMES.

Face it, its been what? Almost a year? And you still maintain that it was in more than just that little tiny school. You have said it many times here, and once again on a Circuit City thread. And by doing so you just shot Robert in the foot. You just proved that YES you DID mean it that way! Matter of fact, now its several states eh?

Now if you can answer for this honestly, without twists, or just outright violating what was really said and meant, by all means do so. But if you intend to just sit back and answer for each one of my statements, then do so with some real responses instead of "you p***k" and "whatever you say hon!". Those have to be the most feeble comebacks for a political thread ever. You never have anything to add except outright insults, questioning of peoples sexual preference, or just some sly rude...."honey!" at the end.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1009 Consumer Comment

Vera's Own Words....PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

To end this whole debate about Vera's little religion phobia.....here are her EXACT WORDS......

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creation?that the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)"

Never has she given the exact source for her information. She vaguely gives a "I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves".

So we have the word "some" and "California". Still to this day Vera maintains that angle. Some is definately MORE than one. Some is at least TWO, but implies even more.

Now we have Robert who is the only person to actually post a link to a site with this "info" and even that "info" doesnt jive with what Vera said. I'm not going to even bother with trying anymore to get either of these two paranoid freaks to make good on thier claim. Its obvious they never will.

Vera has even gone over to the Circuit City website and stirred this up...AGAIN...then had the gall to say..."leave the Circuit City people in peace. Well right back at you Vera. If you look at the dates I returned to this moronic thread several days if not a week before you HUNTED me down on the Circuit City site.

Even on the Circuit City site she still maintains this "islam in CA schoolS" (notice the S...as in plural). Even after Robert has tried to backtrack and say that "wasnt what we meant". Well once again......

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS!

Now it wasnt SOME schools, it was one school. They TRIED to offer it, and got shot down, then the story went away (at least for the majority of people in the universe!).

Robert has tried to sway away from the original issue by bringing up populations of entire counties, and even his own. All have been shown to be wrong.

So far we have heard 160,000 in his county which he says is the same as mine.

Then he says its 930k for mine right after saying his was 160k.

Even in an earlier post he stated that this whole incident happened in Byron with HIS numbers of Byron population being 400-500 (dont remember exactly but it was well below 1000). Now this is probably true. But it seems odd that Vera would get all fired up about SOME schools (untrue!) pushing courses in Islam and ranting, hiding from reality, and just generally dodging the real facts, when even the SCHOOL IN QUESTION HAS TO BE ONE OF THE SMALLEST IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY OF.....(here is the kicker for Robert to rant and dodge and deflect on...).....ABOUT ONE MILLION!

Good lord, the town only has 500 people and you think Islam is going to take over our education system?? Because one class tried to OFFER (not FORCE as you have led to believe in later posts) a course (not "crash course") in Islam (not terrorism...as I assume was your end intention to portray)????

Now here I am Vera. YOU leave the Circuit City thread alone.

Me a stalker?

PROOF IS IN THE POSTS.

THE DATES.

THE TIMES.

Face it, its been what? Almost a year? And you still maintain that it was in more than just that little tiny school. You have said it many times here, and once again on a Circuit City thread. And by doing so you just shot Robert in the foot. You just proved that YES you DID mean it that way! Matter of fact, now its several states eh?

Now if you can answer for this honestly, without twists, or just outright violating what was really said and meant, by all means do so. But if you intend to just sit back and answer for each one of my statements, then do so with some real responses instead of "you p***k" and "whatever you say hon!". Those have to be the most feeble comebacks for a political thread ever. You never have anything to add except outright insults, questioning of peoples sexual preference, or just some sly rude...."honey!" at the end.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1008 Consumer Comment

economics 1001 failed

AUTHOR: Richard - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

It amazes me to see how stupid some are in why our fuel cost are so high. If you think any polititian has control over this you are as stupid as they are. America buys 95% of everything from China. China now needs more fuel and energy to keep up with orders from Wal Mart and other american retail stores. The Chinesse are buying cars in record numbers. Americans do not want to talk about this subject and niether will the news media. 30 Years ago the talk was that with the chinesse population would use up all of the worlds food supplies in time. Looks like the energy will be first while the rest of the world continues to not even know that they are supporting this fuel thurst. Keep shopping at Wal Mart, Target, AutoZone, Sears and do not forget to buy more tennis shoes. It is all from China everything you buy. Give China more money and blame Bush, Clinton or any of these puppets. I vote but vote for the best looking. I am middle class with no health insurance, no retirement and sick of free health care for illegals. My son is sick, I have health problems and I can not see a doctor with no insurance and small amount of cash. I will die young so I need no retirement. retirement is for the rich and social security is for the poor. Our political system is nothing more than a game like it or not. Keep buying from China and watch your fuel cost go to $5.00 per gallon or more. Buy more cars, need more fuel, Build more houses, need more electricity and water. Make more babies, need more food. Go figure. Also, The Clinton surplus is Visa, Mastercard, discover, GMAC, Chase, Bank America, Enron? MCI? and now 10 years later no way to pay it back. It was borrowed money. They all suck but I still vote like betting on a horse. I expect and receive nothing as you do to. welcome to america homeboy.I love america and if you do not, leave because Delta is ready when you are. Mexico sells cheap gas, MOVE

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1007 Consumer Comment

Right back at ya......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

This is a good one...

"OK this posting was funny when it first started but its getting OLD. Democrats lost; Republicans won. Get over it. Nothing you say or do is going to change that."


Seems the Republicans did the same thing when Clinton was in office. Bitched, moaned, complained, spent 200 million to chase a b*****b etc.

This part is the best.....

"Nothing you say or do is going to change that."


Well if Bush has his way and makes this a ahocracy....then yes you would be right.

We are not there......yet.

We still have elections.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1006 Consumer Comment

Robert face it... you got caught.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

Robert your last post makes no sense at all.....

Your reposted my comment..."Let's see...70K or 770K is a far cry MORE than an error of ONE."

Then you respond with "And then you claim ONE is larger than 70K, or 770K."

What the heck are you talking about??!

Let go over this again....

You say "my county has 160,000 in it"

I say "our county has about 1 million in it".

You attack me by saying that I am a liar, my numbers are a lie, I havent shown any proof blah blah blah. When I gave the link to the Census page and followed with exactly what I put in to a search engine to find THAT page.

You then repsond with "your county has about the same as the one I'm typing from"

Then you say my county has "930K".

You have been attacking me with this number of "930k" since the MIDDLE of the argument. You STILL have NEVER given where you got that number. You have only SAID that it was the 2000 estimate. While I have SHOWN from the GOVERNMENT PAGE ITSELF the 2004 estimate (your still forgetting that its 2006.....2 years later even!).


So Robert.....

Does your county have 930k in it?

Does your county have 160k in it?

You have CLAIMED BOTH!

Where did you get your info for the 2000 Census. You have never shown the link for it, while I have for mine. I find it dubious that you can continue to attack, while never showing the same material. Now I'm not saying that 930k is not viable...FOR 2000!!!! But it is 2006, and you attack my numbers with MY proof shown, yet cant show your own?!

Now as usual, you are taking this tangent on another tangent by talking about "one".

What is this "one" that you were off by?

What "one" are you speaking of?

You said 160,000...thats not "one".

You said 930,000....thats not "one".


Now your attacking me with this pathetic drivel (after your complete math meltdown above).....

"And then you claim ONE is larger than 70K, or 770K."


WHAT??!? What are you talking about!!

You were off by 770K.....and YES!!!! 770k is FAR MORE THAN ONE(1)(uno)!!!

So what is it Robert? 160K? 930K (thats "about" 1 million in my book, just as you said you have "about" the same in your county as mine....funny how you can use the word "about" and I cant!).

As far as I know, the Census puts the number at ABOUT 1 million for 2004. That should be a little higher 2 years later. Thus any way you slice it your 160k, your 930k, and your "one" are all outdated, or just completely wrong.

Good day! 8)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1005 Consumer Comment

The Republicans won, alright.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

But you're wrong Michael, there is something we can do to change it, and we will in November. Then we'll change the other part of the equation two years later.

And let's look at just what the Republicans have won. A record national debt! An eternal holy war! Record prices at the pump! A government that routinely disregards their first amendment rights, that has violated the 4th, 5th, 6th, & 8th amendments frequently, that liberally interprets the 8th & 9th, and if my friends at the NRA are credible, will soon be mounting a major attack on the 2nd ammendment. Hooray!

BTW, when the NRA calls you, they'll be asking for $100. Give them 2, its a small price to pay for freedom, eh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1004 Consumer Comment

all republicans did was cheat

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 11, 2006

Micheal that saying is old, all republicans did was cheat @ both elections regardless with what people say. We, are just treating bush like how republicans treated clinton for 8 years its not fair how republicans treat middle class & poor people, but we just have to suffer threw it till bush is out of office!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1003 Consumer Comment

good hell

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 10, 2006

OK this posting was funny when it first started but its getting OLD. Democrats lost; Republicans won. Get over it. Nothing you say or do is going to change that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1002 Consumer Comment

Third time's the charm.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 10, 2006

A person who's BEN getting correctd, fails to see reality.

Say there, Micro-Brain...

If "cross posting" is such a bad thing for everyone else, why do you do it?

Robert's statement over on the Circuit City Report---where YOU are the one who was the first to cross-post, as you had before---was simply to echo the fact that a fellow living in Oklahoma had to deal with the same garbage (Islam as a "culture" study, yeah...right!) as we had found as fact was being taught in AT LEAST ONE California School.

And like I said before; if it's one, two, or twenty schools teaching "Lessons" in Islam, be they in California or Colorado, New York or Ohio it doesn't belong there ANY MORE than you'd feel lessons on Christian conduct belong in any school. Difference is, Princess, I don't care if they teach Islam in a school in Iraq, Pakistan, or anywhere in their own Country...after all, it is the religion that founded their culture.

Just like it was the Christian religion that founded much of the American culture. But since all these whiny retards---you know, people like YOU---have to piss and moan (And let's not forget making the kids lie in court) about how traumatized they are for saying the Pledge with the words "Under God" in it, the courts decided to appease the squeaky wheels and eliminate prayer. Never mind the fact that the majority of kids in school don't really mind, unless their parents tell them to.

But leave it up to you to assume that others are referring to you when they try to address their own problems, or present that they, too, experienced exactly what we proved was being present in some Cali schools. After all, in your little world, EVERYTHING MUST BE ABOUT Wee Benny Boo-h*o.

As I (and everyone else, I'm sure) understood it, Paul was mentioning that he (that's Paul, of Tulsa, Oklahoma, NOT BEN whinin' from the County Seat where Islam was being offered as curriculum) had that same circumstance in HIS (that's Paul's, of Oklahoma) State (you know, the State of Oklahoma).

Answer me this; when a baby cries in your place, is it your "wife's" instinct to come to the little bawler, or your daughter?

Why don't you just get over yourself, you vapid little p***k?

I'm sure mommy has a bitter sip from the nip for you. Drink up.

----Oh, and "B." of Denver...

I don't mind "B."-ing corrected, but I can't find where I ever "denied anything or changed my story, per se.

Your comment was:
"Vera brought this issue up in response to one of my posts."

You're absolutely right. See, Bennie, it was a question asked of me by "B.", and not you.)

"It was included in a list of supposed attacks on Christianity in the schools, and included schools in several states."

These aren't "supposed" attacks. This information comes from more than just one source, and I don't mean just "Fox News".

"So, Ben, no she was not trying to single out you or the state you live in."

Correct. (And thanks....you're yet another person offering concrete commentary, that the world isn't all about Bennie.) My presentation of information was intended to imply that it's mainly Christian-Based religions that are under restriction, and the laws are getting bolder in their statement, more suffocating, and even worse as time progresses.

"And, Robert, it is obvious from her phrasing and context that she was, contrary to her later denial, attempting to cast it in as broad a spectrum as possible."

At what point have I denied my intent? When did I try to retract an issue I have taken clear effort to point out? I'm looking...and so far, this is what I've found:

"In Columbine, they made commemorative tiles for the kids who were killed, but found ninety tiles containing "objectionable material" like "4/20/99 Jesus Wept" and "God is Love" and promptly removed them. A federal court upheld the decision.

"In Pennsylvania, the Christmas program is sterilized of any Christian connotations, and children are led to "Celebrate Kwanzaa!" In Texas, Christmas songs are banned, but the kids are threatened with lower grades if they don't participate in the celebrations of other religious faiths. In New York City, the Chancellor of the Dept. of Education prohibited the display of the Nativity, but expressly permitted the display of the Jewish menorah and the Islamic star and crescent. Isn't New York City already the largest display of Islam, being home to Ground Zero?

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah "The compassionate" chanting "Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation" (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creationthat the act of creation is viewed as "presumptuous" in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)

"So as far as I can see, you could further narrow the scope of that "freedom FROM religion" statement to read "Freedom FROM the Christian Religion". Seems to me, any religion that encourages a free will, but urges awful things like personal responsibility, self-discipline, self-control, monogamy (NT) and humility to an Entity greater than oneself is a bad thing. It is my observation that the only religion that isn't allowed in schools is Christianity."

Here's another comment I made, emphasizing the same thoughts:

"Yet here we areand the Establishment Clause is routinely used to prevent me and mine (or any other Christianity-based faith) from exercising my religious beliefs in public school...and public life. As always, with that puffy, self-righteous air, people will insist as if they know so much, that there's a 'wall of separation between church and state'."

"Nope. Christianity is the only one that's specifically singled out and BANNED. Any other religion is usually welcomed in the name of "Tolerance"...including the atheist belief. Thank you Madalyn Murray-O'w***e."

"I'm not the one who lied in court to take away prayer in schools...your Founder did that. So who's stomping on the rights of others, hunh? Not I. President Bush will be gone in another couple years, and you can blame your woes on the next President, since you're certainly not going to be caught being responsible for yourself."

"And yes, Ben, Muslim religion, in the guise of a history lesson, is/was being fenced off as curriculum in some of the schools there in California. If you just can't figure out how to find the article, then it's your problem. Do also note, that if it were in any state that you lived in, whether it be California, Massachusetts, Ohio, or whatever, I don't care. When I have presented info, sources, and so forth in their unedited form, you and James have called it lies and propaganda, spin, and so on(is there and echo in here?...Oh! It's the resound off of empty skulls!)...I could bring the persons who were there or the writer(s) of the article(s), and you and your ilk would just say we're wrong, or lying, or full of it, etc."

"Just for the fun of it, I went back to Patrick's post and typed in the same words as he "islam taught california middle school", but I made it "islam taught IN california middle school" on my yahoo browser, and I got the response Patrick got, plus more...lots more. Hopefully, this will clear up a few issues. I never implied that this was the doctrine being taught in ALL middle schools in California, just some of them...and one, two, or twenty---doesn't change the fact that it's there.

So far, I see that I haven't tried to occlude the point, or change my mind. I haven't denied anything, either; as my point in all of this was then and is still simply, that the Christian Religion isn't welcome anywhere in the New America. Islam, Buddhism, Kwanzaa...these cannot SHARE space...they must overpower and eliminate, or supplant. Christianity is getting stripped out and vilified for being something it's not---and that's an image being fed to you by the paranoid delusions of a great and many of the uninformed, the unknowing, and the Great Unwashed.

The kinda people like Bennie, there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1001 Consumer Comment

You need therapy Charles

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Chucky-poo, you & the rest of the Commu-crats go spread your hatred somewhere else. I have not called anyone names or insulted anyone. You need to get off your pedestal. You started this. I will not sink to your level! As far has spewing venom, who came up with that phrase? You are the only one spewing venom on this forum with all the other Commu-crats. Quit blaming everyone else for your problems. Commu-crats are the ones that are violating everyones (civil rights), as well as people like you. You are the only one calling people names like moron. Please, we don't need insane people like you making the rest of us sane people crazy. Get off your pedestal & quit insulting people. You think you can violate my (civil rights)? Try it! you have no right to violate mine or anyone else's (civil rights). This is what is going on with government agencies, violating peoples (civil rights). The reason why you're not complaining is because you have everything. Nobody will mess things up for me. Everything is fine until people like you start. I have a right to my opinion just like everyone else, so stop violating everyones (civil rights).I see you're as s****.> First of all, thank you for providing a nice post for me to turn around on you. It covers just about everything you and your fellow Commu-crats accuse others of. Now, once again, I had to take an extra 15 minutes correcting your grammar, spelling and sentence structure. It is very difficult to understand what you are saying when you type at 250 miles per hour. You come off as being totally illiterate. Once again, as I have indicated in your post that I copied and modified, you continue to rant and rave about your "civil rights" being violated. I found several references to "civil rights". It is impossible for me or anyone else on this forum to violate your "civil rights". You truly need therapy, Chucky-poo.

Can't you come up with anything substantial to type about? You blather on about the same thing, over and over. It's old and tired. You look like a typical Commu-crat bucket carrier, railing against Republicans, being a hypocrite in everything you say in your posts. I have no issues with you posting here. You have every right. In fact, though your ranting is old, worn out and repetitive, some of it is actually amusing in wierd sort of way. You also provide much cannon fodder for the rest of us.

Why don't you look at the newpaper and find an article about a traffic accident, and come one here and start another new rant about how it is Bush's fault. At least it would be something new. And maybe you could amaze us all by spelling correctly, using 10th grade grammar, and assembling your sentences in a way that we can understand. They way they are now, all jumbled up and run together, makes it look like your brain is in the same type of disarray.

By the way, what make you think I'm a Republican, anyway? How do you know I'm not an independent? You assume many things, Chucky boy. I may or may not be a Republican (not that it really matters).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1000 Consumer Comment

D go spew your hatred somewhere else

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

D, you & the rest of the bush fans go spread your hatred somewhere else i have not called anyone names or insulted anyone, you need to get of your pedistial, you started this i will not sink to your level!. Has, far has spewing venom where did someone come up with that prase, you are the only one sprewing venom on this forum with all the other bush fans quit blaming everyone else for your problems, bush is the cause of violating everyones civil rights & people like you. You are the only one, calling names like moron please we don't need insane people like you making the rest of us sane people crazy, get off your pedistial & quit insulting people you think you can violate my civil rights try it you have no right to violate my or anyone elses civil rights. These is what is going on with government agencies with violating peoples civil rights the reason why your not complaining because you have everything nobody will mess things up for me, everything is fine until people like you start i have a right to my opinion just like everyone else, so stop violating everyones civil rights but i see your s****.>

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#999 Consumer Comment

D go spew your hatred somewhere else

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

D, you & the rest of the bush fans go spread your hatred somewhere else i have not called anyone names or insulted anyone, you need to get of your pedistial, you started this i will not sink to your level!. Has, far has spewing venom where did someone come up with that prase, you are the only one sprewing venom on this forum with all the other bush fans quit blaming everyone else for your problems, bush is the cause of violating everyones civil rights & people like you. You are the only one, calling names like moron please we don't need insane people like you making the rest of us sane people crazy, get off your pedistial & quit insulting people you think you can violate my civil rights try it you have no right to violate my or anyone elses civil rights. These is what is going on with government agencies with violating peoples civil rights the reason why your not complaining because you have everything nobody will mess things up for me, everything is fine until people like you start i have a right to my opinion just like everyone else, so stop violating everyones civil rights but i see your s****.>

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#998 Consumer Comment

To Charles--You are 100% WRONG!

AUTHOR: Ed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Charles I am not one to call people names or make insulting comments, but let me tell you something.

I was just married, educated and looking for work when Jimmy Carter was ruining this country back in the late 70's. And yes, gas @ 70c per gal is equivelent to 4.00 adjusted for inflation. So gas was actually more expensive in 1978 than it is now..Also, remember the gdp can sustain these higher levels due to the best economy this country is experiencing since George Washington.

Charles, trust me, back in the late 70's during Carter's presidency, he almost bankrupted America. Why don't you critize that great liberal democrat Al Gore. After all he is one of the biggest and richest shareholder of Occidental Petroleum. Only some large mutual funds own more oil stock than Gore. Let me also remind you, Sen Ted Kennedy with his five (5) oil companies as well..HMMM, maybe that is why he is against wind power..Can't make to much profit from something that's free, can you?

So, Charles, with all due respect from a human being to another, "you are just plain wrong."

Check out what I have posted. My post are 100% correct and factual. Al Gore's millions in oil investments (and Kennedy) is all PUBLIC RECORD.

So, don't tell me the repbulicans are cleaning up on the higher oil prices (sure some are) but the majority is no doubt, plain and simple the democrats and their huge financier George (socialist) Soros himself..That's another story.

Anyway, Best regards...And get the facts straight and then you may see why many Americans are republicans; it appears the truth hurts your democrats..And I STILL STAND BY MY POST: "Democrats are most definetly the party of liers." God Bless

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#997 Consumer Comment

d- you are so mean spritied

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

D- you are so mean spritied you have the nerve to come on this forum & call people names, the bush fans sure have their nerve accusing us of calling names & spewing hatred when they are the ones thats doing it, but according to them if we oppose bush we don't have rights!, if you think bush is such a christian then why does he have the courts in all the state violate peoples civil rights, a true christian does not violate peoples civil rights. If, you oppose bush in anyway you have a mental disorder according to bush fans like d, & ed, then they have the nerve to accuse you of promoting hatred & calling people names when they are the ones calling us pigs & morons & telling us we have a mental disorder!. They are the ones with the mental disorder you see how crazy they get when we oppose bush so they are the ones that need to talk, they come to this website calling us names but we are not suppose to say anything back to them. This, is why their is so much hatred in the world!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#996 Consumer Comment

d- you are so mean spritied

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

D- you are so mean spritied you have the nerve to come on this forum & call people names, the bush fans sure have their nerve accusing us of calling names & spewing hatred when they are the ones thats doing it, but according to them if we oppose bush we don't have rights!, if you think bush is such a christian then why does he have the courts in all the state violate peoples civil rights, a true christian does not violate peoples civil rights. If, you oppose bush in anyway you have a mental disorder according to bush fans like d, & ed, then they have the nerve to accuse you of promoting hatred & calling people names when they are the ones calling us pigs & morons & telling us we have a mental disorder!. They are the ones with the mental disorder you see how crazy they get when we oppose bush so they are the ones that need to talk, they come to this website calling us names but we are not suppose to say anything back to them. This, is why their is so much hatred in the world!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#995 Consumer Comment

d- you are so mean spritied

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

D- you are so mean spritied you have the nerve to come on this forum & call people names, the bush fans sure have their nerve accusing us of calling names & spewing hatred when they are the ones thats doing it, but according to them if we oppose bush we don't have rights!, if you think bush is such a christian then why does he have the courts in all the state violate peoples civil rights, a true christian does not violate peoples civil rights. If, you oppose bush in anyway you have a mental disorder according to bush fans like d, & ed, then they have the nerve to accuse you of promoting hatred & calling people names when they are the ones calling us pigs & morons & telling us we have a mental disorder!. They are the ones with the mental disorder you see how crazy they get when we oppose bush so they are the ones that need to talk, they come to this website calling us names but we are not suppose to say anything back to them. This, is why their is so much hatred in the world!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#994 Consumer Comment

Last time for the idiot Ben.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Ben,

First let me say, this is one of the reasons I don't post much to this report. Mostly it's to correct some false claims made by persons such as Charles, and the James twins as Vera so fondly refers to them.

OK, so one last time, please try to follow the bouncing ball. Reading comprehension truly is your friend once you learn to master it. Instead of copying and pasting directly, I will just paraphrase to save space.

Charles said things were just fine until Bush came along, then we had all this terrorist stuff happen. My ONLY reason for posting a response was to prove Charles was incorrect. I then went on to cite 2 instances of terrorist attacks during Clinton's tenure, and one which was planned mostly while he was in office. This proves that Charles' statement was false.

Never in my post did I say I support Bush, or the war in Iraq. The word "Iraq" does not even appear in my post. Why? Because it was not a topic of dicussion in my post. It was YOU who brought up Iraq in your response to me (and I wasn't even directing the post at you to begin with, troll).

In your last reponse, you say Bin Laden is in Afghanistan (properly spelled, by the way) or Pakistan. Well, no s**t Sherlock! But your previous comment seems to indicate Bush knows EXACTLY where he is (just as Clinton did), but is not doing anything to capture him. Don't you realize we still have troops in Afghanistan looking for him, al-Qaeda and Taliban? Oh, I'm sorry, it's not reported on the news anymore as it is not grandiose enough to warrant a news story. It's a shame that news stories are based more upon ratings and money than actually reporting the truth, no matter how boring it is. They'd rather report about how many soldiers died in Iraq, because it gets more viewers and readers. It's tragic, I agree. Again I didn't say I supported this war.

Now, if I wish to debate you on issues in the future, I will address you directly. Otherwise, butt out. Let Charles defend himself....(sorry, the mental image of Charles actually being able to carry on a logial debate made me laugh out loud!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#993 Consumer Comment

Round and round we go...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

"Your actually going to try and blast me for saying "about 1 million" when a 6 year old ESTIMATE of your OWN, comes to 930k?? Sounds "about a million" too me! 70k is a far cry from 770k.

So I would have to say that your "one" that you speak of is about EXACTLY (since estimates are too much for you to handle!) 10 TIMES LARGER THAN MY "error"."

Let's see...70K or 770K is a far cry MORE than an error of ONE.

And then you claim ONE is larger than 70K, or 770K. That completely details the problem Ben. YOU don't know which number is larger. My estimate of TWO, was off by ONE. Your estimates are off by tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions. And ALL of your errors are off by a much larger margin, than ONE.

Good day.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#992 Consumer Comment

You see what i mean

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Look @ the rants from bush fans blaming clinton for everything when republicans are the culprits behind this evil, 8 years sense clinton was found not guilty from congress people are still bitching about clinton @ least they didn't have to pay $2 for gas what the hell is going on today with gas $2 it should never be this high their isn't a shortage of gas when the news says its going to go up the gas goes up so the news needs to keep their mouth shut, the media is to blame for alot of this mess amerians are sick of paying $2 for gas. I look forward for another delusional rant from the bush fans ha ha!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#991 Consumer Comment

Oh puh-leaze.....6 years on and still looking to blame Clinton?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Patrick says...

"Oh yeah, so George knows where bin Laden is huh? Please make sure you post a link to your statement of fact, will you? It's the least you can do."


Let me see.....


We knew he was in Afganistan, and lost him. We now assume hes in eastern Afganistan, or Pakistan. And exactly what have we done to get him?

We invaded Iraq.

Now if you need links to "this" info, then I suggest you come back to reality and watch the regular news. Everyone else on the planet knows these facts are true. It doesnt take a rocket scientist.


So next time you b***h and groan about Clinton, just remember that Bush did/does know where to look. He IS our President, not Clinton. 6 years later is a pretty feeble angle to dodge Bush's responsibilities by blaming Clinton for something Bush has done no better at.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#990 Consumer Comment

Charles, you hypocritical tool

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

You MORON! Take a whiff of what you're shoveling! You talk out of both sides of your pie-hole. You rant and rant about how "Bush fans" as you call them call names and run you down and "violate" your civil rights if they don't agree with you(Democrats). How can one's civil rights be violated with posts on this thread!? I can't help but to laugh at that. Doesn't seem to me like anyone has been able to stifle your posts. The Editor of Rip-off Report IS posting your comments(as asenine as they are)here. Have you been arrested for any of these posts? I would guess not, unless you have been given a computer and internet access from your jail cell. Get off the civil rights crap. It make you look more and more like a dolt. You are as guilty as those you accuse of name calling and so forth. You want those other people to be civil to you? Try being ccivil to them and get off your freakin' pedestal! You are a prime example of what the Democratic Party has sunk to. If you are really interested in civility, you sure aren't showing it here. You will be treated the same way here as you treat others. Spew your venemous swill at others, and you can expeect to get it back. I guarantee it. Treat others with a little respect, and you might just surprise yourself.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#989 Consumer Comment

Spin, spin away Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

The link you gave was for the US Census site. That site gives both, the actual census count, and the estimates you want to use.

I also told you about your own County Government site. If you cannot figure out how to find your County's own site, I cannot help you further. I live in Duval County Fl right now. My home County is Onslow, NC. I am quite capable of finding both of those sites with nothing more than the name of the County.

And one more time, for the learning impaired...I use the numbers that are meaningful. You use estimates. NOTHING is based on estimates in this country, other than how much food to make for a BBQ contest. The reason a census is taken every 10 years is so Governments have an accurate count for all Government services and functions.

You like make-believe, I like facts.

I stand by every statement I make. You keep spinning away. Maybe one day, you'll be able to take off.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#988 Consumer Comment

Spin, spin away Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

The link you gave was for the US Census site. That site gives both, the actual census count, and the estimates you want to use.

I also told you about your own County Government site. If you cannot figure out how to find your County's own site, I cannot help you further. I live in Duval County Fl right now. My home County is Onslow, NC. I am quite capable of finding both of those sites with nothing more than the name of the County.

And one more time, for the learning impaired...I use the numbers that are meaningful. You use estimates. NOTHING is based on estimates in this country, other than how much food to make for a BBQ contest. The reason a census is taken every 10 years is so Governments have an accurate count for all Government services and functions.

You like make-believe, I like facts.

I stand by every statement I make. You keep spinning away. Maybe one day, you'll be able to take off.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#987 Consumer Comment

Spin, spin away Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

The link you gave was for the US Census site. That site gives both, the actual census count, and the estimates you want to use.

I also told you about your own County Government site. If you cannot figure out how to find your County's own site, I cannot help you further. I live in Duval County Fl right now. My home County is Onslow, NC. I am quite capable of finding both of those sites with nothing more than the name of the County.

And one more time, for the learning impaired...I use the numbers that are meaningful. You use estimates. NOTHING is based on estimates in this country, other than how much food to make for a BBQ contest. The reason a census is taken every 10 years is so Governments have an accurate count for all Government services and functions.

You like make-believe, I like facts.

I stand by every statement I make. You keep spinning away. Maybe one day, you'll be able to take off.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#986 Consumer Suggestion

Charles, Please respond - As a christian, do you hold it against democrats because they are for abortion?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Charles:

I have tries to ask you with all civility about your christian viewpoints and you continually avoid answering. Is this because the truth hurts?

As a christian, do you hold it against democrats because they are for abortion? Where in the bible does it say to hate Republicans because they don't agree with you?

Again, please have the decency to answer my questions and quit showing hatred and evil to everyone that opposes you.

I am praying that we all ge through the problems that are facing our civilization whether democrats or republicans has nothing to do with it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#985 Consumer Comment

Can bush fans be more civil & respectful

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Can bush fans be more civil & respectful, they think we don't have the right to live if we oppose bush then they disrespect you & insult you then they accept you to respect them back!. Their is another delusional statement from another bush fan, bush fans can't be civil has you see in previous posts if you don't agree with them they result in name calling ect., we have a right to oppose bush republicans are the culprits in all this & no matter what people like d say they will not voliate my civil rights!. D can piss off so can ed, we will not be abused or bullied futhermore they will be ignored don't respond to these bullies & thugs they call us names to make them look big, i dislike bush & oppose bush if anybody don't like it then thats their problem!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#984 Consumer Comment

Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Robert you have to be kidding me!

"YOU have to answer for being 770K off. Not me. My admitted error was ONE. YOU continue to attempt pathetically to pawn YOUR thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions as being MY error. My error was a grand total of ONE."

One? ONE!?

I have to answer for 770K??????

These are YOUR comments....not mine Robert!......

"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


TJE"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


THESE ARE YOUR COMMENTS ROBERT?

Now how the heck you expect me to answer for your pathetic numbers is beyond me. How your going to justify being off by 770k, which is completely WRONG and not even based on ANY census data (which you have never given any link too....and as always...I DO!), when I GAVE THE LINK TO THE CENSUS PAGE showing where and HOW I got my numbers is beyond me as well.

Your just pathetic Robert. You have twisted and contorted your way out of every angle you come up with. While this entire time I maintain the same numbers, same angle, same links, same everything.

Once again...The proof is in the posts.

Watching you squirm and twist only shows how completely off your rocker you really are.


Your actually going to try and blast me for saying "about 1 million" when a 6 year old ESTIMATE of your OWN, comes to 930k?? Sounds "about a million" too me! 70k is a far cry from 770k.

So I would have to say that your "one" that you speak of is about EXACTLY (since estimates are too much for you to handle!) 10 TIMES LARGER THAN MY "error".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#983 Consumer Comment

Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Robert you have to be kidding me!

"YOU have to answer for being 770K off. Not me. My admitted error was ONE. YOU continue to attempt pathetically to pawn YOUR thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions as being MY error. My error was a grand total of ONE."

One? ONE!?

I have to answer for 770K??????

These are YOUR comments....not mine Robert!......

"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


TJE"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


THESE ARE YOUR COMMENTS ROBERT?

Now how the heck you expect me to answer for your pathetic numbers is beyond me. How your going to justify being off by 770k, which is completely WRONG and not even based on ANY census data (which you have never given any link too....and as always...I DO!), when I GAVE THE LINK TO THE CENSUS PAGE showing where and HOW I got my numbers is beyond me as well.

Your just pathetic Robert. You have twisted and contorted your way out of every angle you come up with. While this entire time I maintain the same numbers, same angle, same links, same everything.

Once again...The proof is in the posts.

Watching you squirm and twist only shows how completely off your rocker you really are.


Your actually going to try and blast me for saying "about 1 million" when a 6 year old ESTIMATE of your OWN, comes to 930k?? Sounds "about a million" too me! 70k is a far cry from 770k.

So I would have to say that your "one" that you speak of is about EXACTLY (since estimates are too much for you to handle!) 10 TIMES LARGER THAN MY "error".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#982 Consumer Comment

Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Robert you have to be kidding me!

"YOU have to answer for being 770K off. Not me. My admitted error was ONE. YOU continue to attempt pathetically to pawn YOUR thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions as being MY error. My error was a grand total of ONE."

One? ONE!?

I have to answer for 770K??????

These are YOUR comments....not mine Robert!......

"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


TJE"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


THESE ARE YOUR COMMENTS ROBERT?

Now how the heck you expect me to answer for your pathetic numbers is beyond me. How your going to justify being off by 770k, which is completely WRONG and not even based on ANY census data (which you have never given any link too....and as always...I DO!), when I GAVE THE LINK TO THE CENSUS PAGE showing where and HOW I got my numbers is beyond me as well.

Your just pathetic Robert. You have twisted and contorted your way out of every angle you come up with. While this entire time I maintain the same numbers, same angle, same links, same everything.

Once again...The proof is in the posts.

Watching you squirm and twist only shows how completely off your rocker you really are.


Your actually going to try and blast me for saying "about 1 million" when a 6 year old ESTIMATE of your OWN, comes to 930k?? Sounds "about a million" too me! 70k is a far cry from 770k.

So I would have to say that your "one" that you speak of is about EXACTLY (since estimates are too much for you to handle!) 10 TIMES LARGER THAN MY "error".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#981 Consumer Comment

Census? Numbers? Robert-Logic?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Robert you have to be kidding me!

"YOU have to answer for being 770K off. Not me. My admitted error was ONE. YOU continue to attempt pathetically to pawn YOUR thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions as being MY error. My error was a grand total of ONE."

One? ONE!?

I have to answer for 770K??????

These are YOUR comments....not mine Robert!......

"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


TJE"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert


THESE ARE YOUR COMMENTS ROBERT?

Now how the heck you expect me to answer for your pathetic numbers is beyond me. How your going to justify being off by 770k, which is completely WRONG and not even based on ANY census data (which you have never given any link too....and as always...I DO!), when I GAVE THE LINK TO THE CENSUS PAGE showing where and HOW I got my numbers is beyond me as well.

Your just pathetic Robert. You have twisted and contorted your way out of every angle you come up with. While this entire time I maintain the same numbers, same angle, same links, same everything.

Once again...The proof is in the posts.

Watching you squirm and twist only shows how completely off your rocker you really are.


Your actually going to try and blast me for saying "about 1 million" when a 6 year old ESTIMATE of your OWN, comes to 930k?? Sounds "about a million" too me! 70k is a far cry from 770k.

So I would have to say that your "one" that you speak of is about EXACTLY (since estimates are too much for you to handle!) 10 TIMES LARGER THAN MY "error".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#980 Consumer Comment

you & the rest of the bush fans come from the party of lies

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

To ed

No you & the rest of the bush fans come from the party of lies, i hate when people think that bush is protecting is when bush knew about the 9/11 attacks & did nothing, bush & his republican cronies are the culprits in this mess. Do, you like how we have to live know sense georga w bush became president sure republicans don't have to suffer or the rich people, you are probally rich for the reason why you say your statements, the middle class & poor people are tired of having their civil rights violated buy people like you!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#979 Consumer Comment

Ignore bush fans - mentally right wing bush nut, don't blame bush for anything its all democrats fault

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Looks like another mentally right wing bush nut, don't blame bush for anything its all democrats fault, how can the high gas prices be their fault!. Bush has the power to lower the gas prices thank god for bill clinton @ least the gas wasn't this high when he was in office & us americans have to suffer for the next 3 years because of bush, how can the democrats be making profits from the gas prices when bush & cheney own the oil companies you sound crazy just like hannity, according to my grandparents & i was alive but i remember the gas prices being sky high when regean was presidet people were paying high for gas, we are paying double for gas then we were 18 years ago so i would like to ask what the hell is going on! we have to suffer because of bush, & the rich americans!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#978 Consumer Comment

More reading comprehension lessons for Ben.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Ben,

You are such a f***ing tard! Please go back to my post that is time stamped 5/5/2006 10:30:55AM. Read the passage that I quoted Charles on, and then read my response again. And this time, try to COMPREHEND my post.

My comments were directed solely at the statement Charles made (and pretty much to just Charles himself). Can you tell me where in my post I ever brought up the war in Iraq? No? I didn't think so.

Go crawl back in your hole. I only posted to point out the flaw in Charles' post. I did not post anything that says I support Bush and the war in Iraq. I posted only facts about the attacks I mentioned, backed up with my source for those facts (Wikipedia).

Oh yeah, so George knows where bin Laden is huh? Please make sure you post a link to your statement of fact, will you? It's the least you can do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#977 Consumer Comment

President Bush not responsible for higher oil prices!

AUTHOR: Ed - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

George W Bush Don't blame Bush for the higher oil prices. Just not true. Washington District of Columbia

George W. Bush Democrats making fortune on higher oil, not President Bush! Washington District of Columbia

Lets get the record straight on the president and high oil prices and who is really benefiting! Fact, between George Bush and Vp Cheney as of right now have absolutely no financial interest in oil and oil companies; they are totally out of this business when they became elected. The truth is actualy the democrats are making a fortune with higher oil prices. Examples are Al Gore and his family who are major shareholders in occidental petroleum (oxy) and the other hypocrital socialist Sen Ted Kennedy and his family own five (5) oil companies.

People the media will never report the facts on who is really getting rich, especially when most of the winners in the oil business are mostly democrats, not republicans as they would like you to believe. Also, when Bill Clinton released some oil from the strategic oil supply; he gave it to occidental to help Al Gore get richer!

Here's another fact, during Jimmy Carter's presidency (another democrat) the price of gas adjusted for inflation is actually higher back then, ie= 70cents per gallon in 1978 is like nearly 4.00 per gal at today's prices. Didn't hear to much then because people weren't commuting like they are today. Back during the Carter years unemployment was so high and interest rates (18%)and inflation to the roof, most people couldn't afford to live. Thank God Ron Reagan took over in 1981.

Why can't the mainstream media report the truth? Is it because they are all sympathetic to the other party (socialist democrats)? I believe they are.

The statemnets I have made above are all true and fact. I may sound like I'm beating up on the democrats, but I have issues with both major parties; however I just think that Bush and the republicans are being made to look like the culprits, when the facts show otherwise. Both parties may play blame the other and use some dirty tricks, but I have to say the democrats are by far the worst offenders. They are the party of liars!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#976 Consumer Suggestion

Charles, You are mean-spirited

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, May 08, 2006

Charles,

Even though i don't agree with D calling names you are the last one to talk. In all your previous posts you call anyone that backs Bush names and then in the next sentence you say that they are the ones calling you names.

I have asked you before so i will ask again since you don't seem to want to answer a simple question. In your earlier posts, you claim to listen and believe in what Joel Osteen says? Please tell me where in the bible where it is alright to hate people because of their beliefs or show me a reference where Joel Osteen says it?

I think you may be upset to hear this but based on his "Christian" beliefs about abortion,etc. I would more likely to believe that that Joel Osteen is a conservative as mmost of the christian leaders of our time are.

Also, i think you meant to use the word "INTOLERANT" instead of tolerant, but yyour right thata I am "tolerant" of people like you because I truly believe that this country gives you the right to say what you believe and it is not the Christian thing to do to show you hatred or call you names.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#975 Consumer Comment

Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 07, 2006

D, the right wing nut is a mental disorder who tries to make the rest of us sane people insane, d i suggest you go to a mental hospital we don't need your kind around here making us crazy like all the other bush fans!. I guess bush fans like d who has to hide his name can't take when we point out the flaws in their arguements so they result in name calling, insults, ect., which bush fans loved to do & trying to make the rest of the world crazy has them. D get a life, i will not take your abuse or attacks from anybody else. Don't let bush fans like d make you feel bad they call people names & insult them to make themselves look big. Just ignore them they will go away we have enough to worry about without their mistreatment & abuse their the ones who can't take what we have to say. I don't have to take anyones abuse or mistreatment they don't show me respect they will get the same type of treatment back!, bush fans are the most toleriant people i have ever seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#974 Consumer Comment

Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 07, 2006

D, the right wing nut is a mental disorder who tries to make the rest of us sane people insane, d i suggest you go to a mental hospital we don't need your kind around here making us crazy like all the other bush fans!. I guess bush fans like d who has to hide his name can't take when we point out the flaws in their arguements so they result in name calling, insults, ect., which bush fans loved to do & trying to make the rest of the world crazy has them. D get a life, i will not take your abuse or attacks from anybody else. Don't let bush fans like d make you feel bad they call people names & insult them to make themselves look big. Just ignore them they will go away we have enough to worry about without their mistreatment & abuse their the ones who can't take what we have to say. I don't have to take anyones abuse or mistreatment they don't show me respect they will get the same type of treatment back!, bush fans are the most toleriant people i have ever seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#973 Consumer Comment

Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 07, 2006

D, the right wing nut is a mental disorder who tries to make the rest of us sane people insane, d i suggest you go to a mental hospital we don't need your kind around here making us crazy like all the other bush fans!. I guess bush fans like d who has to hide his name can't take when we point out the flaws in their arguements so they result in name calling, insults, ect., which bush fans loved to do & trying to make the rest of the world crazy has them. D get a life, i will not take your abuse or attacks from anybody else. Don't let bush fans like d make you feel bad they call people names & insult them to make themselves look big. Just ignore them they will go away we have enough to worry about without their mistreatment & abuse their the ones who can't take what we have to say. I don't have to take anyones abuse or mistreatment they don't show me respect they will get the same type of treatment back!, bush fans are the most toleriant people i have ever seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#972 Consumer Comment

Ignore the bush fans, bush fans are the most tolerant people i have ever seen

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, May 07, 2006

D, the right wing nut is a mental disorder who tries to make the rest of us sane people insane, d i suggest you go to a mental hospital we don't need your kind around here making us crazy like all the other bush fans!. I guess bush fans like d who has to hide his name can't take when we point out the flaws in their arguements so they result in name calling, insults, ect., which bush fans loved to do & trying to make the rest of the world crazy has them. D get a life, i will not take your abuse or attacks from anybody else. Don't let bush fans like d make you feel bad they call people names & insult them to make themselves look big. Just ignore them they will go away we have enough to worry about without their mistreatment & abuse their the ones who can't take what we have to say. I don't have to take anyones abuse or mistreatment they don't show me respect they will get the same type of treatment back!, bush fans are the most toleriant people i have ever seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#971 Consumer Comment

Liberalism is a mental disorder

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 06, 2006

Charles continues to blow his goofy, left wing brain vomit all over this thread. Liberalism is a mental disorder, one that just about every Democrat contracts from the very first time they vote for one. Charles, you really need to get some new material. Why don't you copy and paste some generic blathering response from one of your first rants on this thread. (you do know how to copy to clipboard and paste, don't you?) Oh, and while you're at it, spell check it, too.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#970 Consumer Comment

One more time about the numbers, Benjo...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 06, 2006

YOU keep trying to use ESTIMATES, while I use the FACTUAL numbers provided by the Census. The numbers that count, are the FACTUAL ones, NOT the estimates. Estimates are not what determines Congressional districts, state, local, and federal funding of ANY sort, crime stats, or ANYTHING else. Estimates are NOT used by ANYONE for ANYTHING!

YOU have to answer for being 770K off. Not me. My admitted error was ONE. YOU continue to attempt pathetically to pawn YOUR thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions as being MY error. My error was a grand total of ONE.

Good spin there, Bennie-Boi.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#969 Consumer Comment

It's easy Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 06, 2006

By widespread, I meant maybe it's widespread across the country. believe it or not, only YOU thinks California is the be all, and end all, to the rest of the planet.

Here's another helpful hint, MOST of us don't even want to be associated with your state.

Go get reading comprehension lessons along with that math lesson. You'll find out tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions, is a much bigger computing error than ONE.

All hail King Benjo.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#968 Consumer Comment

More Robert-logic

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, May 06, 2006

Well lets look at more Robert-logic.....

"Once again, you have real problems with reading comprehension."

Well lets see Robert I think you followed an earlier post with "maybe it is widespread".

Care to answer for that statement Robert?

Your STILL trying to find ways to twist and contort it into a WIDESPREAD issue. On one hand you say "we didnt mean it that way" then follow with "maybe it is widespread"?

You just shot yourself in the foot ....again.

And you still need to answer for being 770,000 off. (Nice to see you can still dodge as always!)

Right back at you bud.....you have real problems with math. Or just reading numbers in general. We can get to real math later.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#967 Consumer Comment

Ben is off the deep end now

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

"WOW! What did Robert say again......"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too.".

And what you meant by "his state" was HIS being me, in California. Try and twist this one and I'll repost your entire post there Robert.

Now Robert, was this a mistake? Was it a lie? Ill bet it was just a lie. It fits your M.O. This poster NEVER mentioned ANYTHING about it being in California. Nothing, nada, zilch.

The fact that you would bring it up that way shows that you STILL are trying to peg the incident on the STATE AS A WHOLE. And by doing so, attacking me personally.

Your whole argument of "we didnt mean it that way" just went out the window (again!)."

Ummmm. Actaualy Ben, I was speaking of Paul in HIS state(OK), just as I wrote it. Once again, you have real problems with reading comprehension.

Man oh man. You are one psychotic individual aren't you? You might want to see someone about that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#966 Consumer Comment

Patrick's latest rant. Which is the same rant heard many times by the Bush lobby - Either way....I'll still take the b*****b.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Since Robert has decided to drag me back here, I'll add my few cents again.

Let us discuss Patrick's latest rant. Which is the same rant heard many times by the Bush lobby. Let us remember that this is 2006, not 1999. Bush is in office, not Clinton. We have had almost 6 full years of Bush to "make good". So any banterings about Clinton at this point is pretty worthless. While Clinton dropped the ball in many areas (never denied myself!), he has been loooooong gone. Bush has had plenty of time to implement "his" way of doing things......and has!

So onto Patricks comments....

"Charles, have you forgotten about the World Trade Center bombing on February 26, 1993? Six dead and over 1,000 injured. Responsibility claimed by al-Qaeda."

NOBODY has forgotten this Patrick. But my question to you is, with your fact (reminder?) in mind.....why are we in Iraq again? Your key phrase there is "Responsibility claimed by al-Qaeda". We still have no link between this attack and Saddam or Iraq. Its been 13 years, I think it would have surfaced by now.

Next.....

"What about the USS Cole, which was attacked on October 12, 2000? 17 dead and 39 injured. Again, al-Qaeda."

Well all I can say here....again....is "Again, al-Qaeda.". Thats right Al-Qaeda....not Saddam, not Iraq. Why are we in Iraq again?

Next.....

"9/11 happened only 9 months after Bush took office. But, it had been planned for several years before it actually took place."

Ok, point taken, facts are right, Clinton could have been more pro-active....yes. No denial there. But still....why Iraq? Its been over 4 years now. We are in Iraq?! No links with 9/11 to Iraq. No links with 9/11 to Saddam.

Next.....

"These are the 3 largest attacks by al-Qaeda."

Once again....ok....Al-Qaeda! Not Iraq!

Next......

"These all happened (with the exception of the execution of 9/11) during, now stay with me here, CLINTON'S WATCH. Several times during his presidency, Clinton knew where Osama bin Laden was, but failed to do anything about him, even after the 1993 bombing."

Now this is the biggest piece of garbage yet. Blah blah Clinton blah! Here is an interesting fact for you Patrick. Bush and the rest of the world KNOWS where Bin Laden is right now. And hes NOT in Iraq! I dont see Bush doing anything about it. You act as if Bin Laden has been captured. He hasnt! So until that happens....RIGHT BACK AT YOU.....

BUSH KNOWS AND HAS KNOWN WHERE BIN LADEN IS DURING HIS ENTIRE PRESIDENCY AND HAS DONE NOTHING TO CAPTURE HIM EITHER!

Matter of fact....we arnt even in the country Bin Laden is! WE ARE IN IRAQ! Afganistan has been ignored. And we have left Pakistan completely alone. GO THERE....NOT IRAQ!

Terrorism is still happening. Bin Laden is still free. Even Bush's own neo-cons agree that its only a matter of when, not if, that another attack will occur. So for anyone to sit there and bash a president that hasnt even been in office for 6 years over an issue a sitting president has done no better at fixing, is just moronic.


Bash Clinton all you want, I personally disliked the man. But I hate Bush. While Clinton could have done more about Al-Quada, so can Bush. Because what Bush has done so far is worthless. As far as Iraq goes, that whole issue is Bush Sr. and Bush Jr's responsibility......PERIOD. Iraq has nothing to do with Al-Quada (or at least it didnt UNTIL Bush went there!), and it had nothing to do with 9/11.

Clinton = moron, lied, did nothing about terrorists, got a b*****b.

Bush = moron, lied, did nothing about terroists, started war in the name of said "terrorists".

Personally....Ill take the "b*****b" over the "started war in the name of said "terrorists". Other than that, Bush and Clinton are the same.

Of course then there is the issue of why each one lied.

Clinton lied about the b*****b.

Bush lied about starting a war.

Either way....I'll still take the b*****b.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#965 Consumer Comment

Why did bush offer retaliation

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Then why did bush offcer retaliation because the uss cole happen 4 months before bush took office so clinton had no time to take agaisnt & with the crappy republicans always bithing & bickering how could he get anything done!. Bush knew 9/11/01 was coming just like pearl harbour the government knew about it but did nothing to try to stop it!, the military did nothing to protect us on 9/11/01!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#964 Consumer Comment

Charles, Charles, Charles....

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

I don't post much to this report anymore, but sometimes the fools come out of the woodwork, and I just have to correct their idiotic ramblings.

Charles said:
"We all slepted just fine when clinton was president, we had no worries about terrorist till good old bush came in office. Bush started all this terrorist crap things where just fine before bush was in office terrorist didn't start until 4 months before bush was president so clinton didn't have any time to retaliate, but did bush offer to do anything nope!"

Charles, have you forgotten about the World Trade Center bombing on February 26, 1993? Six dead and over 1,000 injured. Responsibility claimed by al-Qaeda.

What about the USS Cole, which was attacked on October 12, 2000? 17 dead and 39 injured. Again, al-Qaeda.

9/11 happened only 9 months after Bush took office. But, it had been planned for several years before it actually took place.

These are the 3 largest attacks by al-Qaeda. Many more were done throught the '90s and into the new millennium. Go check out Wikipedia and type in "Al-Qaeda" for some more examples of their activities. These all happened (with the exception of the execution of 9/11) during, now stay with me here, CLINTON'S WATCH. Several times during his presidency, Clinton knew where Osama bin Laden was, but failed to do anything about him, even after the 1993 bombing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#963 Consumer Comment

Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Well lets have some more fun with "Robert-Logic". Or shall we just call it outright "Robert-Lies" this time?........

"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too."

Well this is "supposed" to be from the Circuit City thread. You can find it here......

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff177628.htm

Thats if you would like to see the entire post by Paul. Lets take a few quick peeks at it shall we.......

"My own kids are being forced to 'learn about islam' in school.

And only recently did we finally succeeded in stopping it.."

Well thats nice. And where is Paul from......

Paul - Tulsa, Oklahoma


WOW! What did Robert say again......"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too.".

And what you meant by "his state" was HIS being me, in California. Try and twist this one and I'll repost your entire post there Robert.


Now Robert, was this a mistake? Was it a lie? Ill bet it was just a lie. It fits your M.O. This poster NEVER mentioned ANYTHING about it being in California. Nothing, nada, zilch.

The fact that you would bring it up that way shows that you STILL are trying to peg the incident on the STATE AS A WHOLE. And by doing so, attacking me personally.

Your whole argument of "we didnt mean it that way" just went out the window (again!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#962 Consumer Comment

Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Well lets have some more fun with "Robert-Logic". Or shall we just call it outright "Robert-Lies" this time?........

"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too."

Well this is "supposed" to be from the Circuit City thread. You can find it here......

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff177628.htm

Thats if you would like to see the entire post by Paul. Lets take a few quick peeks at it shall we.......

"My own kids are being forced to 'learn about islam' in school.

And only recently did we finally succeeded in stopping it.."

Well thats nice. And where is Paul from......

Paul - Tulsa, Oklahoma


WOW! What did Robert say again......"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too.".

And what you meant by "his state" was HIS being me, in California. Try and twist this one and I'll repost your entire post there Robert.


Now Robert, was this a mistake? Was it a lie? Ill bet it was just a lie. It fits your M.O. This poster NEVER mentioned ANYTHING about it being in California. Nothing, nada, zilch.

The fact that you would bring it up that way shows that you STILL are trying to peg the incident on the STATE AS A WHOLE. And by doing so, attacking me personally.

Your whole argument of "we didnt mean it that way" just went out the window (again!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#961 Consumer Comment

Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Well lets have some more fun with "Robert-Logic". Or shall we just call it outright "Robert-Lies" this time?........

"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too."

Well this is "supposed" to be from the Circuit City thread. You can find it here......

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff177628.htm

Thats if you would like to see the entire post by Paul. Lets take a few quick peeks at it shall we.......

"My own kids are being forced to 'learn about islam' in school.

And only recently did we finally succeeded in stopping it.."

Well thats nice. And where is Paul from......

Paul - Tulsa, Oklahoma


WOW! What did Robert say again......"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too.".

And what you meant by "his state" was HIS being me, in California. Try and twist this one and I'll repost your entire post there Robert.


Now Robert, was this a mistake? Was it a lie? Ill bet it was just a lie. It fits your M.O. This poster NEVER mentioned ANYTHING about it being in California. Nothing, nada, zilch.

The fact that you would bring it up that way shows that you STILL are trying to peg the incident on the STATE AS A WHOLE. And by doing so, attacking me personally.

Your whole argument of "we didnt mean it that way" just went out the window (again!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#960 Consumer Comment

Robert-Logic.....Or Robert-Lies?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

Well lets have some more fun with "Robert-Logic". Or shall we just call it outright "Robert-Lies" this time?........

"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too."

Well this is "supposed" to be from the Circuit City thread. You can find it here......

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff177628.htm

Thats if you would like to see the entire post by Paul. Lets take a few quick peeks at it shall we.......

"My own kids are being forced to 'learn about islam' in school.

And only recently did we finally succeeded in stopping it.."

Well thats nice. And where is Paul from......

Paul - Tulsa, Oklahoma


WOW! What did Robert say again......"Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too.".

And what you meant by "his state" was HIS being me, in California. Try and twist this one and I'll repost your entire post there Robert.


Now Robert, was this a mistake? Was it a lie? Ill bet it was just a lie. It fits your M.O. This poster NEVER mentioned ANYTHING about it being in California. Nothing, nada, zilch.

The fact that you would bring it up that way shows that you STILL are trying to peg the incident on the STATE AS A WHOLE. And by doing so, attacking me personally.

Your whole argument of "we didnt mean it that way" just went out the window (again!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#959 Consumer Comment

Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

YOU went nuts over the grand sum of ONE. YOU could not accept the difference between ONE and TWO, a total difference of ONE, as being anything but an error on such a grand scale as to bring the universe to a crashing halt. YOU considered ONE to be a huge difference in numbers. ONE!

YOU are off by tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions, and that's okay, because YOU are the one who is off. YOU consider ONE to be a great miscarriage of truth, while millions is just a minor error, not to be even considered as WRONG.

You claim to own a business. I would love to see how you justify your math skills in an audit.

I'm not off by anything. I use the FACTUAL numbers, while YOU use the estimates. Estimates are not ACTUAL counts, so of course in your world, they must be more accurate than the ACTUAL census count. I'm sure my math teachers were just having a bad year when they always wanted the ACTUAL numbers at the end of an equation, instead of just having some ESTIMATES.

Try and get this right also Ben. OU812 is an album by VanHalen. The question mark makes no sense. In fact, nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question. The fact that you keep topping yourself with each new attempt just adds to the fun.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#958 Consumer Comment

Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

YOU went nuts over the grand sum of ONE. YOU could not accept the difference between ONE and TWO, a total difference of ONE, as being anything but an error on such a grand scale as to bring the universe to a crashing halt. YOU considered ONE to be a huge difference in numbers. ONE!

YOU are off by tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions, and that's okay, because YOU are the one who is off. YOU consider ONE to be a great miscarriage of truth, while millions is just a minor error, not to be even considered as WRONG.

You claim to own a business. I would love to see how you justify your math skills in an audit.

I'm not off by anything. I use the FACTUAL numbers, while YOU use the estimates. Estimates are not ACTUAL counts, so of course in your world, they must be more accurate than the ACTUAL census count. I'm sure my math teachers were just having a bad year when they always wanted the ACTUAL numbers at the end of an equation, instead of just having some ESTIMATES.

Try and get this right also Ben. OU812 is an album by VanHalen. The question mark makes no sense. In fact, nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question. The fact that you keep topping yourself with each new attempt just adds to the fun.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#957 Consumer Comment

Pay attention Ben - - nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

YOU went nuts over the grand sum of ONE. YOU could not accept the difference between ONE and TWO, a total difference of ONE, as being anything but an error on such a grand scale as to bring the universe to a crashing halt. YOU considered ONE to be a huge difference in numbers. ONE!

YOU are off by tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions, and that's okay, because YOU are the one who is off. YOU consider ONE to be a great miscarriage of truth, while millions is just a minor error, not to be even considered as WRONG.

You claim to own a business. I would love to see how you justify your math skills in an audit.

I'm not off by anything. I use the FACTUAL numbers, while YOU use the estimates. Estimates are not ACTUAL counts, so of course in your world, they must be more accurate than the ACTUAL census count. I'm sure my math teachers were just having a bad year when they always wanted the ACTUAL numbers at the end of an equation, instead of just having some ESTIMATES.

Try and get this right also Ben. OU812 is an album by VanHalen. The question mark makes no sense. In fact, nothing you ever post makes sense. CYBMS? is a very good question. The fact that you keep topping yourself with each new attempt just adds to the fun.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#956 Consumer Suggestion

Sick of the BS. I like most, was a huge Bush supporter.

AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 05, 2006

I'm gonna jump in here because it's time for people to make a stand. I like most, was a huge Bush supporter. Some that remember my strong comments supporting him on this site can confirm this. To someone that commented above; honestly I have to say, we did sleep better at night with Clinton in office, but if your recall, he knew of Bin Laden's whereabouts and choice to ignore it. So, in retrospect, everything terrorist wise, could have been avoided.

Now, I'm not so blind to the facts. After my family has been put through hell and back, as of recently, I have little to no respect for any government in power. I'm sick of my family busting their a*s day in and day out, for what? To be slapped in the face over and over. We not only own a company, but also work to keep a constant flow of money to pay our bills. Here's the situation:

We moved in October of last year, to find that the property was not in the condition assured and contracted to be in. We were placed in a position where we had no choice but to take it, but have been struggling ever since to have the property completed, fixed, etc. In January, we held back 1/8th of the rent due and explained in detail the reason for this. So, the landlord filed an eviction proceeding. We filed a rent escrow. We were given less than one week to prepare, because the landlord is in another state and can not be served. So, we get to court and she never bothers to show, just her attorney friend. He claims that we didn't have a legal merit because we never sent her a certified letter allowing her 30 days to fix the property. We couldn't, she refused to give us an address. All we had was an email address, her cell number and account number (for deposits). So, I was then told to send her a certified letter now that the courts have given me her address, but they would have to rule in her favor at that time. So, we had to pay. Ever since she has come after us at least every other week bring us in and out of court. We've appealed, etc. turns out, we'll never win as she is good friends with the judge. We have been trying to get the Health Department involved, etc, you know what they tell us; ?Unless you're section 8, we can't help you.? So, I found out that the items done and not done needed permits, none were sought, so finally I got a county inspector out here. He found the property to be ?a serious concern?? Her friend, the judge, saw this letter and disregarded it.

So, now we're in the position of losing everything we've worked so very hard for. We tried getting help with our local social service department to be told, ?Sorry, we can't help you.? So, basically, my reason for telling this story; unless you're some fat corporate jerk or in government power, you're nothing. I lost my job because of having to constantly take off for this. I can't understand why these people that can't keep their legs closed or sit on their asses, can get all the help they need, what about the working America? We get stuck with gas prices soaring through the roofs, and that's if you can even find a gas station that's still selling gas.

Were we live has become extremely industrialized. We're even getting a minor league baseball stadium soon. The cost to buy a home or even rent a home here is beyond what any real person could afford, so of course the number of foreclosures and evictions have sky-rocketed. Jobs, though, there are none. Either you look for a job making minimum wage (not enough to even feed a family) or the job you applied for is taken by someone not even legalized to work in the US. Tax cuts are given to the rich or very poor, what about all of us in between? What the hell happened? How are people expected to live and support their families? Why can't our own president get the homeless off the streets right in front of the White House? Oh, but we can send billions of dollars to help other countries, right? I have lost all my faith in a system I was brought up to respect and admire. I want what every hard working American wants, the right to live and live happy.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#955 Consumer Comment

"Robert-Logic"

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 04, 2006

Well its nice to see that the man hell bent on insulting the universe has finally stopped his cross threading.

So lets take this time to look at some "Robert-Logic"........


"My home County has 150K people in it, and everyone knows just about everyone." -Robert

"You have roughly the same population in your County as I do in the one I am currently typing from." - Robert

"Your County Government puts the number at 930K." -Robert

"You have ZERO credibility" -Robert


No Robert, you have ZERO credibility. You bash my numbers, yet they come from the same place. You hold to EXACT numbers, because I said "about 1million" when the 2000 Census (its 2006 now Rob!) puts it at 930k. So big deal. Off by 70k? You intend to hold me accountable for tossing out something like "about 1 million", when your numbers dont even REMOTELY come close?? Even when the Census page itself says that its estimated at one million for 2004? (I bet your actually going to have the gall to say that CA most likely shrunk now between 2000-04 to bolster your pathetic argument??)

Care to answer for your missing 770k??

Now after near 9 months (dont remember the exact time...DONT CARE...its been awhile....looooong while!), you try to use the "we didnt mean it like that" excuse? Might have held water had you or Vera taken up that excuse waaaay back then. But not after months of dodging the issue. Not after months of having a little rally every time it comes up.

A little late there Robert. And about 770k short.


OU812? Yep.

CYBMS? Yep.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#954 Consumer Comment

Ignore the bush fans

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 04, 2006

We all slepted just fine when clinton was president, we had no worries about terrorist till good old bush came in office. Bush started all this terrorist crap things where just fine before bush was in office terrorist didn't start until 4 months before bush was president so clinton didn't have any time to retaliate, but did bush offer to do anything nope! why all of a sudden bush acts like he cares for the american people because he doesn't! & people need to wake up, just ignore hannity fans to!, if you oppose bush in anyway hannity will blast you & not let you talk no wonder people dislike hannity so much!. If bush fans attack our guy we will attack theirs but bush fans seem to have a one sided arguement! we should just let the bush fans & hannity go their merry way because they are to stubborn to listen to anybody!.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#953 Consumer Comment

Who cares

AUTHOR: Carolyn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 03, 2006

I can sleep better tonight knowing George Bush put the fear of the United States in terrorist minds Perhaps they will think before they kill another Americian.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#952 UPDATE EX-employee responds

My Company tis of thee

AUTHOR: Terrance - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 03, 2006

My Company tis of thee, Sweet land of Corporatism,C.E.O. is Vice president. Land where the children cry,land where my brothers die,land where the dollar flys,Let polution flow! Follow the money people, any good detective does. It ain't in my pocket, aint in yours. It's in the plunderers! About 8 trillion is missing/ someone has it! How about not being so conservative with the I.N.S. agents and sending them into every Company to see who they have illegally working for them/ Then fine some of that money back. How about a "LIBERAL" gaurd at the Border too. And while we are at it how about a conservative fiscal policy that does not take needless risks with our country. After all when we lose it there's no place to run! So who is a Liberal and who is a conservative. Maybe it's time the Government did administer to something!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#951 Consumer Comment

No argument there B

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 03, 2006

My buddy's Beagle could do a better job than most pols have been doing so far, from either side of the aisle. Maybe we could turn the election process into something like American Idol. More people vote for that.

Go to the Circuit City thread this argument took over. Ben is STILL trying to claim Vera and Sean painted the issue as a huge problem, when HE was the ONLY one saying that. Another poster jumped in and said the schools in his state are doing the Islam thing too. So, maybe it IS a widespread issue.

For the record, I don't want ANY religion taught in Government Schools, but I definitely do not want the religion of head chopping and stoning taught there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#950 Consumer Comment

Sorry, Ben & Robert, but you're both wrong!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Vera brought this issue up in response to one of my posts. It was included in a list of supposed attacks on Christianity in the schools, and included schools in several states. So, Ben, no she was not trying to single out you or the state you live in. And, Robert, it is obvious from her phrasing and context that she was, contrary to her later denial, attempting to cast it in as broad a spectrum as possible. 'Sides, the "logic" you are espousing is pretty far out there, even for you.

As for that voting fiasco in Florida, Robert, there were so many problems the whole election should have been declared null and void. But rather than letting Congress pick one idiot or the other, we should have just hired someone competent for the job. Perhaps an illegal immigrant selected at random from a day labor pool. I understand most people are very satisfied with the work they do, so he'd have an approval rating higher than Bush's effective IQ. And we could pay him 1/3 of Bush's salary with no bennies. It is hard to fathom how he could do a worse job. On the downside, people would expect him to be a terrible speaker since English would be a second language, which would put hundreds of stand-up comedians out of work.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#949 Consumer Comment

Let's all see if we can see who's zooming who?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 30, 2006

More nitwittery from Benjo:
"These numbers are listed as "2004 estimate". Let me guess that will be your next tangent to go off on?"

You betcha. ALL you ever did in HERE was drone on about needing proof of EXACT numbers. Now, you want to use ESTIMATES as your proof? Get real. The entire argument was about the difference between ONE, and maybe TWO or more. You went off the tracks for months over this ONE point. Now, when YOU use numbers that are thousands, or millions off the mark, YOU demand estimates be allowed as PROOF. Fat chance.

"The reason this whole subject was started was because Vera and you wanted to attack me personally by associating ME with this INCIDENT in a small town near me. By doing so you wanted to discredit the entire state of California.

In that capacity.....you failed! COMPLETELY!"

Again Bennie-Boi, WE never claimed it was anything like that. YOU tried repeatedly to make the argument about some grand statewide program. YOU Ben. Nobody else. Just YOU. As it turns out though, it was two schools in your County. I said Byron, and you gave me Brentwood. Nice. That just proves YOU knew it all along. The only one who failed at all, was YOU. YOU tried to make a mountain out of a molehill, and WE kept razing your attempts.

"Even if I was completely clueless about the incident, which is the bogus scenario you rally around, it makes no difference. The fact is still the same. Vera and you used it to discredit me. Just for the simple fact that I LIVED in the same state. As if I persononally had something to do with it."

At least you admit you are clueless. I like the second part of that sentence though. You are admitting that you knew what we were talking about, but as you say, it makes no difference. That's for sure. FACTS never make a difference to Liberals. They just get in the way of a good cry don't they? Vera and I(don't forget Sean) didn't discredit you. YOU did that all by yourself. And the issue isn't that you lived in the same STATE. You live in the same COUNTY. And, you live in the County Seat, where the School Board decided to allow this idiocy. And yes Ben, YOU do have something to do with it "personally". YOU live there. A decent, honest man, with integrity, would have said something like "yes, they attempted that sort of thing here, but the citizens found out about it and had the program eliminated". Instead, YOU chose to call us names, and try to berate the whole issue as Right-Wing, Religious Fanaticism.

"Have you heard me bash you about hanging chads because you live in Florida? NO! Of course if I were like you and Vera, I would be bringing that up non-stop since I "just happened to notice" that you live in Florida."

Go for it Ben. I didn't live here when that fiasco happened. The only real problem about that whole issue was, the Dems only wanted to recount the votes in the 6 districts they knew they might win. The Reps, and the US Supreme Court said that if they were going to recount, they had to recount the entire state, INCLUDING ALL of the absentee ballots. The Dems also attempted to eliminate those from the vote. Hanging chads? I think they should have thrown those away. If you are too stupid or pathetic to push a sharp pin through a perforated piece of paper, you don't deserve a vote. Anyone want to bet who those voters were trying to vote FOR? Here's a hint...he lost.

Have a nice day Ben.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#948 Consumer Comment

Anwar? - The Bush administration repeatedly displays contempt for personal liberties. The Bush administration has wasted thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in a war of many circumstances and reasons, but primarily about oil.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 30, 2006

"Don't forget it is the democrats that blocked the oil drilling in Anwar where if we had started it 20 years ago when it was first brought up we wouldn't be in the predicament we are in today."

John, when you say Anwar, I presume you mean ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in Alaska. Don't be naive. Like the typical neocon, you swallow every conservative newsbyte placed before you and regurgitate upon demand, never checking to see if the facts even superficially support the claim. The ANWR reserves are scattered in small pools throughout the Refuge, not concentrated lakes like the current producing areas. Even if we go with the most liberal figures and estimates (those espoused by the "conservatives") at full production, the ANWR fields would reduce our dependence on foreign oil by less than 10 percent. The most realistic figures seem to fall in the 5-6 percent range. While the oil execs claim they can do exploration with a small environmental footprint, even they have had to admit that full blown extraction would have a major impact. And your contention that Democrats, in particular, are responsible for blocking the drilling, is absurd, and merely reflects your hatred for Democrats.

So you continue to propagate the big lie, that more profits to big oil companies can somehow mitigate the predicament we are in. The real culprit is greed, and the ONLY way to reduce our dependence on foreign oil is to reduce the greed. Greed at the top that promotes raping the earth and stealing from our descendants, in the name of obscene profits, while at best paying lip service to the idea of developing renewable and sustainable energy sources. Greed shared by almost every man, woman, and child in this country, that places our every whim and immediate gratification above the life sustaining needs of other countries, above the legacy we pass to our children, and above the continued security of this country. Where is the passage in your vaunted holy bible that advocates this kind of greed?

With less than 5 percent of the world population, we consume more than a fourth of the oil produced, yet we b***h and freak out when our gas prices exceed a third of what people in other countries pay. We have enjoyed the benefits of unchecked industrialization for a century. For half that time we've known increasingly about the problems, but have done little to alleviate them. Now, we would rather go to war than allow developing nations to enjoy those same benefits. We would rather go to war than nurture the vivacious, innovative spirit that once made this a great country. We have become fat and lazy and are courting a major heart attack. It would be a significant burden on my budget if gas jumped to 20 dollars a gallon, but since conventional wisdom holds that only sissies and Democrats take positive action for any reason other than a hit in the pocketbook, I can only hope we see a major price increase soon.

The Bush administration repeatedly displays contempt for personal liberties. The Bush administration has wasted thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in a war of many circumstances and reasons, but primarily about oil. Bush supports energy policies that will totally deplete our natural resources in 20 - 30 years, leaving us completely at the mercy of OPEC and the like. Bush's economic policies have nearly doubled the national debt in six years and we are running record budget deficits. The Bush administration has overseen the gutting of the average household wage coupled with a marked decrease in spending power, and is currently engaged in a plan to circumvent the already pathetic minimum wage laws by flooding the market with workers from Mexico. Bush continually lies to and misleads the public to further his own political ambitions. Why is it that you blindly support this administration? Is it just so you can continue to crap on Democrats? Are you willing to forsake everything in order to feel superior to the liberals? Well, happy hunting, my friend. Luckily, I will be long gone when the reaper arrives to harvest what we have sown. I weep for my grandchildren.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#947 Consumer Comment

Patrick, Patrick...And you are one to talk?

AUTHOR: Joustin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 29, 2006

Here is an idea, maybe proofread your submission before having this feeling of accomplishment. I know of no "desease" in this Universe and of nobody inflicted with such a thing. Unproven opinions? Facts can be substantiated; but opinions, you know what they say about those. At this point your proving this adage with your rendition of intelligence. I really enjoy this thread, regardless of what may appear as someone's intellectual inaptitude, so Patrick stick with this thread or file your own against James.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#946 Consumer Comment

To the two James, one in New York and the other in Canada!

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 29, 2006

I have killed a number of minutes reading your comments. I have come to the conclusion that you are both related to each other or have the same genetic desease...lack of brain cells. MY GOD....how have you lived your life to this point being so stupid? It would seem your neighbors or for that matter, your teachers or parents would have taken you out to the woods and come back without you! Maybe they did. You really should stop rambling on with your STUPID and unproven opinions.....it only works you up and destroys more brain cells! And we all know what happens then...more stupid thoughts spewed out of your mouths! God gave you a mouth to prevent stupid thoughts from spilling out of your small underdeveloped brains...use that small physical ability to prevent that. Seriously, It sounds like you might have been "driven" to Canada in the late 60's or early 70"s to escape your draft status. James in New York, you have snuck back across the border, haven't you? Reading your drivel is disheartening......proving that even the most stupid human beings can't be helped in developing their miniscule brains! Sorry....you need to go back to remedial schooling to help find a way to support yourselves. Enough said!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#945 Consumer Comment

Fairy height 911

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 29, 2006

Tressa, please tell me you're kidding. Michael Moore has the same sort of filmmaking talent that M. Knight Shyamalan has - that of making the ridiculous seem (barely) plausible. Like Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code, F911 spins its fiction off a bedrock of facts to make the tale more compelling, but the end result is the same, fictional entertainment. Well, the first part is entertaining; lets face it, its fun to make fun of the big guy. The remainder is nothing more than a series of dull, narrow vignettes, sequenced, edited and narrated to entice the viewer into believing often vague conspiracy theories. In many cases, the only logic underlying a particular theory is that provided by the droning voice of Moore as narrator. There are no documents, no legal evidence, just spin.

Case in point, the Bush family dealings with the bin Laden family are no secret. Most of the world who have business in Saudi Arabia have had dealings with the bin Laden family. And many US Presidents have enjoyed a close relationship with the Saudi royal family since Roosevelt arranged for us to provide their military security in exchange for privileged access to their oil. More interesting is the way Clinton and Bush Sr. have been cozying up together recently. What foul conspiracy must be brewing behind that relationship, eh?

To really begin to understand Bush's position, you need to spend some time in the library researching the politics and government actions of the last 50-60 years. The reality is much more entertaining (and more frightening) than Michael Moore's self-serving and mostly fictional attack-u-mentary.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#944 Consumer Comment

Concerning f911

AUTHOR: Paul - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 29, 2006

Tressa - Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Your a fool, that movie was so full of holes, lies, and mistruths that anybody who would
consider it anything but filth is a idiot.

While some of it may have some element of truth within, its sufficent bad enough to not even be a good movie.

That producer of that movie should get run over by a truck.


Signed,
A former democrat.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#943 Consumer Comment

Everyone--watch "Farenheit 911"

AUTHOR: Tressa - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

All US citizens:
Go to your local video store and rent the movie "Farenheit 911". It wraps up George W. in a nutshell. There are all sorts of documents and scenes of him caught on tape that we do not realize. For example--there is legal evidence that the Bush family had business dealings with the bin Laden family way before Bush senior became our president! I was surprised at this! Hmmmmm...terror from a greedy business dealing gone bad?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#942 Consumer Suggestion

I'm serious man!

AUTHOR: Carlo - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

Hey, I am not name calling! Some of my best freinds and family members are Republican.
I am serious when I say it seems if not to be a mental illness, then a rather scewed sense of philosophy based on prejudice, fear and I hate to say it...greed.

You could say almost the same for liberal conspiracy theorists.

It has not always been this way. In the past the two partys were more alike. Lets not forget Theodore Roosevelt, in spite of his trophy hunting obsession was freinds and ally with John Muir who started the Sierra Club. Being Conservative also meant conserving.

And yes, the Fox news channel seems small minded and a little too c**k-sure about its facts.
And for those who say Democrats don't have any answers, I advise to get out and read there current events and history a little more.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#941 Consumer Comment

You have to love these guys

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

According to the truly "inspired", anyone who shows no animosity toward Bush is a right-wing fanatic, a religios zealot, or just a mean old republican.

Absolutely astounding to say the least.

And here I am, a fiscal conservative-social liberal, atheist, Libertarian.

I have no ill will for Bush. At least he took the fight to the bad guys. It seems one party in this country forgot we were at war with them during the 90's. Just because our President during that time chose to do nothing, had no effect on them continuing to attack us.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#940 Consumer Suggestion

Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

Way to go Carlo.......

You just prove the theory that the democrats have no agenda or plan and their only plan is to belittle and show hatred to Republicans.

With this agenda led by Howard Dean, John Kerry and others the democrats are turning int babies that cry and belittle anyone that doesn't agree with them. Maybe someone would agree with them if they came up with a plan instead of just namecalling and proving that they HATE anyone who isn't a Democrat.

I pray that you and others will wise up so that this country could possibly come together.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#939 Consumer Suggestion

Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

Way to go Carlo.......

You just prove the theory that the democrats have no agenda or plan and their only plan is to belittle and show hatred to Republicans.

With this agenda led by Howard Dean, John Kerry and others the democrats are turning int babies that cry and belittle anyone that doesn't agree with them. Maybe someone would agree with them if they came up with a plan instead of just namecalling and proving that they HATE anyone who isn't a Democrat.

I pray that you and others will wise up so that this country could possibly come together.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#938 Consumer Suggestion

Another Brilliant Statement Carlo

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 28, 2006

Way to go Carlo.......

You just prove the theory that the democrats have no agenda or plan and their only plan is to belittle and show hatred to Republicans.

With this agenda led by Howard Dean, John Kerry and others the democrats are turning int babies that cry and belittle anyone that doesn't agree with them. Maybe someone would agree with them if they came up with a plan instead of just namecalling and proving that they HATE anyone who isn't a Democrat.

I pray that you and others will wise up so that this country could possibly come together.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#937 Consumer Suggestion

Republicanism is a mental illness.

AUTHOR: Carlo - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 27, 2006

I am convinced that Republicanism is an undiagnosed mental illness, fueled by zipperheads on the likes of the Fox News channel.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#936 Consumer Suggestion

Charles, You all have Al Franken????

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Charles,
You say in your post that Sean Hannity blasts all democrats. he only blasts the people that call his show that come up with the same rhetoric that you do when you constantly repeat the same thing over and over again. Why do you have so much hatred for the republicans? You claim to be a christian and you spew nothing but hate. Please tell me where in the bible i can find where it is OK to hate somebody just because they don't agree with me....... You won't answer this because you are a typical democrat and don't have an answer you just want to hate Republicans.

Do you ever listen to Al Franken? You will never hear a conservative on his show because he has them all screened out so that he isn't confronted. He spews the typical "WE HAte Bush" and of course has no legitimate suggestion on what to do except that if it is frpom a republican it is wrong.

Don't forget it is the democrats that blocked the oil drilling in Anwar where if we had started it 20 years ago when it was first brought up we wouldn't be in the predicament we are in today. The democrats claim to be in favor of alternate energy but when the energy companies wanted to put windmills near your buddy Ted kennedy's house that was the end of that. In other words the democrats want something done just not in this country or where we can see it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#935 Consumer Suggestion

Charles, You all have Al Franken????

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Charles,
You say in your post that Sean Hannity blasts all democrats. he only blasts the people that call his show that come up with the same rhetoric that you do when you constantly repeat the same thing over and over again. Why do you have so much hatred for the republicans? You claim to be a christian and you spew nothing but hate. Please tell me where in the bible i can find where it is OK to hate somebody just because they don't agree with me....... You won't answer this because you are a typical democrat and don't have an answer you just want to hate Republicans.

Do you ever listen to Al Franken? You will never hear a conservative on his show because he has them all screened out so that he isn't confronted. He spews the typical "WE HAte Bush" and of course has no legitimate suggestion on what to do except that if it is frpom a republican it is wrong.

Don't forget it is the democrats that blocked the oil drilling in Anwar where if we had started it 20 years ago when it was first brought up we wouldn't be in the predicament we are in today. The democrats claim to be in favor of alternate energy but when the energy companies wanted to put windmills near your buddy Ted kennedy's house that was the end of that. In other words the democrats want something done just not in this country or where we can see it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#934 Consumer Comment

Hannity republicans offical mascot

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Everytime hannity speaks he spews his venom @ people who disagrees with him don't listn to the bush or hannity fans on this website, they do not know what they are talking about they just get in the way for us not to say anything negative about bush just ignore them!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#933 Consumer Comment

George Bush....he is in line for the "balance".

AUTHOR: Scott D. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 24, 2006

George Bush Ain't Great...but Liberals Confuse Lack Of Greatness With Honest EFFORT! Confusing Washington District of Columbia

As I read these thoughts, of many, I stop and wonder how we got where we are. Seems we are all looking for faith in people and the future.

One side is a slasher and the other a defender. Who is truly right and who is truly wrong? Just maybe...just maybe neither are on the side of correctness. Decisions are made and people judge them...that is it...bottom line. Every president can be hammered on causing deaths...weather the intervened or decided to turn their head.

Where do we go from here? Anger wins nothing but frustration.

"We the people", I do like the feeling that gives me. It is time we turn our thoughts to "We" and not me. Too many, on both sides, feel they have the answer. There never truly is an answer that is right for both spectrums of thought.

Where do we go from here? Seems we neeed to believe in something bigger then any president, past or present, has or can offer. Seems we need to re-believe in "We the People". By doing this we can put down the masks and the barriers that prevent both sides from reversing their extremeness.

We all want our children to grow up and live a life that has fullness and joy. Each one of us wants to enjoy the calmness and sweetness of nature and love. Yet...we banter like children that have to say their toy is the best.

Where to we go from here? "We The People". Thing about the words...let them sink in and find those feelings of togetherness. We have a long walk ahead of us just like generations before.

Each President has tried his best and there actons seem to balance out the other. Maybe some are scum...or greedy...but like the uniqueness of life the end results find a balance.

Where to we go from here? Maybe it is time to understand the balances of life. You need to accept your party will not be in office for a while but soon they will be....the "balance". It is this balance that has made this country great. It is these checks and balances that the forefathers where blessed to know were the right thing to add to our original documents of existance.

I don't believe any party hates the country. There may be a few on the far edge...but deep down inside 99% completely love the U.S.A.. We need to recognize this fact.

Where do we go from here? Pyschiatrists, therapists, self help groups? Not for this. They do have a place though. Each person, of sound mind and body, needs to find there peace in accepting "the balance". To not get caught up in hype...media or other. Find a way to accept. Do go dormant and not care. But care with an understanding of "the balance". In doing this there will be less hate. I have never seen hate win anything of importance that lasted.

Republicans are noted as the defenders and worriers. Democrats are seen to be for fair rights and awareness. Both feel they are both of these. Both are wrong. That's O.K....because we have a balance. The balance of time and change.


Where do we fo from here? Read and educate yourself on being positive. A negative mind will only destroy its holder. Napolean Hill was quite insightfull in framing your mind in a positive manner daily.

It is time for each man and woman to find faith and comfort in "the balance" the forefathers created. Seek this place...the place where you stop screaming at eachother. Find yourself by knowing that our country is one that will, in the long term, balance out its priorities and efforts.

You know not which party I am for...I am comitted to a "forefather" based party. This means that at different times I am saddling both sides of the fence. Not to be wishy-washy but to see the importance of the "balance". Each side has its upmost importance. Those whom say the Democrat party is going deep end liberal should comfort in the fact that their group will balance them out as they feel they are balancing you out.

Last time..."Where to we go from here?". I suggest to get a diary and write in it how you feel then finish with a way we can be more tolerant of the other and realize it will balance out. You might not think so...but it will. This is the first step. By doing this you start realizing the other is human...not some mutation. This first step is crucial...you must find the tolerant logical side of you that sees the other as a real person...not something dreamed up as pure evil.

Next...we must start showing this in public so the faith in eachother can regrow. In the conversations you have ,with similair opinions, you need to show the caring for the otherside as they are a crucial part of the balance.

To finish, find your peace...remove anger and put in concern. Remove tantrums and display diplomacy...even when the other won't. You will be the stronger and the more "forefather" seen advocate. This country is not about hatred. Remove that...find your quiet place where you understand the "We the People" is going to make the scale stay in the middle.

Good luck. Stay wise. Don't compromise yourself for others

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#932 Consumer Suggestion

Park your Car in front of the White House !!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 24, 2006

Well when we all don't have enough gas because the Big Oil Companies are holding out on us, we all should drive, trailer or tow our cars to Washington and park them out front of the White House,, and Declare it a new National Historic Site !!!

Also write foul things on the windshields, as to our disgrace with the politics of this !!

It could also be considered a new National Junk-Yard for automobiles,, got a piece of junk that doesn't drive anymore, or a gas hog you can't get gas for anymore,,, park it in front of the White House, and also leave them in front of the Big Oil companies Executive offices !!!

I can just see hundreds of thousands of cars parked in front of the White House and the offices of the Oil Executives,,, that'd leave them in a mess,,,,,

Hey George,, can I borrow a few thousand for gas,, I got a hot date tonight,,,,and your daughter would rather not walk, she prefers to ride,, need gas money "Daddy O' "

IF You ain't got it, thats OK, I'll try asking Uncle d**k,,, we all know Cheneys got money,,,,

If he's to tight,, I'll ask your buddy ol' Kenneth Lay of that Enron Corportation, I'm sure he's got a few Billon squirreled away somewhere from the eyes of the Feds !!!!!!

Promise I'll have her by Midnight, if I don't run out of gas,, remember that ol' trick ???????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#931 Consumer Comment

George Bush and 9/11

AUTHOR: Steven - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 24, 2006

As far as September 11th, George W. Bush basically has admitted to prior knowledge of the attacks. Here's the proof:

1. He stated that he saw the first plane it the tower prior to going into the classroom. He was told about the second plane crash as he was sitting in the classroom, this was seen on television.

How can he have seen the "first" plane crash when it wasn't shown on television until later? How could he have meant to say that he saw the "second" plane crash when it didn't happen until after he was in the classroom?

2. Where was the plane wreckage that hit the Pentagon? Why wasn't there more video cameras shown to the public after the attack?

There were no wreckage at the Pentagon of the airplane. The damage to the Pentagon was too small for a 757 Boeing to attack and leave no wreckage.

At first, the government stated that there were no video footage of the attack on the Pentagon. Then later, after several discrepancies being revealed, they showed some shots of video footages that are delayed 5 to 10 seconds. Second, the date and time on the video footage shown was wrong. It indicated September 12th. They should have more video footage of this attack. After all, the Pentagon is the nerve center of our military.

3. Wouldn't a tower that was struck by an airplane have fallen differently instead of like a controlled demolition?

All three towers fell in the manner of a controlled demolition. The north tower, the south tower, and building 7 were the three towers that fell on September 11th.

If you are thinking that after the towers were attacked that the government decided to "pull" the towers to prevent further damage to other buildings and people. Then I have to say that they could have let several dozen more people out of the towers prior to "pulling" the towers.

4. What's up with building 7? Why did they have to "pull" it?

I've yet to figure this one out.

5. What about the previous warnings provided to the FBI about student pilots wanting to learn to fly but not how to take off?

These reports were disregarded. Why?

6. The plane that attacked the Pentagon was "officially" reported that the plane was only a few inches from the ground when it hit and that the plane had been flying very low. Why didn't people around hear or see an airplane flying low? Why didn't the plane damage anything else prior to hitting the Pentagon?

When a plane is flying so low to the ground, it is hard not to see and hear. Why didn't the media ask the general public if they heard or saw anything? They only asked public officials.

If you live near the Pentagon or were around the Pentagon, did you hear or see a 757 boeing flying low to the ground? Be honest with us and yourself. You know that you didn't and I know that you didn't, because there was no 757 boeing that attacked the Pentagon.

There are several more conflicts with the "official" report of September 11th, I am going to go ahead and send this.

As far as George W. Bush and Iraq, he did not attack them because of oil. The real reasons are:

1. Sadam technically beat his daddy. If someone beat your daddy as Sadam did, wouldn't you want to do what Bush Jr. did?

2. This is the beginning of the WWIII, known as the war against the Muslims. This war has been known about since the late 1700s. Yes, late 1700s. Do your research on the illuminati and you will find out. This reason is the main reason of the two.

As far as the "Republican Party" and "Democrat Party," these parties are nothing but a bunch of bull. The only way to vote is for the person, not the stupid party.

Seriously think about what I just said.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#930 Consumer Suggestion

Secret Oil Meetings !!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 24, 2006

Remember those Secret Oil Meetings Cheney had with Oil Executives a few years ago,, well now we see what that was about,,, to let them hike the prices up, as high as they want, and to let the executives make ridlicious amounts of greedy cash and multi-billion dollar pensions for themselves !

They're all "Fraudusters", Parasites, Termites, to society !!!!!

I'm all ready for them tho,,, I've got my MAD-MAX car ready,,and will become the "Road-Warrior", when all hell breaks loose !!!!

Times a coming,,, it'll be just like that too ! Signed: The Postman !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#929 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush is making a profit on gas prices!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 22, 2006

George Walker Bush-d**k Cheney, are making huge profits from our oil prices. I see gas prices at $3.19 per gallon. I find this as repulsive as Bush himself. I don't think we should be blamed because of Bush's failure as an oil executive. He ran his company into the ground. I see he has run our country into the ground as well. I dare and praise people to speak up against this travesty and condone Bush for his doing!!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#928 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush is making a profit on gas prices!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 22, 2006

George Walker Bush-d**k Cheney, are making huge profits from our oil prices. I see gas prices at $3.19 per gallon. I find this as repulsive as Bush himself. I don't think we should be blamed because of Bush's failure as an oil executive. He ran his company into the ground. I see he has run our country into the ground as well. I dare and praise people to speak up against this travesty and condone Bush for his doing!!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#927 Consumer Comment

I see you took a day off for "four-twenty", Jim....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 22, 2006

Feeling a little "out of the loop", eh, James of Tupper?

Okay, let's Tango, Baby.

"George Walker Bush became alot richer, as he made lots of money in oil-gas prices=he is linked to Exxon-Mobil as profiter."

Where is your irrefutable proof regarding this statement? George Bush himself is our President, not the Oil tycoon running Exxon Mobil. But I'd like to see where you get your info.

At least, when I say "Mike Moore had shares in Halliburton Stock", there's proof out there. Look for a book called "Do As I Say, Not As I Do" for pictures of his (Moore's) taxes, signature, and other fun things the liberals lie to us about.


"I say we are stealing oil from Iraq, and I beg to be proven wrong!"

I say you're fulla gorilla snot, as you have NEVER, EVER provided even ONE SINGLE SCRAP of evidence to prove you're right or that you're telling the truth. You have already been repeatedly and systematically proven wrong by any number of posts here, including on the other Report. So your "beg" has been answered.

"It will never be---"

---It just has, look all over this very Report and its responses. If you can't see it, then you're one blind Egyptian, living in DeNile, like much of the Leftie-Losers out there.


"---as I am telling the truth."

Not anywhere near it...don't worry. :)

"George W. Bush is at war because Daddy got slapped! I also believe he needed a reason to invade Iraq for the rich Americans..."

Blah, blah, yack...yack, burp, fart, blah, blah...
Same old drivel......same old drivel....same old......z-z-z-z-z-z?zzzzz.....

"We are killing!"

What's this "We" stuff you're bleating on about? It's not like you'd have the cahones to join the military and fight for your Country!
?I don't like to kill!?

Start by stopping the mass murder of brain cells (in your case, it might be too late!)?or are you at least decent enough to get them drunk first, as you rape them over and over with your leftbent thought process? Put down the Joint/blunt/bottle/bong/pipe or whatever, stop filling yourself with chemical courage and get a life.

Let me guess, as this will most likely bring about another clever little quip about how I'm "a dumb b***h" or "retarded or wealthy", "Brain-dead or blind"...yaddah-yaddah....yaddah-yaddah....

Just remember, Jimbo...take it to your tender mercies that in a battle of wits, I won't fight an unarmed man, so you're safe. Nothing you could possibly say is gonna bring you a millimeter closer to providing a grain of truth.

As usual, you disappoint.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#926 REBUTTAL Individual responds

George Walker Bush -Killing for wealth!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 22, 2006

George Walker Bush became alot richer, as he made lots of money in oil-gas prices=he is linked to Exxon-Mobil as profiter. I say we are stealing oil from Iraq, and I beg to be proven wrong! It will never be, as I am telling the truth. George W. Bush is at war because Daddy got slapped! I also believe he needed a reason to invade Iraq for the rich Americans. They need the oil from Iraq! They are stealing it very well, with exception from some Iraqis that blow them up. If some foreign country took us over, tell me if you would let them just controll us??? I know I wouldn't. I would fight them! Thats what Iraq people are doing! We are killing! I don't like to kill! I urge you to post this!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#925 Consumer Comment

A Republican Speaks Out!!!

AUTHOR: Arthur - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 17, 2006

To all of you in this thread who think voting a party is easier than thinking, do not read on. If you would vote for and make excuses for a child rapist and Satan worshiper as long as he was on your party's ticket, you won't want to read on. If you are an American first and a party loyalist second there is hope for you. Read on, please.

Now, I voted for Bush because I hoped he would be the lesser of two evils. I have been proven wrong, and I admit my mistake. The following is a post I wrote on CONGRESS.ORG back in December. I periodically add things there as they seem appropriate. You folks can go there and sound off in their forum as well.

You can also go to reopen911.org and they will send you a free DVD titled Confronting The Evidence. All you who are patriotic Americans owe it to your country to check it out. You ostriches in hysterical denial will, of course, lash out and spit venom and offer no coherent and sane reasons why you refuse to do so.

Happy reading, you decent people out there. :-)

Arthur


A Republican Speaks Out!

I May Vote Republican, But I Am Not Blind, Nor Am I a Dumb Sheep

Now that "my" president got up to the podium and insulted my intelligence and my patriotism on Veterans Day I am going to answer him. He said, in essence, "It doesn't matter any more whether I lied to the American people and manipulated the intelligence presented to Congress in order to gain support for my invasion of Iraq. The fact is we are there. And now that we are there, even if it us under false pretenses, it is cruel and inhuman treatment of our troops if we don't support them."

It's Pearl Harbor all over again. Intelligence suppressed to make the case for war. U.S. ships and American lives sacrificed in order to enrage the populace and gain support for war. Even without watching some documentary about WWII on TV exposing the cover-up of intelligence information, all you have to do is go to the Naval Historical Center's own website and read with half a brain. It says:

"By late November 1941, with peace negotiations [with Japan] clearly approaching an end, informed U.S. officials (and they were well-informed... through an ability to read Japan's diplomatic codes) fully expected a Japanese attack into the Indies, Malaya and probably the Philippines. Completely unanticipated [HUH?] was the prospect that Japan would attack east, as well."
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/pearlhbr/pearlhbr.htm

Yeah, right. We had all this info, and the codes broken and everything, and never once heard a single word about the plans to attack the U.S. Just all those other places.

So what was the real behind-the-scenes reason for invading Iraq, incensing an already U.S.-hating region, and destabilizing the area? Not oil, surely. Saddam would sell us all the oil we wanted. Sure Saddam was a mass murderer and mass rapist, but whose job was it to stop him? God's or the U.S.? Did God appoint George Bush as His hit man? And if you don't think there is a God, by what authority do you say we should go in and waste Saddam? You have no moral authority for the invasion in that case, now that nobody has been able to come up with any WMD's as promised.
Unless you fancy yourself as god and chief of police of the natural order, that is....

Is this the best way to fight the terrorists in the first place? I'm no general with a lifer career under my belt, but would my best choice be to subject our troops to 120? heat while wrapping them in all that body armor and go in virtually hand-to-hand? And then take an area and leave, only to let the enemy slither back out of their holes and worm their way back into the territory you just "liberated"? Nope. There has got to be a better way!
And why are things so poorly run that the U.S. Army with all its armaments and technology can't even hold and defend the road to the airport without 60 Minutes doing a report first?

Am I supposed to believe the U.S. Army is this stupid and incompetent and not think they are forced to be so by the higher-ups?

And that makes this Vietnam all over again as well. Limited war for limited objectives. Like Rambo said in a psychotic flashback to Vietnam:
"They [U.S. top officials] wouldn't LET us win!"

I've heard Bush called "out of touch with the American people." He must be, to think he could get away with an old scam like this that's already been tried before. Not too smart, Mr. President, to wage a protracted war where your Secretary of State won't even rule out the possibility of being there for an additional ten years... or even more.

This is the sort of behavior the GOP endorses. Especially Elizabeth Dole, who got on a Sunday talk show and tried to hijack the program with her pro-Bush and pro-war rhetoric, talking on and on about things not germane in order to hold the floor as long as possible and stifle any opposing views.

That's how the subversive left behaves, Lizzie.

The blood of those who died be on your head, Elizabeth, and on those who think and act like you: Pragmatists who think the end justifies the means, no matter how immoral and unconscionable.

I used to think that it was the liberal extremists who thought with their glands, who embraced unsubstantiated opinion to their bosom at the drop of a hat, virtually swept off their feet by their own self-perceived compassion, while the conservatives used reason, honest debate, and common sense to come to their conclusions and justify their views. Now the far left and the far right are looking a lot alike. Both equally given to blind and irrational opinions without fact or merit.

So what is the answer? We lobby for an end to this war post haste; we accept no excuses for a Commander-in-Chief and Defense Secretary (and a Senator McCain) who could not know in advance that if we pull out of an area the enemy returns...("Oops! Now we need more troops to hold the areas we took...couldn't have foreseen the need before, heh heh."); and we don't stand for leadership who thinks we are so stupid that we can't tell when they are milking a war for profit and political gain.

And then we ask God to see to it that the guilty parties--those who were responsible for using lies and half truths as excuses for spilling American blood for their own personal private ends (as well as those who agree with them) -- will have their own blood spilled as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#924 Consumer Comment

What HUGE profits?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 13, 2006

You talk about the "Oil Companies" manipulating prices. OPEC did that in the 70's, not the Oil Companies.

The wage and price controls were set in place by Nixon...bad idea on his part.

As for the HUGE profits the Oil Companies are raking in, so what? They still only average about 7-9% profit MARGIN. This is the normal margin for ANY company, oil related or not.

Were you complaining about their LOW profits during the 80's and 90's when fuel was much cheaper? They operated on 4-6% margins then. Now, they are actually in line with the rest of the world markets.

BTW, in case you missed it, most truck companies went under during the late 70's-80's due to their attempts to raise shipping rates. It didn't work then, and it won't work now. It's called COMPETITION. Look into it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#923 Consumer Suggestion

Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Well how many of you Remember the early 1970s ?? Remember the Truckers Strike and Protests out on the Interstates and how they used their Rigs to block the Hi-Ways when the Big Oil Companies tried to manuipliate the high Fuel prices back in 1973 and 1974 and again in 1979 !!!!!!

Well guess what,, its going to start again fairly soon, if this ridlicious high Gouging keeps up, their getting by with it,, because we Americans are letting them, and we keep letting them, because we, are asleep at the wheel !!!!

We, sure as hell didn't let them get by with it in the 70s, why, are we now, letting them get by with it now ??????

Have we, been so dumbed down, by Corporate America and Big Government that we are unable to think and act for ourselves ??????


People, "nobody" is going to just happen by and change your world for you, "YOU" have to Act and make it happen, and get others involved, just like we did in the 1970s, when, we blocked I-80 with our trucks,, and formed Trucker Convoys across the United States and straight to Washington, where we, used our semi Trucks to circle the White House and the State Capitol in Washington to protest what these Big Oil Conglormates were doin to us, and lieing to us,,, while enjoying enoromously huge profits, and disrupting the economic well being of this country and others for outright pure GREED !!!

I'd suggest everybody,,, show support for the Truckers when the Time nears we have to do it again, which will be very soon, were sticking up for everybody, show support and join in if necessary we'd greatly appreciate it !!!

Thank-You !!!! Trucker/24 years ! !

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#922 Consumer Suggestion

Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Well how many of you Remember the early 1970s ?? Remember the Truckers Strike and Protests out on the Interstates and how they used their Rigs to block the Hi-Ways when the Big Oil Companies tried to manuipliate the high Fuel prices back in 1973 and 1974 and again in 1979 !!!!!!

Well guess what,, its going to start again fairly soon, if this ridlicious high Gouging keeps up, their getting by with it,, because we Americans are letting them, and we keep letting them, because we, are asleep at the wheel !!!!

We, sure as hell didn't let them get by with it in the 70s, why, are we now, letting them get by with it now ??????

Have we, been so dumbed down, by Corporate America and Big Government that we are unable to think and act for ourselves ??????


People, "nobody" is going to just happen by and change your world for you, "YOU" have to Act and make it happen, and get others involved, just like we did in the 1970s, when, we blocked I-80 with our trucks,, and formed Trucker Convoys across the United States and straight to Washington, where we, used our semi Trucks to circle the White House and the State Capitol in Washington to protest what these Big Oil Conglormates were doin to us, and lieing to us,,, while enjoying enoromously huge profits, and disrupting the economic well being of this country and others for outright pure GREED !!!

I'd suggest everybody,,, show support for the Truckers when the Time nears we have to do it again, which will be very soon, were sticking up for everybody, show support and join in if necessary we'd greatly appreciate it !!!

Thank-You !!!! Trucker/24 years ! !

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#921 Consumer Suggestion

Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Well how many of you Remember the early 1970s ?? Remember the Truckers Strike and Protests out on the Interstates and how they used their Rigs to block the Hi-Ways when the Big Oil Companies tried to manuipliate the high Fuel prices back in 1973 and 1974 and again in 1979 !!!!!!

Well guess what,, its going to start again fairly soon, if this ridlicious high Gouging keeps up, their getting by with it,, because we Americans are letting them, and we keep letting them, because we, are asleep at the wheel !!!!

We, sure as hell didn't let them get by with it in the 70s, why, are we now, letting them get by with it now ??????

Have we, been so dumbed down, by Corporate America and Big Government that we are unable to think and act for ourselves ??????


People, "nobody" is going to just happen by and change your world for you, "YOU" have to Act and make it happen, and get others involved, just like we did in the 1970s, when, we blocked I-80 with our trucks,, and formed Trucker Convoys across the United States and straight to Washington, where we, used our semi Trucks to circle the White House and the State Capitol in Washington to protest what these Big Oil Conglormates were doin to us, and lieing to us,,, while enjoying enoromously huge profits, and disrupting the economic well being of this country and others for outright pure GREED !!!

I'd suggest everybody,,, show support for the Truckers when the Time nears we have to do it again, which will be very soon, were sticking up for everybody, show support and join in if necessary we'd greatly appreciate it !!!

Thank-You !!!! Trucker/24 years ! !

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#920 Consumer Suggestion

Its a "Gasser" !!!!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Well how many of you Remember the early 1970s ?? Remember the Truckers Strike and Protests out on the Interstates and how they used their Rigs to block the Hi-Ways when the Big Oil Companies tried to manuipliate the high Fuel prices back in 1973 and 1974 and again in 1979 !!!!!!

Well guess what,, its going to start again fairly soon, if this ridlicious high Gouging keeps up, their getting by with it,, because we Americans are letting them, and we keep letting them, because we, are asleep at the wheel !!!!

We, sure as hell didn't let them get by with it in the 70s, why, are we now, letting them get by with it now ??????

Have we, been so dumbed down, by Corporate America and Big Government that we are unable to think and act for ourselves ??????


People, "nobody" is going to just happen by and change your world for you, "YOU" have to Act and make it happen, and get others involved, just like we did in the 1970s, when, we blocked I-80 with our trucks,, and formed Trucker Convoys across the United States and straight to Washington, where we, used our semi Trucks to circle the White House and the State Capitol in Washington to protest what these Big Oil Conglormates were doin to us, and lieing to us,,, while enjoying enoromously huge profits, and disrupting the economic well being of this country and others for outright pure GREED !!!

I'd suggest everybody,,, show support for the Truckers when the Time nears we have to do it again, which will be very soon, were sticking up for everybody, show support and join in if necessary we'd greatly appreciate it !!!

Thank-You !!!! Trucker/24 years ! !

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#919 Consumer Comment

I'd love to see the "stats" you speak of

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

"If you ask them, most college and high school kids would approve nukular strike against any country expressing disagreement with US policies - and it has nothing to do with educational level but rather immaturity, showoff, and expressing of power. Its statistical truth that most intellectuals are democrats(what other choice do they have?). On the other side- high paid corporate officials and lowest income and educated people make the republican base. A strange coalition indeed! Im neither party cheerleader but stats are obvious."

Nothing in this statement makes sense, from the poor attempts at spelling, to the various cases of direct conflict, such as saying uneducated people are Reps, while the brainy ones are Dems, then saying the heads of big corporations are Reps. This ignores your premise of educated people all being Dems. Charles will NEVER be the head of ANY company. Get it?

BTW, Bush got better grades than Kerry. That is FACT. Neither of them are all that bright. One inherited wealth, the other married it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#918 Consumer Comment

Democracy as a valuable commodity

AUTHOR: Koko - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

If you ask them, most college and high school kids would approve nukular strike against any country expressing disagreement with US policies - and it has nothing to do with educational level but rather immaturity, showoff, and expressing of power. Its statistical truth that most intellectuals are democrats(what other choice do they have?). On the other side- high paid corporate officials and lowest income and educated people make the republican base. A strange coalition indeed! Im neither party cheerleader but stats are obvious.

Damien, I dont think anyone but perhaps aljaziras subscribers have ever seen that tape as it was censored on all networks while waiting for the translation. Not even the so called liberal (a** someone described it above) CNN had the guts to broadcast it. The excuse as always was asit may carry a message to terror groups in the country. If the gov thinks that this is the method those people would chose to communicate(God help us), they are certainly underestimating them, which is probably the reason why 911 happened on first place. Most likely the tape was censored because it mightve been too damaging to the faith of the nation in its government and the elections that were due in few days, which is understandable, but then! what makes this gov different than the gov of china, n. korea or any other ruling body that suppresses information based on its own interests? AKA leave us decide whats appropriate for you. You - go out and shop(we were advised after 911).

If someone still wants to do the thinking on their own, the only full transcript of the tape Ive found is here:

As theres no nation on earth that prefer living in the bloody and horrific death in war, if we go back to history well find that all rulers or governments that desired to initiate a war usually lied to their people to create the illusion that support for the war is the only possible choice they can make. The sad part is that they usually succeed.

"All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it.... Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise." Adolph H.

"Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have." -- Richard Salent

"Television is altering the meaning of "being informed" by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation... Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information - misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information - information that creates the illusion of knowing something, but which in fact leads one away from knowing." -- Neil Postman

And some more on democracy that may make you think if its the right path we are headed:

The highest measure of democracy is neither the 'extent of freedom' nor the 'extent of equality', but rather the highest measure of participation. -A. d. Benoist

Elections belong to the people. It is their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters. -Abraham Lincoln

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. -Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)

As a rule, dictatorships guarantee safe streets and terror of the doorbell. In democracy the streets may be unsafe after dark, but the most likely visitor in the early hours will be the milkman. - Adam Michnik

A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular. - Adlai Ewing Stevenson

Democracy consists of choosing your dictators, after they've told you what you think it is you want to hear. - Alan Coren

Freedom is when the people can speak; democracy is when the government listens. -Alastair Farrugia

Dictatorships are one-way streets. Democracy boasts two-way traffic. -Albert Moravia
Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. -Aldous Huxley

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. - Alexander Tytler

Democracy does not create strong ties between people. But it does make living together easier. - Alexis de Tocqueville
The art of progress is to preserve order amid change, and to preserve change amid order. - Alfred North Whitehead

We must all live so that our children do not have to pay for our deeds. - Andrejs Upits
If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost. - Aristotle
Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers. - Aristotle
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle

The wild, cruel beast is not behind the bars of the cage. He is in front of it. - Axel Munthe

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual) - Ayn Rand

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote! - Benjamin Franklin

They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

Vote for the man who promises least; he'll be the least disappointing. - Bernard Baruch

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#917 Consumer Comment

Rip-off in Texas

AUTHOR: Troy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Back to the original subject for a sec, I have a job that requires a lot of driving, these high gas prices are taking food out of my mouth. something needs to be done to bring them down.

There are Alot of people that "joy ride" even with gas prices this high. Maybe if more people stayed home, and run errands all in one trip, gas prices might go down. All these people build these big fine homes, but NEVER stay home.

I have also been ripped-off by our government in other areas. It's not Bush, or any other presidents fault. It is the peoples fault, running to our government for welfare, and running to them to pass a law about eveything. When so many people depend on government aid, and large tax returns, of course they are going to "control" us.

I pay my own way, always have, no matter how hard it gets, I NEVER ask the government to help me. But yet there are so many laws that violate my civil rights.

Every law that is passed, is another freedom gone.
Look up the words freedom and government, they CANNOT go together, unless someone has redifined the word freedom.

Of course we need laws that cover "major" crimes.
But the government telling me how to raise a child, or how to clean my yard and house,or me "having" to wear my seatbelt, these laws make me feel as if "my life" belongs to the government.

Yet people still run to the government to pass laws, more and more laws. Take for instance Yahoo.
They shut down the Yahoo user rooms over a kid being in one. The parents run to the government.

I have 4 computers in my home, I have "parental controls" on them, I took the time to set them up to protect my children. It is "my" job to do so. It is "my" job to raise them as "I" see fit.

These lazy people run to our government to pass a law, instead of doing "their" job as a parent, and it affects "all" of us.

I love America don't get me wrong, But there is something wrong with the way it is being run. The government needs a major overhaul.

We the people, need to have the right to vote on "every single law" that is passed. Each "individual" should be able to vote on "everything". Let the majority rule, Then two thirds of theses laws would be gone!

As it is now, You take "ONE" person who does not like something, a law can be passed. This is bull.

As far as running to the government for help, this makes them happy, because the people "depend" om them. There are plenty of churches to run to for help for the christians, and places such as H.O.P.E.,that takes donations to help the poor, for the non-believers.

I feel like I own "nothing". It can "all" be taken by the government if taxes aren't paid. And you go to jail, if income taxes aren't paid.

If the government didn't have to "support" all these people, they wouldn't need all this money.

As far as overseas affairs go, leave them All alone. We came to America to "get away" from all of that. If we kept to ourselves and not even worry about the rest of the world, they wouldn't be so angry towards us.

We stay here in "our" country, make our own goods, supply our own everything. And when supplies run out, switch to an alternative. We don't need to even be communicating with the rest of the world..period.

As far as "spreading freedom", who cares this is "our" home. Who cares if other countries have bombs and we don't know about it. If we kept to ourselves, they wouldn't be wanting to use them on us in the first place.

As far as retirement and social security, let people "take care of their own" like back in the day.

The world seems to be "one big country" fighting.
Let them fight. Let America be want it was meant to be, a "get-away" from the rest of the world.

Let "we the people" run it, not the government run the people. Live and let live.

But this can't really be done unless we "all" unite as a nation, overhaul the government, and start from scratch. I am willing, but it will take "all of us" to do so, and I don't see that happening.

Right now America is on a path to destruction, and will hold that path, until we learn to take care of our own, and worry about our own. If we would have done this in the first place, 911 wouldn't have happened.

I am so scared that our children won't live to see tomorrow, and they are scared too. So what Bush is doing has not made us feel "safe". But our government system was already corrupted whe he went in office, and has been for years.

So we can't really blame Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, or Bush Jr. The right was given to "the sytem" to control us a long time before them.

Of course we need a defense system here in "our" homeland. Let us fight to the death to defend our country if someone invades us, which would be "highly" doubtful if we kept to ourselves.

"Being ready", "Government Intellegence",
or "Phone Tapping", does not make me feel safe.
The rest of the world is mad...And that scares me. Our troops need to be "here" defeding "our land".

Of course this is my opinion, freedom of speech is a great thing that is fading away as well. I just wanted to give my opinion on this issue while I still have the chance. Thank you all for reading my opinion. You can agree or disagree, it is your right. But I am not a "mental case", or have any mental issues of any kind just because my opinion differs from yours. Have A nice day!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#916 Consumer Comment

Charles has made yet ANOTHER fine point!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 11, 2006

"...all college & highschool kids support bush well not me..."

Excellent point Charles. By your own admission, people who have attained some degree of education vote for independence and economic freedom, while those who are dumber than a bag of hammers, do not.

Charles...official mascot of the Democrap Party.

Stay tuned for more -Rantings of a Madman!!! ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#915 Consumer Comment

stupid younger generantion that voted bush in office

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 10, 2006

Well i was not stupid to vote for bush in the last election i voted for kerry but the other 100% of my generation who is young voted for bush, people are stupid & blinded bush thinks we are all stupid but has he realized that we are not buying into him anymore. Bush has 100% of the people under a spell & my generantion has fallen for bush to well i haven't it proves they are no smart people in the united states only dumb ones, all college & highschool kids support bush well not me i will not get suckered into their game i will vote for the next democrat to!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#914 Consumer Suggestion

National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

All Working Americans should participate in the "National-Sit-Out-Day", and "not" report for work !

Working Americans should take a National "Strike Day", in protest of the way our Federal Government is handling the Affairs of this country!!

May 19th is the day, it falls on a Friday, just before Armed Forces Day . You'll enjoy a 3 day week-end, write to your congressman/woman. Call your congress person/ show up! Arrange a bus brigade to go to Washington and let your voices be heard ! Pass the word to family and friends and co-workers!!

May 19th 2006 is our day! Hey the Illegals can do it, we sure as hell ought to be able to do the same! We can protest in the streets to can't we , just like they did!!

Let your voices be heard and demand to be represented as an American Tax Paying Citizen, that your Fed-Up, with this incompetent form of Government representation! Everybody participate, spread the word, join the crowd, participate in National Sit Out Day!! May 19th 2006

Thank-You !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#913 Consumer Suggestion

National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

All Working Americans should participate in the "National-Sit-Out-Day", and "not" report for work !

Working Americans should take a National "Strike Day", in protest of the way our Federal Government is handling the Affairs of this country!!

May 19th is the day, it falls on a Friday, just before Armed Forces Day . You'll enjoy a 3 day week-end, write to your congressman/woman. Call your congress person/ show up! Arrange a bus brigade to go to Washington and let your voices be heard ! Pass the word to family and friends and co-workers!!

May 19th 2006 is our day! Hey the Illegals can do it, we sure as hell ought to be able to do the same! We can protest in the streets to can't we , just like they did!!

Let your voices be heard and demand to be represented as an American Tax Paying Citizen, that your Fed-Up, with this incompetent form of Government representation! Everybody participate, spread the word, join the crowd, participate in National Sit Out Day!! May 19th 2006

Thank-You !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#912 Consumer Suggestion

National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

All Working Americans should participate in the "National-Sit-Out-Day", and "not" report for work !

Working Americans should take a National "Strike Day", in protest of the way our Federal Government is handling the Affairs of this country!!

May 19th is the day, it falls on a Friday, just before Armed Forces Day . You'll enjoy a 3 day week-end, write to your congressman/woman. Call your congress person/ show up! Arrange a bus brigade to go to Washington and let your voices be heard ! Pass the word to family and friends and co-workers!!

May 19th 2006 is our day! Hey the Illegals can do it, we sure as hell ought to be able to do the same! We can protest in the streets to can't we , just like they did!!

Let your voices be heard and demand to be represented as an American Tax Paying Citizen, that your Fed-Up, with this incompetent form of Government representation! Everybody participate, spread the word, join the crowd, participate in National Sit Out Day!! May 19th 2006

Thank-You !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#911 Consumer Suggestion

National "Sit-Out Day" May 19th 2006/ America on Strike !!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

All Working Americans should participate in the "National-Sit-Out-Day", and "not" report for work !

Working Americans should take a National "Strike Day", in protest of the way our Federal Government is handling the Affairs of this country!!

May 19th is the day, it falls on a Friday, just before Armed Forces Day . You'll enjoy a 3 day week-end, write to your congressman/woman. Call your congress person/ show up! Arrange a bus brigade to go to Washington and let your voices be heard ! Pass the word to family and friends and co-workers!!

May 19th 2006 is our day! Hey the Illegals can do it, we sure as hell ought to be able to do the same! We can protest in the streets to can't we , just like they did!!

Let your voices be heard and demand to be represented as an American Tax Paying Citizen, that your Fed-Up, with this incompetent form of Government representation! Everybody participate, spread the word, join the crowd, participate in National Sit Out Day!! May 19th 2006

Thank-You !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#910 Consumer Comment

Sad Day's of Bush

AUTHOR: Todd - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

I guess I should believe were not in Iraq for Oil. That is silly. Have any of ya'll ever heard of "PSA's"? Do a google search for Iraq Oil. You'll see a link to Oil in Iraq - Global Policy forum. If you bother to take the time to read the report, I think as an open minded, even half a*s educated individual, you will see WE ARE IN IRAQ FOR OIL! Not for US (Hard working Americans), but for Bush and Shooter's (VP) big business interests. They gonna help Iraq out with their oil production problems. How sweet. LOL It's a world wide screwfest, and the W sticker set is still in full support. Either too proud, or too stupid to see the folly of their ways. WMD thing is a joke. Heck North Korea has nukes. No rush to put them in check. I could go on and on.
The whole thing is sick. SICK!

Hope you holly rollers are happy with the results you got from George the Christian. All that BS bout gays. Nothing done. Wasn't nothing to be done. He knew that. But many voters didn't. That's always been the way Republicans have managed to hang on to the poor/middle class white demographic. Kinda the same way the KKK worked. If your not with us then you must be with the Blacks and Gays! That attitude is still alive and well here in beautiful sunny south GA. Heard it myself many times. During local city elections, a young lady came too my door. She informed me she was running for city commission, and asked if I would vote for her. During the conversation I asked her what party she belonged too. She answered Republican. When I asked her why? She said she didnt know, and that her dad was always a Republican, and had said the Democrats are for N--- and Gays, so she figured she must be Republican. I told her I could not vote for her.

Republicans are smart. They didn't get rich and all three braches of the Federal Government by accident. I have lived North, South, East and West in this GREAT nation of ours. WE the people are the greatest on earth. Our Government simply sucks! Like Me Mom's use to say, "Mad, Sad, Happy, or Glad...That's just the facts kid."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#909 Consumer Comment

we just have to agree with anything republicans do it is a crime know if we say anything bad about bush

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 09, 2006

When will we get it they we are not buying into this false war when will bush realize that the americans are not buying into it anymore bush think everybody is stupid, the abusiers & insulters like to come on this website to try to control you don't let anybody control you they need to quit posting on here because we are not buying, bush is an hitler wanna be & i do not care how many people get pissed about that because if anybody says anything bad about their presdient they want people to pay the prize but we are just suppose to sit back & let them to continue to say bad things about our former presdient bill clinton, we are not suppose to say anything about what bush or republicans have to say or say anything bad, then we get accused of being terrorist & hating america & we are not allowed to say anything bad about bush, do they have a new law out that it is agaisnt the law to say anything bad about bush if you do you break the law when did they sumbit this law in privacy, so if any american says anything bad about bush it is a crime well if they say anything bad about the former president then they have commited the crime!. People say we should belong in prision for saying bad things about bush! you see its a crime know to say anything bad or negative but bush supporters & hannity & fox news can contiue to say bad things about the former president, we have the right no to like how the country is being run but we don't have to get out of america!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#908 Consumer Comment

Why should the united states keep letting illegal immigrates stay in america

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 08, 2006

Its one problem after the other first blacks try to take over america & try putting white people as slaves, know we have to put up with millions of illegal immigrates stay in the united states for free & giving them more money & more beneifits the illegal immigrates who are in ameirca illegaly should be arrested & put in jail for not coming in this country legal why should we stand by & let this happen. Let the illegal immigrates have their protesting marches its not gonna get them anywhere accept deporting back to their own country what if we went to their country & tried to take over they would not like it! they would be angry like we are besides bush worring about iraq all the time gives these illegal immigrates every chance they can get to get into this country bush is to stubborn & stupid because he continues to be on this one sided arguement!, we have a stubborn president!, like a horse!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#907 Consumer Comment

Guy Get your facts Straight

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 08, 2006

If the testimony by Libby is the truth, then there were no laws broken and he shouldn't even be on trial.

If Bush did authorize the release of classified information then the information is no longer classified, No where in his statements is he saying that the information released included the CIA Agent's identity.

So please tell me what law you theink Bush broke since he is the one in this country that could declassify information???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#906 Consumer Comment

Bush supporters are retaliating agaisnt us

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 08, 2006

The bush supporters are retaliating agaisnt us on this report trying to violate our rights which republicans are out to do, so what do they do they retaliate if you point out anything to them they say you need to belong in a mental hospital they think they are being smart but we are on to their little game & that we will not play their little game accept try to abuse us. Abusiers like republicans like to make you think everything is your fault when its their fault & try to play the blame game its them who really needs to belong in an mental hospital sense they cannot take what we have to say if we don't give bush any credit which he doesn't deserve or agree with how he runs things which we have the right just like they have the right to their opionion, but they said we should belong in jail for speaking out agaisnt bush but that is not how america is we have a right to speak out but republicans are trying to sabotage our rights.

Republicans will not be incontrol for 12 years this time bush has ruined it for all republicans ruining for president because republicans have lost respect from all americans & will never gain respect back, republicans know they are losing this time once they lost respect from the american people they will never get it back! & bush supporters can retalate agaisnt us all they feel like because i am tired of republicans trying to ruin my life!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#905 Consumer Suggestion

How about the Secetary of Labor and others !!!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, April 07, 2006

How about the Secetary of Labor and Secetary of Trade,, they could use some heat too, for their inactions as well !!!!

First, keep in mind, that our Tax Dollars go to pay their salaries and benefits etc.

I'm speaking of Secetary of Labor, Elaine Choas, or however you spell her name,, I've been researching and have been a victim myself of Employer Fraud and mistreatment, as well as others!

She has done very little in my research of her and her job, to help promote integrity in to the work place in this century !!

I see and hear of to many employers mainly big corportations and big corporate enterprises taking advantage of the American Worker of all ages and Nationalties, and Genders male/female !

Shes done very little to enforce the act known as the FLSA,(Fair-Labor-Standards-Act), and to educate younger American Workers about their rights as future employees of this country, and how the act applys to them as workers !!

That gives big Corporate employers the ability and the advantage to,, abuse and corce you into working in unsafe conditions, and putting up with work place violations, and not recieving the proper compensation(pay) for all hours worked !!

There seems to be very little enforcement on behalf of the Department of Labor, to "Enforce" work place laws, governed under the FLSA !!!

We don't need any more "Super Discount Stores", attempting to claim they create jobs, when in fact, they only create such low-wage employment jobs, that a large percentage of their employees Qualify for state medical assistance, which costs "All" of us on our insurance and thru higher taxes, while these big super conglormate retail chain stores profit in the multi-billions of dollars, and then attempt to hide behind a "Mask" of deception and outright lies, and use their corporate influence to hide their multi-billions of dollars, so their corrupt and inept, incompetent CEOs can commit greed and despair amongst others !!!!

Seems we also have a Secetary of Trade, thats apparently forgotton what Country they live in, evidently, he thinks its "China",by the way he's done very little to curb and slow down the amount of Chinese Crap that flows into this country, without consquences !!!!

Evidently, he thinks its OK,to ship American Manufacturing jobs, overseas and to lose the incredible TAX base to the Federal and State Governments as well,not to mention the Working men &Women of this country and their families, no matter what political party they may belong to !!

Then again, just look at FEMA and their directors and management, and the TSA, and the management there, is also a complete mess and incompetent as well !!!

Is this how, you want your Tax Dollars spent, on the salaries of these incompetent people ?????

Most of you, if you were over charged at the cash register at your local grocery store, for a ridlicious amount, would outright throw a Tissy (fit), and demand it to be corrected, not to mention bring it to the store managers attention !!!

Example : $100.00 for a loaf of bread !!!!

Yet when we let a particular person hold a public office, rather hired or elected, we all act like were asleep at the wheel, and do nothing,, when these people(politicians)-(officials), can't or won't do the jobs they are elected or hired to do, or have a special interest in something besides the agenda they are required to represent.

I believe its time we all wake up no matter what political party we belong to and realize some of these people we are sending to Washington, aren't truly there to represent us or the people of this country as they should be !!!!

We need to Quit being naive, and getting duped by these professional con-artists and crooks who we elect to office, who are supposed to represent us, our kids, and our families, as we pay them to !!!!!

Thank-You !!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#904 Consumer Suggestion

It gets better and better...

AUTHOR: Guy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 06, 2006

Latest news. What a shocker (EXTREME sarcasm):

Libby court papers: Cheney said Bush OK'd intelligence leak

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Vice President d**k Cheney's former top aide told prosecutors that his boss said President Bush authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq, according to court papers filed by prosecutors in the CIA leak case.

Before his indictment, I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say. According to the documents, the authorization led to the July 8, 2003, conversation between Libby and New York Times reporter Judith Miller.

There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame's CIA identity. (Watch what the court document says Libby said about Bush -- 3:05)

But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.

Bush's political foes jumped on the revelation about Libby's testimony.

"The fact that the president was willing to reveal classified information for political gain and put interests of his political party ahead of Americas security shows that he can no longer be trusted to keep America safe," Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said.

Libby's testimony also puts the president and the vice president in the awkward position of authorizing leaks -- a practice both men have long said they abhor, so much so that the administration has put in motion criminal investigations to hunt down leakers.

The most recent instance is the administration's launching of a probe into who disclosed to The New York Times the existence of the warrantless domestic surveillance program authorized by Bush shortly after the September 11 attacks.

The authorization involving intelligence information came as the Bush administration faced mounting criticism about its failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the main reason the president and his aides had given for going to war.

Libby's participation in a critical conversation with Miller on July 8, 2003 "occurred only after the vice president advised defendant that the president specifically had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the National Intelligence Estimate," the papers by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald stated. The filing did not specify the "certain information."

"Defendant testified that the circumstances of his conversation with reporter Miller -- getting approval from the president through the vice president to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval -- were unique in his recollection," the papers added.

Libby is asking for voluminous amounts of classified information from the government in order to defend himself against five counts of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI in the Plame affair.

He is accused of making false statements about how he learned of Plame's CIA employment and what he told reporters about it.

Her CIA status was publicly disclosed eight days after her husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, accused the Bush administration of twisting prewar intelligence to exaggerate the Iraqi threat from weapons of mass destruction.

In 2002, Wilson had been dispatched to Africa by the CIA to check out intelligence that Iraq had an agreement to acquire uranium yellowcake from Niger, and Wilson had concluded that there was no such arrangement.

Libby says he needs extensive classified files from the government to demonstrate that Plame's CIA connection was a peripheral matter that he never focused on, and that the role of Wilson's wife was a small piece in a building public controversy over the failure to find WMD in Iraq.

Fitzgerald said in the new court filing that Libby's requests for information go too far and the prosecutor cited Libby's own statements to investigators in an attempt to limit the amount of information the government must turn over to Cheney's former chief of staff for his criminal defense.

According to Miller's grand jury testimony, Libby told her about Plame's CIA status in the July 8, 2003 conversation that took place shortly after the White House aide -- according to the new court filing -- was authorized by Bush through Cheney to disclose sensitive intelligence about Iraq and WMD contained in a National Intelligence Estimate.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#903 Consumer Comment

Research before you speak

AUTHOR: Angel - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

I will try to make this as quickly as possible.
President George W. Bush DID NOT lie. He acted on the information given to ALL politicians in this country and many others. Bin Laden DID have a relationship with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein DID have weapons of Mass destructions. He was even recorded saying, did you hide all the weapons(that's not a direct quote, its summarized), you don't agree look it up! Saddam Hussein DID aid Bin Laden, DID give him money, DID give him shelter. It's all documented Also, if there weren't weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq what was that protest by environmentalists when the military brought 5 tons of barrels full of chemicals, missiles, and shells into American soil? Oh that's right you did hear about that, but why is that?. Because mainstream media is corrupt, anti-American, anti-Bush, anti-capitalistic, they will lie, cheated, cover up, and ignore anything that may give President G. W. Bush any credit.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#902 UPDATE Employee

Semper Fidelis

AUTHOR: Perry - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

I have not seen such mindless drivel in a while. In fact I happened upon this site quite by accident and was a bit taken aback by the outlandish and hateful prose posted by so many democrats.

As a lifetime military member and one who has served in our nations defense/best interests, shame on all of you. Why waste your energy and effort anonymously pecking away at your keyboards from the sanctity of your homes?

If you feel so strongly about the discussion here as to say that you "hate" anything about America, then get off you butt and go do something about it. If you are poor - go get a job (maybe two), if you feel gas prices cripple you - try a bus pass. If what you need is a political pulpit to spew your hate of the president, the government, our boys in the trenches or whatever - then go find some grass roots political party to get involved with.

By the way, from a servicemember - its NOT ok to sit back and put up your "NO WAR" posters and then say that your still supporting the troops. Dont give us this half-hearted support. We deserve better - if you protest, then your not my supporter.

To coin a phrase from comic lore: "With great power comes great responsibility"

Cheesy, yes. But something I hope to teach my children to understand. There is nobility in defending those incapable (whatever the reason) of doing it for themselves.

hoorah

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#901 Consumer Comment

war for oil?

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Nadine, you are as brainwashed as these other recreational Bush bashers are. If he went to war for oil, why are we paying $3 a gallon for gas? This war for oil thing is a lame a*s rallying cry for all the brain dead Democrats that have have nothing to offer this country but bullshit. And this Charles character from Penix City really needs to be admitted to a mental hospital. His omni-directional slinging of brain vomit is completely rediculous. The Republican Party is not perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than the Democrats. The Democrats really need to clean their house and get off of the far left fringes and get closer to center. There's a lot of club cancers there (Pelosi, Dean, Kerry, Kennedy) just to name a few, who really need to be voted out of office. The Dems can, if they really want to, return to a time when the Dem party really stood for something. Maybe in this mid term year Republicans and Democrats alike should vote in all new players, and see where we go from here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#900 Consumer Comment

war for oil?

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Nadine, you are as brainwashed as these other recreational Bush bashers are. If he went to war for oil, why are we paying $3 a gallon for gas? This war for oil thing is a lame a*s rallying cry for all the brain dead Democrats that have have nothing to offer this country but bullshit. And this Charles character from Penix City really needs to be admitted to a mental hospital. His omni-directional slinging of brain vomit is completely rediculous. The Republican Party is not perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than the Democrats. The Democrats really need to clean their house and get off of the far left fringes and get closer to center. There's a lot of club cancers there (Pelosi, Dean, Kerry, Kennedy) just to name a few, who really need to be voted out of office. The Dems can, if they really want to, return to a time when the Dem party really stood for something. Maybe in this mid term year Republicans and Democrats alike should vote in all new players, and see where we go from here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#899 Consumer Comment

war for oil?

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Nadine, you are as brainwashed as these other recreational Bush bashers are. If he went to war for oil, why are we paying $3 a gallon for gas? This war for oil thing is a lame a*s rallying cry for all the brain dead Democrats that have have nothing to offer this country but bullshit. And this Charles character from Penix City really needs to be admitted to a mental hospital. His omni-directional slinging of brain vomit is completely rediculous. The Republican Party is not perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than the Democrats. The Democrats really need to clean their house and get off of the far left fringes and get closer to center. There's a lot of club cancers there (Pelosi, Dean, Kerry, Kennedy) just to name a few, who really need to be voted out of office. The Dems can, if they really want to, return to a time when the Dem party really stood for something. Maybe in this mid term year Republicans and Democrats alike should vote in all new players, and see where we go from here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#898 Consumer Suggestion

did anyone ever pay attention to this?

AUTHOR: Damien - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, April 05, 2006

I never trusted george bush....he seems to be able to manipulate an audience using scare tactics.

first of all...did anyone ever see that video where bin ladin straight out said..."your president is lying to you" and basically telling us the people of the USA that we have control over what happens to us...and that our president is lying to us? and telling us to stay out of their affairs?

would there be any reason bin ladin would lie and say this? This is a message he is sending to us. Listen to it.

i highly doubt he just sits there and says these things for fun.

i think this country has a lot less personal freedom than many most countries i have visited (i am not referring to financial freedom...money is not everything)...so this bs thing that he tells the nation..that bin ladin is trying take our freedom is BS. and all this propaganda about protecting our freedom and destroying terrorism...

we the US commit lots of terrorist activities in other countries...right?

so..my point is...its all greed and power. simple as that. it is not about saving humanity.
if that were the case...why didn't we help el salvador in the 80's??? cause they have nothing to offer us.

why did we enter the ports of bosnia in the 90's?? because they threatened to close ports on us!!

get real bush lovers...just because we are the USA...that does not mean...we have a president who is president to protect our interests.

just like years ago...we never thought that the USA could ever be victim to foreign terrorism....cause we are the superpower..you also think that there is no evil motive behind the war and later on..it will be revealed..and covered up with lies.

I have met many people who have worked for the military..who have gone to the war..and totally disagree with alot that the USA is carrying on out there. Quit believeing everything you see coming out of his mouth and look at the facts...the results...the fatalities...and the international connections he has. ANY FIGURE WHO HAS PERSONAL OR BUSINESS TIES TO FAMILIES (LADIN FAMILY) RELATED TO THOSE WHO PROMOTE AND CARRY OUT TERRORISM (like BIN LADIN)SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES....IT SHOULD BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#897 Consumer Comment

A GA resident who totally agrees

AUTHOR: Nadine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 04, 2006

I could not agree more witht the "Bush is a dumbass" comment. It makes me sick to see all theses stupid and blind people with their W stickers, it makes me SICK! He is the worse president ever! I am in support of the troops but how sad that they can't trust the president to send them to a just war. Look at all those people who enlisted after 9-11. They wanted to defend our country, now look at them dying for the oil! F George and his back a** war!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#896 Consumer Comment

Republicans have no feelings toward people

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Republicans have no feelings toward people, this is why people hate republicans because they have no feelings middle class working people or poor people it will be before hell freezes over before people realize that, which republicans are creating hell on earth for everybody. Bush supporters accuse us of promoting hatred when the are the ones doing it themselves & they are the name callers & who insult people & bully people, republicans cause people to be on welfare & people on welfare have to put up with abuse from smart people who have good paying jobs & make fun of the poor people well one day they will reep what they sowed & they will be poor & be on welfare & see how it feels not being able to work & being made fun off!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#895 Consumer Comment

Hello, John. You raise good points...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, April 04, 2006

And please permit me to address them as best I can, bearing with the fact that I can't really hide my disdain for the left anymore. The more I read about current events, the more uneasy I become.
Ahh, well...one bite at a time...

Are you going to tell me it is better to leave him alone so that more innocent lives may be lost.

That's exactly what they mean to tell you (it worked for Clinton!). From what I have read about the liberal Left, the only thing that matters to them is making Government the sole controller of your money and mine, your rights and mine, and that to die and be grease for them is a noble cause.

They're pro-choice when it comes to making decisions that eliminate the weakest members of society---the unborn, the elderly, and the infirm (hmm---who else wanted to weed out certain members of society?)---and they're pro-life when it comes to sending able bodied soldiers who volunteer and desire to keep our country free off to war. That's when they cry out Our poor Babies! Going off to War!

These are people who want to ensure the rights of elk in some godforsaken strip of barren scrub-land in Alaska, or grant adult men the right to have sex with children (Look up the efforts the ACLU is making for NAMBLA), but when it comes to the right to speak freely about a religious belief, or to exercise a less-than-leftwise opinion, FORGET IT.

This is typical of the democratic leaders that say they have a better way, but don't divulge any suggestions. Anyone can say

You're correct there. Thing is, their solution to the problem seems to be to coddle the terrorists and admire the Communists and the Dictators. Where are Cindy She-Hag and Harry Belafondle? Cuddling up to Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez---who has actually threatened publicly to topple the US.

This dictator consoles his people by giving the appearance to look down on the rich, and that America is an imperialist society, and dogs like She-Hag and Belafondle lap it up. The irony is, that if Bush is a monster because he has ties to Oil, what is Chavez? Citgo gas is 100% Venezuelan-Owned.

Chavez has been close to Castro, who has been close to Former President Carter, another Hater Of America.

Charles is out there still claiming ato be a Christian and professing hatred in the same breath.

Cast not pearls before swine, John. It's all that do as I say, not as I do nonsense. Nothing more and nothing less. Everything is the fault of everyone else but him. He's broke because he can't get a job with this or that company, his life is miserable because of his abusive Dad, the economy is lousy because of the rich, gas is high because Bush is president, and so on. His good Christian suit is used only for those who agree with him. But remember, it's everyone else's fault, but his.

Oh, and don't waste your time writing up some nasty spit to me, Charles. I've tried to be civil with you (which I know you'll just deny, but you keep right on eating your elephant, Chum.) and even tried to read some of your latest poisoned polemic. It's all the same insults with zero research, and how you hate this and hate that. I wish the aliens would come and abduct all the Republicans. White Trash, Racist, Hate. Hate. Hate. Can I have an Amen from the good brotha ovah there?

"Quien siembra vientos, recoge tempestades." Look it up.

I reiterate: Trash comes in all colors. Get off the plantation and put on your erect posture. It's time to step into the twenty-first Century.

You wanna hate? Hate Bin Laden and all those who seek to undermine the Country that's birthed you (and no doubt supported you)! Hate the subversive mentality that's dividing our country---start with the United Nations, the ACLU, Sheehan and her types, then start hating anyone in politics that has ANYTHING to do with re-writing the Constitution and Re-shaping America into a Communistic society. I don't care if your favorite subversive is Democratic or Republican. Just prove that you have a good reason, other than they're a liar and I hate them because I hated my Dad. Or whatever it is that motivates you.

Better yet, rather than hate them, do the American thing and Fight them.
Do the Christian thing and pray for them.
Whatever it takes, quit prioritizing hatred first and productivity last.
You are expecting others to conform to and live in a fashion you yourself will not.

Seems to me, the only reason you feel you cannot rise above, is because you've convinced yourself that you can't, and used your poor, poor past as an excuse.

Maybe he should go hunting with d**k Cheney.

I tell you the truth; I'd rather hunt with Cheney than ride with Kennedy!

And why is it that when our VP makes a mistake that has happened almost everywhere in a hunting season (after all, why the hell else do hunters have to wear that neon-orange vest?), the media is all over it, but we're supposed to forget the sins of the Left as human error?

I would be willing to listen tho the democratic ideas but all I hear is
1. Impeach Bush
2. Bush is an idiot
3. Bush ideas aree no good. (The democrats don't even have any.

Yeah, but I'm sure it's because they're tired of hearing things like, One Nation Under God, INDIVISIBLE, With LIBERTY and Justice For All.

All of congress should get the message that they should not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants. This message is for both parties.

Amen.

And they're not taking back what's theirs treaties were signed and they were given millions for land they gave up. (Need to do more research, as I got this off of an MSNBC article, and heard it on CNN--two Liberally-oriented sources, no less! So much for that whole "she only watches FOX News" Bit, but hey, what do they know...? FOX is only one source of information. Since I have been writing here, I have to admit that I've given it more glances than I used to.)

They want it back because we've done more with what they've thrown away, and they're revolting because our Country's people are divided. (Sire! Sire! The Peasants are revolting! Yes, I know they are, but why the fuss?! LOL!) They think they smell weakness. I notice they don't grieve at China (owners of South America's canals)...they know better. China doesn't represent to them what we do, and they're not under the media's microscope (our media doesn't view Communism as big a monster as self-control and the right to life, apparently.)

Personally, I'm all for putting an aggressive force at the border to keep em out. In fact, they can have all their d**n illegals back, too. Plus interest.
Why the hell can't they apply themselves to bettering what they have, rather than trying to take something that's been bettered by someone else (sounds like buyers' remorse, to me)?

They wanna live here? Fine. Let them do so legally, and NOT get the generous handouts and tax-breaks that those of us BORN HERE can't get! Let them get jobs and pay taxes like us, rather than get free medical and other Government freebies. Some of us are born into struggle, too. It is rising out of that struggle that can define our character, and certainly, make us better than when we started. Hehh, teach a man to fish...

Why do they want to reward illegal behavior????

My guess? An attempt at honor among thieves.

At any rate, those illegals may have relatives that have legal right to be hereand those relatives are votes.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#894 Consumer Suggestion

The Democrats are no Better

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 03, 2006

This so called unified group of Democrats. They Say that they will catch Osama Bin Laden if elected.

If these idiots have a sure fire plan, then why aren't they sharing it? Are you going to tell me it is better to leave him alone so that more innocent lives may be lost.

This is typical of the democratic leaders that say they have a better way, but don't divulge any suggestions. Anyone can say the have a better way and not give anythin concrete or any suggestions. If theyu know wher Bin laden is then they should be brought up on charges for aiding and abetting enemies of the US.

Charles is out there still claiming ato be a Christian and professing hatred in the same breath. Maybe he should go hunting with d**k Cheney......

I would be willing to listen tho the democratic ideas but all I hear is
1. Impeach Bush
2. Bush is an idiot
3. Bush ideas aree no good. (The democrats don't even have any.

All of congress should get the message that they should not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants. This message is for both parties. The plans sound like they will give amnesty and out the ones that came into the country illegally on a easier path to citizenship than the ones that are here legally. (This is idiotic)
Why do they want to reward illegal behavior????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#893 Consumer Suggestion

The Democrats are no Better

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 03, 2006

This so called unified group of Democrats. They Say that they will catch Osama Bin Laden if elected.

If these idiots have a sure fire plan, then why aren't they sharing it? Are you going to tell me it is better to leave him alone so that more innocent lives may be lost.

This is typical of the democratic leaders that say they have a better way, but don't divulge any suggestions. Anyone can say the have a better way and not give anythin concrete or any suggestions. If theyu know wher Bin laden is then they should be brought up on charges for aiding and abetting enemies of the US.

Charles is out there still claiming ato be a Christian and professing hatred in the same breath. Maybe he should go hunting with d**k Cheney......

I would be willing to listen tho the democratic ideas but all I hear is
1. Impeach Bush
2. Bush is an idiot
3. Bush ideas aree no good. (The democrats don't even have any.

All of congress should get the message that they should not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants. This message is for both parties. The plans sound like they will give amnesty and out the ones that came into the country illegally on a easier path to citizenship than the ones that are here legally. (This is idiotic)
Why do they want to reward illegal behavior????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#892 Consumer Suggestion

The Democrats are no Better

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 03, 2006

This so called unified group of Democrats. They Say that they will catch Osama Bin Laden if elected.

If these idiots have a sure fire plan, then why aren't they sharing it? Are you going to tell me it is better to leave him alone so that more innocent lives may be lost.

This is typical of the democratic leaders that say they have a better way, but don't divulge any suggestions. Anyone can say the have a better way and not give anythin concrete or any suggestions. If theyu know wher Bin laden is then they should be brought up on charges for aiding and abetting enemies of the US.

Charles is out there still claiming ato be a Christian and professing hatred in the same breath. Maybe he should go hunting with d**k Cheney......

I would be willing to listen tho the democratic ideas but all I hear is
1. Impeach Bush
2. Bush is an idiot
3. Bush ideas aree no good. (The democrats don't even have any.

All of congress should get the message that they should not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants. This message is for both parties. The plans sound like they will give amnesty and out the ones that came into the country illegally on a easier path to citizenship than the ones that are here legally. (This is idiotic)
Why do they want to reward illegal behavior????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#891 Consumer Suggestion

The Democrats are no Better

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, April 03, 2006

This so called unified group of Democrats. They Say that they will catch Osama Bin Laden if elected.

If these idiots have a sure fire plan, then why aren't they sharing it? Are you going to tell me it is better to leave him alone so that more innocent lives may be lost.

This is typical of the democratic leaders that say they have a better way, but don't divulge any suggestions. Anyone can say the have a better way and not give anythin concrete or any suggestions. If theyu know wher Bin laden is then they should be brought up on charges for aiding and abetting enemies of the US.

Charles is out there still claiming ato be a Christian and professing hatred in the same breath. Maybe he should go hunting with d**k Cheney......

I would be willing to listen tho the democratic ideas but all I hear is
1. Impeach Bush
2. Bush is an idiot
3. Bush ideas aree no good. (The democrats don't even have any.

All of congress should get the message that they should not give amnesty to the illegal immigrants. This message is for both parties. The plans sound like they will give amnesty and out the ones that came into the country illegally on a easier path to citizenship than the ones that are here legally. (This is idiotic)
Why do they want to reward illegal behavior????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#890 Consumer Comment

I can understand why you'd think I'm falling....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 02, 2006

People often look as though they're gonna fall, with no floor supporting their back. From your current position of being vertically challenged, anyone willing to stand firm would look that way.

And as far as "being a closet Republican", no...you can find all the answers you want if you read through this entire "Report". And spare me the "too much to read" bit...if you want to give rant, then do it with certain knowledge of my writ. Otherwise, don't bother me an' I won't bother you.

And I can also see why some folks think I'm so Republican....my stances are obviously considered "right-wing". So yeah, if caring for my Family, and retaining the right to keep and bear arms, being pro-life, and wanting to take the fight to the animals that tried to bring it here makes me a big bad Republican, then call me what you wish. Even if the label is wrong.

But as I understand it, some folks just have to call others names to make themselves feel better.

Oh, and just because you worked somewhere as a grunt, doesn't put you in the know about jack. Not every drone knows what's happening in the whole hive.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#889 Consumer Comment

Your falling for everything!

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 02, 2006

So Vera, you are an Independent? Okay, lets say that is fair. But why the pro-conservative/Republican rhetoric? I will have to agree with Dave on our current president. Is it that you won't claim your association with the Republican party because you are too embarassed at this point? But I am not the one to judge, you know what you are and what you want to be. Dave one disagreement, Bush does not speak well at all. He happens to say the same exact things all the time. Either WMD or Terrorist, and every problem that we have in this country happens to revolve around these issues, according to him :).

GOD BLESSES!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#888 Consumer Suggestion

Republican "Jugheads" !!!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, April 02, 2006

Yes, these Republican "Jugheads" have managed to bring this country down again !!!!!

Ever notice, that when they have something smart -assed to say, they are always smirking or smiling like they are the greatest thing since moms homemade apple pie !!!

Most, not all, but most of them are so beside themselves and ridlicious, uneducated, arrogrant its ridlicious !!!!

I worked for the Halliburton/KBR Inc over in Iraq, and if the people really knew what was going on, of both parties, they'd rise up and revolt, its that badd !!!!

Quite Obvious, most of the Republican partiers, will never admit they don't have the true ability to properly run even a "Lemonade Stand" without screwing it up !!!!!!

Before Bush was ever elected(bribes), when he was govenor of Texas, he managed to bankrupt the public school system and throw it in a fiasco, as well the man lost millions in failed Oil Ventures like Harken Energy and the like .

Lets also not forget,, many of the same players who now reside in the White (Corrupt)House,, were at one time key players in the Iran-Contra Scandal, in which Bush Sr. would of been convicted and tried,, but abruptly took whats known as "Executive Priviledge" at the last minute to keep from having to testify and be found Guilty in that Scandal!

The Republicans, will try to put a Spin on it with more rehertic and lies, because they can't handle the "FACT" that we are all catching on as to how corrupt and decietfull they are, and the fact they just can't handle what a screw up of an idiot they have in the oval office.

Just where is ol' "Osama Bin Forgotton",,, anyway ???????

Sending Multi-Billions of Tax Payer money to Iraq,, and the hell with the people in an american city like New Orleans !!

How many thousands of trailers are still sitting in Hope Ark, waiting to be delivered ????/ $$$$$$$$

How much is Oil/Gas ??????

Really is our Borders really Secure ????????

How much is the National Debt now ??????

President Bush sounds good to hear him talk, but like most "Used Car Salesman", thats all they do is sound good,, because, thats all they really can do is talk ! ! !

I didn't like Clinton Either, but, I will say the economy for everybody was a hell of a lot better than.

We also had a balanced budget, but the health care never got off the platform.

Also noticed that the CEO's of the country enriched themselves enoromously at the workers expense.

A complete unfair trade balance with China erupted and continues also, along with massive amounts of illegal aliens crossing the border, and that been happening for the last 4 adminstrations with very little done to stop it, both political parties are to blame for that fiasco !!!!!

Simply put, I'm for who-ever can get the job done and do it right, I'm not into playing partytics, could care less,, just get the job right and get it done !!!

First and foremost, care about the people in your own country first, and worry about the neighbors later, after you make sure your own family has food and shelter first, than try to help someone else !!!!!

Bush and President Fox of Mexico are in bed together, and not wearing any protection, this is Dangerous to both societies, on both sides of the border ! !

We all should Demand that our politicians be held accountable, honest, and dependable to all Americans,, no matter what political party you belong to,, we all contribute our Tax Dollars to pay their salaries and benefits !!!

It should not take an act of God, to have any Politician "Impeached" and imprisioned for outright betrayal and lieing to the people they were elected to represent !!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#887 Consumer Comment

To Jeremy

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, April 01, 2006

How much are the republicans in the bush white house to pay you to come on this website to defend bush! & to stop people from complaining. Because you sound just like you good old pal hannity on fox news who tries to embarrass democrats who come on his stupid show! he is rude ignorant he interrupts people all the time does not let them finish saying what they have to say.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#886 Consumer Comment

I've said it before....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 31, 2006

....I'll say it again:

"If you won't stand for something,
You'll fall for anything."

AND:

"Better to die on my feet, than to live on my knees."

I do not feel the need to "pick a party", as I find there's no need to align one's self with a title in the sense (after all...isn't it a bit "traitorous", if I happen to like a particular candidate, even if that candidate isn't a member of my "party"? Who needs to deal with that?). I've mentioned that I'm not a Republican or a Democrat; I am an Independent. I just know that I'm nowhere near "Left", and that delights me to no end.

But I seem to have many of the views of a Libertarian, and that's fine, too.

Simply put, I think that if we're going to get ourselves all bent out of shape over the politics of our Country, we should at least do our research...and not just research until we can find a means by which to prove ourselves right and then stop.

If you're concerned about "picking and sticking" with any particular party, it should behoove you to adhere to your own advice.

There is no means by which I'd find it justifiable to accept the Great Liberal Democratic Cause----because they are neither liberal nor democratic in their views.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#885 Consumer Comment

I've said it before....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 31, 2006

....I'll say it again:

"If you won't stand for something,
You'll fall for anything."

AND:

"Better to die on my feet, than to live on my knees."

I do not feel the need to "pick a party", as I find there's no need to align one's self with a title in the sense (after all...isn't it a bit "traitorous", if I happen to like a particular candidate, even if that candidate isn't a member of my "party"? Who needs to deal with that?). I've mentioned that I'm not a Republican or a Democrat; I am an Independent. I just know that I'm nowhere near "Left", and that delights me to no end.

But I seem to have many of the views of a Libertarian, and that's fine, too.

Simply put, I think that if we're going to get ourselves all bent out of shape over the politics of our Country, we should at least do our research...and not just research until we can find a means by which to prove ourselves right and then stop.

If you're concerned about "picking and sticking" with any particular party, it should behoove you to adhere to your own advice.

There is no means by which I'd find it justifiable to accept the Great Liberal Democratic Cause----because they are neither liberal nor democratic in their views.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#884 Consumer Comment

I've said it before....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 31, 2006

....I'll say it again:

"If you won't stand for something,
You'll fall for anything."

AND:

"Better to die on my feet, than to live on my knees."

I do not feel the need to "pick a party", as I find there's no need to align one's self with a title in the sense (after all...isn't it a bit "traitorous", if I happen to like a particular candidate, even if that candidate isn't a member of my "party"? Who needs to deal with that?). I've mentioned that I'm not a Republican or a Democrat; I am an Independent. I just know that I'm nowhere near "Left", and that delights me to no end.

But I seem to have many of the views of a Libertarian, and that's fine, too.

Simply put, I think that if we're going to get ourselves all bent out of shape over the politics of our Country, we should at least do our research...and not just research until we can find a means by which to prove ourselves right and then stop.

If you're concerned about "picking and sticking" with any particular party, it should behoove you to adhere to your own advice.

There is no means by which I'd find it justifiable to accept the Great Liberal Democratic Cause----because they are neither liberal nor democratic in their views.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#883 Consumer Comment

I've said it before....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 31, 2006

....I'll say it again:

"If you won't stand for something,
You'll fall for anything."

AND:

"Better to die on my feet, than to live on my knees."

I do not feel the need to "pick a party", as I find there's no need to align one's self with a title in the sense (after all...isn't it a bit "traitorous", if I happen to like a particular candidate, even if that candidate isn't a member of my "party"? Who needs to deal with that?). I've mentioned that I'm not a Republican or a Democrat; I am an Independent. I just know that I'm nowhere near "Left", and that delights me to no end.

But I seem to have many of the views of a Libertarian, and that's fine, too.

Simply put, I think that if we're going to get ourselves all bent out of shape over the politics of our Country, we should at least do our research...and not just research until we can find a means by which to prove ourselves right and then stop.

If you're concerned about "picking and sticking" with any particular party, it should behoove you to adhere to your own advice.

There is no means by which I'd find it justifiable to accept the Great Liberal Democratic Cause----because they are neither liberal nor democratic in their views.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#882 Consumer Suggestion

New evidence - I spent a year in Iraq during this war and would do it over again in a heartbeat.

AUTHOR: Jeremy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 25, 2006

I invite you all to go to abcnews.com Iraqi documents have been declassified and answers your questions reguarding WMD's and the relation between Afganistan and Iraq. Read thse translations in their entirety and then try and convince me that the Bush administration lied. I spent a year in Iraq during this war and would do it over again in a heartbeat.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#881 Consumer Comment

Democrats should blast cheney for his derogatory remarks who cares what cheneys sas democrats don't need to take cheneys s**t

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 24, 2006

We all know cheney hates democrats, & we all have to put up with his derogatory, racist, & bully remarks from him! he as cursed @ democrat senators always blasted democrats like all republicans like to do, democrats don't need to get mad but get even with cheney & his republican thugs friends!. I personally hate cheney & his wife for what they said about kerry for what kerry made a comment about their daughter well john edwards did the same thing & cheney didn't get pissed @ him or his wife, then the next day after the debate cheneys wife was bitching & bickering about kerry saying he is a bad guy that got me pissed! cheney thinks he is the vice president & he thinks he can act & do whatever he wants & says about people!. Ever sense bush as been in office cheney as always bitched about the democrats the reason why cheneys wife did that was to try to make kerry a bad guy to make him lose, democrats don't need to take cheneys "s**t", bush & cheney don't realize that they are making it hard for their hard to win for the next elections so we need to sit back & let the republicans keep doing & saying because they are just making it easier & easier for democrats to get back in office & republicans will lose all respect from americans forever!. It will probally take 100 years to fix the united states from how much bush as screwed it up & taking everybodys civil rights away just like republicans love to do they love to do it to the middle class more poor & the rich richer!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#880 Consumer Comment

Sheesh, Vera. Pick a party, grab a beer and grow a sense of humor . Vote Democrat!

AUTHOR: Roseanne - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 24, 2006

Sheesh, Vera, I wasn't done yet.

1. If you think mothers should be able to kill their unborn babies at will, you should vote Democrat.

2. If you think Robert should marry Ben, you should vote Democrat.

3. If you think 12- and 13-year-old girls should have abortions without parental notification, you should vote Democrat.

4. If you think we need more liberal judges who would legislate from the bench (or cite some other country's constitution), you should vote Democrat.

5. If you think we need more gun laws instead of prosecuting criminals, vote Democrat.

6. If you think the solution to the energy problems is to block every proposal for five or six years without a positive proposal of your own, vote Democrat.

7. If you think the way to productively conduct a government is to try to continually block up or down votes (majority rule), vote Democrat.

8. If you think that the values and goals of generational welfare minorities are aligned with your own goals and values, vote Democrat.

9. If you think we should surrender in Iraq and sit back and hope that the terrorists won't attack us again, you should vote Democrat.

Put both lists in a box along with your politicians, shake 'em up, mix 'em and match 'em to suit yourself, roll it around, shake it some more, jiggle it, waggle it, wiggle it, roll 'em out and see what you have. Then repeat the exercise. Shake it, baby, shake it. Repeat again. And again. Keep looking at what rolls out each time...same old people, different "beliefs".

You'll eventually figure out that it don't matter what party label they hang on themselves. They are all the same. Their first priority is themselves. Politics is built on a shaky foundation of shifting sands. Politicians beliefs change depending on what the polls say. Might as well make sweeping generalizations because if you hang around long enough, most of 'em will come true at some time or other. Look at Hillary. She seesaws between hawk and dove so fast that I get whiplash trying to watch her. Do I care? Naw, I ain't invitin' her to dinner at my house. She looks so bloated these days I am afraid she will try to borrow my clothes.

Believe in yourself and your own beliefs and hope that the d**n fools don't take them completely away from you some day while you ain't looking. Try not to take it all so seriously...I know you have a sense of humor buried somewhere under all that outrage.

Calm down. Have a little fun, enjoy your life. Live like every day is your last because with the goofballs at the wheel, it very well may be. Salud!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#879 Consumer Comment

Awwww...someone thinks they have a wit! How cute...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 24, 2006

Well, you're about half-right, anyway.

And really, I don't feel much like demonstrating my usual decorum, when I hear the same Democratic Gurgles being regurgitated yet again. Same old soundbytes, and this time, presented in broad, sweeping generalizations.

Let me take a whack at it, and play by your same template....

Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
1. Saddam was a good guy when...

What was he when Clinton ignored his underhanded and vile practices, in the exact same fashion of ignoring Bin Laden? Oh! I know! A non-issue! After all, we have to be careful not to blow the chances of Billy-Boy getting his Piece Prize---I mean, PEACE Prize.

2. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.'

Well, I just guess I've got an in for Carter's buddy Castro. What can I say? And just in case you're not aware (wow, what a surprise THAT'D be!), we're still trying to patch things over with Vietnam and China from the past.

3. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Funny how we hear about all these women's rights being leached away when the subject of murdering for the sake of convenience comes up. Where's all this want for self-control when these women should be exercising the right to NOT have sex?

Oh, and I'm not into big corporations having any say over my life, either...but I'm also not Republican. I love how you have no objections when big corporations create the drugs that help a woman make her CHOICE, like the Morning After' pill.

4. Jesus loves you and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

Actually, Jesus' attitude is to hate the sin, not the sinner. Try as I might, I can find no instance in the NT where he said you're gay, go to hell!--perhaps you can point it out for me? Personally, I wouldn't want anyone to go to Hell...but I'll be damned (pardon the pun...no, really!) if I'm gonna let Hitlery bring Hell to Earth any faster.

5. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

Talk to Clinton if you really want great stories on how the Military lost money. I'm sure he did the very best he could! He was busily stripping us down to nakedness, while arming our enemies. Clinton is the biggest reason our current War is so ridiculously expensive.

6. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

No, but it's not the smartest idea for Schools and other media sources to tell kids to go ahead and have sex, either. But then again, how many homes nowadays HAVEN'T seen a divorce? Marriage-Type relationships are an outgoing trend, it seems. Besides, we wouldn't want our kids to not think about their genitals! It's their right!

7. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.'

Look how well it's worked for Canada...and by the way, how much good is providing welfare recipients the best health care money can't afford, while can barely afford the average? Great. We'll have the healthiest population of non-working class people around. Oh, but hey, according to the Liberals, it's not their fault they're poor! No! It's those evil Right-Wing bastards, what with that awful Ozzy-And Harriet lifestyle they're dreaming of!

And aside from that, what's wrong with helping people out? Which is it? Are we bastards because we're causing them all these injuries (no, US, NOT the Terrorists!), or are we bastards because we're trying to make them well or fix what we helped break? I tell you, there's no pleasing Liberals!

Yet liberals want to keep welfare going, make it stronger and able to serve a further-reaching demographic of people, what with all their newly created psychoses and disabilities, but we know there's a reason.
If we eliminated welfare, the Democrats would lose the bulk of their voter-base. Saddam Hussein kept his people poor and obligated for a REASON. They're easier to control and manipulate.

8. HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Sort of like homosexual marriages have the sanctity of monogamous relationships at heart...it has nothing to do with being able to double-up on insurance benefits. And of course, Liberals understand the common man. We all know this...they're literally in the thick of it, what with all the maids and waiters at their country clubs (using blue-collar joes like the Kerrys as an example.)...

9. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

Well, what's evolution got to be so worried about? If it's true, it has nothing to worry about, right? D'you know who Anthony Flew is? He's a scientist who also happens to be a dyed-in-the-wool- atheist and had no interest in the possibility of Creationism. However, upon study of the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (that's DNA to you and me), even the great Anthony Flew was willing to consider the possibility of Intelligent Design.

10. A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

A President lying about an affair? No...when he lies under oath, and prevents his victim her protected right to have her say (and her day) in court, yeah. That's Perjury, Sunshine. We can add that to the catalogued list of offenses perpetrated by the Head Pervert.

11. Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

Well, as far as gay marriage goes, I've made several statements regarding it. I don't care if everyone agrees with me. On the subject of censure of the Internet, I'm all for limiting the access predators have to my kids, and for keeping porno pop-ups out of the reach of my minor-aged kidlings. Too bad you don't appear to feel the same way as I...and I'm glad I'm not one of your kids.

Oh...and a picture isn't freedom of speech; it's a picture...you can't say' a picture, but a picture can say a thousand words. I can bet you dollars to dollhouses that if there were a simple black-and-white text storyline instead of a picture, the porn industry would crash and burn. However, one single pornographic image viewed by a young child (say, even a pre-teen boy, since they think they're so savvy), can create a series of thoughts and events that develop to a point where gratification or furtherment will most likely be sought. After all, why is the porn industry so much more popular with the men?

12. The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George W. Bush's cocaine conviction and military service record are none of our business.

Ahh, that old hat again

Yeah, isn't it funny how George Bush's DUI is big news, and he was a bad guy because he tried cocaine, and there's this big stink about his time in the military

The fact that Bush provided proof on nine separate occasions that his military record was on the up-and-up didn't seem to make the news, apparently...funny...and am I the only one who knows about how CBS' Dan Blather forged documents, and the CBS heads knew about it an STILL let the lie be told. Hey, remember...He's still our President.

Where was all this outrage when Clinton got to keep his office, and HE actually WAS A.W.O.L.! Good Ol' Boy Jimmy Carter was the Prez who gave Clinton the pardon, thereby making Clinton the First Felon (pardoned) to serve in the Executive Branch! A draft-dodger sleeps in the White house, while our Vets sleep under bridges.

Never mind the fact that Clinton was also known to admit that he tried pot---oh, yeah! He didn't inhale! If a rapist uses a condom when he rapes a 12 year old, is he less of a rapist because he didn't get any body-fluids in his victim?

What tripe!

Oh, and on the subject of DUIs and whatnot...why is no one up in arms over the fact that Ted Kennedy had multiple offenses of not just driving drunk, but of driving drunk and without a license, speeding, and the fact that a young lady was killed as a result of this behavior? Is it any nobler that he waited for the booze to leave his system, changed his clothes, and fabricated an alibi before he actually called the police?

13. You must be pro-life that is, unless we're talking about the death penalty.

Well, I am PRO LIFE, when it comes down to the wire, Sisteryour ad-hominem bullshit works about as well as a screen door on a submarine.

How can you even make the comparison between a psychopathic serial killer, a child rapist, a mass-murderer (you know, those that the law finds guilty and therefore DESERVING of the death penalty!), and a completely innocent, unborn, and defenseless human being?

I'd love to see how your mind languishes, to draw the similarities between these two, much less come up with that conclusion!

And considering the fact that I have researched my data (at least five sourcesGoogle em up), I have numbers ranging on the low end, that is, .01 percent, to the high end, .06 per cent---both less than ONE PER CENT---of abortions are performed as a result of rape and/or incest. Over ninety five per cent are performed for the sake of varying degrees of convenience: career, figure, finances, discovered affair or infidelity, morning after/coyote date regrets...and on and on.

The remaining percentile is drug-induced (not the morning after' pill, but a pharmacological reaction for one reason or another) and/or emergency/endangerment to the life of the mother or viability of the infant (ultrasound detected severe malformations and the like).

So I'll venture to say, that when they tell a woman that the decision to have an abortion is a matter between a woman and her Doctor, they really are forgetting someone---an' I don't mean the Daddy.

Why is it bad for young adults---not children, ADULTS---to die or kill defending their loved ones or themselves, and yet it's okay to take the life of another human being to keep your figure/job/relationship/whatever? At least the soldiers went down in service to protect our lives. These young people weren't drafted, they volunteered. And they weren't defenseless.

I mean, which is it? Are they our children, fighting in Iraq for some greedy corporations---oh, my! They've forgotten their booties! or are they Bloodthirsty marauding and pillaging monsters of America's mighty military machine! Smashin' daisies and breaking all the kids' Barney pencils!

And tell me---hat justified the deaths of the 3,000 people going to work on a warm September day five years ago? Why aren't you pro-life for them? They have all the earmarks of your favorite kind of victim: unsuspecting, unarmed, distracted, hapless and harmless. Perfect target for a terrorist---or a terrorist sympathizer...you'd love them.

SO, let's recap: to be a LIEberal, you MUST believe...

1. There are no good guys or bad guys...it's all fodder, and don't stand up in defense of your country because it'll ruin your crack at a Nobel peace Prize. And it's okay that folks died or were injured like they were on the U.S.S. Cole and those embassies, coz they don't matter. Grist for the Mill.

2. Let's buddy up to a country that has absolutely nothing of value to import to this country, unless you value drugs and illegal aliens, and completely disregard a country that has more intelligence and resource at its disposal than Cuba could fabricate over ten Castro Leaderships.

3. A woman's right to eliminate human life should be hers, as we wouldn't want any women out there to be inconvenienced with the problem or burden of reproductive responsibility. After all, we don't want women to be victims here...we want them to have the same selfish disregard for human life as the average horny pool boy. Besides, a woman can't attend any Feminazi Rallies, if she can't arrange daycare. And Lord knows, we don't want woman to be EQUAL in the responsibility for bringing birth control to the party. Or life into this world.

All these years, women have tried to advance, and some of us are STILL using our sexuality as a weapon one minute and a shield the next. Pity. Looks like some of us are still struggling to evolve, hunh?

4. And let's love our selves and sexuality like Hitlery Clinton, who won't let her kid pierce her ears, but fights for our 13 and 14 year old daughters to have an abortion with out parental consent. Free sexuality! Whee! But we all know she won't put her daughter in a public school, let alone a school that distributes condoms. Funny how some women are more equal than othersfight the power, Sister. [Eyeroll.]

5. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay. After all, I'm sure the Democrats are trying...we know Clinton did his best, and he even worked to arm Communist China with our technology. But rest assured, the donations made to the Democratic Party were used...well, democratically! :D

Oh, and you left out that part where you'll teleconference messages of support and praise to the troops overseas...but when the troops aren't looking you're busy calling them marauders and butchers of the Bush Regime and cheapening EVERY sacrifice they've made, every step forward is seen as a liability.

6. We have to teach children that their sexuality is their power. We have to teach that it's okay to be gay, and let NAMBLA write some of the curriculum about Sex before eight or it's too late! And that sex can be used as currency, and sex is love. But then we'll take it back, and tell them sex is okay as long as you use a condombut really, you shouldn't...but in case you do...here's a condom. Oh, and my Cel number, in case you have any questions...yeah.

We have to encourage exposure to wholesome images of Brittney Spears doing a striptease at seventeen (anyone remember the song she sung while doing that performance?), Fifty Cent getting pinned down and shot in the face, all while listening to the clarion call of Nelly: It's getting' hott in here, so take off all your clothes! (Female echoes: I am get-ting so hott, I will take my clothes off!) This is freedom of speech, but if I suggest someone demonstrate self control, or that they're more than the sum of their parts, and I'm Forcing my right-wing message of religion down their throats.

Oh, and fire that b***h that tried to insert masturbation as a subject in health, willya? That sorta thing's immoral!

7. Providing health care to people who won't work for a living, and making the ones that WILL work for a living pay for all of it, plus any other essentials, is good for the Democratic Voting Base.

Yep. Nothing screams poverty like a 72-inch plasma screen, hanging on the wall of a section-8 home. Residence of the Gimmee-Elite paid for by your taxes. All those nice folks, kept warm in their homes with heat they keep on eighty during the winter, indifferent of fuel costs because they pay twenty to fifty bucks a month regardless. Meanwhile, those that work keep the temp at fifty when they're out, and sixty five when they're home---and still pay over two hundred a month! Think about that when you cruise down the pocked roads of the city, so damaged you need a four-wheel-drive to negotiate them. And know where your tax dollars are REALLY at "work".

And don't forget what the construction of that subsidized housing project will do to your property values. I'd almost rather live by a prison. At least you can expect snakes to come out of a snake's den.

8. We'll b***h about the Big Bad HMOs, but we'll do nothing to cut back on pork barrel spending and welfare expense. Never mind the fact that there have been some of the largest malpractice lawsuits (also some of the most trivial) at the hands of John Edwards...but don't pay any attention to that.

9. Let's spread the word that global warming is what caused that poor, chocolate city of New Orleans to suffer at the hands of Katrina...no, wait...it was Mississippi that actually got hit, for one, and hurricanes fluctuate on decade long cycles (see NOAA.org iffen y'don't believe me), and...but then, there's El Nio, andwell, New Orleans is 12 feet BELOW sea level, and they had the money for ages to repair the levees, and, unh...but wait! Sean Penn was there! HE saw the carnage! And that damned BUSH, Oohh!! He---he's Bush! It's all his fault!
Did we mention that Bush's family is into OIL?

10. Liberal Democrats can perjure, use drugs, commit any number of illegal offenses individually, or as a group, and get away with it. It's ludicrous for Republicans to assume they have the same privileges as We Do.

Do as I say, not as I do;
I demand respect, but won't give it to you.
I'll be your man til the s**t hits the fan,
Then I'll turn and I'll point, and I'll blame it on you.

I'll stand as the man with the noble comment,
I'll use sleight of hand to mask my intent.
I'll pose with my Bible, to prove I'm reliable
And never reveal how my outlook is bent.

11. Government should give all its approval and money to any group that will further the Great Liberal Cause; give us your tired, your poor, we'll create lazy victims with more rights and privileges than you can shake a stick at. We'll let the gays marry, and next the Polygamists, and the Polyandrous types...while we're at it let's let pedophiles marry children, and children marry children---what the hell! Hmm! This lady sure is fond of her hairbrush! Pretty much anything you can have sex with, you can marry it! Let's completely cheapen the bonds of matrimony! Think of the money all these lawyers will make on the divorces! Then we can have big corporations of...dah-dah-dahh! Attorneys! Yippee!

Let's alter the Constitution to INCLUDE that often used (albeit INCORRECTLY!) phrase, a wall of separation between Church and State! (Again, that statement doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution, Bill Of Rights, or the Declaration of independence...it only appears in a letter written well AFTER all these documents were set in place, and the separation clause refers to not permitting each state to have a singular representative religion, instead of keeping religion out of every aspect of public life.)

12. Only Liberal Democrats have the right to sling mud of any kind, whether it's true or false. Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, etcetera need never inject ANY return volley even in self-defense---and ESPECIALLY, not the TRUTH!

This is fun! :D

13. You must be pro-choice. By cracky, you'd BETTER BE!
And you'd better use that freedom of choice to agree with US.

Especially when it comes to those vicious, heartless unborn children! How dare they get in the way of my illicit affair, or cost me my (six) figure (salary)~!

Now we can't harm our friends the terrorists or the Communists, after all, those assholes working at the World Trade Center had it coming to them! Yeah. Finally, America got what She deserved! Chalk one up for Bin Laden!
Death is only tragic if it's used to grease the wheels of the Leftist Agenda. How sad, that I've probably had this same argument a dozen times before.

And really, how many Liberal loudmouths bearing the name Roseanne do we need? Isn't one enough? But at least, the reigning Queen of White Trash is FUNNY, sometimes. Your material needs work.

Or at least, update to better soundbytes to mimick.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#878 Consumer Comment

You might be a Republican...

AUTHOR: Roseanne - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

1. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a we can't find bin Laden diversion.

2. Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

3. A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

4. Jesus loves you and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

5. The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

6. If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

7. Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

8. HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

9. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

10. A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

11. Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

12. The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George W. Bush's cocaine conviction and military service record are none of our business.

13. You must be pro-life that is, unless we're talking about the death penalty.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#877 Consumer Comment

To many ignorant bush supporters on this forum

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, March 16, 2006

Its useless to discuss anything with bush supporters everything is fine till they spread their hate & try to force everybody else with their beliefs you see it on fox news all the time, how they try to blind everybody like how hannity does & the bush supporters on this forum who try to blind people & show hate to those who don't support bush or who say anti bush remarks & how the republicans want people to pay the price for saying any anit bush remarks or who oppose bush & this false war!, everybody as the right to speak out agaisnt the president just like people who hate the former president bill clinton who still spread hatred about him today, that is why people have to pay alot more for gas because of bush & cheney who own the oil companies & they are crooks they are robbing the american people to make them right gas is the highest it as ever been in history & republicans have made it clear they are not going to do anything about it & bush said don't expect the gas $ to come down. This will get alot harder for americans in the coming years the cost of living as gone up! then it was when bill clinton was president bill clinton, gave americans a break if bush is such a true chrisitan & beliver in god then why does he try to make life hard for the middle class people, bush does not care for americans all he cares is stealing from the american people to make himself rich by the time he leaves office america will have made bush the richest man in america.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#876 Consumer Suggestion

Stop the hate!

AUTHOR: Mary - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Respect each other's different views. Everyone has a right to his/her own opinions. What I am observing here is one group of thinkers wanting to bully another group for their views. What makes you right or wrong? Neither side has proved an argument for or against Bush. Everything that is being said is fueled with hate. Remember there are those that are intelligent enough to realize that they are "individuals" and have not been socially brainwashed into believing everything they hear or see on T.V.

What I am trying to say is that the way you are going about arguing is why we have wars to begin with. Think about what is being said.

A people in one accord can run a nation smoothly. It will never happen with this amount of hate.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#875 Consumer Comment

Typical of an uneducated populace

AUTHOR: Al - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 13, 2006

I hate to break it to all of you, but your wierd political beliefs are exactly why America is coming apart. How dare you defame the country my ancestors (I have a distant ancestor that fought at the Battle of Saratoga in 1777)founded! If I had the power I would deport all of you! Nevertheless, I will tell you the three main reasons why America is falling apart, and what we need to do to fix it.

1. A merger of business and the state does not work. As CEOs and Governors become more intertwined, the law will become more twisted and warped, primarily to serve the elite. To solve this, we need to do the following:

Take away the constitutional rights of corporations (including LLPs, LLCs, private corporations, and the like), political parties and quasigovernmental agencies, and enact laws to prevent the merger of governments and business, and also to prevent special interest groups from gaining power in office.

2. Any nation that embraces religion will destroy itself, regardless of whether it is Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Wicca, or any other strange religion. This is why there is so much domestic violence and aggression even over trivial matters such as what is being discussed here. You need to understand that not all religions are equal, and reason and a good education, based in critical thinking and an understanding of the world for what it is, are preferable to political or religious dogma. To solve this we need to:

Remove and completely seperate religion and politics from school, and teach our children the fundamentals, such as reading, mathematics, finance, history, and the other topics that will make us competitive in the world. We have fallen from grace, it is not really any different than from many decades ago.

Stop public subsidizing of religion and political contributions, and any and all religious and non-profit institutions must be reorganized into corporations so they many not gain a hold onto public office

3. Our taxation and legal system is broke. We as a country have maybe 10 years at best of life. We need to remove all forms of direct and unconstitutional taxation and go back to a tariff system that favors domestic production. With the tariffs we recieve from China's imports, we would have no need for income taxes or socialist security or a massive defense budget. Here we must:

Reduce the IRS's authority to collecting federal tariffs and taxes on imports and interstate commerce ONLY, and removal of all income taxes, payroll taxes, SS taxes, and all other direct taxes. A gold standard must be in place instead of a fiat currency.

Ending the subsidation of the defense industry and reducing the military down to a more appropriate size (perhaps 5% of what it is now), and the restoral of gun rights to all Americans. At least the average American will be able to defend themselves. The idea is not to encourage people to stock up on assault rifles, but to show the world and ourselves that we can change for the better, perhaps so the rest of the world does not fear us as much.

Most of the national budget (at least 80%) is spend on three pork items: Social Security, defense, and HUD expenses, the only necessary one is defense, and at a much reduced level. Think about it. If we make these improvements at the federal level, chances are they will help state governments better themselves as well. We could fund the other national programs with the tariffs we already collect, and industry would eventually come back to America now that it would be a stable and more egalitarian society. What a brave new world indeed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#874 Consumer Comment

I just loved this... My Fellow Americans

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 13, 2006

Wouldn't it be great to turn on the TeeVee and hear any U.S. President, Democrat or Republican, give the following speech?

My Fellow Americans:

As you all know, the defeat of Iraq regime has been completed.

Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now to begin the reckoning.

Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries, which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short. The United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia, and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hellholes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.

Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic?
Call France!

In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations: Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.

Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France, or maybe China.

I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.

I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York.

A special note to our neighbors: Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.

Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple extra tank and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put em? Yep, border security. So start doing something with your oil.

Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty - starting now.

We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling for oil in Alaska - which will take care of this country's oil needs for decades to come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there. They care.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, "Darn tootin'!"

Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America. It is time to eliminate homelessness in America. It is time to eliminate World Cup Soccer from America. To the nations on List 1, a final thought: Thanks guys. We owe you and we won't forget.

To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn to speak Arabic.

God bless America!

Thank you and good night.

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.

Ohyeah. And to the GUY with No d**k?

?you don't KNOW d**k.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#873 Consumer Comment

Gee, Guy. That poll meant alot...about NOTHING!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, March 09, 2006

The poll you refer to, the one by CBS(a bastion of honesty) used 400 registered Democrats, and 200 Republicans. What a shock that 2/3 disliked Bush, when 2/3 are Democrats. I'll bet if you asked the families of the people Ted Kennedy has murdered in his car, you'll find a very low approval rating of the Senator too.

WOW! Where's Dan Blather when you need him. Oh, that's right...He's still trying to figure out how to make a Microsoft Word Doc look like it was made on a Selectric Typewriter.

You also need to re-read the posts by us "Bush supporters". None of us have pledged loyalty to him. We simply agree that killing the bad guys in their countries is better than them killing us in ours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#872 Consumer Comment

To John in Halifax, PA

AUTHOR: Guy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Please don't refer to hearsay as "facts." Its bad enough that we have to survive this presidency for another 3 years, let alone put up with all the blind ignorance of his supporters.

Finally it is coming to light what Americans think of the job their current president is doing. While I take the polls with a grain of salt, there is no doubting the validity of the recent poll results. Dumbya is on his way to the absolute lowest approval ratings in the history of the US presidency, and that rating has truly been earned! Only Nixon had lower approval ratings, and only after the Watergate scandal broke. I am sure, however, that these people who don't approve of the job our president is doing, actually still love this great country of ours. Yes, you can love America and not love the president at the same time, although those at Fox News would have you believe differently.

To close, I have a message for the anti-abortion folk. Instead of worrying so much about abortion, you should concentrate more on abstinence - you know, NO BUSH, NO d**k!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#871 Consumer Comment

The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 06, 2006

Did anybody watch the eposide on the history channel last night about the antichrist read your bible & read the newspaper & watch the news, all the things the bible predicted is happning today! we are living in the endtimes. Bush has gotten away with spying on innocent americans this is the purpose of the antichrist!. And if anybody says anything bad about bush he & his republican friends & bush's network fox news & hannity makes sure people pay the price for not supporting bush's policy's, & we have to listen to hannitys insults about our former president bill clinton & the rest of the fox news thugs who seek to make people pay the price for being agaisnt bush, we have the right to be agaisnt bush & republicans nor hannity will force us to support bush or his policy's, & nobody cares about hannity or what he doesn't like if anybody says anti bush remarks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#870 Consumer Comment

The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 06, 2006

Did anybody watch the eposide on the history channel last night about the antichrist read your bible & read the newspaper & watch the news, all the things the bible predicted is happning today! we are living in the endtimes. Bush has gotten away with spying on innocent americans this is the purpose of the antichrist!. And if anybody says anything bad about bush he & his republican friends & bush's network fox news & hannity makes sure people pay the price for not supporting bush's policy's, & we have to listen to hannitys insults about our former president bill clinton & the rest of the fox news thugs who seek to make people pay the price for being agaisnt bush, we have the right to be agaisnt bush & republicans nor hannity will force us to support bush or his policy's, & nobody cares about hannity or what he doesn't like if anybody says anti bush remarks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#869 Consumer Comment

The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 06, 2006

Did anybody watch the eposide on the history channel last night about the antichrist read your bible & read the newspaper & watch the news, all the things the bible predicted is happning today! we are living in the endtimes. Bush has gotten away with spying on innocent americans this is the purpose of the antichrist!. And if anybody says anything bad about bush he & his republican friends & bush's network fox news & hannity makes sure people pay the price for not supporting bush's policy's, & we have to listen to hannitys insults about our former president bill clinton & the rest of the fox news thugs who seek to make people pay the price for being agaisnt bush, we have the right to be agaisnt bush & republicans nor hannity will force us to support bush or his policy's, & nobody cares about hannity or what he doesn't like if anybody says anti bush remarks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#868 Consumer Comment

The antichrist is upon us fox news promotes hatred

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 06, 2006

Did anybody watch the eposide on the history channel last night about the antichrist read your bible & read the newspaper & watch the news, all the things the bible predicted is happning today! we are living in the endtimes. Bush has gotten away with spying on innocent americans this is the purpose of the antichrist!. And if anybody says anything bad about bush he & his republican friends & bush's network fox news & hannity makes sure people pay the price for not supporting bush's policy's, & we have to listen to hannitys insults about our former president bill clinton & the rest of the fox news thugs who seek to make people pay the price for being agaisnt bush, we have the right to be agaisnt bush & republicans nor hannity will force us to support bush or his policy's, & nobody cares about hannity or what he doesn't like if anybody says anti bush remarks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#867 Consumer Suggestion

Check out the FACTS!

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, March 06, 2006

1. After 17(or even 1) seperate UN resolutions it was ILLEGAL NOT TO INVADE IRAQ! The 49 nations who supported the invasion(Unilateral? LOL!) were the only nations who take their promises and laws seriously. Most of the non-supportive nations have since been caught with their fingers in the oil-for-food till. Look inti it.

2. Enough chemical weapons to kill MILLIONS of people have indeed been found squirreled away in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. What more do you want? For them to be used AGAIN? It is a well documented FACT that those supposedly nonexistant chemical weapons were indeed used repeatedly by Saddam on Kurd villiages, and Iranian villiages. He both had 'em and used 'em. Have you even seen what happened to the victims? Would you prefer to see it in YOUR hometown(assuming you were a survivor)? Look into it.

3. Find out what the "Bush Doctrine" is and what it means. This is NOT an undeclared war like Vietnam. There are very specific conditions in the declaration of war against terror. You ALL (Democrats and liberals included) supported it at the time. Would you have Bush flip-flop on his word- just like you do, further damaging our credibility and costing the lives of MILLIONS of americans and others?Look into it.

4. Where did the Anthrax come from? Which nation had the capability to weaponize it in such a way? Who was it who met with an Iraqi intelligence agent a week before flying a highjacked plane into tower 1? Where was this particular al-queda associate(Atta) at the time and where was the 1st case of anthrax? Well? Coincidence? There is no such thing in my line of work. There's no scientific PROOF, but there's a very strong evidence trail leading directly to Saddam. Look into it.

5. He (Saddam) most certainly DID support islamic terrorists in every way. Look into it! He left quite a paper trail! Do I have to keep saying it? LOOK INTO IT!

6. Hitler was a SOCIALIST, and far far left, not right. Comparisons to the right are idiocy... National Socialist German Workers' Party. Duh!

7. The US government does NOT have the luxury of using lies to explain itself. The left, terrorists, and lunatics do. If anyone cares to actually check into the FACTS the truth becomes obvious. Try it! But I'm well aware that the truth will never interfere with a cherished "belief system". And some people will swallow propaganda that flies in the face of reality, no matter how obviously false such propaganda is.

8. Michael Moore produces "Op Ed's"(his own words) based strictly on his opinion, not facts(also his own words). He freely admits this! To take opinion that CANNOT be backed up with fact as "gospel truth" is not only profoundly stupid, but in this case extremely dangerous! We ARE at war, and this is NOT Vietnam. YOUR life is at stake, RIGHT WHERE YOU SIT, RIGHT NOW! Wake up! We are fighting an enemy who really CAN hurt YOU!

9.The majority of the REAL ENEMY we are fighting have foolishly chosen to concentrate themselves in Iraq. Good, let them all gather up in one place.... But if we leave THEY WILL COME HERE! That's right, the war will be fought with or without your approval anyway, but leaving Iraq will bring the war quickly to YOUR hometown. Do you really want that? Are YOU prepared to defend yourself from THAT? Your protests won't stop al-queda at all(even though you are busy helping them). They'll gladly kill you too, especially the way you tend to gather up in big crowds... talk about soft targets!

10. You might want to check out Bush's DOMESTIC POLICY.... that's what's really scary! Or do you not notice your rights slipping away? Soon you won't have the right to spew your idiotic propaganda... WHY AREN'T YOU RAISING HELL ABOUT THAT! FOOLS!!!!

CHECK OUT THE FACTS FOR A CHANGE!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#866 Consumer Comment

It's like discovering you have a spot on your shirt at a restaurant...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 05, 2006

....you're embarrassed it's there, but you don't wanna spoil the night out for others by going home to change, so you simply tolerate it. I can imagine that many of the people in James' life must feel that way while they're with him.

"TO ALL PEOPLE:---" ---Named James of Tupper....

?I started this TRUE Story to see how many people would actually believe the truth that I have stated.?

Shouldn't that read: ?I started this (non-)TRUE Story to see how many people I could get to give me attention?? (Yay....another troll who wants to "see how many people believe", then knock them for what they believe---especially if it opposes his view.)

Or maybe: ?I started this (version of a) TRUE Story to piss and whine because I now have to choose between putting gas in my car, OR buying booze, OR buying porn, because now, I can't afford all three??

Either way, what you have ?stated? is nothing more than your interpretation on some conjecture regurgitated from the likes of Michael Moore-On and the rest of the leftmedia. All of which has thus far been challenged and debunked. Repeatedly.

?I am horrified to see that some people----?

-----Are allowed access to the Internet, have no mental capacity what-so-ever, couldn't present a SINGLE SHRED of truthful credible fact to back up nonsensical claims. And then they get pissed off because people who are more informed won't swallow their bullshit. Even the people here that DON'T like Bush think you're mental, Jimbo The Bimbo. That makes me smile a lot.

?----are blinded by Bush and his use of 9/11 as an excuse to invade ANY nation.?

Someone needs to change your Depends, ya bedwetter. 9-11 wasn't the only reason we've gone to war, but you go on ahead and believe a fat pigshitter like you have. Maybe Moore's right, in your case: ?Possibly the dumbest people on the planet.?

I'd like to say you suck, Darling?.but we wouldn't want to give the nice folks here the impression that you have some sort of potential.

?Well, because you idiots, are letting this happen, American troops are dying.?

Unh-hunh. And who cares about Saddam's mass-graves, right? Who gives a big whoop about three thousand innocent lives that were snuffed out in a sneak attack, as opposed to those who went down fighting for their Country, right? What about crime? Drugs? Black market prostitution, and the sexual exploitation of minors? The war isn't the only thing that's killing people?.but we can see clearly that you have done nothing to help besides piss and moan on this website. But I understand?that would involve you thinking of other people and not yourself?.and we know you wouldn't want to do that. That might tear you away from the important things, like reciting Michael Moore's greatest insults, pick-ups and one-liners. And Lord knows, you wouldn't want to think of other people, unless it has something to do with insulting other people on this site?that would be way out of your league.

?I have one dream!?

Would that have anything to do with the check that arrives at its appointed date, or does it involve the nice lady in white who has a happy-needle for you?

Or is there only enough room for "ONE dream" in that pin-head of yours?

?I wish people like that dumb b***h??
See, there you go, making the mistake of assuming I care about the opinion of some dreg who has issues. I'm not your Momma, so quit calling me by pet names. You have as much chance of presenting solid challenge to me, as you'd have of breeding with a female outside of your family troupe, or even one who's sober.

I'll bet you're happy you've got a friend in Rohypnol, hunh, Jimbo?

And if I'm so ?dumb?, why is it that I've been handing you your a*s so much? You have yet to even stand to my initial challenge?.but I notice that since I've come here, the bulk of your posts are aimed at me by direct or insinuative comment.

You're down to nothing but insults for me....and you've never produced one fact. Wow. That was easy.

?----Vera-Tweet-Ohio, You need a real life, you are under a wrong assumption, do you think Bush is GOD??

And he calls ME the ?dumb? one.
Let me answer your query with a response, I feel, sums you up nicely---and you'll be able to understand it:

?Duuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh?..?

And you're a fine one to be telling me to ?get a life?.'
But then again, you really seem to enjoy picking fights with people whom have you outclassed at every turn. ROFLMAO?.Talk about being a glutton for punishment.

?Well, I will tell you he is NOT!?

See above. And thanks, Mr. Points-Out-The-Obvious-A lot.

I invite you to point out ONE SINGLE PHRASE that I have said that equates GWB with God. The trick is, it has to be understood as it is meant, not spun to your interpretation. (Don't forget the date and title of the post you contrived---I mean, got----it from, ?kay?) But as I have seen so often before with ANY other challenge I have presented, you'll do nothing of the sort. You'll come back with some other insult that's just as lame as your mentality.

Come on, Nutless Wonder?.turn your attention from ?Barely-Legal Hot N Horny Teens? (whom in reality, wouldn't want some liquor-jerked piece of inferior-cut meat like you if you were a millionaire) to reading something of intelligence. Mike Moore isn't the only source of info you can get your spinformation from, I'm sure.

?Bush has stirred a bee's nest and blood will be shed!?

And it's clear you're happy about it. After all, what other reason would you have to get some attention? All the other Reports you've responded to are filled with people who are sick of hearing your tripe, so they pretty much ignore you when you do take time from your day and fart up something you think is clever. Just remember?it's only you who thinks it's clever, and, well, little things amuse little minds.

Go wipe your chin?.the smeg is unappealing.

And Robert of Florida....

Tee-Hee. Don't be so mean.....one bad apple don't spoil the bushel...lmao

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#865 Consumer Comment

I have a dream too

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, March 05, 2006

I have a dream that Bush will use the military to invade Tupper Lake and get rid of that cesspool of genetic mutants once and for all. I can only imagine how much better America will be with TL no longer dragging us down. Test scores will double or triple. No more problems.

Yep, I have a dream.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#864 Author of original report

horrified to see that some people are blinded by Bush and his use of 9/11 as an excuse to invade ANY nation

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 04, 2006

TO ALL PEOPLE:

I started this TRUE Story to see how many people would actually believe the truth that I have stated. I am horrified to see that some people are blinded by Bush and his use of 9/11 as an excuse to invade ANY nation. Well, Iraq is petroleum rich but poor, so we can invade them and take their oil, we will than involve the Saudis, to increase oil prices for American people. Well, because you idiots, are letting this happen, American troops are dying. I have one dream! A dream without "GEORGE WALKER BUSH"!
I wish people like that dumb b***h Vera-Tweet-Ohio, You need a real life, you are under a wrong assumption, do you think Bush is GOD? Well, I will tell you he is NOT! Bush has stirred a bee's nest and blood will be shed!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#863 Consumer Comment

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Anti-Christ

AUTHOR: Damon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, March 04, 2006

Weapons of mass destruction? Soldiers dying daily? Spying on the American people? Control of several ports to Middle Eastern Interest?
Am I the only one seeing the pattern here?
Ask yourself, who is the real terrorist here?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#862 Consumer Comment

Cuius est solum, ejus est usque ad caelum et ad inferos.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 03, 2006

Cuius est solum, ejus est usque ad caelum et ad inferos.

"To whomever owns the land, shall own the earth to its center and up to the heavens". This Latin maxim was the precursor to modern law of the air and of the earth below it. But case law has greatly tempered the extent to which such a right can now be enforced. Mining, electricity distribution, sewer systems disposal and air travel have all conspired to erode this principle such that it is now little more than legal folklore.

Like all things, once the government decided it wanted mineral rights for mining and airspace for airplanes, it was all over. It is now held that a land owner has rights only so far as practical and necessary to protect their structures or to use their land. The airways are part of the use of your land if you live on it. They are still yours, but don't remind the FCC.

Thank you for your response. Imagine my relief to find that you really did not think I was a Clinton supporter. The thought is intolerable! And since I am not a Bush supporter, either, I must be a strange breed to some.

A couple of books that might interest you. "No Place to Hide" by Robert O'Harrow, Jr. and "What Every American Should Know About Who's Really Running the World" by Melissa Rossi.

Sorry so short, but time is short today.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#861 Consumer Comment

Hello, Robert of Dallas; it's always a pleasure...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, March 03, 2006

I hope all is well with everyone. :)

To begin;

Vera, you seem to think that I am somehow saying that Clinton is a better man than Bush.

I apologize, if you are led in this impression. I never intended to imply that you were applauding Clinton a so much the better ('course, if you felt that way, it's your choice), but your last Comment seemed to be singing his praises. Never once, during the Clinton administration, did I have to worry about gas, or get that creeping sense of dread that I feel now. (Paraphrased.)

And you're entitled to that. During the Clinton years, I watched welfare sprawl, and watched big Corporations deepen their foothold, no different than today, except that there wasn't a war going on. Of course, if Clinton would have been less preoccupied with getting a Nobel Peace Prize, maybe we would have gotten Bin laden sooner, 9-11 wouldn't have happened. And 9-11 wouldn't have been planned on Clinton's watch.

The talking head on the screen is immaterial, anyway, and I support neither man. How these men "handle themselves" is also a non-issue.

And I'm not in favor of Bush 100%, either. As far as how a man handles his own affairs (no pun intended, in Clinton's case), tells you much about how they feel about the People of the Nation they lead. And of course, Clinton's abuse of power against any woman would be irrelevant to you.the instances of sexual harassment from a female boss to her male subordinates is almost nonexistent. Which isn't to say that it doesn't happen. it's just rarer than when it happens to women.

I've been on the receiving end of some pretty heavy-duty harassment, myself, and it's degrading. In some cases, it was public and there were other men around. Of course, I was foolish in expecting any one of these men to be decent enough and stand in my defense when I bought it to the attention of Superintendant.

I worked as hard (if not harder), carried myself with credibility, and treated my co-workers with respect. I didn't flounce and flirt, I wasn't a Construction Sweetie or a Doll, expecting some big, brave buck to come to my rescue and lift what I couldn't. I seldom asked for help for any reason, bought my own tools, and learned about my job. So it wasn't like I was playing Bob The Builder and got in over my head.

And it wasn't like I was overreacting to a few appreciative wolf-whistles, either. What has happened to me was insulting, demeaning, and humiliating, and having that letch leering over me and making some of the crudest comments.ugh, he had even tried touching me in inappropriate places. Accidental contact, don't you know.

And he wasn't the only boss or higher-up to try playing this game. I'm happily married, and have absolutely NO desire to just throw away my relationship with my Husband on some pathetic fling. These assholes act like they're doing me a favor, that I should be so honored that some horny dog wants to hump my leg. And it ain't gonna happen. I'm there to work a job, learn a trade.not pick up sex-partners. So to me, Clinton's behavior only assuaged any concerns about harassing women on the job: Stand your ground; no one will do a d**n thing.

And no, my job choice DOESN'T make me at fault for setting myself up for that, any more than a fella choosing to be a nurse makes it okay for female employees to exploit him. All that matters, is that the applicant can perform the duties of the job in an appropriate manner.

Both men suffer human character flaws.

That they do. And Clinton is no better than Bush.

The video has been released that proves Bush was not ignorant of the damage that Katrina might create.

And again I state: Those buses that sit up to their windows in water were utilized with enough efficiency to get all those poor people to the voting booths within 24 hours. But they weren't good enough to evacuate a city. Also, when Amtrak offered some 600 seats, they were sent away empty 2 or 3 days before Katrina hit. Apparently, Nagin and Blanco were aware of the impending doom, as well. They can share in the tragedy, and its associated blame. Lord knows, they're first in line when the money's being allocated. Funny thing, thoughas I recall, New Orleans, Louisiana, wasn't the only place hit by Katrina. Oh, and wasn't Gulfport, Mississippi where Katrina actually made landfall?

I do not believe that he was ignorant of the Dubai port deal, either.

You know, when I listened to the News talking about the Dubai Ports Deal, I have to admit I was fairly alarmed. Here's I'm thinking, UAE wants to control six of our ports? No way! What if they let Al Qa'ida in? Arabs are usually sympathetic to other Arab interests. And that was exactly the kind of paranoia the News wants us to be fed, slipping in comments like The UAE has shown deference to Al Qa'ida interests (CNN)

Here's something for the Federalist Patriot (FederalistPatriot.US, used with permission.):
Protests about the planned transfer of management for several U.S. seaports to a state-owned company in the United Arab Emirates are fraught with almost as much confusion as fervorwhich explains why the current division within the political parties is almost as stark as the one between them. When Karl Rove, Jimmy Carter and The Los Angeles Times line up on one side of an issue, while Senators Bill Frist, Chuck Schumer and The New York Times line up on the other, something is seriously amiss.

Of course, the first casualty of political conquest is the truth, which is not to say that both sides don't feel genuine concern. In an effort to elucidate the issue, let us first distinguish between fact and fiction.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a multi-agency panel that evaluates foreign financial interests in the U.S. with national-security implications, has approved the transfer of management of some port terminals (not the sale of these ports) in New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans and Houston. The transfer is from a British owned company, Peninsula and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, to Dubai Ports World, which is headquartered in the UAE. What this means, essentially, is that American managers and longshoremen will now get their checks cut by DPW instead of P&O. In other words, DPW will become one of many operators in these ports.

This does not put DPW in a position to act as an agent for al-Qa'ida, delivering weapons of mass destruction to their terror-cell operatives in the U.S., as has been suggested by some print and Internet tabloids. Direct responsibility for port security is shared by the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, and state and local port authorities. Here it should also be noted that port-management priorities are wholly subordinate to port-security priorities. Of course, port-security operations, particularly those pertaining to interdiction of WMD, are augmented by the entire asset base of the U.S. military, its intelligence community and its law enforcement agencies.

The U.S. does not outsource national security operations.
Despite the rancor, the U.S. does not outsource the protection of our critical national-security infrastructure.

Approval of the DPW proposal underwent three months of interagency review. According to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, This review definitely was not cursory and it definitely was not casual. Rather, it was in depth and comprehensive.' This is the same review that management companies based in China, Denmark, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan underwent before being authorized to manage terminals in the port of Los Angeles. We might add, China now manages some terminals on both ends of the Panama Canal.

Foreign investment in the U.S., including port management, is nothing new.

As for the assertion that President George Bush should have known about the proposal, Frances Townsend, his senior advisor for Homeland Security, counters, Rarely do these [reviews] wind up on the president's desk and that's only after there has been an investigation and there is some disagreement. This didn't get there because none of the agencies who reviewed it had any objection.'

The public remonstration in this case is the result of a volatile combination of legitimate sentiments: a fundamental distrust of Islamic countries combined with a concern about the potential for terrorist exploitation of our busy shipping ports.

The distrust is warranted, particularly in the wake of 9/11. Not only were two of the hijackers from the UAE, but 11 of the Saudi hijackers traveled to the U.S. from Dubai, and $250,000 used to bankroll the 9/11 attacks was wired through Dubai banks. There were ties between Islamist emirs in the UAE and Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, and the UAE recognized the Taliban government.

On the latter point, however, our intel sources indicate those ties enabled the CIA to confirm the location of bin Laden twice in 1999, but the Clinton administration declined to eliminate him. Bill Clinton has floated several excuses for why he did not act on this intelligencewhich all sank.

Further, Pakistani nuclear proliferator Abdul Qadeer Khan testified that a UAE company assisted him with the transfer of nuclear technology to Iran. However, as we noted two years ago, our sources indicate that Khan was either a CIA operative or a dupe and that the UAE cooperated fully with surveillance of Khan's contacts in Dubai.

Thus, if we want to punish the UAE because it has airports and banks, or because it has cooperated with CIA clandestine counter-proliferation efforts, so be it. There is, however, no suggestion of evidence that the UAE government had any knowledge, much less complicity, with the al-Qa'ida cell responsible for the 9/11 attacks, or any other attack on U.S. interests or personnel. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that the UAE, along with Kuwait and now Iraq, is a critical ally in the region.

The UAE government has provided significant intelligence and staging support in the war against Jihadistan.

Indeed, since 9/11 the UAE government has provided significant intelligence and staging support in the war against Jihadistan. They have actively participated in the pursuit of al-Qa'ida terrorists. In 2002, for example, UAE officials arrested and turned over to U.S. officials Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who conspired in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and masterminded the attack on the USS Cole in 2000. In 2004, UAE officials arrested Qari Saifullah Akhtar, who trained thousands of al-Qa'ida operatives around the world. He was returned to U.S. interrogators in Pakistan.

As for Dubai Ports World, it already provides support for U.S. Navy ships in Jebel Ali and Fujairah, which accommodates more U.S. Navy ships than any other international port. DPW is also the primary support contractor for U.S. Air Force assets at Al Dhafra Air Base.

Rising above the din, the real issue is this: America's seaports constitute one of many big holes in our border security, regardless of who manages the terminals. Despite the port security that exists both stateside and in the ports of origin, there is no guarantee that WMD won't be smuggled into the U.S. in one of the thousands of cargo containers that land on our shores each and every day.

The harsh reality is, there simply is no way to secure U.S. borders.
As we have noted before, when al-Qa'ida has mated the right nuclear core with the right weapons hardware (something they may have already succeeded in doing), getting that weapon into the U.S. will not be that difficult, regardless of who is managing and securing entry points. The harsh reality is that there simply is no way to secure U.S. borders, with even a modest degree of confidence, against importation of nuclear WMD hardware the size of a footlocker, and a fissile core the size of an orange.
This reality accounts for the Bush Doctrine of Pre-emptiontake the fight to the enemy and endeavor to wage war on their turf, not ours. It is a reality for which pre-emption is our only optionour only chance of preventing a catastrophic attack on our nation.

This is certainly not to suggest that we adopt the French border-security modelone in which we throw up our hands and run away. Indeed, we need to be vigilant about territorial security. However, allowing a UAE company to manage some port terminals does not constitute a surrender from such vigilance.

For the public, there may be some psychological solace in the assertion that preventing DPW from managing port terminals is tantamount to securing our destinybut it is a false sense of security.

The public confusion, media hysterics and, consequently, opportunistic political posturing and demagoguery have all but completely obscured the facts pertaining to our relationship with the UAE and its shipping conglomerate, DPW. The Democrats have used this issue to leapfrog to the right of Republicans on national security, and some Republicans responded quickly by adopting the same line on DPW. Unfortunately, both are doing so at the peril of our national security.

The consequences of derailing our relationship with the UAE constitute a grave threat to our national security.

Not only has President Bush declared, The UAE has been a valuable partner in fighting the war on terror,' but has even threatened to veto any legislation to undo this deal. As he has yet to use his veto for any legislation (to our utter dismay, given some great opportunities), threatening a veto in this case can only mean that the consequences of derailing our relationship with the UAE constitute a grave threat to our national security.

Most likely, a compromise on UAE/DPW between the White House and Republican congressional leaders was brokered prior to public objections from Sen. Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert. If that compromise is anything other than a "technical delay" in approving this transaction, we believe U.S. national security will suffer the consequences.

The bulk of the Patriot's staff isn't Republicanin fact, most of them seem to lean toward the Libertarian side (that is, being more inclined to translate the Constitution more strictly), and they have been equally critical of Bush and his doings, when he strays from a good central point. And believe me...I know he has. It seems as though you and I just disagree on the war, mainly. Other than that, I'm just as concerned as you are about a lot of the same things.


However, from my POV as an average citizen trying to get along in America today, I can only say that my feelings of unease have intensified over the past few years.

You think mine haven't? I've been an unhappy camper since Carter was in office, improved when Regan took over (substantially, believe it!), and have been watching Clinton with scrutiny and distrust ever since. Bush Sr. was another tough hombreand I was indifferent to him personally, but I think he was decent as a President. His son, (Our Current) confuses, befuddles, and sometimes just pisses me off, but at least he doesn't put his own accolades ahead of the Security of our People.

And his party doesn't take the time to belittle and insult his opponents during the funeral of an important historical figure, like they did during the funeral of Coretta Scott king. How utterly petty, and tactlessso typical of the Liberals and their self-serving agendas, not one day can pass that they won't seek the opportunity to make everything all about themselves. There's that goddamned hubris again.

We have given up nearly the last shreds of our right to speak freely. The USA Patriot Act will be renewed

I'm not thrilled over the Patriot Act, I've already stated this. I do, however, think that every sonuvabitch that comes to this Country to become a Citizen here, must disavow ANY and ALL allegiance to their former country, and truly become American.if they get caught doing ANYTHING otherwise, off they go, deported or to prison, depending on the severity of their offense.

Maybe, just MAYBE, this will prevent the victims of things like 9-11, the war dead, and the injured or maimed flooding the hospitals.

None of my current feelings of unease stem from the men or the party in office, they stem from the course that this country is being driven on today.

Man, you're really preaching to the Choir here, Robert. I believe I'm as anti-Big-Brother and anti-Corporate as you are, and just as concerned. Don't get me wrongI'm all for letting people who actually make money, keep that which is theirs. It's when they use that wealth to manipulate people in the wrong direction that sends up flares for me.

It is because corporations buy the candidates before elections with campaign donations

Amen, Brother.

This morning I watched a news show on a network called FSTV.

I'll have to look into that FSTVsounds like it's very interesting, even if it seems critical of bush. You see, just like you, I'm out to find the truth through various sources, myself. I do not just watch my local newsI read a lot from the internet, have a growing library of books and information, and seek to draw my own conclusions.

A Veteran's Affairs nurse from NM was featured.For speaking out she was subjected to having her work computer removed and the hard drive checked .

And that is truly tragic. No one should have to be subject to that kind of treatment.

But honestly, I feel that this sort of thing is something that the Government can do to anyone, secretly, and never get caught. This could just as well be a circumstance under which she actually caught our Government being clumsy (Like the whole Elian Gonzales affair, clumsy). It reverberates with strains of paranoia cooked up and fed out like the Liberals on the left are doing with much of the News.

Read it for yourself if you feel I am making this up.

Are you kidding? I've read much of the sources you have offered, and have no complaint as to their veracity. I just take exception to the fact that you seem to think I'm in some cloistered cubby-hole, refusing to see reality simply because I don't agree with you.

Hundreds of thousands of people have died in the past; defending the fact that freedom isn't free. We're not sending our five-year-olds out into the rain and cold without their sweaters, these are young adults who have volunteered to serve their Country, a place they love and feel is worth the sacrifice. It isn't just a you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet mentality; it's a fact that these are young men and women joined under the knowledge that they might go to war. If one goes to war without the impression that they might become a casualty, they are deluded. (They don't deserve to be harmed, but they're really in for a rude awakening.)

I know that I can think of less noble reasons to go to war; kids are being gunned down by other kids in drive-by shootings, simply because they're a member of a different gang affiliation.
Hell, there are video games out there glorifying this very thing. Where's the mighty left's outrage over this? Video games aren't covered under free speechsame thing with pornography. You can't say a picture. It's an image. (Description doesn't necessarily qualify; a visual market is set for visual gratification.)

The left seems more preoccupied with ensuring they can get a fourteen the right to have an abortion without her parent's consent or knowledgethey don't seem to be concerned over the fact that these fourteen year olds are being used as sexual playthings by adults.

The American networks air them as real stories while knowing that they are not real at all. Why? It sells product!

Sort of like that whole Bush was A.W.O.L. nonsense cooked up by Dan Rather.

And from
A return to the Constitution is in order and soon.

To
The parallels that were drawn came right from corporate ad agencies at the government's request.

I couldn't agree with you moreeloquently stated.
But about You do know that Constitutionally citizens still own the airways, don't you?

Actuallyno, I didn't know that. Then why the big fuss over getting nasty lyrics off the radio waves? Sure, it's free speech, but since people break the law to crank up their stereos to insane volumes, doesn't that change it from free speech to noise pollution, and as such a misdemeanor?

But thank youI had no idea that the People had any form of autonomy regarding what's done with the airwaves. I always thought it was the right to peaceably assemble and free-speech Vs. decency that makes folks protest the music and so forth, that offends them.

Do you believe in ads?

I can answer that and all afterward with a resounding no, and you should know that, if you credit me with the intelligence you claim you do. And you know as well as I do, that in order for one to assume they know the whole truth, one must have all the facts. No single person can truly make that claim, not even George Bush or Bill Clinton.

If you can truthfully say that Bush makes you feel happy and safe every single day, the debate will end here and now on my part.

I never feel safe and happy every single day. Never. I have more issues and concerns (a teenaged Daughter, and the Boys are sniffing at our door! Egad!), even on a local level, never mind what I feel about my Nation's state of affairs.

The truth is ugly and it hurts the soul to look at it. Better to suffer pain than be ignorant. Better to weep than live as a brainwashed zombie.

Againamen, Brother.

Better to die on your feet, than to live on your knees. We are different threads, for the most part, but on the same weave of cloth. Neither end of the loom is the better

Semper viglio, paratus, et fidelis.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#860 Consumer Comment

Are you brave enough, Vera, to crawl out of your safe rut and look around for the truth or will you remain a brainwashed zombie?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, March 02, 2006

Vera, you seem to think that I am somehow saying that Clinton is a better man than Bush. The talking head on the screen is immaterial, anyway, and I support neither man. How these men "handle themselves" is also a non-issue.

Both men suffer human character flaws. The video has been released that proves Bush was not ignorant of the damage that Katrina might create. I do not believe that he was ignorant of the Dubai port deal, either. And Clinton, well, he has his own problems as we all know from the ceaseless news coverage of some of the incidents. Both men will lie when the truth would serve better, IMHO.

However, from my POV as an average citizen trying to get along in America today, I can only say that my feelings of unease have intensified over the past few years. Clinton's sexual peccadilloes did NOT affect me as personally like Bush's actions have.

We have given up nearly the last shreds of our right to speak freely. The USA Patriot Act will be renewed, we are being stalked daily by the government, our email will be read, phone calls monitored and analyzed, we will all be profiled and the Constitution has shrunk to micro-mini size.

None of my current feelings of unease stem from the men or the party in office, they stem from the course that this country is being driven on today.

It is because corporations buy the candidates before elections with campaign donations. The talking heads you see are nothing more than Madams in the brothel of Washington, D.C. The lobbyists are the pimps selling the corporate agenda and elected congresspeople are the whores driving expensive cars. These people were bought and paid for before you ever heard of them.

Clinton turned to big oil and chemical companies in order to ad blitz early on in his campaign. Those were his masters. The drug companies now run the FDA because they contribute heavily and we wind up with killer drugs like Celebrex and Rezulin being fast tracked to market. d**n those killed and maimed by these drugs, we must have our profits.

Some corporations cover themselves in all directions by donating heavily to both parties. These guys are mostly "sin" industries, tobacco and liquor who fear regulatory actions by the Feds. The entire freaking system is broken.

This morning I watched a news show on a network called FSTV. A Veteran's Affairs nurse from NM was featured. This woman was so upset by what she was seeing in the VA hospitals due to the war in Iraq that she was moved to write a letter to the editor in Albuquerque, NM stating what the Iraq war effects are from her point of view as a nurse.

For speaking out she was subjected to having her work computer removed and the hard drive checked to ensure that she did not write her letter while at work. (She had not written the letter at work). She was visited by the FBI and warned that she was now on their watchlist and the FBI could now come enter her home any time it wanted. The FBI could now tap her phone and have her followed at will. In other words, she was being threatened. She has been branded as "seditious" for nothing more than speaking her mind and heart.

This very brave woman, Laura Berg, chose to step forward rather than hide and hope that the FBI would go away. Her story is available by searching FSTV. Read it for yourself if you feel I am making this up.

This is what America is today. Speak out, sure, but at your own risk. There is a entire program in place to intimidate anyone not talking the corporate party line into shutting the hell up! This reminds me very much of the SS in n**i Germany.

Did you know that the Bush administration boldly told network news that they were not to show any pictures of coffins and/or bodies connected to the Iraq war? And the corporate toadies licked Bush's boots and said "Sure thing, boss!" This allows the Bushies to trumpet "Only 2500+ killed" while not saying "and 11,000+ maimed beyond comprehension, armless, legless, living yet not living".

Did you know that the Bush Administration allows only death figures to be released from Iraq rather than casualty figures? Why? Because it knew that casualty figures would be more than triple the number of deaths and Americans would be rightly horrified! We will have a generation of the maimed to care for that remains unheralded. These people live, but rather then being lauded as heroes they are tucked into a dark closet of shame. How do you think those soldiers feel about Bush? These soldiers are now the living dead, unnamed and unremembered. Is it better to be dead in this case?

You are being spoon fed the same corporate line of BS by all the major networks. Get out of Fox News (the worst of the propagandists IMO), CNN, and all the others. Expand your mind by reading on the Internet, reading newspapers. Foreign news coverage WILL show the dead and maimed on the battlefield. This is not a bloodless war as Bush would have us believe. It is horrific and the images are there for those who will seek them out. This is reminiscent of the media manipulation by brutal regimes all over the world for all of history.

The whole d**n mess has been engineered to feed the mindless "profit for profit's sake" mentality of today's government and corporations, now bonded together like hellish Siamese twins. The USA Patriot Act is not about security, it is about complete control of the new American slaves. The government hires huge advertising and public relations firms to churn out their lies for them...doesn't anyone remember the Jessica Lynch advertisement? These short reels are then released to network news as real news stories when they are little more than propaganda and ads for the agenda! The American networks air them as real stories while knowing that they are not real at all. Why? It sells product!

We are the new slave class. We will be used up, sucked dry and cast aside just as surely as those wounded soldiers fighting in a sham war.

A return to the Constitution is in order and soon. It has to be made illegal to accept massive corporate donations for election drives. The citizenry should be allowed to donate to a candidate of their choice to a certain dollar amount and major networks must be forced to donate air time to all candidates equally in order to allow all candidates to be heard equally. You do know that Constitutionally citizens still own the airways, don't you?

The best thing that could happen would be for all Americans to shut off the televisions sets that have become nothing more than huge propaganda tools. By that simple act the citizenry can retake control of its own airways. When the major networks realize that their products are not being sold and their advertising income plummets, they will be willing to talk turkey about election airtime issues! Read some newspapers, see what is being reported abroad. Use the Internet. Read some books.

How many outright lies and half-truths will it take for Americans to realize that our country is being stolen bit by bit from under our very noses? How long will it take to get the average thinking human to realize that 9/11 and Iraq have absolutely nothing in common? The parallels that were drawn came right from corporate ad agencies at the government's request. I can produce the name of the agencies involved if anyone is interested.

Do you believe in ads? Do you really think that if you drink a certain beer or wear a certain style of clothing your life will be measurably improved? Do you really believe that driving a certain car will make you more attractive to the opposite sex? Do you think that only money will make you truly happy? Do you trust the government? If so, you should be happy in your safe cocoon with the propaganda being presented.

Are you brave enough, Vera, to crawl out of your safe rut and look around for the truth? Only then will you be able to form an opinion and intelligently debate the real issues. No one can debate facts without knowing what the true facts are. Are you content with the lies you are being told? Aren't there some things that nag at you subconsciously because you know deep down inside that it really doesn't add up?

I suppose next you will want all my sources as to where I gathered my information. I presented one of my sources to you here right now (FSTV, easily checked by Googling, although your IP will be presented to the government when Google folds and gives us all up. And it will, as there is really no other option for it). I can prepare a bibliography of the rest when time allows. I am not talking out of my a*s; all these things are documented, but you might have to read a book or two. You appear to be quite literate and I cannot see where this will be a problem.

It is very discouraging to me to read this post and see just how many have already fallen for the propaganda, spouting "facts" that are not facts and walking in lockstep with the agenda. Repeating the talking points that spew out of the White House every day, the catch phrase of the week like mindless parrots.

Doesn't anyone care enough to look anymore? Instead of being so c****ure that you are the only one armed with the "truth" try asking some questions here. Get past the petty bickering with one another and engage in real debate instead of personal insults. Stop deliberately misreading what is said for the purposes of shoving your prized opinions down others' throats for the pure joy of meanness.

If you are not feeling a sense of creeping dread lately, you are as detached from the issues as Bush is sitting in Crawford, TX playing at being a rancher. If you can say with certainty that your economic status is better then it was in 1998, you are deluded. Wealth made up of figures on paper does not truly exist and wealth made of money with no intrinsic value is just another lie. The government told us last week that we have a 2% inflation rate. What is not made so clear is that food and fuel were excluded from the report because adding those minor needs raised the level to 7%. I don't know many humans who can go for long without food or fuel, but the goal was to wind up with no more than 2% lest the population become panicked. Therefore, the report was manipulated to show that magic 2% and, by golly, by gosh, they managed to do it! We just have to stop eating and driving to maintain a 2% level. That's not too much to ask, is it?

If you can truthfully say that Bush makes you feel happy and safe every single day, the debate will end here and now on my part. Why? Because you are entitled to your beliefs and equally entitled to form those beliefs from lies like the economic report mentioned above. It can be your choice to know that there is more to the story than you are being told and still choose to ignore it. In America, one can choose to live in La La Land and by doing so citizens make the government feel happy and safe. They will love you for your dedication to their cause.

The truth is ugly and it hurts the soul to look at it. Better to suffer pain than be ignorant. Better to weep than live as a brainwashed zombie. Better to speak while we can before we hear the knock at the door as Laura Berg did.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#859 Consumer Comment

Never discuss who you vote for

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Never discuss politics with anyone on the web or in your work place! because of all the IGNORANT people in the united states its a way to void confirmation, arguing, & insults, because as you read responses to these reports agaisnt george w. its not a good idea to discuss which party you are for because its starts with everybody insulting each other & bashing! each other calling names ect. So please do not discuss who you like to president because it can lead to an all right dirty war with people insulting each other & calling every name in the book!. Has you see in many reports on this website how people react to what you say about george w. bush & if people say they are a democrat again another war of insults!, so please if you cannot respect anybody don't discuss your which party your in because it always leads to a dead in!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#858 Consumer Comment

It's another fine mess...

AUTHOR: Roy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Thank you all for a most entertaining rant series.

Some of you have made some really good information and thoughts available for consideration, if a person be willing to think.

My perspective is a little different than most, I think. Some points to consider:
1.Just because a person doesn't express themselves really well, does not mean that they are wrong.The converse also is valid-well thought out, smooth presentations can be very,very wrong.No matter how it is processed, garbage in equals garbage out.
2."True believers" cannot be converted by reason; they have given their reason away, to accept belief. You may force conversion(re:Inquisition)but the sincerity is lacking.(Common Law-contract under duress)
3.The past ,is Past-good for reference only, hopefully to prevent future mistakes.(ref:Nixon,LBJ,Reagan,Clinton, and a host of Senators and Representatives). The Genie will not fit back into the bottle.
4. This country was founded by misfits from the rest of the world. I am kinda proud to be one,but am not blinded by hubris,I hope. I have been "misinformed" by my government since FDR-and each administration has lied, some more than others(at least some got caught more often). My government has propped up some of the most outrageous dictators the world has known-Saddam,Noriega,Somoza ,pop into my mind .There are more.

So, Bush will soon be gone-where will we go from here?
Will we continue to bankrupt our country?
Will we become a theocracy?
Will we determine a sane energy policy?
Will we continue sending our jobs overseas?
Will we vote the bastards out?
Dang! life is interesting.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#857 Consumer Suggestion

Charles, I am truly sorry you have had a rough life

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Charles,

i am truly sorry that you had a rough life, but i don't think you can blame it of George bush and all the republicans. there have been many years where the democrats have been in power and they obviously didn'r change your situation either.

i am also still waiting for you to answer the quwestion about where eithe Joel Osteen or the Bilble preached that yoh can hate your fellow man.

my bible tells me that the greatest commandment is to Love the Lord god with all your heart and to LOVE your neighbor as yourself.

Obvoiously you won't answer because you don't have one.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#856 Consumer Comment

What good freedom

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

What good freedom we have in the united states, nobody can find work jobs are more discrinanmotry employers everywhere will not hire anyone employers lie about employees to the unemployment office to whom they don't like working for them. I look at the lives of other people & I thank god for the life that I have I am not poor living on the streets I have a nice home then I did 20 years ago when my mother & fahter lived togather I did not have anything, 20 years ago live was very hard for me listening to my parents fight all the time living in a old house, life is a little bit easier for me know

I was not excepted from anybody on my mothers side from my family my uncles my moms brothers did not except me & I was not welcomed near them but thank god my grandparents excepted me & helped me from being poor & living on the streets or in a homeless shelter

I do not want to look back on the past 20 years ago my mother & grandparents have provided me with a better life they would not allow me to live with my fahter & me getting introuble with the law my fahter put me & my mother threw hell.

I look at other families who have it alot harder then me because of their sorry fahters like mine my mother would not allow my fahter to ruin my life, I might not have a good job or in college but I have a pretty decent living I have food to eat I am not starving I look at all the other families who have to starve & it upsets me that people are poorer then me but their is nothing I can do to help me.

Its sad that this goes on everyday in the united states my mother has provided me with a good life even though her employers lie about her & she has to put up with that abuse my mother has not remarried & she will never will she said she rather be alone then to be abused by someone else

I have to stuggle everyday to survie, & my mother has to put up with abusive landlords like how my fahter abused my mother who try to steal her money & kick us out

how can americans have it so good if they get treated like crap by everybody like my mother has been.

These landlords have mistreated & abused my mother she had to put up with this s**t all her life we get hell in life everyday unless your rich like george w. bush you'er nothing george w. bush needs to exchange lives & live like how we have to live for a day everyday & mabye he will change his views about the poor people like us, & try to help us out besides trying to take everything away from us like how republicans love to do!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#855 Consumer Comment

Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

Edward get used to people bashing bush, john kerry would be a hell of alot better president then bush will ever be people can't admit bush's policy's are failing on him, well edward if you attack our party we WILL! attack yours look at all the clinton bashing like your party does like your buddy hannity on fox news does, we all have to listen to the bickering & bitching & complaining from hannity & the rest of fox news its all childish behavior. We WILL! continue to bash bush as long republicans continue to attack & bash, & judge clinton which bill clinton has done nothing to republicans except win two terms the only democrat to win two terms.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#854 Consumer Comment

Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

Edward get used to people bashing bush, john kerry would be a hell of alot better president then bush will ever be people can't admit bush's policy's are failing on him, well edward if you attack our party we WILL! attack yours look at all the clinton bashing like your party does like your buddy hannity on fox news does, we all have to listen to the bickering & bitching & complaining from hannity & the rest of fox news its all childish behavior. We WILL! continue to bash bush as long republicans continue to attack & bash, & judge clinton which bill clinton has done nothing to republicans except win two terms the only democrat to win two terms.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#853 Consumer Comment

Edward get used to it! ignore comments from john

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

Edward get used to people bashing bush, john kerry would be a hell of alot better president then bush will ever be people can't admit bush's policy's are failing on him, well edward if you attack our party we WILL! attack yours look at all the clinton bashing like your party does like your buddy hannity on fox news does, we all have to listen to the bickering & bitching & complaining from hannity & the rest of fox news its all childish behavior. We WILL! continue to bash bush as long republicans continue to attack & bash, & judge clinton which bill clinton has done nothing to republicans except win two terms the only democrat to win two terms.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#852 Consumer Comment

B you have been ripped to shreds by everyone here

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

'B', you make me ashamed to be in the same genome with you. I've watched you mindless brain vomit spew across this thread for months, and you have been ripped to shreds by everyone here because you have a big bag of NOTHING to offer. Why do you continue to post here? Haven't you had enough of the punishment from the intelligent people here (like, say, Vera? You make yourself a clay pidgeon for her, and she has dusted your a*s over and over. GIVE UP!

You must really be an idiot with that statement you made about WMDs being moved to Syria. Let me put it to you in 1st grade, Big Chief No. 2 pencil language for you; We aren't finding WMDs in Iraq because(now read carefully), SADDAMS' BOYS HID THEM IN SYRIA JUST BEFORE WE WENT INTO IRAQ!!!!! Please keep in mind that once they're able to, weapons inspectors will go back to Iraq and find the remainder of the WMDs hidden by Saddams' minions.

It is my sincere hope that you will fade away from this thread quietly, or maybe we will all hit the jackpot to find out that you have removed yourself from the gene pool in a manner worthy of a Darwin Award.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#851 Consumer Suggestion

To Mary From Duluth

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

George bush is your president. Just thenk God that John Kerry isn't president because his views change almost daily based on the political climate at the time.
Please show proof as to the fact that GW is lying about what he is listening to. he has submitted proof that he is only litening to americans that are in contact with known members and sympathizers of al Qaeda in foreign countries. What are you gonna say about it when something happens that he could have found out about. You can't have it both ways.
Al gore goes to the mideast and completely demeans our government and our country to a group of people in the Mideast. If you really think that GE is breaking the law then I submit that al Gore be brought up on charges of treason. He has no business talking to a group that has supported our enemies in the past.
^You support John kerry because of his views? Kerry, gore, and clinton all said that social security is in trouble and needs to be fixed. When they lost the election and george bush asked the democratic senate and congress for suggestions, they not only refused but claimed that GW was wrong and Social Security is fine.And how can we forger that when the senate voted on the war John Kerry was very outspoken in favor of it, but when he ran for president he was against it. How can you claim you respect his views when they always change?
You say you support the troops, but your buddy John Kerry and othere are undermining the troops every chance they get. John Kerry goes on national tv and claims that the troops are really terrorists and are attacking women and children at night in their homes. (THAT"S REAL SUPPORT HUH???)
You claim the "Christian" argument but yet you are obviously in favor of abortion. Please tell me in your bible where Abortion is allowed?
You claim the Bush intelligence missed 9-11. What about the fact that the clinton administration was told about the Al Qaeda cewll that was in the US a year before and did nothing? This is nort a Republican meltdown but is the fault of the government at a whole ecause it slipped through the cracks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#850 Consumer Suggestion

To Mary From Duluth

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

George bush is your president. Just thenk God that John Kerry isn't president because his views change almost daily based on the political climate at the time.
Please show proof as to the fact that GW is lying about what he is listening to. he has submitted proof that he is only litening to americans that are in contact with known members and sympathizers of al Qaeda in foreign countries. What are you gonna say about it when something happens that he could have found out about. You can't have it both ways.
Al gore goes to the mideast and completely demeans our government and our country to a group of people in the Mideast. If you really think that GE is breaking the law then I submit that al Gore be brought up on charges of treason. He has no business talking to a group that has supported our enemies in the past.
^You support John kerry because of his views? Kerry, gore, and clinton all said that social security is in trouble and needs to be fixed. When they lost the election and george bush asked the democratic senate and congress for suggestions, they not only refused but claimed that GW was wrong and Social Security is fine.And how can we forger that when the senate voted on the war John Kerry was very outspoken in favor of it, but when he ran for president he was against it. How can you claim you respect his views when they always change?
You say you support the troops, but your buddy John Kerry and othere are undermining the troops every chance they get. John Kerry goes on national tv and claims that the troops are really terrorists and are attacking women and children at night in their homes. (THAT"S REAL SUPPORT HUH???)
You claim the "Christian" argument but yet you are obviously in favor of abortion. Please tell me in your bible where Abortion is allowed?
You claim the Bush intelligence missed 9-11. What about the fact that the clinton administration was told about the Al Qaeda cewll that was in the US a year before and did nothing? This is nort a Republican meltdown but is the fault of the government at a whole ecause it slipped through the cracks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#849 Consumer Suggestion

To Mary From Duluth

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

George bush is your president. Just thenk God that John Kerry isn't president because his views change almost daily based on the political climate at the time.
Please show proof as to the fact that GW is lying about what he is listening to. he has submitted proof that he is only litening to americans that are in contact with known members and sympathizers of al Qaeda in foreign countries. What are you gonna say about it when something happens that he could have found out about. You can't have it both ways.
Al gore goes to the mideast and completely demeans our government and our country to a group of people in the Mideast. If you really think that GE is breaking the law then I submit that al Gore be brought up on charges of treason. He has no business talking to a group that has supported our enemies in the past.
^You support John kerry because of his views? Kerry, gore, and clinton all said that social security is in trouble and needs to be fixed. When they lost the election and george bush asked the democratic senate and congress for suggestions, they not only refused but claimed that GW was wrong and Social Security is fine.And how can we forger that when the senate voted on the war John Kerry was very outspoken in favor of it, but when he ran for president he was against it. How can you claim you respect his views when they always change?
You say you support the troops, but your buddy John Kerry and othere are undermining the troops every chance they get. John Kerry goes on national tv and claims that the troops are really terrorists and are attacking women and children at night in their homes. (THAT"S REAL SUPPORT HUH???)
You claim the "Christian" argument but yet you are obviously in favor of abortion. Please tell me in your bible where Abortion is allowed?
You claim the Bush intelligence missed 9-11. What about the fact that the clinton administration was told about the Al Qaeda cewll that was in the US a year before and did nothing? This is nort a Republican meltdown but is the fault of the government at a whole ecause it slipped through the cracks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#848 Consumer Suggestion

To Mary From Duluth

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 27, 2006

George bush is your president. Just thenk God that John Kerry isn't president because his views change almost daily based on the political climate at the time.
Please show proof as to the fact that GW is lying about what he is listening to. he has submitted proof that he is only litening to americans that are in contact with known members and sympathizers of al Qaeda in foreign countries. What are you gonna say about it when something happens that he could have found out about. You can't have it both ways.
Al gore goes to the mideast and completely demeans our government and our country to a group of people in the Mideast. If you really think that GE is breaking the law then I submit that al Gore be brought up on charges of treason. He has no business talking to a group that has supported our enemies in the past.
^You support John kerry because of his views? Kerry, gore, and clinton all said that social security is in trouble and needs to be fixed. When they lost the election and george bush asked the democratic senate and congress for suggestions, they not only refused but claimed that GW was wrong and Social Security is fine.And how can we forger that when the senate voted on the war John Kerry was very outspoken in favor of it, but when he ran for president he was against it. How can you claim you respect his views when they always change?
You say you support the troops, but your buddy John Kerry and othere are undermining the troops every chance they get. John Kerry goes on national tv and claims that the troops are really terrorists and are attacking women and children at night in their homes. (THAT"S REAL SUPPORT HUH???)
You claim the "Christian" argument but yet you are obviously in favor of abortion. Please tell me in your bible where Abortion is allowed?
You claim the Bush intelligence missed 9-11. What about the fact that the clinton administration was told about the Al Qaeda cewll that was in the US a year before and did nothing? This is nort a Republican meltdown but is the fault of the government at a whole ecause it slipped through the cracks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#847 Consumer Comment

Bunch of Liberal Babies in Here!!!

AUTHOR: Edward - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 26, 2006

I am sick to death of the country bashing Bush and cannot believe you all can't see the way your acting. Bush is the leader of this country and if you don't like it move to another country and see how good you will have it there for God-Sake you people are pathetic!!!! Grow up or move OUT!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#846 Consumer Suggestion

I Want My $200k Back, Bush!

AUTHOR: Mary - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 26, 2006

I read some of these responses and first I'd like to say that there is NO reason adults need to resort to name calling to make their points valid. I think that is very tacky and immature, you should be ashamed of yourselves (either side of the debate) for calling each other names.

Secondly, I never voted for George Bush. I live in Minnesota and I am VERY proud to be a blue state. I voted for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 because I thought both of them were wonderful men and would offer the country many great things, including great leadership. I agreed with MOST of their opinions regarding issues such as education, health care, environment, and women's issues. I was proud that they were running and did my best to get EACH of them elected. I actually CRIED both times when Bush was elected because I was so scared for our nation. He is not a great leader, he's not even a good leader. He can barely walk and chew gum at the same time, let alone run America correctly.

Third, I think that George Bush is actually more ignorant then a tree branch! If you don't believe me read some of his BUSH-isms. I am too much of a lady to actually embarrass him further by repeating some of them here. However, He cannot read or even speak grammatically correct English and he is supposed to be the 'leader of a great nation'? If my seven year old can speak and read better then the President there is SOMETHING wrong with Americans for having elected such a complete moron. I'm sorry for having said it out loud, because name calling is really unneeded, but he really is a moron. I don't even know if that's considered name calling if that's WHAT someone is.

Fourth, I do not support the war but I do support the troops. Those are my classmates, family members, and friends over fighting and it's NOT their fault for doing their jobs. With that being said, I think that America has a duty to actually tell the SOLDIERS the truth about what it is they are fighting for, how long it should take for them to be over there fighting, not extend their tours of duty, and to not send them into harms way unless it's ABSOLUTELY necessary. Sure Saddam was an evil dictator, but he was not a threat to the United States and he had no weapons of mass destruction. If you want to get down to facts, George Bush is an evil dictator for almost everything HE has done during his presidency! But sure enough the Bush Administration sent the troops to Iraq based on LIES they told Americans.

Fifth, I am a Christian and I am tired of the Republican Party stating that because I believe what I believe I'm not a true Christian and they are more moral. You are not a Christian if your main goal in life is to call people names, never lift a finger to help your fellow man, and lie. I'm sorry, Christianity is following the teachings of Christ. Do you think Christ would have done ANYTHING the Bush Administration has done to date? I really don't THINK that Christ would have.

Sixth, I am tired of the Republican party telling me what I can and cannot do with my body and my reproductive choices. You do not own my uterus, no matter how hard you try or what taxes you make me pay. This is my body and I have a right to do with it what I will. Every woman has the right, in America, to make whatever reproductive choices she feels are necessary without the state legislating her choices or questioning her humanity!

Seventh, I am tired of the Bush Administration using 9/11 as a crutch for their 'support' and 'patriotism'. You are not a patriot because you were president and sat in a chair for several minutes after you were told the nation was under attack. You are not a patriot for having neglected to follow information given to you regarding the possible threats of terroristic attacks in the United States and failing to warn citizens. You are not a patriot for having scared the American public into such a frenzy regarding possible terroristic attacks so that we would back your lie of a war. You are not a patriot for having decided to attack the wrong country in hopes of filling your bank book with new job offerings and oil for your flunky friends and colleagues. You are NOT a patriot, Mr. Bush!

Eighth, God have mercy on your soul, Mr. Bush. You are a horrible president and I am sorry to see you were ever elected.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#845 Consumer Suggestion

I fully agree!

AUTHOR: Mary - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 26, 2006

George Bush is also NOT my president! He has lied to the American public time and time again. First he lied to us to get us to support his terrorist retaliation on Iraq for 9/11, then he lied to us about how long our soldiers would be there and under what conditions, then he failed to protect the people of New Orleans/Alabama from death after the hurricanes (it took them three days to show up), he's put people on the Supreme Court who are trying very hard to over turn Roe Vs. Wade and the abortion laws around the nation (which will hurt WOMEN), and now he's lying to the American public about his 'spy' programs and who he is 'spying' on. I think George Bush is an American Psycho and most definitely a terrorist himself.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#844 Consumer Comment

This'n's a Monster....but I haven't posted in a while so....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 26, 2006

nnm...I thought I'd catch all I could in one fell swoop. And so, on we go....

Melvin, of Amityville;

Thanks for your supportive commentaryhad I gotten to this board sooner than today, I'd have warned you that you could be setting yourself up for some nasty scathes. Best bet, you're not aloneI'm just one of the more vociferous (and lately, less active, due to outside circumstances!) commentators to this Report. Another is Shawn (who seems to have all but disappeared, but not for long, I hope.I like him like I like B., or the Roberts).

As far as Laim (and yes, I know I reversed the two letters) is concerned, I just ignore him. Like the (now two) Canadian(s), his self righteousness is of less value than the ranting of any armchair quarterback, and I think it serves to gratify him in that he can present the image of the typically stuffy Brit.

w**k off, Ruggles.

B. of Denver;

This must be another manifestation of that feminine anti-logic that some visceral component tells them is logical.

Comments like that lead me to believe you have issues with women, but in light of its context, I can see this as an attempt at humor. But if it's not humor, I think I now understand why you're not getting propagated and nurtured regularly. ;)

The same anti-logic that allows them to transcend the experience of carrying a 20 lb pelvic tumor for months that makes them hot, uncomfortable, snappish, and makes dancing at best a grotesque parody, then giving birth, in a process that must be the equivalent of my passing a kidney stone the size of a baseball, to an ugly, squalling, mucous covered blob, and deciding its beautiful.

Just remember.that female anti-logic is what has allowed your survival and not cut short your existence, given to once having been a squalling, mucous-covered blob yourself. ;)

And I cannot imagine any woman that would dance on purpose, when pregnantroflmao!

The same anti-logic that leads them to suffer through the first few months of the child's untimely screams and demands without killing it for its crimes against humanity, then turn around and want to repeat the whole wonderful process all over again. Sheesh!

Honestly, I think that's why kidlets become so cute quickly after birthit keeps us from eating them. In fact, I believe there's scientific data supporting that the big eyes, rounded features, soft skin and little dollish features, along with a baby's smell (when it's CLEAN, for God's sake!) appeals ascetically with our desire to nurture. This prevents (most of) us from infanticide, anyway. Count your blessings, LOL!

If you can present a logical argument, based on facts, that Clinton's actions were worse than Nixon's, I'll never harangue you again for inappropriately using his name in an argument.

Well, since Jimbo The Bimbo seems to place all his stock in polls, I can simply start with referencing a previous post I had made regarding a poll conducted in October of 1999 (Post was aired on 10/22/05, titled I hate to break my own word, but.). In a poll where almost 20,000 (a pretty decent slice of demographic) folks were contributing, Bill and Hillary raked in the most votes among the 25 of the Most Evil People of the Millennium. And here, they were write-in votes. They were considered more evil than six of the most infamous murderers born on American soil.

Any other reasons I have against Clinton, I've stated in this report and another (Report #165478); of which include:

Clinton did nothing to get rid of Osama Bin Laden when he had the chance.
Clinton sold sensitive information and technology to the Communist Chinese.
Clinton and Hillary, using a cataloguing error (yeah, right!) tried to steal White House furniture.
Clinton was responsible for slashing military budgets and military gains to the bone---make that, to the marrow, not just the bone---and openly admits: I despise the Military, and all it stands for.
Also. pardon me, but Nixon's history is a little blurry to medid Nixon not step down before impeachment proceedings took place?
Clinton was the first pardoned FELON (pardoned by another good-ole-boy, Carter) to become a sitting President.
Clinton WAS A.W.O.L. (which is why he was a felon in the first place, and needed Carter's help!), and ran from his service. He never served in the Military of this Countryand an exception was made to allow him the Presidency!

So yeah, in my opinion, Nixon WOULD have been a better president than Clinton.but at least Nixon had the churchbells to step down. Clinton went on a pardoning spree and released murderers (one of which was in the first FIVE of America's TEN most Wanted!) He took out short-term loans to falsely inflate the economy and passed bills that now make it horribly expensive for our elderly or handicapped to obtain Medical carethe largest increases in history, signed into life by former President Clinton.

Time magazine had an article about Clinton's morality and habits---I can't remember the exact issue, I'll have to hunt for it---and polled junior high and high school kids on how they felt about it. Many of those kids said that they don't feel that drugs and promiscuous behavior are such a big deal, and cited the Prevaricator in Chief as a reference. It can't be all that bad, the President did it, and he's okay. But I'll have to dig more to get absolutes on the article itself. I do remember reading it in my Doctor's office, so I know it's out there.

When I hear kids say things like that, it really makes me wonderand kinda scares me, too.

The philosophy of the Classroom in one generation will be the philosophy of the Government in the next. Wasn't George Washington the luminary with vision who made this comment? I know you'll correct me, if I'm wrong.

If you can't, you agree to at least try to let Bush and Nixon stand on their own two feet, and quit bringing up Clinton every time someone criticizes them.

People's opinions are what they are, regarding politicians and politics. Nothing I say is going to change that. My whole point here is that some of the jackasses that piss and moan about Bush are no better for praising Clinton, Carter, Kerry, or Gore.and I'm just pointing that out. Like it, don't like it, I am indifferent. Merely tossing my hat into the ring. Bush, Nixon, Clintonlet them stand on their own. I've never met a perfect politician.

Now, whether you feel my feminine logic suits you, is another stripe altogether. I ask only that you simply respect my views and that which I presented as fact that supports my view. The option to respond to haranguing is mine. :D

Melvin---What are you, the Amityville whorer?

You surprised me with that oneit was so obvious (picking on Melvin because of his infamous hometown), I thought you'd exercise discretion and not use some cheap jab to poke fun. (Or at least you could have been more original.man! I saw that one coming a mile away!) And should I too, be offended at this sling..? After all, his first post to this board lends recognition to my comments to James of Tupper. I mean, technically, he may not even agree with my political leaningshe just thought my post to Jimmy-Poo was funny.

So if he is the whorer does that make me---in your opinionthe w***e? And what did I do that I deserve that label, when you defended me once before in a nasty comment made by the Moron Canadian?

Oh, and speaking of moron Canadians
Kathrine, of Toronto, CanaDUH.

Where would we be without you? We need your cheap pharmaceuticals, casinos, drug trades and whores like we need a window in the back of our skulls, but I guess you offer what you can, right?

Never mind where you'd be if America were to come under control of a lunatic like Bin Laden. but then again, terrorists have been using Canada as a financial, strategic logistical base for many years already. so we know why the little attack that happened on American soil isn't an issue to the likes of you. (By the way, it was the second of TWO attacks that happened on American soiland we responded to it the same way the last time, too. Why don't you read what Admiral Yamamoto had to say about our retaliation? I feel we have awakened a fierce Giant, and filled him with horrible resolve.)

But then again, don't expect that I'd lose sleep over the eradication of your entire genetic base from the reproductive pool, kay, Sugar? (You should count your blessings that this isn't the way I really feel!)

Bush presented NINE TIMES the information that PROVED his service in the National Guard.

It turned out that Danny Blather's information was forged.completely false.
As far as drunk driving and drug use, what makes Bush worse than Ted Kennedy, who was responsible for the death of another individual (Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign aide he was trying to bag) by trapping her in his sinking Olds on the Chappaquiddick? He did nothing to rescue her, and hauled his drunken a*s out in time to let the car sink, change his clothes, and invent an alibi before he ever called the police. Nice. He got rid of his old car, and a potential threat to his career (an illicit affair), waited for the booze to clear his system and managed to never serve time for his crime.

Incidentally, the police report and the Coroner's reports both indicate that Mary Jo lived for a while AFTER the olds had sunk, so she was ALIVE when it went down.

Why is Bush the bad guy, for a DUI, while Kennedy still has his d**n job?
And if ya didn't know about the circumstances surrounding Teddy Kennedy, maybe ya shoulda came to this Report armed with something more than a buncha regurgitated left-wing sound-bytes from your precious Mike Moore-On shlockumentary or Ih8tBush websites. You're another outsider who can w**k off, for all I care. I'll quote another Canadian, respectively: Why don't you clean up your own back yard before you go looking into other people's business? (Courtesy of James d' Calgary)

Oh, and maybe you can answer this oneI've kinda wondered this for a while.

If you're from Georgia, you are a Georgian from Austria, you're an Austrian from Australia, an Australian; but if you're from Iowa, and Iowan, from Ohio, an Ohioan, and so on, right?

If you're a Canadian, why isn't your homeland called Canadia?

Just curious. :)


Robert of Dallas;

Clinton's blow job affected all of three people; Bill, Monica and Hillary

You are incorrect, Sir.
What transpired between Monica and Slick Willy is just another example of how he handled himself. He acted like he was above everyone, and then proved it when he got away with doing what he did. Monica Lewinsky was the more high-profile incident (in terms of longevity than was the Paula Jones incidentbut that's really only my opinion.) and she was just as guilty of the indiscretion, but these weren't the only two cases that stand against Clinton. So even if the press coverage wasn't as intense, the fact remains that the damage is still present.

For a man who presented himself as a staunch supporter of Womens' Rights in the workplace, and seemingly frowning upon and vilifying the act of sexual harassment, Bill Clinton truly set a poor example. Where's the guy who joked about pubic hairs in a can of soda? Where's the woman who tried to structure the learning of masturbation, and implement it into our schools' curricula?

How people can see him as just some Loveable Rogue mystifies me; the man is a letch and a piece of trash wrapped up in a classy suit----most likely picked out for him by his wife (or whomever he happens to be balling at the time). Another thing that I find unfathomable is how any woman could find him physically attractive. But I guess to some women, neither looks nor morals matter, as long as the wallet's fat. (Shrugging) But then again, Hillary ain't much of a catch, either.

About Bush.
The man is not my hero. When I first responded to this asinine Report, it was to simply state my opinion and why I felt the way I did, and to present the fact that I felt we went to war for good reasons. I do not feel that Bush is a hundred percent correct in all of his actions, any more than I feel he is the complete Villain.

(Funny how we sung his George Sr.'s praises for being an oilman, when we were thumbing our noses at the Middle East and paying less than a buck a gallon for gas. Just thought I'd interject.)

The fact is, that we are where we are in the light of events, and we cannot just take it back. Even the terrorists themselves support that things wouldn't get better if the Troops were to just up and leave. In fact, as I have provided in a previous post, the Terrorists are counting on the Main Stream Media to fight the portion of the battle that they are---that being to weaken and divide public opinion, and subvert a good cause---and they aren't wrong. Another point they make, is that things will get worse, or be just as bloody once the American forces leave.

And it is my opinion that this battle is over much more than the price of gas, as per the suggestion of the original post gurgled up by James of Tupper. As time progresses, I find the real nature of things becoming harder to focus on, and since current events in my life have become so darned active as of late, I haven't the time to really dedicate any research to figuring out what's all going on.

When I did pop back here to see the latest string of replies, I noticed that life has once again been breathed back into this particular report. Sadly, I find, that the bulk of commentary is either a quick pop in to insult Bush (from, at times, the assumed safety of another Country, as if one has the right to sit in judgment, rather than offer constructive comment or supportive/alternative advice), or, just another soupy fart from the likes of James that's all flame and no substance.

Basically, those that just want to b***h and complain and insult do so for the sake of it, and offer no consideration of the effort it takes to research and compile data to clarify a point. After all, if one wishes to, it's just a simple process of elimination that determines if it's on-subject or not. And if you don't want to read all the entries, just skim and skip the quarrels (example, the spitting match that happened between Ben and I), and stick to the subject itself. It's not brain surgery.

I'd be willing to wager nary a soul has actually read the length of this report from start til current, but felt their need to respond was more important than doing any real fact-gathering. And I don't fault a person for feeling their words and feelings have merit; I just shake my head miserably that these are the same that wouldn't give those they insult the same respect they expect from those they attack. In other words, it's just more Liberalese: Do as I say, not as I do. I don't give respect, but I want it from you!

I bite my thumb at you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#843 Consumer Comment

the only NON-Left leaning media is FoxNews. They have more than one side.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 24, 2006

That was the best ever "B". Between you asking ED to remove this thread because you are fighting a losing battle(who'd have guessed when your only support comes from the James Gang, and Charles), and then continuing on with another non-point, the EDitor let you know what Freedom of speech is all about.

That's right...if you don't like what is being said, go elsewhere. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I love ED. He's a good American. He may not agree with what you say, but he'll let you say it.

Now, on to your last statement.

"When I worked for the newspaper, the editors of all the left wing rags in the region used to meet weekly to discuss their devious plans. And right at the top of their agenda was fomenting hatred toward the Republican government. Yeah, right."

Very good "B". At least you are admitting it...just as the New York and Los Angeles Times have done. In fact, the editor in Chief of the LA Times said in a press conference that there would be less of a left-wing bias in his paper's reporting. The NY TImes has never made an attempt at hiding it's left-wing approach. They won't show the "Danish Cartoons", but had no problem showing a painting of Mary covered in pornographic images and cow dung. Sure. That's a real Conservative paper there "B". In fact, a poll taken every election shows Jornalists vote for the Liberal 97% of the time. That leaves 3% of the reporters and editorial staff being "right-minded".

Now, I know it's been awhile since I took a math test, but here goes. 97%>3%. That was easy.

Want more? How about how the mainstream media in this country has portrayed Bush as a dolt, while they held John Kerry up as the next Mensa member. Here's the truth. Kerry was a "D" student, while Bush was a high "C". More math for you...D
How about Dan Blather? That tard is still trying to claim the "Bush was UA" documents are legit, even after it was proven they are fakes.

Remember the 2000 election? Jennings, Brokaw, and Blather all reported Gore as the winner in Florida while the polling stations were still open. Tens of thousands of people went home because of it. This is not arguable. This came out during the vote counts. You know, the ones that kept PROVING Bush won. Those voters who went back home came from the panhandle...a heavily fortified Reagan democrat stronghold. They wouldn't have voted for Gore if he was the only one running. Sort of like Gore's own home town.

Nope, the only NON-Left leaning media is FoxNews. They have more than one side. They have Liberals, Moderates, and Conservatives. Some of the smaller newspapers do too, but the NY Times, LA Times, Atlanta J&C, Washington Post, and ALL of the rest of the big papers and News Channels are ALL hard line Lefties.

Want to know why they really hate him? Because while they try to convince everyone how stupid he is, he runs circles around them, and gets whatever he wants in the process. We had another President who did that for 8 years. His name was Ronald Wilson Reagan. While GW is no Ronnie, I do like his style...if only because it pisses you guys on the left off.

But don't worry "B". I like you, and so do the others in here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#842 Consumer Comment

Signing off Mates!

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 24, 2006

Liam, Didn't mean to sound emotional or go too rough on you. I was just trying to impress the audience here with my knowledge of British slang.

B: Now YOU are a wanker extraordinnaire. I am finished arguing with you; you are all over the map, you are a mess. A better name for you would be "Sybil", since you can't seem to focus enough on one subject or idea long enough to make any sense. So Sybil, I am not going to post on this thread anymore because it is long enough, and you are a waste of argumentive energy. I never said anything about Bush or his politics, about what I do and do not support, but that fundamental fact escaped your ability to discern.

I am sure you will now spew some more irrational blather, then boldy plant your flag and claim victory. But nobody will care.

You can have this thread, it can be your little sandbox. Everyone is done playing in it and has gone home. So now you can play with your wee wee all you want and no one will care.

G'day.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#841 Consumer Comment

Welcome to Troll City.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 24, 2006

Mooville,

Its not impossible for me to admit I'm wrong, its just so rarely necessary. Again, since you have a problem with reading comprehension, I will repeat myself; I am not defending James or his posts, I am attacking yours. You obviously lack the wit to defend the actions of your little boy in the President's chair. Instead, like your boy in the What?House, you attempt to suppress our political speech by any means available, including maligning our character, our families, our neighbors. How juvenile! Your comments do nothing to refute the charges against Bush, they only underscore your immaturity and dishonesty. You pop up out of nowhere, toss around some hate speech, and then have the audacity to tell me to 'piss off'? Well, sod off yourself, Bucky; come back when you've graduated from diapers to training pants.

Your disagreement with, or lack of ability to discern, the rationale for James' report, and our responses, is as irrelevant as the rest of your comments, and in no way invalidates its appropriateness. Since you like quotes, I will quote the relevant parts of an earlier post in this report:

EDITOR - please cut this thread off

EDitor's staff comment...
Why? ..if you don't want to read this Report, please, just go on to the next report of your choice. You can never say enough when it comes to our wonderful and honest government. Not!

May I be the first to invite you to heed this advice?

________________________
D,

You make me ashamed to be in the same alphabet with you. LOL! Your attempts to moderate opposing political opinion through irrelevant hate speech deserves as much scorn as do Moonville's. Calling a poster's nationality in to question is absurd. As Molehill already pointed out, this is an international forum, and President George is definitely an international kind of guy. And you have as little hope of defending your position that your conversations in this form are private as you have of defending your absurd comments about Bush.

Hello! Let's use at least a modicum of logic, shall we? If Iraq moved their WMD to Syria, they were no longer in Iraq, were they? Why didn't we attack Syria? When I worked for the newspaper, the editors of all the left wing rags in the region used to meet weekly to discuss their devious plans. And right at the top of their agenda was fomenting hatred toward the Republican government. Yeah, right.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#840 Consumer Comment

Excuse me Sir Liam of London, Europe, United Kingdom

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 24, 2006

Gee Mr. Liam, I a so sorry. I don't want to come across as a crass American, but I do believe my comments were directed at someone else, so please, if you don't mind too much, MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!! I WASN'T TALKING TO YOU!! YOU DON'T SEE ME INTERFERING IN YOUR LITTLE CONVERSTION WITH MELVIN, DO YOU!!? Thank you for your attention.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#839 Consumer Comment

and back to you Melvin

AUTHOR: Liam - (United Kingdom)

POSTED: Friday, February 24, 2006

Sounds like your getting a bit emotional there old boy. My response was merely to explain to D why the rest of us feel free to have an opinion about American politics. The only part that applied to you was the line 'Melvin you can Piss off.'

I should have remembered to hit Enter twice after that.

Sorry

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#838 Consumer Comment

Response ti Liam

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Liam: What a bloody daft wanker you are! WHERE in my posts did I EVER even bring up George Bush's politics, the Iraq war, Britain's support of the war, or ANYTHING related to your post?

Read my posts and see the point. I simply said two things (I'll enumerate them so there won't be any more "confusion"):

1. This is not a political rant or chat website. There are plenty of other websites for that purpose.

2. James from Tupper Lake comes off as an illiterate buffoon, which if you do a search on this site for "Tupper Lake", seems to be typical of Tupperians.

Got it, now? Is that stated simply enough for you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#837 Consumer Comment

Response ti Liam

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Liam: What a bloody daft wanker you are! WHERE in my posts did I EVER even bring up George Bush's politics, the Iraq war, Britain's support of the war, or ANYTHING related to your post?

Read my posts and see the point. I simply said two things (I'll enumerate them so there won't be any more "confusion"):

1. This is not a political rant or chat website. There are plenty of other websites for that purpose.

2. James from Tupper Lake comes off as an illiterate buffoon, which if you do a search on this site for "Tupper Lake", seems to be typical of Tupperians.

Got it, now? Is that stated simply enough for you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#836 Consumer Comment

Response ti Liam

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Liam: What a bloody daft wanker you are! WHERE in my posts did I EVER even bring up George Bush's politics, the Iraq war, Britain's support of the war, or ANYTHING related to your post?

Read my posts and see the point. I simply said two things (I'll enumerate them so there won't be any more "confusion"):

1. This is not a political rant or chat website. There are plenty of other websites for that purpose.

2. James from Tupper Lake comes off as an illiterate buffoon, which if you do a search on this site for "Tupper Lake", seems to be typical of Tupperians.

Got it, now? Is that stated simply enough for you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#835 Consumer Comment

Response ti Liam

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Liam: What a bloody daft wanker you are! WHERE in my posts did I EVER even bring up George Bush's politics, the Iraq war, Britain's support of the war, or ANYTHING related to your post?

Read my posts and see the point. I simply said two things (I'll enumerate them so there won't be any more "confusion"):

1. This is not a political rant or chat website. There are plenty of other websites for that purpose.

2. James from Tupper Lake comes off as an illiterate buffoon, which if you do a search on this site for "Tupper Lake", seems to be typical of Tupperians.

Got it, now? Is that stated simply enough for you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#834 Consumer Comment

Ashley of Grayslake - try and convince other idiotic Americans to impeach George Bush

AUTHOR: Emily - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

It is quite obvious to anyone reading your rambling that these "facts" are merely "figments of your imagination" as it is clear you cannot see into the future therefore you can not say "IT IS A FACT" that he will be impeached. Since I'm sure you get all your "facts" from ihatebush.com, I won't even bother asking you to support a word of foolishness that you wrote on here. Even if any real facts were presented to you, I'm sure you too caught up in the "F--- Bush" frenzy to even care. Do you honestly think that our President will be hung? Give me a break, saying things like that just set you up for ridicule! If you're trying to make your "Hate Bush" Club look good, don't embarrass yourself! So why don't you go back to sitting in your basement and thinking of clever bumpersticker to try and convince other idiotic Americans to impeach George Bush. Don't waste everyone's time with your "facts" because we all know they're BS.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#833 Consumer Comment

Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

AUTHOR: Liam - (United Kingdom)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Melvin you can piss off. 100 of our boys dead and buried now because Georgie Walker didn't want to go to war alone. Now whilst I accept full responsibility for Tony Blair it is common knowledge over here that he is nothing more than Georges lap dog.

D from freaky county, it is for the above reason that we foreigners take so much interest in your president and his affairs. Nobody cares about your domestic politics but unfortunately you are unable to keep it in the family. So I will pass comments on your president and yes I do believe he is a Tosser.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#832 Consumer Comment

Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

AUTHOR: Liam - (United Kingdom)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Melvin you can piss off. 100 of our boys dead and buried now because Georgie Walker didn't want to go to war alone. Now whilst I accept full responsibility for Tony Blair it is common knowledge over here that he is nothing more than Georges lap dog.

D from freaky county, it is for the above reason that we foreigners take so much interest in your president and his affairs. Nobody cares about your domestic politics but unfortunately you are unable to keep it in the family. So I will pass comments on your president and yes I do believe he is a Tosser.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#831 Consumer Comment

Sorry Melvin. Could you even find Britain on a map?

AUTHOR: Liam - (United Kingdom)

POSTED: Thursday, February 23, 2006

Melvin you can piss off. 100 of our boys dead and buried now because Georgie Walker didn't want to go to war alone. Now whilst I accept full responsibility for Tony Blair it is common knowledge over here that he is nothing more than Georges lap dog.

D from freaky county, it is for the above reason that we foreigners take so much interest in your president and his affairs. Nobody cares about your domestic politics but unfortunately you are unable to keep it in the family. So I will pass comments on your president and yes I do believe he is a Tosser.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#830 Consumer Comment

To Mr B from Denver

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Here's a quote from Ripoffreport.com's homepage:

Victim of a consumer Rip-off? Want justice? Rip-off Report is a worldwide consumer reporting Website & Publication, by consumers, for consumers, to file & document complaints about companies or individuals who ripoff consumers.
******************

So unless James, the pride of Tupper Lake, can explain how George W Bush ripped James off, his blather does not belong on this site. So I know it is probably impossible for you to ever admit, but you are WRONG.

Now why don't you just step aside (or piss off, as the brits would say) and let James fend for himself? I'm sure he's a big boy. He doesn't need you to change his diapers.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#829 Consumer Comment

Why does Bill Clinton keep rising up when Monica is nowhere to be seen at Rip-off Report? Forget WMDs and focus on MPGs! Bush-o-nomics rules.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

OK, the post is about Bush yet folks still seem to want to discuss Clinton. Clinton is history and nothing can be done about any of it now. Is there a Clinton post here at Rip-off Report? I don't know, haven't looked.

Bill Clinton's sexual peccadilloes were not what Americans wanted to hear about happening in the Oval Office but they are over. History will vilify him or canonize him as it sees fit. Talking about Clinton here will change nothing!

Let us compare, Clinton vs. Bush:

Clinton's blow job affected all of three people; Bill, Monica and Hillary until the press jumped on it. Then it became a topic of gossip in all barbershops, but it did not affect national security or kill anyone. It did not cause my electric bill to triple or really affect any of us in any way. No wars were started over it. It was a personal crisis for the Clintons and a media circus, but just a ripple in the average American's day to day lives.

The things Bush does affects all of us directly and in a negative way. Countries are invaded, people are dying, the economy sucks big time. The Bush Team tell us all is well, but a little bit of looking beyond the mainstream media reveals the real truth.

Iraq is not going too well. Americans are not being welcomed with open arms as liberators. Insurgency is rising around the globe and folks that used to like America or ignore America now actively hate this country. The puppet government that Team Bush had lined up to rule Iraq was rejected by the Iraqi people.

Our ports are being outsourced to UAE...during wartime!??! When the terrorists surround us ready to drop their bombs any second? So, wartime allows the President to wiretap freely into all communications, but does not preclude this port deal? On the surface, the two do not seem to go together at all and one must wonder if the government is schizophrenic! (I believe Bush is backing off of this port deal now and will claim he did not know about it earlier....so, if the President did not know, who is running the darned country?)

As for those economic reports I cannot begin to fathom where these people are getting their numbers. For the little guy in small town America, the big squeeze is on. Interest rates are rising, gasoline is rising and utility bills are doubling and tripling! Bush-o-nomics is hitting us hard right in our homes now! You will be glad to know that something is not going up:wages! So people must now squeeze pennies until they bleed just to maintain the same standard of living they had during Clinton's tenure. Telephone bills are outrageous; the more the phone company promises we will "save", the higher the bills get. They have mastered Bush-o-nomics!

Forget getting ahead; now it is all we can do to try to stay even.

I think it just occurred to me today why these political posts become so heated very quickly, though. A revelation of epic proportions!

I was driving along, checking my estimated miles per gallon according to the onboard computer and realized that I never thought about that much during Clinton's presidency. During his presidency, I kept the temperature and directional display on. Now I obsess about MPGs! I shut lights off and am once again distressed about the cost of food. It is Depression-era behavior.

NEVER ONCE, during Clinton's entire presidency did I feel such a sense of personal unease as I have felt for the past several years. NEVER ONCE did I speculate that the entire economy of this country was on the brink of collapse. Now I feel like I am just waiting for the official announcement that the dollar truly is worth nothing (which is really true anyway). NEVER ONCE did I worry about how America was viewed by the rest of the world. And NEVER ONCE did I wonder just who might hate this country enough to try to kill a large portion of its population in a grand attack. Now I realize that there are a lot more people hating us than there were during Clinton's presidency! Team Bush seems to always strive for negativity and to stir up hatred.

I realized that I am always waiting for something bad to happen. Something bad on an epic scale. I am poised to "run" all the time and my personal danger system is screaming warnings all the time. I am restless and exhausted at the same time.

People who are forced to struggle every day just to get the basics of life are unhappy people. History has shown that. The entire American population is uneasy because we never know what seemingly harebrained idea will come out of DC next. There is no immediately clear plan from this administration and decisions seem arbitrary....unless one looks at the really, really REALLY big picture. The RRR big picture points to a desire for world dominance and a government run by big business with political "figureheads", sort of like Britain's monarchy. Lots of pomp and show, but little real power.

Every outrageous thing done by the Bush Team is aimed at that goal. In order to achieve it, we are all being herded along like sheep in a chute. People who are solely focused on survival have no time or money to make waves or take time off from work to protest. If the government can listen in on all conversations and email and track us every minute of every day, rebellion can be quelled before it starts.

The rich get richer in order to remove any discretionary funds from the middle class. Otherwise, someone might take a little time to really look at what Team Bush is up to and spill it publicly by buying ads in major newspapers around the country. Other folks might use their extra funds to travel to Washington and protest or visit with their Congresspeople. The general population must not be allowed to have money above what is needed to survive!

Many of us are living on the edge, but the government must have money to ensure that America will always rule outer space and cyberspace and all other countries, too.

Think about this for just a minute before rejecting it as the writing of a loon out of hand. Retired people on fixed incomes are literally hurting now. They are trying to decide if they should buy food and eat in the dark or keep the lights on and go hungry. It is already that bad for some right now. Wage earners are beginning to feel the pinch and eventually we will be feeling like we need to make these same decisions if things continue this way.

Once mass bankruptcies begin occurring along with fewer jobs available due to outsourcing, people will begin being forced to turn more and more to the government as a means of support. One cannot wish for the downfall of one's own benefactor. What we are witnessing is an economic coup of this country, cleverly manipulated and low-key. A bloodless coup (although it will not remain that way. Look for suicide rates to soar as people begin losing everything they worked all their lives to attain).

Rather than boldly kill those who object or disagree as a dictator like Saddam might, this coup is infinitely more stealthy. We are giving up liberty and privacy for "safety", which is a sham reason. The government cannot stop terrorists and it never could. Terrorists are outside the box and therefore outside of any governmental control. That is the real reason that the Bush Team hates them so much.

The only thing that will be stopped is the American way of life. Americans will no longer be self-sufficient and innovative because we will not be allowed those freedoms. We will simply be worker drones allowed to survive by the ruling class. Ceasing to be productive will result in a death sentence. The Constitution will shrink until it is never mentioned and to have a copy of it will be punishable by death. Our children will be indoctrinated by the Department of Education to believe that things were always that way.

We have all read these books and seen these movies and we are all smart enough to see it happening right before our eyes.

So, why not Ron Paul and Kinky Freidman? Ron Paul is like the lone voice in the wilderness. Smart Americans should listen more to him.

Maybe we should contact him and let him know that we would really like to take our country back. Barring any handy plane crashes, I think he could put a real scare into the pinheads in DC. The hour grows late for the Republic now.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#828 Consumer Comment

To Katherine

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Your mindless babble make no sense. There was WMDs; they were moved to Syria. Other WMDs have been found but the US left wing media refuses to report it because it goes against their goals of fomenting hatred toward the Republican led government. Talk to the ex-Saddam Gov't. General who interviewed with a national US media outlet (can't remember who off hand)....about that.

GWB is not a coke head, and he served his country honorably in the Military.

Why are you even on here blathering on about the US government anyway? You live in Canada. Are you so bitter about your liberal letist government being blown out of the last elections by the conservative right that you have nothing elso to do but bag on you neighbor?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#827 Consumer Comment

To Katherine

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Your mindless babble make no sense. There was WMDs; they were moved to Syria. Other WMDs have been found but the US left wing media refuses to report it because it goes against their goals of fomenting hatred toward the Republican led government. Talk to the ex-Saddam Gov't. General who interviewed with a national US media outlet (can't remember who off hand)....about that.

GWB is not a coke head, and he served his country honorably in the Military.

Why are you even on here blathering on about the US government anyway? You live in Canada. Are you so bitter about your liberal letist government being blown out of the last elections by the conservative right that you have nothing elso to do but bag on you neighbor?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#826 Consumer Comment

To Katherine

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Your mindless babble make no sense. There was WMDs; they were moved to Syria. Other WMDs have been found but the US left wing media refuses to report it because it goes against their goals of fomenting hatred toward the Republican led government. Talk to the ex-Saddam Gov't. General who interviewed with a national US media outlet (can't remember who off hand)....about that.

GWB is not a coke head, and he served his country honorably in the Military.

Why are you even on here blathering on about the US government anyway? You live in Canada. Are you so bitter about your liberal letist government being blown out of the last elections by the conservative right that you have nothing elso to do but bag on you neighbor?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#825 Consumer Comment

To Katherine

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Your mindless babble make no sense. There was WMDs; they were moved to Syria. Other WMDs have been found but the US left wing media refuses to report it because it goes against their goals of fomenting hatred toward the Republican led government. Talk to the ex-Saddam Gov't. General who interviewed with a national US media outlet (can't remember who off hand)....about that.

GWB is not a coke head, and he served his country honorably in the Military.

Why are you even on here blathering on about the US government anyway? You live in Canada. Are you so bitter about your liberal letist government being blown out of the last elections by the conservative right that you have nothing elso to do but bag on you neighbor?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#824 Consumer Comment

What damage?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

"You have established the fact that the earliest embodiments of Congress, to which many of these early authorities were member, were already violating YOUR idea of the perfect government."

Not MY idea...the idea of the men who formed our Government. They did not like an all powerful Central Government. They fough a Revolution to eliminate that sort of thing.

"You have established the fact that the Supreme Court has decided that YOUR viewpoint is incorrect."

Only recently "B". Prior to FDR, the Supreme Court used strict interpretations of the Constitution. In fact, it was FDR who "packed" the Court with activist judges.

"And you apparently are not at all concerned with the damage and destruction that would result from the implementation of YOUR vision. And you seem unwilling to entertain any change that would accomplish similar ends."

What damege? The damage that the last 60 years of the WELFARE STATE has wrought? WOW! I'm willing to risk the "damage" that will occur when everyone has to support themselves. What "change" are you talking about that would "accomplish similar ends"? The only "change" needed is a strict interpretation of the Constitution and letting the chips fall where they may. Offer a "change" that will right the wrongs of the last 60 years. So far, the WELFARE STATE has given us huge increases in "out of wedlock" childbirths, all but eliminated the two parent black family, and filled out penal system with a steady stream of "regulars". Yep, that's some great history we've brought to our country.

Look at FEMA and the trailer fiasco for people uprooted by Katrina. They have thousands of trailers available, yet cannot use them because where they are needed is considered a "flood plain". Well no s**t!!! 12 feet below sea level is a flood plain! Only the Federal Government could come up with something that stupid. This goes back to letting the States and individuals handle nearly everything. TSA? Yep, there's another winner. Strip search grandma and baby Johhny, while letting Mohammed walk right through with his unchecked briefcase. Good one.

"Sorry, if it looks like a religious belief, struts like a religious belief, and quacks like a religious belief, what else would you have me call it?"

I call it having a brain that functions correctly. Using emotional feel-good doublespeak does not make good policies. Considering GW has given us the largest Federal Government ever, and shows no signs of slowing it down, I would think you would love him.

He's giving everything to everybody...and pissing everyone off in the process.

Using your theory on ducks however, I could do the same and compare you to Charles and the James Gang. I will not do that though. Good taste, and a sense of fair play prohibit me from doing so. I place you above them, as I have stated before.

As for Bill Clinton and his legal troubles...don't care. Never did, never will. If the source I used was wrong, so be it. I linked to it from the official Arkansas site.

It reminds me of a billboard I saw in 1992 when I drove through. It said: "Vote for Bill Clinton for President...It may be the only way we can get rid of him".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#823 Consumer Suggestion

GEORGE W. BUSH IS A MORON BUT ONLY CAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT ..You may have been "suckered" into having him as President the first time, but then ya buncha schmucks VOTED him in the second time.

AUTHOR: Katherine - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

The U.S. has been "ripped off". You have been lied to (where are those pesky WMD's?) Your civil liberties have been violated (why can't I wiretap anybody I want to???) GW went to war without just cause (Yeah, Saddam is a dictator but he ain't the only one around.

Why aren't troops in the Sudan, Somalia, good god, ya let Idi Amin go live in Saudi Arabia and he was a CANNIBAL) Your "free" press only gets to cover the war if they're "imbedded" & Scott McLellan dismisses valid questions out of hand. If you ask too many tough ones, you'll be banned from the press corps. Yet ya knew the man was a coke head, drunk driver and lied about his "military" service during Vietnam.

You may have been "suckered" into having him as President the first time, but then ya buncha schmucks VOTED him in the second time. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. What happened to the brave, proud American people. Scared off by one attack on your home soil. Yeesh!!!! (oh and by the way, are ya even still LOOKING for Osama??)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#822 Consumer Comment

Robert's Religion.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Robert,

Oh, I understand quite well that this is what you believe, just as I understand that Vera believes an omnipotent being who creates universes is interested in her behavior.

You have established the fact that Madison and Jefferson are not the only early authorities on the Constitution.

You have established the fact that the earliest embodiments of Congress, to which many of these early authorities were member, were already violating YOUR idea of the perfect government.

You have established the fact that the Supreme Court has the right and authority to interpret the constitutionality of Congress' legislation.

You have established the fact that the Supreme Court has decided that YOUR viewpoint is incorrect.

In short, you have established the fact that, if it ever truly existed in the first place, YOUR concept of idyllic government, marching to the beat of YOUR interpretation of the Constitution, lasted but a heartbeat in our history.

Yet you insist we should all turn our backs on reality and adopt YOUR vision because it is somehow more right and pure than the one we know, that we should adopt YOUR mantra, "As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, Federal Government without interference. Amen." These are, after all, the words of the mighty prophets, Madison and Jefferson.

And you apparently are not at all concerned with the damage and destruction that would result from the implementation of YOUR vision. And you seem unwilling to entertain any change that would accomplish similar ends. No, any change that does not include returning to that moment just before we committed the first sin would be unholy and impure.

Sorry, if it looks like a religious belief, struts like a religious belief, and quacks like a religious belief, what else would you have me call it?

And as to your mistaken rant about Clinton, once again your neocon sources have led you down the garden path. I will reiterate, a citation for civil contempt is the court's judgment of misbehavior before the court, and carries no further presumption of criminal guilt. If your interpretation of events were correct, these matters would not still have been on the table in Clinton's deal with Robert Ray. And I will post my sources, the two relevant orders Judge Wright issued in the matter:

I. The citation for contempt:
Accordingly, the Court adjudges the President to be in civil contempt of court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2) for his willful failure to obey this Court's discovery Orders and hereby orders the following:

1. The President shall pay plaintiff any reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, caused by his willful failure to obey this Court's discovery Orders. Plaintiff's former counsel are directed to submit to this Court a detailed statement of any expenses and attorney's fees incurred in connection with this matter within twenty (20) days of the date of entry of this Memorandum Opinion and Order.

2. The President shall deposit into the registry of this Court the sum of $ 1,202.00, the total expenses incurred by this Court in traveling to Washington, D.C. at the President's request to preside over his January 17th deposition.

In addition, the Court will refer this matter to the Arkansas Supreme Court's Committee on Professional Conduct for review and any action it deems appropriate.

II. The order to pay Jones' attorneys' costs:
Accordingly, the Court hereby orders the following:

1. The President shall deposit the sum of $1,202.00 into the registry of this Court within sixty (60) days of the date of entry of this Memorandum and Order.

2. The President shall pay RCFP the sum of $79,999.12 within sixty (60) days of the date of entry of this Memorandum and Order.

3. The President shall pay TRI the sum of $9,484.93 within sixty (60) days of the date of entry of this Memorandum and Order.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#821 Consumer Comment

That's very extreme "B"

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

I'll start this with an oldie, but a goodie.

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."-James Madison

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."-Thomas Jefferson

This simply states that the term "General Welfare" does not mean it should cover everyone for everything, cradle to grave. To think it does, is a total bastardization of the phrase. It involved treating all States equally, and all citizens equally. It provided defense from attacks, and equal representation without regard for wealth or status.

"...The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."-James Madison

"The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its
jurisdiction."-James Madison

This states very clearly, the Federal Government has very little authority to do anything. It also states very clearly, the States are more apt to be qualified for helping it's citizens.

Why is this so difficult for you and others to understand? It seems so easy to me. The Founding Fathers wanted a small Federal Government, while today, most people think it's the Feds responsibility to take care of everything.

Since you like posting Articles, try this:

"AMENDMENT X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The 10th Amendmendment says the States and individuals are responsible for themselves, not the Federal Government.

As for my source for Clinton and his GUILTY verdict in Court, I got that little bit of whimsy from "Anything Arkansas". I posted the source. The $90K was the FINE, not attorneys fees. And yes, the Judge decided he LIED to her, and found him GUILTY of perjury. The contempt charge was because of him PERJURING himself, denying Paula Jones her day in court. The fun part of that is Bill Clinton himself signed into law the basis of her complaint against him. Then he made sure he wouldn't have to answer for it. Sucks to be him...it didn't work. Seems the only other President to be Impeached also came from Arkansas. No Charles and James, Nixon was never Impeached. He had enough honor and dignity to resign before it happened.

As for me being part of the religious types...HAHHAAHHAHA!!!! I have been an Atheist since I was thrown out of Sunday School for asking questions. Some religious nut I'd make. On the other hand, I do not disregard the opinions of anyone who does worship a higher power. But honestly, if you wish to lump me in with Vera and the other right-thinkers, I'll gladly accept that as an honor. You're stuck with Charles and the James Gang.

Nope, my logic follows a straight line. The US Constitution does not allow most of what the Government wastes money on. To paraphrase you...If a politician doesn't bring home the bacon, the people will find one who will. Or, as Ben Franklin put it: "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#820 Consumer Comment

Make the states pay the debt

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Robert from Jacksonville,

Article I, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
. . .

Looks like it says make the States pay the Debts, but I don't see the part that says only the debts for Constitutional programs. And no matter what sophistry you and James Madison employ to minimize it, the phrase "provide for the. . . general Welfare" is there and it means something. Besides, I think I can make a reasonable argument that programs to mitigate disease, programs to mitigate starvation and other causes of civil unrest, hell even the 'race for space', have all done more to provide for the common defense than the war we're fighting to overthrow the government of a tiny third world nation, one that could never be construed as a serious military threat.

As for turning back the clock, it can't be done, anymore than you can jump in your time travel machine. The population of Denver alone exceeds that of the entire nation at the time the Constitution was written. We have instantaneous communication, and nearly instantaneous travel to any destination. The idea of state autonomy no longer has the same meaning, I have spent my entire life as a citizen of the United States of America, not a citizen of Colorado, as did my parents and grandparents. The world around us has changed dramatically. The megacorporations and multinationals have no allegiance to the communities whose wealth they accumulate. If the Supreme Court declared tomorrow that all funding for programs other than defense was unconstitutional and must cease immediately, the nation would be thrown into chaos, violence in the streets, and those already familiar with fighting in the streets would be the victors. You would be forced to choose between the red and the blue, only in today's society, that would be the Bloods and the Crips.

But seriously, why would you want to forfeit all our forward progress just to fix the mistakes we've made? Is this a religious fixation? Do you consider any cooperative venture between the states to be so intrinsically evil that any benefits derived are inherently tainted, and must be destroyed? And if we refuse to face those mistakes and work through them, what makes you think our descendants will be any more likely to avoid these pitfalls than we were? The problem is not that Congress is allowed to spend money for things other than defense, it is that they are allowed to spend money they don't have. I suspect Madison would agree with me when I say I cannot put my finger on that article of the Constitution which allows the Federal government to expend the money of its constituents on the invasion of an irrelevant third world country.

I will say it again. If we basically repeal that line that says, "To borrow Money on the credit of the United States," the problem will take care of itself. When Congress is forced to collect taxes to pay for the government's expenditures, rather than artificially prolonging payment into infinity, the states will quickly respond. They will decide what they are willing to spend money on, and the least chaotic way to get from here to there. And any Congressman who refuses to play ball will swiftly be replaced by one who will.

Your source is extremely flawed. Clinton was charged in Article I with lying under oath to the grand jury, not in the Jones case. He was charged in Article III with obstructing justice in the Jones case, but oddly not with perjury. He was acquitted on both charges. Surprisingly, 45 Republican Senators voted to convict under Article I, even though neither the Special Prosecutor nor the House Prosecutors could point to a single false statement he had made. Judge Wright's contempt citation was not for perjury in the deposition. She cited him for contempt because he intentionally withheld discovery she had ordered. Even if she had found him in contempt for perjury, he would not be GUILTY of perjury unless he contested the citation and was allowed to present evidence and testimony in his defense. The $90K was not a fine, but a reimbursement to Jones' attorneys for their expenses and time spent in preparing for the deposition. He also had to reimburse the court $1200 for its expenses. The surrender of his law license was part of a 'deal' with Special Prosecutor Robert Ray, in which he also admitted to making "evasive and misleading" statements in the Jones case. In return, Ray agreed to end the OIC investigation and forego any criminal indictment on charges of obstruction. The fun thing about this case is the appearance of irony at every turn. The Supreme Court ruling that allowed the Jones case to proceed because it would have negligible impact on Clinton's duties as President. The fact that Clinton's reinstatement of the OIC allowed Ken Starr, one of dozens of top gun Republican attorneys working pro bono on the Jones case, to take over the Whitewater investigation. Judge Wright's ruling, two weeks after Clinton's deposition in the Jones case, that testimony concerning Lewinsky would be inadmissible, and her dismissal of the case altogether two months later.

I see you subscribe to the same anti-logic that Vera uses, so maybe its not a female thing. I hope you two are never on my jury. You'd convict me of rape because I once kissed my cousin under the mistletoe at a Christmas party and I refused to volunteer a DNA sample. And never mind that I was seen having dinner in London two hours earlier, I couldn't PROVE my whereabouts at the time of the crime.


____________________________
Robert from Dallas,

Thanks again. I didn't know about 11110. Yours is the first theory I've heard that makes any real sense.


____________________________
Melvin from Amityville,

Well, Melville (May I call you Melville?) since you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension, let me try to condense it down into one simple sentence for you. I'm not defending James or his post, I'm attacking yours. Simple enough for you? Given the choice that you were either drunk or an antisocial, unsophisticated boor, I made the mistake of giving you the benefit of the doubt. Excuse me. It won't happen again.

Contrary to your mistaken belief, this thread is all about political ranting. If The Ed (kind of like a cyberspace The Lloyd) thought it was inappropriate, I suspect he would have told us many posts ago. Some of us are fact people, some opinion people, most prefer a blend of the two. So far, you have offered neither, just a mindless character assassination. And now you tell me how WRONG I am to call you on it.

There are several of us discussing Bush and related topics. Do you have anything relevant, any pre-Doctoral wisdom, you'd care to share with us?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#819 Consumer Comment

Response to "B"

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 20, 2006

"What are you, the Amityville whorer? I may not agree with everything James posts, and he certainly does not go out of his way to defend his comments, but at least his posts have some informational content. Yours offer zero content, which puts the inbred moron from Tupper Lake about two pegs above you. Anybody who can read can see the case (or lack thereof) that James makes for Bush being a rip-off, which puts you down another peg. Oh, and I'm that nutjob that actually wants to read it, so when you drag yourself up from the depths of your humiliation, you can take your best shot at trying to crack me."
***************

And who are you, James of Tupper's pit bull? He won't defend his posts so he hired you? Maybe he doesn't access this thread anymore because at 9600 BAUD, it takes way too long to post.

So his posts, ANY of his posts, contained ANY information? Well they didn't only blathering opinion, so you are wrong.

His case for GWB being a "ripoff"? Maybe you can see it, because you march to your own drummer, but it doesn't exist. This isn't a political ranting website, which is what he did, so his crap compilation doesn't belong here. You are WRONG again.

"I see you're on a Doctoral path in elbow bending, which, oddly was my major back in the day. Difference is, imagination, logic, and a sense of humor were prerequisites back then. Obviously, you're getting ripped off by a degree mill that isn't preparing you for actual work in the field. Tell you what, you come to Denver and I'll take you around to all the dives for some practicum. You buy all the beer, and if you're stupid enough to pick a fight, I'll make sure they don't beat you any more than you deserve. Whaddya say?"
***************

You've wasted your comedic "skills" (such as they are) on a useless assumption about me and my background that has nothing to do with any of this. I just wonder why you care so much about James that you must take up the cudgel and carry his water for him. Surely your razor-like political and argumentive acumen is better employed in a cause more valuable than coming to the rescue of a barely-literate buffoon?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#818 Consumer Comment

Response to "B"

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 20, 2006

"What are you, the Amityville whorer? I may not agree with everything James posts, and he certainly does not go out of his way to defend his comments, but at least his posts have some informational content. Yours offer zero content, which puts the inbred moron from Tupper Lake about two pegs above you. Anybody who can read can see the case (or lack thereof) that James makes for Bush being a rip-off, which puts you down another peg. Oh, and I'm that nutjob that actually wants to read it, so when you drag yourself up from the depths of your humiliation, you can take your best shot at trying to crack me."
***************

And who are you, James of Tupper's pit bull? He won't defend his posts so he hired you? Maybe he doesn't access this thread anymore because at 9600 BAUD, it takes way too long to post.

So his posts, ANY of his posts, contained ANY information? Well they didn't only blathering opinion, so you are wrong.

His case for GWB being a "ripoff"? Maybe you can see it, because you march to your own drummer, but it doesn't exist. This isn't a political ranting website, which is what he did, so his crap compilation doesn't belong here. You are WRONG again.

"I see you're on a Doctoral path in elbow bending, which, oddly was my major back in the day. Difference is, imagination, logic, and a sense of humor were prerequisites back then. Obviously, you're getting ripped off by a degree mill that isn't preparing you for actual work in the field. Tell you what, you come to Denver and I'll take you around to all the dives for some practicum. You buy all the beer, and if you're stupid enough to pick a fight, I'll make sure they don't beat you any more than you deserve. Whaddya say?"
***************

You've wasted your comedic "skills" (such as they are) on a useless assumption about me and my background that has nothing to do with any of this. I just wonder why you care so much about James that you must take up the cudgel and carry his water for him. Surely your razor-like political and argumentive acumen is better employed in a cause more valuable than coming to the rescue of a barely-literate buffoon?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#817 Consumer Comment

Response to "B"

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 20, 2006

"What are you, the Amityville whorer? I may not agree with everything James posts, and he certainly does not go out of his way to defend his comments, but at least his posts have some informational content. Yours offer zero content, which puts the inbred moron from Tupper Lake about two pegs above you. Anybody who can read can see the case (or lack thereof) that James makes for Bush being a rip-off, which puts you down another peg. Oh, and I'm that nutjob that actually wants to read it, so when you drag yourself up from the depths of your humiliation, you can take your best shot at trying to crack me."
***************

And who are you, James of Tupper's pit bull? He won't defend his posts so he hired you? Maybe he doesn't access this thread anymore because at 9600 BAUD, it takes way too long to post.

So his posts, ANY of his posts, contained ANY information? Well they didn't only blathering opinion, so you are wrong.

His case for GWB being a "ripoff"? Maybe you can see it, because you march to your own drummer, but it doesn't exist. This isn't a political ranting website, which is what he did, so his crap compilation doesn't belong here. You are WRONG again.

"I see you're on a Doctoral path in elbow bending, which, oddly was my major back in the day. Difference is, imagination, logic, and a sense of humor were prerequisites back then. Obviously, you're getting ripped off by a degree mill that isn't preparing you for actual work in the field. Tell you what, you come to Denver and I'll take you around to all the dives for some practicum. You buy all the beer, and if you're stupid enough to pick a fight, I'll make sure they don't beat you any more than you deserve. Whaddya say?"
***************

You've wasted your comedic "skills" (such as they are) on a useless assumption about me and my background that has nothing to do with any of this. I just wonder why you care so much about James that you must take up the cudgel and carry his water for him. Surely your razor-like political and argumentive acumen is better employed in a cause more valuable than coming to the rescue of a barely-literate buffoon?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#816 Consumer Comment

For B: President John F.Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

B, you may be closer to the truth than you know.

Though Castro and Kennedy were bitter toward each other, I never felt that Castro had a hand in JFK's assassination. The Mafia, nope! And I always felt that Oswald was a nutjob who had been manipulated by others.

I have always felt that Kennedy was killed for signing Executive Order No. 11110.

On June 4, 1963, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank "would soon be out of business".

Executive Order No. 11110 returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy's order gave the Treasury the power "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous.

Six months later, Kennedy died in Dallas. If you check into this it seems that this Executive Order is still in effect. However, the presidents following Kennedy chose to ignore it. Much easier to continue printing play money.

More and more American citizens are beginning to think that the Federal Reserve Bank is part of the government. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Federal Reserve was formed by bankers and is owned by banks for their own benefit. It is nothing but a cartel of extortionists! When banks decide it is time to squeeze citizens a little harder, they send in the chairman to raise interest rates. (Read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" for a hair-raising history of the Federal Reserve)

I have always speculated that Kennedy was killed for attempting to kill the illegal and unconstitutional Federal Reserve Bank!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#815 Consumer Comment

Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

"Bill Clinton was charged with lying under oath about his affair with Lewinsky to gain advantage in a sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones, a case he later settled by paying Paula Jones $850,000. A Federal judge found Clinton also to be in contempt of court for lying in a deposition and ordered him to pay a $90,000 fine. This contempt citation led to disbarment proceedings to remove his law license. To avoid these Clinton surrendered his law license and is no longer allowed to practice law."-Anything Arkansas

Innocent people don't pay their victims $850K. They also don't lose their law license, or pay $90K fines.

The contempt citation was for lying under oath for the deposition...PERJURY! I don't see it getting any more clear than that. Just because Congress let him off, doesn't mean the Judge would. She found him GUILTY.

As for turning back the clock and eliminating all of the waste in Government spending...why not? The people who gave us these asinine programs aren't the ones paying for them. I didn't vote for them, and neither did you. If I get hungry and homeless(won't ever happen), I'll go find work and a place to live. It really is just that simple.

Also, nowhere in the Constitutution does it say anything about making States pay for Congress' unConstitutional programs.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#814 Consumer Comment

Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

"Bill Clinton was charged with lying under oath about his affair with Lewinsky to gain advantage in a sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones, a case he later settled by paying Paula Jones $850,000. A Federal judge found Clinton also to be in contempt of court for lying in a deposition and ordered him to pay a $90,000 fine. This contempt citation led to disbarment proceedings to remove his law license. To avoid these Clinton surrendered his law license and is no longer allowed to practice law."-Anything Arkansas

Innocent people don't pay their victims $850K. They also don't lose their law license, or pay $90K fines.

The contempt citation was for lying under oath for the deposition...PERJURY! I don't see it getting any more clear than that. Just because Congress let him off, doesn't mean the Judge would. She found him GUILTY.

As for turning back the clock and eliminating all of the waste in Government spending...why not? The people who gave us these asinine programs aren't the ones paying for them. I didn't vote for them, and neither did you. If I get hungry and homeless(won't ever happen), I'll go find work and a place to live. It really is just that simple.

Also, nowhere in the Constitutution does it say anything about making States pay for Congress' unConstitutional programs.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#813 Consumer Comment

Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

"Bill Clinton was charged with lying under oath about his affair with Lewinsky to gain advantage in a sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones, a case he later settled by paying Paula Jones $850,000. A Federal judge found Clinton also to be in contempt of court for lying in a deposition and ordered him to pay a $90,000 fine. This contempt citation led to disbarment proceedings to remove his law license. To avoid these Clinton surrendered his law license and is no longer allowed to practice law."-Anything Arkansas

Innocent people don't pay their victims $850K. They also don't lose their law license, or pay $90K fines.

The contempt citation was for lying under oath for the deposition...PERJURY! I don't see it getting any more clear than that. Just because Congress let him off, doesn't mean the Judge would. She found him GUILTY.

As for turning back the clock and eliminating all of the waste in Government spending...why not? The people who gave us these asinine programs aren't the ones paying for them. I didn't vote for them, and neither did you. If I get hungry and homeless(won't ever happen), I'll go find work and a place to live. It really is just that simple.

Also, nowhere in the Constitutution does it say anything about making States pay for Congress' unConstitutional programs.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#812 Consumer Comment

Guilty of Perjury...and other crimes

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

"Bill Clinton was charged with lying under oath about his affair with Lewinsky to gain advantage in a sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones, a case he later settled by paying Paula Jones $850,000. A Federal judge found Clinton also to be in contempt of court for lying in a deposition and ordered him to pay a $90,000 fine. This contempt citation led to disbarment proceedings to remove his law license. To avoid these Clinton surrendered his law license and is no longer allowed to practice law."-Anything Arkansas

Innocent people don't pay their victims $850K. They also don't lose their law license, or pay $90K fines.

The contempt citation was for lying under oath for the deposition...PERJURY! I don't see it getting any more clear than that. Just because Congress let him off, doesn't mean the Judge would. She found him GUILTY.

As for turning back the clock and eliminating all of the waste in Government spending...why not? The people who gave us these asinine programs aren't the ones paying for them. I didn't vote for them, and neither did you. If I get hungry and homeless(won't ever happen), I'll go find work and a place to live. It really is just that simple.

Also, nowhere in the Constitutution does it say anything about making States pay for Congress' unConstitutional programs.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#811 Consumer Comment

Cutting the purse strings.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 19, 2006

Robert,

I'm all for cutting Congress' bottomless purse strings, but I guess I'm just not a 'baby out with the bath water' kind of guy. I have yet to see an argument that would convince me we have to give up our cultural treasures or the positive aspects of cooperative governance in order to run a balanced budget. Perhaps what is needed is a Constitutional Amendment that allows Congress to borrow money only when needed to repel invaders. Something with specific wording that makes the intent clear and takes voodoo economics off the table. And while we're at it, maybe a mandatory annual payment of all interest and 10% of the principal on existing debt. Borrowing money made sense when we were a fledgling nation, but at this point we should have a surplus. I suspect that as soon as we get back to a 'pay as you go' economy, the 'spend as you can' Congressman will become a rapidly vanishing breed.

As for leaving anything to private enterprise, yeah, sure, 'cause Enron and Worldcomm are such vanguards of the American way. And I'm not convinced the states are much better. In 1993, President Clinton handed Congress a comprehensive welfare reform package that would have transformed the system from a lifetime entitlement package to a two year retraining program. What they gave him back to sign in 1996 was a toothless, spineless mishmash that bore almost no resemblance to the original. It's major reform (just barely ahead of its wonderful system for penalizing unwed mothers, and their children) is a 5 year lifetime cap on receiving federal benefits. So in theory, by this time we should have booted all the lifetime members out of the system. The problem is, they turned management of it over to the states, leaving them the option of continuing people beyond the 5 year cap as they deemed necessary. I'm sure you've noticed that the states have managed to prune the welfare rolls to almost nothing... yeah, right.

The 'Federalist Papers' were written by Hamilton, Madison, and John Jay during the period when individual states were considering ratification of the proposed Constitution, and in direct response to the negative essays written by its opponents. As the major thrust of the opposition was 'Big government gonna eatcha up', it should come as no surprise that the Federalist essays did everything they could to tone down those aspects of the new Constitution. Both the Federalist and the anti-Federalist essays should be required reading in high school, to better understand the Constitution's historical context. But nothing portrays the "original intent" better than Madison's copious notes, nearly a transcript, of the Constitutional Convention itself.

____________________
Charles,

Welcome! I don't care what these agents of sedition say about you, I say anyone who opposes Bush and his Republicrims can't be all bad. Just remember, the attacks on your spelling and typing come from people who have nothing to say about your message.

____________________
John,

Well, according to my country's laws, a person is innocent until proven guilty. Not only has BJ Clinton never been proven guilty of perjury, he has actually been acquitted on charges of perjury. So why are you running around with your fly unzipped yelling Clinton's a liar? Way to go, another good Christian act.

_________________________
Robert (from Dallas),

Thanks for the post, and the link. As usual, you come up with the meat while the rest of us are just making sandwiches. Scary, indeed! It provides the common thread for all these pieces I've sensed for years were related, I just couldn't figure out how. Its all too simple, to convenient; a part of me does not want to believe this has become the core of American patriotism. The next thing you're going to tell me is JFK was assassinated for threatening to expose this. Oh, s**t...

Any chance we can get Ron Paul to run for prez in 08 on the Democratic ticket? Maybe with Kinky Friedman as VP?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#810 Consumer Suggestion

Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 17, 2006

George Bush is just propping up our "play money". A fast invasion of Iran is likely and it won't be about oil or WMD there, either!

Here is an excerpt from the end of Rep. Ron Paul's speech for those of you with a limited attention span:

"It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.

The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.

But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.

Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better."

For those of you who want to know more, the speech can be read in its entirety here. Be prepared to feel very uneasy when you finish this!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul303.html

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#809 Consumer Suggestion

Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 17, 2006

George Bush is just propping up our "play money". A fast invasion of Iran is likely and it won't be about oil or WMD there, either!

Here is an excerpt from the end of Rep. Ron Paul's speech for those of you with a limited attention span:

"It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.

The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.

But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.

Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better."

For those of you who want to know more, the speech can be read in its entirety here. Be prepared to feel very uneasy when you finish this!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul303.html

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#808 Consumer Suggestion

Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) has cracked this nut and we are ALL wrong. The truth about the invasion of Iraq is much, much scarier!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 17, 2006

George Bush is just propping up our "play money". A fast invasion of Iran is likely and it won't be about oil or WMD there, either!

Here is an excerpt from the end of Rep. Ron Paul's speech for those of you with a limited attention span:

"It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.

The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.

But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.

Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.

And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.

Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.

The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better."

For those of you who want to know more, the speech can be read in its entirety here. Be prepared to feel very uneasy when you finish this!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul303.html

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#807 Consumer Suggestion

Charles why so much hatred?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 17, 2006

Charles:

You talked in your earlier posts about how you were a christian and follow joe Osteen's teachings. I asked you then and I am asking you again if you can tell me where the bible or Joel Osteen's teachings it preaches hating other people. In all your posts you spew hate. You make claims about how the president broke the law and stole the elections.

Please submit your proof or do you alwas blindly attack someone because you don't like them. Way to go another good christian act.

You claim Bill Clinton never broke a law. What do you call lying under oath and getting others to do the same. According to my countries laws this a CRIME and is called P E R J U R Y.

I know you won't respond to this because you didn't bother the last time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#806 Consumer Comment

Bush the biggest piece of trash president america has ever had

AUTHOR: Charles - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 16, 2006

Bill clinton did not commit any crimes in office, George W. bush has commited several crimes with stealing the election in 2000 & 2004, republicans are very good with covering their tracks bush is more sneaky to get his own way bush is full of s**t. Republicans covered their tracks in the 2000 election & destroyed all the evidence that will send them to prison for life for the fraud they committed & their ignorant hateful republican lawyers help them to cover their tracks, they have been covering their tracks with their crimes that they commit the whole 6 years bush has been president with everything failing on bush. People said they will ignore me & anything I have to say well go ahead ignore me don't listen to anything I have to say don't reply back to me but I will not keep quit I will still speak my mind regardless, of anybody who will not respond to my response or who will bash me or ridcule me about my typing or spelling they are scum of the earth who voted for bush!. Republicans need to get ready to back their bags because they will lose the whitehouse in 2008 & republicans will lose respect from all americas republicans might have gotten americans agaisnt democrats but democrats will rise again to take down evil republicans & to take this country back!, bush & his administration have destoryed what this country once stood for!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#805 Consumer Comment

Here we go again

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 16, 2006

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its
jurisdiction."
-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 6, 1788]

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
--James Madison

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The best way to help the poor is to not be one of them." - Mark Victor Hansen

No "B", I do not believe it is the reponsibility of the US Federal Government to provide ANYBODY with ANYTHING, other than defense. Everything else should be left to the individual States, and private enterprise. I cannot even think of a single thing the US Government does that isn't done more efficiently by others. Fighting a war doesn't seem to be on the "can-do" list either.

As for James Madison writing the Constitution, yes he was among the committee that put pen to paper. He is infact, known as the "Father of the Constitution" because of his participation.

But still, if you wish to know what the original intent was, read the "Federalist Papers". Madison authored several of those, and were the basis for the Constitution we ended up with.


Respond to this report!
What's this?

#804 Consumer Comment

Here we go again

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 16, 2006

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its
jurisdiction."
-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 6, 1788]

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
--James Madison

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The best way to help the poor is to not be one of them." - Mark Victor Hansen

No "B", I do not believe it is the reponsibility of the US Federal Government to provide ANYBODY with ANYTHING, other than defense. Everything else should be left to the individual States, and private enterprise. I cannot even think of a single thing the US Government does that isn't done more efficiently by others. Fighting a war doesn't seem to be on the "can-do" list either.

As for James Madison writing the Constitution, yes he was among the committee that put pen to paper. He is infact, known as the "Father of the Constitution" because of his participation.

But still, if you wish to know what the original intent was, read the "Federalist Papers". Madison authored several of those, and were the basis for the Constitution we ended up with.


Respond to this report!
What's this?

#803 Consumer Comment

Here we go again

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 16, 2006

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated."
-- Thomas Jefferson

"The powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its
jurisdiction."
-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 6, 1788]

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
--James Madison

" I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"The best way to help the poor is to not be one of them." - Mark Victor Hansen

No "B", I do not believe it is the reponsibility of the US Federal Government to provide ANYBODY with ANYTHING, other than defense. Everything else should be left to the individual States, and private enterprise. I cannot even think of a single thing the US Government does that isn't done more efficiently by others. Fighting a war doesn't seem to be on the "can-do" list either.

As for James Madison writing the Constitution, yes he was among the committee that put pen to paper. He is infact, known as the "Father of the Constitution" because of his participation.

But still, if you wish to know what the original intent was, read the "Federalist Papers". Madison authored several of those, and were the basis for the Constitution we ended up with.


Respond to this report!
What's this?

#802 Consumer Comment

Where do you draw the line?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 16, 2006

Robert,

You are arguing against your own hypotheses. I hate to disabuse your sacred cows, but Madison did not author the Constitution. It was "written" through 4 months of the heated debate and compromise of over 50 delegates to the Constitutional Convention. In 1794, I believe, these same delegates composed the bulk of Congress; certainly many of the more prominent delegates were Congressmen. The fact that this Congress voted to appropriate money for the 'Haitian' refugees, a mere 6 years after ratification of the Constitution, despite the eloquent objections of James Madison, proves his was not the only interpretation of "the general welfare", in fact it was not even the most popular understanding.

Where do you draw the line? Is the only allowable peaceful expenditure to establish post offices and post roads? And having established them, do we 'read into' the Constitution an intent not explicitly stated by its authors, and allow Congress to appropriate funds to maintain them, or must we allow them to fall into disrepair and then "establish" new ones? Can we use peaceful means to ensure domestic tranquility, or must we wait for violence to erupt and then use police force to quash it? Which was the biggest bang for our federal buck, the trillions spent to make us 'secure' by poising the world on the brink of annihilation for 40 years, or the paltry billions spent on space exploration that fueled our technological innovation and superiority for 25 years? Which seems more in line with the vision of this country's founders, running around the world killing people who refuse to bow to our President, or building a strong, proud nation whose children are healthy, well-fed, and prosperous? And coincidentally, which seems most likely to result in the establishment of peaceful, cooperative relationships with the other countries of the world? Must we say goodbye to the Lincoln Memorial, the Smithsonian, the Library of Congress, the .National Parks and Monuments, the Centers for Disease Control, because funding for these institutions is not specifically mandated by the Constitution?

Or perhaps you share the philosophy of our current government, that it is the expenditure of tax dollars on domestic programs that is the root of all evil, not the domestic programs themselves. Under this philosophy, Congress is well within the intent of the authors of the Constitution to mandate the state expenditure of funds for specific programs, like domestic security and childhood education, but they are not allowed to provide federally collected tax dollars to support them. They are, however, allowed to demand that states pony up hundreds of billions of dollars annually to support the effort to beat the crap out of any nation that might someday become a threat to us.

And you think my philosophy is out of touch with reality?


_________________________
Vera,

OK, now you've gone too far! LOL! Its one thing to use Clinton to excuse President George's actions, totally misguided, but one thing nonetheless. PG should be allowed to stand on his own as an adult and be responsible for his own actions. But there is a certain logic, twisty though it may be, in saying but after what Clinton did, anything Bush is accused of pales by comparison. It is another thing entirely to use Clinton to excuse Nixon's actions. Not only is it totally absurd to say that what Clinton did was MUCH WORSE, it is completely illogical to even contemplate some sort of reverse causal relationship. This must be another manifestation of that feminine anti-logic that some visceral component tells them is logical. The same anti-logic that allows them to transcend the experience of carrying a 20 lb pelvic tumor for months that makes them hot, uncomfortable, snappish, and makes dancing at best a grotesque parody, then giving birth, in a process that must be the equivalent of my passing a kidney stone the size of a baseball, to an ugly, squalling, mucous covered blob, and deciding its beautiful. The same anti-logic that leads them to suffer through the first few months of the child's untimely screams and demands without killing it for its crimes against humanity, then turn around and want to repeat the whole wonderful process all over again. Sheesh!

Now, I have tried to avoid any prolonged discussion of Clinton because his actions are generally tangential to Bush's actions, at best. But you just can't seem to let this sleeping dog lie. So, I'll make you a deal. If you can present a logical argument, based on facts, that Clinton's actions were worse than Nixon's, I'll never harangue you again for inappropriately using his name in an argument. If you can't, you agree to at least try to let Bush and Nixon stand on their own two feet, and quit bringing up Clinton every time someone criticizes them.

_________________________
Melvin,

What are you, the Amityville whorer? I may not agree with everything James posts, and he certainly does not go out of his way to defend his comments, but at least his posts have some informational content. Yours offer zero content, which puts the inbred moron from Tupper Lake about two pegs above you. Anybody who can read can see the case (or lack thereof) that James makes for Bush being a rip-off, which puts you down another peg. Oh, and I'm that nutjob that actually wants to read it, so when you drag yourself up from the depths of your humiliation, you can take your best shot at trying to crack me.

I see you're on a Doctoral path in elbow bending, which, oddly was my major back in the day. Difference is, imagination, logic, and a sense of humor were prerequisites back then. Obviously, you're getting ripped off by a degree mill that isn't preparing you for actual work in the field. Tell you what, you come to Denver and I'll take you around to all the dives for some practicum. You buy all the beer, and if you're stupid enough to pick a fight, I'll make sure they don't beat you any more than you deserve. Whaddya say?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#801 Consumer Comment

One More Thing James...

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, February 10, 2006

I have read so many things about Tupper Lake that my curiosity is piqued (for those of you in Rio Linda and Tupper Lake, that means I'm interested). I'm thinking of writing my Doctoral thesis about the phenomenon of how the combination of bad genes, inbreeding, the worst of human nature, alcohol and drug abuse, corruption, and low average IQ can affect so many people at the same time, the majority of one community.

From what I've read on this site, I'm thinking perhaps Tupper Lake is the ideal venue for the study. It seems to exhibit all of the attributes of this phenomenon, in an uncommonly high percentage of its residents.

If I come to Tupper Lake, will you be my local guide, show me around, introduce me to the Tupperians? I'll buy you beer the whole time in exchange. If we get into a fight in a local dive bar, you'll back me up, right? Whaddya say?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#800 Consumer Comment

Good Post, Vera

AUTHOR: Melvin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 09, 2006

James o' Tupper: You better get a new screen name to post under, because Vera just smacked you down and humiliated you so badly you'll never recover.

One more thing to add: Why do you think that any person in the real world gives a d**n about what one obvious idiot, from Tupper Lake of all places, thinks?

Actually, you are not thinking. You are just regurgitating fragments of soundbytes and talking points from Michael Moore, the Democrites like Howard Deaniac and Bowtox Kerry. There is no intelligent thought process evident in your brain, only basic, primeval functions.

Now did George W. Bush rip you off? What, he sell you a used car or something? No, he didn't? Well then go post your drivel on some Liberal whackjob chat board or blog, where it is on topic. Oh, and where some other nutjob may actually want to read it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#799 Consumer Comment

Wrongo, Bongo!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, February 07, 2006

James of Tupper

Robert and B. are having a great conversation, and I've been enjoying the readyou're just getting in the way. Everyone who has been reading through this long thread has borne witness to the fact that the meat of your commentary is based in o-spinion, not fact, and you're clearly not willing to back up your opinion with anything other than Michael Moore-On's shlock and huff mockumentary.

Really, you should lay down before you hurt yourself. the only thing you can ever be at this point, is wrong.

Now, about your latest bit o' bile.

There are far more Americans that are poor than rich in America!

Well, we could curb that problem by being more personally responsible in the bedroom, or in your case, a well applied neutering. Maybe then, we could learn to provide for the children we have, rather than crank out kid after kid for the System to support.

The world sees Americans as rich and wish to join us, until they see this is a ploy as most Americans are poor.

Well, I'm not rich, but I'm certainly not poor, eitherbut I'm average, for a typical American; in that I mean, I work for a living, care for my Family, and try to contribute socially, economically, and personally in a reasonably decent manner, I guess. (Shrugging) Granted, I don't go to the Hamptons in the summer but I don't really want to. Give me a nice evening in the Florida room (My dream home has one!) with Friends and familya little music, and it's a good time. If I want a vacation, I go camping or hiking.or snorkeling. None of these is terribly expensive.

Where do you suppose they get the idea that America is rich? Do they see it on Television, where the celebrity-elites chant their consequence-free and irresponsible message to indulge what you want, someone else will take care of it?

Add that to the fact that many in other countries see the freedoms Americans take for granted, and stand in awe at the wealth we have as a people in this Nation. They are stymied by the fact that WE think WE are oppressed.

Commonly, the super-rich you see on TeeVee are the exception; we don't watch shows like Joe Millionaire and The Apprentice because we want to see Mr. or Mrs. Average. We watch that crap because we want to be entertained.

People who can be defined as self-realized most often have one major common thread: They ALL work, or have worked their a*s off to get where they aremany of them are still working. Those who are willing to work deserve the reward of taking a break to say, I did that and I'm proud, so I'll have a vacation .or a treat, or a new suit, or get a car that has a few luxuries.

Y'know what, Champ? If I bust my hump and my Family benefits from it, or if I create the next multi-million dollar idea, I have the right to enjoy the fruits of my labor! It wasn't handed to me! I suffered for it, or worked for itso I'll skip the beans and have steak for supper one night. Why not? If I worked for it, and am blessed with the extra, I'm gonna use a portion of it, share a portion of it, and invest a portion of it. It's my money, and MY choice.

I also state---

Far too much and actually have very little to really SAY. But anyway.

---that when us poor and underdogs state anything against our leaders as George Walker Bush, we are dismissed and labeled as problem people.

You get dismissed because you come off as an under-educated, over-spoken hick that doesn't want to learn more about his politics before he starts bitching. You spread the doctrine of victimhood thick, and act like you're helpless because you're too terrified to actually do something to effect positive change in your own life. Forget thinking outside of the box for you! It's easier to sit and b***h; up to your waist in sewagedon't you dare actually DO something about your circumstances! Us poorindeed! You're tired of being poor? Do something to fix it!

Start saving nowdisconnect your Internet!

You had the gall to ask another poster a few months ago, Will YOU go to Iraq? (To which she smacked you down with a reply that she HAD, in fact, served!)

What about YOU, Jim? Would you, if you could? Or will you use the coward's defense: This is an unjust war! (Yeah, babysnug those diapers up a little closer, so we won't hear the dump.) You have all this ire and fireuntil you are faced with the simple truth; you don't have the guts to do what's right in any circumstance, let alone this one.

But still, you feel so out of the attention loop, so you hiccup another post on the ol' Rip Off Reports.

Our liberties are being ERASED and being blamed on 9/11!!!!!

Waitaminnit I thought Michael MooreGod told you that Bush planned and orchestrated 9-11. Why hasn't MooreGod told you about this nasty raghead, Osama Bin Laden? Or is it he who told you that the Bush Family is in bed with Osama?

Or was that Hussein?

My GOODNESS, the Bush Family sure has a big bed! (I picture a slumber party, with Castro and Carter having pillow fights on the veranda, while Ted Kennedy flashes both a rogue's grin and the flask of Crown Royal he snuck past the First lady.)

People wake up, The Government sacrificed thousands of people in NY to make a case for war with Iraq

---Oh, okay. There it isbut yet, in this Report and in others, you've even said that 9-11 isn't the reason the Troops are in Iraqit's so George Bush can fatten his wallet with all the oil that's over there!

Yet you have never proven any case of your many flip-flops. Where's all the oil we got out of Iraq? Where's the proof of GWB orchestrating 9-11---You put that worn-out copy of F-911 on VHS (Or is it Beta?!) down! Real proof, Jimbo---not edited spin.


and all theses new policies restricting our rights!

Policies that are in place since the horrible attack on the WTC on 9-11-01. Bush had been in office what---eight months? What was he supposed to do, pull a Clinton and ignore it?

We see how well that worked for Clinton, didn't we?

President Nixon got impeeched for illegal wiretapps!

And Clinton did MUCH WORSE, and got to stay in office longer than he deserved! While he was impeached, it was a little too little, and a little too late. That's the bigger outrage!

Bush needs impeachment, as this is one of many laws he has broken.

Okay. List Them. I've only been asking you that for the better part of two months now. Your opinion is nothing, in terms of proof. Show the reading populace just what laws, specifically, warrant impeachment, James. And what laws you know of that support impeachment. Since there are so many, they should be easy to research! But be prepared, I can dig up even more on the Clintons----hell, I have already supplied plenty!

Hehh, I'll bet you'll offer nothing more than the usual string of insults, and offer no answers. Maybe you'll luck out and someone will jump in and do it for youbut I want to see YOUR researchnot someone else's. This makes it what? The fifth time I've asked you to put up or shut up?

Thing is, you never want to do either.

I ask people, WHY HAVEN'T IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS BEEN ENACTED!

And I keep wondering, Why hasn't anyone taken away his internet connection? or How long will it be before all Internet Service Providers refuse to give service to this guy?

Ah, wellI've said it beforeat least, if he's on the Internet, he ain't breeding. I take my blessings where I find em, and I'm happy to know that even the cracked-out, desperate, teenaged whores who'll have sex with a guy they know is married, carrying a disease or even possibly a relative, wouldn't sleep with James.

Hehehehhh....women. Such fickle creatures.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#798 Consumer Comment

Wrong as always James

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, February 06, 2006

Impeachment proceedings were started against Nixon for covering up the actions of his subordinates. He resigned before anything came of it.

GW hasn't been impeached for a very simple reason...he hasn't committed any crimes.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#797 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush and the USA Government is too POWERFUL!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, February 05, 2006

There are far more Americans that are poor than rich in America! The world sees Americans as rich and wish to join us, until they see this is a ploy as most Americans are poor. I also state that when us poor and underdogs state anything against our leaders as George Walker Bush, we are dismissed and labeled as problem people. Our liberties are being ERASED and being blamed on 9/11!!!!! People wake up, The Government sacrificed thousands of people in NY to make a case for war with Iraq, and all theses new policies restricting our rights! President Nixon got impeeched for illegal wiretapps! Bush needs impeachment, as this is one of many laws he has broken. I ask people, WHY HAVEN'T IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS BEEN ENACTED!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#796 Consumer Comment

I found another great quote

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 02, 2006

In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

I think this one should settle it. The man who authored the US Constitution couldn't find the authority anywhere in it to spend tax money on anything not clearly spelled out.

Paying money to someone, just because it's "nice", is NOT allowed by the CConstitution. The mere fact that the guy who wrote it said so, is ALL the proof I need.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#795 Consumer Comment

The Court should be politically neutral?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 02, 2006

That is a nice sentiment, but an unrealistic one. I do agree with the premise however.

If the 9 Justices actually decided each case based on the Constitutionality of it, it would be neutral. Where in the Constitution does it allow the Federal Government to take care of anyone financially? What about healthcare? How is that the Government's responsibility?

"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the "Articles of Confederation," and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted."

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."

"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions."

Do any of these quotes make sense to you? Probably not, if you went to a Government school during the last 30 years. They are all from the man who wrote the US Constitution...James Madison. Thomas Jefferson will be next.

I wish I had a time machine.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#794 Consumer Comment

SCOTUS does not have line item approval

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, February 02, 2006

Robert,

Sorry if I misinterpreted your comments, but you seemed to take the position that judges have line item approval over the budget, an absurd and unconstitutional idea. Certainly, if someone brought suit, they could decide the issue, but the evidence would have to be overwhelming that a particular expenditure did not rise to the level of providing for the general welfare.

Your advocacy of "stacking the bench" with judges who agree with your definition of "strict interpretation" is no different from your opponents. The Supreme Court, above all other courts, should remain politically neutral. I expect them to be primarily good jurists, which includes taking an extremely conservative position toward making new law or changing existing law. I would include any attempt to thwart the legislative intent of Congress and the President, on purely ideological grounds, in the definition of "legislating from the bench."

On Roe v Wade, you are flogging a dead horse. The Court has already found that Court's "right to privacy" construction invalid, but upheld the general conclusion on other, more obvious grounds. I simply cannot agree with your position that this should be a state issue, any more than I could agree that slavery should be a state issue.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#793 Consumer Comment

Try again B, this time in English

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Where did I advocate Judges legislating from the bench? For the Supreme Court to "strictly interpret" the Constitution, is to follow the rule of law. Legislating from the bench is how we got all the nitwittery that passes for law today.

Let's use AFDC, or "welfare". Promoting the general welfare does not mean, handing a lazy f****s a check every month because she doesn't know how to keep her legs closed. It means providing security to all within the borders, and keeping the bad guys out. It also doesn't mean handing out tax breaks or tax money to businesses. Corporate welfare is just as bad as regular welfare.

Roe v Wade was just bad law altogether. This was a state issue, not a federal one. There is no "right to privacy" accorded by the US Constitution. In fact, the word "privacy", like volunteer, and democracy, are nowhere to be found in it. Legislating from the bench gave us that infamous decision. State Judges do it all the time. In MA, a Judge actually told the State Legislature they HAD TO pass a law making homosexual marriage legal. THAT is legislating from the bench. For those who live and breathe for abortion "rights", why are you afraid to let the voters of this country decide the issue? This is a State issue, and should be decided at a State level.

Reading the US Constitution and nullifying the crap that passes through the House and Senate is NOT legislating. It's called doing what the US Constitution requires the US Supreme Court to do.
The Supreme Court, under John Marshall, defined itself with its historic 1803 decision in the case of Marbury v. Madison. In this single landmark case, the Supreme Court established its power to interpret the U.S. Constitution and to determine the constitutionality of laws passed by congress and the state legislatures. Pretty simple isn't it?

So, try again "B". If you can show how actually requiring the US Constitution be followed is "legislating from the bench", show me. Good luck.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#792 Consumer Comment

The taxing behavior of the US Congress.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Ok, Robert, I'll play. The relevant portion of the Constitution seems to be the first line from Article I, Section 8, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

I would have to say a strict interpretation of the Constitution allows any sort of idiocy the Congress considers to provide for the general welfare of the US.

On the other hand, I find nothing in the Constitution that allows for any branch of the government to dilute or waive the protections of the 4th Amendment against warrantless searches, under any circumstance, including a condition of war. Also, no extralegal powers are granted to the President acting as Commander in Chief, rather, "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed..."

You are advocating not only that activist judges "legislate from the bench," but also that they unconstitutionally interfere with the budgetary authority of the Congress and the President. It would seem your goal is not so much a strict interpretation of the Constitution, as a strict enforcement of a rational implementation of the Constitution, according to the rationale of Robert. Robert's Rules? Or maybe just Robert Rules?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#791 Consumer Comment

Here's a novel idea "B" - How about having the US Constitution strictly followed. There's a whacky thought!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 28, 2006

Get rid of ALL expenditures that are not allowed by a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Just think of the money we'd all save. Remember, we fought a Revolution over a 1% tax on tea. It would have taken a family of 4, 20 years to pay even 1 Pound to the King. I'd take those rates today. For the record, at no time during the Revlutionary War did a majority of Colonists support the effort.

Taxes are legal. Spending those taxes to study the mating ritual of the Northeastern Sand Salmon, or a study of whether poison is bad for you are NOT. If anyone can tell me which part of the Constitution does allow this sort of idiocy, please feel free to instruct me.

With any luck, a couple more of the Lefties on the US Supreme Court will die or retire, and another good appointment or two, will be made. I can only hope that Roberts and Alito stay the course and start getting rid of bad law, and stopping future abuses of power...by either side of the aisle.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#790 Consumer Comment

Answer to "unusual paragraph"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 28, 2006

It may not be "on topic", but I thought all could use a break from battle! So, what makes the previously posted paragraph unusual?

- The most frequently used letter of the alphabet - the letter "e" - is not used at all throught the entire paragraph.

God Bless America,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#789 Consumer Comment

I don't know how anyone could lie about the Clintons

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 26, 2006

But you're doing an excellent job of keeping the ball rolling.

Sorry, Robert, your argument isn't logically consistent with reality. First, unless you're secretly working for the NSA, or a member of President George's inner circle, you don't KNOW who is being surveilled or who sees that information. There is plenty of anecdotal information that their fishing expedition is not limited to international calls. And if they are, why circumvent the law and risk having the courts throw out any prosecutions due to lack of probable cause? Finally, your numbers don't add up. If the NSA has been surveilling 500 citizens daily in this program, even allowing an average of 3 months per surveillance, which seems on the high side, that would mean there were over 8000 numbers on that laptop. Or that they're surveilling everybody and his mechanic... and barber... broker? relatives? friends? And since they're focusing on individuals, they probably monitor their email and possibly other internet communication as well. Of course, ANY reasonable person would expect that they just ignore the content of all domestic bound communication, and ONLY look at the international stuff.

And, btw, at the time of the Brooklyn Bridge incident, they said they picked it up from routine monitoring of foreign communication, now suddenly its a product of Bush's special project. Is that official, or just more neocon spin? And which lie are we to believe? Last year, Bush told us that they executed a warrant for EVERY wiretap. Obviously we shouldn't believe that lie. Now, apparently he says he briefed Congress daily and they authorized the NSA wiretap program. Well, I guess these aren't out-and-out lies; Congress does receive a daily intelligence brief, and (according to the Boy George theory of Constitutional Law) in authorizing him to use military force against al Quaida, Congress was also authorizing him to break any law and ignore any passage in the Constitution that gets in the way of his self-proclaimed war on terror.

Don't get me wrong. I am a reasonable person. I do expect our government to follow up on any information of a foreign threat to our country. But I expect them to do so in a reasonable manner, one that protects rather than threatens our Constitution. I hold, in the abstract, that to do otherwise potentially threatens our way of life far more than any specific act of terrorism. I expect them to operate within the minimal framework of oversight that Congress has legislated, not off in secret like the thugs and goons they purport to be protecting us from. I expect that if I am inadvertantly caught up in their net, once they realize I am not a fish, they will release me and destroy any surveillance product related to me. Yet how can I trust the workings of an intelligence agency that redacts the names of Americans from its foreign intel reports, but then routinely provides them to anyone who requests them? How do I trust a govenment that admits it is spying on peaceful demonstrators? How do I trust a President who waves a little flag in one hand and talks about protecting our Constitutional rights, while his other hand is doing everything possible to weaken them? Why should I expect him to respect the 4th amendment rights of his political opponents when he has repeatedly demonstrated the contempt he has for their 1st amendment rights?

Yes, you are probably right about the Clintons and all the LiberNazis who voted for them. They are the scum of the earth, offering nothing and doing nothing to improve our society, hellbent on destroying our Constitution. The millions spent on examining and cross-examining every person they ever knew, on reading and investigating every piece of paper related to their affairs, was millions well spent even if we could never find any evidence against them. We all know they were guilty as hell anyway. And who could doubt the reports of the many evils from their past, as truly and faithfully investigated by their political opponents? Or the more recent reports from truly sincere people who have tried so hard to give them the benefit of the doubt? And Hillary, my god what a shrew, almost as bad as that dragon b***h that married John Lennon. Alas, it is truly a shame the Republicans have done no better. They could have at least tried for a President who could speak the English Language. Ah, for the good old days of McCarthy... when you only had to worry if you were helping the enemy - defined as anyone McCarthy perceived as standing between him and the conclusion of his mission to expose the evils of communism.

And I know what you mean about the Constitution, there were a whole lot of things I couldn't find in there, like Oil Subsidy, Enron, Watergate, Executive Privilege, Moon Rocket, Microwave Oven, Nuclear Warfare... The list does just go on and on. Maybe we should just scrap it and write one that takes the last 200 years of history into account. LOL! Why is it I get the feeling that people like you would love to have any laws struck down, under whatever theory, that don't strictly support your view of things. Cryin' shame there's so many other people living here.

Hey, I love the idea of crafts and canoeing, darts, horseshoes and hand grenades, whatever! But, umm.... I'm not sure its that kind of camp. Whatever! By the gods, we'll make it fun! And shoot me over one o' them pudding 'pops', chocolate if you got one.

Vera, nice to 'see' you too! I'd write more, but its past time to jump in the shower. TTFN

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#788 Consumer Comment

just for fun

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 26, 2006

No hours for joy tonight just a quick post for fun - will post solution in 24 hours.

How quickly can you find out what is unusual about this paragraph? It looks so ordinary that you would think that nothing was wrong with it at all and, in fact, nothing is. But it is unusual. Why? If you study it and think about it you may find out, but I am not going to assist you in any way. You must do it without coaching. No doubt, if you work at it for long, it will dawn on you. Who knows? Go to work and try your skill. Par is about half an hour.

How is your IQ?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#787 Consumer Comment

Shawn, your news about "Spygate" is completely bogus.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Shawn,

Thank you for the welcome. From the sparkle in your mom's eye, you've developed into quite a gem. If I decide to base a character on you in my next spy novel, do you think I should refer to him as 'Gemini', reflecting your multi-faceted, lustrous personality, or 'Dr. Whom', reflecting the various temporal anomalies which seem to beset you? LOL! I have no idea what point you're trying to make in your Democrat vs Democrat vs Democrat statement, but you're right, it certainly has me spinning.

As for Senator Clinton's comments, no of course she would not use the same metaphor in a midwest farming town, any more than President Bush would go into that same town and talk about the problems confronting Wall Street bankers. Her language was highly appropriate to her audience and commuciated very effectively to them what she was feeling. If she had any premeditated expectation for the effect it would have on people outside that audience, it could only have been that they would overreact, and if that was her plan, you all fell for it. And you will have to explain to me why this has anything whatever to do with the separation of church and state.

I fail to see how my comment that gays are denied equal protection in any way clouds the issue of civil rights. It is a fact of modern life, and one of its bitter ironies. Gays are a large enough and important enough group, that we have massive national debate, state ballot issues, and proposed Constitutional amendments over whether or not we should extend to them and their families the same recognition and benefits we extend to all other families without question, but they are not significant enough to be recognized as a protected class. Which means that in most states, you can be fired from your job just because you are gay, you can be harassed on the job because you are gay, you can be denied benefits extended to every other employee because you are gay, and you can be locked out of participation in public and private functions and facilities because you are gay. Once again I will issue my standard challenge. Can anyone explain to me why someone would 'choose' to be gay?

Contrary to your assertion, Bush's so-called "illegal" spy program has in fact not undergone judicial review. Neither the FISC nor the FISC review court has ever issued an opinion that warantless searches are completely legal, and if they had, it would be mostly irrelevant, as it refers to an area beyond their jurisdiction. And they would obviously never hear a case that bypassed the FISC entirely. The case being (mis)represented by OpinionJournal, and apparently thousands of other 'news' websites, deals with the constitutionality of the government using the FISC, under the Patriot Act, to obtain secret warrants for primarily criminal investigations. Their discussion of Truong (contrary to your source, this was not a FISC case) recognizes that before FISA the courts historically held that the President had authority to conduct warrantless searches, and that FISA does not, could not, encroach upon his Constitutional powers. While it does not support the reading you desire, it was nonetheless a landmark case that allows the FBI to secretly invade your home and refer anything illegal or potentially illegal that it finds to your local police for further investigation and prosecution. I'm surprised you weren't aware of it at the time. Oh, that's right, you neocons like the idea that the government can invade your homes without probable cause, and then withold any helpful information from you and your attorney, under cloak of secrecy, while they prosecute you. And, what the hell, if you're one of the little fish that accidentally got caught in the big net, its all for a good cause - national security. Below is the completed transcript of the relevant portion of the review court's decision.

It will be recalled that the case that set forth the primary purpose test as constitutionally
required was Truong. The Fourth Circuit thought that Keith's balancing standard implied the adoption of the primary purpose test. We reiterate that Truong dealt with a pre-FISA
surveillance based on the President's constitutional responsibility to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States. 629 F.2d at 914. Although Truong suggested the line it drew was a constitutional minimum that would apply to a FISA surveillance, see id. at 914 n.4, it had no occasion to consider the application of the statute carefully. The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President
does have that authority, and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power. The question before us is the reverse, does FISA amplify the President's power by providing a mechanism that at least approaches a classic warrant and which therefore supports the government's contention that FISA searches are constitutionally reasonable.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#786 Consumer Comment

Well I'll "B." Darned!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Long time no see!
You were missed there for a while. Without hesitation, it's a good thing to see your writ again, and I admit it.

My only qualm with you lies in the fact that you seem to think I support any underhanded surveillance; I don't think it's right, no matter whom sits at the wheel, and I believe I have stated no less in more than one Rebuttal. I feel it is no more right for G.W. Bush to do anything untoward, as it would have been for Clinton.

And it's already been made abundantly clear, what a psychopathic narcissist I view Clinton (And Ted Kennedy, and Hitlery, and John Kerry, Mike Moore....etc. etc. etc.) to be. It wasn't fair for Clinton to invoke Special Commander In Chief Privilege---Executive Privilege, either.

I'm a very private person. While I have nothing to hide, I wouldn't want the most intimate aspects of my life to be a matter of public opinion or scrutiny. So you are in err, if you think I'm okay with the Patriot Act, or ANY modification that means I'll lose my right to have privacy, freedom, or own my own weapon.... actually, "WeaponS"...I have several. ;)

Sadly, the Law Of The Land is so voluminous in its nature that politicians of every stripe seek to take severe advantage of the ignorance of the typical American. For each of us to study the Law at extreme length would be far too daunting for most, and they know this---and take liberty with it. And hey, what they cannot defeat, they simply either filibuster, or write a New Law for. Ironically, we show antipathy towards both lawyers and criminals for these same reasons.

Freedoms we don't need include giving aid and comfort to terrorist operatives within our Country, the right to destroy a human life for the sake of convenience alone, or the right to nurse at the State Teat for indefinite periods, so long as a kid is cranked out every year and a half. Just to name a few, that is.

All that aside, I'm glad you're back. You make me think a lot. :)
I welcome itand you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#785 Consumer Comment

I didn't know anyone could lie about the Clintons

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Considering neither of them could tell the truth, how does one actually lie about them?

I saw a snippet on TV this morning. Bush was at a press conference. Someone asked a question about the wiretaps being illegal, and Congress investigating them. Bush simply replied something to the tune of "Investigate what? Congress was briefed daily and gave authorization before the NSA did anything".

This will be yet one more missed shot on the part of the left to bring down this President. It truly is a shame the left didn't have so much concern for the Constitution during the 90's.

Back to the wiretaps. They were done ONLY on international calls, and ONLY on calls between KNOWN terrorists and people in the US. Personally, I do not give a rat's a*s if some scumbag in the US is mad because his call from Osama was intercepted. It was one of these calls that prevented a cell from blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge. The Government has these phone numbers by sheer luck. They were on the laptop that Al-Zarqawi left behind while running for his life. I'm sure the James Gang thinks these numbers are for Pizza delivery, since they also thought the artillery shells were for pudding delivery.

Here's a question for you. What would your complaint be if the Government didn't do the wiretaps, and thousands more were killed? Would you then be decrying their failure to act when they had the phone numbers available to intercept? Of course you would. You are a reasonable person.

Lincoln did far worse during the Civil War. People disappeared for no other reason than they claimed no sides in the conflict. FDR was no jewel during WW2. Wilson did what had to be done during WW1. ALL war time Presidents do it to some degree.

The only reason the left is going nuts over everything Bush says, does, or may do in some unkown future, is because they lost power. They are the minority party in both Federal houses, minority of State Governorships and State houses, and no longer can do any further damage to the US Constitution through the Supreme Court. The last one is what really sends the left into a hissy. With Alito, the Court will stand 5-4, Constitutionalist-Activist. I only hope a few more retire in the next couple years. People like me would love to have laws struck down as un-Constitutional by a Court who can read the English Language.

Words have meanings, and "promote the general welfare" does not mean stealing my money to give to some lazy slob who just wants to sit on her a*s, when she's not on her back. Drug Plan? I can't find that in my copy of the Constitution either...along with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Corporate handouts, and on and on.

Nope, nobody has to lie when they talk about the Clinton era. At least during McCarthy's day, you only had to worry if you were helping the enemy. During Clinton's reign, you had to worry if he was trying to duck another self imposed scandal. So far, more than a dozen of his people have been convicted and jailed, and a dozen more turned evidence to avoid jail. What's the count on Bush and his buddies so far? That's right...ZERO!

I am glad to see you're back "B". At least you can offer up an opposing viewpoint without the vindictiveness of the others on your side. And about going to Camp? I never went as a kid. Can we do crafts and go canoeing?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#784 Consumer Comment

Just curious, Robert, not yellow?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 23, 2006

In 1978, in response to previous abuses of Presidential authority, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The Act provides a framework for the conduct of foreign intelligence surveillance within the US, that meets the requirements of the 4th amendment. It further provides that it will be the exclusive method for conducting such surveillance, creating the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to review and approve warrants, and an appellate court. The latitude granted the Court to approve these warrants is extremely broad, and the Patriot Act has made it broader still. In addition, in quick response situations, surveillance may be initiated, and a warrant presented to the Court within 3 days. For 21 years before President George, 4 admininstrations (including BJ Clinton's) functioned within this legal framework. During that time, the FISC approved over 13,000 warrants, rejecting none and modifying only 2. Since 2001, the court has processed around 1700 warrants, rejecting half a dozen and finding it necessary to modify about 180. Maybe shrub lawyers are just too dumb to figure out how to construct a warrant properly?

Now we find out that President George has routinely bypassed the FISC since 2002, and directed the NSA to surveil roughly 500 citizens a day, no mention of exactly how many thousands that has added up to over the course of 4 years. Why? Because the FISA process was "too cumbersome." So rather than going to Congress, which has proven to be more than willing to make changes, and saying this doesn't work, we need to change it, he decides to operate outside the law. Until he gets caught. Then the AG sends Congress a truly tortured legal opinion that, as near as I can make out, says that because Congress authorized the Prez to use military force in Afghanistan, and because the wording in the FISA refers to Title III statutes, but doesn't specify exactly which ones, he can decide to ignore the law's exclusive method clause. Furthermore, although he can ignore it, the fact that it is there prevents reference to the Title III statutes that clarify the FISA wording, because its exclusive loophole trumps the ability of the other statutes to explain it away. And anyway, it concludes, echoing the same empty rhetoric the Prez always uses when he's breaking the law, he is the Commander-In-Chief, which gives him broad and unspecified powers and abilities beyond those of mortal men.

So here we have a President who holds himself above the law, who routinely runs roughshod over the Constitution, distorts the truth, operates in secret, ignores oversight and legislation from Congress, and tells the courts they have no jurisdiction over him. But yeah, rather than focus on that, lets go through that litany of neocon lies and distortions about the last President one more time. I suppose we should be thankful George wasn't President during the Cuban Missile Crisis. With his preemptive strike mentality, I doubt we'd have made it through the Cold War with much of the earth intact. See you in the camps, my friend, if you're still alive by the time I get there. I'm sure Atheists will be one of the first groups on the list, since we all know 99.9% of them are worthless liberals.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#783 Consumer Comment

He's 'B'a-aack! LOL

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 23, 2006

B',
Let me begin by welcoming you back! Your insightful and educated opinions have been greatly missed, and I have especially found the banter with the other Democrat Representatives(I use that term in the loosest sense) on this thread to be sorely missing both the literary eloquence and the intellectual challenge that I have enjoyed from your posts. I do agree that this thread has become too redundant in its content and I am hoping that your re-introduction of an intelligent speaker from the left can and will return our discussions to resemble some level of maturity and honorable decorum. Of course, the sarcasm, insults, and constant fulmination is not likely to be discontinued by either side . . . I (and I speak only for myself) neither take any offense, nor intend any by the contumelious nature of these posts. I have learnt that such politically charged debates are mostly disputatious in manner regardless of intent, and therefore any apparent offenses should be taken with a grain of salt, and understood as being used for the purpose of adding colorful banter to what would otherwise be little more than a replication of our elected pundits daily rhetoric! Now where would the challenge or enjoyment be in that?

I assure you that I had no intentions of insulting those who lived through and experienced the battles which were unfortunately necessary to impel the government to recognize the constitution as a guarantee of various rights and freedoms which was, and is intended to be an equal protection for all of America's people, regardless of color, sex, and religion (or lack thereof.) How you turned Hillary's attempted allusion (plantation statement) towards the long time Democrat's incessant touting that bigotry and discrimination are inherent attributes found to be an integral basis of a Republicans belief system. Further, they put on a scene that a Democrat is above such vile attitudes, even going so far as to ignore the fact that some of their highest ranking members were solidly ingrained in the violent, murderous K.K.K.! Hell, Senator Byrd has been recorded using racially offensive language ( the N word) as recently as 2001. Of course a prepared statement of apology, a couple of (less than) 30 second blurbs on any news reports (except Fox) and a quick sweep under the carpet, and the good Senator Byrd is no more a racist than Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, or Hillary Clinton! But, I digress . . .how you turned Hillary Clinton's plantation statement to the topics of disparaging statements in reference to the poor in New Orleans and your unsubstantiated claims that the gays are somehow being denied a constitutional right, is a topnotch example of how many liberals try to cloud the issues by tossing in topics which are correlated at no more than a base level at best! I do, however agree with you that neither party has a lock on civil rights, and both have their own bigots, and bigotted attitudes from leadership, through rank and file.

Regarding my closing admonitions, and your mistaken summary of such: Although I appreciate your taking notice that my political beliefs are in line with the concept of a free republic, I must correct you on . . . well, everything else! The purpose of my post was to develop a new topic of discussion, and, at the time of composition, your opinionated drivel had not yet posted so I could not offer a response (living in reality has the unfortunate restraints of the whole space/time continuum thing!) Aside from that non-option, I was faced with either continuing on in the same banal manner which even you have referred to as rehashing the same tired diatribe, or post on a topic which wouldn't be twisted into yet another attack by Ben, Jeff, or one of the James', claiming that some comment or another proves Vera or myself to be a religious zealot, homo-phoebe, or bigot! I thought it wise to save the time of having to wait for the inevitable post filled with the diversionary tactics I described, by pre-stating my objection to such! Of course, I could have posted on a topic which would serve the purpose of denigrating our present Commander in Chief and further weakening the already fragile electoral system, but, that's more in line with what the Democrats apparently pride themselves on!

Nice try painting all those right of wacky-ville with the same, broad strokes of conjecture, but Robert, Vera and myself have all stated numerous times throughout this thread that we do not always agree with the Presidents actions and/or policies, foreign or domestic - hell, we don't even agree with all of each others policies, but we do all most certainly agree that Ben's unwavering commitment to the denial of reality is truly one of the most exemplary displays of absurdity that any have seen for quite some time. But now you, B' are getting close! Could you possibly be suggesting that had she been speaking at a small town in the Mid-west, surrounded by farmers and blue collar workers, she would have used the same racial metaphor, followed with her little if you know what I mean squeaking out one side of her mouth while she nodded her head in agreement with . . . herself! That, sir, is truly laughable! She had every breath, every word, and every action planned out before she ever set one foot in that church - and the fact that it was an all black congregation which she was preaching to was no coincidence! BTW, what happened to that separation of church and state? Or does that only work one way?

Sorry if my characterization of the Democrats that filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1954 as Democrats confused anyone, I should have, in fact, characterized them as Democrats, not Democrats as I did previously. My Lord, and you talk about me spinning! Oh, and I'm certain you're aware B', and I'm probably falling into some trap, but I did miss it' at the time. You see, it doesn't matter how much news coverage it had, as I wasn't even a sparkle in my mothers eye at the time - apparently another case of space/time continuum restraints!

Almost done! lol Just a little news I discovered, once again shattering the king George theory that everything Bush does is in some action without seeking counsel or permissions from appropriate authorities -- -- -- >Contrary to claims by Democrats currently hyperventilating on Capitol Hill over President Bush's decision to use the National Security Agency to monitor communications among terrorists, Bush's so-called "illegal" spy program has indeed undergone judicial review.
And a special foreign intelligence surveillance appeals court set up to review the case confirmed that such "warrant less searches" were completely legal.
Notes OpinionJournal.com today:
"The allegation of Presidential law-breaking rests solely on the fact that Mr. Bush authorized wiretaps without first getting the approval of the court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978."
But the Journal notes that in a 2002 case dubbed: "In Re: Sealed Case," the FISA appeals court decision cited a previous FISA case [U.S. v. Truong], where a federal court "held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrant less searches to obtain foreign intelligence information."
The court's decision went on to say: "We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."
What's more, notes the Journal: "The two district court judges who have presided over the FISA court since 9/11 also knew about" the Bush surveillance program.

This information was out in December already, but the Dems kept touting their lies, creating a mountain out of a molehill!

So here is my opinion, based on as much information as I could get my hands on over the course of one day, and taking what I believe to be true, as the other malarkey sounds too much like some conspiracy theorist's lunch hour chatters. : You may have to decide one day soon whether to pick up your gun and defend America, or wonder just how in the hell the Democrats managed to remove yet another constitutional right - the second amendment. Yes, one day soon, unless American's come to their senses and tell our leaders that we will not send our men and women to die for such frivolous reasons as Life, Liberty, and the protection of our rights and freedoms as laid out in both the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights! I may not agree with every move the President makes, but I'd feel a hell of a lot more secure living in a nation ruled by King George, than what I would should Lady Hitlery be elected into office. At least I would still have the right to own a gun - this amendment alone helps to ensure all the others are not taken from me! Beware, if Hitlery's New World Order platform gives her enough seats necessary, we won't have our guns to defeat or defend from our enemies - we won't have any borders to defend, and NATO will be our new governing body - with Hillary at the Helm!

Shawn P. Irwin

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#782 Consumer Comment

The Civil Rights Act of 1964

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 22, 2006

Shawn,

Your attempt (or anyone else's) to cast the Democratic Party as racial oppressors is short-sighted and disgusting. It does a severe disservice to the millions of Americans, Democrats and Republicans, men and women, blacks and whites and all shades in between, who side-by-side fought an unresponsive government to obtain something the Constitution, in theory, already guaranteed, equal recognition and treatment for all Americans, regardless of such artificial distinctions as parentage, sex, or religion. Statements disparaging the poor in New Orleans and seeking to deny equal protection to gays only prove we have yet a long journey to the realization of that goal. Neither party has a lock on civil rights, and neither is free of bigotry, in either the leadership or the rank and file.

Your closing admonitions ". . .not just more of the usual diversionary rhetoric and self righteous drivel." and ". . .but just pointing elsewhere and playing the look, over there . . . game. . ." are truly laughable, considering your entire post is a textbook example of exactly those intellectually dishonest tactics. How very... freepish of you! You neocons crack me up. You'll jump through hoops and bend over backward to defend anything President George says, castigating anyone who says different, who dares to question his almighty word, and then turn around and spin all manner of fairy tale about the use of one word, taken completely out of context from a speech made by Senator Clinton. If you can bother yourself to actually read a transcript, rather than just picking up the spin from whatever 'fair and balanced' neocon 'news' source you're relying on today, you will see she makes no reference to Republicans being racist. Her point was clearly that she feels this administration has the same contempt for all Americans, black or white, including members of Congress and judges, that plantation owners had for their 'niggers', back in the day.

And so, you see, the only historical innacuracies are yours. I will not even bother to attack your statement that the Democrats "have actually attempted to keep African-Americans down," etc. That's the kind of tinfoil statement I'd expect from Tupper Lake, though not so eloquently phrased, I'm sure. Your mischaracterization that President Johnson could not get the Democratic majority to back the Civil Rights Act of 1954 is patently absurd. A vast majority of Congress, both House and Senate, both Democrat and Republican supported the legislation. The problem was that a handful of Dixiecrats filibustered it in the Senate, and they were half a dozen votes shy of the 2/3 majority needed to force cloture and end the filibuster. It was all over the news at the time, I'm surprised you missed it. Eventually, through the efforts of the Republican minority leader and the massive outpouring of public response, the additional Republican Senators needed were persuaded to change their vote on cloture, and voting on the legislation was allowed to proceed. While it is true that Republicans have voted in support of civil rights legislation more often than Democrats (its something like 96% and 83% respectively), without knowing the particulars of each instance, that statistic is about as useful as saying John Kerry voted against defense 30 some times, or 99% of all heroin addicts drank milk as children. The best we can say is that, on average, neither party has voted a predominately anti-Negro position.

Your report on Senator Clinton's defense request is a pathetic attempt to discredit her, at best. You and your fellow researcher, Ken Taylor, document 4 cases, representing 17 of the purported 123 million, in which the companies supposedly made contributions to Democratic campaigns. Did these companies also contribute to Republican causes? Did any of the other companies not contribute to Democratic causes? How do you know the DOD has not requested these things? Are you privvy to all their purchase requests? And I must say, you have a lot of nerve comparing the allegations that the Bush administration has illegally awarded multi-billion dollar no-compete contracts with the actions of a Senator asking the Pentagon to consider spending some chump change in her state. That's the way things work in Washington - you scratch my back & I'll wave your flag. Don't like it? Then do something to change it. And here's a tip: Pointing your finger at either party and saying they're evil is not going to change a thing. It is truly a bipartisan effort, and one they've been successfully pursuing for decades.

Here's my opinion, based on no research, just a gut level reaction to current events. If we continue along our current path, you may have to decide one day soon whether to pick up your gun and defend America, or remain a party loyalist. And I mean all of America, the homeless, the queers, the whores, even the lawyers and tax collectors. Same decision the people in n**i Germany had to make. Will you aim your gun at the true enemy, or will you aim it at whatever group of Americans your party tells you is evil, be it Jews, gays, Muslims, Democrats, whatever? Time to grow up. Heil Hitlery or bow to King George, or risk your life and your family's lives to take a stand? Even if it does not come to this, you owe yourself an honest answer to these questions. Which side will you be on?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#781 Consumer Comment

Just curious "B"...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 21, 2006

Since you think Bush did something illegal by intercepting international calls between KNOWN Al Quaida links, and people in the US, did you also hold Bill Clinton to the same standard?

He did the exact same thing, for 8 years. He wiretapped international calls from KNOWN terror organizations to America.

He also had the IRS go through his enemies(Republicans and Democrats alike) tax returns. That is illegal.

He had FBI files stolen from their lockers...Sandy Berger anyone?

He used unprecedented overkill at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

He bombed Iraq to get the media away from Monica. He managed to eliminate our entire stockpile of cruise missiles doing this. At $575K each, that got very expensive, very fast. For the record, he hit nothing of importance.

He was offered Bin Laden on a silver platter by The Sudan, but turned down the offer claiming, "we don't have anything to hold him on". Ummm. how about the 93 World Trade Center bombing, the USS Cole bombing, all the Embassies that were bombed, etc.

He committed US Combat troops to a 3 month UNAUTHORIZED bombing campaign in Bosnia. That's right. The Senate and House refused to authorize any military action there. Bill Clinton used his authority as President to do it. We still have troops there. At least Bush has the ability to say he was AUTHORIZED to send troops in harm's way.

I could go on about this clown, but why bother? He is out of office, and Bush will be too, in 3 years. Then, we'll get to berate the next Groomed Idiot that we elect.

Ya gotta love this place!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#780 Consumer Comment

Hillary exposed!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 21, 2006

Not that I dare to view the thorough thrashing that was recently handed our political opponents as a victory, but I feel the need to comment on the sudden disappearance of the seemingly ineducable left wing wannabe pundits, who previously posted their non-thought-provoking spintastic pablum on a daily basis or more. Could it be that they are in hiding? Perhaps they are gathering in their secret tunnels, conversing and devising their next big lie. Should we be on guard, ever ready to defend against what is certain to be a strategically placed bombshell of circumstantially plausible, yet bitterly false information? Or is it that they are just lazing about in their double-wides, awaiting their mid-month government hand-outs so they can purchase their next pint of Democrat Intellect? Either way, I find that in light of the silence demonstrated by our previously un-mutable opponents, I have opportunity to express a mixture of educated and fact based opinion, along with a few undeniable facts which point to both the true hypocrisy in the Democratic party, and the obvious hate-mongering attempts of one of their frontmen - Hildabeast Clinton!

I found most of this information in various (liberal mostly)newspaper articles from across the nation. Of course, none of the articles revealed all of this information together, but rather they used a snippet here or there to show their Lady Hillary as being the wonderful supporter of our military that she is. (
In a blatant attempt to reward their campaign contributors the Hildabeast and her New York partner in swine, Chucky Schumer are asking the Pentagon for 123 MILLION dollars in defense spending in New York. The joke of it all - it is for a list of projects that the Defense Department DID NOT EVEN ASK FOR ! Here are a few examples which little ol' me has discovered:

- $5 million to STIDD Systems of Greenport - its president gave $2,500 to the Friends of Hillary political action committee in May, 2005. They make seats for military vessels ( there is already an estimated 2500 - 3500 unused seats of various design in storage, made by this same company - ordered during the Clinton Years.

- $2 million to Nano-Dynamics, Incorporated (Buffalo), its chairman gave $4,400 to the Friends of Hillary political action committee in 2005. Three more of the firms higher ups gave $2,000 each to Schumer's campaign.

- $8 million to the defense contracting firm D.R.S. Technologies. The firm's political action committee gave $8,000 to Friends of Schumer and $30,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (which Schumer chairs). They also gave Her Hilliaryness' political action committee $2,000

- $2 million to Plug Power, Incorporated, Roger Saillant(president/CEO) gave $2,000 to the Friends of Hillary committee plus $3,000 to the Friends of Schumer committee ( over a four year period)

From what I can see, and most experts (but then, what constitutes being an expert?) agree that the spending requests are frivolous and unwanted by the Pentagon - but I highly doubt that it will stop the Hildabeast and Chucky! It's a shame that in a time of war, with Democrats bitching about the high costs of defense spending (which they approved before they started with their moaning) these defense bills cannot find passage without pork attached. OINK, OINK, Hillary - OINK, OINK! ROTFLMAO

Next on my Hitlery expos'e, I would like to bring attention to her recent attempt to portray the Republican party, and its members as some group of racist pigs, intent on keeping the black man down! To accuse the Republicans of being racists and bigots, as is implied by her , "plantation, " statement in her Martin Luther King speech, is as far from the historical truth as one can be. It was a Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, who issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which (though flawed in some of its exclusions) gave Lincoln the ability to pave the way for the 13th amendment - which abolished slavery. Remember, it was the Democrats who ran on a pro-slavery platform in both of Lincoln's elections! When civil rights legislation was before Congress during the Johnson administration (early 60's), he could NOT get the Democratic majority to go along with the legislation and relied upon Republicans to get the bill passed.

Let's look at more recent history - although Bill Clinton had a few African-Americans in his administration, all were in relatively minor tokenpositions. George Bush has had TWO as Secretary of State and his father was the first to appoint an African-American as Chairman of The Joint Chiefs. The Democrats, through lies, spin, and various tidbits here and there, have actually attempted to keep African-Americans down in order to keep them as a voting block - never really offering them programs that better their condition, but just enough to keep them dependent on the government, and thus beholden to the Democrats. So as for Hitlery's attempt to accuse Republicans as being racist and bigots, she is not only historically incorrect, but it proves that she needs to look in her own backyard (let's not forget about the good senator Byrd ), namely her party' for this, "plantation, " that she makes reference to!

There you have it, hypocrisy in action! The worst part is, she has the liberals so snowed over, that she doesn't even try to hide her B.S. and thievery - the media does what they can to hide it for her, and about 50% of this country doesn't acknowledge that it's happening anyway - even when the facts are right there in their faces. I guess they're too busy looking under every rock for some clandestine conspiracy of the right wing! I can't wait to see the sheep-o-matic, dem-o-cratic, liberbots jump to the defense of their queen! Danger! Danger! Attack on the Queen! Danger! Protect the queen! Danger! (Arms flailing about wildly as they spin in random circles) Must deny, Danger, Yell, Scream, Abuse, Danger, Danger, George Bush is an a*****e, Danger, Scooter Libbyeeza Rice, Dangerrrrrrrr, rrrrrr, melt down, whoop, whoop , woooo-oo-oo-o-o - clunk!

Still waiting for answers, not just more of the usual diversionary rhetoric and self righteous drivel. Do me a favor if your going to respond - try not to answer with another question, ambiguous statements, or denunciative conjecture. If you can offer fact to the contrary of my post or any portion within, I invite you to do so, but just pointing elsewhere and playing the look, over there! That person's actions are really evil game doesn't make Hillary and Chucky any less guilty of being who they are - liars, hypocrites, plugugly- hate-mongerers, and, worst of all, left wing liberals through and through!

May God Bless America, and Rescue the Sheep from the claws of the Lie-berals,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#779 Consumer Comment

what is there to say about a president who openly proclaims himself to be above the law and beyond the confines of the Constitution?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 20, 2006

But, no, I see its just the same three people rehashing the same tired diatribe; loudly proclaiming their adulthood while they take turns bashing the guy they insist is acting like a child. I had hoped for some discussion of recent events, but all I find is a couple of remarks from Vera that she's just fine with her government trashing the Constitution and violating her rights.

Of course, what is there to say about a president who openly proclaims himself to be above the law and beyond the confines of the Constitution? I've written my Congressional Representatives, demanding a Special Prosecutor be appointed to investigate the Bush administration's illegal wiretapping, and I suggest you all let your voices be heard. If its important enough to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate a President's sexual improprieties and empanel a grand jury to find out just what his definition of is is, it had damned well better be important enough to investigate a President's open violation of the law and flagrant disregard of the rights of thousands of US citizens!

Its all fine and fun to sit here debating the finer points of politics and playing one-upmanship with the truth, but I think we've reached the point where we need to recognize the danger to our Constitution and our way of life that is posed by this administration and those that follow. Heads up, kids! Our next President may be the looniest of the lefties, and he/she will inherit all the powers (and abuses therof) that we grant the current one.

That is, if we have another election. At this point, I wouldn't put it past President George to come up with some cockamamie theory that he has the right, as Commander-In-Chief, to suspend popular elections until we have won his self-proclaimed war on terror.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#778 Consumer Comment

Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

If I were to say "Boo-h*o" do you think he'd think I'm calling him? And if he isn't reading them, he shouldn't be responding, right?

Should I jump on the whole See? We made him post! bandwagon? Nahh, it's too easy. No one can prove Ben a bigger liar and hypocrite than Ben himself. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's surprised; Robert was right on the money.

I have done two things since I've come to these posts

We know. 1.) Spin, and 2.) Lie.

But truthfully, you're leaving out all the other wonderful things, like circle-talking, double standards, baiting and trolling, etc. And then there's MY personal favorite: Getting consistently proven wrong and caught in lies, self-contradiction and of course, getting your scrawny a*s kicked up between your ears. Well, I s'pose it's better to fill a vacancy than to leave a void.

What I find really amazing is that for the last 3 months Vera managed to dodge constantly.

Show me when and where, Princess. I've posted the articles and consistently told you where to find them. It is you who is dodging the read. Just like it is you who is most weightedly responsible for having turned this thread into an argument on anything but the Subject at hand. By your own admission, for three months. Man, Mommy really did a good job in teaching her li'l boy how to be bitter.

Just like you deny reading my posts. You're so full of it, if you bought odor-eaters you'd disappear in ten steps or less. Fact is, Bennie, you got called out for the b***h you areyou tried to pick a fight, and bit off more than you were able to chew.

As far as tracking you down, you are mistaken. I've been reading the Mike Moore post long before you or the Canadian went there to defend your hero. I just never felt the need to respond. And as far as the Just Brakes thread, I never would have went and read it, had you not mentioned it in multiple other statements on another post. Who was it on some Report about Pat Benatar (which shows up when I type in Just Brakes because you are trying to drag one post into another.)?

I find some retard from Martinez asking questions like:

Are you the same "Robert" from the Just Brake websites?

The "Robert" that trolls these threads for people to bash and never pay attention to the basic subject matter of the original post?

The "Robert" that constantly touts this "Hey its common sense people...if you cant figure it out....your an idiot" sort of mentality?

The "Robert" that thinks EVERYONE else is an absolute idiot for not knowing everything about everything, yet turns around and admits, he doesnt know everything?

(And he gathers this line of thought exclusively from Robert having told the original poster: If you know you got shafted when you pay too MUCH for something, you should be sensible enough to suspect when you're being offered a price that's too low. And that's all he really said!)

How many of us see red flags go up when some kid offers us a Rolex for $20.00? It IS common sense! While it is unfortunate that these folks got taken in by a bullcrap ad, other folks echo his [Robert's] statements in agreement!

If you are this "Robert".......go suck a fat babies' p***s you A$$hole! Good lord your an egotistical shmuck!

Ben - Martinez, California
U.S.A.
(Posted on 10/17/05)

Sound familiar? What did that have to do with Pat Benatar? Seems to me, it's not Robert that's stalking youit's the other way around. Sadly, I have to state the obvious, because I know you just won't get it. Or you'll deny it.

Now all of a sudden Robbie here takes up some sort of crusade and starts this BS all over again. Gee wiz, where did all this info come from all of a sudden there gang'o'three?

Well, unlike your fictitious Pal you managed to pull out of thin air, the truth is easy to prove. And considering the kind of person you are, I can understand how you find it so difficult to fathom that someone would be bothered by not knowing the rest of the story.

I thought you said I was the one that got all riled up. s**t man! Your talking about commies in our backyard, Jesus in our bedroom, some bizarre incident from 4 years ago in my county (I notice now you finally admit it had happened in your county!)

Uhn-hunhand wasn't it you who, from a statement made out of HUMOR gets some idea that Bush is trying to turn this country into a theocracy/dictatorship! and Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.) and Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet?

Let's not neglect to recall your supposed "links of proof" that point to "reverse-engineering UFO/Alien technology" and "New World Orders".

You know, down South they call folks like you Bump Kids.

One is take on you racist rednecks on THIS Bush thread.

Cute. Now you're borrowing from other folks on other threads. Ran outta your own material, or just tired of watching your unoriginal notions and spinformation getting debunked?

Vera "tracked me down" on the other one, and brought Shawn in. Matter of fact Vera started in on the cross threading by referencing between them!

Try again, PrincessI was looking for a post that others were having intelligent discussion on, as I had grown tired of kicking you around here. I made ONE reference to another post; this Report, where you compare everyone who supports the war in Iraq with Hitler. That's it. ONE reference. After that, I quoted you, nothing more. (Never mind the fact that you had been spewing your ditto-copied hatred a week or two before I ever even responded.) Shawn came in of his own accord.

And for the record, I don't think that it was my post on 12/29/05 (titled Wow!) that brings in: Face it Robert, your still pissed because of that Just Brakes thread where you proven without a doubt that you have complete contempt for everyone....period.

Why is it okay for you to use references from other posts, and not okay for anyone else?

I know why!

Because when someone else--like me---does it, I have a plethora of examples of your own hypocrisy readly at hand to use! Even worse, I'm better at it than you are.

And if I were supposedly tracking you, why wouldn't I give you a hard time over on the Circuit City Reports or the Just Brakes or Pat Benatar Reports? Simplebecause I have more important things to do than troll for people to belittle or pick fights on subjects I know little or nothing about. So in essence, I'm not youI'm a person. :)

I'll admit, Vera posted before me on this thread. But, how could I "track her down" if I DIDNT EVEN KNOW HER UNTIL THEN!!??

s**t, Sunshineyou don't know me now.
Look up, Bennie. Your first post from this thread predates mine. See?
09/07/05Conservative Moaning 09/13/05---You didn't ask, but here's my take
Almost a full week before my first-ever post on this Report, you posted first, spelled out so you can grasp it. Nice try, though. You seem to be consistent, in that you like to try to lead the subject of so may posts to either McCarthy or religion-based attacks.

I'll assume that most people can understand dates. Of course that could be reaching with some in this crowd.
So much could be said for yourselfand right here, on this very Report, too! ROTFLMAO!

And it's fine that you don't read what I postit's more important to me that everyone else does, anyway. so my commentary can continue to go unchallenged by youafter all, it's hard to refute the truth. In order to render any comment to me, you have to take a snippet and twist or warp it into something it isn't.

So as they say

G'bye, Farewell, Auf Weidershen, Adieu. it's time---to sayGood Bye to you, Boo-h*o---Goooooodbye, goooodbyeGood.Byyyyyye! {Hitting a high note} And of course, Don' come back now, y'hear?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#777 Consumer Comment

Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

If I were to say "Boo-h*o" do you think he'd think I'm calling him? And if he isn't reading them, he shouldn't be responding, right?

Should I jump on the whole See? We made him post! bandwagon? Nahh, it's too easy. No one can prove Ben a bigger liar and hypocrite than Ben himself. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's surprised; Robert was right on the money.

I have done two things since I've come to these posts

We know. 1.) Spin, and 2.) Lie.

But truthfully, you're leaving out all the other wonderful things, like circle-talking, double standards, baiting and trolling, etc. And then there's MY personal favorite: Getting consistently proven wrong and caught in lies, self-contradiction and of course, getting your scrawny a*s kicked up between your ears. Well, I s'pose it's better to fill a vacancy than to leave a void.

What I find really amazing is that for the last 3 months Vera managed to dodge constantly.

Show me when and where, Princess. I've posted the articles and consistently told you where to find them. It is you who is dodging the read. Just like it is you who is most weightedly responsible for having turned this thread into an argument on anything but the Subject at hand. By your own admission, for three months. Man, Mommy really did a good job in teaching her li'l boy how to be bitter.

Just like you deny reading my posts. You're so full of it, if you bought odor-eaters you'd disappear in ten steps or less. Fact is, Bennie, you got called out for the b***h you areyou tried to pick a fight, and bit off more than you were able to chew.

As far as tracking you down, you are mistaken. I've been reading the Mike Moore post long before you or the Canadian went there to defend your hero. I just never felt the need to respond. And as far as the Just Brakes thread, I never would have went and read it, had you not mentioned it in multiple other statements on another post. Who was it on some Report about Pat Benatar (which shows up when I type in Just Brakes because you are trying to drag one post into another.)?

I find some retard from Martinez asking questions like:

Are you the same "Robert" from the Just Brake websites?

The "Robert" that trolls these threads for people to bash and never pay attention to the basic subject matter of the original post?

The "Robert" that constantly touts this "Hey its common sense people...if you cant figure it out....your an idiot" sort of mentality?

The "Robert" that thinks EVERYONE else is an absolute idiot for not knowing everything about everything, yet turns around and admits, he doesnt know everything?

(And he gathers this line of thought exclusively from Robert having told the original poster: If you know you got shafted when you pay too MUCH for something, you should be sensible enough to suspect when you're being offered a price that's too low. And that's all he really said!)

How many of us see red flags go up when some kid offers us a Rolex for $20.00? It IS common sense! While it is unfortunate that these folks got taken in by a bullcrap ad, other folks echo his [Robert's] statements in agreement!

If you are this "Robert".......go suck a fat babies' p***s you A$$hole! Good lord your an egotistical shmuck!

Ben - Martinez, California
U.S.A.
(Posted on 10/17/05)

Sound familiar? What did that have to do with Pat Benatar? Seems to me, it's not Robert that's stalking youit's the other way around. Sadly, I have to state the obvious, because I know you just won't get it. Or you'll deny it.

Now all of a sudden Robbie here takes up some sort of crusade and starts this BS all over again. Gee wiz, where did all this info come from all of a sudden there gang'o'three?

Well, unlike your fictitious Pal you managed to pull out of thin air, the truth is easy to prove. And considering the kind of person you are, I can understand how you find it so difficult to fathom that someone would be bothered by not knowing the rest of the story.

I thought you said I was the one that got all riled up. s**t man! Your talking about commies in our backyard, Jesus in our bedroom, some bizarre incident from 4 years ago in my county (I notice now you finally admit it had happened in your county!)

Uhn-hunhand wasn't it you who, from a statement made out of HUMOR gets some idea that Bush is trying to turn this country into a theocracy/dictatorship! and Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.) and Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet?

Let's not neglect to recall your supposed "links of proof" that point to "reverse-engineering UFO/Alien technology" and "New World Orders".

You know, down South they call folks like you Bump Kids.

One is take on you racist rednecks on THIS Bush thread.

Cute. Now you're borrowing from other folks on other threads. Ran outta your own material, or just tired of watching your unoriginal notions and spinformation getting debunked?

Vera "tracked me down" on the other one, and brought Shawn in. Matter of fact Vera started in on the cross threading by referencing between them!

Try again, PrincessI was looking for a post that others were having intelligent discussion on, as I had grown tired of kicking you around here. I made ONE reference to another post; this Report, where you compare everyone who supports the war in Iraq with Hitler. That's it. ONE reference. After that, I quoted you, nothing more. (Never mind the fact that you had been spewing your ditto-copied hatred a week or two before I ever even responded.) Shawn came in of his own accord.

And for the record, I don't think that it was my post on 12/29/05 (titled Wow!) that brings in: Face it Robert, your still pissed because of that Just Brakes thread where you proven without a doubt that you have complete contempt for everyone....period.

Why is it okay for you to use references from other posts, and not okay for anyone else?

I know why!

Because when someone else--like me---does it, I have a plethora of examples of your own hypocrisy readly at hand to use! Even worse, I'm better at it than you are.

And if I were supposedly tracking you, why wouldn't I give you a hard time over on the Circuit City Reports or the Just Brakes or Pat Benatar Reports? Simplebecause I have more important things to do than troll for people to belittle or pick fights on subjects I know little or nothing about. So in essence, I'm not youI'm a person. :)

I'll admit, Vera posted before me on this thread. But, how could I "track her down" if I DIDNT EVEN KNOW HER UNTIL THEN!!??

s**t, Sunshineyou don't know me now.
Look up, Bennie. Your first post from this thread predates mine. See?
09/07/05Conservative Moaning 09/13/05---You didn't ask, but here's my take
Almost a full week before my first-ever post on this Report, you posted first, spelled out so you can grasp it. Nice try, though. You seem to be consistent, in that you like to try to lead the subject of so may posts to either McCarthy or religion-based attacks.

I'll assume that most people can understand dates. Of course that could be reaching with some in this crowd.
So much could be said for yourselfand right here, on this very Report, too! ROTFLMAO!

And it's fine that you don't read what I postit's more important to me that everyone else does, anyway. so my commentary can continue to go unchallenged by youafter all, it's hard to refute the truth. In order to render any comment to me, you have to take a snippet and twist or warp it into something it isn't.

So as they say

G'bye, Farewell, Auf Weidershen, Adieu. it's time---to sayGood Bye to you, Boo-h*o---Goooooodbye, goooodbyeGood.Byyyyyye! {Hitting a high note} And of course, Don' come back now, y'hear?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#776 Consumer Comment

Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

If I were to say "Boo-h*o" do you think he'd think I'm calling him? And if he isn't reading them, he shouldn't be responding, right?

Should I jump on the whole See? We made him post! bandwagon? Nahh, it's too easy. No one can prove Ben a bigger liar and hypocrite than Ben himself. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's surprised; Robert was right on the money.

I have done two things since I've come to these posts

We know. 1.) Spin, and 2.) Lie.

But truthfully, you're leaving out all the other wonderful things, like circle-talking, double standards, baiting and trolling, etc. And then there's MY personal favorite: Getting consistently proven wrong and caught in lies, self-contradiction and of course, getting your scrawny a*s kicked up between your ears. Well, I s'pose it's better to fill a vacancy than to leave a void.

What I find really amazing is that for the last 3 months Vera managed to dodge constantly.

Show me when and where, Princess. I've posted the articles and consistently told you where to find them. It is you who is dodging the read. Just like it is you who is most weightedly responsible for having turned this thread into an argument on anything but the Subject at hand. By your own admission, for three months. Man, Mommy really did a good job in teaching her li'l boy how to be bitter.

Just like you deny reading my posts. You're so full of it, if you bought odor-eaters you'd disappear in ten steps or less. Fact is, Bennie, you got called out for the b***h you areyou tried to pick a fight, and bit off more than you were able to chew.

As far as tracking you down, you are mistaken. I've been reading the Mike Moore post long before you or the Canadian went there to defend your hero. I just never felt the need to respond. And as far as the Just Brakes thread, I never would have went and read it, had you not mentioned it in multiple other statements on another post. Who was it on some Report about Pat Benatar (which shows up when I type in Just Brakes because you are trying to drag one post into another.)?

I find some retard from Martinez asking questions like:

Are you the same "Robert" from the Just Brake websites?

The "Robert" that trolls these threads for people to bash and never pay attention to the basic subject matter of the original post?

The "Robert" that constantly touts this "Hey its common sense people...if you cant figure it out....your an idiot" sort of mentality?

The "Robert" that thinks EVERYONE else is an absolute idiot for not knowing everything about everything, yet turns around and admits, he doesnt know everything?

(And he gathers this line of thought exclusively from Robert having told the original poster: If you know you got shafted when you pay too MUCH for something, you should be sensible enough to suspect when you're being offered a price that's too low. And that's all he really said!)

How many of us see red flags go up when some kid offers us a Rolex for $20.00? It IS common sense! While it is unfortunate that these folks got taken in by a bullcrap ad, other folks echo his [Robert's] statements in agreement!

If you are this "Robert".......go suck a fat babies' p***s you A$$hole! Good lord your an egotistical shmuck!

Ben - Martinez, California
U.S.A.
(Posted on 10/17/05)

Sound familiar? What did that have to do with Pat Benatar? Seems to me, it's not Robert that's stalking youit's the other way around. Sadly, I have to state the obvious, because I know you just won't get it. Or you'll deny it.

Now all of a sudden Robbie here takes up some sort of crusade and starts this BS all over again. Gee wiz, where did all this info come from all of a sudden there gang'o'three?

Well, unlike your fictitious Pal you managed to pull out of thin air, the truth is easy to prove. And considering the kind of person you are, I can understand how you find it so difficult to fathom that someone would be bothered by not knowing the rest of the story.

I thought you said I was the one that got all riled up. s**t man! Your talking about commies in our backyard, Jesus in our bedroom, some bizarre incident from 4 years ago in my county (I notice now you finally admit it had happened in your county!)

Uhn-hunhand wasn't it you who, from a statement made out of HUMOR gets some idea that Bush is trying to turn this country into a theocracy/dictatorship! and Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.) and Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet?

Let's not neglect to recall your supposed "links of proof" that point to "reverse-engineering UFO/Alien technology" and "New World Orders".

You know, down South they call folks like you Bump Kids.

One is take on you racist rednecks on THIS Bush thread.

Cute. Now you're borrowing from other folks on other threads. Ran outta your own material, or just tired of watching your unoriginal notions and spinformation getting debunked?

Vera "tracked me down" on the other one, and brought Shawn in. Matter of fact Vera started in on the cross threading by referencing between them!

Try again, PrincessI was looking for a post that others were having intelligent discussion on, as I had grown tired of kicking you around here. I made ONE reference to another post; this Report, where you compare everyone who supports the war in Iraq with Hitler. That's it. ONE reference. After that, I quoted you, nothing more. (Never mind the fact that you had been spewing your ditto-copied hatred a week or two before I ever even responded.) Shawn came in of his own accord.

And for the record, I don't think that it was my post on 12/29/05 (titled Wow!) that brings in: Face it Robert, your still pissed because of that Just Brakes thread where you proven without a doubt that you have complete contempt for everyone....period.

Why is it okay for you to use references from other posts, and not okay for anyone else?

I know why!

Because when someone else--like me---does it, I have a plethora of examples of your own hypocrisy readly at hand to use! Even worse, I'm better at it than you are.

And if I were supposedly tracking you, why wouldn't I give you a hard time over on the Circuit City Reports or the Just Brakes or Pat Benatar Reports? Simplebecause I have more important things to do than troll for people to belittle or pick fights on subjects I know little or nothing about. So in essence, I'm not youI'm a person. :)

I'll admit, Vera posted before me on this thread. But, how could I "track her down" if I DIDNT EVEN KNOW HER UNTIL THEN!!??

s**t, Sunshineyou don't know me now.
Look up, Bennie. Your first post from this thread predates mine. See?
09/07/05Conservative Moaning 09/13/05---You didn't ask, but here's my take
Almost a full week before my first-ever post on this Report, you posted first, spelled out so you can grasp it. Nice try, though. You seem to be consistent, in that you like to try to lead the subject of so may posts to either McCarthy or religion-based attacks.

I'll assume that most people can understand dates. Of course that could be reaching with some in this crowd.
So much could be said for yourselfand right here, on this very Report, too! ROTFLMAO!

And it's fine that you don't read what I postit's more important to me that everyone else does, anyway. so my commentary can continue to go unchallenged by youafter all, it's hard to refute the truth. In order to render any comment to me, you have to take a snippet and twist or warp it into something it isn't.

So as they say

G'bye, Farewell, Auf Weidershen, Adieu. it's time---to sayGood Bye to you, Boo-h*o---Goooooodbye, goooodbyeGood.Byyyyyye! {Hitting a high note} And of course, Don' come back now, y'hear?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#775 Consumer Comment

Should I be crushed, that Bennie doesn't read my replies?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

If I were to say "Boo-h*o" do you think he'd think I'm calling him? And if he isn't reading them, he shouldn't be responding, right?

Should I jump on the whole See? We made him post! bandwagon? Nahh, it's too easy. No one can prove Ben a bigger liar and hypocrite than Ben himself. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's surprised; Robert was right on the money.

I have done two things since I've come to these posts

We know. 1.) Spin, and 2.) Lie.

But truthfully, you're leaving out all the other wonderful things, like circle-talking, double standards, baiting and trolling, etc. And then there's MY personal favorite: Getting consistently proven wrong and caught in lies, self-contradiction and of course, getting your scrawny a*s kicked up between your ears. Well, I s'pose it's better to fill a vacancy than to leave a void.

What I find really amazing is that for the last 3 months Vera managed to dodge constantly.

Show me when and where, Princess. I've posted the articles and consistently told you where to find them. It is you who is dodging the read. Just like it is you who is most weightedly responsible for having turned this thread into an argument on anything but the Subject at hand. By your own admission, for three months. Man, Mommy really did a good job in teaching her li'l boy how to be bitter.

Just like you deny reading my posts. You're so full of it, if you bought odor-eaters you'd disappear in ten steps or less. Fact is, Bennie, you got called out for the b***h you areyou tried to pick a fight, and bit off more than you were able to chew.

As far as tracking you down, you are mistaken. I've been reading the Mike Moore post long before you or the Canadian went there to defend your hero. I just never felt the need to respond. And as far as the Just Brakes thread, I never would have went and read it, had you not mentioned it in multiple other statements on another post. Who was it on some Report about Pat Benatar (which shows up when I type in Just Brakes because you are trying to drag one post into another.)?

I find some retard from Martinez asking questions like:

Are you the same "Robert" from the Just Brake websites?

The "Robert" that trolls these threads for people to bash and never pay attention to the basic subject matter of the original post?

The "Robert" that constantly touts this "Hey its common sense people...if you cant figure it out....your an idiot" sort of mentality?

The "Robert" that thinks EVERYONE else is an absolute idiot for not knowing everything about everything, yet turns around and admits, he doesnt know everything?

(And he gathers this line of thought exclusively from Robert having told the original poster: If you know you got shafted when you pay too MUCH for something, you should be sensible enough to suspect when you're being offered a price that's too low. And that's all he really said!)

How many of us see red flags go up when some kid offers us a Rolex for $20.00? It IS common sense! While it is unfortunate that these folks got taken in by a bullcrap ad, other folks echo his [Robert's] statements in agreement!

If you are this "Robert".......go suck a fat babies' p***s you A$$hole! Good lord your an egotistical shmuck!

Ben - Martinez, California
U.S.A.
(Posted on 10/17/05)

Sound familiar? What did that have to do with Pat Benatar? Seems to me, it's not Robert that's stalking youit's the other way around. Sadly, I have to state the obvious, because I know you just won't get it. Or you'll deny it.

Now all of a sudden Robbie here takes up some sort of crusade and starts this BS all over again. Gee wiz, where did all this info come from all of a sudden there gang'o'three?

Well, unlike your fictitious Pal you managed to pull out of thin air, the truth is easy to prove. And considering the kind of person you are, I can understand how you find it so difficult to fathom that someone would be bothered by not knowing the rest of the story.

I thought you said I was the one that got all riled up. s**t man! Your talking about commies in our backyard, Jesus in our bedroom, some bizarre incident from 4 years ago in my county (I notice now you finally admit it had happened in your county!)

Uhn-hunhand wasn't it you who, from a statement made out of HUMOR gets some idea that Bush is trying to turn this country into a theocracy/dictatorship! and Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.) and Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet?

Let's not neglect to recall your supposed "links of proof" that point to "reverse-engineering UFO/Alien technology" and "New World Orders".

You know, down South they call folks like you Bump Kids.

One is take on you racist rednecks on THIS Bush thread.

Cute. Now you're borrowing from other folks on other threads. Ran outta your own material, or just tired of watching your unoriginal notions and spinformation getting debunked?

Vera "tracked me down" on the other one, and brought Shawn in. Matter of fact Vera started in on the cross threading by referencing between them!

Try again, PrincessI was looking for a post that others were having intelligent discussion on, as I had grown tired of kicking you around here. I made ONE reference to another post; this Report, where you compare everyone who supports the war in Iraq with Hitler. That's it. ONE reference. After that, I quoted you, nothing more. (Never mind the fact that you had been spewing your ditto-copied hatred a week or two before I ever even responded.) Shawn came in of his own accord.

And for the record, I don't think that it was my post on 12/29/05 (titled Wow!) that brings in: Face it Robert, your still pissed because of that Just Brakes thread where you proven without a doubt that you have complete contempt for everyone....period.

Why is it okay for you to use references from other posts, and not okay for anyone else?

I know why!

Because when someone else--like me---does it, I have a plethora of examples of your own hypocrisy readly at hand to use! Even worse, I'm better at it than you are.

And if I were supposedly tracking you, why wouldn't I give you a hard time over on the Circuit City Reports or the Just Brakes or Pat Benatar Reports? Simplebecause I have more important things to do than troll for people to belittle or pick fights on subjects I know little or nothing about. So in essence, I'm not youI'm a person. :)

I'll admit, Vera posted before me on this thread. But, how could I "track her down" if I DIDNT EVEN KNOW HER UNTIL THEN!!??

s**t, Sunshineyou don't know me now.
Look up, Bennie. Your first post from this thread predates mine. See?
09/07/05Conservative Moaning 09/13/05---You didn't ask, but here's my take
Almost a full week before my first-ever post on this Report, you posted first, spelled out so you can grasp it. Nice try, though. You seem to be consistent, in that you like to try to lead the subject of so may posts to either McCarthy or religion-based attacks.

I'll assume that most people can understand dates. Of course that could be reaching with some in this crowd.
So much could be said for yourselfand right here, on this very Report, too! ROTFLMAO!

And it's fine that you don't read what I postit's more important to me that everyone else does, anyway. so my commentary can continue to go unchallenged by youafter all, it's hard to refute the truth. In order to render any comment to me, you have to take a snippet and twist or warp it into something it isn't.

So as they say

G'bye, Farewell, Auf Weidershen, Adieu. it's time---to sayGood Bye to you, Boo-h*o---Goooooodbye, goooodbyeGood.Byyyyyye! {Hitting a high note} And of course, Don' come back now, y'hear?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#774 Consumer Comment

School's "in"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Just so ya know, Jeff, five minutes with a dictionary would have saved you an hour with the Thesaurus, and, I did indeed "miss it at first read!" I do, however, thank you for taking the time necessary to exemplify some of the most inappropriate word usage possible. I'll give you an A' for effort, now go back to school an lurn sumthing.

To put a roof on the rest of your conjectural post is an unfortunate necessity which, honestly, I find to be a rather prodigal bore. First off, none of your inferences "stand to reason" as you have no concept of reason! You are obviously lacking the facilities required to differentiate fact from conjecture. Instead of logic, you offer a juvenile attempt at the usage of bifurcation - an illogical approach by which you attempt to draw others to believe your erroneous conclusions. In case you missed the previous primer offered to yours truly by 'B', I'll reiterate for you: If p is true and q is false, then p AND q is false, and p OR q is true. See, it's not that hard at all. Post your illogical opinions at will, but spare me your bullshit rhetoric.

I have skimmed back through these posts, and I could not find where I made this statement you are accrediting towards me. That does not mean that I did not say it, nor that I disagree with it, I stand by that assertion either way. But I don't believe that I would have stated that it is a tactic used solely by any particular political affiliate, if I did then I apologize, for I mis-spoke. I am sure that I would have meant only to infer that, as a general rule, liberals more quickly resort to this particular tactic when in debate or disputation.

No need to apologize for your youth, and please, take my advice - don't wager any of your average thought process, you haven't any to spare! Now take your oxymoron injected expositions, and leave me to my quality filled guesses!

Ben! Ben, Ben, Ben,Ben,BenBenBen(shaking my head in disapproval) . . . I've called you ineducable as a stab between debaters from opposite sides, but I didn't know I was so on the mark' with it! It was meant in jest, but it has become obviously literal to fact! Since when was a posted link the only source of information accepted as credible? I'm sorry Ben, call me old fashioned, but I still use those antique dust collectors called books! I also frequent that ramshackle building called a library where I have opportunity to peruse copies and photostats of past and present newspapers, documents, court rulings, speeches made by all sorts of government officials, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. I told you where I got my information from, if you're too lazy to look it up for yourself (more than likely too scared to discover truth), then it is no fault of mine for your ignorance. BTW, much of what I quoted can probably be verified online by doing a simple Google Search for the stated article, speaker, document or ruling - I just refuse to support the advancement of technology, being the po', prosecuted, yet faithful Christian boy that I am.

Once again Boo-h*o, I'm still waiting for answers from you, I HAVE provided proof and source, time and time again - you have provided nothing - catch up Bennie . . . here fishy, fishy, fishy . . . speak!

BTW, your little grade 8 intellect may not be able to solve your question which proves there is no God, but there are adults here. God can indeed build a wall which even he cannot jump over. Think Boo-h*o, if you can't solve that non-conundrum, then you really are more dense than what even I have given you credit to be. I'll give you the answer when you answer my questions - and here's one more to add to the answers I want from you, actually, if you can answer this one, I'll forget about the rest of the questions! Ready? - Who created it? - I'll post the answer to your infantile question elsewhere right away so as to avoid your false accusations of my needing more time, or other such B.S.!

May God, the Builder of Unjumpable Walls, Bless America,

(Lmao, I bet Ben's do is a mulletard)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#773 Consumer Comment

One more thing Benjo

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Senator McCarthy did nothing to stop the 1st Ammendment. Freedom of speech had nothing to do with his Senate Committee. He never said anything about disallowing the Communists their free speech rights in this country.

Just like ALL Liberals, you just cannot get it.

His Committee went after the Communists who were employed by the Federal Government...ONLY! Noone else was even thought of by Senator McCarthy. He only cared about who was in the Federal Government. When he found one, and EVERY SINGLE ONE ON HIS LIST HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE ONE, he brought them in for questioning. As you say, none of them were ever "convicted". There is a simple reason for that...they were never criminally charged. They were questioned, and if they were active Communist agents, they were fired. Being fired is not the same as being convicted.

This will come as a shock to you, since you live on the Left Coast, but for more than 40+ years, Communists were the enemy. During WW2, the Feds did not employ Japanese, or German employees, without thorough background checks. Here's another shocker...not all Japanese were interned, and some Germans were. Today, we wouldn't employ a known member of a terrorist group in the Federal Government.

This has nothing to do with Free Speech...it has everything to do with COMMON SENSE...a subject you don't like, as you don't believe such a thing exists.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#772 Consumer Comment

I knew he couldn't last a week

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Hell, he couldn't last a day. Benjo, you are so sad.

I find it amusing though that you consider an Atheist a religious fanatic.

What part of I DON'T WANT ANY RELIGION TAUGHT IN A GOVERNMENT SCHOOL do you not understand?

No, the big whoopdeedoo over Islam being taught by YOUR Board of Education was never big news anywhere, except in your own newspaper. Why? Because the lawsuit in Federal Court cost you and the rest of the taxpayers in your County a fortune.

Once again Benjo, you have shown that you have no honor, integriry, credibility, etc. If anyone wants to look up the "dates" as you put it, fine. Once again, YOU'LL be the one in the hot seat. You're just like that schmo Charles. He fires away blindly at people, and when he gets it back in spades, he cries foul and says he didn't say anything.

I hear your wife calling...she has some powder for you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#771 Consumer Comment

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 16, 2006

I just thought it befitting to honor "the departure" of Ben(t on being a victim) Boo-h*o with a statement which is so relative to his posts. It really amazes me that with all the typing he has done, not once did he let his fingers stop so his mind could generate an idea greater than the logic produced by a gaseous pressure release from the depths of my bowels!

All in all, I can say few things about Ben leaving us . . . considering the man had the intellect of an anal zit, and the personality of a botched labotomy patient, his loss for words shall undoubtedly be our gain! Oh, and the whole "atheist" angle . . I don't believe in atheists! lmao

Vera, don't worry about trying to disprove the existance of his "magically appearing friend", I don't think anyone believes that there is anybody in America with standards that low!

Now as far as "the moderates" go . . . we are they! the left has gone so far left that the moderates appear far right! Let's face it, George W. Bush's platform for his first run at office was nearly identical to that of the Democrats favorite poster boy, J.F.K., who was thought by the "far right" of the time to be "far left". Now the "moderate left" feel that the same ideologies are too far right - you figure it out! lmfao

Still waiting for answers.

It's been fun, gotta run . . .

God Bless America

P.S. Has anybody notced that, by "coikidink" I'm sure, every time Ben sits at the computer some idiot starts banging at the keyboard? Just an observation - don't shoot the messenger

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#770 Consumer Comment

No Shawn, I don't think you "missed it at first read."

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 16, 2006

You made the ridiculous assertion that screaming, bellowing, and talking over someone who disagrees with your point of view is a "liberal" tactic. I proceeded to point out three self described conservatives who routinely utilize the aforementioned tactic. I then inferred, by your decretive statement, that these three men clearly must be members of a liberal leaning political party, or they espouse some "liberal" tactics in spite of their sworn opposition to all things "liberal."

If one is to take your postings seriously, obviously it stands to reason that what I have inferred is true. Or is it possible that you did not intend for anyone to take your original statement as fact? Could it be that human beings of all walks of life and political affiliations have employed this tactic at one time or another, especially when angry?

You did not miss anything I wrote in my initial post at first read. It simply took you a few days to come up with another one of your typical dialectical expositions of haughty temerity.

Simply put, you are upset because I called you out on an assinine assumption you made earlier, and now you are trying to discredit my original post on this thread by stating, among other things that, "I am getting too used to writing as if for children!" Sorry, but I'm twenty nine years old and I'm more than willing to wager my "average thought process" is equal to or possibly greater than yours.

At any rate, I've said as much as I care to regarding this issue. Shawn, if you don't appreciate others taking you to task for contrived statements you've made, please just save the imbued conjecture for your diary and discuss facts here at ripoffreport.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#769 Consumer Comment

The pot calling the kettle black...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 16, 2006

"I love how he tracks down people in other threads and starts in on them. When someone else does it back to him, he cries like a little baby, and takes his ball and goes home." ----Robert

Isnt that the pot calling kettle black!

Do a search on Moore, Circuit City, Just Brakes, and Bush. The pattern is clear. I'll assume that most people can understand dates. Of course that could be reaching with some in this crowd.

Track down people??? Me?? Ummm ya sure. Whatever.

Ive done two things on this site. One is take on you racist rednecks on THIS Bush thread. Vera "tracked me down" on the other one, and brought Shawn in. Matter of fact Vera started in on the cross threading by referencing between them! Robert did the same. Now how could I "track people down" when I posted before them? I'll admit, Vera posted before me on this thread. But, how could I "track her down" if I DIDNT EVEN KNOW HER UNTIL THEN!!??

The second thing I have done is attack individuals that show a pattern of attacking consumers for everything. This being on Circuit City threads, and Roberts Just Brake threads. The same little employees saying the same thing on every single thread with the same excuse regardless of the situation "Not our fault...no rip off here". I saw the pattern and went after them. Robert loved to show up on every Just Brakes thread where consumers were being hit with a bait & switch brake job calling them idiots and morons while defending the practice as "honest". So I saw the pattern and went for it.Hes obviously still so pissed about it he "tracks" me down now on just about every thread he can.

Nothing more than a con-man. Obviously Robbie you must have gotten the shaft by some law enforcement for the way you run your shop. Your hatred of all consumers and government is a good tip off. You must have had to pay dearly at that little run down grease pit you call a job. Its set you upon this site like a rabid maggot.

For Vera.....nothing...as stated before...I dont even bother reading her posts anymore. Always the same, nothing new. God this. God that. Shes not "intolerant" she just hates everyone thats not Christian...yada yada yada.

For Shawn....totally worthless. I gave up on him when he showed he couldnt post a link or reference his claims if his life depended on it. Then falls into "Vera mode" with his "you lie!" crap when he can say how you "lie" or even make up for his own failings on reference material. I think I really realized this guy could twist and contort when he tried to use physics and science in general in some feeble attempt to "show" that people without god have no morals. Well shawn, lets use that same science and physics on your god......

"Can god make a wall even he cant jump over?"

Think about that one Shawn. There just like you "proving only people that believe in god can have morals".....I just proved that God cant exist with one sentence. (ya right whatever)

For Robert, I think its well can clear what you are. All these posts, on all these threads. I dont need to go into details. And I am not the only one to lock horns with you (a fact you fail to fathom). For someone that says hes a Libertarian, you fall flat. Your a die-hard neo-con and nothing more. No Libertarian would ever support McCarthy. Strict interpretation of the Constitution is what I thought Libertarians were all for. I think "Freedom of Speech" is pretty stright forward. To support anything that "good senator" (what a joke) did and say your a libertarian shows you need to seriously redefine yourself.

Oh...and its still just the THREE, as in 3 (3) of you. Hardly a vast army of the "morally right(wing)" to strike fear into anyone. Let alone me.

Live your life of fear if you wish. I can see through the smoke that your buddie in the White House makes. And apparently so can many in the Republican party as well. When he only won by 51%, his approval rating is tanked, and his own party is starting to distance themselves...it should tell you something.

Of course not finding any WMD's in Iraq should have told him somthing as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#768 Consumer Comment

Ummmm ....No..... This case was big news in your hometown and took up alot of time and resources from the County budget fighting it.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 16, 2006

This incident happened 4 years ago, and elections in the county were won and lost based on this case. Unless you were in a Coma, living in Martinez California was a freakish nightmare for a few years because of this lawsuit."----Robert

Ummmm no Robbie, it wasnt.

It barely showed on the radar. Only religious nuts made a big deal about it. And apparently (thanks to Vera) only religious nuts still do.

What I find really amazing is that for the last 3 months Vera managed to dodge constantly. Unable to produce any source for her "See LOOK!! Even California is pushing Islam on its CHILDREN!!! God help us!". Now all of a sudden Robbie here takes up some sort of crusade and starts this BS all over again. Gee wiz, where did all this info come from all of a sudden there gang'o'three? Why all the fuss for so long to wait until now to show anything. Of course now that you do, you hype it into something it wasnt. I still have seen nothing to show that this incident shows some underlying conspirecy that Islam is taking over our country. WHICH WAS the basis for Vera's original rant.

Ever heard of the term "making a mountain out of a mole hill".

The whole thing was pathetic. Just a bunch of religious nuts in a panic (like yourselves) over some percived threat to your "Christian" way of life. What a joke. Whatever money that was lost by the school board out here will only hurt the schools. And who do we have to thank for it? You guessed it! People like Robbie, Vera, and Shawn. What a nice bunch of panic mongers!

Now I bet they will support cutting more funds from education around the nation. That will teach those d**n schools to spit in the face of JESUS eh!

Look over there! Islam in CA schools!!! run and hide!

Look over there! Athiests without GOD!!! Run....get'em!!

Look over there! COMMIES!!!! Give up your freedom of speech. And while your at it dump freedom of thought as well. After all.....Big Brother Bush is watching with the NSA.


Panic Panic Panic......keeps the masses in check dont it. What a nice thing this man Bush has done to this nation. All this love, all this tolerance, all this peace......ya right. What a joke.


You people are pathetic.

Let me leave you with a nice piece of history from your "hero's" downfall there Robbie.......

"Have you no decency, Sir! Have you no decency!"

Torpedo away Robbie, seems your the one all hell bent nowdays. I thought you said I was the one that got all riled up. s**t man! Your talking about commies in our backyard, Jesus in our bedroom, some bizarre incident from 4 years ago in my county (thats COUNTY....not HOME TOWN as you like to say) thats some supposed foundation of some takeover of our society by Islam, crazy rants that McCarthy was a "hero", chasing me down over multiple threads, yaking about some radio signal from space with explicit lyrics, being pissed about buying a childrens video with no profane language, justifying bait and switch advertisements for brake jobs, and basically saying that "all consumers are wrong", which in itself raises the question of why you even come to this site in the first place.

You have issues man. All three of you do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#767 Consumer Comment

Anyone want to place bets that Ben will really go away?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

I love how he tracks down people in other threads and starts in on them. When someone else does it back to him, he cries like a little baby, and takes his ball and goes home.

I'll bet he comes back for more abuse within the week.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#766 Consumer Comment

Where have all the moderates gone??

AUTHOR: Cassandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

I knew when I looked up "George Bush" in ROR's search, I was destined to find some heated arguments. However, the name calling on these posts never ceases to amaze me.
Firstly, I must admit I did not read all of the rebuttals to this post---it would have taken hours!
My apologies if anything I write is redundant of anyone else's comments.

For what it's worth, just a couple of comments.

It is a a very dangerous assumption that because someone is not a conservative, they are a liberal.
Where are the moderates? Remember....those people that vote on an issue for the issue....not because of what their party typically votes for?

Just because a person is liberal..they are not automatically a "God hater" or an "America-hater"
That said, just because a person is a Christian does not mean that they are a good person or leader.

And for the people that think God would approve of our actions in Iraq.....how do you know? No one on this forum is qualified to give that opinion.

What does 9/11 have to do w/the invasion of Iraq?
Nothing! Never has!


All of this slandering is getting the country no where!

Examples:
"Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam
Bull.

"Please refrain from polluting this forum with your lame a*s pathetic oral diarreah you liberal hack. You sicken us with this subversive, hate mongering drivel. Take your stupid anti-American brain vomit and go play in traffic."
(sidenote: you are describing what
you are writing)


"MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW."
(sidenote) More dangerous assumptions....need I remind you that is is "our"country...not just yours.


No wonder nothing is getting done!

All of us, conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike ALL need to quit bitching. The fact of the matter is, we are in Iraq now. Bush is the president of our great country. The time has come to quit slandering each other and COME TO A RESOLUTION!

Have a great day!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#765 Consumer Comment

Where have all the moderates gone??

AUTHOR: Cassandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

I knew when I looked up "George Bush" in ROR's search, I was destined to find some heated arguments. However, the name calling on these posts never ceases to amaze me.
Firstly, I must admit I did not read all of the rebuttals to this post---it would have taken hours!
My apologies if anything I write is redundant of anyone else's comments.

For what it's worth, just a couple of comments.

It is a a very dangerous assumption that because someone is not a conservative, they are a liberal.
Where are the moderates? Remember....those people that vote on an issue for the issue....not because of what their party typically votes for?

Just because a person is liberal..they are not automatically a "God hater" or an "America-hater"
That said, just because a person is a Christian does not mean that they are a good person or leader.

And for the people that think God would approve of our actions in Iraq.....how do you know? No one on this forum is qualified to give that opinion.

What does 9/11 have to do w/the invasion of Iraq?
Nothing! Never has!


All of this slandering is getting the country no where!

Examples:
"Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam
Bull.

"Please refrain from polluting this forum with your lame a*s pathetic oral diarreah you liberal hack. You sicken us with this subversive, hate mongering drivel. Take your stupid anti-American brain vomit and go play in traffic."
(sidenote: you are describing what
you are writing)


"MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW."
(sidenote) More dangerous assumptions....need I remind you that is is "our"country...not just yours.


No wonder nothing is getting done!

All of us, conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike ALL need to quit bitching. The fact of the matter is, we are in Iraq now. Bush is the president of our great country. The time has come to quit slandering each other and COME TO A RESOLUTION!

Have a great day!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#764 Consumer Comment

Where have all the moderates gone??

AUTHOR: Cassandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

I knew when I looked up "George Bush" in ROR's search, I was destined to find some heated arguments. However, the name calling on these posts never ceases to amaze me.
Firstly, I must admit I did not read all of the rebuttals to this post---it would have taken hours!
My apologies if anything I write is redundant of anyone else's comments.

For what it's worth, just a couple of comments.

It is a a very dangerous assumption that because someone is not a conservative, they are a liberal.
Where are the moderates? Remember....those people that vote on an issue for the issue....not because of what their party typically votes for?

Just because a person is liberal..they are not automatically a "God hater" or an "America-hater"
That said, just because a person is a Christian does not mean that they are a good person or leader.

And for the people that think God would approve of our actions in Iraq.....how do you know? No one on this forum is qualified to give that opinion.

What does 9/11 have to do w/the invasion of Iraq?
Nothing! Never has!


All of this slandering is getting the country no where!

Examples:
"Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam
Bull.

"Please refrain from polluting this forum with your lame a*s pathetic oral diarreah you liberal hack. You sicken us with this subversive, hate mongering drivel. Take your stupid anti-American brain vomit and go play in traffic."
(sidenote: you are describing what
you are writing)


"MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW."
(sidenote) More dangerous assumptions....need I remind you that is is "our"country...not just yours.


No wonder nothing is getting done!

All of us, conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike ALL need to quit bitching. The fact of the matter is, we are in Iraq now. Bush is the president of our great country. The time has come to quit slandering each other and COME TO A RESOLUTION!

Have a great day!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#763 Consumer Comment

Where have all the moderates gone??

AUTHOR: Cassandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

I knew when I looked up "George Bush" in ROR's search, I was destined to find some heated arguments. However, the name calling on these posts never ceases to amaze me.
Firstly, I must admit I did not read all of the rebuttals to this post---it would have taken hours!
My apologies if anything I write is redundant of anyone else's comments.

For what it's worth, just a couple of comments.

It is a a very dangerous assumption that because someone is not a conservative, they are a liberal.
Where are the moderates? Remember....those people that vote on an issue for the issue....not because of what their party typically votes for?

Just because a person is liberal..they are not automatically a "God hater" or an "America-hater"
That said, just because a person is a Christian does not mean that they are a good person or leader.

And for the people that think God would approve of our actions in Iraq.....how do you know? No one on this forum is qualified to give that opinion.

What does 9/11 have to do w/the invasion of Iraq?
Nothing! Never has!


All of this slandering is getting the country no where!

Examples:
"Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam
Bull.

"Please refrain from polluting this forum with your lame a*s pathetic oral diarreah you liberal hack. You sicken us with this subversive, hate mongering drivel. Take your stupid anti-American brain vomit and go play in traffic."
(sidenote: you are describing what
you are writing)


"MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW."
(sidenote) More dangerous assumptions....need I remind you that is is "our"country...not just yours.


No wonder nothing is getting done!

All of us, conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike ALL need to quit bitching. The fact of the matter is, we are in Iraq now. Bush is the president of our great country. The time has come to quit slandering each other and COME TO A RESOLUTION!

Have a great day!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#762 Consumer Comment

coward.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 15, 2006

Yes, Ben, I remember that ONE post on the Michael Moron thread - The difference is, I didn't partake of multiple posts on that thread, defending the absurd to ludicrousness, and then run away scared when proven to be wrong - as you are doing here. Spin and lies Ben, that's been all you have ever offered on any thread. You are "leaving" this one with some 20 plus direct questions still unanswered - coward? I think the proof is in your own actions.

Have a nice life, "Boo-h*o", I'm sure you will find some other blog, thread, or opinion website to continue trying to spread your hatred and lies. If you develop a backbone, or even some proof to support your B.S. rhetoric, I'll be right here - the same place we started our "discussion". But then, I suppose I have no reason to run away, I haven't filled my posts with the crap you have filled yours with - I can prove my statements, and I have. You can only add to your long list of lies if you try to state the same!

You, Ben, are a liar, and a coward, and running away won't change that fact, it will only serve the purpose of allowing you to spread more B.S. elsewhere, this time unchallenged by reality (you hope)!

God Bless America(so long as I do still have my First Amendment Right to say that)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#761 Consumer Comment

Been away a while... lots to read. And lookee here!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 14, 2006

If it ain't ol' Boo-h*o-Bennie! How the heck you Ben, wee willie winkie?!

Hey Ben...I'm glad you're through your group encounter course on "cutting and pasting". Maybe now, you can get yourself your very own copy of Word!

And if I'm from the "ultra-right religious group", who was it who jumped all over my having only mentioned the whole "Muslim Taught In California Schools" bit? If you look back, you'll see clearly that it was you who had jumped my case about it---just like in all those other circumstances. And just like in everything else, it's your CONSTANT denial that has dragged it on and on and on. So it wasn't ME who made a big deal of it, initiallyit was you who tried to refute it and miserably failed. Don't hate.

And I've given you links to my articles. See?

(Dubya, dubya, dubya, dot) ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff165478.htm

Just like you like it---all out in the open and whatnot! I don't post the full link out of respect for the Editor's request that we not post e-mails or links (It's in the rules, if you bothered to read them). But if you're too lazy to put in three dubyas (or read the rules about links), then it's on you.

What is it about trolls and stalkers who, when they pick a target that seems like a shoe-in for them and it turns out to be a bigger fight than they were ready to handle, they act like they are the victim once they are soundly trounced? If you want a smaller mouthful, sugarstick to Daddy.

And just for your personal enrichment, I not only offered where the info could be found; I actually posted TWO articles about it. Not just a couple bad links, Ala-You, but the actual article. If you think it's too long to read, than you can blame your own laziness, and not a lack of research on my part.

And if your "suddenly materializing friend" that you just magically pulled out of your a*s (or did he pull out first?), has kids ranging between the ages of three and nine, they are NOT Junior High School or Middle School age. But there was, I believe, mention in the articles provided where kids in the lower grades were offered the opportunity to give up something they like, or give up eating food during daylight hours, to give them a "feel" for what those of the Muslim FAITH might experience during Ramadan.

As long as you've pissed and whined about it, you'd think it would be easier than to spend a couple months denying what IS there and IS FACT. But hey, you're you, and that's just the way you like your denial.

And if "Christians are such bad guys", why is it that you don't see a lot of Christians pissing and moaning about other faiths? I see some a*****e who wants to make churches lose their tax exempt status...I see those of certain groups trying to remove "under God" from the Pledge, I see certain types trying to remove the rights of others for even the simple practice of a pre-game prayer.

As a member of the Judeo-Christian denomination, I don't have a problem with folks that want to pray to Allah or Shiva, or folks that don't want to pray at all. What I do have a problem with, is bitter little f**ktards like YOU who try to take away my right to pray, or peaceably assemble as a Christian-Oriented group on public or private property. Yet ANY other religion besides MINE is welcome, it seems.

The same blanket of free speech that allows you to assemble with fellow assholes and piss and moan ALSO allows me to assemble with others of my interest, and sing hymns or chant limericks at the Metro Park (which ever I were to choose). If I don't like what's on TeeVee, I can change the channel...if you don't wanna hear me pray, or see a Christmas play, then plug your ears or leave the area. Come on, where's that wonderful spirit of Liberal Tolerance you guys hold so near and dear?

So don't tell me about duplicity. You literally personify the word. And I have taken great joy in pointing that out to you and the rest of those who would choose to read the full length of this thread. Either that, or I can simply use the glory of cut and paste and make YET ANOTHER super-long post of all your own self-contradictions and show everyone in one convenient glance. What say, Chief? Third time's the charm! (And that doesn't include the other Report!) And there ARE plenty of selections to choose from, as well.

Here's an even better option. Get a real jobapparently there's too much free time for trolling and Masterbaiting at your current occupation. And for the record, I'd much rather be classed in along with people like Robert or Shawn than the likes of You and the James Pair.Twin Freaks Plus One. oughtta make for one truly interesting game of Reach*A*Round.

Ready for another bullshit post full of more of the same.
I know I won't be disappointed. ;)

*** And to Jeff of Indiana.

I couldn't agree more. And your comment about---

The unfortunate fact is that far too many of these women have "sold out", if you will, by accepting out of court settlements in which Clinton does not admit wrongdoing. Money can ease a lot of pains, but can it compensate for the fact that a person who forcibly took part of your life is allowed to walk away scot free?

---is also spot-on. But as I understand things from the victims' points of view, I'm sure many of them just didn't want to live the next umpteen years of their lives having to repeatedly go to court. When a woman (or a man) is raped, it's a terribly personal type of hurt; even those that manage to get on with their lives are inwardly woundedand really good at hiding it. I have not met a single person who was able to truly and completely remain wholly unaffected by the circumstances of their rape. Not a one.

If you want to hurt a man who is a public figure, then you bring your charges out in the open; if you want to wound a man who loves his money, punish him in such a way that it takes a portion of his money, or makes it difficult for him to have access to his money. Much as I hate to admit it, women are artful in the retribution department. Maybe there was a different motivator, in the case of Juanita Broaddrick et al, but you can bet, Clinton would be a tough opponent to bring down. With his legal knowledge and elite defense team, he'd have these women practically living in Court.

Personally, though. I don't think that would be the best environment for healing to take place---not that it hasn't, for some---but having to re-live it over and over again isn't the best way to overcome the hurt of a rape. While it differs from individual to individual, one of the best things to do is to move forward by whatever means. I think they did the right thing, bringing it out into the openand the fact that Clinton paid to get it out of public view doesn't vindicate him. Lord knows, it didn't work for Michael Jackson.

Looking forward to more correspondence! :)

Robert and Shawnwhat can I say..Good work, as usual! You guys rock out loud! :D I really enjoy reading your posts!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#760 Consumer Comment

Maybe you could lie some more Benjo

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 14, 2006

Let's see, Martinez is the County Seat for the County and School District that was sued in Federal Court for teaching Islam in a Government Schhol.

This means the Board of Education and all of the County Government activities take place in Martinez. How could you NOT know of it? It would have, and DID, make headlines in the paper out there. A little research is easy, but takes time. This case was big news in your hometown and took up alot of time and resources from the County budget fighting it. This incident happened 4 years ago, and elections in the county were won and lost based on this case. Unless you were in a Coma, living in Martinez California was a freakish nightmare for a few years because of this lawsuit.

You lie more than a dog. You wanted proof, but thought nobody would piece it together. I did. You kept denying the incident ever happened. You take after your hero, Bill Clinton.

This one incident in this one thread proves one thing Benjo. It proves you have no credibility on anything.

By the way, in case you don't know what a "Benjo" is, I'll tell you. It's a ditch used for the dispersal of waste. I figure since you're so full of s**t, adding a "jo" to the end of your name is very fitting.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#759 Consumer Comment

Sorry folks.....one last time......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 13, 2006

Sorry sorry sorry,

Really, this will be the last time I post on this BLOG. I really dont see the point badgering with the same 3 nuts. Especially now since one has decided that its their personal vendetta to track me down and make a post on every single thread I show up on. I believe his last comment was.......

"I will torpedo you"

Hmmmm.....I remember a certain communist leader with a similar statment from back in the late 50's early 60's saying something to the tune of "I will bury you". What nice guys! 8) Oh well, dearest Robbie is stuck in those two decades for some reason. Most likely dreaming about how horribly his "good senator" was treated.

But I thought I would leave with one last say so since the "Gang'o'Three" has consistantly referred to me even while I'm not posting here. (spare me your outrage over the "Gang'o'Three" comment....you three have used "James Gang" for months....but hey you always have insisted that your rules are not for YOU...only for others...so complain away if you must. Maybe I should call you "Jerry's Kids" for your hero Jerry Falwell?


Vera (Tweet), Robert (Robbie), Shawn (KFROG).....this is for you. This is called a "link" you can "cut & paste" these "links" onto this site when you make a post. That way you can quickly and easily show where you got your information. Or PROOF! Or, point people to a website that you want them to look at. Isnt that simple? Notice how I separate it from the rest of the paragraphs in this post to not make you dabble in my other comments. You can scroll down with you mousewheel.....oops...im sorry, I bet you dont have or even know what a "mousewheel" is since science, technology, and any form of progress is "against GOD ALMIGHTY!". Nevermind. Anyways here it is separated for easy finding.......

http://www.christiangallery.com/strategy.html


ISNT THAT EASY!!!?? WOW!!! AMAZING!

Rinse and repeat........


Now have fun looking for liberal, athiest, or agnostic websites that have a similar agenda. I doubt you will find any. Matter of fact.....you wont find any. I think this "link" (if you need explanation again...since showing proof is sooo d**n hard for you people when you demand it of others....LOOK ABOVE) tells it all about just how stupid, pathetic, and down right wrong the path this country has been headed in regards to Church and State. What kind of idiot could believe such nonsense? Well I think we know THREE here that do! The same people touting that teaching culture courses about Islam in CA schools was some statewide conspiricy against JESUS! If not a national one. Along with "happy holidays" was an insult to GOD and a conspiricy by the left to sink Christianity. Ya ya whatever...sure.

Enjoy.


P.S. Oh and Shawn.....before you rant and rave about "hes leaving HES LEAVING"....just remember....you left one post on the Moore thread and never came back......OOPS! me bad again....I keep forgetting that your rules dont apply to you! hehe sorry. Take a deep breath, get in your run-down pickup truck with the dog in the back and that redneck KFROG bumper sticker (yes shawn I'm well aware of that long standing redneck joke about people that live in San Bernardino and Riverside counties!....I spent 12 years living in Orange County CA, and Im sure you fit the bill EXACTLY) turn on your country tunes and take a break. Dream about all those non-conservative liberal gay and l*****n baby killers that your going to blow-up, kill, maim, and mutilate in your future. After all, I'm sure they used "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" so your stocking up on fertilizer at this moment for your Ryder truck hell bent on retaliation. I'll make sure to stay away from government buildings and planned parenthood clinics. Heres a parting shot for you. It might help.....

ENOUGH.

Disclaimer: If there are any grammer, or spelling mistakes, I deeply apologize. Allow me to use a rule from Vera (which of course I'm not supposed to use, since her rules only apply "one-way").........

WHOOPSIE!

THERE! I am now cleansed of sin just like Vera! Yay!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#758 Consumer Comment

Robert, your pathetic.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 13, 2006

This is the last time I will post on this thread. Its worthless to even try to argue with 3 religious puritanical nuts.

You quote....

"yet they were doing it right there in your county"

Wow! Robert, didnt you see my post from almost a month ago!!??

I mentioned Byron, I mentioned I even had a friend with 3 kids in that district. I mentioned that all of it was bullshit because even my friend said this lasted about 2 months, the school district dropped the studies. And the whole thing was over hyped by the Christian-Right to make it look like it was more than it really was (my friends words not mine...I just quoted him). Kinda similar to this "supposed" attack on Christmas that the religious goons tried to say was happening back in December. Oh you poor persectuted Christians!

So I did mention it. Yet still Vera (the original person to post it here) couldnt show where SHE got the info.

Yes, Robert, I didnt know about it. Why? Because it was such a tiny issue and it was shut down so quickly that even the people that live only a few miles from where it occured barely knew about it. That shows right there it was just overblown by the Christian-Ultra-Right to make people think they were being persecuted. Even Vera's only link came from a ulta-right Christian site.

It has taken 3 months for one of YOU to post some info (and once again you really didnt post any links....just a bunch of ****). And when you finally do....you proved what I intended. It was nothing. A far cry from some "muslim agenda and conspiricy" that Vera tried to make it into. Even after the plan was dropped by the school district, it still won in court. TWICE!!! Your post only proves my case.

The whole issue is hardly worth noting. And was hardly noted. The only people all pissy about it are the heavy handed religious types with nothing better to do but try to make their views policy in other peoples lives.

Now go back to living your life of "the customer is always wrong" and go scam some more non-automotive types on a brake job.

Enough.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#757 Consumer Comment

A correction:

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 13, 2006

I made a mistakre in my question:"Anybody want to venture a guess what county in California has Martinez as the "seat"? If you guessed Martinez, you are correct."

"
The answer should have read: If you guessed Contra Costa, you are correct.

I'll assume everyone can get that without the correction. The point is, while Ben blathers on about wanting proof of where Islam is being taught in California, he knew it was in his own backyard the whole time. This just shows the lengths that a typical liberal will go to obfuscate and deceive. Are you going to continue denying it happened Ben? Probably. Your record thus far shows you will.

You're a real piece of work Ben.

Beautiful town though.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#756 Consumer Comment

James, such reasoned arguments are difficult to contest, but . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 12, 2006

My God you're persistent, James. But persistence doesn't change the fact that you are full of anger and hatred and do not offer anything other than lies, rhetoric, and spin! I could tear your last post apart piece by piece, but I shall only pin-point your opening statement for comment and let that speak for the veracity of the rest!

I am not stupid and I know whats going on here. . . .

You see, your first sentence offers a prime example of all three:

To start with, the whole tincture of your opening statement lends to the tired rhetoric that there is some conspiracy that only the wealthy, or smart folk, have been let in on. There are no secret little conspiracies going on in dark corners of the Republican's homes - that is still today, as it has been in the past, the standard habits of the Democrats.*

Secondly, you offer what has become known as spin in the political world with the first half of this sentence ( I am not stupid.) This exemplifies spin, for nothing as far as factual evidence and proof has been shown in support of this statement, and, in actuality, all evidence offered would suggest (but, unfortunately not quite prove) that the opposite is true. But without solid proof on either side, you tout it as fact, simply because you know it has not been disproved - thus . . . spin.

The last example found in your opening statement is the blatant lie:
. . . I know whats going on here . . . Although this is rather self explanatory, I feel the need to explicate for the less fortunate souls who haven't had access to our (approx.) seventy-billion-dollar a year education system! You see, any evidence offered by either side has always pointed to the same, undeniable fact, James. You DO NOT know what's going on here, there, or anywhere! You have h-e-a-r-d of certain circumstances, and you have r-e-a-d of other actions, but, due to your lack of willingness to do any research beyond the 5 o'clock news with Dan Blather and Michael Moron's latest lie-beral mockumentary**, you have accepted that the lies, spin, and rhetoric of the liberal media are indeed facts. Clue bus head slap for James . . . they aren't! Oh, and don't try defending yourself with another lie like I didn't know, If you are too stupid to know that your hero - Mr. Mike Moron - is full of crap**, don't get on the clue bus, do society a favor and lay down in front of it.

Jeff, I missed it at first read, but your comparison of the average liberal to the likes of Bill O'Rielly (who I don't really consider a conservative, more of a . . . navy libertarian - middle of the road, but switches his leanings from left to right and back again depending on his guest), Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage is absolutely ridiculous! I'm sure that you realize that they each have their own talk show. If I were to have my own talk . . . actually, it doesn't matter what I'd do. I hope that the average thought process for readers of these threads is a little more full functioning. To compare the average liberal wannabe pundit to famous talk show hosts is just not a realist's manner of approach! My comparisons were, of course, average Democrats vs. average Republicans - duh! I can't believe I just explained such a simple premise in abounding detail - I am getting too used to writing as if for children!


* The following is documented and easily accessible to any who seek the truth. Take note, many of the names are those which are associated not only with great wealth, but with upstanding Democrats in our history, and present day politics as well.

In the first three decades of the 20th Century, American corporate philanthropy combined with prestigious academic fraud to create the pseudoscience eugenics that institutionalized race politics as national policy. The goal: create a superior, white, Nordic race and obliterate the viability of everyone else.
How? By identifying so-called "defective" family trees and subjecting them to legislated segregation and sterilization programs. The victims: poor people, brown-haired white people, African Americans, immigrants, Indians, Eastern European Jews, the infirm and really anyone classified outside the superior genetic lines drawn up by American raceologists.

The main culprits were the CARNEGIE INSTITUTION, the ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION and the HARRIMAN RAILROAD FORTUNE, in league with America's most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as HARVARD, YALE and PRINCETON, operating out of a complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island. The eugenic network worked in tandem with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the State Department and numerous state governmental bodies and legislatures throughout the country, and even the U.S. Supreme Court. They were all bent on breeding a eugenically superior race, just as agronomists would breed better strains of corn. The plan was to wipe away the reproductive capability of the weak and inferior.

Ultimately, 60,000 Americans were coercively sterilized legally and extra-legally. Many never discovered the truth until decades later. Those who actively supported eugenics include America's most progressive figures: WOODROW WILSON, MARGARET SANGER and OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES.

The ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION financed the KAISER WILHELM INSTITUTE and the work of its central racial scientists. Once WWII began, n**i eugenics turned from mass sterilization and euthanasia to genocidal murder. One of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute doctors in the program financed by the Rockefeller Foundation was JOSEF MENGELE who continued his research in AUSCHWITZ.

After the world recoiled from n**i atrocities, the American eugenics movement, its institutions and leading scientists, renamed and regrouped under the banner of an enlightened science called human genetics.

** see :(dubya, dubya, dubya, dot) davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#755 Consumer Comment

Vera & Shawn: I appreciate your candor.

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 12, 2006

I must confess that I fully expected to be flamed by both of you for my post. To say the least, I'm quite pleasantly surprised by your respective responses. If more of us could debate policy and current events in a rational manner, we might be further along as a society than we are presently.

Shawn, I now understand your position better. In reading some of your previous posts, I developed an impression of you as a "dittohead" parroting the neo-con agenda. Obviously, my first impression was wrong. Thanx for the clarification.

Vera, I'll not dispute your hypothesis that Clinton was/is a womanizer. I'm certain that some of the allegations brought against him have considerable merit. The unfortunate fact is that far too many of these women have "sold out", if you will, by accepting out of court settlements in which Clinton does not admit wrongdoing. Money can ease a lot of pains, but can it compensate for the fact that a person who forcibly took part of your life is allowed to walk away scot free?

Yes, most news is, in a way, third party gossip. In my judgment, Reuters & the AP have more credibility than the supermarket tabloids and celebrity fluff shows like Entertainment Tonight. They all had something to say regarding the Clinton impeachment, 9-11, as well as the War in Iraq. I tend to believe the former two examples over the latter two because I don't believe they possess as much of a desire to sensationalize the subjects they are reporting on.

Thanx for your response.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#754 Consumer Comment

This one is for the records folks. Grab a beer and get ready to read!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 12, 2006

"A Contra Costa County school was educating seventh-graders about Islam, not indoctrinating them, in role-playing sessions in which students used Muslim names and recited language from prayers, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a lawsuit by two Christian students and their parents, who accused the Byron Union School District of unconstitutionally endorsing a religious practice.

"The Islam program activities were not overt religious exercises that raise Establishment Clause concerns,'' the three-judge panel said, referring to the First Amendment ban on government sanctioning a religion.

During the history course at Excelsior School in the fall of 2001, the teacher, using an instructional guide, told the students they would adopt roles as Muslims for three weeks to help them learn what Muslims believe.

She encouraged them to use Muslim names, recited prayers in class and made them give up something for a day, such as television or candy, to simulate fasting during Ramadan. The final exam asked students for a critique of elements of Muslim culture.

U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton ruled in favor of the school district in 2003, saying that the class had an instructional purpose and that students had engaged in no actual religious exercises.

The appeals court upheld her ruling Thursday in a three-paragraph decision that was not published as a precedent for future cases, which generally is an indication that the court considers the legal issue to be clear from past rulings.

The court cited its 1994 ruling rejecting a suit by evangelical Christian parents in Woodland (Yolo County) who objected to elementary school children reading texts that contained tales and role-playing exercises about witches. In that case, the court said classroom activities related to the texts, which included casting a make-believe spell, were secular instruction rather than religious rituals.

The brevity of Thursday's ruling "underscores the fact that what the district and its teachers did was entirely within the mainstream of educational practice,'' said Linda Lye, attorney for the Byron schools.

Edward White of the Thomas More Center, the attorney in the case for the two children and their parents, said he will ask the full appeals court for a rehearing. He said the panel failed to address his argument that the district violated parents' rights.

"What happened in this classroom was clearly an endorsement of religion and indoctrination of children in the Islamic religion, which would never have stood if it were a class on Christianity or Judaism,'' White said.


I have obtained excerpts of the actual Islam simulation curriculum, which you can download here (PDF). A few snippets:



***


***


Jay at Stop the ACLU: "Can we find a teacher out there willing to make some Muslim students pretend to be Christians for a few weeks? You know, just to better understand the culture and all."

More blog reax: Jeff Goldstein, My Pet Jawa

Background: Daniel Pipes reported on the curriculum in 2002 and wrote...

Americans and other Westerners face a choice: They can insist that Islam, like other religions, be taught in schools objectively. Or, as is increasingly the case, they can permit true believers to design instruction materials about Islam that serve as a mechanism for proselytizing. The answer will substantially affect the future course of militant Islam in the West.
LGF July 2002
Christianity Today October 2002
Paul Sperry May 2004: Look who's teaching Johnny about Islam

***

Here's an excellent antidote: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades)"

Gee, this was very interesting, don't you think Ben? Anybody want to venture a guess what county in California has Martinez as the "seat"? If you guessed Martinez, you are correct.

So Ben, you have never heard of Islam being taught in any California schools, yet they were doing it right there in your county. How convenient. You cannot possibly attempt to bring any credibility to yourself at this point. You are worse than the James Gang. At least they do their shtick because they don't know any better. You are beyond words.

At this point, if you say anything else to try and defend yourself in this, you'll just look like the a*s you truly are. As I said in another thread, you are a real piece of work.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#753 Consumer Comment

Eat your honey --- ten million bears just CAN'T be wrong!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Regarding the loveable rogue, our favorite Prevaricator In Chief...the man who taught us that "Eatin' ain't cheatin"....I have only this to offer as my reply.

To Jeff of Fort Wayne

Saludos amistosos! :)
Firstly, let me at least open with gratitude that you at least wrote with a degree of civility, and didn't seem truly nasty in your commentary. I do appreciate that, as it's all to easy to be nasty when calling someone out on a comment you don't agree with.

Vera's assertion that Janet Reno was "trying to push masterbation as a subject for health class" is flat out wrong. Surgeon General M. Jocelyn Elders

And on this, I stand corrected, and concede that you are correct. Pardon my mistake. Seems to me I heard it a hundred years ago on News Radio driving to work. You got me! And thanks for showing me my mistake.

Besides. I can see why Clinton would want to stamp out the voice of a woman who talks about masturbationafter all, since women are only things to him, he wouldn't want the ones that are actually willing' to sleep with him to feel they deserve satisfaction. But of course, he can stand in a hotel room with his pants at his ankles and a blushing erection and expose himself to his female underling (Paula Jones May 8, 1991). He told her to Kiss it. And that's okay. But don't talk about masturbation.

The only time I could ever agree with Clinton; that subject does NOT belong in ANY school curriculum. but I don't think she should have been fired for it. Clinton didn't get fired fro other positions for the many awful things he has done (exception, his impeachment), so why should Elders? By far and away, things that have been documented and proven against Clinton are much more severe in nature than suggesting nasty curricula!

Vera also has stated that President Clinton was a rapist even though he was never charged, tried, or convicted.

Yet you type in "rape charges levelled against Bill Clinton", and you get over fifty-thousand hits. Go fig. Big stink for something that doesn't exist.

For your edification, this is from a press conference with Sam Donaldson.

"Mr. President, when Juanita Broaddrick leveled her charges against you of rape in a nationally televised interview, your attorney, David Kendall, issued a statement denying them. But shouldn't you speak directly on this matter and reassure the public? And if they are not true, can you tell us what your relationship with Mrs. Broaddrick was, if any?"

Clinton responded: "Well, five weeks ago today, five weeks ago today, I stood in the Rose Garden after the Senate voted, and I told you that I thought I owed it to the American people to give them 100 percent of my time and to focus on their business, and that I would leave it to others to decide whether they would follow that lead. And that is why I have decided, as soon as that vote was over, that I would allow all future questions to be answered by my attorneys. And I think the American people do understand it and support it, and I think it was the right decision."

Donaldson: "Can you not simply deny it, sir?"

Clinton: "There's been a statement made by my attorney. He speaks for me, and I think he spoke quite clearly."

And that's how Clinton dealt with the only rape charge ever leveled against a sitting U.S. president. Maybe it's time to review Kendall's "clear" response to Broaddrick's charge.

"Any allegation that the president assaulted Mrs. Broaddrick more than 20 years ago is absolutely false."

Is that clear enough for you?

Actually, it's not even a straightforward denial. Instead, it is more legalistic parsing of words.

Why did Kendall use the word "any" when the question on the table is about one very specific allegation? The fifth word of the statement -- "president" -- is also noteworthy. Of course, no one, including Mrs. Broaddrick, suggests Bill Clinton was president at the time of the assault. And no one suggests the president at the time of the crime, Jimmy Carter, was responsible for the attack. Notice that Kendall's statement refers to the victim as Mrs. Broaddrick. Of course, in 1978, when she was raped in a hotel room, her name was not Mrs. Broaddrick. So here's another possible lawyerly hairsplitting technicality.

So, the question remains, why won't Clinton address this important allegation?

The answer is: Because the White House press corps and Congress won't force him to answer it. They have let him off the hook. Clinton beat the rap on perjury and obstruction of justice, so he won't be held accountable for rape.

Can you live with that America? And, under the circumstances, can you trust this man to deal honestly and forthrightly with bigger, national-security issues such as the theft of nuclear secrets by the Chinese?

>>>>>>>End of article
And I've said it beforeClinton was a better crook than he was President. There's a book about the women enmeshed in the lives of the Clintons...it's called Their lives, by Candice Jackson (And she's not republican). Former president Clinton was good at weaseling his way out of uncomfortable circumstances, but we all know how Slick Willy's Willie. gets him into trouble. The man has seen more a*s than a public toilet in his political career alone. You can add the more public accounts to the nameless private accounts that haven't made it to public knowledge.

And I'll ask you a fair question; if you love your job, and it's all you have to keep your Family supportedand a higher-up wants you to do something inappropriate (sexual in nature), then holds your position at jeopardy if your refusewhat is that called, if you have to sleep with your boss to keep your job? ---Forget advancing youJust to keep your job!

Look up the definition of rape. What you'll get is varying accounts of sex by force or coercion or forced sexual act perpetrated against an unwilling victimwhat do you define it as?

How many rapes occur, that don't incriminate the perpetrator, so he is free? The women can't ALL be making this stuff up.

From Free Republic.

Hillary: 'Rapists Should be Punished With Full Force of Law'

First lady Hillary Clinton has yet to say whether she believes Arkansas businesswoman Juanita Broaddrick, who leveled a rape accusation against the president last year.

But on Monday Mrs. Clinton said it should be a "national priority" to see that men who commit sexual assault, rape and other forms of domestic violence are tracked down and punished with the full force of the law.
The first lady spoke out in support of congressional reauthorization for the Violence Against Women Act at an event she hosted at the White House:
"One million women are stalked each year," said Mrs. Clinton. "And when women are still being raped and assaulted more than 300,000 times in 1998 alone, our job is far from done. I don't believe law enforcement yet has the resources needed to track down and to punish those who hurt women, with the full force of the law."

In a dramatic interview with NBC's Lisa Myers broadcast two weeks after the Senate acquitted the president on Sexgate impeachment charges, Broaddrick said Clinton accosted her in a Little Rock hotel room in April 1978, pushed her down on the bed, ripped her clothing and bit her lip until she submitted to the assault.

The Clinton rape accuser said she remained silent for 20 years because she thought no one would believe her.

Mrs. Clinton's remarks on Monday echoed that concern:
"For centuries of domestic violence, women suffered in silence. But now that is no longer the case. But we cannot permit our country to take s step back. We must reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act so the message goes out loudly and clearly:

"Make no mistake about it, this is still a national priority that we intend to keep focusing on and pushing until we see that every woman has the protection she needs and law enforcement has the resources they require, and protective orders actually protect women."

In Arkansas, Mrs. Clinton was among the country's earliest crusaders against gender-related violence and is credited with establishing the state's first rape crisis hotline.

Six women, including Broaddrick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and flight attendant Cristy Zercher, have accused the president of making unwanted sexual advances. A Little Rock lawyer who asked Clinton biographer Roger Morris not to identify her said the president sexually attacked her in 1978, "biting and bruising her in the process."

A sixth victim, who also requested anonymity, told Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff that Clinton sexually assaulted her in the Oval Office. Isikoff documented the incident in his 1999 book, "Uncovering Clinton."
In the book Isikoff raised questions about a seventh possible assault victim, former Miss America Elizabeth Ward Gracen, who has acknowledged a consensual one-night stand with the then-Arkansas governor in 1983.

But the Newsweek reporter revealed that Gracen was bitten during her Clinton encounter, which she described as "rough."

Gracen friend Judy Stokes has said the beauty queen came to her in tears immediately afterward, saying that the sex was "something I did not want to happen."

>>>>>>>End of article
Apparently, someone thought it was noteworthy. There are books about Clinton's behavior and it was in the News, and it's still a hot topic for discussion. Is every woman a liar here? So he didn't get arrested. doesn't mean it couldn't have happenedit just means he covered his tracks well enough to get away with it. After all, Billy WAS a lawyerso he knows exactly how to subvert and avoid prosecution.

Of course, if someone refers to GWB as a murderer or warmonger, Vera immediately demands proof of these allegations.

So whom has George Bush murdered? Don't tell me the 2,000 American Soldiers or the innocent Iraqis that are victims of the political Machine hokum. That's too general.and too easy to fall back on.

Personally, I can't stand Clinton or Bush, and I don't think either one of them are/were effective leaders, but I don't let my displeasure with either of them affect my reasoning.

And really, my intention is to point out to those who adore Bill or Hitlery Clinton, that the Clintons were no angels, either. Aside from that, my position here is to debunk the original poster's comment that the US is at war exclusively for fattening wallets from profits made at the gas pump. His [Jim's, of Tupper] incessant repeat-it-to-facthood (flawed) logic serves no greater purpose than to prove what state of denial he's in.

Vera, your argument against Clinton would be much more reasonable if you left the unfounded allegations and third party gossip out of it.

Really. what is News, but third-party gossip'? Unless you did it (first party) or were present to witness or participate in it (second party), you're getting it from a source you have deemed (in your own opinion, supported by some level of reason or experience) reliable; say, like the News you watch/read/listen to (third party).

And by the way, I'm not Republican' eitherI'm an Independent', with Conservative values. I don't agree with every single thing Bush is doingbut I sure as hell won't cheapen the sacrifices made by seeking to divide or subvert the efforts of our Military. Much of the mainstream media and the liberals seek to do exactly that. What they withhold from the American populace, and what they tell the American populace, is never quite the whole story.



James of Tupper

I am not stupid

Well, you haven't proven that.

and I know whats going on here.

Apparently, you're not with it' enough to provide some valid proof of why you make the bullshit statements you makeso how can you make a statement like that. Every point you try to repeat is repeatedly debunked. But instead of providing ANY shred of real proof, you simply repeat the same tripe. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.

I have been exposing this scheme for quite a while.

You say that on virtually every report you make or respond to. To expose something doesn't involve touching your zipper in any way, Jimboand from what I've seen in your information gathering skillswell, I'm willing to bet you're pretty unimpressive on a general level. You have exposed nothingunless you are making efforts to expose yourself as the bleating dip, then you're doing a bang-up job! Beyond that, ZILCH.

You can't even stand up to a challenge.

You can post s**t about me, lie about me by using false names, but you can't ignore the truth, just look at the news!

There's s**t about you in the News?
By any chance, would it involve something regarding chromosomes missing or having one too many?

The Republicans are very corrupt, thus my argument Bush is also corrupt as he lied to invade a soveriegn nation, stole Iraq oil, Blamed 9/11 on O'sama Bin Ladden, but we never captured Bin-ladden- Why not??

Well, I'll answer that question with questions of my own. How easy is it to get rid of the roaches in your 1959 Streamliner? Superimpose that logic to Bin Laden.

And didn't you just post in this Report or the other Report that Bin Laden admitted he had everything to do with 9-11? Which is it? Did he, or didn't he own up to 9-11?

Where is the proof that Bush et al have made one thin dime off this war? You offer nothing that even remotely supports thatjust the same liberal catcalls. Bush lied, thousands died! Illegal war! Blood for oil! It's the same cadence, over and over again. And show us where Bush has stolen a single drop. I dare you.

Because Bin ladden is friends with Bush's.

The Family of Bin Ladenfor the umpteenth timehas long since disavowed their Son Osama. It happened long ago, when he decided to start using money to seed a terrorist interest, and his Family pulled the plug. This was before 9-11, before the Gulf War. Look it upit's not that hard to find out. If you can plug in a VHS copy of Fahrenheit 9-11', you can find out the necessary info on the Internet.

The United States has been screwed in the a*s.

You should be so lucky.
The main screwing is done by the naysayers and whiners that seek to divide that which should stand United. All because you're pissed off about paying $2.25 a gallon. I'll ask again: Where was all this angst when we had to pay $2.29 a gallon during the Clinton presidency? I notice you don't bother to answer that question, along with the heaps of others standing against you.

And while I'm at it. where was all the SUPPORT when Gasoline went down to $.89 cents a gallon during the early stage of the Gulf War?

Bush is a representative as well as Cheney on

Yap Yap.more crapand Clinton sucked as a human being, and his wife is a Feminazi turncoat. But Clinton made a fine crookand he actually WAS A.W.O.L. Other than that, there's nothing meritorious in that whole paragraph.

It was a SAD day when Bush Stole the election in 2000!!!!!!!!

[Rolling my eyes.] Denial of facts. Pity. How can you disagree with Supreme Court Rulings? Easy! Deny you saw them! [Shaking my head.]

What would be the classic translation of your mental disorder, Jimbo? Would it be classified as wanton, deliberate stupidity, some weird kind of attention deficit disorder coupled with bi-polar narcissism? Chemical imbalance? Or is it an issue revolving around chromosome numbers?

I refuse to accept your reality, and wish to substitute my own! Or something like that.

Do you repeat yourself and refuse to accept reality so it keeps attention focused on you? And why doesn't it bother you that most folkseven some that agree with you---see you as a sad and pathetic creature, unencumbered by the presence of an education? You are so unfortunate as to almost be pitiable.

Emphasis on almost'.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#752 Consumer Comment

Libertarian eh?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Why is it that every person that claims to be a "libertarian" seems to be so damned sensible and reasoned? lol Like I said before - I'll have to look into it!

As far as your questions, Jeff, the answer is simple . . . there are quite enough, if not an over abundance of persons readily touting the "negative" influences within the republican "support-group". I have not "jumped to the defense" of such political pundits, nor will I . . . but when blatant lies are posted, I present a truthful alternative to such. If I were to point by point every "stretched" sentence from each side of the aisle, I'm afraid my business would be left unattended, and thus I would have no choice but to find some government program that would pay me to sit here and "play" on the computer all day. Don't laugh, I'm sure that if I looked long and hard, I could find some "program along those lines! But, no time for idle chit-chat this morning, gotta run . . .

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#751 Consumer Comment

Libertarian eh?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Why is it that every person that claims to be a "libertarian" seems to be so damned sensible and reasoned? lol Like I said before - I'll have to look into it!

As far as your questions, Jeff, the answer is simple . . . there are quite enough, if not an over abundance of persons readily touting the "negative" influences within the republican "support-group". I have not "jumped to the defense" of such political pundits, nor will I . . . but when blatant lies are posted, I present a truthful alternative to such. If I were to point by point every "stretched" sentence from each side of the aisle, I'm afraid my business would be left unattended, and thus I would have no choice but to find some government program that would pay me to sit here and "play" on the computer all day. Don't laugh, I'm sure that if I looked long and hard, I could find some "program along those lines! But, no time for idle chit-chat this morning, gotta run . . .

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#750 Consumer Comment

Libertarian eh?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Why is it that every person that claims to be a "libertarian" seems to be so damned sensible and reasoned? lol Like I said before - I'll have to look into it!

As far as your questions, Jeff, the answer is simple . . . there are quite enough, if not an over abundance of persons readily touting the "negative" influences within the republican "support-group". I have not "jumped to the defense" of such political pundits, nor will I . . . but when blatant lies are posted, I present a truthful alternative to such. If I were to point by point every "stretched" sentence from each side of the aisle, I'm afraid my business would be left unattended, and thus I would have no choice but to find some government program that would pay me to sit here and "play" on the computer all day. Don't laugh, I'm sure that if I looked long and hard, I could find some "program along those lines! But, no time for idle chit-chat this morning, gotta run . . .

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#749 Consumer Comment

Libertarian eh?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Why is it that every person that claims to be a "libertarian" seems to be so damned sensible and reasoned? lol Like I said before - I'll have to look into it!

As far as your questions, Jeff, the answer is simple . . . there are quite enough, if not an over abundance of persons readily touting the "negative" influences within the republican "support-group". I have not "jumped to the defense" of such political pundits, nor will I . . . but when blatant lies are posted, I present a truthful alternative to such. If I were to point by point every "stretched" sentence from each side of the aisle, I'm afraid my business would be left unattended, and thus I would have no choice but to find some government program that would pay me to sit here and "play" on the computer all day. Don't laugh, I'm sure that if I looked long and hard, I could find some "program along those lines! But, no time for idle chit-chat this morning, gotta run . . .

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#748 Consumer Comment

Republicans-Dumb asses

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, January 11, 2006

I will show how Bush should be impeached! George Walker Bush needs to be impeached! He got the United States in a war with Iraq, which was unwarrented! He has kept war going no matter as polls show he has lost polls for him in favor. Bush is an equall to Hitler, as I see he is thinking he is the god of war. George W. Bush needs to be IMPEACHED! He lied to American People to Invade a Soveriegn Nation, He lied about Illegally spying on American Citizens, He never went after O'sama Bin Ladden, who CLAIMED responsibilty for the 9/11, twin towers collapse. Bush is too corrupt and we need to impeach his a*s! Thank you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#747 Consumer Comment

You disbelievers or deceivers F OFF!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 10, 2006

I am not stupid and I know whats going on here. I have been exposing this scheme for quite a while. You can post s**t about me, lie about me by using false names, but you can't ignore the truth, just look at the news! The Republicans are very corrupt, thus my argument Bush is also corrupt as he lied to invade a soveriegn nation, stole Iraq oil, Blamed 9/11 on O'sama Bin Ladden, but we never captured Bin-ladden- Why not?? Because Bin ladden is friends with Bush's. The United States has been screwed in the a*s. Bush is a representative as well as Cheney on oil production. Bush and Cheney are very bad politicians, They are also oil executives! Bush and Cheney are the most corrupt team-President-Vice-President in the history of the United States!!!!!! It was a SAD day when Bush Stole the election in 2000!!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#746 Consumer Comment

My two cents.

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 09, 2006

I'm neither conservative nor liberal. I'm not affiliated with the Democrat or Republican parties. I find them both to be moribund beyond repair or redemption. If I identify with any party, it most likely is Libertarian. Having said this, I really don't feel that "Dubya" is much better or worse than the last five Presidents our nation has elected.

I don't know if GWB lied to get us into Iraq, only a handful of people do, and they aren't talking. I do remember reading an AP article in Jan. or Feb. 2003 which quoted WH spokesman Ari Fleisher as saying that Iraq's oil supply could legally be taken as "spoils of war." Whether or not GWB invaded solely for this purpose is debatable, but the prospect of cheap oil being used as a selling point for the war is certainly plausible.

I don't buy the theory that there was a 9-11/Saddam Hussein connection. Saddam did give money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel, but I don't feel that he had anything to do with the events of 9-11. Osama Bin Laden had been critical of the Hussein regime when Kuwait was invaded in 1990. He also did not agree with the largely secular government in Iraq.

As for WMD's, there was certainly evidence to suggest that Hussein had them. After all, President Reagan & Donald Rumsfeld eagerly supplied him with anthrax and bubonic plague strains in the 1980's during the Iraq-Iran war. What I don't understand is why the UN inspectors weren't given more time to look around. Hindsight is always 20/20, but in the grand scheme of things, why couldn't we have just waited a few more months?

Ultimately, GWB got his wish, and only time will tell if our Democracy experiment in Iraq will succeed. My personal opinion is that a theocratical, Islamic government much resembling Iran's will rise to power.


The whole cons. vs. libs. argument raging on here is ridiculous. Vera's assertion that Janet Reno was "trying to push masterbation as a subject for health class" is flat out wrong. Surgeon General M. Jocelyn Elders made a remark in Nov. 1994 that perhaps masterbation should be taught as a part of sex education in the public school system, and was subsequently forced (by Pres. Clinton) to resign a month later. Janet Reno had nothing to do with it. Vera also has stated that President Clinton was a rapist even though he was never charged, tried, or convicted. Of course, if someone refers to GWB as a murderer or warmonger, Vera immediately demands proof of these allegations. Personally, I can't stand Clinton or Bush, and I don't think either one of them are/were effective leaders, but I don't let my displeasure with either of them affect my reasoning.

Vera, your argument against Clinton would be much more reasonable if you left the unfounded allegations and third party gossip out of it. If you cannot bring yourself to do this, don't be so righteously indignant when someone else makes snide remarks about Bush, or anyone else you support.

Shawn wrote: "As for myself, I am spending the time necessary to research the veracity of various accusations from the left, then posting the truth so that others who who may not be certain of today's political climate can have a documented and honest response to such vicious lies."

Well Shawn, why are you so silent about Tom DeLay & Scooter Libby? Aren't these allegations vicious enough? Should Harriet Myers have gotten the Supreme Court appointment? Did Rush Limbaugh really abuse Rx drugs? Was Ron Brown really killed in that plane crash? Do Democrats ever tell the truth?

You also said that bellowing, screaming, and talking over someone else is a "liberal" tactic. If this is true, I presume Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage are all card carrying Democrats, right?

I really don't enjoy arguing with people all that much, but the hypocrisy that abounds within this thread is appalling. I could quote some things written by James in Tupper Lake or Charles in Phenix City, but well, I think we all know how much those posts speak for themselves. I'm not trying to be hard on anyone, but most of the things said in this thread are just blatant hearsay.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#745 Consumer Suggestion

Help me impeach Bush: Sign the petition!

AUTHOR: Pete - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 09, 2006

Sign the petition @:

http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/Impeach_GeorgeBush/

Bush lied to Congress and the American public about the reasons for invading Iraq.
Bush conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens.

Bush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes.
Bush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war.

Bush was negligent in his slow response to American suffering caused by Hurricane Katrina.
Election Fraud Before the election in 2000, George Bush, his brother Jeb Bush, and his Florida campaign manager Secretary of State Katherine Harris, illegally purged over 57,000 mostly Democratic Florida voters from the rolls. This was enough votes to account for Bush's 537 vote margin over Al Gore. If this crime had not been committed then Al Gore would have been president.

He is allowing NAFTA to send all of our cost of living jobs out of the country, which will cause the common man to work for slave wages.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#744 Consumer Comment

Way to go Nick!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 08, 2006

You tell them. I admire your respect for the Constitution and just know you hold it in the highest esteem.

In fact, I expect to see you at the next NRA Banquet helping the other 99.99999% of your liberal bretheren learn how to read the one Amendment that makes sure the rest are abided. You know, the one that allows me to own my arsenal of fine weaponry.

See you at the dinner.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#743 Consumer Comment

Oops! A quick response has turned into an editorial !

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 08, 2006

Well, James of Tupper Lake's last post I have already discredited as just another one of his after party, drunk weekend rants, but, it appears we have an all new addition to our little debate thread - Nick, from Chicago. Nick, let me welcome you . . . although it appears that you are one of the members of our society that refuses to live in reality ( see: ripoffreport 154773 1/7/2006), it is always a pleasure and comedic relief to an otherwise stressful day in reality, to take a break to discuss our government and its administration with the media influenced aboulic of our society. I do hope that it is not too late to save you from the ranks of Ben(t) on being a victim (boo-h*o), the James twins, and others like them who have proven time and again that their self-inflicted ignorance has run rampant over a large part of this country's uneducable Democrat Party supporters! I only say this because your opening rant is so blatantly similar to the rhetoric and vile spewing that is customary to those who do not read before responding. If you would only take the time to read a few of the posts on this thread previous to your hate-filled blather, you will see that most all of your points have been summarily disgraced by reality.
Darren, from San Diego - were you trying to exemplify the term ironic? Are you yet another Democrat who, instead of injecting any solutions yourself, has decided to toss in their 2 cents worth by adding yet another question to the pile? You brought it up, so . . . what are you doing about it? As for myself, I am spending the time necessary to research the veracity of various accusations from the left, then posting the truth so that others who may not be certain of today's political climate can have a documented and honest response to such vicious lies. I understand that there are not many who read this thread that don't already have their mindset as to which political leaning they identify with, but, the information I discover also helps me to correct our disillusioned youth whom I encounter on my daily travels. One would be amazed at some of the ridiculous rhetoric that some of our educators are trying to cram down the throats of our children! Aside from that, I make certain to vote at every election, I have dispersed flyers dispelling lies of the left, I pray daily for the President and his administration( as well as Ben, the James twins, and all those suckered in by the Democrats and thier media), and I also take the time to prepare and serve meals at a local homeless shelter three times weekly ( I spent many years as a sioux chef at a top rated fine dining establishment it does my heart good to see the way many of these peoples eyes light up when they see it is my night to cook!).
Besides these trivial little tasks, my wife and I help to support our economy by growing our buisiness/es and paying taxes! At this time, our efforts have given over 30 families a respectable income(plus 2 more whom my wife is helping to re-introduce to the work force). In the past, I have taught classes on entrepreneurial endeavors(the reality of MLM's - not all are equal ), small business start-up, and investment basics. I have personally funded and coached 7 different people/ couples from homelessness, to small business ownership over the last 2 years, and 5 of them are still in business and growing. The other 2, although thier businesses did not amount to the success levels they had hoped for, they are now employed in management by a couple of mid to large size companies - let's just say they do fairly well for themselves. What credit do I take for this? Absolutely none! Thier successes are based on thier own ideas and motivations (I just helped to organize a bit ), as well as thier dependance on God, not the government. Even the financial help which came through me was not my own, it was only that which I believe God blessed me with in order to help those others out.
So, what was the secret to success for them? Let us summarize: Government? - nope! Education? Somewhat. Desire? A must! God? Absolutely! Self respect? You betcha! Hand-outs? Not a one! Free _____? None! All I'm trying to get across to you is that too many of society look to ther government to blame for thier success and/or failure in business. The government has nothing to do with it really (aside from a few businesses which may be affected by immigration and policies of sort which affect the workforce and overall competition) Business success depends on the individual - thier character, motivation, education, desire, faith and willingness to work - not government hand-outs, tax breaks, grants, or any other liberal touted necessity for success! One more point, of the 7", only one couple was white, and one couple was 1"white, 1 spanish/mexican. The other 5 were all either African American, or Spanish/Mexican, but, they did all speak English very well. In other words, I don't believe that the liberal backed demagogues like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have a place in todays society, if they would stop creating racial tensions for the sake of thier own pocketbooks, we would find that success has nothing, I repeat - NOTHING to do with the color of our skin. But, I digress.
I guess that I allowed my emotion to steer me a little bit off-track this A.M., but, I hope the message still made it through - Darren, I do plenty in my day to day life to help make this country better, and that includes supporting our president (who I have previously mentioned I don't always agree with) and our troops overseas. If Americans would stop whining, and holding out thier selfish little what about me hands, looking for the working population to support thier lazy, self-pitying, negative attitudes which have placed them in poverty, and instead started taking pride in ourselves as individuals, our rights and freedoms, and our nationality (whoever the President is, is irrelevant) then we wouldn't be in the position we are now! There was a time that the U.S.A. exuded such pride from its people that the likes of Saddam Heussein wouldn't have dared to threaten, Bin Laden and Al Qieuda wouldn't have so much as farted on American soil, and the mere threat of invasion, supported by a proud society, would have been enough to save sending our troops overseas! The whiny, liberal media, and self serving left are as much responsible for the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq as anyone else is. But, in fairness, let's put the blame where it truly belongs - square on the shoulders of Heussien, Bin Laden, and thier ilk.

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#742 Consumer Comment

Two Byrds, One Stone...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, January 08, 2006

Once again, Jimmy pulled his head out of the bottle, and scraped the dead lice from under his fingernails to type us a message from "beyond the knave..."

Y'know, I notice you can only repeat the same garbage, but never address a challenge or disprove any challenges set before you. You merely sidestep, watch Farenheit 9-11 again, and type another message with tingling palms. You sure talk big for someone who has so little to say...and you can''t back up your own rhetoric worth a s**t.

George W. Bush is worst President in history as he has stolen an election for the Presidency

I already corrected you with information on that. But I know, I can see you clutching the box Fahrenheit came in, screaming No, no, no!! It's can't be true! Not my precious! It lies! It LIES!! It lies to us!!

"he has continually lied to American citizens, and led us to the Illegal, wrong, war with Iraq.

Here again, you have been soundly disproven. But, I'll ask, simply because I need the laugh: What informationbased on real, accessible information OTHER than Moore's film---that Bush lied, and that the War in Iraq is a.) Illegal, b.) unwelcome by the Iraqi people, c.) to fill the pockets of his oil-mogul friends"?

Bush first blamed the Taliban(Bin Ladden- Afghanistan)

Hey, Genius.Bin Laden admitted to the fact that he was involved in 9-11. Saddam Hussein has been funneling money into terrorists' coffers for years, and the evidence is all over the Internet, as well as the news. Saddam has repeatedly thumbed his nose at the lawand now he's gotten nailed for it. I know it must hurt to see one of your favorite people in trouble for the atrocities he's committed, but hey, that's the breaks, Kid. That's what happens when you back a losing horse.

but chose to strike on Iraq because he and family are friends with Bin Laddens.

You do realize, don't you, that the Family Bin Laden disowned/disavowed their son many years ago (long before 9-11-01), when he chose to get involved with the Islamofacists, right? His is ZERO share, in the construction companies owned by his Family Members. Read the articles in Time, or watch it on the History or Learning Channelsafter all, I get the notion that you really don't like to read.

Bush had ALL Bin Laddens relatives flown out of US afer 9-11.

And where is the article that leads to the information? Either way, if the Ladens disown their Son, the nefarious Bin, then they have just as much right to travel freely with the pertinent documentation. Aside from that, what else do you know about the President's relationship to the laden Family? And where do you get your news from? I want to see the articles themselvesnot just the blogs that refer to them. I want you to show me where Bush paid for the tickets.

Why did our d**k head President let the family members fly out of the country when 1,000's of murders were commited by the same people??????

So far as we know, only Bin Laden is responsible for any acts of terrorism. Can you show me where the parents sent planes flying into buildings? How about the kids other than Bin Laden? Come onyou think you're so knowledgeable! Show us where!

Bush has been shown to be a deceitful President

Yeah, not like the ever-upright and honest Bill Clinton! What IS the cost of a Presidential pardon, if you're a mass-murderer? And I'm just curiousd'you think he fetched a good bid for the White House furniture on EBay, or did he sell it outright? We know he didn't return all of it

he lies all the time

Uh-hunh
I did not have sexual relations with that woman
I didn't inhale

he let's American soldiers get killed
I don't see your a*s signing up to help protect anybodyI know, I know.
I won't fight an unjust war! Right?
This generation sure is snappy at using noble principle to mask basic cowardess. Anybody else smell a pasture?

he raises petroleum prices so Americans are paying huge amounts of money for gas prices, heating costs

How many times does one have to tell you; the cost of gas is high because the taxes are at or above the fifty-percent-mark. We used to have lots of little refineries competing, but all the big corporations bought them out and conglomerated. The oil interests (not just Bush! There are around five major oil companies, and the Bush Family is a considerably small player in the field.) are insanely wealthyand they can pretty much tell the Government where to get off without concern for their profits. After all, if the Government raises the taxes levied against Big Oil, the Big Oil simply raises the cost of fuel and disperses the cost to the Consumer---in case you don't know, Jimmy-Poo (or it's just after nine a.m. and you're into a good bottle-buzz already) the Consumer is you and me.

and he is stealing Iraq oil for the Rich in the United States.

Still waiting for proofI want to see the pipeline that's sending oil from them to the US. Or documents, articles, or something OTHER than Mike Moore's Spinformation. You keep repeating this as fact, yet offer nothing credible. You vomit out snippets from Fahrenheit as if they were the gospel. I can teach a parrot to do the same d**n thing! Doesn't make the bird smartjust means he can repeat something he hears constantly.

Now Bush is spying on OUR citizens, this is a violation of the First Ammendment of the United States.

Spying on whom? When? Where? Specifically.
Newsflashif the Government wants to know something about you, they'll knowno matter WHOM is President. I remember reading stuff in the seventies about how the Government can read a book over your shoulder using a satellite in space, and in the eighties I heard of how they can use a beam of light no larger than the eraser of a pencil, to pick up conversation information via the vibrations on a windowpane. Are all these things true? Well, technology is pretty amazing, and IC [Integrated Circuitry] is getting smaller and smaller by leaps and bounds. A little light research can determine true plausibility.

Bush is part of a network that is to restrict freedom within our country, A new world will form soon in our future.

You must be confusing Bush with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

I ask you ALL to stop, think

And we ask you to just STOP.
We know the process of think is already out of the question.

and see the rights we have lost, and are about to lose

Once again, look at the ACLU for rights lost. Look to the Liberals who want to teach my Daughter that we all originated from common ancestry with apes, and that she's an accident of molecular convenience. Look to the ones who want to scrub every modicum of human decency from society, and teach our kids in Junior High about alternative lifestyles being okay, and noble souls like Janet Reno trying to push masturbation as a subject for health class. Look to the ones who are bent on pushing the religion of secular humanism into society's views, who want to teach us that we're all victims and that Big Brother will care for all our needs. Behind all these, you'll likely find the socialist liberal agenda, not the conservative agenda.

We will never have privacy.

So much can be said for the privacy of the Folks in Tupper, as long as you have a sober day and the check's in the mail.

Wiretaps are invasion of privacy especially without a warrant. But thats what Bush is doing. Bush has authorized illegal wiretapping.

When and where, Jim? D'you think they're gonna tap your phone? Hell, if they want a good list of 1-976-sex-calls, they can ask Slick Willy!

I urge ALL Americans to file Impeach laws towards George W. Bush!

Sing with me now: "DUH-luh-luh-luh-luh-luh Bye oh, Bye Y'got teh don' be shy g'wan an' Kiss De Girl..."

Just what acts, specifically, has Bush done that can be LEGALLY defined as Impeachable Offenses? And Nixon? He caught hell for admitting to thinking about imposing audits on the taxes of people he didn't likeClinton actually DID it! Oh, and so you know, Nixon was considered one of the smartest men alive.Former Prez Clinton and her Husband were known as the Number One of the twenty-five Most Evil People of the Millennium. Quite an accomplishment.

Once again, more spew with no real view, lotsa squeal, no deal. Hey, Jimwhy don't you just take your Mike Moore movie, Fahrenhype 9-11, pull it out of your rectum and make an AVI out of it. Then you won't have to post your views here any more. After all, I'm still waiting for more credible proof on which you base your knowledge, than some shlockumentary made by a fat piece of pigshit that can't even be honest enough to admit he never really came from Flint, Michigan. (His fat a*s came from the lily white, upper middle class suburb of Davidson, and had a job at GM for ONE DAY. He couldn't relate to blue collar if he tried!)

You wanna snippet of what Mike Moore thinks of you? I quote: They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet. This was in an interview in Munich, Germany, where the Europeans just LOVE Moore.
That's Mike Moore, speaking about his fellow Americans. After all, garbage don't roll far from the dump!
And who would know better, than the Spin Doctor himself?


From the Civil Liberal from the Windy-City
worst President in US History worst President in US History!SQUAWK!

A new liberal parrot! How cute!Incidentally, civil people don't start out right off with calling everyone whose beliefs differ from theirs as right wing-nuts. Just for your personal edification, kay?

He has robbed our nation of our freedom and many other countries around the globe.

See my reply to Jim about the ACLU and the Political Correctness Squad.
And as to the robbery allegation? Clintons stole from the White House (property of the American People), and Clintons are the ones who took out short-term loans to give the illusion of the "bolstered economy. Guess when the collection was due to take effect on those loans? Next Presidential Term!

Clinton and other Elites undercut military budgets and sold arms to other countries, leaving us vulnerable. As a result, we have the expenses of today's military, rebuilt by the Bush administration. Clinton's view on our Brave Troops: I despise the military, and all it stands for. Whatta great guy. (In case you don't know it, that's SARCASM.)

He tries to push his religious beliefs on everyone like he is Jesus himself.

Bullshit. The man has mentioned he has a Judeo-Christian faith, that this is one Nation Under God and admits to prayer. Nothing else. You don't like the mention of God, that's fine...just don't use any money...because "In God We Trust" is printed and minted thereon. I don't see the secular humanism that's shoved down our kids' throats in schoolpaid for by our tax dollars---as a positive influence, either. And since mentioning something about God makes someone a Religion Peddler, what about Senator Byrd? West Virginia has always had four friends: God Almighty, Sears Roebuck, Carter's Liver Pills, and Robert C. Byrd. (Honestly, I don't think there's a single vacant slab of concrete that doesn't bear his name!)

He has wiped his rear with the US Constitution (a documents us "civilized liberals" hold dearly).

Don't make me laugh. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Je$$e Jack$on and other liberal Elitists are the ones using the Constitution for rectal hygieneand telling you to breathe in the smell of roses (s'cuse mey'gotta little smudgeit's on your..uhmoh, never mind).

And invaded a sovereign nation with no WMDs only the worlds largest supply of oil.

There are all sorts of differing views on the WMD subject all over this very Report. Many of which are backed up with facts. And the President didn't lie about WMDhe went on the same information that Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton and the rest of congress did. And they voted it in, too. Does that mean, they ALSO lied to us? Does that mean the mountain of paperwork provided by the previous administration (that would be, the Clinton Presidency, right?) was also a lie? I'd call Clinton et al liars before I'd call Bush a liar.

Anyone who disputes that is saying that the terrorists attacked the world trade center and the Pentagon because the believed the concrete had asbestos.

Nice straw-man arguing there. Does that logic support that Since zips are like zots, and zots move like zoodles, then zips must therefore be zoodles? What the hell are you talking about?

No, they attacked them because it is the financial and military center of our fine nation.

Oooh! A gold star for you! I heard em saying that on CNN and CBS, too! But it ain't like that's too hard to figure out.

When G-Dub is out of office, the Democrats will find out about all the crimes he has committed and he and his cronies will be brought to a court of law - the American Way, not make up the Patriot Act and violate our Civil Liberties.

You know, I'll be honestI don't like the concept of the Patriot Act any more than anyone else. There are many decisions Bush has made that I don't necessarily agree with. But I do agree with the fact that we are at war for a good reason. Even Congress supports this. Look anywhere and you'll find statements from even far left agreeing that Saddam had to go. You'll find statements supporting the war from the likes of Kerry, Byrd, Clinton, and so on.

But this whole make-up-some-new-act is nothing more than hogwash. If you think the Patriot Act is some sort of watered down and distracted way of removing rights, then finepetition for its defeat. But I didn't see anyone jump to their feet in outrage when Clinton attacked Bosnia to distract from his own court proceedings. And he was STILL found guilty.

In truth, I think the Liberals are extra-offended, because the Patriot Act would prevent them from being able to commit all the underhanded dealings they like to keep out of the public view. But as we've seen with Clinton (who was a poor President, but an excellent crook), what's okay for Liberal Democrats is NOT okay for Conservative Republicans. Double Standards run amok.

I would love to see every right-wing nut job have their phones tapped and homes seized without due process, then they can say they love G-dub and the Patriot Act.

More of how what applies to me doesn't necessarily apply to you liberal-speak. You say you have the right to be offended that the President wants to do some arbitrary wire-tappingthen you wish it on any others that don't adopt your views. The very definition of double standard if ever I saw it. You have the rightto agree with me totallyor suffer dire consequences. Liberal Credo.

By the way, if your home gets seized, would that not imply that you wouldn't have a phone to tap...? I don't think cel phones can be "tapped", unless there's a receiver in direct proximity to the transmitter (being the phone itself). I'm unsure, but just checking....

You know, I can't help but agree with Shawn, when he points out how liberals are so up-in-arms about the President and the war in Iraqyet we don't see the Say No to Jihad and Ban The Taliban or Down With Islamofascist Terrorism lobbyists anywhere.

We do, however, see the incessant spew that compares Bush (and everyone else who doesn't support the Great Liberal Way) being compared to Hitler (yet Liberals are the ones who quote, emulate, and idealize Communists!), and the American Peoples are like the Jews of the Holocaust (yet Hillary can call one of her staff a "Jew b*****d"). Do you people just not realize the Media seeks to divide the People of this Nation, knowing that most folks just get their News in quick little portions? Or do you just not really care about your information enough to look at both sides and make your own minds up for yourselves? Liberals claim to be so damned smart, and act so smug among the commontheir educations from Harvard, Yale, and the remaining Ivy League bastions are nothing more than regurgitated bile from the likes of Eric Foner and Noam Chomsky or Sheldon Hackney.

All that education, and they refuse to look at both sides of the storythe very thing they claim that non-liberals are doing. I'm offended, therefore, I am. The Irony lies in the fact that when you point at the flaws of others you fail to realize that you have three other fingers pointing back at yourself.

Civil Liberal from Chicago.

Yeah, sure. Whatever.

Maybe you civil liberals need to fly Taliban Airand take your communistic socialist ideals with you. Tell Castro President Carter sent you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#741 Consumer Suggestion

Can any right wing nuts talk common sense?

AUTHOR: Nick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, January 07, 2006

G-Dub is indisputably the worst President in US History. He has robbed our nation of our freedom and many other countries around the globe. He tries to push his religious beliefs on everyone like he is Jesus himself. He has wiped his rear with the US Constitution (a documents us "civilized liberals" hold dearly). And invaded a sovereign nation with no WMDs only the worlds largest supply of oil. Anyone who disputes that is saying that the terrorists attacked the world trade center and the Pentagon because the believed the concrete had asbestos. No, they attacked them because it is the financial and military center of our fine nation. When G-Dub is out of office, the Democrats will find out about all the crimes he has committed and he and his cronies will be brought to a court of law - the American Way, not make up the Patriot Act and violate our Civil Liberties. I would love to see every right-wing nut job have their phones tapped and homes seized without due process, then they can say they love G-dub and the Patriot Act.

Long live America without the Bush Clan ruling it

-A Civil Liberal

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#740 Consumer Comment

People, Bush is a Hitler wannabe, he loves wealth, and POWER!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, January 06, 2006

George W. Bush is worst President in history as he has stolen an election for the Presidency, he has continually lied to American citizens, and led us to the Illegal, wrong, war with Iraq. Bush first blamed the Taliban(Bin Ladden- Afghanistan)but chose to strike on Iraq because he and family are friends with Bin Laddens. Bush had ALL Bin Laddens relatives flown out of US afer 9-11. I have to ask why? Why did our d**k head President let the family members fly out of the country when 1,000's of murders were commited by the same people?????? Bush has been shown to be a deceitful President, he lies all the time, he let's American soldiers get killed, he raises petroleum prices so Americans are paying huge amounts of money for gas prices, heating costs, and he is stealing Iraq oil for the Rich in the United States. Now Bush is spying on OUR citizens, this is a violation of the First Ammendment of the United States. Bush is part of a network that is to restrict freedom within our country, A new world will form soon in our future. I ask you ALL to stop, think, and see the rights we have lost, and are about to lose, We will never have privacy. Wiretaps are invasion of privacy especially without a warrant. But thats what Bush is doing. Bush has authorized illegal wiretapping. President Richard N. Nixon was IMPEACED because of such act. The Watergate Scandal! I urge ALL Americans to file Impeach laws towards George W. Bush!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#739 Consumer Comment

Did you know . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 05, 2006

(I agree patrick! Please, someone . . . stop the insanity!!!)
. . . :

- that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?

- that the Iraqi government employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

- that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and 38 new schools have been built in Iraq?

- that Iraq's higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers?

- that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in January 2004 for the re-established Fulbright program?

- that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5- 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a navel infantry regiment.

- that Iraqi's Air Force consists of three operation squadrons, 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft which operate day and night, and they will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 bell jet rangers?

- that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

- that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

- that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

- there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

- that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

- that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

- that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up more than 168%?

- that Iraq has an independent media that consist of more than 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

- that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

- that 2 candidates in the recent Iraqi presidential election had a televised debate?

WHY didn't you know??????

Because a Bush-hating media and the Democratic Party would rather see the world blow up than lose the power they hold over their supporters, many of whom rely on excerpts and soundbites from the 5 o'clock news to determine their political position.

Instead of shouting these accomplishments from every rooftop, they would rather show photos of what a few perverted malcontent soldiers have done in prisons - in many cases never disclosing the circumstances surrounding the events. Instead of showing love for our country and support for our troops, we get photos of flag burning incidents at Abu Ghraib and people throwing s****.> To neglect accentuating the positives in Iraq serves only one purpose - It undermines the world's perception of the United States and our soldiers, and weakens the thread that holds us together - as Americans.

On a lighter side, I have decided to post the following for all, so that each has a full and comprehensive understanding of what, exactly, is being said when entering into discussion with a Democrat/liberal. I am not a linguist, and make no such claims to be, but past years of dealing with hard line supporters of the left wing has given me a basic understanding of their language. The toughest part of all, is that so many of their terms/phrases contain more than one meaning. Sometimes, depending upon what context it is spoken, they may mean only one of the possible definitions, other times it will be all encompassing - unfortunately, only experience can help you to determine which is which. The following is a brief summary translation of a few of their most commonly used phrases:

* pro-choice - (1) I believe in removing choice from all except for the person that has already demonstrated that they have no concept of responsibility (2) I believe that murder is a form of birth control (3) I believe that the father has no rights regarding this decision, however, if the mother decides to carry full term, the father is then at least 50% responsible (4) If a human being can not speak for themselves, it's O.K. to murder them for convenience.(5) birth control

* open dialogue - (1) Listen to me! (2) tolerant only of liberal diatribes (3) Agree with me or I'll sling insults based on race, religion, education, and finances! - everything they accuse Republicans of doing/being (4) Every Democrat has a right to voice their opinion (5) Your to stoopud ta undersdand!

* First Amendment Rights - (1)the systematic removal off all forms of religious faith from modern society (2) freedom FROM religion (3) Everybody's right as long as they agree with me (who doesn't actually have an opinion of their own, but rather assimilates the opinions of their party leaders and then regurgitates)

* Separation of Church and State - (1) gag the church (2) (see): First Amendment Rights (3) found within the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment, among others

* Inclusive Language - (1) I support radical feminism (2) Yet another hoop to jump through to remain politically correct (3) There are absolutely no notable differences between man and woman (4) the government should force the churches to reprint their Bibles, heedless of any direct translations, and make certain it not offend any militant feminists (ie. There are some times when censoring is O.K. - see: First Amendment Rights; Separation of Chur . . . scratch that!)

* Female Clergy - (1) inject radical feminism into religion (2) government force of change in church policy

*ethical - (1) subjective morality (2) for the promotion of the Democratic party and its ideals (3) counter productive to the Republican party and its ideals (4) whatever I FEEEEL like (5) a graduated scale of right or wrong which incorporates many factors such as race, finances, parental influence, addictions, economy, sexuality, hair color, clothing style, age, education, taxes, medications, weather, illness, marital status, criminal record, who you know, how you feel, weight, time, diet, voting record, political affiliation, career choice, number of children, shoe size, . . . . . . (6) blow job (7) amoral

* Sex Education - (1) the indoctrination of today's youth into an amoral belief system of sexuality, contrary to their parents desires, and religious beliefs (2) promotion of a sexually active culture (3) promotion of premarital sex

* Safe Sex - (1) sexual amorality (2) (see): oxi-moron (3) a catch phrase designed to give our youth and uneducated society members a false sense of security (4) anything but self control/abstinence

* Family - (1) (family)-as-relativists-define-it (2) conglomeration of units grouped together by a close genetic link (3) fellow members of a street gang (4) members of a group interconnected by any common thread (5) an illusion used by Republicans to make others feel less than

* Marriage - (1) a tax benefit (2) two people living under the same roof (3) a public statement of commitment between two persons (4) benefits

* Law - (1) suggested form of behavior (2) irrelevant to my feeeeelings and the way I choooose to live my life, but an excellent tool to twist and contort so that it might be readily used against a Republican politician (3) protection offered to criminals in exchange for the terror inflicted on civilized members of society ensuring them opportunity to inflict societal agitation several times throughout their lives

As you can see, a slippery slope of sly speech! I hope this helps you when you next enter into a discussion or debate with a Democrat/liberal.

May Good Bless You, America, and all our military - home and abroad,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#738 Consumer Comment

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

AUTHOR: Darren - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 05, 2006

I noticed everyone on this site is afraid to answer the only question that matters...WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#737 Consumer Comment

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

AUTHOR: Darren - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 05, 2006

I noticed everyone on this site is afraid to answer the only question that matters...WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#736 Consumer Comment

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOU IT ???

AUTHOR: Darren - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, January 05, 2006

I noticed everyone on this site is afraid to answer the only question that matters...WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#735 Consumer Comment

Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Well, let's face it, appearrance would lend support to the statement Ben has won. Not in the sense of his arguments being true, or even reasonably sound, but rather that through his introduction of several red herrings to these threads, and the cooperation of we that were ignorant to his intent, he has successfully aborted the sensible debates which were found on these threads! Why? I can only assume that it was/is his goal to prevent the truth of anything to be seen by those who seek. He, and once again I can only base this on supposition and appearance (God forbid he should he accuse me of hypostatization or reification within my writings!), has sought out those who logically and truthfully supply argument in favor of morality, family values, responsibility, and all things which the successes of America have been built upon. He has monopolized our time so as to drive away others who, more logical and open minded than he, would have (or at least could have) discovered that the venems and bifurcatious (not sure if that's a word! lol) statements which he and his ilk spew, are indeed laced with mallicious, and mendacious intent. In other words, he fears the masses learn the truth!
[bifurcation, when used in logic, is the fallacy created by inferring black or white as the only logical choices , in order to hide the fact that there may be several other available conclusions to an argument, but I'm not certain of bifucatious - Oh well, maybe I just created a new word! lmao]

Sadly, one must face the facts that, although as short time ago as three or four weeks, these threads were riddled with as many as ten or twelve(by moderate guesstimate) contributors in any given week, and now it is reduced to the same four or five of us, redundantly arguing ludicrousness to absurdity in attempt to educate the intentionally ignorant (thereby ineducable!) When I look at the tactics he has used to divert all from reaching conclusion, I am appalled that any, including myself, fell for his plays. Just to mention a few, I have found amphiboly, and, when exposed he turned it to an argument on grammar, and the validity of statements based on such premise; argumentum ad nauseum, yet even when proven false, he continued repeating his lies over and over and over, in the hopes that such repetition would somehow convice us that they are truth; reification and hypostatization, and when asked for more solid foundation of his statements, he merely resorted back to the ol' argumentum ad nauseum play. At one point (he must have felt threatened) he even sunk to a loaded list of questions and blatantly injected plurium interrogationum - not even any attempt at hiding it :There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".
I guess it's really our own fault, the usage of argumentum ad lazarum, craenumum, and nauseum, as well as bifurcation, amphiboly, and reification, could not have been so easily used by him if we hadn't fallen for his red herrings in the first place! It is no wonder that so many have departed, most likely to go in search of threads', chats', and blogs'which are not so easily diverted from topic. At least that way, those who seek truth and learning, just might find it!
Can anybody tell that I found an old logics book last night? Funny thing is, I don't remember ever purchasing the dang thing - haven't the slightest idea where it came from! Oh well, I decided that I would practice the application of some new words/phrases that I've now added to my vocabulary, and, being that they pertain to logic, I thought using them as a descriptive of the most illogical person I know was the most logical action I could logically ascertain.(uh-oh, one of those moods again, I had better cut this short - lol) That person (most illogical) is, of course, Ben[t] on being a victim. Not much political meat, but, truthful and accurate - hopefully it gives you something to chuckle about throughout your day! (Remember, Ben - it's the short bus! rotflmao)

Happy New Year! May God Bless America an All Her Troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#734 Consumer Comment

Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Well, let's face it, appearrance would lend support to the statement Ben has won. Not in the sense of his arguments being true, or even reasonably sound, but rather that through his introduction of several red herrings to these threads, and the cooperation of we that were ignorant to his intent, he has successfully aborted the sensible debates which were found on these threads! Why? I can only assume that it was/is his goal to prevent the truth of anything to be seen by those who seek. He, and once again I can only base this on supposition and appearance (God forbid he should he accuse me of hypostatization or reification within my writings!), has sought out those who logically and truthfully supply argument in favor of morality, family values, responsibility, and all things which the successes of America have been built upon. He has monopolized our time so as to drive away others who, more logical and open minded than he, would have (or at least could have) discovered that the venems and bifurcatious (not sure if that's a word! lol) statements which he and his ilk spew, are indeed laced with mallicious, and mendacious intent. In other words, he fears the masses learn the truth!
[bifurcation, when used in logic, is the fallacy created by inferring black or white as the only logical choices , in order to hide the fact that there may be several other available conclusions to an argument, but I'm not certain of bifucatious - Oh well, maybe I just created a new word! lmao]

Sadly, one must face the facts that, although as short time ago as three or four weeks, these threads were riddled with as many as ten or twelve(by moderate guesstimate) contributors in any given week, and now it is reduced to the same four or five of us, redundantly arguing ludicrousness to absurdity in attempt to educate the intentionally ignorant (thereby ineducable!) When I look at the tactics he has used to divert all from reaching conclusion, I am appalled that any, including myself, fell for his plays. Just to mention a few, I have found amphiboly, and, when exposed he turned it to an argument on grammar, and the validity of statements based on such premise; argumentum ad nauseum, yet even when proven false, he continued repeating his lies over and over and over, in the hopes that such repetition would somehow convice us that they are truth; reification and hypostatization, and when asked for more solid foundation of his statements, he merely resorted back to the ol' argumentum ad nauseum play. At one point (he must have felt threatened) he even sunk to a loaded list of questions and blatantly injected plurium interrogationum - not even any attempt at hiding it :There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".
I guess it's really our own fault, the usage of argumentum ad lazarum, craenumum, and nauseum, as well as bifurcation, amphiboly, and reification, could not have been so easily used by him if we hadn't fallen for his red herrings in the first place! It is no wonder that so many have departed, most likely to go in search of threads', chats', and blogs'which are not so easily diverted from topic. At least that way, those who seek truth and learning, just might find it!
Can anybody tell that I found an old logics book last night? Funny thing is, I don't remember ever purchasing the dang thing - haven't the slightest idea where it came from! Oh well, I decided that I would practice the application of some new words/phrases that I've now added to my vocabulary, and, being that they pertain to logic, I thought using them as a descriptive of the most illogical person I know was the most logical action I could logically ascertain.(uh-oh, one of those moods again, I had better cut this short - lol) That person (most illogical) is, of course, Ben[t] on being a victim. Not much political meat, but, truthful and accurate - hopefully it gives you something to chuckle about throughout your day! (Remember, Ben - it's the short bus! rotflmao)

Happy New Year! May God Bless America an All Her Troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#733 Consumer Comment

Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Well, let's face it, appearrance would lend support to the statement Ben has won. Not in the sense of his arguments being true, or even reasonably sound, but rather that through his introduction of several red herrings to these threads, and the cooperation of we that were ignorant to his intent, he has successfully aborted the sensible debates which were found on these threads! Why? I can only assume that it was/is his goal to prevent the truth of anything to be seen by those who seek. He, and once again I can only base this on supposition and appearance (God forbid he should he accuse me of hypostatization or reification within my writings!), has sought out those who logically and truthfully supply argument in favor of morality, family values, responsibility, and all things which the successes of America have been built upon. He has monopolized our time so as to drive away others who, more logical and open minded than he, would have (or at least could have) discovered that the venems and bifurcatious (not sure if that's a word! lol) statements which he and his ilk spew, are indeed laced with mallicious, and mendacious intent. In other words, he fears the masses learn the truth!
[bifurcation, when used in logic, is the fallacy created by inferring black or white as the only logical choices , in order to hide the fact that there may be several other available conclusions to an argument, but I'm not certain of bifucatious - Oh well, maybe I just created a new word! lmao]

Sadly, one must face the facts that, although as short time ago as three or four weeks, these threads were riddled with as many as ten or twelve(by moderate guesstimate) contributors in any given week, and now it is reduced to the same four or five of us, redundantly arguing ludicrousness to absurdity in attempt to educate the intentionally ignorant (thereby ineducable!) When I look at the tactics he has used to divert all from reaching conclusion, I am appalled that any, including myself, fell for his plays. Just to mention a few, I have found amphiboly, and, when exposed he turned it to an argument on grammar, and the validity of statements based on such premise; argumentum ad nauseum, yet even when proven false, he continued repeating his lies over and over and over, in the hopes that such repetition would somehow convice us that they are truth; reification and hypostatization, and when asked for more solid foundation of his statements, he merely resorted back to the ol' argumentum ad nauseum play. At one point (he must have felt threatened) he even sunk to a loaded list of questions and blatantly injected plurium interrogationum - not even any attempt at hiding it :There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".
I guess it's really our own fault, the usage of argumentum ad lazarum, craenumum, and nauseum, as well as bifurcation, amphiboly, and reification, could not have been so easily used by him if we hadn't fallen for his red herrings in the first place! It is no wonder that so many have departed, most likely to go in search of threads', chats', and blogs'which are not so easily diverted from topic. At least that way, those who seek truth and learning, just might find it!
Can anybody tell that I found an old logics book last night? Funny thing is, I don't remember ever purchasing the dang thing - haven't the slightest idea where it came from! Oh well, I decided that I would practice the application of some new words/phrases that I've now added to my vocabulary, and, being that they pertain to logic, I thought using them as a descriptive of the most illogical person I know was the most logical action I could logically ascertain.(uh-oh, one of those moods again, I had better cut this short - lol) That person (most illogical) is, of course, Ben[t] on being a victim. Not much political meat, but, truthful and accurate - hopefully it gives you something to chuckle about throughout your day! (Remember, Ben - it's the short bus! rotflmao)

Happy New Year! May God Bless America an All Her Troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#732 Consumer Comment

Hey! A book titled "Logic: The Antithesis of Ben[t] On Being a Victom"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Well, let's face it, appearrance would lend support to the statement Ben has won. Not in the sense of his arguments being true, or even reasonably sound, but rather that through his introduction of several red herrings to these threads, and the cooperation of we that were ignorant to his intent, he has successfully aborted the sensible debates which were found on these threads! Why? I can only assume that it was/is his goal to prevent the truth of anything to be seen by those who seek. He, and once again I can only base this on supposition and appearance (God forbid he should he accuse me of hypostatization or reification within my writings!), has sought out those who logically and truthfully supply argument in favor of morality, family values, responsibility, and all things which the successes of America have been built upon. He has monopolized our time so as to drive away others who, more logical and open minded than he, would have (or at least could have) discovered that the venems and bifurcatious (not sure if that's a word! lol) statements which he and his ilk spew, are indeed laced with mallicious, and mendacious intent. In other words, he fears the masses learn the truth!
[bifurcation, when used in logic, is the fallacy created by inferring black or white as the only logical choices , in order to hide the fact that there may be several other available conclusions to an argument, but I'm not certain of bifucatious - Oh well, maybe I just created a new word! lmao]

Sadly, one must face the facts that, although as short time ago as three or four weeks, these threads were riddled with as many as ten or twelve(by moderate guesstimate) contributors in any given week, and now it is reduced to the same four or five of us, redundantly arguing ludicrousness to absurdity in attempt to educate the intentionally ignorant (thereby ineducable!) When I look at the tactics he has used to divert all from reaching conclusion, I am appalled that any, including myself, fell for his plays. Just to mention a few, I have found amphiboly, and, when exposed he turned it to an argument on grammar, and the validity of statements based on such premise; argumentum ad nauseum, yet even when proven false, he continued repeating his lies over and over and over, in the hopes that such repetition would somehow convice us that they are truth; reification and hypostatization, and when asked for more solid foundation of his statements, he merely resorted back to the ol' argumentum ad nauseum play. At one point (he must have felt threatened) he even sunk to a loaded list of questions and blatantly injected plurium interrogationum - not even any attempt at hiding it :There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".
I guess it's really our own fault, the usage of argumentum ad lazarum, craenumum, and nauseum, as well as bifurcation, amphiboly, and reification, could not have been so easily used by him if we hadn't fallen for his red herrings in the first place! It is no wonder that so many have departed, most likely to go in search of threads', chats', and blogs'which are not so easily diverted from topic. At least that way, those who seek truth and learning, just might find it!
Can anybody tell that I found an old logics book last night? Funny thing is, I don't remember ever purchasing the dang thing - haven't the slightest idea where it came from! Oh well, I decided that I would practice the application of some new words/phrases that I've now added to my vocabulary, and, being that they pertain to logic, I thought using them as a descriptive of the most illogical person I know was the most logical action I could logically ascertain.(uh-oh, one of those moods again, I had better cut this short - lol) That person (most illogical) is, of course, Ben[t] on being a victim. Not much political meat, but, truthful and accurate - hopefully it gives you something to chuckle about throughout your day! (Remember, Ben - it's the short bus! rotflmao)

Happy New Year! May God Bless America an All Her Troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#731 Consumer Comment

This is getting out of hand.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Again, I feel the need to step in and say "ENOUGH ALREADY!" For a fleeting moment, I thought we had gotten this post back on track. But alas, I was mistaken, Ben just won't seem to let it go.

OK, so I have one small item myself for Ben regarding Google and the words "islam taught in california schools". I went directly to Google, typed in those words, and got 1.58M search results, pretty much the same as you. But to that I say "So what?" Everything that everyone is referring to, is listed in those first 10 results on page 1. Who gives a crap how many results you get? And if you honestly believe that all 1.58M of those results are about islam being taught in California schools, then you have a lot to learn about the internet my friend.

NOW, can we please, please, please get back on track here?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#730 Consumer Comment

D'you suppose, that little Bennie is a millionaire like Aeropostale?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 02, 2006

And didn't I make a similar commentary about "kitten" and "stew" a long while back?

Incidentally, I live in a place called Toledo, Ohio...guess what? The nicknames for our town: "Glass City"...and --hold onto your hats!---"FrogTown"! Every once in a while, you can see these enormous frog figures, placed in the front of businesses. Now, it hasn't always been "FrogTown"...at least, it wasn't when I left for Florida, but by golly, it was when I came back!

And Ben, the only thing you've proven is that you have lots of spare time on your hands. I guess it's lucky that your "significant other" has a real job.

Incidentally...I noticed you couldn't produce a single article on how "Conservative Frogs High Jacked Christmas". Or whatever. I gave names and addresses, and even the actual textbook used. Go to the Publisher's Web Site for that book, and it actually does exist.

Oh, but that's right.you won't read that titanic length post, right? Ben, you're one pathetic piece of work. Even worse, you post short little bits of worthless nonsense in dozens of worthless postsI'll even bet you've beaten James of Cana-DUH's multiple posts record! Your liters of litany soil multiple boardsyou attack the grammar and spelling of others, then tell them how petty they are when they return the favor. You piss and whine about civil rights vanishing and strive to discredit the civil rights of others. You shove homosexual marriage down other's throats, and then call people by homosexual synonyms, or tell a man to suck a fat baby p***s (how funnythat you'd think of a baby's p***s as fatI really sympathize for your significant other! I'd bet coitus interruptus is no big deal for her. So if your mate asks you give me ten inches and make it hurt, do you screw em three times and sock em in the nose?)

Oh, wellon to BIGGER THINGS, eh? ;)

So lets seeI can type Islam Taught In California Schoolsand get an article about that exact subjectI type in frogs highjacking Christmas and I get blogs and web pages that contain the words, but these words have no correlation. There is no article about frogs trying to take over Christmas. Or, for that matter, nothing that correlates frogs with Christmas, except places to buy cute ornaments that feature a frog theme (I think there was one link that offered a book about a frog's experience with Christmas!).

I put in Christianity and death, and I get websites ranging from The Passion Of The Christ, Victory over Death, and Christianitycult of death? and web pages on Christian Metal (music)lots more. I don't think you could have picked more wide-range choices for appearances' sake, but we know where you're headed with that one. I could do the same about your belief choicebut I'd be breaking my word, and I won't do that. I can say, however, that typing in Christianity yields 53,300,000 pages, whereas atheism pops out 9,300,000 without getting too involved in it.

And the Robert is wrong over the Ben is wrong bit? Nice try. Robert's a much more common name. My Family alone contains at least four that I can think of, on Grandma's and Grandpa's sides each. It is my Father's name, and my Brother's name. Our relatives came here on the Mayflower, and the name Robert features prominently in our genealogy.

Oh, and I can actually get an article for kitten stew, believe it or don'tsame thing with Shepherd's Pie. The difference is, the recipe for kitten stew actually includes the kitten (as an ingredient!), where the Shepherd is only the NAME of the pie.

And your second post, once again asking for that which was already provided? No prob!

ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff154773.htmlook for Here are some articles I found (don't forget the dubyas'!)

There's your link, the whole post is actually the article. Enjoy!

Now if you'd only go out and get yourself a copy of Word.

Ohand further reading, will tune you in to this f**ktard named Ben from Martinez, California. This dense Dipshit can't seem to get over the fact that he's been trounced---but I get the feeling he knows it!

Good lord, what a lamer! :D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#729 Consumer Comment

This goes back to my "inane comment" post

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 02, 2006

Look up Ben, and there you are. One inane comment after another.

Today, I ran "Islam taught in California schools" and got 103,000 hits. I use Netscape, and Netscape uses Google for it's search engine. So Ben, according to you, Islam is not being taught there. Also, according to you, it is being taught there. You wanted proof, there you have it. What an a*s.

I can play your game too. I searched for "Ben AND Jackass", and got 367,000 hits. I also typed in "Ben AND Highly Intelligent", and only got back 108,000 hits. I guess the numbers are correct. Three times as many people think you are an a*s as think you have a lick of sense. According to the rundown in these threads, those are very accurate. Remember who is on your side...The James Gang.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#728 Consumer Comment

The only logical response to Ben . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, January 02, 2006

Ben, I have scoured the posts you have made on a variety of threads, and I have decided to dedicate this entire post to comment on all of the statements you have made which:

a) are truthful

b) are factual

c) are not "spun"

OR

d) are reality based.

e) I'll even include the one's that could be described as having "wit".

Let's start with . . . hmmmm . . . well, I guess that's it. So there it is, for all to see - the truth about Ben's posts.

God Bless America

P.S. I noticed you're still evading and dodging the questions I had for you - like I said, you mustn't be able to think of the right way to spin them . . . yet! Also, are you suggesting that:

indictment of Scooter Libby, National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, Hans Blix report, Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos to the U.N. on 5 February 2003, National Security Council under Clinton, Clinton(and a whole list of his cronies, Vice Chaiirman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, New York Times, The Times, The Washington Post, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee (report of 2004), the March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission, State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11, a speech at West Point - six months later, State of the Union address in 2003, The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, theButler Commission', my beautiful wife (who is, in fact, a homosexual man trapped in a woman's body), physics, biology, laws of nature, evolution, science, and history are all just my opinion? Let me borrow a suggestion from Robert that I noticed he's already given you - hop on the clue bus! My Wal-Mart you're dense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#727 Consumer Comment

Shawn, YOU and VERA made the statements. Where is the proof behind them?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 31, 2005

Shawn,

You state....

"There you go, 30 times in a row where I made a statement, then backed it up with who said it"


Ok you did put down statements. You did put down the dates. But when it comes to the "who said it part", it was either you, or Vera.

Now here is the problem. YOU and VERA made the statements. Where is the proof behind them? Where did you get your information? They are just statments YOU made. Did you give any links or reference media to back them up? No! You have it all nicely laid out and numbered but I see NOTHING in regards to the "who" part other than that "who" being YOU!!!!!!

When I make statments or quotes, I have provided links to where I found them. And "who" said them.

You have provided nothing but you own opinions. You havent even shown others opinions.

Do I need to once again show you how to cut and paste a link??

If I made a statment that the "sky was green" and gave you the date and time of the post. Even cut and pasted it over and over it would mean nothing. Unless I could provide some proof that the sky was green. Anything less would just be a STATEMENT made by ME alone.

Thats all I see from you and Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#726 Consumer Comment

amzing post from the twilight zone

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 31, 2005

Another amzing post from the twilight zone.....

"I did a Google Search for "Islam taught in California schools". It came back with 106,000 hits."----Robert

Ok in Yahoo....I put in "Christianity" and "Death".

RESULTS: "of about" 16,600,000

Lets try "frogs" and "christmas"........

RESULTS: 4,720,00

Now lets try "Islam taught in California schools".....

RESULTS: 653,000

Ok.....now lets move on to google........

Same words......


"Christianity" and "Death"..........

RESULTS: 13,700,000

"frogs" and "christmas"

RESULTS: 2,090,000

Now for big one....
"Islam taught in California Schools"

RESULTS: 1,630,000


Ok, now that that little bit is over with. Settled in full.


So Robert, just where did you get those numbers again? I see you have a number of 106,000. Thats waaaaaay below even what I got!!!


WOW!!!


So I guess your right!! HAHA...not quite. As much as Vera and you would like to make some overblown and totally bogus fear mantra continue about "Islam taught in California schools" (that was what you put in the google search wasnt it?.......wording, case, and all?), I think you need to worry more about FROGS hijacking your CHRISTMAS!!

Actually now that I'm well aware of your tolerance for "proof" (or should I say "intolerance"?).....lets try a few more complex ones along the lines of "Islam taught in California schools". I just know you would use this as a dodge if I didnt address it.....


Lets try....."Dodo birds born in October" (in Yahoo first!).....

RESULTS: 33,000 (Oh my!! actually less than your original "Islam" search) Well hehe, the dodo is extinct isnt it?

Lets move on.....Google's turn......

RESULTS: 53,400 (Amazing....well not really...the bird is still extinct!!)


Moving on........


Lets try "Christianity in California schools" ini yahoo....

RESULTS: 2,110,000

Now google...."Christianity in California schools"........

RESULTS: 1,750,000


Now here is the kicker.......

Lets try "All Your Base Are Us"...........

Yahoo.........

RESULTS: 274,000,000 (AMAZING!!!)

Google.....

RESULTS: 840,000,000 (FREAKING AMAZING!! ALMOST A BILLION!!!)




So to end this Robert........Where the hell did you get such a low number for "Islam in California schools"? Obviously you full of s**t. Even a petty video game got more hits with the "All Your Base Are Us" search. I think you better put on that tinfoil hat and worry about some connection between frogs and christmas than "Islam in California schools".


Just for fun....lets do....."Conservative Frogs that support Bush"

Yahoo RESULTS: 210,000 (WOW!!! there are more "conservative frogs that support Bush" than hit for "Islam taught in California schools"!!.....AMAZING!)

Google RESULTS: 687,000 (WOW!!!....yes Vera...at this point.....it deserves drama)



I rest my case. And slaughter yours Robert.

And to make it fair.....

Lets try "Liberal frogs that support Bush"....

Yahoo RESULTS: 285,000

Google RESULTS: 906,000 (WOW! are there more liberals supporting Bush!!!)


So Robert, about this 106,000 number again. Where did you get it?? Its rather low for a simple search on Yahoo or Google. I think my random searches have proven that.

Ok one last one...(this is fun!).....

How about "Robert is wrong"....on yahoo.....

RESULTS: 40,200,000

How about "Ben is wrong" ....on yahoo.....

RESULTS: 19,800,000

WOW!!! Does that prove that I am right?? Uh....NO. It proves nothing. Its just a simple search on some words.

Once again......Robert......get real.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#725 Consumer Comment

I hate it when I get "sucked back in", but . . . lol

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 30, 2005

Here goes . . . in short form . . .

the indictment of Scooter Libby

National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002,

Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos to the U.N. on 5 February 2003

the INR stated in the NIE of 2002:

Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. In the late spring of 2002,

the NIE of 2002

In 1998, Clinton said:

Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998,

Sandy Berger 1999

- Nancy Pelosi February, 2003

Carl Levin 2001

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee

Al Gore in September 2002

And the list of Democrats whose statements I used as examples goes on and on - I noted each quote with who said it, what year, and often times even narrowed it down to what month for you - if you don't believe me . . . look it up for yourself, I'm not going to do your homework for you!

New York Times

The Times

the Washington Post,

in its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee

The March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission

State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11,

in a speech at West Point, six months later

State of the Union address in 2003

The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission

independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler

Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times

Butler Commission'

Here, I even quote an excerpt for you . . .

The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:
a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.
b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.
c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

In his press conference on the indictment against Libby, Patrick Fitzgerald

My beautiful wife (who is, in fact, a homosexual man trapped in a woman's body
In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence

Here, I pointed out that it was a topic of opinion and suggested we move past it - you couldn't let sleeping dogs lie!:
That is one(of many, I'm sure) topic that is open to much opinionated interpretation, and one that I doubt that you and I will ever see eye to eye on, so what say we just agree that we disagree, and move on.

physics, biology, laws of nature, evolution, science, history,

(proven 12/4/05)
Speaking of unanswered/dodged questions . . .

From 11/17/05
1. Tell me Ben, what is it that makes you believe that we should focus on progress, and leave those horrible times behind us, except the parts that you don't want to?
2. Yes, Ben, it is so obvious to me that you don't want what is right', or fair', or what is best for all', all that you want is to have the right to live in some perverse, unnatural fantasy world, and have the rest of society appease your guilt by telling you that it is O.K.'. No mention of sin, religion, or the teachings of my Mother Goose Storybook - just science, evolution, progress and nature that stands against homosexuality - so why should I, as a voice within a modern society, allow for the recognized union of such?

11/25/05
1. Do you read????

12/1/05
1. where do we draw the line on what is, and isn't morally acceptable within our society?
2. Who gets the honor of being the morality judge?
3. why not accept the practices of the man-boy love association? Do they not have the same rights as heterosexuals? Christians? Athiests? Homosexuals? Lesbians? Transvestites? What about necropheliacs? Pedophiles? Should we legalize and accept incest?
4. Do you really believe that the intent of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights is to ensure anarchy?

12/4/05
1. Must an act, to be not wrong, be beneficial only to oneself, to a particular nation, to all of mankind, to all living things, or to the universe as a whole?
2. from an atheist's view (if wrong, please explain where), what is wrong with killing anything, any more than destroying a tree or a rock? How is it more or less wrong to kill a man rather than a beast? How is it truly wrong for the fleeting particles that make up one body to spill the particles that make up another? How can there be right and wrong for mere substance

12/9/05
1. if one spreads' another's lie, even if they know it to be false, is that person not also lying?
2. Do you think it's patriotic to accept help from a terrorist organization which has killed and kidnapped hundreds of Americans, which works with al Qaeda and other terrorists, and which is currently aiding the killing of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians?
3. It's not unpatriotic to criticize a war or particular wartime policies. But how many patriots do you know who take aid from terrorists who kill Americans?

12/17/05
1. How many times do we need be attacked, and how many lives must be lost due to those attacks, before they are reality in your sheltered little fantasy land?

12/28/05
1. Gee Benny, how much effort does it take to discredit non-existent comments which you, with your lack of morals, somehow justify making up and passing off (attempting to) as another's statement, with the malicious intent of vilifying the honest?
2. how, exacty, does one response to a comment from you equal constantly blather?
3. does 0(ZERO) times and consistantly state coincide in your warped little world?
4. what gives you the right, when given answers and evidence, to ignore fact, and discount that which you disagree with, without ever offering evidence to the contrary?
5. (Actually, in retrospect, I believe it was you that called me a fruit) - hypocrite to the end now aren't you Ben, or is it alright for you to chastize me for actions which you are the only one guilty of committing?
6. Once you even stated that to be against the war was against progress. - Really Ben! Where?


There you go, 30 times in a row where I made a statement, then backed it up with who said it, what report it was in, when it was from, etc. - basically everything you need to know, should you be willing to do a bit of your own research (actually, most of them would be readily displayed by a simple google search!) I don't usually offer url's, websights, etc. they are as most often as credible as I find you to be . . . instead, I offer the names/dates of the actual documents or quotes from which the information was obtained, wherever possible. If you can't find it on a simple search, then by all means challenge me . . . but until you make an effort . . . to quote you . . . shut the hell up!

Also, I looked back a little more than a month and found almost 20 unanswered questions which were directed at you - and guess what? Yep! Ignored and/or dodged! I guess you just couldn't come up ith the right spin for those ones.

Finally, for the last time, if you're gonna accuse me . . . quote me! Maybe next time I'll go through your vile rants and pick out all the misquotes you try to pass off as mine and then spin some psuedo-wit to counter them with. If you were to try to respond to actual quotes in thier entirety, without contorting context, well . . . let's just say you probably wouldn't have much material in your posts - but hey! Maybe there would be some truth and fact to them for a change!

God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#724 Consumer Comment

You never cease to amaze me, Ben

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 30, 2005

I did a Google Search for "Islam taught in California schools". It came back with 106,000 hits.

Can you be any more daft?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#723 Consumer Comment

Where? Where? Where?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 30, 2005

Ok Shawn,

You state.....

"I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read"


Ok this is how a conversation goes with shawn....


He says that above.......


Then I say "Where?"


Then he says again...."I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read"


Then I say "Where?"

Then he says "I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read"

Then I say "Where"


Then he says "I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read"


This is the same response Vera has given for months over the Islam in CA schools. They SAY they put the proof down somewhere then just dodge when you ask the exact place. If they do point you to some specific post, it has nothing but their own OPINIONS. No links, no media reference.....nothing.

Then the cycle continues.......

He says "I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read"

I say "Where?"

Rinse and repeat.........

Cant read it if ITS NOT THERE!! Or you dont point to where IT IS! And I certainly cant read it if you DONT POST IT!! Which I have yet to see ANY link whatsoever.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#722 Consumer Comment

Whatever.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 29, 2005

O.K. Ben, I suppose you'll respond to this anyways, but, don't bother. I have provided proof several times over, but you refuse to read . . . this id just turning into a duplicate of your tantrums with Vera last month. I'm not falling for it - you are a loser, you have lost on every point, and it's not that any of your "points" are moot, you are! It's plain to see that, aside from your little group of fellow patients, nobody in reality will take you seriously. When you are released from the institution, climb back home to your little apartment, and forget about the sacrifices that have been made so that you do have these bastardized rights you tout.

That's all, No long post - my time is more valuable than that. I won't be responding to your inane garbage any longer Boo-h*o - you are stuck on being a victim, and nothing I say can or will change that. Don't think you've "won" anything either Benny, I leave past posts as "proof" of any win/loss which may be determined - I rest my case. I know that most people that have contributed to these posts are more reasonable, and intellectual than the likes of you, and your spin and lies can be seen through by anyone with an IQ higher than "the average purple cow from Neptune"!

Now, turn off the nice doctor's computer and go take your medication - and God Bless you Ben - I don't know of anything else that can help you at this point.

With most sincere wishes of good luck in all you do,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#721 Consumer Comment

Unh-UNH, Honey....!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 29, 2005

Unh-UNH, Honey!

And about this grammar issue. Drop it.

Fine yammering, for someone whose primary argument is calling Bush an idiot for bad jokes and the occasional spoken whoopsie. What makes it okay for you, and wrong for everyone else?


You have only had two angles of attack since this whole thing began. One, you just sit back and demand proof to every statement someone makes. Of course you dont acknowledge it when they do. Then refuse to show any of your own whatsoever. You give no links, reference media, nothing.

Yappyapp.[checking my nails]ya--hunh? Oh, I'm on.

I think these latest verbal farts are the funniest
Haven't we been saying this same exact thing to He Who Spins? Shawn has provided proof from sources on the Web, in the News (varying sources), and offered info from books out there on the subjectand so have I. Yet Ben says it doesn't exist and we're supposed to accpt that. Yet when he [Ben] points us to blogs and bulletin boards, broken links and crackpot websites, we are expected to take these as concrete proof?

s**t too, iffen y'eat regular!!

By what right does it expect to take our civil liberties away under a McCarthy like "fear propaganda" campaign?

What propaganda? There is video footage of what Saddam did to his own people! You may want him back in power and free to roam, but I can imagine the people of Iraq do not.

Also, 9-11 was NOT propaganda! You want propaganda, just watch that schlockumentary shat out by Michael Moore. It's got the weak minds of the Twin Freaks thoroughly washed, so you'd probably enjoy it.

Bush said Iraq HAD weapons of mass distruction at the time the war began.

Information that was given to him in piles of paperwork handed to him from the previous administration. Did all the Liberal Democrats that supported and voted for us to go to war not have that same information? If they're a part of it, they lied to us, too!

Bush said Iraq HAD weapons of mass distruction at the time the war began. That was the main, if not only reason for invasion. That is a fact.

No, it's not. WMD were only one of the factsthe violated Resolutions were another part of why we went after Saddam. And if there's no connection between Al Qaeda, why did Saddam give the families of the kids that sacrificed themselves to terrorist causes $25,000.00? Magnanimous-Day?
Sure.
Given time, I'm sure you'll put your personal spin on it.

We as citizens demand it. The ghosts of 2100+ dead demand it as well.

Yeahthere's that selective outrage. What makes the 2,100 lives lost DEFENDING THIS COUNTRY AND FIGHTING FOR THEMSELVES more worthy of our mourning than the 3,000 lives that were snuffed out in an act of terrorstruck when they were defenseless---on 911?

What makes those lives more valuable than the lives that are snuffed out in silence for the sake of convenience, as an act of post-coital birth control?

And what's with the ghosts? I thought you didn't believe in the supernatural? I guess one can modify their beliefs for the sake of convenience, too, then?

You even go as far as throwing out a persons sexual preference as a matter of policy.

You knowI can almost hear those very same lines uttered in the voice of D.A. Jack McCoy of Law & Order fame. But the truth is, Benyou're just turning the venting you were doing at me towards Shawn. Another truth, the only persons here that's been derogatory about anyone's sexuality is You and BOTH of the Twin Freaks. Examples include James telling Robert that The girls will sleep with him if he finds proof! Maybe Vera will sleep with him! How about it?! One for the Gipper! Or for the Board! zips readily to mind, you, for not only calling Shawn a Sick fruit, but for trying to drag this argument over to the other board and then telling me to shove things in my Uptight, theocratic, religious t**t.

Outside of that, the only comment Shawn made to you was to the tune of First you say you're Dating a Kindergarten Teacher', then you say you are Married with a Kid'---he even wished you congrats, AND, took the time to provide a post where he was eating his own words (or a big greasy dish of crow) when you clarified.

So really, it seems that it's more you who is taking something out of context and focusing on that---for example, you say that we pick on the whole grammar bitbut you dedicate whole posts and repeatedly bring up the fact that I have two posts on this board with odd little symbols (you called em artifacts'). The whole dictator bitI never denied the fact that Bush may have said thatbut everything you pointed to in your own sources (what actually did show, as little as there was) implied it was a humorous jolt, and nothing more.

The same could be said for Blanco's remark about writing one's Social Security number on their forearms with indelible inknow THAT was tasteless!

Now I am even seeing comments about Bush being a "king". And this right after you and Vera blasted me about calling him a dictator.

Well, we can't control the comments of others, for one, and wouldn't, as an act of sheer will. It wouldn't be fair. You may not see a difference between Saddam and George Bush, but you shouldn't bash and resent because we don't agree with your views. The only places I've ever seen our president called King George is in places like this, where unreasonable people spew out nasty diatribe and snarl at ANY opposition.

I have seen our laws ignored. Proof: Illegal wiretaps on American citizens without judges approval. (Bush even admitted them, and admitted he would continue...so spare me the "spin" and "show more proof")

Hmmmm.I'm still wondering where all this outrage was, when Clinton was doing this to people whom he perceived as a threat. How about when he had the IRS combing over and auditing the taxes of people who dared oppose him? How much does he make on a per-pardon basis? Did he give group discounts' for groups of ten or more?

Let me guessI'm just talking into my hat over those things, right? More spin? Pardongate was just an hallucination? Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Lastly, I'll start using a spell checker like you when you start doing what you ask so many other to do......show proof.

Firstlywhy does one need a spell-checker for proof, and I thought I was a Bad Guy for using a spell-checker!---Oh! I must be forgetting that some folks are more equal than others.

Your next post yields even more fun.

Lets start with #1. Shawn, you and many others here have defended our reasoning for going into Iraq as an extension of the "War on Terror". That is a FACT. This "War on Terror" was started by the events of 9/11. That is a FACT. Not by the first Gulf War in 91'. And certainly not by Saddams continued pathetic treatment of his own citizens. Or even his desire to obtain WMD's.

Butwait.in your last post, you said that the ONLY reason we went to war, was under the assumption of Saddam having WMD. Now you're saying something totally different. Oh, well.maybe you need to get a Freudian Grip?

AnywaysI had to laugh at the Now on to number 2........I'm not even going to bother with it. I see no reason to answer this one at all because of you complete hypocritical attitude.

Yet you give a windy wah-wah on how you're feeling picked on. But that's not the funniest part, Champ. It's THIS:

Remember? The one where you hunted me down just to diss me (and you call me a troll?????!! At least I dont "troll" just for specific people to harrass!).

[Big, doe-ey eyes, watering, as my lips are drawn to a pale, almost non-existent line. Little snicker-grunts squeak outmy face tics]

BWAAA___HhahahahahahahahahahahaaaahhAHH-hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaahaaaahhhh!!
HAAAHHHHhahahahahahahaaaghh!!
[Big, scrawling inhale!]
HhahahahahahahahahahahaaaahhAHH-hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaahaaaahhhh!!
[Tears!] Banging the desktop with my fist.

I picture you Masterbaiting for the Religious-Types.
You see the irony here, right?

But moving on

This same scenario played out in the 50's under McCarthy.

Here's a fine example of cross-posting. You tried a similar attack on Robert, and he shot you down over there rather nicely. And I notice you didn't have an answer to my query, when I asked that if we can rewrite History to make Christopher Columbus a disease-bringing dark agent that slaughtered the Native American peoples, why is it that the same history that points to McCarthy as a baddie can't be rewritten to make him out to be less of a nasty piece of work? But I have to just ignore that, right? Yeah, a handful of people were routed outand they actually were guiltyand the Liberals have had more than fifty years to disprove it and couldn't. Give em timethey'll invent something, like the forged documents presented by Dan Blather and Company at CBS News discrediting Bush's National Guard service.

But that footing must still fall within the lines of the LAW. And that line has been crossed much to often by the Bush administration.

Yeah, and Clinton, or Ted Kennedy have NEVER p***y-footed around the law, those upright fellows! Yeah.

There is no election organizer that will disagree to the fact that instilling fear in to the populace is a good way to ensure you get your way.

Well, Kerry sure used it to his advantageas did his African-American-But-Won't-Become-An-American-Citizen-Because She's-A-World-Citizen' wife, Tuh-RAY-sa.


Bush is using that to his advantage. Not to protect the people of this nation but to just simply "get his way" for his own personal gain and that of his cronies.

Sorta like Clinton didodd coincidence that his attack' just HAPPENED to be timed during the legal proceedings. Personally, I equate that with dumping millions of gallons of crude into the Persian Gulf, or setting the oilfields ablaze to evade attention. I don't rememberdid anyone die, back then?

Need PROOF??

Don't tease. You know you won't provide any.

Use common sense man! If someone robbed your house, you call the cops. You dont go out and invent a completely new police force that answers only to you! You follow the LAW! Not make your own!

See? I was right. Syllogisms don't equal proof.
Incidentally, if someone is intent on robbing my house and I'm cornered, I'll shoot the b*****d. I fully support the right to keep and bear arms.oh, and I drive a big truck, too. [Tim Allen grunting!]

What about wiretaps? If they want to tap you, they'll tap youand they can use a beam at the edge of a window to pick up a baby's fart at midnight if they want to. If you're doing something that's illegal, then you deserve to get busted. When someone's committing a crime, do you honestly think they're concerned with the rights of the person they commit the crime against? But I want to see where you get this information. Who has Bush had tapped, that he just woke up one day and shuffled into the Oval Office in his Deputy Dawg slickees and said, Hmm. I think I'll tap this poor schmuck today.

Let me guess: I'm not gonna point it out because you'll just say the link don't work, I don't like the source, or something that'll let you feel good about yourself! Right? Or will you surprise me, and show me something substantial? [Rattling the bones! Come on, Baby! Momma needs a new pair of shoes!]

'The biggest problem is, due to liberal cronies and money driven activists, the only people that receive benefit of the Constitution are criminals and deviants!' Now if I had made such a statment, you would demand "proof". Ok, Shawn, show me the proof!

How about what Norman Mailer did for the convicted murderer Jack Henry Abbott? How about the perps who brutally raped and murdered a woman in Central Park? What about Richard Timmons, a man who slaughtered his wife {beheaded her] his stepson [stabbed to death] and his seven-year-old son [beheaded him.in fact, the 911 tape was considered too brutal for the jurors, where you can hear the seven-year-old's last wordsStop, DaddyStop!---just before he was decapitated.) How do you think the actions of John Edwards has affected the cost of health care?

You're more than welcome to look into all thosecases where the crooks got off, got less than they deserved, or used their case as a means to reap the benefits of a Sue-Me Lottery---but experience in dealing with loudmouths like you tells me that you won't bother to look. You only have time to insult and spew posts equal in length to my own, but lacking even a tenth of the information to support your point, much less discredit my points or Shawn's points.

Check that spell checker of yours hypocrite. Practice what you preach. Its one thing to b***h about grammar, spelling, and making "snipes". Then when you go off and do it yourself.... Yadda-yadda.

What is it with you and spell-checkers? First you're accusing me, then you're using it as an attack, now you're accusing Shawn. Can't you come up with better material? And why the hell are we bad for ribbing about grammar, then you turn around and do the very same thing? Christ almighty! Buy yourself a copy of Word, and you can have a spell-checker too!

So keep "trolling" and "spinning" there bud.
Don't make me laugh.

I see no c***k out of my armor

What? Are you picking on the Chinese?
Isn't c***k' an offensive term? But seriously.

I don't see your posture as armoredmore like cocooned. And horribly, ridiculously flawed.

Just like Vera, your rules are......
Do what I say.....not what I do.
You have rules.....I dont.
You must show proof.......I dont.
If you use poor grammar, misspell, or take personal snipes at an individual..... then your points are moot......but not mine.

You must have me confused with a common, garden-variety liberal, like YOU, Bennie. I can play and live by my own rulesit's you who can't face reality.

And as always you will question people that come here and disagree with Bush.

Freedom of Speech grants me the right to speak my peaceso where ever there's a moron who thinks Mike Moore is a spreader of the Gospel, rather than the fertilizer-fodder he producesmore like spins up---I'll be there to refute it. So where ever people like you spread their tainted venom, you bet your a*s I'll be there to help patch the wound and debrede the pustule.

Calling them traitors, un-American, and telling them to leave this country.

Well, I do recall certain members of the Illiterati made the statement If Bush gets (re-)elected, I'll leave the Country! Yet ninety-plus percent are still here. I wonder how well it would pan out if Madonna were to make out with a mulatto Jesus in a Muslim Mosque? D'you think Brittney (Sp?) Spears would be able to squooze and grope her hubby, or give him a b*****b on a balcony in Serbia? Maybe, Pakistan?

And yeah, if a person wants to talk all this Anti-American crap, and berate this Country, it's their rightbut if they hate it here SO d**n MUCH, they are also welcome to exercise their right to LEAVE. Gynneth (Sp?) Paltrow lives somewhere in London or elsewhere in England, to avoid American issuesbut we know how well she loves the American dollar! How noble, hiding behind a child to assuage the guilt of desertion. It's all to rare, to find a celebrity willing to walk away from a life of vice and leisure to serve their Country, like Reagan, Wayne, Presley, and many others. All the little pansies are too busy enjoying the good life and spreading their message of selfishness and consequence-free irresponsibility. They hide behind mock nobility, and use this as a platform to level attacks against their own country, when they can work around their dry-heaves and spa-visits or psychic readings.

Outside of that, I know I still haven't called you a traitor or un-Americanand I invite you to prove it if I have.

Of course you have totally forgotten that only 6 years ago you and your ilk bitched and moaned about Clinton for years.

Actually, I wasn't happy with Clinton as a President, and outside of the standard complaintsyou know, like my taxes are too high Stuff is too expensive and the general material of that nature, I didn't have much else to say about Clinton. Except that the man was allowed to be our President, and that he was the first President that was never in the Military. I found that a bit bothersome, because of the whole Our Vets sleep under a bridge, while a draft dodger sleeps in the White House. When I volunteered at a homeless shelter in Florida, I saw many a Vet in the food lines. These were guys of varying ages and reasons, but a common thread. So I still believe every President should have served in the Military.

You do not have the right to question a President we like......but we reserve the right to question whatever a President you like.
You cant have free speech........we can.

You must be talking about your own personal views, there.

The fact still remains that even Bush himself has finally admitted the "causes" that were given to congress and the citizens of this country were not viable. Need proof? Dont tell me your going to "forget" his admission to the CIA's failures only a few weeks ago???

At what point has anyone ever stressed that the CIA is perfect? Can you point me to where you're getting info on this? I'll admit I haven't read or watched anything regarding it.honestly, I've been pretty busy over the Thanksgiving/Christmas season, and haven't been getting my doses of News like I'm accustomed.

If those reasons were NOT viable, then he has very shaky legs to stand on when promoting his heavy handed slaughter of our civil liberties and freedom of speech.

I notice the incessant use of Civil liberties being Stripped and Slaughtered, Massacred, and other brutal terms. You do know that at present, the Patriot Act is in a sort of Holding Pattern' right?

Any "course" maintained based on faulty info, is a faulty course to begin with.

Wowwhere'd you get that clever poit!' from? Gum wrapper? Where everit's not your style, and I can tell.

And in reference to your most recent post, titled Where Shawn? ....for the 90th time ....where??

What difference does it make to point post and date to you? You won't bother to read it, or you'll just deny it's there, say it's too long, that it's riddled with grammatical errors, and so forth. Whatever method or means there is to refuse to allow it to exist on your personal plane, you've used that sort of nonsense from the start. You want a post to show your continuous contradictions? I've given multiple examples on many posts.

On 10/24/05, a post titled Bennie, I swear you're so narrow-minded points out lots of your BS and contradictions, but the one that directly points out your snide, snippety twittering, name-calling and self-contradictions in their glory is the one on 11/15/05, titled Bush and his religious cronies are out to make this country Somehow, this post got one of the statements in your post placed as the title, as opposed to the actual title I had written for it. (I think it was something like BENt Logic, but I may have used that as the title to another post later on.)

The post Shawn is directing you to is, I believe, titled In response to some of Ben's past boo-h*o-ing. It's right above the post offered by James of Cana-DUH, titled to the effect of Saddam being in Kangaroo-Court, dated 12/06/05. So it's there, and eloquently writtenif you don't see it, it's that Egyptian Blood in youkeeping you in that state of De-Nile.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#720 Consumer Comment

Where Shawn? ....for the 90th time ....where??

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 28, 2005

"Oh, and Ben . . . I have proven time and time again that you are a liar, a spin artist, and a narrowminded ignoramus, yet you still come around spewing your immoral (proven 12/4/05) opinions."


Show me the "proof" Shawn. What post from 12/4???

What lies??

What "immoral opinions"???

You toss out a date, yet no quotes....nothing....as usual. I found nothing from 12/4. And certainly nothing that comes across as viable "proof" like you b***h and moan about from everyone else.

Consider yourself challenged. I seriously doubt you can dodge this one. I really am interested in these "immoral opinions". Let me guess....something to do with sexuality again I guess? It is your standard M.O.

You just cant leave that old grade school lunch yard can you? Cut down on the sugar there bud.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#719 Consumer Comment

Ok point for point.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Lets take a good long look at Shawns three points of "proof" shall we......

"1. I was never under the impression, nor have I stated, that Iraq, or Saddam Hussein were behind 9/11. Where do you get your news from?
2. Nowhere have I stated that you have no right to, nor that you must not, question anything, but what gives you the right, when given answers and evidence, to ignore fact, and discount that which you disagree with, without ever offering evidence to the contrary? If you ddon't want to know, don't ask!
3.McCarthy like fear propaganda' campaign . . . hold on a second . . . Bwaaaaaaaaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha . . . O.K. . . . now are you really suggesting that the need to be prepared, the need to take further steps to ensure that Bin Laden and his ilk can never again hit us as hard as we were hit on 9/11, you're suggesting that is a propoganda campain??? HELLOO-O - 9/11 happened Ben, no propoganda, it really happened! And now we (all Americans) should be grateful that the government is stepping up to the challenge. The biggest problem is, due to liberal cronies and money driven activists, the only people that receive benefit of the Constitution are criminals and deviants! That is one(of many, I'm sure) topic that is open to much opinionated interpretation, and one that I doubt that you and I will ever see eye to eye on, so what say we just agree that we disagree, and move on."


Lets start with #1. Shawn, you and many others here have defended our reasoning for going into Iraq as an extension of the "War on Terror". That is a FACT. This "War on Terror" was started by the events of 9/11. That is a FACT. Not by the first Gulf War in 91'. And certainly not by Saddams continued pathetic treatment of his own citizens. Or even his desire to obtain WMD's. It was started by a man named Osama Bin Laden. The leader of a terrorist organization based in AFGANISTAN, not Iraq. The Bush administration consistantly and constantly bantered about connections between Al-Quada and Iraq during the run up to the invasion. That is a FACT.

Those FACTS above totally trounce your #1. You stood, and stand behind all of the Bush administrations assertions that there was a connection. Its a little late now to back away from your own "reasoning". You said it, he said it. He acted on it, and you defend him for it. Reasoning that is completely discredited and proven false.

Now on to number 2........

I'm not even going to bother with it. I see no reason to answer this one at all because of you complete hypocritical attitude. You have never shown any proof to your statments. I should not have to bow down to someone that cant even live up to his own rules. But just to wet you fancy a bit, yes, you did say things like that many times. You constantly blather how people should have no right to speak out against this administration's actions. DO YOU NEED PROOF!? I suggest you read your posts on this thread and the one about Moore and his film. Do you remember that post there Shawn?? Remember? The one where you hunted me down just to diss me (and you call me a troll?????!! At least I dont "troll" just for specific people to harrass!).

Number 3......

We have all seen the pattern well and clear. This same scenario played out in the 50's under McCarthy. The only person I have met that can deny that that era in our nation's history was an evil and vile one is maybe you, and Robert. I will be right in line with you when it comes to the subject that we ARE a nation at war. I will also be right there in line with you when it comes to the subject of "security over civil rights". But there is a line called "going to far". That is where we differ. You think that the executive branch should have any say it wants during this "War on Terror". I dont think that way. There were very good reasons for the "checks and balances" system. To bypass them would be at the nations peril. I have no problem with being on a war footing. But that footing must still fall within the lines of the LAW. And that line has been crossed much to often by the Bush administration. There is no election organizer that will disagree to the fact that instilling fear in to the populace is a good way to ensure you get your way. Bush is using that to his advantage. Not to protect the people of this nation but to just simply "get his way" for his own personal gain and that of his cronies. This wiretap issue is a good example. There ARE courts in place to authorize such wiretaps. Bush clearly sidestepped them. Why? The courts are not out in the open and both sides of political arena have admitted that these courts were "secret". Rightfully so they were secret....they were created for.....WIRETAPS! Why then must Bush make up his own rules? There WAS a system in place to address this issue. He had no need to overstep his bounds. Unless......he is up to something else. Which is obviously the case. Need PROOF?? Use common sense man! If someone robbed your house, you call the cops. You dont go out and invent a completely new police force that answers only to you! You follow the LAW! Not make your own!


Now lets move on to the way you angle your attacks..........


First, you made this statement.....

"The biggest problem is, due to liberal cronies and money driven activists, the only people that receive benefit of the Constitution are criminals and deviants!"

Now if I had made such a statment, you would demand "proof". Ok, Shawn, show me the proof! And if you do (which is a serious doubt since you never do!), I bet I can show you proof for each point that both liberals, AND conservatives are guilty as sin of all charges equally.

Second,

Let me quote more of your wonderful hate filled speaches......

"Bwaaaaaaaaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha . . . O.K. . . . "

and....

"HELLOO"

Check that spell checker of yours hypocrite. Practice what you preach. Its one thing to b***h about grammar, spelling, and making "snipes". Then when you go off and do it yourself....only you look like the fool. (granted no TRUE grammar or spelling there....but definately a SNIPE)

So keep "trolling" and "spinning" there bud. I see no c***k out of my armor as long as you continue to act like a school boy at recess yelling "f*g!" at everyone that disagrees with him because mommy packed to much sugar in his lunch that day.




"If you ddon't want to know, don't ask!"


Oops I guess you did misspell tthheree......dooose thaaaat meaaan youuur entiiire post is MOOOOOOOT now like you make miiiine out toooooo beeeeee?


Just using your own rules! But, of course, you will come back and say that I "spun" it all again. Just like Vera, your rules are......

Do what I say.....not what I do.

You have rules.....I dont.

You must show proof.......I dont.

If you use poor grammar, misspell, or take personal snipes at an individual..... then your points are moot......but not mine.


And as always you will question people that come here and disagree with Bush. Calling them traitors, un-American, and telling them to leave this country. Under the simple rule of "he is our President and its un-American to question a sitting president". Of course you have totally forgotten that only 6 years ago you and your ilk bitched and moaned about Clinton for years.

But I guess that falls under the.....

You have rules....and I dont, clause eh?

Or is it the.....

Do what I say.....not what I do, clause?

How about you just flat out state what your posts have already made well and clear in a nutshell........

You do not have the right to question a President we like......but we reserve the right to question whatever a President you like.

Or how about......

You cant have free speech........we can.


In the end we can sit here an b***h about what was done before the invasion till the purple cows from Neptune come home for all I care. The fact still remains that even Bush himself has finally admitted the "causes" that were given to congress and the citizens of this country were not viable. Need proof? Dont tell me your going to "forget" his admission to the CIA's failures only a few weeks ago???
If those reasons were NOT viable, then he has very shaky legs to stand on when promoting his heavy handed slaughter of our civil liberties and freedom of speech.

So now that we KNOW that the info was misguided from the beginning...by his own admission....I see no reason to continue "the course" that HE laid down for us based on that info. To defend "the course" when the info is false can only mean one of two things to me. He is up to some other agenda that would require our liberties to be curtailed, and he needs an excuse. Or the man is seriously disfunctional in the head, and cant realize that he even admitted it was wrong. Thus continues to stay "the course".

Take your choice.

Any "course" maintained based on faulty info, is a faulty course to begin with.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#718 Consumer Comment

Ben - proof that you're a liar is in your own vitriol! (sorry, another 'longun' - anyone care for a coffee?)

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 28, 2005

O.K. Ben, you have passed the point of ridiculous, flew right by absurdity, blinked and missed fatuousness, and are now somewhere between mentally unstable and braindead! I do, however, want to thank you for the spectacular example of your sarcasm, inability to read/accept fact (perhaps both), and your putting words in my mouth in a miserable attempt at discrediting the information contained within my posts. Too bad you can't get away with your mendacity and spin if you actually quote me - it's very difficult to refute the truth, but I'm certain your morally inept mind will continue spewing your, what has become far too predictable and redundant, diatribe. Although it is apparent you have contracted the mind numbing disease ignoramous giganteus, it is uncertain whether or not you have done so intentionally. Judging by your ineducable condition, I would venture to guess (and give fair odds) that it was self inflicted. In the off-chance that this debilitating disease enters remission, I will (although I hate having to do this, the persistence of Ben's ludicrousity (wd.? - lol) deems it unavoidable) point by point show you the difference between WHAT I WROTE, and WHAT YOU (attempt to) SPIN!

Shall we begin then? Come along, Boo-h*o ... . . . . . . Booooooo - h*o(echo) oooo oooo ooo oo . . . Oh! There you are . . . I thought you ran away. Now, go get me a switch cause you deserve to get spanked . . . and you're about to!

What I wrote:**To lie is to say something one knows to be false. It is as close to certainty as we can get (unless you are perhaps a mind-reader, per se) that Bush believed what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.
How could he have not? George Tenet, his own CIA director, assured him that it was a slam dunk. This phrase would later become notorious, but in using it, Tenet had the backing of all fifteen agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States.

I then offered proof of my statement with the following facts:
In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence was that:

Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and FRANCE all agreed with this judgment. even Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

The discovery of a number of 122-mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker, and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . . . They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.***

To SPIN, Ben writes : (In attempted parody)
Iraq HAS WMD's. They are all over the place. We have already found 100's of nukes. Ranging from basic dirty bombs, all the way up to neutron weapons that even our own military doesnt have. Our proof? Well we found one centerfuge in some guys back yard in Bagdad. That should be enough. If you question it your a liberal traitor. So shut up. And bow to King Bush.

Next, I wrote:
**** . . . Now then, was it a lie to suggest that a connection could be traced between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? Contrary to how the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings were summarized in the mainstream media, their report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives. . . .

Proof of statement and sources found within:
ie. - Senate Intelligence Committee's report (sorry-2002) - public information
- 9/11 commission report - public information
- Independant British Investigation by Lord Butler (ever hear of Google?)

To SPIN, Ben Writes (in attempted parody):

Saddam was part of Al-Quada. We have the proof, and have no need to show it. So shut up you liberal liars! And bow to King Bush.

Next? 16 words from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.. . . then, further down I wrote
. . . every single one of the sixteen words at issue was true - that is, British intelligence had assured the CIA that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy enriched uranium from the African country of Niger. Furthermore, Britain's independent Butler Commission' concluded that it was well-founded. The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this. . . .

I offered evidence and source within, even taking the time to provide you with a direct quote from the Butler Commission's report I then went on t give further evidence, and quoted further source

To SPIN, Ben wrote (in attempted parody):

Saddam bought tons of yellow cake from Zimbabwe. If you want proof, then you must be a liberal. So shut up. And bow to King Bush.


Next, Ben pulls one of his old tricky quickies and tries to put a fast one by everybody - I never said that Haliburton didn't receive any contracts in Iraq - I never even hinted that Halliburton wasn't there. I vaguely remember some time ago (at least a month, if I had to guess) providing some information about how Cheney disposed of any and all vested interest in Halliburton prior to being sworn in for his first term as V.P.

From that age old statement, Ben SPINS it into

Halliburton has NO contracts in Iraq. Now shut up and bow to King Bush.
Gee Benny, how much effort does it take to discredit non-existent comments which you, with your lack of morals, somehow justify making up and passing off (attempting to) as another's statement, with the malicious intent of vilifying the honest.

Let's move right on to your next invective post and its continued diatribe which, I must admit, appears that you took the time to piece together with more than your usual bleating and farting. Of course, it's still full of sh!+, but different than your usual!
Please show me the proof. The only thing I have seen is RECENT Al Queda involvment since our invasion of the country. This war has made Iraq a magnet for every Al Queda nut on the planet. So when you do produce proof, make sure it has reference to BEFORE the war. Any reference to something after that will only prove that the invasion was the root cause of the connection. And prove that you are a "spinner" of massive magnitude.

OOOOO! Spinner of massive magnitude lol How long did it take you to look up those big words in your little pocket Webster's? I'm certain you could have found some astronomically ostentatious language previous to arriving at M, or you could have gone just a little further and found a multi-syllabic communication unit to further suggest that if I don't repeat my PROOF including my already supplied SOURCES, then I am to be considered a magniloquent manufacturer of erroneous iteration. See Above - (****)

Next, your rants move towarda grammar!

. . . You have only had two angles of attack since this whole thing began. One, you just sit back and demand proof to every statement someone makes. Of course you dont acknowledge it when they do. Then refuse to show any of your own whatsoever. You give no links, reference media, nothing. Yet for some reason you think of yourself as exempt from the same requests you toss at others. Two, you constantly blather about "grammar". . . . and . . . or doesnt take the time to use a spell checker like you do, does not makes the entire post irrelevant. And it certainly doesnt make any links, URLs, or media references they give "lies" as you so consistantly state. . . .

Hmmmm . . . let's see now . . . nope! I just went back to before the first of December and ya know what Benny? You guessed it . . . I had ONE POST where I commented on grammar(12/17/05 - eat grandpa vs.eat, grandpa), and that was in response to YOUR infantile comments on improper spelling! I haven't checked the other thread', but I would suspect that the outcome woud be very similar. Prime example of your unfounded spintastic accusations Ben - how, exacty, does one response to a comment from you equal constantly blather? Oh, and NOT EVEN ONCE have I found mention within any of my posts that any links, URLs, or media references given were lies . . . so does 0(ZERO) times and consistantly state coincide in your warped little world? It honestly wouldn't surprise me if they do! Now, not that it is any of your business, nor that it would make a difference if I did, but I don't use any spellchecker programs. I find that this is a good form of exercise for my mind - you see Ben, it is probably more difficult fo me to write a properly cunstructed sentence, without excessive spelling errors than it is for most . . . I have dyslexia. There was a time when the spelling of my own name changed daily ( advanced a fair bit, and do alright for myself. If I relied on spellchecker all the time, it wouldn't take long before I regressed.

Now, for your onto the subject at hand, to answer your questions in the order posed . . .

. . . Yet here we are in Iraq. Under the ruse that they were behind 9/11 as well. Thousands of American lives have been lost. That right there is enough reason to question our governments decision to go into Iraq. Under what right does this administraton foolishly expect us to bow down and believe it when it gives us such questionable information? By what right does it send our citizens to their deaths without giving us the right to question that decision? By what right does it expect to take our civil liberties away under a McCarthy like "fear propaganda" campaign?

1. I was never under the impression, nor have I stated, that Iraq, or Saddam Hussein were behind 9/11. Where do you get your news from?
2. Nowhere have I stated that you have no right to, nor that you must not, question anything, but what gives you the right, when given answers and evidence, to ignore fact, and discount that which you disagree with, without ever offering evidence to the contrary? If you ddon't want to know, don't ask!
3.McCarthy like fear propaganda' campaign . . . hold on a second . . . Bwaaaaaaaaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha . . . O.K. . . . now are you really suggesting that the need to be prepared, the need to take further steps to ensure that Bin Laden and his ilk can never again hit us as hard as we were hit on 9/11, you're suggesting that is a propoganda campain??? HELLOO-O - 9/11 happened Ben, no propoganda, it really happened! And now we (all Americans) should be grateful that the government is stepping up to the challenge. The biggest problem is, due to liberal cronies and money driven activists, the only people that receive benefit of the Constitution are criminals and deviants! That is one(of many, I'm sure) topic that is open to much opinionated interpretation, and one that I doubt that you and I will ever see eye to eye on, so what say we just agree that we disagree, and move on.

Regarding your demand for proof of WMD's . . . see above section from ** to ***, or, for further iteration of facts in support of my stance, (re)read my post from 12/20/2005 from which that exerpt was taken.

You even go as far as throwing out a persons sexual preference as a matter of policy. You obviously took great pains in trying to figure out which way "I went" in regards to sexuality.

WHAAAAA???(one eyebrow raised as I peer' beffuddledishly through the opposite, squinting eye) Whoooa now Trigger, back it up a bit! Where in your disillusioned world did this (mis)conception take place? I haven't even suggested to know the sexual preferences of anybody else on this thread, and eveeeeeeen if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't be throwing it out as a matter of policy, or anything else for that matter! I don't give a wooden nickels change about your, or anyone elses sexual preference . . . just keep it in YOUR OWN bedroom please - not the streets. (Actually, in retrospect, I believe it was you that called me a fruit) - hypocrite to the end now aren't you Ben, or is it alright for you to chastize me for actions which you are the only one guilty of committing?

As far as your I heard some . . . king Bush . . . blah,blah,blah bologna, some right wing extremist nut makes an audaciously inane comment and you wanna paint the whole by those standards? O.K., I heard a democrat say that there should not be any law against the sacrificing of a woman, as long as it is done for religious purposes . . . what's your wife/girlfriend doing during the next full moon? Oooowwwwwwwwww lmao Hello. Ben, reality wanted me to tell you she misses you.

As the majority of your remaining post is just your usual unsubstantiated drivel, filled with mendacious sentiment and blatant lies with an obvious intent of your usual asinine modal spin, and the unjust vilification of any who oppose your views, I will do my best to respond in summary.

To clarify a few words which you attempt to unscrupulously give credit as mine, I never said that war is progress, nor have I blasted anyone for questioning the activities of this administration. I have used the term un-American one time, and that was to chastize another republican for his statement which suggested the intentional disenfranchisment of a particular group, from their right to free speech and their right to representation , because their voices generally lend weight to the left wing. See Ben, I too am a fervent supporter of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the main difference between you and I, is I believe those rights apply to everyone, not just those who believe as I do.

Once you even stated that to be against the war was against progress. - Really Ben! Where? I guess you have once again proven yourself a liar.

Oh, and Ben . . . I have proven time and time again that you are a liar, a spin artist, and a narrowminded ignoramus, yet you still come around spewing your immoral (proven 12/4/05) opinions. You have yet to provide a shred of evidence refuting even one of MY STATEMENTS, which, due to your obvious dishonest nature you have yet to offr more than opinionated drivel and rhetoric in response to. You, Ben, have accused me of all sorts of evil on these threads, but, in fact, you are the one guilty of these transgressions. I have, point by point, shown you where I HAVE INDEED, offered both proof, and source to EVERY single one of my statements which you have falsely, and repetitively accused me of not doing - you offer opinion; I have applied physics, biology, laws of nature, evolution, science, history, and even your own expressed sentiments and beliefs to reinforce my standpoint on various subject matters, you come back with typical of you religious types and other such vitriol.

Let's face it Ben, all you've discredited over the last few months is yourself, and your immoral, perverse and deviant manner along with your bastardized form of some heretical constitution, which, if continued to be (mis)interpreted by your ilk, will surely send this country (and your much touted rights) to hell in a handbasket in very, very short order.

God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#717 Consumer Suggestion

Ben you sir are a hypocritre

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Ben:

You actually say that Bush lied about the WMD's. If there were truly none and Iraq no longer had them all they had to do was allow the inspectors in which they refused to do. For what possible reason would they not disclose the paperwork necesarry that they adhered to the Un sanctions.

Also, you say Bush lied about WMD's. Are you willing to admit that all your democratic leaders who had the same information that the preseident had went on record saying that Iraq had to be stopped because they had the capability to attack with WMD's. Don't come out calling one man a liar unless you are willing to include Bill clinton, hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, john Kerry, john Edwards, howard Dean and the rest of the democratic leadership. Everytime you say that the president lied you seem to conveniently ignore this fact.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#716 Consumer Comment

Shawn, Iraq, Al-Quada, ...where is the proof?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Shawn,

You quote...

"it has been proven that there was, and still is a connection between Iraq an Al Queda "

Please show me the proof. The only thing I have seen is RECENT Al Queda involvment since our invasion of the country. This war has made Iraq a magnet for every Al Queda nut on the planet. So when you do produce proof, make sure it has reference to BEFORE the war. Any reference to something after that will only prove that the invasion was the root cause of the connection. And prove that you are a "spinner" of massive magnitude.


And about this grammar issue. Drop it. You have only had two angles of attack since this whole thing began. One, you just sit back and demand proof to every statement someone makes. Of course you dont acknowledge it when they do. Then refuse to show any of your own whatsoever. You give no links, reference media, nothing. Yet for some reason you think of yourself as exempt from the same requests you toss at others. Two, you constantly blather about "grammar". It has already been "refuted" and "discredited" that just because someone has poor grammar, or doesnt take the time to use a spell checker like you do, does not makes the entire post irrelevant. And it certainly doesnt make any links, URLs, or media references they give "lies" as you so consistantly state.

Now on to the subject at hand.....

This nation is now at war. A war brought upon us by a man named Osama Bin Laden. A man that has never denied involvement in 9/11. Yet here we are in Iraq. Under the ruse that they were behind 9/11 as well. Thousands of American lives have been lost. That right there is enough reason to question our governments decision to go into Iraq. Under what right does this administraton foolishly expect us to bow down and believe it when it gives us such questionable information? By what right does it send our citizens to their deaths without giving us the right to question that decision? By what right does it expect to take our civil liberties away under a McCarthy like "fear propaganda" campaign?

Bush said Iraq HAD weapons of mass distruction at the time the war began. That was the main, if not only reason for invasion. That is a fact. That is no spin. Bush and his administration said it, meant it, and acted on it. For you or anyone else to deny it would be the ultimate spin in the universe.

WHERE ARE THOSE WMD's? Cough them up or put up with the questions.....period!

If WMD's were his reasoning, then let the reasoning stand and he must answer for it. To this date NONE HAVE BEEN FOUND. I challenge you to show proof Shawn. SHOW US THE PROOF! Just as Bush must do. We as citizens demand it. The ghosts of 2100+ dead demand it as well.

WHAT CONNECTION TO AL-QUADA? Cough up the proof....or put up with the questions.

If a connection to Al-Quada was his reasoning, then let the reasoning stand and he must answer for it. To this date nothing but loose connections have been shown to the public. All of which date back to the mid 80's when both Bin Laden and Saddam were on the "friend" list to America. Bin Laden was an ally against the Soviets in Afganistan, and Saddam an ally against Iran. To use it any other way (especially 15-20 years later!!) is an ultimate proof of "spin" you so consistantly rally against.

Now if you want to go on and on bitching and moaning about grammar...fine. But that will never make up for the fact that you cant stand by these two questions with any fact or proof whatsoever. You have dodged, spun, and blatantly lied your way through this entire thread. Your only angle of attack is to deny doing yourself what you demand of others, or, to b***h about someones grammar. You even go as far as throwing out a persons sexual preference as a matter of policy. You obviously took great pains in trying to figure out which way "I went" in regards to sexuality. You poured over several threads, and many many posts. Trying to toss in quote here or sentence there in some patchwork of bullshit. In the end you only managed to sound like a 10 year old school boy at recess yelling "f*g!!!" at another kid that just happened to annoy him. Well Shawn, once again, your wrong. Sorry you wasted so much time on it. Maybe you should have spent more time on your proof about the subject at hand than trying to find proof about my sexuality. But you cant do that can you? Because to you, a persons sexuality is justifiable angle of attack in ANY discussion. See you at recess.


Then to add insult to injury, you blast anyone that dares to question the policies and actions of this administration as a traitor to their county. Even going as far as "spinning" a persons comment about "defending civil liberties" into some twisted bullshit un-American activity. Once you even stated that to be against the war was against progress. Well, Shawn, while I'll admit mankind has a long way to go to outgrow war. I can hardly call war a good sign of "progress" like you do. Nor will I ever say that denial of privacy or civil rights is a hallmark of "progress" as well. That would be something I will have to leave to a professional spin doctor like yourself.

Now I am even seeing comments about Bush being a "king". And this right after you and Vera blasted me about calling him a dictator. On one hand you say anyone that calls Bush a dictator is a liar and spinning, then on the other you people come out and call him king??

With that comment in mind......

I have seen our Constitution get trampled on.

Proof: Patriot Act

I have seen our laws ignored.

Proof: Illegal wiretaps on American citizens without judges approval. (Bush even admitted them, and admitted he would continue...so spare me the "spin" and "show more proof")

Now I have even seen someone banter about "shutting up" because Bush is "your King". This in itself is so un-American, and so vile, that it even slings mud at the Declaration of Independance itself!

Why did we break away from England again??

Lastly, I'll start using a spell checker like you when you start doing what you ask so many other to do......show proof.

So unless you start scanning in those NSA, CIA, and FBI documents with proof positive of WMD's in Iraq at the time the war began....then shut the hell up.....liar, spinner!

Or, you can show me the NSA, CIA, and FBI documents with proof that Bin Laden and Al-Quada were in bed with Saddam.....then shut the hell up....liar, spinner!

Spare us your spin game.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#715 Consumer Suggestion

Wrong Forum

AUTHOR: Troy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Firstly, the establishment of this thread for the Bush invading for oil argument is intellectually juvenile at best and really tired. The left needs to brain-storm and come up with a new clichs.

Secondly, is this the correct forum to complain about your displeasure with the executive branch? The country voted in record numbers this last go-round and Bush is in for a few more years. Get over it! The left is so pissed that they can't see straight and apparently their deductive reasoning is a bit taxed as well.

Thirdly, if you are on the left and you wish to win a national election, come up with some new ideas and show the populace an innovative direction for OUR country. Also, quit being so d**n divisive. If there is anything most people can't stand is a complainer. That is all the left does these days...complains. Its old but thanks JAMES for more of it. Oh and the pictures you attached are real clever.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#714 Consumer Comment

Ok Shawn... If you can get past your homophobe views. Here, I'll tell "your" truth..

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 27, 2005

"Here's a little advice Ben (and others who have been following his rickety mantra) - rather than continuing on as part of the problem, why don't you get honest (I know that's a far stretch for some, but at least open your minds and try!) stop posting your usual un-informative rants filled with base opinion and sarcasm, and instead try offering up a few points to ponder."---Shawn

Ok Shawn,

If you can get past your homophobe views. Here, I'll tell "your" truth..

Iraq HAS WMD's. They are all over the place. We have already found 100's of nukes. Ranging from basic dirty bombs, all the way up to neutron weapons that even our own military doesnt have. Our proof? Well we found one centerfuge in some guys back yard in Bagdad. That should be enough. If you question it your a liberal traitor. So shut up. And bow to King Bush.

Saddam was part of Al-Quada. We have the proof, and have no need to show it. So shut up you liberal liars! And bow to King Bush.

Saddam bought tons of yellow cake from Zimbabwe. If you want proof, then you must be a liberal. So shut up. And bow to King Bush.

Halliburton has NO contracts in Iraq. Now shut up and bow to King Bush.

There happy Shawn? Ill bow down to the party line now. (But I will bow to no king!)

By the way.....I have some beach front property to sell you in New Orleans. Unfortunately the nearest people to you will be below the poverty line minorities. Being a racist homophobe a*s that thinks the loss of civil liberties is a form of progress, I doubt you will want to live there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#713 Consumer Comment

Either Ben's a mindreader, or my wife has him "pegged" lol

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 25, 2005

A quip about grammar . . . hmmmm (fingers tap, tap, tapping in succession on my desk as I contemplate how best to respond to Ben's latest diatribe) hmmmmmm . . . Yaaaaa-whateverloser!

My beautiful wife (who is, in fact, a homosexual man trapped in a woman's body
I really must apologize to those who actually read my post on 12/20/05, but, I find I must re-iterate for the illiterate (or lazy, or intentionally ignorant, or what ever the reason is you failed to grasp reality) I'll even write in a grade school level english in the hopes you may have a better chance at understanding the facts. Actually, rather than waste the time of so many others, please allow me a moment to speak directly to Ben. . . it looks as though the rest of us are trying to move on into a more mature, and reasoned debate which includes the exchange of both fact, and substantiated opinions from a variety of personalities. While it appears that most of us are quite content with this, you once again came slithering along and injected your usual snide little squeeks filled with sarcasm and empty, if not mendacious assertions. I do believe this has been refered to as trolling

Here's a little advice Ben (and others who have been following his rickety mantra) - rather than continuing on as part of the problem, why don't you get honest (I know that's a far stretch for some, but at least open your minds and try!) stop posting your usual un-informative rants filled with base opinion and sarcasm, and instead try offering up a few points to ponder. Of those points, you should be willing to back them up with more than just your usual parries and juvenile approaches - which usually amount to no more than a I know you are but what am I mentallity. Contrary to your obvious misconception that if you just keep repeating it, it will be recognized as a fact by all who read your posts, we are (mostly) adults on these threads' and would like to see at least a hint as to some rational behind your thoughts. If you aren't willing to at least do this much, don't b***h and moan when you are easily proven ( as has been done so often in the past) to, at best, have a distorted view of reality!

BTW . . . it has been proven that there was, and still is a connection between Iraq an Al Queda - failing to accept the truth doesn't make it any less factual, and it hasn't been proven that there weren't any WMD in Iraq in the months leading up to the initial assault on Iraq. Actually, as one of my previous posts explained in detail with documented facts offered in support, the contrary is, and most certainly was at the time, the only logical conclusion which anyone with normal mental function or better could have come to! So, once again your little synopsis, or response has been empty rhetoric and mis-representation of information, which is eqaul to spin . . . nothing more!

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#712 Consumer Comment

Ah yes. the hypocrite.. continues...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 23, 2005

"What infuriates me most, is the number of Americans (James, Ben, etc.) who accept it as a self-evident truth, even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike."---Shawn

Yes "refuted" and "discredited". Those are some nice terms.

They can also be used for.......

"Iraq had weapons of mass distruction"

and.....

"Iraq was involved with Al-Quada"

One small difference is.......these two have cost 2100 American lives. And the count continues to grow. On the "dictator" front, we can just let everyone make up their own minds about loss of civil liberties and the new issue of un-warrented wiretaps. I cant say much more or our dear Shawn will cry "Spin!" and make posts with emulated baby noises. Then end it with a quip about grammar.

All hail King Bush! Now shut up you liberals!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#711 Consumer Comment

Holidays turn me into an insomniac!!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 22, 2005

I know, Vera, you can tell by the hour that I posted it that time sort of got away from me when I was researching/editing that one! Sorry to all for the long read, I will try to offer information in a little less wordy a manner in the future! I guess I should have offered that coffee at the start! lol

I, too wish to take a moment to thank Patrick, and all of the men and women who are serving, and have served in our armed forces, past and present. I find it takes a far nobler man/woman than most Americans, to put their lives on the line to ensure the rights and freedoms which these self proclaimed patriots take for granted! It amazes me to see today's youth, running free and spouting off about their rights, and not one of them has a spark of understanding' where those rights came from, or at what cost!

I had another tid-bit that I tried to post last night, but I don't think it worked - my fault, I tried to send it before signing in! lol I'm not going to reproduce it, but I will try to re-create the thought behind it. . . .

To offer my thoughts on how things may change in Iraq since the elections, especially in consideration of the heavy Sunni turnout . . . not much! Why such a pessimistic outlook? Well, first off, the Sunni' are not the main force behind the terror attacks perpetrated against our soldiers, and the civilian population of Iraq, nor is it romantic nationalist insurgents (as some liberal journalists and marchers like to pretend), but an evil grouping of Saddamite gangsters' furious at losing power, Syrian and Iranian agents intent on creating mayhem and then theocracy, and Islamo-fascists who want to re-enslave the Middle East - and whose local 'Pol Pot', Abu Musab Zarqawi, boasts of seeking to murder as many of Iraq's majority Shiite population as he can!

Secondly, I must correct a previous opinion I have posted, and say that those requesting a definitive plan for withdrawl are correct in the need for such. My reason's for agreement are not as anti-war as most, but rather I have developed this concept through what I consider a slightly more logical process of thought.

Both George Bush and Bill Clinton have stated that to do so, would only serve to have the insurgents lay low for that period, then rise up at the determined time of withdrawl. Super! I say. That means that for the next 6 - 18 months (whatever time-frame is given), it will drastically reduce the number of deaths of both American military and Iraqi civilians; and it will provide time for the new elected government to solidify their position in that society, and have developed and trained soldiers, and police of their own! The secondary benefit, is that should the insurgents rise up at that time, we, at the request of the new Iraqi government, can then supply troops (most likely about 1/3 or fewer as what are presently there) to aid in the peace keeping, and we would be seen in a much more favorable light, rather than as occupiers.

In closing (for I fear I could drone on and on - lol), thanks to the coalition Iraqis have more confidence in their future than we do. Iraqi refugees are not fleeing abroad in vast numbers, as happened during previous crises. The Iraqi dinar has strengthened, not weakened, against the currencies of other oil-producing nations. The mistakes that have been made in Iraq since its liberation do not alter the fact that the overthrow of Hussein has given Iraqis a chance they never had before, and has shaken the corrupt and dictatorial foundations of the Middle East.

May God Bless America,

P.S. Vera, as a Canadian citizen, I can tell you that James is not a good representation of Canadians, and I always enjoyed when some event brought an influx of Americans to my home town. I must, however, speak in begrudged defense of the little dummy. After speaking with my parents earlier this week, I have come to the conclusion that most all of the information making it "North of the 40th" is tainted by some liberal hack censur, intent on hiding truth, and bastardizing history. James is just one of the "easily duped"!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#710 Consumer Comment

Sigh... just when you think it's safe to get back into the water again...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

As young Johnny helps his Mother clear the table, post dinner, a glimmer of silver streaking over the horizon catches his eye. "What's that little disc?" He queries, as the shape rapidly grows, then sinks, followed by the sensation of an immensely heavy object striking Earth. The television flickers in synch with the impact, and uneasy glances are shared among the Family members present...

The ships land, the smoke clears as the main hatch opens and up comes the Supreme Leader/head Flunkie of planet Recton...yes, it is none other than Sfing-KTor (known among most personnel as "Sphing the Worthless"). Lord of all methane-based life forms in the Smegmal quadrant (and often laughed at by those that wear fuzzy turtleneck sweaters). Ol' Sphing has come back from his class on how to write like a sixteen year old. "Hey, yooz Guyz! U got nothin' 2 B proud of, w/Desert Storm." How proud he must feel, having farted out his first words in backward, mangled l337-speak.or teen-speakorwhatever.

I know...a little dramatic for an intro...but I just have to wonder where this guy gets off. And I've heard we Americans are considered arrogant!

But at any rate, James of Cana-DUH, I'm still waiting for you to do something more than present some hyper-edited e-mail as your grounds for assuming the flaws you see in our government and our military. It's been four months (almost to the day!) since James of Tupper has posted this little "Report" of his...and neither you nor he has presented one shred of credible information to justify your positions.

So maybe you should get with your "peepz" and talk about the root causes of "terrorizm". Or perhaps sidestep into something other than the "Ebonics" dictionary, and learn to write English. Can you present something a little more fact-based than your own opinion?

And Shawn....wow! A longie, but worth the read every minute...and a wonderful synopsis of the situation. Well done indeed!

Patrick---thanks for serving. Every holiday that involves our Military, I try to celebrate. I am proud of my country, and I know that freedom comes at a big price; it started at our foundation, and continues to this day. I salute you, my friend! (\:D)
Have a happy!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#709 Consumer Comment

Whatever.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

James - Calgary, Alberta

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#708 Consumer Comment

Whatever.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

James - Calgary, Alberta

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#707 Consumer Comment

Whatever.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

James - Calgary, Alberta

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#706 Consumer Comment

Whatever.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

James - Calgary, Alberta

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#705 Consumer Suggestion

Yep u keep on honoring those troops Patrick

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Patrick;

As you will find & you can "mark my words" the winners of the election in Iraq will be religeous based & not backing the USA in any way, but more sypathetic to Iran. Iran will go on to build their nuclear weapons & be determined to put an end to Isreal, as we know it. US presence in the region has not gained the USA popularity at all, anywhere in the world... & it does not matter what Fox News says.

Yep the big "can of worms" that was opened up by Desert Storm & the people who had part of it... sure will have something to be proud of.

George Bush will go down in history as the "Man Who Changed the World"... but not in a good way & you just go on with (not believing in all of his policies), as the terrorists continue to set up cells in the USA.

Oh & they don't have to come in on a plane or a boat or through Canada as Vera is convinced they will. A $50 Bill should be enough to get a police escort, as anyone transports a nuclear bomb into the USA through Mexico.

Yep hold your head high for your great work in Desert Storm... & prepare yourself for "Storm USA" as it is merely a matter of time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#704 Consumer Comment

Thank you Vera.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Vera,

Glad to see you are ready to move on from the topics being debated with Ben.

Just as you said, I too have learned quite a bit of good information by reading and participating in this report. I certainly hope "B" returns and provides more insight, along with others who have positively contributed. And I'm not talking about just taking sides, but presenting intriguing information. And no, intriguing information does not include things like n**i subs in Lake Ontario, sales of Ford vehicles to Germany, and who had the first supersonic plane. Or whether or not Islam is being taught in California schools (sorry Vera, he he).

Now, if we can get Shawn and Ben to also agree (more Ben than Shawn as he was your primary adversary), then we should be able to get this report back on track again.

I for one am keenly interested to see how things in Iraq shake out now that the congressional elections were held last week. With more Sunni representation in the government, maybe things will start to stabilize and our troops (or the majority of them at least) can finally come home and leave Iraq to the Iraqis.

I am a proud veteran of Desert Storm, having served six years in the Air Force defending my country's freedoms. I support the military, and our President (even if I don't agree with all of his policies). I hope that we can have a safe return of all our troops in the middle east abd around the world, and I honor the memory of those who have served and died, past and present.

Just remember, our voices do count. Make yourself heard and vote in ALL elections, local, state and national. This is the only way to institute change.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#703 Consumer Comment

Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Ah, yes . . . I agree, Sir Patrick (or is it St.?lol) . . . enough with the Boo-h*o's of this thread - off with their heads! On to the tangible, factual, and inarguable truths. It may create the need for more time (that one be certain that what they pen is concrete in verity), but indeed the debates should lessen in opinion, and thereby temperments settle. Now onwards . . . (
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debates on this, and similar threads, one in particular stands out above all others - the charge that George W. Bush misled us into a war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been exposed. What infuriates me most, is the number of Americans (James, Ben, etc.) who accept it as a self-evident truth, even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. This lie reminds me of those animated cartoon characters, who after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Are there honestly that many of us that base our political stance on the likes of Goofy?

Please, although it is a looooong read, allow me to reveal it for the prevarication that it is. Although doing so will require reiterating that which I (and many others) have covered before, I hope that revisiting these facts may also serve to refresh faded memories, to clarify mixed thoughts, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.

The main lie that George W. Bush is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of WMD's. From this followed the subsidiary lie that Iraq under Saddam's regime, posed a double-edged imminent threat. On one hand, we were informed there was a distinct possibility that Saddam himself would use these weapons against us and/or our allies; and on the other, there was the more dangerous possibility that he would supply them to terrorists - like those who had already attacked us on 9/11 (and to whom he was linked).
This entire scenario of purported deceit was given a boost by the indictment of Scooter Libby, then chief of staff to d**k Cheney.

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury - a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had outed Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. To clarify, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame, but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that:

[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel. This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation, about the compromise of a CIA officer's identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some persona person, Mr. Libbylied or not.

From this was born the following lie by Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, who spoke for a host of other opponents of the war in insisting that:

[t]his case is bigger than the leak of classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the President.

If only to avoid argument, let's say that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the period leading up to the invasion, still, it would defy all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted that they did. To lie is to say something one knows to be false. It is as close to certainty as we can get (unless you are perhaps a mind-reader, per se) that Bush believed what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.
How could he have not? George Tenet, his own CIA director, assured him that it was a slam dunk. This phrase would later become notorious, but in using it, Tenet had the backing of all fifteen agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States. In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence was that:

Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and FRANCE all agreed with this judgment. even Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

The discovery of a number of 122-mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker, and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . . . They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.

Blix now claims that he was only bein cautious here, but if, as he now also adds, the Bush administration misled itself in interpreting the evidence before it, he at the very least lent it a helping hand. Once again, so did the British, the French, and the Germans, all of whom signed on in advance to Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos, which he presented to the UN in the period leading up to the invasion. Powell himself and his chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, now feel that this speech was the low point of his tenure as Secretary of State. Even so, Wilkerson (in the process of a vicious attack on the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of Defense for getting us into Iraq) is forced to acknowledge that the Bush administration did not lack for company in interpreting the available evidence as it did:

I can't tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can't. I've wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASPAmmunition Supply Pointwith chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they're there, you have to conclude that it's a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet's deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell's UN speech] was accurate.

Moving on, and shooting down a widespread impression, Wilkerson informs us that even the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was convinced:

People say, well, INR dissented. That's a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That's all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.

In explaining its dissent on Iraq's nuclear program, the INR stated in the NIE of 2002:

Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes [which are] central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program. . . . INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors . . . in Iraq's nuclear-weapons program.

But, according to Wilkerson,The French came in in the middle of my deliberations at the CIA and said, we have just spun aluminum tubes, and by God, we did it to this RPM, et cetera, et cetera, and it was all, you know, proof positive that the aluminum tubes were not for mortar casings or artillery casings, they were for centrifuges. Otherwise, why would you have such exquisite instruments?

In short, the consensus of the intelligence community, as Wilkerson puts it, was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also, in all probability, well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.
Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. In the late spring of 2002, Pollack wrote:

I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant. (a facility for separating uranium isotopes).

No wonder, then, that another conclusion the NIE of 2002 reached with high confidence was that:

Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year, once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

But the consensus on which Bush relied was not born in his own administration. In fact, it was first fully formed in the Clinton administration. In 1998, Clinton said:

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program.

Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998, stated:

Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

Here are a few other quotes of interest . . . :

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. - Sandy Berger 1999

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. - Nancy Pelosi February, 2003

There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf war status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies. - letter to the new President (by a group of democratic party Senators who now cllaim to have been duped, led by Bob Graham) 2001

Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them. - Carl Levin 2001

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed as well:

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

Even more striking were the sentiments of Bush's opponents in his two campaigns for the presidency. Thus Al Gore in September 2002:

We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. . . . and also . . .
Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use forceif necessaryto disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. - John Kerry 2002

Perhaps most damning of all, given the rhetoric that they now employ against Bush, are statements made by Senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, also in 2002:

Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.

Byrd: The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.

Finally, Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, was so sure Saddam had stockpiles of WMD that he remained absolutely convinced of it even after our failure to find them in the wake of the invasion in March 2003.
Nor did leading Democrats in Congress entertain any doubts on this score. A few months after Clinton and his people made the statements I have just quoted, a group of Democratic Senators, including such liberals as Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, urged the President
to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons-of-mass-destruction programs.

Liberal politicians like these were seconded by the mainstream media, in whose columns a very different tune is now being played. For example, throughout the last two years of the Clinton administration, editorials in the New York Times repeatedly insisted that:

without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year [and] future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again.

The Times was also skeptical of negotiations, pointing out that it was:

hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country's salvation.

So, too, the Washington Post, which greeted the inauguration of George W. Bush in January 2001 with the admonition that:

[o]f all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerousor more urgentthan the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos . . . show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.

All this should suffice beyond reasonable doubt (at least to those with eyes) that Bush was telling what he believed to be the truth about Saddam's stockpile of WMD. It also disposes of the fallback charge that Bush lied by exaggerating or hyping the intelligence presented to him. Why would he have done so when the intelligence itself was so compelling that it convinced everyone who had direct access to it? Also, it clearly shows that hardly anyone in the world (and certainly the U.S.A.) believed that Saddam had, as he claimed, complied with the sixteen resolutions of the Security Council demanding that he get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.

Another fallback charge is that Bush, operating mainly through Cheney, somehow forced the CIA into telling him what he wanted to hear. Yet in its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, while criticizing the CIA for relying on what, in hindsight, looked like weak or faulty intelligence, stated that it:

did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities.

The March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission, which investigated intelligence failures on Iraq, reached the same conclusion, finding:

no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . . [A]nalysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."

Even those who believed that Saddam did possess WMD, and was ruthless enough to use them, accused Bush of telling a different sort of lie - by characterizing the risk as imminent. But this, too, is false. Bush consistently rejected imminence as a justification for war, in the State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11, Bush declared that he would not wait on events while dangers gather and that he would not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. Then, in a speech at West Point, six months later, he reiterated the same point:

If we wait for threats to materialize, we will have waited too long.

And as if that were not clear enough, he went out of his way in his State of the Union address in 2003 (that is, three months before the invasion), to bring up the word imminent itself, in order to repudiate it:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

Now then, was it a lie to suggest that a connection could be traced between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? Contrary to how the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings were summarized in the mainstream media, their report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives.

Next? 16 words from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

This is the lie Wilson bragged about having debunked, after being sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to check out the intelligence it had received to that effect. Wilson would later angrily deny that his wife had recommended him for this mission, and would do his best to spread the impression that choosing him had been the Vice President's idea. But Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, through whom Wilson first planted this impression, was eventually forced to admit that Cheney apparently didn't know that Wilson had been dispatched. As for Wilson's wife's supposed non-role in his mission, here is what Valerie Plame Wilson wrote in a memo to her boss at the CIA:

My husband has good relations with the PM [the prime minister of Niger] and the former minister of mines . . . , both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.

More than a year after his return, Wilson succeeded ( probably beyond his wildest dreams) in setting off a political firestorm.
In response, the White House, (to the charge that (in Wilson's latest iteration of it) lies and disinformation [were] used to justify the invasion of Iraq,) acknowledged that the President's statement did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. as might have been expected. This response served to make things worse rather than better. And yet it was totally unnecessaryfor the simple reason that every single one of the sixteen words at issue was true - that is, British intelligence had assured the CIA that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy enriched uranium from the African country of Niger. Furthermore, Britain's independent Butler Commission' concluded that it was well-founded. The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

Wilson himself, far from challenging the British report when he was debriefed on his return from Niger (although challenging it is what he now never stops doing), actually strengthened the CIA's belief in its accuracy. From the Senate Intelligence Committee report:
He [the CIA reports officer] said he judged that the most important fact in the report [by Wilson] was that Niger officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Niger prime minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium.
And again:

The report on [Wilson's] trip to Niger . . . did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal.

This passage goes on to note that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Researchwhich (as we have already seen) did not believe that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weaponsfound support in Wilson's report for its assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq. This, as the Butler report quoted above points out, would not mean that Iraq had not tried to buy itwhich was the only claim made by British intelligence, and then Bush in the famous sixteen words.

To top all this off, just as Cheney had nothing to do with the choice of Wilson for the mission to Niger, neither was it true that, as Wilson confirmed for a credulous New Republic reporter, the CIA circulated [his] report to the Vice President's office, thereby supposedly proving that Cheney and his staff knew the Niger story was a flatout lie. Yet (the mind reels) if Cheney had actually been briefed on Wilson's oral report to the CIA (which he was not), he would, like the CIA itself, have been more inclined to believe that Saddam had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger.

So much for the author of the best-selling and much acclaimed book whose title alone - The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity - has set a new record for audacity.

Wait! There is worse! In his press conference on the indictment against Libby, Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that lying to federal investigators is a serious crime both because it is itself against the law and because, by sending them on endless wild-goose chases, it constitutes the even more serious crime of obstruction of justice. By those standards, Wilson (who has repeatedly made false statements about every aspect of his mission to Niger, including whose idea it was to send him and what he told the CIA upon his return; who was then shown up by the Senate Intelligence Committee as having lied about forged documents; and whose mendacity has sent the whole country into a wild-goose chase after allegations that, the more they are refuted, the more they keep being repeated) is himself an excellent candidate for criminal prosecution.

Now, so long as we are hunting for liars in this area, let me suggest that we begin with the Democrats who now proclaim that they were duped, and that we then broaden out to all those who in their desperation to delegitimize the larger policy being tested in Iraq (the policy of making the Middle East safe for America by making it safe for democracy) have consistently used distortion, spin, misrepresentation, and selective perception to vilify as immoral, a bold and noble enterprise; and to brand as an ignominious defeat, what is proving itself (more and more every day) to be a victory of American arms, and a vindication of American ideals. For those with eyes whom choose to see . . . welcome to reality, friend - coffee? sugar? one lump or two? Hunh? Oh, that . . . don't let it bother you, it's just the screams of insanity by those who won't climb out of their spintastic fantasy land! (with a fiberal government, of course)

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#702 Consumer Comment

Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Ah, yes . . . I agree, Sir Patrick (or is it St.?lol) . . . enough with the Boo-h*o's of this thread - off with their heads! On to the tangible, factual, and inarguable truths. It may create the need for more time (that one be certain that what they pen is concrete in verity), but indeed the debates should lessen in opinion, and thereby temperments settle. Now onwards . . . (
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debates on this, and similar threads, one in particular stands out above all others - the charge that George W. Bush misled us into a war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been exposed. What infuriates me most, is the number of Americans (James, Ben, etc.) who accept it as a self-evident truth, even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. This lie reminds me of those animated cartoon characters, who after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Are there honestly that many of us that base our political stance on the likes of Goofy?

Please, although it is a looooong read, allow me to reveal it for the prevarication that it is. Although doing so will require reiterating that which I (and many others) have covered before, I hope that revisiting these facts may also serve to refresh faded memories, to clarify mixed thoughts, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.

The main lie that George W. Bush is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of WMD's. From this followed the subsidiary lie that Iraq under Saddam's regime, posed a double-edged imminent threat. On one hand, we were informed there was a distinct possibility that Saddam himself would use these weapons against us and/or our allies; and on the other, there was the more dangerous possibility that he would supply them to terrorists - like those who had already attacked us on 9/11 (and to whom he was linked).
This entire scenario of purported deceit was given a boost by the indictment of Scooter Libby, then chief of staff to d**k Cheney.

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury - a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had outed Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. To clarify, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame, but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that:

[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel. This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation, about the compromise of a CIA officer's identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some persona person, Mr. Libbylied or not.

From this was born the following lie by Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, who spoke for a host of other opponents of the war in insisting that:

[t]his case is bigger than the leak of classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the President.

If only to avoid argument, let's say that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the period leading up to the invasion, still, it would defy all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted that they did. To lie is to say something one knows to be false. It is as close to certainty as we can get (unless you are perhaps a mind-reader, per se) that Bush believed what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.
How could he have not? George Tenet, his own CIA director, assured him that it was a slam dunk. This phrase would later become notorious, but in using it, Tenet had the backing of all fifteen agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States. In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence was that:

Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and FRANCE all agreed with this judgment. even Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

The discovery of a number of 122-mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker, and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . . . They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.

Blix now claims that he was only bein cautious here, but if, as he now also adds, the Bush administration misled itself in interpreting the evidence before it, he at the very least lent it a helping hand. Once again, so did the British, the French, and the Germans, all of whom signed on in advance to Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos, which he presented to the UN in the period leading up to the invasion. Powell himself and his chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, now feel that this speech was the low point of his tenure as Secretary of State. Even so, Wilkerson (in the process of a vicious attack on the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of Defense for getting us into Iraq) is forced to acknowledge that the Bush administration did not lack for company in interpreting the available evidence as it did:

I can't tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can't. I've wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASPAmmunition Supply Pointwith chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they're there, you have to conclude that it's a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet's deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell's UN speech] was accurate.

Moving on, and shooting down a widespread impression, Wilkerson informs us that even the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was convinced:

People say, well, INR dissented. That's a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That's all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.

In explaining its dissent on Iraq's nuclear program, the INR stated in the NIE of 2002:

Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes [which are] central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program. . . . INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors . . . in Iraq's nuclear-weapons program.

But, according to Wilkerson,The French came in in the middle of my deliberations at the CIA and said, we have just spun aluminum tubes, and by God, we did it to this RPM, et cetera, et cetera, and it was all, you know, proof positive that the aluminum tubes were not for mortar casings or artillery casings, they were for centrifuges. Otherwise, why would you have such exquisite instruments?

In short, the consensus of the intelligence community, as Wilkerson puts it, was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also, in all probability, well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.
Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. In the late spring of 2002, Pollack wrote:

I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant. (a facility for separating uranium isotopes).

No wonder, then, that another conclusion the NIE of 2002 reached with high confidence was that:

Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year, once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

But the consensus on which Bush relied was not born in his own administration. In fact, it was first fully formed in the Clinton administration. In 1998, Clinton said:

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program.

Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998, stated:

Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

Here are a few other quotes of interest . . . :

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. - Sandy Berger 1999

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. - Nancy Pelosi February, 2003

There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf war status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies. - letter to the new President (by a group of democratic party Senators who now cllaim to have been duped, led by Bob Graham) 2001

Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them. - Carl Levin 2001

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed as well:

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

Even more striking were the sentiments of Bush's opponents in his two campaigns for the presidency. Thus Al Gore in September 2002:

We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. . . . and also . . .
Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use forceif necessaryto disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. - John Kerry 2002

Perhaps most damning of all, given the rhetoric that they now employ against Bush, are statements made by Senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, also in 2002:

Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.

Byrd: The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.

Finally, Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, was so sure Saddam had stockpiles of WMD that he remained absolutely convinced of it even after our failure to find them in the wake of the invasion in March 2003.
Nor did leading Democrats in Congress entertain any doubts on this score. A few months after Clinton and his people made the statements I have just quoted, a group of Democratic Senators, including such liberals as Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, urged the President
to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons-of-mass-destruction programs.

Liberal politicians like these were seconded by the mainstream media, in whose columns a very different tune is now being played. For example, throughout the last two years of the Clinton administration, editorials in the New York Times repeatedly insisted that:

without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year [and] future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again.

The Times was also skeptical of negotiations, pointing out that it was:

hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country's salvation.

So, too, the Washington Post, which greeted the inauguration of George W. Bush in January 2001 with the admonition that:

[o]f all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerousor more urgentthan the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos . . . show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.

All this should suffice beyond reasonable doubt (at least to those with eyes) that Bush was telling what he believed to be the truth about Saddam's stockpile of WMD. It also disposes of the fallback charge that Bush lied by exaggerating or hyping the intelligence presented to him. Why would he have done so when the intelligence itself was so compelling that it convinced everyone who had direct access to it? Also, it clearly shows that hardly anyone in the world (and certainly the U.S.A.) believed that Saddam had, as he claimed, complied with the sixteen resolutions of the Security Council demanding that he get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.

Another fallback charge is that Bush, operating mainly through Cheney, somehow forced the CIA into telling him what he wanted to hear. Yet in its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, while criticizing the CIA for relying on what, in hindsight, looked like weak or faulty intelligence, stated that it:

did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities.

The March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission, which investigated intelligence failures on Iraq, reached the same conclusion, finding:

no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . . [A]nalysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."

Even those who believed that Saddam did possess WMD, and was ruthless enough to use them, accused Bush of telling a different sort of lie - by characterizing the risk as imminent. But this, too, is false. Bush consistently rejected imminence as a justification for war, in the State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11, Bush declared that he would not wait on events while dangers gather and that he would not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. Then, in a speech at West Point, six months later, he reiterated the same point:

If we wait for threats to materialize, we will have waited too long.

And as if that were not clear enough, he went out of his way in his State of the Union address in 2003 (that is, three months before the invasion), to bring up the word imminent itself, in order to repudiate it:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

Now then, was it a lie to suggest that a connection could be traced between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? Contrary to how the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings were summarized in the mainstream media, their report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives.

Next? 16 words from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

This is the lie Wilson bragged about having debunked, after being sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to check out the intelligence it had received to that effect. Wilson would later angrily deny that his wife had recommended him for this mission, and would do his best to spread the impression that choosing him had been the Vice President's idea. But Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, through whom Wilson first planted this impression, was eventually forced to admit that Cheney apparently didn't know that Wilson had been dispatched. As for Wilson's wife's supposed non-role in his mission, here is what Valerie Plame Wilson wrote in a memo to her boss at the CIA:

My husband has good relations with the PM [the prime minister of Niger] and the former minister of mines . . . , both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.

More than a year after his return, Wilson succeeded ( probably beyond his wildest dreams) in setting off a political firestorm.
In response, the White House, (to the charge that (in Wilson's latest iteration of it) lies and disinformation [were] used to justify the invasion of Iraq,) acknowledged that the President's statement did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. as might have been expected. This response served to make things worse rather than better. And yet it was totally unnecessaryfor the simple reason that every single one of the sixteen words at issue was true - that is, British intelligence had assured the CIA that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy enriched uranium from the African country of Niger. Furthermore, Britain's independent Butler Commission' concluded that it was well-founded. The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

Wilson himself, far from challenging the British report when he was debriefed on his return from Niger (although challenging it is what he now never stops doing), actually strengthened the CIA's belief in its accuracy. From the Senate Intelligence Committee report:
He [the CIA reports officer] said he judged that the most important fact in the report [by Wilson] was that Niger officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Niger prime minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium.
And again:

The report on [Wilson's] trip to Niger . . . did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal.

This passage goes on to note that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Researchwhich (as we have already seen) did not believe that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weaponsfound support in Wilson's report for its assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq. This, as the Butler report quoted above points out, would not mean that Iraq had not tried to buy itwhich was the only claim made by British intelligence, and then Bush in the famous sixteen words.

To top all this off, just as Cheney had nothing to do with the choice of Wilson for the mission to Niger, neither was it true that, as Wilson confirmed for a credulous New Republic reporter, the CIA circulated [his] report to the Vice President's office, thereby supposedly proving that Cheney and his staff knew the Niger story was a flatout lie. Yet (the mind reels) if Cheney had actually been briefed on Wilson's oral report to the CIA (which he was not), he would, like the CIA itself, have been more inclined to believe that Saddam had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger.

So much for the author of the best-selling and much acclaimed book whose title alone - The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity - has set a new record for audacity.

Wait! There is worse! In his press conference on the indictment against Libby, Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that lying to federal investigators is a serious crime both because it is itself against the law and because, by sending them on endless wild-goose chases, it constitutes the even more serious crime of obstruction of justice. By those standards, Wilson (who has repeatedly made false statements about every aspect of his mission to Niger, including whose idea it was to send him and what he told the CIA upon his return; who was then shown up by the Senate Intelligence Committee as having lied about forged documents; and whose mendacity has sent the whole country into a wild-goose chase after allegations that, the more they are refuted, the more they keep being repeated) is himself an excellent candidate for criminal prosecution.

Now, so long as we are hunting for liars in this area, let me suggest that we begin with the Democrats who now proclaim that they were duped, and that we then broaden out to all those who in their desperation to delegitimize the larger policy being tested in Iraq (the policy of making the Middle East safe for America by making it safe for democracy) have consistently used distortion, spin, misrepresentation, and selective perception to vilify as immoral, a bold and noble enterprise; and to brand as an ignominious defeat, what is proving itself (more and more every day) to be a victory of American arms, and a vindication of American ideals. For those with eyes whom choose to see . . . welcome to reality, friend - coffee? sugar? one lump or two? Hunh? Oh, that . . . don't let it bother you, it's just the screams of insanity by those who won't climb out of their spintastic fantasy land! (with a fiberal government, of course)

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#701 Consumer Comment

Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Ah, yes . . . I agree, Sir Patrick (or is it St.?lol) . . . enough with the Boo-h*o's of this thread - off with their heads! On to the tangible, factual, and inarguable truths. It may create the need for more time (that one be certain that what they pen is concrete in verity), but indeed the debates should lessen in opinion, and thereby temperments settle. Now onwards . . . (
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debates on this, and similar threads, one in particular stands out above all others - the charge that George W. Bush misled us into a war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been exposed. What infuriates me most, is the number of Americans (James, Ben, etc.) who accept it as a self-evident truth, even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. This lie reminds me of those animated cartoon characters, who after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Are there honestly that many of us that base our political stance on the likes of Goofy?

Please, although it is a looooong read, allow me to reveal it for the prevarication that it is. Although doing so will require reiterating that which I (and many others) have covered before, I hope that revisiting these facts may also serve to refresh faded memories, to clarify mixed thoughts, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.

The main lie that George W. Bush is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of WMD's. From this followed the subsidiary lie that Iraq under Saddam's regime, posed a double-edged imminent threat. On one hand, we were informed there was a distinct possibility that Saddam himself would use these weapons against us and/or our allies; and on the other, there was the more dangerous possibility that he would supply them to terrorists - like those who had already attacked us on 9/11 (and to whom he was linked).
This entire scenario of purported deceit was given a boost by the indictment of Scooter Libby, then chief of staff to d**k Cheney.

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury - a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had outed Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. To clarify, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame, but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that:

[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel. This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation, about the compromise of a CIA officer's identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some persona person, Mr. Libbylied or not.

From this was born the following lie by Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, who spoke for a host of other opponents of the war in insisting that:

[t]his case is bigger than the leak of classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the President.

If only to avoid argument, let's say that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the period leading up to the invasion, still, it would defy all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted that they did. To lie is to say something one knows to be false. It is as close to certainty as we can get (unless you are perhaps a mind-reader, per se) that Bush believed what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.
How could he have not? George Tenet, his own CIA director, assured him that it was a slam dunk. This phrase would later become notorious, but in using it, Tenet had the backing of all fifteen agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States. In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence was that:

Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and FRANCE all agreed with this judgment. even Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

The discovery of a number of 122-mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker, and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . . . They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.

Blix now claims that he was only bein cautious here, but if, as he now also adds, the Bush administration misled itself in interpreting the evidence before it, he at the very least lent it a helping hand. Once again, so did the British, the French, and the Germans, all of whom signed on in advance to Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos, which he presented to the UN in the period leading up to the invasion. Powell himself and his chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, now feel that this speech was the low point of his tenure as Secretary of State. Even so, Wilkerson (in the process of a vicious attack on the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of Defense for getting us into Iraq) is forced to acknowledge that the Bush administration did not lack for company in interpreting the available evidence as it did:

I can't tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can't. I've wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASPAmmunition Supply Pointwith chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they're there, you have to conclude that it's a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet's deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell's UN speech] was accurate.

Moving on, and shooting down a widespread impression, Wilkerson informs us that even the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was convinced:

People say, well, INR dissented. That's a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That's all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.

In explaining its dissent on Iraq's nuclear program, the INR stated in the NIE of 2002:

Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes [which are] central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program. . . . INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors . . . in Iraq's nuclear-weapons program.

But, according to Wilkerson,The French came in in the middle of my deliberations at the CIA and said, we have just spun aluminum tubes, and by God, we did it to this RPM, et cetera, et cetera, and it was all, you know, proof positive that the aluminum tubes were not for mortar casings or artillery casings, they were for centrifuges. Otherwise, why would you have such exquisite instruments?

In short, the consensus of the intelligence community, as Wilkerson puts it, was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also, in all probability, well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.
Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. In the late spring of 2002, Pollack wrote:

I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant. (a facility for separating uranium isotopes).

No wonder, then, that another conclusion the NIE of 2002 reached with high confidence was that:

Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year, once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

But the consensus on which Bush relied was not born in his own administration. In fact, it was first fully formed in the Clinton administration. In 1998, Clinton said:

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program.

Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998, stated:

Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

Here are a few other quotes of interest . . . :

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. - Sandy Berger 1999

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. - Nancy Pelosi February, 2003

There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf war status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies. - letter to the new President (by a group of democratic party Senators who now cllaim to have been duped, led by Bob Graham) 2001

Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them. - Carl Levin 2001

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed as well:

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

Even more striking were the sentiments of Bush's opponents in his two campaigns for the presidency. Thus Al Gore in September 2002:

We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. . . . and also . . .
Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use forceif necessaryto disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. - John Kerry 2002

Perhaps most damning of all, given the rhetoric that they now employ against Bush, are statements made by Senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, also in 2002:

Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.

Byrd: The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.

Finally, Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, was so sure Saddam had stockpiles of WMD that he remained absolutely convinced of it even after our failure to find them in the wake of the invasion in March 2003.
Nor did leading Democrats in Congress entertain any doubts on this score. A few months after Clinton and his people made the statements I have just quoted, a group of Democratic Senators, including such liberals as Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, urged the President
to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons-of-mass-destruction programs.

Liberal politicians like these were seconded by the mainstream media, in whose columns a very different tune is now being played. For example, throughout the last two years of the Clinton administration, editorials in the New York Times repeatedly insisted that:

without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year [and] future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again.

The Times was also skeptical of negotiations, pointing out that it was:

hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country's salvation.

So, too, the Washington Post, which greeted the inauguration of George W. Bush in January 2001 with the admonition that:

[o]f all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerousor more urgentthan the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos . . . show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.

All this should suffice beyond reasonable doubt (at least to those with eyes) that Bush was telling what he believed to be the truth about Saddam's stockpile of WMD. It also disposes of the fallback charge that Bush lied by exaggerating or hyping the intelligence presented to him. Why would he have done so when the intelligence itself was so compelling that it convinced everyone who had direct access to it? Also, it clearly shows that hardly anyone in the world (and certainly the U.S.A.) believed that Saddam had, as he claimed, complied with the sixteen resolutions of the Security Council demanding that he get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.

Another fallback charge is that Bush, operating mainly through Cheney, somehow forced the CIA into telling him what he wanted to hear. Yet in its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, while criticizing the CIA for relying on what, in hindsight, looked like weak or faulty intelligence, stated that it:

did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities.

The March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission, which investigated intelligence failures on Iraq, reached the same conclusion, finding:

no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . . [A]nalysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."

Even those who believed that Saddam did possess WMD, and was ruthless enough to use them, accused Bush of telling a different sort of lie - by characterizing the risk as imminent. But this, too, is false. Bush consistently rejected imminence as a justification for war, in the State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11, Bush declared that he would not wait on events while dangers gather and that he would not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. Then, in a speech at West Point, six months later, he reiterated the same point:

If we wait for threats to materialize, we will have waited too long.

And as if that were not clear enough, he went out of his way in his State of the Union address in 2003 (that is, three months before the invasion), to bring up the word imminent itself, in order to repudiate it:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

Now then, was it a lie to suggest that a connection could be traced between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? Contrary to how the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings were summarized in the mainstream media, their report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives.

Next? 16 words from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

This is the lie Wilson bragged about having debunked, after being sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to check out the intelligence it had received to that effect. Wilson would later angrily deny that his wife had recommended him for this mission, and would do his best to spread the impression that choosing him had been the Vice President's idea. But Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, through whom Wilson first planted this impression, was eventually forced to admit that Cheney apparently didn't know that Wilson had been dispatched. As for Wilson's wife's supposed non-role in his mission, here is what Valerie Plame Wilson wrote in a memo to her boss at the CIA:

My husband has good relations with the PM [the prime minister of Niger] and the former minister of mines . . . , both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.

More than a year after his return, Wilson succeeded ( probably beyond his wildest dreams) in setting off a political firestorm.
In response, the White House, (to the charge that (in Wilson's latest iteration of it) lies and disinformation [were] used to justify the invasion of Iraq,) acknowledged that the President's statement did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. as might have been expected. This response served to make things worse rather than better. And yet it was totally unnecessaryfor the simple reason that every single one of the sixteen words at issue was true - that is, British intelligence had assured the CIA that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy enriched uranium from the African country of Niger. Furthermore, Britain's independent Butler Commission' concluded that it was well-founded. The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

Wilson himself, far from challenging the British report when he was debriefed on his return from Niger (although challenging it is what he now never stops doing), actually strengthened the CIA's belief in its accuracy. From the Senate Intelligence Committee report:
He [the CIA reports officer] said he judged that the most important fact in the report [by Wilson] was that Niger officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Niger prime minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium.
And again:

The report on [Wilson's] trip to Niger . . . did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal.

This passage goes on to note that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Researchwhich (as we have already seen) did not believe that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weaponsfound support in Wilson's report for its assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq. This, as the Butler report quoted above points out, would not mean that Iraq had not tried to buy itwhich was the only claim made by British intelligence, and then Bush in the famous sixteen words.

To top all this off, just as Cheney had nothing to do with the choice of Wilson for the mission to Niger, neither was it true that, as Wilson confirmed for a credulous New Republic reporter, the CIA circulated [his] report to the Vice President's office, thereby supposedly proving that Cheney and his staff knew the Niger story was a flatout lie. Yet (the mind reels) if Cheney had actually been briefed on Wilson's oral report to the CIA (which he was not), he would, like the CIA itself, have been more inclined to believe that Saddam had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger.

So much for the author of the best-selling and much acclaimed book whose title alone - The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity - has set a new record for audacity.

Wait! There is worse! In his press conference on the indictment against Libby, Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that lying to federal investigators is a serious crime both because it is itself against the law and because, by sending them on endless wild-goose chases, it constitutes the even more serious crime of obstruction of justice. By those standards, Wilson (who has repeatedly made false statements about every aspect of his mission to Niger, including whose idea it was to send him and what he told the CIA upon his return; who was then shown up by the Senate Intelligence Committee as having lied about forged documents; and whose mendacity has sent the whole country into a wild-goose chase after allegations that, the more they are refuted, the more they keep being repeated) is himself an excellent candidate for criminal prosecution.

Now, so long as we are hunting for liars in this area, let me suggest that we begin with the Democrats who now proclaim that they were duped, and that we then broaden out to all those who in their desperation to delegitimize the larger policy being tested in Iraq (the policy of making the Middle East safe for America by making it safe for democracy) have consistently used distortion, spin, misrepresentation, and selective perception to vilify as immoral, a bold and noble enterprise; and to brand as an ignominious defeat, what is proving itself (more and more every day) to be a victory of American arms, and a vindication of American ideals. For those with eyes whom choose to see . . . welcome to reality, friend - coffee? sugar? one lump or two? Hunh? Oh, that . . . don't let it bother you, it's just the screams of insanity by those who won't climb out of their spintastic fantasy land! (with a fiberal government, of course)

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#700 Consumer Comment

Then we move on! - There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Ah, yes . . . I agree, Sir Patrick (or is it St.?lol) . . . enough with the Boo-h*o's of this thread - off with their heads! On to the tangible, factual, and inarguable truths. It may create the need for more time (that one be certain that what they pen is concrete in verity), but indeed the debates should lessen in opinion, and thereby temperments settle. Now onwards . . . (
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debates on this, and similar threads, one in particular stands out above all others - the charge that George W. Bush misled us into a war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been exposed. What infuriates me most, is the number of Americans (James, Ben, etc.) who accept it as a self-evident truth, even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. This lie reminds me of those animated cartoon characters, who after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Are there honestly that many of us that base our political stance on the likes of Goofy?

Please, although it is a looooong read, allow me to reveal it for the prevarication that it is. Although doing so will require reiterating that which I (and many others) have covered before, I hope that revisiting these facts may also serve to refresh faded memories, to clarify mixed thoughts, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.

The main lie that George W. Bush is accused of telling us is that Saddam Hussein possessed an arsenal of WMD's. From this followed the subsidiary lie that Iraq under Saddam's regime, posed a double-edged imminent threat. On one hand, we were informed there was a distinct possibility that Saddam himself would use these weapons against us and/or our allies; and on the other, there was the more dangerous possibility that he would supply them to terrorists - like those who had already attacked us on 9/11 (and to whom he was linked).
This entire scenario of purported deceit was given a boost by the indictment of Scooter Libby, then chief of staff to d**k Cheney.

Libby stands accused of making false statements to the FBI and of committing perjury in testifying before a grand jury - a grand jury that had been convened to find out who in the Bush administration had outed Valerie Plame, a CIA agent married to the retired ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV. To clarify, Libby was not charged with having outed Plame, but only with having lied about when and from whom he first learned that she worked for the CIA. Moreover, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor who brought the indictment against him, made a point of emphasizing that:

[t]his indictment is not about the war. This indictment is not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel. This is simply an indictment that says, in a national-security investigation, about the compromise of a CIA officer's identity that may have taken place in the context of a very heated debate over the war, whether some persona person, Mr. Libbylied or not.

From this was born the following lie by Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, who spoke for a host of other opponents of the war in insisting that:

[t]his case is bigger than the leak of classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the President.

If only to avoid argument, let's say that no weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq in the period leading up to the invasion, still, it would defy all reason to think that Bush was lying when he asserted that they did. To lie is to say something one knows to be false. It is as close to certainty as we can get (unless you are perhaps a mind-reader, per se) that Bush believed what he was saying about WMD in Iraq.
How could he have not? George Tenet, his own CIA director, assured him that it was a slam dunk. This phrase would later become notorious, but in using it, Tenet had the backing of all fifteen agencies involved in gathering intelligence for the United States. In the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, one of the conclusions offered with high confidence was that:

Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and FRANCE all agreed with this judgment. even Hans Blix lent further credibility to the case in a report he issued only a few months before the invasion:

The discovery of a number of 122-mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker, and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . . . They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.

Blix now claims that he was only bein cautious here, but if, as he now also adds, the Bush administration misled itself in interpreting the evidence before it, he at the very least lent it a helping hand. Once again, so did the British, the French, and the Germans, all of whom signed on in advance to Colin Powell's reading of the satellite photos, which he presented to the UN in the period leading up to the invasion. Powell himself and his chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, now feel that this speech was the low point of his tenure as Secretary of State. Even so, Wilkerson (in the process of a vicious attack on the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of Defense for getting us into Iraq) is forced to acknowledge that the Bush administration did not lack for company in interpreting the available evidence as it did:

I can't tell you why the French, the Germans, the Brits, and us thought that most of the material, if not all of it, that we presented at the UN on 5 February 2003 was the truth. I can't. I've wrestled with it. [But] when you see a satellite photograph of all the signs of the chemical-weapons ASPAmmunition Supply Pointwith chemical weapons, and you match all those signs with your matrix on what should show a chemical ASP, and they're there, you have to conclude that it's a chemical ASP, especially when you see the next satellite photograph which shows the UN inspectors wheeling in their white vehicles with black markings on them to that same ASP, and everything is changed, everything is clean. . . . But George [Tenet] was convinced, John McLaughlin [Tenet's deputy] was convinced, that what we were presented [for Powell's UN speech] was accurate.

Moving on, and shooting down a widespread impression, Wilkerson informs us that even the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) was convinced:

People say, well, INR dissented. That's a bunch of bull. INR dissented that the nuclear program was up and running. That's all INR dissented on. They were right there with the chems and the bios.

In explaining its dissent on Iraq's nuclear program, the INR stated in the NIE of 2002:

Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum tubes [which are] central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear-weapons program. . . . INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are intended for use as centrifuge rotors . . . in Iraq's nuclear-weapons program.

But, according to Wilkerson,The French came in in the middle of my deliberations at the CIA and said, we have just spun aluminum tubes, and by God, we did it to this RPM, et cetera, et cetera, and it was all, you know, proof positive that the aluminum tubes were not for mortar casings or artillery casings, they were for centrifuges. Otherwise, why would you have such exquisite instruments?

In short, the consensus of the intelligence community, as Wilkerson puts it, was overwhelming in the period leading up to the invasion of Iraq, that Saddam definitely had an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, and that he was also, in all probability, well on the way to rebuilding the nuclear capability that the Israelis had damaged by bombing the Osirak reactor in 1981.
Additional confirmation of this latter point comes from Kenneth Pollack, who served in the National Security Council under Clinton. In the late spring of 2002, Pollack wrote:

I participated in a Washington meeting about Iraqi WMD. Those present included nearly twenty former inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), the force established in 1991 to oversee the elimination of WMD in Iraq. One of the senior people put a question to the group: did anyone in the room doubt that Iraq was currently operating a secret centrifuge plant? No one did. Three people added that they believed Iraq was also operating a secret calutron plant. (a facility for separating uranium isotopes).

No wonder, then, that another conclusion the NIE of 2002 reached with high confidence was that:

Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year, once it acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

But the consensus on which Bush relied was not born in his own administration. In fact, it was first fully formed in the Clinton administration. In 1998, Clinton said:

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program.

Madeline Albright, also speaking in 1998, stated:

Iraq is a long way from [the USA], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

Here are a few other quotes of interest . . . :

He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. - Sandy Berger 1999

Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons-of-mass-destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. - Nancy Pelosi February, 2003

There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical, and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf war status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies. - letter to the new President (by a group of democratic party Senators who now cllaim to have been duped, led by Bob Graham) 2001

Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them. - Carl Levin 2001

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members.

Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed as well:

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

Even more striking were the sentiments of Bush's opponents in his two campaigns for the presidency. Thus Al Gore in September 2002:

We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. . . . and also . . .
Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use forceif necessaryto disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. - John Kerry 2002

Perhaps most damning of all, given the rhetoric that they now employ against Bush, are statements made by Senators Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd, also in 2002:

Kennedy: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.

Byrd: The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.

Finally, Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, was so sure Saddam had stockpiles of WMD that he remained absolutely convinced of it even after our failure to find them in the wake of the invasion in March 2003.
Nor did leading Democrats in Congress entertain any doubts on this score. A few months after Clinton and his people made the statements I have just quoted, a group of Democratic Senators, including such liberals as Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, and John Kerry, urged the President
to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons-of-mass-destruction programs.

Liberal politicians like these were seconded by the mainstream media, in whose columns a very different tune is now being played. For example, throughout the last two years of the Clinton administration, editorials in the New York Times repeatedly insisted that:

without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year [and] future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again.

The Times was also skeptical of negotiations, pointing out that it was:

hard to negotiate with a tyrant who has no intention of honoring his commitments and who sees nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as his country's salvation.

So, too, the Washington Post, which greeted the inauguration of George W. Bush in January 2001 with the admonition that:

[o]f all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerousor more urgentthan the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf [where] intelligence photos . . . show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.

All this should suffice beyond reasonable doubt (at least to those with eyes) that Bush was telling what he believed to be the truth about Saddam's stockpile of WMD. It also disposes of the fallback charge that Bush lied by exaggerating or hyping the intelligence presented to him. Why would he have done so when the intelligence itself was so compelling that it convinced everyone who had direct access to it? Also, it clearly shows that hardly anyone in the world (and certainly the U.S.A.) believed that Saddam had, as he claimed, complied with the sixteen resolutions of the Security Council demanding that he get rid of his weapons of mass destruction.

Another fallback charge is that Bush, operating mainly through Cheney, somehow forced the CIA into telling him what he wanted to hear. Yet in its report of 2004, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, while criticizing the CIA for relying on what, in hindsight, looked like weak or faulty intelligence, stated that it:

did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence, or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction capabilities.

The March 2005 report of the equally bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission, which investigated intelligence failures on Iraq, reached the same conclusion, finding:

no evidence of political pressure to influence the intelligence community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . . [A]nalysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments."

Even those who believed that Saddam did possess WMD, and was ruthless enough to use them, accused Bush of telling a different sort of lie - by characterizing the risk as imminent. But this, too, is false. Bush consistently rejected imminence as a justification for war, in the State of the Union address, only three months after 9/11, Bush declared that he would not wait on events while dangers gather and that he would not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. Then, in a speech at West Point, six months later, he reiterated the same point:

If we wait for threats to materialize, we will have waited too long.

And as if that were not clear enough, he went out of his way in his State of the Union address in 2003 (that is, three months before the invasion), to bring up the word imminent itself, in order to repudiate it:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

Now then, was it a lie to suggest that a connection could be traced between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terrorists who had attacked us on 9/11? Contrary to how the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings were summarized in the mainstream media, their report explicitly concluded that al Qaeda did in fact have a cooperative, if informal, relationship with Iraqi agents working under Saddam. The report of the bipartisan 9/11 commission came to the same conclusion, as did a comparably independent British investigation conducted by Lord Butler, which pointed to meetings between senior Iraqi representatives and senior al-Qaeda operatives.

Next? 16 words from Bush's 2003 State of the Union address:

The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

This is the lie Wilson bragged about having debunked, after being sent by the CIA to Niger in 2002 to check out the intelligence it had received to that effect. Wilson would later angrily deny that his wife had recommended him for this mission, and would do his best to spread the impression that choosing him had been the Vice President's idea. But Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, through whom Wilson first planted this impression, was eventually forced to admit that Cheney apparently didn't know that Wilson had been dispatched. As for Wilson's wife's supposed non-role in his mission, here is what Valerie Plame Wilson wrote in a memo to her boss at the CIA:

My husband has good relations with the PM [the prime minister of Niger] and the former minister of mines . . . , both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.

More than a year after his return, Wilson succeeded ( probably beyond his wildest dreams) in setting off a political firestorm.
In response, the White House, (to the charge that (in Wilson's latest iteration of it) lies and disinformation [were] used to justify the invasion of Iraq,) acknowledged that the President's statement did not rise to the level of inclusion in the State of the Union address. as might have been expected. This response served to make things worse rather than better. And yet it was totally unnecessaryfor the simple reason that every single one of the sixteen words at issue was true - that is, British intelligence had assured the CIA that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy enriched uranium from the African country of Niger. Furthermore, Britain's independent Butler Commission' concluded that it was well-founded. The relevant passage is worth quoting at length:

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

Wilson himself, far from challenging the British report when he was debriefed on his return from Niger (although challenging it is what he now never stops doing), actually strengthened the CIA's belief in its accuracy. From the Senate Intelligence Committee report:
He [the CIA reports officer] said he judged that the most important fact in the report [by Wilson] was that Niger officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Niger prime minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium.
And again:

The report on [Wilson's] trip to Niger . . . did not change any analysts' assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal.

This passage goes on to note that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Researchwhich (as we have already seen) did not believe that Saddam Hussein was trying to develop nuclear weaponsfound support in Wilson's report for its assessment that Niger was unlikely to be willing or able to sell uranium to Iraq. This, as the Butler report quoted above points out, would not mean that Iraq had not tried to buy itwhich was the only claim made by British intelligence, and then Bush in the famous sixteen words.

To top all this off, just as Cheney had nothing to do with the choice of Wilson for the mission to Niger, neither was it true that, as Wilson confirmed for a credulous New Republic reporter, the CIA circulated [his] report to the Vice President's office, thereby supposedly proving that Cheney and his staff knew the Niger story was a flatout lie. Yet (the mind reels) if Cheney had actually been briefed on Wilson's oral report to the CIA (which he was not), he would, like the CIA itself, have been more inclined to believe that Saddam had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger.

So much for the author of the best-selling and much acclaimed book whose title alone - The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity - has set a new record for audacity.

Wait! There is worse! In his press conference on the indictment against Libby, Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that lying to federal investigators is a serious crime both because it is itself against the law and because, by sending them on endless wild-goose chases, it constitutes the even more serious crime of obstruction of justice. By those standards, Wilson (who has repeatedly made false statements about every aspect of his mission to Niger, including whose idea it was to send him and what he told the CIA upon his return; who was then shown up by the Senate Intelligence Committee as having lied about forged documents; and whose mendacity has sent the whole country into a wild-goose chase after allegations that, the more they are refuted, the more they keep being repeated) is himself an excellent candidate for criminal prosecution.

Now, so long as we are hunting for liars in this area, let me suggest that we begin with the Democrats who now proclaim that they were duped, and that we then broaden out to all those who in their desperation to delegitimize the larger policy being tested in Iraq (the policy of making the Middle East safe for America by making it safe for democracy) have consistently used distortion, spin, misrepresentation, and selective perception to vilify as immoral, a bold and noble enterprise; and to brand as an ignominious defeat, what is proving itself (more and more every day) to be a victory of American arms, and a vindication of American ideals. For those with eyes whom choose to see . . . welcome to reality, friend - coffee? sugar? one lump or two? Hunh? Oh, that . . . don't let it bother you, it's just the screams of insanity by those who won't climb out of their spintastic fantasy land! (with a fiberal government, of course)

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#699 Consumer Comment

Patrick---I couldn't agree more.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, December 19, 2005

That's why I was seeking out other posts...I have long since been tired of this old hat. I, too, miss the commentary by "B.", Robert (both of them), and other folks...and I do empathize.

When I saw the same attempts on the other post, I truly felt the need to speak up, once I had contributed. And so I did. Part of me was actually surprised--but only briefly--that subjects exclusive to this particular thread would come directly into the fray, and I did try to divert that back over here to this post.

But sadly, I agree that this post has indeed degraded---and by no small part do I deny it to be no more than a pathetic pissing match. Remarkable, I have to admire the irony of Ben's angst and drive, in that he is so willing to commit to and defend so tentative a position.

I'm all for concluding this. I feel I have proven--and offered that proof of--my position, and am content to simply move on. It's been fun meeting everyone here--and I owe a degree of thanks to each person, in turn. If not to be better prepared and more aware, I have looked very closely into current events, and have tied many things together that one wouldn't normally associate, one with the other. I am once again amazed, how so many seemingly innocuous things weave together to subvert, wound, or damage our social structure.

If nothing else, I walk away from this with a better understanding of self, a good look into how others think, and an even greater arsenal of return-fire on some political subjects. I am more alert now of matters going on in the world---and I owe a heap of thanks to Shawn, B., Robert of Florida, Robert of Texas, Jon, and a dozen others---and I'll also include Georganna, for bringing a genteel sort of compassion in presenting her information.

So what sayshall we move on, then?

Semper viglio, paratus, et fidelis!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#698 Consumer Comment

This is for Ben, Shawn and Vera. ..you three have hijacked this thread for long enough

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 18, 2005

OK, I think you three have hijacked this thread for long enough. This whole report has degenerated into one big pissing contest between you three, and I for one think it's gone on for way too long.

There used to be some great posts by the likes of "B", but now even he (or she?) doesn't bother posting anymore. There was even the occassional injecture of humor by the James Twins.

All this is now is a copy and paste fest of prior posts, and it's getting old. Let's get back on track, shall we?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#697 Consumer Comment

One more question to add, Ben

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 17, 2005

How many times do we need be attacked, and how many lives must be lost due to those attacks, before they are reality in your sheltered little fantasy land?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#696 Consumer Comment

Yes, it's Almost the same, but I'm not going to write two separate responses for the same B.S. spin! O.K. Ben . . . you win!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 17, 2005

. . . Bwaaaaaah-ha-ha-ha . . . NOT! rotflmao Sorry,Boo-h*o, but your continued insistance that I answer for that which I have not said . . . well, let's just say it doesn't give you any points.

1) I never said that you were no longer posting on 154773', but, of course, you spin my suggestion (that you have been defeated) into a defense against something that wasn't said - pretty easy to battle the non-existant Benny, wouldn't you say? Just to clarify . . . my defeat comment stems from the fact that you refuse to address anything real - Of course you continue repeating the same ol', same ol bleating and farting' (thanks Vera, I like the ring to that-lol) post, after post, after post! Everybody knows that you are too lazy (blind/ stupid/ unwilling/ narrow-minded/ etc.) to bother looking for the proof that Vera offered you (re: Islam in California schools) - get over it, move on, and let's continue with some of the new points that have come up! (FYI - Vera stated that she read it in an article, which, admittedly, was two years old - then, five different websites were posted by others - Ben, she is not still insisting on the veracity of her statement, you have been provided with proof that is was written, the only way she could PROVE her statement (that she read it in an article two years old) would be to mail you the article (not gonna happen!) - if she concedes that she has no proof that there are 3 week crash courses in some middle schools in California, will you concede that she was not lying when she said she read about it? Just accept that she posted some mis-information, which, at the time, was perceived to be true. Is this copasetic with you, Vera?)(Sorry, Vera, I just want for all of us to get past this!)

2) I haven't complained, spouted off constantly, or addressed such issues as name-calling or hijacking across threads - to be quite frank, I couldn't care less about such things. You see Ben, when debating today's politics, everything from gay rights to religion, Constitutional rights to the U.N. Charter, hell, even our education system can be a post's thematic tincture, and it will be on topic for these threads (no matter what the original post' stated, these threads are all, really, just political debates!) There have been many instances where you have made such exaggerated statements as [Vera and Shawn]are always saying or [Vera and Shawn ] are constantly spouting -off / accusing/ etc., usually followed by a statement which can be attributed to nothing more than your attempt to put words in my mouth(or Vera's), because you have a good come back for it. Once again, pretty easy to battle the non-existant! From now on, please, for the sake of showing your honest intent, put down the quote to which you are referring (in it's FULL CONTEXT). That way, if you don't lie, add, or spin, I should have no contest.

3) Your comments about spelling are infantile, as is your understanding of reality, equality, and comparison . . . niether Vera, nor I have corrected intentional mis-spellings. See, Ben, if I wanna make my witings sownd wike a wittow two yeer owd speaks, den I spewel da woods diffwently, dat dunnit make dem wong! On the other hand, when one's posts are riddle with spelling errors, improper grammar, and improperly placed (if any at all) punctuation marks; it is, often times, difficult to read, and in some cases, determine the intent of certain statements. Let me provide an example: I am going to eat grampa before we leave for you're home
Do I mean : I am going to eat grampa before we leave, for you're home

Or

I am going to eat, grampa, before we leave for your home . . .

One would suggest EATING GRAMPA before leaving their present location, because YOU ARE at home (probably don't want anyone to witness the devouring of papa!)
The other suggests that the orator is SPEAKING TO GRANDPA, and wishes to eat a meal/snack before leaving for HIS HOME.

See the difference? These are the errors that we corrected in the past. Please take notice though, neither one of us has done so recently (aside from the occasional ribbing for an obvious error, with blazing intent of witticism). I guess that we have just accepted that, with the occasional exception, liberal democrats are either lazy, stupid, uneducated, or just lack the ability to care about anything other than their own little subjective view of the world! Actually, from the scene displayed by you and your ilk on these posts, I would say it's due to a combination of all of the above! lol

Now, if you can get past your whiny tantrums of I still haven't seen proof . . . and false accusations of non-quotes, as well as out-of-context snippits, I do have several questions posed that YOU have not answered. Benny-boo-h*o, have you no answers? Are you ascared' of them? Or, could it be that the reason that they remain unanswered, is that to answer them honestly, would require a view of reality unobstructed by self, and open to a personal paradigm shift' inclusive of society's best interests? C'mon Ben . . . defeated? Or are you just in need of more time to configure some manner of changing context, adding/deleting words, spinning, and creating some new useless drivel and rhetoric (bleating and farting!?!), that is close enough to the topic of my queries that your fellow spin worshippers, with their (see above: lazy, stupid, . . . ) psuedo-iintellect, can justify choosing to blindly accept your lunatic based rants as reasoned response? That sounds more like your personal manner.
"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York. This is a great terrorist, international terrorist network that is determined to defeat freedom. It has perverted Islam from a peaceful religion into one in which they call on it for violence. And they're all linked. And Iraq is a central front because, if and when, and we will, . . .

That was the official statement regarding Heussein's involvement in 9/11, an it hasn't been disproven! You live in a fantasy world Ben. Oh, and you're right about one thing for sure . . . I am calling your proof that George Bush is trying to turn this country into a dictatorship - blatant spin! More fantasy land drivel Benny! Any reasonable adult would determine that his statement was made in jest ( the chuckle' he gave afterward sorta gave it away). I suppose that for you to be reasonable or adult, is somewhat of a fantasy of my own though!

Finally Boo-h*o, I'm getting dizzy from all your spin, but I can't help but stop you! Even when dizzied by your bleating and farting (yeah, I really do like the ring of that, Vera - thanks again! lol) it's easy to burst your bubble. Take for instance, your rant that Vera has been demanding proof that Bush is creating a dictatorship (or wants to), just isn't true . . . she's been asking for proof about a lot of things, even that it's Bush' plan to have America as a theocracy, but not as a dictatorship. You really should decide which one you think he's conspiring - it's impossible to have both a dictatorship, and a theocracy at the same time! You really are a wanker! And please, stop using the word hypocrite so often - I understand it's probably one of the larger words in your vocabulary (list of words you know), but it really doesn't impress anybody, except the twins maybe. Especially when you over use it the way you have been . . . it's just too redundant . . . like your lies! One more "spin stopper", Boo-h*o: I never said 42% was good (although it's higher than Clinton's worst), I was just correcting TL James' false statement!

May God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#695 Consumer Comment

Nahh-ah! Try again. :D

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 17, 2005

Pardon me, little boy. who is spinning here?

Let's refresh. You say you have a buddy (how convenient---you just now managed to pull a pal outta your a*s), who has kids who are between or ranging in the ages three to nine. What a miracle, that you just now managed to remember that you actually HAVE a friend. But anyhoo, Boo-h*o, here's the first words of the post, dated 11/02/05 Here are some articles (Of course, I've taken the time to actually correct my typing errorsso much for your she puts everything through her spell checker theory. After all, I even left proper nouns uncapitalized, for your cutting and pasting ease, but that would be foolish of me, assuming someone like you would even bother to look into facts!)

Just for the fun of it, I went back to Patrick's post and typed in the same words as he "Islam taught California middle school", but I made it "Islam taught IN California middle school" on my yahoo browser, and I got the response Patrick got, plus more...lots more. Hopefully, this will clear up a few issues. I never implied that this was the doctrine being taught in ALL middle schools in California, just some of them...and one, two, or twenty---doesn't change the fact that it's there.'

See that?

It says somenot all, not every SCHOOL in California, for one, but most importantly, it says MIDDLE SCHOOL.

How many three-to nine-year-olds are in Middle School, Benniekins?

Let me guess: Your friend's kids (who didn't exist up until suddenly) are somehow of an advanced groupasuperior racethan everyone else? Accelerated learning program, perhaps? (Say...maybe they can figure out how to reverse enigineer alien technology!)

For that matter, why should I even believe these kids exist? You've been caught in so many subversions and lies, it's kinda logical to assume these kids are fictitious, but I'll give you the BENefit of the doubt, even if your logic and sense of truth are as terribly flawed as they are.

Also, you'll notice, that I have included the exact phrase I used, and the search engine I usedall for the greater ease of pointing it out to you. But you couldn't even follow the simple, spelled out instructions given. But even Google says it's true, so use Googleafter all, we already know what the masterminds at Google think of President Bush, so I can understand why you'd use Google. Yahoo will lead you to sources outside of the Christian realms, but if you expect me not to question the credibility of your work, you certainly have no place questioning mine. At least the links I suggest all point to the actual info, and not UFO reverse-engineering crackpot websites.

And as far as the sources are concerned, you can go ahead and think they are all right wingI never said that Liberal-minded sources ALWAYS lie, I said that they like to make Republicans out to be the source of all ills, and such is not true. If you look into all the founders of many social ills, you'd be very surprised at what you'd find; how many Liberals voted to instate welfare, how many fine Liberal minds fine turned it to the creation of the Gimmee Elite, how many Liberals are out in droves to take away my Constitutional right to bear arms, and how many Liberal minds are trying to ramrod abortions for the young without parental consent through Congress? How many liberals did it take to cut the military budget? How many of those brilliant liberal minds support the ACLU, I wonder?

Vera states....'Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?'
Well lets see for a month now you have been spouting off about "showing proof". So there I give you a few links. Now of course you change your tune to I never said he didnt say that'.

Who's changing what tune? Did I ever deny that Bush had said anything about being a dictator? No. Not one time. There's no tune' to change here. You've become so deluded, I don't even think you remember why you actually came to this report, other than to spout off you bullshit logic and nonsense theories---and of course, to troll for a Believer.

As far as the Dictator commentary, I never denied the fact that he made the statement. I merely stated that he meant it in JEST. And each of the links (few as they were!) that actually DID open up, alluded to exactly that, or, they were just the same little snippet, hanging out of context in the middle of dead airspace (like the cranial vacancy you call your mind). No other speech surrounded the little snippet. Nothing. Another website was a blog, or a bulletin boardnothing but opinion. And I already know the opinions of many that don't like Bush. Another link leads the reader to a website that clamors on and on about conspiracies, Kerry and Bush are Satatnists, and reverse-engineering UFO technologypardon me, if I snicker. (I want to believe!! Whistling the tune of the X-Files)

Then you go on trying to disprove each link? Get real!

Unfortunately for you, I did, and have been real for a long time (I think it's funny that you, a person living in a state famous for plastic people is telling me to get real! Is that like Got Milk? Another clever quip style buzz-phrase?)

So you can prove that he said that. If that's everything you're basing your pseudofear on for hating Bush, that's pretty lame.

And it still doesn't support your fears very well. But apparently, you're pretty good at taking a single quote---hell, a single WORD---and spinning it into some reason to attack another, and say it's them forcing you to think like they do. I still bet your eyes are brown, you're so full of s**t.

Take your tinfoil hat off. The b*****d said it and meant it. And to just brush it off that he said it "ages" ago, and its not relevent now isnt going to cut it in anyones book.

I can challenge that threefold:

1.) Tinfoil hat? It wasn't me that pointed everyone to a website talking about UFO tech, among other ridiculous bullshit. Even I wouldn't say Kerry was a Satatnist, for one, and the LAW has proven---even you admitted yourself!---that Bush didn't steal any elections.

2.) He said it and meant it? Aren't you getting into the realm of speculation, now? Even some of the info YOU provide indicates it to have been said in humor. And speculation is worthless, in terms of the lawit's called leading. How can you assume to know the feelings in the heart of G.W. Bush? As far as you're concerned, feelings are only the body's chemical response to stimuluscan you determine which chemicals were racing through George Bush's bloodstream at that exact moment? Can you determine the very core of his cognition? No. And neither can I. Only him and God know his inner motivations. Outside of that, it's mere assumption.

3.) Ages? NO. I believed I used the word eonsand thank youyou just shot your own theory fulla holes. You see, you mentioned long ago, that If they did do that, it was years ago, and it's not being done now, so it doesn't matter. (Paraphrased from one of YOUR endlessly long and multitudinous responses.)

Beyond all this, there's nothing else in your post that's worthy of a response, let alone continued reading. It's all just a bunch of childish prattling, like much of your twitterings are.

But no matter what of the worst life could hand me, I can take comfort in knowing there's worse out there. After all, I could be you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#694 Consumer Comment

Here's something else you'll claim you're too busy to read, Princess.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

I see you pulled a quick pop in to insult. So much your speedtypical, to come in, fart, and leave. My kids used to think it was hilarious to hide behind a door and fart when they were little. Is this the same game, then?

Of course, when littleI mean really little---boys do that, it's kinda cute, in that low-budget homespun biological warfare sorta wayah, well.

Let's get to it, then.

Sorry Vera

Yes, we all know how sorry you are. It's about time you apologized.

I dont read your entire posts when you spout off for that long if you havent noticed.

Well, I don't share your perch, if that's what you mean. And obviously, you manage to read enough of my posts---and even think you can tear me down, quote by quote. I'm still standing, on both legs, and you cannot phase my position. So much for your theory, I don't read all your posts. A new attack; Your posts are too long-winded. Hmm.that's almost as lame as You're using a spell-checker. Hiss!

Ever hear of sentence structure?

Its not worth my time.

Nice way to play off the fact that I have repeatedly handed you your a*s. It's okay, little one.all the reading populace here is capable of forming their own opinion, and you've done a fine job of talking in circles.

Im still waiting for your "proof".

Well, you can continue to pretend to not see it, that's fine.

ONCE AGAIN....make it in a nice simple post.

Ben, I'm already writing at an eighth grade level for your benefit exclusively, and I'm sick of obliging you. Anything lower, and I'd have to have the Twin Freaks translate the pips and squeals. I must say, I've seen both ends of the spectrum in California's mentality. There are reasonable people like Shawn, and a couple others here who represent the bright end of things---and then there's you; the dregs of your local brothel.

SAYING you put it in one of your looooooooooooooong winded Encyclopedia Stupidia editions simply wont cut it (and that was a looooong sermon there Vera!

Well, facts don't come in little sound bytes all the time, like your thoughts and opinions, none of which are based in fact. I like to present the whole side of the story. If you don't want to deal with the possibility of a long read, you should know better than to challenge someone who's not too lazy to put solid information down.

You have way to much time on your hands....collecting welfare I take it?).

Why? Did you see a particularly handsome woman while standing in line with Mommy to collect your vouchers? I can assure you that I haven't visited Martinez before, so the dashing chic was just a figment of your fantasies, like your clever wit and intellect. And I wouldn't get into the issue of time, were I you; I've seen the time periods of your posts and noted, that your job obviously doesn't keep you very busy.

Or is that what you're reduced to, attacking my occupation? Hehh! All the signs are there. Reduced to nothing more than innuendoes, insults, and name-calling.

Put it down in a nice simple format....nice simple post....get it?!

Niftynow you're trying to configure how I am to write. Hahahahahahahahhh!! It will be a cold day on the surface of the Sun before I take writing orders from some little Philistine like you, Boy. Read it or don't. Accept it or don't. It's real, and it's thereand I delight in pointing it out to you repeatedly. It's almost as much fun as showing you how stupid you truly are.

I think I showed you how above if you still cant grasp the concept.

What, those bullshit links? Yeah, right. The only thing you've shown me how to do is SPINand since I'm inclined to be honest, spin's a bit awkward for me. Try posting links that actually work or direct you where you point out the infoor better yet, try taking an actual FACT, and presenting it! That's novel, isn't it? Something more substantial than the usual out of context quip or lame a*s quote.

And also...ONCE AGAIN...stop this cross thread bullshit.

You should take your own advice.

You know d**n well you went over to the other thread and attacked me. I will address your posts here ON THIS THREAD.

Well, I've yet to see that.

I addressed you with a question relative to that thread. If you see a mere question as a personal attack, then you can call it what you want. No amount of spin will subtract from the fact that, while I asked you a simple question: Do you compare everyone who doesn't agree with you to Hitler?, you were the one who is trying to bring the Islam in California schools issue up on that thread, claiming it to have been Months since you called me out on it. (When it had only been a month and eight days, from 11/02/05the date of Here are some articles--- to the date of the post I responded to you when YOU bought it up on the wrong thread.)

And, according to your latest drivel-installment, you can't even keep your own word by your own standards. If. You. Could. Only. See. The. Surprise. On. My. Face. (Picture Ben Stein's monotones as you read that.)

You should work for the DNC, Benyou're really into self-serving, spin, and lies. Better yetdon't work for the DNC; if an average working class housewife can use your own logic to beat you, Ann Coulter would devour you in one bite.

Is this more of that I refuse to see proof, therefore, it doesn't exist! bullshit? Again, bring it. Back up what you say by honoring your own word. I know that's alien to you, but if you try, I'm sure you can do it.

And I will your posts THERE on THAT thread.

Back it up, Sunshine! Address ONLY the issues on that thread, with FACT.

But I will not give you your jollies by cutting and pasting between each of them to contort the subject at hand...

Darlin', if I were to get my jollies by arguing with someone, I'd pick someone with more mental firepower than some little kept man like you. I mean, let's face itif brains were leather, you couldn't saddle a flea.

And at least, I can keep the arguments in check between each other, and I know where each belongs. You seem to have trouble with that. :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#693 Consumer Comment

My letter to the Editor of Army Times Publication

AUTHOR: Georganna - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

This was also printed in a small town newspaper near Crawford Texas. My effort is not to aggrivate or provoke. All I ask is that both sides think about the impact you have on military families as you continue to debate this issue.

I assisted an old veteran in retrieving an item off a shelf at our commissary. Suspecting that he may continue to need assistance, I decided to time my own shopping with his so that I could continue to be available to assist him. He told me how he had contracted tuberculosis during World War II and how the doctors had removed one and a half of his lungs in order to save his life. I was quite impressed at how obviously successful that treatment was. He asked me if my husband was in Iraq and I told him that he was indeed. The man began to weep. He grasped my shoulder and apologized to me. He had been in Egypt and the Middle East. He fought the fascists who supported the Nazis in that region. He said if he had done his job right, if he had not failed, there would not have been a need to send my husband to Iraq. I had no idea how to respond and so I said nothing for the remainder of our time together.
During my husbands tour I had another veteran apologize to me. He was a Vietnam veteran who had been drafted. He told me he had marched in the anti-war protests after he had come home. He said that he was sorry my government had not listened to him who had demanded that there be no more American Soldiers spilling their blood on foreign soil to make people rich.
I am still amazed at the contrast of thinking between these two men. I can only conclude that this is due to the different times in which these two men had served. Most of the WW II generation grew up during the depression in a time when there was little. They fought oppression so they could free the world. The Vietnam generation, my parents, were sheltered from the suffering their parents had known. They grew up in a time when there was plenty and they fear their children will not be as fortunate. They embrace oppression in an effort to pacify it. Cindy Sheehan is part of this generation. Could this be her goal as well?

I am so sorry for Cindy, for the loss of her son Casey. I have heard the worry in my mother-in-laws voice. I know that my husband's deployment was much more difficult for her than it was for our children and me. What if it was my soldier who had not come home? His parents would be devastated yet; they would never stand next to Cindy Sheehan. No matter how they felt about this administration or the war effort, they would never show anything but pride and respect for the decisions their son has made to support his country through this war.

I hope that Casey never knew of the distaste his mother had for his decision to serve his country. I hope that he believed that his mother was actually proud of him.

I am, and I never even met him.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#692 Consumer Comment

Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

Vera states....

"Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?"


Well lets see for a month now you have been spouting off about "showing proof". So there I give you a few links. Now of course you change your tune to "I never said he didnt say that". What???? You've been demanding proof...well...there it is!

Then you go on trying to disprove each link? Get real Vera!! If I can just google or yahoo the EXACT phrase "this is not a dictatorship but i tried to make it one in that instance" and get those links inside of 2.4 seconds then I think thats pretty powerful proof that he said that. And there are MANY links.

Of course now your going to say its some Liberal conspiracy. Or you and Shawn both will say it was a "spin".

Take your tinfoil hat off. The b*****d said it and meant it. And to just brush it off that he said it "ages" ago, and its not relevent now isnt going to cut it in anyones book.

I take it when Bush said "Saddam helped Al Quada" (now completely and totally disproven to the point that, even Fox News wont even acknowledge the bogus connection) as a point to goto war with Iraq now is moot because it was "ages" (3 years) ago??? (about the same time he made the "dictator" speach mind you)

It was only a couple of years ago, he said it, he meant it, he carried it out (or are you going to need me to provide "proof" that the bill was submitted and rammed through as well? And that it passed?), it happened. Deal with it.

If you dont like those links I gave you, fine. But I have shown where I originally got the quote. From a calendar notepad of "Bush Mis-speak". I gave the link to the company. They have also made the pads for other Presidents in past years. And most likely will continue well into the future (if we still have one!). Lets just assume that your plan of attack will be to discredit even this most mundane of sources. Ok. Dont you think a company that has been doing this for years would try to avoid "getting it wrong". Especially if it were a quote from high ranking politician, or lawyer? (which most if not all politicians are!). This would open them up to a slander suit quicker than Standard Oil can shakedown a motorist.


Now on the same note.....I have tried to google this exact phrase......."Islam in California Schools". All the links that come up are as I stated in an earlier post...from very far right "Christian" websites. Hardly fair and balanced reports. Matter of fact your hero's website comes up at a whopping #3!!! PatRobertson.com!!! Wow...amazing....go figure! (I think Nasa had some budget cuts if you need a rocket scientist to help you figure that one out yourself)

Does this mean I can post things from Al Franken and call it concrete PROOF!? No...I wont sink as low as you Vera.

Ok...just once.....8).....

"Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot!" Al said it, it must be true!

(sorry I couldnt resist....Im sure Vera and Shawn just had a meltdown)

On another note...One of my best friends from high school lives in Brentwood. If you notice on a map, Martinez and Brentwood/Byron are only 15 miles from each other. He has 3 children, ages 3-9. They go to the same school district these so called "reports" state was "imposing" this on the students. Flat out....he stated it was bullshit. Only one school sent out a flyer to parents suggesting this at the beginning of a school year and the idea was quickly dropped. ONE SCHOOL, hardly justifies demonizing an entire states school system. And it certainly doesnt justify creating another "fear mentality" witch hunt.

"Look over there!! Islam in CA schools...quick! Give up your civil rights, surrender your freedoms so that we can save you....and hide..or at least do everything we say without question or we will call you a traitor, and report you to Homeland Security!!"

So ....what was that you and Shawn say about "spinning" again?

Isnt there another way you and McCarthy....oops..I mean Bush....can fight communism....oops..I mean terrorism?

Eeeeeeeeek!!! Over there! Look! Communism!!...oops...I mean TERRORISM! Quick, my lemmings HIDE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#691 Consumer Comment

Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

Vera states....

"Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?"


Well lets see for a month now you have been spouting off about "showing proof". So there I give you a few links. Now of course you change your tune to "I never said he didnt say that". What???? You've been demanding proof...well...there it is!

Then you go on trying to disprove each link? Get real Vera!! If I can just google or yahoo the EXACT phrase "this is not a dictatorship but i tried to make it one in that instance" and get those links inside of 2.4 seconds then I think thats pretty powerful proof that he said that. And there are MANY links.

Of course now your going to say its some Liberal conspiracy. Or you and Shawn both will say it was a "spin".

Take your tinfoil hat off. The b*****d said it and meant it. And to just brush it off that he said it "ages" ago, and its not relevent now isnt going to cut it in anyones book.

I take it when Bush said "Saddam helped Al Quada" (now completely and totally disproven to the point that, even Fox News wont even acknowledge the bogus connection) as a point to goto war with Iraq now is moot because it was "ages" (3 years) ago??? (about the same time he made the "dictator" speach mind you)

It was only a couple of years ago, he said it, he meant it, he carried it out (or are you going to need me to provide "proof" that the bill was submitted and rammed through as well? And that it passed?), it happened. Deal with it.

If you dont like those links I gave you, fine. But I have shown where I originally got the quote. From a calendar notepad of "Bush Mis-speak". I gave the link to the company. They have also made the pads for other Presidents in past years. And most likely will continue well into the future (if we still have one!). Lets just assume that your plan of attack will be to discredit even this most mundane of sources. Ok. Dont you think a company that has been doing this for years would try to avoid "getting it wrong". Especially if it were a quote from high ranking politician, or lawyer? (which most if not all politicians are!). This would open them up to a slander suit quicker than Standard Oil can shakedown a motorist.


Now on the same note.....I have tried to google this exact phrase......."Islam in California Schools". All the links that come up are as I stated in an earlier post...from very far right "Christian" websites. Hardly fair and balanced reports. Matter of fact your hero's website comes up at a whopping #3!!! PatRobertson.com!!! Wow...amazing....go figure! (I think Nasa had some budget cuts if you need a rocket scientist to help you figure that one out yourself)

Does this mean I can post things from Al Franken and call it concrete PROOF!? No...I wont sink as low as you Vera.

Ok...just once.....8).....

"Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot!" Al said it, it must be true!

(sorry I couldnt resist....Im sure Vera and Shawn just had a meltdown)

On another note...One of my best friends from high school lives in Brentwood. If you notice on a map, Martinez and Brentwood/Byron are only 15 miles from each other. He has 3 children, ages 3-9. They go to the same school district these so called "reports" state was "imposing" this on the students. Flat out....he stated it was bullshit. Only one school sent out a flyer to parents suggesting this at the beginning of a school year and the idea was quickly dropped. ONE SCHOOL, hardly justifies demonizing an entire states school system. And it certainly doesnt justify creating another "fear mentality" witch hunt.

"Look over there!! Islam in CA schools...quick! Give up your civil rights, surrender your freedoms so that we can save you....and hide..or at least do everything we say without question or we will call you a traitor, and report you to Homeland Security!!"

So ....what was that you and Shawn say about "spinning" again?

Isnt there another way you and McCarthy....oops..I mean Bush....can fight communism....oops..I mean terrorism?

Eeeeeeeeek!!! Over there! Look! Communism!!...oops...I mean TERRORISM! Quick, my lemmings HIDE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#690 Consumer Comment

Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

Vera states....

"Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?"


Well lets see for a month now you have been spouting off about "showing proof". So there I give you a few links. Now of course you change your tune to "I never said he didnt say that". What???? You've been demanding proof...well...there it is!

Then you go on trying to disprove each link? Get real Vera!! If I can just google or yahoo the EXACT phrase "this is not a dictatorship but i tried to make it one in that instance" and get those links inside of 2.4 seconds then I think thats pretty powerful proof that he said that. And there are MANY links.

Of course now your going to say its some Liberal conspiracy. Or you and Shawn both will say it was a "spin".

Take your tinfoil hat off. The b*****d said it and meant it. And to just brush it off that he said it "ages" ago, and its not relevent now isnt going to cut it in anyones book.

I take it when Bush said "Saddam helped Al Quada" (now completely and totally disproven to the point that, even Fox News wont even acknowledge the bogus connection) as a point to goto war with Iraq now is moot because it was "ages" (3 years) ago??? (about the same time he made the "dictator" speach mind you)

It was only a couple of years ago, he said it, he meant it, he carried it out (or are you going to need me to provide "proof" that the bill was submitted and rammed through as well? And that it passed?), it happened. Deal with it.

If you dont like those links I gave you, fine. But I have shown where I originally got the quote. From a calendar notepad of "Bush Mis-speak". I gave the link to the company. They have also made the pads for other Presidents in past years. And most likely will continue well into the future (if we still have one!). Lets just assume that your plan of attack will be to discredit even this most mundane of sources. Ok. Dont you think a company that has been doing this for years would try to avoid "getting it wrong". Especially if it were a quote from high ranking politician, or lawyer? (which most if not all politicians are!). This would open them up to a slander suit quicker than Standard Oil can shakedown a motorist.


Now on the same note.....I have tried to google this exact phrase......."Islam in California Schools". All the links that come up are as I stated in an earlier post...from very far right "Christian" websites. Hardly fair and balanced reports. Matter of fact your hero's website comes up at a whopping #3!!! PatRobertson.com!!! Wow...amazing....go figure! (I think Nasa had some budget cuts if you need a rocket scientist to help you figure that one out yourself)

Does this mean I can post things from Al Franken and call it concrete PROOF!? No...I wont sink as low as you Vera.

Ok...just once.....8).....

"Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot!" Al said it, it must be true!

(sorry I couldnt resist....Im sure Vera and Shawn just had a meltdown)

On another note...One of my best friends from high school lives in Brentwood. If you notice on a map, Martinez and Brentwood/Byron are only 15 miles from each other. He has 3 children, ages 3-9. They go to the same school district these so called "reports" state was "imposing" this on the students. Flat out....he stated it was bullshit. Only one school sent out a flyer to parents suggesting this at the beginning of a school year and the idea was quickly dropped. ONE SCHOOL, hardly justifies demonizing an entire states school system. And it certainly doesnt justify creating another "fear mentality" witch hunt.

"Look over there!! Islam in CA schools...quick! Give up your civil rights, surrender your freedoms so that we can save you....and hide..or at least do everything we say without question or we will call you a traitor, and report you to Homeland Security!!"

So ....what was that you and Shawn say about "spinning" again?

Isnt there another way you and McCarthy....oops..I mean Bush....can fight communism....oops..I mean terrorism?

Eeeeeeeeek!!! Over there! Look! Communism!!...oops...I mean TERRORISM! Quick, my lemmings HIDE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#689 Consumer Comment

Wow amazing.... proof shown and.... ignored... why am I not surprised

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 16, 2005

Vera states....

"Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?"


Well lets see for a month now you have been spouting off about "showing proof". So there I give you a few links. Now of course you change your tune to "I never said he didnt say that". What???? You've been demanding proof...well...there it is!

Then you go on trying to disprove each link? Get real Vera!! If I can just google or yahoo the EXACT phrase "this is not a dictatorship but i tried to make it one in that instance" and get those links inside of 2.4 seconds then I think thats pretty powerful proof that he said that. And there are MANY links.

Of course now your going to say its some Liberal conspiracy. Or you and Shawn both will say it was a "spin".

Take your tinfoil hat off. The b*****d said it and meant it. And to just brush it off that he said it "ages" ago, and its not relevent now isnt going to cut it in anyones book.

I take it when Bush said "Saddam helped Al Quada" (now completely and totally disproven to the point that, even Fox News wont even acknowledge the bogus connection) as a point to goto war with Iraq now is moot because it was "ages" (3 years) ago??? (about the same time he made the "dictator" speach mind you)

It was only a couple of years ago, he said it, he meant it, he carried it out (or are you going to need me to provide "proof" that the bill was submitted and rammed through as well? And that it passed?), it happened. Deal with it.

If you dont like those links I gave you, fine. But I have shown where I originally got the quote. From a calendar notepad of "Bush Mis-speak". I gave the link to the company. They have also made the pads for other Presidents in past years. And most likely will continue well into the future (if we still have one!). Lets just assume that your plan of attack will be to discredit even this most mundane of sources. Ok. Dont you think a company that has been doing this for years would try to avoid "getting it wrong". Especially if it were a quote from high ranking politician, or lawyer? (which most if not all politicians are!). This would open them up to a slander suit quicker than Standard Oil can shakedown a motorist.


Now on the same note.....I have tried to google this exact phrase......."Islam in California Schools". All the links that come up are as I stated in an earlier post...from very far right "Christian" websites. Hardly fair and balanced reports. Matter of fact your hero's website comes up at a whopping #3!!! PatRobertson.com!!! Wow...amazing....go figure! (I think Nasa had some budget cuts if you need a rocket scientist to help you figure that one out yourself)

Does this mean I can post things from Al Franken and call it concrete PROOF!? No...I wont sink as low as you Vera.

Ok...just once.....8).....

"Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot!" Al said it, it must be true!

(sorry I couldnt resist....Im sure Vera and Shawn just had a meltdown)

On another note...One of my best friends from high school lives in Brentwood. If you notice on a map, Martinez and Brentwood/Byron are only 15 miles from each other. He has 3 children, ages 3-9. They go to the same school district these so called "reports" state was "imposing" this on the students. Flat out....he stated it was bullshit. Only one school sent out a flyer to parents suggesting this at the beginning of a school year and the idea was quickly dropped. ONE SCHOOL, hardly justifies demonizing an entire states school system. And it certainly doesnt justify creating another "fear mentality" witch hunt.

"Look over there!! Islam in CA schools...quick! Give up your civil rights, surrender your freedoms so that we can save you....and hide..or at least do everything we say without question or we will call you a traitor, and report you to Homeland Security!!"

So ....what was that you and Shawn say about "spinning" again?

Isnt there another way you and McCarthy....oops..I mean Bush....can fight communism....oops..I mean terrorism?

Eeeeeeeeek!!! Over there! Look! Communism!!...oops...I mean TERRORISM! Quick, my lemmings HIDE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#688 Consumer Comment

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

AUTHOR: Darren - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 15, 2005

Nothing any of you people has said will make any difference what so ever. The ONLY question that matters is WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT ??? They key word is "DO". All any of you are doing is whining and venting , which may give some relief to YOU , but WONT CHANGE ANYTHING AT ALL. Your votes are meaningless , your opinions are meanlingless, and your words are falling on deaf ears(i.e. Big Corporate/Federal Government , neither of which has any vested interest in what you think because its more profitable for them to listen to each other than to the whining masses).Untill and unless EVERYONE(and i do mean EVERYONE) is willing to stop buying anything from any major coroporation (including gas,food,cars,medication,credit cards,etc.) or phsycially take up arms and declare a revolution NOTHING YOU SAY OR DO WILL CHANGE ANYTHING.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#687 Consumer Comment

Wow! another edition of Encyclopedia Stupidia!!

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 15, 2005

Sorry Vera, I dont read your entire posts when you spout off for that long if you havent noticed. Its not worth my time.

Im still waiting for your "proof".

ONCE AGAIN....make it in a nice simple post. SAYING you put it in one of your looooooooooooooong winded Encyclopedia Stupidia editions simply wont cut it (and that was a looooong sermon there Vera! You have way to much time on your hands....collecting welfare I take it?). Put it down in a nice simple format....nice simple post....get it?!

I think I showed you how above if you still cant grasp the concept.

And also...ONCE AGAIN...stop this cross thread bullshit. You know d**n well you went over to the other thread and attacked me. I will address your posts here ON THIS THREAD. And I will your posts THERE on THAT thread. But I will not give you your jollies by cutting and pasting between each of them to contort the subject at hand (another tactic you must have gotten from Jerry Falwell I guess).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#686 Consumer Comment

Canadunce James

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 15, 2005

James,

Please tell me where you got the information to back up this statement:

"...even though a "vast majority" of Iraqi's want the USA out of there..."

From all the reports I have seen, the majority of Iraqis are actually HAPPY that Saddam (this is the correct spelling by the way, not "Suddam", please get it right in the future) is now out of power, and that they have greater freedoms now than they had during his tyrannical rule.

In fact, elections for the new parliment were held today, and this time (as opposed to last January) there was a heavy Sunni turnout. The insurgency in Iraq is made up mostly of Sunnis, as they are keen on getting the US out of Iraq. Now, with the large turnout, they will have much better representation in the new government than they did after the January elections.

I for one see this as a very good sign that we will be able to pull out of the area in the coming near future. I agree that we need to pull out as soon as possible, but we also need to make sure that we do not leave behind a situation that will result in a very bloody civil war.

Hopefully, with pretty much equal representation of all religious factions in Iraq, the area will become much more stable. Even today as elections were taking place, there was only a very small number of terrorist type activities. Maybe this is a sign of a brighter future for the Iraqi people, and the region overall, and our troops will be able to return home safely.

Oh, and as a final comment to the original post of this report, I still have seen no evidence that we went into Iraq for oil. Gas here is still over $2 a gallon ($2.09 is the lowest I have seen). And these prices are way down after the problems with Katrina and Rita interrupting US refinery processing. If we had truly gone in for oil, don't you think our gas prices would be a lot lower, now that we had control of that supply?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#685 Consumer Comment

Man, I hate it when I can't sleep!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 15, 2005

From the latest in spin technology

Here you go folks. Proof of Bush's "plans" for our nation.

Actually, most of these focus that whole dictator comment Bush made an eon ago, and one or two mention the faith-based initiatives or the Patriot Act. The most conversation on any "subject" is offered by that site "rumor-mill", and you'll see the tangent it takes below.

Backing up good ol' boy Bush's quotes. My favorite being, of course, this one.....
"'Its not a dictatorship but I tried to make it one in that instance' ---speaking about his "faith-based" initiative (Just for you Vera!)
Where, exactly, have I ever said Bush did not make any remarks regarding Dictatorial subjects?

So let's look at your little collection of links.

quicklyfind.com/quote-george_w__bush.html

Hmmmlots of out of context quips, and oh, looklittle artifacts all through the text. Didn't you try to palm it off, that similar little dittles made a couple of my posts unreadable, and thus, non-valid?

Here's a thought, genius. When you were a kid---even as an adult, what the heck---are you gonna tell me that you have never, EVER said something that was misconstrued by others? And of course, you've NEVER said something you regretted, right? And you've never said it one way, but the intent wasn't clear---and it was taken the completely opposite way?

Oh, and FYI.a dictatorship is nothing like a Presidency; Dictatorships are not a matter of votedictatorships are based on fear and lies, and in some ways, are easier. It's just a matter of finding some sellouts---like you, and any other liberal who sees the chance for self-advancementsay, James of Tupper and James of Canada. Give the doggies a bone and you've got the start of a faithful following.

Find some more hypocritical wishy-washies, and the numbers grow. Saddam could tell you, you'd live like a king, and there's no fear of being voted out. You just kill the opposition, and the fear will keep the masses in place.

Ah, but do I, personally, think a dictatorship is good? No, not really.

By the way, you get similar, in link form, for Clinton on the selfsame website. :) It's just a collection of quotes and quipsfor fun or amusement purposes.

libertymagazine.org/article/articleview/468/1/2

The last two paragraphs are what this article is about in your eyes, right? And up to a point, I can agree that studying the Bible shouldn't be a form of punishment, in that the punished is forced to read, recite, and accept as a truth under duress. True conviction begins in the heart. But was the person offered the option to choose prison/jail over this?

I've even admitted, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Your most fatal error is in assuming that, because I defend the War, that I supposedly support every single thing our Leader does. As with so much else, you are mistaken, as usual.

But do tell, what, exactly does this particular straying have to do with the real topic? Faith based initiatives are only one of the issues presented by Bush. What does this have to do with the war in Iraq?

firethefcc.com/fccforum/printthread.php?t=13

Here's a little more than just the dictator statement, in the context it's offered by Ben.

But he also made it clear to them, in more than two and a half hours of meetings, that he intends to stand by his tax cut proposal and other planks in his campaign agenda.
GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.

Funny, looks different when you add more of the whole story around it.

Too bad half the links here don't work, or they lead you to pages that don't contain the actual quotes. It's more of the A dictatorship would be lots easier stuff. Is this what you're pointing out? So whatit's the same thing you gave us with your last bunch of links.

Is the Dictator statement any less noble than I did not have inappropriate sexual relations.with that woman.

This was cute. Public Opinion. There's a big disconnect between the American people and the Pundit Elite. The Beltway Gang writes endlessly about the President's mangled English, and the late-night comics delight in their "Bush Is a Dolt" routines. But the President scores decent job-performance ratings in the public polls. Most national surveys have Bush hovering in the mid-50s -- nearly 10 percentage points below his honeymoon highs, but similar to the struggling early Presidency of Bill Clinton. In a bit of good news for the White House, a Democratic poll even found that most Americans consider Bush smart.

That's off the BusinessWeek lkink that was offered on that page you sent me to, but no direct comment about dictator was present.

So far, I'm still pretty unimpressed, Bennie.

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=61036

Here's a suspicious looking name! Let's check it out, shall we?

Oh, good Lordit talks about New World Orders and sucheven offers a quip by GHWB Sr. containing that exact phrase. Let's see how the page starts out.

Brace yourself. I'm afraid we may be in for a fairly rough ride.
President Bush has gotten four more years (almost certainly through massive vote fraud) to complete the process of setting up his NWO police state, and it is coming on fast now with the passing of Patriot Act II and a national identity card ("Your papers please!"). It also looks as if preparations are being put in place to carry out forced psychiatric testing of the population (see: "New Freedom Initiative" which passed Congress by a giant majority).

Hmmm.starts right out with an open mind, didn't he? But lets look at some more.

The proof that George W. Bush is the worst president in the history of the United States is all over the place, almost too voluminous to even catalog. (Mind you, I'm not saying Kerry would have been much better, since they both belong to the same satatnic cult, loyalty to which seems to have trumped all else).

(Well, you're a non-believer, so what difference does it make, if neither Satatn or God exists?)

Curiouser and curiouser: who are the satatnists? Ah, wellno matter. Onward, onward

'There ought to be limits to freedom.' - George W. Bush, in response to a website parodying him

And like that dictator remark, it was a joke. Now granted, he didn't have fine supporters like Michael Moore making nasty movies about his opponentsand, it's not like he went out and told the IRS to audit the taxes of people he specifically chose. Nothing so noble. And hey, like the stolen White House furniture, and the vandalism prank, well, it seems like the liberals and democrats are the ones lacking in the humor department. Let's dig a little more

Dr. Steven Greer, a group working toward the disclosure of what the U.S. and other governments know about UFOs and free energy systems (reportedly reverse engineered from crashed UFOs).

Okay.that's real good. I think I'm finished with that site.

http://www.1115.org/2004/01/16/

Kay.a blog site, like a bulletin board. Mostly opinions and some writ by a person who has a gif image containing the words ain't no such things as Halfway Crooks; the image is of the flag, with the Prez and Company in front of it. Real open-minded. But it is your source.

http://www.dubyaspeak.com/repeatoffender.phtml?offense=dictator

More dictator comments, right? Sigh.
Cannot find server. Dubya-Speak? Repeat Offender? This is the same site I used to see posted on some of the bulletin boards at Collegeit basically contains most of the little dumb snippets of Bush's verbal whoopsies. You're really stuck on that, hunh, Bennie?

Isn't this just a larger, grander version of the same s**t you're bashing me for? Spelling, grammar, and verbal whoopsies? Would you care to tell me what makes it okay for you to attack and bash the President (myself, and others) for the same things you accuse and condemn me for doing?

What makes you feel you're so much better than everyone else here?

This looks promising! Will it pan out?

http://www.newshounds.us/2004/08/26/citizen_over_the_age_of_35_you_qualify.php

Well, I've tried repeatedly to get it to load, changing my settings and everything. I'm really trying to give this a fair go, but the web pages aren't cooperating.

Ok there you go. See how its done Vera? HIS words, YOUR proof.

That was a good dry run, Ben. Maybe, next time, you could get links that actually work? And howcum you're trying to pass off this same link twice? (Speaking of that whole repeat offender thing!) Make it look like volume? I'll give you an e for effort, because at least you tried.

Now lets see if you can do the same. And for Mr. "Everything he said is taken out of context!! You liars!!" Shawn.......Tell me Shawn....Just what context WOULD you put that in??

Don't worry, Shawn, I put it in better context up toward the top of this post. Even in the pages Ben has provided, the dictator comment, when chased back to its point of origin, is intended in humor, and nothing more.

We're supposed to have a sense of humor when crude fun is poked at us---but poke it back, and you've crossed the line! More liberal do as I say, not as I do double standard double talk.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#684 Consumer Comment

More diatribe from Report number 165478

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 14, 2005

You see, Ben, this argument between you and I belongs here and nowhere else, so here is where I will respond to it.

What proof Vera??? Im still waiting!
You have shown nothing. Not one link. Not one URL. Not one newscast. Not one newspaper. Not one commercial. Not anyting. Im still waiting!!

Not anyting?? Well, Mon, I be standin' firm in what I sayed when I sayed it, Braddah. You actin' all MontEGO Bay an' cavah-lyeer ain't gon' change a ting, kyeh?

Its kinda hard to "lose" when
Same old rhetoric. Answered. Proven. Get over it. Accept it.
You wanna link? Here. (Sing with me now: dubyah, dubyah, dubyah, dot) ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff154773.htm

Enjoy, stupid. >:}

Your not doing yourself or you ignorant, racist, evangelical theocratic agenda any good by spouting off about others showing proof when you havent even shown the slightest a*s hair of your own!

Well, unlike you, I don't consider my a*s (or any hairs thereon) one of my finest points, let alone a talking point. And racist? I'd love to see where you warp logic to come to that conclusionbut I know, as B. has said, I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong. (11/26/05)

You made an outragous statment and called it fact. Now cough up the goods!

See above. 11/02/05 Here are some articles Yadda, yadda. Link? Sure!
(Sing with me now: dubyah, dubyah, dubyah, dot) ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff154773.htm
{cough, Cough, VURRP!}

Another classic Vera quote....
"don't bother responding if you can't be civil..." Yap-Yap.
WOW! The pot calling the kettle black again!

And I stand by that, too. you fail to see here that I WAS civil when I responded to you, and tried to be civil again thereafter. Just rememberthe first part of classic is classand you have NONE. You, on the other hand, were the snide, snippety, twittering little pot-licker you are to this very day. And you're pathetic.

Your such the saint arnt you Vera?

Never said I was. In fact, I have pointed out that I'm not perfect. Much worse, I've pointed out that YOU'RE not perfect, and I've proven you to be nothing more than a little trolling liar.

After telling gays to leave this country?

Nah, that's more Ben-Spin. I suggested that if gay folks wanna marry, that they find the place, marry, and come back as a couple if it's that important to them. But I just know you're using that notorious bullshit-ray to BENd it into something it clearly isn't. If that's your view and you have to rub yourself with it to comfort yourself, then have at it. You want to see me as the villain to justify your hatred, so you can feel good about yourself. Knock your socks off---or, more to the point, get your rocks off.

I can think of better things to live for, than hatred. Apparently, you can't.

Telling people without religion that they have no morals?

Date and post---or postS, as you have previously claimed that I have made this statement MANY times. Yet not a single time, have you ever proven this as fact. So I have addressed this before.

"You have even gone as far as questioning my sexuality.

No more or less than you have questioned Shawn's (And then miserably failed at backpedaling, when caught.).

And again, previously addressed. I asked you if your were gay simply based on the fact that you're the ONLY person on this Report that's shoving Gay Marriage down my throat screaming, Accept it! Embrace it! Advocate it! How repulsive is love! You theocrats' don't wanna approve the marriage of any two same-sex couples shacked up together!

Even when selling it, you give spleen: Same-sex couples shacked up together!

But I'm just restating the obviousand will continue to do so, just to keep my side fresh. And it will never change. Like I've saidI've had many of my notions longer than you've been alive. Do you think your bleating and farting is really gonna change that? (Haahahahahahahaahhh! I really AM laughing!)

And now you comming off saying I was vicious??

Unh-hunh. Nasty and snippety from start to current. Picking fights like a troll. Puffy and Pissy. (Please stop using Blue Boy magazine as your reference to spell coming)

Your sick,

Nahhnot even the slightest hint of a fever or sniffle. But y'know, some days, I just wanna put on a bunny suit and scream my lungs out.

and need serious help. Im not talking about some "faith based" thing either.

You need new material. And I'll bet I've borne witness to more genuine miracles in the name of Faith, than you have in your religion of Tolerance. But that's not the topic here, is it, Free-Thinker? (You shame the very concept.)

Because you have shown that you have NO MORALS WHATSOEVER

Awww.are you hoping to offend? Nice try. Just because you think I have no morals, shows me how back-spun you've become. You see, if I'm a religious zealot who thinks she's a saint, then I'd quarrel with you on the BASIS of my morality as taught to me by religion only. Since I have never professed myself as a saint, and since I have never called you immoral, and have not used a religiously-based pretext of morality (you know, something based on the Big Ten) as a direct reference, you cannot possibly come to this conclusion by any logical fashion. Therefore, you really can't offend me by calling me immoral. That is purely your spin.

After all, I CAN quote you: If you're religious, then you have no morals. (Strange how that looks, taken from its original post, hunh?)

AFTER MAKING A COMMENT LIKE THAT AFTER ALL THE LOOOOOOOONG EVIL TWISTED POSTS YOU HAVE MADE TO ME AND OTHERS.

Evil? No. At times uncivil and mean-natured, yesabsolutely. And I've never denied it. But again, the times I have been uncivil were RESPONSES to the incivility of others (mainly yours and the Twin Freaks). From the beginning statement, I had stated, You didn't ask for it, but here's my take Feel free to deny this exists, too, iffen y'want. Again, I'll quote something said by B., just in case you think I'm the only one who seems to see illusions of your demeanor: You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide.

And, to be fair, B. has also been inclined to let me know when he thinks I'm full of it, but at least he gives me the simple respect to air or defend my position. When I have made a mistake I have apologized and set it straight. If you don't see it, fineI don't lose sleep over not being in agreement with some little hypocritical troll who can't see past his own ego.

Try looking up the word diplomacy in your Encyclopedia Stupidia.

Ohyeah. And what's the difference, in terms of length; six posts, each with seven-hundred words, or one post, with forty-two-hundred words?

Where do you get off on this? eh?

Actually, I'm of the mind to think it's you who gets off on this sort of thing. Apparently. I just hope you wash your hands before you touch the keys. But then again, I could be sure you're accustomed to talking around a mouthful of protein? (And you're welcome to take that in any context you wish, coz this time, I AM being vicious. Deliberately so.)

You attack people then complain when they attack back.

Ah, there's some fine plagiarism (yet again)! I said that to James d' Calgary way-long ago. And I still say the same thing: the times I have been uncivil were RESPONSES to the incivility of others. And I don't complain'. I return fire, bolt for bolt and better. Too bad you cannot say the same; you're the only one who thinks you're witty. To me, you're just twitty.

You say that "liberals" have no religion

Where did I say this? Date and post. Are you gonna tell me that old discharge again, how you're not gonna go through my titanic length' posts to find it? I guess then, the burden of proof DOES lie with you. If you're unwilling, you're just blowing off steam and cannot prove that I'm this lying, doctrine-spewing fire-breathing hypocrite. But I have whole posts dedicated to your fine examples of spinning, lying, hypocrisy and bullshit. And each new post provides me with yet more! :D

and are taking religion away from you

You mean, like a handful of marbles? Here, I ain't got any, so's I'm a-gonna take away yours!
Ben, you lost your marbles a while back, there.

My view on many of the Liberal Elites is this. if you won't live that way, stop making laws forcing me to live in a way you won't. If Chelsea isn't allowed to go to a Public School where they distribute condoms, and she isn't allowed to pierce her ears, I don't want former President Clinton OR HER HUSBAND shoving bills through congress appealing for the rights of thirteen year old girls to get abortions without their parent's consent.

For that matter, why does the responsibility of reproductive IRRESPONSIBILITY always seem to have to rest with the girls involved? So far, from experience (both mine and what my Daughter, my friends' Daughters, and my Daughter's friends, and so onI can only assume you might get the idea), it's not the young girls who are pressuring the boys for sex, unless they in turn have been pressured by young boys. Not in every case, but it certainly is the exception more than it is the rule! The double standard lives to this day: If a girl sleeps around, she's a w***e. (But we have sixteen-and-seventeen-year-old Brittney Spears [sp?] doing striptease on national TeeVee, while looking out at the audience: Look how shockingly sexual I am!) But if a boy sleeps around, he's a stud, or The Man!

yet try to take rights away from them and everyone else.

Show me where I have specifically tried to take away any rights from anyone. Far as I can see, this world seems hell-bent to circumvent and pervert the traditional Family model---Christian or otherwise.

You demand proof from people for their statements

And I'm still demanding it. The difference, I've given proofshutting your eyes against it only blocks YOU from seeing it.

yet make outragous ones yourself and never even acknowledge when people ask for proof from you...

I've backed up my statements. Shutting your eyes against it only blocks YOU from seeing it.

It Still Exists.

Thats pretty sick....hypocritical.....and just plain stupid.

So are the greater bulk of your postsbut, well, hehh, here we are. :)

Do you really think your pulling the wool over people's eyes?

What wool? Sheep have wool. Sheepbleat. The only one here that's bleating (---and farting! We can't forget the farting!) is you.

Pulling the wool over someone's eyes implies intent to mislead. I have done no such thing. Where I have been corrected, I have adjusted; where I have been PROVEN wrong, I have conceded or corrected. I believe what I believe. And you seem to resent that, monuMENTALLY. (Note emphasis.)

I guess you think you are since you follow the Bush mantra.
You seem to think that everyone is going to follow you hook line and sinker, then get pissed when they dont.

That's more your speed, Sweetheart. I wasn't the one Masterbaiting here, so there's no hook in my writ. Psssttth. I don't have a problem with other people's opinions. you do. Otherwise, you wouldn't be trolling for religious types.

Then try to demonize them in front of others to deflect the stupidity that you foist on everyone.

Oohdemonize. Wow. Have YOU ben' reading YOUR Encyclopedia Stupidia?

I don't have to foist or demonize youyou're doing a splendid job of chewing on your own a*s, for the world to see. And it's d**n funny stuff.

You seem to attack on all the same points:

**I'm a bad-guy coz I use my Word program to produce an intelligently composed rebuttal. Ooh, I'm so gonna smoke a turd in Hell for that one!

**You warp and twist something I've already explained to look like I'm a homophobic gay-basher, when in truth, I have never said anything truly untoward regarding people who wish to be gay. In fact, the only thing I can say that could even remotely be insinuated (or spun, so you can grasp it), is that being homosexual is not like being an ethnicity, or a congenital condition; it is a CHOICE, and that perhaps the voting populace isn't ready for same-sex unions.'

**You deny the whole Islam in California schools thing. In fact, that is the second greatest reason you seem to post to me about anything. The first greatest? You're upset because---and this is it, exclusively, as you have provided NO BASIS TO SUPPORT ANY OTHER REASON---I'm what you call a religious typethe exact type you were Masterbaiting for.

**You are trying to let this quarrel spill over onto the other post, since I wanted to go there and see how other people feelsorta, get some idea as to real, major, KEY arguing points as to why other folks don't like Bush (and I'm sick of this bullshit with you). So you're using that post as another attempt to high jack it into a subject that it CLEARLY IS NOT---a post for your personal bashing.

**You insist that I've said you have no morals. Wrong! I have never said thisnor have I said that you're going to Hell, nor have I told you to go to Hell, nor have I ever called you a traitor. I've never, EVER said I'm a saint, and that everyone has to follow my doctrine---or any doctrine. And I defy you to prove it. Dates and Posts, just like I've provided in the literally ENDLESS supply of your rants.

**You insist that I'm the first to attack, when indeed, this is not the case. And by your own admission, you were the one who intentionally Masterbaits for the religious types like myself.

I could go on and on, Kid...but this time I've spent responding to you is already too much...and you're really unworthy of it.

Practice what you preach, Vera. And you preach waaaaaaay to often.

You're confused. You make a baseless statement; I provide a counterpoint, and cover said counterpoint with facts from good sources. It's called debate. I know you're lost, calling names and telling me to shove things into my uptight theocratic religious t**t or whatever.

One thing for sure Vera, you better HOPE I am right about my religious beliefs.

Your religious beliefs? Have you forgotten? Let me refresh.

atheist; (noun)

Definition: Non-believer.

That is to say, one who doesn't believe in the existence of Gods, Great or Evil; one who possesses no belief whatsoever in the physical existence of any supernatural force, being, or Entity. Not a religion. Right?

Well, from your final statement to me in your little diatribe, it's clear that your nonbelief is fragile. Logically, what I believe is no more relevant and no more belongs in your vocabulary than words like interbreeding cabbages, dancing walruses or Peony Tablecloths.

Things like evil and good and heresy, God, the Devil or Satan, and places like Hell should also be no more or less different in their context and meaning, and thus, have little relevance to you.

Because if I am wrong, there is a god, and a heaven.......your going to be up s**t creek when you get to those pearly gates

Well, Benif I do have to answer for the things I do---and make no mistake, I know I will---that answer will not be to someone like you. So why are you concerned?

after the vile, sexist, racist, homophobe crap you have spouted on these two threads.

Waitaminnit---I am to be. punished for wrongdeeds?.By a God you don't believe even exists? Who's doing the firebrand preaching here, Bennie? You're trying to instill a fear, based on the concept sin, created by a God that doesn't exist?

Whatever, Loser.

Oh, and please feel free to point out to me where I have been sexist.roflmao!!
Haa-haa-haahhh.Hahhahahahahahahahahahahahahh!!!! Considering how quick you back down from quarreling with Shawn and B., (whom I know and HAVE known are both men!), you're the next best thing to being there.

And the only one who has really been homophobic between you and I is you. Have another bite of fruit....yeah.....eat around those black feahters....

If I am truely wrong....say "HI!" to the Bush's and Bin Laden's in hell for me. And give a good kick in the fanny to your fearless leaders Falwell & Robertson Co. while your at it.

Again, Hell, Gingham Sweater", Squidbillies, "Jackelopes. Am I supposed to be offended when someone like you tells me to go to Hell? Why don't you tell me to go to K-Mart (where the big red K stands for Kwality!)? At least, to the both of us, places like K-Mart, Wal*Mart, or Saks actually exist on a real physical plain, and we can both easily agree that they are, in fact, real. Hell is no more real than Honnalee or Valhalla, as far as you're concerned, right? Right?

If I do go to Hell, Bendon't worry.
I'll leave the light on for you. ;)
Otherwise, I hope not to see you there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#683 Consumer Comment

Bush the Dictator... with PROOF! Just for Vera and Shawn......so they can see how it is done.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 14, 2005

Here you go folks. Proof of Bush's "plans" for our nation. Backing up good ol' boy Bush's quotes. My favorite being, of course, this one.....

"Its not a dictatorship but I tried to make it one in that instance" ---speaking about his "faith-based" initiative (Just for you Vera!)


http://www.quicklyfind.com/quote-george_w__bush.html

http://www.libertymagazine.org/article/articleview/468/1/2

http://www.firethefcc.com/fccforum/printthread.php?t=13

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=61036

http://www.1115.org/2004/01/16/

http://www.dubyaspeak.com/repeatoffender.phtml?offense=dictator

http://www.newshounds.us/2004/08/26/citizen_over_the_age_of_35_you_qualify.php

http://www.newshounds.us/2004/08/26/citizen_over_the_age_of_35_you_qualify.php

Ok there you go. See how its done Vera? HIS words, YOUR proof. Now lets see if you can do the same. And for Mr. "Everything he said is taken out of context!! You liars!!" Shawn.......Tell me Shawn....Just what context WOULD you put that in??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#682 Consumer Suggestion

Ok for all you lost causes:

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Yes Peeps... Canada did have a "Non Confidence Vote"

Guess what... so did the USA! However in Canada an Election must be called, while in the USA, Bush can continue to be the main cause of terrorizm & even though a "vast majority" of Iraqi's want the USA out of there... along with a majority of American citizens, you fools cannot see it is time to go!

You can't see that now can ya? Stupid friggin war! White Phosphorus is a "biological weapon" & definately a WMD! If it's not... I sure as hell would like to know what is classed as one! Something that penetrates every crack & crevice & burns through all human skin to the bone is a fair weapon in war? Yea right! Suddam is on trial by "American's" & not Iraqi's at all you fools! Unless you still wanna believe Bush's spin, just like his spin on Nuclear Weapons Suddam was aquireing!

By all means Iraq's don't really care anymore about Suddam. Only Americans do! Why because he killed less people in his entire reign of power than George Bush has directly & indirectly in 5 years? Give me a friggin break!

Yes you are being "ripped off" & almost the "Entire Administration" is suspect now. In a "criminal court of law"!

Invasion of another Country by a Country, or allie of one, who is not under attack, is a "criminal act" morons! A fact! You could possibly get Suddam for Kuwait... but he left! The USA has not. Still there killing people & getting your troops killed & for what?

Give it up! George Bush & his oil buddies are "corrupt as hell" & you are nothing more than "sheep" if your dumb enough to follow him "expecially after" his recent non confidence vote. Thank God I am Canadian!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#681 Consumer Comment

T.L. James . . . do you ever research??

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, December 12, 2005

Hey dum-dum, Bush's LATEST approval rating is at 43% according to the AP. It has been as low as 27% in the past. Do your research, or continue proving me right - idiot!

God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#680 Consumer Suggestion

What is at stake

AUTHOR: Lee - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 11, 2005

Larry (one of the first people to post here) states "what is at stake". Well, please inform us "what is at stake?" Weapons of Mass Destruction, well we played hide and seek on those for a little while while the Bush party tap danced.

Freeing IRAQ? O.k. Well how come we were not told we were there to Free Iraq. Is our duty to go around and FREE all the countries with a tyranical dictatorship? If so, then we have a long job ahead of us, and by the way isnt that what Hitler wanted to do (crush all the other governments that did not conform to his?) Are we there so the Iraqi's can put up satellite dishes and watch Tom and Jerry reruns?

O.k. lets just say (which he probably was) Saddam was having Genocide. Let just say we went in there to do that (for arguements sake). Well why did we not go into 90% of of the African countries? They have that everyday, but we are not going over there to stick our nose in that.

O.k. lets say we went over there to secure the oil fields and keep the price of Oil down, and from it falling into the hands of the Terrorist. Well the price of Oil had not been kept down has it? Yea, I know the bush loyalist can blame it on Katrina. Anyone that listens to the news knows that Oil hit record highs BEFORE Katrina. Katrina only knocked out a large portion of the refineries (which is where the oil goes AFTER it is purchased).

O.k. lets say it was a terrorist training ground and that Saddam was in with Osama Bin Laden. Well first, there has not been any connection between Saddam and Osama (Ret. General Collin Powell stated that). Next, Bush states (on Sept 12, 2001) that "we will not rest until Osama has been caught/killed" In February of the next year, when asked "where is Osama?" He stated that "He is hiding, we dont know where he is. He is not our concern." So we can scratch that one off our list of reasons we went over there. Not to mention that no terrorist organization has ever been linked with the Iraqi Government. If you come out and say that, they usually roll over on your CIA wife and ruin her career.

If we were to take the above premise into account, we have a lot more countries to roll on through. Anyone know where most the "suspected" terrorist were from? Saudi Arabia. Well, I ask you -- if we are in a war on Terror, then are we queing up S.A? Next, has anyone tried to find out who these people were that took our very powerful country into a panic striken fear with box cutters and plastic knives? 9 of them are still alive. Dont believe me. Go out to the Bush touting news agencies and do searches on their stories.

So what was at stake? Do me a favor (actually I should say "Do yourself a favor"). Go out to the news network that you trust the MOST. Look through their archives and what was reported about this. You will be very suprised at what just grazed the news and then something else came around and stole the spotlight.

Next, trust in your government and go to the only place that can not be bought or sold (per their words). It is the Library of Congress. Look up the Operation Northwood document. Read it, and look at what the country was trying to do for the invasion of Cuba. *DO NOT* believe me in any shape form or fashion. Do that work yourself. Go to LEGITIMATE news agencies and find the information there. Then come back and tell me "What is at stake".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#679 Consumer Suggestion

What is at stake

AUTHOR: Lee - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 11, 2005

Larry (one of the first people to post here) states "what is at stake". Well, please inform us "what is at stake?" Weapons of Mass Destruction, well we played hide and seek on those for a little while while the Bush party tap danced.

Freeing IRAQ? O.k. Well how come we were not told we were there to Free Iraq. Is our duty to go around and FREE all the countries with a tyranical dictatorship? If so, then we have a long job ahead of us, and by the way isnt that what Hitler wanted to do (crush all the other governments that did not conform to his?) Are we there so the Iraqi's can put up satellite dishes and watch Tom and Jerry reruns?

O.k. lets just say (which he probably was) Saddam was having Genocide. Let just say we went in there to do that (for arguements sake). Well why did we not go into 90% of of the African countries? They have that everyday, but we are not going over there to stick our nose in that.

O.k. lets say we went over there to secure the oil fields and keep the price of Oil down, and from it falling into the hands of the Terrorist. Well the price of Oil had not been kept down has it? Yea, I know the bush loyalist can blame it on Katrina. Anyone that listens to the news knows that Oil hit record highs BEFORE Katrina. Katrina only knocked out a large portion of the refineries (which is where the oil goes AFTER it is purchased).

O.k. lets say it was a terrorist training ground and that Saddam was in with Osama Bin Laden. Well first, there has not been any connection between Saddam and Osama (Ret. General Collin Powell stated that). Next, Bush states (on Sept 12, 2001) that "we will not rest until Osama has been caught/killed" In February of the next year, when asked "where is Osama?" He stated that "He is hiding, we dont know where he is. He is not our concern." So we can scratch that one off our list of reasons we went over there. Not to mention that no terrorist organization has ever been linked with the Iraqi Government. If you come out and say that, they usually roll over on your CIA wife and ruin her career.

If we were to take the above premise into account, we have a lot more countries to roll on through. Anyone know where most the "suspected" terrorist were from? Saudi Arabia. Well, I ask you -- if we are in a war on Terror, then are we queing up S.A? Next, has anyone tried to find out who these people were that took our very powerful country into a panic striken fear with box cutters and plastic knives? 9 of them are still alive. Dont believe me. Go out to the Bush touting news agencies and do searches on their stories.

So what was at stake? Do me a favor (actually I should say "Do yourself a favor"). Go out to the news network that you trust the MOST. Look through their archives and what was reported about this. You will be very suprised at what just grazed the news and then something else came around and stole the spotlight.

Next, trust in your government and go to the only place that can not be bought or sold (per their words). It is the Library of Congress. Look up the Operation Northwood document. Read it, and look at what the country was trying to do for the invasion of Cuba. *DO NOT* believe me in any shape form or fashion. Do that work yourself. Go to LEGITIMATE news agencies and find the information there. Then come back and tell me "What is at stake".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#678 Consumer Suggestion

What is at stake

AUTHOR: Lee - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 11, 2005

Larry (one of the first people to post here) states "what is at stake". Well, please inform us "what is at stake?" Weapons of Mass Destruction, well we played hide and seek on those for a little while while the Bush party tap danced.

Freeing IRAQ? O.k. Well how come we were not told we were there to Free Iraq. Is our duty to go around and FREE all the countries with a tyranical dictatorship? If so, then we have a long job ahead of us, and by the way isnt that what Hitler wanted to do (crush all the other governments that did not conform to his?) Are we there so the Iraqi's can put up satellite dishes and watch Tom and Jerry reruns?

O.k. lets just say (which he probably was) Saddam was having Genocide. Let just say we went in there to do that (for arguements sake). Well why did we not go into 90% of of the African countries? They have that everyday, but we are not going over there to stick our nose in that.

O.k. lets say we went over there to secure the oil fields and keep the price of Oil down, and from it falling into the hands of the Terrorist. Well the price of Oil had not been kept down has it? Yea, I know the bush loyalist can blame it on Katrina. Anyone that listens to the news knows that Oil hit record highs BEFORE Katrina. Katrina only knocked out a large portion of the refineries (which is where the oil goes AFTER it is purchased).

O.k. lets say it was a terrorist training ground and that Saddam was in with Osama Bin Laden. Well first, there has not been any connection between Saddam and Osama (Ret. General Collin Powell stated that). Next, Bush states (on Sept 12, 2001) that "we will not rest until Osama has been caught/killed" In February of the next year, when asked "where is Osama?" He stated that "He is hiding, we dont know where he is. He is not our concern." So we can scratch that one off our list of reasons we went over there. Not to mention that no terrorist organization has ever been linked with the Iraqi Government. If you come out and say that, they usually roll over on your CIA wife and ruin her career.

If we were to take the above premise into account, we have a lot more countries to roll on through. Anyone know where most the "suspected" terrorist were from? Saudi Arabia. Well, I ask you -- if we are in a war on Terror, then are we queing up S.A? Next, has anyone tried to find out who these people were that took our very powerful country into a panic striken fear with box cutters and plastic knives? 9 of them are still alive. Dont believe me. Go out to the Bush touting news agencies and do searches on their stories.

So what was at stake? Do me a favor (actually I should say "Do yourself a favor"). Go out to the news network that you trust the MOST. Look through their archives and what was reported about this. You will be very suprised at what just grazed the news and then something else came around and stole the spotlight.

Next, trust in your government and go to the only place that can not be bought or sold (per their words). It is the Library of Congress. Look up the Operation Northwood document. Read it, and look at what the country was trying to do for the invasion of Cuba. *DO NOT* believe me in any shape form or fashion. Do that work yourself. Go to LEGITIMATE news agencies and find the information there. Then come back and tell me "What is at stake".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#677 Consumer Comment

Bush supporters are at All time low!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 11, 2005

Bush supporters are either retarded or drug users. I just can't see any other way they actually support him in this unjustified war with Iraq, after feeding Saddam Hussein(real spelling for some illiterates) with the weapons to fight other countries. The United States is secretly selling weapons to other countries for big money. They did the same to Iraq and then they turned around and is trying to bust them for WMD! That is wrong!!!Saddam was an ALLIE of USA and now a terrorist country, BULLSHIT, OIL is needed and they were the weakest nation with lot's of oil! I say we IMPEACH- GEORGE WALKER BUSH, He is a drunk b***h, making millions over thousands of our soldiers, for a FALSE WAR. Bush you f**ked your own brother at a try at the White House! People may be dumb, but not that dumb, Jeb I guarantee you will never be elected to PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES! Georgie Blew it for you and the Republicans!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#676 Consumer Comment

Let's put this back where it belongs(Post Number 154773)

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 10, 2005

(From Post Number 165478)

Still waiting for your facts Vera!!

Closing your eyes doesn't mean they don't exist. All this time you've wasted nagging me and getting the same responseI have to laugh. You could have easily found it in the info I have provided on this post. Which by the way, is where this portion of your endless commentary belongs. (And it's why I bought this post's text here.)

Please, once again I say.......dont put it down with your Encyclopedia Stupidia.

Wow. Did you pick that up from one of your wife's/girlfriend's/boyfriend's classmates? Sounds about your speed. How very clever. You must think it's really cute, if you're using it in BOTH this thread and the other. Again, Wow.

Its been months now. You cant post one simple thing to back up your lies? Just one URL? Just one shred? Anything? How can you possibly tout things about "proof" when you cant even do it yourself. Oopsie...I keep forgetting. Your a hypocrite. Do as I say not as I do eh?

Well, I provided it on this post. You not reading it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Look for it. It is titled (and I'll separate this text so you can read it):

Here are some articles I found. It's on this very page, and it's over a month old. (dated 11/02/2005)

Its been MONTHS now??? Try one month, eight days. MonthS implies more than one calendar month (simultaneous periods more than twenty seven days in length). Odd, I thought they taught things like days of the week and how to tell time in Kindergarten...must be somehow advanced to the first grade.

The whole post is two articles that point out the information as fact, complete with names and addresses. Anything beyond that information you might want, you'll have to look for yourself. Might I suggest one othe the OTHER links provided by other people on the thread?

And as far as what I feel is being taken away from us' religious types?

It isn't what I feel, it's what I SEE, and have discovered. But, in keeping with A.) My Word (I just know the concept of honor eludes you) and B.) the topic of THIS POST, it's not going to get discussed any further than this here. If you want more details, you're just gonna have to suffer through reading my titanic length posts if you want anything beyond thisafter all, it seems fairly obvious that I've not shifted from my position. But you just gotta keep trying, I understand. I've held my views for longer than you've been alive, kidwhat makes you think your bleating and bullshit is gonna change that.
No matter how the wind must howl, the mountain will never bow to it.

Oh and about this "hijacking of threads" you mention. Blow it out your intolerant, evangelical, Christian Coalition a*s!

You first.

Yes, high jackinglike you're doing here, trying to let this post bleed into the other one. I want to see how OTHER folks think about our presidentI already know how you think of him---by your own admission, you don't care about the taxes, the war, or anythingyou just think George Bush is trying to turn America into some theocracy because he has mentioned a relationship with God.

And you're entitled to feel this wayI just wish you'd make your own post about it. But you and I know you couldn't get your rocks off attacking me there, because I already know you're wrong (and I suspect deeply that you know you are, too), and I wouldn't waste my time with you otherwise. (I'll wait for the chicken calls, Lord knows, I expect emand you're ridiculously predictable, Boo-h*o.)


You mentioned everything from Islam in CA schools on that other thread to bogus CIA reports, to talking about how "christians" are some persecuted group.

Go, and specify exactly where I have said anything about fake CIA reports, or to where I have not used these things in a direct response to some bullshit YOU spouted. Why do you fail to see my right to defend myself against your personal attacks less valid that your right to attack others based on their beliefs? If you want to prove your argument, do the same thing I didFIND your proof and show it (I think I have several of your backspinnings and self-contradictions, in addition to your outright statement that you were Masterbaiting this board!). Date and post! The only thing I saw about bogus CIA reports wasn't posted by me. I posted something by the NIE---and it's unaltered, if you want to go to their website and look. If you don't want to look, the burden of proof rests with you, then.

NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING you "say" Clinton did ("say" since you have never backed up you claims with ONE shred of PROOF....EVER) can even compare to the 2000+ dead that Bush and Co. have leveled on this Nation. And spare me the "ooooh! the Democrats voted to goto war too!!" bullshit.

Once again, more of your selective outrage we aren't fighting Iraqis, specifically and exclusively; we're fighting a borderless nation that supports terrorism. I've heard it referred to as Jihadistan, among other things. These people come from everywhere in the Middle East; some from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and so on. These people fully support ANYTHING that's anti-American. So I take it you're okay with the deaths from 9-11, and the people killed by the NOW-DEPOSED Saddam Hussein? How many are homeless and displaced because of him? But you don't have to answerbecause I know you won't see any logic behind why I think Saddam's removal was a good thing.

You're just worried Bush is gonna turn America into the Church of My Way Or The Highway---which is so desperately unfounded it's not even worth discussion. Let alone I don't want to break my given word.

That's as much a bunch of crap as your artificial "outrage" over my using Word to process my work here on the RipOff Reports. Can't you fight your own battles? Do you really have to reach that far to invent them? Ninety-Five Per Cent of the computers out there COME WITH WORD on them, and they ALL have Word available to them (PC AND Mac!)...it's a matter of merely installing it or using it. You're acting as though I'm lording some exclusive right over other folks that lack the power to use tools that are available to them. Totally piffle, and worth even less.

If it bothers you that I care enough about my writ to present it in a neat, sensible fashion, than rage on! Like my stance in pretty much everything else, you're just screaming into the surf.

The Dems in congress were going on info fed to them by the CIA. Info that the Bush administration TOLD THE CIA TO PUT OUT. Bogus info that even they knew was WRONG.

Yet they voted it in anyway. Hmm. Whatever.

Do you have proof that it really was wrong? I mean, with links and all that that you want ME to provide (which I have indeed done). Or shall I just do what you do, and declare it a lie without giving you the right to air it?

Hijack? My a*s its a hijack. The only hijack here is Bush fleecing this nation and taking us into a war with 2000+ dead and counting. Bilking the nations people to feed that corporate greed and fill the pockets of his cronies.

I addressed this bull aboveno point in repeating myself.

Proof? My a*s you have shown any proof. Not even Bush can show proof in Iraq. Yet you dont mind. Your like a lemming heading for a cliff.

Like, Wow. You sure like talking with and about your a*s a lot. Closing your eyes and stamping your feet. No-no-NO!!! Doesn't make it not exist.

Well here is something to stick in your tight assed puritanical evangelical theocratic t**t.........

Nice. You're really showing your loss here. Should I make a similar comment about big mouths and small penises and direct it to you? Nahit's too obvious and way-way-way-way WAYYY too easy.

I will NOT fall off that cliff with you! And by the poll numbers.....the rest of the country most likely wont either. (but I forgot, you dont listen to poll numbers, just like Bush.....nor do you listen to reason....or proof).

packed like lem-mings into shin-ing me-tal box-es Hmm?
Speaking of lemmingsI'm sure you just wait, panting orgasmically at waking up to the opinion the Media hands you.

Someone mentioned in an earlier post that they still supported Bush even when he does wrong. That, to not support him, was being a traitor. He is now our President and "right or wrong" we should support him.

And this has, exactly, what to do with me? Here's an easier one: why should I even care?

The opinions of a perfect stranger has nothing to do with how I feel, personallyeven if this person supports our President, no matter what, it's their own personal opinion. How is this my fault (I'll await the warp and spin you give that one!)

Well, all I can say to that is........I'm sure lots of Germans said that about Hitler in 1939. It didnt fly then, and it doesnt fly now.

More of the yack-yack-yackBush is Hitler rhetoric. That doesn't fly with me, either. And, uh, it sorta did fly back thenuntil the end of the War. Actually, I think you'd rather like Hitler; while raised a Catholic, he had a very Ben-Zen outlook on life. He did make comments (and lived by the logic) that Religion was the worst thing to ever be bought into existence. In his view, any doctrine that demonstrated forgiveness and mercy was the dogma of weakness. Try reading mein kampf (that's my struggle', in Deutsch), to get a look into his head.

Be a good little lemming Vera.......find a cliff. And take the Bush's (all of them!), Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, Jerry Falwell, and the Carlyle Group with you.

Funnyaren't YOU the one who has been accusing ME of wanting you obliterated gassed (or was it burned?), and other forms of miserable death, yet you cannot find a solitary statement alluding SPECIFICALLY (that means not assumed or, so you can understand it, un-spun) to such? Now who wants WHOM to die off, Bennie? (Isn't this the SECOND time I've said this?)

You really are hitting the shrill notes of a lunatic, Ben.
Welcome my sonwelcome to the Dark Side Of The Loon. (Satirizing Pink Floyd)

Walking away, whistling the X-Files tune.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#675 Consumer Comment

I bet mine's longer than yours . . . get your mind outta the gutter!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 09, 2005

Hey Boo-h*o', don't you read?? I told you I wouldn't make any further posts on the other one', so you and James and all your dim-witted ilk were free to continue your lies, spin, and B.S. there', without my corrections. From what I've witnessed, Vera does a good enough job of keeping you worshippers of Moron' (the producer of falseumentalries like fahrenhype 911' and such) from spewing too much trash unchecked! lol

As far as your question goes, I didn't say that you lied in that post, I said that you were a spinner, liar, and idiot who spews venemous trash. I also said that you were a hater, stupid, and incapable of debating anything/anyone on the basis of morals and/or facts (I included the James' and their friends in that description as well). But, as usual, you tried to spin' my post and pidgeon hole me into answering a question that, by your take, would undoubtedly show you the superior or righteous one! Your attempts may have been enticing, had you directed such efforts towards a 6 year old, but, I am an adult bonehead, you will have to try harder than that to get one up on me'! Actually, you'll have to try harder on several occasions, because right now your waaaayyy down! rotflmao So far, your feeble attempts at spin have been rather uneffective, and, I would have to describe them as laughable, at best.

So, to sum it up, I stand by my description of you and your pre-pubescent spin worshippers, and I won't be sucked in' to answer for that which I have not stated. As far as justifying my determination of your (including the James') ethical motivation (or lack thereof), all one really needs to do is scroll back and read this thread - what is as plain to see as your argumentative nature and self righteous attitude is that you ignore fact,and attempt to cover it with repetitious calls for more, or different proof (even when it has been supplied time and again with a variety of sources, and verifiable links, sights, etc), and malevolent outcries of name-calling; usually filled with a propoganda-ish tincture, insinuating that those whose opinions differ from yours, are attacking you, and thereby, somehow tarnishing the Constitution (which I still don't think you've ever taken the time to read!) You tout science over religion, but when that same science is used to prove your statements and ideals wrong, you glance over it and go right back to your usual mantra (explained above), without even acknowledging that it was written! Newsflash wittle Bennie Boo-h*o, ignoring it doesn't make it less real - grow up. Also, it is evident by your endless supply of snippits', that you really have no interest in providing the WHOLE truth, but rather, only using enough text to spin peoples words - far from the context from which it was spoken, and into some bastardized form which helps to (falsely) support your unstable, reality challenged point of view. Let me offer an example: To use one of your quotes - Sure Shawn.......abortion rights, gay rights, separation of church and state are really going to send us back into the dark ages.....yeah....riiiiight.
Now, in the spirit of Ben, I'll take it . . . . . quote you :
abortion rights, gay rights, separation of church and state are really going to send us back into the dark ages
There, I've quoted you, and I've added nothing. So YOU MUST believe that abortion, gays, and separation of church and state ARE REALLY going to send us back to the dark ages( I always picture you sticking your tongue out at the end of your ridiculous (mis)quotes, then covering your ears and closing your eyes screaming lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala){eye roll}

Finally, if one spreads' another's lie, even if they know it to be false, is that person not also lying? The reason I ask, is that you can't actually sit there with a straight face and say that you don't know how full of it Moore is?!? Oh, and your little synopsis of : a guy made a movie - his movie shows his views . . . ( spoken at a higher octive with a snotty nasal drawl to mimick Ben) - BUUUULLLLLL$H!!!!!T !! He's not expressing his views' - he's LYING . . . and raking in millions off of stupid, gullible, hatemongering Americans! He's not patriotic. As a matter of fact, if his mokumentary' was about anyone other than a politition, he'd have so many law suits against him, he wouldn't be able to afford rent at the poor house! His views don't piss me off. What pisses me off is that anyone can make a film so obstreperously perceptible to be nothing but misrepresentations, tout it as a factual documentary, and then people like YOU cloak him in some bastardized form of the first amendment! And then you're feebleminded enough to pay him for that honor! What a bunch of dullards? ( I can't help but chuckle as I shake my head in disbelief)

I realize that this is a long read, but I can't just spill my alphabet soup and set out whatever it spells like Ben and his bitches. Contesting such vehement lies with fact takes a little more research than that! I am also sorry to those who live in the real world and could see thee following with thier own eyes, but this has still got a few sentences to go, just because, if I don't spell it out for the left, Boo-h*o and the twins will accuse me of trashing their Moron god' (Michael) without proof!

Although I only found 38 lies/deciets ] in Micheal Moore's lates (un)documentary, others found more, and, had the opportunity to question your evil master about them . . . out of 59 points, he declined comment on all but 17 - out of those 17, 17 were answered with a simple I stand by that line, or something similar. This clown would fit right in with you lefties - he can't offer any proof for his lies either! lmao I've copied this list (with permission) from Dave Koppel's website. Before you start whining about Koppel's political leanings', I also found similar lists on numerous other sights . . . this one was just the easiest read', and was set out in point form.

1. The Gore victory rally isn't celebrating a Florida win. It was held before the polls had even opened.

2. Like all the other networks, Fox mistakenly said that Gore had won in Florida. The first network to retract the Florida mistake was CBS, not Fox.

3. A 6-month study by a consortium of major newspapers shows that Bush would have won the Florida recount under any of the terms which Gore sought in his lawsuits.

4. Investigation by the Palm Beach Post and others shows that race was not a reason why election officials mistakenly disqualified some voters because they were incorrectly thought to have felony convictions.

5. Bush's Presidency before 9/11 was not in serious trouble. No commentator said that he looked like a lame-duck president. Congress had passed his #1 bill (the tax cut) and was on the way to passing his #2 bill (the education bill).
6. The scene at the end of the movie in which Bush tells a rich audience I call you my base, was from an October 2000 charity fund-raiser. Both Gore and Bush spoke at the fund-raiser and, as is the custom at the fund-raiser, made fun of themselves.

7.In his first eight months in office before September 11th, George W. Bush was on vacation, according to the Washington Post, forty-two percent of the time. As the Washington Post reported, the figure includes weekends, and includes time in vacation locations such as Camp David, where Bush was workingas when he met with Tony Blair.

7.5 In the golf course scene (about the middle of the movie), Bush had just heard about a terrorist attack on Israel. He called the press together to make a quick statement condemning the terrorism against Israel. He was not speaking about attacks on the United States. ( Sorry, misnumbering caught too late)

8. There is no evidence that Bush did not read the Aug. 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing about al Qaeda.

9. He never claimed that the title's vagueness was an excuse for not reading it.

10. The Briefing did not say said that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack America by hijacking airplanes. It said that the FBI has not been able to corroborate such a threat.

11. The Saudis left the U.S. only after air travel was opened for the general public.

12. According to Richard Clarke and the September 11 Commission, Clarke personally approved the Saudi departures, and the decision went no higher in the chain of command.

13. Moore lied to a TV reporter in claiming that Fahrenheit discloses Clarke's decision to the audience. Clarke called the Saudi exit material in Fahrenheit a mistake by Moore.

14. Contrary to what Fahrenheit claims, the September 11 Commission found that many Saudis were asked detailed questions before being allowed to leave.

15. James Bath did not invest bin Laden family money in Bush's energy company Arbusto. He invested his own money.

16. Bath's name was blacked-out from an Alabama National Guard record released by the White Houseas required by federal law, which prohibits the disclosure of health-related personal information.

17. Prince Bandar has way too much influence on the U.S. government, as Fahrenheit shows, but American coddling of the Saudi tyranny is a long-standing bi-partisan tradition, not a Bush invention.

18. Harken Energy: Bush only sold the stock after company lawyers told him it was OK.

19. The reason that Bush beat the rap was because there was no evidence he had engaged in insider trading.

20. The Carlyle Group is not a Bush playground. Many Bush opponents are investors, including George Soros.

21. The Bush administration dealt Carlyle a huge financial blow by canceling the Crusader, one of the few weapons cancellations in the Bush administration.

22. The bin Ladens dropped out of Carlyle before the stock sale. Of the 1.4 billion that the Saudis invested in companies with Bush connections, the vast majority of the money was invested in Carlyle before George H.W. Bush joined the firm.

23. Craig Unger claims that the Saudis have $860 billion invested in the U.S. The figure appears in his book House of Bush, House of Saud, but neither of Unger's cited sources support such a large figure.

24. Moore claims that the Saudis own 7% of America. But even if you believe Unger's fictitious $860 billion figure, the Saudis own only about 7% of total foreign investment in America, which is over 10 trillion dollars. Only if all of America were owned by foreigners could Moore's claim be correct.

25. The Saudi embassy does not receive special protection. It is not the only foreign embassy which is guarded by the U.S. Secret Service. An international treaty signed by the U.S. requires the U.S. to protect any embassy which asks for protection.

26. Moore's insinuation that Bush runs U.S. foreign policy according to Saudi instructions is contradicted by the Afghanistan invasion (which toppled the Taliban regime which the Saudis strongly supported), and by the Iraq War (which the Saudis opposed, in part because Iraqi oil will compete with Saudi oil).

27. As Governor of Texas, Bush never met with Taliban representatives.

28. The proposed Unocal pipeline was supported by the Clinton administration, but Unocal abandoned the pipeline idea in 1998.

29. The new Afghani government has signed a protocol to build a pipeline, but it is an entirely different pipeline, in a location hundreds of miles distant from the Unocal proposal.

30. Construction has not begun on the new pipeline. Although Moore claims that Enron stood to benefit from the pipeline, Enron has never had any participation in either pipeline.

31. The Bush administration did not welcome Taliban diplomats in March 2001, but instead condemned them for failing to hand over Osama bin Laden.

32. Despite Moore's pose in the movie, he opposed the Afghanistan War, andin December 2002claimed that Osama bin Laden might be innocent.

33. In claiming that the Afghanistan invasion was a mere ruse to protect the Saudis, Moore omits the results of liberation in Afghanistan: destruction of al Qaeda training camps, the creation of free elections, more freedom for women, and the homecoming of 1.5 million refugees from the Taliban.

34. The various quotes about Bush administration cooperation with the September 11 Commission have been re-sequenced to create a false impression.

35. In July 2003, Chairman Kean complained about lack of cooperation. In February 2004, Bush said that the White House had given extraordinary cooperation. Kean agreed, and praised the White House for providing unprecedented access.

36. John Ashcroft didn't really lose a Senate election to a dead guy. Mel Carnahan died in a plane crash a few weeks before the election, and the Missouri Governor had promised to appoint Carnahan's widow Jean Carnahan if voters pulled the lever for Mel Carnahan.

37. The FBI did not know about al Qaeda suspects who were attending flight training schools. The information was never passed above the level of one field office.

38. Ashcroft did not cut overall counter-terrorism funding. He only proposed a one-year cut in a particular program that already had two years of unspent money.

39. Rep. Porter Goss says he has an 800 number, and the Fahrenheit caption says He's lying. Goss does have a toll-free number, although the prefix is 877.

40. Moore says Saddam's Iraq had never murdered a single American citizen. In fact, Saddam paid for terrorist bombers in Israel who murdered Americans, along with people of other nationalities. Saddam also sheltered the American-kill-ing terrorist Abu Nidal, and the bomb-maker for the 1993 World Trade Center bombings. In addition, Saddam ordered assassination attempts against former President Bush and against U.S. diplomats in the Philippines.

41. Moore claims that the Saddam regime never threatened to attack the United States. In fact, in 1997 the regime publicly ordered: American and British interests, embassies, and naval ships in the Arab region should be the targets of military operations and commando attacks by Arab political forces. On the first anniversary of September 11, Saddam's regime called for suicide attacks on Americans.

42. Moore claims that there was no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. In fact, there is an extensive record of collaboration althoughas the September 11 Commission announcedthere is no proof that Saddam participated beforehand in al Qaeda attacks on America.

43. Fahrenheit shows Condoleezza Rice saying, Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. The audience laughs derisively. Here is what Rice really said on Nov. 28, 2003:
"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It's not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York. This is a great terrorist, international terrorist network that is determined to defeat freedom. It has perverted Islam from a peaceful religion into one in which they call on it for violence. And they're all linked. And Iraq is a central front because, if and when, and we will, we change the nature of Iraq to a place that is peaceful and democratic and prosperous in the heart of the Middle East, you will begin to change the Middle East...."
44. Moore portrays pre-liberation Iraq as a happy nation of kite-flying and weddings. In fact, a sixth of the population had fled Saddam's tyranny. The United Nations and Amnesty International condemned the systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq, resulting in an all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror.''
45. The only Iraqi casualties which Moore shows are civilians, although military casualties far outnumbered civilian.

46. When showing pictures of buildings being blown up, Moore does not reveal that many of them were military buildings, and civilians were never allowed anywhere near them.

47. A humorous sequence making fun of tiny countries in the Iraq liberation Coalition does not even mention the major countries in the Coalition, such as the U.K., Australia, Italy, and Japan.

48. Not a deceit, but mean-spirited and exploitive: The footage of the funeral of U.S. Air Force Maj. Gregory Stone at Arlington National Cemetery appears without his family's permission, and over their vehement objection. Major Stone strongly believed in the Iraq mission, as does his family. The footage of Massachusetts National Guardsman Peter Damon, who is undergoing therapy at Walter Reed Army Medical Center is also used without his permission.

49. Despite Moore's claims, American media have not been mindlessly supportive of the Iraq war. For example, Peter Jennings has been extremely critical. The evidence that Moore offers to portray Jennings as a war supporter is a clip of Jennings reporting in April 2003 that Saddam's army had collapsedwhich was true.

50. The scene of American soldiers making fun of a man underneath a sheet is not torture of a prisoner of war. They are making fun of a drunk who passed out in the street.

51. Moore reports that Bush proposed closing some Veteran's hospitals. But he also proposed opening other veteran's hospitals.

52. Bush once opposed renewing a special bonus of $75/ month for soldiers in imminent danger zones. Moore claims that Bush proposed cutting combat soldiers' pay by 1/3; but a soldier's pay and benefits is over $27,000 per year, even at low enlisted grades.

53. While making false claims about a Bush pay cut, Moore omits the fact that Bush sought and won a 3.7% military pay raise in 2003.

54. Moore claims that only one Congressman has a child in Iraq. Actually, two do. (Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of S.D., and Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California.) Also, John Ashcroft has a son on a naval ship in the Persian Gulf.

55. Fahrenheit deceptively cut the footage of Rep. Mark Kennedy to make it look like Kennedy rebuffed Moore's request to help enlist Congressional children. In fact, Kennedy said it was a good idea, and offered to help.

56. Fahrenheit shows Rep. Michael Castle walking past Moore. But Rep. Castle is childless.

57. Based on Census Bureau data, Congressional families are more likely than other families to have children serving in Iraq.

58. Moore calls Flint, Michigan, my hometown. In fact, he grew up in Davison, a much wealthier and much whiter suburb.

59. In Fahrenheit, Moore pretends to support our troops. But in fact, he supports the enemy in Iraq-the coalition of Saddam loyalists, al Qaeda operatives, and terrorists controlled by Iran or Syria-who are united in their desire to murder Iraqis, and to destroy any possibility of democracy in Iraq. Here is what Moore said on April 14, 2004, about the forces who are killing Americans and trying to impose totalitarian rule on Iraq: The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not insurgents' or terrorists' or The Enemy.' They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will growand they will win. Do you really think that someone who wants Iraq to be ruled by Islamist or Ba'athist tyranny, and who deliberately kills innocent civilians with car bombs, is like the American Minutemen?

As reported in the trade journal Screen Daily, affiliates of the Iranian and Syrian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah are promoting Fahrenheit 9/11, and Moore's Middle East distributor, Front Row, is accepting the terrorist assistance:

In terms of marketing the film, Front Row is getting a boost from organizations related to Hezbollah which have rung up from Lebanon to ask if there is anything they can do to support the film. And although [Front Row's Managing Director Giancarlo] Chacra says he and his company feel strongly that Fahrenheit is not anti-American, but anti-Bush, we can't go against these organizations as they could strongly boycott the film in Lebanon and Syria.' (Nancy Tartaglione, Fahrenheit to be first doc released theatrically in Middle East, Screen Daily.com, June 9, 2004. The story is discussed in Samantha Ellis, Fahrenheit 9/11 gets help offer from Hezbollah, The Guardian (London), June 17, 2004.)
Slate.com (6/24/04) followed up on the story, and reported: Gianluca Chacra, the managing director of Front Row Entertainment, the movie's distributor in the United Arab Emirates, confirms that Lebanese student members of Hezbollah have asked us if there's any way they could support the film.' Chacra was unfazed, even excited, about their offer. Having the support of such an entity in Lebanon is quite significant for that market and not at all controversial. I think it's quite natural.'
Do you think it's patriotic to accept help from a terrorist organization which has killed and kidnapped hundreds of Americans, which works with al Qaeda and other terrorists, and which is currently aiding the killing of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians? American patriotism can include presenting honest arguments against a particular American military policy. Hateriotism is the spreading of vicious lies against American soldiers and in favor of tyrants.
It's not unpatriotic to criticize a war or particular wartime policies. But how many patriots do you know who take aid from terrorists who kill Americans?
I just want to point out that, when proven wrong, or, even when doing our own research should we happen to find fact contrary to some post made previous, those from the right have graciously conceded, and, even pointed out our own mistakes' (which were accidental, I'm sure). Does anyone believe that there will be a day when we see the same, honorable actions from the left? To quote Ben ; yeah, riiight!


God Bless America

P.S. 'B', I didn't challenge you, I know better than that lol Keep your eye out for that ad in the New Year, I am, after all, a man of my word!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#674 Consumer Comment

Shawn, you should know better than to make that challenge.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 09, 2005

Shawn,

Well, that was an awfully long winded way of telling us what we already knew, that there were problems with the vote counting in Florida, and depending on whose version you accept of "how the votes should have been counted," either Bush or Gore "should have" won by a few hundred votes. LOL.

But you and Dr. Wattenburg ignore the larger problem, the FACT that CONTRADICTS your statement, "the only one that got any favors from ANYONE in Florida was Gore". Yes, I'm talking about that paragon of pre-election voter disenfranchisement, the ubiquitous voter purge list! Prepared at the direction of the Legislature, under the auspices of the Division of Elections, with special assistance from Jeb Bush and Kathrine Harris! By drawing from inappropriate databases and using inappropriate matching criteria, tens of thousands of blacks were illegally denied the right to vote, a group that traditionally votes about 70% Democrat! So, yes, I'd have to conclude that Dubya got favors from several people in Florida.

That would be The Rocky Mountain News, Saturday edition (conservative), or The Denver Post, Sunday edition (liberal), both accessible at denvernewspaperagency dot com. And I want your wife in that picture, too. I want to see the woman who can shut you up for even short periods of time. Give her my thanks, btw, for keeping you from posting even more often than you do! B^D

Seriously, tho, IMO all this quibbling over a few votes detracts from the debate we should be having about the appropriateness of the current electoral process. I'm sure the Electoral College made sense back in the day, when there was no wireless communication and it took several days to travel to Washington. But today, with popular elections, a mobile population, and intensive media coverage, does it make any sense? Should one state have so much focus and so much power? Should voter requirements and eligibility vary significantly from state to state? Should the media be allowed the influence they have? I would propose a federal election system, one person - one vote, mail-in ballots, same rules for everyone, and no last-minute media coverage.

BTW, I posted some stuff a couple of days ago, but it never showed. Probably did sumthin stoopid. Oh, well, huh? Maybe if I get some time this weekend I'll try to recreate it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#673 Consumer Comment

Sorry Lara consider the fleecing of an entire nation

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 09, 2005

Sorry Lara,

I consider the fleecing of an entire nation, if not an entire planet a "rip-off". As well as the enslavement of an entire nation under a theocracy. If those are not, then nothing is.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#672 Consumer Comment

Misquoth the raven, "Evermore!"

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 09, 2005

Enter stage left: James (yet another one), carrying a bucket of garbage (yet another one) to add to the fire.

Welcome, James of New Jersey, to the weenie roast. I hope you were planning to stay for dinner. LOL.

Yeah, I got a copy of this email early last year. Funny thing is, a couple of years earlier I got an email from this guy, using quotes from some of the same people to 'prove' that Desert Fox was just a ruse to distract people from "Monicagate," and there really were no WMD. LOL! You guys can't even keep your spin straight.

My first clue that this was the same sort of hack job President George uses to get elected, was the fact that the first third of the quotes are from the leadup to Desert Fox, which (in case you were asleep then, too) was meant to destroy Saddam's WMD capabilities. Predictably, those people might have a different opinion in 2003. Some of the quotes don't even say Saddam had WMD.

So, we are left with 8 prominent Democrats who expressed the opinion that Saddam had WMD in the months leading up to the war. Even if we were to stop here, does that prove the bottom line? Does their opinion prove Bush didn't lie? No. If his lips were moving its reasonable to believe he was lying. Does their opinion prove he didn't take us to war for his oil buddies? No. There must have been some reason, and it doesn't look like it was WMD. Maybe he just wanted to test his new fireworks display before taking it on world tour. And just who are the Democrats that are saying this; the authors of these quotes, or someone else who may have had a different opinion all along? And what of the Republicans who feel the same way?

But we can't stop there. Curiosity, if nothing else, compels us to examine the context in which these remarks were made. Lets start with the last one from Senator Kerry, ignoring the fact that its been butchered almost beyond recognition, lets just complete that last line. He said, "So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." And, of course, being John Kerry, he went on to say a lot more, or at least to speak for a long time.

Ooooh, lets play again. Correcting and completing Senator Byrd's quote, "Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. It is now October of 2002. Four years have gone by in which neither this administration nor the previous one felt compelled to invade Iraq to protect against the imminent threat of weapons of mass destruction. Until today. Until 33 days until election day. Now we are being told that we must act immediately, before adjournment and before the elections. Why the rush?"

And so it goes with most of these quotes, but perhaps Senator Kerry says it best. Correcting and completing Senator Kerry's earlier quote, "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable. And the administration, I believe, is now committed to a recognition that war must be the last option to address this threat, not the first, and that we must act in concert with allies around the globe to make the world's case against Saddam Hussein. Let me be clear, the vote I will give to the President is for one reason and one reason only: To disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, if we cannot accomplish that objective through new, tough weapons inspections in joint concert with our allies. In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough and immediate inspection requirements, and to act with our allies at our side if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force. If he fails to do so, I will be among the first to speak out."

Here are a couple of interesting quotes from IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei and from UNMOVIC chief inspector Hans Blix, from statements made to the UN Security Council on March 7, 2003, twelve days before the start of the war.

Dr ElBaradei: "After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq. . . . I should note that, in the past three weeks, possibly as a result of ever-increasing pressure by the international community, Iraq has been forthcoming in its co-operation, particularly with regard to the conduct of private interviews and in making available evidence that could contribute to the resolution of matters of IAEA concern. . . . The detailed knowledge of Iraq's capabilities that IAEA experts have accumulated since 1991 - combined with the extended rights provided by resolution 1441, the active commitment by all States to help us fulfil our mandate, and the recently increased level of Iraqi co-operation - should enable us in the near future to provide the Security Council with an objective and thorough assessment of Iraq's nuclear-related capabilities."

Mr. Blix: After describing the work in progress, work remaining, hurdles yet to overcome, and unparalleled Iraqi cooperation including the realative ease in resolving problems, "How much time would it take to resolve the key remaining disarmament tasks? While cooperation can -- cooperation can and is to be immediate, disarmament, and at any rate verification of it, cannot be instant. Even with a proactive Iraqi attitude induced by continued outside pressure, it will still take some time to verify sites and items, analyze documents, interview relevant persons and draw conclusions. It will not take years, nor weeks, but months."

No matter what opinions were held by Democrats, Republicans, or President George himself, this was the summary of the people most familiar with the situation. So, tell me again why it was necessary to invade Iraq at this time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#671 Consumer Comment

Quick Point

AUTHOR: Lara - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 08, 2005

You people are all morons. Take a moment to read the url at the top of your window. Yea... it says "http://www.ripoffreport.com".

Stop posting stupid bs to this site making it look rediculous to people who come here for the first time. Stupid crap like this being on the site does not add to it's legitimacy. Editors should delete this garbage.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#670 Consumer Comment

And another classic dodge by Vera.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 08, 2005

"Beware! Some folks don't like facts here"

Yup Vera your right. You seem to be the king of avoiding facts! Hypocrite to the end arnt you!! Your a freaking joke! How can you possibly make a comment like that when you STILL havent shown any facts for your outrageous claims?? Thats one way to stick your puritanical high-top in your mouth!

I'm still waiting for your "facts". And remember posting quotes from the 700 Club wont count. Just as you wouldnt accept a quote from Al Franken (not like I ever have made a post from Al!).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#669 Consumer Comment

Still waiting for you to back up your lies "Tweet!"

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 08, 2005

Still waiting for that easily accessable link there Vera!

1.Where is your proof about Islam being forced in CA schools?

2.What exactly is it that you say is being taken from you religious types?

Put it down in a nice simple post Vera. Your encyclopedia stupidia that you keep posting is waaaaaaaaay too long to decipher any tangible reference material.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#668 Consumer Comment

Oo-oo-ooh! A "James" I LIKE!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Hello and welcome, James of Atco!
Beware! Some folks don't like facts here (That being Ben and the Twin Freaks, mainly, so they'll just either ignore what you post, call it an outright lie (or "spin", as is the populsar term here), or they'll repeatedly ask you to prove it over and over again (most likely, to see how many times they can get you to do it, I guess).

Either way, Welcome! And don't give 'em an inch! :)

And Patrick...feel free to use any euphemism you like...I'm not the vainglorious and vapid Paris Whoreton (Hilton), that I'd try to "own" a common phrase. "Cana-DUH" is free to the usage of the populace. :) Feel free to indulge!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#667 Consumer Comment

Yo! Dum-dums! (That's you James 'n James)

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Let me paraphrase James' (it doesn't matter which one) most recent post:
VUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRP! eeeeww . . . chunks!
Once again you've gone off spouting bullshit, like a broken fire-hydrant does water! Just like aboot' 99% of the other vurps, spews, and mendacious statements you spread around these posts without checking facts. (Typical left-wing moves - Well I heard it from another of my liberal cronies who heard it on a liberal controlled, left-wing media, news station . . . so I can repeat it without checking facts. Who cares if it's a lie? - It trashes republicans!')

If you want a few FACTUAL TRUTHS, the fighting in Fallujah has led to a number of wide-spread myths including false charges that the United States is using chemical weapons such as napalm, (illegal)white-phos., and poison gas. None of these allegations are true, just more
liberal spew!

Qatar-based Internet site Islam Online' was one of the first to spread the FALSE chemical weapons claim. On November 10, 2004, it reported that U.S. troops were using "chemical weapons and poisonous gas" in Fallujah. It sourced this claim to Al-Quds Press', which cited only anonymous sources for its allegation. Some left wing idiot took the word of our enemy's press, and, without verifying the veracity of such allegations, posted it all over the internet as fact'.

On November 12, 2004, the U.S. Department of Defense issued a denial of the chemical weapons charge, stating:

"The United States categorically denies the use of chemical weapons at anytime in Iraq, which includes the ongoing Fallujah operation. Furthermore, the United States does not under any circumstance support or condone the development, production, acquisition, transfer or use of chemical weapons by any country. All chemical weapons currently possessed by the United States have been declared to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and are being destroyed in the United States in accordance with our obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention."

Islam Online' noted that U.S. forces had used napalm-like incendiary weapons during the march to Baghdad in the spring of 2003. Although all napalm in the U.S. arsenal had been destroyed by 2001, Mark-77 firebombs, which have a similar effect to napalm, were used against enemy positions in 2003, but never in Fallujah!

On Nov. 11, 2004, the Nov. 10 Islam Online' story was reposted by the New York Transfer News' Web site, with the inaccurate headline "Resistance Says US Using Napalm, Gas in Fallujah." This false napalm allegation was repeated and recreated and touted by liberals everywhere, until it eventually appeared in print media. For example, on Nov. 28, 2004, the UK's Sunday Mirror' inaccurately claimed U.S. forces were "secretly using outlawed napalm gas" in Fallujah. First, napalm or napalm-like incendiary weapons are not outlawed. International law permits their use against military forces, which is how they were used in 2003, Second, as noted above, no Mark-77 firebombs were used in Fallujah. The liberal Sunday Mirror's' phrasing "napalm gas" is also evidentiary of the writer's failure to check for facts - napalm ( The Sunday Mirror's' mis-information about napalm gas was reported in identical articles on Nov. 28 by aljazeera.com and islamonline.com. Any surprise that some left-wing print media would suspiciously run the same story, on the same day, as two enemy controlled newspapers?
lol, it's laughable, to say the least!

Finally, some news accounts have claimed that U.S. forces have used "outlawed" phosphorous shells in Fallujah. Phosphorous shells ARE NOT outlawed, and U.S. forces have used them very sparingly. White phosphorous shells, which produce smoke, were used in Fallujah for screening purposes (i.e., obscuring troop movements,) and to flush out enemy fighters so that they could then be targeted with high explosive rounds.

There is a great deal of lies and liberal propoganda, feeding on itself about U.S. forces using "outlawed" weapons in Fallujah. The facts are that U.S. forces are NOT using any illegal weapons in Fallujah or anywhere else in Iraq. - you haven't shown any regard for truth or fact so far, so I'd be surpried if the facts stop you from spreading your venemous spew this time either . . .come on James, I dare you to prove me wrong.

Also, the U.N. has been made fully aware of ALL prisoners' and their locations. Since the shameful fiasco at Abu Ghruib(sp.?), our military has been extra careful' at ensuring that all laws regarding P.O.W.'s' are followed - here's an idea, James - If you can't prove it, don't say it! ( but I guess that would be against your . . . uh . . ahem . . . principles??) rotflmao

Finally, James # 2 (hmmmmm, what else is #2" used as a euphemism for? hmmmmm, I know it will come to me . . .) - can we settle this whole stolen election thing with facts? I'm sure Kathy Harris could offer more proof than I as to what an idiot you are, but I'll do my best in her absence. O.K.? O.K.!

December 8, 2000 - The Florida Supreme Court ordered that 215 votes from Palm Beach County must be added to the Gore total. This was fair because those votes were counted completely and fairly. However, the court also ordered 168 votes from a partial recount in Miami Dade County to be added to Gore. That was political and discriminatory in the most vulgar way. Any person who can do simple arithmetic can confirm that from the court's own numbers for Miami Dade given in its order, pages 2829. These numbers are given below.

Claims by propagandists that the Florida Supreme Court ordered a fair and full recount of all ballots in Florida were false. The court ordered a recount of undervotes (no discernible vote for president) only. But for Miami Dade County, they counted only the 9000 remaining undervotes not previously counted by hand that gave Gore another 168 votes. That was done in Tallahassee by judges using different standards than were use to get Gore the first 168 awarded by the court before the recount even began!
The court did not order a full recount of all 10,750 undervotes identified by machines in all precincts in Miami Dade. There should have been a clean recount of all 10,750 using the same rules for all ballots. But, the court deliberately reserved the net 168 counted by hand by democratic friends for Gore and then said that the remaining 9000 should be recounted in Tallahassee by new judges. Why? This was the equivalent of giving your friends some points from the last football game played before you start the new game.

The Florida Supreme Court ordered that 168 votes from Miami Dade County be added to Gore. Those votes came from a total manual recount of 40,000 +/- ballots from selected precincts which were 75% to 25% democratic voters. Knowing this by their own admission in their order (pages 2829), the same court ordered that only the remaining 9000 undervotes that were identified by machines should be recounted by new judges in Tallahassee. Why not all of the original 10,750 undervotes in Miami Dade? This is what the court had ordered for all other counties.
These 9,000 remaining overvotes were not identified by a full hand count (and the same rules) as the ballots that produced the additional 168 for Gore. The rules set down by independent judges in Tallahassee for counting 9,000 ballots with no clear vote for president were far more strict than those used by the democratic Miami Dade Board - however, the Florida Supreme Court did not order a new, full recount of all 10,750 Miami Dade undervotes using the same rules used to recount the 9,000 left over. The order stated (paraphrase): keep what is in Gore's favor so far, and then count the rest with new rules.

The democratic campaign propagandists claim that black people were discriminated against in some way. But they don't mention that the heavily Hispanic and Cuban areas in Miami Dade that voted republican were deliberately not included in the 20% of precincts used for a partial full manual recount. Miami Dade County (overall) voted about 53% for Gore and 47% for Bush, not 75% Gore, 25% Bush. Why did they only select ballots from the strong Gore supporters for a partial full manual recount? They easily could have selected 20% of the precincts that represented an approximate 53% Gore, 47% Bush distribution of voters. They did not have to leave out the minority groups in the other precincts.

Those net 168 votes for Gore did not come from just a recount of the 10,750 undervotes that were identified by the machines.
The full manual recount of only 20% of precincts in Miami Dade produced 436 additional votes beyond what had been counted by the previous machine count for these same precincts. This was 302 for Gore and 134 for Bush to equal 168 for Gore.

Here are the numbers to keep in mindtaken directly from the Florida Supreme Court order, 12-8-2000, page 2829, and the sworn testimony in Judge Sauls' trial.
1. During Nov 19 to Nov 21, Miami Dade Canvassing Board (MDCB) selected 20% of precincts to recount all ballots(note that this was all ballots, not just those culled out as undervotes by machines because there was no clear vote for president.)
However, these selected precincts were in the north coast area that voted democratic by 75% to 25%. No precincts in the Cuban and Hispanic areas that voted heavily for Bush were included in the 20% sample. Why?

Hence, it was known ahead of time by the MDCB that any new votes found among the undervotes not counted by the machines, would most likely be in favor of Gore by a 3 to 1 margin.
2. During the full manual recount of these 20% precincts, 1,750 of the 10,750 machine identified undervotes were examined and tallied while manually counting all ballots from these areas. This left 9,000 undervote ballots from mostly republican precincts that were not counted by the same rules that were applied to get 168 more votes for Gore out of the heavily democratic areas. At that time,( November 21) the Miami Dade Canvassing Board decided to stop its recount. Why? Palm Beach County managed to count almost all of their 400,000 plus votes before the deadline.

Could it be that they the democratic Miami Dade Board knew that if they continued to count the republican precincts in Miami Dade that they would come up with more votes for Bush? The four Florida Supremes blessed this vulgar manipulation.

There is a good reason why the Gore team focused on selected precincts in Miami Dade county. It is the same reason that four Democratic members of the Florida Supreme Court ordered that 168 Miami Dade votes from a partial recount on November 19 to November 21 be added to the Gore totalwithout even recounting those partial precincts by the same standards used to recount the rest of the precincts. In other words, the Florida Supreme Court blatantly said: Give Gore credit for the 168 that were previously produced by the Miami Dade people and then count the rest of the ballots that could favor republicans by different standards to be established by judges in Tallahassee.Gore propagandists steadfastly claimed that all the overvotes would be counted fairly. This was, and is not true. They knew that their friends on the Florida Supreme Court simply put more points on the scoreboard for Gore before the recount even began.

The Florida Secretary of State, Kathrine Harris, accepted 170 Palm Beach votes for Gore that were reported by the deadline established by the previous Florida Supreme Court order. Then, the court gave her a different interpretation of their previous order. The four Democratic supporters on the court now said that they really meant that she should have accepted all votes counted later (215) no matter when the votes were reported - after the deadline that the court itself had specified. Fine. But there was no prior statement whatsoever that the deadline should be arbitrarily extended.

Kathrine Harris did exercise discretion . . . IN FAVOR OF GORE . . . by correcting the partial results submitted by Palm Beach county at 5pm, because they had left out thousands of votes for Gore. Nevertheless, she has been assaulted by the democratic party, liberal public, and the left-wing media propagandists, as unfair, evil, immoral, and at best partisan! All because she followed the laws that were given her.
These same political propagandists didn't bother to mention that Kathrine Harris would be replaced by the Florida Attorney General if she had stepped aside. The Florida Attorney General just happened to be a Democrat ( the Florida campaign manager for Gore.)

Awwwe, I could continue on, but, let's face it . . . the only one that got any favors from ANYONE in Florida was Gore - and he STILL LOST! Think you can come up with contradictory fact and NOT just more oppinionated rants? I challenge you then . . . provide me with FACTS to the contrary of anything I've set out in this post, and I will place an advertisement in your local newspaper stating that I was wrong, and you were right - I'll even include my picture :D ! Lol

God Bless America!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#666 Consumer Comment

To the James twins.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Would you both (or even just one of you for that matter) please present some facts regarding your statements?

All either of you seem to do is spew the same garbage over and over. There was absolutely nothing in either of your last posts that you have not said before.

And James of Cana-DUH (sorry Vera, had to steal one of yours ;) ), I think we all know what your "opinion" is worth! How's that new government coming along, eh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#665 Consumer Suggestion

You had your chance

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

That's what you get when you try to run a quitter for President.
But if you're so concerned about "lies" then chew on these:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#664 Consumer Comment

Oh, Brother.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Oh Brother.

These two leave me wondering; can they post anything new? Or are they content in garnering their attention through the same old drivel?

Can't they at least be original?

James of Tupper, PROVE that the election was stolen in either Florida or Ohio. Don't just accuse; prove it. If you can't your little rants are nothing more than worthless tantrums.

James of Cana-DUH, yes, phosphor is cruel...just about as cruel as shoving whole villages into barns and standing guard over them to insure no one gets out. Listen to the chorus of screams as the Anglophones burn, in the name of social and racial purity. A hatred that continues to this very day.

Or how about the victims of Saddam's "human shredders"? Is that any better? If they wanted information from you, you went in feet-first, shredded like a document. Or you could just hang upside down while Uday or Qsay used a baseball bat and slapped the soles of your feet repeatedly, with just enough pressure to break the bones a little at a time. How about letting parents watch at their children were tortured? The children could be any age...there, Saddam wasn't inclined to discriminate.

Yeah, we know Saddam is your Hero, James. D'you go to sleep at night on your Dudley Do-Right bedsheets with visions of Saddam running free in you li'l head?

Of course, we all know that Canada was raking in, right up there with France and Russia, when the Food for Oil Program was up and running. Now Russia has unpaid debts because we got Saddam, and for all those wonderful natural resources available in Canada, you guys sure don't seem to mind getting a little something extra with Saddam.

No wonder you guys don't want us to be at war; you're protecting your interests.

What business are America's affairs to some Shill-Billy of Cana-DUH?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#663 Consumer Comment

This is for the James' Gang...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Canada James, Willy Pete is NOT a WMD. It is perfectly legal for battlefield use. There are countermeasures than can be used immediately to lesses it's effect. I'd rather get hit with WP than with HE. It's hard to fix a blown up body, or one that's burned to a crisp with a flamethrower, or napalm. Untill you learn about military stuff, stay out of the argument. Remember to vote. Your Governmentwas EXPELLED for incompetence. You are so concerned about mine, yours got the boot. Seems the majority of Canadians were fed up with Liberals running(ruining) the country.

USA James, while I thoroughly disagree with all of your positions, at least your latest effort contained no vitriol. I commend you for being civil...finally. Thank you.

Sarcasm and the occasional barb, are acceptable debating techniques. Spewing venom is not.

Shawn, as an Atheist, I can agree with you on the "morality" issue. On the other hand, "ethical" behavior is inherent. I don't mess with anyone's life because it's not the right thing to do. Living an ethical life works for me. And no, I have never met anyone who gives a rats a*s about In God We Trust on money, the pledge of alleigance, or anything else that media w***e Newdow is doing. He's an ambarrassment, no matter what your religion is.

So is Cindy Sheehan, no matter what your view on the war is. She sure knows how to "honor" her son's wishes. Her son died doing what HE asked to do. Nobody forced him to do anything. I wonder why the media plays her up while ignoring the dozens of other Sheehan family members who have expressed disgust over her idiocy.

It's Dec 7 people. Don't forget to hug an old guy today. You too, Canada James.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#662 Consumer Comment

Sadaam is on Trial by Iraqi's

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Another ignorant response from James in canada. Why don't you learn some facts before you belittle My Country. No one here is attacking Canada but keep up your crap and maybe we will start.

You sit there on your high horse and tell us what we are doing wrong. If you feel you can do better why don't you move down here and show us.

Sadaam Hussein is being tried in an Iraq court. Maybe you feel we should just let him go and ignore the fact that he killed thousands of people.

i know lets deport him to Canada and get a campaign going to make him Prime Minister since james loved him so much.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#661 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush should be impeached!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, December 07, 2005

To ALL people:

I truly believe George W. Bush lied to the American people about the invasion of Iraq. Bush in reality should never have stepped foot in the white house. Rigging elections is a crime, but since he a powerful backing, of George H. Bushs' old cabinet, as well as some new comers with powerful ties, such as Katherine Harris, Florida Vote counter(Bush supporter), Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida(George W. Bush's brother). I believe Bush and Cheney are filling their bank accounts with this war while innocent people die as a result of this false war. I must say that with a few top Republicans who are being exposed as the corrupt officials they are, of defrauding people and taxpayers of millions of dollars are being brought out in the open. The Republicans are being exposed to the corrupt individuals they are. I am glad as I believe with approval rating of The United States Congress at all time low and the approval ratings of George W. Bush is so low , some Repubs are swaying away from Bush. Bush is the "Titanic" and the majority of republicans do not want to be on board with him, So they jump ship in a life boat, so to say.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#660 Consumer Suggestion

Suddam is in a Kangaroo Court!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, December 06, 2005

The United States of America, following George Bush, are definately the "pot calling the kettle black" in their trial of Suddam in Iraq!

The USA claims Iraq illegally invaded Kuwait, but it was the USA that systematically destroyed the defensive capeability of Iraq & then illegally invaded that Country claiming knowledge of WMD's never found!

However...
It was the USA that supplied Iraq with any such weapons they ever posessed! It was the USA that helped Suddam get into power & directly involved themselves in the actions of Iraq previous to the invasion of Kuwait, by Iraq after Kuwait had been proven to be "slant drilling" & stealing oil from Iraq.

It is claimed by the USA that Suddam had his own people inhumanely gassed & tortured, giving the USA "good reason" to remove him from power.

However...
It was the USA that invaded Iraq using White Phosphorus as a weapon. A weapon that flows into every crack & crevice & when it touches the skin... it burns human beings directly down to the bone. It is the USA that has been proven to be using torture on a regular basis involving suspected terrorists & has even spirited such suspects to "secret holding centres" all over the world where the USA is able to continue to torture under a veil of secretcy.

It is the USA that set up this Kangaroo Court, a trial of Suddam for "war crimes", when it is the United States of America, under the leadership of George W. Bush, that have been the biggest terrorists of all in this whole issue & it is Bush himself who should be on trial.

The actions of the USA have increased terrorism "all over the world" & it is about time that the people of the USA stand up & stop the insanity!

How can you as an "American Citizen" sit there & allow someone like Suddam to be so tried & executed when it is "your President" that should be on trial?

How can you indeed!

In my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#659 Consumer Comment

In response to some of Ben's past boo-h*o-ing

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 04, 2005

Although, up until now, nobody has accused you (Ben) of being incapable of having morals, you have repeatedly asked why we think that you (as an achiest) don't have morals. The truth is, although you may live by certain morals', you, as an athiest, lack the ability to objectively determine morality. At best, you have a subjective view of morality, thus, even the small percentage of society that seems to agree with you, will individually have their own twist', depending on their own subjective view. In fact, the only people with the ability to objectively determine a moral system of values, is a theist. Without a belief in God, or, at least, some higher power, you cannot possibly conceive morality. In support, I offer the following:

A body at rest tends to stay at rest, until acted upon by some outside force. A body in motion tends to stay in motion, until acted upon by some outside force. This change in motion by the influence of another body is but a transfer of motion that was previously transferred to the influencing body. This ability, to receive and transfer motion, can be considered passive power.

Active power is the ability to contemplate and initiate change or motion. Of the two, active power is the signification which is more properly considered power. Passive power is likened to a billiards ball, acted upon by a billiards stick the former capable of receiving motion from the latter, as well as of transferring that motion to another ball, but not capable of actually initiating motion, nor of the consideration of whether or not to do so. Active power is likened to the holder of the stick, for the billiards stick itself is, in fact, merely passive responding to the initiation of motion by its holder, wherein lies the action of contemplation and initiation of motion.

Where this becomes truly interesting, is if we consider that the holder of the stick hath no soul. The body is matter. It is an organized grouping of fleeting particles of matter; organized into cells, which are in turn organized into organs, which are organized into a single mass that gives an appearance of wholeness. Underneath the facade, each particle is a body in motion, acted upon by others likewise in motion, never initiating any motion on its own but only continuing the motion set off by a source of active power . . . Thinking, reflection . . .

these are the source of active power, setting into motion the body to act upon others. Yet, these are mere illusion's, hath the body no soul; they are instead in such a case the motion of particles in the organ that we call a brain, particles that have motion only which was transferred to them by other particles, and transferring to other particles that motion which was transferred to them; with never any consideration or direction excepting that they move according to the forces of those other particles. If such is the case, then the holder of the stick to is likened to a billiards ball acted upon by another, which it was acted upon by still another, acted upon by another all the way back to the initiation of the motion, the Big Bang.

The soul is where consideration takes place, if indeed there even is such a thing. Without a soul, there is no ability to choose whether or not to pass on motion that has been transferred to the body, nor is there the power to determine how to do so, nor more importantly the power to initiate motion. Without a soul, there is no active power; there is only causality.

Are atheists capable of "moral" behavior? Yes, but they are incapable of recognizing it as such. Similarly, they are incapable of recognizing immoral behavior as well. An atheists moral understanding, on whatever basis it is usually given, is always subjective, without an understanding of the greater good, which requires an understanding of the higher goal. This is always contrived without a higher law.

Morality takes on three forms. The first two forms of morality - compliance with civil law and compliance with the opinions of society, are both created by man, with whatever basis the creators' decide the purpose of morality ought to be, and with whatever limits, or, lack of limitations they believe appropriate. With such a basis and set of limitations, such standards of morality are quite subjective. The third form, divine law or natural law
(including instincts, and such), is objective. It is based on the goals of a higher power, whose position is absolute. Even without God per se, an understanding of the reason or purpose of the soul's existence grants objectivity to a view of right and wrong.

An atheist's views on morality are always subjective, then; moreover, because they do not believe in the soul or in any form of God, they do not believe in an absolute arbiter of right and wrong. Their views on right and wrong, are that it is right or wrong to take certain actions as a soulless human, usually based on whether or not such actions cause harm to another. Not only are their views on right and wrong, then, completely subjective - they are as declaring wrong the striking of a billiards ball by another, despite the reality that the strike was purely the result of causality, from which we must understand that there is no fault in the ball that does the striking; hence there is no wrong.

Well, if the atheists are right, then yes, Ben - you have to disagree. You have no choice in the matter, and I cannot fault you for it. However, if the theists are right, then you have a choice, and you (will undoubtedly) CHOOSE to disagree, but you do not actually have to.

As an atheist, your morality stems from an action's benefits (or lack thereof), or it's resulting influence on your life' (thus the incessant questioning of just what effect is gay marriage going to have on your life?). However, where's the objectivity in this? What is the measure of a beneficial act? Must an act, to be not wrong, be beneficial only to oneself, to a particular nation, to all of mankind, to all living things, or to the universe as a whole? It matters not how you answer - for it will be only your preference for the basis of morality; hence, a subjective answer, as are all of the moral laws which you base upon it.

Many say that our instincts inherantly offer our morality. Human nature, generally, is to live in groups, and ensure all of our kind is fed and sheltered. Our own nature tells us that murder is wrong, and a moral standard is drawn. With this example, I suppose that one might say that morality' is derived from nature, and instinct. I ask, then, how we know of natural law, there being no higher power? Certainly, we do not get this particular view on it - that killing from amongst one's own kind is wrong - from watching . . . mothers who eat their own young, females eating their mates, packs that kill the weak within their ranks, or mortal battles between males competing for mating rights.

Now, from an atheist's view (if wrong, please explain where), what is wrong with killing anything, any more than destroying a tree or a rock? How is it more or less wrong to kill a man rather than a beast? How is it truly wrong for the fleeting particles that make up one body to spill the particles that make up another? How can there be right and wrong for mere substance?

If the atheists have it right, then we have no purpose. We are instead merely an accidental result of some chemical/electrical reaction within a pool of amino acids. The original life forms would have been strands of molecules that autonomously fed and replicated, mutating often and being replaced by more efficient mutations that eventually led to our present existence. Given this theory of our creation, our only purposes, if you could call that which animates us a purpose, are feeding and replication; society is merely a means to that end.

On the other hand, if there is a higher power that created us (God), then there was, and is, a reason for our existence. We have a purpose. That which is inconsistent with that purpose is, objectively, considered immoral. In such a case there is an absolute something that we are required to do, according to one who objectively has authority over us: our very creator, God.

Anything less would simply be your own, subjective opinion.

May God Bless the U.S.A.

(I know, B', you're wondering how I can be so astute at reasonably arguing to absurdity . . . God only knows!!! lol)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#658 Consumer Comment

The Bush Ripoff?

AUTHOR: Tim - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 04, 2005

I have some sad, sad things to say to all.

1. If we went to IRAQ just for the oil, think about this. During Desert Storm we had 200,000 boots on the ground, if oil is the reason we had the force to take out and conrol the entire Middle East.

2. War is ugly, as a Retired Disable Vietnam Vet i do have some experience ( Not a Hero ). The loss of a soldiers life is bad at anytime, but a loss of any life is bad also. The media focus on the 2000 boots that went t**s up adds fuel to the fire. Now everyone will jump at me but I got to say it anyway. How many soldiers die every year in training accidents, how may soldiers die every year in traffic accidents, how many soldiers die every year from cancer and other medical conditions. I can go on how many women are murdered every year from crazed husbands, how many childern die every year from pedafiles, how many men, women and childern die every year from drunk drivers, how many kids die every year in gang related paybacks, and on and on and on.

If you understand this, I don't have to explain why 2,000 is a very small number. A professional soldier does one and only one thing, fight wars, and wars KILL.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#657 Consumer Comment

Here is reality.... no one to blame but ourselves in regards to the current BS state affairs in this country

AUTHOR: Unique - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, December 04, 2005

We have no one to blame but ourselves in regards to the current BS state affairs in this country. Not only does the majority of U.S citizens lack the ability to decipher truth from false, a dizzying high percentage of citizens are promoters of it. With no real surprise some with honest ignorant intentions.

There are people who are addicted to negative games and like to argue egotistical non-sense, which is passed off as knowledge/truth from what I've read. When in fact, it is just rehashed opinions of their beliefs systems. Some of ya'll honestly, have no idea regarding real issues/facts that dangerously face us today.

I am not stating that I am the almighty know-it-all either, because that is impossible. To actually literally know any information in its' entirety, is basically saying you need not to learn/know anything else about it. This includes the popular topics such as WMD, oil and the last but not least religion. Can you really sit there and say who is correct and who's not. This comment is w/o biased

Don't get me wrong. There are some smart, talented writers on these forums, but I see intellectual energies wasted on the wrong things. Why?? Please people do your research!!

Regardless it is not okay to lie, steal and cheat your way to the top of anything. Someone questioned why is Bush & corrupted money hungry individuals are so bad for us...I'll be happy to add info, but we'll see if my response gets posted this time. Sometimes the truth hurts.sometimes of loved ones

Until next time

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#656 Consumer Comment

The troll is baaaaack!

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

Boy, just when I thought it was safe to surf the reports again, Canada James has returned! I guess the men in the white coats finally decided three weeks was a long enough stay at the "hotel".

And then, to our utter dismay, he only makes a short post, and sputters only gibberish.

Being played out now in the media, eh mister great white north? Um, it's been playing out for almost 3 years now you twit!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#655 Consumer Comment

Wheeee! Ben's latest PABLUM is out!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

In regard to your latest spew, BennieI'll respond to your.responses! :)

Well lets see, I dont remember saying you MUST "applaud" or "embrace" gay marriage.

That much could be read from the temper of statements like how repulsive is love, as if I were to find the thought of two people being in love repulsive...but then again, my version of love is a little different than what two folks decide to do with their genitals.

All I did was ask you why you think its your right to BAN it.

When did I ever state it was my personal objective to ban it? I have said, it's possible that America isn't ready for same-sex unions. Only you could infer that I'd make it my personal credo to ban something from that statement. That statement's Ben Spun to death.

As to the "fruit" comment.....well you associate it with "gays" only I guess.

Me, and countless others could easily draw that conclusion. Nice backpedaling. Well, not really. You got caught again, and now you're gonna try and wiggle free.

I guess all I can say is I use it for other things as well.

Sure, like that air freshener smells fruity? Or, maybe I feel like having a fruit for lunch today. Face it, you twityou were using it as a derogatory term to insult Shawn by calling him a q***r in an off-color way. No more and no less. And it's clear what you meant. But I'm curious. What DID You mean when you directed it at Shawn?

Thats my right....
You got it, Princessthat IS your right. Just like it's MY right to say as I wish, Believe as I wish, and Vote, Support, or Decry whomever I wish to.

I wouldnt call it "puffy" that I became.

I would. Puffy n' pissy. Like an ignorant li'l girl who isn't getting her way an' she's mad about it.

Actually the entire gay marriage thing is bait for you religious types. And you took it hook line and sinker.

After a statement like that, you have alotta nerve to call me a hypocrite. What's funny is the fact that you deny/subterfuge it in other posts, and then admit to it in your latest.

Your the ones all "puffy" about it. All I've said and asked is "why are you so against it when it doesnt have any effect on your life?". But you attacked like a rabid wolf. And of course you fell for the next mantra....."well you must be gay then". Once again....falling hook line and sinker.

"Rabid"? From two sentences, you get "rabid"?

WowI'll bet you think you're really clever, when all you've really done, is discredit everything you've been standing on and proclaiming thus far. So I am indeed correct; you were trolling these boards, you were looking to insinuate a fight with someone on principle, and you had the objective to single a specific type of person out. In chat rooms, you're known as a S.N.E.R.T., or a Troll. A little no-life teenaged (or young, as in between the ages of ten and twenty-five) nutless p***k that seeks fights for the sake of ruffling feathers, not on personal principle. How pathetic. I bet you would soil yourself if faced with a real confrontation in life.

Uh...Vera.....ONCE AGAIN......Offended because if it were legal....or not.... Wind. Wind. Noise. Drivel. And no real answer. Do I need to re-word the question, or is it truly just an effort on your part to ignore the nature of the question. It's as clear as the reason you called Shawn a fruit. Why would it piss you off so vehemently, if I called you a homosexual? I'm not asking you to express how you feel about a gay couple getting married, or what bearing it'd have on your life, I asked you why would you get mad if someone accused you of being gay?

Not quite sure what the hell you mean here.

Another direct avoidance. Apparently, you really mean to say Yes, rather than the duh, well, at first glance, I'd have to say No'. bullshit. This whole thread is riddled with your do as I say, not as I do crapola.

I dont see them imposing their will on me. I dont see them imosing their will on anyone. So I really dont have any problem with them. I DO see people like you trying to impose your will on me. Thus...I fight back. Take the fight to those that are taking things from me and imposing things on me. You are doing that. They are not..

Again, by your own infected bleating, you admit readily to baiting and trolling. I wasn't looking to fight about religion, gay rights, abortion, or anything other than the topic of this post. You were. The fact that I got sick of watching you bash and lash was what prompted my response; all two sentences of itwhereas you had dedicated POSTS to it. Since YOU are the one who's trolling, it is YOU who's trying to enforce your rhetoric, and I'm in the position of defense. So I'M only in YOUR face, because YOU got in MINE first.

Be who you want to be. Thats fair. And dont invade others privacy. (You mean, like TROLLING for a certain type of individual?) Or impose your will on others. Thats fair. If you chose not to like someone, some thing, or some idea. Thats your right. But when you cross the line of it being a certain thing you "believe" into the area of imposing it others, then you have gone to far.

(You mean, like TROLLING for a certain type of individual?)
Not according to your written actions on this post. You don't want me or anyone like me to have my/our say, if it's contrary to what you want. That much can be seen with little effort. No BENding, no twisting on your part will deduct from that.

Now if someones actions have a negative effect on others then that is NOT fair.
You mean, like trolling and baiting, looking (for a certain type of individual) to goad a fight on a totally off-topic subject and using a flawed and weak way to correlate them? Gee, thanks for clearing that up.

You obviously dont tolerate many things Vera, and you are willing to take rights away, or ban rights before they are really "rights".

Well, thenif they aren't qualified by law as rights, what are they then? You got it. Decisions and CHOICES. And how do you know what I am truly tolerant of? We are only discussing a few issues here, not the whole spectrum of everyone's political, personal, beliefs, thoughts, and so on. From what I've seen you demonstrate here and on many of your other posts, I perceive your arsenal of convictions to be small and shifty. You can't even back up what you want to force others to believe.

Because your here Vera. Your a sick religious intolerant nut.

Are you stalking me? (Hahahahahahahahahh!!) Don't forget: I'm also "evil" (ANOTHER tage I haven't labeled you with).

You are a perfect example of why I really dont like Bush. And this thread is about Bush."

Then why troll for Christians here? I know! Because many people hold their political values close to their religious principles. "Vote you conscience" isn't just a recent catch-phrase, like "eat my shorts".

"...(and lets not forget your comment that got me started....something along the lines of "Almighty Gods nation" and "power from god to lead" blah blah blah....

What I said, I still stand by. So it really pissed you off that I used statements by the Founding Fathers (people you claim to have great respect for, and I had the impudence to mention the name of God. Tough. I have just as much right to Free Speech as you, but at least I used it in a context that was about the subject. You were trolling for almost a month before I ever came to this board. I know I just made your day. ;)

im not going to bother to look over your titanic length posts for the exact phrase now....ill be here all week and lunch is near over.
You think this post I'm responding to is a short one? And I know you won't go over my previous poststhere isn't anything in any of them that indicates I'm out picking a fight' about anything other than the subject, or changing or weakening in my current stance.

8.)Why won't you pick this bullshit fight on another post of your own?
(Repeat) So I'm still right, then. I'm not surprised. See? I can reproduce the same answer again, too.

What I said, I still stand by. So it really pissed you off that I used statements by the Founding Fathers (people you claim to have great respect for, and I had the impudence to mention the name of God. Tough. I have just as much right to Free Speech as you, but at least I used it in a context that was about the subject. You were trolling for almost a month before I ever came to this board.

Because you have not shown any proof whatsoever about your comments on Islam in CA schools. You have glossed it over and pointed to others posts to defend yourself yet you cant even post one URL in a decent fashion. You consistantly tell others what they have to do and cant even do it yourself." Bullshit. I ask for prrof, and provide it. Just because you're too lazy to look again, doesn't burden ME with the flaw.

"The only comment I have been able to find was one referencing me to one of Roberts posts.

Your stupidity is titanic. See my previous post for the answer to this.

And the URL he had was suspiciously looking like a Christian website. Thats like me saying I got my "proof" from Al Franken (which I'm sure you wont accept!) So how can you expect me to accept "proof" from the 700Club website. Or something similar. All other times you dodge. And "proof" of that, is in your comment about "Im not going to do your work for you". Well, Vera, it was your comment....thus its YOUR WORK. Get on it! Or the statement that your a liar stands.

Ah, I see. So because something has a suspiciously Christian look to it, you don't see it as valid. What a hypocrite! And you want me to embrace and support your beliefs on your own weak premises? How completely absurd! Your eyes must work in Series, rather than ParallelI swear, one MUST be directly behind the other.

Oh PUH-LEEEZE Vera, thats been my line. Blah, blah, bleat, blah, blah, bullshitlong winded, and repetitive, redundant piffle. Bleating and farting. Not to mention, it's outright wrong.

You set the precident, not I.

Well lah dee dahso I'm a bad girl to expect adults who THINK they are educated, to write like they actually ARE educatedbut that doesn't mean that I did it Constantly, for one, and for two, it doesn't change the fact that it does make it easier to read and understand it if it's written like an intelligent post. Get over yourself, Princess. I'd be busier than a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest, were I to point out ALL of your grammatical and spelling whoopsies, as well as my own. See, the difference is clear, betwixt you and I; I KNOW I'm not prefect, and I don't expect anyone to follow rules that I don't incorporate in my own life. You, on the other hand, cannot make that statement.

I dont know. Perhaps you should take that up with the company that made your checker.

Memo to Microsoft Word:
Dear Sir, can you please tell me why my speel chekur izn't working k'rectly? Another DUHHHHH moment, Ben. You're the King, Baby.

If this is some sort of comment to say "see I dont use one"

Never said I don't use one, just that I don't spell-check everything I write.

then explain the little boxs and artifacts in some of your posts.

See, right there is that you owe me an explanation attitude again. What's the big deal here? I've explained it in another post, and it's not that big a dealthe post is just as readable with very little effort on the reader's part. Is this the best you can come up with, you pathetic little minniewhiffer? The fact that I process my stuff through an old version of Word? Ooh! You got me! I'm gonna smoke a turd in Hell now!! [eyeroll]

You obviously had to cut and paste from somewhere this site doesnt totally agree with (in the technical sense of course....in case you try to twist that comment). Why the need to cut and paste from somewhere else? This web-based system not good enough for you?

What has this to do with the price of fish?? You're the one who's reaching for a quarrel, Ben.

Because I think your evil.
Awwwww.did I scare the li'l boy? To coin a phrase, Mission Accomplished if a Midwestern housewife and roofer can convince you there's evil out there in the world (by the mere mention of a deity), you're gonna wet yourself if you ever walk the city streets at night, Ben. ---Oh, and, unh, Hisssssssss!!! {With fangs, hands clawed} Have a nice evening!

I dont think that way of B. I may disagree with B. B may disagree with me. But I see no harsh intolerance in his/her posts. Even tho I see some reference to religion in his/her posts, my attitude is the same as when you asked me about James in an earlier post.....B doesnt seem to want me obliterated because I refuse to have a religion. You do. As for the woman/man thing. Get real.

Point it out...date and post. Where have I EVER said you need to be "oblitterated because you don't believe as I do/ share my same political views"? No Bennie's Babble Korner, just the post where I made any comment that clearly states I feel you should die or deserve to die for what you believe or don't believe. That assumption is PURELY YOURS ONLY!

That may be the way you have to BENd in order to see things, but logic dictates, you don't wanna pick a fight with a person who could shove sand so far up your a*s with consummate ease, you'd taste silica every time you licked your lips. Apparently, you are capable of picking your fights carefully enough to know when you're licked. I just think it's sheer stubbornness that makes you cling to the little remnants you have, now.

To be honest....

Now THERE'S a glaring contradiction! Lessee here.YOU troll for a particular type of person to pick an off-topic fight with, rejoice when they take your bait (---and pound you with it), call them hypocrites for sticking to what they believe in, and can't even live by the same rhetoric you defend. Hmm. YAH. Sure. Honest. WL.

.I thought B was a woman. Maybe because I had a Great Aunt Bea.

Unh-HUNH. More of your honesty, Bennie? Did your Great Aunt Bea have a trophy bag? (Wellmaybe, if she's YOUR relative!) Could she say well, that's what happens when a man's seed isn't propagated and nurtured in a sentence applying to her OWN physical anatomy? M'kay.

Never read enough into it to make a difference.

What's to read into it here?? B. has mentioned, Maybe Ben's lucky enough to have a wife, and has the teacher on the side. We should all be so lucky. (Paraphrased) While I know there are women out there who swing, I can't imagine this to be a statement made by a woman. Not to say that it can't, but it just seems unlikely. There is much about B.'s demeanor, and his style that tells me he's a gent, even if you overlook his clear indications (both here and elsewhere.) that he is a male.
How many women have a trophy bag? How many produce seed. On the planet I come from (That would be EARTH) women have the ovum, not the seed. Christ almighty, you are SO full of s**t BenI'm laughing myself silly, watching you circle talk and bite your own a*s. Absolutely hilarious.

Is your Aunt Bea a transgender, an hermaphrodite, a l*****n, or what? .Does the fruit REALLY not fall that far from the tree?

(no offence intended B....a persons sex really makes no difference to me here....regardless of how Vera has tried to bait me on this question)

We can read that as: for the love of Potato Salad, don't turn your superior wrath on meI doubt I could handle fighting someone who's so far over-par! (Would you like to hit me?) I only want to fight with Vera because she mentions that awful God once in a while.so I thought I'd bait her by putting a bunch of outrageous stuff in here that I don't REALLY believe in, then twist her words to make them my own when I need an intelligent comeback, or take them purely out of context and act all angsty about it. Really, it's only okay if I do the baiting! Why is it okay for you, but it would be wrong for me? (Although I'm not really baiting you, per se; I'm aware of the argument you're indulging with Shawn, but I can really feel your attempts to lash when you speak to me. Your hatred is literally PALPABLE towards me, because I'm still unshaken by your rant. (D'you have issues with Mommie?)

Also did you totally forget that Shawn is male (or at least I assume he is). I've locked horns with him as well as you.

Not really. You couldn't lock horns with someone on a higher plane of thought than you. You're floundering miserably with ME! And I'm just averagebut the fact that I disagree with you across the board is enough to keep your direct venom aimed at me.

Are you calling him a woman? Or are you just purposely "forgetting" about him.

How could I forget such a person as Shawn? Reading his writ---so close in its legibility to that of B.---and easily well above my own (I get a vibe he's younger than me, too! LOL) is a delight, and certainly offers me good info to use in debates outside of this forum. Besides, if I thought Shawn was a girl, that'd spoil your "fruit" comment.

Your point about gender is totally moot.

I'd disagree with that. But then again, if I'm wrong, it was only a conclusion that I came to based on your written answers and statements.

I pick my fight with you because your a typical Bush supporter.

Unh-hunhnice.and my Belief has absolutely nothing to do with it. Again, you're full of it.

(stated above, but I know your capacity for needing me to repeat myself 100's of times)

You mean, like the times I've repeated the post here are some articles regarding Islam in Cali Schools? Sound all you like, little Peonit doesn't change that facts are what they are.

and Robert (I guess your calling Robert a female too?).

I don't see you looking for Robert directly here, on this post. However, I see you trying to start a fight with him about McCarthy on ANOTHER post about Bush. And no, I never have seen Robert as a female...say it with me now.... "DUHHHHH!"

Your blind to any tolerance whatsoever.

Well, little loudmouthed assholes who spin and lie their way into a conversation is kinda hard to tolerate. You can bet this is why I find you such an annoyance. You don't even support half of your own rhetoric, let alone provide facts.

And completely willing to twist things around to make yourself look like the persecuted one.

Must be talking to a mirror here. I wasn't trolling this board for an off-topic fight, and it IS off topic, no matter how hard you try to correlate the non-subject with the subject.

Twisting in the sense that, you think your rights are being infringed on. When the only "right" your talking about is this BS "right" to take away or ban other peoples rights. Which thankfully so far you still do not have, and hopefully never will.'

Once again, when the vote came to gay marriage, it wasn't me alone who voted it down. If you failed to see it on the ballot, then you either don't read what you sign, or you don't vote. It was the MAJORITY of American voters that turned it down. I reiterate: I guess the American Populace isn't ready to agree that gays should marry. Being gay isn't like being black or Asianit's not like having a congenital condition. It IS a Choice. I may not agree with it, but I don't hate people because of the Choice they make, no matter how you try to subvert my words.

I dont feel that way. Thats a very broad way to put it.

Bull. It's EXACTLY what it is.

I do feel that someone needs to show some sort of validity to their claims.

I claim nothing. My statements are true and correct, whether or not you agree with them. And I have provided validitywith addresses, names, organizations, and links. Your ardent refusal to see it mystifies me, but I understand well how little boys think: If I deny it, I can make it go away! It's the written equivalent to covering your eyes and stamping your feet: There is NO(stomp!) NO(Stomp!) NO(Stomp!) such thing in California Schools!

Especially if they are as incendiary as your comment about Islam in CA schools.

Ooh! Someone learned a new word today! Incendiary! Watching Firestarter tonight? I think the more incendiary issue here, is that I've provided proof, as has Robert, and you're just unwilling to accept it.

Why are you such a hypocrite Vera? Your question here (#14) is absolutely outragous considering your the one that has bitched and moaned about proof from me which I put down many URLs and links.

You did that in one post, recentlyand may have done in one other in the past. Goody for you. I've pointed to my sources in pretty much every post I have that directly quotes an article, and have gotten permission for use of it. Just because you refuse to accept that I've done my work far and away better than you have yours, doesn't make me a hypocrite. But it does prove that you're one. I've used a lot of your own logic to debate you, and you're looking more and more loony with each response.

Now about your ending comment.....
Well thats a very venomous way to end your list. Certainly sets the tone.

Well, I know what to expect out of you, and you didn't disappoint. LMAO

I hardly call myself being "venomous" in my answers.

Calling someone an idiot, a Jihadist, a freak, a moron, a dorkyeah, I can see where you've been SO civil, and conscious of the feelings of those you were trolling for.

I will admit to calling you "evil". Which still stands.
I thought the concept of evil was irrelevant to one with nonbelief. Hunh, go fig. Nice labeling there; I'm evil because I don't believe as you do, and even worse, I have the temerity to stand in that faith as rigid as before. Whatever, Loser. (WL)

It is my opinion and its still my right to have.

Sure it's your right to have an opinion. I don't quarrel that. Too bad you don't have the same attitude.

I really like the part......."if he bothers to answer any at all". A hypocrite to the end, arnt you Vera!

No, I arnt. [eyeroll] That was my chicken call. ;} If you can use it, so can I. Fair is fair, even if your concept of fairness is warped as it is.

You cant answer my questions yet make a "venomous" comment like that when you havent even answered ONE of mine.

I have answered them, both in the order asked, and in various other posts. Just because you don't like the answers you got (and aren't smart enough to try and pick a fresh fight with what you getbecause my answers are consistent!), doesn't mean my answers are invalid. Considering that over half of your little loaded questions are religious in nature, I'm loath to break my word and discuss that any further. How many times you s'pose I'm gonna have to tell you that one (probably as often as I'll refer you to my post Here are some articles, hunh?)?

You cant even show proof to your "claims". And you cant even answer the simple question of......(for the 100th time!!).....

If you're too lazy, stupid, or just chose to be blind, that's your choice, Kidif you won't look, stop asking me to give you something I already have given you. (What's this, the fourth time you've bought it up in this post?) Sucks to be you, getting the same answer over and overthat's called consistency.

Get real Vera....practice what you preach. And you preach pretty darn heavy.

Unlike you, I can and do, Bennie. Apparently, that bothers you.

My questions were directed at everyone. And I CLEARLY invited everyone to answer them if they pleased.

Again, can we have all the Veras here, raise their hands? .I don't count, coz I'm a Vera and I'm asking the question. (Feel free to re-read the post I'm quoting from.)

Your questions were clearly directed at me alone.
Uhmm, DUH. That's why my questions were written in the portion of that post that's directed at YOU. Now for some questions you won't answer in the portion of the post written to Ben. I made no inferences, that these questions were intended for everyone else. Point, please?

While they did on occasion single out your particular "faith", you can hardly call them venomous.

You should have written that as While they did on multiple and frequent occasion single out your particular faith for the first part, as like you've admitted, you WERE trolling to pick a fight with a Believer, and I certainly wouldn't call your tenor civil, by any stretch of the imagination. And if you single a person out and attack them for their skin color, or other ethnic means, I think that's called profiling. How can you attack someone on such a tender subject and then fault them for defending their beliefs? Simple! Because you're Ben, and you're above and beyond everyone else, in your own little bitty mind. (When does the ethnic cleansing begin, Ben?)

Which is not what can be said about your questions.

My questions weren't uncivil, and I think they applied as well to these circumstances as yours did. What do you care, How I feel? What difference does it make if I'm a Trekkie or whatever?

Mine were simple questions that one might even here from a telephone polling company working for CNN or FOX (ie: Do you suport abortion rights? Yes? No?....Do you support or oppose gay marriage? Yes? No?).

I've NEVER had some phone company, or the Clinton News Network, or FOX Network call me and ask such loaded questions. And I'll bet I've been paying my phone bill since your li'l pink fanny was in diapers.

While yours were clearly directed at me to bash.

Missed the mark again, Kiddo. They were just geared at your apparent stance on homosexuality, and you've still never answered the questions directly. I was pretty direct in answering the questions you presented (or pointed you to where you could find the answer), and have kept consistent in my views. If you're too lazy to look, don't accuse me of not answering, because clearly, it's not the answer you want anywayit's a chance to gather more stones. I don't want to force others to pass or debunk the gay-marriage issue, if I don't feel it's in my own interests, just like I'd not try to force anyone to live one way and expect the opposite for myself.

The best teachers are influence and example. I used to smoke, but I don't want my kids toergo, I quit smoking (didn't smoke around my kids in the house, either), and instruct them that it's better to never start the habit. I tell my kids not to use drugs, or drink to excessguess the example I have to set? I have friends who smoke pot. My kids know they smoke pot.they ask me (when they were little), But isn't that a bad thing? I tell them it's just not healthy, and the law says it's not legal, either. But that doesn't make the person necessarily badit's just not a wise choice. To my friends that do it, I ask them they don't do it around me or my kids, and that they don't ever act inappropriately towards me or my kids.

You may have been the motivation for the posting of my questions.

So, they were directed more at me than anyone else. Thanks for the clarification.

But I made it well and clear that any were welcome to answer them. Can you make the same claim about yours? I seriously doubt your going to be able to twist that one into reality!

I never said my questions were directed at anyone else. Again, point, please?

You also had no mention about Bush in any of your questions. I had numerous questions about Bush, his policies, and his actions.

Because I already know your views on Bush. Hey, if you can stray this post into off-topic matter, so can I. My rights are the same as yours.

So you basically just trumped your own questions about me making non-relevant comments on this thread.

No, your comments have relevance to someone out there, I'm sure. Just not to me. :) And anyone who reads these posts can see plainly the bizarre circles in which you think. How entertaining! B. loves quizzes, I love puzzles.

And asking my why I dont "start my own thread".

And I'm still wondering the true nature of that. I just think you like arguing with me in particular. I'm sure the thought of actually taking on some seriously super-hard-core creationists and Christians is something you're far too ill prepared for. Same reason you won't bow your chest at B. You're too juvenile to play with bigger dogs.

So think about that next time you banter about being "venomous".

Or what? What should I think about? Is there some lesson here you hope to teach me? I'll line that up with the severity of James of Tupper or Canaduh's little threats, and disregard it accordingly. Thanks for the cannon-fodder. (Still standing strong!)

And when you b***h and moan about being singled out. Or gripe about being "off-topic".

Well, Princess, I wouldn't make the statement if it weren't based in fact (that means true). You admit readily that you laid out the bait and I took it hook, line, and sinker. (I'll call it for what it isMasterbaiting!)

Once again.....your a hypocrite to the end Vera.
And once again, Bennie, you're the butt of the joke. Time to lay out some fresh Masterbaitthis old one's got the stench of your opinion all over it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#654 Consumer Comment

Ooh! James and his Girlfriend are back!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

Speak, ohh Great, Toothless One!

Vera from Toledo

What? Am I supposed to react with shock because you have seen other posts where I've got Toledo instead of Tweet? Aww. Sorry to disappoint you, ShnookumsI use Tweet because of a joke running between my Daughter and I. I think it's cute, and I really don't give a flying whoop-dee-doo if you think it is or not.

You seem very religious

You seem very stupid.
Unfortunately, your weak mind has been influenced by the likes of James from Cana-DUH, and Boo-h*o Bennie. My intent when I responded to this post was, and still is, meant to be taken in a political context until I got called out as a right-wing religious zealot/freak/fanatic. I got sick of it, just like I'm sick of saying the same things over and over with you, Canadunce, and Boo-h*o. But if the fact that I have Faith and I'm not ashamed of it makes me religious, well, then so be it. It never would have gotten this far, if I hadn't been repeatedly prodded, but I'm a big enough kid that I can defend myself against the likes of you, Darlin'.

but if you Worship George W. Bush,

At what point have I ever demonstrated a worshipful attitude, oh Weenie of the Bottle? I'll tell you: Never. What the hell is wrong with you, other than the possibility that Mom hit the crack pipe too much while carrying you? I defend my President's right to legally engage war against a dictator who supports terrorism, and has conducted illicit behavior towards my country, rather than support sedition, as you and your valentine do.

I would say you love the killing of a living human,,,,,,

As opposed to whatthe killing of dead humans? (Oh, and elipses are made with little dots.....like that. Not commas.) There's that apocalyptic beacon' again, flashing like the bulb of a camera. Christ, you're dense! The mind veritably swims! Don't even try to pick a fight with me, you're so incredibly unqualified---I might make you overheat that bourbon-soaked lepton that's swimming aimlessly between your ears.

I'd say in your case, a mind truly is a terrible thing to wastebut since you seem to lack any significance, I don't think you should worry. Toss back another shot of ol Gran'Dad, and tell me what a clever pundit you are.

weather by Bush as Governor of Texas or President of The United States Of America. Hunh? What does the weather have to do with the President?

Vera from Toleda ohio, If you are religious you can not support these actions. What does my Faith have to do with this war, the weather, or whatever? (PssttToledo, Jackass) I'm still waiting for you to present something more factually based than the average.what was it? Vurp? (Is that where you throw-up a little when you belch, Shawn? I've never heard that one before, and I hope I'm using it correctly.) You have not produced ONE SINGLE SHRED of credible proof. All you wanna do is whine.

I will expose you you freak.
Expose me for what? Do you sit with a finger deep in your rectum, the other finger in your mouth, and play switch? What chemicals induce your kind of thought process? Are you as eloquent socially as you present yourself here? If so, do you WONDER why you can't get a date?
Isn't this idle s**t the same thing you say in just about EVERY post you write? Puh! You've gotta be kidding me. And freak? I ain'tcher Momma, so don't try romancing me.

You really don't know who you are dealing with.

Sadly, I do know what I'm dealing with. It is you who assumes muchand thinks little. Bring it, b***h.
Self-defense would surely leave you sorry. >:}

I have been around all sorts.

Let's not bring your barnyard conquests into this.

James of Cana-Duh

Seven lines of the same drivel. Nice to see your stupidity is consistent as ever. LOL.
I'd like to say welcome back, we missed yah, but I don't like to lie.

Yeah. The Mediathere's a good source of info, nowadays. If you want the truth, you have to look for it, if you want to think you have the truth, you have only to turn on CNN or some similar liberal media outlet. And in Robert's absence (I really think he's sick of the bullshit going on between Ben and I, and I can't blame him.), I haveta ask, what does Canada give a crap about what's going on in the US (a country you claim they scourge)?
Run outta free heroin and needles, didja?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#653 Consumer Suggestion

Are you Guyz outta yer minds"

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

Ok I have talked about Vera being lost & Robert too!

Even "B".... are you guys all friggin idiots er what? I said before as I will say again... the bullshit on Iraq is being played out "right now" in the media. Your arguements are crap!

Wake up & smell the coffee... there was no "good reason" to go into Iraq & the fact that ya did causes more problems.

You will not ever live this down, as if you leave or you stay... you will not prevent the problems you have caused.

Period!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#652 Consumer Suggestion

Vera, Tweety, Show me your true self!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

Vera from Toledo,

You seem very religious, but if you Worship George W. Bush, I would say you love the killing of a living human,,,,,, weather by Bush as Governor of Texas or President of The United States Of America. Vera from Toleda ohio, If you are religious you can not support these actions. I will expose you you freak. You really don't know who you are dealing with. I have been around all sorts.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#651 Consumer Comment

A Question . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, December 03, 2005

The price at the pumps is coming down. George W. has provided a "plan" for Iraq. (He failed to give a specific time frame for the withdrawl of our troops, but, even Clinton stated that would be a foolish thing to do{see the interview with that snuffluffogus guy}) 215,000 new jobs in the the month of November, and nearly 4.5 million new jobs in the last two-and-a-half years. Third-quarter growth this year was 4.3 percent. The unemployment rate is 5 percent, that's lower than the average for the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s! The dollar is up 10% versus the euro in the past eight months. The 10-year treasury yield, at 4.5%, is well below its 2000 average yield of 6% (when the U.S. faced surpluses as far as the eye could see!). Holiday shopping is strong contrary to pessimist's projeections. Oh yes, and some 28,000 troops are already scheduled to be home from Iraq . . . before Christmas!

My question is . . . what the hell is everyone bitching about? Iraq and gay rights? Those two things make George W. an "evil-dictator" and the "worst president in history"??? Get off your partisan soap boxes and step into reality!

"I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. ... progress is visible and practical." (11/29/05)
" . . . this is important, and I think the point is we are making progress."(11/30/05)
(both comments by Senator Joseph Leiberman speaking about Iraq)


God Bless the U.S.A. and all Her Troops

Post Script: I apologize for the double posting(previous), the first time I submitted it was early a.m. on the 30th!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#650 Consumer Comment

Another thing Vera......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 02, 2005

My questions were directed at everyone. And I CLEARLY invited everyone to answer them if they pleased.

Your questions were clearly directed at me alone.

While they did on occasion single out your particular "faith", you can hardly call them venomous. Which is not what can be said about your questions. Mine were simple questions that one might even here from a telephone polling company working for CNN or FOX (ie: Do you suport abortion rights? Yes? No?....Do you support or oppose gay marriage? Yes? No?). While yours were clearly directed at me to bash.

You may have been the motivation for the posting of my questions. But I made it well and clear that any were welcome to answer them. Can you make the same claim about yours? I seriously doubt your going to be able to twist that one into reality!

You also had no mention about Bush in any of your questions. I had numerous questions about Bush, his policies, and his actions. So you basically just trumped your own questions about me making non-relevant comments on this thread. And asking my why I dont "start my own thread".

So think about that next time you banter about being "venomous". And when you b***h and moan about being singled out. Or gripe about being "off-topic".

Once again.....your a hypocrite to the end Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#649 Consumer Comment

OK Vera...I'll do something you cant do.. answer some simple questions..

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 02, 2005

Funny how you are willing to post questions for me (which I did say I would answer) yet wont even answer mine. (I'm STILL waiting for your proof on ISLAM IN CA SCHOOLS!!!)

So lets begin......

1.)Why do you insist that I simply MUST applaud, support, and embrace gay marriage, yet you call Shawn a fruit (a term literally synonymous with being gay, since you'll probably play dumb) as an insult?

Well lets see, I dont remember saying you MUST "applaud" or "embrace" gay marriage. All I did was ask you why you think its your right to BAN it. Once AGAIN I re-state.....It has NO effect on your life if its legal. Why do you bother to fight it so? As to the "fruit" comment.....well you associate it with "gays" only I guess. I guess all I can say is I use it for other things as well. Thats my right....unless you religious types are trying to make it permanently associated with "gays". Are you? (I wouldnt be surprised if you were...after all you want to regulate everything else other people do. Why not the language completely as well?)

2.)After the innumerable times you've tried to literally fling gay marriage into the conversation, why do you get all puffed-up n' pissy when I ask you if you're gay? (It was an honest question, after allbased on the frequency of your inquiry.)

I wouldnt call it "puffy" that I became. Actually the entire gay marriage thing is bait for you religious types. And you took it hook line and sinker. Your the ones all "puffy" about it. All I've said and asked is "why are you so against it when it doesnt have any effect on your life?". But you attacked like a rabid wolf. And of course you fell for the next mantra....."well you must be gay then". Once again....falling hook line and sinker. The gay marriage thing is a perfect example of your intolerance and ignorance. Its a perfect example how something that has nothing to do with you, must be controlled by you in your twisted idea that you should be allowed in peoples bedrooms.

3.)Why so offended, in the event I were to actually inquire?


Uh...Vera.....ONCE AGAIN......Offended because if it were legal....or not....it HAS NO EFFECT ON YOUR LIFE. Thus for you to be so completely against it, and support laws forbidding it, shows that you cannot leave others alone even when their actions dont have anything to do with you and never will. Who wouldnt be offended if some stranger was constantly busting into their bedroom!? Simply put....I'm offended because your pushing your religious values on others when those others actions dont affect your life in any way whatsoever.

4.)Does this mean that a different set of rules applies to how you're allowed to feel about gay folks, and how I'm supposed to feel about gay folks?

Not quite sure what the hell you mean here. But from first glance.....I would say.... no. There should be no rules at all. What gay people do has nothing to do with my life, or yours. So niether of us should have any rules...or any say about it....period. It's their business, not yours. And the only business I have made it of mine is that I defend their right to privacy and their right to do as they please so long as it has no negative affect on others (which it doesnt!).

5.)It IS clear, that you don't like the thought of homosexuality applying to you; why then do you support it so avidly?

I dont see them imposing their will on me. I dont see them imosing their will on anyone. So I really dont have any problem with them. I DO see people like you trying to impose your will on me. Thus...I fight back. Take the fight to those that are taking things from me and imposing things on me. You are doing that. They are not.

6.)Is what you are based more on what you'll tolerate, as opposed to your personal stock in yourself (that is, WHO you are)?

Be who you want to be. Thats fair. And dont invade others privacy. Or impose your will on others. Thats fair. If you chose not to like someone, some thing, or some idea. Thats your right. But when you cross the line of it being a certain thing you "believe" into the area of imposing it others, then you have gone to far. Now if someones actions have a negative effect on others then that is NOT fair. You obviously dont tolerate many things Vera, and you are willing to take rights away, or ban rights before they are really "rights". Even when those actions have no effect on your life. That is NOT fair as well.

7.)Why did you come here, looking to pick an off-topic fight about a very sensitive subject, then get all snippety and offended when you get one? (Especially, after REPEATED pronging!)

Because your here Vera. Your a sick religious intolerant nut. You are a perfect example of why I really dont like Bush. And this thread is about Bush. (and lets not forget your comment that got me started....something along the lines of "Almighty Gods nation" and "power from god to lead" blah blah blah....im not going to bother to look over your titanic length posts for the exact phrase now....ill be here all week and lunch is near over)

8.)Why won't you pick this bullshit fight on another post of your own?

(Repeat) Because your here Vera. Your a sick religious intolerant nut. You are a perfect example of why I really dont like Bush. And this thread is about Bush. (and lets not forget your comment that got me started....something along the lines of "Almighty Gods nation" and "power from god to lead" blah blah blah....im not going to bother to look over your titanic length posts for the exact phrases now)

9.)Why do you say I'm full of it and a liar and then turn around and tell me that I've given you all the proof and answers---yet you tell me I've proven nothing? (Note: "Because you ARE!" Isn't an answer...it's an accusation. And you've done it before, copping out seems to be your choice when you're on a question you don't like.)

Because you have not shown any proof whatsoever about your comments on Islam in CA schools. You have glossed it over and pointed to others posts to defend yourself yet you cant even post one URL in a decent fashion. You consistantly tell others what they have to do and cant even do it yourself. The only comment I have been able to find was one referencing me to one of Roberts posts. And the URL he had was suspiciously looking like a Christian website. Thats like me saying I got my "proof" from Al Franken (which I'm sure you wont accept!) So how can you expect me to accept "proof" from the 700Club website. Or something similar. All other times you dodge. And "proof" of that, is in your comment about "Im not going to do your work for you". Well, Vera, it was your comment....thus its YOUR WORK. Get on it! Or the statement that your a liar stands.

10.)If I'm CONSTANTLY on and on about the grammar and spelling of others, and that makes all of my posts invalid, doesn't that render your arguments invalid because most of your little snippets of Bush's speeches are grammar and misspoken whoopsies?

Oh PUH-LEEEZE Vera, thats been my line from the first time you bashed about my grammar. YOU were the one constantly bitching about grammer and acting like it invalidated peoples posts. Dont try and twist it around. I only attacked your grammar when it was clear that you do the same thing. And I ONLY attacked it because of that point.....not because of the bad grammar itself. Once again showing that you cant even practice what you preach. By all means Vera mis-spell away. I dont care. I still understand what you state. Your grammar and type-o's arnt so bad that I dont understand what your trying to say. And you can say the same for me. This isnt a school paper waiting to graded. Thats a perfect example of how you and your ilk twist and contort things. First you b***h about something....then someone catches you doing the exact same thing...so they point out your doing it as well......then you come back around and say "see...your doing it!!". Get real Vera...you started bitching about grammar. And got caught using it yourself. Dont try and play the poor persecuted one this time. You set the precident, not I.

11.)Speaking of spelling and grammar whoopsiesif I put EVERYTHING I write through my spell-checker why do I still get spelling errors on my posts?

I dont know. Perhaps you should take that up with the company that made your checker. If this is some sort of comment to say "see I dont use one" then explain the little boxs and artifacts in some of your posts. You obviously had to cut and paste from somewhere this site doesnt totally agree with (in the technical sense of course....in case you try to twist that comment). Why the need to cut and paste from somewhere else? This web-based system not good enough for you?

12.)I've noticed that when B. puts your toes to the coals, you barely respond to himand in the offhand ways you do, you're never as nasty to him as you are to me. Is there a reason for this, or am I to just continue under the supposition that you're more comfortable trying to pick a fight with a woman?

Because I think your evil. I dont think that way of B. I may disagree with B. B may disagree with me. But I see no harsh intolerance in his/her posts. Even tho I see some reference to religion in his/her posts, my attitude is the same as when you asked me about James in an earlier post.....B doesnt seem to want me obliterated because I refuse to have a religion. You do. As for the woman/man thing. Get real. To be honest....I thought B was a woman. Maybe because I had a Great Aunt Bea. Never read enough into it to make a difference. (no offence intended B....a persons sex really makes no difference to me here....regardless of how Vera has tried to bait me on this question). Also did you totally forget that Shawn is male (or at least I assume he is). I've locked horns with him as well as you. Are you calling him a woman? Or are you just purposely "forgetting" about him. Your point about gender is totally moot.

13.)So is it my gender, ACCOMPANIED with my political leanings, that makes me a more logical candidate to quarrel with, or are you singling me out with such obvious prejudice for other reasons?

Look at my response above. Once again your point about gender is totally moot. I pick my fight with you because your a typical Bush supporter. I have picked them with Shawn as well (stated above, but I know your capacity for needing me to repeat myself 100's of times), and Robert (I guess your calling Robert a female too?). Your blind to any tolerance whatsoever. And completely willing to twist things around to make yourself look like the persecuted one. Twisting in the sense that, you think your rights are being infringed on. When the only "right" your talking about is this BS "right" to take away or ban other peoples rights. Which thankfully so far you still do not have, and hopefully never will.

14.)Why do you feel everyone owes you some sort of explanation for their beliefs, but you refuse to offer anything more than viscosity when the same is expected of you?

I dont feel that way. Thats a very broad way to put it. I do feel that someone needs to show some sort of validity to their claims. Especially if they are as incendiary as your comment about Islam in CA schools. Why are you such a hypocrite Vera? Your question here (#14) is absolutely outragous considering your the one that has bitched and moaned about proof from me which I put down many URLs and links. Yet you cant seem to even put down one. And you dodge at every chance. Now if its truely "beliefs" you speak of thats slightly differnt. I have explained my "beliefs" in great detail and small. As you have as well. If your talking about "claims" then you are seriously lacking Vera, and a hypocrite to the end. Your question is completely laughable on that level.

Now about your ending comment.....

"Chances are, I'll get some venomous, infected screed, or a poorly done version of an attempted synopsis, if he bothers to answer any at all."


Well thats a very venomous way to end your list. Certainly sets the tone. I hardly call myself being "venomous" in my answers. I will admit to calling you "evil". Which still stands. It is my opinion and its still my right to have. I really like the part......."if he bothers to answer any at all". A hypocrite to the end, arnt you Vera!

You cant answer my questions yet make a "venomous" comment like that when you havent even answered ONE of mine. You cant even show proof to your "claims". And you cant even answer the simple question of......(for the 100th time!!).....

What exactly is it that is being TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU BY PEOPLE WITHOUT RELIGION?

Get real Vera....practice what you preach. And you preach pretty darn heavy. Along with your poster boy for theocracy......Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#648 Consumer Comment

I'll try this again, as my last 2 haven't posted - Help! I've been ripped off!! lol

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, December 02, 2005

Well, I have to admit, although using the term "Visigoth" was not my only reason for that post, I do find it a rather a 'cool' word to speak! lol Just say it again and feel it roll off your tongue . . . Visigoth!

'B', I have to admit, there is very little of your post that I can debate with you, but then, the post which you contest was not intended to be debated with you, but rather with Ben. If I would have known I would have to debate such statements with somebody who has an intellectual capacity greater than that of a gnat, then I would have inserted various prequalifying statements, and offered further explanations elsewhere. You see, 'B', as I believe that you are an intellectual, I can understand where you may perceive me as some religious zealot with a mindset of judgements based solely on some puritanical Christian principles which I refuse to gaze beyond for fear of the real world' slipping in and desecrating my holy understanding, but the truth is, I don't necessarily have the views that I post. That is to say, that my system of belief is such an evolving order that it is impossible to fully comprehend my true intent behind any statement or posted sentiment. My sense of morality' most often clashes with my human, or flesh desires', resulting in a constantly revising conglomeration of perplexity from which a single statement of absolute representation would be impossible to ascertain. Therefore, my posts' are merely a devils advocate approach from my own psyche, in response to the inane blathers of a stereotypical left wing elitist idiot'.

In truth, I am as much a middle of the road' person as any. I have my share of bones in the closet, whether one looks from a viewpoint of man's law', God's law', or even our society's understanding and acceptance of what is right, and what is wrong (sorry, I'd just hate to offend anyone by using the word morals)', and, you know what, my postings are oftentimes laced with a do as I say, not as I do' message. I don't judge, or deny anybody's freedoms, but I do try to set my political and moral' stance on what I believe to be best for our society as a whole, not what is best for just me, or my present group of influence. Hell, there was a time in my life that, should I not have cared about what's best for all', I would have voted for anyone who came out and said that we should legalize all drugs( especially stimulants and hallucinagenics, yee haw ), run around naked, sticking our dicks in anything with a hole and a heartbeat, and just take whatever you need or want from those who lack the ability(or willingness) to defend what is rightfully theirs! Thank God I've matured since last year!

I don't have a problem with a couple of queers' promising to love' each other forever and calling it a marriage, what I have a problem with is people like Ben, and yourself to some extent(B'), telling me that I have to accept it as natural, progressive, or anything less than a perverse abhoration, according to MY understanding and acceptance of the teachings of God. You see, I probably wouldn't have anything to say if it was just kept in the bedroom, but year after year, I, and all of our society, is subjected to parades of gays, lesbians, transvestites, trans-genders, and such, in various stages of dress ( and undress! ), shouting slogans such as We're q***r! We're here! while displaying such sexual acts in public that I find offensive, and would even if it were a couple of attractive heterosexuals doing the same. (I know some idiot is getting ready to respond with some stupid statement about someone like the KKK' parading around . . . don't bother, if that's where your mind is at, you're missing my point completely!)

What several of you, and especially Ben, don't seem to understand, is that we as a society must have a certain, and specific set of rules (call them morals if you wish, I do!) by which to live, if not, or, if those rules can be changed simply by the squeaky wheel, then we are left with anarchy. Every year those rules are getting less and less restrictive, and society is being forced to accept certain perversions and deviant behaviors as normalcy, those who resist are labeled bigots, and legally repremanded for maintaning such old-aged thoughts. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to live life as it was three-hundred, two-hundred, or even one-hundred years ago, but where do we draw the line on what is, and isn't morally acceptable within our society? Who gets the honor of being the morality judge?

Thirty-some years ago the Supreme Court put the right to be irresponsible, and reverse nature' later as a matter of convenience, above the rights of a human life, provided it was previous to certain levels of development (at the time, some 72% disagreed with that decision, today, there is still 63% opposed) Today, even though there is opposition from a majority of Americans, there is a fight to accept homo-sexuality into our culture . . . if this occurs, why not accept the practices of the man-boy love association? Do they not have the same rights as heterosexuals? Christians? Athiests? Homosexuals? Lesbians? Transvestites? What about necropheliacs? Pedophiles? Should we legalize and accept incest? I know you are probably thinking c'mon, there is no comparison, all we're talking about here is some good people who want to proclaim their love for one another! Well twenty or thirty years ago, those good people were lumped in' with the rest of these deviants'. So tell me, where do we draw the line? And by who's morality is that decision to be made? Do you really believe that the intent of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights is to ensure anarchy?

You scream about the government coming into our bedrooms', hell, they've been coming into our minds and telling us what we can and can not think for years now - and you're just now getting upset because this time, it doesn't quite line up with YOUR way of thinking! - I don't see anyone from the left complaining about the virtual disappearance of the 2nd amendment ( when a right is conditional, it's not a right . . . it's a privelidge) - I can't believe that you act so in tune' with the constitution, but you accept the stifling of religion to be the intent of the first amendment (BTW, Ben, it reads freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion, as you have tried to sell on many occasions.) And, once again, NOWHERE in the constitution, bill of rights, or any legal document (prior to the Supreme Court's {mis}ruling in the twentieth century), does it state a separation of church and state - it seems you want to take literal translation of some amendments, but then insert, reword, and delete, in part or in whole, the ones which you don't like or agree with!

Finally, B' . . . regarding your dismissal of WMD's - you stated that there were only 8 missiles found, and, the sarin would have been inert. May I interest you in a cup of tea with arsenic? I'll only put a few drops in, really a joke compared to if I wanted you dead, besides, it's past the expiration date, it should be harmless! lol

God Bless the U.S.A.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#647 Consumer Comment

constitution?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 01, 2005

Well, I have to admit, although using the term "Visigoth" was not my only reason for that post, I do find it a rather a 'cool' word to speak! lol Just say it again and feel it roll off your tongue . . . Visigoth!

'B', I have to admit, there is very little of your post that I can debate with you, but then, the post which you contest was not intended to be debated with you, but rather with Ben. If I would have known I would have to debate such statements with somebody who has an intellectual capacity greater than a gnat, then I would have inserted various prequalifying statements, and offered further explanations elsewhere. You see, 'B', as I believe that you are an intellectual, I can understand where you may perceive me as some religious zealot with a mindset of judgements based solely on some puritanical Christian principles which I refuse to gaze beyond for fear of the real world' slipping in and desecrating my holy understanding, but the truth is, I don't necessarily have the views that I post. That is to say, that my system of belief is such an evolving order that it is impossible to fully comprehend my true intent behind any statement or posted sentiment. My sense of morality' most often clashes with my human, or flesh desires', resulting in a constantly revising conglomeration of perplexity from which a single statement of absolute representation would be impossible to ascertain. Therefore, my posts' are merely a devils advocate approach from my own psyche, in response to the inane blathers of a stereotypical left wing elitist idiot'.

In truth, I am as much a middle of the road' person as any. I have my share of bones in the closet, whether one looks from a viewpoint of man's law', God's law', or even our society's understanding and acceptance of what is right, and what is wrong (sorry, I'd just hate to offend anyone by using the word morals)', and, you know what, my postings are oftentimes laced with a do as I say, not as I do' message. I don't judge, or deny anybody's freedoms, but I do try to set my political and moral' stance on what I believe to be best for our society as a whole, not what is best for just me, or my present group of influence. Hell, there was a time in my life that, should I not have cared about what's best for all', I would have voted for anyone who came out and said that we should legalize all drugs( especially stimulants and hallucinagenics, yee haw ), run around naked, sticking our dicks in anything with a hole and a heartbeat, and just take whatever you need or want from those who lack the ability(or willingness) to defend what is rightfully theirs! Thank God I've matured since last year!

I don't have a problem with a couple of queers' promising to love' each other forever and calling it a marriage, what I have a problem with is people like Ben, and yourself to some extent(B'), telling me that I have to accept it as natural, progressive, or anything less than a perverse abhoration, according to MY understanding and acceptance of the teachings of God. You see, I probably wouldn't have anything to say if it was just kept in the bedroom, but year after year, I, and all of our society, is subjected to parades of gays, lesbians, transvestites, trans-genders, and such, in various stages of dress ( and undress! ), shouting slogans such as We're q***r! We're here! while displaying such sexual acts in public that I find offensive, and would even if it were a couple of attractive heterosexuals doing the same. (I know some idiot is getting ready to respond with some stupid statement about someone like the KKK' parading around . . . don't bother, if that's where your mind is at, you're missing my point completely!)


What several of you, and especially Ben, don't seem to understand, is that we as a society must have a certain, and specific set of rules (call them morals if you wish, I do!) by which to live, if not, or, if those rules can be changed simply by the squeaky wheel, then we are left with anarchy. Every year those rules are getting less and less restrictive, and society is being forced to accept certain perversions and deviant behaviors as normalcy, those who resist are labeled bigots, and legally repremanded for maintaning such old-aged thoughts. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to live life as it was three-hundred, two-hundred, or even one-hundred years ago, but where do we draw the line on what is, and isn't morally acceptable within our society? Who gets the honor of being the morality judge?

Thirty-some years ago the Supreme Court put the right to be irresponsible, and reverse nature' later as a matter of convenience, above the rights of a human life, provided it was previous to certain levels of development (at the time, some 72% disagreed with that decision, today, there is still 63% opposed) Today, even though there is opposition from a majority of Americans, there is a fight to accept homo-sexuality into our culture . . . if this occurs, why not accept the practices of the man-boy love association? Do they not have the same rights as heterosexuals? Christians? Athiests? Homosexuals? Lesbians? Transvestites? What about necropheliacs? Pedophiles? Should we legalize and accept incest? I know you are probably thinking c'mon, there is no comparison, all we're talking about here is some good people who want to proclaim their love for one another! Well twenty or thirty years ago, those good people were lumped in' with the rest of these deviants'. So tell me, where do we draw the line? And by who's morality is that decision to be made? Do you really believe that the intent of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights is to ensure anarchy?

You scream about the government coming into our bedrooms', hell, they've been coming into our minds and telling us what we can and can not think for years now - and you're just now getting upset because this time, it doesn't quite line up with YOUR way of thinking! - I don't see anyone from the left complaining about the virtual disappearance of the 2nd amendment ( when a right is coditional, it's not a right . . . it's a privelege) - I can't believe that you act so in tune' with the constitution, but you accept the stifling of religion to be the intent of the first amendment (BTW, Ben, it reads freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion, as you have tried to sell on many occasions.) And, once again, NOWHERE in the constitution, bill of rights, or any legal document (prior to the Supreme Court's {mis}ruling in the twentieth century), does it state a separation of church and state - it seems you want to take literal translation of some amendments, but then insert, reword, and delete, in part or in whole, the ones which you don't like or agree with!

Finally, B' . . . regarding your dismissal of WMD's - you stated that there were only 8 missiles found, and, the sarin would have been inert. May I interest you in a cup of tea with arsenic? I'll only put a few drops in, really a joke compared to if I wanted you dead, besides, it's past the expiration date, it should be harmless! lol

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#646 Consumer Comment

Talk abot'cher fun on a bun!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, December 01, 2005

Not looking to pick a fight on the critter question...just inserting an opinion...and that's all.

It is true that some animals demonstrate that which could be perceived as homosexual behavior. However, I can't think of any one particular case that stands out among animals as a decision made out of preference. That is, where the animals had at some point decided to shake off the natural drive of instinct---to further their own genes---in favor of a monogamous, homosexual relationship under normal environmental and social circumstances.
---Make that, to the exclusion of any heterosexual relationships.

I've seen circumstances in the Desert here in the US, among a species of whiptail lizards where they're all femalesbut no onenot even science--can determine what has happened to the males of this little specie. There are groups of little females, and in some cases, there's a larger female that has a more masculine attitude, and sometimes she mounts the others like a male to encourage ovulation. (Not true sexual dimorphism.) They lay these little, raisin-like eggs that soak up water and incubate, hatching to produce a clone of their mother-lizardsnot the united genes of the surrogate male and the little female. (By the way...the bigger female retains her size, for the most part, but loses that "masculinity" after the laying season is over.)

These little girls are the only exception to the rule among the land vertebrates (that I'm at present aware of) which produce offspring without the presence of a male of their own kind.
Mind you, this is my manner of thoughtsince I'm a big fan of the critter-kingdom. I don't have any degrees in animal biology.

The term homosexuality should be limited to the human species, for in animals the observer can ascertain only motor behavior. As soon as he interprets the animal's motivation he is applying human psychodynamics--a risky, if not imprudent scientific approach. It is unscientific to read human motivation and sentiment into animal behaviorI think that's called anthropomorphism.

With people we can often speak directly to individuals (or read written accounts)...with animals in contrast, we can often directly observe their sexual (and allied) behaviors, but can only infer or interpret their meanings and motivations. It is a frequent error for people to contrast human and animal behaviors, as if the two were homogenous.

If man is anything like an animal, he is a rational animal, driven by a wholly different set of rules. I don't buy into that whole well, animals do it, and animals are natural, so therefore, it must be good and right, and above all else, natural. If such were the case, there would be lobbying for the whole cannibalism and filicide groups, wouldn't there..? How about if human menusing animals as a behavioral template---were to follow the example of their weasel counterparts? Grown (sexually matured/fertile) men could sneak into a nursery, separate the boy-babies from the girl-babies, and inseminate the girls to ensure their genetic perpetuation. Any normal person would find this behavior abhorrent, and certainly wouldn't foster it.

Anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts; shortage of mates, shortage of food, the prey animals have chosen an alternate migratory route, anomalous environmental stimulus and such.

Animals lack the precision and clarity of human intellectual perceptiontheir cognitive properties rely more on sensorial input, their instincts motivate them to some end, respective to their nature. The spontaneous thrust of the instinctive impulse can suffer modifications as it runs its course. Other sensorial images, perceptions or memories can act as new stimuli affecting the animal's behavior. Moreover, the conflict between two or more instincts can sometimes modify the original impulse.

In man, when two instinctive reactions clash, the intellect determines the best course to follow, and the will then holds one's instinct in check while encouraging the other. With animals that lack intellect and will, when two instinctive impulses clash, the one most favored by circumstances prevails.

To stimuli and clashing instincts, however, we must add another factor: In expressing its affective states, an animal is radically inferior to man.

Since animals lack true reason, their means of expressing their affective states (fear, pleasure, pain, desire, etc.) are limited. Animals lack the rich resources at man's disposal to express his sentiments. Man can adapt his way of talking, writing, gazing, gesturing in untold ways. Animals cannot. Consequently, animals often express their affective states ambiguously. They "borrow," so to speak, the manifestations of the instinct of reproduction to manifest the instincts of dominance, aggressiveness, fear, gregariousness and so on. Another example that comes to mind where animals might be inclined to demonstrate homosexual behavior is long-term captivity.

(Bonobo chimpanzees are a good example of borrowing, using sex to appease or divert aggressive tensions, to establish the lead role for one event or another, or whateverI've seen females gi-gi-rub their privates upon meeting-up after the day's forage. Bonobo chimps also have larger social groups than that of their cousinsI'm guessing that with all that close contactI dunnohsomething's gotta happen. [blithe shrug] Maybe, it's just a bonobo thing.)

Same-sex dogs will mount each other to exhibit dominance, or frustration, or if the mounter smells oestrus on the mountee. Females who are not in heat even sometimes mount females that are in heat. In other species (the further down the kingdom ladder you get) do it out of ambiguity (they can't tell if the intended mate is a mate, competitoror a maybe). :D

Not that I wanna turn this into a debate on gay animalsjust ponying up my two cents. I'm no expertand I'm sure there's probably lots of contrary information from those experts out there, if one cares to look. I don't. I also don't think that everything animals do is applicable and acceptable for humans to engage in.but that's just me. Principlesboth personal, and those based on my Faith---are a part of what motivates my thinking, but mainly, it just doesn't make biological sense to me.

Make no mistake.I am VERY well aware.of the fact that sexual contact has more merits than procreation alone, for people! :)

Nowabout polyandry.well, I have to admit, I do indulge the two man fantasy, like any red-blooded healthy gal would'cept in MY fantasyone's cooking, the other's cleaning. ;) Hee.

Ben

See my post dated 10/20/05; it's titled, Don't Worry, B. happy now! for an answer to question number one.
You've attacked me for answering B. with this one, so you can go ahead and let it apply to you (as in your little world, EVERYTHING seems to apply to you...except, of course, the rules of fair play, and the concept of other people having rights).

For the answer to number twoand, I've said this before.why you're not getting it is beyond me---look at my post dated 11/02/05. It's titled Here are some articles I found The WHOLE POST is two articles that augment each other. Try widening that slit you're looking through to see reality.

(To all the others hereis that post just not showing up? Can anyone else see that post? Or is it possible Ben's computer has a filter of sorts?)

Ah, well, Ben...if you ask again, you'll get basically this same response, if I feel like taking the time to do so. It's not gonna change. So don't piss and moan at me because your attention span is too short to read the whole post.

Now for some questions you won't answer (civilly, at least, honestly, at best):

1.)Why do you insist that I simply MUST applaud, support, and embrace gay marriage, yet you call Shawn a fruit (a term literally synonymous with being gay, since you'll probably play dumb) as an insult?

2.)After the innumerable times you've tried to literally fling gay marriage into the conversation, why do you get all puffed-up n' pissy when I ask you if you're gay? (It was an honest question, after allbased on the frequency of your inquiry.)

3.)Why so offended, in the event I were to actually inquire?

4.)Does this mean that a different set of rules applies to how you're allowed to feel about gay folks, and how I'm supposed to feel about gay folks?

5.)It IS clear, that you don't like the thought of homosexuality applying to you; why then do you support it so avidly?

6.)Is what you are based more on what you'll tolerate, as opposed to your personal stock in yourself (that is, WHO you are)?

7.)Why did you come here, looking to pick an off-topic fight about a very sensitive subject, then get all snippety and offended when you get one? (Especially, after REPEATED pronging!)

8.)Why won't you pick this bullshit fight on another post of your own?

9.)Why do you say I'm full of it and a liar and then turn around and tell me that I've given you all the proof and answers---yet you tell me I've proven nothing? (Note: "Because you ARE!" Isn't an answer...it's an accusation. And you've done it before, copping out seems to be your choice when you're on a question you don't like.)

10.)If I'm CONSTANTLY on and on about the grammar and spelling of others, and that makes all of my posts invalid, doesn't that render your arguments invalid because most of your little snippets of Bush's speeches are grammar and misspoken whoopsies?

11.)Speaking of spelling and grammar whoopsiesif I put EVERYTHING I write through my spell-checker why do I still get spelling errors on my posts?

12.)I've noticed that when B. puts your toes to the coals, you barely respond to himand in the offhand ways you do, you're never as nasty to him as you are to me. Is there a reason for this, or am I to just continue under the supposition that you're more comfortable trying to pick a fight with a woman?

13.)So is it my gender, ACCOMPANIED with my political leanings, that makes me a more logical candidate to quarrel with, or are you singling me out with such obvious prejudice for other reasons?

14.)Why do you feel everyone owes you some sort of explanation for their beliefs, but you refuse to offer anything more than viscosity when the same is expected of you?

Chances are, I'll get some venomous, infected screed, or a poorly done version of an attempted synopsis, if he bothers to answer any at all.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#645 Consumer Comment

to B in Denver

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 30, 2005

For a blow hard left wing Dem, you sure have a whole lot of nothing to say. how long do you sit up nights trying to think up this sort of brain-vomit? You really should pull your head out of your liberal left wing a*s and take in a little oxygen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#644 Consumer Comment

Your brain is a tiny sample of WMD.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Wow! "Put that in your liberal leftist pipe and smoke it!" Pretty strong words from someone who's afraid to reveal his sources. Obviously, you not only "don't give a s**t" if anybody believes you, you "don't give a s**t" that your statements are pure BS. In this case, mostly, it is not your sources that are at fault, it is your intentional misrepresentation of the information that is the lie. Lets take these one by one, shall we?

> 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
Wrong! This was removed by the IAEA at the end of the Gulf War. For some reason, right-wing spin doctors keep trying to make it seem relevant.

> 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents
B - Lie! Chemicals that had been manufactured AFTER 2003 were found in a lab. They COULD be combined to produce toxic agents, but not WMD.

> Chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times more deadly than sarin gas)
B - Spin! A dozen warheads were purchased from a black market peddler. They proved to be remnants from the Iran-Iraq war and, of course, completely inert.

> Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas
B - Spin/Lie! Radiologicals were collected from over 1000 medical and industrial sources. Some were in powdered form. None were meant for dispersal over populated areas.

Here's a suggestion; rather than trying to find or make up "facts" that support the version of reality you'd like to believe in, try finding the reality that exists and change it to be something we'd all like to believe in. But you'll have to put down that crack pipe first.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#643 Consumer Comment

Just for example, here's a tiny sample from a large list of WMDs that have been found in Iraq but suppressed by the elitest left wing media.

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Not only was the materials found, but as I posted earlier, the aircraft capable of delivering them were dug up out of the Iraqi sand also. The sources are reliable and I don't give a s**t if you liberals believe it or not. I tend to think that you will try to discredit any source that shows the truth of things. Put that in your liberal leftist pipe and smoke it!

1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents

Chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times more deadly than sarin gas)

Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#642 Consumer Comment

WMD were found in 2003, inside your head.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 29, 2005

David in OK,

I can't tell whether you're seriously expecting to baffle us with BS, just haven't done your homework, or you're dumb enough to just accept and parrot whatever some right-wing pundit feeds you. Maybe all three. So let me clue you in to a few facts.

In theory, if you exploded one of these shells at the apex of the Superdome in New Orleans, it would affect everyone; some would have permanent neurological damage, a few might die. And it would take 7 Superdomes to hold half a million people. Its interesting that you can quote, however incorrectly, a specific kill figure, but you state the number of shells found as "several." The last I heard, it was 8. Under battlefield conditions, that isn't WMD, its a joke. You'ld be almost as likely to kill a soldier with a direct hit as to poison him with Sarin. And they were all remnants from before the Kuwait invasion, which means any Sarin they may once have contained, has been inert for over 10 years. Compared to the thousands that were destroyed after the Gulf War, these amount to nothing more than a clerical error. As for planes, a) they are not WMD, and b) any plane is capable of carrying WMD; a cropduster would be particularly effective for dispersing nerve agents. Is that what they found buried in the desert, a cropduster? And since there is no mention of planes in UNSCR 687, I will simply assume you have no idea what you're talking about. The one area where they were in violation, their long-range missile program, was in the process of being dismantled under UNMOVIC supervision when President George decided to conduct this little invasion.

On the other hand, the same Security Council Resolutions you say Iraq was violating, required us to share any information we had with the weapons inspectors. If, as Bush claimed, as Powell claimed, as Rumsfeld claimed, we knew precisely where they were supposedly manufacturing these WMD, and we did not share that with the UNMOVIC team, it is we who were in violation. And really, if you wanted to catch Saddam in the act of making WMD, would you just have the weapons inspectors show up one day, or would you announce that we know where they are and in a couple of months, after we take Baghdad, we're going to come get them? This implies that either Bush knew the intel was faulty, or he's just incredibly stupid. And then there are our many violations of the UN charter, such as bombing key military targets in Iraq to soften them up for invasion, months before there was any talk about it, back when we were supposedly fighting a war against terrorism.

Do you people have no idea how paranoid and sophomoric your rants against "the left wing elitest media" make you appear? Where do you suppose I first heard about the Sarin-filled artillery shells? CNN. The news media is after one thing, sensational or controversial news. There's no conspiracy to suppress this information, it simply isn't "news" anymore, and wasn't really "news" when it was first reported. Oh, sure, some of the news will be colored somewhat by the thoughts of the station owners and managers, but in any major outlet, the reporting much more reflects the personalities of the individual reporters and commentators. On CNN, on this issue, I've heard the entire range of opinion.

Of course, I don't need media opinion to answer the question of WMD in Iraq. Bush's special team of investigators have been scouring the country for the last 2 years, and diverting resources from the war effort to his priority mission of finding WMD. And THEY say there are none, and no evidence of any recent attempts to manufacture them. That's all the opinion I need.

You know, this country is founded on the concept of a free press challenging the political status quo. Why is it that with you neocons in power, suddenly any voice challenging the government is seditious and supporting the enemy, and anyone with a difference of opinion is branded a coward and a traitor, no matter their record of service to this country? I suppose by your lights, the negative press coverage of President Clinton, and that mockery of a judicial investigation where he was tried and convicted in the kangaroo court of popular media opinion, was also seditious and unpatriotic? Well, if you're waiting for the major media to tow the mark, and report only the news you want to hear, don't hold your breath.

Since you refuse to learn from history, it is likely to shoot you in the butt. It will report that the Republican Party was responsible for the fall of western civilization, by giving all the keys to multinational corporations.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#641 Consumer Comment

Bush lovers are either super rich or retarded!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 29, 2005

I find it hard to believe we have seen Donald Rumsfeld and Saddam shaking hands during George H. Bushs Presidency. We also learned that the United States gave Iraq weapons to fight Iran. The question remains what weapons? We then go after Iraq for weapons of mass destruction after George W. Bush gets in office by rigging election with help of Jeb baby, George W's brother, Gov. of Florida and Katherine Harris, the INFAMOUS vote counter in Florida. Why are we at war in Iraq when the Taliban took credit for the twin towers? The Taliban is Afghans=Osama bin Laden, by the way the Bin ladens own a huge percentage of USA stock. People you need to get your head out of the clouds. Bush invaded Iraq for oil, and to redeem his dads failure, also to try to lay 9/11 blame at Saddam, while we all know Osama Bin Ladden was responsible. Maybe the U.S.A. Government flew unmanned aircrafts into the trade centers to make the US Citizens furious, furious enough to invade a sovereign nation, just because a President said we have to. The word Bush is EQUALL to Hitler.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#640 Consumer Comment

Hey Canada... You still suck!!!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 28, 2005

Dateline Toronto;

"A corruption scandal forced a vote of no-confidence Monday that toppled Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority government, triggering an unusual election campaign during the Christmas holidays.

Canada's three opposition parties, which control a majority in Parliament, voted against Martin's government, claiming his Liberal Party no longer has the moral authority to lead the nation.

The loss means an election for all 308 seats in the lower House of Commons, likely on Jan. 23. Martin and his Cabinet would continue to govern until then.

Opposition leaders last week called for the no-confidence vote after Martin rejected their demands to dissolve Parliament in January and hold early elections in February. Monday's vote follows a flurry of spending announcements in Ottawa last week, with the government trying to advance its agenda ahead of its demise.

Martin is expected to dissolve the House of Commons on Tuesday.

Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper joined with the New Democratic and Bloc Quebecois parties to bring down the government prompting the first Christmas and winter campaign in mostly Christian Canada in 26 years. Recent polls have given the Liberals a slight lead over the Conservatives, with the New Democrats in third place.

Majority government unlikely
The same surveys suggest the Bloc Quebecois would sweep the French-speaking province of Quebec, making a majority government unlikely no matter which party wins the most seats.

Harper would become prime minister if the Conservatives receive the most seats in Parliament. He favors tax cuts and opposed Martin's successful bill to legalize same-sex marriage throughout Canada.

The opposition is banking on the public's disgust with a corruption scandal involving the misuse of funds targeted for a national unity program in Quebec.

An initial investigation absolved Martin of wrongdoing but accused senior Liberal members of taking kickbacks and misspending tens of millions of dollars in public funds.

The government ran into peril this month when it lost the support of the New Democratic Party, whose backing earlier this year helped Martin escape a previous no-confidence motion by a single vote.

New Democrat leader Jack Layton said he hadn't received enough assurances the Liberal Party would fight the increased use of private health care in Canada. Martin made the deal for support from Layton's leftist party last spring by pledging $3.6 billion in social spending and promising to delay billions in corporate tax cuts.

Martin appears prepared to take his chances with a holiday campaign and blamed his opponents for any inconvenience to the predominantly Christian electorate.

He had promised to call an election within 30 days of the release of a follow-up report on the corruption scandal. The document is expected Feb. 1, which would have meant elections in the first week of April, a time that suits Canadians better than the bitterly cold and busy holiday season.

Break in campaigns expected for holidays
Although no formal agreement is in place, all the parties are likely to agree to a pause in the campaign around the Christmas and New Year holidays. The campaign is expected to start Tuesday, after Parliament is dissolved.

Grace Skogstad, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, said she believes Canadians will pay little attention to the election until after the New Year, so Martin's opponents are unlikely to face a backlash for forcing a holiday campaign.

"It's going to be those last three weeks after Jan. 1 that are going to matter," said Skogstad, who believes the Liberals will win another minority government. "For the Liberals, they are going to try to put all the focus on the economy, which is doing phenomenally well."

Unemployment in Canada is at a 30-year low, and Canada runs a budget surplus.

Andrew Stark, a political science professor at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, also maintained that the campaign would not be decided until the final days. Stark, however, believed the Conservatives will win a minority government if Canadians view another Liberal and New Democrat coalition as being unaccountable with tax money.

The last time a Canadian political campaign coincided with the holiday season was in 1979, when Joe Clark's minority Conservative government was toppled just weeks before Christmas. That vote was delayed until February, however, when Pierre Trudeau and the Liberals took back Parliament.

The latest collapse comes 17 months after an election that turned a Liberal majority into a fragile minority on June 28, 2004."

I'll paraphrase the whole story for you James, et al. Even the Canadians hate Liberals.

AAAAHHHHHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHA!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#639 Consumer Comment

WMDs WERE found in 2003, shortly after we went into Iraq.

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 28, 2005

Artillery shells loaded with sarin gas. One shell holds enough to kill 500k people. Several shells found. Also, planes capable of carrying WMDs found buried in sand. This and many other things that violated the UN sanctions. The left wing elitest media refuses to report on them. They don't want to show anything that might "validate" the reasons to ivade Iraq. And the Left Wing Liberals just can't let that happen. Too bad for you liberals; the word was out 2 years ago. Now you and the leftist media floods the airwaves with lies and negativity. And the elitest media is seditious in the way they report the news. Why don't they and all you liberals just hand the keys of the country over to the islamic extremists and bend over, spread your cheeks, and embrace their fanatical doctrine. All this anti-government crap you're spewing encourages the savages to do more and more. Won't be long before the muslims in the US get their code word from UBL to rise up and start blowing us up here in the US. Keep all your irrelevant history diatribes to yourself; history will likely show that the Democratic party was responsible for the destruction of western society by handing our home over to islamic savages. Thanks heaps.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#638 Consumer Comment

Still waiting.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 28, 2005

1. What exactly is IT that you think is being taken away from you religious nuts?

2. Where is my proof about Islam being forced in CA schools. (and once again....dont hide it deeeeeeep in one of your long winded posts)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#637 Consumer Comment

Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 26, 2005

It occurs to me that the argument against the war being about oil, because its too expensive, is fundamentally flawed. While its true that the war is costing far, far more than any profit we could hope to derive from whatever oil we might squeeze out of the deal, we have to remember that the people reaping the profits(oil companies) are not the same people who are paying for the war(taxpayers). And we need not search too deeply to discover which side of the equation President George and his Congressional Posse favor.

_______________
Vera,

Rhino vs Humm-Vee. ROFL! Get out of the way, Patrick!

_____________
Ben,

You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide. And now, you try to use the (oh, my, how surprising) fact that she's not willing to play by your rules as evidence that her arguments are without merit, and that she has something to hide. I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong by coming up with something even more absurd.

Btw, "Dark Age" was originally coined by a 15th century historian, referring to the dearth of literature from the period. It was adopted by modern historians to refer to the general lack of any information from the period, dark meaning not illuminated. Today, it has been completely abandoned, both because we now have quite a bit of knowledge about the time, and because of the unfortunate identification in popular culture with the more sinister meanings of darkness.

_____________________
Shawn,

In your discussion of various cultural practices, you repeatedly ask if long-standing acceptance makes them right. Am I to infer from this that you think they are wrong? I ask because, while you do not provide any evidence or specific argument that they are wrong, your general tone and your reference to "many social ills" would seem to indicate that you include these practices in that category. This would of course be a purely religious sentiment, as there could be no rational (in the scientific sense) argument to support this commonality. From a strictly scientific perspective, those things that promote propagation and social development within a culture are the 'right' things for that culture. For instance, in a cultural milieu where men significantly outnumber women, a family pattern of multiple husbands is a natural development, and a better alternative biologically and socially than the men killing each other or becoming homosexual. In ancient biblical times, a man was expected to marry his widowed sister-in-law. I would certainly hope that if you were the last man on earth, with 5 women, you could rise to the occasion and shed your cultural taboos in the interest of preserving the species.

Problems arise when diverse cultures meet or when conditions change that make a practice or outlook unresponsive to the needs of the community. For instance, in the above example, if many of the men were killed in a war, causing a reversal in the female/male ratio, it would cause a cultural 'train wreck'. All the social expectations, status based on number of husbands, etc. would be wiped away. In our own country we have many examples. I'm sure many Jews who strictly follow the Kashrut find cheeseburger commercials as offensive as you would find commercials for a homosexual dating service, and would have as much biblical support for their revulsion as you for yours. My mother becomes nauseated at the thought of oral sex. When we explained it to my grandmother during a Phil Donahue show, she was completely stunned, the possibility had simply never occurred to her. The clash of cultures meeting is probably what gave rise to the world of Islam as we know it today. As Christian culture spread into the Middle East, many groups were offended by the pagan worship they encountered, and felt completely justified in destroying their temples and killing their priests. It is quite likely that adherents of many diverse religions came together under Muhammad's "banner" to repel the Christians, who had become invaders rather than neighbors. We are experiencing the ultimate culture clash today, around the world, and in our own country, as information exchange and travel become global. Predictably, there are two extreme poles guiding the way we deal with these clashes. One says we must accept and adapt to everyone else's way of life. The other says sod off, its my way or the highway. One says peace at all cost, the other says, "How'd you like a global thermoknucklear sandwich?"

With our ability to completely destroy our planet, I feel it is more important than ever before to carefully separate those attributes that truly have cross-cultural applicability from those that are merely the ingrained habits we have become used to. A truly difficult prospect in that our nervous systems are not naturally suited to this type of objective analysis. You make the mistake, based on your cultural prejudice, of assuming that any behavior which has a sexual aspect, necessarily has a sexual motivation, and a perverse one at that. This is simply not true. The coming-of-age ceremonies you mention are truly that, and something we probably need more of in our culture, not that I'm suggesting in any way that we adopt those you mention, they are definitely not a good fit. The sexual component comes from a belief in the life-creating power of sex, and from a recognition that the children have become adults and are now initiated into the "tribe" with access to these mysteries and responsibility for their own actions. It is not, as you seem to believe, a sublimated desire to bugger children, and such accusation would probably get your throat slit. I have met many people who live together in groupings that are considered unusual. They come together because they love each other and, out of that love, desire to be a family. It is rough, because it is not the cultural norm, and many break apart because of that pressure, but I can assure you they understand what love is and hold it far more dear than many 'traditional' couples, because they have to fight people like you for it every day of their lives. Your insistence that it is a "social ill" masquerading as a love relationship not only insults these fine people, it degrades and cheapens the very concept of love to being only what will fit between here and here in your personal set of cultural taboos. And just because a lot of people in our society agree with you, does that make it right?

Btw, interesting synopsis of history from the 5th century onward. Of course, there is nothing absolute about history, at least from our perspective, there is only our agreed interpretation of what we know of history, which we can't really fully relate to, since we don't have the same nervous systems our ancestors did. Oh sure, we can say with some certainty that Vesuvius erupted and buried Pompeii, we have physical evidence, but what that meant at the time to the people, what effect it had on surrounding cultures, we can speculate based on fragmentary evidence, but we can never be certain. We can't even agree on what happens currently when witnessing physical events, because we all abstract them differently. Ask any group of x people what happened, and you will get at least x/5 different accounts. And as the people think about it, the difference will approach x very closely. I'll bet you did it just so you could say Visigoth. God, I love that word. It conjures such a strong archetype for me, and it just sounds really cool. Visigoth! Oh, and there is no natural mechanism rejecting homosexuality, contrary to what your internal logic tells you. In fact, nature abounds with examples of animals that practice homosexuality and 'polyandry', especially when one sex dramatically outnumbers the other. Again, it is generally a better model for survival than warring with each other over existing mates. Not to mention plants that just sit around waiting for bees to fly around stimulating their sex organs in an orgy of pollen. Now, that's a practice I'd like to put an achoo! I mean put an end to!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#636 Consumer Comment

Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 26, 2005

It occurs to me that the argument against the war being about oil, because its too expensive, is fundamentally flawed. While its true that the war is costing far, far more than any profit we could hope to derive from whatever oil we might squeeze out of the deal, we have to remember that the people reaping the profits(oil companies) are not the same people who are paying for the war(taxpayers). And we need not search too deeply to discover which side of the equation President George and his Congressional Posse favor.

_______________
Vera,

Rhino vs Humm-Vee. ROFL! Get out of the way, Patrick!

_____________
Ben,

You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide. And now, you try to use the (oh, my, how surprising) fact that she's not willing to play by your rules as evidence that her arguments are without merit, and that she has something to hide. I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong by coming up with something even more absurd.

Btw, "Dark Age" was originally coined by a 15th century historian, referring to the dearth of literature from the period. It was adopted by modern historians to refer to the general lack of any information from the period, dark meaning not illuminated. Today, it has been completely abandoned, both because we now have quite a bit of knowledge about the time, and because of the unfortunate identification in popular culture with the more sinister meanings of darkness.

_____________________
Shawn,

In your discussion of various cultural practices, you repeatedly ask if long-standing acceptance makes them right. Am I to infer from this that you think they are wrong? I ask because, while you do not provide any evidence or specific argument that they are wrong, your general tone and your reference to "many social ills" would seem to indicate that you include these practices in that category. This would of course be a purely religious sentiment, as there could be no rational (in the scientific sense) argument to support this commonality. From a strictly scientific perspective, those things that promote propagation and social development within a culture are the 'right' things for that culture. For instance, in a cultural milieu where men significantly outnumber women, a family pattern of multiple husbands is a natural development, and a better alternative biologically and socially than the men killing each other or becoming homosexual. In ancient biblical times, a man was expected to marry his widowed sister-in-law. I would certainly hope that if you were the last man on earth, with 5 women, you could rise to the occasion and shed your cultural taboos in the interest of preserving the species.

Problems arise when diverse cultures meet or when conditions change that make a practice or outlook unresponsive to the needs of the community. For instance, in the above example, if many of the men were killed in a war, causing a reversal in the female/male ratio, it would cause a cultural 'train wreck'. All the social expectations, status based on number of husbands, etc. would be wiped away. In our own country we have many examples. I'm sure many Jews who strictly follow the Kashrut find cheeseburger commercials as offensive as you would find commercials for a homosexual dating service, and would have as much biblical support for their revulsion as you for yours. My mother becomes nauseated at the thought of oral sex. When we explained it to my grandmother during a Phil Donahue show, she was completely stunned, the possibility had simply never occurred to her. The clash of cultures meeting is probably what gave rise to the world of Islam as we know it today. As Christian culture spread into the Middle East, many groups were offended by the pagan worship they encountered, and felt completely justified in destroying their temples and killing their priests. It is quite likely that adherents of many diverse religions came together under Muhammad's "banner" to repel the Christians, who had become invaders rather than neighbors. We are experiencing the ultimate culture clash today, around the world, and in our own country, as information exchange and travel become global. Predictably, there are two extreme poles guiding the way we deal with these clashes. One says we must accept and adapt to everyone else's way of life. The other says sod off, its my way or the highway. One says peace at all cost, the other says, "How'd you like a global thermoknucklear sandwich?"

With our ability to completely destroy our planet, I feel it is more important than ever before to carefully separate those attributes that truly have cross-cultural applicability from those that are merely the ingrained habits we have become used to. A truly difficult prospect in that our nervous systems are not naturally suited to this type of objective analysis. You make the mistake, based on your cultural prejudice, of assuming that any behavior which has a sexual aspect, necessarily has a sexual motivation, and a perverse one at that. This is simply not true. The coming-of-age ceremonies you mention are truly that, and something we probably need more of in our culture, not that I'm suggesting in any way that we adopt those you mention, they are definitely not a good fit. The sexual component comes from a belief in the life-creating power of sex, and from a recognition that the children have become adults and are now initiated into the "tribe" with access to these mysteries and responsibility for their own actions. It is not, as you seem to believe, a sublimated desire to bugger children, and such accusation would probably get your throat slit. I have met many people who live together in groupings that are considered unusual. They come together because they love each other and, out of that love, desire to be a family. It is rough, because it is not the cultural norm, and many break apart because of that pressure, but I can assure you they understand what love is and hold it far more dear than many 'traditional' couples, because they have to fight people like you for it every day of their lives. Your insistence that it is a "social ill" masquerading as a love relationship not only insults these fine people, it degrades and cheapens the very concept of love to being only what will fit between here and here in your personal set of cultural taboos. And just because a lot of people in our society agree with you, does that make it right?

Btw, interesting synopsis of history from the 5th century onward. Of course, there is nothing absolute about history, at least from our perspective, there is only our agreed interpretation of what we know of history, which we can't really fully relate to, since we don't have the same nervous systems our ancestors did. Oh sure, we can say with some certainty that Vesuvius erupted and buried Pompeii, we have physical evidence, but what that meant at the time to the people, what effect it had on surrounding cultures, we can speculate based on fragmentary evidence, but we can never be certain. We can't even agree on what happens currently when witnessing physical events, because we all abstract them differently. Ask any group of x people what happened, and you will get at least x/5 different accounts. And as the people think about it, the difference will approach x very closely. I'll bet you did it just so you could say Visigoth. God, I love that word. It conjures such a strong archetype for me, and it just sounds really cool. Visigoth! Oh, and there is no natural mechanism rejecting homosexuality, contrary to what your internal logic tells you. In fact, nature abounds with examples of animals that practice homosexuality and 'polyandry', especially when one sex dramatically outnumbers the other. Again, it is generally a better model for survival than warring with each other over existing mates. Not to mention plants that just sit around waiting for bees to fly around stimulating their sex organs in an orgy of pollen. Now, that's a practice I'd like to put an achoo! I mean put an end to!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#635 Consumer Comment

Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 26, 2005

It occurs to me that the argument against the war being about oil, because its too expensive, is fundamentally flawed. While its true that the war is costing far, far more than any profit we could hope to derive from whatever oil we might squeeze out of the deal, we have to remember that the people reaping the profits(oil companies) are not the same people who are paying for the war(taxpayers). And we need not search too deeply to discover which side of the equation President George and his Congressional Posse favor.

_______________
Vera,

Rhino vs Humm-Vee. ROFL! Get out of the way, Patrick!

_____________
Ben,

You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide. And now, you try to use the (oh, my, how surprising) fact that she's not willing to play by your rules as evidence that her arguments are without merit, and that she has something to hide. I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong by coming up with something even more absurd.

Btw, "Dark Age" was originally coined by a 15th century historian, referring to the dearth of literature from the period. It was adopted by modern historians to refer to the general lack of any information from the period, dark meaning not illuminated. Today, it has been completely abandoned, both because we now have quite a bit of knowledge about the time, and because of the unfortunate identification in popular culture with the more sinister meanings of darkness.

_____________________
Shawn,

In your discussion of various cultural practices, you repeatedly ask if long-standing acceptance makes them right. Am I to infer from this that you think they are wrong? I ask because, while you do not provide any evidence or specific argument that they are wrong, your general tone and your reference to "many social ills" would seem to indicate that you include these practices in that category. This would of course be a purely religious sentiment, as there could be no rational (in the scientific sense) argument to support this commonality. From a strictly scientific perspective, those things that promote propagation and social development within a culture are the 'right' things for that culture. For instance, in a cultural milieu where men significantly outnumber women, a family pattern of multiple husbands is a natural development, and a better alternative biologically and socially than the men killing each other or becoming homosexual. In ancient biblical times, a man was expected to marry his widowed sister-in-law. I would certainly hope that if you were the last man on earth, with 5 women, you could rise to the occasion and shed your cultural taboos in the interest of preserving the species.

Problems arise when diverse cultures meet or when conditions change that make a practice or outlook unresponsive to the needs of the community. For instance, in the above example, if many of the men were killed in a war, causing a reversal in the female/male ratio, it would cause a cultural 'train wreck'. All the social expectations, status based on number of husbands, etc. would be wiped away. In our own country we have many examples. I'm sure many Jews who strictly follow the Kashrut find cheeseburger commercials as offensive as you would find commercials for a homosexual dating service, and would have as much biblical support for their revulsion as you for yours. My mother becomes nauseated at the thought of oral sex. When we explained it to my grandmother during a Phil Donahue show, she was completely stunned, the possibility had simply never occurred to her. The clash of cultures meeting is probably what gave rise to the world of Islam as we know it today. As Christian culture spread into the Middle East, many groups were offended by the pagan worship they encountered, and felt completely justified in destroying their temples and killing their priests. It is quite likely that adherents of many diverse religions came together under Muhammad's "banner" to repel the Christians, who had become invaders rather than neighbors. We are experiencing the ultimate culture clash today, around the world, and in our own country, as information exchange and travel become global. Predictably, there are two extreme poles guiding the way we deal with these clashes. One says we must accept and adapt to everyone else's way of life. The other says sod off, its my way or the highway. One says peace at all cost, the other says, "How'd you like a global thermoknucklear sandwich?"

With our ability to completely destroy our planet, I feel it is more important than ever before to carefully separate those attributes that truly have cross-cultural applicability from those that are merely the ingrained habits we have become used to. A truly difficult prospect in that our nervous systems are not naturally suited to this type of objective analysis. You make the mistake, based on your cultural prejudice, of assuming that any behavior which has a sexual aspect, necessarily has a sexual motivation, and a perverse one at that. This is simply not true. The coming-of-age ceremonies you mention are truly that, and something we probably need more of in our culture, not that I'm suggesting in any way that we adopt those you mention, they are definitely not a good fit. The sexual component comes from a belief in the life-creating power of sex, and from a recognition that the children have become adults and are now initiated into the "tribe" with access to these mysteries and responsibility for their own actions. It is not, as you seem to believe, a sublimated desire to bugger children, and such accusation would probably get your throat slit. I have met many people who live together in groupings that are considered unusual. They come together because they love each other and, out of that love, desire to be a family. It is rough, because it is not the cultural norm, and many break apart because of that pressure, but I can assure you they understand what love is and hold it far more dear than many 'traditional' couples, because they have to fight people like you for it every day of their lives. Your insistence that it is a "social ill" masquerading as a love relationship not only insults these fine people, it degrades and cheapens the very concept of love to being only what will fit between here and here in your personal set of cultural taboos. And just because a lot of people in our society agree with you, does that make it right?

Btw, interesting synopsis of history from the 5th century onward. Of course, there is nothing absolute about history, at least from our perspective, there is only our agreed interpretation of what we know of history, which we can't really fully relate to, since we don't have the same nervous systems our ancestors did. Oh sure, we can say with some certainty that Vesuvius erupted and buried Pompeii, we have physical evidence, but what that meant at the time to the people, what effect it had on surrounding cultures, we can speculate based on fragmentary evidence, but we can never be certain. We can't even agree on what happens currently when witnessing physical events, because we all abstract them differently. Ask any group of x people what happened, and you will get at least x/5 different accounts. And as the people think about it, the difference will approach x very closely. I'll bet you did it just so you could say Visigoth. God, I love that word. It conjures such a strong archetype for me, and it just sounds really cool. Visigoth! Oh, and there is no natural mechanism rejecting homosexuality, contrary to what your internal logic tells you. In fact, nature abounds with examples of animals that practice homosexuality and 'polyandry', especially when one sex dramatically outnumbers the other. Again, it is generally a better model for survival than warring with each other over existing mates. Not to mention plants that just sit around waiting for bees to fly around stimulating their sex organs in an orgy of pollen. Now, that's a practice I'd like to put an achoo! I mean put an end to!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#634 Consumer Comment

Reconsidering the price of oil argument.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 26, 2005

It occurs to me that the argument against the war being about oil, because its too expensive, is fundamentally flawed. While its true that the war is costing far, far more than any profit we could hope to derive from whatever oil we might squeeze out of the deal, we have to remember that the people reaping the profits(oil companies) are not the same people who are paying for the war(taxpayers). And we need not search too deeply to discover which side of the equation President George and his Congressional Posse favor.

_______________
Vera,

Rhino vs Humm-Vee. ROFL! Get out of the way, Patrick!

_____________
Ben,

You have reached the height of absurdity. You cannot post a sentence to Vera that is not laced with invective, yet you accuse her of doing all the mud-slinging, and react with mock surprise when she does not treat you to the same civility she does others. If this is a contest to see who can produce the most unsubstantiated slander, you're winning by a landslide. And now, you try to use the (oh, my, how surprising) fact that she's not willing to play by your rules as evidence that her arguments are without merit, and that she has something to hide. I say you've reached the height, but experience says you'll prove me wrong by coming up with something even more absurd.

Btw, "Dark Age" was originally coined by a 15th century historian, referring to the dearth of literature from the period. It was adopted by modern historians to refer to the general lack of any information from the period, dark meaning not illuminated. Today, it has been completely abandoned, both because we now have quite a bit of knowledge about the time, and because of the unfortunate identification in popular culture with the more sinister meanings of darkness.

_____________________
Shawn,

In your discussion of various cultural practices, you repeatedly ask if long-standing acceptance makes them right. Am I to infer from this that you think they are wrong? I ask because, while you do not provide any evidence or specific argument that they are wrong, your general tone and your reference to "many social ills" would seem to indicate that you include these practices in that category. This would of course be a purely religious sentiment, as there could be no rational (in the scientific sense) argument to support this commonality. From a strictly scientific perspective, those things that promote propagation and social development within a culture are the 'right' things for that culture. For instance, in a cultural milieu where men significantly outnumber women, a family pattern of multiple husbands is a natural development, and a better alternative biologically and socially than the men killing each other or becoming homosexual. In ancient biblical times, a man was expected to marry his widowed sister-in-law. I would certainly hope that if you were the last man on earth, with 5 women, you could rise to the occasion and shed your cultural taboos in the interest of preserving the species.

Problems arise when diverse cultures meet or when conditions change that make a practice or outlook unresponsive to the needs of the community. For instance, in the above example, if many of the men were killed in a war, causing a reversal in the female/male ratio, it would cause a cultural 'train wreck'. All the social expectations, status based on number of husbands, etc. would be wiped away. In our own country we have many examples. I'm sure many Jews who strictly follow the Kashrut find cheeseburger commercials as offensive as you would find commercials for a homosexual dating service, and would have as much biblical support for their revulsion as you for yours. My mother becomes nauseated at the thought of oral sex. When we explained it to my grandmother during a Phil Donahue show, she was completely stunned, the possibility had simply never occurred to her. The clash of cultures meeting is probably what gave rise to the world of Islam as we know it today. As Christian culture spread into the Middle East, many groups were offended by the pagan worship they encountered, and felt completely justified in destroying their temples and killing their priests. It is quite likely that adherents of many diverse religions came together under Muhammad's "banner" to repel the Christians, who had become invaders rather than neighbors. We are experiencing the ultimate culture clash today, around the world, and in our own country, as information exchange and travel become global. Predictably, there are two extreme poles guiding the way we deal with these clashes. One says we must accept and adapt to everyone else's way of life. The other says sod off, its my way or the highway. One says peace at all cost, the other says, "How'd you like a global thermoknucklear sandwich?"

With our ability to completely destroy our planet, I feel it is more important than ever before to carefully separate those attributes that truly have cross-cultural applicability from those that are merely the ingrained habits we have become used to. A truly difficult prospect in that our nervous systems are not naturally suited to this type of objective analysis. You make the mistake, based on your cultural prejudice, of assuming that any behavior which has a sexual aspect, necessarily has a sexual motivation, and a perverse one at that. This is simply not true. The coming-of-age ceremonies you mention are truly that, and something we probably need more of in our culture, not that I'm suggesting in any way that we adopt those you mention, they are definitely not a good fit. The sexual component comes from a belief in the life-creating power of sex, and from a recognition that the children have become adults and are now initiated into the "tribe" with access to these mysteries and responsibility for their own actions. It is not, as you seem to believe, a sublimated desire to bugger children, and such accusation would probably get your throat slit. I have met many people who live together in groupings that are considered unusual. They come together because they love each other and, out of that love, desire to be a family. It is rough, because it is not the cultural norm, and many break apart because of that pressure, but I can assure you they understand what love is and hold it far more dear than many 'traditional' couples, because they have to fight people like you for it every day of their lives. Your insistence that it is a "social ill" masquerading as a love relationship not only insults these fine people, it degrades and cheapens the very concept of love to being only what will fit between here and here in your personal set of cultural taboos. And just because a lot of people in our society agree with you, does that make it right?

Btw, interesting synopsis of history from the 5th century onward. Of course, there is nothing absolute about history, at least from our perspective, there is only our agreed interpretation of what we know of history, which we can't really fully relate to, since we don't have the same nervous systems our ancestors did. Oh sure, we can say with some certainty that Vesuvius erupted and buried Pompeii, we have physical evidence, but what that meant at the time to the people, what effect it had on surrounding cultures, we can speculate based on fragmentary evidence, but we can never be certain. We can't even agree on what happens currently when witnessing physical events, because we all abstract them differently. Ask any group of x people what happened, and you will get at least x/5 different accounts. And as the people think about it, the difference will approach x very closely. I'll bet you did it just so you could say Visigoth. God, I love that word. It conjures such a strong archetype for me, and it just sounds really cool. Visigoth! Oh, and there is no natural mechanism rejecting homosexuality, contrary to what your internal logic tells you. In fact, nature abounds with examples of animals that practice homosexuality and 'polyandry', especially when one sex dramatically outnumbers the other. Again, it is generally a better model for survival than warring with each other over existing mates. Not to mention plants that just sit around waiting for bees to fly around stimulating their sex organs in an orgy of pollen. Now, that's a practice I'd like to put an achoo! I mean put an end to!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#633 Consumer Comment

yooo-h*o, hey boo h*o. . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 25, 2005

Do you read???? I haven't used anything religious as a basis for my posts, and still you come whining about religion. You ask me to prove things I haven't said, all the while ignoring the proof I offer! I tell ya what boo-h*o . . . it's time for you to start backing up your allegations with more than your usual blather. If you want to use my words, then quote me. If you want to debate, provide more than opinion . . . oh, wait, bullshit and spin is your mantra. . . O.K. then, just be specific on where history is wrong, and I'll change it for you. Schmuck!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#632 Consumer Comment

Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 24, 2005

1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?
B - WMD is about the only issue I can think of that could have justified the war. And, btw, its not technically a war.

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?
B - Just because we didn't find them doesn't mean they weren't there. He probably gave them to his mortal enemies just before Shokanaw. That might seem to some that in starting the war, we caused the very thing we went to war to prevent, but even if that were one of the true ironies of these kinds of complicated negotiations, there's still the fact that he was an evil dictator, and junk like that. Anyway, BJ Clinton said they had them, too, and two rights can't make a wrong. Oh, wait, that's wrong, BJ is a left... a right and a left can't make a... we won't get fooled again!

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?
B - I can safely say that whether or not WMD are ever found, I will support Bush's call as much as I ever did.

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?
B - Yes, that decision should rest with the President. I'm sure he has nothing to hide, and would only refuse to release them if national security were at stake.

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?
B - A qualified yes, given the fact we bungled our way into the situation in the first place. Working with the UN to 'keep the peace' and strengthen the new government is the only reasonable course of action.

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?
B - No. Can you explain why you feel his current poll numbers should have any bearing on my previous answer?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?
B - If the mission was to depose Saddam Hussein, kill his sons, foster civil unrest and terrorism, and upgrade the oil fields with modern equipment, then I'd say we've done a bang-up job. Cleaning up the mess is, after all, a mission for the UN, and we obviously never included it in the plans for the original mission.

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?
B - Probably more. Those damnfool liberals, even in defeat, keep trying go give people rights the Constitution doesn't guarantee. Like the right of all people to fair and equal treatment under the law. Now, where do you see that in the Constitution, huh?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?
B - You must mean rights like, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...", or, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...", or, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, ...and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." Now, those are rights the Constitution does guarantee, but I suppose if those liberals are going to demand rights that aren't in the Constitution, its only fair that we take back a few that are. Besides, we are in a state of constant danger, right? Now that I think about it, your aura does have a bit of an orange tint; I think an anonymous tip to the FBI might be in order.

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"
B - No. The Constitution was created to establish a central government, and to define its structure and operation.

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?
B - Only when those things clearly and specifically threaten our security or our rights, such as Amendment 3, "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner...", or Amendment 13, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, ...shall exist within the United States..." I would never approve of using the Constitution to limit the rights of specific groups of people.

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?
B - Sure, about as much as I believe in objectivity from a subjective nervous system. Its a great goal to strive for, and I truly believe that those who seek more religious influence in government are, in the end, cutting their own throats, or those of their children. But lets face it, we are a government of the people, and the hope that people can leave their religion at home is a leap of faith indeed, nor would we probably want them to, completely. You would not have to worry about Christians in this regard if we actually followed the faith we profess. Jesus recognized a complete separation of church and state. He advocated a private life of introspection and devotion, and a public life of humility, love, and servitude. His message was that HE would change the hearts and minds of men from within. There is no biblical authority for the collective bullying many are engaged in, and certainly no authority for the demented, 'worldly' politics they're willing to play to get their way. And its not about their right to practice their religion, its a self-centered and self-aggrandizing attempt to subvert God's will and force their way of life and their vision of perfection on the rest of us. It is not a sign of their devotion to God, it is an attempt to use their religion as a crass political tool. And the leaders are not shepherds, they are wolves in lamb's clothing. They'll probably arrive at the pearly gates en masse, loudly proclaiming the millions of souls they brought to the Lord, and all the monuments they built in his honor, and St. Peter will say, "Sorry, not one of you is on the guest list. Fang! Phyllis! Escort these gentlemen to the path 'down the mountain', please." Of course, when I arrive, he'll probably say, "Oh, sorry, the answer we were looking for was 'meek', not 'shirk'. Fang!"

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?
B - No, there are two, the Moneytarians, and the Church of the Enormous I.

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?
B - No, I would say morals arise from a combination of childhood training, and the adult recognition that one may have duties and responsibilities to oneself, one's fellows, one's ancestors, one's descendants, and others. Religion and fairy tales sometimes help to clarify, or at least codify, and reinforce these morals.

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?
B - No, but they have no interesting stories about where they came from, nor any excuse when they f**k up.

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?
B - God, no. Who would I have to argue with? But I certainly believe they are the ultimate religious values, and all would benefit from adopting them. You can read all about my religious philosophy in my new book, "B. (All You Can Be)."

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?
B - No comment.

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?
B - My religious values do not disapprove of gay marriage on moral grounds, and have no comment on secular grounds.

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.
B - It has in the past and may in the future.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.
B - Inasmuch as it would affect my gay friends (I would be attending a lot of weddings), and make significant changes in society.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?
B - I think that a majority of the first immigrants to this country from Europe belonged to Christian sects and that a majority of the current population would identify themselves as Christians.

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?
B - Only when they're not superseded by his political values. This guy is the king of the flip-flop. And he obviously has no qualms about bearing false witness against his opponents in his campaign strategy.

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?
B - I think this is an absurd question. If you want someone who completely ignores their moral and religious values when making decisions, vote for a robot. Hmmm... Come to think of it, with a little reprogramming, Robby the robot could do a fair imitation of Dubya. "Warning! My friends in &LOCATION, we are all in danger. (Waving arms) Danger! Danger, my friends! Orange Alert! Orange Alert!" A more relevant question would be if I think it constitutional for him to make decisions that favor others' religious views.

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?
B - I have no problem with the government funding a Christian institution, as opposed to any other private institution, for providing government services, provided they are capable and are required to provide a paper trail. On the other hand, I think its absurd to give churches blanket tax exemption. They should pay the same sales taxes, real estate taxes and income taxes that everyone else does. The only assets that should be exempt are those 100% dedicated to providing charity. Same rules everyone else has to live by.

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?
B - Same as #28.

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?
B - No.

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?
B - To be fair, since I didn't hear him make the statement, don't have the context, the tone of voice he said it in, etc., it is hard to make a judgment call. On the face of it, I think it displays a callous disregard for the Constitution and the American people. But they are two very different people. One earned his cynicism through a lifetime of political and government service, the other had it shoved up his nose on a silver spoon. I believe Bush Sr. to be perfectly capable of dealing with people he personally despises in a (mostly) fair and above board manner. I do not believe Junior has that depth of character.

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?
B - I think he is very selective on who he unites and who he divides.

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?
B - Isn't that what doctors do with their staff just prior to performing an operation?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)
B - Middle-aged.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#631 Consumer Comment

Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 24, 2005

1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?
B - WMD is about the only issue I can think of that could have justified the war. And, btw, its not technically a war.

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?
B - Just because we didn't find them doesn't mean they weren't there. He probably gave them to his mortal enemies just before Shokanaw. That might seem to some that in starting the war, we caused the very thing we went to war to prevent, but even if that were one of the true ironies of these kinds of complicated negotiations, there's still the fact that he was an evil dictator, and junk like that. Anyway, BJ Clinton said they had them, too, and two rights can't make a wrong. Oh, wait, that's wrong, BJ is a left... a right and a left can't make a... we won't get fooled again!

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?
B - I can safely say that whether or not WMD are ever found, I will support Bush's call as much as I ever did.

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?
B - Yes, that decision should rest with the President. I'm sure he has nothing to hide, and would only refuse to release them if national security were at stake.

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?
B - A qualified yes, given the fact we bungled our way into the situation in the first place. Working with the UN to 'keep the peace' and strengthen the new government is the only reasonable course of action.

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?
B - No. Can you explain why you feel his current poll numbers should have any bearing on my previous answer?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?
B - If the mission was to depose Saddam Hussein, kill his sons, foster civil unrest and terrorism, and upgrade the oil fields with modern equipment, then I'd say we've done a bang-up job. Cleaning up the mess is, after all, a mission for the UN, and we obviously never included it in the plans for the original mission.

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?
B - Probably more. Those damnfool liberals, even in defeat, keep trying go give people rights the Constitution doesn't guarantee. Like the right of all people to fair and equal treatment under the law. Now, where do you see that in the Constitution, huh?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?
B - You must mean rights like, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...", or, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...", or, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, ...and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." Now, those are rights the Constitution does guarantee, but I suppose if those liberals are going to demand rights that aren't in the Constitution, its only fair that we take back a few that are. Besides, we are in a state of constant danger, right? Now that I think about it, your aura does have a bit of an orange tint; I think an anonymous tip to the FBI might be in order.

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"
B - No. The Constitution was created to establish a central government, and to define its structure and operation.

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?
B - Only when those things clearly and specifically threaten our security or our rights, such as Amendment 3, "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner...", or Amendment 13, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, ...shall exist within the United States..." I would never approve of using the Constitution to limit the rights of specific groups of people.

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?
B - Sure, about as much as I believe in objectivity from a subjective nervous system. Its a great goal to strive for, and I truly believe that those who seek more religious influence in government are, in the end, cutting their own throats, or those of their children. But lets face it, we are a government of the people, and the hope that people can leave their religion at home is a leap of faith indeed, nor would we probably want them to, completely. You would not have to worry about Christians in this regard if we actually followed the faith we profess. Jesus recognized a complete separation of church and state. He advocated a private life of introspection and devotion, and a public life of humility, love, and servitude. His message was that HE would change the hearts and minds of men from within. There is no biblical authority for the collective bullying many are engaged in, and certainly no authority for the demented, 'worldly' politics they're willing to play to get their way. And its not about their right to practice their religion, its a self-centered and self-aggrandizing attempt to subvert God's will and force their way of life and their vision of perfection on the rest of us. It is not a sign of their devotion to God, it is an attempt to use their religion as a crass political tool. And the leaders are not shepherds, they are wolves in lamb's clothing. They'll probably arrive at the pearly gates en masse, loudly proclaiming the millions of souls they brought to the Lord, and all the monuments they built in his honor, and St. Peter will say, "Sorry, not one of you is on the guest list. Fang! Phyllis! Escort these gentlemen to the path 'down the mountain', please." Of course, when I arrive, he'll probably say, "Oh, sorry, the answer we were looking for was 'meek', not 'shirk'. Fang!"

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?
B - No, there are two, the Moneytarians, and the Church of the Enormous I.

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?
B - No, I would say morals arise from a combination of childhood training, and the adult recognition that one may have duties and responsibilities to oneself, one's fellows, one's ancestors, one's descendants, and others. Religion and fairy tales sometimes help to clarify, or at least codify, and reinforce these morals.

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?
B - No, but they have no interesting stories about where they came from, nor any excuse when they f**k up.

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?
B - God, no. Who would I have to argue with? But I certainly believe they are the ultimate religious values, and all would benefit from adopting them. You can read all about my religious philosophy in my new book, "B. (All You Can Be)."

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?
B - No comment.

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?
B - My religious values do not disapprove of gay marriage on moral grounds, and have no comment on secular grounds.

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.
B - It has in the past and may in the future.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.
B - Inasmuch as it would affect my gay friends (I would be attending a lot of weddings), and make significant changes in society.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?
B - I think that a majority of the first immigrants to this country from Europe belonged to Christian sects and that a majority of the current population would identify themselves as Christians.

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?
B - Only when they're not superseded by his political values. This guy is the king of the flip-flop. And he obviously has no qualms about bearing false witness against his opponents in his campaign strategy.

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?
B - I think this is an absurd question. If you want someone who completely ignores their moral and religious values when making decisions, vote for a robot. Hmmm... Come to think of it, with a little reprogramming, Robby the robot could do a fair imitation of Dubya. "Warning! My friends in &LOCATION, we are all in danger. (Waving arms) Danger! Danger, my friends! Orange Alert! Orange Alert!" A more relevant question would be if I think it constitutional for him to make decisions that favor others' religious views.

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?
B - I have no problem with the government funding a Christian institution, as opposed to any other private institution, for providing government services, provided they are capable and are required to provide a paper trail. On the other hand, I think its absurd to give churches blanket tax exemption. They should pay the same sales taxes, real estate taxes and income taxes that everyone else does. The only assets that should be exempt are those 100% dedicated to providing charity. Same rules everyone else has to live by.

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?
B - Same as #28.

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?
B - No.

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?
B - To be fair, since I didn't hear him make the statement, don't have the context, the tone of voice he said it in, etc., it is hard to make a judgment call. On the face of it, I think it displays a callous disregard for the Constitution and the American people. But they are two very different people. One earned his cynicism through a lifetime of political and government service, the other had it shoved up his nose on a silver spoon. I believe Bush Sr. to be perfectly capable of dealing with people he personally despises in a (mostly) fair and above board manner. I do not believe Junior has that depth of character.

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?
B - I think he is very selective on who he unites and who he divides.

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?
B - Isn't that what doctors do with their staff just prior to performing an operation?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)
B - Middle-aged.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#630 Consumer Comment

Oh, Ben, you've discovered my weakness; I just love quizzes.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 24, 2005

1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?
B - WMD is about the only issue I can think of that could have justified the war. And, btw, its not technically a war.

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?
B - Just because we didn't find them doesn't mean they weren't there. He probably gave them to his mortal enemies just before Shokanaw. That might seem to some that in starting the war, we caused the very thing we went to war to prevent, but even if that were one of the true ironies of these kinds of complicated negotiations, there's still the fact that he was an evil dictator, and junk like that. Anyway, BJ Clinton said they had them, too, and two rights can't make a wrong. Oh, wait, that's wrong, BJ is a left... a right and a left can't make a... we won't get fooled again!

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?
B - I can safely say that whether or not WMD are ever found, I will support Bush's call as much as I ever did.

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?
B - Bush has an energy policy?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?
B - Yes, that decision should rest with the President. I'm sure he has nothing to hide, and would only refuse to release them if national security were at stake.

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?
B - A qualified yes, given the fact we bungled our way into the situation in the first place. Working with the UN to 'keep the peace' and strengthen the new government is the only reasonable course of action.

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?
B - No. Can you explain why you feel his current poll numbers should have any bearing on my previous answer?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?
B - If the mission was to depose Saddam Hussein, kill his sons, foster civil unrest and terrorism, and upgrade the oil fields with modern equipment, then I'd say we've done a bang-up job. Cleaning up the mess is, after all, a mission for the UN, and we obviously never included it in the plans for the original mission.

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?
B - Probably more. Those damnfool liberals, even in defeat, keep trying go give people rights the Constitution doesn't guarantee. Like the right of all people to fair and equal treatment under the law. Now, where do you see that in the Constitution, huh?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?
B - You must mean rights like, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...", or, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...", or, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, ...and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." Now, those are rights the Constitution does guarantee, but I suppose if those liberals are going to demand rights that aren't in the Constitution, its only fair that we take back a few that are. Besides, we are in a state of constant danger, right? Now that I think about it, your aura does have a bit of an orange tint; I think an anonymous tip to the FBI might be in order.

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"
B - No. The Constitution was created to establish a central government, and to define its structure and operation.

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?
B - Only when those things clearly and specifically threaten our security or our rights, such as Amendment 3, "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner...", or Amendment 13, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, ...shall exist within the United States..." I would never approve of using the Constitution to limit the rights of specific groups of people.

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?
B - Sure, about as much as I believe in objectivity from a subjective nervous system. Its a great goal to strive for, and I truly believe that those who seek more religious influence in government are, in the end, cutting their own throats, or those of their children. But lets face it, we are a government of the people, and the hope that people can leave their religion at home is a leap of faith indeed, nor would we probably want them to, completely. You would not have to worry about Christians in this regard if we actually followed the faith we profess. Jesus recognized a complete separation of church and state. He advocated a private life of introspection and devotion, and a public life of humility, love, and servitude. His message was that HE would change the hearts and minds of men from within. There is no biblical authority for the collective bullying many are engaged in, and certainly no authority for the demented, 'worldly' politics they're willing to play to get their way. And its not about their right to practice their religion, its a self-centered and self-aggrandizing attempt to subvert God's will and force their way of life and their vision of perfection on the rest of us. It is not a sign of their devotion to God, it is an attempt to use their religion as a crass political tool. And the leaders are not shepherds, they are wolves in lamb's clothing. They'll probably arrive at the pearly gates en masse, loudly proclaiming the millions of souls they brought to the Lord, and all the monuments they built in his honor, and St. Peter will say, "Sorry, not one of you is on the guest list. Fang! Phyllis! Escort these gentlemen to the path 'down the mountain', please." Of course, when I arrive, he'll probably say, "Oh, sorry, the answer we were looking for was 'meek', not 'shirk'. Fang!"

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?
B - No, there are two, the Moneytarians, and the Church of the Enormous I.

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?
B - No, I would say morals arise from a combination of childhood training, and the adult recognition that one may have duties and responsibilities to oneself, one's fellows, one's ancestors, one's descendants, and others. Religion and fairy tales sometimes help to clarify, or at least codify, and reinforce these morals.

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?
B - No, but they have no interesting stories about where they came from, nor any excuse when they f**k up.

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?
B - God, no. Who would I have to argue with? But I certainly believe they are the ultimate religious values, and all would benefit from adopting them. You can read all about my religious philosophy in my new book, "B. (All You Can Be)."

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?
B - No comment.

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?
B - My religious values do not disapprove of gay marriage on moral grounds, and have no comment on secular grounds.

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.
B - It has in the past and may in the future.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.
B - Inasmuch as it would affect my gay friends (I would be attending a lot of weddings), and make significant changes in society.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?
B - I think that a majority of the first immigrants to this country from Europe belonged to Christian sects and that a majority of the current population would identify themselves as Christians.

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?
B - Only when they're not superseded by his political values. This guy is the king of the flip-flop. And he obviously has no qualms about bearing false witness against his opponents in his campaign strategy.

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?
B - I think this is an absurd question. If you want someone who completely ignores their moral and religious values when making decisions, vote for a robot. Hmmm... Come to think of it, with a little reprogramming, Robby the robot could do a fair imitation of Dubya. "Warning! My friends in &LOCATION, we are all in danger. (Waving arms) Danger! Danger, my friends! Orange Alert! Orange Alert!" A more relevant question would be if I think it constitutional for him to make decisions that favor others' religious views.

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?
B - I have no problem with the government funding a Christian institution, as opposed to any other private institution, for providing government services, provided they are capable and are required to provide a paper trail. On the other hand, I think its absurd to give churches blanket tax exemption. They should pay the same sales taxes, real estate taxes and income taxes that everyone else does. The only assets that should be exempt are those 100% dedicated to providing charity. Same rules everyone else has to live by.

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?
B - Same as #28.

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?
B - No.

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?
B - To be fair, since I didn't hear him make the statement, don't have the context, the tone of voice he said it in, etc., it is hard to make a judgment call. On the face of it, I think it displays a callous disregard for the Constitution and the American people. But they are two very different people. One earned his cynicism through a lifetime of political and government service, the other had it shoved up his nose on a silver spoon. I believe Bush Sr. to be perfectly capable of dealing with people he personally despises in a (mostly) fair and above board manner. I do not believe Junior has that depth of character.

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?
B - I think he is very selective on who he unites and who he divides.

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?
B - Isn't that what doctors do with their staff just prior to performing an operation?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)
B - Middle-aged.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#629 Consumer Comment

Too bad... so sad... AGAIN!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 24, 2005

Now who's picking on the grammar of others?

I don't put my stuff through the "spell-checker" in Word...I see very few red lines when I print what I write. Mine only detects slang and proper nouns as whoopsies, for one...and I've seen lots of other spelling errors I've made, that made it to final print, so obviously I'm not spell-checking everything. If nothing else, maybe you should start running yours through Word before postingmake them make a little sense, or at least, print better-composed Ben-Spin. What's so offensive about wanting to provide properly spelled or grammatically composed posts...?

But go ahead...take any number of posts of yours, and run them through Word and see what happens...looks like Christmas, all the pretty reds and greens. The post appears like that because of an html error; I had tried to post my Russian moniker on those two posts, and for some reason, they just got all goofed up. So that's TWO whole posts out of the dozens I've made. Hell, I'm nice enough to even offer an explanationeven though I don't owe you one.

Sorta like that picture of the "yellow cake" box up there. That's not mine, but it's on my post...I have no idea why. There are also two of my posts missing, and they're entirely out of order. I have no control over html hiccups, or erroneously posted pictures. But maybe you can clarify something for me. You seem to think you're better and smarter than all of us hereso why do you write like a third-grader? If my whoopsies make my posts null, you've wasted mega-gulps of space on this board with your prattle (by your bad-spelling-equals-void-point logic).

Back to business....

I like how you take something I had written and turn it as an attack against me, like you could have thought of something so original for yourself. (I'm waiting for the "well how do you like getting what you're doing to me" bit...more pure bullshit. See, sunshineI have chronology on my side...it's evident that I said it first, then you plagiarized it. refer to the order of the posts, if you don't believe me.)

What happened to "Post the article, and it'll make your case legit."? Well, I have, Bennie-kins--I've posted TWO in one post, and you're still crying for more info. I gave you the site I got it from. So I'll reiterate: "Apparently not." as I had in the last post where I've clearly pointed out your double standard, double-talking, two-faced hypocrisy for the whole of "readerdom" to see.

Here are MORE fine examples: (there are SO MANY!)

I'm sure any ghost from the dead people at a bombed planned parenthood clinic can tell you that.

Point one: Ghosts, Ben? I thought your nonbelief system denounced the supernatural.

Point Two: how many died in those bombings? Was it greater than the slaughter that occurred when Planned Parenthood was up and running? That is, death in the name of convenience'?

Wanna see more? There's a maelstrom of em in that one post I made that points out your bashing, name-calling, generalizing, and labeling.

More? Kay!

You have denied giving a d**n about the war, taxes, and the loss of lives, and expressed your main concern being of some theocracy (09/16/05) Im not worried anymore about his obvious and blatant tax rip offs and the war in Iraq. This religion thing scares me to death.

I find it amusing that your view on things is so selective, and utterly hypocritical.

If you want to believe, finejust don't push it on others.
---Never mind the fact that you've not only been pushing for a quarrel about religion since mid-September. Who's pushing their beliefs on whom?

---You have consistently labeled anyone who has Faith and doesn't agree with your political views as a Religious Zealot.

---You repeatedly prong me with insults containing words that sling mud at my Faith, then get all pissy coz I called you a p***y (Just curious.what justified you calling that Steph guy an a*****e (he had said nothing to you, personally)? At least my derogatory turn was a RETURN fire.)

---Outrage, over a war that YOU YOURSELF HAD DENIED ANY CONCERN WITHbecause it's this religion thing that scares me to death.

---Yet you claim you're miffed over the loss of human livesafter accusing ME of flying planes into or bombing Planned Parenthood Clinics.

---The real irony here is that Planned Parenthood and its satellite organizations have snuffed out more human lives in the name of convenience than any one of our most heavily casualtied wars. The loss of human life is tragic, periodbut at least the soldiers who volunteered had the right to fight for their lifeand yours. But the loss of THOSE lives is okay, right? Selective outrageit's only of value if it edifies YOUR point. If we use it as an example, it's not allowed. But I notice you completely gloss over it when I present it.

---I find it amusing that you get all puffed-up at the thought that I don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle, and that you accuse me of calling you gay (after all, you've been the one pushing the gay marriage debate down my throat---most recently thinly disguised as Question 14 in your little Kwestionfest post). Yet you call Shawn a fruit. Your meaning is ABUNDANTLY clear, no mistake about it. I'm supposed to embrace that which you regard as an intentionally vicious chide.
Lovely double standard, there.

Ironic? I've STILL never called you unpatriotic, a traitor, or immoral. Nah, the best word that describes you? Pathetic.

You know what's sad, is that this pointless diatribe between you and I (which I have tried to end on MULTIPLE occasions!) has made other posters put up their own posts. No lie (fathom that concept, Bennie!), this person has said, to the effect of, "I don't want THIS post high-jacked into a long argument about religion."

And I cannot blame this person. If you wanna have a fight where you can pick on Believers, why don't you just make up your own post? I'm sure they'll swarm to you like flies to s**t. (How many times have I offered this as an option? But I know, you'll never take me up on it. Probably, because you know it's ridiculousand you'll get the verbal s**t kicked out of you by others---some more.)

Once again, I'll state (like a broken record if need be, because apparently, it does!): not liking my answers doesn't render them non-existent, and repeatedly asking the same questions (re-worded so you think I'll perceive them differentlyI know this gamemy sons used to try and catch me all the time, and NEVER havejust like YOU NEVER WILL) will not get you the opposite answer. Read my post, dated 11/02/05, and titled Here are some articles I found If that's not good enough for you, there are other links offered by other posters. I've already done enough for you.
Accept it.

You have said you stated it before, and posted info before (yet its totally impossible to find because your posts are so filled with intolerance and hate filled bullshit most people give up after the first two paragraphs).

You must be reading yours and thinking they're mine. What can I say, Bennie-Boy? You inspire all things negative, but don't have the power to create hatred in me. Honey, if I hated you, I wouldn't be nice enough to waste my time indulging your insipid rebuttals.

While so full of it, Ben, hate is a powerful emotion; it's the perfect opposite to love. I do not possess such a strong emotion for youmaybe disdain, but certainly not hate. Apparently, you missed the comment I made, when I said very few people on this planet carry that status. Or to that affect. I don't hate you, kidmore's the pity, but not hatred, I have for you.

And I'll tell you the same thing that I've told James, in reference to the length of my posts. If your tiny attention span can only hold onto a little bit at a time, then pass my posts by and make no comments regarding them. I notice you don't seem, to mind cranking out long posts yourself, but it's okay for you, but not me. Keep up the fine jobthe more you post, the more cannon-fodder you give me to chop at that pedestal you've placed yourself on. It's so easy, it's almost shameful.

Obviously, you really love the attentionI can almost hear you twittering happily as you type your senseless reword-the-same-question-hoping-for-a-different-answer (in hopes to catch me at something) bullshit. Do you keep a cuttlebone on a stick next to your computer to sharpen your little budgie-beak on?

I sometimes wonder if responding with your vicious invective renders you tumescent as you sit there, content in feeling you're the legman lead in this game of Beleaguer the Believer. So sad, that you're not in the leadyou're just some little jerk who has big fuzzies on his computer, but would soil himself at the keen edge of a real conflict or confrontation. What's the word I'm looking for...? Oh, yes! "Bedwetter"!

We are not your children Vera.

I know, LoveI only breed within my species.

The term "do what I say, not what I do" does not apply to us.

Apparently, it does, Bennie (and who is this We you speak ofthe other face?)that's what you're resting your whole argument on.

Something else I've said beforeyou can't attack my parenting skills in hopes of riling some maternal indignation. While not perfect, I know we've raised our kids to be so much better at being people than you are. I'm solid and content in that knowledgeand you can't even touch it. I equate your efforts as trying to chop through a mountain with a plastic Spork.

I'm really getting bored with your re-hashing. I think maybe I'll just start putting ditto marks instead of posting, since better than half of my posts refer to something I've said before. Better yet, Ben, why don't YOU just put in the ditto marksI've really heard it all before, and I do wish to get on with the nature of this post---the real nature and topic, not something that's Ben-Spun to your liking.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#628 Consumer Comment

your sorry a*s that religion was the root cause of the dark ages

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 23, 2005

1. What is it that you think we are "taking away from you" religious types?

2. Where is my proof that Islam is being forced on children in the CA school system.

And shawn.....

No long winded post is going to "SPIN" the fact and save your sorry a*s that religion was the root cause of the dark ages.

You have got to be kidding me!

So spare me your "spin". There is no way you can possibly say that science is responsible for the dark ages.

Exactly what "progress" are you speaking of that someone like me is holding back? (see question #1 above)

Sure Shawn.......abortion rights, gay rights, separation of church and state are really going to send us back into the dark ages.....yeah....riiiiight.

Save your puritanical religious rantings for a soap box on a street corner.

You want religion...fine. Keep it in your own yard and out of mine.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#627 Consumer Comment

Ben, you and your posts are laughable, to say the least!!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Hmmmmm, I offer you , science, evolution, progress, and nature, and all you can do is cry back about religion??? You don't even try to hide your spin anymore Boo-h*o . . . getting pretty sloppy! Now, on to 'the meat" . . .

You are telling me to study history??? You and your spin game are truly laughable Ben! Do YOU know nothing about the dark ages??? Ummm, let me school you (although I am certain that you will continue spinning and lying and spinning some more anyway). To begin, the beginning of the MIDDLE AGES is often called the "Dark Ages" because the civilizations of Greece and Rome had fallen and life in Europe was very hard. Few people could read or write and nobody expected conditions to improve. The only hope for most people was their strong belief in Christianity, and the hope that life in heaven would be better than life on earth.
The Dark Ages were anything but dark in other parts of the world. The Muslims in the Middle East and North Africa studied and improved on the works of the ancient Greeks while civilization flourished in sub-Saharan Africa, China, India, and here in the Americas. Europe began to experience great change by about 1450. Within one hundred years, Columbus had sailed to America, literacy spread, scientists made great discoveries, and artists created work that still inspires us today. Historians call the next period of European history the "Renaissance" period, or, modern history.
During the Middle Ages, peasants could no longer count on the Roman army to protect them from invading armies such as the Huns, Vikings, and Magyar tribes. As they overran homes and farms throughout Europe, the peasants turned to the landowners, often called lords, to protect them. In exchange for this protection, most gave up their freedoms and became serf's, which is comparable to a slave, except they could not be bought or sold.

By the later Middle Ages, the gods of the Romans, Greeks, and Celts had long since been forgotten, and Christianity became the universal faith of almost all of the people of Europe. During this time, Europe was commonly known as Christondom, or, the community of Christians. Religious life attracted many people during the Middle Ages as the Church was often the only way to get an education. It also allowed less fortunate people the opportunity to rise in power. Aside from the Pope, other clergy also included bishops, priests, nuns, and monks. Monks devoted their lives to prayer, and their behavior influenced the entire church. Monasteries produced many well-educated men prepared to serve as administrators for uneducated kings and lords. Monks were responsible for keeping the Greek and Latin classical cultures alive. Monks copied books by hand in an era before the printing press. Though few in number, monks played a significant role in the Middle Ages, and it's advancements in literature, history documentation, and science.
The Huns were skilled horsemen, typically considered godless, who plundered settlements throughout Europe. They moved into the land west of the Caspian Sea, forcing the Visigoths and other Germanic tribes to move into the Roman Empire. The Huns were illiterate and had no interest in the lands they raided. They simply attacked and plundered. In 445, Attila became the sole leader of the Huns after murdering his brother and the Romans refered to Attila as the Scourge of God. After Attila died suddenly in 453, the threat of the Huns dwindled.. The morning following a drunken celebration for his latest marriage' (Attila had more than 20 wives), he was found dead, he had choked to death from a nosebleed. Within two years the Ostrogoths and other Germanic tribes combined to remove the Huns as a threat to more civilized people.

Alaric, king of the Visigoths, was another notable anti-Christian leader in Europe during the dark ages. In 410, when the Romans refused to pay a bribe, Alaric's soldiers formed a siege around Rome. When the city was close to starvation, the Roman citizens opened the gates and allowed the army to enter. The Visigoths rampaged through the streets for three days, pillaging and burning. Rome was not completely destroyed, but for the first time in nearly 800 years, the eternal city had been defeated. Germanic tribes overran what was left of the Roman Empire. The Ostrogoths, came from land we know call the Ukraine. The Ostrogoths conquered most of Italy, Greece, and the western Balkans. The Vandals took control of the Roman territory in North Africa.
The Byzantine Empire (Constantinopal) began to look less like the Roman Empire as the years passed. The empire covered Greece, the Balkans, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt. By the seventh century, Greek had completely replaced Latin as the language of the empire. Seljuk Turks began moving into the Byzantine Empire from Central Asia in the eleventh century. The Turks had recently become Muslims, and the Byzantine emperor feared they would soon overpower his Christian empire. He asked the the Pope to assist in a holy war against the Turks. In 1095, Pope Urban II launched the first of many Crusades, or wars of the cross. Urban hoped that in addition to expelling the Turks from the Byzantine Empire, he would also be able to reclaim the holy city of Jerusalem from Muslim control. Soldiers from western Europe left their homes to free the Byzantine Empire of the Turks. This was the first time many Europeans had left their homes and their exposure to new and different cultures was a factor that led to the Renaissance period.
Ultimately, the Crusades were unsuccessful because the Turks conquered the Byzantine Empire. The city first called Byzantium and later Constantinople is now known as Istanbul, Turkey. Turkish has replaced Greek as the language of Asia Minor, and 99.8% of the people in modern Turkey are Muslims.

The Franks were a Germanic tribe in western Europe that began to conquer other tribes. Clovis was a Frankish king who united most of present day France and western Germany. Clovis converted to Christianity about 496 and forced his subjects to accept the faith. Muslims had conquered Spain, and in 732 they crossed the Pyrenees Mountains and attempted to conquer France. Frankish ruler Charles Martel kept the Muslims from invading France.

Charlemagne or Charles the Great, was Charles Martel's grandson and the greatest of the Frankish kings. e expanded the kingdom of the Franks into Spain and Central Europe. Charlemagne's goal was to unite all of the Germanic tribes into a single Christian kingdom. When the Lombards attacked the papal territory in 774, Charlemagne defeated the Lombards, and rescued the Pope. On Christmas Day, 800, Pope Leo III repaid Charlemagne for defeating the Lombards. As Charlemagne rose from prayer, Leo placed a crown on his head and proclaimed him Augustus, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. Charlemagne never learned how to read or write, but he set up schools throughout his empire and provided funds that allowed monks to copy the works of Greek and Roman authors. Charlemagne's empire crumbled soon after his death, and the promise of returning the glory of Rome to Western Europe soon faded. The term Holy Roman Empire was used to describe different Frankish and German lands for another ten centuries, but it could be argued that after Charlemagne, it wasn't holy, it wasn't Roman, and it certainly was not an empire. In 1806, Napoleon prepared to oust Francis II from his title as Holy Roman Emperor, so Francis renounced his title and decreed himself emperor of Austria.

William the Conqueror was a powerful Norman ruler who invaded England in 1066, and, for the next three hundred years, England would be ruled by kings who did not speak English. The Norman Conquest destroyed English rule and created a French military state where the Normans seized English lands and destroyed any opposition. The Tower of London, built by the Normans was designed to protect the capital, but it also served as a reminder of the power of the Normans. The Norman conquest was the beginning of centuries of hostilities between England and France. They fought the Hundred Years' War between 1336 and 1453 and strongly competed for new colonies in America. England was a target of Napoleon, and the Duke of Wellington led the forces that defeated Napoleon in the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. The two nations did not truly become allies until the last century, when they combined forces in the two World Wars.

The bubonic plague, or, black death, killed almost half the population of Europe. It began in Asia where is is reported to have killed more than thirty-five million people. In 1347, Italian merchant ships returned from the Black Sea with many of the sailors already dying of the plague, and, within days the disease had spread from the port cities to the surrounding countryside; and even as far as England within a year. Some Europeans believed the plague was a sign from God. Groups known as flagellants tried to atone for the sins of the world by inflicting punishments upon themselves. Pope Clement VI condemned the flagellants and declared that their veiws were not those of the church, but many still wrongfully view the actions of these flagellants as the church's promotion of a non-medical approach to a cure. The truth of the matter is, the church called on, and funded many scientists and physicians of the time to aid in the research for a cure. Flagellants can still be found today wherever an outbreak may occur

Like I said previously, history can neither be agreed with, nor disagreed with, it just is. Judging by history, your base opinions are founded on nothing more than lies, spin, and pure bullshit! Next time you want to justify your existence on documented history, you might want to research it for yourself - apparently your boyfriend doesn't know everything.(I guess that's why he teaches kindergarten - not much intellect required to play ring around the rosy')

I'm not getting into another one of your off topics, but just so you know, I read the article you pointed out (something I don't supposed you would ever do should the roles be reversed), and I have to ask . . . so what? A couple of impatient scientists use a delay in funding to (probably) try to drive up their salary, and that has to do with this thread how? Before you answer, let me provide you with a few facts. (These I have researched, I'm not gonna make that mistake again! lol)

First, George W. Bush is the first president to allow for ANY government funding of stem cell research. This is against many peoples religious beliefs, but hey, as long as it's the Christian's belief's that it's contradicting, who gives a s**t about the majority?!?

Second, The so called limitations that people are touting are for government funded research . . . if you don't like em, get private funding!

Third, for government funded research there are existing lines of stem cells available (reports vary from 10 lines to as many as 60) researchers are not allowed to destroy embryos solely for the purpose of retrieving stem cells. These lines of stem cells that are already available(even if it is only 10) are enough to furnish all stem cell researchers in the U.S. with the needed cells to last them at least 2 years. Since funding became available in 2001, there have been less than 50 requests for stem cells . . . why? The major jist of restrictions is that it can only be used for medically necessary' research - you know, no cloning and such, and the researchers must file reports with the appropriate government agency.

Fourth, I don't care how you try to spin this Ben, this is the last of my comments on such.

Go back to whining and spitting your lies and useless, unfounded drivel. Bye bye Boo-h*o, until the next time I feel like exposing your lies . . .

May God bless America

P.S. Keep writing Ben, I need the laughs!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#626 Consumer Comment

This is classic hypocritical right wing mantra......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 21, 2005

ANOTHER.....wonderful Vera quote.....

"I see you as the biggest RipOff in Tupper Lake. Next to that, youfre a RipOff to your Grammar-School teachers, by the way you mangle the English language and spout endless nonfactual drivel"

Notice the little boxes in there. And if you read her entire post, you will see many other "artifacts" left by her spell checker.

Funny Vera, how you consistantly and constantly crack on others grammar and spelling while you use a spell checker (obviously not working very well with cutting and pasting here!) and supporting a President that butchers the English language on a daily if not hourly basis.

And for Shawn....about your little "your against progress" comment again.....why dont you look at this article (and spare me the "spin" bullshit).....

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/21/stanford.stem.cells.ap/index.html


Oh ya! Its those evil non-religious athiest people from the "dark ages" that are stunting our science and education in this country. What a joke.

Please, Shawn, tell me just what "progress" is it that you say I, and the people like me, are against? The forward progress of going backward and REVERSING Roe v Wade? I like that "forward in reverse". But I guess you will say thats a "spin" eh?

Ok how about you put it in your "non-spin" terms. Tell me how its "progress"?

Or how about the article itself? Are we evil non-religious athiests keeping you in the dark ages with our hopes in stem cell research? Are we keeping you from moving FORWARD into the future by wanting you to lift a BAN on it?

So once again lets put down the "spin" mantra you two speak of. If you wont answer any of my earlier questions then why dont you answer these two simple ones. Two simple questions....I doubt you will ever answer.

1. What exactly is it that you two think Athiests are "taking" from you.

I mean obviously you are trying to spin it into some "poor persecuted Christian" thing. So what is it?

2. Vera, where is my proof that Islam is being forced on the children in the public school system of CA?

You have said you dont need to give proof (then demanded it of others). You have said you dont want to do the "work for me" (yet still demand it of others). You have said you stated it before, and posted info before (yet its totally impossible to find because your posts are so filled with intolerance and hate filled bullshit most people give up after the first two paragraphs).

JUST POST THE d**n LINKS!! One simple post, one simple URL, link, or other. It doesnt matter. If you had the info, why not just POST IT! Its been over a month and all you do is give excuses. If we missed it sorry, so just post it again! Its not like your crossing some taboo. Or is it? Did I miss something in your "book" about not being able or not having to prove anything?

We are not your children Vera. The term "do what I say, not what I do" does not apply to us.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#625 Consumer Comment

Shawn

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 21, 2005

Shawn,

Apparently you have something to hide if you think those simple questions are a "litmus" test. Why is it people on your side of the isle are so willing to impose your will through subverting the constitution yet you just cant come out and say what you want and why you want it. I love this little line too......

"Ben, you don't really want progress . . . you want us to return to the dark ages' when people had no sense of morality - when men owned' their wives (as well as slaves), and brut force was as much the law as anything."

Let me get this down right, you say I want to go back to the "dark ages". And I've been the one saying "leave religion out of my life". Thats a laugh!

I think it was religion that supported the "men owning their wives" and the "slavery" pal. You need a good history lesson. Not to mention a very serious lesson into just what the "dark ages" were and WHY they were called that. As for your "morality" comment, well, I can only imagine that your worse than Vera on the "morality can only stem from religion" crap.

Once again I will say (like a broken record if need be...which apparently it does!), you dont HAVE TO HAVE religion for morality. I'm sure any ghost from the dead people at a bombed planned parenthood clinic can tell you that.

You want religion....more power to you. Just dont force it on others.


Progress!? Really Shawn, go to the library and get a history book on the "dark ages". And you will see just where religion in general stands on "progress". I think you seriously need to take good look in the mirror and think about who really "doesnt want progress".

Your entire statment can be shot down by any post I've made and ANY history book discussing progress over the last 2000 years under the "church". You sir, are the one scared of "progress".

The only "progress" you can think, is to add "bans" to our Constitution. Now go figure, a thing devoted to protecting freedom......with "bans" to things in it. Nice "progress" there Shawn......not.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#624 Consumer Comment

When is ME, not ME?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 19, 2005


Waling along calmly, whistling the tune from Night Stalker

Here's a strange fish.

These questions dont have to be answered by you alone either. So spare me the "I'm such a poor persecuted Christian" thing again."[Rolling eyes] Spare me, indeed.

Kay. Why then:

Vera, If your scared of answering honest questions? (You know, the bwawk-bwawk-ChicKANNN! Call.)

More specifically, how about:

Lets be fair here Vera. Ill throw some questions out to you and see

Can we have all the Veras here raise their hand, since this questionnaire is directed at those named specific? (I don't count, coz I'm a Vera, and I'm asking the question here.) Anybody? Hulloh? Hmm. I don't see any others. Just wondering. See, if those little hair-triggered questions were directed at EVERYONE, why are BOTH posts titled to address me? (Since you're clearly not as clever as the average fourteen-year-old, perhaps I should clarify the nature of this particular post to you.)

Hunh, I'll bet your eyes are brown, you're so full of s**t.

And this IS getting old. Actually, it has BEEN old for a while.

And I never said that I was a poor, persecuted Christianbut it could easily be perceived, judging by your incessant need to single me out, personally. But I've got big shouldersI've easily had far worse adversaries than youand they presented no greater a challenge. I guess you should have picked an easier mark, Darlin'. Now why don't you go run along and playI'm tired of sitting at the kiddie-table with you.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#623 Consumer Comment

Oh the humanity!

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 18, 2005

"....with all the literary grace of a rhino trying to rape a Humm-Vee."

Gad! The mental image had me rolling for 5 minutes! I can picture the infantrymen scrambling to get out of the way.

Oh my sides hurt!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#622 Consumer Comment

Vera, If your scared of answering honest questions, then that tells us something

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 18, 2005

Im sorry I couldnt read your entire posts. The fact that you cut and paste from your spell checker made that near impossible. But the few scraps of info I did manage to decipher pretty much gave me the gist of your standing.

It was not intended to "crucify" the Christian. I stated very clearly that they are simple questions (funny I do remember some mention of Islam). Questions that anyone in this country could ask regarding a president and his policies. And, how a person thinks of those policies. I even stated that you could post questions yourself. Thus, why would I try to "crucify" you only to let you do it to me.

If your scared of answering honest questions, then that tells us something right then and there. You obviously have very deep emotions and thoughts about Bush, religion, abortion, gay marriage and they way they interact. Why are you so scared to answer them? You want certian things for this country. You want to continue Bush's policy. Yet you dont want to state them? Do you have something to hide all of a sudden? You had no problem stating your opinions on the matter over looooong winded posts spanning over several months. Why be scared of putting them down in one concise place.

So let me get this down right. You are willing to support Bush, and his agenda, but not state it?

You seem so outspoken before. Why hide now?

These questions dont have to be answered by you alone either. So spare me the "I'm such a poor persecuted Christian" thing again. Its really getting old. And its total bullshit. Nobody is persecuting Christianity. If you state that it is again then we are going to slide right back into that "show proof" crap again. So be prepared to show EXACTLY what is being taken away from you "poor persecuted Christians".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#621 Consumer Comment

First...and then...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 18, 2005

First...

To Shawn of Phelan, California...

What can I say besides "Wow!"?
Your most recent post was well composed, very thorough, and insightful. Also, I was very flattered by the comment you've made to me in that and your other post...I really don't know what exactly to say but...thank you!

And yes, I do deeply wish to move on to the subject...right up to the point where I just may have to learn to ignore Ben's personal Inquisition-Style of mousetrap-questions form here in. Man, what an obstacle.

...And then...

Truthfully, I'd just love it if the original poster would just explain the data from where he forms his opinion. To date, Gas prices here in NW Ohio are down to $1.97 a gallon...only about thirty cents higher than they were before this whole mess started.

Not that thirty cents isn't a hell of a jump, mind you...when you consider the volumes of gas purchased daily by folks just fuelling their autos, it's pretty staggering. I thought there was supposed to be a "rule", as it were, that stipulated something about the price of gas not being able to go up by more than a dime over a seven-day week...I'm really not sure. Might anyone here know anything about that? And would you mind directing me to the source of the info?

This whole line of outrage--over the price of gas?
I've been perusing these reports for a year or so (I've even filed a few), and in all the many, many, MANY responses by this Jim of Tupper, not one time have I ever seen this person take any type of political posture in regard to the President. Hell, he doesn't do anything but flame others on various posts, then bask happily in the attention. Read a shining example in an older report about one Chanell Fournier, who threw a newborn in a snow bank because she couldn't go out and get liquored-up, and you'll see what I mean.

(As an aside, you'll see in that post how he derides homosexuality, spitting it at two women who disagree with him...and using some truly vile euphemisms.)

That thread is d**n near as long as this one. The good news is that Chanell has apparently made HUGE strides for the better, and seems to be turning her life around. Meanwhile, since that thread has faded out of the limelight, this joker seems to be looking for another bite at fifteen minutes of fame.

It appears he knows nothing of any real or substantial issues...he just takes little headlines and inserts them here, 'tarded up with his opinion. All because he's pissed off at prices at the pump.

Here's a thought, Jimbo...how about buying an economy car? How about a big f**kin' TRUCK, with TWO gas tanks? (Tim Allen grunting) Maybe, you could get your car tuned up, get it all fixed up and running in peak condition, then maintain it...believe it or not, doing that saves gas. Sure, it's expensive at first, but maintenance is cheaper than big repair bills.

My truck runs like a top...I can't afford it to not run soundly. Too much depends on my truck.
(I get the feeling the "redneck" remarks are gonna start rolling in....lol!)

We ALL have to pay high prices for gas, not just you, so we all feel the sting. I go fewer places, and find ways to carpool to save the scratch...whatever it takes to lessen the burden. It's not President Bush alone who is responsible for the high price of gas...it's all of big oil, and the taxes on gasoline is absorbed by the consumer population, to take the blow off the big corporations.

Same with your electricity, same with your natural gas or propane heat. You'd think, with that veritable wealth of information on oil provided by Robert of Texas, you'd have understood that. Apparently not. Silly me, assuming you could figure out for yourself that all big oil isn't owned by Bush! Shame on me!

Here's a challenge, Jim...why don't you think up a some REAL solutions? "IMPEACH BUSH!!" is not necessarily one of them. Try broadening your view, to include all of big oil.

Meanwhile, I'll be waiting over here by the vending machines, for your proof on the specific "war crimes" President Bush has committed. See, I'm relatively ignorant of Geneva Conventions and the rules of Warfare, in relation to that violation or those violations imposed by our President.

Will my requests continue to go ignored, as they have throughout this thread? After all, how many times have I SPECIFICALLY asked you for your sources of data? Or is it that you can't respond, as you've only recently come off with a tingling palm from the latest viewing of "Fahrenheit 911"?

Come on, don't be shy...give-give-give.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#620 Consumer Comment

"To all 'PEACEFULL' People!"...JIM BEAMs another dry heave in our direction....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 17, 2005

gTo ALL PEACEFULL People:h

Whatc? Ifm not part of the gpeacefulh crowdc?

hI urge you to pressure majority of Americans to IMPEACH Bush on war crimes!h

Specifically which ones, according to law and code, Jimbo?

And what's so noble about pressuring (read: forcing) someone to see the world from your jaded view? Must be a nasty case of the brown bottle flu ya got there, Junior.

gBush is only interested in oil profits andch

c.Sighchow many times has this statement been proven imperishably false? I guess I could restate to you, that not liking the answer you get doesnft render it false.

gccorrecting daddy George Sr.s reputation, because he failed to do anything with Saddam but a few bombs here and there.h

There was no ecorrectionf to be made here. What did Clinton do when informed of the underhanded dealings of Bin Laden?

gThe Bush family has had ties with the Hussein Family for a long timech

And Bin Laden himself has cried for help at our feet. Please point out some facts that Bush has been---how have you said it?---gin bedh with Saddam.

gPeople, see, The United States plays countries against other countries so that inevitably the United States can intervene and invade or strike.h

Hmmmmc.I could say the same about you. Just read some of your other posts elsewhere on this site. At any rate, what makes it more acceptable if the Media does it? If Clinton does it?

gGWB is a pathetic President that is suppose to represent The United States Of Americanch

You have no basis more reliable than your own inanity to make that claim. Youfre a lousy representative of Tupper Lake, as I have seen a few incredibly intelligent posts made by people from that same area. But people will only see Tupper as "Springerville", if you have anything to do about it. Ifve also seen innocent people get truly shafted by others in higher positions in Tupper. Where is your outrage for these? Why donft you take up their cause? Why not lend a hand to the Editor of this very site, and do something positive for your locality? I see you exploiting and tainting the Editorfs efforts, working to divide people on a grander scalecbut not to bring unity and improvement to your own area. Somehow I get the feeling that you've never served (I may have even read it somewhere...I know you usually disappear when asked!), and I'll bet you don't vote.

I see you as the biggest RipOff in Tupper Lake. Next to that, youfre a RipOff to your Grammar-School teachers, by the way you mangle the English language and spout endless nonfactual drivel (History teacher ripped off) with all the literary grace of a rhino trying to rape a Humm-Vee.

If your greatest supporter is the gedu-gandah peddler from Canadac.well, youfre being short-changed. Time to turn on your no doubt badly worn copy of Moorefs shlocumentary, Farenhype 911, and take more notes.

(See my up-and coming about how I view gratingsh. Right up there in factuality with gGore wins in Florida! Welcome to GORE-ida!")

gcCitizens, George W. Bush ratings are at ALL TIME LOW=at 27% approval rating!!h

Whaddaya knowchis ratings are STILL higher than yours. ;)

byp

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#619 Consumer Comment

Still haven't moved on . . . good! 'Cause here's my 2 cents! lol

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 17, 2005

As mentioned previously, I found myself eating a little crow, it seems I should have taken a bit of my own advice and challenged those I respect - out of respect. B'and Ben, I apologize - you were correct in stating that "the institute of marriage is only 1100 years old", was a ludicrous statement of mine. I am not too big a man' to admit when I am wrong. It happens to us all, and, provided that we keep our minds open to learning (except B', whose mind is a steel trap' - lol), we can view our errors as a positive, and come out' better for it.

Amongst that which I discovered, was how nonsensical our words were as we touted agreement or disagreement with history. This would be like saying that we agree or disagree with time, or reality - these are not such that can be agreed with or disagreed with - they just are; in truth, we are saying that we agree with the way that our (from my perspective - you may insert the derivitive influence of your opinions) parents, grandparents, and ancestors before them thought about things.

Regarding the current topic, What I suppose you are saying is that you agree with the introduction of homosexual unions as equivalent, or, same as, heterosexual marriages, without exclusion. You have expressed your support of such by emphasizing the negatives in history, of those whose opinions are contrary to yours. Examples of such would be
Just remember, once upon a time, most of the western civilized world was run by the "church".It was called "The Dark Ages". , and
You had your chance to run the world. You sucked at it. , or
I'm sorry, you Christians had your chance to run western civilization and millions died, science was stunted for over 1000 years, people have been displaced, wars have sprung up endlessly, the sun revolved around the Earth (along with everything else) and the Earth was flat, anyone that did not follow religous lines perfectly, was torched, impaled, beheaded, or just general disposed of in horrible ways.

So, as I understand it, you think that it is time to make room for progress', or, eliminate our old school' thinking. I believe that to be in line with these thoughts, you think that we would be required to do away with the old-fashioned' views of those from the past and incorporate homosexual unions' into our definition of marriage' . . . am I correct in this paraphrasing of your thoughts'?

Well Ben, you and I agree on one thing . . . it certainly is time to make room for progress'! This, I'm sure you will agree, includes doing away with all that old school mumbo-jumbo' bullsh*t and moving forward . . . no sense in returning to the laws from archaic days when people fought to the death as entertainment for emperors, hands were cut off as punishment for theft, and public stonings' were common for any number of crimes. Thank God (or whatever force you choose to believe is responsible for progress) that our ancestors have progressed from those days into a more civil society. You wouldn't want for us (as a society) to digress in our moral and legal thoughts to such days. Would you? I didn't think so.

Tell me Ben, what is it that makes you believe that we should focus on progress, and leave those horrible times behind us, except the parts that you don't want to? You see Ben, there was a time that homo-sexual unions were recognized as, and considered equal to heterosexual marriages. John Boswell, author of Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality' (University of Chicago Press, 1980), documents legally recognized homosexual marriage in ancient Rome extending into the Christian period, and in his book Same-sex Unions in pre-modern Europe' (Villard Books, 1994), he discusses Church-blessed same-sex unions and even an ancient Christian same-sex nuptial liturgy. What the study of world history will really tell you, is that pretty much any kind of sexual behavior can become institutionalized somewhere, sometime. Do you know that polygamy remains normal and legal in many nations, as it was among our Mormon forebears in Utah(does that make it right?). In Tibet, polyandry has a long history, and modern Chinese law seems powerless to prevent marriages between one women and two or three men(does that make this right?). Getting back to same-sex issues, the Sambia of New Guinea have traditionally believed that for an adolescent boy to grow into a man, he must fellate an adult male and chug the semen down. I'm not making this up; see Gilbert H. Herdt, Guardians of the Flutes (Columbia University Press, 1981). Now you and I would see that as a kind of child abuse(I hope), but to the Sambians, it's just common sense. It's been that way for well over 3,000 years of their history. (You might want to ask yourself again: does that 3,000 year record make it right?) Some ancient Greek tribes had a similar notion of the necessary reception of semen to make a boy a man, only with them it was an anal-routed process. (I don't recall the books title, but it was authored by Jan Brenner)

Many believe there have been two basic traditions of male homosexual behavior, prior to the evolution' of the contemporary egalitarian model: these inter-generational role-specific ones, in both pre-class and more sophisticated societies; and those that involve males who assume a female identity', who often also have shamanistic roles, such as the berdache' of Native American peoples, or the hijr'a in Hindu society. These are generally available for "straight" men to bed with if they want to. A variation of this tradition is the ancient Mesopotamian male temple-prostitute ( see 1 Kings14:24, 22:47, as an example of such in Israel). The idea was, you'd bugger one of these holy prostitutes', and thereby mystically unite with the deity', and your fee for this would assist in maintaining the temple.

I'm not trying to gross anyone out or anything, just help you realize that there have been, and are, many social ills taking place throughout the world, and hedonistic sexual desires are the root of many. As you can see, they are disguised as everything from a passage to manhood, to a religious ceremony - and now today, right here in America, where we've seen the deviant and unnatural ways of homosexuality, they' are trying to disguise it as a love relationship.

Ben, you don't really want progress . . . you want us to return to the dark ages' when people had no sense of morality - when men owned' their wives (as well as slaves), and brut force was as much the law as anything. You apparently want us to return to times before we heeded scientific discoveries. (If homosexuality was natural', even by Darwin's theory, the human race would be extinct by now!) Yes, Ben, it is so obvious to me that you don't want what is right', or fair', or what is best for all', all that you want is to have the right to live in some perverse, unnatural fantasy world, and have the rest of society appease your guilt by telling you that it is O.K.'. No mention of sin, religion, or the teachings of my Mother Goose Storybook - just science, evolution, progress and nature that stands against homosexuality - so why should I, as a voice within a modern society, allow for the recognized union of such?

Continuing on, (as I take a deep breath, a noticeable intensity develops within my eyes, my chest swells and my heart beats more rapidly with every second - take not of my clenched fists, shaking by my side . . . ) What Vera said! . . . nya - because I couldn't have said it better.

I just wanted to let you know Vera, I truly do have an appreciation for your ability to politely (most times - lol) tell these dum-dums to #$^%&* *&^, or *&(^$## ^^&&* *&^%^%$. I hope to one day acquire such skills - but, at least for now, I'll just have to stick with what I do best - be myself! lol Oh, and B' . . . I envy your command of the English language, but then, you have 15 or 16 years of study and experience over me - I may never catch you, but I will most certainly pass the same markers (don't worry about that spot in your rear-view mirror, it's just me!)

Now I am done with this religion/gay marriage topic . . . I don't have time to write that often so can we move on by the next time I post? Pretty pleeeeeeease.

Oh, and for a perfectly logical (at least by my account B') explanation for George Bush's low poll ratings, go to: (dubya, dubya, dubya, dot)

boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/11/02/the_good_news_from_iraq_is_not_fit_to_print/

(copy and paste)

and humaneventsonline.com/article.phpid=10090


May God bless the U.S.A. and all her troops - past and present,

P.S. Ben, your little 'litmus test' . . . I hope nobody falls for it. All it may prove, is that you've become so good at 'spinning', you don't even need someone else' comments to pervert . . . you can extract your wanted responses through 'loaded questions'.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#618 Consumer Comment

Can't always get what'cha want....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 17, 2005

Lets be fair here Vera.

Ive been waiting for that. Yes, lets DO. From what Ive read so far of your little Perryesque (Inquisitional? ;} ) endeavor, there isnt a yes or no answer that shouldnt be followed by an explanationbut I know how lawyers play this game, using it to strengthen their position and subvert those viewed as the enemy. Sort of like all your fluff and crap and name-labeling making you feel better about your own line of speech.

Ill throw some questions out to you and see where this "spin" game you speak of takes it. I will refrain from making a quote by quote comment on your responses and let others make up their own minds based on your answers.

Ah, so it really IS a personal attack on myself, then? While this is intended to be a discussion on the war and oil, youre trying to use it as a vehicle of attack on a totally unrelated subject. This really isnt the proper forum to play Crucify the Christian-Oriented Person. (By the waythis spin game I speak of Spin is a term bought to the post by someone elseI just borrowed the word.)

If you wish you may even post questions to me which I will respond in kind assuming you can hold back from the personal attacks and refrain as well from the comments.

From your posture, you couldnt do anything in kind. Add to that, your nasty invective has already put my inclination toward you in a disfavorable bent, so theres pretty much no chance I wont be as venomous to you as you are to me. See, I tried to ask you a question or two in a lighter spiritI was very civil to you at the starteven tried to be civil again after--- and you turned and snarled at me on BOTH occasions. Looks like you grabbed the snake too far down its neck (twice!)and it turned and bit your hand as you tried to strangle it.

One should know well enough by now, that many serpents are commonly immune to venomto kill it, one must crush the head.

Let the answers stand on their own.

The reading populace has already seen your reasoning and mine; if they cannot infer some conclusion at this point in the game (based on their own logic, not that which you are trying to spoon-feed), you and I have no need for further correspondence...it would be moot. From what I see, everyone here (including me!) is sick of watching you and I quarrel off topic. Damned if I havent tried to oblige them!

Most importantly we WILL keep this in perspective in regards to Bush's Presidency and that of his fathers. Please answer them with short, but descriptive responses. There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".

Ive addressed this above. (And youll see a more detailed account in my Math section.)

In response to questions numbered 1,2, and 3: WMDs have been discussed. They have not turned up anything yet, according to the Clinton News Network, as well as most other news sources. But like your unfounded fear of some Crusade MAYBE happening, that doesnt mean it would never happen. Im just using the same logic you are using.

Questions 4,5, and 6: I know very little about the energy policy; I do know that Big Oil---which Bush is only a small player in the field---has made far too much profit on the gouging of many. Considering the taxes levied out on fuel costs across the board (being at around fifty-eight percent, or d**n close), I dont see the WHOLE of government (democrats and republicans) doing too badly on the latest fleecing of the People. I have never denied the fact that Bush and his Family are in oil interestswhat I do deny, is that the whole war is over making profit off of some big oil heist-type of scenario. Liberal and conservatives alike have pointed out that the cost of war has been far too exorbitant for the ends to justify the means.

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?

Do agree? are you requesting that I agree with something here?
I think he should tell the truthI think all Government officials should. (Where was all this outrage and all these honest, truth-seeking people when the Liberals were robbing us blind?) Better yetwas Clinton totally open about his affairs, which dragged this country to a stock-market bubble, and a devastating (for some) crash?

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?

I think he acted on information given, and I believe he is doing the best he can. Ive mentioned this statement before.

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?

I dont care about the opinions given to the masses by the Liberal MediaI think people should have access to ALL the information. not just what the Liberal Media wants us to believe.

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?

Saddam IS out of power, isnt he? Now begins the work to root out the rest of the evil thereand that includes Al Qaeda, or anyone else who sets themselves to support Saddams interests. The same freedom you cry for (and take rigorous advantage of) has no prejudices on whom receives it. Sadly, that same freedom has not only been trampled, its been subverted and perverted to mean, anything goes.

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?

About the samebut dont worry, BenIm sure youre working on it. ;)

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?

I feel that we should be less worried about hurt feelings, and pay close attention to ANYONE who might align themselves with terroristsif that means singling out swarthy individuals because they LOOK suspicious (by way of their papers and their appearance), fine. Instead of pissing and moaning about how they were profiled, they should thank the Terrorists for the inconvenience, and place the anger there---WHERE IT BELONGS. But no, in all fairness, we all have to endure the inconvenience equally. More reason to hate Bin Laden, terrorists, and people like Hillary Clinton, Mike Moore, and Jimmy Carter.

I believe a country without borders is doomed. Just out of curiosity.how many of those bodies of Americans that were dragged through the street, burned, or strung up over bridges were definably swarthy-looking? Care to take a stab at the numbers? Would you be willing to bet they were all or most nearly all, white-skinned (Caucasoid), men and women who would fit the typical description of John Q. Public?

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"

What the heck do you think, Ben? I think the Constitution isnt open to interpretation, no matter how the liberals want to warp and destroy the intentions of the Founding Fathers.

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?

See #13.

Questions 15 through 31 are all attempts by you to make me look like a monster because I believe differently than you, and Ive already answered these in various posts in the past. Interesting. Lets do a little Math here: you have presented thirty-four questions; of these thirty-four, a full seventeen are questions that attempt to stab at or incriminate me as being guilty so you can feel all warm and fuzzy about calling me a religious zealot. (Apparently its YOU who is, in fact, intolerant.)
Questions eleven and twelve are really the same question, and are regarding civil rights (ironically, we both feel the same, but are at perfectly opposite ends of the spectrum!). Questions numbers thirteen and fourteen are a cutealthough weak---lead in attempt to start the questions on a religious note, but Ive answered them anyway. So thats now nineteen religious or quasi-religious questions out of thirty-four. Two others, being based on civil rights, dont necessarily apply to the real topic of this post, War and Oil.

I intend to keep my word about not getting into another religious debate with youaccept it.

Questions thirty-three and (thirty-three? Do YOU think that "strategery" is a word?) thirty-four are just senseless piffle that doesnt even apply herehow many times have WE added or omitted a word, misspelled a word or misinterpreted here? Just another attempt to make President Bush look like a moron because of a misread note or had a verbal stumble.

How about I never had sexual relations with that woman. as another grand demonstration of Whoops!? And thats just one of DOZENS! I could do the same thing with lots of other sources, political or otherwise. How about when the Liberal Media had preemptively called Florida for Gore before the polls closed in the Panhandle? ---Oh, thats right---were only supposed to focus on the fact that Fox News called Bush the victor, and there was some mistake.(later, we found there was no real mistake on the part of Fox News! But more details are provided in my Gore-Loser post.) Oh yeah! And it still turned out Bush Won! (Smacking my brow with my open palmIm such a noodge!)

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?

I consider the Media to be the largest institution for division in this countryagain, something thats been going on LONG before the Bush boys ever crossed the threshold on Capitol Hill.

So getting back to the Maththirty-four questionsnineteen are religion or quasi-religion-based, two are civil-rights-oriented and dont apply, two are fluff, so thats twenty-three non-issues out of thirty-fourand that leaves only eleven questions. In Mathematical form:
34 C 19 C 2 C 2 = 11.

Further breaking them down, Ive answered questions one through three with one answer, four through six got one answer, and the remainder have each received the answers I have given. So really, only seven of your questions just about apply. (34 C 7 = 27) So you could have just asked the seven that apply, which I have duly answered. If youre not satisfied, that doesnt make my answers invalid to everyonejust to you.

But I think Ive been a pretty good sport by answering more than that (fifteen of em, as the crow flies). You dont have to like my answers, you can call em a dodge, or spin, or an evasionwhatever it takes for you to wrap your head around them. But those are the answers I have given, and those are the answers you will get. I do not care if youre content with themI have to live with them as my decisions, and you have to do the same with yours. Im okay with that.

It seems apparent in your line of questioning, that you feel I have need to answer to you for my viewsas in so many other cases, you are wrong. I have to wonder what it is about you that makes you feel that anyone has to explain themselves further---after clearly making their point (whether or not you like it or agree with it)---to you. How unreservedly and absolutely---resolutely!---ludicrous. (I suspect narcissism.)

Who was it that said, "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."? I know it was attributed to Winston Churchillbut who is REALLY responsible for that quote, if not he?

And in regard to your side note: while I do appreciate the attempt at civility, its a day late and a dollar short.

On an altogether different veinwhat on Earth happened to my little post to Jon of San Diego? Well, in case it doesnt post, I wanted to point out (again) that its nice to agree on some things, and even nicer to have the couth to recognize a common thread in someone you dont agree with.

And youre spot-on with your comment to James on AlaskaI remember reading about that in Grade School, that Alaska was jokingly referred to as Sewards Icebox. Nice catch, Jon. ;)
(Psssttbut you know if he comes back with anything, itll be, Yes, but thats not the subject! **quiet wheezing giggle**)

b

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#617 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush- Bush is an Adolf Hitler want to be!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 17, 2005

To ALL PEACEFULL People:

I urge you to pressure majority of Americans to IMPEACH Bush on war crimes! Bush is only interested in oil profits and correcting daddy George Sr.s reputation, because he failed to do anything with Saddam but a few bombs here and there. The Bush family has had ties with the Hussein Family for a long time, since Iran/Iraq war, in which America gave the Iraq President weapons to fight Iran with. People, see, The United States plays countries against other countries so that inevitably the United States can intervene and invade or strike. GWB is a pathetic President that is suppose to represent The United States Of American- Citizens, George W. Bush ratings are at ALL TIME LOW=at 27% approval rating!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#616 Consumer Comment

A side note about the questions.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Sorry, some of my questions refered to previous questions (numbers inculded) and may be a bit off. I tried to keep the general groupings together and forgot completely to change the numbers referenced when I added questions later. This was a type-o and nothing more. I had no intention to mis-lead or "spin" anything into confusion. I think most people will be smart enough to figure out what questions were actually being referenced.

My deepest apologies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#615 Consumer Comment

A side note about the questions.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Sorry, some of my questions refered to previous questions (numbers inculded) and may be a bit off. I tried to keep the general groupings together and forgot completely to change the numbers referenced when I added questions later. This was a type-o and nothing more. I had no intention to mis-lead or "spin" anything into confusion. I think most people will be smart enough to figure out what questions were actually being referenced.

My deepest apologies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#614 Consumer Comment

A side note about the questions.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Sorry, some of my questions refered to previous questions (numbers inculded) and may be a bit off. I tried to keep the general groupings together and forgot completely to change the numbers referenced when I added questions later. This was a type-o and nothing more. I had no intention to mis-lead or "spin" anything into confusion. I think most people will be smart enough to figure out what questions were actually being referenced.

My deepest apologies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#613 Consumer Comment

Ok Vera lets be fair......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Lets be fair here Vera. Ill throw some questions out to you and see where this "spin" game you speak of takes it. I will refrain from making a quote by quote comment on your responses and let others make up their own minds based on your answers. If you wish you may even post questions to me which I will respond in kind assuming you can hold back from the personal attacks and refrain as well from the comments. Let the answers stand on their own. Most importantly we WILL keep this in perspective in regards to Bush's Presidency and that of his fathers. Please answer them with short, but descriptive responses. There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".


1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#612 Consumer Comment

Ok Vera lets be fair......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Lets be fair here Vera. Ill throw some questions out to you and see where this "spin" game you speak of takes it. I will refrain from making a quote by quote comment on your responses and let others make up their own minds based on your answers. If you wish you may even post questions to me which I will respond in kind assuming you can hold back from the personal attacks and refrain as well from the comments. Let the answers stand on their own. Most importantly we WILL keep this in perspective in regards to Bush's Presidency and that of his fathers. Please answer them with short, but descriptive responses. There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".


1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#611 Consumer Comment

Ok Vera lets be fair......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Lets be fair here Vera. Ill throw some questions out to you and see where this "spin" game you speak of takes it. I will refrain from making a quote by quote comment on your responses and let others make up their own minds based on your answers. If you wish you may even post questions to me which I will respond in kind assuming you can hold back from the personal attacks and refrain as well from the comments. Let the answers stand on their own. Most importantly we WILL keep this in perspective in regards to Bush's Presidency and that of his fathers. Please answer them with short, but descriptive responses. There is no need to go into long winded replies. Many can be answered "yes" and "no".


1. Do you think the war in Iraq was justified based on the issue of WMD?

2. If the answer above was "yes", how do you justify your response based on the fact that no WMD's have been found so far?

3. IF no WMD's are ever found, will you still support President Bush's call to war?

4. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of the American people?

5. Do you think that Bush's energy policy is in the best intrest of large engery corporations?

6. Do you think that Bush's energy policy has been part of the foundation to goto war with Iraq?

7. Do agree that the Vice-President should not have to release documents and memos from his "closed-door" meetings with big energy corporations from 2001?

8. Do you approve of how Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?

9. If your answer to the above question is "yes", can you explain why you feel this way even with the current approval ratings for his Presidency?

10. Do you agree with Bush's statment that it has been "Mission Accomplished"?

11. Do you feel that we have more or less civil rights now, than we did 6 years ago?

12. Do you feel that civil rights should be less due to the events of 9/11?

13. Do you agree with the following statement?...."The Constitution of this country was created to protect our freedoms and civil rights"

14. Do you approve or disapprove of making changes in the Constitution to "ban" certain things or actions?

15. Do you believe in a separation of church and state?

16. Do you feel that there is one religion to represent this country?

17. Do you feel that morals only stem from religious faith?

18. Do you feel that people witout religion in their lives are incapable of having "morals"?

19. Do you feel that others should live their lives based on your religious values?

20. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on abortion?

21. Do your religious values approve, dis-approve, or have no comment on gay marriage?

22. Does the fact that abortion is now legal in the country affect your life? If "yes" please explain.

23. If gay marriage were to become legal in this country, do you feel that it would affect your life? If "yes", please explain.

24. If the answers to both 20 and 21 above were "no" then can you please explain why you still maintain that they should be banned while not affecting your life?

25. Do you think that this country was founded by "Christians" and therefore is a "Christian" country to this day?

26. Do you believe that President Bush bases his decisions on his religious values?

27. If the above answer is "yes", do you think that it is fair for others that do not share his (Bush's) religious values?

28. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding a Christian charity or other Christian institution?

29. Do you approve of Goverernment money, and thus taxpayer money, funding an Islamic charity or other Islamic institution?

30. Do you agree with George Bush Sr. statement that people without religion are "not real citizens of this country"?

31. Do you think the above statement by Bush Sr. has affected the way he, and his son, have handled issues of faith and religion during their presidency?

32. Do you consider Bush Jr. a "uniter" or "divider"?

33. Do you think that "strategery" is a word?

And last but not least....for you Trekkies.......

33. How do you feel? :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#610 Consumer Comment

Bush and his religious cronies are out to make this country into something even more vile than the Taliban in Afganistan

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Since he refuses to see why I feel HE is the one on the offensive, I'll point it out here.

Examples/Dates of Ben's name-calling, labeling, or generalizing, in reference to myself and some others:

08/29/05 I love these bible thumping, war loving, "conservatives".

No bite that time.

Next some dork is going to say "well if your not a Christian then you must support SATAN!".

Dangstill a dry hook.

Unfortunately the Republican party has been hijacked by these fundamentalist Christian nuts

Grrr.maybe, if he tries to bonk the bait on the head of the other posters.(Steph of Park Ridge was the target, right?)

Well...my response: Get a life moron, I see in color, not just BLACK AND WHITE LIKE YOU. And even if I was completely colorblind, I can still see shades of grey......you a*****e

Here's a good one: And to be honest, reminds me of grade school mentality. Grow up.

I guess I'm not so mature as you, calling people morons, Zealots and Jihadists. But I never denied the fact that I identified people with certain monikers. I never called you a traitor because of your views---because I don't feel you're a traitor. I don't agree with your views, that's alland hey, with the attitude you've treated me with because I'm just as strong in my beliefs as you, I've still never called you a traitor.

08/31/05

Ben snarls, directed at Michael, in Utah

mind you another RIGHT WING conservative religious zealot!

You guessed it, conservative, religous zealots

About the only difference between these living examples that evolution and the theory that man came from ape are fact, and the general Middle Eastern Terrorist

What, you would rather we hung around with the bomb? Who wants whom to die, now? How barbaric.

09/01/05

To Michael, in Utahagain

The commies that are left cant hurt you. Go back to sleep.....be a good consumer....dont question your government....buy more goods.....reproduce.....sleeeeeeep.

And you conservative nuts say WE are the ones looking for a conspiracy under every rock?!

Now after that CNN post from another screwball from Utah...

Sleep....little capitalist....sleep....do whatever Bush tells you.....buy more goods.....reproduce....be a good consumer....sleep......shhhhh...dont mind those commies.....Bush and Fox news will protect you.

Well, judging by the fact that liberals seem to want a society that's so dependant upon Government, I can see where anyone would perceive it as politically correct communism. After all what did Michael of Utah ever do to you?

09/16/05 (Once again.....its that "God" thing again...)

If this puritanical ranting and overdone religious zealot attitude continues, then this country is done for.

Bush and his religious cronies are out to make this country into something even more vile than the Taliban in Afganistan. Im not worried anymore about his obvious and blatant tax rip offs and the war in Iraq. This religion thing scares me to death.

By the wayif the war isn't a concern, then a.) Why all the grandstanding, and b.) Why not make your own post about religion elsewhere and pick a fight with others to your heart's content? Oh, and incidentallyyou're pretty quick to lump people with different beliefs in the Taliban category here. Is that the new catch phrase?

And for the dork that comes back saying "if your religious then you have no morals!". Well ya dork

So, can we please have the REAL Republican party back from you religious zealots?

First call directed at me; the post is clearly aimed at me, because I'm the first subject of attack.

Sure, at the end of the post, you've made the famous if you're into it, finejust don't drag the rest of us in statementbut how can you pick a fight on such a tender subject, and then tell someone they're a dork if they try to defend their position? Nonetheless, I do try to remain focused on the subject at hand, limiting my response to you, and keeping my focus elsewhere. In fact, I think the only comment I had made to you was on 09/19/05:

Ben, from Martinez, all I can say is this: You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party.

And that was only meant in jestbut since I didn't follow it with any indication (he-he or lol), I can see where you saw it as non-humorous. Either way, that statement I had madeall two sentences of itwas no more or less unfair than any of the many comments you had made, that I was responding to. The b***h of it all is, I still stand by that comment. As soon as the liberals stop trying to force me to live a lifestyle that's contraindicative to my beliefs, I'll be happy to back off. They want it so bad, let TEHM live it.but I know they wont (see examples given in my last post to B.).

Ohand in another post, notice that I make an effort to show I'm at least relatively good natured to you: (09/20/05) Even Ben's pretty cool, and whether or not he believes in the Almighty, that's his choice. We'll all find out the Answer in the End. I'm not a religious zealot, or a homophobe In case you're not familiar, that's an attempt to diffuse a potentially caustic situation by issuing a compliment. I don't imagine you receive many, as all of your replies to me have been nothing but acerbic and nasty.)

10/11/05

The very title of this post is a discredit to my sanity and/or mentality:
Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

At this point, I had not made a SINGLE comment, insulting younot ONE.

You were first in line to attack my beliefs, second in line to question my interpretation of the Bible: ...spare me the stories of evil elves from your Mother Goose book....er...I mean..The Bible

And I have NO idea where you come off with this shtick:

Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet? (and I'm not talking the d**n enviroment here people....I mean the WHOLE freaking planet! Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply. (WTF??!)

As if the thought of science sends me cringing in terror (but I've already addressed that spin of yours in other posts...). Percieved as an accusation of paranoid stupidity.

On 10/12/05, I tried to avoid getting off subject again, and really meant to leave it at that.

But you attack, on 10/13/05, with a bend, a twist, and a We dont need your book or your churches to get common sense and morality like you week minded people do. Why you religous nuts think you have to do some holy crusade and convert us

Here again, because I believe differently than you, you accuse me of being weak-minded and a religious nut. Still, not ONE insult to you, personally.

And maybe you see that in the Presidentbut I do not. And I have NEVER made any attempts to convert ANYONE. EVER. Just like you can, I can also use quotes from MY sources. Interpret as you wishbut at least, interpret correctly. Why don't you just make your own post somewhere about this nonsense? You have denied giving a d**n about the war, taxes, and the loss of lives, and expressed your main concern being of some theocracy (09/16/05) Im not worried anymore about his obvious and blatant tax rip offs and the war in Iraq. This religion thing scares me to death.

On 10/15/05 I made the post that contained the information on O'Hair. Like it or don't, she is the founder of the organization here in America (at least, she WAScheck wikipedia). That was the one post that I had dedicated to you, and you alone because I got sick and tired of your personal attacks; but at that point, too, I was set on not letting it flywheel out of control into another topic. But you were clearly spoiling, having set the hook firmly.

It was the post by B. on 10/19/05 that I gave more detailed response to (on 10/20/05)not you. He asked me questions, or made comments, and I responded to them. Yes that is the post that contains the curriculum data you refuse to allow to exist. Notice that you get a whole post in, that I don't even bother to respond to (I'd have to checkI don't even think I read it!), in hopes of keeping my word.

Your next reply to me, on 10/20/05, calls me a liar (you're either making things up) or implies that I watch only religious programming (both of which are WRONG).

And more comments: Foist your christian propaganda elsewhere.

Once again I say to you and your Bushite religous zealots...

You people are sick.

We dont need it for morals or family values like you week minded folk do.

We are not lazy like you and need to send our children to sunday school to learn how to be civil.

When did I ever insult your parenting skills, that I deserve such a scathe? Where have I ever said that you, personally, are sick because you believe different than I? Where did I ever say you were uncivil?

You had your chance to run the world. You sucked at it. Hows that for morals? eh?

Where did I say, at this point, that you had no morals (speaking of waiting a long time for proof!)?

10/22/05 I felt compelled to reply directly to you. And now, I'm nasty about things. Yes, I do refer to O'Hair as O'Whorebut why are you concerned? You're not part of what she supports, now, are you?

Yet you stand in her defense. Hmm. Whatever.

10/24/05, where you think you can tear me down, quote by quote (still waiting! :D )right off the top with the insults, aren't we?

Lets go over your last religous right-wing banterings and BS. I really love how you nuts like to make things up

Twist and contort...and outright LIE. Its the religous way. And clearly, the Ben-Way. Anything to keep those week minded masses from converting to SATAN! Eh?

we knew you were FULL of it! And the previous quote from you is proof. You pulled that whole argument out of your a*s

You zealots

I will admit tho, Vera, I DO think your a "bible thumping war monger".

For petes sake you nuts are such hypocrits.

An attack on my parenting skills (where I had made NONE on yours):

Your going to honestly tell me that when your sons were young children (and I'm sure you started them young!) and they told you that they DINDT want to goto church....you would have been fine with that?! Your not going to pull the wool over my eyes Vera, or anyone elses. You know d**n well that isnt true. You made them go. Dont lie. And after making them go for so long, I bet your saying "ill be damned if they try to stop". You obviously cant handle me not paying attention to "god". I can only imagine what you would do to your sons.

10/25/05 THREE Posts, all dedicated to telling me that you're a liar, Vera, singling me out as your kind of people, your types, and such.

Your no different than those ultra-loony religous rednecks from the southeast

You and your ilk and then people like yourself

So you see Vera, I can be fair. You cant.

You, Bush, and your ilk do tho.

10/25/05Uh, Vera, presenting the article would make your case legit.

Apparently not, Bennie-Boy. ;)

10/31/05

Here I am you religous freaking zealot. Your a liar Vera. Completely and totally.

You....flat out lied. And now you have no intention to back up your claims.

You lie, and make things up.

I can only assume you are lying since you are completely incapable of showing any viable proof.

If you are a liar Vera (and its becomming very obvious) then you have no honor....or morals.

Perhaps you should re-read your "book".I thought we didn't need a fairy-tale book to teach us morals.? More do as I say, not as I do?

you and your ilk preach to the world and lie outright to push your misguided views of life

Here's a fave: You people are complete hypocrites.

On 11/02/05, I'm reason-challenged, according to the title of this post.

Im sure your just giddy and in total glee that you nuts will be able to take science out of mainstream life and bring back more important moral things like the inquisition. Followed closely by buring at the stake any two couples shacked up together of the same sex.

Like so many of these other comments, you accuse me of cheering/supporting:

a.) The Holocaust,
b.) The Inquisition,
c.) The Crusades.

And fearing or decrying science, scientific advancement, or anything science relatedyet you offer not one instance where I have indicated science to be evil, or the devil's work. All pure Ben-Spin.

11/04/05

You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

how hypocritical you and your ilk really are.

everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong.

Come out of your biblical era mud hut

Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut.

that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

That can't be.otherwise, you'd be friendlier towards one who preaches the same tainted gospel as you.

Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town
I never said I wanted you dead, or that I'd dance on your grave, or whatever. More Ben-Spin.

Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it.

Yawn.eye-roll. More off-color ways to call me a Jihadist again?

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

You first.

11/07/05 brings us another attempt to sound tough

Lets once again tear Vera down..with her own intolerance etc

Hell, I'm still waiting since the FIRST time you made a claim that you could tear me down. Here I am, b***h. STILL standing strong!

you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues.

Hitler did the same about Jews Comparing me with Hitler?

You should be talking to a mirror, here: And you get all pissy when someone else does in response to you.

Nice way to DODGE there Vera.

I dodged nothing. If you're not happy with my responses, that's just too bad, Boo-h*o.

Yup I bet the SS said that to the Jews when they were being forced into cattle cars.

Another comparison to the monstrous behavior of the Nazis. Is your hate justified now?

Still unable to back up your lies?

Only one problem. I'm not presenting lies. You are the one who insists I'm trying to convert others, which you have not proven by any substantial means (no matter how you try to claim I provided you with proofI just don't see it. Not because I refusebut because it doesn't exist.). You claim I'm trying to force others to live like saints, and profess myself as an example (see comment in parenthesis again.). You claim that I support the terrorists, the Nazis, the Crusades, the Witch Trials.and so on. Again, see the comment made in parenthesis. You're the one who started this off-topic quarrel, and by your own admission (Im not worried anymore about his obvious and blatant tax rip offs and the war in Iraq. This religion thing scares me to death.), you ARE here to pick a fight about something that STILL doesn't apply.

Apparently, you're too infatuated with quarreling with me, and too timid to make your OWN post on that same subject, because you know those that support Faith will swarm and sting you like wasps to a piece of rotten meat.

If you don't care, then none of these posts would even have been made. But you did make them Vera.

I responded to you because I'm sick of self-righteous little pricks like you and James bashing my right to voice my opinion, and call me a liar because my views don't agree with yours. You are clearly the one who's stuck on stupid.

You cant fathom the idea that someone without religion has morals. Since you think morals can ONLY stem from religion itself.

That's a subject you have bought in, and I have addressed it. See previous posts.

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

You misconstrued the message (and no doubt, did it on purpose, so you could feel justified in such a blatant and obvious misconception).

And people like you are leading the charge.

With comments like that, if I were black, I could justify and prove that you're a racist. But I digress.I'd just be playing the Ben-Spin game.

Your really reaching here Vera.

No, not at all. Just proving which forms of life are more worthy of your sympathy and/or concern.

Ive avoided this subject so far.

Interesting.like you avoided the subject of gay marriage by bringing it up what? Six times? You haven't avoided this subjectyou're just touching on the issues you KNOW will spark a firefight with me, because you love the thought of quarreling with a person on personal belief or religious principle. I've said it before and I still stand firmyou were trolling for a person to pick a fight with on religion. And how nice that it fits, I'M the biggest villain on the board, according to you, the Twin Freaks, Jon, Liam, Greg and so on.

11/09/05

The only "hate" I have shown is for intolerant people like yourself.

The only intolerance I see, is that I don't agree with you, and you're intolerant of it.

Your attacks have slid into nothing more than rants and ravings of some schoolyard bully. With the elementary wit to boot.

I could say the same for you, but I wouldn't want you to think you're as smart as the average schoolyard bully, with the elementary wit, so I won't issue the compliment.

You have called me just about every name in the book.

Well, this post points out that I clearly ain't the first, in the volley-match between you and I. In fact, it's the very nature of this whole post, for the reading populace to enjoy.

You have questioned my sexuality Because I asked you if you were in the closet? Okay.but remember, I wasn't the one trying to bring gay marriage into this post on MULTIPLE occasions.

Sad and typicalyou're pushing all the hot-buttons you know will start a fight. And lookyou're just as lame as ever, no matter how much you have to pat yourself on the back to make your head swell.

The last post was nothing but tizzy tantrum by a typical lost religious nut. Yes I call you names Vera, but I stick to exactly what you are..... a Zealot.

Unable to prove anything, yet the old standby is name-calling. Congrats Bennieyou've contradicted yourself again. Here's some more

You cant even get it in your little mind

Because your too filled with hate to acknowledge anything but your own views. (Must be talking to a mirror here.)

If you do, your either a moron or totally out of touch with reality.

Its a little hard to decipher any real info from your posts when they are so littered with your hate for homosexuals

Where did I say I hate Gay folks? You insinuatethat's your only platform.

myself You flatter yourself, by assuming you're important enough for me to hate. Very few people on this planet carry that status. I take love and hate very seriouslyjust as I'd not be inclined to tell a person to go to hell. (Ironically, I don't even get phased when people tell me I can go to hell...it's such an empty threat when it comes from people like you.)

Its even harder when your posts are laced with constant stream of personal attacks like "p***y" and telling people to "f**k off".

Hard to see your point of view for the same reasons, Sunshine---oh, and the fact that you present very few provable facts. The bulk of your commentary has been so laced with hate, and even more so, since I've picked up the gauntlet. And apparently, it seems I'm capable of handling my own fairly well. You don't intimidate me. And neither do others like you.

If you do anything Vera, just answer this one question and make it short.....Do you want Roe Vs. Wade overturned?

Nice try at another hot-button chance to hop the fence. I've stated how I feel about abortions. Glean what you wish out of it---you're doing it with everything else, why should this be any different? You're trying to push me into double-blind, baiting me. So this will leave no room for this spin' you speak ofunless you provide it. Discuss it elsewhere.

11/09/05

Just for you Vera, since you seem totally incapable of realizing that YOU are the PROOF of what I have been saying.

Yet ANOTHER lazy assed cop out by another lazy a*s crybaby.
Andan attack on my reasoningbecause I don't agree with your OPINION of me. So be it.

If I'm incapable of reason, it's fair to reason that you're incapable of intelligent thought.

More labeling.

Here we see how the nut-case religious right

I know its hard for you zealot types but try hard for me

You keep dodging Vera, I'll keep track of our vanishing civil rights, and our war dead. Because obviously you dont care.

Sureand you do care. Riiiiight. Quack! Said the Dog. Once again.selective outrage, for one set of lives deemed worthy over the rights of the defenseless. Death is tragic, no mater the age of the casualty. Try keeping track of ALL vanishing civil rightsnot just yours (it is to laugh!), and maybe you might get a glimpse of the whole picture. Why are my rights less valid than yours? Some of the worst things happened LONG before Bush (Dad or Son) was ever in office. It's just a travesty now, because the liberals aren't getting their way.

More double-standards.

11/10/05
Vera, and now you attack me because

You know where I stand on this. I was not the first to attack you under any circumstances, and I wasn't the one trolling to pick a fight on that subject. That honor belongs to you, and you have plenty of sources provided in this very post, to prove it.

I challenge you to re-post ANYTHING I have said

This post is rife with examples of your claiming (erroneously) that I'm trying to indoctrinate you or anyone. The ONE thing you ARE accurate on, is that I've called you names. I concede nothing else to you, other than the fact that you're a sorely delusional fellow, and you seem to think you're clever. Yours is an easy argument to bat asideI've known many idiots like you, and you get easier to topple with every post.

Unfortunately the only people spinning here is you and Vera. Now you have taken this quote of mine time and time again and used is as a basis for saying that I am forcing something on you?? Are you kidding me??

Hmm.that's not what I get from what Shawn writes. But that IS exactly what YOU are doing.

Only a sick twisted fruit like yourself

Are you questioning Shawn's sexuality? With the negative derision in which you spit this at him, you'd think it was an insult! Gaspity-GASP! A little pot calling the kettle black?

11/14/05

Once again you continue with this BS Vera. Your only the enemy if you PUSH IT ON OTHERS. And that is something you have consistantly and constantly done and/or approved of.

Bullshit. That is your OPINION, not a fact. Close your legsyour breath stinks.

So now I challenge you.

Unfortunately, no you haven't. Sad, and true. My thorniest challenge has been trying to find a single point in any of my posts here that implies I'm trying to convert anyone. Y'see, I don't post here because I think I'll win the argumentI post here to challenge people's opinions with my own. That's the swell part of debate. What I find annoying or offensive, is someone calling me a zealot or a homophobe because I believe differently than they, so they assume, therefore, than since I have Faith, I MUST be a homophobe, or a Bible-thumper, or a war-monger and thus, deserve to be lumped into a group like n**i, or Jihadist.

Its really sick and twisted that your hate of anyone without religion has turned into some vile attempt to lay blame on me for something like what your doing.

Once again, you flatter yourself into thinking that you can inspire a feeling stronger than nausea in me, Bennie. Yet ANOTHER statement founded on conjecture and opinion, not fact.

No matter how many times you print the same phrase, you have a mountain of contrary evidence. You accuse me, then turn around and say I'm accusing youand provide a cop out when I ask you to show me. Or you just totally misinterpret something I said (and have the gall to call me a liar when I correct it, or accuse me of dodging---you know---like YOU do), surround it with nasty titles Zealot, n**i, Jihadist, Religious Nut, Freak, Freaking Religious Zealot, ad infinitum.so it'll look more real to you.

Simple enough for you? Good! Now stop spinning and bullshitting. You know d**n well I dont hate religion. And you KNOW d**n well WHAT I DO HATE.

Sure do. You hate the fact that you can't wear me down, let alone tear me down. It'll be a cold day in hell before I break under the baffle em with bullshit style of verbal warfare you institute.

I'm not the one taking little snippets of information and twittering gleefully as I eliminate the whole body of text between two statements in order to correlate them. You want this to end? Stop goading a fight on anything other than the subject of this post. Is that too hard? Can't you justNOT pick a fight about something off topic, like gay marriage, abortion, religion, and other crap you've been trolling for? Can't you just make another, SEPARATE POST in another topic category, instead of trying to kidnap the people of this topic?

So Ben, I can learn, and I can listen.but you're asking me to do two things I cannot, in reference to your posts. I can learn where I make errorand I see no error in the information that I have presented as per request. I can listen to sound and logical reason, given that it is presented consistently. Therein lies my greatest example of your hypocrisyyou tell everyone here believe as you wishyet you constantly bash me for what I believe in, and treat it like a crime when I present my view based on my belief or knowledge.

You accuse me of trying to indoctrinate others, and I have presented nothing that supports this. And you further bash anyone on the right' as being a religious zealota quarrel that you've been trying to flame up since VERY early on.

If you really believe in what you say, do as you wish, be the bigger kid' and let it end here. I WANT to get back into the fray with other peoplequite franklyI find you a dreadful bore.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#609 Consumer Comment

"The U.S. Stole Alaska"

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 15, 2005

I'm sorry but I just have to ask: James, how did the U.S. steal Alaska? I could almost agree there might be a little controversy regarding the acquisition of Hawaii. But William H. Seward, Secretary of State, under President Andrew Johnson was intensely criticized for purchasing Alaska from Russia.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#608 Consumer Comment

Just to set the facts straight

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 14, 2005

Vera,

In past posts you have erroneously labeled me as a liberal just because I don't share your favorable opinion of Bush. Just to set the record straight: I'm not! Believe it or not, I totally agree with your comments above regarding: Al, Barbara, Jessie, John, etc. I have the same level of disgust regarding these folks; they're just more of the same old worthless, blathering hypocrites. In fact, my list of these is people is likely to be a bit more inclusive that yours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#607 Consumer Comment

Just to set the facts straight

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 14, 2005

Vera,

In past posts you have erroneously labeled me as a liberal just because I don't share your favorable opinion of Bush. Just to set the record straight: I'm not! Believe it or not, I totally agree with your comments above regarding: Al, Barbara, Jessie, John, etc. I have the same level of disgust regarding these folks; they're just more of the same old worthless, blathering hypocrites. In fact, my list of these is people is likely to be a bit more inclusive that yours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#606 Consumer Comment

Just to set the facts straight

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 14, 2005

Vera,

In past posts you have erroneously labeled me as a liberal just because I don't share your favorable opinion of Bush. Just to set the record straight: I'm not! Believe it or not, I totally agree with your comments above regarding: Al, Barbara, Jessie, John, etc. I have the same level of disgust regarding these folks; they're just more of the same old worthless, blathering hypocrites. In fact, my list of these is people is likely to be a bit more inclusive that yours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#605 Consumer Comment

Just to set the facts straight

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 14, 2005

Vera,

In past posts you have erroneously labeled me as a liberal just because I don't share your favorable opinion of Bush. Just to set the record straight: I'm not! Believe it or not, I totally agree with your comments above regarding: Al, Barbara, Jessie, John, etc. I have the same level of disgust regarding these folks; they're just more of the same old worthless, blathering hypocrites. In fact, my list of these is people is likely to be a bit more inclusive that yours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#604 Consumer Comment

Vera.....you just dont learn....or listen... do you?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 14, 2005

Good grief Vera......

"But no, Ben sees the world through some narrow slit, that ANYone who has the balls to have different political views and dares believe in a divinity (much less, to actually mention said divinity, or to admit to consulting same!) is the enemy."


Over and over we go. Ok Ill say it again....and again....and again....

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.

If you believe in religion....fine. Just dont push it on others.


Once again you continue with this BS Vera. Your only the enemy if you PUSH IT ON OTHERS. And that is something you have consistantly and constantly done and/or approved of. I dont hate religion. Only when its pushed on me through politics or other means. This is the same thing I have said constantly and consistantly. I challenged Shawn to prove that I have stated otherwise. So now I challenge you. Its really sick and twisted that your hate of anyone without religion has turned into some vile attempt to lay blame on me for something like what your doing.

Have you forgotten all your comments about some women that tried to organize "atheism"? Lets assume I was part of this "organization" you speak of (which I'm not, despite your constant attempts to accuse me of such). You obviously have great hatred of this woman and her "organization" and therefore you hate me. And you have great hatred of anything non-religious. Your comments calling her a "w***e" and other things is fair proof in any light. And your hatred of me because of my views is also apparent (your comments about how I was conceived in one of your latest posts is a good example....plus many other silly personal attacks).

Yet you still maintain that I hate "anyone with opposing viewpoints". When I have ALWAYS said....."only those who FORCE their views on others". And there YOU are hating someone with an "opposing viewpoint". How do you expect anyone that reads your posts to take you seriously about this? I mean really, there you are accusing me of something thats obviously false, while your doing that EXACT thing!

That hardly translates into "hating religion".

You want it...FINE! More power to you. But while your in church on Sunday, Ill be watching football. That is no problem to me. And it should be no problem to you. My watching football, or doing anything else other than going to church, has no effect on your life. But if you come and take it away from me....then we have a problem. You need not worry about me comming to take away your Sunday mass at church, so its best not try and make me come to church when I dont want it.

Simple enough for you? Good! Now stop spinning and bullshitting. You know d**n well I dont hate religion. And you KNOW d**n well WHAT I DO HATE.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#603 Consumer Comment

Jon's website...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

Regarding Jon's website; if you do a few more mouse clicks, you'll see this beginning statement written by the creator of the site...

"Purpose and Intent of this website:

This website does not suggest that it contains the "truth". The truth is a combination of all information and all facts relating to a topic. It is therefore unachievable (in my opinion) for anyone to say "I know the truth."

If you came to this site in search of "the truth" you will be disappointed."

Of course, he further goes on to explain this position--and rather well, I might add. I commend the fact that at least, in this statement, he appears to be relatively impartial.

However, his motives seem more to divide, than unite, our wounded country's views, if the article presented by Jon is a view he agrees with. If this is the case...why doesn't this guy just LOVE CNN?

Well...at least he tries present some level of honesty.
Thanks for the link, Jon. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#602 Consumer Comment

A little sensitive are we?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

Robert,

Oh calm down, I didn't even state whether I believed the post to be true or not. The fact is I just found it and then just read enough of it to know that I could get a rise out of you guys. Well, I see it worked. The simple fact is that I don't like Bush or his minions, but that said, I can't remember the last time I was enthusiastic at all about any politician, so lighten up will you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#601 Consumer Comment

A little sensitive are we?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

Robert,

Oh calm down, I didn't even state whether I believed the post to be true or not. The fact is I just found it and then just read enough of it to know that I could get a rise out of you guys. Well, I see it worked. The simple fact is that I don't like Bush or his minions, but that said, I can't remember the last time I was enthusiastic at all about any politician, so lighten up will you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#600 Consumer Comment

A little sensitive are we?

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

Robert,

Oh calm down, I didn't even state whether I believed the post to be true or not. The fact is I just found it and then just read enough of it to know that I could get a rise out of you guys. Well, I see it worked. The simple fact is that I don't like Bush or his minions, but that said, I can't remember the last time I was enthusiastic at all about any politician, so lighten up will you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#599 Consumer Comment

Speaking of low ratings...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

It is to laugh...

You should see how other folks from Tupper Lake, as well as the rest of the country, have treated the intellect in posts made by this James of Tupper character. And that's just using the data within this website. Maybe someone should "impeach" Tupper's self-proclaimed "man on the street", taking away his camera and computer.

Outside of that, you've got the media to blame for the President's ratings (if those ratings are indeed true, AND the fact that he's become too concerned with trying to placate the likes of Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry.). If they'd only report the whole story, and both sides, and give a totally unbiased view, perhaps we would be better able to make our decision. This is the reason I read most of my News, then seek out more. I never once said everyone has to agree with me, believe as I do, or that I'm always right...but I'll be damned if I'll let someone step on my views and go unchallenged.

But we all know that if a Liberal does wrong "everybody does it", and "he was under a lot of pressure"...but if a Conservative does something wrong, "He's a dictator!" and "he's taking away our rights!" Let's not forget the ever popular "It's a massive smear-campaign mounted by the 'vast religious right-wing conservative machine'." (Speaking of "let's not forget": it was Kerry's team that started smearing the fake "Bush Jr. went A.W.O.L. in the National Guard" bit into the light...and it was completely disproved NINE times.)

Meanwhile, the Liberals want the rest of the United States to live in ways they themselves won't live. Rosie O'Donnel's body guards carry Guns. Head of the Million Mom march has a record--for shooting another person! Noam Chomsky leads people to believe the Pentagon is evil, but he's made millions in contract work for the Department of Defense. Babs Streisand owns a strip-mining company (nice, for an environmentalist!). Hillary Clinton supports letting thirteen year old girls to have abortions, but wouldn't dream of letting her kid pierce her ears. She's also enrolled in a school that doesn't distribute condoms to the kids. There's some nice double-standard thinking for you. To put it simply: they live the very lifestyle they're passing laws to eliminate from US, the People.

Many of the policies instituted by some of these people don't relieve the burden of poverty...they create dependency. A minority person can't be truly sure if their position in the job they have is as a result of their own talent and effort, or the result of them fitting the criteria for "affirmative action". People like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton work harder to keep prejudice alive than they do to eliminate it. If prejudice didn't exist, they'd lose their following.

To "B."...

Well, thanks, I think...but that's only my view. As far as what to do, well...I dunnoh. So far, I've suggested that they go to where ever it IS legal for gay people to marry, and both times, Ben has taken it as some kind of attack, like I'm trying to "force everyone to conform". (And I know I'll get another post saying--to the effect of--"YOU ARE trying to force everyone to be under your control! You ARE taking away our rights! You ARE upset because you can't stop attacking everyone's right to 'just be themselves'--because you can't interfere!"---ALL pure bullshit, but if it's what he's gotta do to make me look like the monster in his own eyes, then---HISSSSSSSSS!! (Maybe I should contact that fat gagging chick from "Trading Spouses" (That's not Kriss--TCHYUUUNN!!" and invite her over for tea!)

I suppose, that if I were to suggest that they go into the next state and get married, he'd see it as me trying to "force people to conform". Personally, if they go to Canada and marry, then come home, They're married. (Shrugging)--I really don't know why that's an issue. They ;eave, have a honeymoon (?), come back with a suitcase fulla souvenirs and little bath soaps (maybe a towel or two, just for yuks), and a marriage certificate. They have their certificate, it's legit, and they can get on with their lives. Why isn't a civil union good enough? Because they can't pick out a china pattern? (Shrugging again)?

I guess my point is, if I were to suggest you go to--I don't know---Outback Steak House, instead of T.G.I. Fridays, I'm meddling in your right to have a steak in an American-Themed restaurant? Is not a T-Bone the same cut, the only difference is the sides (depending on which place you choose)? But no, Ben sees the world through some narrow slit, that ANYone who has the balls to have different political views and dares believe in a divinity (much less, to actually mention said divinity, or to admit to consulting same!) is the enemy. To add some sort of clout, he presents completely out of context information and claims THIS is the basis on which I believe, this is somehow MY MINDSET, and then surrounds it with color, fluff and piffle to make it look like fact.

If he weren't such a weak-minded little cop-out, he'd almost be half decent at the spin game.

Ohh--before I forget...keep the bats in there....the voices in one's head can always use company. (I know it works for me!) Heh. :D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#598 Consumer Comment

Gee Jon, why wouldn't any of us "right" thinkers want to read your link?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

Is it because it's a left wing crackpot site? That's is probably it. Let's see...it refers to the Bush family as "gangsters", and has a petition to free Jose Padilla, also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir.

Who's he you ask? He's the AlQueda terrorist who had trained for, and sought materials for use in a radiological(dirty) bomb. He was given access to the top guys in AlQueda, including Bin Laden and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. HE was arrested as he got off the plane in Chicago. Some great poster boy the liberals have in this guy. He was a thug before becoming a terrorist, spending most of his life as a juvenile and adult in jail.

Everything in that site is anti-American, with the anti-Bush theme being the "flavor of the month". It even refers to a group of scumbags in the cells of Gitmo as "Patriots", and makes the case that they are just tourists caught up in a bad moment. They are terrorists and enemy combatants. The reports of American deaths are given great fanfare, while the reports of terrorists are treated as if they were all innocent civilians...civilians with massive amounts of weapons stockpiled. Maybe they were going hunting gophers with the RPG's and machine guns.

Great link there Jon. Maybe you can get together with James in Canada and pass these notes between yourselves. It doesn't help your case when you tell us where you get your information. Perhaps you should keep it a secret, like James is doing now. He at least admitted to getting his from Chinese communists.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#597 REBUTTAL Individual responds

George W. Bush- Ratings at ALL time LOW!!!!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 13, 2005

I see that George Bush Jr. is the second lowest rated President since Richard Nixon, also a republican. Bush is seen as a dishonest President and, he lied to the American People about the Iraq WAR!!! George Bush Jr. has killed innocent people for profit. George Bush Sr. was smart enough not to get involved with this pay-off, but you Junior you have to explain the way the USA is taking over the world sneaky, and slowly , 1 country at a time! We already stole, Alaska, and Hawaii!Now we stole Iraq!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#596 Consumer Comment

I finally understand why people see gay marriage as an attack on the institution.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 12, 2005

Vera,

Thanks for taking the time to explain all that to me. I finally understand why people see gay marriage as an attack on the institution. I suppose I also have you to thank for all the time its going to take me to incorporate this new info into my "world view." RRRrrrrrrrrrr! LOL

So, while I'm taking things apart, rearranging and dusting things off in the ol' mental attic (and chasing out the occasional bat), do you have any foundation-shaking ideas on how we achieve some sort of parity for gays and their children?

Grandkidlets! Truly God's other gift to the world! Its like having your cake and eating it too, and somebody else does the dishes. 8D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#595 Consumer Comment

B, Thanx for interesting reading throughout

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 12, 2005

B,

I don't know if you have read the information presented on the site below regarding the Bush family... but in case you haven't, you may want to do so by accessing the following site: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3308.htm

Vera & Gang,

You won't believe it, so why bother reading it. Just thought I'd be nice and save you some time. Additionally, it will only upset you further.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#594 Consumer Comment

jummpst hmmmoooold aawwwn ooon mnut!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 12, 2005

Gulp! Sorry, it's hard to talk when you've got a mouth full of crow! (Failed to heed my own advice - took comment from someone I respected and regarded it as fact. Learned otherwise when trying to proove you wrong - sorry boo-h*o) Oh well, at least it's still warm. I will comment further once the WHOLE pie is digested. lol

Gotta run!

uuuuuuurp! 'scuse me

May God bless the U.S.A. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#593 Consumer Comment

"If only" and "I believe"

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

If only the Bible mentioned petroleum products, we could discuss that issue without religion being an extraneous topic.

If only "The Joy of Sex" had mentioned oil, we could discuss that issue without sex being an extraneous topic.

If only I could have faith in my country and trust in its leadership again.

If only I could tell the troops how much I thank them for what they have given up in this war.

If only every single person who has died as a direct result of the Iraq conflict could live again.

If only I could shake the feeling that America is hurtling toward her own implosion and ultimate destruction as one spectacular suicidal nova.

I believe that we "cannot" catch bin Laden because he is a prince of the Saudi royal family. I believe that we will never "catch" bin Laden because we cannot afford to catch him.

I believe that Iraq was invaded to give America a base in a central location in the Middle East. I believe that someone has plans that will make this centrally-located base necessary in the future.

I believe that the only hope for this country is to show both big parties the door and try to start again with a leader who has read the Constitution.

I believe if only we could turn back time, things might be different.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#592 Consumer Comment

To those who served....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

>>>>>>>Happy Veterans Day
It is a fitting place and a focal point to honor American veterans, but as General George S. Patton, Jr., reminded us, "It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. A man who has nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance at being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

--John Stuart Mill

Amid all the political rancor about justifications for operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, it is worth remembering the words of USMC Chaplain Dennis Edward O'Brian: "It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.

I won't forget. Thanks, Dear Veterans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#591 Consumer Comment

Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

Robert in Dallas,

Thanks for the windfall tax info. I haven't had time to be 'plugged in' to the news the past few weeks. I caught a couple of minutes of some Senator talking about it on CSPAN2, but I didn't have anything to tie it to.

An interesting side note. We have some decent refining capacity here in Denver, and the furthest our supply has to travel is from Wyoming. Nonetheless, during the 'hurricane spike', our price at the pump shot up about 75 cents to a dollar per gallon. Also, we've enjoyed fairly reasonable prices for natural gas - until they finished the pipeline, at which point our prices shot up to 'market' value.

I came across an interesting theory the other day, that our real purpose in Iraq is to protect our interests in Saudi Arabia. Both in distracting the terrorists and in having arms and personnel available to defend. I didn't quite understand why the terrorists would suddenly want to attack Saudi Arabia, and I kinda blew the whole thing off as yet another left-wing wacko thinking too far outside his box. But later I got to thinking, you know I've never seen Bush holding anyone else's hand but Laura's. And, Moorish conspiracy theories aside, I think I'd have to say Bush and the new King are a little more than casual acquaintances.

_________________
Ben,

I cannot find any reference to the dictator quote you posted, and nothing like it shows in the white house transcripts of his speeches on that day, so... its possible the calendar people made it up or attributed the wrong date, but I'm finding no other references to it anywhere.

Not that you need quotes to show he's pushing religion. You, of course, as an atheist, probably have no quarrel with the 'tithe' he's imposing on the middle class and 'only mildly wealthy' to pay for preaching the gospel to people who literally have no choice but to listen. Not that funding religious institutions to deliver services is anything new, we've been doing it for decades. But we used to demand that certain criteria be met, including no preaching. Now, you need housing assistance, you gonna hear bout Jesus first. If you read Bush's speeches from that day, you will find that we had it all wrong. Somehow, the churches cannot deliver service as well as secular agencies without comingling their fairy tales. I guess its a sort of value added service. When my best friend was laid off, he went to the Federal Job Bank to see what listings they had. His 'counselor' told him they really didn't have much available in the tech sector, but suggested he check with his church to see what they had available. Just his tough luck, I guess, that he doesn't pray that way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#590 Consumer Comment

Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

Robert in Dallas,

Thanks for the windfall tax info. I haven't had time to be 'plugged in' to the news the past few weeks. I caught a couple of minutes of some Senator talking about it on CSPAN2, but I didn't have anything to tie it to.

An interesting side note. We have some decent refining capacity here in Denver, and the furthest our supply has to travel is from Wyoming. Nonetheless, during the 'hurricane spike', our price at the pump shot up about 75 cents to a dollar per gallon. Also, we've enjoyed fairly reasonable prices for natural gas - until they finished the pipeline, at which point our prices shot up to 'market' value.

I came across an interesting theory the other day, that our real purpose in Iraq is to protect our interests in Saudi Arabia. Both in distracting the terrorists and in having arms and personnel available to defend. I didn't quite understand why the terrorists would suddenly want to attack Saudi Arabia, and I kinda blew the whole thing off as yet another left-wing wacko thinking too far outside his box. But later I got to thinking, you know I've never seen Bush holding anyone else's hand but Laura's. And, Moorish conspiracy theories aside, I think I'd have to say Bush and the new King are a little more than casual acquaintances.

_________________
Ben,

I cannot find any reference to the dictator quote you posted, and nothing like it shows in the white house transcripts of his speeches on that day, so... its possible the calendar people made it up or attributed the wrong date, but I'm finding no other references to it anywhere.

Not that you need quotes to show he's pushing religion. You, of course, as an atheist, probably have no quarrel with the 'tithe' he's imposing on the middle class and 'only mildly wealthy' to pay for preaching the gospel to people who literally have no choice but to listen. Not that funding religious institutions to deliver services is anything new, we've been doing it for decades. But we used to demand that certain criteria be met, including no preaching. Now, you need housing assistance, you gonna hear bout Jesus first. If you read Bush's speeches from that day, you will find that we had it all wrong. Somehow, the churches cannot deliver service as well as secular agencies without comingling their fairy tales. I guess its a sort of value added service. When my best friend was laid off, he went to the Federal Job Bank to see what listings they had. His 'counselor' told him they really didn't have much available in the tech sector, but suggested he check with his church to see what they had available. Just his tough luck, I guess, that he doesn't pray that way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#589 Consumer Comment

Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

Robert in Dallas,

Thanks for the windfall tax info. I haven't had time to be 'plugged in' to the news the past few weeks. I caught a couple of minutes of some Senator talking about it on CSPAN2, but I didn't have anything to tie it to.

An interesting side note. We have some decent refining capacity here in Denver, and the furthest our supply has to travel is from Wyoming. Nonetheless, during the 'hurricane spike', our price at the pump shot up about 75 cents to a dollar per gallon. Also, we've enjoyed fairly reasonable prices for natural gas - until they finished the pipeline, at which point our prices shot up to 'market' value.

I came across an interesting theory the other day, that our real purpose in Iraq is to protect our interests in Saudi Arabia. Both in distracting the terrorists and in having arms and personnel available to defend. I didn't quite understand why the terrorists would suddenly want to attack Saudi Arabia, and I kinda blew the whole thing off as yet another left-wing wacko thinking too far outside his box. But later I got to thinking, you know I've never seen Bush holding anyone else's hand but Laura's. And, Moorish conspiracy theories aside, I think I'd have to say Bush and the new King are a little more than casual acquaintances.

_________________
Ben,

I cannot find any reference to the dictator quote you posted, and nothing like it shows in the white house transcripts of his speeches on that day, so... its possible the calendar people made it up or attributed the wrong date, but I'm finding no other references to it anywhere.

Not that you need quotes to show he's pushing religion. You, of course, as an atheist, probably have no quarrel with the 'tithe' he's imposing on the middle class and 'only mildly wealthy' to pay for preaching the gospel to people who literally have no choice but to listen. Not that funding religious institutions to deliver services is anything new, we've been doing it for decades. But we used to demand that certain criteria be met, including no preaching. Now, you need housing assistance, you gonna hear bout Jesus first. If you read Bush's speeches from that day, you will find that we had it all wrong. Somehow, the churches cannot deliver service as well as secular agencies without comingling their fairy tales. I guess its a sort of value added service. When my best friend was laid off, he went to the Federal Job Bank to see what listings they had. His 'counselor' told him they really didn't have much available in the tech sector, but suggested he check with his church to see what they had available. Just his tough luck, I guess, that he doesn't pray that way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#588 Consumer Comment

Maybe we need to throw a Houston 'tea' party.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

Robert in Dallas,

Thanks for the windfall tax info. I haven't had time to be 'plugged in' to the news the past few weeks. I caught a couple of minutes of some Senator talking about it on CSPAN2, but I didn't have anything to tie it to.

An interesting side note. We have some decent refining capacity here in Denver, and the furthest our supply has to travel is from Wyoming. Nonetheless, during the 'hurricane spike', our price at the pump shot up about 75 cents to a dollar per gallon. Also, we've enjoyed fairly reasonable prices for natural gas - until they finished the pipeline, at which point our prices shot up to 'market' value.

I came across an interesting theory the other day, that our real purpose in Iraq is to protect our interests in Saudi Arabia. Both in distracting the terrorists and in having arms and personnel available to defend. I didn't quite understand why the terrorists would suddenly want to attack Saudi Arabia, and I kinda blew the whole thing off as yet another left-wing wacko thinking too far outside his box. But later I got to thinking, you know I've never seen Bush holding anyone else's hand but Laura's. And, Moorish conspiracy theories aside, I think I'd have to say Bush and the new King are a little more than casual acquaintances.

_________________
Ben,

I cannot find any reference to the dictator quote you posted, and nothing like it shows in the white house transcripts of his speeches on that day, so... its possible the calendar people made it up or attributed the wrong date, but I'm finding no other references to it anywhere.

Not that you need quotes to show he's pushing religion. You, of course, as an atheist, probably have no quarrel with the 'tithe' he's imposing on the middle class and 'only mildly wealthy' to pay for preaching the gospel to people who literally have no choice but to listen. Not that funding religious institutions to deliver services is anything new, we've been doing it for decades. But we used to demand that certain criteria be met, including no preaching. Now, you need housing assistance, you gonna hear bout Jesus first. If you read Bush's speeches from that day, you will find that we had it all wrong. Somehow, the churches cannot deliver service as well as secular agencies without comingling their fairy tales. I guess its a sort of value added service. When my best friend was laid off, he went to the Federal Job Bank to see what listings they had. His 'counselor' told him they really didn't have much available in the tech sector, but suggested he check with his church to see what they had available. Just his tough luck, I guess, that he doesn't pray that way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#587 Consumer Comment

ummm ben . . . all I did was point out an inconsistency in your own writings

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

. . . nobody asked about your personal life . . . that was information you offered. Don't get upset, all I did was point out an inconsistency in your own writings

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#586 Consumer Comment

Must... goad... Shawn...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 11, 2005

Shawn,

As you say, UNSCR 678, p2, authorizes member states to use all necessary means to uphold UNSCR 660 and "all subsequent relevant resolutions." Paragraph 1, and the preceding declarations, clearly state that those subsequent resolutions are the ones between 660 and 678. Nowhere is there an indication, before or after, that this authority was meant to continue beyond the conditions of 678. Nor do I see the disconnect that you apparently do, between the requirement for specific authorization, and the goal of peaceful settlement of differences. As I have said before, I agree with you 100% on the timing and current necessity of the mission, but I would add one caveat on the timing. I find it odd indeed that the very moment that Iraq began giving UNMOVIC their full cooperation, the very moment they began making overtures toward addressing the remaining burdens placed on them by 687, that is the moment that Bush felt compelled to intervene.

As to my intellect, I'll have you know my mind is like a steel trap - after 50 years of neglect, it is rusted shut! LOL! Well, if people don't challenge my opinions because they're afraid I'll "hold their feet to the fire," I'll just have to goad them a little harder. The reason you'll rarely see me demand citations is that I'm here to challenge the soft bigotry of predigested pablum. I'm not nearly as interested in where people get their ideas as I am in how they process them.

As to Ben, there are any number of explanations for his statements. My wife and I were happily living together in sin and commitment for several years before we were officially notarized. It was such a non-change that it took awhile before I consistently referred to her as my wife rather than girlfriend or significant other. Or, maybe they did just get married. He was kinda quiet there for a couple of days, and maybe his wife... likes it... when he gets all worked up reading ROR. OOH! OOH! OOH! Maybe he has a wife AND he's dating a kindergarten teacher - we should be so lucky. LOL! Hell, most may have no problem with recognizing the union between two people of the same gender, but you can't even recognize the union between two people of opposite gender! LMAO! Do you really think that every marriage out there has to conform to your Ozzie&Harriet definition to be valid?

Ok, let's see... Josephus talks about Roman weddings, Tacitus talks about Celtic wedding traditions that are were hundreds of years old, I have Jewish texts that describe wedding ceremonies 2-3 centuries BC, there's all that chatter in both old and new testaments about brides and bridegrooms; you must mean the RC Church introduced the narrow-minded concept of marriage that you practice today. Tell you what, you want to view your own homo-sexuality as sin, I'll be the first to pray for your salvation; you want to get in somebody's face because of their sexuality, I'd say you're out of line; you convince half the country that homosexuals are unnatural sinners, don't come to me acting all surprised and pious and s**t when some of them get murdered. See, in my church we believe that those homo-sexuals are equally God's children, right alongside the whores, tax-collectors, dukes, duchesses, and other assorted saints. And the last time I checked, he hadn't delegated his authority to sit in judgment to you or any of your co-conspirators.

And this crap you spew out, trying to evade the issue! You have to pay for a license to practice masturbation? You have to pay for a license to register your marriage as a civil partnership, so you can collect all the government sponsored welfare you depend on. Which is exactly what the homosexuals are asking for, not to be married in your god forsaken church! So you tell me what amendment to the Constitution commands the government to hand out a package of rights to one group of people and deny them to another, based SOLELY on your religious beliefs.

Sorry, can't help myself... must... goad... Shawn. lol

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#585 Consumer Comment

Yet another heavy sigh...but wait....! Is that a light...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

...Or is that light a train?

James, I can only hope you leave this board for a LONG while...but either way, you're getting easier to ignore, for the most part...so it's almost as good a thing as your absence.

Man...I almost...'did' "glee."

More from the "yacking hand."

Ben, I've already said to you what I have to say. If it isn't good enough, well, then go find a round room and pee in the corner.

I can only imagine the day your Pap must've been jacking off and YOU bounced off the wall. Or maybe he spunked into a flowerpot...because I think you're a blooming idiot. Get over it, and shove your future responses up your a*s...this is the only type of reply you'll get outta me from now on, so you can keep on demanding proof.

I have provided TWO articles, which have given this information (they're both in one post) if you wish to refute them, contact those agencies and argue with them. As far as the whole "sex ed" issue, I'll tell you the same thing you think is a good enough excuse for proving what you have to say to me: "READ THE NEWS". If you can't find it, you're avoiding it intentionally.

Aside from that, I mention it in passing; just another example of the liberals wanting to take away more parent's rights. It's not the topic, so it doesn't warrant discussion here. I will state again:

Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.
Y'bore me, Ben.

Maybe one of these days, the liberals in charge--and the ones like Ben, who THINK they are--(who contradict their own rhetoric through the actions they live, or show on this post) will learn that, if they cannot expect themSELVES to live by the standards they preach, what makes it good for the world to live by their edict?

After all...I'M supposed to rubber-stamp gay marriage...and Ben can't even stand strongly enough by it to follow his own apparent yearnings and lead by example. (One-digit salute to Bennie.)

About marriage... (To "B.", not to Ben...I really don't give a d**n what Ben thinks about marriage...for all we know, his "dating a teacher"
could very well be a closet relationship outside of his marriage. And since it's "okay" to dispose of human lives for the sake of "convinience" (career, the loss of the wife's figure, daddy's meagaer salary, Mom and/or Dad will find out I'm having sex...whatever reason), I don't imagine Ben has a very good concept of Family, either.)

But ANYways....

What do I view as sanctity...I see it as a lifelong relationship between a man and a woman, inviolate. The relationship I have shared with my husband over these past years has matured; we still have fun, we maintain open communication with even our grown children, and we have remained faithful. We have raised our children well enough, and they can fully understand the relationship that a man shares with a woman, how a man should treat a woman, and how that same man shoud treat others (regardless of that individual's sexual orientation). All of my children understand that homosexuality is a choice; they kind of have the same attitude you hear everyone else say "If that's their choice, fine; as long as you respect my choices, I will respect yours, and we'll get along just fine." (They were raised that way...after all, they have an "uncle" who has been openly gay since he was in high school. He's my Hubby's old school-chum.)

Truthfully, I can't exactly pin down "sanctity" in one statement...it's just how a couple that cares about each other develops, and the strength of that bond starts in the holy bond of matrimony. A promise to the Divine we believe in (or in the case of thise that don't believe in Divinity, in the presence of an empowered official), and each other, and tempered over time. Alot of give and take goes on here, but the result is (if you really work at it, and love the person you are with) fruition, maturity...and eventually, Grandkidlets!

So much out there in society tells us to "do what feels good", and not worry about consequences. The simple--you can call it old fashioned, if you want--one-man-one-woman concept of marriage has been under attack for such a long time. Now, divorce rates raise, infidelity increases, and marriage is avoided because it's feared (what happens if I get a divorce--that b***h'll take everything I've worked hard to get!) Society has cheapened and demoralized the institution of marriage, relieved the burden of consequences, and in my opinion, same-sex marriages would only seek to further decay the intention of marriage.

Women don't make good men; Women are Mothers, not Fathers.
Men don't make good women; Men are Fathers, not Mothers.

I don't care how many classes you take. We're differnt, and we compliment each other in that difference.

Children learn crucial things about family life by observing our crucial relationships up close: interactions between men and women; husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, and parents to children of the same and opposite sexes. Human experience and a vast body of social science research show that children do best in married, mother-father households. It is wrong to create fatherless or motherless families by design. The effort is being driven by the desires of adults, not the needs of children.

I consider myself lucky because this is my first marriage, and it's lasted so long. Add to that, I think my Husband's still a really teriffic guy...from what I see, and have heard others tell me, he seems to feel I'm a pretty good choice for a Missus (and he still brags me up to this day, amazingly). To get his side, you'll have to ask him, really. He'd be alot better at telling you how he feels than I am. (I've never felt it was my place, honestly.) :)

Comparing current laws limiting marriage to a man and a woman with the laws in some that once limited inter-racial marriage is irrelevant and misleading. The very soul of marriage the joining of the two sexeswas never at issue when the Supreme Court struck down laws against inter-racial marriage.

Marriage is of such importance that it is uniquely protected in the law and culture. It predates the law and the Constitution, and is an anthropological and sociological reality, not primarily a legal one. No civilization can survive without it, and those societies that allowed it to become irrelevant have faded into history.

It's not the same thing, when you're talking about removing half of the equation (that member of the opposite sex)---it's just no longer "marriage". Sure, it has similar properties...but it's no more the same thng than "grape juice" is to "wine"; similar, but not the same.

I know that if "Amending the Constitution to Include Same-Sex Marriages" were bought forth thirty years ago, it would have been thrown out on its ear. Both parties--the liberals, and the conservatives--just wish it to disappear. The Liberals are worried about making the decision that'll get them voted back into office, so there's no real "for" or "against" with them. Like I have said, they say they want to give the people what they think is best, but most of them wouldn't be caught dead living like they expect others to live. Conservatives just want it to disappear, for personal, religious, or whatever other reasons.

That's just my view...take it or leave it...but I really don't wish to debate that issue here. Even though, I can solidly predict that Ben will throw this into a fresh attack...or even better a fresh reason to attack the "hissing Christian Zealot" (humble little ol' me). Let me attempt to nip this in the bud: I won't discuss this here. I was asked a question by "B.", and have answered it. Now let's move back into conversation regarding the War and Oil.

Robert of Florida--Happy Anniversary to the Marines! [sharp salute!] My Hubby was Army, His brother, Navy, my Nephew, Air Force---gotta love those military folk! :) Much respect! (Semper Fidelis--ooh-rah!)

Robert of Texas...I have never had the greatest love for Big Government; very early on in all these rebuttals, I had said that I'm not so enamoured that I think everything Bush does is golden. No matter how much Ben or the Twin Freaks try to spin things, no matter how much critical crap Jon or those others have tried to put on it, I never said I wholeheartedly agree with everything Bush does. I do not enjoy the fact that we are at war, but I understand well enough that if I don't stand for something, I'll fall for anything. I really believe that I'd much rather die on my feet than live on my knees. I swear that.

The hegemony demonstrated over congress by the large oil companies is just another example of how all the power has been handed to the wealthy. You've heard the Golden Rule? "He who has the gold makes the rules." Our Government hasdone a fine job of securing itself over its people, and many statements written by the founding Government of this very country has pointed this sort of thing out clearly.

I have mentioned that I'm unsure as to a solution to this---I really don't think (and have posted links of articles and letters supporting it) that if we were to "just get the troops out" would solve anything other than strengthening the enemy. And yes, that is what they are, no matter how swell James One and James Two (Designate whichever number to which...I just call 'em "Twin Freaks" anymore.) thinks the terrorists are.

In the meantime, I talk to folks when I can, learn what I can, and sign petitions or vote, protest on my free days (or make the days free, if I can)when I am called to. I'd be open to sound suggestions from intelligent sources as to what I could further do, in addition to what I've done or am doing. However, I will not serve better, to further devide or demoralize the military's efforts. I won't cheapen or invalidate the lives lost in acts of terrorism, or those that have perished in service--past or present. Nor will I render worthless the value of those that are currently serving our country. If Sheehan can stand on her soapbox and shame her son's memory, I can stand on mine and proclaim the old phrase "freedom isn't free."

Maybe this war IS for oil...if so, then it's not for the reason James of Tupper has posted...it's a big division in the globe created by those that were making good off the Oil For Food Program whenit was up and running. The three countries benefitting the greatest? Russia, France, and Canada.

I agree with you that there is no shortage...just the big companies tryng to fatten their profits. This is not the hand of our President alone, though...they've been doing this crap since the seventies.

Meanwhile, I look forward to most of y'all's correspondance.

Take care! :D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#584 Consumer Comment

A challenge Shawn.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

You state...

"You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves."

If its truely "no problem" then why have these posts even been made. Vera, and now you attack me because I say "Bush is forcing religion on people". Yet now you come and say that I am telling people how to believe? I have NEVER done that. I challenge you to re-post ANYTHING I have said where I am "telling" someone how to believe other than telling people to LEAVE OTHERS ALONE IF THEY DONT BELIEVE WHAT YOU DO.

Over and over and over again I have stated this.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Unfortunately the only people spinning here is you and Vera. Now you have taken this quote of mine time and time again and used is as a basis for saying that I am forcing something on you?? Are you kidding me?? Get real.

Once again.....your comments along with Vera's sum up to one thing.....

You think your right to infringe on others rights is being infringed upon.

And your pissed about it. Yes Shawn, I am infringing on your right to infringe on others. Because you DONT have that right. Especially when what other people do has no effect and NOTHING to do with your life. Thats just vile that you think you can invade peoples privacy (your comments about my marriage status being a REAL good one...I dont need to explain my life with my wife...thats the teacher if you have forgotten.....to you, or anybody! Its NOT YOUR f**kING BUSINESS!). Why cant you nuts just stay out of peoples lives?? Is that so hard? What is it that makes you people think you should have a say in something or someones life when it has no bearing on yours? What makes others peoples lives "your business"?? Nobody has done ANYTHING TO YOU!

I guess its a lost cause. Over and over I have stated the same thing. Yet you never will let go of your belief that YOU should have some say in our lives.

But I challenge you to show where I am trying to "force" religion out of someones life. I have always said.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Only a sick twisted fruit like yourself would "spin" and "twist" that into something like trying take religion away from you. Do you really expect anyone to believe you when you say that my refusal to "have or believe in a religion" is taking "yours away"?? Or taking "rights" from you??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#583 Consumer Comment

A challenge Shawn.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

You state...

"You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves."

If its truely "no problem" then why have these posts even been made. Vera, and now you attack me because I say "Bush is forcing religion on people". Yet now you come and say that I am telling people how to believe? I have NEVER done that. I challenge you to re-post ANYTHING I have said where I am "telling" someone how to believe other than telling people to LEAVE OTHERS ALONE IF THEY DONT BELIEVE WHAT YOU DO.

Over and over and over again I have stated this.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Unfortunately the only people spinning here is you and Vera. Now you have taken this quote of mine time and time again and used is as a basis for saying that I am forcing something on you?? Are you kidding me?? Get real.

Once again.....your comments along with Vera's sum up to one thing.....

You think your right to infringe on others rights is being infringed upon.

And your pissed about it. Yes Shawn, I am infringing on your right to infringe on others. Because you DONT have that right. Especially when what other people do has no effect and NOTHING to do with your life. Thats just vile that you think you can invade peoples privacy (your comments about my marriage status being a REAL good one...I dont need to explain my life with my wife...thats the teacher if you have forgotten.....to you, or anybody! Its NOT YOUR f**kING BUSINESS!). Why cant you nuts just stay out of peoples lives?? Is that so hard? What is it that makes you people think you should have a say in something or someones life when it has no bearing on yours? What makes others peoples lives "your business"?? Nobody has done ANYTHING TO YOU!

I guess its a lost cause. Over and over I have stated the same thing. Yet you never will let go of your belief that YOU should have some say in our lives.

But I challenge you to show where I am trying to "force" religion out of someones life. I have always said.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Only a sick twisted fruit like yourself would "spin" and "twist" that into something like trying take religion away from you. Do you really expect anyone to believe you when you say that my refusal to "have or believe in a religion" is taking "yours away"?? Or taking "rights" from you??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#582 Consumer Comment

A challenge Shawn.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

You state...

"You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves."

If its truely "no problem" then why have these posts even been made. Vera, and now you attack me because I say "Bush is forcing religion on people". Yet now you come and say that I am telling people how to believe? I have NEVER done that. I challenge you to re-post ANYTHING I have said where I am "telling" someone how to believe other than telling people to LEAVE OTHERS ALONE IF THEY DONT BELIEVE WHAT YOU DO.

Over and over and over again I have stated this.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Unfortunately the only people spinning here is you and Vera. Now you have taken this quote of mine time and time again and used is as a basis for saying that I am forcing something on you?? Are you kidding me?? Get real.

Once again.....your comments along with Vera's sum up to one thing.....

You think your right to infringe on others rights is being infringed upon.

And your pissed about it. Yes Shawn, I am infringing on your right to infringe on others. Because you DONT have that right. Especially when what other people do has no effect and NOTHING to do with your life. Thats just vile that you think you can invade peoples privacy (your comments about my marriage status being a REAL good one...I dont need to explain my life with my wife...thats the teacher if you have forgotten.....to you, or anybody! Its NOT YOUR f**kING BUSINESS!). Why cant you nuts just stay out of peoples lives?? Is that so hard? What is it that makes you people think you should have a say in something or someones life when it has no bearing on yours? What makes others peoples lives "your business"?? Nobody has done ANYTHING TO YOU!

I guess its a lost cause. Over and over I have stated the same thing. Yet you never will let go of your belief that YOU should have some say in our lives.

But I challenge you to show where I am trying to "force" religion out of someones life. I have always said.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Only a sick twisted fruit like yourself would "spin" and "twist" that into something like trying take religion away from you. Do you really expect anyone to believe you when you say that my refusal to "have or believe in a religion" is taking "yours away"?? Or taking "rights" from you??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#581 Consumer Comment

A challenge Shawn.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

You state...

"You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves."

If its truely "no problem" then why have these posts even been made. Vera, and now you attack me because I say "Bush is forcing religion on people". Yet now you come and say that I am telling people how to believe? I have NEVER done that. I challenge you to re-post ANYTHING I have said where I am "telling" someone how to believe other than telling people to LEAVE OTHERS ALONE IF THEY DONT BELIEVE WHAT YOU DO.

Over and over and over again I have stated this.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Unfortunately the only people spinning here is you and Vera. Now you have taken this quote of mine time and time again and used is as a basis for saying that I am forcing something on you?? Are you kidding me?? Get real.

Once again.....your comments along with Vera's sum up to one thing.....

You think your right to infringe on others rights is being infringed upon.

And your pissed about it. Yes Shawn, I am infringing on your right to infringe on others. Because you DONT have that right. Especially when what other people do has no effect and NOTHING to do with your life. Thats just vile that you think you can invade peoples privacy (your comments about my marriage status being a REAL good one...I dont need to explain my life with my wife...thats the teacher if you have forgotten.....to you, or anybody! Its NOT YOUR f**kING BUSINESS!). Why cant you nuts just stay out of peoples lives?? Is that so hard? What is it that makes you people think you should have a say in something or someones life when it has no bearing on yours? What makes others peoples lives "your business"?? Nobody has done ANYTHING TO YOU!

I guess its a lost cause. Over and over I have stated the same thing. Yet you never will let go of your belief that YOU should have some say in our lives.

But I challenge you to show where I am trying to "force" religion out of someones life. I have always said.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

and again.....

If you believe in religion...FINE! Just dont force it on others.

Only a sick twisted fruit like yourself would "spin" and "twist" that into something like trying take religion away from you. Do you really expect anyone to believe you when you say that my refusal to "have or believe in a religion" is taking "yours away"?? Or taking "rights" from you??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#580 Consumer Comment

And finally......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

.....proof for Vera and the other religious loonys that are in complete denial. No spin here. Nothing taken out of context. Just a quote as it was said....nothing more.......

"It's not a dictatorship in Washinton but I tried to make it one in that instance."

George W. Bush --January 15, 2004
Referring to the executive order making federal funding available to faith-based organizations. Speaking in New Orleans, Louisiana

If you would like links to the source, so be it....

www.bushcalendar.com

I suggest you buy one Vera. You might learn something about the evil you support. You, tolerant? Thats about the second stupidest thing I've seen on this thread...right after Shawn's recent comment about marriage only being 1100 years old.

If you need any more "proof" then I suggest again that you look in the mirror and re-read your own posts. You, Vera, are the ultimate proof postitive of what I have been saying. Just looking at your posts certainly is enough proof to me that Bush's agenda is a Theocracy.

Spin away Shawn and Vera. You will really need to pull a rabbit out of your hat this time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#579 Consumer Comment

Vera....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Once again here we go.....


"As I understand it, now, the liberals want to take away MY right to have voice on how they conduct the teaching of sex-ed in Public Schools?"

Ok Vera...PROOF PLEASE! Still waiting for you proof on Islam in schools as well. Four weeks and counting...........Ive shown you some links. Lets get with it Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#578 Consumer Comment

Vera....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Once again here we go.....


"As I understand it, now, the liberals want to take away MY right to have voice on how they conduct the teaching of sex-ed in Public Schools?"

Ok Vera...PROOF PLEASE! Still waiting for you proof on Islam in schools as well. Four weeks and counting...........Ive shown you some links. Lets get with it Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#577 Consumer Comment

Vera....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Once again here we go.....


"As I understand it, now, the liberals want to take away MY right to have voice on how they conduct the teaching of sex-ed in Public Schools?"

Ok Vera...PROOF PLEASE! Still waiting for you proof on Islam in schools as well. Four weeks and counting...........Ive shown you some links. Lets get with it Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#576 Consumer Comment

Vera....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Once again here we go.....


"As I understand it, now, the liberals want to take away MY right to have voice on how they conduct the teaching of sex-ed in Public Schools?"

Ok Vera...PROOF PLEASE! Still waiting for you proof on Islam in schools as well. Four weeks and counting...........Ive shown you some links. Lets get with it Vera.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#575 Consumer Comment

How the government has gradually stolen your rights and Americans haven't even noticed! Big Brother LOVES this bunch!!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Well, here it is. The never ending squabbling over petty crap that has nothing to do with the subject. You folks are beyond hopeless. The government LOVES you because you cannot think in a straight line.

The government knows how this works. Create a big stink about something. Make a big show of investigating the issue. Get the populace arguing among itself over the issue. Gradually let the issue fade with nothing done except making the population feel warm and fuzzy (and guaranteeing being re-elected).

The big oil men went before Congress yesterday and pretty well told Congress to shove it. There had better not be any windfall taxes levied and, no, thank you, they do not feel like chipping in so the poor don't freeze to death this winter.

While you all argue on endlessly about pointless crap the issue will fade away because Congress has no intention of doing anything. This is the warm and fuzzy part. The good Senators only worry about being re-elected, not about you.

Maybe when you get cold later on because of the "shortages" or find an elderly neighbor frozen to death because that neighbor could not afford heat and food at the same time, your brains will finally kick in and work properly to have a rational discussion about this issue.

Pay attention...the five major oil companies told Congress to shove it yesterday. And Congress did.

Now, you tell me...WHO runs this country??!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#574 Consumer Comment

Happy 230th Marines!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

It's the USMC's 230th Birthday today.

This is the one day of the year when the slackers stay home alone while the babes repel NO boarders.

Semper Fi.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#573 Consumer Suggestion

Basically this is getting "Old & Tired"

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 10, 2005

Robert, Vera & Shawn are all still looking for proof that the USA is in Iraq over oil (as if there could be any other viable reason), Ben is fighting with Vera & Shawn over religeon & B is just supplying them all with proof, that they do not comment with any "real intelligence on", then as soon as the subject comes up again, they cry:

SHOW ME THE PROOF!

It really has gotten "old" & tired & really even "B" has little to add at this point that can say anything further.

The proof is being played out in the media. Robert can go "on & on" about all these Countries backing the USA in Iraq, as it's only supporter in reality "Tony Blair" goes down in flames.

People are going to jail for lieing & most people in the world can see how rediculous this war in Iraq is. Expecially Countries like my own, who will be "directly affected" by terrorist attacks on this Continent, just as we are "directly affected" by the impositions we are put through to remain secure in our own Country, while the USA tries to take over the world.

I think I have repeated this last paragraph for "Roberts sake" at least 3 times in the past & he still cannot get why Canadians would care less. People all over the world are affected now by terrorism, simply because of the actions of the USA. I guess if we just sit back & leave it to B... well these situations will all be solved eventually right?

I think I might just leave this thread alone for a while & see how things improve, leaving the only constant voice on here that makes any sense, & on subject, B's... as B clearly does not need any help.

Let American citizens handle America... cause they have done such a good job at it themselves so far! They don't need input from anywhere else. Possibly a "sane solution" is to join with other Countries who do give a "rat's a*s" as to what goes on in this world & find a way to fight back against a Country that is so pompas... they don't want input from "either side" of the debate if it does not come from someone who lives in the USA.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#572 Consumer Comment

P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

You never mentioned your wedding! How did you find the time to post so much with a wedding, honeymon, etc.?

What is it I'm talking about? On 10/25/2005 you were "dating a kindergarden teacher", and here on 11/7/2005, you are " . . . happily married with a child . . . "! - Liar?

By the way Ben, just so ya know, marriage IS a religious creation. The Roman Catholic Church introduced marriage some 1100 years ago. Prior to that, any man and woman that lived together and "knew" one another (Biblically speaking) were considered as husband and wife. Most have no problem (including myself) with recognizing the "union" between two people of the same gender, hell, if that's what you need to feel whole, go for it! What I, and a majority of this country, disagree with is the attempt at forcing religion to recognize these same sex unions, as a marriage. I don't see you touting a 'separation of church and state' when I have to PAY for a LICENSE to practice my beliefs (ie. marriage)

You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves. If you would have allowed 'them' their Constitutional right of freedom of religion, this wouldn't be a concern. Face facts asswipe, you're just pissed that any religion has a right to view homo-sexuality as sin. What's the matter boo-h*o, does it give you a guilty conscience?

Actually, don't bother responding, you've been exposed as the fraud that you are, any further rambles can be discounted as the shrill bleatings of the dishonest trying to justify their lies. Remember, justificatin is like masterbation . . . you're only f**king yourself!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#571 Consumer Comment

P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

You never mentioned your wedding! How did you find the time to post so much with a wedding, honeymon, etc.?

What is it I'm talking about? On 10/25/2005 you were "dating a kindergarden teacher", and here on 11/7/2005, you are " . . . happily married with a child . . . "! - Liar?

By the way Ben, just so ya know, marriage IS a religious creation. The Roman Catholic Church introduced marriage some 1100 years ago. Prior to that, any man and woman that lived together and "knew" one another (Biblically speaking) were considered as husband and wife. Most have no problem (including myself) with recognizing the "union" between two people of the same gender, hell, if that's what you need to feel whole, go for it! What I, and a majority of this country, disagree with is the attempt at forcing religion to recognize these same sex unions, as a marriage. I don't see you touting a 'separation of church and state' when I have to PAY for a LICENSE to practice my beliefs (ie. marriage)

You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves. If you would have allowed 'them' their Constitutional right of freedom of religion, this wouldn't be a concern. Face facts asswipe, you're just pissed that any religion has a right to view homo-sexuality as sin. What's the matter boo-h*o, does it give you a guilty conscience?

Actually, don't bother responding, you've been exposed as the fraud that you are, any further rambles can be discounted as the shrill bleatings of the dishonest trying to justify their lies. Remember, justificatin is like masterbation . . . you're only f**king yourself!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#570 Consumer Comment

P.S. Congrats! Ben . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

You never mentioned your wedding! How did you find the time to post so much with a wedding, honeymon, etc.?

What is it I'm talking about? On 10/25/2005 you were "dating a kindergarden teacher", and here on 11/7/2005, you are " . . . happily married with a child . . . "! - Liar?

By the way Ben, just so ya know, marriage IS a religious creation. The Roman Catholic Church introduced marriage some 1100 years ago. Prior to that, any man and woman that lived together and "knew" one another (Biblically speaking) were considered as husband and wife. Most have no problem (including myself) with recognizing the "union" between two people of the same gender, hell, if that's what you need to feel whole, go for it! What I, and a majority of this country, disagree with is the attempt at forcing religion to recognize these same sex unions, as a marriage. I don't see you touting a 'separation of church and state' when I have to PAY for a LICENSE to practice my beliefs (ie. marriage)

You want to keep religion out of your life? No problem, that's your right and your choice; but don't go sticking your nose into religion, and try to tell "them" how to believe and what to believe, then get your feathers in a ruffle when they explain their beliefs, as part of defending themselves. If you would have allowed 'them' their Constitutional right of freedom of religion, this wouldn't be a concern. Face facts asswipe, you're just pissed that any religion has a right to view homo-sexuality as sin. What's the matter boo-h*o, does it give you a guilty conscience?

Actually, don't bother responding, you've been exposed as the fraud that you are, any further rambles can be discounted as the shrill bleatings of the dishonest trying to justify their lies. Remember, justificatin is like masterbation . . . you're only f**king yourself!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#569 Consumer Comment

round and round and round we go

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Round and round and round we go . . . I really do have more important things to do than spend what little free time I have reading and responding to these posts. I know I am the one who decided to do so in the first place, and, I have to admit, it is a little addictive! lol So, I guess what I am trying to say is, . . . I have decided to spend a lot less time on this site than I have been, and therefore will only place an occasional post from here on. (Hold down the cheers of excitement James, Vera has no problem shedding the lite on your stupidity without me . . . come to think of it, you pretty much look after making yourself look stupid on your own!)

Before I go, I do wish to leave a quick note to each of you, individually. (Kinda like with freedom of religion, this is freedom of the Rip-off-report post #154773 according to Shawn, that is to say - take what you want, leave the rest, you don't even have to keep any of it, but, I do have the right to say it. So, read on or skip on by, either way, I won't be offended. Also, this is not a cop out' to get the last word in, being a gentleman, I leave that privilege to each of you - I will read ALL responses and treat each with deserving respect.

In no particular order (but since you have been the most recent with whom I volleyed' . . . )

B',
UNSCR 678, paragraph 2 - authorizes member states to use all necessary means to uphold Res. 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions. This is/was the legal authority' granted by the U.N. for the Gulf War', in 1990. UNSCR 686, paragraph 4 - states that UNSCR 678, paragraph two remains valid until Iraq fulfills several different demands and conditions to the cease fire' - ie: If UNSCR 678, paragraph two authorized the use of military force for the 'Gulf War', Then it would also authorize the use of force to ensure the fulfillment of conditions set forth in UNSCR 686, and all subsequent relevant resolutions, until such a time as there is a specific UNSCR resolution recanting that authority (which I couldn't find anywhere,) the notion that we had to go back and ask for authorization again is absurd!

If your logic were to hold up (as I understand it,) it would be the same to say (as a hypothetical example,) ten years ago, the freeway raised the speed limit up to 70mph, from it's original 55mph. As I stop to refuel today on my way to work, there is a police officer at the next pump so I ask him what the speed limit is on the freeway, and he states it to be 55mph. When his partner comes out, I ask him the same, as is his response. When I pull out onto the freeway, I notice some cars traveling at 55mph, but most are around the 70 mph mark, and to my amazement / pleasure, there is a sign that reads Max. Speed 70mph' - so I travel at 70mph. When I am written a ticket for exceeding the speed limit', and question how do ya figure that?, if you were the officer (and maintained your current ill twisted logic,) you would say something along the lines of that speed limit was raised ten years ago, and you already traveled at 70mph on this freeway several times, if you wish to do so again, you will have to find police officers/congressmen to give you permission to continue driving at 70mph. Sound ridiculous? I think so to.

I do believe that you, and many others, have misconstrued my defense of the legalities of our invasion' of Iraq, as an endorsement backing the war. This was, and is, a twisted view of such. I have said on more than one occasion that I don't agree with our involvement in Iraq. Not that I don't think that it was necessary, just that the timing was wrong, with far more pressing issues that needed to be addressed right here at home. That being said, I also pointed out the fact that we are there now, and, since none of us can undo that which has been done, I will support the president, the troops, and the U.S.A., through the COMPLETION of our mission. When will that be? I don't know, but I do know that Iraq will be, as it already is, a safer, more free society than it was five years ago. The majority of Iraqi citizens will be grateful for the help(actually, most already are!)

You are the first person to whom I've responded today, and I already find that I have strayed far from my intended post! lol My intent was not to get into the meat' of any particular subject, but rather to offer a few more personal observations', and leave it at that. Sorry

Back to the intended . . . B', I view you as a highly intelligent, informed, and thoughtful man whose posts have always offered a vast quantity of information. Your skills as a literatus' are unparalleled on this thread, and have offered you much respect as a result. The downside to that is that many do not challenge your writings due to the eloquent format of their presentation, thus putting your opinions as equals to facts. You and I both know that this serves no higher purpose', as none may ascertain truth without questioning statement. (Although, as I hope is not the intent, you must find it quite a stroking of the ego) lol The reason I state this is not as an additional stroking', but, rather as a warning - be cautious not to fall into your own trap, to close the mind when it holds such intellect would be a disservice to all, especially yourself.

James from Tupper Lake, you leave me virtually speechless(notice I said virtually - lol) your inane rants are devoid of anything bearing even resemblance to fact. Your opinionated drivel is only equaled to that which may be found on such intellectually stimulating programs as Geraldo, Jenny Jones, and Jerry Springer. I often wonder how the likes of you and your ilk justify your opinions - is there some mystical force granting supernatural powers to you, which allows for the ability to twist and contort your body into such positions which would allow for cranial insertion into one's own anal cavity? Do tell.

James from Calgary, it is obvious that you are a passionate soul, with a desire to aid in the creation of a peaceful society in which we all live with the harmonious intent of helping thy neighbor', ever diligent at your calling as an ambassador to the nations, on behalf of all who suffer the oppressive regimes who silence their peoples voice. Your discontent with societies which still embrace the archaic principles of morality, law, and common good is obvious by your dubious verbiage of other; further supported by your sympathetic (or just pathetic) defenses of Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, Al Quada and other such terrorist organizations. Your posts (and there are many - too many) rarely amount to more than blathering insanity, or the epitome of stupidity - you choose, I don't want to be narrow minded or judgmental. Either way, my advice to you is simple (that way you may have the capability of understanding), and I've plagiarized a little here,You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are? No long post here needed! Work on your own Country!

Vera, keep up the good work! It is rare that a white Christian woman from the Midwest is found to be so outspoken! lol I actually pictured a middle aged (the closer I get, the more I hate that term! Oh s**t, I think I'm there !?! :c )'African American' woman who hadn't caved to the leachings, or, I mean teachings, of Reggie Jackson, Al Sharpton and the ilk who preach that the minorities' of this country are oppressed by the white powers in charge'. It never ceases to amaze me that every black' person I know that thinks of Reggie, Al, and their likes as the depressing nay-sayers they are, is typically educated, hard working and successful (to varying degrees) in their chosen field. Whoaaaaaaa Trigger! I don't know how I got that far off the topic!! Oh well, gotta give the dead one' something new to b***h about, otherwise he might have to use his brain as more than an ear separator! lol Back to the topic . . . I have enjoyed your posts from the start, and, although some are long, I always found them informative, factual, and witty.

Your honesty is truly a breath of fresh air on these posts, but I still feel I have advice to offer which you may or may not agree with. (I won't, however, be happy until I have indoctrinated you into my way of thinking, and created a world dominating faith known as Shawniism') Leave James be, all who read these posts know that he is into drugs, full of s**t, and out of line - besides, it's been my experience, that if you leave his type alone, eventually they just disappear (usually picked up by the police.) Stick to conversing with those of equal intelligence, that way people who read can learn something from these posts. Bennie boo-h*o' is an equal waste of time; although he shows occasional ability to access some long forgotten intellect, he's too concerned about remaining a victim, to ever worry about un-spun facts and truths - leave him to his little glass bowl and bubbling water- pipe. Oh ya, and . . . Rock on.

Ben, your posts are not witty, they are not informative, and you have offered little to no proof of anything you write. You are very talented at spinning' and misquoting, and have shown some ability at the whole cut and paste thing. You come across as an angry, self-centered jerk who just needs someone to blame for his own shortcomings. The only advice I have for you - next time something gets all messed up and you need someone to blame, look in the mirror; it's a little ironic to place blame on a God, which you don't believe exists!

Finally, Robert from Florida, I don't have much to offer you. I have always found that you have been quick to the point, informative, truthful, and without fail have been able to back up' your statements with more proof than reasonably required. Aside from that, Your humor is always point based and, I enjoy that it has not been based on personal attacks and vulgarities - something we should all learn from. Libertarian eh? Hmmm, sounds worth looking into!

To those not mentioned by name, most of your posts are nonfactual, base opinions, with little or no support. Both sides' have had little more than angry, insulting drivel injected by such, with little to no effect on the remainder of us, but for the occasional brief change in topic', in order to support, or squelch, your input. Try supporting your opinions, even if the only support you offer is a report on CNN or FOX . . . at least that way, you can't be held responsible for your views'.

Remember, We are all citizens of the United States of America (except James), insults, mudslinging, lies and spin will only drive us further from a solution. Talk, discuss, and open your minds to the fact that you may sometimes be wrong ( as, admittedly, I have been on occasion.) Remember, a scientist, even if they disagree, holds a theory as fact, until such a time as they can disprove it, only then is it discarded, and regarded as rubbish. Once disproved, only a fool continues using it as a basis of belief.

May God bless the U.S., and all her troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#568 Consumer Comment

round and round and round we go

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Round and round and round we go . . . I really do have more important things to do than spend what little free time I have reading and responding to these posts. I know I am the one who decided to do so in the first place, and, I have to admit, it is a little addictive! lol So, I guess what I am trying to say is, . . . I have decided to spend a lot less time on this site than I have been, and therefore will only place an occasional post from here on. (Hold down the cheers of excitement James, Vera has no problem shedding the lite on your stupidity without me . . . come to think of it, you pretty much look after making yourself look stupid on your own!)

Before I go, I do wish to leave a quick note to each of you, individually. (Kinda like with freedom of religion, this is freedom of the Rip-off-report post #154773 according to Shawn, that is to say - take what you want, leave the rest, you don't even have to keep any of it, but, I do have the right to say it. So, read on or skip on by, either way, I won't be offended. Also, this is not a cop out' to get the last word in, being a gentleman, I leave that privilege to each of you - I will read ALL responses and treat each with deserving respect.

In no particular order (but since you have been the most recent with whom I volleyed' . . . )

B',
UNSCR 678, paragraph 2 - authorizes member states to use all necessary means to uphold Res. 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions. This is/was the legal authority' granted by the U.N. for the Gulf War', in 1990. UNSCR 686, paragraph 4 - states that UNSCR 678, paragraph two remains valid until Iraq fulfills several different demands and conditions to the cease fire' - ie: If UNSCR 678, paragraph two authorized the use of military force for the 'Gulf War', Then it would also authorize the use of force to ensure the fulfillment of conditions set forth in UNSCR 686, and all subsequent relevant resolutions, until such a time as there is a specific UNSCR resolution recanting that authority (which I couldn't find anywhere,) the notion that we had to go back and ask for authorization again is absurd!

If your logic were to hold up (as I understand it,) it would be the same to say (as a hypothetical example,) ten years ago, the freeway raised the speed limit up to 70mph, from it's original 55mph. As I stop to refuel today on my way to work, there is a police officer at the next pump so I ask him what the speed limit is on the freeway, and he states it to be 55mph. When his partner comes out, I ask him the same, as is his response. When I pull out onto the freeway, I notice some cars traveling at 55mph, but most are around the 70 mph mark, and to my amazement / pleasure, there is a sign that reads Max. Speed 70mph' - so I travel at 70mph. When I am written a ticket for exceeding the speed limit', and question how do ya figure that?, if you were the officer (and maintained your current ill twisted logic,) you would say something along the lines of that speed limit was raised ten years ago, and you already traveled at 70mph on this freeway several times, if you wish to do so again, you will have to find police officers/congressmen to give you permission to continue driving at 70mph. Sound ridiculous? I think so to.

I do believe that you, and many others, have misconstrued my defense of the legalities of our invasion' of Iraq, as an endorsement backing the war. This was, and is, a twisted view of such. I have said on more than one occasion that I don't agree with our involvement in Iraq. Not that I don't think that it was necessary, just that the timing was wrong, with far more pressing issues that needed to be addressed right here at home. That being said, I also pointed out the fact that we are there now, and, since none of us can undo that which has been done, I will support the president, the troops, and the U.S.A., through the COMPLETION of our mission. When will that be? I don't know, but I do know that Iraq will be, as it already is, a safer, more free society than it was five years ago. The majority of Iraqi citizens will be grateful for the help(actually, most already are!)

You are the first person to whom I've responded today, and I already find that I have strayed far from my intended post! lol My intent was not to get into the meat' of any particular subject, but rather to offer a few more personal observations', and leave it at that. Sorry

Back to the intended . . . B', I view you as a highly intelligent, informed, and thoughtful man whose posts have always offered a vast quantity of information. Your skills as a literatus' are unparalleled on this thread, and have offered you much respect as a result. The downside to that is that many do not challenge your writings due to the eloquent format of their presentation, thus putting your opinions as equals to facts. You and I both know that this serves no higher purpose', as none may ascertain truth without questioning statement. (Although, as I hope is not the intent, you must find it quite a stroking of the ego) lol The reason I state this is not as an additional stroking', but, rather as a warning - be cautious not to fall into your own trap, to close the mind when it holds such intellect would be a disservice to all, especially yourself.

James from Tupper Lake, you leave me virtually speechless(notice I said virtually - lol) your inane rants are devoid of anything bearing even resemblance to fact. Your opinionated drivel is only equaled to that which may be found on such intellectually stimulating programs as Geraldo, Jenny Jones, and Jerry Springer. I often wonder how the likes of you and your ilk justify your opinions - is there some mystical force granting supernatural powers to you, which allows for the ability to twist and contort your body into such positions which would allow for cranial insertion into one's own anal cavity? Do tell.

James from Calgary, it is obvious that you are a passionate soul, with a desire to aid in the creation of a peaceful society in which we all live with the harmonious intent of helping thy neighbor', ever diligent at your calling as an ambassador to the nations, on behalf of all who suffer the oppressive regimes who silence their peoples voice. Your discontent with societies which still embrace the archaic principles of morality, law, and common good is obvious by your dubious verbiage of other; further supported by your sympathetic (or just pathetic) defenses of Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, Al Quada and other such terrorist organizations. Your posts (and there are many - too many) rarely amount to more than blathering insanity, or the epitome of stupidity - you choose, I don't want to be narrow minded or judgmental. Either way, my advice to you is simple (that way you may have the capability of understanding), and I've plagiarized a little here,You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are? No long post here needed! Work on your own Country!

Vera, keep up the good work! It is rare that a white Christian woman from the Midwest is found to be so outspoken! lol I actually pictured a middle aged (the closer I get, the more I hate that term! Oh s**t, I think I'm there !?! :c )'African American' woman who hadn't caved to the leachings, or, I mean teachings, of Reggie Jackson, Al Sharpton and the ilk who preach that the minorities' of this country are oppressed by the white powers in charge'. It never ceases to amaze me that every black' person I know that thinks of Reggie, Al, and their likes as the depressing nay-sayers they are, is typically educated, hard working and successful (to varying degrees) in their chosen field. Whoaaaaaaa Trigger! I don't know how I got that far off the topic!! Oh well, gotta give the dead one' something new to b***h about, otherwise he might have to use his brain as more than an ear separator! lol Back to the topic . . . I have enjoyed your posts from the start, and, although some are long, I always found them informative, factual, and witty.

Your honesty is truly a breath of fresh air on these posts, but I still feel I have advice to offer which you may or may not agree with. (I won't, however, be happy until I have indoctrinated you into my way of thinking, and created a world dominating faith known as Shawniism') Leave James be, all who read these posts know that he is into drugs, full of s**t, and out of line - besides, it's been my experience, that if you leave his type alone, eventually they just disappear (usually picked up by the police.) Stick to conversing with those of equal intelligence, that way people who read can learn something from these posts. Bennie boo-h*o' is an equal waste of time; although he shows occasional ability to access some long forgotten intellect, he's too concerned about remaining a victim, to ever worry about un-spun facts and truths - leave him to his little glass bowl and bubbling water- pipe. Oh ya, and . . . Rock on.

Ben, your posts are not witty, they are not informative, and you have offered little to no proof of anything you write. You are very talented at spinning' and misquoting, and have shown some ability at the whole cut and paste thing. You come across as an angry, self-centered jerk who just needs someone to blame for his own shortcomings. The only advice I have for you - next time something gets all messed up and you need someone to blame, look in the mirror; it's a little ironic to place blame on a God, which you don't believe exists!

Finally, Robert from Florida, I don't have much to offer you. I have always found that you have been quick to the point, informative, truthful, and without fail have been able to back up' your statements with more proof than reasonably required. Aside from that, Your humor is always point based and, I enjoy that it has not been based on personal attacks and vulgarities - something we should all learn from. Libertarian eh? Hmmm, sounds worth looking into!

To those not mentioned by name, most of your posts are nonfactual, base opinions, with little or no support. Both sides' have had little more than angry, insulting drivel injected by such, with little to no effect on the remainder of us, but for the occasional brief change in topic', in order to support, or squelch, your input. Try supporting your opinions, even if the only support you offer is a report on CNN or FOX . . . at least that way, you can't be held responsible for your views'.

Remember, We are all citizens of the United States of America (except James), insults, mudslinging, lies and spin will only drive us further from a solution. Talk, discuss, and open your minds to the fact that you may sometimes be wrong ( as, admittedly, I have been on occasion.) Remember, a scientist, even if they disagree, holds a theory as fact, until such a time as they can disprove it, only then is it discarded, and regarded as rubbish. Once disproved, only a fool continues using it as a basis of belief.

May God bless the U.S., and all her troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#567 Consumer Comment

round and round and round we go

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Round and round and round we go . . . I really do have more important things to do than spend what little free time I have reading and responding to these posts. I know I am the one who decided to do so in the first place, and, I have to admit, it is a little addictive! lol So, I guess what I am trying to say is, . . . I have decided to spend a lot less time on this site than I have been, and therefore will only place an occasional post from here on. (Hold down the cheers of excitement James, Vera has no problem shedding the lite on your stupidity without me . . . come to think of it, you pretty much look after making yourself look stupid on your own!)

Before I go, I do wish to leave a quick note to each of you, individually. (Kinda like with freedom of religion, this is freedom of the Rip-off-report post #154773 according to Shawn, that is to say - take what you want, leave the rest, you don't even have to keep any of it, but, I do have the right to say it. So, read on or skip on by, either way, I won't be offended. Also, this is not a cop out' to get the last word in, being a gentleman, I leave that privilege to each of you - I will read ALL responses and treat each with deserving respect.

In no particular order (but since you have been the most recent with whom I volleyed' . . . )

B',
UNSCR 678, paragraph 2 - authorizes member states to use all necessary means to uphold Res. 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions. This is/was the legal authority' granted by the U.N. for the Gulf War', in 1990. UNSCR 686, paragraph 4 - states that UNSCR 678, paragraph two remains valid until Iraq fulfills several different demands and conditions to the cease fire' - ie: If UNSCR 678, paragraph two authorized the use of military force for the 'Gulf War', Then it would also authorize the use of force to ensure the fulfillment of conditions set forth in UNSCR 686, and all subsequent relevant resolutions, until such a time as there is a specific UNSCR resolution recanting that authority (which I couldn't find anywhere,) the notion that we had to go back and ask for authorization again is absurd!

If your logic were to hold up (as I understand it,) it would be the same to say (as a hypothetical example,) ten years ago, the freeway raised the speed limit up to 70mph, from it's original 55mph. As I stop to refuel today on my way to work, there is a police officer at the next pump so I ask him what the speed limit is on the freeway, and he states it to be 55mph. When his partner comes out, I ask him the same, as is his response. When I pull out onto the freeway, I notice some cars traveling at 55mph, but most are around the 70 mph mark, and to my amazement / pleasure, there is a sign that reads Max. Speed 70mph' - so I travel at 70mph. When I am written a ticket for exceeding the speed limit', and question how do ya figure that?, if you were the officer (and maintained your current ill twisted logic,) you would say something along the lines of that speed limit was raised ten years ago, and you already traveled at 70mph on this freeway several times, if you wish to do so again, you will have to find police officers/congressmen to give you permission to continue driving at 70mph. Sound ridiculous? I think so to.

I do believe that you, and many others, have misconstrued my defense of the legalities of our invasion' of Iraq, as an endorsement backing the war. This was, and is, a twisted view of such. I have said on more than one occasion that I don't agree with our involvement in Iraq. Not that I don't think that it was necessary, just that the timing was wrong, with far more pressing issues that needed to be addressed right here at home. That being said, I also pointed out the fact that we are there now, and, since none of us can undo that which has been done, I will support the president, the troops, and the U.S.A., through the COMPLETION of our mission. When will that be? I don't know, but I do know that Iraq will be, as it already is, a safer, more free society than it was five years ago. The majority of Iraqi citizens will be grateful for the help(actually, most already are!)

You are the first person to whom I've responded today, and I already find that I have strayed far from my intended post! lol My intent was not to get into the meat' of any particular subject, but rather to offer a few more personal observations', and leave it at that. Sorry

Back to the intended . . . B', I view you as a highly intelligent, informed, and thoughtful man whose posts have always offered a vast quantity of information. Your skills as a literatus' are unparalleled on this thread, and have offered you much respect as a result. The downside to that is that many do not challenge your writings due to the eloquent format of their presentation, thus putting your opinions as equals to facts. You and I both know that this serves no higher purpose', as none may ascertain truth without questioning statement. (Although, as I hope is not the intent, you must find it quite a stroking of the ego) lol The reason I state this is not as an additional stroking', but, rather as a warning - be cautious not to fall into your own trap, to close the mind when it holds such intellect would be a disservice to all, especially yourself.

James from Tupper Lake, you leave me virtually speechless(notice I said virtually - lol) your inane rants are devoid of anything bearing even resemblance to fact. Your opinionated drivel is only equaled to that which may be found on such intellectually stimulating programs as Geraldo, Jenny Jones, and Jerry Springer. I often wonder how the likes of you and your ilk justify your opinions - is there some mystical force granting supernatural powers to you, which allows for the ability to twist and contort your body into such positions which would allow for cranial insertion into one's own anal cavity? Do tell.

James from Calgary, it is obvious that you are a passionate soul, with a desire to aid in the creation of a peaceful society in which we all live with the harmonious intent of helping thy neighbor', ever diligent at your calling as an ambassador to the nations, on behalf of all who suffer the oppressive regimes who silence their peoples voice. Your discontent with societies which still embrace the archaic principles of morality, law, and common good is obvious by your dubious verbiage of other; further supported by your sympathetic (or just pathetic) defenses of Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, Al Quada and other such terrorist organizations. Your posts (and there are many - too many) rarely amount to more than blathering insanity, or the epitome of stupidity - you choose, I don't want to be narrow minded or judgmental. Either way, my advice to you is simple (that way you may have the capability of understanding), and I've plagiarized a little here,You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are? No long post here needed! Work on your own Country!

Vera, keep up the good work! It is rare that a white Christian woman from the Midwest is found to be so outspoken! lol I actually pictured a middle aged (the closer I get, the more I hate that term! Oh s**t, I think I'm there !?! :c )'African American' woman who hadn't caved to the leachings, or, I mean teachings, of Reggie Jackson, Al Sharpton and the ilk who preach that the minorities' of this country are oppressed by the white powers in charge'. It never ceases to amaze me that every black' person I know that thinks of Reggie, Al, and their likes as the depressing nay-sayers they are, is typically educated, hard working and successful (to varying degrees) in their chosen field. Whoaaaaaaa Trigger! I don't know how I got that far off the topic!! Oh well, gotta give the dead one' something new to b***h about, otherwise he might have to use his brain as more than an ear separator! lol Back to the topic . . . I have enjoyed your posts from the start, and, although some are long, I always found them informative, factual, and witty.

Your honesty is truly a breath of fresh air on these posts, but I still feel I have advice to offer which you may or may not agree with. (I won't, however, be happy until I have indoctrinated you into my way of thinking, and created a world dominating faith known as Shawniism') Leave James be, all who read these posts know that he is into drugs, full of s**t, and out of line - besides, it's been my experience, that if you leave his type alone, eventually they just disappear (usually picked up by the police.) Stick to conversing with those of equal intelligence, that way people who read can learn something from these posts. Bennie boo-h*o' is an equal waste of time; although he shows occasional ability to access some long forgotten intellect, he's too concerned about remaining a victim, to ever worry about un-spun facts and truths - leave him to his little glass bowl and bubbling water- pipe. Oh ya, and . . . Rock on.

Ben, your posts are not witty, they are not informative, and you have offered little to no proof of anything you write. You are very talented at spinning' and misquoting, and have shown some ability at the whole cut and paste thing. You come across as an angry, self-centered jerk who just needs someone to blame for his own shortcomings. The only advice I have for you - next time something gets all messed up and you need someone to blame, look in the mirror; it's a little ironic to place blame on a God, which you don't believe exists!

Finally, Robert from Florida, I don't have much to offer you. I have always found that you have been quick to the point, informative, truthful, and without fail have been able to back up' your statements with more proof than reasonably required. Aside from that, Your humor is always point based and, I enjoy that it has not been based on personal attacks and vulgarities - something we should all learn from. Libertarian eh? Hmmm, sounds worth looking into!

To those not mentioned by name, most of your posts are nonfactual, base opinions, with little or no support. Both sides' have had little more than angry, insulting drivel injected by such, with little to no effect on the remainder of us, but for the occasional brief change in topic', in order to support, or squelch, your input. Try supporting your opinions, even if the only support you offer is a report on CNN or FOX . . . at least that way, you can't be held responsible for your views'.

Remember, We are all citizens of the United States of America (except James), insults, mudslinging, lies and spin will only drive us further from a solution. Talk, discuss, and open your minds to the fact that you may sometimes be wrong ( as, admittedly, I have been on occasion.) Remember, a scientist, even if they disagree, holds a theory as fact, until such a time as they can disprove it, only then is it discarded, and regarded as rubbish. Once disproved, only a fool continues using it as a basis of belief.

May God bless the U.S., and all her troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#566 Consumer Comment

round and round and round we go

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Round and round and round we go . . . I really do have more important things to do than spend what little free time I have reading and responding to these posts. I know I am the one who decided to do so in the first place, and, I have to admit, it is a little addictive! lol So, I guess what I am trying to say is, . . . I have decided to spend a lot less time on this site than I have been, and therefore will only place an occasional post from here on. (Hold down the cheers of excitement James, Vera has no problem shedding the lite on your stupidity without me . . . come to think of it, you pretty much look after making yourself look stupid on your own!)

Before I go, I do wish to leave a quick note to each of you, individually. (Kinda like with freedom of religion, this is freedom of the Rip-off-report post #154773 according to Shawn, that is to say - take what you want, leave the rest, you don't even have to keep any of it, but, I do have the right to say it. So, read on or skip on by, either way, I won't be offended. Also, this is not a cop out' to get the last word in, being a gentleman, I leave that privilege to each of you - I will read ALL responses and treat each with deserving respect.

In no particular order (but since you have been the most recent with whom I volleyed' . . . )

B',
UNSCR 678, paragraph 2 - authorizes member states to use all necessary means to uphold Res. 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions. This is/was the legal authority' granted by the U.N. for the Gulf War', in 1990. UNSCR 686, paragraph 4 - states that UNSCR 678, paragraph two remains valid until Iraq fulfills several different demands and conditions to the cease fire' - ie: If UNSCR 678, paragraph two authorized the use of military force for the 'Gulf War', Then it would also authorize the use of force to ensure the fulfillment of conditions set forth in UNSCR 686, and all subsequent relevant resolutions, until such a time as there is a specific UNSCR resolution recanting that authority (which I couldn't find anywhere,) the notion that we had to go back and ask for authorization again is absurd!

If your logic were to hold up (as I understand it,) it would be the same to say (as a hypothetical example,) ten years ago, the freeway raised the speed limit up to 70mph, from it's original 55mph. As I stop to refuel today on my way to work, there is a police officer at the next pump so I ask him what the speed limit is on the freeway, and he states it to be 55mph. When his partner comes out, I ask him the same, as is his response. When I pull out onto the freeway, I notice some cars traveling at 55mph, but most are around the 70 mph mark, and to my amazement / pleasure, there is a sign that reads Max. Speed 70mph' - so I travel at 70mph. When I am written a ticket for exceeding the speed limit', and question how do ya figure that?, if you were the officer (and maintained your current ill twisted logic,) you would say something along the lines of that speed limit was raised ten years ago, and you already traveled at 70mph on this freeway several times, if you wish to do so again, you will have to find police officers/congressmen to give you permission to continue driving at 70mph. Sound ridiculous? I think so to.

I do believe that you, and many others, have misconstrued my defense of the legalities of our invasion' of Iraq, as an endorsement backing the war. This was, and is, a twisted view of such. I have said on more than one occasion that I don't agree with our involvement in Iraq. Not that I don't think that it was necessary, just that the timing was wrong, with far more pressing issues that needed to be addressed right here at home. That being said, I also pointed out the fact that we are there now, and, since none of us can undo that which has been done, I will support the president, the troops, and the U.S.A., through the COMPLETION of our mission. When will that be? I don't know, but I do know that Iraq will be, as it already is, a safer, more free society than it was five years ago. The majority of Iraqi citizens will be grateful for the help(actually, most already are!)

You are the first person to whom I've responded today, and I already find that I have strayed far from my intended post! lol My intent was not to get into the meat' of any particular subject, but rather to offer a few more personal observations', and leave it at that. Sorry

Back to the intended . . . B', I view you as a highly intelligent, informed, and thoughtful man whose posts have always offered a vast quantity of information. Your skills as a literatus' are unparalleled on this thread, and have offered you much respect as a result. The downside to that is that many do not challenge your writings due to the eloquent format of their presentation, thus putting your opinions as equals to facts. You and I both know that this serves no higher purpose', as none may ascertain truth without questioning statement. (Although, as I hope is not the intent, you must find it quite a stroking of the ego) lol The reason I state this is not as an additional stroking', but, rather as a warning - be cautious not to fall into your own trap, to close the mind when it holds such intellect would be a disservice to all, especially yourself.

James from Tupper Lake, you leave me virtually speechless(notice I said virtually - lol) your inane rants are devoid of anything bearing even resemblance to fact. Your opinionated drivel is only equaled to that which may be found on such intellectually stimulating programs as Geraldo, Jenny Jones, and Jerry Springer. I often wonder how the likes of you and your ilk justify your opinions - is there some mystical force granting supernatural powers to you, which allows for the ability to twist and contort your body into such positions which would allow for cranial insertion into one's own anal cavity? Do tell.

James from Calgary, it is obvious that you are a passionate soul, with a desire to aid in the creation of a peaceful society in which we all live with the harmonious intent of helping thy neighbor', ever diligent at your calling as an ambassador to the nations, on behalf of all who suffer the oppressive regimes who silence their peoples voice. Your discontent with societies which still embrace the archaic principles of morality, law, and common good is obvious by your dubious verbiage of other; further supported by your sympathetic (or just pathetic) defenses of Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, Al Quada and other such terrorist organizations. Your posts (and there are many - too many) rarely amount to more than blathering insanity, or the epitome of stupidity - you choose, I don't want to be narrow minded or judgmental. Either way, my advice to you is simple (that way you may have the capability of understanding), and I've plagiarized a little here,You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are? No long post here needed! Work on your own Country!

Vera, keep up the good work! It is rare that a white Christian woman from the Midwest is found to be so outspoken! lol I actually pictured a middle aged (the closer I get, the more I hate that term! Oh s**t, I think I'm there !?! :c )'African American' woman who hadn't caved to the leachings, or, I mean teachings, of Reggie Jackson, Al Sharpton and the ilk who preach that the minorities' of this country are oppressed by the white powers in charge'. It never ceases to amaze me that every black' person I know that thinks of Reggie, Al, and their likes as the depressing nay-sayers they are, is typically educated, hard working and successful (to varying degrees) in their chosen field. Whoaaaaaaa Trigger! I don't know how I got that far off the topic!! Oh well, gotta give the dead one' something new to b***h about, otherwise he might have to use his brain as more than an ear separator! lol Back to the topic . . . I have enjoyed your posts from the start, and, although some are long, I always found them informative, factual, and witty.

Your honesty is truly a breath of fresh air on these posts, but I still feel I have advice to offer which you may or may not agree with. (I won't, however, be happy until I have indoctrinated you into my way of thinking, and created a world dominating faith known as Shawniism') Leave James be, all who read these posts know that he is into drugs, full of s**t, and out of line - besides, it's been my experience, that if you leave his type alone, eventually they just disappear (usually picked up by the police.) Stick to conversing with those of equal intelligence, that way people who read can learn something from these posts. Bennie boo-h*o' is an equal waste of time; although he shows occasional ability to access some long forgotten intellect, he's too concerned about remaining a victim, to ever worry about un-spun facts and truths - leave him to his little glass bowl and bubbling water- pipe. Oh ya, and . . . Rock on.

Ben, your posts are not witty, they are not informative, and you have offered little to no proof of anything you write. You are very talented at spinning' and misquoting, and have shown some ability at the whole cut and paste thing. You come across as an angry, self-centered jerk who just needs someone to blame for his own shortcomings. The only advice I have for you - next time something gets all messed up and you need someone to blame, look in the mirror; it's a little ironic to place blame on a God, which you don't believe exists!

Finally, Robert from Florida, I don't have much to offer you. I have always found that you have been quick to the point, informative, truthful, and without fail have been able to back up' your statements with more proof than reasonably required. Aside from that, Your humor is always point based and, I enjoy that it has not been based on personal attacks and vulgarities - something we should all learn from. Libertarian eh? Hmmm, sounds worth looking into!

To those not mentioned by name, most of your posts are nonfactual, base opinions, with little or no support. Both sides' have had little more than angry, insulting drivel injected by such, with little to no effect on the remainder of us, but for the occasional brief change in topic', in order to support, or squelch, your input. Try supporting your opinions, even if the only support you offer is a report on CNN or FOX . . . at least that way, you can't be held responsible for your views'.

Remember, We are all citizens of the United States of America (except James), insults, mudslinging, lies and spin will only drive us further from a solution. Talk, discuss, and open your minds to the fact that you may sometimes be wrong ( as, admittedly, I have been on occasion.) Remember, a scientist, even if they disagree, holds a theory as fact, until such a time as they can disprove it, only then is it discarded, and regarded as rubbish. Once disproved, only a fool continues using it as a basis of belief.

May God bless the U.S., and all her troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#565 Consumer Comment

The hand....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

....Goes yack-yack-yack...blahh-blahh-blahh. Two posts of nothing about THIS subject---but then again, I really didn't bother to read them...I believe there might have even been a link or two, this time.

I'm sick of you Ben. When I consider the rights I have lost in the name of political correctness, and all the big mouths who will only feel good about themselves if they strip yet another joy or right out of the lives of others, I want to vomit. As I understand it, now, the liberals want to take away MY right to have voice on how they conduct the teaching of sex-ed in Public Schools? Hasn't Kinsey done enough damage to the world, along with O'w***e?

Take your point of view and shove it back up your over-spoken, self glorifying sphincter. If I'm incapable of reason, then you are incapable of conscience, thought, and logic. Spew, spew, spew.

I'll look at your leftmedia when I feel d**n good and ready....to waste more of my time. (Feel free to call it a cop-out if you wish...Lord knows I've watched you post that same s**t repeatedly.)

Please, feel free to hold your breath...I hear it's hard to breathe (let alone think) when your head's situated like that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#564 Consumer Comment

Ok...and back to Bush......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Lets get a little more on topic and watch the Bushites squirm. Now I will take DIRECT quotes...un-altered. Dont get your panties in a ruffle and start spouting "your spinning! your spinning!". These are direct quotes with the dates they were said. You CANT spin a direct quote. And there will be none of this BS "your taking it out of context" crap either from you Bushites. Taking it out of context would be if I were to add comments to each...which I wont. These will have dates, and if possible, the places they were said. I'll leave it to everyone who reads them to make up their own mind........(oh and Vera.....you better not ever bring up my spelling or grammer again....your President is no winner in those...boy does this man need to learn "tense").........

"The world is a more peaceful and more free under my leadership" Oct. 28, 03

"Work is not done. There's still dangers and challenges to remain." Apr. 24,03

"There is such hope here in Northern Ireland that the pat can be broken" Apr. 8,03

"Many doctors serve their fellow humans ini the most compassionate ways. I went down to Mississippi, met a man who had moved to Mississippi to provide health care for some of most neediest citizens" Mar. 4, 03 Speaking at the AMA conference

"For years the freedom of our people were really never in doubt" Feb. 14,03 FBI headquarters Wash.D.C.

"The American people is this country's greatest asset." Feb.12,03 Alexandria Va.

"Small business oweners like Joe may have problems passing their business off to a child or somebody they choose to pass their business off of." Jan. 22,03 St.Louis Missouri

"No, I know all the war rhetoric, but it's all aimed at achieving peace" Aug.7,02

"In 1994, there were 67 schools in Texas that were rated 'exemplorary' according to our own tests" Oct.5,99

"I appreciate Charlie Curie here. He's the administration of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service of the Department of Health and Human Services." Mar.3,04

"God loves you, and I love you. And you can count on both of us as a powerful message that the people who wonder about their future can hear." Mar.3,04

Ok break time is over again. I can post more "Bush-isms" later.

And....Good golly Vera! How can you crack on someones spelling and grammer to defend this guy!?? I'm just a guy posting on a website. This nut in the White House.....IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#563 Consumer Comment

Bush and the future (lack of) Civil Rights.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Just for you Vera, since you seem totally incapable of realizing that YOU are the PROOF of what I have been saying. Also this will show you how to put down a link in an easily seen format so you can stop dodging and get to the point.

Are our civil rights dissappearing under Bush?....
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/200584_civil22.html

How about an opinion post (with source) complete with direct quotes from our fearless leader. (spare us the "your spinning" line Vera...quotes are QUOTES!)......

"Bush called for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, saying that's the only way to protect "the most fundamental institution of civilization" from activist judges. "If we are to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a constitutional amendment," Bush said. "The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution . . . honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith." "
Source: Deborah Orin, New York Post Feb 25, 2004

Here we see how the nut-case religious right wants to BAN something before it was even made legal. They fear this so much it, they feel they must ban it before it has a chance. What do they fear about it....well I think we have gone over that already. It just amazes me that 1000's are dead in Iraq, and they feel this needs to get the front burner first.

Lets continue....here we see how the GOP wanted to hide Bush's record on civil rights before last years election. Now golly gee wizzers.....if Bush is such a civil rights champion...why would they want to hide and delay such a report?......

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/101304W.shtml

And even more hiding of his record. Once again I ask.....why hide if your such a champion of it?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/archive/2004/10/05/eguillermo.DTL&type=printable

Ok....now lets get a little more focused on the Bush/Religion aspect. I really like the part in this next article...."People who subvert science in name of ideological preferences only do harm to themselves and everyone else around them." But I'll let you folks read the whole thing.....(oh and Vera, if you can throw biased articles up and say they are proof.....so can I lets be fair here...I know its hard for you zealot types but try hard for me)

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/122495.htm

Here I will throw out a site obviously religious in nature. While this site may seem obviously "against" my personal views, I will show it in all fairness. The purpose of which, to show, that even people of moderate to high levels of "faith" are questioning Bush's hard line stance on religion in American life and how he is projecting it on the world.......

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0317/p01s01-uspo.html

I will take a break now (since my lunch break is over). If you need more "proof" Vera, so be it. Ill be happy to do more tomorrow, and the next day and the next. But in the end, the best thing to do is just read a d**n newspaper, or watch a little news on TV. One does not need to cut and paste from the net all this crap. Its constant, everyday, in our face. Just as much as the Iraq war itself and the constant ticker of American and Iraqi dead.

For now I leave you with this nice quote.....

"If you don't think it's a gamble to put a man in the White House who believes we should have guns in church, who thinks the Taliban is a rock band, who was such a failure as a businessman that his company was nicknamed "El-Busto," who wants to turn our Social Security system into a Wall Street boiler room, who can't name a single thing he disagrees with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson on, who smeared a bona fide hero named John McCain, and whose principle policy proposal is to give America's surplus to the idle rich in the form of a $1.3 trillion tax cut, you're either nuts or a Republican."-----Equal Time co-host Paul Begala

You keep dodging Vera, I'll keep track of our vanishing civil rights, and our war dead. Because obviously you dont care.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#562 Consumer Comment

You have shown nothing but Roberts post Vera...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

A quote from your last post says it all....

"And warping it and twisting it to fit your hateful view of others"

The only "hate" I have shown is for intolerant people like yourself. Nothing and nobody else. You just cant seem to fathom it. Your attacks have slid into nothing more than rants and ravings of some schoolyard bully. With the elementary wit to boot. You have called me just about every name in the book. You have questioned my sexuality (and that of others). The last post was nothing but tizzy tantrum by a typical lost religious nut. Yes I call you names Vera, but I stick to exactly what you are..... a Zealot.

You cant even get it in your little mind about what it is to be an Athiest. Why? Because your too filled with hate to acknowledge anything but your own views. You cant even handle other views that dont even affect you (need proof?? look at your own post about abortion and gays). You have even gone as far as saying Atheism is an "Organization" (Need proof??? see your own post just before this last one). There is no Atheist "organization". Its JUST a belief....period. Once again I must repeat myself for the 40th time......we dont all get together on Sundays. We dont have rituals. We dont have ANYTHING! Oh...and this is no mysterious "founder". Get a grip.

George Bush is trying to push his religious values on the rest of the country. NEED PROOF!!?? WATCH TV!!....OR....just remember the ammendment to the constitution banning gay marriages...or will you just deny that Bush proposed that? Nuff proof for you? Probably not. Ok, how about his appointments to the Supreme Court? Need PROOF?? What do you think are his appointments stance on abortion?

Theres plenty of proof right there alone that Bush is pushing his "faith" and "values" on the rest of the country. Or are you going to deny he made any appointments at all?

Are you going to deny that his choices are based on his "faith". If you do, your either a moron or totally out of touch with reality. I guess you will deny that Bush stated "god talks to him" as well?

What more proof could you need?

And remember, I have said all along....WATCH TV. Any TV. They all carry this. No matter what bias they have or not. Or have you totally missed that 2 court seats came up in the last year? Are you so deep in that cave that even basic news escapes you?

Now if you have shown proof about your claims of CA pushing Islam on children in schools, dont bury it in your long winded firebrand preaching. Make a simple post with the URL's, info, etc. Its a little hard to decipher any real info from your posts when they are so littered with your hate for homosexuals, myself, and others that dont agree with your religion and views. Its even harder when your posts are laced with constant stream of personal attacks like "p***y" and telling people to "f**k off".

How can you honestly say you, people like you, and Bush Co. are not pushing their values on the rest of the nation when you make a comment like this.....

"Whatever gay men or ladies wanna marry, let them go to therecall it a Love Pilgrimage. What the hell do you suggest, if they want a document that defines their partnership as legal? Forge one?"

You obviously dont want it here. Even when it wont affect you in the slightest. Whats even more silly is the fact you put that comment in a paragragh intended to show your "tolerance"??? Are you kidding me. WOW...what a tolerant person you are! And then you have the gall to say I'm "spinning" your words? Vera for PETES SAKE YOU SAID THIS!!! And you call yourself tolerant!!?? "Forge one"?????? are you out of your mind!!?

How could I possibly "spin" a DIRECT quote from you??

Now to end this proof thing about Bush Co., values, and pushing on others.....Ill use the abortion issue. Finally...and in protest because its the only thing you nuts seem to pay attention too.

Bush, you, and people like you would have no problem installing Judges that would force my daughter to complete a pregnancy created out of rape.

DO you DENY this Vera? If RoevWade were overturned, this would be the result. Now if you need proof of this then you are in denial of your own fundamental beliefs that you already have made will clear to everyone.

You are not tolerant. (Need proof? read your own posts)

You wish to force your values on others by denial of rights to those others. (Need proof?? read your own posts)

If you do anything Vera, just answer this one question and make it short.....

Do you want Roe Vs. Wade overturned?

Your answer will be proof positive of what I have been saying. Proof that you want to impose your values on others when those others actions have no affect on your life whatsoever.

So give us the Proof Vera. And spare us the "your spinning" bullshit. Its a simple question. And it has a "yes" or "no" answer. That leaves no room for this "spin" you speak of.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#561 Consumer Comment

PLease, please, PLEASE can we get back on topic?

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Vera believes in religion, the bible, Jesus Christ and God.

Ben does not.

Are we all in agreement here? Good!

Now, can we PLEASE get back on topic and leave the religious crap out? Thank you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#560 Consumer Comment

Charlene, welcome!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Charlene,

You stupid, idiotic moron! LOL There, now you've been officially 'baptized', and you no longer have to worry about when someone is going to call you these things. Welcome to the SIM club, where the only stupid question is the one currently under discussion.

I think that, however illegitimate our reasons for starting this war, we now have a responsibility to those people, who are looking to us to safeguard not only their lives, but their new way of life. You must be very proud of your sister, in choosing to risk her own life to defend so many others. I will pray for her protection every day until she is safely home. Should you plan a homecoming picnic, I will look forward to meeting both of you, and sampling some of that fabled Georgian cuisine.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#559 Consumer Comment

Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Vera,

Perhaps you can explain this concept of 'sanctity of marriage' to me, and how it applies to the marriage of gays. It would seem to me that it sank long before the Titanic sailed. Apparently those who claim to hold it most dear, in truth, consider it no more than a handful of mud to sling at their opponent. It is irrevocably tarnished by its use as a convenient means to a hateful end. When we had laws forbidding the marriage of blacks and whites, these same arguments were used to support them; its unholy, it will completely destroy the institution of marriage as we know it. I think we can see the validity of those predictions. I would also appreciate it if you can justify the claim of homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. 'Cause I'm thinking I probably wouldn't choose to have reduced rights, to be vilified in my community and on the national airwaves, to be repeatedly passed over for promotions or even outright fired, no matter how cute I thought some guy's a*s was.

When I was younger, Planned Parenthood was THE community resource for all things related to sexual activity. If you had a problem or just wanted to talk to someone, everybody knew, that's where you went. If a young woman wanted birth control, she was first counseled on the preferred alternative, abstinence. If a woman wanted an abortion, she was acquainted with other options before it was even considered, and if she chose another course, they had resources and contacts to assist her. STD diagnosis, treatment and counseling; rape and abuse counseling and resources; the list goes on, a smorgasbord of services available from people who were there to help you, not judge you. Today, probably the only funding they can get is for performing abortions. Yay, team! Further proof there's nothing we can't accomplish in the name of God. What is it about these abortions that troubles you so? Is it the thwarting of "God's Plan", the loss of a potential human life; do you weep at the passing of every unfertilized egg? Or is it the loss of another statistic in the battle of ideologies, another child smacked around by a drunken parent who didn't want her in the first place? Or perhaps you mourn the loss of a potential soldier whose life can be callously traded in a far-off land for the lives of the unfaithful?

And finally, we come to the conversation killer, Hitler. If you cannot see that we have become the same fascist regime that gave rise to that shameful era, please study the history, there is probably nothing I can say that will convince you. And if we do give birth to our own little monster, or have already, we cannot be excused, as can the German people of that era, for having failed to see it coming.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#558 Consumer Comment

Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Vera,

Perhaps you can explain this concept of 'sanctity of marriage' to me, and how it applies to the marriage of gays. It would seem to me that it sank long before the Titanic sailed. Apparently those who claim to hold it most dear, in truth, consider it no more than a handful of mud to sling at their opponent. It is irrevocably tarnished by its use as a convenient means to a hateful end. When we had laws forbidding the marriage of blacks and whites, these same arguments were used to support them; its unholy, it will completely destroy the institution of marriage as we know it. I think we can see the validity of those predictions. I would also appreciate it if you can justify the claim of homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. 'Cause I'm thinking I probably wouldn't choose to have reduced rights, to be vilified in my community and on the national airwaves, to be repeatedly passed over for promotions or even outright fired, no matter how cute I thought some guy's a*s was.

When I was younger, Planned Parenthood was THE community resource for all things related to sexual activity. If you had a problem or just wanted to talk to someone, everybody knew, that's where you went. If a young woman wanted birth control, she was first counseled on the preferred alternative, abstinence. If a woman wanted an abortion, she was acquainted with other options before it was even considered, and if she chose another course, they had resources and contacts to assist her. STD diagnosis, treatment and counseling; rape and abuse counseling and resources; the list goes on, a smorgasbord of services available from people who were there to help you, not judge you. Today, probably the only funding they can get is for performing abortions. Yay, team! Further proof there's nothing we can't accomplish in the name of God. What is it about these abortions that troubles you so? Is it the thwarting of "God's Plan", the loss of a potential human life; do you weep at the passing of every unfertilized egg? Or is it the loss of another statistic in the battle of ideologies, another child smacked around by a drunken parent who didn't want her in the first place? Or perhaps you mourn the loss of a potential soldier whose life can be callously traded in a far-off land for the lives of the unfaithful?

And finally, we come to the conversation killer, Hitler. If you cannot see that we have become the same fascist regime that gave rise to that shameful era, please study the history, there is probably nothing I can say that will convince you. And if we do give birth to our own little monster, or have already, we cannot be excused, as can the German people of that era, for having failed to see it coming.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#557 Consumer Comment

Vera, about that 'sanctity' of marriage thing...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Vera,

Perhaps you can explain this concept of 'sanctity of marriage' to me, and how it applies to the marriage of gays. It would seem to me that it sank long before the Titanic sailed. Apparently those who claim to hold it most dear, in truth, consider it no more than a handful of mud to sling at their opponent. It is irrevocably tarnished by its use as a convenient means to a hateful end. When we had laws forbidding the marriage of blacks and whites, these same arguments were used to support them; its unholy, it will completely destroy the institution of marriage as we know it. I think we can see the validity of those predictions. I would also appreciate it if you can justify the claim of homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. 'Cause I'm thinking I probably wouldn't choose to have reduced rights, to be vilified in my community and on the national airwaves, to be repeatedly passed over for promotions or even outright fired, no matter how cute I thought some guy's a*s was.

When I was younger, Planned Parenthood was THE community resource for all things related to sexual activity. If you had a problem or just wanted to talk to someone, everybody knew, that's where you went. If a young woman wanted birth control, she was first counseled on the preferred alternative, abstinence. If a woman wanted an abortion, she was acquainted with other options before it was even considered, and if she chose another course, they had resources and contacts to assist her. STD diagnosis, treatment and counseling; rape and abuse counseling and resources; the list goes on, a smorgasbord of services available from people who were there to help you, not judge you. Today, probably the only funding they can get is for performing abortions. Yay, team! Further proof there's nothing we can't accomplish in the name of God. What is it about these abortions that troubles you so? Is it the thwarting of "God's Plan", the loss of a potential human life; do you weep at the passing of every unfertilized egg? Or is it the loss of another statistic in the battle of ideologies, another child smacked around by a drunken parent who didn't want her in the first place? Or perhaps you mourn the loss of a potential soldier whose life can be callously traded in a far-off land for the lives of the unfaithful?

And finally, we come to the conversation killer, Hitler. If you cannot see that we have become the same fascist regime that gave rise to that shameful era, please study the history, there is probably nothing I can say that will convince you. And if we do give birth to our own little monster, or have already, we cannot be excused, as can the German people of that era, for having failed to see it coming.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#556 Consumer Comment

James, please learn to count. ..They make wild accusations and the press gives it a pass.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

You say that there "isn't one leader...." Funny. I stopped counting at 45. That's the number of countries involved in Iraq. Of course, the countries whose leaders were being paid by Hussein aren't on the list, but that still leaves fully 1/4 the total number of countries on the planet. There are more involved than GHW Bush had in 1990, and Bush Jr didn't have to bribe anyone to help. Bush Sr waived off any and all debts the other countries owed the US to get them to sign on. Even Japan(who I would much rather have as an ally than France or Canada) ammended their Constitution so they could send Combat troops.

Hell, France can't even stop the terrorists in their own country. It's been nearly 2 full weeks and have over 300 cities burning every night. What is the French response? "We need to set up a dialogue of dignity and respect". What?! You need to send in the military and shoot every single person who has anything in their hands. One night of military or even police enforcement will end the arson.

Nice try James. I'm still researching why a Canadian cares what is happening in my Government. You shouldn't worry at all. We'll always be there to defend your country. We all know you won't.

As for those who still think this is a war for oil, make your point or give up.

For those asking why Jenna and Barbara Bush haven't been "sent" to war, I have answered that several times. Again, our military is a volunteer force. Everyone enlists on their own accord, not drafted. Women have no place in combat, but that isn't the issue at hand.

The only media outlet that is remotely NOT beholden to the left wing of the Democrats is FOX News. Ben will call them "biased", yet use CNN as the model of objective journalism. CNN is the grand-daddy of leftwing media play. Remember Peter Arnett? After openly assisting our enemies, CNN fired his sorry a*s and he went running to the BBC, who knew he was just the sort of scumbag they needed to fill out their circus of fallen stars. The rest of the CATV outlets and the Networks are all the same too.

The Programming Manager at NPR was fired for trying to bring in conservative radio shows. They can have all the liberal crap they can handle, but god help them if someone wants to balance it out some.

To a liberal, "balanced" means putting 1 conservative against 5 liberals. Granted, it normally takes the combined mental powers of 5 liberals to get up to the triple digit IQ's of the average conservative. In most cases, the "conservative" is someone nobody has ever heard of, or is actually a moderate or a RINO(Republican In Name Only) like Arlan Specter or John McCain.

I still like the fact that Air America had to steal money from a Boys/Girls Club to get on the air. They also have to pay stations to put their drivel on the air. Without George Soros, they wouldn't be on the air today. They're even running pledge drives to get money. A show should be able to sell commercials to stay on the air. No business wants to air a commercial during their shows. Funny stuff.

They make wild accusations and the press gives it a pass. Pat Robertson suggests whacking Chaves and gets hammered. Randi Rhoades says she wants President Bush assasinated and the press gives her a pass. A Rightwinger says we should kill a Commie, and he needs to be charged with "something" and handed over to the Venezuelans for summary execution. A Leftwinger wants our own President killed, and she's just doing shtick. You people are pathetic at best.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#555 Consumer Comment

Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Robert,

If David Limbaugh is one of the voices in your head, its easy to see why you feel that way. lol

I used to think Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the UN was part of a careful balancing act to keep his butt intact while maintaining 'street cred' in the Arab world. Now it seems he was more like a Pit Bull. Come to think of it, he does have that same kind of blank look. Perhaps he was a CIA experiment in mind control, activated by the Johnson administration, that never quite achieved full potential. Maybe James in TL has some sources that can verify this theory.

______________________
Vera,

Odd that you should mention it; I was wondering about the same thing. Would we become fast friends, or would it be a remake of The Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat? Woof, woof! Meeeowwwwwwrrrrrrrr!

______________________
James,

I have no idea what paranoid fantasies your brain must be spinning, regarding my interaction with the other posters on this report, nor do I have any wish to divine them. I think our relationship could best be described as an uneasy truce. While our thoughts converge at strange points, and I suspect my politcal 'leaning' would be characterized as closer to yours, in truth I feel more kinship with those I am arguing with. Perhaps this can be explained by common national intersts. Or not. K?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#554 Consumer Comment

Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Robert,

If David Limbaugh is one of the voices in your head, its easy to see why you feel that way. lol

I used to think Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the UN was part of a careful balancing act to keep his butt intact while maintaining 'street cred' in the Arab world. Now it seems he was more like a Pit Bull. Come to think of it, he does have that same kind of blank look. Perhaps he was a CIA experiment in mind control, activated by the Johnson administration, that never quite achieved full potential. Maybe James in TL has some sources that can verify this theory.

______________________
Vera,

Odd that you should mention it; I was wondering about the same thing. Would we become fast friends, or would it be a remake of The Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat? Woof, woof! Meeeowwwwwwrrrrrrrr!

______________________
James,

I have no idea what paranoid fantasies your brain must be spinning, regarding my interaction with the other posters on this report, nor do I have any wish to divine them. I think our relationship could best be described as an uneasy truce. While our thoughts converge at strange points, and I suspect my politcal 'leaning' would be characterized as closer to yours, in truth I feel more kinship with those I am arguing with. Perhaps this can be explained by common national intersts. Or not. K?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#553 Consumer Comment

Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Robert,

If David Limbaugh is one of the voices in your head, its easy to see why you feel that way. lol

I used to think Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the UN was part of a careful balancing act to keep his butt intact while maintaining 'street cred' in the Arab world. Now it seems he was more like a Pit Bull. Come to think of it, he does have that same kind of blank look. Perhaps he was a CIA experiment in mind control, activated by the Johnson administration, that never quite achieved full potential. Maybe James in TL has some sources that can verify this theory.

______________________
Vera,

Odd that you should mention it; I was wondering about the same thing. Would we become fast friends, or would it be a remake of The Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat? Woof, woof! Meeeowwwwwwrrrrrrrr!

______________________
James,

I have no idea what paranoid fantasies your brain must be spinning, regarding my interaction with the other posters on this report, nor do I have any wish to divine them. I think our relationship could best be described as an uneasy truce. While our thoughts converge at strange points, and I suspect my politcal 'leaning' would be characterized as closer to yours, in truth I feel more kinship with those I am arguing with. Perhaps this can be explained by common national intersts. Or not. K?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#552 Consumer Comment

Saddam Insane is a lobotomy experiment gone bad.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Robert,

If David Limbaugh is one of the voices in your head, its easy to see why you feel that way. lol

I used to think Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the UN was part of a careful balancing act to keep his butt intact while maintaining 'street cred' in the Arab world. Now it seems he was more like a Pit Bull. Come to think of it, he does have that same kind of blank look. Perhaps he was a CIA experiment in mind control, activated by the Johnson administration, that never quite achieved full potential. Maybe James in TL has some sources that can verify this theory.

______________________
Vera,

Odd that you should mention it; I was wondering about the same thing. Would we become fast friends, or would it be a remake of The Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat? Woof, woof! Meeeowwwwwwrrrrrrrr!

______________________
James,

I have no idea what paranoid fantasies your brain must be spinning, regarding my interaction with the other posters on this report, nor do I have any wish to divine them. I think our relationship could best be described as an uneasy truce. While our thoughts converge at strange points, and I suspect my politcal 'leaning' would be characterized as closer to yours, in truth I feel more kinship with those I am arguing with. Perhaps this can be explained by common national intersts. Or not. K?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#551 Consumer Comment

Man, I've had gas with more talent...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

And I still intend to keep my word. This isn't a post about religion, but it is a response to Ben. Most likely, my final post to Ben, unless he comes up with something factual and on-topic.

Once again Vera you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues.

Just like you, eh Bennie?

Hitler did the same about Jews.never mindI bet you need facts since you types usually discount the Holocaust).

I'm aware of the Holocaust. What's this got to do with the War in Iraq and our President being a greedy oil tycoon wanting more oil at the cost of American troops' lives?

Lets once again tear Vera down..

You still aren't man (or woman) enoughand it hasn't happened yet, Dogboy.

If it looks and sounds like a duck.I think you know the rest Vera.

Sure do! Shall I call you a p***y, then? You sure sound like one. Your posts are a clever as a qweef...and equally substantial.

Funny.Nobody mentioned proof till your outlandish comments about Islam in schools. At which point I asked for proof. I have seen none.

Hmmmm.a laundry list of times I have asked for proof (and a case where Robert has)

See my post on 09/21/05 (Good Grief) Waiting for something un-spun, asking for proof.

09/21/05 (Five posts in a row! A personal Best) asking for proof.

See 09/26/05 (Okay, Finnigan) Asking to stay on subject.

On 09/29/05 (James, stop please!) Robert waits in Breathless Anticipation for proof.

10/07/05 (Yet another response) It is pointed out that proof has been repeatedly requested. Remarks about subject changes, as well as a bevvy of contradictions (courtesy of James d' Calgary).

10/08/05 (Oh, Brothergive em facts) Middle-top of post Proof pleasejust the facts.

10/11/05 (h*o Boy!) Proof pleasejust the facts, not opinions.

10/13/05 (Once again, blah-blah) Still waiting. Whole post is asking for proof.

10/15/05 (From Anybody But Bush') What this topic ISN'T about, what it IS about.

10/15/05 (James needs to take a Ba'ath) More requests for proof.

10/17/05 SEE THIS POST'S TITLE!

10/20/05 (don't worry, B. happy) The dreaded curriculum post is bought into our little circle! Proof has been givenmany sources. If you don't want to believe, that doesn't make it not exist.

10/22/05 I break my word, but again, ask that we stay on topic.

10/24/05 (Tsk-Tsk-Tsk'and those that have eyes') Don't bug me if you can't provide more fact than flame.

10/25/05 (Holy Cow!) Still waiting for YOUR facts.

So you see hereas in so MANY other places---I don't need to pull out quotes, delete the info between em and spin them to make my point. You keep going on, painting your little pictures of how I supposedly laughed at the Holocaust, or tried to force something that simply isn't true, or whatever. This board offers plenty of proof, it's just a matter of not being too lazy to see what's there and do a little research.

As you can plainly see, I've been asking for proof a hell of a lot longer than you have...it's right here on this board. Stupidity and lackadaisical mentality aside, you'd haveta be blind not to see it.

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

If that's the way you need to spin things to vilify others and justify your pithy hatred, knock yourself out. I can think of better things to live for, than hatredapparently you cannot.

Ummm excuse me?

There IS no excuse for people like you (I mean ungrateful, childish little brats---having nothing to do with religion). I blame poor parenting skills and a weak home life.

Just WHO was it that was gassing people in the Holocaust eh? Were those nasty Jews gassing themselves? And about the torturing of children..that's a joke!! You really live a sheltered life and see no world news do you?!

OddI thought it was HITLER that was responsible for the Holocaust.
Your comment borders on the anti-Semitic.

I did not know there was a quota on how many people needed to be killed to mention that they have been killed. Sorry, please tell me the number of people that need to be killed before you will acknowledge that someone actually died.

I asked you that. You dodged. Pathetic.

Once againsorry Vera. I did not know that you had a quota on how many must die or be maimed before you will acknowledge an evil.

That's twice you've tried to spin and plagiarize. Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Well well well, seems somebody has a hard time remembering what they posted in the same post! I didn't pick and choose Vera. Ive been saying all along these ALL were something to be outraged over. You're the one picking and choosing. Need more proof? I think I put it all down already on this post.nuff said.

Multiple plagiarisms, and now, copping out in quadruplicate. I'll bet you're just a-twittering with glee.

'Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program?'
Your really reaching here Vera. Ive avoided this subject so far.

I know. That's why I think you're picking and choosing which deaths are more tragic than others. And my faith has nothing to do with my outrage, so don't even bother. So I can see why you don't care about the lives taken by Planned Parenthood. Yet I'll bet you'd be one of the first to shout Bush agrees with Genocide! With you, life does come with a price tag.

But so be it. This is YOUR VIEW. Thank you for proving once again that you wish to impose YOUR VIEW on others.

Wrong againcop out again.

Im not mocking your choice

Yes you are. And warping it and twisting it to fit your hateful view of others, then using that view to pass a blanket judgment against those who don't share your political view. Hatred is hatred, no matter how you polish it.

I'm mocking you pushing your choice on others. I think I have proven your hypocritical.

Only in your narrow little mind. Smashing job, proving YOURSELF a hypocrite, though. Bully-Rah!

Ah yes, that's a good come back. I tell you to leave them alone and you spin twist and dodge. No real answer so you try and make me look like I'm attacking them? Get real! Matter of fact that was my EXACT question to you.so you just throw it back at me? Ummmm hmmmm..your really reaching here. Once again..nice dodgenot!

Try again, Retardo Mentalblock. I had long since answered your question regarding my views on homosexuality. I can quote myself indirectly: I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I recognize it as a choice. I don't pass judgment on itI have gay friends whom I simply adore, and they respect my choice to be straight, and I respect their choice to be gay.

And three, because sooner or later the schoolyard mentality comes out and someone will accuse me of being gay. Well, Vera, you get the schoolyard award! Is that your angle..

I never accused you of being a homosexual. I asked you a question. See, there's more of your wonderful spin. You bought it up so many times, and I believe one of your comments was ...how repulsive is love or something to that effect.

Ben's GAY! That's why he defends them!..Crusaders! ATTACK! Sorry Vera, I'm happily married with a child to someone of the opposite sex. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Oh, that poor child! Let's all hope the fruit falls as far from the tree as possible. And that's how I feel about you as a person, beliefs aside. Are you as much a dominating p***k to your Family members, as you sell yourself to be on this board?

Guess you will have to find another reason to attack my defense of people that have done you no wrong and never will.

More Ben-Spin. I wasn't trolling for a fight; you were.

Why should YOU care about the sanctity of marriage?'
Uh, not quite sure what your trying to twist here Vera.

Don't you mean I haven't figured out a way to turn this into a vicious attack of sufficient severity? Wait a couple posts, I'm sure you'll have figured out something by then.

Funny I don't remember that being on a national ballot.

Well, it was here in Ohio. If you didn't see it on the voting ballot, you either missed it or you didn't vote.

No Vera, that is not what you have been saying. And that certainly is not what Bush has been saying. If it had been then this debate wouldn't be happening. It IS what I have been saying. And you have attacked because of it.

Wrong. Want proof? Read all the last posts between you and I as they are writtenand don't spin it for a change. Better yettake copies of the posts to some NEUTRAL sources (that means "people that aren't the mini-minded masses you can personally identify with--you know a good, solid sample of a NORMAL demographic) and let them see.

You haven't given anything! Only once did you mention it again and you told me to look at OTHERS POSTS! You have not posted ONE thing to show proof. You only pointed to a post by Robert that comes from a dubious source to which I have already commented. You have dodged non-stop over this since the beginning. Now put up some proof or shut up.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. And I offer you the same. Put up or shut up. Or just shut up.

Forget about telling gays to goto Canada already? Or should I just start the whole abortion thing again?

Still more Ben-Spin. In no way (unless you read that into it, as you have) is that meant to be a my way or the highway' view. But you go ahead. You've done a bang-up job proving yourself an a*s. Where else is gay marriage legal, here in the States?? Whatever gay men or ladies wanna marry, let them go to therecall it a Love Pilgrimage. What the hell do you suggest, if they want a document that defines their partnership as legal? Forge one?

As usual, you have nothing more to offer regarding the War, so you wanna stand on your soap box and bash. Go cram your views back up where they came from, and stop trying to paint others who believe differently as the monsters you portray them. You're a deluded, sick little c****ucker, Ben, and I truly pity those that have to live with you and your inane babble on a daily basis. You're nutless, gutless, and lame, and your views are so badly occluded, you're the one who sounds like a zealot.

Now I offer you a chance to leave me alone. Just ignore me, don't post anything directed to me, don't try the James Tactic of trying to insinuate an attack through a post responding to someone else. Try only discussing the subjectnot what you're imagining and reading into it.

Once again, I'll point it out to you; the topic is about how some mental midget in Tupperville thinks the sitting President is a RipOff because he's had to pay three bucks a gallon for gas. Not that gas prices are that high now (To date [11/08/05], the lowest I've seen it is currently $2.14 per gallon, but we know that'll change, no matter WHO is President). Never mind that this same President has been in office for four years prior---it's the fact that the Prez is from a family that's vested in oil, and that we have to pay so much NOW that matters to him. He can't even offer information to add credibility to his claims. His ship has long since sunkand he's the little vermin swimming in circles in hopes of not drowning. Doesn't have the sense to swim to shore.

I'm sick to death of beating the dead horse you dragged in, and I'm not going to do so any further. I've come dangerously close to breaking my promise a second time, by even bothering to respond to you, and I'm sick of you subverting and twisting every friggin' thing I say to demonize me.

You have stated your opinion ad nauseum, as I have mine, and I have nothing more to say to you outside of insultsand honey, I don't see my well ever drying up on the insults I have set aside for you. And that's just on a personal level! I pair you right up with the Moron from Canada! Two sides of the same d**n coin. (Like "funny-money", minus the "funny".)

Any other attacks you wanna issue my way.just picture this; as I skimmed your last windstorm, All I could see is a hand doing that yack-yack-blah-blah-blah gesture. Same thing with James' posts. No substance, just bullshit. Enough already. Let's all get back to the subject.

(But of course, I'll bet right now you're sphincter is itchin' to cut loose! I'll get the yack-yack hand ready.) Blahh-blahh-blahh.

Blah-Blah Black Sheep, have you any wool?
Yes, Ma'am, yes, Ma'am--Bennie's a*****e's full!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#550 Consumer Comment

Man, I've had gas with more talent...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

And I still intend to keep my word. This isn't a post about religion, but it is a response to Ben. Most likely, my final post to Ben, unless he comes up with something factual and on-topic.

Once again Vera you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues.

Just like you, eh Bennie?

Hitler did the same about Jews.never mindI bet you need facts since you types usually discount the Holocaust).

I'm aware of the Holocaust. What's this got to do with the War in Iraq and our President being a greedy oil tycoon wanting more oil at the cost of American troops' lives?

Lets once again tear Vera down..

You still aren't man (or woman) enoughand it hasn't happened yet, Dogboy.

If it looks and sounds like a duck.I think you know the rest Vera.

Sure do! Shall I call you a p***y, then? You sure sound like one. Your posts are a clever as a qweef...and equally substantial.

Funny.Nobody mentioned proof till your outlandish comments about Islam in schools. At which point I asked for proof. I have seen none.

Hmmmm.a laundry list of times I have asked for proof (and a case where Robert has)

See my post on 09/21/05 (Good Grief) Waiting for something un-spun, asking for proof.

09/21/05 (Five posts in a row! A personal Best) asking for proof.

See 09/26/05 (Okay, Finnigan) Asking to stay on subject.

On 09/29/05 (James, stop please!) Robert waits in Breathless Anticipation for proof.

10/07/05 (Yet another response) It is pointed out that proof has been repeatedly requested. Remarks about subject changes, as well as a bevvy of contradictions (courtesy of James d' Calgary).

10/08/05 (Oh, Brothergive em facts) Middle-top of post Proof pleasejust the facts.

10/11/05 (h*o Boy!) Proof pleasejust the facts, not opinions.

10/13/05 (Once again, blah-blah) Still waiting. Whole post is asking for proof.

10/15/05 (From Anybody But Bush') What this topic ISN'T about, what it IS about.

10/15/05 (James needs to take a Ba'ath) More requests for proof.

10/17/05 SEE THIS POST'S TITLE!

10/20/05 (don't worry, B. happy) The dreaded curriculum post is bought into our little circle! Proof has been givenmany sources. If you don't want to believe, that doesn't make it not exist.

10/22/05 I break my word, but again, ask that we stay on topic.

10/24/05 (Tsk-Tsk-Tsk'and those that have eyes') Don't bug me if you can't provide more fact than flame.

10/25/05 (Holy Cow!) Still waiting for YOUR facts.

So you see hereas in so MANY other places---I don't need to pull out quotes, delete the info between em and spin them to make my point. You keep going on, painting your little pictures of how I supposedly laughed at the Holocaust, or tried to force something that simply isn't true, or whatever. This board offers plenty of proof, it's just a matter of not being too lazy to see what's there and do a little research.

As you can plainly see, I've been asking for proof a hell of a lot longer than you have...it's right here on this board. Stupidity and lackadaisical mentality aside, you'd haveta be blind not to see it.

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

If that's the way you need to spin things to vilify others and justify your pithy hatred, knock yourself out. I can think of better things to live for, than hatredapparently you cannot.

Ummm excuse me?

There IS no excuse for people like you (I mean ungrateful, childish little brats---having nothing to do with religion). I blame poor parenting skills and a weak home life.

Just WHO was it that was gassing people in the Holocaust eh? Were those nasty Jews gassing themselves? And about the torturing of children..that's a joke!! You really live a sheltered life and see no world news do you?!

OddI thought it was HITLER that was responsible for the Holocaust.
Your comment borders on the anti-Semitic.

I did not know there was a quota on how many people needed to be killed to mention that they have been killed. Sorry, please tell me the number of people that need to be killed before you will acknowledge that someone actually died.

I asked you that. You dodged. Pathetic.

Once againsorry Vera. I did not know that you had a quota on how many must die or be maimed before you will acknowledge an evil.

That's twice you've tried to spin and plagiarize. Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Well well well, seems somebody has a hard time remembering what they posted in the same post! I didn't pick and choose Vera. Ive been saying all along these ALL were something to be outraged over. You're the one picking and choosing. Need more proof? I think I put it all down already on this post.nuff said.

Multiple plagiarisms, and now, copping out in quadruplicate. I'll bet you're just a-twittering with glee.

'Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program?'
Your really reaching here Vera. Ive avoided this subject so far.

I know. That's why I think you're picking and choosing which deaths are more tragic than others. And my faith has nothing to do with my outrage, so don't even bother. So I can see why you don't care about the lives taken by Planned Parenthood. Yet I'll bet you'd be one of the first to shout Bush agrees with Genocide! With you, life does come with a price tag.

But so be it. This is YOUR VIEW. Thank you for proving once again that you wish to impose YOUR VIEW on others.

Wrong againcop out again.

Im not mocking your choice

Yes you are. And warping it and twisting it to fit your hateful view of others, then using that view to pass a blanket judgment against those who don't share your political view. Hatred is hatred, no matter how you polish it.

I'm mocking you pushing your choice on others. I think I have proven your hypocritical.

Only in your narrow little mind. Smashing job, proving YOURSELF a hypocrite, though. Bully-Rah!

Ah yes, that's a good come back. I tell you to leave them alone and you spin twist and dodge. No real answer so you try and make me look like I'm attacking them? Get real! Matter of fact that was my EXACT question to you.so you just throw it back at me? Ummmm hmmmm..your really reaching here. Once again..nice dodgenot!

Try again, Retardo Mentalblock. I had long since answered your question regarding my views on homosexuality. I can quote myself indirectly: I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I recognize it as a choice. I don't pass judgment on itI have gay friends whom I simply adore, and they respect my choice to be straight, and I respect their choice to be gay.

And three, because sooner or later the schoolyard mentality comes out and someone will accuse me of being gay. Well, Vera, you get the schoolyard award! Is that your angle..

I never accused you of being a homosexual. I asked you a question. See, there's more of your wonderful spin. You bought it up so many times, and I believe one of your comments was ...how repulsive is love or something to that effect.

Ben's GAY! That's why he defends them!..Crusaders! ATTACK! Sorry Vera, I'm happily married with a child to someone of the opposite sex. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Oh, that poor child! Let's all hope the fruit falls as far from the tree as possible. And that's how I feel about you as a person, beliefs aside. Are you as much a dominating p***k to your Family members, as you sell yourself to be on this board?

Guess you will have to find another reason to attack my defense of people that have done you no wrong and never will.

More Ben-Spin. I wasn't trolling for a fight; you were.

Why should YOU care about the sanctity of marriage?'
Uh, not quite sure what your trying to twist here Vera.

Don't you mean I haven't figured out a way to turn this into a vicious attack of sufficient severity? Wait a couple posts, I'm sure you'll have figured out something by then.

Funny I don't remember that being on a national ballot.

Well, it was here in Ohio. If you didn't see it on the voting ballot, you either missed it or you didn't vote.

No Vera, that is not what you have been saying. And that certainly is not what Bush has been saying. If it had been then this debate wouldn't be happening. It IS what I have been saying. And you have attacked because of it.

Wrong. Want proof? Read all the last posts between you and I as they are writtenand don't spin it for a change. Better yettake copies of the posts to some NEUTRAL sources (that means "people that aren't the mini-minded masses you can personally identify with--you know a good, solid sample of a NORMAL demographic) and let them see.

You haven't given anything! Only once did you mention it again and you told me to look at OTHERS POSTS! You have not posted ONE thing to show proof. You only pointed to a post by Robert that comes from a dubious source to which I have already commented. You have dodged non-stop over this since the beginning. Now put up some proof or shut up.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. And I offer you the same. Put up or shut up. Or just shut up.

Forget about telling gays to goto Canada already? Or should I just start the whole abortion thing again?

Still more Ben-Spin. In no way (unless you read that into it, as you have) is that meant to be a my way or the highway' view. But you go ahead. You've done a bang-up job proving yourself an a*s. Where else is gay marriage legal, here in the States?? Whatever gay men or ladies wanna marry, let them go to therecall it a Love Pilgrimage. What the hell do you suggest, if they want a document that defines their partnership as legal? Forge one?

As usual, you have nothing more to offer regarding the War, so you wanna stand on your soap box and bash. Go cram your views back up where they came from, and stop trying to paint others who believe differently as the monsters you portray them. You're a deluded, sick little c****ucker, Ben, and I truly pity those that have to live with you and your inane babble on a daily basis. You're nutless, gutless, and lame, and your views are so badly occluded, you're the one who sounds like a zealot.

Now I offer you a chance to leave me alone. Just ignore me, don't post anything directed to me, don't try the James Tactic of trying to insinuate an attack through a post responding to someone else. Try only discussing the subjectnot what you're imagining and reading into it.

Once again, I'll point it out to you; the topic is about how some mental midget in Tupperville thinks the sitting President is a RipOff because he's had to pay three bucks a gallon for gas. Not that gas prices are that high now (To date [11/08/05], the lowest I've seen it is currently $2.14 per gallon, but we know that'll change, no matter WHO is President). Never mind that this same President has been in office for four years prior---it's the fact that the Prez is from a family that's vested in oil, and that we have to pay so much NOW that matters to him. He can't even offer information to add credibility to his claims. His ship has long since sunkand he's the little vermin swimming in circles in hopes of not drowning. Doesn't have the sense to swim to shore.

I'm sick to death of beating the dead horse you dragged in, and I'm not going to do so any further. I've come dangerously close to breaking my promise a second time, by even bothering to respond to you, and I'm sick of you subverting and twisting every friggin' thing I say to demonize me.

You have stated your opinion ad nauseum, as I have mine, and I have nothing more to say to you outside of insultsand honey, I don't see my well ever drying up on the insults I have set aside for you. And that's just on a personal level! I pair you right up with the Moron from Canada! Two sides of the same d**n coin. (Like "funny-money", minus the "funny".)

Any other attacks you wanna issue my way.just picture this; as I skimmed your last windstorm, All I could see is a hand doing that yack-yack-blah-blah-blah gesture. Same thing with James' posts. No substance, just bullshit. Enough already. Let's all get back to the subject.

(But of course, I'll bet right now you're sphincter is itchin' to cut loose! I'll get the yack-yack hand ready.) Blahh-blahh-blahh.

Blah-Blah Black Sheep, have you any wool?
Yes, Ma'am, yes, Ma'am--Bennie's a*****e's full!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#549 Consumer Comment

Man, I've had gas with more talent...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

And I still intend to keep my word. This isn't a post about religion, but it is a response to Ben. Most likely, my final post to Ben, unless he comes up with something factual and on-topic.

Once again Vera you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues.

Just like you, eh Bennie?

Hitler did the same about Jews.never mindI bet you need facts since you types usually discount the Holocaust).

I'm aware of the Holocaust. What's this got to do with the War in Iraq and our President being a greedy oil tycoon wanting more oil at the cost of American troops' lives?

Lets once again tear Vera down..

You still aren't man (or woman) enoughand it hasn't happened yet, Dogboy.

If it looks and sounds like a duck.I think you know the rest Vera.

Sure do! Shall I call you a p***y, then? You sure sound like one. Your posts are a clever as a qweef...and equally substantial.

Funny.Nobody mentioned proof till your outlandish comments about Islam in schools. At which point I asked for proof. I have seen none.

Hmmmm.a laundry list of times I have asked for proof (and a case where Robert has)

See my post on 09/21/05 (Good Grief) Waiting for something un-spun, asking for proof.

09/21/05 (Five posts in a row! A personal Best) asking for proof.

See 09/26/05 (Okay, Finnigan) Asking to stay on subject.

On 09/29/05 (James, stop please!) Robert waits in Breathless Anticipation for proof.

10/07/05 (Yet another response) It is pointed out that proof has been repeatedly requested. Remarks about subject changes, as well as a bevvy of contradictions (courtesy of James d' Calgary).

10/08/05 (Oh, Brothergive em facts) Middle-top of post Proof pleasejust the facts.

10/11/05 (h*o Boy!) Proof pleasejust the facts, not opinions.

10/13/05 (Once again, blah-blah) Still waiting. Whole post is asking for proof.

10/15/05 (From Anybody But Bush') What this topic ISN'T about, what it IS about.

10/15/05 (James needs to take a Ba'ath) More requests for proof.

10/17/05 SEE THIS POST'S TITLE!

10/20/05 (don't worry, B. happy) The dreaded curriculum post is bought into our little circle! Proof has been givenmany sources. If you don't want to believe, that doesn't make it not exist.

10/22/05 I break my word, but again, ask that we stay on topic.

10/24/05 (Tsk-Tsk-Tsk'and those that have eyes') Don't bug me if you can't provide more fact than flame.

10/25/05 (Holy Cow!) Still waiting for YOUR facts.

So you see hereas in so MANY other places---I don't need to pull out quotes, delete the info between em and spin them to make my point. You keep going on, painting your little pictures of how I supposedly laughed at the Holocaust, or tried to force something that simply isn't true, or whatever. This board offers plenty of proof, it's just a matter of not being too lazy to see what's there and do a little research.

As you can plainly see, I've been asking for proof a hell of a lot longer than you have...it's right here on this board. Stupidity and lackadaisical mentality aside, you'd haveta be blind not to see it.

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

If that's the way you need to spin things to vilify others and justify your pithy hatred, knock yourself out. I can think of better things to live for, than hatredapparently you cannot.

Ummm excuse me?

There IS no excuse for people like you (I mean ungrateful, childish little brats---having nothing to do with religion). I blame poor parenting skills and a weak home life.

Just WHO was it that was gassing people in the Holocaust eh? Were those nasty Jews gassing themselves? And about the torturing of children..that's a joke!! You really live a sheltered life and see no world news do you?!

OddI thought it was HITLER that was responsible for the Holocaust.
Your comment borders on the anti-Semitic.

I did not know there was a quota on how many people needed to be killed to mention that they have been killed. Sorry, please tell me the number of people that need to be killed before you will acknowledge that someone actually died.

I asked you that. You dodged. Pathetic.

Once againsorry Vera. I did not know that you had a quota on how many must die or be maimed before you will acknowledge an evil.

That's twice you've tried to spin and plagiarize. Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Well well well, seems somebody has a hard time remembering what they posted in the same post! I didn't pick and choose Vera. Ive been saying all along these ALL were something to be outraged over. You're the one picking and choosing. Need more proof? I think I put it all down already on this post.nuff said.

Multiple plagiarisms, and now, copping out in quadruplicate. I'll bet you're just a-twittering with glee.

'Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program?'
Your really reaching here Vera. Ive avoided this subject so far.

I know. That's why I think you're picking and choosing which deaths are more tragic than others. And my faith has nothing to do with my outrage, so don't even bother. So I can see why you don't care about the lives taken by Planned Parenthood. Yet I'll bet you'd be one of the first to shout Bush agrees with Genocide! With you, life does come with a price tag.

But so be it. This is YOUR VIEW. Thank you for proving once again that you wish to impose YOUR VIEW on others.

Wrong againcop out again.

Im not mocking your choice

Yes you are. And warping it and twisting it to fit your hateful view of others, then using that view to pass a blanket judgment against those who don't share your political view. Hatred is hatred, no matter how you polish it.

I'm mocking you pushing your choice on others. I think I have proven your hypocritical.

Only in your narrow little mind. Smashing job, proving YOURSELF a hypocrite, though. Bully-Rah!

Ah yes, that's a good come back. I tell you to leave them alone and you spin twist and dodge. No real answer so you try and make me look like I'm attacking them? Get real! Matter of fact that was my EXACT question to you.so you just throw it back at me? Ummmm hmmmm..your really reaching here. Once again..nice dodgenot!

Try again, Retardo Mentalblock. I had long since answered your question regarding my views on homosexuality. I can quote myself indirectly: I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I recognize it as a choice. I don't pass judgment on itI have gay friends whom I simply adore, and they respect my choice to be straight, and I respect their choice to be gay.

And three, because sooner or later the schoolyard mentality comes out and someone will accuse me of being gay. Well, Vera, you get the schoolyard award! Is that your angle..

I never accused you of being a homosexual. I asked you a question. See, there's more of your wonderful spin. You bought it up so many times, and I believe one of your comments was ...how repulsive is love or something to that effect.

Ben's GAY! That's why he defends them!..Crusaders! ATTACK! Sorry Vera, I'm happily married with a child to someone of the opposite sex. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Oh, that poor child! Let's all hope the fruit falls as far from the tree as possible. And that's how I feel about you as a person, beliefs aside. Are you as much a dominating p***k to your Family members, as you sell yourself to be on this board?

Guess you will have to find another reason to attack my defense of people that have done you no wrong and never will.

More Ben-Spin. I wasn't trolling for a fight; you were.

Why should YOU care about the sanctity of marriage?'
Uh, not quite sure what your trying to twist here Vera.

Don't you mean I haven't figured out a way to turn this into a vicious attack of sufficient severity? Wait a couple posts, I'm sure you'll have figured out something by then.

Funny I don't remember that being on a national ballot.

Well, it was here in Ohio. If you didn't see it on the voting ballot, you either missed it or you didn't vote.

No Vera, that is not what you have been saying. And that certainly is not what Bush has been saying. If it had been then this debate wouldn't be happening. It IS what I have been saying. And you have attacked because of it.

Wrong. Want proof? Read all the last posts between you and I as they are writtenand don't spin it for a change. Better yettake copies of the posts to some NEUTRAL sources (that means "people that aren't the mini-minded masses you can personally identify with--you know a good, solid sample of a NORMAL demographic) and let them see.

You haven't given anything! Only once did you mention it again and you told me to look at OTHERS POSTS! You have not posted ONE thing to show proof. You only pointed to a post by Robert that comes from a dubious source to which I have already commented. You have dodged non-stop over this since the beginning. Now put up some proof or shut up.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. And I offer you the same. Put up or shut up. Or just shut up.

Forget about telling gays to goto Canada already? Or should I just start the whole abortion thing again?

Still more Ben-Spin. In no way (unless you read that into it, as you have) is that meant to be a my way or the highway' view. But you go ahead. You've done a bang-up job proving yourself an a*s. Where else is gay marriage legal, here in the States?? Whatever gay men or ladies wanna marry, let them go to therecall it a Love Pilgrimage. What the hell do you suggest, if they want a document that defines their partnership as legal? Forge one?

As usual, you have nothing more to offer regarding the War, so you wanna stand on your soap box and bash. Go cram your views back up where they came from, and stop trying to paint others who believe differently as the monsters you portray them. You're a deluded, sick little c****ucker, Ben, and I truly pity those that have to live with you and your inane babble on a daily basis. You're nutless, gutless, and lame, and your views are so badly occluded, you're the one who sounds like a zealot.

Now I offer you a chance to leave me alone. Just ignore me, don't post anything directed to me, don't try the James Tactic of trying to insinuate an attack through a post responding to someone else. Try only discussing the subjectnot what you're imagining and reading into it.

Once again, I'll point it out to you; the topic is about how some mental midget in Tupperville thinks the sitting President is a RipOff because he's had to pay three bucks a gallon for gas. Not that gas prices are that high now (To date [11/08/05], the lowest I've seen it is currently $2.14 per gallon, but we know that'll change, no matter WHO is President). Never mind that this same President has been in office for four years prior---it's the fact that the Prez is from a family that's vested in oil, and that we have to pay so much NOW that matters to him. He can't even offer information to add credibility to his claims. His ship has long since sunkand he's the little vermin swimming in circles in hopes of not drowning. Doesn't have the sense to swim to shore.

I'm sick to death of beating the dead horse you dragged in, and I'm not going to do so any further. I've come dangerously close to breaking my promise a second time, by even bothering to respond to you, and I'm sick of you subverting and twisting every friggin' thing I say to demonize me.

You have stated your opinion ad nauseum, as I have mine, and I have nothing more to say to you outside of insultsand honey, I don't see my well ever drying up on the insults I have set aside for you. And that's just on a personal level! I pair you right up with the Moron from Canada! Two sides of the same d**n coin. (Like "funny-money", minus the "funny".)

Any other attacks you wanna issue my way.just picture this; as I skimmed your last windstorm, All I could see is a hand doing that yack-yack-blah-blah-blah gesture. Same thing with James' posts. No substance, just bullshit. Enough already. Let's all get back to the subject.

(But of course, I'll bet right now you're sphincter is itchin' to cut loose! I'll get the yack-yack hand ready.) Blahh-blahh-blahh.

Blah-Blah Black Sheep, have you any wool?
Yes, Ma'am, yes, Ma'am--Bennie's a*****e's full!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#548 Consumer Comment

Man, I've had gas with more talent...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

And I still intend to keep my word. This isn't a post about religion, but it is a response to Ben. Most likely, my final post to Ben, unless he comes up with something factual and on-topic.

Once again Vera you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues.

Just like you, eh Bennie?

Hitler did the same about Jews.never mindI bet you need facts since you types usually discount the Holocaust).

I'm aware of the Holocaust. What's this got to do with the War in Iraq and our President being a greedy oil tycoon wanting more oil at the cost of American troops' lives?

Lets once again tear Vera down..

You still aren't man (or woman) enoughand it hasn't happened yet, Dogboy.

If it looks and sounds like a duck.I think you know the rest Vera.

Sure do! Shall I call you a p***y, then? You sure sound like one. Your posts are a clever as a qweef...and equally substantial.

Funny.Nobody mentioned proof till your outlandish comments about Islam in schools. At which point I asked for proof. I have seen none.

Hmmmm.a laundry list of times I have asked for proof (and a case where Robert has)

See my post on 09/21/05 (Good Grief) Waiting for something un-spun, asking for proof.

09/21/05 (Five posts in a row! A personal Best) asking for proof.

See 09/26/05 (Okay, Finnigan) Asking to stay on subject.

On 09/29/05 (James, stop please!) Robert waits in Breathless Anticipation for proof.

10/07/05 (Yet another response) It is pointed out that proof has been repeatedly requested. Remarks about subject changes, as well as a bevvy of contradictions (courtesy of James d' Calgary).

10/08/05 (Oh, Brothergive em facts) Middle-top of post Proof pleasejust the facts.

10/11/05 (h*o Boy!) Proof pleasejust the facts, not opinions.

10/13/05 (Once again, blah-blah) Still waiting. Whole post is asking for proof.

10/15/05 (From Anybody But Bush') What this topic ISN'T about, what it IS about.

10/15/05 (James needs to take a Ba'ath) More requests for proof.

10/17/05 SEE THIS POST'S TITLE!

10/20/05 (don't worry, B. happy) The dreaded curriculum post is bought into our little circle! Proof has been givenmany sources. If you don't want to believe, that doesn't make it not exist.

10/22/05 I break my word, but again, ask that we stay on topic.

10/24/05 (Tsk-Tsk-Tsk'and those that have eyes') Don't bug me if you can't provide more fact than flame.

10/25/05 (Holy Cow!) Still waiting for YOUR facts.

So you see hereas in so MANY other places---I don't need to pull out quotes, delete the info between em and spin them to make my point. You keep going on, painting your little pictures of how I supposedly laughed at the Holocaust, or tried to force something that simply isn't true, or whatever. This board offers plenty of proof, it's just a matter of not being too lazy to see what's there and do a little research.

As you can plainly see, I've been asking for proof a hell of a lot longer than you have...it's right here on this board. Stupidity and lackadaisical mentality aside, you'd haveta be blind not to see it.

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

If that's the way you need to spin things to vilify others and justify your pithy hatred, knock yourself out. I can think of better things to live for, than hatredapparently you cannot.

Ummm excuse me?

There IS no excuse for people like you (I mean ungrateful, childish little brats---having nothing to do with religion). I blame poor parenting skills and a weak home life.

Just WHO was it that was gassing people in the Holocaust eh? Were those nasty Jews gassing themselves? And about the torturing of children..that's a joke!! You really live a sheltered life and see no world news do you?!

OddI thought it was HITLER that was responsible for the Holocaust.
Your comment borders on the anti-Semitic.

I did not know there was a quota on how many people needed to be killed to mention that they have been killed. Sorry, please tell me the number of people that need to be killed before you will acknowledge that someone actually died.

I asked you that. You dodged. Pathetic.

Once againsorry Vera. I did not know that you had a quota on how many must die or be maimed before you will acknowledge an evil.

That's twice you've tried to spin and plagiarize. Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Well well well, seems somebody has a hard time remembering what they posted in the same post! I didn't pick and choose Vera. Ive been saying all along these ALL were something to be outraged over. You're the one picking and choosing. Need more proof? I think I put it all down already on this post.nuff said.

Multiple plagiarisms, and now, copping out in quadruplicate. I'll bet you're just a-twittering with glee.

'Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program?'
Your really reaching here Vera. Ive avoided this subject so far.

I know. That's why I think you're picking and choosing which deaths are more tragic than others. And my faith has nothing to do with my outrage, so don't even bother. So I can see why you don't care about the lives taken by Planned Parenthood. Yet I'll bet you'd be one of the first to shout Bush agrees with Genocide! With you, life does come with a price tag.

But so be it. This is YOUR VIEW. Thank you for proving once again that you wish to impose YOUR VIEW on others.

Wrong againcop out again.

Im not mocking your choice

Yes you are. And warping it and twisting it to fit your hateful view of others, then using that view to pass a blanket judgment against those who don't share your political view. Hatred is hatred, no matter how you polish it.

I'm mocking you pushing your choice on others. I think I have proven your hypocritical.

Only in your narrow little mind. Smashing job, proving YOURSELF a hypocrite, though. Bully-Rah!

Ah yes, that's a good come back. I tell you to leave them alone and you spin twist and dodge. No real answer so you try and make me look like I'm attacking them? Get real! Matter of fact that was my EXACT question to you.so you just throw it back at me? Ummmm hmmmm..your really reaching here. Once again..nice dodgenot!

Try again, Retardo Mentalblock. I had long since answered your question regarding my views on homosexuality. I can quote myself indirectly: I don't agree with the lifestyle, but I recognize it as a choice. I don't pass judgment on itI have gay friends whom I simply adore, and they respect my choice to be straight, and I respect their choice to be gay.

And three, because sooner or later the schoolyard mentality comes out and someone will accuse me of being gay. Well, Vera, you get the schoolyard award! Is that your angle..

I never accused you of being a homosexual. I asked you a question. See, there's more of your wonderful spin. You bought it up so many times, and I believe one of your comments was ...how repulsive is love or something to that effect.

Ben's GAY! That's why he defends them!..Crusaders! ATTACK! Sorry Vera, I'm happily married with a child to someone of the opposite sex. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Oh, that poor child! Let's all hope the fruit falls as far from the tree as possible. And that's how I feel about you as a person, beliefs aside. Are you as much a dominating p***k to your Family members, as you sell yourself to be on this board?

Guess you will have to find another reason to attack my defense of people that have done you no wrong and never will.

More Ben-Spin. I wasn't trolling for a fight; you were.

Why should YOU care about the sanctity of marriage?'
Uh, not quite sure what your trying to twist here Vera.

Don't you mean I haven't figured out a way to turn this into a vicious attack of sufficient severity? Wait a couple posts, I'm sure you'll have figured out something by then.

Funny I don't remember that being on a national ballot.

Well, it was here in Ohio. If you didn't see it on the voting ballot, you either missed it or you didn't vote.

No Vera, that is not what you have been saying. And that certainly is not what Bush has been saying. If it had been then this debate wouldn't be happening. It IS what I have been saying. And you have attacked because of it.

Wrong. Want proof? Read all the last posts between you and I as they are writtenand don't spin it for a change. Better yettake copies of the posts to some NEUTRAL sources (that means "people that aren't the mini-minded masses you can personally identify with--you know a good, solid sample of a NORMAL demographic) and let them see.

You haven't given anything! Only once did you mention it again and you told me to look at OTHERS POSTS! You have not posted ONE thing to show proof. You only pointed to a post by Robert that comes from a dubious source to which I have already commented. You have dodged non-stop over this since the beginning. Now put up some proof or shut up.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. And I offer you the same. Put up or shut up. Or just shut up.

Forget about telling gays to goto Canada already? Or should I just start the whole abortion thing again?

Still more Ben-Spin. In no way (unless you read that into it, as you have) is that meant to be a my way or the highway' view. But you go ahead. You've done a bang-up job proving yourself an a*s. Where else is gay marriage legal, here in the States?? Whatever gay men or ladies wanna marry, let them go to therecall it a Love Pilgrimage. What the hell do you suggest, if they want a document that defines their partnership as legal? Forge one?

As usual, you have nothing more to offer regarding the War, so you wanna stand on your soap box and bash. Go cram your views back up where they came from, and stop trying to paint others who believe differently as the monsters you portray them. You're a deluded, sick little c****ucker, Ben, and I truly pity those that have to live with you and your inane babble on a daily basis. You're nutless, gutless, and lame, and your views are so badly occluded, you're the one who sounds like a zealot.

Now I offer you a chance to leave me alone. Just ignore me, don't post anything directed to me, don't try the James Tactic of trying to insinuate an attack through a post responding to someone else. Try only discussing the subjectnot what you're imagining and reading into it.

Once again, I'll point it out to you; the topic is about how some mental midget in Tupperville thinks the sitting President is a RipOff because he's had to pay three bucks a gallon for gas. Not that gas prices are that high now (To date [11/08/05], the lowest I've seen it is currently $2.14 per gallon, but we know that'll change, no matter WHO is President). Never mind that this same President has been in office for four years prior---it's the fact that the Prez is from a family that's vested in oil, and that we have to pay so much NOW that matters to him. He can't even offer information to add credibility to his claims. His ship has long since sunkand he's the little vermin swimming in circles in hopes of not drowning. Doesn't have the sense to swim to shore.

I'm sick to death of beating the dead horse you dragged in, and I'm not going to do so any further. I've come dangerously close to breaking my promise a second time, by even bothering to respond to you, and I'm sick of you subverting and twisting every friggin' thing I say to demonize me.

You have stated your opinion ad nauseum, as I have mine, and I have nothing more to say to you outside of insultsand honey, I don't see my well ever drying up on the insults I have set aside for you. And that's just on a personal level! I pair you right up with the Moron from Canada! Two sides of the same d**n coin. (Like "funny-money", minus the "funny".)

Any other attacks you wanna issue my way.just picture this; as I skimmed your last windstorm, All I could see is a hand doing that yack-yack-blah-blah-blah gesture. Same thing with James' posts. No substance, just bullshit. Enough already. Let's all get back to the subject.

(But of course, I'll bet right now you're sphincter is itchin' to cut loose! I'll get the yack-yack hand ready.) Blahh-blahh-blahh.

Blah-Blah Black Sheep, have you any wool?
Yes, Ma'am, yes, Ma'am--Bennie's a*****e's full!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#547 Consumer Comment

Bush cheated his way into office.

AUTHOR: Charlene - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

President Bush cheated his way into office. Florida of all states had a problem with the ballots. I wonder why. Uh... because his brother is the governor could that be the answer.

The US went to war with Iraq for no reason. Weapons of Mass Destruction! Yeah Right. If that was the case where are they? Why didn't we go after bin Laden? He's the one who confessed to the 9/11 attacks.

Every since this war has started the only thing that has happened is that the lives of our soldiers are being lost.

And every year since this war has started people who I love and care about are going to Iraq not knowing whether they are going to make back home and putting their lives in danger. For what OIL and our greedy President?

It's funny how not one of his loved ones have been over there yet.

I've read some of the comments that have been made on this subject. So you can call me stupid, an idiot, or even a moron because my opinion is my opinion and you or no one else can make change the way I feel.

My sister is over there in Iraq and pray every night and every day that the Lord sends her back home to me and my family alive. I've already lost my Mom and I don't know what I would do if I lost her too.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#546 Consumer Suggestion

Vera & Robert

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Vera;

Here you go again... looking for proof when it is stareing you in the face. Heroin?

Vera, in Canada, where we hand out "free needles", we have shown a "sharp decline" in "drug related" aids cases, & when heroin was at it's peak in Vancouver (which had the highest use of heroin per capita in the Country), they decided to try something new. The crime rate was "rampant" & mostly a result of large use of heroin. So, for a period of time, they opened up the hospitals for "free heroin". The crime rate dropped immediately by 2/3! Things like this are just right there in front of your nose to see... but you stare at the ground & ask for proof. Oh I know what you will return with. "Oh of course... if they don't have to pay for it, why steal for it?" Right? Makes sense right? So why does it not make sense that if "It was Governmeant controlled & cheaper & even free for those willing to submit themselves into rehab centres", that they would not need to steal for it?

Never mind looking at other Countries in the world that have relaxed drug laws, & relatively less drug crime... you just keep your blinders on! Demand proof & grab those "drug sniffin dogs", cause you have "only begun to fight" with your war on drugs!

The biggest drug problem Vera in the USA right now is not heroin. Its not crack either. If you lifted those blinders for a moment... you would see that it is METH!

You cannot track Meth. You cannot bust shiploads of Meth. You cannot arrest even the Cartel Leaders for Meth! It can be made in any closet in North America & there is sweet d**k all you can do about it! Except Legalization Vera!

People like you just wanna try to "control, control, control" the hell out of everyones life & that is the reason why you have these problems to begin with! Drugs become attractive because they are illegal in the beginning! Then addiction takes over & it does not matter the laws you pass then! All you end up with is a "tripple expense" now... of supporting the dealers (1), raising the crime rate (2) & filling your jails as you feed & support the addicts (3). That is what you call "cutting your nose off to spite your face".

Robert;

Give it up Man! There is not a leader you could name that has the backing of "any amount" of people that believe there were found WMD's in Iraq, even if it does have anything to do with the price of cheese & it does not!

Why don't you try to organize enough people for a "return to Vietnam"... as your issues might be more convincing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#545 Consumer Comment

Josef Goebbels had the right idea

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Our "mainstream"(read left wing)media has fine tuned it to perfection. While I know the lefties will dismiss this as just another fabrication of the right wing, tough. read it at your own risk.

"The following is a non-exhaustive sampling of certain important precepts one must believe, pretend to believe, or advocate in order to be in the Democratic leadership fraternity, that bizarre cadre of partisan creatures dedicated to destroying President Bush personally as an alternative to devising a coherent, politically viable policy agenda:

n**i and Communist propagandists were on to something in teaching that if you repeat a lie -- even an outrageous one -- often enough people will begin to believe it.

This principle holds true even if you are guilty of precisely the same thing as those you accuse (talking up Saddam's WMDs) and your complicity is conclusively demonstrated on audiotape and videotape.

When your obvious duplicity in this affair is illuminated by reference to the uncontroverted fact that when you made similar claims about Saddam's WMDs you had access to the same intelligence as the administration, you simply say the president pressured the intelligence community to doctor the data.

When this specious assertion is contradicted by unequivocal findings of bipartisan investigative commissions, you simply demand, with righteous indignation, more investigations.

The following is a non-exhaustive sampling of certain important precepts one must believe, pretend to believe, or advocate in order to be in the Democratic leadership fraternity, that bizarre cadre of partisan creatures dedicated to destroying President Bush personally as an alternative to devising a coherent, politically viable policy agenda:

n**i and Communist propagandists were on to something in teaching that if you repeat a lie -- even an outrageous one -- often enough people will begin to believe it.

This principle holds true even if you are guilty of precisely the same thing as those you accuse (talking up Saddam's WMDs) and your complicity is conclusively demonstrated on audiotape and videotape.

When your obvious duplicity in this affair is illuminated by reference to the uncontroverted fact that when you made similar claims about Saddam's WMDs you had access to the same intelligence as the administration, you simply say the president pressured the intelligence community to doctor the data.


When this specious assertion is contradicted by unequivocal findings of bipartisan investigative commissions, you simply demand, with righteous indignation, more investigations.

In the meantime, you also charge that President Bush cherry-picked certain intelligence and deliberately relied on other discredited intelligence in order to bolster his case for war against Iraq. And you do that knowing that it is you who are retrospectively cherry-picking the evidence and presenting it as irrefutable proof that Bush lied.

For example, you triumphantly cite a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document dated February 2002, stating it was probable that an Al Qaeda informant had fabricated his claim that Iraq trained Al Qaeda in the use of biological and chemical weapons. You smugly point out that since this DIA document predated, by months, public statements by President Bush and his team in which they referenced the "impeached" terrorist's claim in support of their assertion of an Iraq/Al Qaeda connection, Bush had to have lied. What neither you nor your New York Times enablers divulge is that the CIA manifestly didn't agree with the DIA's assessment. (According to "The Weekly Standard's" Stephen Hayes, CIA Director George Tenet, a year after the DIA report, testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee that Iraq trained Al Qaeda in document forgery, bomb making, poisons and gases.)

As another example, you figure if you obfuscate artfully enough, the public will not realize that the infamous 16-word assertion in the president's State of the Union address that the Brits learned Saddam tried to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger is as true today as when he uttered it.

When confronted with the annoying detail that Bill Clinton likewise made bold assertions about Saddam's WMDs, you shrewdly calculate that this fact can actually be twisted in your favor. After all, though Clinton knew Saddam was hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons, using them against us and distributing them to our terrorist enemies also to use against us, he chose -- in his infinite wisdom -- not to invade Iraq -- apart from his cosmetic cruise missile volleys. And, since the Iraq War has proven to be such a delightful failure in your eyes, you declare that Clinton is vindicated for having chosen not to take out Saddam. Thus, those sour lemons are converted to lemonade.

Though you insist your foreign policy is guided both by humanitarian and national security interests, you are nevertheless unmoved by the remarkably positive developments that have occurred in Iraq as a result of our intervention. You essentially pooh pooh our deposition of the murderous dictator Saddam and even more so the Iraqi people's historic progress toward constitutional self-rule. And, despite the terrorists' single-minded focus on preventing the democratization of Iraq, you still deny it's part of the War on Terror. The fact that we've sustained casualties apparently negates in your mind any good that has accrued, giving rise to the obvious question: Is any foreign policy cause worth dying for?

You also must conveniently ignore that no matter what 20/20 hindsight may reveal after the fact, reasonable people agree that Saddam had WMDs, used them on his own people, had a legal obligation to prove he'd disposed of them and failed to meet that burden, choosing instead to submit a 12,000-page document of lies. You must flagrantly disregard the inconvenient, but undeniable fact that Saddam could have prevented an American attack if he'd complied with his treaties, cooperated with weapons inspectors and proven he'd disposed of his WMDs as required. By flipping us off instead, he invited the War. You must also ignore that virtually all the world's intelligence agencies believed Saddam still had WMD stockpiles. Did Bush trick all of them, too?

You must steadfastly maintain the Libby indictment directly taints d**k Cheney, Karl Rove and the entire administration, even though Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald did not issue any indictments on underlying crimes and explicitly denied the indictment speaks to the propriety of the war. Indeed, using liberal logic you are utterly undeterred by the lack of indictments as you clamor for a presidential "housecleaning." Such a disingenuous, nonsensical strategy might just fool people into believing your false claims that the administration "outed" Valerie Plame to punish her "useful idiot" husband and advance your fantasy of criminalizing the war and, ultimately, impeaching President Bush."

David Limbaugh is a syndicated columnist who blogs at DavidLimbaugh.com.(This is for James in Canada. I actually do give the sources for my information. The voices in my head aren't very reliable)

It amazes me how even though the left admit everything about Iraq using WMD,s etc., they still cannot bring themselves to accept that in order to use them, they had to have them. Even if the US gave them to Iraq(never once attributed by anyone on the left-only in this thread), the fact still remains, Iraq had them, and simply had to provide proof of their disposal. Seems simple enough to me.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#544 Consumer Comment

Oh, Brother....James simply can't get away from his own hypocrisy...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Jimmy Carter has also spoken out against what Bush has done to America. I have never seen a former President break ranks like that before. They normally don't comment.

You mean, like that whole INTERVIEW you posted, about Slick Willy's interview with Stepan O'Phallus? More hypocrisy. Jimmy Carter has been giving under-the-table head-bobbing accolades to commies for years, and got his Nobel as a slap in the face to President Bush.

I'm not gonna get into this big religeous thing, as it really has no revelence here. I see none at all.

Nice, after you try to start another argument on that subject.
When Jesus was asked about the taxes... he asked "before" what you said "Who's head is on that coin". They replied Ceasar & then he replied "Render to Ceasar..." Basically they were trying to trap Jesus into saying they should not pay taxes. However as it is explained he was saying, as he had said before... "If you want to live by Man's money... go ahead. Yet you don't have to. Look at the Sparrow, look at the Crow. he neither reaps or sews... but God looks after him. How much better are you, than a Sparrow or a Crow". Jesus was anti Church & material wealth.

And naturally: Now of course I changed the words a little

What a shocker.

I see people wanting to control others using religeon as a weapon. People like Shawn & Vera.

Another unfounded and absolutely wrong statement by another deluded moron. Spin onthere's no shock value anymorewe've come to expect it. Better include your presentation of the CSV as an attempt at control.

I agree with you on the "drug thing"... yet I would go farther by legalizing heroin too.

Rememberthis is the mind we're dealing with. Clearly, you've never seen the damage heroin has done, to Families, Children, and the users. Let's not forget the climb in AIDS, since it's common for users to share (despite the organizations that hand out little bottles of bleach to clean the works between uses.), not to mention the people that come in contact with infected needles carelessly cast to the ground in playgrounds and parks, alleys, and so on.

As far as Vera goes... I can't believe you would taunt her to continue. Her posts are so "vast" & filled with "cut & paste" stuff totally off subject... filled with sarcastic garbage that does not make any sense to even the warped mind'.

My posts are vastbut they are less than HALF in number to yoursand that's not even counting your repeats.
No, Darlin' much of my stuff is my owntoo bad you can't say the same, as far as any factoids you present, they're so out-of-context and spun, it's laughable. What I DO actually cut and paste is the WHOLE comment. Another thing you can't say the same to. And if you're gonna try and attack me through responses to others, you flaming f**ktard, at least approach the subject. You have NOT proven any points that this war is about Oil, in the light that the Vaudevillian Mind from Tupper presents it. If you can't, then don't waste space on this board with your petty cries for attention.
I'm happy to know I piss your kind off, and it's even better to know I can do it by being correct, providing factual support.

I really do not care if you agree with me. If the length of my posts keeps you and your tiny little attention-span (heroin soaked mind? Maybe this is where the unreturned money goes!) too confused, Do not read them, and stop all forms of comment on them.

I should have held myself above such childish antics & I really wonder why you are anything but discusted with her for hitting that low & so far "off subject".

James, you're above everyone AND reproach, but only in the vastness of cranial emptiness that is your mind. My lash at you was to point out what a busy bodied, hypocritical, two-faced waste of protein you are, having all this tree-hugging compassion (I picture Michael Jackson, waving his bony, whitewashed arms: Don' fight, it's Ig-nuh-ant!) for those poor AMERICAN Soldiers and Airmen who VOLUNTEERED to be there, yet you can't have any compassion for the folks getting screwed out of their refund money. That's why I pointed out your shady little job.

Why do you even care? Is it that all those young American kids could be up in Canada, gambling away their college tuition?

to Roberts claim that Vera's rediculous lyrics were better than mine, when they were simply Childish as hell!

Oooh-h*o-h*o! Robert! You hit a nerve!
I s'pose it pissed him off when no one patted him on the back for his little (failed) attempt at cleverness. (Ppwhaahh-hahahahahhh!)


Finally to Vera who acts like a 5 year old with her posts that are just nothing more than absolutely Childish rantings... compleatly off subject... making no sense & as long as the Mississippi!

Y'know, my posts get long because they also contain the comments written by their authors, and my comments to thembut don't get me wrong, I know I have a tendency to write a lot. I also try to space my commentary to make it easier to read and follow. But because I don't agree with you, that fact alone doesn't make me childish. I know that if my posts were as long, and DID agree with you (which I know you'll deny!), they would most likely be welcomed. You're just another moronic hypocrite, who contributes little by the way of factual information and adult discussion to the board.

I will restate; if you do not like my posts, their content, or subject matter, feel free to pass them by without comment. How many times will I have to make that statement to you before you grasp the concept, James? Don't talk to me, and don't use the posts of others as platforms to attack me. And certainly, don't use space on this board to comment and dedicate whole, windy posts about the other posters here getting off-subjectafter all, you are the one who dominated the absolute number of diversions.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#543 Consumer Comment

Shawn, I just don't understand some of your responses.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 07, 2005

Shawn,

I just don't understand what it is you are trying to argue. The subsequent resolutions deal with setting up embargoes on trade with Iraq, denial of any legitimacy to the invasion, reminders of the detail of various treaties Iraq had signed, repeated demands to cease the invasion and withdraw, repeated demands to recognize the interests of foreign diplomats, and repeated demands to cease mistreatment of the people and property in Kuwai, including foreign diplomats.

Obviously, once they had withdrawn, they were no longer in a position to perform the mistreatment mentioned.

Perhaps you don't understand my position clearly. I do not dispute the fact that Iraq was in material violation of most UNSCRs passed after 678, including many it agreed to. Although I disagree with the decision to invade Iraq, I'm not saying it was completely insane and totally unjustifiable, only that there was no UN authority for it. I recognize that lawyers may endlessly debate the ways that technicalities could be argued in a court of law, and that a good attorney might convince a judge that black was white. I am not trying to split hairs or twist words, I am relying only on the common sense reading. Here is my argument in 3 simple points:

1. UNSCR 678 authorizes the US, and others, only to repel the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and by extension, any other positions in the area they might have acquired. As President Bush, Sr. recognized, that authority ended at the Iraq border.
2. UNSCR 678 does not authorize the 'enforcement' of subsequent resolutions.
3. The Security Council has passed no other resolutions authorizing military activity with regards to Iraq.

As further evidence that this was the common understanding of the US and the rest of the SC, the US & UK have repeatedly petitioned the SC to pass a resolution specifying in some manner that the authority granted under 678 extended to enforcement of 686 & 687 (the cease-fire resolutions). These requests have all been refused. They could not even get the SC to legitimize the no-fly zones, years after they were an established fact.

If you think I am in error, please use your calm voice to explain why. There is no need to post the entire text of the resolutions, I am familiar with all of them.

Wow, so now I'm actually putting my words in your mouth. Cool! lol Well, not that anyone would currently believe anything the NY Times had to say regarding Iraq, we only have the author's statement that they were the source of his facts, not the outright lies he tries to spin them into. The centrifuge parts had been buried for over 10 years. But its a big desert, who knows what we may eventually find buried there. Atlantis? Garden of Eden? Sponge Bob Squarepants? ;) to V

No, what I was trying to point out is that we were responsible for all those innocent deaths. We knew they were dying. We knew the embargoes weren't particularly effective against Saddam. The Security Council tried repeatedly to lift the embargoes. The holdouts? US & UK. Year after year the reports came in from the ground showing that Saddam had a very efficient system for distributing goods and did distribute everything that came in. So why were all these people dying? Because the US kept blocking the shipments, arguing they contained dual-use items; things like pencils, coffee urns, super balls; you should really read the list sometime. I guess if they loaded all those super balls into a warhead it would bounce all over the place. And all the while, your friend President rip-off George was straight-faced lying to the American public, telling us it was Saddam's fault. Maybe he figured if enough people died they would eventually revolt, I don't know. Chicken-s**t coward! And yes, I know how Clinton's attentions were diverted from his duties. By a power-hungry Republican machine, who were so 'right', any means justified the end, no matter how vile, illegal, and immoral. And then the people voted them into power. Go figure! Unless you were trying to con me into believing that a couple of 5 minute hummers in the hallway just blew his mind and he couldn't think of another thing for 8 f**king years. See, ya got my dander up. Happy now?

And here you are again, complaining about the parts I left out. And you even give us two sources for the same document, the joint resolution titled Public Law 107-243. What is your point? I don't get it. And if you really equate Sheehan's peaceful civil disobedience with robbing a bank, I probably never will. I hope you didn't spend too much time away from the wife thinking that one up. Friggin' nutcase indeed!

Spin, spin, spin, whine, whine, whine. Is that all you strict constructionist nutcases can do? LOL Ok, briefly, lets look at the abortion issue. As I recollect... Prior to WW2, most states didn't have abortion laws. After that it became a problem. The first case to hit the Supreme Court was Roe v Wade. The case was brought as a violation of several Constitutional amendments. That court ruled the laws vague, and further came up with the theory that the Constitution inferred a right to privacy that 2 justices disagreed with, and they raised holy hell about it. In a later case, Casey v (somebody, I don't remember), that Court, with 8 Republican appointees, ruled the privacy theory was ill-advised but that the Constitution still conferred the right to abortion. Both Courts ruled that, at some point, the state had a right to protect the life of a viable fetus, but the latter court, based on superior medical evidence, ruled that point to be several weeks earlier. So, before the fetus reaches the point it could survive independently of the mother, it is between her, her doctor, and her God, if you will. Just like it was before states started passing anti-abortion laws. After that, the state has the right to completely proscribe abortion. There is also a middle stage where the state has an interest in protecting the mother's health, meaning they can require a hospital rather than a clinic. As to what facts and circumstances changed, I would presume that as women gained more parity with men, they realized that an unwanted pregnancy would completely derail their plans for a career. And your presumption that changes in people and moral values should not translate into changes in the law is IMO completely absurd. That would be like saying just because slaves were emancipated and could hold jobs and property, didn't mean we should change the laws and let them marry white women. Ooops, oh yeah, they did try to argue that, didn't they, and using the exact same arguments they're using today to ban gay marriage. Hmmm... As to making prayer in schools unconstitutional, I'm not aware of any such case. Can you point me in the right direction?

Really have to go, but let me leave you with this thought... Remember, the last time you 'jerked' off does constitue 'having' a virgin. lol

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#542 Consumer Comment

Oh Vera....how you twist away....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 07, 2005

Once again Vera you show how you and your kind can't tolerate anything but your stance on issues. And you complete inability to bring in the facts (still waitinggoing on 3 weeks now about that Islam in CA schools.that's it keep fueling that bullshit fear to keep your GOP in power. Hitler did the same about Jews.never mindI bet you need facts since you types usually discount the Holocaust).

Lets once again tear Vera down..with her own intolerance etc


Add to that, the fact that I'm no preacherif nothing else

Yet you tout quotes from the bible...nteresting. And you get all pissy when someone else does in response to you. If it looks and sounds like a duck.I think you know the rest Vera.

Well, I like how you pick and choose which Christians are zealots (the ones who don't agree with your leftist views).

This was in response to my question about you picking and choosing what parts of the Bible to live by. Nice way to DODGE there Vera. And to retort.I have NO PROBLEM with your views Vera. Its when you force them on others. Which you have shown you are more than happy to do. ONE MORE TIME VERA.I RE-stateIf you want religon.FINE. But don't force feed it on others. (I'll get to where you force feed AGAIN for you later in the post since you seem to forget from paragraph to paragraph).

No I didn'tthat's your spin.

Now here is a real good one. This was your response to mine about telling others they have to live by your rules. Uh..did you forget about that move to Canada line Vera? I'll let you figure it outor spin it. I think telling others that have no affect on your life to move is pretty harsh if not OUTRIGHT telling others how/where to live.

Call it what you want. It's still a fact. The Crusades WERE long ago, those epic battles DID involve the Jews taking back their land. And I'm fairly solid in my mind being made up. You're criticizing that which you don't know.

Ummmm yeah right. Those were Jews 1000 years ago storming the holy land? And who gave the order? Let me guess the high priest of Judiaism? I think those crusaders had crosses on their skirts girl. And yes that was long ago. My fear is that it will come back. And people like you are proof of it. History never seems to learn from its mistakes. The holocaust was just over 50 years ago. I hardly would call it impossible for something similar to happen again. Same for the crusades or the inquisition.

Methinks thou doth protest too much. I know what my religion tells me about the Bible, and I know that you are so utterly wrongit is to laugh!

Here is another good dodge by you. I stated that you and Bush think we should live by Gods Law. So your answer is Methinks thou doth protest to much. Yup I bet the SS said that to the Jews when they were being forced into cattle cars. (Oopsbetter get my pictures ready of those cattle cars. I bet you deny them). Great dodge Vera. Next time be more specific.

Still (stil-stil-still) waiting (aiting-aiting-ting) for (for-or-or-) your (your-or-or) proof (roof-roof-oof).

Funny.Nobody mentioned proof till your outlandish comments about Islam in schools. At which point I asked for proof. I have seen none. Matter of fact, you have said to ask others. You even have totally dodged it in other posts. Whats the matter Vera? Still unable to back up your lies? Then wish to impose the rules you can live by on others. Thanks for proving much of what I have been saying about nuts like you! I gave you proof you didn't want to hear it. Matter of fact your response was tape it for me. You're a joke on the proof aspect. I suggest you give it up and show us some of yours since you the one dodging at every turn.

I DON'T CARE whether or not you BELIEVE.

Obviously you do! If the above statement were true, there would be no banterings about the word god in the pledge. No worry over gays getting married. No worry over who is getting an abortion. It can go on and on and on why that statement is outright false. If you don't care, then none of these posts would even have been made. But you did make them Vera. You DO care because your stuck on stupid and drunk on Jesus. You cant fathom the idea that someone without religion has morals. Since you think morals can ONLY stem from religion itself.

James also has called himself a Christian. Where's your pointing See?! See?! SEE!? Hypocrite! Religious Zealot!

Its simple Vera. ONE MORE TIME (I think this makes about the 40th time ive had to tell you this) I have no problem with religion. Its when its forced on others. You are happy to force feed it. James, I have no problem with, because he has no problem with my lack of religion. You on the other hand seem totally horrified that people like myself exist. And you want me to leave because of it. If not outright reversal of my civil rights.

I've never seen a preist go tell some one , "Go f**k yourself, my son!")

But you in telling others to leave the country if they don't follow your view or change their lifestyle is basically saying f**k off.

Nor does it prove that something like the Crusades WILL happen. Last I checked, it's the Islamofascists who want the world to be ONE religion--thiers.

And I suppose people like yourself that tout this country was founded by Christians, IS Christian, and always will be Christian are any different?? I see nothing different in Osama's great plan for Islam than I do Jerry Falwell's or Pat Robertson's plan for Christianity in America. Or Bush's for that matter.

Kaythen you need to stop bringing up the Crusades and the Inquisition. Neither of those happened here in Americaand the past events that did have, have been long since dealt with. Another FACT you'll just have to get over.

Ok so THEY are over. Time for something new. And people like you are leading the charge. As I stated before. Just because one is over doesn't mean it cant happen again. Don't be foolish. Forgotten history will repeat itself. I see nothing different in this country right now. You want to take away peoples rights firstthen the people after that. The same M.O. , just different time periods. America IS following that trend. And your intolerant comments about other religions and people like myself without religion is proof that the ball is rolling.

Christians don't gas their own people; Christians don't rape and behead their women for daring disagree. Christians aren't torturing the children of others in front of them to make them converts

Ummm excuse me? What planet are you on? Just WHO was it that was gassing people in the Holocaust eh? Were those nasty Jews gassing themselves? And about the torturing of children..that's a joke!! You really live a sheltered life and see no world news do you?! (forgot Uganda already?.oops I forgot that's not here thus to you it didn't happen) Oh ya sure Vera! You Christians are just the saints of the religious world!!

What were the casualties of the persons killed in those Planned Parenthood bombings?

I did not know there was a quota on how many people needed to be killed to mention that they have been killed. Sorry, please tell me the number of people that need to be killed before you will acknowledge that someone actually died. And I'm also sorry that I did not know people MUST die for a bombing in a public place will be acknowledged as a bombing. I just love your mentality there. Nice show of your morals eh?

Are you sure these bombers were all well-established, indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy?

Never said they were indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy. But one thing that is apparent. They did this because their faith was against it or at least what they believed was their faith. Did we forget Eric Rudolf already? And have we forgotten that Timothy McVeigh stated as one of his reasons for the bombing in Oklahoma City was because of what happened in Waco? I can assure you.faith is a major reason these types of attacks occur.

I don't deny that it has happenedbut I certainly wouldn't use it as a comparable datum, in reference to the Islamofascists.

I see no difference in what happened in Oklahoma, or at any of the planned parenthood clinics than I do on 9/11. It was a bunch of religious nuts that were pissed because they didn't get their way and saw others doing what they thought were wrong based on their faith.

I'll bet more people were killed at the WTC in 2001, than were killed at all of those Planned Parenthood clinic bombings nationwide.

Once againsorry Vera. I did not know that you had a quota on how many must die or be maimed before you will acknowledge an evil. I guess that's how religious nuts like you fly under the radar.we only killed 20!! That's not enough to matter!!. Is that how it is??

Never mind the attempted bombing of the WTC (that pretty much went unanswered) when Clinton was in office.

But Vera, this goes against your own rule. If few died that first time, then it shouldn't matter right? Oops! I forgot, these were ISLAMIC people that did that first bombing. I guess the quota for Islamic nuts is different than Christian ones eh? Gotta keep that fear going for Bush to look good huh?

Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Well well well, seems somebody has a hard time remembering what they posted in the same post! I didn't pick and choose Vera. Ive been saying all along these ALL were something to be outraged over. You're the one picking and choosing. Need more proof? I think I put it all down already on this post.nuff said.

Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program?

Your really reaching here Vera. Ive avoided this subject so far. But so be it. This is YOUR VIEW. Thank you for proving once again that you wish to impose YOUR VIEW on others. Some people don't look at it this way. You just don't like others views do ya. What do you care if my daughter gets an abortion? It has no affect on your life whatsoever. Why bother getting involved with others lives when they have no affect on yours. You don't want an abortionso be it..don't have one. But don't tell others how they can or cant. Its not your business. And your invading others PRIVACY. There is a word for you that you obviously don't have in your vocabulary..PRIVACY.

Not orchestrated in America. And not spearheaded by me.

This in response to my mention of the LRA in Uganda. Ah yes Vera, this is a good one. So if you didn't do it exactly, then you wont even acknowledge it? I DID happen, and IS happening. Not here in America yet thank goodness. But we are well on our way. You took it out of context as well. My mentioning of the LRA was in response to your constant quotes about how the Crusades are over and so is the inquisition. Well, Vera, they are still around. Just in different forms and different places. Its only a matter of time before it makes its way to these shores and Bush Co. is leading the charge.

he's not knocking my choice to believe, or that choice made by others, whether he agrees with them or not.

How many times do I have to say if you believe that's fine.just don't push it on others. I guess you missed that (along with everything else around you). Im not mocking your choiceI'm mocking you pushing your choice on others. I think I have proven your hypocritical if not outright denial of that issue.

If anything, Bennie, you're the type that is what those that believe in religion see as typical of atheism as a whole, just like O'hair. You do your organization a great disservice.

Ah yes, I do a great disservice. When all I said was leave us alone and we will leave you alone? But you cant, can you Vera. You want people to leave this country if they don't follow your views. As far as the first part of that quote.you make no sense. And you really have to stop with this O'hair crap. Atheism is not a religion. Stop thinking EVERYONE has to have SOME religion, or some founder.

I've been asking for proof from you retards all along. Long before I ever said a pip about Muslim being part of the curriculum in SOME California schools (which it was).

Ah so its retards now? Eh? Im still waiting for the proof Vera. You want proof for my claims.well we will get to CNN and FOX in a minute.

I am way too into having a social and Family life, Schnookums. Tape it for me?

Ok so now its back to the do work for me crap again? If you don't watch the news, read a newspaper or look for news any way shape or form..I cant help you. No posting of links or URL is going to do any good to someone with a mentality like yours. Dodge away little looney!

Let me get this straight--Fox is biasedbut they show you something about every subject you mentioned EVERY NIGHT? Mmmmmm'kay. Who can't make up their mind?

That's right Vera, every day you can see on any channel regardless of where they stand these sorts of issues. Eroding of our Civil rights and liberties is on every channel regardless of how biased or not. CNN may just mention it and say hey this is happening. MSNBC may mention it and say hey this sucks!. FOX will mention it and say hey isn't this GREAT!. Biased has nothing to do with it. It just has to do with if someone is for it or against it. They ALL show it happening. They just don't all sit on the same side of SHOULD it be happening.

Bennie, what is your obsession with homosexuals? Leave those nice folks alone! What did they ever do to you?

Ah yes, that's a good come back. I tell you to leave them alone and you spin twist and dodge. No real answer so you try and make me look like I'm attacking them? Get real! Matter of fact that was my EXACT question to you.so you just throw it back at me? Ummmm hmmmm..your really reaching here. Once again..nice dodgenot!

OhmiGosh! Are you in the closet? If you are, then it isn't ME who's ashamedit's YOU. Step into the light, girl!

I used the homosexual issue for three reasons. One, its more blatantly in the open on the news lately. Two because for some reason religious nuts seem to think its more important and more dangerous to the moral fiber of America than any rampant evil Bush could do. And three, because sooner or later the schoolyard mentality comes out and someone will accuse me of being gay. Well, Vera, you get the schoolyard award! Is that your angle..Ben's GAY! That's why he defends them!..Crusaders! ATTACK!. Sorry Vera, I'm happily married with a child to someone of the opposite sex. Sorry to burst your bubble. Guess you will have to find another reason to attack my defense of people that have done you no wrong and never will.

Why should YOU care about the sanctity of marriage? You seem perfectly happy to eliminate God from the equation in everything else---why do you care if a Church would legally be able to join same sex couples?!

Uh, not quite sure what your trying to twist here Vera. Are you trying to say that now I cant be married because I don't have a religion? Are you saying I shouldn't be allowed now? I'm a little confused by this statement. Best as I can tell, your just throwing my own question back at me to dodge like earlier (see above). But to answer it.I don't care. But obviously YOU DO. So let me ask again.why do you think you have the right based on your faith to control how others get married? Sorry Vera, marriage is NOT religion only turf no matter how much you zealots try to twist it.

And it wasn't MY efforts alone that got Gay Marriages shelved. The voting populace of America turned it down in an agreement.

Funny I don't remember that being on a national ballot. There were 50 states last I heard.

I've said it many times Believe as you wishor don't believe at all.

No Vera, that is not what you have been saying. And that certainly is not what Bush has been saying. If it had been then this debate wouldn't be happening. It IS what I have been saying. And you have attacked because of it.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid.

Vera! You haven't given anything! Only once did you mention it again and you told me to look at OTHERS POSTS! You have not posted ONE thing to show proof. You only pointed to a post by Robert that comes from a dubious source to which I have already commented. You have dodged non-stop over this since the beginning. Now put up some proof or shut up.

Show me where I have specifically said, You MUST believe as I do! to any person here.

Forget about telling gays to goto Canada already? Or should I just start the whole abortion thing again?

Well, that was the plan, and you just seem to rave endlessly on how you hate God and Christians.

No Vera, once again you show how anyone that says I wont be Christian is blatantly attacking Christians to you. I don't say I hate it. I have just been saying I hate it when its forced on people. And that has always applied to ALL religions. Believe in what you want. Just don't jump my case if I wont. My beliefs are applied to ALL religions in that I don't believe. My hate is applied to all those of any religion that try to force it on others. That includes wacky orthodox Jews, Muslims, Christians etc. Stop playing the oh poor persecuted Christian faith that you bible thumpers like to do. Nobody is persecuting you. Your just persecuting others that don't cow-tow in line with your views. Plain and simple. If they don't believe like you and your drunk on Jesus Bush, then they need to leave. Its only a matter of time before the leave part turns to die. History has shown that all too often over and over again.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#541 Consumer Comment

A quick note to 'B'

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, November 07, 2005

'B', I apologize for my offensive 'tantrum' aimed toward you. I was actually laughing while typing, thinking to myself "I can't believe that Mother F%$#@r made me look so bad, and he made it look so easy!" lol I do actually enjoy the exchange of VWMD's (verbal weapons of . . . anyway,) I got carried away and typed with the emotion of a lovestruck teen on his first unsupervised "Drive Inn Movie" date! In doing so, I furthered your cause without having yu have to type another word; I am certain anyone new to reading this post, if that was their first impression of me, must think me an ignorant boob at best.(but at least still a few pegs above James on the "Darwin Scale")

What I am trying to say, is that I know I went "overboard" on the insults, the personal attacks on your mother and sister were totally uncalled for . . . I haven't seen your mothers number on those walls for weeks! ROTFLMAO

All joking aside, I do offer my most sincere apologies, and, that being said,(and since I don't have much time this A.M.,) I leave you with the ever appropriate farewell, as 'coined' by one of this country's greatest historical personalities . . .

T.T.F.N.
(Tigger -
That's pronounced "Tee-eye-double G - RRRRR")

God bless the U.S. and all her troops!

I . . . can't . . . help myself . . . b***h! (lol)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#540 Consumer Suggestion

Well B, you certainly cover the same subjects I do... in a different light.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, November 07, 2005

B;

I would have to say that you cover with these people the same opinions I have... you have a different way of saying it for sure.

A couple of things you mentioned... I thought I should comment on. When Jesus was asked about the taxes... he asked "before" what you said "Who's head is on that coin". They replied Ceasar & then he replied "Render to Ceasar..." Basically they were trying to trap Jesus into saying they should not pay taxes. However as it is explained he was saying, as he had said before... "If you want to live by Man's money... go ahead. Yet you don't have to. Look at the Sparrow, look at the Crow. he neither reaps or sews... but God looks after him. How much better are you, than a Sparrow or a Crow". Jesus was anti Church & material wealth.

Now of course I changed the words a little, but his point was that you do not need to live under that system. However if you choose to do that, then you need to follow those laws. Now what laws do you want to live with? What is oppressive & what is not?

Just as it is in Canada, the USA was begun with the idea of "total freedom". In the beginning... there were few taxes & you really did have choices if you did not want to pay for taxed goods. Things have changed drastically. Now there are elected leaders who take a vast amount of our money & regulate strongly what we do, while doing whatever they please like, as you said, import drugs for sale under the table. Also to support regrimes that are oppressive. Go to war & invade other Countries & set up trade agreements with other Countries they do not hold their end up on. All the time leaving a "bad taste" in the mouths of people from other Countries that need to deal with the USA.

That was one of the things that got me so mad about getting my "birth certificate". As a Canadian... I do not need to deal with the government at all! I can live off the land if I choose & I do not have to know anyone! I can be a hermit & I should not be regulated by my Government to know certain people in order to get documentation of my legal birth in Canada. However, my Government decided since 911 to make it even harder for people to obtain "false identification" & their solution was to put conditions on me. Unfair... yes. Good reason... probably. However I know the root cause of the 911 attack was not something I did or even Canadians did. It was because the USA is sticking their noses in other parts of the world, which is none of their business. These people feel helpless to fight back with an equal sized armed force & so instead they resort to terrorism.

As Wilson said in his interview with Larry King... this war in Iraq is an absolute disaster & the troops are for the most part just phoneing it in. There is no real exit strategy & it is so very costly. What worries me the most is the terrorism in the future that will be a result of this action of the USA. It will happen & if you are lucky enough to not be where the next bomb goes off, then I guess you can continue to think about it as a "small issue". I do not. I don't live in earthquake zones, or hurricane zones & I really don't like suprises. It is for this desire to live comfortably in peace, that I make an issue here about this silly mess.

Wilson also quoted Ben Franklin, when he was asked what kind of a government was left for Americans, after the setting up of the Government was done. He replied "A Republic Madam, if you can keep it". Have you kept it? Does it's definition include what is going on with Bush & the illegal acts putting Americans in "harms way"?

Jimmy Carter has also spoken out against what Bush has done to America. I have never seen a former President break ranks like that before. They normally don't comment.

I'm not gonna get into this big religeous thing, as it really has no revelence here. I see none at all. I see people wanting to control others using religeon as a weapon. People like Shawn & Vera. I don't see where it does any good to be discussing "more control" here of the Government over the people when we should be discussing the "excessive control" that the Government has over the people. It's a road leading in the wrong direction.

I agree with you on the "drug thing"... yet I would go farther by legalizing heroin too. Any drug out there under control of Cartels is a bad idea. If you are of legal age, you should be allowed to do to your body what you wish. That includes cutting your nose off to spite your face... your leg off if it offends you & something growing in your body you do not want. Any move to take away your basic freedoms is a move in the wrong direction in my opinion. If you are not harming anyone else "beyond their control", then you should be left to do what you please. That might include smoking "bananna peels". Who really cares? Government does not need to be in our bedrooms or bathrooms or our private life in any way. That is what freedom is all about.

As far as Vera goes... I can't believe you would taunt her to continue. Her posts are so "vast" & filled with "cut & paste" stuff totally off subject... filled with sarcastic garbage that does not make any sense to even the "warped mind". You don't have to have the "same opinion" as I, by the way about roofers... but I will tell you... I grew up with them. I worked with 3 different ones. I know what is common practice. Over estimations of the square on a roof estimate are the norm. Possibly Vera does not do these estimates... & does not know... but you cannot compete & stay in business for long in the roofing business playing by the book. The chances of the customer ever being a "return customer" are extreamly rare. Much rarer than in almost any other industry includeing selling cars. Which by the way does have a fair amount of return customers. You just need to be in business for 10 or more years to begin to reap the benefits of them. Yet again this is "off subject" & it was only because Vera began bashing my job... that I was childish enough to come back at her bashing hers. I should have held myself above such childish antics & I really wonder why you are anything but discusted with her for hitting that low & so far "off subject".

It's all Childish B, & you know it. From Shawns rantings & swearing on unparagraphed posts, basically saying nothing other than "Your Mother Wears Army Boots", to Roberts claim that Vera's rediculous lyrics were better than mine, when they were simply Childish as hell! Finally to Vera who acts like a 5 year old with her posts that are just nothing more than absolutely Childish rantings... compleatly off subject... making no sense & as long as the Mississippi!

I don't know B, for a guy I compleatly agree with on just about every subject we discuss here... you certainly do seem to miss the point of some of these people. Definately please do not put me in their category.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#539 Consumer Comment

Shawn on KBR, Newsmax, Religion, and Drugs.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 06, 2005

Shawn,

I'm sorry, based on your previous posts to myself and others, I thought you enjoyed and welcomed this 'verbal badgering'. If this is not the case, I apologize, and will refrain in the future. The reason I didn't respond to the rest of your post is simply that I had to go somewhere. I did post a response yesterday addressing the very points you mention. I'm afraid it wasn't particularly 'in a more mature manner', in fact I was quite shameless in needling you. A couple of addenda... The fact that the administration may have mentioned other reasons, if you choose to call them such, for the invasion, does not detract from the fact that they focused on WMD. I would ask you to show any instance leading up to the invasion where Bush stated other reasons and did not include WMD. I will also reiterate that to my mind, and to many others, WMD was the only conceivable reason that might justify an invasion. You are posing the Sheehan problem in terms of either/or, which is probably why you did not get my meaning. She was arrested for demonstrating without a permit AND that has the effect of silencing her from speaking out against the government. Whatever the intention or justification, we do in fact have a law that negates her first amendment rights.

You are correct, calling Robert's statement theory and insinuating I have the facts does not make my theories any more factual than his. Nonetheless, they are. Or, more precisely, I presented several facts that his theory did not consider. Generally, though there are exceptions, I tend to present the facts that I know. I rarely intentionally suppress facts just because they don't fit my argument, although I may argue their relevance. In this case, Robert stated that KBR was the ONLY company that could handle the job and that Clinton authorized their contract. I stated the relevant facts and argued that his conclusions were incorrect. I also stated some related facts that I think are interesting, but did not pursue them further because they are only tangentially relevant to the topic. Your assertion that I did not fully cover them due to some bias is absurd. I barely touched on them. I would call your presentation woefully incomplete as well. I don't see the relevance of Cheney's divestiture. Am I missing something?

You misinterpreted my advertising comment as applying to general contractors; it was meant only to apply to the LOGCAP bidding. It was nothing more than a cheap shot, but perhaps you can suggest a better explanation that will satisfy me and the civilian overseer, as to why the contract was awarded to a company with a history of problems over one with demonstrated effectiveness.

___________________
Robert,

The Newsmax story is pure crap. The only recycling going on is the author's attempt to recycle old news as new intrigue. He states the weapons inspectors didn't know about this uranium before the war, he just neglects to mention which war. After the 1st Gulf War, the inspectors found 500 tons of yellowcake and 1.8 tons of partially enriched uranium. The yellowcake was left in Iraq (I have no idea why) under IAEA seal. The 1.8 tons of partially enriched uranium was taken to the Soviet Union and destroyed. Didn't we cover this once before? The assertion that Wilson doesn't like to talk about Iraq's purchase of uranium from Niger in the 80's is absurd. That's why he was sent to Niger in the first place. Its no secret. There was no reason for Niger not to sell uranium to Iraq in the 80's.

___________________
Ben jammin,

I think you're fighting a losing battle, my friend. Vera is exceptionally good at appearing dispassionate in her passionate defense of her position. You, on the other hand, like Shawn and James, appear to get wilder and more speculative as your passion increases. She appears to have calmly reasoned ideas, and you look like a kook. I know its only appearance, but in this sort of forum, that can count more than content. I very much appreciate your posts (and Vera's), but I have to admit I've stopped reading the 'he said, she said' dialog between the two of you; it just isn't going anywhere anymore. I hope you won't mind me throwing in my two cents in hope of diminishing the hostility.

I think that Vera (mild by comparison) and others are confused, to varying degrees. They are confused about the difference between the need for compassion and justice in government, and religious morality. They are confused about the government's right to abrogate the individual's right to pursue their own brand of happiness. They are confused as to where their fair right to expression and community ends, and others' right to privacy and different morality begins. Their absolute belief in the authority of their bible, the truth and godliness of their preachers, and their own moral compass leads them to intolerance. It blinds them to objective consideration of others' right to hold and have the equal empowerment of different beliefs; the very concept of 'different but equal' is difficult for some to pay lip service to, much less embrace. Everything is either/or, shades of grey might possibly exist, but only in this limited band. Examples that pop into mind: the fear of Islam being taught in schools, contrasted with the demand for the teaching of Christianity; and the relegation of homosexuals to the dregs of humanity, labeling them as unnatural, and by extension, unfit for equal recognition and empowerment. My opinion: people who profess belief in fairy tales should not have the expectation that those beliefs will be taken seriously in any objective setting; when Jesus said, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's," he did not intend his remark to apply only to taxation; people who advocate religion in government should be placed in stasis until another religion becomes dominant; any politician who hawks his religion for election purposes or advocates a religious intent for government should be pilloried in the public square.

You, and other 'followers of the antichrist' (lol) are paranoid, obstinate, and confused, to varying degrees; oh, and evil, of course. They refuse to see the need for compassion and tolerance in government. They think their rights as an individual trump the government, no matter what the circumstances. They are confused about where their right to be offended ends, and others' right to believe in fairy tales and act accordingly begins. Their absolute rejection of a higher authority and common fairy tales, and belief in their own moral compass leads them to intolerance and antagonism; they reject the very notion that they have any civil responsibility to make nice and sometimes play the games their neighbors enjoy. They believe that any expression of a religious nature is a direct, personal attack. Everything must be grey, there are no absolutes. Examples that pop into mind: most of your conversation with Vera. My opinion: all things tainted by contact with religion are not spoiled; Christianity has been responsible for many of the good things in this world, and a few bad, so suck it up and count your lucky stars; Atheism is the ultimate cop-out, especially in the young, rejecting the wisdom of ages with no empirical basis, rejecting entire universes of possibility; any politician or teacher who advocates Atheism should be pilloried in the public square.

Ok, The First Church of Beism: House of Inner Vision is now open for potshots. Spectacles guaranteed within the hour.
Jammin and jammin and jammin and jammin, I hope you like jammin too...

___________________
Vera,

No offense was intended. My comments were meant to be sarcastic. I've heard 'falling off the roof' used as a euphemism for a recurring biological function that I'll likely never experience first hand. So when James suggested that you had fallen off the roof, I'm afraid it severely tickled my funny bone. I do not share James' rather pathetic estimation of your profession, though perhaps it does explain why you seem so fond of the expression "slippery slope." :)

If you read my post again, you will see that I do not "ignore" the problems associated with alcohol abuse, I'm all too aware of them. And the reason I included the parenthetical "(statistically speaking)" is specifically because I am sympathetic to the fact that each of those dehumanized 'numbers' represents some family's very personal life-changing tragedy. But I do believe the end result would be a significant reduction of tragedy. Many of your arguments actually favor the change. Of all the drugs commonly used for 'recreation', and I do not include heroin in this category, alcohol ranks number 1 in motor impairment and suppression of inhibitions, and is the most addictive. So to the extent that alcohol usage is replaced by usage of other drugs, we improve these areas. And when I talk about crime, I'm not referring to the petty main street America variety, I'm talking about the activities of the criminal shadow 'society' that pervades the distribution of illegal drugs, that is all too willing to suck in the young and the naive and redirect their lives to criminal purpose. If my granddaughter decides to use drugs, I'd much rather see her trying to convince gullible neighbors to buy her a 20 pack of pot than a 6 pack of beer, and VERY much prefer her dealing with neighbors than with the fringes of organized crime. Right now, hundreds of thousands are being brutally sodomized in our prisons, whose only 'crime' is that they used a different mood-altering chemical than the one officially sanctioned. Add in those imprisoned for other directly drug related charges, and you have a number that exceeds the amount by which our prisons are overcrowded. And each of these is a potential social problem in the making. If drugs were legalized, would you snort a line of 'snow' tomorrow before work, to make your slope that much more slippery? No, nor would I, my wife, our children, their spouses, etc. Most of us have people and activities in our lives that we consider to be of primary importance, and we would approach the use of other drugs with the same degree of responsibility we now use with alcohol. There would be a few who would find some new drug to be their particular 'demon', but I cannot imagine their numbers would even approach the number we are currently demonizing through law enforcement. One of the biggest growing problems recognized by the police is meth labs which, in addition to the problems of fire, explosion, and poisoning, leave the environment saturated with poisonous chemicals to affect the lives of future inhabitants. All gone under legalization.

Whether or not we choose to embrace full legalization, we should seriously entertain the idea of making some responsible changes. Right off the top, lets get the feds out of the relationship between doctors and patients. Bush has mandated the thwarting of states' attempts to decriminalize medical use of pot. Is this another of his attempts, as Ben postulates, to absolutely control the morality of America? Or is he afraid of the stigma of 'authorizing' any usage? From a practical standpoint, it is completely irresponsible. Pot has unique properties in the treatment of some diseases, and is an effective, non-addictive method of mediating pain in others, and medical usage is unlikely to have any remarkable impact on overall availability. Another thing we should do is cut off the billions in back-door funding for rip-off Bush's pet bureaucratic and military projects, under the guise of a 'war on drugs'. Over 10 years and going strong, despite the fact there is no evidence that it will ever be effective. And we can dump all that money into drug education and intervention programs. Statistics indicate that the DARE campaign (much to my surprise) and other youth education programs have been very effective in reducing child and teen drug use, but studies show the influence all but disappears when they hit college age. We need to determine why, and revamp those programs. We need to start college and adult programs. We need to make everyone persistently aware that alcohol also is a drug and one of the worst. And those whose political bent leads them to stoically prefer spending billions for nothing rather than spending one dime for domestic welfare programs can just pop a Valium and bite their wicked little tongues. Criminalization, as you say, has some deterrent effect, but to what end? Organized crime takes in 5% less money? A 5% increase in alcoholism? Lets eliminate prison time for minor possession and sales, and substitute community service (serious service for sales) and mandatory counseling. And none of this ounce is possession, ounce + 1 gram is intent to sell. Target the severe penalties to serious distributors, not users who are just trying to sell enough to cover their own costs.

Whoopsie! Looks like I dozed off and spent the night in the chair. Oooh, iss gonna hurt when I stand up, an I gonna haf to REAL soon. So, let me just add, Vera, skew you too, and the house you rode in on. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#538 Consumer Comment

Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Vera, the definition of a Libertarian is someone who is able to hold strong beliefs and opinions and yet remain able to refrain from demanding that those beliefs and opinions be legislated into law. (Something I am afraid Dems, the GOP and our President have completely forgotten as social agendas intrude more and more into the daily schedules of the politicians).

Libertarians also tend to respect the opinions of others as it is your right to hold them and air them. We might "call" you on obvious misinformation, but your opinions are your own.

Doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with you. I find your posts interesting and intelligent. I consider your opinions and weigh them. No, we don't agree on everything but what two humans do? Perhaps I am too tolerant sometimes and too hard-headed at others.

A lot of my knowledge about the oil cartel comes from being in the right place at the right time and knowing to look for the signs of what I was told then.

In the early seventies, I spent some time in a town called Borger, TX. Oilfield work was booming there and it was easy to get a job on a drilling rig or any of the support services needed by oil wells...hauling off salt water, frac jobs. Oil wells are labor intensive.

Just a rock's throw away from Borger was a town called Philips, TX, owned by...you guessed it...Philips Petroleum. Philips, TX was mostly one huge refinery with a few blocks of company houses. (Won't do to look for Philips, TX now, though, unless you have access to an old map. Philips Petroleum had the whole town literally picked up and moved right outside Borger in the early eighties after a refinery explosion rocked the town pretty hard.After which the Philips refinery was expanded.)

By necessity, the folks in the support services have occasion to rub elbows with the higher ups at various petroleum companies. So how do I know a cartel was formed...I was told by someone who knew while the formation of that cartel was in progress that it was happening.

At the time, I laughed it off; less than two years later I was watching the long gas lines in California on the evening news. The storage tanks at Philips were FULL; there was no gas shortage. (Fuel storage tanks had a floating cover. It was easy to tell even from the highway which storage tanks are full and which are not. Many of them still have that same floating cover now.)

The oil cartel had effectively created its own shortage. The government was either complicit or the most easily duped morons on the planet. Your choice. I could tell the tanks were full, but evidently even with all its surveillance techniques the government could not.

It happened. It really happened. Folks in TX were scratching their heads and muttering "WTF? Gas is EVERYWHERE." We were literally floating in the stuff, everything was full. Except that none of that fuel was being sent down the pipe so California was feeling the pinch. It was being held in those storage tanks in TX. The fuel prices in California zoomed upward as a result. And that was the first sign of the truth of what I had been told.

You asked for research material. You can Google "limited domestic refining capacity in the US" and you will have so many links your head will spin.

I would like to direct you to one particular document. A study by Senator Ron Wyden in 2001. You can find it here:

http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/reports/wyden_oil_report.pdf

The study outlines the whole scam down to some of the internal memos that prove the collusion among the oil companies in limiting supplies and raising prices.

It makes me sick because it proves that the government is well aware of the manipulations that were engineered. It simply doesn't care. Nothing to the government if a working person has to choose between filling his gas tank to go to work and eating or making his mortgage payment or going to the dentist.

We are now racing toward a monopoly situation. As these mega petroleum companies continue to merge and merge and merge, there will soon be only two or so players in the field and refinery capacity will be engineered to even less than it is now. Then, look out!

When that happens I will buy a horse. Vaseline is "petroleum jelly" which will be completely unaffordable by then. I do not intend to take the reaming the oil companies and the government are preparing for me without it.

"Better saddle sore than cornholed" is my motto.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#537 Consumer Comment

Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Vera, the definition of a Libertarian is someone who is able to hold strong beliefs and opinions and yet remain able to refrain from demanding that those beliefs and opinions be legislated into law. (Something I am afraid Dems, the GOP and our President have completely forgotten as social agendas intrude more and more into the daily schedules of the politicians).

Libertarians also tend to respect the opinions of others as it is your right to hold them and air them. We might "call" you on obvious misinformation, but your opinions are your own.

Doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with you. I find your posts interesting and intelligent. I consider your opinions and weigh them. No, we don't agree on everything but what two humans do? Perhaps I am too tolerant sometimes and too hard-headed at others.

A lot of my knowledge about the oil cartel comes from being in the right place at the right time and knowing to look for the signs of what I was told then.

In the early seventies, I spent some time in a town called Borger, TX. Oilfield work was booming there and it was easy to get a job on a drilling rig or any of the support services needed by oil wells...hauling off salt water, frac jobs. Oil wells are labor intensive.

Just a rock's throw away from Borger was a town called Philips, TX, owned by...you guessed it...Philips Petroleum. Philips, TX was mostly one huge refinery with a few blocks of company houses. (Won't do to look for Philips, TX now, though, unless you have access to an old map. Philips Petroleum had the whole town literally picked up and moved right outside Borger in the early eighties after a refinery explosion rocked the town pretty hard.After which the Philips refinery was expanded.)

By necessity, the folks in the support services have occasion to rub elbows with the higher ups at various petroleum companies. So how do I know a cartel was formed...I was told by someone who knew while the formation of that cartel was in progress that it was happening.

At the time, I laughed it off; less than two years later I was watching the long gas lines in California on the evening news. The storage tanks at Philips were FULL; there was no gas shortage. (Fuel storage tanks had a floating cover. It was easy to tell even from the highway which storage tanks are full and which are not. Many of them still have that same floating cover now.)

The oil cartel had effectively created its own shortage. The government was either complicit or the most easily duped morons on the planet. Your choice. I could tell the tanks were full, but evidently even with all its surveillance techniques the government could not.

It happened. It really happened. Folks in TX were scratching their heads and muttering "WTF? Gas is EVERYWHERE." We were literally floating in the stuff, everything was full. Except that none of that fuel was being sent down the pipe so California was feeling the pinch. It was being held in those storage tanks in TX. The fuel prices in California zoomed upward as a result. And that was the first sign of the truth of what I had been told.

You asked for research material. You can Google "limited domestic refining capacity in the US" and you will have so many links your head will spin.

I would like to direct you to one particular document. A study by Senator Ron Wyden in 2001. You can find it here:

http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/reports/wyden_oil_report.pdf

The study outlines the whole scam down to some of the internal memos that prove the collusion among the oil companies in limiting supplies and raising prices.

It makes me sick because it proves that the government is well aware of the manipulations that were engineered. It simply doesn't care. Nothing to the government if a working person has to choose between filling his gas tank to go to work and eating or making his mortgage payment or going to the dentist.

We are now racing toward a monopoly situation. As these mega petroleum companies continue to merge and merge and merge, there will soon be only two or so players in the field and refinery capacity will be engineered to even less than it is now. Then, look out!

When that happens I will buy a horse. Vaseline is "petroleum jelly" which will be completely unaffordable by then. I do not intend to take the reaming the oil companies and the government are preparing for me without it.

"Better saddle sore than cornholed" is my motto.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#536 Consumer Comment

Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Vera, the definition of a Libertarian is someone who is able to hold strong beliefs and opinions and yet remain able to refrain from demanding that those beliefs and opinions be legislated into law. (Something I am afraid Dems, the GOP and our President have completely forgotten as social agendas intrude more and more into the daily schedules of the politicians).

Libertarians also tend to respect the opinions of others as it is your right to hold them and air them. We might "call" you on obvious misinformation, but your opinions are your own.

Doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with you. I find your posts interesting and intelligent. I consider your opinions and weigh them. No, we don't agree on everything but what two humans do? Perhaps I am too tolerant sometimes and too hard-headed at others.

A lot of my knowledge about the oil cartel comes from being in the right place at the right time and knowing to look for the signs of what I was told then.

In the early seventies, I spent some time in a town called Borger, TX. Oilfield work was booming there and it was easy to get a job on a drilling rig or any of the support services needed by oil wells...hauling off salt water, frac jobs. Oil wells are labor intensive.

Just a rock's throw away from Borger was a town called Philips, TX, owned by...you guessed it...Philips Petroleum. Philips, TX was mostly one huge refinery with a few blocks of company houses. (Won't do to look for Philips, TX now, though, unless you have access to an old map. Philips Petroleum had the whole town literally picked up and moved right outside Borger in the early eighties after a refinery explosion rocked the town pretty hard.After which the Philips refinery was expanded.)

By necessity, the folks in the support services have occasion to rub elbows with the higher ups at various petroleum companies. So how do I know a cartel was formed...I was told by someone who knew while the formation of that cartel was in progress that it was happening.

At the time, I laughed it off; less than two years later I was watching the long gas lines in California on the evening news. The storage tanks at Philips were FULL; there was no gas shortage. (Fuel storage tanks had a floating cover. It was easy to tell even from the highway which storage tanks are full and which are not. Many of them still have that same floating cover now.)

The oil cartel had effectively created its own shortage. The government was either complicit or the most easily duped morons on the planet. Your choice. I could tell the tanks were full, but evidently even with all its surveillance techniques the government could not.

It happened. It really happened. Folks in TX were scratching their heads and muttering "WTF? Gas is EVERYWHERE." We were literally floating in the stuff, everything was full. Except that none of that fuel was being sent down the pipe so California was feeling the pinch. It was being held in those storage tanks in TX. The fuel prices in California zoomed upward as a result. And that was the first sign of the truth of what I had been told.

You asked for research material. You can Google "limited domestic refining capacity in the US" and you will have so many links your head will spin.

I would like to direct you to one particular document. A study by Senator Ron Wyden in 2001. You can find it here:

http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/reports/wyden_oil_report.pdf

The study outlines the whole scam down to some of the internal memos that prove the collusion among the oil companies in limiting supplies and raising prices.

It makes me sick because it proves that the government is well aware of the manipulations that were engineered. It simply doesn't care. Nothing to the government if a working person has to choose between filling his gas tank to go to work and eating or making his mortgage payment or going to the dentist.

We are now racing toward a monopoly situation. As these mega petroleum companies continue to merge and merge and merge, there will soon be only two or so players in the field and refinery capacity will be engineered to even less than it is now. Then, look out!

When that happens I will buy a horse. Vaseline is "petroleum jelly" which will be completely unaffordable by then. I do not intend to take the reaming the oil companies and the government are preparing for me without it.

"Better saddle sore than cornholed" is my motto.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#535 Consumer Comment

Man seeks horse...."Better saddle sore than cornholed" !

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Vera, the definition of a Libertarian is someone who is able to hold strong beliefs and opinions and yet remain able to refrain from demanding that those beliefs and opinions be legislated into law. (Something I am afraid Dems, the GOP and our President have completely forgotten as social agendas intrude more and more into the daily schedules of the politicians).

Libertarians also tend to respect the opinions of others as it is your right to hold them and air them. We might "call" you on obvious misinformation, but your opinions are your own.

Doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with you. I find your posts interesting and intelligent. I consider your opinions and weigh them. No, we don't agree on everything but what two humans do? Perhaps I am too tolerant sometimes and too hard-headed at others.

A lot of my knowledge about the oil cartel comes from being in the right place at the right time and knowing to look for the signs of what I was told then.

In the early seventies, I spent some time in a town called Borger, TX. Oilfield work was booming there and it was easy to get a job on a drilling rig or any of the support services needed by oil wells...hauling off salt water, frac jobs. Oil wells are labor intensive.

Just a rock's throw away from Borger was a town called Philips, TX, owned by...you guessed it...Philips Petroleum. Philips, TX was mostly one huge refinery with a few blocks of company houses. (Won't do to look for Philips, TX now, though, unless you have access to an old map. Philips Petroleum had the whole town literally picked up and moved right outside Borger in the early eighties after a refinery explosion rocked the town pretty hard.After which the Philips refinery was expanded.)

By necessity, the folks in the support services have occasion to rub elbows with the higher ups at various petroleum companies. So how do I know a cartel was formed...I was told by someone who knew while the formation of that cartel was in progress that it was happening.

At the time, I laughed it off; less than two years later I was watching the long gas lines in California on the evening news. The storage tanks at Philips were FULL; there was no gas shortage. (Fuel storage tanks had a floating cover. It was easy to tell even from the highway which storage tanks are full and which are not. Many of them still have that same floating cover now.)

The oil cartel had effectively created its own shortage. The government was either complicit or the most easily duped morons on the planet. Your choice. I could tell the tanks were full, but evidently even with all its surveillance techniques the government could not.

It happened. It really happened. Folks in TX were scratching their heads and muttering "WTF? Gas is EVERYWHERE." We were literally floating in the stuff, everything was full. Except that none of that fuel was being sent down the pipe so California was feeling the pinch. It was being held in those storage tanks in TX. The fuel prices in California zoomed upward as a result. And that was the first sign of the truth of what I had been told.

You asked for research material. You can Google "limited domestic refining capacity in the US" and you will have so many links your head will spin.

I would like to direct you to one particular document. A study by Senator Ron Wyden in 2001. You can find it here:

http://wyden.senate.gov/leg_issues/reports/wyden_oil_report.pdf

The study outlines the whole scam down to some of the internal memos that prove the collusion among the oil companies in limiting supplies and raising prices.

It makes me sick because it proves that the government is well aware of the manipulations that were engineered. It simply doesn't care. Nothing to the government if a working person has to choose between filling his gas tank to go to work and eating or making his mortgage payment or going to the dentist.

We are now racing toward a monopoly situation. As these mega petroleum companies continue to merge and merge and merge, there will soon be only two or so players in the field and refinery capacity will be engineered to even less than it is now. Then, look out!

When that happens I will buy a horse. Vaseline is "petroleum jelly" which will be completely unaffordable by then. I do not intend to take the reaming the oil companies and the government are preparing for me without it.

"Better saddle sore than cornholed" is my motto.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#534 Consumer Suggestion

And again... the longest post award goes to...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Vera;

Do you really think anyone reads all of your "off subject" posts?

I certainly don't. I might read some of the stuff directed at me for a laugh... but the rest of it is just pure garbage!

Again... do us all a favor & quit waisting space.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#533 Consumer Comment

Yo, c'mere fishy

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

O.K. now that we have that settled . . . onto the meat. In UNSCR 678, paragraph 2 (apparently I have to do the research for you and not just point you in the right direction), we find the much discussed authority to invade.

UNSCR 678
2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in paragraph one above, the foregoing resolutions, to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;

. . . Member States co-operating with the government of . . . , in other words, all Member States who are supplying troops in regards to enforcing the resolutions against Iraq (in favor of Kuwait,) are authorized to use . . . all necessary means to implement Resolution 660 and ALL subsequent relevant resolutions . . . . (I am sorry that I feel the need for English to English translation, but some of you idiots just don't otherwise get it'.) O.K. B', let's see if you can keeeeep uuuuup thiiiisssss tiiiiiime . . . ALL SUBSEQUENT RELEVANT RESOLUTIONS! You see, like I said before, it's not what you write that I have a problem with, it's what you leave out that gives your rambles a left wing spin.

Let's take a look at UNSCR 660
1. Condemns the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait;
2. Demands that Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990;
3. Calls upon Iraq and Kuwait to begin immediately intensive negotiations for the resolution of their differences and supports all efforts in this regard, and especially those of the League of Arab States;
4. Decides to meet again as necessary to consider further steps with to ensure compliance with the present resolution.
Really self explanatory, thus the Gulf War. Oh yes, what was it . . . and subsequent relevant resolutions . . .

Let's take a look at UNSCR 686 (the cease fire')

. . . Recalling and reaffirming its resolutions 660 (1990), 661 (1990), 662 (1990), 664 (1990), 665 (1990), 666 (1990), 667 (1990), 669 (1990), 670 (1990), 674 (1990), 677 (1990), and 678 (1990), . . .
. . . Taking note of the letters of the Foreign Minister of Iraq confirming Iraq's agreement to comply fully with all of the resolutions noted above (S/22275), and stating its intention to release prisoners of war immediately (S/22273), . . .
. . . Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter,
1. Affirms that all twelve resolutions noted above continue to have full force and effect;
2. Demands that Iraq implement its acceptance of all twelve resolutions noted above and in particular that Iraq: (a) Rescind immediately its actions purporting to annex Kuwait; (b) Accept in principle its liability for any loss, damage, or injury arising in regard to Kuwait and third States, and their nationals and corporations, as a result of the invasion and illegal occupation of Kuwait by Iraq; (c) Under international law immediately release under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Red Cross Societies, or Red Crescent Societies, all Kuwaiti and third country nationals detained by Iraq and return the remains of any deceased Kuwaiti and third country nationals so detained; and (d) Immediately begin to return all Kuwaiti property seized by Iraq, to be completed in the shortest possible period;
3. Further demands that Iraq: (a) Cease hostile or provocative actions by its forces against all Member States including missile attacks and flights of combat aircraft; (b) Designate military commanders to meet with counterparts from the forces of Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait pursuant to resolution 678 (1990) to arrange for the military aspects of a cessation of hostilities at the earliest possible time; (c) Arrange for immediate access to and release of all prisoners of war under the auspices of the International Committee of the Red Cross and return the remains of any deceased personnel of the forces of Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait pursuant to resolution 678 (1990); and (d) Provide all information and assistance in identifying Iraqi mines, booby traps and other explosives as well as any chemical and biological weapons and material in Kuwait, in areas of Iraq where forces of Member States cooperating with Kuwait pursuant to resolution 678 (1990) are present temporarily, and in adjacent waters;
4. Recognizes that during the period required for Iraq to comply with paragraphs 2 and 3 above, THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH 2 OF RESOLUTION 678 (1990 ) REMAIN VALID;

Can anybody tell me when Iraq complied with all of these? Also, for those who b***h and whine and say it's unfair for us to force them' to do something that they never agreed to, to just arbitrarily set rules for them, take note - the Foreign Minister of Iraq confirmed that it was Iraq's intent to . . . comply fully with all of the resolutions. . .

Moving on . . . Not going too fast for you am I B' (b***h?) ? I am really tired of doing all the work for you, so I am just going to list the subsequent relevant resolutions that we know Iraq did not comply with. (Sorry if it's not verbatim, if I were to do that, I might as well post the whole f**kin' thing for you)

-UNSCR 687 was the formal' cease fire . . . or . . . er . . . cessation of aggressive actions
-Repression of the Iraqi civilian population (UNSCR - 688 demands the end to such)
(Also used to claim the legal right to impose U.S. and British no fly zones' _ this is incorrect as 688 does not invoke Ch. VII of th U.N. Charter, a necessary condition for such measures. See B' that's presenting both sides )
-UNSCR 707 in August/91 condemned Iraq's failure to comply with UNSCR 687 and called it a material breach
- in October of 92, the U.N. stated that . . . awe f**kit, you should join the real world, READ ALL of the text in each of the UNSCR's and discover the truth. If your opinion of the meat contained in it differs from mine - so be it! I am done arguing this B.S.! Greater minds, who have studied international law, can't even agree - nobody on this thread is going to have any input greater than theirs. Basically, we ALL claim to have the facts to support our individual positions' on these matters, but the simple truth is, we are all just arguing opinion. (Actually, the twins, Ben, and a few other intellectually numb participants don't even claim to have facts, they knowingly spew their opinions without any attempt at providing a factual basis of support.)

As far as B' roasting' me for my word usage of . . . we don't know they didn't have . . . , well, I was just using his words ( that we knew of,) and turning them about, as my response. C'mon, if I researched everything that he touted as fact I wouldn't have much of a life away from this computer (as it is, my wife thinks I spend too much time with you quacks'!) lol That aside, I noticed that there has been not mention of the link posted by Robert (from Florida). Is that because your favorite source of information, the N.Y. Times, actually confirmed the opposite to which you have been spouting? Maybe it's because you inherited those rose colored glasses' when Canadunce passed on'. Either way, the proof is in . . . partially enriched uranium, centrifuge program (along with key components to the centrifuge), Saddam's continued funding of the IAEC from 1991 until the beginning of the war in 2003, . . . can a nuclear weapon be considered a WMD??? Hell ya!

Millions of innocent Iraqi civilians have died because we won't let the shipments of food and supplies through to them, er, uhh, I mean because Saddam's diverting them. Let's see, thousands of lives, Soldiers and civilians, vs. millions of innocent Iraqi civilians . . . . . . ummm, I don't understand B', are you saying that it's better the millions of Iraqi's die than, God forbid, any of our soldiers do? I believe that we have lost many lives in wars that our only business being there was to help defend those that couldn't defend themselves! Were we wrong every time? Or just the times there was a republican president? Oh, and I'll forget about any comments about your Clinton snippit', we all know how his attentions were diverted from his duties.



Once again, there's that part B' left out, this is a direct clipping from the joint resolution of congress which I had made reference to, I am not sure why B' quoted public law 107-243 with the insinuation that this was my defense of our right to invade', but then, I always have had a hard time following spin!
. . .Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
1. SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".
SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS
The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--
(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and
(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) ENFORCE ALL RELEVANT UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS REGARDING IRAQ.
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION. . . .

If you want to read the whole joint resolution, here it is :
whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
And if you want to see the report on B's 107-243, here's that too.
c-span.org/resources/pdf/Report107_243.pdf
Of course you hafta add the dubya's and a dot.

Regarding Sheehan, the next time I want to protest . . .say . . . taxes, I think, to prove my commitment, I'll rob a bank! Don't worry, It will just be to symbolically break the law. lol
What a friggin' nutcase!

Next time I want an explanation of Biblical text I'll look it up for myself, not ask you. I was, after all trying to explain it in a manner that James might be able to understand, sort of like talking to a grade 2 student, and tossing in a dig' at Benny boo-h*o at the same time. If I were to seriously debate the finer points of Matthew 6, or any other verse within the Bible, I sure wouldn't do so with James, he obviously has far to great an understanding of God's word for me to even begin to comprehend. As far as the translation from Hebrew/Greek, I don't care . . . it's all Greek to me!

You and I agree on one thing, the courts have no power to change or create laws, that would be the job/responsibility of the legislature thus the catch phrase legislating from the bench! double duh on you'! To choose one system of beliefs over another is not what the courts are empanelled to do, yet that is what they are doing. You state that it is to change the application of the law to different facts and circumstances. What facts and circumstances changed to have them apply the prevention of the murder of an unborn child to be suddenly unconstitutional? What facts and circumstances changed that suddenly made prayer in school unconstitutional? Don't even bother with the whole it's a different time garbage. The writer's of the constitution have made several statements which contradict that argument, I've already posted some in previous responses. What the courts have done is changed the application of the law based on changes in people and moral values', the facts and circumstances haven't changed.
I know you would like us all to see things from your perspective ( At least, that's the way it looks from here.) But I don't think I want to get my head anywhere near your a*s, never mind crammed deep inside!

Sidenote: B', I really do enjoy reading your posts, I've stated several times that, although we differ in opinions, at least you offer some proof' or facts' (isn't it amazing how that which is unarguably true, can be argued when discussing politics!)which the other left leaning' contributors (and I use that term in it's loosest sense)seem to deem unnecessary. I do concede to you this, your grasp of the English language, and skills of the pen, do indeed exceed those of mine, but, I have a life, a wife, a business and a future . . . I don't have the time or desire to curl up' with a dictionary and a Thesaurus every night, just so I can add stylish verbal abuse techniques as a plus' on my resume'! Dammit! I just can't seem to get a compliment out without tossing in a 'jab' . . . sorry.( No really, I mean it, I really am apologizing.)

P.S. psst - 'B', remembering the first time you jerked' off does not constitute having a virgin lol

May God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#532 Consumer Comment

By my troth...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Dear Robert, thanks again for the accolades. Admittedly, I enjoy getting my horn tooted by the hand of another (why does that sound soweird?), but I just wish my little song posted in the format it was written in...part of the visual joke, I suppose. I see you read that article on Mike moore...wasn't that interesting? I love it when Mike Moore gets foisted by his own petard!

Now if you please, divert your gaze (or gird yourself, lol), as I have a final response to Ben of California (after my own accolades) on the subject of Religion; after this, I won't respond to it any more. Scout's honor, cross my heart.

Shawn, thanks. You're truly terrific, I enjoy your posts, jokes, and your honesty. I also get a kick out of the occasional addendum to James' epitaph. Rock on, Dude!

"B.", you're just plain fun...and sometimes, disturbing. I know that if you and I ever met, we'd have lots of fun together (out of respect, that's to be construed as friendly!). Your sense of humor is so warped, man...

Robert of Texas, I really enjoy your research...and whould love to see more of it. You don't have to agree with me--or even like me--but don't stop the intelligent presentation of your information. Please tell me, where you got that information about oil and its prices...I want to learn more.

Much respect.

To Ben:

You say I sound like a car salesman? So be it. You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

No, I didn't say that. There you go putting words in my mouth again, you ignorant hypocrite. Actually, ignorance implies the simple innocence of being unaware; you CHOOSE to not know the truthand thus, qualify for Stupid. Depths of the abyss?Am I a satanic priest? What? Hunh?

And it wasn't me who bought up and condemned religion on this board. Add to that, the fact that I'm no preacherif nothing else, I've pointed out my human imperfection many times. If you wanna b***h at someone for preaching, might I suggest you stick by your principle (ha-ha!) that religion be banned and whine at James for bringing in the Canadian Skewed Version of Matt. Six? Come onwhere's YOUR righteous indignation against him?

I really like how you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to live by.

Well, I like how you pick and choose which Christians are zealots (the ones who don't agree with your leftist views). s**t peddler. If you have to lump us all together, then hate equally. But we all know, the devil doesn't try to convert the whores and the criminals; he's already got those and he knows it.

Not my choice, Darlin'. The term Christian happened first at Pentecost. Take it up with the Apostles. Why don't you get to know the religion of Christianity before you knock it? I know, I know.I don't need to study YOUR RELIGION to know you're a freakin' religious ZEALOT! Shtick. Spare me. (Rolling my eyes)

Then turn around and tell others they HAVE to live by it.

No I didn'tthat's your spin.

You cant make up your mind? Oh, how it changes through the centuries yet remains the same in one basic aspect....intolerant. Your rants about "oh that was long ago" and "it was the Jews" shows just how hypocritical you and your ilk really are.

Call it what you want. It's still a fact. The Crusades WERE long ago, those epic battles DID involve the Jews taking back their land. And I'm fairly solid in my mind being made up. You're criticizing that which you don't know.

So what if it was the "old" testament. Bush, and people like you say we must live by "Gods Law". Yet you cant even figure out what parts to honor or not. And you want US to live by them?

Methinks thou doth protest too much. I know what my religion tells me about the Bible, and I know that you are so utterly wrongit is to laugh!

Gee wiz Vera, make up your mind. You have proven without a doubt just about everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong.

And you've been trolling for someone to pick a fight about religion from the beginning. I've also proven that. And I only get nasty when I'm attacked directly---echo-echo-echo. Still (stil-stil-still) waiting (aiting-aiting-ting) for (for-or-or-) your (your-or-or) proof (roof-roof-oof). All you have said is we're trying to force YOU (that's as in Bennie, the Webbed-Fingered Wonder) to believethen it came to you accusing me that I'm trying to make you believe. I'm NOT. I DON'T CARE whether or not you BELIEVE.

Notice also, that I've never told a single person to go to hell, either. Feel free to ALSO notice that I've never said that a single person here is going to Hell. Your darling James can't even make that claim, after telling certain of this board Go to HELL!!! And have a nice day!) James also has called himself a Christian. Where's your pointing See?! See?! SEE!? Hypocrite! Religious Zealot! You have called everyone here that's in disagreement with your political viewand has also mentioned Goda religious zealot.

Not a one of us has presented ANYTHING to lend credence to your false accusations of conversion attempts--let alone, zealotry. (I've never seen a preist go tell some one , "Go f**k yourself, my son!") But in your mind, you've already convinced yourself that any poor soul who doesn't agree with Bennie is a religious zealot.

Telling us to live by "gods law" when you turn around and say "oh well, we dont pay attention to THAT part anymore". Well Vera, where does it stop. And how can we be assured you wont START again.

That's gotta be the umpteenth time you've mentioned that. I've answered it. Move on. Just because you don't like my answer, repeating the question endlessly isn't gonna change my view. Nor does it prove that something like the Crusades WILL happen. Last I checked, it's the Islamofascists who want the world to be ONE religion--thiers.

Spare me the "LOOK! over there....EVIL MUSLIMS!" bullshit. Thats just a diversion.

Kaythen you need to stop bringing up the Crusades and the Inquisition. Neither of those happened here in Americaand the past events that did have, have been long since dealt with. Another FACT you'll just have to get over.

Christians don't gas their own people; Christians don't rape and behead their women for daring disagree. Christians aren't torturing the children of others in front of them to make them converts. The atrocities committed in the name of ALLAH (or the Almighty dollar) are still going on TODAY. The Crusades? OVER. The Spanish Inquisition (why is it not called the Christian Inquisition?)? OVER. The Salem Witch Trials? OVER. Spell it with me: Oh-Vee-Eeh-Are Finished. Caput.

What were the casualties of the persons killed in those Planned Parenthood bombings? Are you sure these bombers were all well-established, indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy? How many of these groups acted at the behest of their Church organization? Or was it just young activists that thought what they were doing with a good thing? The road to Hell is PAVED with decent intentions. I don't deny that it has happenedbut I certainly wouldn't use it as a comparable datum, in reference to the Islamofascists. I'll bet more people were killed at the WTC in 2001, than were killed at all of those Planned Parenthood clinic bombings nationwide. Never mind the attempted bombing of the WTC (that pretty much went unanswered) when Clinton was in office.

Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program? Now you assholes want preteens and young girls (minors) to get abortions without having to notify their parents?

You know d**n well that there are Christian groups and entities pulling this sort of thing right now. Look at the LRA in Uganda.

Not orchestrated in America. And not spearheaded by me. I never denied the existence of religious zealots. But I don't support them, or approve of their actions. Ever hear of the phrase one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch?

What about all those members of the UN ("peacekeepers"---yeah, right!) that have been found (and admitted to) raping little girls (some as young as seven)? Some instances were even filmed. But the news only glossed over that, so it must not have been important.

Remember all the bombings at planned parenthood clinics? Forget those already? Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut. Christian, Muslim, Jew etc. it doesnt matter.

Nope. I never said there WEREN'T religious fanatics. Just that I'm not one, and I don't support them. Zealots do more harm than good, no matter their religious preference...or non-religious preference. Do you think you're a good representative of the atheist choice? I don't think sobut Robert is, because he's not knocking my choice to believe, or that choice made by others, whether he agrees with them or not.

If anything, Bennie, you're the type that is what those that believe in religion see as typical of atheism as a whole, just like O'hair. You do your organization a great disservice. Maybe the atheists should also distance themselves from you...or, teach you that tolerance doesn't mean you simply HAVE to agree. All you're doing is deepening the foaming-at-the-mouth-atheist stigma.

Thank goodness Robert represents proof that you're not the typical of those that make your choice. You should thank Robert for that.

Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

Only to the misinformed morons that really, really want to see it that way. That's you, Ben. Note that the same can (and has) been said about money.

Then you have the gall to say "show me proof" when for over 2 weeks you cant even come up with viable proof for your claims??? Get real! Is this one of those "do what I say, not what I do" things? After all your entire rant back at me was filled with that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

I've been asking for proof from you retards all along. Long before I ever said a pip about Muslim being part of the curriculum in SOME California schools (which it was). The best I can get is the interpretation of Law by B.'" surrounded by lots of terms from Introduction to Logic. Outside of that, all I get is spin and quips out of context.

You want proof.....fine. Come out of your biblical era mud hut and watch the news on TV every night. EVERY d**n NIGHT!

I am way too into having a social and Family life, Schnookums. Tape it for me?

And you dont have to watch just MSNBC and CNN or all the others I'm sure you brand the "liberal media". Try even watching your ultra-biased Fox News. You will see something about every subject I mentioned EVERY NIGHT on Fox as well.

Change the channel, Bennie. (Let me get this straight--Fox is biasedbut they show you something about every subject you mentioned EVERY NIGHT? Mmmmmm'kay. Who can't make up their mind?)

But I really dont have to prove anything to you Vera. Why?

Because you cant, not because you won't. Charlatan.

Because you didnt deny any of my points were wrong.

You're right. I don't deny that any of them are wrong. They are. :)

Matter of fact you applauded them. You basically proved them for me. For just about every single one you just said "so what...tough luck!". Why would I need to prove what you already believe in?

I identified the (one) quote from the Bible as correct. Followed that with a perfectly rational explanation of the Christian faith. I couldn't ever applaud what you said, but I recognized your effort. And I have also statedmore than once---that I pretty much disagree with you across the board on just about everything else (except the Meirs withdrawal).

Example.....
I said you nuts are all bent out of shape because of gay marrage.
You answered....
"Let them goto Canada"
See you really know all this is going on. And your happy about it. Your in complete satifaction that your will is being imposed on others.

Where did I say I was happy about it?

Lets take this gay marrage thing as an example again. Just what is it that you think gay marrage will do to YOU? What part of your life will be affected.

Bennie, what is your obsession with homosexuals? Leave those nice folks alone! What did they ever do to you?

OhmiGosh! Are you in the closet? If you are, then it isn't ME who's ashamedit's YOU. Step into the light, girl!

Ill tell you Vera......NONE. Yet you still maintain that YOU must dictate how others live. Why?

No, I'll tell you; I said I wouldn't let this turn into a fight about religion, and I broke my word because YOU, ya a*****e, decided to respond to a post I made---which was talking to B. (not you! B. As in SOMEONE ELSE!)! And I'll be damned if I'm gonna let you spin this into an argument on gay marriage. (
And it wasn't MY efforts alone that got Gay Marriages shelved. The voting populace of America turned it down in an agreement. Most folks don't think of being gay as being a race, like being black, Asian, or Indian. It's a lifestyle choice, not a genetic circumstance. I guess folks aren't ready for it, like I said before.

Tell us Vera. Why do you think you should control others and their actions when they dont affect your life in any capacity?

I don't. That's more of your spin.

What kind of vile human are you to impose your will on others for no reason? Spare me the "its the beginning of the end for the moral fabric of this nation" crap. You will sound like those nuts that say having to register a gun is the same as banning them.

Not my department, Kiddo. Get off your soapbox. I'm not the one spinning into a froth on my posts in a paranoid rant that they're out to get me, make me believe what they believe! nonsense. That's YOU, Doll. I've said it many times Believe as you wishor don't believe at all. And this isn't a debate about gun control.

So there is your proof Vera. You gave it to me.

Cop out. Again.

Now im still waiting for proof from you. Two weeks and counting. How dare you ask for proof from others when you cant even produce any yourself.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. Like I have said in several other postsnothing I could presenteven if I bought proof in the writers of the article themselves---you'd still tell me it isn't good enough. Nothing will turn a whining bleating liberal sheep into a happy camper.

Just like nothing will change the fact that it happenedI even gave names, addresses, the name of the books published and the publishing company in the articles I actually did provide. Truthhow offensive!

And how dare you tout with glee your forceful pushing of your "morals" on others.

Show me where I have specifically said, You MUST believe as I do! to any person here. (Add that to the many times I've said you have no morals if you don't believe in God and the other stuff you have YET to prove.) Not just bullshit you have construed (extruded, is more like it) from my writing style or tone. That's just inference. I don't 'do' "glee".

I read to you some of your "morals" in my last post. Yet you tried to skirt and deny.....even when it comes from YOUR BOOK!

No, I believe I addressed them directly. Your denials only prove that I didn't in YOUR little world. Please show me where I said that was wrong statement from the Bible (according to you, just a few paragraphs back, I applauded you!). Your not liking my answer doesn't render my answer wrong. Only in your little mind. One verse from a chapter in the Old Testament does not a moral make..it has to be considered in light of the mitigating circumstance at the time.

You have shown your comments are totally ignorant. You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

Opinions are like assesand your REALLY needs a wipe. And apparently, my comments piss you off, so how stupid does that make you, Bumpkin? I'm all for freedombut unlike you, that same freedom doesn't haveta agree with me. Apparently Freedom comes in a box with conditions for you. Pity.

To bad we cant give a DUI to you and Bush for being "drunk on Jesus" because people like you are going to drive this country into the ground. You already have us in reverse.

A shining example of your stupidity in thought-action.

Goto Canada and get married?....s**t Vera! I thought you were trying to deny it. Thanks for proving it!

Well, James (d' Calgary) did say, Gay marriage is getting legalized here in one of his older posts. It's not legal hereit was the closest suggestion I could think of. (Shrugging)

Prayer in schools gone?.....s**t Vera! Then why are you people so pissed about motions to remove the word "god" from the Pledge?

"Separation of Church and State? Well you didnt deny that either...nuff said. Thanks for pointing out your Theocratic plans!

My God (am I praying now, Dipshit?), you are PARANOID. If I wanted a Theocracy, don't you think I would work harder to whitewash myself as a saint (you know, like Jimmy Carter, who has been begging for a Nobel prize for twenty years-plus! I won't even get into Je$$e Jack$on or Al $harpton!)? I don't think I'm a saint, and I NEVER said I was, or that anyone here is gonna go to Hell. If a person doesn't want to say one nation under God in the Pledge, they can simply NOT say it. So because a couplehell, even FIVE---kids are bothered by that particular phrase (like most of 'em are TOLD to be by their folks), the other thirty kids who WANT to say it should be denied their rights?

I can go on and on.

Please don'thaven't you already distracted the topic enough by bringing in religion? And I promise, this WILL be my LAST post to you on religion. I want to talk about the topic, no matter how you and others try to spin, lie, and subterfuge. The only Dodge I like is the truck.

So in the end...you want proof?

Well, that was the plan, and you just seem to rave endlessly on how you hate God and Christians. Clearly, you cannot present any of your own proof, and don't have the brains to come out from behind bullshit like you just proved me right with your statement! (Which I have yet to see how that worksbut I know how your types are, taking a knife to a gunfight.) So I know I'll never see any real, valid proof from you. Bark, FishieRuhh! (Patting the scaly head, slipping a brine shrimp-cube for a treat). Buena pescado!

And about this "your as liberal as they come". Well Vera, when a person like you who is on the absolute LAST peg to the right looks at everyone else, of course EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE LEFT OF YOU! DUH! Take off those blinders, and get some grayscale in your vision there you Christian Jihadist. There are more colors than just black and white.

Nice try, with the jihadist remark. Should I say Yo Momma! now? (How 'bout calling you "Ben Ladin", or asking you if you've not "Ben Laid In a while?" The list is endless...!) And it isn't me who can't see the grey shades, Oreo. Like I saidturn around to look forward. So far, the smartest thing you've said in the whole post that wraps up "Bennie in a Nutshell": "DUH!" Nice to see you as you really are.

Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town (along with burning our loot!). Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it. Not much difference between you, Bush, and Osama. Some are just Christian. The others Muslim. Next year it will be Buddists. All religon. All ignorant and based on the CONTROL of others. To defy......means you must die. So say'th your lord.

HaaaaahHahahahahahahahahhhh! Ahh-hahahahahhh! Hahahahahhh!
So sayeth the Lord! Haaa-hahahahahahahh!!!! ROTFLOL!!!!!!
Well, if Christians are proof man descended from apes, Benniewhat does that make you? A monkey's Uncle?

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

And I invite you to do the same, Boo-h*o-Bennie. (.wiping laughter tears from my eyes, still fetching from the laughterAahh-hahhaaaahhh)

Oop--! There's the teapot. Gotta jet!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#531 Consumer Comment

By my troth...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Dear Robert, thanks again for the accolades. Admittedly, I enjoy getting my horn tooted by the hand of another (why does that sound soweird?), but I just wish my little song posted in the format it was written in...part of the visual joke, I suppose. I see you read that article on Mike moore...wasn't that interesting? I love it when Mike Moore gets foisted by his own petard!

Now if you please, divert your gaze (or gird yourself, lol), as I have a final response to Ben of California (after my own accolades) on the subject of Religion; after this, I won't respond to it any more. Scout's honor, cross my heart.

Shawn, thanks. You're truly terrific, I enjoy your posts, jokes, and your honesty. I also get a kick out of the occasional addendum to James' epitaph. Rock on, Dude!

"B.", you're just plain fun...and sometimes, disturbing. I know that if you and I ever met, we'd have lots of fun together (out of respect, that's to be construed as friendly!). Your sense of humor is so warped, man...

Robert of Texas, I really enjoy your research...and whould love to see more of it. You don't have to agree with me--or even like me--but don't stop the intelligent presentation of your information. Please tell me, where you got that information about oil and its prices...I want to learn more.

Much respect.

To Ben:

You say I sound like a car salesman? So be it. You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

No, I didn't say that. There you go putting words in my mouth again, you ignorant hypocrite. Actually, ignorance implies the simple innocence of being unaware; you CHOOSE to not know the truthand thus, qualify for Stupid. Depths of the abyss?Am I a satanic priest? What? Hunh?

And it wasn't me who bought up and condemned religion on this board. Add to that, the fact that I'm no preacherif nothing else, I've pointed out my human imperfection many times. If you wanna b***h at someone for preaching, might I suggest you stick by your principle (ha-ha!) that religion be banned and whine at James for bringing in the Canadian Skewed Version of Matt. Six? Come onwhere's YOUR righteous indignation against him?

I really like how you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to live by.

Well, I like how you pick and choose which Christians are zealots (the ones who don't agree with your leftist views). s**t peddler. If you have to lump us all together, then hate equally. But we all know, the devil doesn't try to convert the whores and the criminals; he's already got those and he knows it.

Not my choice, Darlin'. The term Christian happened first at Pentecost. Take it up with the Apostles. Why don't you get to know the religion of Christianity before you knock it? I know, I know.I don't need to study YOUR RELIGION to know you're a freakin' religious ZEALOT! Shtick. Spare me. (Rolling my eyes)

Then turn around and tell others they HAVE to live by it.

No I didn'tthat's your spin.

You cant make up your mind? Oh, how it changes through the centuries yet remains the same in one basic aspect....intolerant. Your rants about "oh that was long ago" and "it was the Jews" shows just how hypocritical you and your ilk really are.

Call it what you want. It's still a fact. The Crusades WERE long ago, those epic battles DID involve the Jews taking back their land. And I'm fairly solid in my mind being made up. You're criticizing that which you don't know.

So what if it was the "old" testament. Bush, and people like you say we must live by "Gods Law". Yet you cant even figure out what parts to honor or not. And you want US to live by them?

Methinks thou doth protest too much. I know what my religion tells me about the Bible, and I know that you are so utterly wrongit is to laugh!

Gee wiz Vera, make up your mind. You have proven without a doubt just about everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong.

And you've been trolling for someone to pick a fight about religion from the beginning. I've also proven that. And I only get nasty when I'm attacked directly---echo-echo-echo. Still (stil-stil-still) waiting (aiting-aiting-ting) for (for-or-or-) your (your-or-or) proof (roof-roof-oof). All you have said is we're trying to force YOU (that's as in Bennie, the Webbed-Fingered Wonder) to believethen it came to you accusing me that I'm trying to make you believe. I'm NOT. I DON'T CARE whether or not you BELIEVE.

Notice also, that I've never told a single person to go to hell, either. Feel free to ALSO notice that I've never said that a single person here is going to Hell. Your darling James can't even make that claim, after telling certain of this board Go to HELL!!! And have a nice day!) James also has called himself a Christian. Where's your pointing See?! See?! SEE!? Hypocrite! Religious Zealot! You have called everyone here that's in disagreement with your political viewand has also mentioned Goda religious zealot.

Not a one of us has presented ANYTHING to lend credence to your false accusations of conversion attempts--let alone, zealotry. (I've never seen a preist go tell some one , "Go f**k yourself, my son!") But in your mind, you've already convinced yourself that any poor soul who doesn't agree with Bennie is a religious zealot.

Telling us to live by "gods law" when you turn around and say "oh well, we dont pay attention to THAT part anymore". Well Vera, where does it stop. And how can we be assured you wont START again.

That's gotta be the umpteenth time you've mentioned that. I've answered it. Move on. Just because you don't like my answer, repeating the question endlessly isn't gonna change my view. Nor does it prove that something like the Crusades WILL happen. Last I checked, it's the Islamofascists who want the world to be ONE religion--thiers.

Spare me the "LOOK! over there....EVIL MUSLIMS!" bullshit. Thats just a diversion.

Kaythen you need to stop bringing up the Crusades and the Inquisition. Neither of those happened here in Americaand the past events that did have, have been long since dealt with. Another FACT you'll just have to get over.

Christians don't gas their own people; Christians don't rape and behead their women for daring disagree. Christians aren't torturing the children of others in front of them to make them converts. The atrocities committed in the name of ALLAH (or the Almighty dollar) are still going on TODAY. The Crusades? OVER. The Spanish Inquisition (why is it not called the Christian Inquisition?)? OVER. The Salem Witch Trials? OVER. Spell it with me: Oh-Vee-Eeh-Are Finished. Caput.

What were the casualties of the persons killed in those Planned Parenthood bombings? Are you sure these bombers were all well-established, indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy? How many of these groups acted at the behest of their Church organization? Or was it just young activists that thought what they were doing with a good thing? The road to Hell is PAVED with decent intentions. I don't deny that it has happenedbut I certainly wouldn't use it as a comparable datum, in reference to the Islamofascists. I'll bet more people were killed at the WTC in 2001, than were killed at all of those Planned Parenthood clinic bombings nationwide. Never mind the attempted bombing of the WTC (that pretty much went unanswered) when Clinton was in office.

Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program? Now you assholes want preteens and young girls (minors) to get abortions without having to notify their parents?

You know d**n well that there are Christian groups and entities pulling this sort of thing right now. Look at the LRA in Uganda.

Not orchestrated in America. And not spearheaded by me. I never denied the existence of religious zealots. But I don't support them, or approve of their actions. Ever hear of the phrase one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch?

What about all those members of the UN ("peacekeepers"---yeah, right!) that have been found (and admitted to) raping little girls (some as young as seven)? Some instances were even filmed. But the news only glossed over that, so it must not have been important.

Remember all the bombings at planned parenthood clinics? Forget those already? Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut. Christian, Muslim, Jew etc. it doesnt matter.

Nope. I never said there WEREN'T religious fanatics. Just that I'm not one, and I don't support them. Zealots do more harm than good, no matter their religious preference...or non-religious preference. Do you think you're a good representative of the atheist choice? I don't think sobut Robert is, because he's not knocking my choice to believe, or that choice made by others, whether he agrees with them or not.

If anything, Bennie, you're the type that is what those that believe in religion see as typical of atheism as a whole, just like O'hair. You do your organization a great disservice. Maybe the atheists should also distance themselves from you...or, teach you that tolerance doesn't mean you simply HAVE to agree. All you're doing is deepening the foaming-at-the-mouth-atheist stigma.

Thank goodness Robert represents proof that you're not the typical of those that make your choice. You should thank Robert for that.

Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

Only to the misinformed morons that really, really want to see it that way. That's you, Ben. Note that the same can (and has) been said about money.

Then you have the gall to say "show me proof" when for over 2 weeks you cant even come up with viable proof for your claims??? Get real! Is this one of those "do what I say, not what I do" things? After all your entire rant back at me was filled with that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

I've been asking for proof from you retards all along. Long before I ever said a pip about Muslim being part of the curriculum in SOME California schools (which it was). The best I can get is the interpretation of Law by B.'" surrounded by lots of terms from Introduction to Logic. Outside of that, all I get is spin and quips out of context.

You want proof.....fine. Come out of your biblical era mud hut and watch the news on TV every night. EVERY d**n NIGHT!

I am way too into having a social and Family life, Schnookums. Tape it for me?

And you dont have to watch just MSNBC and CNN or all the others I'm sure you brand the "liberal media". Try even watching your ultra-biased Fox News. You will see something about every subject I mentioned EVERY NIGHT on Fox as well.

Change the channel, Bennie. (Let me get this straight--Fox is biasedbut they show you something about every subject you mentioned EVERY NIGHT? Mmmmmm'kay. Who can't make up their mind?)

But I really dont have to prove anything to you Vera. Why?

Because you cant, not because you won't. Charlatan.

Because you didnt deny any of my points were wrong.

You're right. I don't deny that any of them are wrong. They are. :)

Matter of fact you applauded them. You basically proved them for me. For just about every single one you just said "so what...tough luck!". Why would I need to prove what you already believe in?

I identified the (one) quote from the Bible as correct. Followed that with a perfectly rational explanation of the Christian faith. I couldn't ever applaud what you said, but I recognized your effort. And I have also statedmore than once---that I pretty much disagree with you across the board on just about everything else (except the Meirs withdrawal).

Example.....
I said you nuts are all bent out of shape because of gay marrage.
You answered....
"Let them goto Canada"
See you really know all this is going on. And your happy about it. Your in complete satifaction that your will is being imposed on others.

Where did I say I was happy about it?

Lets take this gay marrage thing as an example again. Just what is it that you think gay marrage will do to YOU? What part of your life will be affected.

Bennie, what is your obsession with homosexuals? Leave those nice folks alone! What did they ever do to you?

OhmiGosh! Are you in the closet? If you are, then it isn't ME who's ashamedit's YOU. Step into the light, girl!

Ill tell you Vera......NONE. Yet you still maintain that YOU must dictate how others live. Why?

No, I'll tell you; I said I wouldn't let this turn into a fight about religion, and I broke my word because YOU, ya a*****e, decided to respond to a post I made---which was talking to B. (not you! B. As in SOMEONE ELSE!)! And I'll be damned if I'm gonna let you spin this into an argument on gay marriage. (
And it wasn't MY efforts alone that got Gay Marriages shelved. The voting populace of America turned it down in an agreement. Most folks don't think of being gay as being a race, like being black, Asian, or Indian. It's a lifestyle choice, not a genetic circumstance. I guess folks aren't ready for it, like I said before.

Tell us Vera. Why do you think you should control others and their actions when they dont affect your life in any capacity?

I don't. That's more of your spin.

What kind of vile human are you to impose your will on others for no reason? Spare me the "its the beginning of the end for the moral fabric of this nation" crap. You will sound like those nuts that say having to register a gun is the same as banning them.

Not my department, Kiddo. Get off your soapbox. I'm not the one spinning into a froth on my posts in a paranoid rant that they're out to get me, make me believe what they believe! nonsense. That's YOU, Doll. I've said it many times Believe as you wishor don't believe at all. And this isn't a debate about gun control.

So there is your proof Vera. You gave it to me.

Cop out. Again.

Now im still waiting for proof from you. Two weeks and counting. How dare you ask for proof from others when you cant even produce any yourself.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. Like I have said in several other postsnothing I could presenteven if I bought proof in the writers of the article themselves---you'd still tell me it isn't good enough. Nothing will turn a whining bleating liberal sheep into a happy camper.

Just like nothing will change the fact that it happenedI even gave names, addresses, the name of the books published and the publishing company in the articles I actually did provide. Truthhow offensive!

And how dare you tout with glee your forceful pushing of your "morals" on others.

Show me where I have specifically said, You MUST believe as I do! to any person here. (Add that to the many times I've said you have no morals if you don't believe in God and the other stuff you have YET to prove.) Not just bullshit you have construed (extruded, is more like it) from my writing style or tone. That's just inference. I don't 'do' "glee".

I read to you some of your "morals" in my last post. Yet you tried to skirt and deny.....even when it comes from YOUR BOOK!

No, I believe I addressed them directly. Your denials only prove that I didn't in YOUR little world. Please show me where I said that was wrong statement from the Bible (according to you, just a few paragraphs back, I applauded you!). Your not liking my answer doesn't render my answer wrong. Only in your little mind. One verse from a chapter in the Old Testament does not a moral make..it has to be considered in light of the mitigating circumstance at the time.

You have shown your comments are totally ignorant. You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

Opinions are like assesand your REALLY needs a wipe. And apparently, my comments piss you off, so how stupid does that make you, Bumpkin? I'm all for freedombut unlike you, that same freedom doesn't haveta agree with me. Apparently Freedom comes in a box with conditions for you. Pity.

To bad we cant give a DUI to you and Bush for being "drunk on Jesus" because people like you are going to drive this country into the ground. You already have us in reverse.

A shining example of your stupidity in thought-action.

Goto Canada and get married?....s**t Vera! I thought you were trying to deny it. Thanks for proving it!

Well, James (d' Calgary) did say, Gay marriage is getting legalized here in one of his older posts. It's not legal hereit was the closest suggestion I could think of. (Shrugging)

Prayer in schools gone?.....s**t Vera! Then why are you people so pissed about motions to remove the word "god" from the Pledge?

"Separation of Church and State? Well you didnt deny that either...nuff said. Thanks for pointing out your Theocratic plans!

My God (am I praying now, Dipshit?), you are PARANOID. If I wanted a Theocracy, don't you think I would work harder to whitewash myself as a saint (you know, like Jimmy Carter, who has been begging for a Nobel prize for twenty years-plus! I won't even get into Je$$e Jack$on or Al $harpton!)? I don't think I'm a saint, and I NEVER said I was, or that anyone here is gonna go to Hell. If a person doesn't want to say one nation under God in the Pledge, they can simply NOT say it. So because a couplehell, even FIVE---kids are bothered by that particular phrase (like most of 'em are TOLD to be by their folks), the other thirty kids who WANT to say it should be denied their rights?

I can go on and on.

Please don'thaven't you already distracted the topic enough by bringing in religion? And I promise, this WILL be my LAST post to you on religion. I want to talk about the topic, no matter how you and others try to spin, lie, and subterfuge. The only Dodge I like is the truck.

So in the end...you want proof?

Well, that was the plan, and you just seem to rave endlessly on how you hate God and Christians. Clearly, you cannot present any of your own proof, and don't have the brains to come out from behind bullshit like you just proved me right with your statement! (Which I have yet to see how that worksbut I know how your types are, taking a knife to a gunfight.) So I know I'll never see any real, valid proof from you. Bark, FishieRuhh! (Patting the scaly head, slipping a brine shrimp-cube for a treat). Buena pescado!

And about this "your as liberal as they come". Well Vera, when a person like you who is on the absolute LAST peg to the right looks at everyone else, of course EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE LEFT OF YOU! DUH! Take off those blinders, and get some grayscale in your vision there you Christian Jihadist. There are more colors than just black and white.

Nice try, with the jihadist remark. Should I say Yo Momma! now? (How 'bout calling you "Ben Ladin", or asking you if you've not "Ben Laid In a while?" The list is endless...!) And it isn't me who can't see the grey shades, Oreo. Like I saidturn around to look forward. So far, the smartest thing you've said in the whole post that wraps up "Bennie in a Nutshell": "DUH!" Nice to see you as you really are.

Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town (along with burning our loot!). Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it. Not much difference between you, Bush, and Osama. Some are just Christian. The others Muslim. Next year it will be Buddists. All religon. All ignorant and based on the CONTROL of others. To defy......means you must die. So say'th your lord.

HaaaaahHahahahahahahahahhhh! Ahh-hahahahahhh! Hahahahahhh!
So sayeth the Lord! Haaa-hahahahahahahh!!!! ROTFLOL!!!!!!
Well, if Christians are proof man descended from apes, Benniewhat does that make you? A monkey's Uncle?

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

And I invite you to do the same, Boo-h*o-Bennie. (.wiping laughter tears from my eyes, still fetching from the laughterAahh-hahhaaaahhh)

Oop--! There's the teapot. Gotta jet!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#530 Consumer Comment

By my troth...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Dear Robert, thanks again for the accolades. Admittedly, I enjoy getting my horn tooted by the hand of another (why does that sound soweird?), but I just wish my little song posted in the format it was written in...part of the visual joke, I suppose. I see you read that article on Mike moore...wasn't that interesting? I love it when Mike Moore gets foisted by his own petard!

Now if you please, divert your gaze (or gird yourself, lol), as I have a final response to Ben of California (after my own accolades) on the subject of Religion; after this, I won't respond to it any more. Scout's honor, cross my heart.

Shawn, thanks. You're truly terrific, I enjoy your posts, jokes, and your honesty. I also get a kick out of the occasional addendum to James' epitaph. Rock on, Dude!

"B.", you're just plain fun...and sometimes, disturbing. I know that if you and I ever met, we'd have lots of fun together (out of respect, that's to be construed as friendly!). Your sense of humor is so warped, man...

Robert of Texas, I really enjoy your research...and whould love to see more of it. You don't have to agree with me--or even like me--but don't stop the intelligent presentation of your information. Please tell me, where you got that information about oil and its prices...I want to learn more.

Much respect.

To Ben:

You say I sound like a car salesman? So be it. You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

No, I didn't say that. There you go putting words in my mouth again, you ignorant hypocrite. Actually, ignorance implies the simple innocence of being unaware; you CHOOSE to not know the truthand thus, qualify for Stupid. Depths of the abyss?Am I a satanic priest? What? Hunh?

And it wasn't me who bought up and condemned religion on this board. Add to that, the fact that I'm no preacherif nothing else, I've pointed out my human imperfection many times. If you wanna b***h at someone for preaching, might I suggest you stick by your principle (ha-ha!) that religion be banned and whine at James for bringing in the Canadian Skewed Version of Matt. Six? Come onwhere's YOUR righteous indignation against him?

I really like how you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to live by.

Well, I like how you pick and choose which Christians are zealots (the ones who don't agree with your leftist views). s**t peddler. If you have to lump us all together, then hate equally. But we all know, the devil doesn't try to convert the whores and the criminals; he's already got those and he knows it.

Not my choice, Darlin'. The term Christian happened first at Pentecost. Take it up with the Apostles. Why don't you get to know the religion of Christianity before you knock it? I know, I know.I don't need to study YOUR RELIGION to know you're a freakin' religious ZEALOT! Shtick. Spare me. (Rolling my eyes)

Then turn around and tell others they HAVE to live by it.

No I didn'tthat's your spin.

You cant make up your mind? Oh, how it changes through the centuries yet remains the same in one basic aspect....intolerant. Your rants about "oh that was long ago" and "it was the Jews" shows just how hypocritical you and your ilk really are.

Call it what you want. It's still a fact. The Crusades WERE long ago, those epic battles DID involve the Jews taking back their land. And I'm fairly solid in my mind being made up. You're criticizing that which you don't know.

So what if it was the "old" testament. Bush, and people like you say we must live by "Gods Law". Yet you cant even figure out what parts to honor or not. And you want US to live by them?

Methinks thou doth protest too much. I know what my religion tells me about the Bible, and I know that you are so utterly wrongit is to laugh!

Gee wiz Vera, make up your mind. You have proven without a doubt just about everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong.

And you've been trolling for someone to pick a fight about religion from the beginning. I've also proven that. And I only get nasty when I'm attacked directly---echo-echo-echo. Still (stil-stil-still) waiting (aiting-aiting-ting) for (for-or-or-) your (your-or-or) proof (roof-roof-oof). All you have said is we're trying to force YOU (that's as in Bennie, the Webbed-Fingered Wonder) to believethen it came to you accusing me that I'm trying to make you believe. I'm NOT. I DON'T CARE whether or not you BELIEVE.

Notice also, that I've never told a single person to go to hell, either. Feel free to ALSO notice that I've never said that a single person here is going to Hell. Your darling James can't even make that claim, after telling certain of this board Go to HELL!!! And have a nice day!) James also has called himself a Christian. Where's your pointing See?! See?! SEE!? Hypocrite! Religious Zealot! You have called everyone here that's in disagreement with your political viewand has also mentioned Goda religious zealot.

Not a one of us has presented ANYTHING to lend credence to your false accusations of conversion attempts--let alone, zealotry. (I've never seen a preist go tell some one , "Go f**k yourself, my son!") But in your mind, you've already convinced yourself that any poor soul who doesn't agree with Bennie is a religious zealot.

Telling us to live by "gods law" when you turn around and say "oh well, we dont pay attention to THAT part anymore". Well Vera, where does it stop. And how can we be assured you wont START again.

That's gotta be the umpteenth time you've mentioned that. I've answered it. Move on. Just because you don't like my answer, repeating the question endlessly isn't gonna change my view. Nor does it prove that something like the Crusades WILL happen. Last I checked, it's the Islamofascists who want the world to be ONE religion--thiers.

Spare me the "LOOK! over there....EVIL MUSLIMS!" bullshit. Thats just a diversion.

Kaythen you need to stop bringing up the Crusades and the Inquisition. Neither of those happened here in Americaand the past events that did have, have been long since dealt with. Another FACT you'll just have to get over.

Christians don't gas their own people; Christians don't rape and behead their women for daring disagree. Christians aren't torturing the children of others in front of them to make them converts. The atrocities committed in the name of ALLAH (or the Almighty dollar) are still going on TODAY. The Crusades? OVER. The Spanish Inquisition (why is it not called the Christian Inquisition?)? OVER. The Salem Witch Trials? OVER. Spell it with me: Oh-Vee-Eeh-Are Finished. Caput.

What were the casualties of the persons killed in those Planned Parenthood bombings? Are you sure these bombers were all well-established, indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy? How many of these groups acted at the behest of their Church organization? Or was it just young activists that thought what they were doing with a good thing? The road to Hell is PAVED with decent intentions. I don't deny that it has happenedbut I certainly wouldn't use it as a comparable datum, in reference to the Islamofascists. I'll bet more people were killed at the WTC in 2001, than were killed at all of those Planned Parenthood clinic bombings nationwide. Never mind the attempted bombing of the WTC (that pretty much went unanswered) when Clinton was in office.

Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program? Now you assholes want preteens and young girls (minors) to get abortions without having to notify their parents?

You know d**n well that there are Christian groups and entities pulling this sort of thing right now. Look at the LRA in Uganda.

Not orchestrated in America. And not spearheaded by me. I never denied the existence of religious zealots. But I don't support them, or approve of their actions. Ever hear of the phrase one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch?

What about all those members of the UN ("peacekeepers"---yeah, right!) that have been found (and admitted to) raping little girls (some as young as seven)? Some instances were even filmed. But the news only glossed over that, so it must not have been important.

Remember all the bombings at planned parenthood clinics? Forget those already? Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut. Christian, Muslim, Jew etc. it doesnt matter.

Nope. I never said there WEREN'T religious fanatics. Just that I'm not one, and I don't support them. Zealots do more harm than good, no matter their religious preference...or non-religious preference. Do you think you're a good representative of the atheist choice? I don't think sobut Robert is, because he's not knocking my choice to believe, or that choice made by others, whether he agrees with them or not.

If anything, Bennie, you're the type that is what those that believe in religion see as typical of atheism as a whole, just like O'hair. You do your organization a great disservice. Maybe the atheists should also distance themselves from you...or, teach you that tolerance doesn't mean you simply HAVE to agree. All you're doing is deepening the foaming-at-the-mouth-atheist stigma.

Thank goodness Robert represents proof that you're not the typical of those that make your choice. You should thank Robert for that.

Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

Only to the misinformed morons that really, really want to see it that way. That's you, Ben. Note that the same can (and has) been said about money.

Then you have the gall to say "show me proof" when for over 2 weeks you cant even come up with viable proof for your claims??? Get real! Is this one of those "do what I say, not what I do" things? After all your entire rant back at me was filled with that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

I've been asking for proof from you retards all along. Long before I ever said a pip about Muslim being part of the curriculum in SOME California schools (which it was). The best I can get is the interpretation of Law by B.'" surrounded by lots of terms from Introduction to Logic. Outside of that, all I get is spin and quips out of context.

You want proof.....fine. Come out of your biblical era mud hut and watch the news on TV every night. EVERY d**n NIGHT!

I am way too into having a social and Family life, Schnookums. Tape it for me?

And you dont have to watch just MSNBC and CNN or all the others I'm sure you brand the "liberal media". Try even watching your ultra-biased Fox News. You will see something about every subject I mentioned EVERY NIGHT on Fox as well.

Change the channel, Bennie. (Let me get this straight--Fox is biasedbut they show you something about every subject you mentioned EVERY NIGHT? Mmmmmm'kay. Who can't make up their mind?)

But I really dont have to prove anything to you Vera. Why?

Because you cant, not because you won't. Charlatan.

Because you didnt deny any of my points were wrong.

You're right. I don't deny that any of them are wrong. They are. :)

Matter of fact you applauded them. You basically proved them for me. For just about every single one you just said "so what...tough luck!". Why would I need to prove what you already believe in?

I identified the (one) quote from the Bible as correct. Followed that with a perfectly rational explanation of the Christian faith. I couldn't ever applaud what you said, but I recognized your effort. And I have also statedmore than once---that I pretty much disagree with you across the board on just about everything else (except the Meirs withdrawal).

Example.....
I said you nuts are all bent out of shape because of gay marrage.
You answered....
"Let them goto Canada"
See you really know all this is going on. And your happy about it. Your in complete satifaction that your will is being imposed on others.

Where did I say I was happy about it?

Lets take this gay marrage thing as an example again. Just what is it that you think gay marrage will do to YOU? What part of your life will be affected.

Bennie, what is your obsession with homosexuals? Leave those nice folks alone! What did they ever do to you?

OhmiGosh! Are you in the closet? If you are, then it isn't ME who's ashamedit's YOU. Step into the light, girl!

Ill tell you Vera......NONE. Yet you still maintain that YOU must dictate how others live. Why?

No, I'll tell you; I said I wouldn't let this turn into a fight about religion, and I broke my word because YOU, ya a*****e, decided to respond to a post I made---which was talking to B. (not you! B. As in SOMEONE ELSE!)! And I'll be damned if I'm gonna let you spin this into an argument on gay marriage. (
And it wasn't MY efforts alone that got Gay Marriages shelved. The voting populace of America turned it down in an agreement. Most folks don't think of being gay as being a race, like being black, Asian, or Indian. It's a lifestyle choice, not a genetic circumstance. I guess folks aren't ready for it, like I said before.

Tell us Vera. Why do you think you should control others and their actions when they dont affect your life in any capacity?

I don't. That's more of your spin.

What kind of vile human are you to impose your will on others for no reason? Spare me the "its the beginning of the end for the moral fabric of this nation" crap. You will sound like those nuts that say having to register a gun is the same as banning them.

Not my department, Kiddo. Get off your soapbox. I'm not the one spinning into a froth on my posts in a paranoid rant that they're out to get me, make me believe what they believe! nonsense. That's YOU, Doll. I've said it many times Believe as you wishor don't believe at all. And this isn't a debate about gun control.

So there is your proof Vera. You gave it to me.

Cop out. Again.

Now im still waiting for proof from you. Two weeks and counting. How dare you ask for proof from others when you cant even produce any yourself.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. Like I have said in several other postsnothing I could presenteven if I bought proof in the writers of the article themselves---you'd still tell me it isn't good enough. Nothing will turn a whining bleating liberal sheep into a happy camper.

Just like nothing will change the fact that it happenedI even gave names, addresses, the name of the books published and the publishing company in the articles I actually did provide. Truthhow offensive!

And how dare you tout with glee your forceful pushing of your "morals" on others.

Show me where I have specifically said, You MUST believe as I do! to any person here. (Add that to the many times I've said you have no morals if you don't believe in God and the other stuff you have YET to prove.) Not just bullshit you have construed (extruded, is more like it) from my writing style or tone. That's just inference. I don't 'do' "glee".

I read to you some of your "morals" in my last post. Yet you tried to skirt and deny.....even when it comes from YOUR BOOK!

No, I believe I addressed them directly. Your denials only prove that I didn't in YOUR little world. Please show me where I said that was wrong statement from the Bible (according to you, just a few paragraphs back, I applauded you!). Your not liking my answer doesn't render my answer wrong. Only in your little mind. One verse from a chapter in the Old Testament does not a moral make..it has to be considered in light of the mitigating circumstance at the time.

You have shown your comments are totally ignorant. You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

Opinions are like assesand your REALLY needs a wipe. And apparently, my comments piss you off, so how stupid does that make you, Bumpkin? I'm all for freedombut unlike you, that same freedom doesn't haveta agree with me. Apparently Freedom comes in a box with conditions for you. Pity.

To bad we cant give a DUI to you and Bush for being "drunk on Jesus" because people like you are going to drive this country into the ground. You already have us in reverse.

A shining example of your stupidity in thought-action.

Goto Canada and get married?....s**t Vera! I thought you were trying to deny it. Thanks for proving it!

Well, James (d' Calgary) did say, Gay marriage is getting legalized here in one of his older posts. It's not legal hereit was the closest suggestion I could think of. (Shrugging)

Prayer in schools gone?.....s**t Vera! Then why are you people so pissed about motions to remove the word "god" from the Pledge?

"Separation of Church and State? Well you didnt deny that either...nuff said. Thanks for pointing out your Theocratic plans!

My God (am I praying now, Dipshit?), you are PARANOID. If I wanted a Theocracy, don't you think I would work harder to whitewash myself as a saint (you know, like Jimmy Carter, who has been begging for a Nobel prize for twenty years-plus! I won't even get into Je$$e Jack$on or Al $harpton!)? I don't think I'm a saint, and I NEVER said I was, or that anyone here is gonna go to Hell. If a person doesn't want to say one nation under God in the Pledge, they can simply NOT say it. So because a couplehell, even FIVE---kids are bothered by that particular phrase (like most of 'em are TOLD to be by their folks), the other thirty kids who WANT to say it should be denied their rights?

I can go on and on.

Please don'thaven't you already distracted the topic enough by bringing in religion? And I promise, this WILL be my LAST post to you on religion. I want to talk about the topic, no matter how you and others try to spin, lie, and subterfuge. The only Dodge I like is the truck.

So in the end...you want proof?

Well, that was the plan, and you just seem to rave endlessly on how you hate God and Christians. Clearly, you cannot present any of your own proof, and don't have the brains to come out from behind bullshit like you just proved me right with your statement! (Which I have yet to see how that worksbut I know how your types are, taking a knife to a gunfight.) So I know I'll never see any real, valid proof from you. Bark, FishieRuhh! (Patting the scaly head, slipping a brine shrimp-cube for a treat). Buena pescado!

And about this "your as liberal as they come". Well Vera, when a person like you who is on the absolute LAST peg to the right looks at everyone else, of course EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE LEFT OF YOU! DUH! Take off those blinders, and get some grayscale in your vision there you Christian Jihadist. There are more colors than just black and white.

Nice try, with the jihadist remark. Should I say Yo Momma! now? (How 'bout calling you "Ben Ladin", or asking you if you've not "Ben Laid In a while?" The list is endless...!) And it isn't me who can't see the grey shades, Oreo. Like I saidturn around to look forward. So far, the smartest thing you've said in the whole post that wraps up "Bennie in a Nutshell": "DUH!" Nice to see you as you really are.

Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town (along with burning our loot!). Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it. Not much difference between you, Bush, and Osama. Some are just Christian. The others Muslim. Next year it will be Buddists. All religon. All ignorant and based on the CONTROL of others. To defy......means you must die. So say'th your lord.

HaaaaahHahahahahahahahahhhh! Ahh-hahahahahhh! Hahahahahhh!
So sayeth the Lord! Haaa-hahahahahahahh!!!! ROTFLOL!!!!!!
Well, if Christians are proof man descended from apes, Benniewhat does that make you? A monkey's Uncle?

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

And I invite you to do the same, Boo-h*o-Bennie. (.wiping laughter tears from my eyes, still fetching from the laughterAahh-hahhaaaahhh)

Oop--! There's the teapot. Gotta jet!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#529 Consumer Comment

By my troth...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Dear Robert, thanks again for the accolades. Admittedly, I enjoy getting my horn tooted by the hand of another (why does that sound soweird?), but I just wish my little song posted in the format it was written in...part of the visual joke, I suppose. I see you read that article on Mike moore...wasn't that interesting? I love it when Mike Moore gets foisted by his own petard!

Now if you please, divert your gaze (or gird yourself, lol), as I have a final response to Ben of California (after my own accolades) on the subject of Religion; after this, I won't respond to it any more. Scout's honor, cross my heart.

Shawn, thanks. You're truly terrific, I enjoy your posts, jokes, and your honesty. I also get a kick out of the occasional addendum to James' epitaph. Rock on, Dude!

"B.", you're just plain fun...and sometimes, disturbing. I know that if you and I ever met, we'd have lots of fun together (out of respect, that's to be construed as friendly!). Your sense of humor is so warped, man...

Robert of Texas, I really enjoy your research...and whould love to see more of it. You don't have to agree with me--or even like me--but don't stop the intelligent presentation of your information. Please tell me, where you got that information about oil and its prices...I want to learn more.

Much respect.

To Ben:

You say I sound like a car salesman? So be it. You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

No, I didn't say that. There you go putting words in my mouth again, you ignorant hypocrite. Actually, ignorance implies the simple innocence of being unaware; you CHOOSE to not know the truthand thus, qualify for Stupid. Depths of the abyss?Am I a satanic priest? What? Hunh?

And it wasn't me who bought up and condemned religion on this board. Add to that, the fact that I'm no preacherif nothing else, I've pointed out my human imperfection many times. If you wanna b***h at someone for preaching, might I suggest you stick by your principle (ha-ha!) that religion be banned and whine at James for bringing in the Canadian Skewed Version of Matt. Six? Come onwhere's YOUR righteous indignation against him?

I really like how you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to live by.

Well, I like how you pick and choose which Christians are zealots (the ones who don't agree with your leftist views). s**t peddler. If you have to lump us all together, then hate equally. But we all know, the devil doesn't try to convert the whores and the criminals; he's already got those and he knows it.

Not my choice, Darlin'. The term Christian happened first at Pentecost. Take it up with the Apostles. Why don't you get to know the religion of Christianity before you knock it? I know, I know.I don't need to study YOUR RELIGION to know you're a freakin' religious ZEALOT! Shtick. Spare me. (Rolling my eyes)

Then turn around and tell others they HAVE to live by it.

No I didn'tthat's your spin.

You cant make up your mind? Oh, how it changes through the centuries yet remains the same in one basic aspect....intolerant. Your rants about "oh that was long ago" and "it was the Jews" shows just how hypocritical you and your ilk really are.

Call it what you want. It's still a fact. The Crusades WERE long ago, those epic battles DID involve the Jews taking back their land. And I'm fairly solid in my mind being made up. You're criticizing that which you don't know.

So what if it was the "old" testament. Bush, and people like you say we must live by "Gods Law". Yet you cant even figure out what parts to honor or not. And you want US to live by them?

Methinks thou doth protest too much. I know what my religion tells me about the Bible, and I know that you are so utterly wrongit is to laugh!

Gee wiz Vera, make up your mind. You have proven without a doubt just about everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong.

And you've been trolling for someone to pick a fight about religion from the beginning. I've also proven that. And I only get nasty when I'm attacked directly---echo-echo-echo. Still (stil-stil-still) waiting (aiting-aiting-ting) for (for-or-or-) your (your-or-or) proof (roof-roof-oof). All you have said is we're trying to force YOU (that's as in Bennie, the Webbed-Fingered Wonder) to believethen it came to you accusing me that I'm trying to make you believe. I'm NOT. I DON'T CARE whether or not you BELIEVE.

Notice also, that I've never told a single person to go to hell, either. Feel free to ALSO notice that I've never said that a single person here is going to Hell. Your darling James can't even make that claim, after telling certain of this board Go to HELL!!! And have a nice day!) James also has called himself a Christian. Where's your pointing See?! See?! SEE!? Hypocrite! Religious Zealot! You have called everyone here that's in disagreement with your political viewand has also mentioned Goda religious zealot.

Not a one of us has presented ANYTHING to lend credence to your false accusations of conversion attempts--let alone, zealotry. (I've never seen a preist go tell some one , "Go f**k yourself, my son!") But in your mind, you've already convinced yourself that any poor soul who doesn't agree with Bennie is a religious zealot.

Telling us to live by "gods law" when you turn around and say "oh well, we dont pay attention to THAT part anymore". Well Vera, where does it stop. And how can we be assured you wont START again.

That's gotta be the umpteenth time you've mentioned that. I've answered it. Move on. Just because you don't like my answer, repeating the question endlessly isn't gonna change my view. Nor does it prove that something like the Crusades WILL happen. Last I checked, it's the Islamofascists who want the world to be ONE religion--thiers.

Spare me the "LOOK! over there....EVIL MUSLIMS!" bullshit. Thats just a diversion.

Kaythen you need to stop bringing up the Crusades and the Inquisition. Neither of those happened here in Americaand the past events that did have, have been long since dealt with. Another FACT you'll just have to get over.

Christians don't gas their own people; Christians don't rape and behead their women for daring disagree. Christians aren't torturing the children of others in front of them to make them converts. The atrocities committed in the name of ALLAH (or the Almighty dollar) are still going on TODAY. The Crusades? OVER. The Spanish Inquisition (why is it not called the Christian Inquisition?)? OVER. The Salem Witch Trials? OVER. Spell it with me: Oh-Vee-Eeh-Are Finished. Caput.

What were the casualties of the persons killed in those Planned Parenthood bombings? Are you sure these bombers were all well-established, indoctrinated preachers/ministers/clergy? How many of these groups acted at the behest of their Church organization? Or was it just young activists that thought what they were doing with a good thing? The road to Hell is PAVED with decent intentions. I don't deny that it has happenedbut I certainly wouldn't use it as a comparable datum, in reference to the Islamofascists. I'll bet more people were killed at the WTC in 2001, than were killed at all of those Planned Parenthood clinic bombings nationwide. Never mind the attempted bombing of the WTC (that pretty much went unanswered) when Clinton was in office.

Why should I pick and choose which deaths to be outraged over, like you?

Hell, how many casualties have been created as a RESULT of Planned Parenthood, and their wonderful post-coital birth control program? Now you assholes want preteens and young girls (minors) to get abortions without having to notify their parents?

You know d**n well that there are Christian groups and entities pulling this sort of thing right now. Look at the LRA in Uganda.

Not orchestrated in America. And not spearheaded by me. I never denied the existence of religious zealots. But I don't support them, or approve of their actions. Ever hear of the phrase one bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch?

What about all those members of the UN ("peacekeepers"---yeah, right!) that have been found (and admitted to) raping little girls (some as young as seven)? Some instances were even filmed. But the news only glossed over that, so it must not have been important.

Remember all the bombings at planned parenthood clinics? Forget those already? Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut. Christian, Muslim, Jew etc. it doesnt matter.

Nope. I never said there WEREN'T religious fanatics. Just that I'm not one, and I don't support them. Zealots do more harm than good, no matter their religious preference...or non-religious preference. Do you think you're a good representative of the atheist choice? I don't think sobut Robert is, because he's not knocking my choice to believe, or that choice made by others, whether he agrees with them or not.

If anything, Bennie, you're the type that is what those that believe in religion see as typical of atheism as a whole, just like O'hair. You do your organization a great disservice. Maybe the atheists should also distance themselves from you...or, teach you that tolerance doesn't mean you simply HAVE to agree. All you're doing is deepening the foaming-at-the-mouth-atheist stigma.

Thank goodness Robert represents proof that you're not the typical of those that make your choice. You should thank Robert for that.

Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

Only to the misinformed morons that really, really want to see it that way. That's you, Ben. Note that the same can (and has) been said about money.

Then you have the gall to say "show me proof" when for over 2 weeks you cant even come up with viable proof for your claims??? Get real! Is this one of those "do what I say, not what I do" things? After all your entire rant back at me was filled with that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

I've been asking for proof from you retards all along. Long before I ever said a pip about Muslim being part of the curriculum in SOME California schools (which it was). The best I can get is the interpretation of Law by B.'" surrounded by lots of terms from Introduction to Logic. Outside of that, all I get is spin and quips out of context.

You want proof.....fine. Come out of your biblical era mud hut and watch the news on TV every night. EVERY d**n NIGHT!

I am way too into having a social and Family life, Schnookums. Tape it for me?

And you dont have to watch just MSNBC and CNN or all the others I'm sure you brand the "liberal media". Try even watching your ultra-biased Fox News. You will see something about every subject I mentioned EVERY NIGHT on Fox as well.

Change the channel, Bennie. (Let me get this straight--Fox is biasedbut they show you something about every subject you mentioned EVERY NIGHT? Mmmmmm'kay. Who can't make up their mind?)

But I really dont have to prove anything to you Vera. Why?

Because you cant, not because you won't. Charlatan.

Because you didnt deny any of my points were wrong.

You're right. I don't deny that any of them are wrong. They are. :)

Matter of fact you applauded them. You basically proved them for me. For just about every single one you just said "so what...tough luck!". Why would I need to prove what you already believe in?

I identified the (one) quote from the Bible as correct. Followed that with a perfectly rational explanation of the Christian faith. I couldn't ever applaud what you said, but I recognized your effort. And I have also statedmore than once---that I pretty much disagree with you across the board on just about everything else (except the Meirs withdrawal).

Example.....
I said you nuts are all bent out of shape because of gay marrage.
You answered....
"Let them goto Canada"
See you really know all this is going on. And your happy about it. Your in complete satifaction that your will is being imposed on others.

Where did I say I was happy about it?

Lets take this gay marrage thing as an example again. Just what is it that you think gay marrage will do to YOU? What part of your life will be affected.

Bennie, what is your obsession with homosexuals? Leave those nice folks alone! What did they ever do to you?

OhmiGosh! Are you in the closet? If you are, then it isn't ME who's ashamedit's YOU. Step into the light, girl!

Ill tell you Vera......NONE. Yet you still maintain that YOU must dictate how others live. Why?

No, I'll tell you; I said I wouldn't let this turn into a fight about religion, and I broke my word because YOU, ya a*****e, decided to respond to a post I made---which was talking to B. (not you! B. As in SOMEONE ELSE!)! And I'll be damned if I'm gonna let you spin this into an argument on gay marriage. (
And it wasn't MY efforts alone that got Gay Marriages shelved. The voting populace of America turned it down in an agreement. Most folks don't think of being gay as being a race, like being black, Asian, or Indian. It's a lifestyle choice, not a genetic circumstance. I guess folks aren't ready for it, like I said before.

Tell us Vera. Why do you think you should control others and their actions when they dont affect your life in any capacity?

I don't. That's more of your spin.

What kind of vile human are you to impose your will on others for no reason? Spare me the "its the beginning of the end for the moral fabric of this nation" crap. You will sound like those nuts that say having to register a gun is the same as banning them.

Not my department, Kiddo. Get off your soapbox. I'm not the one spinning into a froth on my posts in a paranoid rant that they're out to get me, make me believe what they believe! nonsense. That's YOU, Doll. I've said it many times Believe as you wishor don't believe at all. And this isn't a debate about gun control.

So there is your proof Vera. You gave it to me.

Cop out. Again.

Now im still waiting for proof from you. Two weeks and counting. How dare you ask for proof from others when you cant even produce any yourself.

Well, if what I already gave isn't good enough, Ben, then you're just stupid. Like I have said in several other postsnothing I could presenteven if I bought proof in the writers of the article themselves---you'd still tell me it isn't good enough. Nothing will turn a whining bleating liberal sheep into a happy camper.

Just like nothing will change the fact that it happenedI even gave names, addresses, the name of the books published and the publishing company in the articles I actually did provide. Truthhow offensive!

And how dare you tout with glee your forceful pushing of your "morals" on others.

Show me where I have specifically said, You MUST believe as I do! to any person here. (Add that to the many times I've said you have no morals if you don't believe in God and the other stuff you have YET to prove.) Not just bullshit you have construed (extruded, is more like it) from my writing style or tone. That's just inference. I don't 'do' "glee".

I read to you some of your "morals" in my last post. Yet you tried to skirt and deny.....even when it comes from YOUR BOOK!

No, I believe I addressed them directly. Your denials only prove that I didn't in YOUR little world. Please show me where I said that was wrong statement from the Bible (according to you, just a few paragraphs back, I applauded you!). Your not liking my answer doesn't render my answer wrong. Only in your little mind. One verse from a chapter in the Old Testament does not a moral make..it has to be considered in light of the mitigating circumstance at the time.

You have shown your comments are totally ignorant. You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

Opinions are like assesand your REALLY needs a wipe. And apparently, my comments piss you off, so how stupid does that make you, Bumpkin? I'm all for freedombut unlike you, that same freedom doesn't haveta agree with me. Apparently Freedom comes in a box with conditions for you. Pity.

To bad we cant give a DUI to you and Bush for being "drunk on Jesus" because people like you are going to drive this country into the ground. You already have us in reverse.

A shining example of your stupidity in thought-action.

Goto Canada and get married?....s**t Vera! I thought you were trying to deny it. Thanks for proving it!

Well, James (d' Calgary) did say, Gay marriage is getting legalized here in one of his older posts. It's not legal hereit was the closest suggestion I could think of. (Shrugging)

Prayer in schools gone?.....s**t Vera! Then why are you people so pissed about motions to remove the word "god" from the Pledge?

"Separation of Church and State? Well you didnt deny that either...nuff said. Thanks for pointing out your Theocratic plans!

My God (am I praying now, Dipshit?), you are PARANOID. If I wanted a Theocracy, don't you think I would work harder to whitewash myself as a saint (you know, like Jimmy Carter, who has been begging for a Nobel prize for twenty years-plus! I won't even get into Je$$e Jack$on or Al $harpton!)? I don't think I'm a saint, and I NEVER said I was, or that anyone here is gonna go to Hell. If a person doesn't want to say one nation under God in the Pledge, they can simply NOT say it. So because a couplehell, even FIVE---kids are bothered by that particular phrase (like most of 'em are TOLD to be by their folks), the other thirty kids who WANT to say it should be denied their rights?

I can go on and on.

Please don'thaven't you already distracted the topic enough by bringing in religion? And I promise, this WILL be my LAST post to you on religion. I want to talk about the topic, no matter how you and others try to spin, lie, and subterfuge. The only Dodge I like is the truck.

So in the end...you want proof?

Well, that was the plan, and you just seem to rave endlessly on how you hate God and Christians. Clearly, you cannot present any of your own proof, and don't have the brains to come out from behind bullshit like you just proved me right with your statement! (Which I have yet to see how that worksbut I know how your types are, taking a knife to a gunfight.) So I know I'll never see any real, valid proof from you. Bark, FishieRuhh! (Patting the scaly head, slipping a brine shrimp-cube for a treat). Buena pescado!

And about this "your as liberal as they come". Well Vera, when a person like you who is on the absolute LAST peg to the right looks at everyone else, of course EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE LEFT OF YOU! DUH! Take off those blinders, and get some grayscale in your vision there you Christian Jihadist. There are more colors than just black and white.

Nice try, with the jihadist remark. Should I say Yo Momma! now? (How 'bout calling you "Ben Ladin", or asking you if you've not "Ben Laid In a while?" The list is endless...!) And it isn't me who can't see the grey shades, Oreo. Like I saidturn around to look forward. So far, the smartest thing you've said in the whole post that wraps up "Bennie in a Nutshell": "DUH!" Nice to see you as you really are.

Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town (along with burning our loot!). Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it. Not much difference between you, Bush, and Osama. Some are just Christian. The others Muslim. Next year it will be Buddists. All religon. All ignorant and based on the CONTROL of others. To defy......means you must die. So say'th your lord.

HaaaaahHahahahahahahahahhhh! Ahh-hahahahahhh! Hahahahahhh!
So sayeth the Lord! Haaa-hahahahahahahh!!!! ROTFLOL!!!!!!
Well, if Christians are proof man descended from apes, Benniewhat does that make you? A monkey's Uncle?

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

And I invite you to do the same, Boo-h*o-Bennie. (.wiping laughter tears from my eyes, still fetching from the laughterAahh-hahhaaaahhh)

Oop--! There's the teapot. Gotta jet!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#528 Consumer Comment

Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

O mi Lord,as I red yor reespons B', I culd hardley cuntane my teers. Yore kallus demeener, your hatefull wurds, your . . . judjmints . . . after all mie komplimints 2 ewe . . . wah!

That's all the tears I can shed for now, I'm too busy dodging those bullets of B's self-righteous, piot . . . Oh! I've been hit! I'm not gonna make it this time, I can feel it, my time has come. Tell little Johnny I love him, and here, Vera, take this to protect you . . . it's the sword of . . . what the??? Heeeeey, what's this?? These aren't bullets!!! They're little pieces of . . . awwwww s**t! No, I mean that literally . . . they're little pieces of s**t! Haw haw haw haw (deep, rotflmao, hold my stomach cause it hurts so bad, side splitting, tear dropping, make your cheeks so sore they feel like rubber, kinda laugh) Roll credits! Oh my God! I think that was worthy of an Oscar . . . check please!

Hey B, if ya want it, don't bother looking for my phone number on the walls of any seedy establishments of puerile pornography, it's not that I wouldn't enter such places, it's just that your mother beat me to all the good spots'! Even if that wasn't the case, I don't think I want your sister calling me, I prefer women who's proudest moment in life isn't getting banged' by all her brothers at once, and still having all four teeth left when it was over! You're a b***h.

I wish I had more time to continue, it really has been fun, but I must wait until later to address what little meat you spewed. Some of us have a life.

Oh ya! Veeeeeeeeerraaaaaaaaa! Can I ask you a favor? Will you please . . . I mean pretty please, with sugar on top . . . give me lesson's on . . . I think it wus how 2 correct uthers speeling an gramma' . . . I'm not curtain, butt 'B(S)' said you wood. Dunt cha thank eye coon yoos thu halp? (lmao - B, you are such a wanker)

Until I have the time . . .

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#527 Consumer Comment

Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

O mi Lord,as I red yor reespons B', I culd hardley cuntane my teers. Yore kallus demeener, your hatefull wurds, your . . . judjmints . . . after all mie komplimints 2 ewe . . . wah!

That's all the tears I can shed for now, I'm too busy dodging those bullets of B's self-righteous, piot . . . Oh! I've been hit! I'm not gonna make it this time, I can feel it, my time has come. Tell little Johnny I love him, and here, Vera, take this to protect you . . . it's the sword of . . . what the??? Heeeeey, what's this?? These aren't bullets!!! They're little pieces of . . . awwwww s**t! No, I mean that literally . . . they're little pieces of s**t! Haw haw haw haw (deep, rotflmao, hold my stomach cause it hurts so bad, side splitting, tear dropping, make your cheeks so sore they feel like rubber, kinda laugh) Roll credits! Oh my God! I think that was worthy of an Oscar . . . check please!

Hey B, if ya want it, don't bother looking for my phone number on the walls of any seedy establishments of puerile pornography, it's not that I wouldn't enter such places, it's just that your mother beat me to all the good spots'! Even if that wasn't the case, I don't think I want your sister calling me, I prefer women who's proudest moment in life isn't getting banged' by all her brothers at once, and still having all four teeth left when it was over! You're a b***h.

I wish I had more time to continue, it really has been fun, but I must wait until later to address what little meat you spewed. Some of us have a life.

Oh ya! Veeeeeeeeerraaaaaaaaa! Can I ask you a favor? Will you please . . . I mean pretty please, with sugar on top . . . give me lesson's on . . . I think it wus how 2 correct uthers speeling an gramma' . . . I'm not curtain, butt 'B(S)' said you wood. Dunt cha thank eye coon yoos thu halp? (lmao - B, you are such a wanker)

Until I have the time . . .

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#526 Consumer Comment

Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

O mi Lord,as I red yor reespons B', I culd hardley cuntane my teers. Yore kallus demeener, your hatefull wurds, your . . . judjmints . . . after all mie komplimints 2 ewe . . . wah!

That's all the tears I can shed for now, I'm too busy dodging those bullets of B's self-righteous, piot . . . Oh! I've been hit! I'm not gonna make it this time, I can feel it, my time has come. Tell little Johnny I love him, and here, Vera, take this to protect you . . . it's the sword of . . . what the??? Heeeeey, what's this?? These aren't bullets!!! They're little pieces of . . . awwwww s**t! No, I mean that literally . . . they're little pieces of s**t! Haw haw haw haw (deep, rotflmao, hold my stomach cause it hurts so bad, side splitting, tear dropping, make your cheeks so sore they feel like rubber, kinda laugh) Roll credits! Oh my God! I think that was worthy of an Oscar . . . check please!

Hey B, if ya want it, don't bother looking for my phone number on the walls of any seedy establishments of puerile pornography, it's not that I wouldn't enter such places, it's just that your mother beat me to all the good spots'! Even if that wasn't the case, I don't think I want your sister calling me, I prefer women who's proudest moment in life isn't getting banged' by all her brothers at once, and still having all four teeth left when it was over! You're a b***h.

I wish I had more time to continue, it really has been fun, but I must wait until later to address what little meat you spewed. Some of us have a life.

Oh ya! Veeeeeeeeerraaaaaaaaa! Can I ask you a favor? Will you please . . . I mean pretty please, with sugar on top . . . give me lesson's on . . . I think it wus how 2 correct uthers speeling an gramma' . . . I'm not curtain, butt 'B(S)' said you wood. Dunt cha thank eye coon yoos thu halp? (lmao - B, you are such a wanker)

Until I have the time . . .

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#525 Consumer Comment

Owe 'B', U is sutch a bulee... ime kriing... wah

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

O mi Lord,as I red yor reespons B', I culd hardley cuntane my teers. Yore kallus demeener, your hatefull wurds, your . . . judjmints . . . after all mie komplimints 2 ewe . . . wah!

That's all the tears I can shed for now, I'm too busy dodging those bullets of B's self-righteous, piot . . . Oh! I've been hit! I'm not gonna make it this time, I can feel it, my time has come. Tell little Johnny I love him, and here, Vera, take this to protect you . . . it's the sword of . . . what the??? Heeeeey, what's this?? These aren't bullets!!! They're little pieces of . . . awwwww s**t! No, I mean that literally . . . they're little pieces of s**t! Haw haw haw haw (deep, rotflmao, hold my stomach cause it hurts so bad, side splitting, tear dropping, make your cheeks so sore they feel like rubber, kinda laugh) Roll credits! Oh my God! I think that was worthy of an Oscar . . . check please!

Hey B, if ya want it, don't bother looking for my phone number on the walls of any seedy establishments of puerile pornography, it's not that I wouldn't enter such places, it's just that your mother beat me to all the good spots'! Even if that wasn't the case, I don't think I want your sister calling me, I prefer women who's proudest moment in life isn't getting banged' by all her brothers at once, and still having all four teeth left when it was over! You're a b***h.

I wish I had more time to continue, it really has been fun, but I must wait until later to address what little meat you spewed. Some of us have a life.

Oh ya! Veeeeeeeeerraaaaaaaaa! Can I ask you a favor? Will you please . . . I mean pretty please, with sugar on top . . . give me lesson's on . . . I think it wus how 2 correct uthers speeling an gramma' . . . I'm not curtain, butt 'B(S)' said you wood. Dunt cha thank eye coon yoos thu halp? (lmao - B, you are such a wanker)

Until I have the time . . .

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#524 Consumer Comment

Bush- Very Low Ratings

AUTHOR: Darlene - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

I agree with james, My family has never been worse off than we are right now. at least with president clinton in office, i felt secure. We have struggled since this so called president has been in office.financially we have been ruined. as far as the other stuff goes, he's an oil man, bent at making money just like every other weatlthy person, the more they have, the more they want. should we have gone to Iraq? NO. its too late now for all that, whats done is done, he has managed to make us the most hated country in the world, thanks to him, and his views we all have to pay for it.. i never voted for bush, sr. or jr. i never would. im proud i didnt help put that idiot in office. i can only hope we last till 2008 when we can elect someone who will be sensible enough,smart enough to try and turn this around before its to late. and Mr. Bush, should keep his eye on N. Korea. his focus is off of the REAL threat. They HAVE the nukes! Iraq, hmm, they couldnt seem to find anything there... try looking at the truth. the man, as in all politicians are liars. they never make good on there promises, and are out for the weatlthy, (especially the repub) those of us who have been struggling for years because of this so called president, have had enough, his approval ratings are in the toilet.. he is 1/2 the president that we have had in years past, and i can only hope and survive another 3 years till we get this person, out of our white house....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#523 Consumer Comment

Bush- Very Low Ratings

AUTHOR: Darlene - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

I agree with james, My family has never been worse off than we are right now. at least with president clinton in office, i felt secure. We have struggled since this so called president has been in office.financially we have been ruined. as far as the other stuff goes, he's an oil man, bent at making money just like every other weatlthy person, the more they have, the more they want. should we have gone to Iraq? NO. its too late now for all that, whats done is done, he has managed to make us the most hated country in the world, thanks to him, and his views we all have to pay for it.. i never voted for bush, sr. or jr. i never would. im proud i didnt help put that idiot in office. i can only hope we last till 2008 when we can elect someone who will be sensible enough,smart enough to try and turn this around before its to late. and Mr. Bush, should keep his eye on N. Korea. his focus is off of the REAL threat. They HAVE the nukes! Iraq, hmm, they couldnt seem to find anything there... try looking at the truth. the man, as in all politicians are liars. they never make good on there promises, and are out for the weatlthy, (especially the repub) those of us who have been struggling for years because of this so called president, have had enough, his approval ratings are in the toilet.. he is 1/2 the president that we have had in years past, and i can only hope and survive another 3 years till we get this person, out of our white house....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#522 Consumer Comment

Bush- Very Low Ratings

AUTHOR: Darlene - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

I agree with james, My family has never been worse off than we are right now. at least with president clinton in office, i felt secure. We have struggled since this so called president has been in office.financially we have been ruined. as far as the other stuff goes, he's an oil man, bent at making money just like every other weatlthy person, the more they have, the more they want. should we have gone to Iraq? NO. its too late now for all that, whats done is done, he has managed to make us the most hated country in the world, thanks to him, and his views we all have to pay for it.. i never voted for bush, sr. or jr. i never would. im proud i didnt help put that idiot in office. i can only hope we last till 2008 when we can elect someone who will be sensible enough,smart enough to try and turn this around before its to late. and Mr. Bush, should keep his eye on N. Korea. his focus is off of the REAL threat. They HAVE the nukes! Iraq, hmm, they couldnt seem to find anything there... try looking at the truth. the man, as in all politicians are liars. they never make good on there promises, and are out for the weatlthy, (especially the repub) those of us who have been struggling for years because of this so called president, have had enough, his approval ratings are in the toilet.. he is 1/2 the president that we have had in years past, and i can only hope and survive another 3 years till we get this person, out of our white house....

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#521 Consumer Comment

George Walker Bush-Worse President in History! The United States is being HIJACKED to provide for the wealthy, while our troops die!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

George Walker Bush is an Adolf Hitler want to be!!! He does not care how many soldiers die in this FALSE WAR, It isn't his daughters-Jenna and Barbara! I think that The United States is being HIJACKED to provide for the wealthy, while our troops die!! Death for OIL is not an option!!!!!I find it very interesting that GWB never served in war! In fact, was never in Air National Guard half the time!!! Bush is at an all time low in polls-27%, More and More Countries view Bush as EVIL! I feel that Bush needs to be impeached!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#520 Consumer Suggestion

Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

B;

Oh I do enjoy your intelligent posts! Your mind set is in a different direction than mine, but I find myself no better or worse than yourself.

I compliment you first... & I see "rare of the same" from you.

However "as a salesman" I can relate to the "average person" & you possibly too... being, the "most intellectual" but, we all know that is very rare!

If someone would be "spinning their wheels". you would be on your posts dealing with Robert, Shawn & Vera! Not dealing with MENSA, as you probably have heard of.

These people are obviously "lost" & the reason why this blog makes sense! We show these idiots for what they are & we explain why their way is not a solution.

One of the major things we had to do was bring it past a "Republican & Democrat" arguement & I think that has been done. However little help from you!

Your facts are real & make a point. I never disputed that! Where in hells name do you get off at "disputeing me" in any way on this subject? Sheesh Man... we agree!

I walk down the street & if someone comes at me with a knife... my "first reaction" is not to try to figure out why he did it! I just defend myself!

However if I have time "afterwards" to think of why he might have done that & what I could have changed to make life more easier for him, so he would not "strike out"... I am gonna think on that.

If I find out the solution, i am gonna tell it to all of the people that are causing this person real pain! I hope we can equally come to some resolution. I am not gonna burn down his house!

In reality... even though I might be a little "naieve"... I am willing to give "Peace a Chance". These other idiots we are talking to, don't even know what the issue is! f**k Peace! They want war!

You can hear it in their words calling them "towelheads" & terrorists & they have no idea why or how or for what reason it is that they are fighting for, even though it is for their own freedom.

It's not just freedom for "intellectuals like you" we are speaking of! We are talking about freedom for the idiot as well! Idiots like Vera, Robert & Shawn... should be allowed to live! However they should be put into the homes that will look after people like them, while we all learn to & do live in peace.

I am intelligent enough to know not to attack you. Please do not do that to me, as we "both loose". You would have to be an idiot to do that, as you are calling my cards & if I was like them... I might strike back! That would make no sense here.

Let's just wake America up. Huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#519 Consumer Suggestion

Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

B;

Oh I do enjoy your intelligent posts! Your mind set is in a different direction than mine, but I find myself no better or worse than yourself.

I compliment you first... & I see "rare of the same" from you.

However "as a salesman" I can relate to the "average person" & you possibly too... being, the "most intellectual" but, we all know that is very rare!

If someone would be "spinning their wheels". you would be on your posts dealing with Robert, Shawn & Vera! Not dealing with MENSA, as you probably have heard of.

These people are obviously "lost" & the reason why this blog makes sense! We show these idiots for what they are & we explain why their way is not a solution.

One of the major things we had to do was bring it past a "Republican & Democrat" arguement & I think that has been done. However little help from you!

Your facts are real & make a point. I never disputed that! Where in hells name do you get off at "disputeing me" in any way on this subject? Sheesh Man... we agree!

I walk down the street & if someone comes at me with a knife... my "first reaction" is not to try to figure out why he did it! I just defend myself!

However if I have time "afterwards" to think of why he might have done that & what I could have changed to make life more easier for him, so he would not "strike out"... I am gonna think on that.

If I find out the solution, i am gonna tell it to all of the people that are causing this person real pain! I hope we can equally come to some resolution. I am not gonna burn down his house!

In reality... even though I might be a little "naieve"... I am willing to give "Peace a Chance". These other idiots we are talking to, don't even know what the issue is! f**k Peace! They want war!

You can hear it in their words calling them "towelheads" & terrorists & they have no idea why or how or for what reason it is that they are fighting for, even though it is for their own freedom.

It's not just freedom for "intellectuals like you" we are speaking of! We are talking about freedom for the idiot as well! Idiots like Vera, Robert & Shawn... should be allowed to live! However they should be put into the homes that will look after people like them, while we all learn to & do live in peace.

I am intelligent enough to know not to attack you. Please do not do that to me, as we "both loose". You would have to be an idiot to do that, as you are calling my cards & if I was like them... I might strike back! That would make no sense here.

Let's just wake America up. Huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#518 Consumer Suggestion

Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

B;

Oh I do enjoy your intelligent posts! Your mind set is in a different direction than mine, but I find myself no better or worse than yourself.

I compliment you first... & I see "rare of the same" from you.

However "as a salesman" I can relate to the "average person" & you possibly too... being, the "most intellectual" but, we all know that is very rare!

If someone would be "spinning their wheels". you would be on your posts dealing with Robert, Shawn & Vera! Not dealing with MENSA, as you probably have heard of.

These people are obviously "lost" & the reason why this blog makes sense! We show these idiots for what they are & we explain why their way is not a solution.

One of the major things we had to do was bring it past a "Republican & Democrat" arguement & I think that has been done. However little help from you!

Your facts are real & make a point. I never disputed that! Where in hells name do you get off at "disputeing me" in any way on this subject? Sheesh Man... we agree!

I walk down the street & if someone comes at me with a knife... my "first reaction" is not to try to figure out why he did it! I just defend myself!

However if I have time "afterwards" to think of why he might have done that & what I could have changed to make life more easier for him, so he would not "strike out"... I am gonna think on that.

If I find out the solution, i am gonna tell it to all of the people that are causing this person real pain! I hope we can equally come to some resolution. I am not gonna burn down his house!

In reality... even though I might be a little "naieve"... I am willing to give "Peace a Chance". These other idiots we are talking to, don't even know what the issue is! f**k Peace! They want war!

You can hear it in their words calling them "towelheads" & terrorists & they have no idea why or how or for what reason it is that they are fighting for, even though it is for their own freedom.

It's not just freedom for "intellectuals like you" we are speaking of! We are talking about freedom for the idiot as well! Idiots like Vera, Robert & Shawn... should be allowed to live! However they should be put into the homes that will look after people like them, while we all learn to & do live in peace.

I am intelligent enough to know not to attack you. Please do not do that to me, as we "both loose". You would have to be an idiot to do that, as you are calling my cards & if I was like them... I might strike back! That would make no sense here.

Let's just wake America up. Huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#517 Consumer Suggestion

Ok B... you wanna piece of me?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

B;

Oh I do enjoy your intelligent posts! Your mind set is in a different direction than mine, but I find myself no better or worse than yourself.

I compliment you first... & I see "rare of the same" from you.

However "as a salesman" I can relate to the "average person" & you possibly too... being, the "most intellectual" but, we all know that is very rare!

If someone would be "spinning their wheels". you would be on your posts dealing with Robert, Shawn & Vera! Not dealing with MENSA, as you probably have heard of.

These people are obviously "lost" & the reason why this blog makes sense! We show these idiots for what they are & we explain why their way is not a solution.

One of the major things we had to do was bring it past a "Republican & Democrat" arguement & I think that has been done. However little help from you!

Your facts are real & make a point. I never disputed that! Where in hells name do you get off at "disputeing me" in any way on this subject? Sheesh Man... we agree!

I walk down the street & if someone comes at me with a knife... my "first reaction" is not to try to figure out why he did it! I just defend myself!

However if I have time "afterwards" to think of why he might have done that & what I could have changed to make life more easier for him, so he would not "strike out"... I am gonna think on that.

If I find out the solution, i am gonna tell it to all of the people that are causing this person real pain! I hope we can equally come to some resolution. I am not gonna burn down his house!

In reality... even though I might be a little "naieve"... I am willing to give "Peace a Chance". These other idiots we are talking to, don't even know what the issue is! f**k Peace! They want war!

You can hear it in their words calling them "towelheads" & terrorists & they have no idea why or how or for what reason it is that they are fighting for, even though it is for their own freedom.

It's not just freedom for "intellectuals like you" we are speaking of! We are talking about freedom for the idiot as well! Idiots like Vera, Robert & Shawn... should be allowed to live! However they should be put into the homes that will look after people like them, while we all learn to & do live in peace.

I am intelligent enough to know not to attack you. Please do not do that to me, as we "both loose". You would have to be an idiot to do that, as you are calling my cards & if I was like them... I might strike back! That would make no sense here.

Let's just wake America up. Huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#516 Consumer Suggestion

Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Ben;

Again I am gonna tell you & you better listen! These people are not "Christians"! They claim to be but they are full of s**t!

Now please call them "King Jamesers" as they are or "Religeous Zealouts" as they are or... Hyprocrates... as they are... but please... please Ben! Please do not call them "Christians" as they are not!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#515 Consumer Suggestion

Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Ben;

Again I am gonna tell you & you better listen! These people are not "Christians"! They claim to be but they are full of s**t!

Now please call them "King Jamesers" as they are or "Religeous Zealouts" as they are or... Hyprocrates... as they are... but please... please Ben! Please do not call them "Christians" as they are not!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#514 Consumer Suggestion

Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Ben;

Again I am gonna tell you & you better listen! These people are not "Christians"! They claim to be but they are full of s**t!

Now please call them "King Jamesers" as they are or "Religeous Zealouts" as they are or... Hyprocrates... as they are... but please... please Ben! Please do not call them "Christians" as they are not!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#513 Consumer Suggestion

Ben! This is the last time I am gonna tell you!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, November 05, 2005

Ben;

Again I am gonna tell you & you better listen! These people are not "Christians"! They claim to be but they are full of s**t!

Now please call them "King Jamesers" as they are or "Religeous Zealouts" as they are or... Hyprocrates... as they are... but please... please Ben! Please do not call them "Christians" as they are not!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#512 Consumer Comment

Nice Firebrand preaching there Vera...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

You say I sound like a car salesman? So be it. You come off as a nutty zealot preacher from the depths of the abyss.

I really like how you pick and choose what parts of the Bible to live by. Then turn around and tell others they HAVE to live by it. You cant make up your mind? Oh, how it changes through the centuries yet remains the same in one basic aspect....intolerant. Your rants about "oh that was long ago" and "it was the Jews" shows just how hypocritical you and your ilk really are. So what if it was the "old" testament. Bush, and people like you say we must live by "Gods Law". Yet you cant even figure out what parts to honor or not. And you want US to live by them? Gee wiz Vera, make up your mind. You have proven without a doubt just about everything I have said about religous nuts. Your intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, mean, and just outright wrong. Telling us to live by "gods law" when you turn around and say "oh well, we dont pay attention to THAT part anymore". Well Vera, where does it stop. And how can we be assured you wont START again. Spare me the "LOOK! over there....EVIL MUSLIMS!" bullshit. Thats just a diversion. You know d**n well that there are Christian groups and entities pulling this sort of thing right now. Look at the LRA in Uganda. Remember all the bombings at planned parenthood clinics? Forget those already? Your no different then any looney fundamentalist religous nut. Christian, Muslim, Jew etc. it doesnt matter. Religon is the foudation of friction, hate, intolerance, and stupidity.

Then you have the gall to say "show me proof" when for over 2 weeks you cant even come up with viable proof for your claims??? Get real! Is this one of those "do what I say, not what I do" things? After all your entire rant back at me was filled with that sort of banter and it is the standard M.O. for religous zealots.

You want proof.....fine. Come out of your biblical era mud hut and watch the news on TV every night. EVERY d**n NIGHT! And you dont have to watch just MSNBC and CNN or all the others I'm sure you brand the "liberal media". Try even watching your ultra-biased Fox News. You will see something about every subject I mentioned EVERY NIGHT on Fox as well.

But I really dont have to prove anything to you Vera. Why? Because you didnt deny any of my points were wrong. Matter of fact you applauded them. You basically proved them for me. For just about every single one you just said "so what...tough luck!". Why would I need to prove what you already believe in?

Example.....

I said you nuts are all bent out of shape because of gay marrage.

You answered....

"Let them goto Canada"

See you really know all this is going on. And your happy about it. Your in complete satifaction that your will is being imposed on others.

Lets take this gay marrage thing as an example again. Just what is it that you think gay marrage will do to YOU? What part of your life will be affected. Ill tell you Vera......NONE. Yet you still maintain that YOU must dictate how others live. Why? Tell us Vera. Why do you think you should control others and their actions when they dont affect your life in any capacity? What kind of vile human are you to impose your will on others for no reason? Spare me the "its the beginning of the end for the moral fabric of this nation" crap. You will sound like those nuts that say having to register a gun is the same as banning them.

So there is your proof Vera. You gave it to me. Now im still waiting for proof from you. Two weeks and counting. How dare you ask for proof from others when you cant even produce any yourself. And how dare you tout with glee your forceful pushing of your "morals" on others. I read to you some of your "morals" in my last post. Yet you tried to skirt and deny.....even when it comes from YOUR BOOK!

You have shown your comments are totally ignorant. You have shown that you are fundamentally against the freedom that this country stands for. You are a complete hypocrite to the end.

To bad we cant give a DUI to you and Bush for being "drunk on Jesus" because people like you are going to drive this country into the ground. You already have us in reverse.

Goto Canada and get married?....s**t Vera! I thought you were trying to deny it. Thanks for proving it!

Prayer in schools gone?.....s**t Vera! Then why are you people so pissed about motions to remove the word "god" from the Pledge?

Separation of Church and State? Well you didnt deny that either...nuff said. Thanks for pointing out your Theocratic plans!

I can go on and on. So in the end...you want proof? Look at your own posts and watch a little TV. Watch Fox for all I care. Biased as it is, it still has the same stories. It just happens to approve of whats happening.


And about this "your as liberal as they come". Well Vera, when a person like you who is on the absolute LAST peg to the right looks at everyone else, of course EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE LEFT OF YOU! DUH! Take off those blinders, and get some grayscale in your vision there you Christian Jihadist. There are more colors than just black and white.


Ill be waiting for you nuts to come kill me and all that live in my town (along with burning our loot!). Or maybe you will just try and blow up a planned parenthood clinc here. Or better yet....fly a plane into it. Not much difference between you, Bush, and Osama. Some are just Christian. The others Muslim. Next year it will be Buddists. All religon. All ignorant and based on the CONTROL of others. To defy......means you must die. So say'th your lord.

Take your ignorance, your intolerance, and your d**n bloody crusade in the Middle East and shove it!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#511 Consumer Comment

he's an even bigger hypocrite and scumbag than anyone ever thought

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I like Vera's better though. Maybe ya'll could have them go head to head in a contest. Later.

One "Moore" thing about dear Michael
It turns out he's an even bigger hypocrite and scumbag than anyone ever thought. It seems he owns tens of thousands of shares of stock in all of the hated companies...oil, drugs, automobiles, technologies, military contractors...Yep, he owns about 2000 shares of Halliburton stock. Gee, I don't know which is harder. Him holding a straight face when he does his shtick, or the fawning dingbats who pay for it taking him seriously.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#510 Consumer Comment

Speaking of specials...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

A little number-crunching of my own....

This very post puts the sheer number of my posts at forty-five.

Jame's most recent remark puts him at a "hundred and one defamations".

I repeat: if you don't want to read my posts and respond to the matter contained within, then don't even waste your time (or mine!) posting to me. Find some other means besides bashing people to gratify yourself and make yourself feel macho.

Just for grins and giggles.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#509 UPDATE EX-employee responds

Sorry Robert... did ya miss the song?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

Robert;

Sheesh & it is climbing right up the charts. Kinda funny & well thought out... very original. Definately nothing like the senseless garbage other people put out that makes them look like bigger fools than the people they are pointing fingers at.

Hey... & I had "no idea" your tax dollars paid for Moores film! Well I will be damned! I guess the Government must be pretty open minded to allow critisizm. I wonder why ol Scooter is up on charges then? Hmm... well anyway... here's the song once again for you to sing Robert:


Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?


Well... Lemme tell ya a story bout a man named Bush

A rich oilman, only problem... his brains are mush;

If smarts were bread, he had no fukin yeast;

The guy becomes President, & we are off to the Middle East!

(Oil that is... Texas Man... Terrorists)

Well the next thing ya know our soldiers are gettin kilt;

Hard on's for Iraq, watched their woodies wilt;

It was all justified cause of the WMD's;

If it was a "car bomb"... Suddam had no f**kin keys;

(Who cares bout dat... we're takin over neway!)

Well the next thing ya know Americans learn of lies;

It was that d**n Cheney, cookin up dem pies;

Soon Scooter Libby, will be off to f**kin jail;

And the rest of us will be checkin for anthrax in our mail;

We are the Oppressing Hillbillies!


Lyrics:

Jim Stewart.

James - Calgary, Alberta
Canada

You will find the lyrics actually fit with the tune. That makes it also really well thought out.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#508 Consumer Comment

please cut this thread off

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

EDITOR - please cut this thread off

Why don't you guys just meet up at a bar and duke it out. That's the only way you're going to settle anything. This is getting really tiring.

This isn't the proper format for this argument and it's high time the editor cuts off this post from further input. If you are so opinionated, then please run for office.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#507 Consumer Comment

"Special"? James? My posts are directed at anyone who cares to read them

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

Darlin', you'd do the world a favor if you'd move on. You make the mistake (as usual) of assuming I want to hear what you have to say, or that I actually care about your opinion.

My posts are directed at anyone who cares to read them...obviously that isn't you, so get over yourself. If you can't read them and address the subject as discussion, then simply do not make any remarks.

You're a great example of saving space...by the time I had FOUR posts up, you had sixteen.

Just another hypocrite "Do as I say, not as I do." If you have any children, you shame them. And I sympathize.

I offer you the same; save space on this board--don't post AT ALL. You have offered no information to lend credence to your position, and all you seem to do is attack me, personally (which is the first thing that started the whole flame fest).

If you can't address the issues in my posts, don't talk to me. Pretty simple, eh? "Simple" like you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#506 Consumer Comment

Shawn, more on Iraq, etc. plus an extra heapin' helping of slime

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

Shawn, you ignorant s**t. Your literary style, an unfortunate blemish on the term, is banal and predictable. Your obsequious assignation with this administration lies unrequited by a single fact or datum. Your opinions and arguments conjure the sulfurous regurgitated bile of some odious subterranean behemoth. Were I to denigrate myself by visiting these seedy establishments of puerile pornography, I should expect to discover your name and telephone number, a lurid slash, adorning the bathroom stalls of the Star, the Globe, and the Enquirer.

You know, you sound a lot like James from Canada when you get all lathered up and sanctimonious. Its almost cute. You're so full of yourself, which is to say full of BS. You say you "respect everyone's right to have their own opinion", but "object to those who post opinions and expect the rest of us to accept them as fact." In truth, you spend, maybe, 50% of your posts dissing anybody who doesn't blindly agree with your formula, "PROOF offered + FACTS verifiable = inarguable." Like you'd know a fact if it ran up and bit you on the a*s. But this hypocrisy is your trademark, so who am I to suggest a change? I must say, though, it takes massive cajones for the Prince of Twisty Logic to rant at others, for half a dozen pages at a time, for minor spelling and grammatical errors. And its not like you even do a good job of it. Maybe Vera will give you lessons if you ask real nice.

I read your "Be careful, you might learn something!" post. Once again, there's no point in referencing your sources if you're not going to differentiate between fact, fiction, and opinion. You cite, "The following information was taken from various reports, history books, the Bible, court documents, and The Constitution of the United States of America." That would seem to mean all of the opinions and conclusions are quotes from other people, yet that does not appear to be the case. So, who is saying what? Or what source is it coming from? Conclusions are drawn from premises for which there appears to be no factual basis. Conclusions are drawn seemingly from thin air. Debatable assertions are made in a voice of finality. With no context, not even known authorship, its impossible to respond, other than to just say, "Whoa! I think maybe there's a lot of crap in there I probably disagree with." Hell, from the same list of sources I could probably report that your moms was having an affair with Jimmy Hoffa, and your pops killed him in the conservatory with a lead pipe then buried him in the back yard. You conclude, "Once again, fact is presented." But, as you have presented no particular thesis, it is unclear what fact, if any, you think you have presented and are expecting to be debated.

OK, then, lets revisit those UNSCRs. See if you can keep up this time, k? I don't know what kind of broken down database you're getting your info from, but paragraph 8 of 686 says nothing about a cease-fire, only that the SC will continue to actively monitor the issue. In fact, the term cease-fire appears nowhere in the resolution. And I find nothing in the resolution that even remotely resembles the verbiage you 'cite'. 678 authorizes member nations to do one basic thing, assist Kuwait in repelling the Iraqi invasion. It does not, as you mistakenly believe, authorize them to invade Iraq, under any circumstances, as Bush Sr. publicly recognized when asked why he didn't "finish the job." Now if you would bother to read the UN charter, you would see that its all about peace; defense not offense. Members agree to seek peaceful settlement of their differences and to assist others to do the same, not look for justification to wage war. Members cannot just unilaterally decide to enforce violations of the SC directives, the SC must specifically authorize any enforcement. So, yes, in 686 and several subsequent resolutions, the SC made a point that the authorization of 678 was still in force, the authorization to keep Iraq out of Kuwait, and possibly, by extension, of other countries in the area. And yes, Iraq repeatedly defied UNSCRs. But there is nothing in any of the resolutions that authorizes the US or any other nation to invade Iraq as a result of this defiance. And if this was in any way unclear, the SC made it clear when the US brought its 'case'. I mean, gee, it would have been nice if they could have passed a resolution specifically stating that, but with the US veto power, that certainly wasn't going to happen. So you can argue any other legal or moral authority you want as to the 'right' the US had to invade Iraq, but the fact remains there was no UN authority for us to do so.

And I can't believe you're using the argument that we don't KNOW they didn't have weapons as a rationale for invading them. And I though Michael Moore's reasoning was paranoid! What's next? Should we dispatch somebody to kill James of Tupper Lake? We don't KNOW that he doesn't have a big bottle of Anthrax in his pantry, and he certainly seems like he could be the sort of unstable personality that might actually use it, or at least give it to someone who would. You're not willing to bet your life or anyone else's on their non-existence, but you're willing to bet the lives of tens of thousands of US soldiers and Iraqi civilians on the slim chance that they might, possibly, exist, even against your better judgment? With that kind of thinking its no wonder you believe President George had "over 19 different reasons to return to Iraq." More like 31 different flavors. "He's an evil dictator with weapons of mass destruction." There's 3, evil, dictator, and WMD. 15 years ago he attacked his neighbor and he's been disrespecting the US and the rest of the world ever since. 20 years ago he attacked his other neighbor with the WMD we gave him for the purpose, and then used it to put down a revolt in his own country. Millions of innocent Iraqi civilians have died because we won't let the shipments of food and supplies through to them, er, uhh, I mean because Saddam's diverting them. If you choose to call these REASONS for invasion, I've got some choice parcels available in Mississippi and Louisiana you might be interested in. And the nerve, some Podunk third world country claiming they didn't have records accounting for every speck of dangerous substances that passed through their hands. Completely unacceptable! And what was President Clinton's response to the UNSCOM report that they had accounted for all but a statistically insignificant portion? Why, that lying, liberal, peacenik scumbag told the SC we wouldn't vote to lift the sanctions until Saddam stepped down. And I seem to recall some peaceful bombing of facilities he claimed were manufacturing new WMD. Swear to God, it just warms the heart to see such bipartisan leadership.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about conditions NOT being met, but here are the relevant conditions To be met from Public Law 107-243, authorizing the president to make the determination to use US Armed Forces to attack Iraq:
...
(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

And yes, after reading through the empty rhetoric that comprised his justification to Congress, I believe I am right in stating the conditions weren't met.

Regarding Sheehan, I'm not trying to prove some big point. I agree she was violating the law, I'm just underling the fact that the law is in apparent opposition to her first amendment rights. And I'd be interested in seeing a 'strict constructionist' argument showing that the 'people's' inconvenience at having to detour around the public square somehow supersedes "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Her intent to break the law is obvious, and I don't expect this situation to ever change. Its a convenient release valve; protesters get to prove their commitment by symbolically breaking the law and paying their fine, peaceably disturbing the peace, without violating the spirit of the Constitution.

If I may be so bold as to tweak your quote of yourself, "The political affiliation of each citizen may be distinguished by the process in which they decide on the issues... the Independent tends to look at an issue, discover the facts, and form an opinion; the Democrat's approach is similar, they look at the issue, form an opinion, and then set out to force the facts to conform; the Republicans can completely ignore the facts, they've got God on their side."

In another post, you explain the reference in Matthew 6 to performing alms in the public eye. I don't understand what slip of your lurid imagination leads you off the path to castigate homosexuals, but these are certainly not the people he was making reference to. HIS reference was only to people 'advertising' their good works and therefore accepting man's reward in place of God's. No lie, cheat, steal, etc. involved. And you wonder why people think you're trying to cram your religious views down their throats; its because you are, whether you can recognize and admit to it or not. Oh, and by the way, Matthew is translated from the common Greek of the day, not from Hebrew.

In the same post, you describe your belief that the Supreme Court is 'legislating from the bench.' But you misrepresent the process somewhat. The Court is not changing the laws, they have no power to do so. What they are changing, which is exactly what they are empanelled to change, is the application of the law to different facts and circumstances. And, yes, in one sense they are, in essence, saying exactly what you think they are, that the law does not rest on your personal belief system. What they are not saying is that someone else's system of beliefs deserves greater protection, only that yours are irrelevant. And that seems to be what irks you the most. At least, that's the way it looks from here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#505 Consumer Comment

Here's something to ponder

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I heard on the Neal Boortz Show, on radio, that Halliburton's profits last year were around $163M. Michael Moore made $194M. One is helping American interests, the other is helping the enemy. Nice.

James, I do not know what you mean by the Bush song...sorry.

Vera, I had tears coming from my eyes. That song was the best. Come on Canada James. You know you loved it too.

Shawn, I am not a middle of the roader. Those guys get ran over. I am a Libertarian. Hard line conservative fiscally, hard line leberal socially. Do what you want, do not expect me to pay for it.

Ben has never bothered me. I find him fun to trade barbs with. He does get worked up rather easily.

I found another interesting snippet. Exxon's profit marging is 9%. That's the highest margin in over 10 years, when it averaged 5%. The typical business uses a 7% margin. I don't remember hearing people complaining about Exxon charging too little during the 90's. Hmmmmm. Seems to me, if big oil was trying to help Bush, they would cut their margin and make fuels cheaper, like they did for Clinton.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#504 Consumer Comment

The dead one is showing "the squirm"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I find it so typical of the 'Canadunce', aka recently deceased, aka the late James of Calgary, to pull a move like that. Hey Vera, you keep proving him an idiot and he slings insults at ya, then you prove him wrong AND an idiot, he tells you not to play! Sorry dead one, you don't own this ball! I hope to see more informative posts from Vera, Robert and others who live in reality, very soon and very often. Even if I can't get to reading them right away, I'll know they're there, and pissing off Canadunce!

Let me cover my next response right now . . . Yaaaaaaawhateverloser!

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#503 Consumer Comment

The dead one is showing "the squirm"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I find it so typical of the 'Canadunce', aka recently deceased, aka the late James of Calgary, to pull a move like that. Hey Vera, you keep proving him an idiot and he slings insults at ya, then you prove him wrong AND an idiot, he tells you not to play! Sorry dead one, you don't own this ball! I hope to see more informative posts from Vera, Robert and others who live in reality, very soon and very often. Even if I can't get to reading them right away, I'll know they're there, and pissing off Canadunce!

Let me cover my next response right now . . . Yaaaaaaawhateverloser!

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#502 Consumer Comment

The dead one is showing "the squirm"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I find it so typical of the 'Canadunce', aka recently deceased, aka the late James of Calgary, to pull a move like that. Hey Vera, you keep proving him an idiot and he slings insults at ya, then you prove him wrong AND an idiot, he tells you not to play! Sorry dead one, you don't own this ball! I hope to see more informative posts from Vera, Robert and others who live in reality, very soon and very often. Even if I can't get to reading them right away, I'll know they're there, and pissing off Canadunce!

Let me cover my next response right now . . . Yaaaaaaawhateverloser!

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#501 Consumer Comment

The dead one is showing "the squirm"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, November 04, 2005

I find it so typical of the 'Canadunce', aka recently deceased, aka the late James of Calgary, to pull a move like that. Hey Vera, you keep proving him an idiot and he slings insults at ya, then you prove him wrong AND an idiot, he tells you not to play! Sorry dead one, you don't own this ball! I hope to see more informative posts from Vera, Robert and others who live in reality, very soon and very often. Even if I can't get to reading them right away, I'll know they're there, and pissing off Canadunce!

Let me cover my next response right now . . . Yaaaaaaawhateverloser!

God bless the U.S. and all her troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#500 Consumer Suggestion

Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Vera;

This would be a "special gift" to all. Your 2 for 1 post is definately long enough to take up 5 posts to say absolutely nothing.

So how about you forego any posts for about a week?

That would be a definate space saver.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#499 Consumer Suggestion

Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Vera;

This would be a "special gift" to all. Your 2 for 1 post is definately long enough to take up 5 posts to say absolutely nothing.

So how about you forego any posts for about a week?

That would be a definate space saver.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#498 Consumer Suggestion

Vera... why don't you really give us a 2 for one special?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Vera;

This would be a "special gift" to all. Your 2 for 1 post is definately long enough to take up 5 posts to say absolutely nothing.

So how about you forego any posts for about a week?

That would be a definate space saver.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#497 Consumer Comment

I am INSPIRED (for about fifteen minutes)! Canadian Shill-Billy!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

I'd like to dedicate this next numberto my dear friend James, of Calgary
(Picking up banjo, sliding on thumb and finger picks)

Come n' listen to the story bout a scammer named James;
Thinks he's got a dandy wit, callin' others names.
Then one day he found this here RipOff Report,
And up from his a*****e, he spat his first retort.

Supporting terrorists that is, tellin' lies, praising Mike Moore.

When asked why in the world would any Canuck even care, His general reply is to annoy you Righties there!
Can't come up with any facts, he just likes to spin, His caricature of the real truth is such a sin.

An affront that is
Downright shamepitiably so.

The Canadian Shill-Billy!

(Banjo interlude!)

I wish we all could say goodbye to James and all his kind.
I'm tired of whipping a dead horseor at least the beast's behind!
He hasn't proven anythingcertainly not his wit!
As far as his opinion goesit isn't worth a s**t.

Like those car addsor his wordtotal lack of integrity.

Don't come back now, y'hear?

You should feel flattered, Jamesyou are the perfect model of injustice. So much so, that you inspire a song! (You also inspire nausea, vomiting, and explosive diarrheabut I won't bring your sex life into the topic. Iraq.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#496 Consumer Comment

Excellent link, Robert of Florida!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Thanks for the tip, Robert...

I really enjoyed the read...and followed the links to other goodies, too!
I'm gonna subscribe!

Since I have provided what I believe to be good, solid information, I feel I have proven my point sufficiently. If they don't agree, then they can lump it; I'm not gonna go there any further.

(psstt....there's a great article about Michael Moore in there, too....hehehehh! D'ja see that...?)

Thanks again! :D

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#495 Consumer Comment

All 'spin' aside, . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

I just realized that so many songs from the 80's and 90's are so suitable to this thread! I am at a bit of a loss for words, with the death of Canadunce-boy and the apparent disappearance (I know, he'll probably reappear by the time this posts)of "Ben-ton being a victim", I have only a few select persons with whom to "converse".

Let's see, there's Vera . . . whom I enjoy for her wit, charm, and elucidative posts, but, we seem to share a similar opinion on most topics, (the most common being James' stupidity,) so the (hypothetical)discussion would serve no purpose to this thread, other than to confirm each others opinions as fact based, and logically sound.

Next would be Tupper Lake James. I am certain that most (who are not 'self-medicated' or 'mentally disadvantaged')would agree, that he is far to irrational and illogical to have a conversation with. He just 'pops in' from time to time to post another inane blurb that rarely amounts to more than an opinionated 'vurp'.

Robert, although seemingly 'middle of the road', does not appear too much a conversationalist. I would love to debate various points with him but, alas, as is the case with Vera, I find I am too often in agreement with him. I guess that is the 'curse' of living in the 'real world'.

Ben? Is that you Ben? See, I knew he'd be back! Well, as it appears that he only wants to direct his aggressions towards outspoken, self-secure, Christian white women from the mid-west, I will be unable to engage in conversation with him. Lord knows, I've tried! (j/k) I have approached him from several 'angles' - from 'empathetic' to 'abusive'- but, I guess there's just no accounting for estrogen! Oh ya, Ben, using excerpts from the Old Testament to paint' Christianity as some violent, unforgiving religion, is like using that man-boy love' organization to judge' athiests! We live by the New Testament', you know, the part with Jesus Christ - thus the term Christians. Go back to crying - baby.

Last, but not least, there is "B". It is with great humility, but I must admit, "B" has me 'against the ropes'. On one hand, I could throw another 'jab' at him, thus setting myself up for yet another of his charmingly witty retorts (no sarcasm intended,) and thus the volley would continue, with no regard for the underlying topic of these posts. Or I could 'bow out' graciously, complimenting him on his intellect, wit, and obvious commitment to higher education. But wait! There is a third option . . . and, I'll get to that later.
First, I do want to let you know that I respect your opinions. You set your words in a professional manner, making certain that you are perceived as an authority, no matter what the topic. It would appear that you research your response topics (for the most part) prior to submitting your text, and you seem to pride yourself on ensuring that you respond to all who have posted comments directed toward you.

All that being said, I wish to point out a few traits' of your responses that can not be deemed as complimentary. After your last response to me, I re-read your post one previous, and, realized that you were correct . . . in so far as your word usage applies. I guess that I was taken aback by your proper grammar, structure, and spelling, when I was so accustomed to dealing with representatives' of the left', who could hardly be credited as civil, never mind educated. I do, however, wish to question you as to the reason you chose to chide me based on that one small portion of my retort, ( which, education and reading levels aside, was only pointing out that you tend to use a preponderance of verbose sentence structure, particularly when considering the likes of James and James need also understand.), when you failed to even touch on' any issues of substance within my post. ( I know that I set myself up for a cynical retort, but I hope you can get past that and respond in a more mature manner)

You have yet to answer for your accusation that I put words in others mouths', you have yet to show any resolution/s by the UNSC which rescind the authorities granted in UNSCR 678, you have yet to show where George W. Bush, or any white house official told us to focus on' WMD's and only that, you have yet to show where Sheehan's arrest was to silence her from speaking out against the government, and not for the reason's her charges state - demonstrating without a permit and creating a public nuisance, and, you have yet to offer anything resembling your sources of information, by which one might verify the facts which you base your opinions on. (Sorry, but calling Robert's statement theory and then insinuating that you have the facts does not make your theories any more factual than his.)

Within your statement, I noticed that you did not mention that d**k Cheney divested himself of all interest in Halliburton in 2000 (As long as you are correcting mis-statements of others, why not this? Was it just an oversight on your part?). Also, according to a piece' by Mark Gongloff, a CNN staff money writer, although Halliburton has the potentially largest contract in the rebuilding of Iraq, they are not the only company contracted, and it is not likely that they will ever see near the dollar amounts projected by some.

Halliburtons contract', was awarded without bid due to security and time-line restrictions, and, is only for the time during which the oilfield infrastructure remains a primary target for Iraqi insurgents. Once these attacks diminish, the contract to oversee the rebuilding of this infrastructure will be awarded by bid, including companies from outside the U.S. Also, at the time this contract was awarded, Haliburton still had over 7000 employees working in Iraq - rebuilding and maintaining the oilfields of previous attacks.

Just a sampling of other companies who have been awarded contracts in the process of rebuilding Iraq include: Bechtel Corp., Washington International Group, Perini Corp., Fluor Corp., International Resources Group, Stevedoring Services of America Corp., Creative Associates International, Inc., and the Research Triangle Institute. In regards to B's assumption that contracts were somehow related to advertising' dollars during election campaigns, the dollar breakdown of such by these top companies' shows that all were campaign contributors with just shy of 2/3 going to the republicans. Oh, btw', three of these companies didn't donate anything to the republican party - 100% of their contributions went to democrat campaigns and Hallburton's total donations to GWB's campaign was under $4000.00. (CBS-newsonline, and citizenworks')

As you can see, your research surrounding Haliburton and the awarding of their contract, leans a little left of center' regarding the truth. I am quite sure that most of what you wrote may indeed be fact, but the information that you left out would suggest that your reporting is both biased, and intended to spin' in favor of your beliefs.

You know what, I sometimes think that things would be more interesting if James from Calgary hadn't passed on'. Not that his posts were challenging, or even resembled anything factual, but, boy oh boy were they ever entertaining. Kinda like a bad car wreck. rotflmao

May God Bless the U.S. and all her troops.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#494 Consumer Comment

Religion, religion, everywhere! It is part of it all.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Can't get off religion where Bush is concerned. It is everywhere. Bush is "Jesus drunk" and he is dangerous for that reason.

Bush has used religion to do exactly what the lunatic-fringe Muslims are doing-using it to kill people. Most religious folk do not invade a country and kill thousands over their principles, nor do they blow themselves up.

Bush is on the same level as the suicide bombers....he is a real cracked crankcase.

Even former President Carter calls Bush's fundamentalism dangerous!

"Breaking tradition, Carter rips Bush's policies

By Chuck Raasch, Gannett News Service

WASHINGTON Former President Jimmy Carter said Thursday that "fundamentalism" under George W. Bush has resulted in a "dramatic and profound and unprecedented change" in American policy that threatens the United States at home and abroad.

Carter, who is promoting a new book critical of Bush, faulted the Bush administration for "an unprecedented and overt ... merger of the church and state, of religion and politics."

Read the rest here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-03-carter-bush_x.htm

Argue on, people!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#493 Consumer Suggestion

Sure Robert... I will go look at more of your evidence...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Robert;

I will go look at more of your evidence. However before I do... would ya just do a verse or two of the Bush song?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#492 Consumer Comment

Don't be such a Gore Loser, Jim of Tupper! :D

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

February 26, 2001
MIAMI (AP) - A review of 10,644 uncounted ballots in Miami-Dade County showed Al Gore would not have gained enough votes to overtake George W. Bush in Florida when those votes were combined with results from three other counties where the vice president requested manual recounts, a newspaper reported.

Gore would have gained no more than 49 votes in Miami-Dade, The Miami Herald reported in Monday's editions. When combined with Gore's gains in Broward, Palm Beach, and Volusia counties, he would have not have overcome the Bush lead.
The four counties used punchcard ballots, which state lawmakers are considering eliminating in favor of optical scanning equipment for the 2002 election in all 67 Florida counties.

The review, sponsored by the newspaper, its parent company Knight Ridder and USA Today, studied undervotes, or ballots where machines were unable to read votes for president.
"There were many people who expected there was a bonanza of votes here for Al Gore, and it turns out there was not," Herald executive editor Martin Baron said Sunday.

The newspaper found that 1,555 Miami-Dade ballots were marked in a manner that might be interpreted as a vote for Gore. An additional 1,506 bore some kind of marking that might be interpreted as a vote for George W. Bush. There were 106 markings for other candidates.

No markings for president were found on 4,892 ballots, and 2,058 ballots bore markings in spaces that had been assigned to no candidate. An additional 527 ballots were deemed to have markings for more than one presidential candidate.


The Herald used broad liberal standards, including counting every dimple, pinprick and hanging chad identified in the section for presidential votes on the ballots.

Republicans said the Herald's results indicated that Bush was always the legitimate winner.
"President Bush was lawfully elected on Election Day. He won after the first statewide machine recount," said Mark Wallace, a Miami lawyer for the Republican Party. "He won after the manual recount, and he won at the conclusion of all the litigation."

Democrats said the review shows neither side could have known how the recounts would turn out.
"This underscores how unpredictable the whole recount strategy was, on both sides," said Doug Hattaway, former Gore campaign spokesman. "This shows Bush's tactics of delaying and blocking vote counts didn't really benefit him."

The Herald and Knight Ridder retained a public accounting firm, BDO Seidman, LLP, to conduct the inspection, which took more than 80 hours spread over nearly three weeks.

A BDO Seidman accountant sat in the Miami-Dade elections office and recorded information about each undervote. The ballots were handled by elections officials. A Herald reporter also reviewed each undervote ballot and made a separate and independent assessment of its characteristics.

A research firm hired by several news organizations, including The Associated Press, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, also is reviewing 180,000 Florida ballots that did not register a vote for president during machine counts.

The Palm Beach Post previously released the results of its own review of 10,600 Miami-Dade undervotes. In that count, the Post found Bush gained six more votes than Gore.
The Post, which used a more restrictive standard than The Herald, concluded that Bush would have gained 251 votes and Gore would have gained 245 votes. No overvotes, or ballots where machines detected more than one presidential vote, were counted.

The certified results in Miami-Dade were 328,808 votes for Gore and 289,533 for Bush, according to the Florida secretary of state's office. Statewide, Bush won Florida by 537 votes out of about 6 million cast.

The networks incorrectly call a Gore victory in Florida while the polls were still open in the Panhandle (I should know, I lived in Pensacola at the time!), suppressing votes for Bushbut Bush still wins. By the wayJeb Bush removed himself from the recount. His presence in Florida had little to do with an election being stolen. Gore tried to delay the confirmation for as long as possible, setting up every delay he could. If he could have prevented Florida from choosing its electors by December 18, when the electors meet, Florida's electors would have been excluded.

I'll quote a guy any Liberal can loveJoseph Stalin: It does not matter who votes, it matters who counts the ballots. I'm sure that's the exact logic Gore was betting on, when he demanded his THIRD recount in Florida at the Demo-Dominant Palm Beach County. In this case, a selective hand count is calculated to ensure Gore's margin will increase, even if an equal number of Bush votes were missed by voting machines statewide. Any hand count will increase the total number of votes cast by resuscitating formerly invalid ballots, including those that would never be accepted by any voting machine.

In an act of downright magnanimousity, they [Florida Supreme Court} even extended the deadline to validate the count by nineteen days! Just for Gore!
But, on November 26 of 2000, the Florida Secretary of State, Katherine Harris certified the electron results on the date set by the Florida Supreme Court: Bush wins a 537-vote lead over Gore.

Maybe more folks should have punched that ballot hard, and not been so afraid to hurt the poor li'l machine. Shamelessly, Gore filed a lawsuit (one of many, I'm sure) against the Florida Supreme Court, asking himself to be declared the winner, on the grounds that there are likely thousands of votes out there that have gone uncounted. Is Gore psychic? How does he know the outcome of thousands of uncounted votes---has he been handing out cartons of ciggs to the homeless again?

So the US Supreme Court gets involved, and on December 1, hears arguments on the Florida Supreme Court's extension of the election deadline. On December 4, the US Supreme Court vacates the Florida Supreme Court's decision, and remands the court to the court with instructions to please read the Constitution and Federal Law, next time.

A Quickie:
12/08/00Florida Supreme Court orders manual recounts fo 43k ballots that registered NO VOTE. The Court adds some 380 votes to Gore.

12/09/00---US Supreme Court orders the recounts stopped.

12/11/00---US Supreme Court hears arguments on Florida Supreme Court's decision.

12/12/00---Florida House of Representatives votes to certify a slate of electors for George W. Bush.

12/12/00---US Supreme Court finds the recount ordered by the florida Supreme Court to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Seven Justices find it violates the Equal Protection Clause; three of these seven find, that it also violates Article II of the Constitution (grants the State's Legislators authority to determine the manner of choosing presidential electors).

So there you have it...supported by the US Supreme court, James of Tupper. Gore lost...legal, fair, and square. You don't gotta like it, but you do gotta live with it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#491 Consumer Comment

A "2 for 1" special!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Constitutional changes to force feed America over what is and what is not a marrage. Bush has touted many times that he feels this is needed because of his FAITH.

Yeah, and so what? Let the gays get married in Canada, or a New Age Church. Even Clinton voted down gay marriage. Why not rave about him? (I still want specific statements by reliable sourcesjust like you. More than one occasion, more than some out-of-context-quip, and more than one specific instance. I want to see that which you deem constant.) Many occurrences should make it easy to find for you, like the supposed many times I'm to have said that you have no morals if you're not of the Christian faith. Mularchy.

Keeping in line with the above....constant harrasment of the gay community. Based on his FAITH.

Well, since you want sources, so do Iand not Gay marriage was voted down!that's proof! Because it isn't proof of how Gay folks are being hunted down, harassed or whatever. If I have to tolerate gay-day at Disney, and watch as parades of French-kissing, fondling, and middle-finger-flipping lovers in same-sex pairs crowd the streets in a parade, you'll just have to accept the fact that most of America---and by most, I mean the voting populace---isn't quite ready to accept same-sex-coupling on a legal basis. I don't have a problem with people who choose to be gay, per se. but I don't like the fact that it's being taught in schools as an alternate lifestyle. Who my kid decides to have sex with shouldn't be something she's given as a selection by her health class teacher in Junior High or High School.

Constant mention of prayer in PUBLIC schools.

Hi, I'm ---prayer in public schools---George---prayer in public schools---Bush! You mean like that? Prayer was removed from public schools long ago. Get you head outta your pASSt and get with the program.

Attempts to undermine the Constitution in regards to separation of Church and State.

Yeah, I don't like it when y'all do it, either.

Heres a real simple one for you.....Faith based initiatives. Thats nice, our taxpayer money going right into the coffers of churches.

Right up there with all the kids getting condoms from the public school nurse, after being instructed on how to use them---also paid for by our taxes. How about methodone clinics on the Federal dime? These addicts would sell their mother for a fix, but can't afford to get off their kick, so we foot the bill. Then there's the long-term health carewe can't even give folks on Social Security a decent living---by the time I'm old enough to get benefits, there won't be any, most likely---but politicians in DC are mad as hell coz they can't have a sculpture park? We have all the money in the world to dole out welfare checks and grants for the Foundation of the Artsbut nothing for the working stiffsespecially the small businessperson. That's you and I, Kiddo.

Giving a near "bat phone" to jokes of reality like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the White House. As if we need these ultra-hypocritical nuts telling the most powerful man on the planet whats "right" and "wrong".

Please show credible proof that there's a Batphone in the White House. Just because our President has faith in a higher entity, and seeks Christian counsel (I really don't care if you think it's hypocritical'---why don't you get that?), he has a right to seek it.

Constant and blatant references that this country is "Christian". Founded by "Christians". And should be "Christian"......period.

Look it up, Darlin'. Of the fifty-five members that wrote the Constitution, fifty-two were active members of their Church. Citing twenty-seven Biblical violations, they wrote the Declaration of independence. Thomas Jefferson called the Bible the cornerstone for American liberty, and put it in schools as a guide. Patrick Henry said, Our Country was Founded on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. James Madison said We have staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart. George Washington said in his farewell address, You can't have National morality apart from Religious principle.

These men are also the ones who believed you couldn't call yourself an American, if you were to subvert the Word of God. These are the same men that you claim you have such tremendous respect for---our Founding Fathers. But it's people like you who make being patriotic something to be ashamed of. What appears to piss off you and other like-minded, is that my values are considered old fashioned, but I still hold them dear to my heart. And people like you think you're so much better than I, so much more enlightened. Why? Because ideals like yours have aided in the slaughter of over Thirty MILLION unborn children since 1973 Roe V. Wade verdict? You're not. You've just sold out, because it's far and away more fun to use your self-righteous posture to avoid responsibility for yourselves. Your types care more for some spotted owl eggs, than you care for the lives of unborn human babies.

I see no difference in Bush Jr's stance. And that stance is just plain vile.

Your opinionin both cases. Please show me where Bush, Jr. said he doesn't view atheists as American citizens. I see no difference is only your opinion, and since you say I'm full of crap because I offer my opinion, I will stand on your very own edict.

Heres a good one Vera. You just about answered your own question......
"Miers is no longer an issueher nomination has been withdrawn. (Thank Goodness!)"

Yeah? And your point is? I didn't like Miers because she lacked judicial experience, and her changes in the past made her a weak candidate. Like I've said beforeI don't agree with everything Bush does.

Well you wanted to know why I thought Bush was forcing religon on us. You just answered it.

Captain of the Double Standard.
Cop out! See? I am doing your work for you! Do you have any factual basis for your opinion that you can claim as a neutral source I mean? You've been telling me how full of it I am, but you say I'm giving you all your answers! And I even tried to be nice in my questioning, too. Well, you can't deny it---I knew this would start a fresh snarl. You didn't disappoint, Ben.
I get the notion that in your world, some rights are more equal than others. If I can't point to other links provided by others posting here, you need to get your own sources.

Miers was a joke to the middle of the road people like myself because she had no experience and was a blatant and obvious crony of Bush.

And now, the scary lady is gone. Oh, myyyySCARY LADY! (Jazz hands and a Jerry Lewis screechy voice) See there? You and I agreed on something (Miers' lack of experience)!

Middle of the road, my Aunt Fanny's fannyyou're so far left, you have to turn around to look forward!

Yet, no one here seems to mind how Clinton fired every single US attorney, and replaced those with his own handpicked selections. At the time ('93), it was thought that he did this to distract investigations into financial scandals in Arkansas. But we know in hindsight that (while it was possible the previous is correct) it was more to prepare for the defense of other, equally large atrocities. Billy's good at the bait-and-switch, I'll give im that. Proof is all over the news. (CronyismPUH!)

Even your own conservatives used those red flags. To those further left she was just another conservative to fight. But to the right end of the spectrum (thats you Vera...just in case you forgot) she wasnt conservative ENOUGH.

Actually, the left saw a potential, malleable option. She was once a Democrat, after all. The Demos were pretty quiet about Miers pretty soon after the shock of her nomination wore off. I honestly think that being upset (brief as it was for the Dems) about the whole Miers nomination was one of the only times both sides were in agreement---that, and the vote to go to war.

Now this new appointment is just a blatant and outright dissing of anything fair.

Dissing?? Yo-yo-yo WhassUP, Home BOYEEEE! Lemme hol' sumpin' fuhyah! [Eye roll]

He is an ultra-right looney that will take us into the dark ages. He's almost a clone of C.Thomas.I dont think I even need to go into what Thomas thinks about religon. Its outright prehistoric (as in get ready to re-write the world map as FLAT and throw away your globes!). I think Ill have more rights if I lived in an Amish community, or even Saudi Arabia after this zealot gets ahold of our constitution.

We'll see, won't we? Nothing's cast in stone yet.
Aside from that, it wasn't Christians who pushed to force prayer from schools, and it wasn't Christians who pushed to put Alfred Kinsey's bent rhetoric (based on the sexual exploitation of hundreds of childrensome as young as two months old) in our public schools to teach our kids about sexuality. It's people like you, Ben, with their big mouths and incessant whining that WE are forcing our rights on YOU. When in reality, it's you who's trying to convince us that our ideas are outmoded, and inferior. (Which they aren't.)

When prayer was in school, during the forties and fifties, chewing gum and talking were the most consistent nagging annoyances. Now that prayer is out, murder and rape have taken place. I'd rather suffer the detention for chewing gum, or laughing at the teacher's goofy haircut, thank you.

Im sure your just giddy and in total glee

I don't do glee'.

that you nuts will be able to take science out of mainstream life and bring back more important moral things like the inquisition. Followed closely by buring at the stake any two couples shacked up together of the same sex.

See, and you accuse me of being narrow-minded! Just because I believe in a Sovereign God, doesn't mean I don't have a healthy respect for science. I loved it in school, and showing my kids the neat little experiments that wowed them when they were little. Are you kidding? I wish I had video-taped my daughter's reaction when I took a copper coil, a coat-hanger and some really strong magnets, and connected the setup to a lightbulb. I spun the magnets within the coil and the bulb litreally simple, but she thought it was the coolest thing!

Regarding the Inquisition, it wasn't American Christians who were responsible. Just like the crusades, it started out as witness, but as more individuals were given greater carte blanche, it became a war of torture and animosity. The only thing the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Witch Trials ever proved, is that absolute power corrupts absolutelyand that deviation from a greater moral center and a lack of self-governing can create monsters. I believe that that much of same can be said for Big Government. They have far too much power at their disposal, and this country has been on a decline since the mid-fifties/early sixties.

By the way...what is your issue with gay folks?? To they not fit in your narrow band of "tolerance"? I'm not passing any judgment on them. I don't agree with their lifestyle, but I respect their right to make that choice! I have gay friends that I simply adoreand they respect my non-gay-ness (??)being straightenough to value my friendship. What one does with their privates is THEIR business, and to be kept discreet (discreet; private, non-publicyou know, like you and James want all aspects of God or Christianity). Not INDISCREET, like Bill Clinton's whoremongering habits.

I own a company that sells laboratory equipment. Chemistry, hemotology, immunoassay systems and such.

Isn't being a small business owner great?

Should I stop selling these and start stocking leaches and blood letting devices?

Personally, I don't recommend that. not a smart business move. However, Leeches and bee-stings have been shown to prove beneficial in the Medical field. So have maggots, the kissing bug, and other of Nature's little miracles. It says so in Romans 1:20: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse Nature has its merits, as does the Science that sought out those natural miracles.

I won't even get into the errors and horrors dealt to society in the name of science.

I mean lets be honest here.

Yes, please, let's DO.

We gotta keep the economy rolling right? (there be rich people out there that need to get richer!) Arrrrrrgh!

Well, if that's your goal, you must be a Liberal Democrat (Socialist in pretty clothes, extortionist, legal theif....you pick...I got lots more!).

After all, we cant keep our health care system the way it is using science (HEAVEN forbid!...that nasty science, next it will be evolution in our schools again! Crusaders! Charge!).

Another fine product of California Schooling. They need to get you kids outta the dark ages. And if they teach the positive aspects of Islam, why can they not teach the more positive aspects of Christianity---not the dark ages', the Spanish Inquisition, and the Crusades? Why can they only see good in Islam, and bad in Christianity? If kids have to pray to Allah, the Compassionate, and Creator, what's wrong with them learning about Jesus Christ, healer of leprosy, blindness, and blood disorders? Why can't we show kids in schools out there that Jesus was forgiving and loving? Why must so many see the angry, vengeful God who smites and plaguesbut not the God who gave his only Son as a sacrifice to a world full of ingrates? What about the God who gave his people repeated chances to redeem themselves, prior to Christ?

And by the waythey DO teach Darwin's Theory of Evolution is schools; of course, they leave out that even Darwin himself conceded to the wisdom of the Almighty, and that he himself states that his writ is a THEORY. All on the tax-payer's coin.

According to zealots like yourselves its this science (and the athiests that support it like myself) that is ruining our country.

Waitaminnit--(looking back, forward, then back again)isn't it you-an atheist---who's saying that the religious zealots are running the country?
Dammit, make up your mind and stop letting both faces talk at once! Not all those that support science are atheist, too, Ben.

Oh and I'm still waiting for proof of your "Islam in CA" crap. The "look on a human rights webpage" doesnt cut it. Especially after I have asked you more than 5 times.

How many times have I asked you---or has Shawn asked you, James, and such---to present proof? How many times have you all outright refused? Why is it okay for you guys to lie, spin, and refuse, but wrong for us to present our opinions (and then later, sources for how we draw those conclusions)? Because it disagrees with yours? (feel free to see the Bill Of Rights before you respond to that.) Far as I can see, I'm one of the ones defending a position, and you guys are on the push. I've already printed in a couple articles---feel free to call em spin---it won't change the fact that it happened, and it's real. (Where did I say you could find it on a Human rights web page? I said look for it on Human Events Online it's a political newspaper. Ronald Regan's favorite, I'm told!)

Your flat out refusal at first. Your comments about "not doing work for me" crap. And your pathetic attempts to use other peoples post as "See others posted for me". Your really reaching here Vera. And dont you dare get some bizzare fundamentalist webpage to point too. I take their banterings about as well as I take yours......its BS.

I answered this above. My sources are as valid to me as your precious Michael Moore-On and Dan Blather are to you. As if you have any right to tell me what and where I need to get my news from. Sorry, kid, I don't have to sit and wait for my opinions and feelings to be issued to me dailylike you apparently do.

Get a viable neutral source. And a weblink....not just a "insert name here". I want the URL, the airdate, or the exact date of the news/magazine article.

Done. And again, see response above.

The computer your using to access this webpage Vera,........you can thank science.

Technology. Birthed by Science, actuallybut declared separate; hence the terms Science and Technology. Eep.

"And on the ninth day....God said let there be Intel.......er AMD.......and Windows. But do NOT eat of the fruit of Linux!"

I can only imagine that you've been somehow victimized by some weird Amish or Mennonite person, who thinks science is the Devil's work, and that we should remain in the days before your electric butt-plug had electricity. What ever the case may be, Christians aren't afraid of sciencemost of us embrace it readily. What do you smoke that adds two more days to your week, dude?

"If you hear that in one of the towns, there are men who are telling people to go and worship other gods, it is your duty to look into the matter and examine it. If it is proved and confirmed, you must put the inhabitants of that town to the sword. You must lay the town under the curse of destruction, the town and everything in it. You must pile up all its loot in the public square and burn the town and all its loot. That town is to be a ruin for all time, and never rebuilt." ---Deuteronomy 13:17

Actually, that's Deuteronomy 13:14 through 16, as you write it, and that's the way it was, back in Old Testament. The Jews were trying to protect their faith (like you are protecting your right to NOT have faith) by whatever means they can. Is it any less brutal, than what the Qu'ran suggests be done with Infidels? That Hitler suggested be done with the Jews (or any race that opposed him?)? How would you feel towards someone who came in and pillaged your people, raped your women and Daughters, killed your Sons and Brothers and slaughtered your kind on sight? Wouldn't you want to see them wiped out, too (you sure have a happy tone in your text when you rejoice over the possibility of the systematic extinction of Christianity!)?

Many of the issues of the Old Testament were changed by Jesus in the New Testament. Semitic (or is it RabbinicI always confuse those!) Jewish are more Old Testament, and Messianic Jewish respect both the Old and the New Testamentbut the Semitic Jewish (I'm not totally sure, just seen a few instances) don't seem to hold the Messianic Jews as a close brotherhoodit seems they don't want much to do with them. Lack of experience in the Jewish culture, however, leaves that open to speculation.

To me this means any OTHER religon ("other gods"), and anyone WITHOUT religon (just the "other" part). Flat out, you WANT ME DEAD (and everyone that happens to live in my town for some odd reason regardless!).

Again, that's the Old Testament, and you're right---that particular paragraph does mean anyone who worships other Gods should be ousted or killed. Earlier in the same chapter of Deuteronomy, it mentions the same fate to members of one's own Family. It's there, alright.

But that doesn't mean I want YOU deadthat was just Old Testament thinking at the time. They were taking back the land they felt was theirs, as promised by God at the time. Do you see the Semitic Jews running around killing Christians, Catholics, Indians, and Buddhists? No. But you sure see Islam advancing every inch they can, don't you?

Am I to assume, then, that you don't have a big problem with the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocents by Saddam? Do you not have a problem with the rape and slaughter of women by his Sons, Uday and Qusay (Sp?)? They didn't do it in the name of a Christian God, so it must have been okay, right?

This is the "Book" you and Bush live for?

No, that's a piece of a Chapter in the Old Testament. In most of the Christian religion, the Old Testament is more of a reference point, in some cases. If you were to look at the myriad religions and their relationship to the Bible as a wagon wheel or bike tire, the bible would be the hub, each denomination would be represented as a spoke, and the common points in each belief system would be the outer rim that joins us all together in some fashion.

You, for the sake of appearances, seem to be looking at the outer rim a lot. You're lumping ALL aspects of Christianity to ONE category, denominizing it Christianity, then have the gall to think (and present as such), that you have a good, solid grip on the Judeo-Christian religion as a whole. Armed with this false and utterly warped, skewed, misconstrued and just plain erroneous information, you think all Christians believe the same, feel the same, act the same, and are the same. You are mistaken.

If you move that same logic to Blacks, it's Racism; to the Poor, it's Elitism, to women (or if you're a woman labeling all men), it's sexism, to homosexuals.well, you get the idea. You're just a bigot in the fancy trappings of political correctness. Tolerance is only open to those who think like you, agree with you, and support you. No better than the Klansman or Grand Wizard we have in Congress, no better than that moron Max Cleland (who claims himself a war hero for collecting a grenade he didn't know was hot on the way to have a beer with his friends).

And spare me the I basterdize the Bible s**t.

I didn't accuse you of that. If you'll notice, I mentioned that you presented the information of the Bible accurately. I would appreciate it if you'd give it the correct number designation (chapter 13, verses 14 through 16, or Deut. 13:1416, as in this case), though. But that's an easy mistake at least you were in the right neighborhood, unlike James.
I am curious. did you get that from the New King James version?

James, your plagiarized a-heeyuck song about Bush only serves to show the world how your backwoods mentality works. You couldn't have possibly come up with that yourself. Once again, you latest string of posts is nothing more than windy a*s-kissing, insult-flinging, and chest-beating about how you've supposedly proven how roofing is a bigger rip off than any business. Just like you claimed you whittled Robert down a bitpure nonsense. You have proven zilchas in, once again, count the brains in your head People just get sick of responding to you, watching you warp, tantrum, spin, bleat, and blather.

How many used car salesmen are called to peoples' homes to give them a really great deal? I'll say it for you: Duhhhhhh!
That's about the level of intellect your posts offer.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#490 Consumer Comment

Enough, with the religion crap already!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Here's a link everyone should find rather interesting. I know the "James' Gang" will ignore the column, but who cares? I still cannot figure out why a Canadian cares so much about our Government. I am not even sure the one in Tupper Lake knows we have a Government.

Go to www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/2/220331.shtml and read it. You will notice the New York Times even confirmed everything in the report. This is the same NY Times that has publicly stated they will not put anything into print that will make Bush look good. They know the information is correct, and still ignore it. Take that for what it's worth. If you still choose to ignore FACTS, so be it.

Let's get off the religion issues, mmmmkay?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#489 Consumer Comment

Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Bush and Cheney should be impeached for lying to us about the reasons for going to war. They were behind the 9-11 attacks, and only now are the bought and paid for news channels actually investigating the Plame leak.

You ignorant people behind Bush are just as guilty for the murders in Iraq!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#488 Consumer Comment

Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Bush and Cheney should be impeached for lying to us about the reasons for going to war. They were behind the 9-11 attacks, and only now are the bought and paid for news channels actually investigating the Plame leak.

You ignorant people behind Bush are just as guilty for the murders in Iraq!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#487 Consumer Comment

Bush and his cronies are getting rich over the war in Iraq

AUTHOR: Katherine - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, November 03, 2005

Bush and Cheney should be impeached for lying to us about the reasons for going to war. They were behind the 9-11 attacks, and only now are the bought and paid for news channels actually investigating the Plame leak.

You ignorant people behind Bush are just as guilty for the murders in Iraq!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#486 Consumer Suggestion

Vera get's off topic & just runs with it! - forget the "billions of dollars" that the government could rake in from the legalization of drugs people are gonna use anyway

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Now she spends an entire post on drugs & welfare!

Yea sure Vera... forget the "billions of dollars" that the government could rake in from the legalization of drugs people are gonna use anyway & just keep that money in the hands of the "Cartel's" right?

I mean we all know if ya make stuff illegal, it lowers it's use... doesn't it? Pick up yer pot sniffin dogs... the war on drugs is on & we have "not begun to fight"!

Well I am all for ya Vera if that might keep troops outta the Middle East! Yea maybe we should all back ya on that one.

I mean if ya legalize stuff like booze & smokes... hell people will be doing it in "every workplace" wherever we go! Last thing I need is a doctor operating on me stoned on crack!

We gotta regulate these people before they get outta control! Why if you legalized drugs just on "Wall Street" alone... just think of what that would do to our economy? Yep... let's back Vera on that one! War on drugs definately makes more sense than a war in the Middle East!

Neither might be win-able but ... without people dieing over something... Vera would not feel whole!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#485 Consumer Comment

An extra note......for the reason challenged Vera....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Heres a good one Vera. You just about answered your own question......

"Miers is no longer an issueher nomination has been withdrawn. (Thank Goodness!)"


Well you wanted to know why I thought Bush was forcing religon on us. You just answered it. Miers was a joke to the middle of the road people like myself because she had no experience and was a blatant and obvious crony of Bush. Even your own conservatives used those red flags. To those further left she was just another conservative to fight. But to the right end of the spectrum (thats you Vera...just in case you forgot) she wasnt conservative ENOUGH.

Now this new appointment is just a blatant and outright dissing of anything fair. He is an ultra-right looney that will take us into the dark ages. He's almost a clone of C.Thomas.I dont think I even need to go into what Thomas thinks about religon. Its outright prehistoric (as in get ready to re-write the world map as FLAT and throw away your globes!). I think Ill have more rights if I lived in an Amish community, or even Saudi Arabia after this zealot gets ahold of our constitution.

Im sure your just giddy and in total glee that you nuts will be able to take science out of mainstream life and bring back more important moral things like the inquisition. Followed closely by buring at the stake any two couples shacked up together of the same sex.

On a side note....

I own a company that sells laboratory equipment. Chemistry, hemotology, immunoassay systems and such.

Should I stop selling these and start stocking leaches and blood letting devices? I mean lets be honest here. We gotta keep the economy rolling right? (there be rich people out there that need to get richer!) After all, we cant keep our health care system the way it is using science (HEAVEN forbid!...that nasty science, next it will be evolution in our schools again! Crusaders! Charge!). According to zealots like yourselves its this science (and the athiests that support it like myself) that is ruining our country.


Oh and I'm still waiting for proof of your "Islam in CA" crap. The "look on a human rights webpage" doesnt cut it. Especially after I have asked you more than 5 times. Your flat out refusal at first. Your comments about "not doing work for me" crap. And your pathetic attempts to use other peoples post as "See others posted for me". Your really reaching here Vera. And dont you dare get some bizzare fundamentalist webpage to point too. I take their banterings about as well as I take yours......its BS. Get a viable neutral source. And a weblink....not just a "insert name here". I want the URL, the airdate, or the exact date of the news/magazine article.


And one more note.......

The computer your using to access this webpage Vera,........you can thank science. At least for now. Im sure you nuts will re-write history soon enough on that one.

"And on the ninth day....God said let there be Intel.......er AMD.......and Windows. But do NOT eat of the fruit of Linux!"


Why am I so scared?.....heres why....


"If you hear that in one of the towns, there are men who are telling people to go and worship other gods, it is your duty to look into the matter and examine it. If it is proved and confirmed, you must put the inhabitants of that town to the sword. You must lay the town under the curse of destruction, the town and everything in it. You must pile up all its loot in the public square and burn the town and all its loot. That town is to be a ruin for all time, and never rebuilt." ---Deuteronomy 13:17

To me this means any OTHER religon ("other gods"), and anyone WITHOUT religon (just the "other" part). Flat out, you WANT ME DEAD (and everyone that happens to live in my town for some odd reason regardless!).

This is the "Book" you and Bush live for? If you think Im going to sit idle while my country is being run by this sort of mentality.....your wrong. And spare me the "dont basterdize the Bible" s**t. I think it stands on its own and its intentions are plain to see.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#484 Consumer Comment

How? Where? What?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

You people are asking me why I think Bush wants to force religon on everyone? Are you serious? You cant see it? Good grief people....its as obvious as the lies about Iraq.


Lets see.....

Constitutional changes to force feed America over what is and what is not a marrage. Bush has touted many times that he feels this is needed because of his FAITH.

Keeping in line with the above....constant harrasment of the gay community. Based on his FAITH.

Constant mention of prayer in PUBLIC schools.

Attempts to undermine the Constitution in regards to separation of Church and State.

Heres a real simple one for you.....Faith based initiatives. Thats nice, our taxpayer money going right into the coffers of churches.

Giving a near "bat phone" to jokes of reality like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the White House. As if we need these ultra-hypocritical nuts telling the most powerful man on the planet whats "right" and "wrong".

Constant and blatant references that this country is "Christian". Founded by "Christians". And should be "Christian"......period.

I can go on and on and on. If you are so gullible and completely oblivious to these blatant snubs at our freedoms and reason in general, then its no surprise you wear blinders to all the other crooked things this administration is doing.

Just remember that Bush's daddy back in '87 said that he "didnt think of athiests as citizens of America".

I see no difference in Bush Jr's stance. And that stance is just plain vile.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#483 Consumer Comment

How? Where? What?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

You people are asking me why I think Bush wants to force religon on everyone? Are you serious? You cant see it? Good grief people....its as obvious as the lies about Iraq.


Lets see.....

Constitutional changes to force feed America over what is and what is not a marrage. Bush has touted many times that he feels this is needed because of his FAITH.

Keeping in line with the above....constant harrasment of the gay community. Based on his FAITH.

Constant mention of prayer in PUBLIC schools.

Attempts to undermine the Constitution in regards to separation of Church and State.

Heres a real simple one for you.....Faith based initiatives. Thats nice, our taxpayer money going right into the coffers of churches.

Giving a near "bat phone" to jokes of reality like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the White House. As if we need these ultra-hypocritical nuts telling the most powerful man on the planet whats "right" and "wrong".

Constant and blatant references that this country is "Christian". Founded by "Christians". And should be "Christian"......period.

I can go on and on and on. If you are so gullible and completely oblivious to these blatant snubs at our freedoms and reason in general, then its no surprise you wear blinders to all the other crooked things this administration is doing.

Just remember that Bush's daddy back in '87 said that he "didnt think of athiests as citizens of America".

I see no difference in Bush Jr's stance. And that stance is just plain vile.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#482 Consumer Comment

How? Where? What?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

You people are asking me why I think Bush wants to force religon on everyone? Are you serious? You cant see it? Good grief people....its as obvious as the lies about Iraq.


Lets see.....

Constitutional changes to force feed America over what is and what is not a marrage. Bush has touted many times that he feels this is needed because of his FAITH.

Keeping in line with the above....constant harrasment of the gay community. Based on his FAITH.

Constant mention of prayer in PUBLIC schools.

Attempts to undermine the Constitution in regards to separation of Church and State.

Heres a real simple one for you.....Faith based initiatives. Thats nice, our taxpayer money going right into the coffers of churches.

Giving a near "bat phone" to jokes of reality like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the White House. As if we need these ultra-hypocritical nuts telling the most powerful man on the planet whats "right" and "wrong".

Constant and blatant references that this country is "Christian". Founded by "Christians". And should be "Christian"......period.

I can go on and on and on. If you are so gullible and completely oblivious to these blatant snubs at our freedoms and reason in general, then its no surprise you wear blinders to all the other crooked things this administration is doing.

Just remember that Bush's daddy back in '87 said that he "didnt think of athiests as citizens of America".

I see no difference in Bush Jr's stance. And that stance is just plain vile.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#481 Consumer Comment

How? Where? What?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

You people are asking me why I think Bush wants to force religon on everyone? Are you serious? You cant see it? Good grief people....its as obvious as the lies about Iraq.


Lets see.....

Constitutional changes to force feed America over what is and what is not a marrage. Bush has touted many times that he feels this is needed because of his FAITH.

Keeping in line with the above....constant harrasment of the gay community. Based on his FAITH.

Constant mention of prayer in PUBLIC schools.

Attempts to undermine the Constitution in regards to separation of Church and State.

Heres a real simple one for you.....Faith based initiatives. Thats nice, our taxpayer money going right into the coffers of churches.

Giving a near "bat phone" to jokes of reality like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the White House. As if we need these ultra-hypocritical nuts telling the most powerful man on the planet whats "right" and "wrong".

Constant and blatant references that this country is "Christian". Founded by "Christians". And should be "Christian"......period.

I can go on and on and on. If you are so gullible and completely oblivious to these blatant snubs at our freedoms and reason in general, then its no surprise you wear blinders to all the other crooked things this administration is doing.

Just remember that Bush's daddy back in '87 said that he "didnt think of athiests as citizens of America".

I see no difference in Bush Jr's stance. And that stance is just plain vile.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#480 Consumer Comment

Here are some articles I found....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Just for the fun of it, I went bact to patrick's post and typed in the same words as he "islam taught california middle school", but I made it "islam taught IN california middle school" on my yahoo browser, and I got the response Patrick got, plus more...lots more. Hopefully, this will clear up a few issues. I never implied that this was the doctrine being taught in ALL middle schools in California, just some of them...and one, two, or twenty---doesn't change the fact that it's there.

This will be that last thing I add regarding this particular phase of the subject (religion in California Schools)...as I too, believe there's alot of wandering going on---even if it is to contest the blather spewed onto this thread by James of Canada who sees fit to change the subject when facts get uncomfortable for him.

So here it is, the only editing being the removal of full links (you can put 'www.' in front of it to make it a link, in most cases.)

Look who's teaching Johnny about Islam
Saudi-funded Islamic activists have final say in shaping public-school lessons on religions

Posted: May 3, 2004
By Paul Sperry
2004 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON -- A top textbook consultant shaping classroom education on Islam in American public schools recently worked for a school funded and controlled by the Saudi government, which propagates a rigidly anti-Western strain of Islam, a WorldNetDaily investigation reveals.

The consultant, Susan L. Douglass, has also praised Pakistan's madrassa schools as "proud symbols of learning," even after the U.S. government blamed them for fueling the rise of the Taliban and al-Qaida.

Douglass, routinely described as a "scholar" or "historian," has edited manuscripts of world history textbooks used by middle and high school students across the country. She's also advised state education boards on curriculum standards dealing with world religion, and has helped train thousands of public school teachers on Islamic instruction.

In effect, she is responsible for teaching millions of American children about Islam, experts say, while operating in relative obscurity.

WorldNetDaily has learned that up until last year Douglass taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria, Va., which teaches Wahhabism through textbooks that condemn Jews and Christians as infidels and enemies of Islam. Her husband, Usama Amer, still teaches at the grades 2-12 school, a spokeswoman there confirmed. Both are practicing Muslims.

The Saudi government funds the school, which has a sister campus in Fairfax, Va.

"It is a school that is under the auspices of the Saudi Embassy," said Ali al-Ahmed, executive director of the Washington-based Saudi Institute, a leading Saudi opposition group. "So the minister of education appoints the principal of the school, and the teachers are paid by the Saudi government."

He says many of the academy's textbooks he has reviewed contain passages promoting hatred of non-Muslims. For example, the eleventh-grade text says one sign of the Day of Judgment will be when Muslims fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: "Oh Muslim, oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him."

Al-Ahmed, a Shiite Muslim born in predominantly Sunni Muslim Saudi Arabia, says the school's religious curriculum was written by Sheik Saleh al-Fawzan, a senior member of the Saudi religious council, who he said has "encouraged war against unbelievers." Al-Fawzan has authored textbooks used in Saudi schools.

A report released last year by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom found that the Saudi Ministry of Education publishes texts presenting Islam as "the only true religion" and denouncing all other religions as "invalid" and "misguided."

"Christians and Jews repeatedly are labeled as infidels and enemies of Islam who should not be befriended or emulated, and are referred to in eighth-grade textbooks as 'apes and pigs,'" the report said. In addition, it found that "some Saudi government-funded textbooks used in North American Islamic schools have been found to encourage incitement to violence again non-Muslims."

Critics complain that Douglass, who taught at the Saudi academy for at least a decade, has convinced American textbook publishers and educators to gloss over the violent aspects of Islam to make the faith more appealing to non-Muslim children. The units on Islam reviewed by WND appear to give a glowing and largely uncritical view of the faith.

Asked about it, Douglass referred questions to the Council on Islamic Education, which did not respond. CIE's website lists her in its staff directory as a "principal researcher and writer."

CIE is a Los Angeles-based Muslim activist group run by Shabbir Mansuri, who has been quoted in the local press saying he's waging a "bloodless" revolution to fight what he calls anti-Muslim bias in public schools and promote Islam in a positive light in American classrooms. Mansuri, who consults with Saudi education ministers at his center, claimed in a 2002 op-ed piece that Islam has been on American soil "since before this nation was founded."

Also, he spoke at a 2001 Islamic conference with several Muslim extremists, including an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, according to a speakers schedule for the event obtained by WND.

The three major U.S. publishers of world history texts Houghton Mifflin, McGraw Hill and Prentice Hall have all let Mansuri and Douglass review their books. In fact, Houghton Mifflin's seventh-grade text, "Across the Centuries," was republished according to CIE's suggestions.

In the past, most K-12 texts devoted no more than a few pages to Islam. But thanks to CIE's efforts since 1990 including lobbying state education boards grade-school text units on Islam have flourished. "Across the Centuries," for one, spends more than 30 pages on Islam and includes colorful prose and graphics.

But it offers a sanitized version of Islam, critics say.

For instance, the text softens the meaning of "jihad" a concept interpreted in Abdullah Yusuf Ali's "The Meaning of the Holy Quran" to mean "waging war," or "fighting in Allah's cause" with dying while fighting in the cause being the highest form of jihad.

Holy war is not part of the definition found in the "Across the Centuries" textbook, however.
"An Islamic term that is often misunderstood is jihad," the text says on page 64. "The term means 'to struggle,' to do one's best to resist temptation and overcome evil."

One of CIE's teachers guides lists quitting smoking as an example of jihad.

"It's a sugar-coated definition," said Edward White, associate counsel for the Thomas More Law Center, an Ann Arbor, Mich.-based public-interest law firm which has fought what it sees as Islamic indoctrination in U.S. public education.

Even scholar John L. Esposito, considered by critics to be one of Islam's leading apologists, has written that "jihad means the struggle to spread and to defend Islam" through "warfare" if necessary.

Houghton Mifflin's high school world history textbook, "Patterns of Interaction," used in Texas and other states, reportedly leaves jihad out altogether.

White argues Houghton Mifflin has published an unrealistic picture of Islam, and has been manipulated by CIE, which clearly has a pro-Muslim bias.

The Boston-based publisher denies it. A spokesman called the assertion "unfounded."

However, its editorial director for school social studies told a Muslim website in 1999 that it's also allowed CIE to critique its coverage of Christian history, and to add its view of what the Crusades were like for the Muslims.

The article, posted on Sound Vision.com, a marketer of Muslim educational products, quotes Houghton Mifflin editor Abigail Jungreis as saying, "We've had a really good relationship with them (CIE) over the years. Their reviewers are knowledgeable."

Jungreis singles out Douglass for praise in the article.

Douglass has argued for more in-depth coverage of Islam in classrooms, while at the same time advising that Christian principles, including historic facts such as Christ's crucifixion, are clearly qualified with attributions such as "Christians believe."

Houghton Mifflin is not the only major publisher influenced by CIE. Prentice Hall also collaborates with the group. And its "Connections to Today," which is the most widely used world history book in the country, instructs students that jihad is an "inner struggle to achieve spiritual peace," according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Also, CIE has helped write supplemental teachers materials that engage children in entertaining Muslim role-playing activities in the class.
Parents say they make the study of Christianity and other religions seem dull by comparison.

A CIE-edited teachers aid used in California schools became the subject of a federal First Amendment case last year, as WorldNetDaily reported. The Thomas More Law Center sued a San Francisco-area school district on behalf of parents of seventh-graders who were required to "become Muslims" for two weeks as part of their world history unit on Islam.

However, U.S. District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, a Clinton appointee, dismissed the lawsuit against the Byron Union School District, arguing the Muslim unit does not promote religion, and therefore does not violate the First Amendment's clause against religious establishment.
White, the lawyer in the case, says he's filed an appeal to overturn the ruling.

The controversial role-playing module, which CIE helped write, requires kids to recite Muslim prayers and verses of the Quran in class. Students also are required to give up things like watching TV or eating candy for a day to simulate Islamic fasting during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

"From the beginning, you and your classmates will become Muslims," the Student Guide portion of the Islam module instructs seventh-graders as an introduction to the material.

White notes that the module, titled "Islam: A simulation of Islamic history and culture," also white-washes the meaning of jihad, calling it a "struggle against oppression."

According to a copyright statement on page 91 of the module obtained by WorldNetDaily, its California-based publisher, Interaction Publishers Inc., agreed to allow CIE "to revise the original manuscript" after CIE protested "errors of fact and interpretation in Western historians' presentation of Islam."

"They had a hand in the revisions to this handbook," White asserted.

The same page states that the publisher also incorporated suggestions by Yousef Salem, associate director of the Islamic Education and Information Center in San Jose, Calif. Salem, a former Saudi resident, has praised the Muslim terrorist group Hezbollah, and called Israelis "terrorists."

The module mirrors parts of the middle-school religious curriculum at the Islamic Saudi Academy where Douglass taught, and where her husband still teaches.

For instance, the Islamic religion coursework for Grade 7 emphasizes, among other things, the "importance of reciting the Quran," according to the academy's website. Eighth-graders, moreover, study "fasting" and "pilgrimage." (They also study Quranic verses that deal with "the Punishment of the Disbelievers.")

The California Department of Education, which requires all seventh-grade world history courses to include a unit on Islam, approved the text and module. In 1998, the state overhauled its standards for its Islam unit to include more teaching about the Muslim prophet Muhammad and the Quran. Mansuri made numerous trips to Sacramento to lobby for the changes, and the department invited CIE to review its draft.

Many California parents say the state essentially is allowing Muslim activists to brainwash their kids into accepting Islam, while at the same time marginalizing Christianity.

In contrast to the seventh-grade Muslim unit, where children are first introduced to Islam, the earlier one on Christianity does not involve any role play. Students are not asked to recite Christian prayers or memorize Scripture.

Moreover, parents argue that neither the Islam chapter nor the role-playing module critically discuss the anti-Christian jihads of old, or new ones led by Islamic terrorists like Osama bin Laden. In fact, Byron teachers warned students against saying anything negative about Islam, U.S. court documents show.

And Islam is praised for tolerance and acceptance of other beliefs.

Yet the unit on Christianity is critical of that core American faith, particularly concerning the Crusades (which came on the heels of earlier Islamic invasions of non-Muslim territory).

One local parent, Jen Schroeder, told WND she worries California may be unwittingly producing more John Walker Lindhs. Lindh, who joined the Taliban, was a product of San Francisco public schools.

"John Walker Lindh is the fruit of California's efforts. He was a young impressionable child, just as my son is," she said. "How many more John Walkers before we stop promoting Islam in public schools?"

She and other critics charge CIE is not just interested in correcting factual or historical errors in textbooks. They say it has a hidden agenda: using public schools to promote Islam. And to do that, they say, it must first make it less threatening to nonbelievers, and more mainstream.

But in an October 2002 white paper, Douglass argued schools should respect the First Amendment and avoid indoctrinating students into religion.
"Teaching about religion should neither promote nor denigrate the ideals of any faith," she wrote.

At the same time, however, she warned teachers against "presenting non-Western religions as static traditions whose unfamiliarity to students can make them seem irrational."

And in the same article, "Teaching about Religion," she defended Pakistan's madrassas, which U.S. officials in the wake of the 9-11 attacks condemned as hatcheries for future bin Ladens.

According to Douglass, the Islamic schools, where young Muslim boys endlessly chant verses from the Quran, are "proud symbols of learning" which "have become confused in the public mind with symbols of ignorance."

Douglass and other staffers at CIE have trained more than 8,000 public school teachers in America on Islam instruction, according to the SoundVision.com article. The center has sold hundreds of copies of its teachers guide to public schools. Besides holding teacher workshops, CIE staffers also lecture at schools and colleges about Islam.

'Islam an American religion'
Douglass is associated with another Muslim activist group, one that is under federal investigation.

From 1988 to 1994, she wrote K-6 social studies books for the International Institute of Islamic Thought, or IIIT, a Saudi-tied charity. Federal authorities in 2002 raided IIIT's Northern Virginia offices on suspicion of terrorist ties.
Shortly after the raids, Mansuri defended the group's officials as "law-abiding Muslims" in a column distributed by the State Department's Office of International Information Programs.
IIIT president Taha Jaber al-Alwani once signed a copy of a fatwa declaring that jihad is the only way to liberate Palestine, according to a federal affidavit for the search warrant. He's also close to Sami al-Arian, recently arrested on terrorism-related charges.

In the same 2002 column, "Muslims Due Place at Table," Mansuri asserted: "Islam is an American religion," adding that "Islam has been on this soil since before the nation was founded, having come over with African slaves."

In July 2001, Mansuri spoke at the Islamic Circle of North America's convention in Cleveland with New York imam Siraj Wahhaj, who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and with Sheik Abdur Rahman al-Sudais, the senior imam at the Grand Mosque in Mecca, who has been quoted vilifying Jews as the "scum of humanity" and "the grandsons of monkeys and pigs."

The previous year Mansuri also appeared with Wahhaj at a fund-raising banquet hosted by the Saudi-backed Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR. Mansuri received an award for helping to eliminate Muslim stereotypes.
Some CAIR officials recently have been arrested on terrorism-related charges.

Nonetheless, the Washington-based Muslim-rights group has launched a coast-to-coast drive to stock public libraries with Islamic books as part of its campaign to educate Americans on the "peaceful" attributes of Islam.

One of the books on its recommended reading list: "Beyond a Thousand and One Nights" by Susan L. Douglass.

>>>end of WND Article.
Here's something I found on a website called ChronWatch, about yet another school

Vouchers Anyone? Islam Openly Taught in California School
Written by Jim Sparkman (ChronWatch Founder)
Sunday, November 30, 2003

A Christian student cannot say a prayer over his lunch without getting a detention, teachers can't wear crosses around their neck, and no one would dare mention Jesus Christ in a classroom. Yet, we hear of this example where Islam is openly taught in school. This report by Steve Klein in the U.S. Newswire tells of such an example in Covina, California.

AMECA Takes Issue with Islamic Indoctrination in America's Public Schools
We, strongly protest the ongoing plan for the Islamization of America through infiltrating our educational system.

American Middle-East Christian Association (AMECA) has learned of Royal Oak Intermediate School, Covina, California, teaching the Islamic religion to America's young, naive, impressionable school children.

In a letter sent home to parents, the teacher wrote, ''During the month of Ramadan, Muslims refrain from food or drink during daylight hours.'' For EXTRA CREDIT, he asked parents' OK for student participation by choosing ''to fast for one, two or three days.''

America's Christian children had better not even utter the name Jesus Christ in public schools without persecution and prosecution by the ''separation of church and state'' zealots.

AMECA will conduct a peaceful educational seminar in accordance with our First Amendment rights on the public sidewalk in front of ROYAL OAK INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL at 303 South Glendora Av in Covina, CA 91723 from 2:00-3:00 p.m. on MONDAY, NOV. 24.

We will have a number of experts in Islam to share quotes from the Koran in both Arabic and English. We will provide an American civics lesson for Royal Oak students, to see our FIRST AMENDMENT exercised peacefully and profoundly: A RIGHT FOUND IN NO ISLAMIC CONTROLLED NATION ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.

Contact Steve Klein at: IslamReview.com

End of Article

Maybe, Ben is correct, that "the religious zealots are taking over"...but it sure isn't the zealots of Christianity.

Good grief, this is scary stuff.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#479 Consumer Comment

And we "look away, look away, look away---" from the topic AGAIN. Thanks, James.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

James, yes poor Vera has fallen.

I don't see where you get that idea, B., I'm as strong in my stance as ever. James (Both of them) has proven nothing more than the fact that he is sorely delusional, and in need of an education. If anything, the only possibility that this war could be about oil, is the French, Russian, and Canadian factions protecting the nice little kickbacks they get from the illegitimate oil sales by Saddam in the UN-Sponsored Oil For Food Program.

No wonder they don't want us to go to war! Saddam's making them billions!

The Queen of Flames.

I already admitted I am hostile in my writespecially when singled out and attacked. You and James' incessant pointing at this fact is redundant.

(In the voice of Jack Nicholson after the witches of Eastwick have 'punished' him) She's the only woman I know who 'falls off the roof' EVERY FREAKIN' DAY OF THE YEAR! Roflmao

Well, if I do ever fall off a roof, it won't be because I'm drunk or stoned. And I don't live my life by pop Culture---what comical reference is next? Spongebob Squarepants? By the way, I could care less what anyone thinks of my professionI know it's honest, so you can rib all you like. I suppose, B., that along with your agreeing with legalizing drugs, ripping people off out of their hard earned money is okay?

Not sure what her problem is with your use of the word preface. From the standpoint that the 'Lord's Prayer' is the highlight, the material preceeding it could definitely be considered to preface it, and even if you don't see it that way, its certainly a relatively minor problem compared to some of the questionable usage others make, Shawn for example.

A preface usually precedes a book, not a chapter for one, and a prayer isn't a book, nor is the instructions to pray the only topic covered in Matthew Six. What I find so ludicrous is how James thinks he's beyond reproach, and so very educated, then he demonstrates otherwise in his hideous mangling of the Bible, and the English language. (Somehow, I get this image of a wee little man running around in the vast expanse that is James' cranial parking lot, slamming, locking, and caulking every opening to prevent the invasion of Reality.much less essential oxygen)

Vera, sorry I agree with James on the subject of legalizing drugs.

Yeah, you're sorry all right.

Lets face it, the biggest problems associated with drug use are the criminal culture and black market surrounding it. One of the worst drugs is already legal alcohol. It can be as addictive as heroin to the 10s of millions who are susceptible, and is responsible for huge amounts of disease, death, assault, and destruction. If legalized, dosage would be controlled, and deadly contaminants avoided.

Yeah, you go right ahead and think that, Kid. Cigarettes have done the world a whole heap of good, just like alcohol. What about the victims that alcohol and drugs claim, that aren't the result of the victim's consumption? Like the kid that gets thrown across a room because he dared walk if front of the TeeVee while Daddy was really drunk as he watched the game? (It's nice how you used shrapnel rending the tender flesh of a five year old, her essence pulsing out of her in coppery waves of gore as a dramatic pivot in one post, but you ignore the brutalities that have been meted out against children by the irresponsible consumption of drugs and alcohol.)

What about the baby that drowns in the tub because Mom's had a few too many nips of the cooking sherry and lost track of the time on a phone call? What about the kids that go to the doctor riddled with ailments because they come from homes with a pair of smoking parents? These problems are big enoughI don't see what good adding drug legalization would do to improve the equation.

Pot's so widespread, and hard as hell to traceit's the BIG shipments, when they get confiscated that make the news---what about the problems caused by teen usage? Should we make it legal for our kids to use?

You are making the mistake of assuming that making something legal (and government controlled, no less! Look at Welfare---there's a stinging tribute to the efficiency of governmental control!) would inspire the people that use it to demonstrate self-control. Some can. Most Cannot. Even more WILL not, should drugs become legal.

And drugs hurt a lot more than the user.

Billions of annual dollars would be diverted from criminal enterprises, both here and abroad, and billions more saved from fighting an ineffective 'war on drugs'.

And those billions can be diverted to the health-care costs of the continuously growing numbers that'll be using drugs, since they'd be legal, and insurance would become more expensive to include drug-related illness. Then there's the issue of lawsuits erupting forth, form the injuries and deaths caused by the consumption of drugs and the operation of heavy machinery. We'll see an increase of sexually transmitted diseases, because more people will be less inhibited to demonstrate sexual responsibility, and more babies will be born with diseasesand they're innocent, so we'll have to take care of them.
Kind of a slippery slope. (Who's lining up straw figures now? Not I.)

The war on drugs is lost?
Well, we've lost the war on murder, too, then. That is, if winning can be defined as total abolition. We don't have laws set up to prevent folks from doing what people don't want to do---and it's clear that people want to use drugs---I believe the laws that prohibit drug use have reduced the incidence of drug use.

Distribution channels that target children and teens would be eliminated.

Sure. And Joe Camel wasn't aimed at encouraging a younger smoking demographic. Before Joe Camel, there was the glamorizing of vice on the silver screen.

When I was a kid, I smoked cigarettes. Not just experimentedI had a habit that started when I was pretty young. To get what I wanted, I stole spare change from my folks, and snuck off to the store to get my ciggies. I'd wait outside, and ask the adults going into the store if they'd get some Cigarettes for my MomI lost the note she gave me, and if I go back empty handed, she'll surely whoop me. Naturally, they bought it. If not, I knew which gas-stations had easy means by which a kid could steal some nice, legal ciggs.

Back in '93, my car was stolen, and used to commit a robbery; since they couldn't get cash from the safe, guess what they DID steal? Armloads of cartons of cigarettes, and booze. When the cops finally managed to get my car back for me, it was stripped and in a really bad neighborhoodbut there were enough pot-seeds in it to start a small crop, and some roaches (do they still call the leftovers of a joint that?) in my ashtray.

So legalization of something doesn't necessarily eliminate the problems of crime surrounding the addiction. In fact, social acceptance has only served to exacerbate the problem. Sexualizing and/or glorifying (or using personable cartoon characters to appeal to the younger masses) the usage makes matters worse still.

Overcrowding in our jails would be reduced, as would criminal culture 'on the streets'. There would probably be a minor increase in social problems, but I doubt it would be significant (statistically speaking), as most of the people with addictive personalities are already using something, if 'only' alcohol.

That's just pure bullshit. All the crimes that land folks in jail aren't exclusively drug-relatedbut drugs in prison are just as big a problem. Small amounts of drugs (especially pot) usually result in a few hours in a holding cell, booking, and fines, not hard jail time.

As far as I'm concerned, a minor increase in social problems is the last thing we need! What if that minor increase in social problems happened to be the Bus driver that takes your kids to school? Sure, he didn't smoke the joint on the clock, but the THC was in his blood at the time he was driving the kids to school! Do you think the parents in such a situation are just going to shrug defeatedly and say, Well, there's nothing we can do. Drugs are legal, thank goodness.

And in most work environments (I dunnoh about Canada), alcohol consumption is not permitted on-premises, during normal work hours. In many cases, it's the same with cigarettes (for example, inside the store or restaurant), to a lesser degree. Could you imagine the nurse at the hospital smoking a bowl of crack on her break? I'm not saying it doesn't happen!
Good grief--look at all the folks that ARE addicted to legal, prescription drugs!
But the laws are in place to reduce the incidence out of fear of punishment.
Punishment that could cost the employee their joband the chance to make more money to buy (or have access to) more drugs.

And if, as James suggests, a significant amount were actually spent on education, the problems would probably diminish.

Look at all the educational programs out there for smoking and the organizations that help people who are addicted to alcohol get off their kick. Are they reducing the numbers of teenaged smokers, or teenagers using alcohol? Doubtful.

Because any teenager who reads some of the more adult-themed magazines (no, not playboy, but Newsweek, Time, Vogue, Popular Science/Mechanics, getting something from an article to contribute to a school paperhow about Hot Rod, Low Rider, and other Bikini-Clad-Girl-Humping-Big-Macho-Machine Magazines?), watches sports, music videos, primetime, or late night TeeVee is inundated with thousands of images glorifying alcohol and other addictive behaviors. There is more out there encouraging illicit behavior, than there is encouraging responsibility.

And while we're dipping into the subject of legal addictions'

Yeah, Welfare sure has been effective in stamping out poverty, hasn't it?

You know, when I was doing electrical work on a section of government subsidized housing, I noticed that all those poor people that live on the system had a lot of common traits: most (really, I mean most, not few!) of them had big-screen TeeVees (nice, new ones!), every game system (Playstation, Xbox, and such) known to mankind, really nice computers, nice clothes, and those really expensive shoes (Lugz, and of that ilk). Is it because Welfare had somehow taught these ingenious folks how to manage the money they get? Noit's because they cheat the system, and the taxpayer's footing the bill. I could conservatively estimate that sixty percent of these homesno lie--had drug paraphernalia or drugs themselves present. You didn't have to look hard, they made absolutely no attempt to hide it. And at least ninety percent of homes that had drugs or drug-stuff in em were nasty, filthy homes.

While I'm paying three-hundred a month for electricity, these guys are paying fifty bucks a month, sitting home, playing videogames and cranking out kid after kid so they don't lose the nice living arrangements.
These are the people that pay fifty bucks a month during winter for gas heat too, keeping the heat on eighty-five even when they aren't home (I guess they don't want to let the roaches get a chill. Birds of a feather). They also enjoy central air conditioning on that fifty-dollar-a-month electric bill, courtesy of the taxpayers of the United States.

All these folks gotta do, is stay unmarriedand the boyfriend cannot collect mail at the address he sleeps at, so alotta guys are enjoying the taxpayer's courtesy, as well. All he's gotta do, is make a kid and then make tracks.

SureWelfare's a really effective solution to the poverty problem; it's created a Gimmee-Elite. Quoting Larry Elder: Welfare is our National Narcotic. Since it's legal, I think it's a plaid-dandy comparison to the effectiveness of legalizing drugs.

I have seen the face of mine enemy, and she is a white, Midwestern married gal who's been married for sixteen years, and has strong connections to Family and Faith, and who 'falls off the roof' every freakin' day of the year. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax; it is melted away in my bowels. For my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaw; and I am... Doomed. We're all... Doomed

Well, goody for you, B.-vis. Maybe you can share a few hits of acid with Butthead from Canada, thereand live out the fantasy of your latest plagiarized screed. (Psalm 22:13 to 15, right? They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. [KJV] )

So we can add drug legalization to the already too-long-list of James' distractions from Topic (you can all rave how I'm steering it into a Welfare debate if you want...y'all don't seem to particularly mind being wrong).and the two of you CAN go skew yourselves.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#478 Consumer Suggestion

Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Well... Lemme tell ya a story bout a man named Bush

A rich oilman, only problem... his brains are mush;

If smarts were bread, he had no fukin yeast;

The guy becomes President, & we are off to the Middle East!

(Oil that is... Texas Man... Terrorists)

Well the next thing ya know our soldiers are gettin kilt;

Hard on's for Iraq, watched their woodies wilt;

It was all justified cause of the WMD's;

If it was a "car bomb"... Suddam had no f**kin keys;

(Who cares bout dat... we're takin over neway!)

Well the next thing ya know Americans learn of lies;

It was that d**n Cheney, cookin up dem pies;

Soon Scooter Libby, will be off to f**kin jail;

And the rest of us will be checkin for anthrax in our mail;

We are the Oppressing Hillbillies!


Lyrics:

Jim Stewart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#477 Consumer Suggestion

Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Well... Lemme tell ya a story bout a man named Bush

A rich oilman, only problem... his brains are mush;

If smarts were bread, he had no fukin yeast;

The guy becomes President, & we are off to the Middle East!

(Oil that is... Texas Man... Terrorists)

Well the next thing ya know our soldiers are gettin kilt;

Hard on's for Iraq, watched their woodies wilt;

It was all justified cause of the WMD's;

If it was a "car bomb"... Suddam had no f**kin keys;

(Who cares bout dat... we're takin over neway!)

Well the next thing ya know Americans learn of lies;

It was that d**n Cheney, cookin up dem pies;

Soon Scooter Libby, will be off to f**kin jail;

And the rest of us will be checkin for anthrax in our mail;

We are the Oppressing Hillbillies!


Lyrics:

Jim Stewart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#476 Consumer Suggestion

Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Well... Lemme tell ya a story bout a man named Bush

A rich oilman, only problem... his brains are mush;

If smarts were bread, he had no fukin yeast;

The guy becomes President, & we are off to the Middle East!

(Oil that is... Texas Man... Terrorists)

Well the next thing ya know our soldiers are gettin kilt;

Hard on's for Iraq, watched their woodies wilt;

It was all justified cause of the WMD's;

If it was a "car bomb"... Suddam had no f**kin keys;

(Who cares bout dat... we're takin over neway!)

Well the next thing ya know Americans learn of lies;

It was that d**n Cheney, cookin up dem pies;

Soon Scooter Libby, will be off to f**kin jail;

And the rest of us will be checkin for anthrax in our mail;

We are the Oppressing Hillbillies!


Lyrics:

Jim Stewart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#475 Consumer Suggestion

Anybody remember the Beverly Hillbillies?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Well... Lemme tell ya a story bout a man named Bush

A rich oilman, only problem... his brains are mush;

If smarts were bread, he had no fukin yeast;

The guy becomes President, & we are off to the Middle East!

(Oil that is... Texas Man... Terrorists)

Well the next thing ya know our soldiers are gettin kilt;

Hard on's for Iraq, watched their woodies wilt;

It was all justified cause of the WMD's;

If it was a "car bomb"... Suddam had no f**kin keys;

(Who cares bout dat... we're takin over neway!)

Well the next thing ya know Americans learn of lies;

It was that d**n Cheney, cookin up dem pies;

Soon Scooter Libby, will be off to f**kin jail;

And the rest of us will be checkin for anthrax in our mail;

We are the Oppressing Hillbillies!


Lyrics:

Jim Stewart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#474 Consumer Suggestion

Well thanks B... a very intelligent Post.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

B;

Although you don't fully agree with me, I assure you I don't think terrorists are "lilly white". No more than I think all American Soldiers are really that concerned with "law & order" in Iraq.

One thing you missed though is about the drugs. Pot for instance comes off the farm at a price under $100 per pound & it is sold on the streets right now for 10-15 dollars a gram! For those of you who do not understand the metric system... there are 28 grams in an ounce. So the profit margin is "vast"! The amount of rehab centres that could be supported, along with education, would be easily accomplished if the Government only charged 1/10th the amount for the drugs! A massive amount of money could be raked in by the Government if they legalized drugs. However the people who are the Millionaires from the drug trade... also make Campaign Contributions to all parties to make sure it stays illegal! The mob certainly does not want to loose their massive profits for sure!

Yet that entire paragraph is "off subject" & we are talking about... here comes the word.... rarley seen in the entirety of Shawn or Vera's posts... get prepared... it is "Iraq"!

I don't need to tear down the roofing business, as anyone who has been involved in it knows what I said is true. Vera either is really ignorant, or simply a liar. I don't need to go on about the bible, as Matthew 6 is written in it's entirety right here for everyone to see on this thread. Nope... I can talk just about Iraq.

Thanks for presenting the "facts" once again about Haliberton & their Military ties. Thanks for making it clear about Iraq being a "windfall" for such companies, funded by the good ol USA!

Oh & nobodys goin to jail eh? Over the lies & deception of this Administration? Oh I am sure some people will have to be a cleanin egg off their face on that one! Yet we are still not done are we?

Next we have a "Kangaroo Court" that is gonna hang Suddam for being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or was he simply set up? Methinks both! Oh I am sure he has kicked a dog or two in his life. I bet he might even retaliate against someone who might expose him lieing to the Iraqi people, in a not so nice way.

What about Cheney? There is a man with Skeletons in his closet! What is gonna happen with him? Was he stupid when he talked about the reasons America had to invade Iraq... or was he just lieing? I wonder what will be dug up about him?

Oh yea this has been going on... the finger pointing... in almost every Administration. However... never have the American People been so blatently lied to... with such far reaching implications as this occupation of Iraq! Maybe he might come clean. Maybe he might resign.

The people in America need to decide. Most understand there is something not right here. Most understand their sons & daughters are dieing over lies.

I do believe "most Americans" are now outraged about all of this. However it would not hurt to have just a few more write in & make calls to their elected representitives, voiceing their concerns. That would make me proud of America.

Iraq is an absolute disaster! Americans need to get out of harms way. Terrorism is not declining, but increasing day by day, month by month, year by year & it really is nothing short of another Vietnam. No good can come from continued presence in the region. I doubt you could find anyone even with a decent exit strategy. I doubt that even you B, could show anyone a viable solution that might work "all around". Either way when the USA leaves Iraq... they will be leaving it in a "worse situation" than if they never had invaded at all.

Iraq has nothing of value worth the occupation. Not even the oil that is the only thing they do have, that might be worth taking by the USA. Nothing at all. Vera might not understand that, but it is entirely true & most sane people know it to be true.

Again I must thank you though. At least B, you can show these "stick in the muds" the facts... as I will just speak to the average "sane person" who can see the forest for the trees.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#473 Consumer Comment

George Walker Bush= loser

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, November 02, 2005

I am so sick of GWB of stealing the election of Albert Gore! President Clintons -Vice prseident! The election was a joke as Bush and his associates hijacked the election. I believe William jefferson Clinton(Bill Clinton) had a due to pay to the Bush's, his two term presidency! The Bush's allowed him to take over to mislead people of the real reason to deceive people! The Clintons are with the Bush's! Also Condolleza Rice is a Bush associate, and a false candidate. She is saying that she will be elected due to her being a Black Woman!!!!!!!! I quarantee She will not be elected President!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#472 Consumer Comment

We are not a perfect society, but we are a model for so many others

AUTHOR: Sandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

In reading everyone's remarks - it is apparent that evil is alive and breeding well within our society. Hatred is not a good thing - once you decide you hate someone, you have opened up your heart and soul to Satan. We are not a perfect society, but we are a model for so many others. Our nation was founded on Christian values, we now critize those Christian values. God has given us ALL free will, to criticize each other, to support each other. How can we turn our back on so many men women and children being slaughtered every day - God would not want us to do this - none of you are allowed to judge each other - there will be one final judgment - at that time will you be able to say "I did not preach hatred or intolerance, I did not turn my back on my brothers and sisters as they were being slaughtered" or will you say "I did the best that I could, I sacrificed my life, I sacrificed my child's life, so that others may live in freedom - the freedom to worship the God we choose to worship - the freedom to not cover our entire head and face simply because we are female - the freedom to grab the hand of the terrorist before he throws the bomb that will kill thousands." My son is sacrificing his life, so many others are sacrificing their lives. I pray every night that our country will be able to bring our military home from Iraq soon - but only once the mission is accomplished - only when men, women and children can vote for whom they decide to vote - America will never win this war or be able to successfully pull out until our nation gets behind the troops 200% - just because you support the soldiers does not mean you have to serve or your family member has to serve - how hyprocritical - sometimes ... war is the only answer. And as far as those bumper stickers that say "Support the Troops - Enlist" - we already did as did thousands of others - those naysayers who are in uniform - I have found that the majority of those are the ones who signed up for the military for a free ride - now they are upset when they have to actually do what they promised to do - defend the USA.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#471 Consumer Comment

Another big sigh....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

James, stick to the subject...and stop bastardizing the Bible, please.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#470 Consumer Comment

To Robert and others who claim Halliburton is the ONLY company who can do the job.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Robert, your theory on KBR sounds good, but doesn't quite fit the facts. Starting from the top... The supposedly competitive LOGCAP (Logistical Civilian Augmentation Program) contract was conceived by the Army and signed into law by the Congress in the mid 80's, and used sparingly during the rest of that decade. Administered by the Army Corps of Engineers, it allows the military to outsource portions of its supply and construction requirements to the LOGCAP contractor, without opening each individual task to competitive bidding. In the last year of Bush Sr.'s presidency, d**k Cheney, then Secretary of Defense, hired Brown and Root (KBR's predecessor) to study those requirements and submit a plan for converting the bulk of them to civilian contract under the LOGCAP. Oddly enough, they were then awarded the LOGCAP contract. And Cheney went to work for Halliburton, B&R's parent. In 1997, the LOGCAP was awarded to DynCorp, due to B&R estimate overruns and other problems. However, Clinton directed the Corps to continue the contracts with B&R, for the Yugoslav region only, into 1999, primarily because they already had the infrastructure in place and understood the problems in the area. DynCorp handled the contract well, with none of the problems B&R had, cheaper, and with better service. Nonetheless, in 2001, over the objections of the civilian overseer, the Corps awarded the LOGCAP to KBR. I guess DynCorp and Ratheon didn't spend enough in 'advertising' during the election campaigns. So, KBR was definitely the 'go to guy' for infrastructure support in Iraq, but it was certainly not the only company that could deliver, and possibly not even the best. And there was no need for them to be the exclusive contractor.

In fall of 2002, shades of 1992, KBR was paid nearly $2 million to submit a plan for rebuilding Iraq's oil fields after the war. The RIO (Rebuild Iraq Oilfields) contract, capped at $7 billion, was then awarded to them, again against the objections of the civilian overseer. While it can be argued that they were the only company on this planet with 6 months advanced knowledge of every detail of the plan, they were hardly the only one that could handle it When GSM, a company that did a large part of the work on the Kuwaiti oilfields, inquired late in 2002 if such work would be available, they were initially told no bidding was anticipated. The civilian overseer, Bunny Greenhouse, took her complaints to Rep. Waxman, and was later demoted. When Congress wanted to investigate, the Corps had her military assistant sign a civilian form that prevented them. So much for checks and balances under this administration. And yet, in every media interview I saw, every Republican mouthpiece had the same line, it was the civilian authority that approved the contract, not the military.

BTW, I had a virgin once, after that she wasn't. But she gave great conversation for many years thereafter. But 70 of them?

__________________________
Patrick, thanks for the info re Byron Union. I took a quick look at the sites you suggested. Looks like Snopes, as usual, did an excellent job. The autobiography assignment on DanielPope is definitely intriguing; I'll have to research it when I get some time. When I was in grade school, the only play acting we got to do was in the annual Christmas pageant. Most of the history was extremely biased US history. The little world history we got was right out of the Atlas, along with some completely disconnected dates and events. No attempt was made to examine circumstances or cultures surrounding these events, nor to tie them together with other, concurrent world events. I'm going to go way out on a limb and suggest that the current curricula have little to do with teachers' political leanings, and are more likely overcompensation for deficiencies in the educational system they grew up with.

__________________________
Dave, LOL, I used to be ascaird of spiders and snakes, but now that I'm a big boy I've graduated to donkeys and elephants. I was thinking of writing a very short book titled, "What Color Is Your Fear?," and cleaning up on some of those $10K lecture bonanzas, but then I realized I just don't have the stomach for it.

__________________________
Clay, I don't think we can trust the (evil) lib media. If NBC said KBR was the only company that could do the job, you can be sure they weren't! So, tell me, what do you think gave them away? The Republican voters, I mean, to the Democrat thugs. Do you think it was that dumb, 'I'll believe anything' look on their faces? Or maybe the thugs just hung around outside gated communities lookin' mean and snarling, "Back in your cage, animal." And yes, it is hard to imagine a man with Soros' wealth supporting anything other than the 'right' economic model.

__________________________
James, yes poor Vera has fallen. The Queen of Flames. (In the voice of Jack Nicholson after the witches of Eastwick have 'punished' him) She's the only woman I know who 'falls off the roof' EVERY FREAKIN' DAY OF THE YEAR! roflmao Not sure what her problem is with your use of the word preface. From the standpoint that the 'Lord's Prayer' is the highlight, the material preceeding it could definitely be considered to preface it, and even if you don't see it that way, its certainly a relatively minor problem compared to some of the questionable usage others make, Shawn for example.

I still have to take exception to your position on terrorists. You say you understand their plight, they have their own laws and way of life. It seems to me their way of life is to act outside the laws. Their plight is that they refuse to evolve, to move forward with the rest of their world. You seem to infer that they are the representative voice of the entire Middle East, but I think that is as likely as saying the Jehovah's Witnesses are the representative voice of North America. In Muhammed's day, with Christians invading the temples of the disorganized 'pagans', a rallying cry to repel the 'infidels' was needed; 1500 years later, not so much. Imagine the terrorism problems we would have, and you would probably share, if Malcom Little had become the Muhammed of American blacks in the sixties. I suspect that most in the Middle East, left to themselves, are more interested in putting food on the table and enjoying their families, than where the US is putting its little military bases.

__________________________
Vera, sorry I agree with James on the subject of legalizing drugs. Lets face it, the biggest problems associated with drug use are the criminal culture and black market surrounding it. One of the worst drugs is already legal - alcohol. It can be as addictive as heroin to the 10s of millions who are susceptible, and is responsible for huge amounts of disease, death, assault, and destruction. If legalized, dosage would be controlled, and deadly contaminants avoided. Billions of annual dollars would be diverted from criminal enterprises, both here and abroad, and billions more saved from fighting an ineffective 'war on drugs'. Distribution channels that target children and teens would be eliminated. Overcrowding in our jails would be reduced, as would criminal culture 'on the streets'. There would probably be a minor increase in social problems, but I doubt it would be significant (statistically speaking), as most of the people with addictive personalities are already using something, if 'only' alcohol. And if, as James suggests, a significant amount were actually spent on education, the problems would probably diminish.

I have seen the face of mine enemy, and she is a white, Midwestern married gal who's been married for sixteen years, and has strong connections to Family and Faith, and who 'falls off the roof' every freakin' day of the year. I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart is like wax; it is melted away in my bowels. For my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaw; and I am... Doomed. We're all... Doomed.
__________________________
Shawn, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you never made it through Junior High School. I see two words in my opening paragraph to you that might be beyond a JH level, and only one that might be considered even slightly unusual. Get a grip, man. I mean, seriously, two minutes with a dictionary would have saved you two hours with the Thesaurus, trying to come up with the most INappropriate usage possible. I'll give you points for originality though; I've NEVER known anybody to use the Thesaurus that way. More on your 'on-topic' commentary later; have to run.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#469 Consumer Comment

More of the same...tells everyone how we need to stay on-topic, then attacks with more stupidity--which is totally off-topic. Way to Go, Cap'n Canuck!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Finally Vera the roofer. Oh yea Vera... roofers are not the biggest crooks known to mankind at all. My first job... oh I remember!

Actually, it's politicians that rate the highest as crooks in the eyes of the American public in generaland that's been a long-standing opinion. So it's only in your little world that roofers rate higher than Lawyers, Politicians, and car salesmen. And like I saidyou don't see sixteen individual posts about the Company I work for. Oh---and before I forget, you also don't see me cruising the board, looking for roofing companies and telling the people that they're to blame for the company ripping them off.

You never over estimate the amount of square on a roof do you?

Nope. Hunh-unh. Never. How do I know? I'm not the person in charge of estimates and contracts. But I do know who is, and I've never seen them overcharge a Customer for any reason.

You never order those shingles for the job "although not needed" & charge the customer for the documented square that you bought the shingles for & then return such shingles (the extra not put on) back to Domtar do you?

Never ordered more than a square (stick, bucket, etc.) or two too many, so far that I know. And most of that gets burned up in cap or edge, or some is damaged. So what about when it's accidentally underestimated? The Company gets to eat that. What about when a novice helper accidentally damages a few bundles? Company eats it. Last time I checked, the owner of the company I work for doesn't have a warehouse, and lives less than a mile from me. His yard isn't littered with any extra materials (his home is the base of his operations; like I said, the company I work for is SMALL). and I won't even get into the volunteer work our company has done, or the good-faith gestures. Nice try on your part, though. I can sleep soundly at night, and look at my reflection in the mirror each day, knowing I'm not ripping folks off. And I sure as shine don't haveta justify myself or my actions to some shyster in Canada.


If you did... you would just be doing what every other roofing company on this Continent does if they want to stay in business. Otherwise they could not compete! One of your biggest competitors is "Sears", who does the same thing!

But if I want a refund from Sears, or my Company, I don't have to spend half the money I spent on materials, and go through a bunch of hoops to get it. I don't have to submit anything more than a valid receipt, whether I paid check, cash, or credit. I don't have to put a stop-payment on my check, call my credit card company, or get my birth certificate or any other obscure forms of I.D., verification of address, or proof of my existence through a neighbor or a philosophy major, Certificate of Baptism, finger-prints, or whatever. Most of the time, if I want a refund for anythingall I haveta do is ask. No explanation as to whyjust I'd like my money back for this, please.

Scary, ain't it?

You get paid for the shingles you don't put on & the flashing you dont use & the nails you dont use & the labor for all (using your reciept of purchase of these items)...

The price is estimated and approved, and the agreement is okay with the Customer, they give us the job. That's how it works. If the Customer thinks our price is too high, maybe that person and the Company's owner can haggle, or, the Customer is welcome to choose someone else. This is all done before the first nail is purchased. We even often ask if the Customer would like us to leave a few extra materials behind, so if something does happen (like a big wind damaging some shingles), it can be repairedby us, or whomever the Customer would like.

then you return this stuff & get the money back for those things on top of it all!

Like I have saidI've never seen it happen. However, I do know the Hardware store we use gives bonuses and incentives to folks who spend a lot of money there.

I can paint em all with the same brush, as they all do the same thing to survive in the marketplace, are one of the "biggest rip off organizations" in North America!

You do a lot of that painting them all with the same brush bullshitdoesn't mean you're right. It just means you're narrow-minded and shallow---a fact that one could pick up by reading any ONE of your posts. The biggest RipOff, according to the opinion of most, is Politiciansbut I've covered that already.

I don't care who else responded to another thread on another subject about another alledged rip off! I care about you calling the "ketttle black" on this thread, since you are the "pot" that is part of one of North America's biggest rip offs & you are the one who is "off subject", & it is you we don't need to hear any more of that "off subject" crap from!

Wrong on all counts, Dipshit. You're the one who keeps up the spinning off into other subjects, and calling the kettle black. I'd tell you to go screw yourselfbut knowing your kind, that's how you reproduce. Lord knows we don't need any more of you running around.

On a side note, I've checked the RipOff Reports and typed in variations of Roofing companies. With simply roofing, I found six pages, which contained eighty-seven reports (this was the way to get the highest number of reports), and fifty-six roofing companies.

Guess what? None are the company I work for! None are even in the same city as I. :)

But, if you look at Canadian scams run across the border to Americans, you've got seven-hundred-thirty some oddcertainly more that all the roofing-jobs-gone-bad in ALL of the United States! If you look into BOTH categories offered for crooked car dealers, you get one group of five-hundred-eighty-nine, and the other with three-thousand-three-hundred-sixty-five. a total of three-thousand-nine-hundred-fifty-four RipOff Reports (and who KNOWS how many rebuttals!) regarding people feeling shafted about a car deal gone wrong. Used Cars, New Cars, or whatever, it appears to me that there are more folks getting shafted over cars (which cost even ore than a roof in some circumstances) than there are folks getting shafted over the installation of a new roof. Add to that, the fact that a roof is gonna last a good bit longer than a car.

So it looks like being a car salesman (or an ASSociate), like you are, is more of a crooked occupation than a roofer, like I am. Count that among the many of your theories that have been blown to bits.

I won't even go into what I've found on Google and Yahoo.

Ya want proof?

UhmmDUH! I've been asking for it from certain of you, and have yet to see anything posted by the Twin Freaks (You and your valentine, that is), Ben, Greg, Jon, and so on. B. has at least provided some level of proof, and had an open enough mind to present a decent argument.

Never mind B has already handed you proof!

Ah, Darlin', but it's you guys that have been mooing factless and unfounded drivel. You see, it's not fair that B. has to pull your share of the workload, as well as his own. Come on, Loverboyyou've been demanding that I show proof; all the while trying to distract when you are asked to do the same. On what basis do you find YOUR pseudo-facts and pointless logic? Michael Moore-On? Please tell me he didn't turn a buck on FarenHYPE-911. ohhh my God.Gimmee a secI'm laughing too damned hard.{cough!}

Just turn on the T.V. Its all there for you to watch!

Should I go out an' get a copy of Michael Moore's latest? {Cough-cough! Ahhhhahahahaaaaahhhh!} Sorry, HonI like to READ my newsI don't care much for TeeVee. But I have watched a little, and I don't know what channel to go to, to find James Stewart of Canada's Warped World View. Maybe CBC? Time to light up another bowl of your opinion and drink a can of charisma!

The liars, the illegal whistle blowers...

Sounds like your kinda crowd! (There's a legal and illegal way to blow a whistle? What if I whistle Yankee Doodle or Camp Town Races? Are those illegal or legal? What if I whistle with my teeth, or use my fingers? How about a tin whistle?)

the people from "your camp" who are now on trial. The ads to get the troops home.

I haven't seen one ad---not one---advertising to bring the troops home. I have heard of certain companies wishing the troops a safe return home, though.

It's all there & you want facts? Turn on the T.V. & get your heads out of your butts!

How many times do I need to tell youto get your own material? And also, like I said beforebe careful about rejoicing over the misfortune of otherselse it'll come to your house and stay a spell.

Shawn... each of those topics discussed dealt with this thread, from Bush's lies to past mistakes when going to war, to evidence of past wars.

Really? What war caused that blackout on the Eastern Seaboard (bought up by you)? What war did we fight in the past that proves Beta to be better than VHS? Which war did we have that gave us inviolate proof that Canada did or didn't produce the first plane that made a sonic boom? Can you pin down the name or time of the war we had that concluded whether or not a sub could get through whichever great lake? What war was responsible for Global Warming? How bout Matthew Six and the Bible? There are LOTS of opportunities presented by your spin to divert attention from the original topic.

Why we are at war, what the reason is & Vera for some unkinown reason still wants to have proof it is over oil!

Yeah, and I'm still waiting for the original poster, or you, to show us the beef. Are you happy now that the attention's back on you again?

They have "NOTHING ELSE" in Iraq Vera worth taking other than oil!

That's the way you see it. I see more than petrochemical resources, there.
[But discussing it would be off topic now, wouldn't it? ;) ]

Why the hell else would American troops be there? To improve society?

Hmmmm..I dunnoh.did they have the opportunity to vote a Constitution of their own into effect when Saddam Insane was the leader there? (We know you'd want him at your place for dinner, James. so don't waste your breath defending what a great guy he is.) Did they have as much clean, running water? How about more available electricity? Nicer schools and supplies? My God, we Americans ARE monsters, aren't we?

Did you fall off a roof or something?

Aww, how clever! You might wanna ask your mom if she did, while infected with you, though.

Yes Shawn you could have your Pastor speak to me, as if he calls himself a "Christian" & does not follow "proven words of Christ", then he is a liar & a cheat!

Yeah, you're a REAL GOOD example, Jamesof a liar and a cheat. You're not even smart enough to recognize sarcasm when you see it. (I'm willing to bet James thinks Seminary Training has something to do with a playboy magazine and a locked bathroom door.)

However, as said before... that is not the point of this thread! It's Iraq. Something again you missed in your entire post to comment on.

Actually, the topic of this post is how Brainiac From Tupper thinks the War is over OIL. See? I haven't lost sight of that.

Let's give examples of some really On Topic Stuff, then, mkay?
Since you are so "adamant" on talking about the bible on this thread... I will include the paper I wrote here: Nothing in this post about Iraq, Bush, Oil, or the War.

How about I made 2 posts referring to Shawn & Vera & their extreamly "long winded" posts that really did not say anything of value regarding the subject at hand, the occupation of Iraq & why it is wrong & really dumb.

These are only two examples of you trying to keep the attention focused on your interests (there are OODLES of others). I notice that when someone who agrees with your (do I call it a point of view?) spun slant of things, but goes off topic (Miers, George Bush and being Drunk/liking killing, Halliburton, and so on, and so on, and so on), you don't seem to have a problem with it. You're such a hypocrite, Jamesand with those, you are in good company. So there you goanother long post you'll read, but don't have the balls to admit itand you'll say it's another long winded post about nothing. So if you don't wanna read it, don't even bother talking to me.

Patrick.I loved the post with Robin Williams!
(Specially the Statue of liberty with her baseball bat and You wanna piece o' me?!' Awesome!) I couldn't think of a better way to solve the problem.

Ben, can you please tell me why you feel that President Bush is trying to force all of America to become Christian? What thing (or things) has he done (you know, like passed laws, as an example) that has given you the impression that he's commanding everyone in America to turn into a believer of God?
I just don't see it. I know he believes in God, and he prays, but I don't see where he's forcing you to change your religious preferences (or lack thereof).

Your first post to this board had nothing to do with your apparent concern over Bush forcing you to believe. It had to do with oil, gas, expensive electricity in California, morals (not based on religion; rather, that someone might think that the country would tank if we didn't feed the Big Corporations), and Enron.

I know my inquiry will most likely bring about a fresh attack, and that's fine. Can you please answer my question, though? I am only curious. Is it possible that you're reading more into it than there really is? If not, can you simply just answer, and show me where he's (Bush) has done this awful thing? Miers is no longer an issueher nomination has been withdrawn. (Thank Goodness!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#468 Consumer Suggestion

Watch em sqirm people... watch em sqirm!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Readers of this thread;

Watch em sqirm as they have no valid arguements left! Oh it would be dumb to spend over a Trillion Dollars to get the savings from oil you could control... yes! Who ever said this Administration was smart?

The Administration is no smarter than Shawn, who in his rampage of sqirming now... resorts to absolute swearing on a post without even paragraphs, he is so lost!

Now he is screaming "It's only one person indicted!" & we all know that there are more guilty than one! There is the "top man" who mis appropriated campaign funds, but he fails to see him as well. Proven that Bush's first election was a "rip off", it's so hard for the Shawn's of this world to believe anyone inside of this Administration would be so "corrupt" as to mis appropriate election funds!

No one of this Administration did anything wrong did they? Why out a man's wife who works for the CIA & put her life in danger unless you are mad at the man who showed the lies of the Administration? There was no nuclear program in Iraq!

However this word "Iraq" is not something these people can use any more in their posts, as it is only on subject & something they cannot dispute! The American People have been lied to! Blathering idiot's who can only sqirm now are Bush's only backers! Watch em sqirm people... watch em sqirm!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#467 Consumer Comment

I wonder why someone in Canada gives a rat's a*s about what happens in my Government.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

As for Lewis Libby, he will not be convicted. He was indicted on a charge, that he did something BEFORE it was deemd illegal. Great way to get rid of someone. Tom Delay will not be convicted either. Political witch-hunts are commonplace in America...get over it. Reps went after Clinton, the Dems are having their turn now.

Yawn. I need a drink.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#466 Consumer Suggestion

Again Ben I am on your side

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Ben;

I am on your side. I agree with you. However please do not mix "Christian" with what these people are doing.

Christ was not into their hypocracy! Christ was not into money & big Corporations. This is something "they invented" & wish to wash Christ's name inside of it. That is what is Blasphmey!

These people are not "Christians"! They don't follow the words of Jesus. I pointed that out clearly. They are what is called "King Jamesers"! They believe the version, although one of hundreds, with books compiled from 100's, is the direct inspiration of God himself! They don't even follow what is "proven" inside of the book!

Proven... I would think... would be something repeated by more than one person from the same book that basically says the same thing... don't you think? Definately if it came from Jesus himself, don't you think? I certainly do! However these blasphemers actually ignore what Jesus said quite clearly! They pray openly in Churches as Jesus said not to. They Preach, just as if they were doing it in the streets as Jesus asked them not to! They refuse to repeat the words of the "Lords Prayer" as Jesus gave it to them! They collect tithes in Jesus name when he was totally against that! They refuse to realise that Jesus was a carpenter & if he wanted to build a d**n Church... he would have built one! They lie! They confuse! Even you Ben, because they have you actually believing they are Christians! They are not if they do these things!

So please... do not paint "Christians" with the same brush as these religeous Zealots! Yes you are correct they are shoveing crap down peoples throats! Yes you are correct they want to force others to follow their doctrine! Yes you are correct they have no right to do it! However do not call them Christian, as they are not if they do these things.

The thing is Ben, if you turn this into a discussion of the Bible & it's relevance to what is going on... the bible arguement is something that is "so deep" & so involved & so very opinionated, in many conflicting ways, that we may never see the "light of day" when discussing this "band of thieves" called the Administration. The American People as a whole need to wake up period!

These morons need to see that Scooter is going to be convicted. Guess what for? Not for lieing to the American People. No. Not for covering up the lies told to the American People. No. He will be convicted for a retalitory strike against someone who exposed the government & their lies! Forget the lies! This administration does things "illegally" against people who expose their lies! That makes them "pure evil"! Shawn & Vera are still stuck in the insane arguement that there was no lie to begin with! How rediculous! Why cover up something or strike back at someone who uncovers things that are not lies? I think Shawn was working with Vera when they both fell off the roof!

Now even the Republicans don't believe in this Administration! Proven by the rejection of Bush's appointment to the Supreme Court! Even the Republicans can see this as a "corrupt Administration" & people like Shawn & Vera are still lost in the woods reading their King James Versions! Where's the beef, they cry! Show me proof, they cry!

Then, since they are being shown by what is happening, that they are "totally wrong"... they pick up a new subject like the bible & run with it. They have been shown now to be lost on both issues, but they continue on blindly. Always spouting "I am the Pot & I am calling the Kettle black! Blind as hell!

If you want to go down the long endless road with them Ben, I certainly grant you rope. However the subject of this thread is the invasion of Iraq, for oil & I am going to do "my best" to stick to it. I will also do my best to try to convince Americans to force Bush to resign!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#465 Consumer Comment

Don't worry, be happy . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

la di da di da be happ - ppy no-ow I hate to admit it, but I never thought dancing on someones grave could be so much fun! Hmmm, One less ignorant s**t-head to deal with, I guess that's why I'm so happy. . . be happy no-ow . . . What's that? He's not REALLY dead? I know that! I am just playing a fantasy game! Just like that (dead) idiot does with reality on this thread. I would point out the facts to support my "case", but I don't think I have to - anyone with an IQ higher than 80 can figure it out on their own.

Now that we,ve got that settled( fetch fishy, fetch . . . good bass) I hope to get on with other topics. Where are ALL these indictments? Is "Libby" the entire White House staff? You see, this is the game they play . . . one person gets indicted, the special prosecutor says the investigation is still on-going, and the liberal media jump aboard and report their biased speculations about who else may be indicted. Meanwhile, back at the "real world ranch", millions of aid packages are being distributed in Iraq, water supplies are being repaired, a Democratically elected government is in session, and a free Iraq is developing their own armed forces to "take over" peace keeping operations. (I know they won't be ready tomorrow, but as long as we stay long enough to help them get "solidified" in their position, it will happen - just give it time) Tii-i--i-ime is on their side yesitis . . . oh, what's that? The left driven sin/spin media isn't reporting that? My word! Whatever is happening to the truth? Oh yes, I remember, the democrats and all their money, power and influence are hiding the truth from the sheepish public who won't open their eyes(democrats). The people who research, and discover fact in order to form their opinions(republicans) know the truth, and that just pisses off those dim-wits and spin artists because they can't justify their bullshit when confronted reality.

I had to laugh at the words of the 'late James from Calgary' when he stated that "all those topics had to do with the war in Iraq". 'Umpteen' different topics, from blowjobs to big t**s and beer, brought up by the 'left'( let's not forget Ben's 'religious zealots' and homosexuals - tsk,tsk, Ben don't you know it's "don't ask, don't tell")and they have to do with Iraq, but apparently U.N. sanctions, Desert Storm, and God are 'off-topic' when brought up by the 'right'.

Money, power, and influence from the left? Yes, I say, Yes! Pick up a copy of 'Forbes' lately? If you do a wee bit of investigation and research, you will discover that over 2/3 of the wealthiest 400 people in America are . . . get this . . . democrats! (A few that are in office too.) To be 'frank' with you, oil is ONE of the biggest businesses in America, but do you know what's even bigger? With a gross income of almost double any one of the major oil companies? Big surprise . . UNIONS! What else? Hmmm . . . Media? With over 85% owned by democratic supporters? You betcha! How much is Ted Turner worth now? How about all those left-wing fanatics getting paid millions/movie? What's wrong boys? Can't justify why money is bad on one side, but it's good on the other? Just another liberal conundrum.

By the way Bennie boy, George W. never even insinuated that he wants to make this a Christian country, he does however want the same constitutional protections to practice his faith in the manner of his choosing, whether it be in public or private, without persecution. One more law that's 'good for the left, but bad for the right' is it Ben? Stop your whining, baby.

So to the 'late James of Calgary', 'Bennie boo-h*o', and all you other left-wing supporters of lies and spin, I leave you with the words of Benjamin Franklin "phlbbbbbbbbbbt"!

May God bless America and all her troops (no sarcastic, 'unless they don't wanna be' this time)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#464 Consumer Comment

Don't worry, be happy . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

la di da di da be happ - ppy no-ow I hate to admit it, but I never thought dancing on someones grave could be so much fun! Hmmm, One less ignorant s**t-head to deal with, I guess that's why I'm so happy. . . be happy no-ow . . . What's that? He's not REALLY dead? I know that! I am just playing a fantasy game! Just like that (dead) idiot does with reality on this thread. I would point out the facts to support my "case", but I don't think I have to - anyone with an IQ higher than 80 can figure it out on their own.

Now that we,ve got that settled( fetch fishy, fetch . . . good bass) I hope to get on with other topics. Where are ALL these indictments? Is "Libby" the entire White House staff? You see, this is the game they play . . . one person gets indicted, the special prosecutor says the investigation is still on-going, and the liberal media jump aboard and report their biased speculations about who else may be indicted. Meanwhile, back at the "real world ranch", millions of aid packages are being distributed in Iraq, water supplies are being repaired, a Democratically elected government is in session, and a free Iraq is developing their own armed forces to "take over" peace keeping operations. (I know they won't be ready tomorrow, but as long as we stay long enough to help them get "solidified" in their position, it will happen - just give it time) Tii-i--i-ime is on their side yesitis . . . oh, what's that? The left driven sin/spin media isn't reporting that? My word! Whatever is happening to the truth? Oh yes, I remember, the democrats and all their money, power and influence are hiding the truth from the sheepish public who won't open their eyes(democrats). The people who research, and discover fact in order to form their opinions(republicans) know the truth, and that just pisses off those dim-wits and spin artists because they can't justify their bullshit when confronted reality.

I had to laugh at the words of the 'late James from Calgary' when he stated that "all those topics had to do with the war in Iraq". 'Umpteen' different topics, from blowjobs to big t**s and beer, brought up by the 'left'( let's not forget Ben's 'religious zealots' and homosexuals - tsk,tsk, Ben don't you know it's "don't ask, don't tell")and they have to do with Iraq, but apparently U.N. sanctions, Desert Storm, and God are 'off-topic' when brought up by the 'right'.

Money, power, and influence from the left? Yes, I say, Yes! Pick up a copy of 'Forbes' lately? If you do a wee bit of investigation and research, you will discover that over 2/3 of the wealthiest 400 people in America are . . . get this . . . democrats! (A few that are in office too.) To be 'frank' with you, oil is ONE of the biggest businesses in America, but do you know what's even bigger? With a gross income of almost double any one of the major oil companies? Big surprise . . UNIONS! What else? Hmmm . . . Media? With over 85% owned by democratic supporters? You betcha! How much is Ted Turner worth now? How about all those left-wing fanatics getting paid millions/movie? What's wrong boys? Can't justify why money is bad on one side, but it's good on the other? Just another liberal conundrum.

By the way Bennie boy, George W. never even insinuated that he wants to make this a Christian country, he does however want the same constitutional protections to practice his faith in the manner of his choosing, whether it be in public or private, without persecution. One more law that's 'good for the left, but bad for the right' is it Ben? Stop your whining, baby.

So to the 'late James of Calgary', 'Bennie boo-h*o', and all you other left-wing supporters of lies and spin, I leave you with the words of Benjamin Franklin "phlbbbbbbbbbbt"!

May God bless America and all her troops (no sarcastic, 'unless they don't wanna be' this time)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#463 Consumer Comment

Don't worry, be happy . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

la di da di da be happ - ppy no-ow I hate to admit it, but I never thought dancing on someones grave could be so much fun! Hmmm, One less ignorant s**t-head to deal with, I guess that's why I'm so happy. . . be happy no-ow . . . What's that? He's not REALLY dead? I know that! I am just playing a fantasy game! Just like that (dead) idiot does with reality on this thread. I would point out the facts to support my "case", but I don't think I have to - anyone with an IQ higher than 80 can figure it out on their own.

Now that we,ve got that settled( fetch fishy, fetch . . . good bass) I hope to get on with other topics. Where are ALL these indictments? Is "Libby" the entire White House staff? You see, this is the game they play . . . one person gets indicted, the special prosecutor says the investigation is still on-going, and the liberal media jump aboard and report their biased speculations about who else may be indicted. Meanwhile, back at the "real world ranch", millions of aid packages are being distributed in Iraq, water supplies are being repaired, a Democratically elected government is in session, and a free Iraq is developing their own armed forces to "take over" peace keeping operations. (I know they won't be ready tomorrow, but as long as we stay long enough to help them get "solidified" in their position, it will happen - just give it time) Tii-i--i-ime is on their side yesitis . . . oh, what's that? The left driven sin/spin media isn't reporting that? My word! Whatever is happening to the truth? Oh yes, I remember, the democrats and all their money, power and influence are hiding the truth from the sheepish public who won't open their eyes(democrats). The people who research, and discover fact in order to form their opinions(republicans) know the truth, and that just pisses off those dim-wits and spin artists because they can't justify their bullshit when confronted reality.

I had to laugh at the words of the 'late James from Calgary' when he stated that "all those topics had to do with the war in Iraq". 'Umpteen' different topics, from blowjobs to big t**s and beer, brought up by the 'left'( let's not forget Ben's 'religious zealots' and homosexuals - tsk,tsk, Ben don't you know it's "don't ask, don't tell")and they have to do with Iraq, but apparently U.N. sanctions, Desert Storm, and God are 'off-topic' when brought up by the 'right'.

Money, power, and influence from the left? Yes, I say, Yes! Pick up a copy of 'Forbes' lately? If you do a wee bit of investigation and research, you will discover that over 2/3 of the wealthiest 400 people in America are . . . get this . . . democrats! (A few that are in office too.) To be 'frank' with you, oil is ONE of the biggest businesses in America, but do you know what's even bigger? With a gross income of almost double any one of the major oil companies? Big surprise . . UNIONS! What else? Hmmm . . . Media? With over 85% owned by democratic supporters? You betcha! How much is Ted Turner worth now? How about all those left-wing fanatics getting paid millions/movie? What's wrong boys? Can't justify why money is bad on one side, but it's good on the other? Just another liberal conundrum.

By the way Bennie boy, George W. never even insinuated that he wants to make this a Christian country, he does however want the same constitutional protections to practice his faith in the manner of his choosing, whether it be in public or private, without persecution. One more law that's 'good for the left, but bad for the right' is it Ben? Stop your whining, baby.

So to the 'late James of Calgary', 'Bennie boo-h*o', and all you other left-wing supporters of lies and spin, I leave you with the words of Benjamin Franklin "phlbbbbbbbbbbt"!

May God bless America and all her troops (no sarcastic, 'unless they don't wanna be' this time)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#462 Consumer Comment

I wish I had more time . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, November 01, 2005

. . . but, as I mentioned, it's like teaching a fish to bark! I can't believe that you are really as close minded as you appear. The only other assumption is that you are stupid. No, not mixed up, not ignorant (you've been told over and over and over. . . ) not even unrealistic . . . just plain ol' stupid! you know what James, the way your mind works is comparative to the concrete I used to pour my patio over the weekend - thoroughly mixed up and permanently set! Obviously you didn't take anything remotely close to mathematics at any level when you were studying the Bible so intently(sarcasm) - as pointed out previously, over a trillion dollars(your figures for the cost of the war) divided over an increase of about $10.00/ barrel, yep sure thing boy genius, only seven or eight HUNDRED YEARS and we should start to see a hefty profit!!! Actually, I've stated and PROVEN you wrong time and time again but you just keep uttering the same inane garbage as your defense. I have better things to do with my life than to teach fish to bark so I'm going to let you off easy. This should also give you a whole bunch of "ammunition" to spout about your righteousnss and other bullshit. Ready? Are you sure? O.K., steady yourself. f**k OFF! Ya, you heard me right F-U-C-K O-F-F !!! I don't usually like to use such vulgar terms, and I can usually discuss most anything without resorting to this, but you . . .you . . . you have no concept of reality! I have come to the conclusion that the only way for you to even get a glimpse of anything other than the inside of your own obviously undernourished brain cell is to sink down to your level for a brief moment and allow myself to give you a piece of my mind (don't go there half-wit, if you had twice the intelligence you think you have I would still leave you looking the fool on any given subject (oh, except ripping honest people off - apparently the auto industry isn't your first stab at that, What roofing company was it you worked for? criminal, through and through!) I don't give a rat's a*s about your base opinions which you derive from rumor, conjecture, and obviously some uneducated nit-wit that you look to for advice, you are an idiot, a moron, a f**king retard, simpleton, dickhead. You are dead to me, and anybody with a brain! Your lack of intellect is equal to that of a gnat! You are a blythe on the a*s of all humanity! There ya have it truth, honesty, and verifiable fact( read the posts) thrown right in your ugly, self-righteous, lying, spinning, God-only-knows-how-stupid-you-can-get . . .face! So, I reiterate - F OFF, you bore me, and . . . I'm done with you.

May God bless the U.S. and her troops (but not anyone that doesn't wanna be)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#461 Consumer Suggestion

Back with the "I need proof again"... turn on the T,V.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

Shawn & Vera;

Ya want proof? Never mind B has already handed you proof! Just turn on the T.V.

Its all there for you to watch! The liars, the illegal whistle blowers... the people from "your camp" who are now on trial. The ads to get the troops home. It's all there & you want facts? Turn on the T.V. & get your heads out of your butts!

Shawn... each of those topics discussed dealt with this thread, from Bush's lies to past mistakes when going to war, to evidence of past wars. Why we are at war, what the reason is & Vera for some unkinown reason still wants to have proof it is over oil!

They have "NOTHING ELSE" in Iraq Vera worth taking other than oil! Why the hell else would American troops be there? To improve society? Did you fall off a roof or something?

Yes Shawn you could have your Pastor speak to me, as if he calls himself a "Christian" & does not follow "proven words of Christ", then he is a liar & a cheat! However, as said before... that is not the point of this thread! It's Iraq. Something again you missed in your entire post to comment on.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#460 Consumer Comment

James.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

Im sorry if you think that the issue of religon on this thread is "off subject".

But this thread IS about Bush. And the original poster got to say his two cents on why he disagreed with Bush. Others have gotten to state why they dislike (or like) Bush. I see no reason why I cannot do the same. Many disagree with Bush over his economic agenda. Others because of his policy overseas. I stated my objections because of his religous agenda. Just because I dont have the same fears about the man that you do, does not make my points moot. I still have fears of him. We are discussing Bush.

I think my points about religon are just as important as others about Iraq, the economy, or anything else this idiot in the White House does. To me Iraq, however important is still...over there. The religon issue is HERE....and in my face. Thus, to me, its far more important. I have grave feelings about Iraq and the economy. The war was wrong. The way he bilks the people of our country is wrong. But in the end his forceful attitude towards religon in the lives of everyone here are far more distressing to me than anything else.

The guy must go.......

Because he wants to make this country a theocracy and the Christian faith the law of the land. For ALL, regardless of their personal feelings. ALL must conform.

Because he gives power to large corporations over the citizens. This country is "Of the People" not his view of "Of the Corporations".

Because he started a foolish war for even more foolish if not outright false reasons. And in doing so ignored where the real enemies of our country lie (Iran, North Korea, Afganistan......hey! Osama is still out there!)

To me he must go for reasons IN THAT ORDER. If you have another order, so be it. More power to you. But that is how I take it, in order of importance.

Off subject? I dont think so.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#459 Consumer Comment

And the award for most topic changes goes to . . .

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

James from Calgary! But that's later, for now I wish t say this to you . . .

O.K., O.K., O.K., James, apparently YOU are the one who spent 4 years in university majoring in psychology, minoring in religious studies. I do apologize to you and your infinite wisdom regarding such matters. I will not argue such points with you any longer as you have most certainly proven that your understanding is greater than any of our feeble minds, and even greater than that of the authors of various books published by scholars who have studied the Bible and who themselves are able to translate Hebrew.(Strong's Concordence, Ryrie Study Bible, Etc.) So James to give to you all due credit and admiration, oooh great, wise and spiritual one, I will not challenge your intellectual and unchallengable interpretations of God's word any more. I do have a question, if it's not too much trouble, I was wondering if I could address my questions regarding the Christian faith to you, rather than wasting my time studying the Bible and reading Strong's and Ryrie's to get my answers. If your answer is yes, I am certain my pastor would be greatly appreciative, as it would free up his time to further educate himself on God's word; who knows, he may even have me come to you on his behalf for those really tricky spots that he can't follow. . . I am certain you would be happy to straighten him out, wouldn't you?

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaah-ha-ha-ha-ha . . . Can anyone else believe this ignorant zit? I think that he actually believes his own ridiculous blather! I was better off when I considered him non-existent! Oh ya, and nice try, that is, to peg these off-topic posts on Vera and myself. The topic changes have most all come from you and your ilk trying to divert attention away from any factual, truthful and verifiable responses to your bias, opinion driven, and inane posts (and similar from your other blind ,stupid, and ignorant; not to mention blatantly dishonest spinners, from the left.)

As far as accusing us of dragging these posts off-topic, I decided to look back at the posts and see who started what topics. I didn't get all the way through, but it does continue in much the same fashion. I am sure I will be blamed for this being off topic, but once again I am responding to some idiots smear campaign.

From the "left", in order of appearance:

Name calling
George W. Bush's personal wealth
George Bush failed business attempt
Accusations of stolen election"
Haliburton Welfare
Clinton
J.F.K.
Morality (Ben)
Economy
Gas prices
Electricity prices in California
China
Roland Arnell
Bankruptcy laws
Substance abuse
Satan
Micheal Moore
Clinton's Blow-job
Pre-knowledge of 9/11
Conscience
George Bush Sr.
Bible thumpers(Ben)
Viet-nam(Ben)
Stem-cell research(Ben)
Christianity(Ben)
Homosexuality(Ben)
Hilary
Iran
North Korea
Immigration & border control
Terrorist attacks before 9/11
Conservative, religious zealots(Ben)
Theory of evolution(Ben)
Anthrax
Poor, black people
Hurricane Katrina
Alcoholism
Mafia
J.F.K.'s Assassination
Barbara Bush
Bosnia
Croatia
The Constitution
Global Warming(james-C)
War on Drugs (James-C(from now on it will be JfC)
Alternative fuels(JfC)
Electoral College(JfC)
World travel
Crime rates
Alternative Fuel Vehicles(All JfC)
WWII(JfC)
Germany
Hitler
n**i's
Henry Ford
U.N. Control
Veto power
Ben Franklin(yup - JfC-all the last5,6,7,. . . )
Blondes, Big Hooter's, Cold beer
Clinton's tax increase
9/11
John Kerry

And, with equal number of posts, from the "right" . . .
U.N Sanctions
ACLU?child molestation
Communism/God
Desert Storm
Nukes
News Station Comparison
Sheehan
Bakker(Vera)
Waco

I really wanted to get down to at least the point where there were U-boats in the St. Lawrence(JfC), but I am too busy to continue researching fct that you won't look at(speak fishy speak.) The rest of these posts continue in much the same manner as the section I got through (about 1/4 of them), the left' diverting away from the topic, and then giving the right' s**t for being off topic when they respond! b***h and moan all ya want, proof is in the pudding! Oh ya, and the winner of most "off-topics" started (like there's any surprise here) . . . James from Calgary!

Like I said, factual, truthful, and verifiable, posts from the "right", and now for the response consisting of biased, opinion driven, inane spin from the blind, stupid, ignorant, and blatantly dishonest.

Here fishy, fishy, fishy, fish . . . now speak!

God bless the U.S. and all her troops (but not those who don't wanna be)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#458 Consumer Comment

Time for a little "comic relief". The Perfect Plan.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

OK, I think it is high time we inject a little humor into this extremely long thread. The following was emailed to me by a friend this morning. I supposedly comes from Robin Williams, and based on the content, I would not be surprised. Here is the text:

"You gotta love Robin Williams...... Even if he's nuts! Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan. What we need now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message.

Robin Williams' plan...(Hard to argue with this logic!)

"I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here's one plan."

1) "The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those 'good ole boys', we will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of whom or where they are. They're illegal!!! France will welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.

5) No foreign "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them are stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH...learn it...or LEAVE...Now, isn't that a winner of a plan?

"The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.' She's got a baseball bat and she's yelling, 'you want a piece of me?'"

End of text.

There, that sounds like a good plan to me. 6 and 7 are my personal favorites.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#457 Consumer Comment

If you're not gonna defend it, then don't bring it up

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

You two are fine ones to talk about honor and morality...I'd bet the both of you need a dictionary to look it up.

Ben, if you think I'm a liar, it's fine. If you want to know where I found that article---that is, if the multiple places where it can be found that have been pointed out by others isn't enough--you can locate it at Human Events online. Feel free to peruse.

As for "never trusting a freaking religious zealot", I've already told you: I'm not a religious zealot. But if calling me names (and being unable to defend a subject YOU and JAMES bought into this discussion) makes you feel all better, then so be it.

I know for a fact that I tried not to get into a pissing match over religion, but as I've pointed out, Ben was spoiling for a chance to troll out a Christian who was willing to defend their beliefs. I hope you're happy Ben, for showing the world what an idiot you are. You've proven nothing. Congratulations. (Go ahead...try to point out that you've proven what a "liar" I am...Jesus, you're so pathetic! LOL) Any one who has the patience to read this thread from top to bottom can see you and James spinning away. Tangle and choke, Dipwads...the world needs the fertilizer.

Where are the facts we've been asking you people to present? James? Credible sources, please...not Michael Moore. Same for you, Bennie, and James of Tupper. I've not seen you guys present one single fact to support your claims...yet "B.", Shawn, Robert (both of them) and I have presented facts. STILL waiting.

So if I'm totally wrong on the whole Muslim History Lesson---and I know I'm not---that will be only ONE point you've gotten me on, and I'd gladly concede it. But we all know that James' constant presentation of the Canadian Skewed Version of the Bible is supposedly acceptable, and the fact that neither of you, or James of Tupper, can produce any facts that prove we're in a war for oil. It's been too solidly debunked. But it's okay I guess, right? 'Course it is! f**king hypocrite.

As far as those of you who are so tickled that these indictments are being handed out...well, you should be careful when you laugh at the misfortune of others...it has a way of visiting your home.

James, if you're not willing to read all of what I write, then write nothing directed to me, write nothing insulting me...obviously, I've proven that you'll just ignore the parts of life you don't like, and pick tiny points to insult on...I recognize a selfish little whiner when I see one. Or in this case, at least four or more.

So yes, let's get back to the original subject. I could use fresh insight as to why this Genius from Tupper still insists that we're at war for oil, then when asked to show us why he thinks so, he comes up with "George Bush has always liked Killing!!!!" or "Huh, funny George Bush is a drunk!" to "substantiate" his supposed posture.

So come on, James of Tupper. Why DO you feel that we're at war for oil? Because buying gas for your li'l hooptie WAS three bucks a gallon?

Still no replies from the crowd, about when Gas was at $2.30 and higher, when Clinton was in office? Where was all that righteous indignation then? I supposed when a rapist and liar is fleecing you, it's okay, as long as that crook isn't a conservative republican.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#456 Consumer Comment

Here I am Vera.. you religous freaking zealot

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 31, 2005

Here I am you religous freaking zealot. Your a liar Vera. Completely and totally. I have no intention of having any sort of debate with someone that makes complete fabrications of reality. Let me quote you again....

"It seems apparent that you're only going to offer issue when I refuse to do anymore work for you people. And yes, Ben, Muslim religion, in the guise of a history lesson, is/was being fenced off as curriculum in some of the schools there in California. If you just can't figure out how to find the article, then it's your problem."

You....flat out lied. And now you have no intention to back up your claims. You have proven once again why I will never trust anyone so deeply involved in any organized religon. You have shown that you will make anything up to press your case to enslave humanity under your con. You support a President that does the same. You lie, and make things up. He lies and makes things up. Your excuse of "im not doing work for you" is just pathetic. You make an outragous statment, yet you cant even cut and paste one viable link. Not one date of a newspaper. And not one airtime of any television program.

Show us Vera. Show us where you found this information. How dare you insult us so. Until you do, I have no reason to debate anything with you. Liars have no place in an honest debate. If you have made a mistake, then retract it. But now that you have shown to still stand by your statements, I can only assume you are lying since you are completely incapable of showing any viable proof.

If you are a liar Vera (and its becomming very obvious) then you have no honor....or morals. Perhaps you should re-read your "book". And take a long look at yourself and what kind of life you have been living under it. How dare you and your ilk preach to the world and lie outright to push your misguided views of life on the rest of humanity. If there is a god do you really think he would approve? You people are complete hypocrites.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#455 Consumer Suggestion

Greg... I certainly agree with you

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 30, 2005

Greg;

I certainly agree with you about the subject of this thread. I have mentioned it many times... but Shawn & Vera just keep going "on & on" about it... then Ben & B fall into their trap of trying to "change the subject"

I made 2 posts referring to Shawn & Vera & their extreamly "long winded" posts that really did not say anything of value regarding the subject at hand, the occupation of Iraq & why it is wrong & really dumb. They respond with more long winded posts without a mention of even the word "Iraq" in their entire posts!

In response they both gave "long winded" replies... both of them saying basically nothing to defend themselves for their babbleing on "off subject" & I am sorry if I need to go off subject to devote a single paragraph or two to respond to their horrid long posts "totally off subject".

Beginning with Shawn, man you can sure come up with the "tried & true" responses... yes I have heard that garbage before. Debts & trespasses are interchangeable are they? Well it is quite clear Jesus meant debts in Matthew 6! Quite obvious indeed! It is also "quite obvious" that Jesus, does not want you to make a spectical of yourself. You can bring up other "un proovable" parts of the bible that point to the opposite & that do support the Churches... I know very well. However if you are a Christian (which means you believe in, & follow Christ), you should understand that Matthew 6 is provable, as it is backed up by Luke. Unless you can show me other places where 2 people talked about what Jesus said disputeing that, I see that as being unprovable. Unprovable... means I will disregard it & "Provable" means you have no other choice, as a so called "Christian" to do anything else but regard it!

Vera, along with you, go on about spelling mistakes & grammar, compleatly "off subject" & please teachers... go find a thread where your skills are needed! I can understand James, as well as any other thinking person. Just as I understand you & Vera when you make the same mistakes. On & on... paragraph after paragraph... you critisize spelling & grammar & what the word "preface means" & how you laugh about it... next I expect to hear what noise you make when taking a "s**t"! None of us really wanna hear this blathering! People intelligent enough to see that this occupation of Iraq is wrong, are also intelligent enough to "get the meaning" grammar & spelling aside!

Finally Vera the roofer. Oh yea Vera... roofers are not the biggest crooks known to mankind at all. My first job... oh I remember! You never over estimate the amount of square on a roof do you? You never order those shingles for the job "although not needed" & charge the customer for the documented square that you bought the shingles for & then return such shingles (the extra not put on) back to Domtar do you? If you did... you would just be doing what every other roofing company on this Continent does if they want to stay in business. Otherwise they could not compete! One of your biggest competitors is "Sears", who does the same thing!

You get paid for the shingles you don't put on & the flashing you dont use & the nails you dont use & the labor for all (using your reciept of purchase of these items)... then you return this stuff & get the money back for those things on top of it all! Roofers ... & yes I can paint em all with the same brush, as they all do the same thing to survive in the marketplace, are one of the "biggest rip off organizations" in North America! I don't care who else responded to another thread on another subject about another alledged rip off! I care about you calling the "ketttle black" on this thread, since you are the "pot" that is part of one of North America's biggest rip offs & you are the one who is "off subject", & it is you we don't need to hear any more of that "off subject" crap from! We are talking about Iraq!

Sorry Greg... it had to be said. I agree with you & for once "Patrick" on this thread. Well actually that is a 1/2 truth, as I agreed with Patrick on another thread that Bush was off topic.

I will devote now 1 paragraph to the subject at hand. Your leaders are now indicted morons! The truth is comming out! The ads are now running on T.V. The protest movement is building their foundation. This war with Iraq is wrong & a "con job" of the American people... by a very, very corrupt administration! As many people on this thread have mentioned, spelling mistakes & grammar included... you need to wake up & see the forest! Right now... your only seeing the trees!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#454 Consumer Comment

Patrick, I Agree

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 30, 2005

This thread is all over the map. Vera, James, Ben, etc. are in their own diatribe and won't let it end.

Perhaps a Blog is the better forum for what is discussed here. Instead of offering advice or suggestions to those who are victims, or even intelligently debating some of the issues discussed in this thread, we have descended into a "My God is better than your God", name calling useless cacaphony of endless dribble.

This country is in serious trouble. Stick to the issues without the theological overtones if you please.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#453 Consumer Comment

What a joke....Oh, Cana-DUH! Where have you Ben?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 29, 2005

I ignore the "religeous end" as that really has nothing to do with this thread. As far as you going on & on about me missing a couple of words... let me make it very clear to you.

Let me make something clear to you: If you choose to avoid the religious end (that WAS bought up by you and Ben), then keep ignoring it. To me, you're just some nosey f**ktard that thinks he's politically aware. You're not awareyou're just a loudmouth with no personal life that wants attention. Just like James of Tupper. In reality he's a nobody like you, but has achieved Internet notoriety, and that makes him feel special.

Read Matthew 6 where not only is the "Lords Prayer" located, but do not forget to read the "Preface to the Lord's Prayer" where Jesus tells you how to pray & how not to pray in that "same chapter"!

Look up what a preface really is, and you might get why I'm laughing, you idiot. Try this: A preliminary statement or essay introducing a book that explains its scope, intention, or background and is usually written by the author.
A prayer isn't a book, Jackass! And YES, you did say that Matthew 6 is the preface to the Lord's prayer! Those were your words. Jesus doesn't tell us to pray in THE closet, but a special little room that is CALLED a prayer closetit's the one room in the home designed for PRIVATE WORSHIP, where one can go and share the most INTIMATE part of their relationship with God the Father.

The instruction isn't to pray in private because you'll be making a spectacle out of yourself (duh.), but so you'll not appear as the Pharisees do, cutting and slashing yourself, rending your garments, and being PIOUS. THAT is why we were instructed to keep our PERSONAL, INTIMATE CONFESSION AND PRAYER PRIVATE. The whole prayer in the prayer closet is but ONE aspect of the communication processeven Jesus himself prayed in visible places (garden of Gethsemane, when he healed the sick, cast out demons or gave blessings and such).

Now, is THAT clear enough to soak into that little gray raisin you've got bonking between your wax encrusted ears?

Our WORSHIP is PUBLIC, our THANKS should be PUBLIC, our RECOGNITION and SINGING IS meant to be PUBLIC.
FELLOWSHIP is NOT a nautically-themed gay bar, it's the practice of going to church and sharing your public devotion to God with others.

Now honestly, I've dumbed it down for you enough. If you refuse to understand, well, then you're just stupid, and that's that. I've known mentally challenged children that are more capable of grasping a concept than you.

There is that clear enough for you Vera? No I never meant that Matthew 6 "was" the preface to the Lords Prayer

Then why did you identify it as such? Twit. Perhaps if you used the terms In Matthew Six, Jesus instructs us to pray in a closet [here, you'd present the text of that chapter, and mention the version of the Bible [KJV, ASV, NIV, etc.]. But we know that you wouldn't want to use those wonderful copy, Paste skills to make a truthful statement.

but it has the preface in that chapter. Nothing laughable or funny about it!

Yeah there iswatching you backpedal is amusing. :)


Most people who call themselves "Christians" don't even recite the Lords Prayer properly & definately miss the preface in it's entirety!

Okay.well, then if we're supposed to memorize----and to recite something, you generally do, so if you don't have your trusty Bible handy, you may find yourself having to pray without it---so why not just add Matthew chapters one through five and call it an even half?

Mmmmmmmyahknow..I think I'll take my INSTRUCTIONS on how to pray from a more sensibleand clearly, more WORTHY source.

If you were a true Christian & you followed Jesus words
I already know I'm not perfectand I've pointed that out myself. But I could be worseI could be you.

you would also follow that preface & keep your relationship with God to yourself & God, as Jesus asks. That is one of the reasons why I do not wish to discuss it.

Yet you make a whole post on it. Why? To put me in my place? You're not man enoughyou're just some misogynistic p***k who's very full of himself and has delusions of grandeur.

Incidentally...if we're supposed to keep our relationship with God like some dirty little secret, how are we to witness?

Here you go! More wisdom of the Word.

Mark 8:38
"Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

Luke 9:26
"For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels."

Pretty cut and dried, ain't it? But in Second Timothy, we have...

2 Timothy 1:8
"Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God..."

[All excerpts KJV, as ya likes it!]

What you do is up to you. Just realise that when you do it, doing it in itself is "not Christian".

Neither is sheisting people of their hard-earned moneybut you don't have a problem with that, do you? :) (number six!) Still laughing my a*s off at you. LMAO
Here's a topper!
Since you are so "adamant" on talking about the bible on this thread... I will include the paper I wrote here
The first person---as has been repeated excessively---to bring the Bible into this discussion was YOU, ya wart. Now you're bragging you wrote a paper on the subject of Matthew sixand put some wonked-out post about it.
I understand that for you to come up with a paper on something must be terribly exhaustive for youbut please, at least make your illiterate screed make sense.

Do me a favordon't tell me how to pray or be a Christian, and I won't tell you how to short-change people. Deal? :D

The level of wrongness in which you interpret the Scripture is so utterly implausible.it's truly a travesty. Hearing someone like you talk of the Wordyou make it soundtainted and sullied.

Meanwhile, you will notice.I'm not the one who's trying to (mis-)quote the Word, and bring it into the conversationI merely mentioned quotes made by those in America's Founding Government---and there is a great deal of mentioning God. Remember? That's the angle that Ben is using, claiming I'm trying to proselytize him.

Also, since this is what the 5th time you brought up where I work, which has nothing to do with this thread whatsoever, could you please give us all the name & address of the company you work at so that we can all go & badger you there?

I do roofing, Dahlin'and other phases of construction. Never stole a thing form anyone, never had a dissatisfied customer. And if my company ever did make a mistake, it would treat the customer with respect, fix the problem, and compensate where necessary. No customer has ever had to spend over half their money jumping through impossible or awkward hoops to get a repair done (remember those "hoops" you have to go through to get a copy of your Birth Certificate? That's how I imagine your customers must feel!), and since I have worked there, there have been NO (read that ZERO, ZIP, Nil, Nada.as in count the brains in your head) dissatisfied customers or call backs. EVER. We do good work (it's a little company, privately owned), we treat the customer with respect, and the employees are pretty happy. By the wayI'm not calling your company and giving you a hard time there.I'm picking on you here and here only.

I mean you seem to have no problem "badmouthing" my company even though you have never had a relationship with them. I would think it only fair that you give me & others the same oppertunity.

Well, I can tell you that the company I work for doesn't have sixteen RipOff Reports and SEVERAL complaints with the Better Business Bureauand the shoddy, hateful way you treat any customers AFTER you get their money is deplorable. You start off as someone who doesn't work there, then you're a friend of the company, then you're an independent contractor/ASSociate or something, and then you say that you're one of the founding designers of the company/concept/website. Thanks to the RipOff Reports, not only do I know I'd never get a vehicle from GC&T, but I'll make certain to refer my friends (Internet and local) to this website so they learn where they need not go.

I AM an employee of where I work. It's an excellent company, I meet lots of really friendly (and some not so friendly) folks, and I do a good job treating others with respect or answering their questions. Friendly or not, each person is handled amicably. Not so with you! All you can post is TWO circumstances where the customer got the OVERCHARGES and TRIPLE BILLINGS off his credit card. And your site doesn't even use SSL to keep identity theft out. Your reply to that is to the tune of If someone needs financing to buy a car, they don't have any money to steal so that's not a big problem! What an a*****e.

If you cannot or will not give us that information, than please take it upon yourself to "SHUT YOUR f**kING MOUTH" about it!

Feelin' froggy, a*****e? Jump.
Look up the article on one of the links provided on Robert's or Patrick's postseven B. points to it. Or maybe I can just ignore the requests, like you and all your other leftist leaguers here. You've been asked to come forth with your information and credible sources and you've ignored and refused to do so. Don't leave the work up to B., Shawn, Robert (either Robert), or me. I've given links for you little Sweethearts to follow, and information with sourcesyou Klingons just call it propaganda and spin, then shower forth the insults (just like you accuse me of doing!). Feel free to follow your own advice, and shut your stinking cake-hole.

It has nothing to do with this thread at all! I have no interest in defending where I work on this thread at all. Not meaning that I would not or could not defend it, but simply that I do not wish to, on this thread, as this thread is about the invasion of Iraq & it's occupation & the fact that Bush has put you into this position. If I have any attacks directed at you, it is about these issues & not "your personal life or where you work". Please give me the same respect.

I couldn't respect you if you paid me to.

Now I think this post should be short enough for you to read & understand, so I would hope you do not have to continue to repeat yourself on these issues any further.

Well, you have that option. You're welcome to keep that ugly wound underneath your nose from sphincting to me, too. But you just can't stopI know how it is, having balls of MicroSoftI've seen your kind come and go.and I like it best when you go.

Ben;
It seems apparent that you're only going to offer issue when I refuse to do anymore work for you people. And yes, Ben, Muslim religion, in the guise of a history lesson, is/was being fenced off as curriculum in some of the schools there in California. If you just can't figure out how to find the article, then it's your problem. Do also note, that if it were in any state that you lived in, whether it be California, Massachusetts, Ohio, or whatever, I don't care. When I have presented info, sources, and so forth in their unedited form, you and James have called it lies and propaganda, spin, and so on(is there and echo in here?Oh! It's the resound off of empty skulls!)I could bring the persons who were there or the writer(s) of the article(s), and you and your ilk would just say we're wrong, or lying, or full of it, etc. There is no pleasing the whining, bitching, BLEATING liberal-minded masses like you and the Twin Freaks. (Echo.echoecho!)

Fine, if you don't believe mebe happy with it. You're the liar here, and you can't even come up with your own, original thoughtyou have to attack the ideas of others.

All you have done is piss and moan about everything. What good have you done for anyone? Your community? Have you ever even bothered to write a letter, sign a petition? What positive effect have you done to improve affairs in your end of the world? Have you ever bothered to contribute to anything that doesn't just improve things for you alone? You don't have to be Christian to do thatall you have to be is less than selfish (somehow, I get the notion that the concept of selflessness is completely alien to you and the Twins.)

Being un-original and all, you can scroll up and see a post written by B., chock-a-block with great ideas on how people can effect change. That is, if you're so out of touch with your community that you can't figure out ways to contribute on your own. If every person worked to extend themselves beyond their own little cocoon, this world would indeed be a better place.

HoweverI somehow feel that stating any message that would impose upon someone to step out of their comfort zone is nothing short of blasphemous, in the case of you and the Twins, Jon, and such. I'll quote Shawn: It's like trying to teach a fish to bark.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#452 Consumer Comment

Some days, it's just too easy! :D

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 29, 2005

Greg, you are correct in the fact that nobody with half a brain believes anything these guys say, however, those of us with full cranial function research, gather facts, and then form our opinion. Such efforts result in believing some of what these guys say!

T.L. James, this is my first response to you directly. I had hoped such would be to a post with a little more substantiative inference but, I guess your average piss' and moans will suffice.

First, I can't see George Bush (or any of our past' presidents) digging a grave for themselves or anyone else, they are far too wealthy for such menial labor and would hire some half-wit like you to do that job. Second, . . . led . . . into a mis-led(sp.-misled) war . . . is an oxymoron, and, prequalifying a statement with so-called(sp.- so called), suggests you believe the opposite to be true; do you believe this is not a false war? Third, I am certain that it has been proven to all that the whole war for oil belief is unrealistic and only spouted by those with low intelligence - get over it already. Here's a tip for the dimwits out there - It is impossible to revenge' an image'. Moving on, your sentence structure is so improper it is difficult to follow, but, once rearranged and punctuated your attempt at offering any relevant points to ponder turns out to be nothing but an opinionated, pointless blurb which made as much sense before grammatical corrections. (Side note: your grammatical presentation and redundant use of words would suggest an education level of about grade three.) Seven? Although I don't follow Jeb's career, I don't recall hearing that he has any intent on running for President so to put that down in writing is a very safe bet, and, last but not least, to put something down in writing, is to insult through written communication; the proper English would be to set' down in writing.

To summerize, your statement is little more than base opinion with no relevant fact, and, your lack of skills in basic grammar suggests a limited education at best. It never ceases to amaze me how so many people, ignorant to fact and without basic skills of comprehension, purport being authority on political subject matter. In other words, James, this post gets an F'.

Regarding your second post, I would have to say that I (choke) agree with you . . . or, at least I agree that the patriot bill', along with the homeland security act', infringes on our constitutional rights. Where your point' becomes spin and drivel is where you suggest that George Bush is the only one responsible for this violation. If you wanted to offer fact without spin, you should have written a statement similar to this: After passing through both the house and the senate, the patriot bill (along with the homeland security act) was signed by George W Bush. These laws' are in flagrant violation of the fourth amendment of our constitution. . ( Fourth amendment reads as follows: . . . The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized . . . ") These acts are in direct contradiction to the sworn duty of our elected officials in the house, senate, and even the oval office.

You see James, I doubt that there are many who will disagree or argue this statement as it is presented in a clear, un-spun manner with facts presented to support my opinion.

To respond to the rest of your drivel and spin, I have to question: what is it you find so repugnant about wealth?' Perhaps if you weren't so disgusted by money, you would have a little more in your pocket; then you wouldn't have to be so resentful of those who earn a comfortable living. Also, WE, as in We, the people, own this country! Get over your tyrannical rich conspiracy theory and join the real world. And lastly, it is not our first amendment right to the freedom of speech that is being infringed upon, otherwise you wouldn't be able to post the garbage you do.

James from Calgary, I guess I do owe you an apology. I somehow misunderstood your previous posts and thought that you were suggesting Matthew 6:1 was telling us not to talk about God or Jesus in public. I thought that you were suggesting that we are not supposed to share the Word of God, according to Jesus' words. I guess that I misunderstood, and you were referring only to prayer and supplication, which is between each individual and their relationship(or lack thereof) with God, when you spoke of keeping it secret' and private'. If this was your point, I offer you my sincere apology.

I do apologize also, to others on this post who are not interested in this discussion on religious philosophy', it was not I who engaged this topic, but I am exercising my right to respond to various points' of hogwash spewed by others. Why are we who respond to lies, attacked for defending our beliefs with truth? If you have no interest, skip ahead to the next post, the rest of this one is for James from Calgary.

I hope you detected a note of sarcasm in my apology dimwit, all you did is support my statement regarding your picking and choosing of excerpts for the sole purpose of supporting your opinion. You didn't even do a good job of that! You had to twist' the Word that teaches prayer to be a private matter, and suggest that it teaches that the whole of Christianity is to be a private matter. I will list scriptures for you to read that will blow' your vile interpretation of Christ's teachings, out of the water'. Just one more point of fact before the list (which, as an ignorant mind, happy in your lack of knowledge and truth, you will most likely not read anyway), if you wish to speak, try pulling your head out for a breath of fresh air, and learn something about your chosen topic first. The reason that some use the word trespass' in the Lord's prayer, and some use the word debt', is that through translation of the original Hebrew text, both of those words are interchangeable, if you study, you will also discover that some translations use the word sin' as well. The King James' version uses debt, as does the Ryrie Study' and the Collins; the First Holistic' and the New Age Translation' use trespass and the New Catholic' uses sin - Strong's Concordance' offers all three.

Matt. 28:19-20, Acts 10:42-43, Acts 1:8, and one just for you, James - 1 Timothy 6:3-4

May God bless U.S.A. and her' troops, but not those who don't want to be?!?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#451 Consumer Comment

Jesus (no pun intended), can we get back on topic?

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 29, 2005

Enough with the religious crap already! Can we please get back on the topic of GWB and the war in Iraq?

No offense to anyone, but if you insist on discussing the bible, and whether or not God exists, please create a new thread and take the discussions there.

Thank you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#450 Consumer Suggestion

Since you are so "adamant" on talking about the bible on this thread... I will include the paper I wrote here:

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 29, 2005

Shawn;

Since you seem to now need to to teach me on the bible & what Jesus actually said, like I said before... I really don't want to comment on it in this thread, as it has nothing to do with Iraq.

However I did write a paper on Matthew 6 & if you don't want to get it... through your Church... then please take it from the King James Version. Since you are so "adamant" on talking about the bible on this thread... I will include the paper I wrote here:



Jesus did not believe in Religeon

I'd like to make a point about how Churches have proven their "Un Christiananity". I, like Jesus, am not into religeon. I would like to make a point from Matthew, the chapter referring to the Lord's Prayer. Backed up in the book of Luke, Jesus tells us all how to pray & what to pray. Not only have most Churches ignored Jesus on the issue of "how" to pray, but they have for the "most part" changed what Jesus said to pray, only to silence the "money rakers" that Jesus words would offend. I give you from the King James Version... Matthew 6:

King James Version

The Book of Matthew

Chapter 6

1

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
seen Matt 6:5, Matt 6:16, Matt 23:5

2

Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
have Luke 6:24
__________________________
*Note* Jesus does not want you to make a big deal! The synagogues of his day are the Churches of our day. The streets of his day are the "air waves" of today that preach as he said "that they may have glory of men".
__________________________
3

But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

4

That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
reward Jer 17:10, Matt 6:6, Matt 6:18

5

And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
seen Matt 6:1, Matt 6:16, Matt 23:5

6

But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
reward Jer 17:10, Matt 6:4, Matt 6:18
__________________________
*Note* Jesus was so concerned with the last note I made, that he repeated himself. He now goes on to say that when you pray, it is meant not to be done in a Church or Synagogue setting. He asks you to pray "in a closet" with the door shut.
____________________________
7

But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

8

Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
knoweth Matt 6:32, Luke 12:30, Phil 4:19

__________________________
*Note* Now Jesus has set it up for you to begin saying the Lords Prayer. He has made it quite clear at this point "how" he wants you to pray. Definately not in a Church or in a public manner in any way. The following is "what" he wants you to pray.
_______________________________
9

After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
After Luke 11:2

10

Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
kingdom Dan 2:44, Matt 3:2, Matt 4:17, Matt 4:23, Matt 10:7, Matt 12:28, Luke 10:9, Luke 11:20, Luke 21:31
will Matt 26:42, Luke 22:42, Acts 21:14

11

Give us this day our daily bread.
Give Prov 30:8, Isa 33:16, Luke 11:3

12

And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
forgive Exod 34:7, Psa 32:1, Psa 130:4, Matt 9:2, Matt 26:28, Eph 1:7, 1st John 1:9
________________________
*Note* These words have been changed by most Churches. You are asked to pray to forgive us our trespasses & not debts. There is a "big difference" between trespasses & debts". It is not such a big issue as to what a trespass is, but it is clear to almost anyone what a debt is. Now why would the Churches wish to change Jesus words in the middle of the Lords Prayer? Who would not want you as a follower to say "debts" & substitute that word for "trespasses" as they do with their masses? Who's interest would it be in if you did not say the words "forgive us our debts"? Who else but the "money rakers"! The banks & other financial institutions that support the Churches that's who! Do you believe that Jesus wanted you to change the words of the Lords Prayer, as he gave them to you?
____________________________
13

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
evil Matt 5:37, Matt 13:19, Matt 13:38, John 17:15, 2nd Thess 3:3, 1st John 2:13, 1st John 3:12, 1st John 5:18

__________________________
*Note* End of the Lords Prayer as Jesus gave it to us. Amen is said. Now read on...
_________________________

14

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
forgive Prov 11:17, Matt 5:7, Matt 18:33

15

But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
_________________________
*Note* Here it is! Sorta said differently & "not" part of the Lords Prayer Jesus gave to us.
___________________________
16

Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
appear Matt 6:1, Matt 6:5, Matt 23:5

17

But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
anoint 2nd Sam 12:20

18

That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
reward Jer 17:10, Matt 6:4, Matt 6:6

19

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
treasures Prov 23:4 Luke 12:21, Luke 12:33, Luke 18:22 1st Tim 6:9 Heb 13:5 Jam 5:2

20

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
lay up 1st Tim 6:19

21

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
For Luke 12:34

22

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
light Luke 11:34

23

But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
eye Deut 15:9, Prov 23:6, Matt 20:15

24

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
two 1st Kings 18:21, Luke 16:13
mammon Luke 16:9, Luke 16:11, Luke 16:13

25

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
thought Luke 10:41, Luke 11:22-23, Phil 4:6, 1st Pet 5:7

26

Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
fowls Job 35:11, Job 38:41, Psa 104:27, Matt 10:29, Luke 12:24

__________________________
*Note* Jesus is making a "big deal" about not being concerned with worldly goods. More proof that Jesus would not want you to change his words of the Lords Prayer from "debts to trespasses", as he is clearly not concerned with material wealth on earth.
_________________________
27

Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
cubit Psa 39:5, Luke 12:25

28

And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
why Luke 12:26

29

And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
Solomon 1st Kings 10:7, 2nd Chron 9:6, 2nd Chron 9:13-28, Luke 12:27

30

Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
grass Luke 12:28 James 1:10,11
O ye Matt 8:26, Matt 14:31, Matt 16:8, Luke 12:28

31

Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
eat Luke 12:29

32

(For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
knoweth Matt 6:8, Luke 12:30, Phil 4:19

33

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
seek Luke 12:31

34

Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

___________________________
***************************End ofChapter**********************

Now that Jesus has told you how to pray & what to pray & why you should pray in that special way, I ask you... How can you call yourself a Christian & go to a Church? How can you go to a Church that has the desire for you to change Jesus's words when you pray? Why would you pray publically when Jesus asked you not to do that? To be a "Christian" is it not important to follow Jesus & his words? How clear does Jesus have to make it in order to make you understand what he was trying to get across?

Jim Stewart.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#449 Consumer Comment

George Walker Bush has made the rules more tightened!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 29, 2005

George W. Bush has enacted the Patriot Bill and has brought a New Beauracracy, called the Homeland Security! I hate to tell you American Citizens, but your rights are being drained in the national interests of getting RICH! WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!. We are limited in responding to the wrongdoings in the country-world.... The people who own the country such as Bush's are big corporations. Bush has limited us citizens of the United States of America of our right to FREEDOM OF SPEECH! The Gov't and Bush are trying to silence the American People! Why not check out what I already said. Look it up, and DON'T TRUST YOUR GOVERNMENT!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#448 Consumer Comment

Bush's Ship is quickly sinking!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 28, 2005

To All:

George W. bush has dug his grave and the graves of his associates. Bush led the American Country into a mis-led war, or a so-called false war. Well I believe Georgie Baby had two agendas in this war, one steal the Iraqi oil and the second to revenge George Hubert Bush's image. Well. with the Very low political polls of GWB, and the withdrawl of Harriet Miers, Bush's lawyer as the new Supreme Court Justice, as she knew she would not survive. Also we have Cheneys chief of staff , resigning, under pressure from exposing Cheney, as the one exposing the CIA Leak. In any event Bush is losing his edge, as the people are waking up! Jeb Bush, YOU will never be elected President! I WILL PUT THIS DOWN IN WRITING!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#447 Consumer Comment

Back to the Original.. Lies, lies, and more lies from the folks who said they were going to restore integrity

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 28, 2005

reason this post is here.

"Scooter" Libby has been indicted. 5 counts total. Now we will give him the benefit of a doubt and he's innocent until proven guilty, but he is looking pretty damned guilty.

Prosecutor Fitzgerald seems like an honest man. It will be extremely difficult for the right-wing pundits to smear him, but no doubt they will try something.

Scooter is just the top layer. When they pull all those other layers off this huge onion they will uncover the lies and deceit this administration used to con this country into going to war, a pre-emptive one at that.

Scooter Libby, Bill Frist, Tom Delay plus other crooks getting what's due to them. 10 billion in profits for Exxon (how much will they give to the RNC?).

Lies, lies, and more lies from the folks who said they were going to restore integrity to the White House back in 2000. How can anyone with half a brain believe anything these guys say?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#446 Consumer Comment

A word to the "non-existant"

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 28, 2005

James, you are such a bonehead! I should probably just accept the fact that you like to spit and sputter about things you have no knowledge or understanding of, but when you pervert the teachings of Christ, I take great offense and must, by my convictions, defend the Word as best I can. Now, I am not a "biblical scholar", nor do I claim to have all the answers, but if you were to read the Bible and not just pick and choose various exerpts that you think might lend support to your hogwash, then you would know that that is NOT what is said in Mathew:6 or anywhere else in the Bible! This is a prime example of you "creating facts" to support your opinion.

"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise you have no reward of your Father which is in heaven." - Matthew,6:1 - King James

"Take care! Don't do your good deeds publicly, to be admired, for then you will lose the rewaed from your Father in heaven." - Matthew, 6:1 - The Catholic living Bible

"But take care not to do your good deeds in publicin public for people to see, for, if you do, you will get no reward from your Father in heaven." - Matthew, 6:1 - The Bible, an American Translation

There are three versions of the verse you are spouting off about. If you knew anything about the Bible you would have an idea that Jesus did not say or mean that we are to remain quiet about our faith. As a matter of fact, throughout the Bible He tells us to spread the Word, not in dark, secretive corners, but rather on the streets and in the light of day, wherever and whenever there are ears to hear.

Jesus, in the verse you have been making reference to, is talking about the 'priests' and 'rabbi's' that spend thier days in the veiw of all, tormenting themselves, whipping their backs, kneeling and praying (the "wailing wall" that is found in Jerusalem comes to mind)They go through all this "self-torture" in public view to show their dedication and willingnesss to "suffer" for our Father in heaven, but then as the sun goes down, and the "public" no longer veiw their actions, they live in sin. They lie, cheat steal, and have multiple sex partners often times partaking in orgies and unnatural sex(homo-sexuality). It is these people that he was making reference to saying that they will recieve thier rewards from man,(ie: respect and honor for the sacrifices they make in the name of God,)and not from God.

The rewards (and punishments)that God delivers are based on what man does when there are no worldly eyes to view his actions. In other words, He judges you based on things like how you react to discovering that, as you are loading your car with a load of groceries, you realize that you were not charged for that two dollar bag of onions on the lower rack - do you say "awe, what the heck, I just paid them 2 or 3 hundred bucks, what's two dollars?" Or do you walk back in, stand in line, and tell the cashier about the missed bag of onions?

They will most likely tell you not to worry about it and to accept it as a gift for your honesty, thus . . . you end up with it free of charge, and free of guilt as well. If they do charge you the 2 bucks, they'll be the best darn onions you've ever tasted. Either way, it is those "character defining" moments God judges you on. Now if you want "man's rewards", go spread the news about your honest act, if you want that "point" from God, feel good about your honesty and keep your mouth shut. (Notice no need for vicious expletives)

A word of advice, whether Christian or athiest,
sidenote - by the way Ben, this post was not to "sling" Christianity at you, I understand your freedom to choose not to believe and, although I feel you are mistaken in your views of my faith and you are misunderstanding that it somehow binds me down by rules and regulations, (the truth is, I have never before felt the freedom I have until I accepted Jesus into my heart and professed him to be my personal Lord and Savior,) and I would love for you, and all people, to experience that same inner peace and freedom, but I do not want you to ever, I repeat, EVER feel forced or coerced into believing in God, Buddha, Allah, or any other deity and their respective teachings.

I also want you to understand that I do not feel that you personally are to blame for the attacks on the Christian foundations (and I use that for lack of better terminology) within this country, but, please realize this, there are laws that this country has had in place for hundreds of years, and those laws have been recently changed by an "athiest movement". Let's take the example of abortion (I don't want to create a 'new topic' or have a discussion about it, but it is necessary to provide an example as such matters are difficult to attach to facts, but are charged with very strong personal opinions) the changing of the laws relating to abortion over the last 40 or 50 years are in direct and flagrant opposition to my belief system. When the Supreme court changed those laws (which, according to the constitution can only be done by congress,)then what they did, was chose, or rule, that your system of beleifs deserves greater protection under the constitution than do mine. The only ruling that they should have made in such curcumstances was that it is beyond their scope of authority and it be best left up to congress, as an elected representation of the people, to decide on such matters. But, I digress.

- (A word of advice) . . . start giving to someone anonymously - maybe a neighbor that you know can't afford to eat as well as you - leave a bag of groceries on their doorstep, or donate some toys for less privelidged children this Chri, or . . . I mean . . . this December's "holiday season". Oh, what the heck, send Jerry Falwell a check for a couple hundred thousand dollars and squeel with delight at the fact that it only cost you 20 bucks in N.S.F. charges to make God (as you do or don't perceive Him) laugh his Almighty tush off! lol

God bless the U.S. and our troops, but not those who don't wanna be!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#445 Consumer Comment

The truth shall set you free

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Although I respect everyone's right to have their own opinion, and I have no objection to anyone writing them out for all to see on this site, I do object to those who post opinions and expect the rest of us to accept them as fact. The truth of it is that I have seen many people who are willing to provide quotes, documents, links and sources for the information provided in their posts, but there are also many that refuse to do so. In these unsubstantiated rants we have heard rumor, conjecture, and ignorance equal to nothing more than the ostentatious squeals of juvenile cretins who spurn genuine disputation between rational adults. We may, with his unsanctioned approval, look at B' as an illustration of the best of the best' off such orientation.

Although his compositions are generous in duration, and tend to have exaggerated utilisation of exceptional linguistic units, his persuasion and rulings (although he confuses sentiment with vox populi') are vacuous respecting existential compositions. In short, focused scrutiny intimates his endeavors appear founded on the premise of if ineffectual at impressing with proficiency, perplex with vacuity.'

Commiseration of this promulgation is grounded in B's own literary genre as witnessed above;:
A preponderance of your responses are devoid of content, weak efforts to traduce your opponent, and can be dismissed offhand. A number of others lack sufficient content to stand on their own, and since you apparently can't count to 50, it is difficult to deduce a positive reference; they will have to be abandoned. If we eliminate the obvious attempts to 'put your words in your opponent's mouth' and the perfectly logical arguments based on obviously fallacious premises, we are left with a manageable list. After combining like arguments and eliminating redundancy, there's just may be enough 'meat' to respond to in the short time I have available. One question though, why is it you are able to perfectly argue from falsehood to absurd conclusion, but seem incapable of applying logic to the facts? Perhaps it is because you already know the answer you are seeking. You must have aced high school geometry.

To paraphrase, in layman's terms, his long-winded thesis can be summarized as follows:
You are off-topic, try to be insulting, and I don't agree. When on topic, you don't give enough information to support your opinion, and since you can't count to 50 (I am certain there is some explanation for this, perhaps I mis-numbered' some response), I have a tough time understanding your point/s so I will toss them out'(and this is logical?.) If I don't listen to your misquotes of others (such as . . . ???,) and your understandable opinions of which I disagree with your sources, there isn't much else. After reducing your remaining responses that say the same thing into one all encompassing statement, there might be some information for me to respond to if I have the time. One Question, why can you make sense out of facts that I disagree with? I consider your opinions absurd and you illogical. Do you just look for facts that support your opinion? Your thought process is calculated. ( To short form': blah, blah, blah, blah . . . look how smart I am, take my opinion as fact because I use big words so you can't understand how illogical I truly am.)

As for the rest of your rhetoric, B', stating that something is a fact is a far cry from a statement actually being a fact! To offer a response to your opinions and unsubstantiated drivel, (although a likely waste of time as you seem to have joined the ranks of those who derive fact out of opinion rather than opinion out of fact) I list before you th following:
1. Specific authorization was granted for the invasion' of Iraq in UNSCR 678 in 1990 (btw - this was not about slant drilling' as some have suggested, it was about a border dispute in which Iraq invaded and annexed Kuwait - Iraq was in the wrong (document S/22432, 1963)
2. Paragraph 8 of UNSCR 686 states clearly that the cease-fire is just that and only that - a cease-fire, and it shall remain in effect only as long as Iraq abides by all (get that - ALL)UNSC resolutions, or, until a UNSC resolution specifically rescinds the authority granted in UNSCR 678 and inso doing represents and end to all hostilities in the Gulf region.
3. UNSCR 687 (April, 1991) was the official terms to the cease fire', but it did not rescind the authorization granted in UNSCR 678.
4. There has never been an end to the hostilities in the Gulf Region, nor did Hussein abide by any, never mind all, of the UNSC resolutions in respect to Iraq.
5. UNSC resolution 1154 (1998) demanded, among other things, full cooperation with weapons inspectors or Iraq would face the severest of consequences. Iraq kicked out all weapons inspectors.
6. I could list at least 19 different UNSC resolutions that Iraq failed to comply with but I don't have the time or energy (besides, my wife would shoot me for spending all that time trying to educate those who will not learn). I don't need to add any more to prove the right' to go back into Iraq as there has still not been a specific' rescinding of the authorization granted in UNSCR 678, and it is obvious that Iraq was not abiding by any of the UNSC resolutions. PROOF offered + FACTS verifiable = inarguable. (Of course, if anybody can offer me verifiable facts to the contrary, please do so, I am always open to learning something new)

The permission granted by the house and senate was not conditional upon certain conditions being met, it was based on certain conditions NOT being met, which, with the full and correct text being printed, you're right about - they weren't.

Yes, we destroyed all of the WMD's that WE COULD FIND after the gulf war, and Clinton, with the authorization granted in UNSCR 678, destroyed all IDENTIFIABLE facilities capable of manufacturing WMD's, but what if there were more? Several resolutions called for the accounting' of all of these weapons and production facilities but Iraq never produced any of the paperwork, I don't believe that they had WMD's any more than you do, but, I don't KNOW that they didn't/don't have them either, and I'm not yet willing to bet my life, or anyone else's, on their non-existence. Oh, and just so ya know, the Bush administration' listed over 19 different reasons to return to Iraq, and, I have yet to read one statement (by George W. Bush or his administration) about why we need/ed to return (when full text is supplied,) that doesn't include at least 3 or 4 other reasons alongside of the WMD's - it was the left and the neutral media (I can't help but chuckle when I write that) have forced the American public to focus on that.

One more point of fact and then I will leave the rest of your left driven false neutrality to rot with the rest of the garbage you write . . . there are many people speaking out against George W, Bush and his administration right here on this website; there are many who do so on T.V., there are many that do so in local bars, restuarants and coffee shops, but neither you nor they are being arrested. Why not? A) They are not creating a public nuisance/disturbance while doing so, and B) Those who do take it to the streets' get permits - and if they don't, I think, and the law states, they should be arrested to.

I would love to respond to you all individually but I don't have the energy to type that much, so, I leave you with a few statements of our nations founders, and a little of my own opinion.

"God grant that in America true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable and that unjust attempts to destroy the one may in the issue tend to the support and establishment of both."
John Witherspoon

"...there is an obligation to teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality." The United States Supreme Court 1844

"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."
James Madison

"Legislators have their authority measured by the Constitution, they are chosen to do what it permits, and NOTHING MORE, and they take solemn oath to obey and support it. . . To pass an act when they are in doubt whether it does or does not violate the Constitution is to treat as of no force the most imperative obligations any person can assume."
Judge Thomas M. Cooley

The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?
Alexander Hamilton

"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair, the event is in the hand of God."
George Washington

"The Eyes of the United States are turned upon this Assembly and their Expectations raised to a very anxious Degree. May God Grant that we may be able to gratify them George Madison


"the Father of lights . . . illuminate our understandings."
Benjamin Franklin

The supporters of each party may be distinguished by the process in which they decide on the issues . . . the republican tends to look at an issue, discover the facts, and form their opinion; the democrat's approach is similar, they look at the issue, form an opinion and then set out to create the facts.
Me

Oh ya! Dave, I welcome you and your opinions, whatever they may be. I am gld to see that you took my first response to you as the light-hearted ribbing' it was meant. I do, however, feel the need to correct your wording. What your post SHOULD have stated was . . . The OPINION that G.W.B. is a divider not a uniter is all the SPIN I need to dislike the man. . . lmao

God bless our country and all our troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#444 Consumer Suggestion

Vera;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Dear Vera;

I ignore the "religeous end" as that really has nothing to do with this thread. As far as you going on & on about me missing a couple of words... let me make it very clear to you.

Read Matthew 6 where not only is the "Lords Prayer" located, but do not forget to read the "Preface to the Lord's Prayer" where Jesus tells you how to pray & how not to pray in that "same chapter"! There is that clear enough for you Vera? No I never meant that Matthew 6 "was" the preface to the Lords Prayer, but it has the preface in that chapter. Nothing laughable or funny about it! Most people who call themselves "Christians" don't even recite the Lords Prayer properly & definately miss the preface in it's entirety! If you were a true Christian & you followed Jesus words, you would also follow that preface & keep your relationship with God to yourself & God, as Jesus asks. That is one of the reasons why I do not wish to discuss it. What you do is up to you. Just realise that when you do it, doing it in itself is "not Christian".

Also, since this is what the 5th time you brought up where I work, which has nothing to do with this thread whatsoever, could you please give us all the name & address of the company you work at so that we can all go & badger you there? I mean you seem to have no problem "badmouthing" my company even though you have never had a relationship with them. I would think it only fair that you give me & others the same oppertunity.

If you cannot or will not give us that information, than please take it upon yourself to "SHUT YOUR f**kING MOUTH" about it! It has nothing to do with this thread at all! I have no interest in defending where I work on this thread at all. Not meaning that I would not or could not defend it, but simply that I do not wish to, on this thread, as this thread is about the invasion of Iraq & it's occupation & the fact that Bush has put you into this position. If I have any attacks directed at you, it is about these issues & not "your personal life or where you work". Please give me the same respect. I am sure anyone reading this can understand exactly where I am comming from.

Now I think this post should be short enough for you to read & understand, so I would hope you do not have to continue to repeat yourself on these issues any further.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#443 Consumer Suggestion

Vera;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Dear Vera;

I ignore the "religeous end" as that really has nothing to do with this thread. As far as you going on & on about me missing a couple of words... let me make it very clear to you.

Read Matthew 6 where not only is the "Lords Prayer" located, but do not forget to read the "Preface to the Lord's Prayer" where Jesus tells you how to pray & how not to pray in that "same chapter"! There is that clear enough for you Vera? No I never meant that Matthew 6 "was" the preface to the Lords Prayer, but it has the preface in that chapter. Nothing laughable or funny about it! Most people who call themselves "Christians" don't even recite the Lords Prayer properly & definately miss the preface in it's entirety! If you were a true Christian & you followed Jesus words, you would also follow that preface & keep your relationship with God to yourself & God, as Jesus asks. That is one of the reasons why I do not wish to discuss it. What you do is up to you. Just realise that when you do it, doing it in itself is "not Christian".

Also, since this is what the 5th time you brought up where I work, which has nothing to do with this thread whatsoever, could you please give us all the name & address of the company you work at so that we can all go & badger you there? I mean you seem to have no problem "badmouthing" my company even though you have never had a relationship with them. I would think it only fair that you give me & others the same oppertunity.

If you cannot or will not give us that information, than please take it upon yourself to "SHUT YOUR f**kING MOUTH" about it! It has nothing to do with this thread at all! I have no interest in defending where I work on this thread at all. Not meaning that I would not or could not defend it, but simply that I do not wish to, on this thread, as this thread is about the invasion of Iraq & it's occupation & the fact that Bush has put you into this position. If I have any attacks directed at you, it is about these issues & not "your personal life or where you work". Please give me the same respect. I am sure anyone reading this can understand exactly where I am comming from.

Now I think this post should be short enough for you to read & understand, so I would hope you do not have to continue to repeat yourself on these issues any further.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#442 Consumer Suggestion

Vera;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Dear Vera;

I ignore the "religeous end" as that really has nothing to do with this thread. As far as you going on & on about me missing a couple of words... let me make it very clear to you.

Read Matthew 6 where not only is the "Lords Prayer" located, but do not forget to read the "Preface to the Lord's Prayer" where Jesus tells you how to pray & how not to pray in that "same chapter"! There is that clear enough for you Vera? No I never meant that Matthew 6 "was" the preface to the Lords Prayer, but it has the preface in that chapter. Nothing laughable or funny about it! Most people who call themselves "Christians" don't even recite the Lords Prayer properly & definately miss the preface in it's entirety! If you were a true Christian & you followed Jesus words, you would also follow that preface & keep your relationship with God to yourself & God, as Jesus asks. That is one of the reasons why I do not wish to discuss it. What you do is up to you. Just realise that when you do it, doing it in itself is "not Christian".

Also, since this is what the 5th time you brought up where I work, which has nothing to do with this thread whatsoever, could you please give us all the name & address of the company you work at so that we can all go & badger you there? I mean you seem to have no problem "badmouthing" my company even though you have never had a relationship with them. I would think it only fair that you give me & others the same oppertunity.

If you cannot or will not give us that information, than please take it upon yourself to "SHUT YOUR f**kING MOUTH" about it! It has nothing to do with this thread at all! I have no interest in defending where I work on this thread at all. Not meaning that I would not or could not defend it, but simply that I do not wish to, on this thread, as this thread is about the invasion of Iraq & it's occupation & the fact that Bush has put you into this position. If I have any attacks directed at you, it is about these issues & not "your personal life or where you work". Please give me the same respect. I am sure anyone reading this can understand exactly where I am comming from.

Now I think this post should be short enough for you to read & understand, so I would hope you do not have to continue to repeat yourself on these issues any further.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#441 Consumer Comment

Vera keeps spinning.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Vera,

You quote again....

"I don't want to do any more work for you...what difference does my presenting the article make"


Uh, Vera, presenting the article would make your case legit. Without it your just spreading BS. You honestly expect us to just swallow your outragous statement without fact? And then sit there and say "buzz off, I dont have to prove anything"? Something tells me had I been from some other state, mysteriously that state would have been the one with Islam in its schools according to you. Because as it stands your statement is exactly that....just according to you and you alone. Nothing else backs it up. At least nothing that can be cross referenced.

No wonder you still think there are WMD's in Iraq. And no wonder you will listen to anything that idiot in the White House says.

And if you want proof that you and your ilk are invading peoples lives.....just read any website about abortion. You will find religous banterings by the truckload. And thats only ONE example.

Shall we touch on the 10 commandments thing? Or move right into the Pledge issue in schools...or how about prayer in schools? Bah, I think you will have your hands full explaining why you think your values on abortion should be practiced by all....by force. Then we can move on to the other issues.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#440 Consumer Comment

Hunh? Oh.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Ben;
I don't want to do any more work for you...what difference does my presenting the article make (feel free to view this as a cop-out...I really don't care.)? Just like James and Jon, you'll insist that it's "a lie", "spin", or whatever. You wanna find the article...do the same thing I did; Search For It. Good luck finding it, if you don't wanna step out of your little liberal bubble.

As far as the whole religion issue is concerned, I still haven't seen you present one verifiable speck that Bush is trying to "turn or burn" the masses. Maybe, since my beliefs are of Judeo-Christian faith, I seem to be the mean ol' monster because there are some extensions of Christianity that are hugely different....but you see fit to lump them all together.
Just imagine how they must perceive atheism!

At any rate, I'll state it again, just so you don't get confused: "Believe as you wish, but don't use Bush as an excuse to attack me about my religion." Have at least enough balls to hate equally, if you must hate. Your being an atheist doesn't bother me...it's your skewed information and attacks on my beliefs (using that inaccuracy), for having mentioned God.

While you're at it, maybe you'll grow up one day and learn that just because Christianity is the currently prevalent faith out there, that all branches of the Christian faith aren't alike. My approach to Worship isn't like, say, the Catholic or Methodist way, but the God we pray to is one and the same. Sort of like how you'd dice an onion...some folks slice the whole thing, then cross-chop the pieces, and some make the cross-cuts three-quarters through and simply slice off the little dices to whatever thickness they like...some people even use a food-processor. Is one way more "right" than the other? No. But they achieve the same purpose.

Some people don't like onions and therefore, don't use them; this isn't necessarily wrong, either.

So if you don't like Christianity, that's your choice. You've made your point, in your spiteful, eye-rolling, "talk-to-the-hand" sort of way.

By your own admission, you don't like Bush or Christianity, and that's the reason my believing in God (or my President's stance on war) bugs you. Get over it. (Incidentally, this is the claim you have chosen to outright deny in previous posts, then openly support in another post.)

I have already stated, long ago, that your non-belief is your choice, my belief is my choice, and that no one will really know until the final curtain draws. I would like to leave this mortal coil having no regrets, and I really don't see where my choice to believe in the Almighty is deserving of your venom because you're pissy over our president voicing his faith. Yet anyone who agrees with you politically is immune, be they Christian or otherwise.

I'll bet you have to pay twice as much for razors and toothbrushes for both of those faces.

To "B."---I didn't mean that O'Hair was the founder of the whole atheist choice. But she was the founder of the organization "American Atheists" here in the United States. I know that there were people that didn't believe in God long before O'Hair. Thanks for pointing that out. I had no intent to claim her as singularly responsible for the whole of atheism.

I don't seek out, for the purpose of harassing or converting, Buddhists, athiests, Wiccans, or anyone else. I don't really have a problem with the fact that other folks make different choices than mine. I do, however, have a problem when someone tries to pick a fight with me about God, then uses some purely invented concept that he believes President Bush is trying to indoctrinate the whole of the US by making statements like, "I believe God speaks to me, directly." (If he did, in fact, use that actual phrase.) This was not his original posture when he first began posting to this thread.

I really did try not to go there. Really, I did. Is it so ridiculous, that my mention of God should be taken as an attack? I notice no one gets upset that I've used the words "hell" and "d**n"---both words that have connections to the Christian faith. Why am I not being accused of trying to 'convert' folks then? Because it's obvious that I'm not trying to convert people to my faith, and certainly not Ben. If anyone can be accused of preaching here, James was the one who brought in, and horribly skewed through his interpretation, Matthew 6 "the preface to the Lord's prayer" (Yeah, I'm still laughing over that one!) from the Bible itself. Why is he immune to such derisive chide? Because he agrees with Ben.

Since I don't, I get the full fury of it all...hatred for Bush, hatred for Christians...just general hatred. As far as he's concerned, I am the enemy.

So get a gander at your enemy...a white, Midwestern married gal who's been married for sixteen years (my first and only marriage), and has strong connections to Family and Faith. What a horrible threat I must represent!

Certainly not the wholesome and goodly, bomb-strapping terrorist whose target is a busload of Jewish college kids can feel safe with my dangerous self prowling the streets at night (Jumping out from behind a mailbox: "Have a great evening!" Hands held up in claws.). I shudder.
I guess I'm not even good enough to be an "infidel". Last I checked, I haven't made any plans to kill everyone who believes differently than I do.

And yet, I notice that in all this, Jon, James, Liam, Ben...none of them perceive what the terrorists do as wrong....in fact, one of 'em used Saddam as a positive comparison...a choice over Bush (Funny thing, this person also loves the Clintons, and yet the American voting populace see each of the Clintons as singularly more evil than Hussein!). Apparently, they're okay with people from other countries using our resources to enable the commission of mass murder (a crime against civilians and not seasoned troops, no less), but they are against the voluntary decision of multitudes of men and women taking up arms and defending their country by CHOICE. Maybe it's something about the whole "evening the playing field" that irks them...I dunnoh.

What really gets them going? Paying three bucks a gallon for gas--and what a b***h, our current sitting Prez just happens to come from a family of oil execs! That's the reason this dipwad from Tupperville put this post up in the first place.
I don't like shelling out high prices for gas, either...but I'm not gonna fuel the fire to further divide Americans by actually filing it as a Rip Off....Jesus (egad!), can't this guy write a letter to the president? Here...how about this....instead of posting a report (hah) that sounds more like something akin to a drunkard swinging at his own shadow behind a bar, he could at least present the facts that he believes lead him to this conclusion. Is that too much to ask? Something more substantial than "This morning, I paid three-plus bucks for gas." The address to e-mail, since you're so fond of using the Internet, is "comments@whitehouse.gov.", from the whitehouse home page.

I noticed that when it was bought up that gas had gotten to $2.29 a gallon during Clinton's time in office, no one responded to that. Is it because no one believes Clinton has ties to big oil? Lemmee guess...."there wasn't a 'RipOffReport' website then!"
The only person that has really shed any light on the whole "why gas is so high" topic is Robert of Texas.

By the way, Robert of Texas...well done! It was an interesting read! :D

So "B.", thanks for standing by your statemnt "I'm just trying to keep it honest." I do appreciate your presentation of an opportunity to clarify a few points.

To James;
Don't take it upon yourself to pick a fight with Clay because you're feeling left out. And I'd rather be an innocent "moron" than a crook, like you. My God, you're such a boob! Completely clueless and utterly without decency. Now who's cranking out reports of "nothing but insults"? ROFLMFriggin'AO!! Ahhh-hahahahahahahahahhh!

To Clay;
Nice to see new faces! Hi there! :)
Regarding the witty address from the "Man Who Would Be Nothing", he seems to view himself as the moderator of this thread and self-proclaimed defender of all things Clinton.

You see, Clay, this person from Canada---when he's not fleecing the people of two countries out of advertising money---has seen reason to wart his way onto the RipOff Reports and sphinct his mind (a feat, I'm sure, could be accomplished by a good, phlegmmy cough.) on American Government. Since he's clearly run out of steam and has no more spin to contribute (that hasn't been debunked), he's trying to attack anyone who doesn't support the same opinion as he.

Sorta makes one wonder...aside from fleeing from some far-off perceived threat, what has he done to improve what he thinks is wrong in HIS OWN Government(he's already admitted, that it's not perfect). The best advice? Have fun with it! LOL!

God bless!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#439 Consumer Suggestion

& to "B' personally

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

B;

You obviously know what you are talking about on "both subjects", religeon & the occupation of Iraq. You produce the "facts" & these ... did I call em morons?... people with little sense then... don't seem to get it!

Oh but the story isn't ending here B, the episode continues with the inditements, then the "kangaroo court" that Suddam will face, then the final end of the "Bush Presidentcy".

Then what? I wonder how they will execute Suddam? Boy there was a guy between a "rock & a hard place" eh? I mean what was he supposed to do after "Desert Storm" to get himself out of a "death sentance" unless he resigned as President eh?

Sheesh if the USA gains any success here or any real respect... is the dream then, to call up any leader... anywhere in the World & have the "following conversation"?:

Hello Mr Leader... I am the President of the USA! Now u got some stuff we want & also we want you to back us in our attempt to do this thing here. Sending you that by encrypted email now, it is the document labeled [ World Domination Sections (1 through 439 backed up by the what we can do to you list]. You should receive that shortly.

Now basically we have our intelligence agency pre-prepared with the things to announce in tomorrows newspapers all over the world. The other Countries we have done this to, before yours, are also backing us & have their own "plants of evidence" to support our cause. Remember when your sister died in that car accident in Spain? Remember how you took her children in after their father was sent to that asylum?

Well we have reports that it was your "personal guard" that smashed into her vehicle & your friends who helped you get in power... remember them? We have two of them ready to say they paid Spanish government officials to find your neices father crazy, so that you could adopt your neices! Oh yes that's right, Mr Leader & we also have photo's of a man that looks just like you having "anal sex" with children that look just like them! Heck they are only 9 years old! That is only where we begin!

So here is the situation. Invasion is only months away after we release our information to the press, as we did so successfully in Iraq! This will happen to you. We thought we would be nice & give you a warning before I pull the switch! We have people to handle Congress as well!

You therefore have 3 choices:

#1 Resign! (which will not help you, because we will hunt you down like a dog anyway! It costs us too much money & time to be setting up other governments for our total control).

#2 Fight us! (which will not help you, as we have control of the press & we will be forced to invade within weeks).

#3 Be our friend & do what we say. (which will help you, unless there is any time that you do not help us attack who we deem as enemies & give us total control of your airbases on your soil.)

Please pick the latter Mr. Leader, as we have already proven what we can do, in such places as Iraq... & we don't want to have to do to you, what we did to that idiot Suddam! Heck with him we did not even have such photo's!

Imagine that conversation B? Is it unreal? Is it outrageous? Can even these Republican sheep deny it is a conversation that could take place & might take place in the future with success? What is worse is that it doesn't have to be a Republican government that does it! Although it usually is.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#438 Consumer Suggestion

Well "B" I will leave you & Ben to the religeous end of this thread

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 27, 2005

I really find it an "endless pit"

As for Robert;

Are you saying then Robert, that the United States of America is not able to promote competition in one of their biggest expence alottments for "Private Enterprise" to handle these Government Contracts?

Are you saying that "Haliberton" is so good... that they cannot or should not have competition in their industry?

I wonder how your railroads ever got made. Was Andrew Carnagie the only one that could produce enough steel to get the railroads built in the United States of America?

Gee Robert, I did not know Canada was so much more advanced! When we build things, or clean up things or manage things... we normally have quite a few companies who "step up to the plate". A few that are American owned too! I really wonder where they come from if it is as you say, impossible to compete with the big ones. I mean how could they even be in business to be able to present a bid in Cananda? As you say... when the "chips are down" in the USA... there I guess is only one place to turn.

I had "no idea" that it was so impossible for Americans to find better minds with money backing them up & able to hire the people necessary to handle the jobs the American Government needs! I had no idea your Country was so backwards & living with their "hands tied". Thank God Canada promotes "more than one company" at a time to prevent monopolies like that! Where we do have monopolies... we sure do b***h! However I guess that is not an issue for Americans anymore. I had no idea!

Although I am sure that IBM probably looked after most of the government computers, I was sure there were other bids as well. Does your govenment even know about Apple & Linux? Hmm... I guess I should just feel sorry for you poor Americans. You find "one company", deal with them only & then they obviously have you & your entire Country "by the balls"!

However in case you missed it, I have already said that Clinton did his bombing of Iraq too, along with operations in Afganistan which are the "root causes" for the terrorism we are speaking about on this thread! Yet possibly I still missed something! Even though...

I don't need to read a book or any document to know that if you oppress others in their region & Countries, they have good reason to rebel against you!

I don't need to do much research to realize that if there is only one company who can handle situations & you want them to survive... you need to keep them employed doing something!

If they get so big, that you run out of things to do for them, then you might have to "invade other Countries" to make sure they have work cut out for them.

I dont need to do too much research to understand the advantages of "free enterprise" & competition. I know that here in Canada. Has the USA changed their beliefs in free enterprise? I had no idea that the USA had moved in a direction that so much more resembles Communism.

So I guess then Robert, that the solution would not be so much getting rid of Bush, or even pulling out of Iraq. Simply if we take what you say to be true, what needs to be done is to get rid of Haliberton to stop terrorism! Right?

Thanks Robert! Inavertantly you gave us all the solution. Put Haliberton "out of business" & that will end... at least greatly reduce... terrorism! Have company "A" who competes with company "B" & in that way you will always know that you are getting the "biggest bang" for your buck! Heck it would not be a bad idea either to split it up even more so a company "C" & "D" could be employed, so that when something major comes along... you really have the Corporations in place that can get the job done... & very fast it they work together!

There ya go B... Robert was not as dumb as I thought! He had the solution all the time! Get rid of Haliberton, lower your costs, get a "better bang fer yer buck" & lessen terrorisim... all without impeechment or even worrying about which party is in power!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#437 Consumer Comment

Ignore this Idiot

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Once again James you remind me why I don't vote for your party......GET THE F... OUT OF AMERICA, I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO WASTE TIME WITH YOU

DUMB a*s

GOD BLESS GEORGE BUSH!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#436 Consumer Comment

Google is a wonderful thing.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

I googled the words "islam taught california middle school". The first two results were www.danielpope.org. Some interesting reading. The third was the link posted by Robert, and the fourth, and probably the most true, was by Snopes.com, who investigate and try to dispell urban legends (like this one). Here is the link:

http://www.snopes.com/religion/islam.htm

So, we have two sources, and a legendbuster's viewpoint. Hopefully, this will settle that debate.

Now, back to the original topic at hand, that Bush took the US to war in Iraq for oil. Let's look at each line originally posted by James of TL:

"Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans!" Well, I think we have OPEC, and a couple of natural disasters to thank for that. Google the words "kuwait slant drilling" and read result #3 titled "The Gulf War". There's some good reading there. But, I still think we need to see an official report of some type proving that was happening.

"This poor excuse of a president has taken the huge surplus President Clinton gave us and has put us in the red-meaning the hole." I think we discussed thoroughly already the "surplus" Clinton gave us, and saw how it really wasn't there, but was on paper only.

"He got us in a war 6 months after stealing the election and claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, of course, that was untrue." No evidence of him "stealing" the election in 2000. Plus, the Iraq war did not start until 2003, long after he was first elected, not 6 months after. And WMD was not the only reason we invaded Iraq, as has also been thoroughly discussed.

"Yet we still keep losing troops to this day and he still incists (sic) we stay in the war to keep America Strong." Yes, we do continue to lose troops. That's what happens when you are fighting an enemy, especially a cowardly one who resorts to sneak suicide bomb attacks that kill many more civilians than they do foreign troops. Believe me, the Iraqis who do want peace in the region, and a stable government for Iraq, wish for the insurgents to stop their attacks also.

"Well I think this Dictator is an a**hole, war monger. Bush I hear you are needing troops soon? Hey why not send your daughters?
They are old enough for draft." That is your opinion James, and as a free American, you have the right to have and express it. Just as others have the right to oppose it. Oh, and once again, there is no draft. Hasn't been one for a very long time now.

OK, so let's knock off the religious crap shall we, and get back on topic?

Thank you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#435 Consumer Comment

Religion is an important aspect of any discussion of Bush!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

I think the topic of religion is central to the issue of whether or not Bush is a rip-off. It is the perception of many that GW is trying to force his religious views on the country. Whether right or wrong and to what degree is a matter for discussion. It is also critical because it has become something of a dividing line between Bush supporters and detractors. Not much time, so I'm just going to skim the surface (& I may ramble a bit).

Vera,

I understand now why you brought up Ms. O'Hair, but you are dead wrong on this one. True, because of her notoriety she was able to draw some support for her American Atheist political org, but equally true most atheists who knew about her wanted no part in her hate campaign. It is incorrect to refer to her in any way as the mother or founder of atheism, as there are records of prominent atheists before the time of Jesus. Some of our founding fathers were atheists. A great many more were deists, 1 step removed from atheists. They believed there was rational argument for the existence of God, but they believed he exercised little, if any, influence in our lives. Sorta like a big generator in they sky; you can pray & maybe get a little increase in general power output. They definitely did not believe in the divinity of Jesus. Again, I argue it is unlikely, given their experience with the tyranny of the state-sponsored Anglican Church, and their personal religious beliefs, that they envisioned any official sponsorship of religion, other than a humble nod-in-passing to a Creator, and certainly not, contrary to statements by Bush, Dobson, and other members of the illiterati and RightMedia, 'one great Christian nation'.

Which leads me to this notion that the Constitution is some sort of inviolate document which must be strictly interpreted, but its getting trashed by the liberals and 'legislation from the bench' by liberal leaning justices, 7/9 of whom are conservative appointees. First of all, its not like the authors had some great vision that they wrote down and hammered out a few small details. Most of the populace were against the idea of a central government in any but the loosest sense. The Bill of Rights was specifically demanded as protection for the people against the government. It has been said that the original Constitution was so fraught with compromise that the only thing any of its authors was happy about was that it was finished. Every time I hear the cry, "strict constructionist," it really means interpret the Constitution MY way, it doesn't mean for instance, to pick one of many examples, to strictly interpret the phrase that says treaties will enjoy equal or superior status to Congressional law. Its like arguing for literal interpretation of the Bible, a collection of fairy tales and mostly word-of-mouth accounts written in different times by peoples with different nervous systems in different languages, none of which has a transliteral relationship with English. As for the supposed liberal attack on the Constitution, I fail to see it. Most of the examples I'm aware of are misrepresentations perpetrated by the illiterati and Conservative Spin Machine and echoed endlessly by their glib and hapless minions. Case in point, your characterization of O'Hair's suit (combined with Schemp(sp?) at SCOTUS) as banning the Bible from schools is incorrect. What it did ban is the practice of schools REQUIRING students to read the Bible, or any other religious text. If you read the majority opinion, you will find that it recognizes the importance of religion, but finds the schools cannot promote a particular religion, nor can they oppose religion; ergo they cannot prevent students from reading the Bible in school. Not exactly the decision O'Hair was looking for. But since you don't want to force your religion on anyone else and this case prohibits the schools from interfering with the non-invasive exercise of religion, this is a big win for your side. And if a school should forbid your children from praying or reading the bible, you would have an unlikely ally in your fight against them, the (evil) ACLU.

Many of the anecdotal instances you cite are sourced from a 2-3 year old book by David Limbaugh, something about liberals persecuting Christians. I can tell from some of the phrasing you used. The book is a collection of anecdotes that had been floating around the internet, tied together by Limbaugh's spin or flavor, if you prefer. He didn't do his homework. Many have been proven to be complete fabrications, many are mythical accounts based on actual events, the rest all suffer from serious distortion or misinterpretation of the facts. I am familiar enough with only 2 of them to discuss them without further research. One is the CA school thing you and Ben are fighting about. And, just an aside, its like watching a spat between 2 kids. You're both 'screaming at the top of your lungs' that you don't want to force your beliefs on the other, but 'you're a liar', but 'you started it', and calling each other 'every name in the book'. And Shawn's like a bigger kid standing there egging you on. LOL! Just what it looks like from here. Anyway, back to CA... The original source for this story is ASSIST News Service, a spin organ of ASSIST Ministries. And when I say spin, I mean right 'round. All the news we see fit to print. Last I checked, the original story was still in their archives. The major 'source' was a good Christian teacher with about a year experience under her belt who had recently become aware of the social studies curriculum, and thought it was just terrible. She knew a lot of detail about several supposed outrages, but little else, except that it was just awful. The truth turns out to be that the 'Islamic indoctrination' is one module out of many that examine various cultures, spanning grades 6-8, taught from the same text statewide. The school board agreed that this particular district, Boyd Union or Byer Union or something like that, may have emphasized the role-playing aspect more than some, but they did not find that they in any way went overboard. There was no Jihad game, dice-based or otherwise. There was a vocabulary list, but no prayers or other doctrinal material. The community was all-a-twitter until the board explained the reality of the situation, then everybody calmed down. I read somewhere that 2 of the parents had filed a lawsuit but I don't have any details and don't know if its even true. There was some concern that the module covering medieval Europe cast Christianity in a bad light, but what can you say, the textbook publishers are obviously evil atheists that hate Christianity.

The other one I'm familiar with is Columbine, for obvious reasons. It is true that they took down several tiles with 'obvious' religious messages, although I'm remembering the number as 40-something. The devil, of course, is in the background. This school is in a fairly wealthy 'bedroom' community. There are no bars on the windows or guards at the doors, children well mannered, the last place you would expect something like this to happen. The community was torn apart. Everybody was suing everybody else. Somebody had to be 'to blame'. The students were understandably a mess. The school was on a 'heal the wounds' kick, hence the idea for the tiles. Several students wanted to put up tiles that used religious terms and imagery in a negative context, some stated that it was specifically a response to all the positive tiles other students had made. After much hand-wringing the school administration decided the only 'fair' approach that would eliminate the negative tiles was to eliminate all tiles with a religious context. I thought it was ironic that they had all these grief counselors to help the kids deal with their emotional problems, but wanted to bury any physical manifestation of negative emotion. So, while I think it was the wrong decision, it was not the act of some liberal school board stepping in and demanding the tiles be removed, it was the local school administrators making a difficult decision during a very emotional crisis.

You have stated several times that it seems like everybody's picking on Christianity. I think there's a very clear reason for that, and its also the reason Ben is so bent out of shape. Christianity, in its various forms, is the majority religion in this country, and depending on who's numbers you believe, possibly the world. It stands to reason, therefore, that a majority of the problems involving religion vs government are going to involve Christianity. Whereas you perceive this as a personal attack on your religion, it is actually a defense of others' rights to follow their own dictates of conscience. Rather than an attack, per se, it is a slow whittling away of the egress of smug Christian complacency into the affairs of others; death to the idea that because Christians are moral and in the majority, their particular brand of morality should be adopted by all others, their answers the only true answers. There were several places in your posts where I had the feeling you couldn't see the forest for the trees. Maybe later tonight I'll have time to enumerate them. Some Christians may feel they have a morally superior, God-given right to suppress other cultures, but that certainly is not a right echoed in the Constitution. And when Christians respond to their loss of cultural control by banding together, even across sects that do not recognize the others as 'true Christians', to follow demagogues intent on regaining that control at whatever cost, we should not be surprised if this engenders a bit of fear in the rest of the populace. And when they throw their combined might behind a political-industrial complex to create a fascist attack dog, the average Christian should not be completely surprised to find themselves occasionally in the crosshairs, whether or not they support the moral majority. You and I both know that once you open yourself to the power of the Spirit, there is no further act of truly BLIND faith. On the other hand, I have known several who profess Christianity but seem blind to the Spirit within them, and a few who so blatantly use their salvation as an excuse to perpetrate all manner of evil, you would have to be blind to miss it. I've known atheists who pay more attention to the spark of light within them. Personally, I think that atheism is a very narrow-minded approach to life, one that rejects the wisdom and counsel of ages. However, I can truthfully say that I would rather embrace any number of whores and atheists than suffer the sanctimonious air of James Dobson or Jerry Falwell. But, of course, more so the whores. lol.

Shawn,

Well, I see you've converted the Q&A (&R) thing into a list thing, stripping all context in the process. I congratulate you on a unique approach to having the last word. And I thank you for disposing of that format; I never did like it, and I was having nightmarish visions of Ps, Os, Es, and any number of other letters cropping up. A preponderance of your responses are devoid of content, weak efforts to traduce your opponent, and can be dismissed offhand. A number of others lack sufficient content to stand on their own, and since you apparently can't count to 50, it is difficult to deduce a positive reference; they will have to be abandoned. If we eliminate the obvious attempts to 'put your words in your opponent's mouth' and the perfectly logical arguments based on obviously fallacious premises, we are left with a manageable list. After combining like arguments and eliminating redundancy, there's just may be enough 'meat' to respond to in the short time I have available. One question though, why is it you are able to perfectly argue from falsehood to absurd conclusion, but seem incapable of applying logic to the facts? Perhaps it is because you already know the answer you are seeking. You must have aced high school geometry.

Its amazing you can post so much on the UNSC and still miss the point. If you're studying to be a lawyer, don't quit your day job. Bush made the decision to invade Iraq on his own authority, you cannot lay this at the doorstep of the UN or anybody else. The fact is that no military action may be taken by a member country against another country without specific authorization by the UNSC, unless it is a response to an immediate threat. The fact is that nothing in all those excerpts from UNSC resolutions you posted, nor in the ones you didn't post, is there a specific authorization to invade Iraq. The fact is that the Congress did not authorize this invasion, they authorized the President to make the decision, provided certain conditions were met, which they were not. The fact is that we destroyed all of the WMD we could find after the Gulf War, and Clinton destroyed all identifiable facilities for their production. Repeat: they weren't there, we d-e-s-t-r-o-y-e-d them (double duh on you). All the huge numbers floating around were based on his continued ability to manufacture them at the same rate he had before the war. The fact is Bush had ample evidence from several sources that there might be no WMD, including the recommendations of the monitoring team, who asked for and had the support of most of the UNSC for just a few more weeks to complete their investigation and submit their final report. Was it illegal? I think so, but I doubt we'll ever see a court opinion to that effect. Especially since the UNSC has decided to get over it and we are now an official UN peacekeeping force in Iraq at the specific request of the officially recognized government.

As to why the "lefties" want to focus on WMD, aside from the fact that the Bush administration told us to focus on them, that is the only conceivable justification for this invasion, both legally and morally. Imminent threat to ourselves or our allies is the only possible defense for putting not only our men and women in uniform, but the entire population of Iraq in this kind of danger. It is the only possible defense for destabilizing the entire region with all the potential future disaster that might entail. Any other reasons we may have had were best left to diplomatic efforts at this point. No matter what you may think of Saddam's sanity, its fairly obvious that even he wouldn't be dumb enough to give WMD to his mortal enemies, except as a final resort. The very idea that the US or any other country has the right to 'oust', at whim, the government of a sovereign nation, is repugnant both legally and morally.

War criminals? No, they're called victims. War criminal would be a term potentially applied to Bush and Rumsfeld for illegally kidnapping, detaining, and 'interrogating' them. Hell, we held 3 children incommunicado in Guantanamo for almost 2 years, for their 'potential intelligence value'. Most of the people already released after 3 years illegal imprisonment were guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place when the US decided to round up everybody in sight. Let us just hope and pray that governments who arrest our citizens will be more responsible and compassionate than our own. You keep telling yourself we are abiding by international law, not "the laws as Bush thinks they should be", keep telling yourself that Sheehan's arrest for 'demonstrating without a permit' is somehow different from 'speaking out against the government', and maybe you'll sleep better at night. Just remember that while you are here, honing your 'persuasive' skills, the criminals your are defending, Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, are evading justice; remember the next time you are throwing a tantrum of outrage that they are responsible for the needless deaths of thousands of Americans, all of whom are somebody's son, daughter, brother or sister. Then go ahead and spin me right 'round, baby. "I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe but at least I'm enjoying the ride."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#434 Consumer Comment

Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

As I stated in a post to Robert, and thanked him for, it was a very interesting article. But I am still waiting for where YOU got your information. Even in fairness I reposted the link he gave so all can see in the name of fairness because I know posts on this thread can be very long and pile up quickly.

Now Robert has added some very interesting fuel to the fire. I would like to see yours. I havent discounted what Robert posted. But I did point out my view that the site, is a little fuzzy. Can you give me something from a more solid site. Like maybe CNN or even the ultra-biased FOX News. I think something like that would add much more power to your comments.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#433 Consumer Suggestion

Go find a blog site...you are all full of hot air

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Why can't you all just go find a blog site or chat room to continue your bitching on this thread. This isn't the forum to continue on and on about things you are never going to resolve anyway.

Some people have opinions you aren't going to change under any circumstance and your continued bitching and name calling is getting tiring. I dont' care who's side your on...enough already.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#432 Consumer Comment

The pot calling the kettle black

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

James should know about idiots, He's their King.

First, I threw in the disclaimer about needing more fact checking in regards to the link I posted. Proper research requires using more than one source. It's called verification. Using a bunch of left wing sources will not prove anything, nor will using a bunch of right wing sources.

This is a difficult task for James. He only reads Chinese propoganda, and other anti-American rags. I guess it's hard to get good news ever since Reagan crushed the Soviets and Pravda went under.

Next, poor James. The No-Bid contracts that Halliburton(actually KBR) got were signed off by Bill Clinton in the 90's, not GW Bush. These contracts were far reaching and long term. If Cheney was the reason for the contract, it means the Dems must really love him. There is a reason, and it is a very good one. KBR is the only company on this planet that can provide what the contract required. I cannot dance ballet. It would do me no good to audition, as I would not get the contract to join. In James, world, everyone is equal and nobody is better than anyone else. Enter the real world. KBR is the only company capable of fulfilling the terms of the contract, and therefore, is the best.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#431 Consumer Suggestion

Ben... if you are gonna handle all 3 of these morons...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Ben;

If you are going to have a war with these 3 morons, Robert, Vera & Shawn... about a subject that is really off topic, then I will handle Clay.

The only thing Vera even touched on with me, I wouldn't change a word on "on her post" anyway... so...

Clay;

Maybe you should read back a little. If Suddam had any WMD's of any amount that could be useful in war, he would have used them when the USA invaded. It was quite clear to him, as well as to anyone else that once the USA invaded, his Presidency would be over forever! It would be obvious to him as well as to anyone else that Suddam could not hide WMD's until after a US invasion & where the time came in some "fantacy world" where he could regain power & bring them back. He didn't have any Clay! Period.

Follow your news Clay & notice the inditements that come down this week involving the lies told to the American people on exactly that issue!

I have discussed with James before on previous posts where I totally agree with him, except for the other issues you mentioned, but as I said then, I say now, I understand why he would be so upset at the issue. James believes this is all over Bush & his pals getting richer & for that he is correct!

As far a Haliberton goes... in a "free Country" these companies are supposed to submit "bids" & after all the bids are submitted by all the Companies who think they can handle the job are tabled, then a Company is chosen. Not so with Haliberton!

Haliberton gets the contract simply because the Vice President is their past CEO, just as an "Arabian Horseman" gets the top job in FEMA!

Bush buddies exist everywhere to rake in the more than a Trillion dollars that will fund this mis guided occupation of Iraq, which makes no sense, as there is no real game plan there! Terrorism will continue, whether the USA pulls out now or later! It also is a war that cannot be won. Terrorism has "increased" since the invasion of Iraq & will continue to do so! Simply because the USA is illegally occupying a Country where they have destroyed the Government there illegally & the USA is attempting to set up another Government there that "will not work".

Many Countries includeing China have WMD's & Iraq was not & still is not as big a threat as the other Countries the USA is afraid to invade! Therefore the fight is not right. The idea was wrong. The justification has been proven wrong. Finally Clay, your Country will be no safer 10 years from today, than it was prior to 911. Just Trillions of dollars poorer! Many lives lost! With all of George's friends & family living as the only "healthy, wealthy & wise" people really having safety in America.

And you Clay go for this "hook, line & sinker"!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#430 Consumer Comment

Very interesting post Robert

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Thank you for finding that article. Its interesting. I will post it again for others to see in the name of fairness....

www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm

I dont know the foundations of the site this article comes from so I do have to slightly question it. To an extent, it can sound frightening. But they do not go far enough to prove their point into if its real or not. It mentions no names of schools, districts, or any other entity. It just says "its happening" without any reference to much of anything. Alot like Vera has done.

So I do have to question the intention of the site it originally comes from. Is it true? Or is it just another nutty religous site trying to scream "the sky is falling....look!"?

From the info I have heard its totally bogus. As stated before, I know several teachers here in CA. None have heard anything like this. But they have said that some classes at certain grades do study in "cultures". Just as I explained in a previous post about learning of Egypt when I was a child. They didnt have us praying to Osirus or Isis tho. We just learned that "hey...these guys were Egyptian...and this is what they are like.....". It was a culture study. I have no problem with them doing the same with Islam OR Christianity, or any other faith, creed, or culture. I dont even have a problem with them teaching "....and this is how they pray or prayed".

I DO have a problem with them saying...YOU MUST pray.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#429 Consumer Comment

Holy Cow!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Robert...I am not only grateful for your supporting data, but deeply humbled, grateful, and pleased that you haven't viewed my return volleys to BEN as an attack on the whole of athiest...?...non-faith. I appreciate that alot.
You're a bigger man than many, and I'm delighted that you served our Country. Semper fi...you have given me hope that people like Ben can learn.
May your path in life grant you success and joy!

To Ben:

I'm still waiting for your "factual data". And please tell me where I said a "friend told me", then changed it to "an article". I'll make it easy for you:

Here's the unedited comment:
"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah..."

The you take it out of context, here:
"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools "
There is NO such thing. Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much."

Since the two posts are so close, you don't begin the "spin" game yet...you try inserting some pseudo-righteous posturing, though.

"Ok let me get this right Vera. You use a statment like that...and you DONT EVEN HAVE THE FACTS??"

Thanks...I did need a laugh. Here's where your "spin" begins...
"They were laughing because we knew you were FULL of it! And the previous quote from you is proof. You pulled that whole argument out of your a*s about Islam in CA schools."

I tell you it's from an article....
"I have the article, and I told you about it."

It thus evolves...
"You DID mention it was ONE school now in your last post. But in the original you made it out to be a standard for all CA schools.
(Actually, I said "some", not "All", and you started with the "All" that became "One"....which is now "All" again.

"There is no forced study of Islam in CA schools. You say you have an "article" now. Yet in the original post you say a friend "told you about it". You later said you will "find the school". Thats singular. As in ONE school."

Well, y'got me...I neglected to pluralize "names" and "Schools". Did you bring in your girlfriend to help you think that one up? Kinda renders you whole "It's petty to pick on the typing/grammar/spelling skills of others and say their opinion doesn't count" stance. {sniff-sniff!} And you tell me I'm "weak" because of my faith. Bwah-hahahahahah! (Why do I get this vibe that you're a "kept" man, Ben?)

By the way...where in my original statement regarding California Schools did I say they have a "forced" course in Islam? A kid can always opt for the lower grade (if that's the instituted "penalty")

And stop befuddling yourself with your nonsensical thought that I care if you think what I write is true. I know it is, and I never said that "SOME" denotes "ALL".(Another something you have yet to properly clarify).

Now the spin is presented in full form:
"So back to that forced Islam in CA schools. We are dying to find out what single school represents the entire state of California according to you! Come on now! Which is it? The suspense is killing us out here in CA."
Nice work there, Scoops McGee.

Your ill-logic is too much a slippery slope for me...and you can't even come up with anything original. I believe that it was me who made the remark of being willing to defend an atheist comrade readily in battle...and here you're stealing it for your personal use. Like you have on a few other posts. To add to this, you're not even presenting any real debate...you're picking on little quotes and spinning, then attacking. What useless piffle.

You know, when I use information gleaned from other sources, I will at least give credit where it's due, if it's a direct copy of text (and I generally get permission, too). Mainly, I feel it's boring to see the facts I present bing labled as "spin" by the purveyors of same.

This was cute.
"You forgot one little thing there Vera. Your right about "science" being behind some serious kill counts. Ill give you that. But something tells me, those were wars. Yes?"

Nope. Think more..."clinically". And do some damned research yourself!

But if you want to include all wars (And diseases), not just the ones that were regarding religion (as I'm sure you're twittering happily in the background somewhere), that makes the body-count even more significant.

"Oh and about that "researchable data" you asked for. Uh, when will I see some "researchable data" about Islam in CA schools?"

Well, Robert's offered a link...and if you'll pull your head out of MoveOn and ACT, and start seeing things outside of the Glitterati and Leftmedia, the data's out there. Just start...plagiarizing someone else. Why should I do all the work for you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#428 Consumer Comment

More Vera.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Oh Vera Vera Vera,

"So Bennie, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view?

Nice use of my own words there Vera. Too bad you mis-used it.

I have no problem if you OPPOSE my view. Thats your right. Matter of fact I think I've stated before, I will even defend YOUR right.

The issue is, I dived in because, you and people like Bush dont just oppose my view.....

....your trying to take it away. There is a difference.

And another one of your wonderful quotes....

"I'm not the one who lied in court to take away prayer in schoolsyour Founder did that."


My founder? I have a founder? What the hell are you talking about Vera? I have an idea and a belief. Its not a religon. Nobody "founded" it. It just exists. Just because some idiot years ago tried to organize it into something similar doesnt mean all of us that think this way got in line behind them. So get real. You just proved for me another angle on why I think religon is so bad. People who believe in it have to put everyone in certain "camps" as if its organized. Well Vera, I am in no organized camp like you. I have no church, I meet nowhere with nobody. I dont take a day out of every week to get together with others and plan how to run other peoples lives or force them to think the way I do.

You, Bush, and your ilk do tho. Everything that everyone does MUST be related to "god" or "the book" with you people. Even your tantrums about some "founder" show your contempt for anything other than your point of view. You obviously have great terror in what this "founder" did. You show that you look upon this "founder" as some evil bent on your destruction. How dare they try to organize into something like YOU HAVE.

Oh nevermind, I totally forgot that I'm talking to someone that thinks gay marrage is going to destroy our country. As if our country is going to falter because two guys shack up together. Theres a real terrorist anti-christian thing for ya eh? Those nasty gay lovers....love is s****.> "OH MY GOD! THOSE TWO MEN ARE SLEEPING TOGETHER! QUICK....HOLD UP THE STATUE OF LIBERTY...ITS TEETERING!"

What a joke.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#427 Consumer Comment

Another wonderful Vera quote...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Another Vera quote from the loony bin...

"Data, please. Researchable data.
I can offer that science and convenience killing has snuffed out the lives of untold millions of innocents, in less than two centuries."

This was in respons to my statement about how many religon has killed in the last 2000 years.

You forgot one little thing there Vera. Your right about "science" being behind some serious kill counts. Ill give you that. But something tells me, those were wars. Yes?

And just what do you think many of those wars were fought over? Hmmmmm?


Do I even need to really say it??

Ok...I will......

RELIGON

Oh and about that "researchable data" you asked for. Uh, when will I see some "researchable data" about Islam in CA schools?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#426 Consumer Comment

Your a liar Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

You flat out lied Vera......period.

There is no forced study of Islam in CA schools. You say you have an "article" now. Yet in the original post you say a friend "told you about it". You later said you will "find the school". Thats singular. As in ONE school. Yet you fail to mention what school that is.

Your no different than those ultra-loony religous rednecks from the southeast that say "see they dont want Christianity....thus they are attacking it". And you call me narrow minded??

Whats wrong Vera? Why do you ultra religous nuts have such a hard time letting people like myself exist? I know there are other religous people here. MOST understand where I am comming from. They know I'm not attacking ALL and EVERYONE. I just push back on those that push me. I'm totally fine with the fact that religon exists, as long as its fine with me existing. You and your ilk are not fine with it tho. It just pisses you off that there could be people out there not under your wing and under your control.

And another thing Vera.....

You mentioned that if Bush was an athiest and pushing those values on people....that I would be fine with it.

Well...YOUR DEAD WRONG.

See this is something your types just can fathom. I will defend against and attack ANYONE that bucks our freedoms. If Bush were such a man....I WOULD DEFEND YOUR RIGHT TO YOUR RELIGON. This is America. We are free (for now!) to think as we please. If someone takes away those rights or even remotely tries to, I will push back. For myself, and for others. That includes YOU. You have your right to your religon. I will not sit back and watch some nutcase athiest take that away from you. Just as I will not sit back and watch some nutcase religous zealot try and take my rights from me. But you are not like that. Your fine with the fact that Bush wants a Christian America, and ONLY a Christian America.

The oval office is not a pulpit. The White House is not a church. And Washington DC is not some church oriented provence like the Vatican. Politics and religon should never mix. Church and state must remain separate in order to maintain freedom FOR ALL. If it mixes, then people like yourself and Bush will try to force their values and beliefs on others. I said freedom FOR religon....and I mean it. And I said freedom FROM religon....and I mean it. You can have both!

So you see Vera, I can be fair. You cant. I would defend you and your kind from athiest zealots regardless of my beliefs if they tried to force things on you. I certainly dont think you can say the same for yourself if it was the other way around.

Wait!

Oops!

It is the other way around! Hmmmm, and your defending Bush's "right" to infringe on my rights.

What a wonderful freedom loving person you are Vera......NOT!

So back to that forced Islam in CA schools. We are dying to find out what single school represents the entire state of California according to you! Come on now! Which is it? The suspense is killing us out here in CA.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#425 Consumer Comment

Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Here is your link to the California school teaching Islam...www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm.

Fascinating stuff. It IS in the curriculum. The School Board is so proud. Shouldn't we all be? I know I would feel much better if my kid was learning how to be a good little terrorist.

For those who think that's an outrageous statement, face the facts. All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but ALL terrorists are Muslims. Have been for the past 30+ years. That's an entire generation and then some for you who went to a Government School and cannot do the math.

As for Atheists doing this or that...get real. The vast majority of Atheists could NOT care less(the proper way to phrase it) what the O'Hares did or what that idiot in California wants, in regards to his daughter saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Anyone who does, should stop using US currency and try paying for everything with gold. "Don't be a hypocrite".

My religious code in the USMC was 75...Atheist. It is NOT a religion, per se, but the code is there to identify your religious preference.

Back to the Islamic teachings. This is some religion of peace. Sure, maybe parts of it. The word Islam translates directly to "submission". The Quoran teaches that there are two types of people, believers, and infidels. If you cannot get the infidels to convert, you are supposed to kill them. That's peaceful, isn't it?

The Crusades were wrong. Then again, they were conducted 1000 years ago, when people thought the world was flat, witches and dragons were real, bathing would make you sick, and science was the devils' work. I would hope that we, as humans have evolved beyond that line of thinking. But no! The Islamic schools themselves teach the same line of crap...the US is evil because of technology. These people live in absolute squalor, with few exceptions. Their leaders live like Kings with all the comforts of our "decadent" society.

Ever wonder why there are no 40 year old suicide bombers? Because they are the ones getting the younger ones to do their bidding. Why? So they can have 70 virgins when they die.

I had a virgin, once. She was worthless in the sack. Give me 70 slutty babes anyday.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#424 Consumer Comment

Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Here is your link to the California school teaching Islam...www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm.

Fascinating stuff. It IS in the curriculum. The School Board is so proud. Shouldn't we all be? I know I would feel much better if my kid was learning how to be a good little terrorist.

For those who think that's an outrageous statement, face the facts. All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but ALL terrorists are Muslims. Have been for the past 30+ years. That's an entire generation and then some for you who went to a Government School and cannot do the math.

As for Atheists doing this or that...get real. The vast majority of Atheists could NOT care less(the proper way to phrase it) what the O'Hares did or what that idiot in California wants, in regards to his daughter saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Anyone who does, should stop using US currency and try paying for everything with gold. "Don't be a hypocrite".

My religious code in the USMC was 75...Atheist. It is NOT a religion, per se, but the code is there to identify your religious preference.

Back to the Islamic teachings. This is some religion of peace. Sure, maybe parts of it. The word Islam translates directly to "submission". The Quoran teaches that there are two types of people, believers, and infidels. If you cannot get the infidels to convert, you are supposed to kill them. That's peaceful, isn't it?

The Crusades were wrong. Then again, they were conducted 1000 years ago, when people thought the world was flat, witches and dragons were real, bathing would make you sick, and science was the devils' work. I would hope that we, as humans have evolved beyond that line of thinking. But no! The Islamic schools themselves teach the same line of crap...the US is evil because of technology. These people live in absolute squalor, with few exceptions. Their leaders live like Kings with all the comforts of our "decadent" society.

Ever wonder why there are no 40 year old suicide bombers? Because they are the ones getting the younger ones to do their bidding. Why? So they can have 70 virgins when they die.

I had a virgin, once. She was worthless in the sack. Give me 70 slutty babes anyday.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#423 Consumer Comment

Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Here is your link to the California school teaching Islam...www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm.

Fascinating stuff. It IS in the curriculum. The School Board is so proud. Shouldn't we all be? I know I would feel much better if my kid was learning how to be a good little terrorist.

For those who think that's an outrageous statement, face the facts. All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but ALL terrorists are Muslims. Have been for the past 30+ years. That's an entire generation and then some for you who went to a Government School and cannot do the math.

As for Atheists doing this or that...get real. The vast majority of Atheists could NOT care less(the proper way to phrase it) what the O'Hares did or what that idiot in California wants, in regards to his daughter saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Anyone who does, should stop using US currency and try paying for everything with gold. "Don't be a hypocrite".

My religious code in the USMC was 75...Atheist. It is NOT a religion, per se, but the code is there to identify your religious preference.

Back to the Islamic teachings. This is some religion of peace. Sure, maybe parts of it. The word Islam translates directly to "submission". The Quoran teaches that there are two types of people, believers, and infidels. If you cannot get the infidels to convert, you are supposed to kill them. That's peaceful, isn't it?

The Crusades were wrong. Then again, they were conducted 1000 years ago, when people thought the world was flat, witches and dragons were real, bathing would make you sick, and science was the devils' work. I would hope that we, as humans have evolved beyond that line of thinking. But no! The Islamic schools themselves teach the same line of crap...the US is evil because of technology. These people live in absolute squalor, with few exceptions. Their leaders live like Kings with all the comforts of our "decadent" society.

Ever wonder why there are no 40 year old suicide bombers? Because they are the ones getting the younger ones to do their bidding. Why? So they can have 70 virgins when they die.

I had a virgin, once. She was worthless in the sack. Give me 70 slutty babes anyday.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#422 Consumer Comment

Vera is right...maybe(need to do more fact checking)

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Here is your link to the California school teaching Islam...www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/byronislam.htm.

Fascinating stuff. It IS in the curriculum. The School Board is so proud. Shouldn't we all be? I know I would feel much better if my kid was learning how to be a good little terrorist.

For those who think that's an outrageous statement, face the facts. All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but ALL terrorists are Muslims. Have been for the past 30+ years. That's an entire generation and then some for you who went to a Government School and cannot do the math.

As for Atheists doing this or that...get real. The vast majority of Atheists could NOT care less(the proper way to phrase it) what the O'Hares did or what that idiot in California wants, in regards to his daughter saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Anyone who does, should stop using US currency and try paying for everything with gold. "Don't be a hypocrite".

My religious code in the USMC was 75...Atheist. It is NOT a religion, per se, but the code is there to identify your religious preference.

Back to the Islamic teachings. This is some religion of peace. Sure, maybe parts of it. The word Islam translates directly to "submission". The Quoran teaches that there are two types of people, believers, and infidels. If you cannot get the infidels to convert, you are supposed to kill them. That's peaceful, isn't it?

The Crusades were wrong. Then again, they were conducted 1000 years ago, when people thought the world was flat, witches and dragons were real, bathing would make you sick, and science was the devils' work. I would hope that we, as humans have evolved beyond that line of thinking. But no! The Islamic schools themselves teach the same line of crap...the US is evil because of technology. These people live in absolute squalor, with few exceptions. Their leaders live like Kings with all the comforts of our "decadent" society.

Ever wonder why there are no 40 year old suicide bombers? Because they are the ones getting the younger ones to do their bidding. Why? So they can have 70 virgins when they die.

I had a virgin, once. She was worthless in the sack. Give me 70 slutty babes anyday.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#421 Consumer Comment

Ohmighosh! Now I understand!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

This one paragraph says it all....

"Did you ever think that if you were to "legalize" some of these drugs, they could be controlled by the government & taxed? The taxes could go towards the "rehab centres" definately needed. However that would just make sense wouldn't it? So instead you go on a "rediculous war on drugs" which does not change anything, except now if you are found with a joint on your boat, or in your vehicle, the govenment now can seize it? Has it helped lower drug use in the USA? No! It's the thinking that is entirely wrong! You don't fight fire with fire, but with water."

Now I see where he gets his logic from....he must smoke a bowl of it prior to posting.

Oh, my God...who do I sue to get the five minutes back that it took to read his post???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#420 Consumer Comment

James and Rebecca

AUTHOR: Clay - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

James and rebecca,

Bush stole the election: What a load of crap. How do you explain then the overwhelming win by GW in the poopular vote as well as the EC in 2004. This is the same garbage your kind have been spouting for 5 yrs. With all the money of george soros and the criminal tactics used by democratic backers to stop and intimidate republican voters and you have the nerve to say GW stole the election in 2000. You failed!!!!!!

Bush sending his daughters to war: First of there is no draft, secondly no son or daughter of the pres. would ever be allowed in combat because of security issues - you need to get your facts straight, and thirdly no one is forced to go into combat.

Haliburton: Haliburton was the only company capable of doing what needed to be done in Iraq. NBC news even admitted that right before the election. I saw it with my own eyes and couldn't belive the lib media actually put this info out before the election. Again get your facts straight.

Clinton and the wonderful economy: You can't be serious that this was Clinton. Clinton came in at exactly the right time in which ANY president would have looked good. if you know business at all you would know that the Internet boom and the rise in the stock market is what drove the economy. Let me ask you something. The beginning of the bust was also happening on Clintons watch and also the chance to get Osama was blown by the Clinton administration. All of this "mess" as you quote could have been avoided by Clinton. So should we give Clinton credit for this too?

WMD's: Again I can't beleive you are trying to pull this over on people here.

Are you trying to deny they had them I sure hope not b/c that would make you look stupid.

If you are trying to say they are not there now. Good.

I am sure you were one of the folks who cried that we need to listen to the UN. I think it is extremely disgusting that you post this drivel while completely ignoring that the UN has been shown to be corrupt and in Saddams back pocket. So address that!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#419 Consumer Comment

Phish ain't bitin

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Shawn, sorry, your hook did not set. My post was not intended as an entry into the "Master Debater Club".

My opinions come from years of observation, like anyone would read these wind-bag sermons of patriotism. At my age I don't need others to tell me what to think. I've been around this block enough times to see the truth. If you want to think that the USA is above wrong doing, go ahead, think that. If you think that the USA does not commit the same sins that you contend other (in your opinion) countries do, who's to stop you?

I only respond to the first few posts, I happen to support the ideas presented in the first thread. If you don't like it, make your own topic. Looks like you would rather go looking for a fight than to be with your own kind.

I skimmed the first paragraphs of some of these post, just a bunch of name calling.

The fact that G W B is a divider and not a uniter is all the proof I need to dis-like the man. I never voted for Clinton, but, at least he brought other countries closer to us, Bush has driven them away. To me Bush's claim of bring freedom to the world has done more harm than good. A friend of mine in Kosavo said they still love Bill there, they can't stand Bush. Post's by people from other countries, on this thread, support that Bush is even slicker than Willy was.

Now have a good day, and learn to play nice.

peace & love now more than ever, Dave

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#418 Consumer Suggestion

You just don't get it either of you... do you?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Vera & Shawn;

I don't have to read all the articals written on Suddam's failure to comply with US resolutions to know he didn't. I know he didn't & I say they were unfair & gave no reason for invasion. Most of the people in your Country agree with me.

I don't have to read someones report on the fact that terrorism will continue when the USA leaves Iraq. I find that quite obvious. I also find it quite obvious that the USA in "no possible way will ever end terrorism by a continued presence in Iraq"! Most Americans agree with that statement also.

Get that you two??? It does not f'ing matter! Invading another Country is wrong & staying there is costly & for no good reason! It is a silly waste of money, time & causes hatred. Lives too.

Now Shawn, your right about one thing for sure. The immigrants that came originally to the American Colonies & to Canada to settle came here to escape Religeon, Taxation & Poverty. Just as the US has a seperation of "Church & State", so does Canada.

When I grew up we were "pretty backwards" like they were in the USA & we had to say the "Lords Prayer" (as the Churches changed the words to fit their agenda) & we also sang "God Save The Queen". Just a little "opression" that both our Countries put our children through. Your Country just replaced "God Save the Queen with the Pledge. Both these things are now out of our schools in Canada, & do you know why?

Simply because to be a Canadian, you do not have to pledge your life to anyone by law. You also do not have to believe in God! Therefore neither has a place in politics, expecially not for a structure that is supposed to be "By the People & for the People"!

I might mention as well, that religeon has "nothing to do" with this thread. However if you are determined to be a "good Christian" I again advise you to follow Jesus words in Matthew 6 & keep your personal relationship with God, as he asked you to keep it. In private. In a closet with the door shut!

Now Vera, as I said before, I have no control over what goes on in your Country. Therefore if I see an iminant threat going on in a certain part of yours, I would only be smart to move away from it. If there was a group that I could join to protest, I would. I am sure there are such groups in the USA, yet as you see in what they did to Sheehan, along with others who make valid points against Bush's little scenerio's, I really begin to wonder just how "free" your Country is. You don't seem to care.

Both of you bring up things written in documents, but you fail to acknowledge the court cases going on right now, about the very issues I am discussing. The lies & the corruption, when brought out into the open & how the "whistle blowers" are silenced, as well as having their personal lives & livelyhoods destroyed.

If you want "proof & facts", simply listen to the minutes of these court proceedings & read the books written by former members of the Republican Administration that point out these things. Then try to point out how these Republicans are merely "Liberals in disquise". That again is not the issue. A lie is a lie!

It does not matter to you that Journalists cannot investigate & report "the truth" as what is going on in Iraq. It does not matter to you they must be "inbedded" now.

You believe fighting this war is "so important" even though it will not change anything, while you ignore that there are "millions" of illegals in your Country now! With only thousands of inspectors to find them. The "main threat" to your Country exists on your soil, & you think that pissing people off on other soils will make you safer? Wake up!

Your Government has not gone to any real lengths to keep even the Government's friendly on your Northern & Southern borders, & the influx of illegals into your Country is so rampant, that you really have no hope in protecting yourselves.

Contantly people like the "both of you" point fingers at "anyone else" but yourselves when problems pop up. Your Government has so much to do... right here on your soil, without even looking anywhere else in the World. Never mind spending a Trillion dollars to accomplish nothing!

No Iraq had nothing to do with 911. As a matter of fact neither did Afganistan! Just as you cannot blame Spain or Germany for attacks in Britian. These are not Countries attacking you, but people who do not want to be opressed. People that will not be satisfied until they have complete control of their own Countries again, just as you would feel if you had an occupying force here.

Wolverines, terrorists... I don't see too much difference at all. Just as the Wolverines would yell "horray" & sing "God Bless America", yes some Muslim's would dance & sing during 911.

So what?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#417 Consumer Comment

well thought out, but too bias

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

Dave, although I am certain you spent all night finding someone much smarter than you to steal a thought or two that express your political stance, I believe the only fact you posted was your last three words. Welcome, and have fun. lol

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#416 Consumer Comment

Bennie, I swear you're so narrow-minded, that if you fell on a pin, it'd blind you in both eyes....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

Okay Vera, let's tear you down, quote by quote

PUH-Leeze. You've proven nothingover and above the fact that you're a bleating, whining, insecure idiot, Ben. Your pathetic meanderings serve only to demonstrate your tantrum-like nature. You ain't man enough to tear me down, Kiddo.

Once againit's that God' thing again (Because I mention GOD in my statement, you take two sentences, omit the info between them, and then attempt to correlate them.)

Vera states about Clinton's b*****b.....
"It's the whole principle. "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God." --George Washington

Mark missed! Good job! (File that one under Omission Accomplished!) This is the point at which you seek to lay out feeble attacksand delight yourself that someone has bitten the barb in the bait. It's fairly obvious that you see fit to take up a fight with me about my religion, and you've achieved your agenda. Bully for you.

Lets go over your last religous right-wing banterings and BS. I really love how you nuts like to make things up, put things in peopls mouths they never said, and generally consider everyone that doesnt want to think the way you do....openly attacking you. Lets take your last post directed at me ....quote by quote......

Still waiting for you to show me where I put words in your mouthhave yet to see that. Quote by quote. (Nice plagiarizing of Shawn, by the way.)
Please show me where I have made anything up, too

"Thats funny every single one of my posts has been "why wont you just leave us non-religous types alone". Or at least thats the basic gist of it. So WHO wont leave it alone Vera??

On the contrary. If you look above, you're the first one to attack me for having mentioned my faith in a quote by G. Washington. I never said in any of my posts that If you don't believe in God, you have no moralsin fact, I think that was in your post It's that God thing again. about some dork. (Clearly aimed at me.)
So it's YOU who won't leave it alone, Ben.

Ok let me get this right Vera. You use a statment like that...and you DONT EVEN HAVE THE FACTS??

I have the article, and I told you about it. As for not presenting the facts and not having them in front of you, you're a fine one to call me a hypocrit (it's hypocrite, by the wayyou should know how to spell what you are.). Here we see the liberal double-standard applied; you and James can lie, spin, and take quote snippets, and arrange them as you like, but if I use an article---that I point out is olderI get waitYOU DON'T EVEN HAVE ALL THE FACTS?
Puh! Cram it up your keister, Bub.

Quick...go find a school QUICK!! Im sure you can find one school that had a 2 or 3 day study in Islam somewhere. Its called learning about CULTURE...not indoctrinating the masses as you paranoid religous freaks might think.

What is Islam, but a religion? Why did the tiles that mention the Bible, Jesus, and God have to be taken down? Why did the little monster ask the girl Do you believe in God? Where's your God now? before he shot her, for answering that she did still believe in God? Why can't the Christian kids have Christian-oriented tiles (made by their Christian and non-Christian friends) dedicated to their Christian faith?

I remember having to study Egyptian mythology when I was in 3rd grade. Bet your going to say now that the ENTIRE state of CA is forcing pagan rituals on us now eh?

If that's your spin on it....Kay. Then let's explore the Christian faith, in a public school. See how well that goes over. After that, we can explore atheism, Satanism, Buddhism, etc.

You DID mention it was ONE school now in your last post. But in the orginal you made it out to be a standard for all CA schools.

Really? Show me where.
Here it is, unedited.
Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools'
You see SOME OF THE MIDDLE SCHOOLS? Not to be confused, what part of SOME denotes ALL?

Twist and contort...and outright LIE.
Well, we know it's your objective, and it seems to be working for you, too. You've done nothing less.

They were laughing because we knew you were FULL of it!
Your opinion. I think you're full of it too.

No, matter of fact I asked for the REAL conservative party back from you nutcases.
After you labeled us as Bible-thumping War-Mongers. So because I, and many other, conservative hold onto our faith, you assume that we're all religious nuts. Pluralizing is generalizing, the way you're using it.

I never labeled ALL as you say.
Yes, you have (I want the Republican/Conservative party back from the religious zealots)and you're particularly hateful towards me, coz I'm still here. Make that'coz I'm still here, coz I'm Christian, AND coz I disagree with your bullshit across the board.

I even gave some examples of GOOD conservatives that haven't fallen into your zealot mantra.

Where? All I've seen is snideness and derision from you. Like I saidI noticed, that when James actually bought the Bible into the conversation, he was immune to your attack. Why? Because he agrees with you. And also presents unfounded, factless dribblejust like you.

And as far as "striking out" at your faith no. Didn't happen.
Yes, you have. Denying it doesn't make it any less valid. I don't have toyour stupidity is an ovation unto itself.

Switch to Shinto, or Budda,or whatever and keep it up, Ill bash you just the same.

So you ARE bashing us? I figured you'd admit it sooner or later. :D
Like I've saidyou're just hateful and angry at the fact that I don't agree with you. It's a nice plus, though, that my Christian orientation pisses you off.

I know you had nothing to do with it, but your faith did.
Speaking of not having the facts in front of youLOL!
Better check your data. All Christ-based religions aren't the same. Look up the dominating religious faith at the time; you'll see it wasn't the Baptists, Charismatic, or Mormons that waged war.

haha take a look at BUSH! Didnt he mention that "god" speaks to him...pesonally?

See, here again, you're taking something out of context. Many of the varied Christian faiths believe that God does, in fact, speak directly to them. I do.
But it's not like a I'm gonna invite Jesus over for tea, and he'll show up at three. Kind of thing; it's a quiet but powerful stirring in the hearta feeling that you just know is His presence. It's a peaceful thingand can be associated with prayer, or a moment of personal epiphany. That's about the best I can nail it down with. You might identify it with psychic intuition, or personal insightor whatever. But none of those comes even close to the peaceful certainty that one knows is God's voice.

No, I said leave us alone, and we will leave you alone...with your religon'.

After the fact that you criticized my faith, and falsely accuse Conservatives as being Bible-thumping war-mongers You're not doing a very good job, speaking of peace; while your hand rests ready to draw your sword. The wisdom of the Bard.and the humor of Will Smith Don't start nothin', won't be nothin'!
Methinks thou art a general offense, and every man should beat thee.

Is it really so hard to leave us alone? You zealots just cant handle the fact we dont want to pray to your god.

I'd be inclined to ask you same. Had you not dedicated a whole post, then attacked me for having mentioned God, We'd not be this far, would we? I even offered again for you to leave me alone: Egg away baby, this will be my last post to you on the Christian Vs. atheist vein. When B. addressed me directly, I returned comment to himnot to YOU. Got that? To B. and not to thee, so to speak. But then you opened your yap, and I justfelt compelled! Your mishandling of information is phenomenal. So DON'T pray to my Godor ANY God. I don't give a hoot.

Just dont make us have to.
Please show me where I stated you HAD to worship the same God as me? Please tell me, by Bush saying he prays, or that God speaks to him, that he's forcing you to become Christian? If anything, it's you who's trying to blot out God and Christianity in particular. You can'tface it. And I can't blot out atheism---not that I'd even bother to try. I've long since accepted that other folks make other choicesand have always tried to respect that. I never once said everyone should be Christian. Your faith (or the absence of it, in your case) is your choice.

I will admit tho, Vera, I DO think your a bible thumping war monger'.
And I think you're an insipid, shallow a*****e with a big mouth and personal issues by the truckload. But I didn't start out attacking you for your beliefs. Tell me again where this has anything to do with the original subject of this post, BennieI'm dying to know.

But I certainly dont think everyone is. Not by a long shot. Unfortunately, the "bible thumping war mongers" are out there, and they are making trouble....for everyone. Along with taking over the country.

Dear God.the magnitude of your stupidity and paranoia is simply.monolithic.

You really need to get a dictionary and read the word "athiest".
Atheist; A*the*ist.(noun)
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.
Okay. what'd I miss?

Atheism was FOUNDED by that one woman crook who took off with some money. Read up on the history of your choice. They tried to BLAME the Christians for her disappearance before they had even one shred of evidence proving anything. It wasn't a ruse of some atheist movement (that statement doesn't even make sense!)like I had said when I did give you a little insight on the founder: Even the atheist religion found her so repulsive, they're trying to distance themselves with any association to their FOUNDER.

I know very little of that crook that started that "movement", but I do know it certainly wasnt a religon.

Check againthat movement was the basis of atheism.

Once again...its not a religon. I dont have a long list of protocols, beliefs, systems or anything else. I only have one "rule" if you want to call it that......I dont believe in god. So what? And, once again, dont even bother bringing up that witch that started that "movement" back in the 70's.

Okay, so it's not a religionyou want that I call it an anti-religion? Tough. I calls em as I sees em. (Feel free to use that phrase to apply to my opinion of you, and face the fact that I don't care what you think of me. Your founding Lady was little more than a venereal wart on the annals of human history, and I find you to be of equal charm.) By the wayshe started her anti-God scrapple back in the sixties. I wonder if she used Government funding to start atheism? Does the atheist non-faith enjoy the tax-exempt status of a Church too, even if it's an anti-religion?

I'm attacking you because your defending a person that is forcing his religous feelings on me. The same feelings you have.

Once again, please tell me where Bush having stated that he prays or whatever is his cry for Monotheism, or a Theocracy. Once again, please tell me where I said you had to convert to Christianity. Can you show me how you came to that conclusion?

And you dont seem to have any qualms with what he is doing or forcing on people. I think its wrong.

Because I don't see things the way you do. I fail to see where Bush is forcing you to believe in God because he does. Can you show me a verifiable quote, by Bush himself, that's not taken out of context and is researchable?

I will attack you or anyone that tries to take my freedom away.

So will I.

Someone always has to jump on the "see...your gammer sucks...thus your point is moot" bandwagon. Ok Vera, you got me, my spelling sucks. Doesnt change the facts of the posts.

Point out some fact. PLEASE!

Nice try.....lets get real and move on. (oh I'm lazy too and dont bother with spell checkers...guess that makes my points even more bullshit eh? Get real!)

Once again, you're welcome to point out where I specifically stated, because your spelling/grammar is poor, you can't make a point, so your point is invalid, moot, orwhatever. Have you missed MY typos? There are many.I don't spell-check everything, either, but I do read and write well enough. I'd love for you to get realbut you keep tripping yourself. (And wasting my time.)

Ah, so you admit your trying to force your religon in public?

What horrid warping of logic pervades you, that I'm trying to fence my religion?

Why must it be in PUBLIC schools? Did you forget there are other religons?

Nope. Christianity is the only one that's specifically singled out and BANNED. Any other religion is usually welcomed in the name of Toleranceincluding the atheist belief. Thank you Madalyn Murray-O'w***e.

Why should ALL taxpayers have to set up places and times for just YOU and YOUR religon?

Interestingbut I'll bet you don't mind getting time off for Easter and Christmas, do you? Two of the largest money-making seasons of the year.

You have your churches. You have your sundays. You have lots of free time to pray when you would like.

Yep, and the government is trying to take that away, too (MIZZ O'w***e tried to remove the tax-exempt status of Churches, in fact!). The government has taken away and sterilized the very BASIS of Christmas, and now we hear Happy Holidays! instead of Merry Christmas. Yes, I know that's how you'd like ityou strike me as a very loveless and selfish person, who wants the joy sucked out of everything good and Godly. How terrible is Christianity, preaching its awful message of love and forgiveness! Even WORSE, that you're responsible to a higher Being, and you get punished if you don't demonstrate a little self-discipline! What a monstrous doctrine!

But why does it HAVE to be in OUR faces.

Answer that yourself. I didn't troll for an atheistbut clearly, you trolled for a Christian! :D

Ill make you a deal, Ill let you pray on MY time, and the rest of the public's time in a public school, if you let me come and talk about evolution on YOUR time at YOUR church on sunday. Deal? Prayer in public schools? Ok! Evolution in Christian churches then! Fair is fair!

Better yet, you can start your own church of evolution, and see how many are flocking to your door to learn something that's already shoved down their throats five days a week at their public schoolswhile our taxes pay for it. Five days a week to one VOLUNTARY Sunday.clearly, the Christians ARE trying to take over! (Ding-Ding! Price check on prune-juice Bob..? Price check on prune-juice..!) You fill me with an intense desire to be lonely, Ben.

I'm assuming the "HIS" you speak of is me? Once again you show how week minded the truely religous zealots can be. You think that having the "lack" of faith, is a faith in itself.

Hey, what can I sayyou keep wrongfully insisting that I'm a follower of Jim Bakker (whom I had only used as a reference), Falwell, and that I attacked you first, or that I watch ONLY Fox news, so I'll keep on insisting that your lack of faith is a religion, and making references to the Founding Mother of Atheism.

Yet you hold to this "you athiests have no morals" BS??? You gotta be kidding me.

Okayplease (ONCE AGAIN) feel free to point out where I had ever said that if you Believe there is no God, you have:
a.) NO Morals.
b.) NO Ethics.
c.) Are Gay.
d.) Are NOT Patriots.

Show me where I made those exact statements, and if they are exactly as you present them, I will apologize publicly. I'll need to know which post they came from so I can review it. I called Madalyn Nurray O'hair an amoral lackwit, but I never said that this is the case of ALL atheists.

For petes sake you nuts are such hypocrits. You want us to be saints, yet never can be yourselves!!??

Again, show me where I said you had to be a Saint. I never said I was. (And pluralizing your statements only further serves to credit my having pointed out your lumping everyone of the Christian faith the way you label me.)

Well well well Vera, in one part you attack someone for personal attacks, then turn around and do it yourself. Hypocrite to the end aint ya there girlie!

Actually, I was pointing out your own hypocrisy. You're accusing me of attacking you personally, then using terms like Bible-Thumper, War-Monger, Zealot, Nut, dork, freak, and so forth as modifiers when addressing me. Pip-Pip, Cheerio, and all that, what?

Yes, you did Vera. You did alot! You flat out accused people without a faith in a deity (your deity to be exact!) of being without morals, and without family values...period.

Well then, if I did it A LOT, it should be easy to find it. Feel free to include each instanceand try not to leap at the whole I'm not gonna waste my time skimming for times where you said it to fish it out. That's bulland a weak assed cop-out. And I pointed this out to many PEOPLE, did I? Hmmmmwhat other people here have attacked my faith and stepped up and announced that they are atheist? Only you, as yetand only you have been addressed, when I responded to you.

You just cant leave others alone can you? You just have to control others dont you? They MUST think the way you do....or else. Another funny thing about this abortion stuff you religous types fail to remember....You say your against abortion, you tout your religon as a reason.

Point it out. Show me, verifiable, etcI've said it before. Where did I say all this?

Then you totally think its fine when some family lets their children die from lack of medical attention. By a easily curable ailment. Because THEIR religon says they shouldnt use doctors.

There you go, generalizing again. That's not my faith, but I do know there are faiths out there that believe as such. Not all Christian faiths refuse medical treatment, play with poisonous snakes, try to practice psychic healings by pulling bacon-fat out of a mystical/divine incision or Holy Surgery. Wow. Your ignorance is REALLY showing, there, Kiddo.

Funny how your totally fine with those people.

Well, I can't say I agree that they let their kids die, but I can't stop itit's how they choose to demonstrate their belief. Hey, society thinks it's okay to murder a perfectly healthy human being for the sake of convenienceand you tell me to Mind my own business. But if I child is allowed to die because the parents have faith that God will heal them, watch out for the Wrath of Ben! Talk about duplicity.

Well, when Roe vs. Wade gets overturned by a religous zealot court
I don't see that happening. Really, I don'tso when you've made efforts to sow seed and pray for a crop failure, you'll still able to destroy the fruits of your act, should they blossom. To put a grisly point on it, you could even say you scraped by that one. No worries, Ben.

Face it Vera, your trying to force your "values" on others.

Only in the hallways of your vastly empty cranial space.

Then why do you need religon for your values if you already had them eh?

Better yet, why are you so threatened by my religion? I choose to love God simply because I do. I like to think there's something better for me, once I die. If you don't, that's fine. I don't see any harm in why I choose to believe as I do.

Why say people need religon to have family values, or morals, then say something like that?

I'M still waiting for you to find where I said, you need religion to have morals or values, or that because you're an atheist, you have none, or are gay, or are unpatriotic. And why did I make that remark about you releasing progeny onto the planet? Simplebecause you sound so hateful and angryand that's the kind of dictum you profess. There's already too much hate, anger, and misery in this worldand it's not because of the Christian faithit's because the foundations of the Family are being attacked. Many children have little or no guidance in this worldand your insufferable attitude only seeks to amplify that.

Angry? Yes. At Christianity? Yes. I dont follow ANY religon. But only Christianity is in my face right now.

Din'cher Pap ever tell ya, pick your fights wisely?

If it backed of, so would I. But by your tone, your logic, and that of Bush, it doesnt seem likely that will ever happen.

As I've pointed out more than abundantly, I react to being singled out by being nasty. It's what I know to do (and a darned good reason why I KNOW I AM NO SAINT.), and I think it's justified to turn the venom of an attack against the attacker. Plus I gave the indication, on more than one occasion, that I didn't want to pursue a squabble on religion because it's not the thing to do here, on this particular post. Yet you stand in accusation that the mere MENTION of God is a personal attack on your not-faith, then take two things out of context and use it as some soapbox basis to attack me. I TRIED NOT TO GO HERE..but you were spoiling for it from the beginning.

Like I said before, its not Jews or Buddists that are trying to force me, its you, here, right now, in my life, in my schools, in my home, in my courts....Christianity.

Here's some helpful info: If you don't like what I'm saying, you can choose just as well to be the bigger kid' and not egg a fight.

Your going to honestly tell me that when your sons were young children (and I'm sure you started them young!) and they told you that they DINDT want to goto church....you would have been fine with that?!

Yep. Do I care if you believe it? Nope.

Your not going to pull the wool over my eyes Vera, or anyone elses. You know d**n well that isnt true. You made them go. Dont lie. And after making them go for so long, I bet your saying "ill be damned if they try to stop". You obviously cant handle me not paying attention to "god". I can only imagine what you would do to your sons.

Please stop assuming that I care, and you'll be on your way to good mental health in no time. I really don't care if you pray, believe, etc. in my God. It's just typical of little cretins like you to say things like I can only imagine what you'd do to your sons if they didn't go in hopes to rouse some parental indignation. I'm comfortable in knowing my words are true, and don't really give a s**t about your opinions and cheap shots, Bennie.

OOOOH!! Believe me!! I do! I do! All the time!

Damnwhad'ja, sit on a Popsicle? (Did it go in?)

But your here, and your christian, and your in my face!

Not until you attacked. And I'll stand solidly on the fact that I tried to diffuse this from the onset. If you're so fragile that the mere mention of God sends you reeling into a barrage of attacks, it's not the Christians who have the problemit's YOU.

Like I said, switch to Budda or Shinto etc.

If I do, will you promise to switch to Hooked On Phonics?

Gosh! You got all that just from "leave us alone...and we will leave you alone"?? How freaking narrow minded!

Why no, by Golly! I got that from all the other jaded, snippy comments you've made! Twitter away, Lovetwitter away.

More people have suffered from religon in the last 2000 years than all the natural disasters to hit humanity in the last 2000 years combined (save for maybe the Black Death....another thing that wouldnt have been so bad had religon not snuffed science for 1500 years!).

Data, please. Researchable data.
I can offer that science and convenience killing has snuffed out the lives of untold millions of innocents, in less than two centuries.

If you want religon.....great....keep it....to yourselves. We are NOT trying to take it away, or "convert" you to non-belief. But you certainly dont sit to well knowing that we non-belivers are out there.

How many times are you gonna say that? I'm glad to see you're willing to repeat some bastardized version of what I had said a while ago, and claim my efforts for your cause. Here are a few others you can choose from, which I had written:

Even Ben's pretty cool, and whether or not he believes in the Almighty, that's his choice. We'll all find out the Answer in the End. I'm not a religious zealot, or a homophobe (See there? Silly me, assuming you were strong enough in your non-belief that you could graciously accept my belief and keep the topic in sight!)

I stand on the fact that I have answered your questions sufficiently, and all you have left to do is knock God. This isn't about the President's IQ, or stupid comments he's made, or about anyone's religious beliefs. read the original post's title.

This isn't about God, it's about Bush's presidency taking us to war over oil and high gas prices. Pardon me for assuming you were decent enough to respect my position, as I was decent enough to respect yours. If you want to pick a fight about God, might I suggest, you file your own Rip-Off Report?

Pick whichever you likejust be sure to plagiarize me appropriately.

And now, I'll quote/steal a few of your words:

So Bennie, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view?

You attack at every chance and widdle away at our rights. Only a fool would expect us to take it lying down and do nothing, that is not the HUMAN way.

Human? Hunh! You flatter yourself. The way you write, you give the impression that you're better than everyone else, since you can't be confused by the ill-logic of Faith. (I wish I could spell the sound of a Bronx Cheer!)
If you have an issue about Bush supposedly forcing you to believe, write a letter to HIMquit supplanting your rage to me, because you're too chickenshit to effect positive and peaceful change. I'm not the one who lied in court to take away prayer in schoolsyour Founder did that. So who's stomping on the rights of others, hunh? Not I. President Bush will be gone in another couple years, and you can blame your woes on the next President, since you're certainly not going to be caught being responsible for yourself.

And I don't think that of all atheists...just YOU.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#415 Consumer Comment

Fear sells

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

George is just doing what America does best...selling fear. He is guilty of ripoff for many reasons, the biggest; not keeping his promise to hunt down the perps who committed 9-11. The actions and proceedures taken have only fueled terrorism.

The biggest ripoff is still to come. The idea that a lasting peace and freedom will result from GWB's actions are pure fantasy. The Middle east will always (in our lifetime) be a place of unrest; fueled by sects of people far more dedicated to their cause than Americans will ever be.

Fear got America in a tizzy and George just found a way to profit from that fear. We profit at home from fear in everyday life. Gun shops, alarm systems, you name it; fear sells.

Whats sad is "good" americans buy right into it and divid the country, picking sides. United States? I think not.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#414 Consumer Comment

Ok Vera.....lets tear you down. Quote by quote.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

Lets go over your last religous right-wing banterings and BS. I really love how you nuts like to make things up, put things in peopls mouths they never said, and generally consider everyone that doesnt want to think the way you do....openly attacking you. Lets take your last post directed at me ....quote by quote......

"Ben just won't let sleeping dogs alone."

Thats funny every single one of my posts has been "why wont you just leave us non-religous types alone". Or at least thats the basic gist of it. So WHO wont leave it alone Vera??

"So you have checked EVERY school in California in less than twenty-four hours? How far back in the curriculum did you check? Impressive. But of course, I'm being sarcastic. I don't yet know the name of the school; if I do find it, I'll let you know."

Ok let me get this right Vera. You use a statment like that...and you DONT EVEN HAVE THE FACTS?? Quick...go find a school QUICK!! Im sure you can find one school that had a 2 or 3 day study in Islam somewhere. Its called learning about CULTURE...not indoctrinating the masses as you paranoid religous freaks might think.I remember having to study Egyptian mythology when I was in 3rd grade. Bet your going to say now that the ENTIRE state of CA is forcing pagan rituals on us now eh? You DID mention it was ONE school now in your last post. But in the orginal you made it out to be a standard for all CA schools. Twist and contort...and outright LIE. Its the religous way. Anything to keep those week minded masses from converting to SATAN! Eh?

"Little things amuse little minds. I'm sure you were twittering when you wrote this message I'm responding to."

They were laughing because we knew you were FULL of it! And the previous quote from you is proof. You pulled that whole argument out of your a*s about Islam in CA schools.

"You were the first to strike out at the Christian faith, labeling all conservatives as Bible-Thumping War-Mongers. So, a*****e, YOU smacked ME with your little neon-orange plastic shovel."

No, matter of fact I asked for the REAL conservative party back from you nutcases. I never labeled ALL as you say. I even gave some examples of GOOD conservatives that havent fallen into your zealot mantra. And as far as "striking out" at your faith no. Didnt happen. Stop making things up to deflect what I really did. I struck out at you religous nuts that are trying to force your "ideals" on us. You just HAPPEN to be christian. Switch to Shinto, or Budda,or whatever and keep it up, Ill bash you just the same.

"You seem to need to remind me of a past (Witch Trials, Crusades, the Inquisition) that I personally had nothing to do with. These were people corrupted by the power of their assigned position, posing their heresy as faith in God."

I know you had nothing to do with it, but your faith did. And about the "correpted people posing their heresy as faith in god"....well.....haha take a look at BUSH! Didnt he mention that "god" speaks to him...pesonally?

"But here you've already judged and comdemned anyone who believes in God as "A Bible-thumping war-monger""

No, I said "leave us alone, and we will leave you alone...with your religon". Is it really so hard to leave us alone? You zealots just cant handle the fact we dont want to pray to your god. If YOU do, so be it. We are fine with that. Just dont make us have to. I will admit tho, Vera, I DO think your a "bible thumping war monger". But I certainly dont think everyone is. Not by a long shot. Unfortunately, the "bible thumping war mongers" are out there, and they are making trouble....for everyone. Along with taking over the country.

"Atheism isn't anything more than a religion based on a tantrum by some fat old broad with an enormous mean streak that doesn't like Christianity."

You really need to get a dictionary and read the word "athiest". Just because some woman crook took off with some money under the ruse of some "athiest" movement doesnt mean she founded the whole idea. There was nothing to found. It just means someone that DOESNT believe in a diety. I know very little of that crook that started that "movement", but I do know it certainly wasnt a religon.

"You should read up on the person who started your religion more."

Once again...its not a religon. I dont have a long list of protocols, beliefs, systems or anything else. I only have one "rule" if you want to call it that......I dont believe in god. So what? And, once again, dont even bother bringing up that witch that started that "movement" back in the 70's. I never read her stuff, never had anything to do with it, and it was not the basis for why I believe in what I do or dont. (I dont even know her name! so just drop that line!)

"The greatest flaw in your posture is that you're only attacking me because I believe in God, AND don't think our president is wrong in going to war."

I'm attacking you because your defending a person that is forcing his religous feelings on me. The same feelings you have. And you dont seem to have any qualms with what he is doing or forcing on people. I think its wrong. I will attack you or anyone that tries to take my freedom away.

"apparent lack of being able to consult your current squeeze on grammar or writing"

Someone always has to jump on the "see...your gammer sucks...thus your point is moot" bandwagon. Ok Vera, you got me, my spelling sucks. Doesnt change the facts of the posts. Nice try.....lets get real and move on. (oh I'm lazy too and dont bother with spell checkers...guess that makes my points even more bullshit eh? Get real!)

"Freedom from the atheists? You betcha! Freedom from your personal attacks and the right to pray in a public school because it is my choice? ABSOLUTELY!"

Ah, so you admit your trying to force your religon in public? Why must it be in PUBLIC schools? Did you forget there are other religons? Or people like myself without religon? Why should ALL taxpayers have to set up places and times for just YOU and YOUR religon? You have your churches. You have your sundays. You have lots of free time to pray when you would like. But why does it HAVE to be in OUR faces. Ill make you a deal, Ill let you pray on MY time, and the rest of the public's time in a public school, if you let me come and talk about evolution on YOUR time at YOUR church on sunday. Deal? Prayer in public schools? Ok! Evolution in Christian churches then! Fair is fair!

"But we know if ol' Madalyn Murray-O'w***e were alive today......"

Oh so that was her name......like I care. So you can see, I have nothing to do with her. If you just spent hours researching it all so you could attempt to attack me with it, im sorry. You wasted your time. I think we can certainly agree on that point. Its not worth anyones time. I heard she swindled alot of people. Thus shes no better than Jim Bakker, Bernie Ebbers, etc. Dont know her, dont know what she said, dont care.

"HIS religious leader writes articles on masturbation to a magazine that's been sued for presenting children in a sexual light (remember Hustler's infamous Chester the Molester'?"

I'm assuming the "HIS" you speak of is me? Once again you show how week minded the truely religous zealots can be. You think that having the "lack" of faith, is a faith in itself. ONE MORE TIME....I never knew this person, never have, never read any of her "teachings", books, etc. MY religon you say? Its not a religon there Vera. Get over it. And just because some crook used athiesim as an angle to bilk people doesnt make them the spokesperson for ALL athiests. If you continue this line of bantering, then I will accuse you of being a Jim Baker follower to this day. Is the same thing.....wrong. I could constantly banter about Jim Baker and how he bilked millions, and call it YOUR religon. But I wont. Its wrong wrong wrong.

"And before you jump my case about being a poor representative of my religion, don't bother. I've already mentioned that I'm no saint."

Yet you hold to this "you athiests have no morals" BS??? You gotta be kidding me. For petes sake you nuts are such hypocrits. You want us to be saints, yet never can be yourselves!!??

"So yes, Ben-doverDO leave me alonewith MY religion."

Well well well Vera, in one part you attack someone for personal attacks, then turn around and do it yourself. Hypocrite to the end aint ya there girlie!

"I never said you had no morals, Ben. And morals don't necessarily mean family values."

Yes, you did Vera. You did alot! You flat out accused people without a faith in a deity (your deity to be exact!) of being without morals, and without family values...period.

"I think abortion is wrong."

Good! More power to you! Then dont have one. For the rest of us, its not your business...period. But your buddy Bush certainly wants to make it his business. So....you still going to say hes NOT kicking in our doors with HIS/YOUR "values"? Eh?

"First, because I don't think the creation of life is accidental or inconvenient. Secondly, because I think attacking a defenseless person who has no way of defending themselves is abhorrent."

Thats the way YOU think. Its NOT YOUR business....period. You just cant leave others alone can you? You just have to control others dont you? They MUST think the way you do....or else. Another funny thing about this abortion stuff you religous types fail to remember....You say your against abortion, you tout your religon as a reason. Then you totally think its fine when some family lets their children die from lack of medical attention. By a easily curable ailment. Because THEIR religon says they shouldnt use doctors. Funny how your totally fine with those people.

"But to put it that way to you, you'd think I was trying to make you a convert""

Well, when Roe vs. Wade gets overturned by a religous zealot court appointed by Bush soon....then you will have forced us to convert. Thus totally swallowing your own words. Face it Vera, your trying to force your "values" on others.

"My kids were taught good moral edict (and were quite civil, thank you) long before we ever took them to Church. The process starts with a good solid Family unit, consisting of two parents, supporting each other. And if you're teaching your kids to behave like you do, when presented with the beliefs of others, I feel sorry for your brood. You're a venomous snot, Benand I do hope you grow up before you release any progeny onto the planet."

Then why do you need religon for your values if you already had them eh? Why say people need religon to have family values, or morals, then say something like that? Oh, better keep abortion legal in case I try to "release any progeny onto the planet".

"You sound so angry against the Christian faith"

Angry? Yes. At Christianity? Yes. I dont follow ANY religon. But only Christianity is in my face right now. If it backed of, so would I. But by your tone, your logic, and that of Bush, it doesnt seem likely that will ever happen. Like I said before, its not Jews or Buddists that are trying to force me, its you, here, right now, in my life, in my schools, in my home, in my courts....Christianity.

"I'd still love both of my grown Sons, even if they decide they no longer wish to attend Church."

Your going to honestly tell me that when your sons were young children (and I'm sure you started them young!) and they told you that they DINDT want to goto church....you would have been fine with that?! Your not going to pull the wool over my eyes Vera, or anyone elses. You know d**n well that isnt true. You made them go. Dont lie. And after making them go for so long, I bet your saying "ill be damned if they try to stop". You obviously cant handle me not paying attention to "god". I can only imagine what you would do to your sons.

"Also, do note the fact that the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, and the Crusades are now OVER."

Of course, people got smarter. But I see them comming back. Those dark moments in human history should never be forgotten. And they stand as proof why we should never let religon run our lives completely like you and Bush think it should.

"No more scary Christians, drunk on the power (and possibly, the Sacramental wine) given to them by their fellow MAN, coming at you with a convert or die philosophy."

Tell that to the Muslims in Bonsnia and Kosovo. Tell that to the Jews in Germany. Tell that the people in Northern Ireland (ok maybe Ireland's "sides" are both christian by nature...but still the "convert or die" holds true.)

"Why don't you send some of that nasty invective to the Muslims that are committing similar atrocities here and abroad?"

OOOOH!! Believe me!! I do! I do! All the time! But your here, and your christian, and your in my face! Like I said, switch to Budda or Shinto etc. It makes no difference to me. Just keep it to youreself, or I will be forced to defend myself. Whatever religon it is.

"You have morals, right? Try presenting the benefits of atheistic conversion to steer others away from Christianity---with a better argument, that atheism isn't a self-centered, self-gratifying, loveless, and godless religion without being the snippy, insinuative, negative smartass you present yourself to be."

Gosh! You got all that just from "leave us alone...and we will leave you alone"?? How freaking narrow minded!




In the end Vera, all I have been saying, and have said it many many times is......If you want religon...fine. More power to you. But dont force it on us. That is exactly what is happening with this country under Bush, supported by people like you. You like your titles and you classifications of people. And that is exactly what causes friction and later hardship. More people have suffered from religon in the last 2000 years than all the natural disasters to hit humanity in the last 2000 years combined (save for maybe the Black Death....another thing that wouldnt have been so bad had religon not snuffed science for 1500 years!).

If you want religon.....great....keep it....to yourselves. We are NOT trying to take it away, or "convert" you to non-belief. But you certainly dont sit to well knowing that we non-belivers are out there. You attack at every chance and widdle away at our rights. Only a fool would expect us to take it lying down and do nothing, that is not the HUMAN way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#413 Consumer Comment

Be careful, you might learn something!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

Well of course you may quote me vera, but, alas, I can not take credit for those words . . . I guess I should have included dead or alive', a band from the 80's in my bibliography. lol

I've noticed that you have been getting attacked for offering . . . or, clarifying a few facts on the topics of Christianity, religion, and the constitution. You are doing a fantastic job on your own, but if you don't mind, I would like to add a few tidbits' of information for the lesser informed. It just infuriates me to see people use the constitution to discriminate against others . . . exactly what it was intended to prevent. The following information was taken from various reports, history books, the Bible, court documents, and The Constitution of the United States of America,. Let me begin by clarifying the statement of Thomas Jefferson that you made mention of in your last post (and so many use to justify discrimination against Christians.)

For those who think' they know what rights are protected by the constitution, be careful . . . you might actually learn something.

The statement,a wall of separation between church and state, was taken from a letter on January 1, 1802, by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut. The congregation heard a rumor that another denomination was to become the national religion. Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation, that the separation was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God.

Jefferson wrote:

I contemplate with solemn reverence, that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.

Jefferson chose the expression "separation of church and state" because he was addressing a denomination of which he was not a member, and he was establishing common ground by borrowing' the words of Roger Williams, one of the Baptist's prominent preachers. Williams said:

When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that there fore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world..

The "wall" was taught to be as one-directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values.

The American people knew what would happen if the State established the Church like in England where they were forced to go, and to do things that were contrary to their conscience. No other churches were allowed, and mandatory attendance of the established church was compelled under the Conventicle Act of 1665. The people did not want freedom from religion, but freedom of religion.

Our founding fathers were 'God-fearing' men who understood that for a country to stand, it must have a solid foundation; the Bible was the source of this foundation. They believed that the Bible was the absolute standard of truth, and used the Bible as a source to form our government. There is no such thing as a pluralistic society. There will always be one dominant view, or, it will be in transition from one belief system to another. Therefore, to say Biblical principles should not be allowed in government and school, is to either be ignorant of the historic intent of the founding fathers, or blatantly bigoted against Christianity.

Each form of government has a 'guiding principle': in a monarchy, the guiding principle is honor; aristocracy - moderation; republican democracy - the guiding principle is virtue; despotism - fear. Without the people of the United States upholding good moral conduct, society degenerates into a corrupt system. People misuse the authority of government to obtain what they want at the expense of others.

The virtue desired of the people is shown in the Bible. This is why Biblical morality was taught in public schools until the early 1960's. Also, government officials were required to declare their belief in God even to be allowed to hold a public office until a case in the U.S. Supreme Court called Torcaso v. Watkins (Oct. 1960). God was seen as the author of natural law and morality. If one did not believe in God one could not operate from a proper moral base. And by not having a foundation from which to work, one would destroy the community. The two primary places where morality is taught are the family and the church.

The church was allowed to influence the government in righteousness and justice so that virtue would be upheld. Not allowing the church to influence the state is detrimental to the country and destroys our foundation of righteousness and justice. The world view at the time of the founding of our government, was a view held by the Bible: that Man's heart is corrupt and if the opportunity to advance oneself at the expense of another arose, more often than not, we would choose to do so. That is why an enormous effort to set up checks and balances' took place. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. They wanted to make certain that no man could take away rights given by God. They also did not set up the government as a true democracy, because they believed man tends towards wickedness. Just because the majority wants something does not mean that it should be granted, because the majority could easily err. (in 1986, a poll was taken asking more than 4000 people who they thought would be the best president, no names were offered, but within the pictures was one of Ted Bundy. Almost 72% chose Ted Bundy!) Government was not to be run by whatever the majority wanted but instead by principle, specifically the principles of the Bible.

In 1973, Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman, reviewed over 15,000 items with explicit political content, printed between 1760 and 1805.. The source most often quoted was the Bible, accounting for 34% of all citations. Sixty percent of all quotes came from men who used the Bible to form their conclusions. An estimated 87% - 94% of all quotes by the founding fathers were based on the Bible. An idea from the Bible and incorporated into our government is Isaiah 33:22 , "For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king..." The founding fathers made three major branches in our government: judicial, legislative, and executive. The President has the power to execute laws but not make them, and Congress has the power to make laws but not to judge the people, and so on. The simple principle of checks and balances came from the Bible to protect people from tyranny. The President is free to influence Congress, although he can not exercise authority over it. Comparitively, why should the church not be allowed to influence the state? People have read too much into the phrase "separation of church and state", which is to be a separation of civil authority from ecclesiastical authority, not moral values. Congress has passed laws that it is illegal to murder and steal, which is the legislation of morality as the Bible teaches it. Should we remove them from law because the church should be separated from the state?

John Witherspoon was President of New Jersey College in 1768 (known as Princeton since 1896) and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He fought firmly for religious freedom and said, "God grant that in America, true religion and civil liberty may be inseparable, and that unjust attempts to destroy the one may in the issue tend to the support an establishment of both."

For 185 years the Constitutional Convention itself was opened with prayer. If the founding fathers didn't want prayer in government why did they pray publicly in official meetings? It is said that it is permissible to pray in school as long as it is silent. In Omaha, Nebraska, 10-year old James Gierke was prohibited from reading his Bible silently during free time. . . the boy was forbidden by his teacher to open his Bible at school and was told doing so was against the law." In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court, without the foundation of precedent, or legislated law, said prayer must be removed from school. Yet the Supreme Court in January, 1844, in a case named Vidal v. Girard's Executors', ruled differently. The Supreme Court ruled, "...there is an obligation to teach what the Bible alone can teach, viz. a pure system of morality" and this had been the precedent for over 185 years. The prayer that the courts ordered removed in from schools 1961 was neither lengthy, nor denominationally geared. It was this: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country." What price have we paid by removing this simple acknowledgment of God's protecting hand in our lives? From 1961 - 1998, birth rates for unwed mothers ages 15-19 increased over 400%; sexually transmitted diseases among 10-14 year olds increased over 1000%; pre-marital sex increased; violent crime; and adolescent homicide have all gone up substantially(by at least 100%) - even after factoring for population growth. The Bible, before 1961, was used extensively in curriculum. After the Bible was removed, scholastic aptitude test scores dropped by an average of 15.3 points!

So once again I state, there is no such thing as a pluralistic society; there will always be one dominant view. Someone's morality is going to be taught -- but whose? Secular Humanism is a religion that teaches that through Man's ability we will reach universal peace and unity and make heaven on earth'. That man is the highest point to which nature has evolved, and he can rely on only himself and that the universe was not created, but instead is self-existing. All of this, of course, is in direct conflict with not only the teachings of the Bible but even the lessons of history.

In June, 1961 in a case called Torcaso v. Watkins, the U.S. Supreme Court stated, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others." The Supreme Court declared Secular Humanism to be a religion. The American Humanist Association certifies counselors who enjoy the same legal status as ordained ministers. Since it is a religion, why is it being allowed to be taught in schools? The removal of public prayer is, in effect, establishing the religion of Humanism and discriminatory of Christianity. This is exactly what our founding fathers tried to stop with the first amendment.

Once again, fact is presented. What mudslinging and vile lies and opinion are to be spewed to discredit these truths? I am certain that time will tell.

May God Bless the U.S.A. and all her troops,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#412 Consumer Comment

Tsk-tsk-tsk...."...and those that have eyes, they will not see..."

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

Firstly, Shawn of Phelan...

Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate that you read my whole posts; I read all the posts as well, so I know how to better respond (with the exception of James of Calgary's posts...I mean, after you read three or four, you can pretty much predict where's he's going. NOWHERE.) But your posts are astutely written (I can only assume that you've gone to college, and actually LEARNED something, like "B." must have...the two of you are such excellent writers!), and your retorts to James and Ben are clever and full of wit. Thanks so much for your recognition!

James of Tupper, don't even talk to me, unless you can present factual information that isn't just your opinion. I've seen so many posts you've either written or responded to, acting like you're Tupperville's "man on the street" and "embedded reporter". You're so far from any "truth" there is out there, inserting your obnoxious opinion and totally, UTTERLY (note..."utterly" has nothing to do with a cow's milk production potential), and completely skew the vaguest concept of truth.

If there is one person who can be identified as the primary cause of Tupper Lake's Internet (Jerry Springer-like) notoriety, it's you. You've done a WORLD of harm to the credibility of the people of that town, and I hope you're pleased with yourself. d**n few of these Tupper Lake posts aren't tainted by your writ.

The EDitor of this site brings Tupper Lake in, and points out the crooked politics, and you come in and point out the lurid, seedy people, the inbred, mobile-home-park themes, and the teenaged whores. You've completely subtracted from the EDitor's intent, and subverted the purpose. I hope you're proud of yourself.

But I've wasted too much time bothering to talk to you already. Suffice it to say, you have not provided your factual presentation of information to support your opinion, and therefore, one has but to conclude you have none. You've been proven wrong time and time again and thus, all you can do is come on here and shout unsubstantiated bullshit. "Huh, funny thing Bush is a drunk" (did you manage past your own dry-heaving to write that one?), "Bush has always liked killing!!!!!!", "Dumb Bush", "Bush-Pig!", on and on. No point, just a rant. And James of Cana-DUH supports you all the way (when he isn't fleecing the public with bad ads and hoops to jump through to get an unobtainable refund). He BACKS YOU, 100%.

Have you guys swapped pictures and valentines yet?

And James of Calgary...good grief, I'm willing to bet you didn't even bother to follow the link and read the whole letter. What part of "The war will not end even after America leaves" are you just not processing? That means that instead of "Americans killing bad-guys" (and unfortunate casualties), you'll have lots more of "Terrorists killing innocent people AND those they view as bad guys" (which means ANYONE who isn't another terrorist, or any one who will agree with and surrender to them). Life means nothing to these people...it has no value. Even their own lives have no value, as a proper death will grant them "Paradise". Life can't be all that great for them, if death is the ultimate accomplishment. (Burkha-Clad Lady: "My son has gone to America to learn to be a doctor" Second Lady, snugging her hdjab closer around her face: "Ah, my Husband has Died today, Slaughtering a busload of American Tourists! He will be boning a gaggle of virgins tonight!")

But there I go again....trying to reason with you. My mistake. It's lost on you, that the day of September 11, 2001 (yes, I know that's not why we are presntly at war, so don't bother.) there were people cheering in the streets. One image in mind, of a woman watching the events on a TeeVee in the market place rejoicing still sits vivid in my mind today. You could hear the reporter talking and the explosion...and then she just jumped and cheered, doing that "bleh-ler-bleh-ler-bleh-ler-leh-leh-leh-leh!" tongue trill.

The same thing was happening in the streets of some Islamic-dominated communities....here in America! Here, where we have offered them a place to be free, and the legally residing citizenry that have sworn their allegiance to THIS COUNTRY, were cheering wildly at the death of three thousand innocent and un-armed fellow human beings. Encouraging a country they forsook by OATH and ACTION for attacking an office building full of men, women and children. Rejoicing AGAINST the Country they pledged allegiance to, that fed and nurtured them, and helped them obtain things and privilege they would NEVER, EVER be allowed to have back where they come from.

Hell, they don't even have to pay taxes for the first five years they live here, if they own a business! And it's a lot easier for immigrants who follow the legal process to become legitimate citizens to get loans and schooling. They are freely given privileges I can't even touch.

There were acts of terrorism committed by these people against their own, the Jewish, and a myriad of other places long before we went to war with them. Like you said "It's what they do, and they DO what they know HOW to DO"...and they've been doing it consistently for generations. You don't care that much about it because it is on the other side of the world, if it doesn't affect you directly, it's not a major concern.

It's only a "travesty" to go to war now because you think your little neighborhood will be directly affected. Otherwise, you wouldn't give a s**t if people in Bosnia, Kosovo, England, or Spain are dying. ("I moved out of Ontario because I figured I'd be safer out West. I just hope they don't pick a target too far West!") Yeah, sounds to me like you've got the whole "just don't put it at my feet!" mentality. Self-preservation, not Peace, is what you place highest priority on.

And you know, self-preservation is only a natural instinct. However, when it's flagged as some "noble cause" and masked with such false pretenses, it just makes you look like a self-righteous arrogant p***k...and you've done a fine job at presenting yourself as an ignorant, fearful..."self-righteous arrogant p***k".

You have done no good to your fellow countrymen...but I'll just pray that you're more the exception than the rule. I've always thought Canadians were fun, sweet, witty folks....too bad the loudest one has to set a bad example (I'll bet you'll say the same about Shawn and I, as you seem to lack any original material of your own.).

So, while I thank you for regarding my post as intelligent (too bad I can't return the favor about any of yours), I'll also thank you to not bother responding to me unless you're willing to a.) read the whole post, or letter that it points you to, or b.) present factual, searchable and reviewable information to support your claims. "B." has done so, Shawn of Phelan has done so, the Roberts (Both Fla. and TX.) have done so and so have I.

Complete information only, please...not some half-spun piece of a quote or quip. Everyone has a mental hiccup once in a while, so a burnt quote or momentary lapse, while I'm sure it's good liberal fodder, isn't useable out of its full context. No distractions about slant-drilling, trucks, power-failures, religion, subs (and the rivers they operate in)...or whatever.

But I've fallen into the slump of repeating myself, haven't I? Well, in for a penny, in for a pound: "Don't bug me if you can't provide more facts than flame."

Besos y abrazos!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#411 Consumer Comment

FEAR SELLS

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 24, 2005

The United States biggest commodity (okay maybe second to porn) is FEAR. George Bush understands this and does his part to strengthen those who profit from fear. You think GWB hates the press, think again, he probably owns stock in CNN. FEAR sells Bibles, Guns, Alarm systems, Books, Papers, Mags, Big safe Trucks and on and on. Fear runs your life in the USA. You Fear Liberals/Conservatives, you Fear races, you Fear death, you Fear the unknown, you Fear the homeless. Fear has you by the nads KEEP ON FEARING AMERICA, IT SELLS BIG TIME.

PS: George was the best the Republicans could come up with? Both Parties suck a big one, and they both depend on the "STUPID FACTOR". Don't let your party down..Stupid on folks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#410 Consumer Suggestion

Vera & Shawn, you are meant for one another.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 23, 2005

Shawn;

Yes I said "Liberal & Democrat" as that is your only opinion about why you don't think the USA should get out of Iraq. Anyone who does see how rediculous the invasion & occupation is, you call a "Liberal or Democrat"! That is your only point. Like it is impossible for someone to think that spending a Trillion dollars in an attempt to control the region of the Middle East is wrong & makes "no sense", they cannot be Republican!

Your posts go on & on & on about UN declarations that were put on Iraq "unfairly" & Suddam did not comply with! The fact is Shawn that Iraq had "every right" to protect their own oilfields from Kuwait's blatent stealing using "slant drilling"! If Mexico did that to the USA, I can guarantee you that the USA would have probably responded in much the same way as Suddam did & I doubt the USA would be subjected to such requirements!

I don't care if the UN made unfair resolutions regarding Iraq, or what exactly resolutions Suddam did not comply with. Unfair rules are unfair & should not be an issue for invasion. Invasion is wrong in any situation.

You seem to forget that 911 had nothing to do with Iraq! You seem to forget that Suddam would have used special weapons to repel a US invasion if he had them! Obviously! When the USA invaded his Country... he did realatively "nothing" as there was little he could do & anyone who would think he expected to retain power... hide weapons & then bring them back into the arena later... would be nuts! He knew his days were numbered nomatter "what he did" after Desert Storm.

When I am talking about "minding your own business", I am not referring to words written on a thread. I am talking about the people who are dieing! The Government the USA is trying to set up in Iraq! That should be obvious!

You & Vera seem to share the same brain & your posts go on & on & on with this drivel! When you bring "God" into the equasion, you really are pushing it! God has nothing to do with your invasion of Iraq! Jesus definately would not be behind the invasion, & if you believe he would, I think you had better read Matthew 6 again, as Vera has not gotten it either! Jesus did not want you to make a "spectical of yourself" when praying or discussing your personal relationship with God! You ignore him & make sure you make a reference to God every time you make a post! Shawn & Vera... you cannot call yourselves Christians if you do not follow Jesus words as he put out in Matthew 6 & backed up by Luke by the way! Keep God out of it! God, I am sure would not appreciate your reference to him when describing an "illegal invasion" & the occupation of a foreign land.

There is no reason to produce facts. Anyone can answer the question, whether they are Liberal, Democrat or Republican in the same way. The question is... under any conditions does one Country have the right to invade another? The answer is no! After WWII did the USA set up a government for Germany? No!

Vera has admitted that the terrorism will not end when the USA finally pulls out of the region. So... what exactly is supposed to be solved here?

You know I just watched the movie tonight "Red Dawn" about what would happen if the USA was invaded. You call the people "terrorists" who fight back against invasion, but in the movie, these same people were called "Wolverines".

I don't have to be friendly with terrorists to understand their plight. They have their own laws & their own way of life which is "vastly different" from yours & guess what? They like it that way!

You may not like their customs or laws, but possibly they don't like yours either. Your rediculous "war on drugs" for instance is nuts to say the least! Hemp has been proven to make better paper, rope, clothing etc... & you can grow 4 crops per year almost anywhere. With your falling job market in the USA, hemp manufacture would be the "smart thing" to set up. However you have laws making it illegal when it really does not harm anyone.

Did you ever think that if you were to "legalize" some of these drugs, they could be controlled by the government & taxed? The taxes could go towards the "rehab centres" definately needed. However that would just make sense wouldn't it? So instead you go on a "rediculous war on drugs" which does not change anything, except now if you are found with a joint on your boat, or in your vehicle, the govenment now can seize it? Has it helped lower drug use in the USA? No! It's the thinking that is entirely wrong! You don't fight fire with fire, but with water.

The point is not really "off subject" as it shows a difference in attitude towards laws & lifestyle as an example. Iraq is not going to be happy with any kind of US law in their Country. Their lifestyle is "vastly different" than your own. I don't need to show documents to proove that! Just look at their culture. You don't need to read books on the subject to see that fact!

Vera & you Shawn are meant for eachother. Both of you spout that if you do not agree with Bush's invasion of Iraq, then you have to be a Liberal. If someone understands the "terrorists delemma", you both think that person must love terrorists. You both throw God into the discussion at any oppertunity & God really has little to do with this discussion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#409 Consumer Suggestion

Well finally Vera comes out with an intelligent post!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 23, 2005

Vera;

Congrats! You actually "this time" have something intelligent to say. I may not agree with the point, but at least it is a "viable" arguement.

Ok... now let's look at the "other side". If you don't pull out of Iraq... then what happens? It's a "no win" situation nomatter how you look at it! Iraq should have never been invaded in the first place!

However... that is "spilt milk" & what should be done now? Continueing a presence in the Middle East will "guarantee" terrorism! Leaving might lessen it. So you tell me? What is the best strategy after a "major screw up"? Your up to 2000 dead American soldiers so far... how many more need to die before anyone makes a move in the "right direction". Setting up a Government for them Vera, will not work! Mark my words.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#408 Consumer Comment

Awww.... Boo-h*o For You!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 23, 2005

Whassamatter li'l Boy? I don't care if you read my posts! Hahahahaha!
And we have the same, if not MORE right to be here than you do...so we'll keep posting whether you like it or not.

So YOU go "F-Off".... heck, "F" yourself, while you're at it. You don't like what we post, don't read it (check the Bill of Rights to OUR COUNTRY, and see if you have any further arguments, 'coz I'm not interested in hearing your off topic blather either).

You just want attention. It still hasn't really shifted to you, so you're getting all testy. Poor kid. Why don't you go back to ripping folks off at Great Cars and Trucks? Or has this Rip-Off Report done so much good that there's a HUGE drop in sales revenues? LMFAO

Clearly, you have nothing to offer that has any value...and you don't like my presentation, or Shawn's, or.....anyone who doesn't agree with you.

Also glaringly clear, is the fact that when I respond to someone else's post that's geared towards me, you scream "off topic" because so little attention is being paid to you. Apparently, Shawn's a bit more of a challenge than you expected...and I'm laughing my a*s off at you. ROFLMAO!!

Nice attempt to rile me, attacking my faith. but as you've demonstrated, your faith is a fair-weather friendship. And your "political stance" is equally weak and spineless.

No, I DON'T think you and Christ have anything in common, as per your statement in that ridiculous post where "Matthew 6 is the preface to the Lord's prayer".

So there you have it, Wee Willie Winkie...a whole post...dedicated to you. If you have nothing more to contribute to this topic, sit down and let the others speak. Or only respond on posts that are directly related to the topic, and inquiring of YOU.

And if you conclude that "B." and I were wrong in assessing that the terrorism in Iraq and all over the world would not end if the Troops withdraw, follow the link I posted in my last rebuttal. Just use those magnificent "cut and paste skills" of yours, and type "www." (minus the quotes) in front of it. See? Even your pals in the Terrorist regime are pointing out your wrong-way logic.

Spin and flame, spin and flame, Jamie...it's like being at the circus! ("You spin me, right 'round, Baby right 'round--like a record baby, right 'round-'round-'round!" --Quoting Shawn [hope he don't mind] ) Pass the cotton candy, please!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#407 Consumer Comment

I won't support anti-American liars any longer

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 23, 2005

Clueless boy from Canada, I wonder if you even read what YOU write??? Liberal and Democrat? Me????? Hahahaha . . . you really do prove your lack of ability to live in reality every time you write.

Hey Vera, don't worry, I read your posts top to bottom. They may be long but to respond armed with truth you can't just write a couple of blurbs you thought up while cooking dinner( or in James' case while entering the time it takes to cook in the microwave.) I went back through the posts and you know what . . . I haven't seen once where either one of us started a new topic, but Ben and James seem to bring up some new cut down or complaint (b***h and moan) on just about every post. I also noticed that when we respond to their off-topic B.S. with truth, reason, fact, and a little bit of unnecessary, albeit enjoyable, insults, that's when they whine about our posts being long and off topic. I guess they consider it their right to spew lies, hatred, and absolutely ridiculous statements of opinion, but when we correct them with facts, then we are attacking them and refusing them their rights. Sounds all to familiar, doesn't it?

You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are?

No long post here needed! Work on your own Country! There is plenty of work here!

James - Calgary, Alberta
Canada

Does anybody else see the irony here??? Take your own advice dumdum! By the way James, there were some 3000 people minding their own business on 9/11 and guess what . . . your friends murdered them! Do we not have the right to take any steps that WE (take note of the quote of yours - above) feel necessary to prevent that sort of thing from ever happening again? I sure am glad that you don't have a right to vote here, we have enough b***h and moan but don't solve the problem idiots'!

Once again James, get off this need to dominate B.S. that you keep trying to push. Our reasons for this war are clear, but you and all your left wing buddies refuse to listen, and then you make up your own bias driven, unsubstantiated, theoretical garbage so you have something to b***h and moan about. As far as having the right to invade, I will show you point by friggin', if you can't follow you have to be a moron, point!

Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated each of the following resolutions:

UNSCR 678 - November 29, 1990

* Iraq must comply fully with UNSCR 660 (regarding Iraq's illegal invasion of Kuwait) "and all subsequent relevant resolutions."
* Authorizes UN Member States "to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area."

UNSCR 686 - March 2, 1991

* Iraq must release prisoners detained during the Gulf War.

* Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War.

* Iraq must accept liability under international law for damages from its illegal invasion of Kuwait.

UNSCR 687 - April 3, 1991

* Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities."

* Iraq must "unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material" or any research, development or manufacturing facilities.

* Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 KM and related major parts and repair and production facilities."

* Iraq must not "use, develop, construct or acquire" any weapons of mass destruction.

* Iraq must reaffirm its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

* Creates the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to verify the elimination of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs and mandated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verify elimination of Iraq's nuclear weapons program.

* Iraq must declare fully its weapons of mass destruction programs.

* Iraq must not commit or support terrorism, or allow terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq.

* Iraq must cooperate in accounting for the missing and dead Kuwaitis and others.

* Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War.

UNSCR 688 - April 5, 1991

* "Condemns" repression of Iraqi civilian population, "the consequences of which threaten international peace and security."
* Iraq must immediately end repression of its civilian population.

* Iraq must allow immediate access to international humanitarian organizations to those in need of assistance.

UNSCR 707 - August 15, 1991

* "Condemns" Iraq's "serious violation" of UNSCR 687.

* "Further condemns" Iraq's noncompliance with IAEA and its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

* Iraq must halt nuclear activities of all kinds until the Security Council deems Iraq in full compliance.

* Iraq must make a full, final and complete disclosure of all aspects of its weapons of mass destruction and missile programs.

* Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

* Iraq must cease attempts to conceal or move weapons of mass destruction, and related materials and facilities.

* Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors to conduct inspection flights throughout Iraq.

* Iraq must provide transportation, medical and logistical support for UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 715 - October 11, 1991

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 949 - October 15, 1994

* "Condemns" Iraq's recent military deployments toward Kuwait.

* Iraq must not utilize its military or other forces in a hostile manner to threaten its neighbors or UN operations in Iraq.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors.

* Iraq must not enhance its military capability in southern Iraq.

UNSCR 1051 - March 27, 1996

* Iraq must report shipments of dual-use items related to weapons of mass destruction to the UN and IAEA.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1060 - June 12, 1996

* "Deplores" Iraq's refusal to allow access to UN inspectors and Iraq's "clear violations" of previous UN resolutions.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1115 - June 21, 1997

* "Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access" to UN inspectors, which constitutes a "clear and flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

* Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview.

UNSCR 1134 - October 23, 1997

* "Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access" to UN inspectors, which constitutes a "flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

* Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview.

UNSCR 1137 - November 12, 1997

* "Condemns the continued violations by Iraq" of previous UN resolutions, including its "implicit threat to the safety of" aircraft operated by UN inspectors and its tampering with UN inspector monitoring equipment.

* Reaffirms Iraq's responsibility to ensure the safety of UN inspectors.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.
UNSCR 1154 - March 2, 1998

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access, and notes that any violation would have the "severest consequences for Iraq."

UNSCR 1194 - September 9, 1998

* "Condemns the decision by Iraq of 5 August 1998 to suspend cooperation with" UN and IAEA inspectors, which constitutes "a totally unacceptable contravention" of its obligations under UNSCR 687, 707, 715, 1060, 1115, and 1154.

* Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors, and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.

UNSCR 1205 - November 5, 1998

* "Condemns the decision by Iraq of 31 October 1998 to cease cooperation" with UN inspectors as "a flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687 and other resolutions.

* Iraq must provide "immediate, complete and unconditional cooperation" with UN and IAEA inspectors.

UNSCR 1284 - December 17, 1999

* Created the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission (UNMOVIC) to replace previous weapon inspection team (UNSCOM).

* Iraq must allow UNMOVIC "immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access" to Iraqi officials and facilities.

* Iraq must fulfill its commitment to return Gulf War prisoners.

* Calls on Iraq to distribute humanitarian goods and medical supplies to its people and address the needs of vulnerable Iraqis without discrimination.

1. Take note of UNSCR 1154 - what in the H-E- double toothpicks do you consider the severest of consequences for Iraq to mean?? Just because nobody else had the resolve to fulfill the duties of the U.N. doesn't mean that the U.S. is responsible for the attack on Iraq. We, as members of the U.N. security council LED the attack along with at least 32 other countries. The 3 permanent members' of the Security Council that did not fulfill the duties of their seats abstained from the invasion because they knew that they would lose the money owed them by Hussein from their ILLEGAL trade with him. Why don't any of you sniveling whiners b***h and moan about the fact that none of these countries has faced charges for their obvious disregard for international laws??? It is pretty convenient of you to pick and chose which laws you want enforced, (actually, I haven't seen any laws you want enforced, just opinions of yours that you think should be enforced,) and which illegal acts should be disregarded. It is pretty convenient that you only chose to b***h and moan about things that show the United States in a bad light (smoke and mirrors), but you won't even mention the flagrant violations of those that oppose this country's efforts.

The more I learn, and the more I ponder the facts of these matters, the more I have doubts as to the reality of my thought that we are all loyal to our country's best interests, we just disagree as to the path we need to take there. I am coming to the sad realization that the left of this country don't really give a sh*t about what's best for everybody, they are willing to discard fact and create upheaval and unrest in order to obtain what they want - be damned with those who think differently!(or should I say, those who think)

Shame on you for bastardizing the constitution to achieve your perverse and deviant rights. Shame on you for twisting and contorting the words of our founders, to have your illegitimate and immoral laws. Shame on me for being so complacent as to allow these perverts, deviants, and hedonists to have new laws created, and old laws misinterpreted, so as to reject the freedom, civility, and moral rectitude, that our founders intended when writing such great documents as the Constitution of the United States of America. Shame on me for even responding to the bull sh*t and lies that James, Ben, and all those others who refuse to use truth, honesty, and fact as a basis for their rantings; I fear that some may misinterpret my responding as me believing that there is some level of credibility to their opinions.

I will no longer lend this credibility to you who hope the disillusioned will fall for your lies; if Vera, Robert, Micheal, B, or others who have the ability to discuss facts and truth in an open, honest and adult manner wish to converse with me, I invite you to do so (yes, I said B, we may differ in opinion, and interpretation of various facts, but at least B backs up his/her {sorry} opinions with documentation and verifiable source), the rest of you anti-American liars just don't exist to me any more.

God bless America and our troops

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#406 Consumer Comment

Vera, You have it figured out, HUH?? ..Bush is sinking

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 23, 2005

Vera,

You are a very foolish woman looking at dooms eyes. Bush is sinking, yet you still want to be a rat on a sinking ship. Eventually you will DROWN! so go ahead and continue your crusade!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#405 Consumer Comment

Here's something that might be of interest to the reading populace.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Here's something I found, from the Wall Stree Journal, regarding our favorite borderless country, "Jihadistan". Most likely, the link won't work, so I'll writ it out as "dni.gov/release_letter_101105.html". If nothing else, it'll point out that the premature withdrawal of the US forces in Iraq would be a bad idea.

"It is a 6,000-word letter from [Ayman al] Zawahiri, presumably in hiding in Pakistan, to al-Qa'ida's commander in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi... It goes a long way toward letting Americans see what we are up against in Iraq and elsewhere in the world. The letter's full text is up on the Web site of the Director of National Intelligence. Those who want a premature U.S. withdrawal from Iraq will now have to explain why that won't play into the handsand plansof the enemy. Zawahiri makes it quite clear that al-Qa'ida's ambitions extend well beyond the borders of any one country. The goal is a fundamentalist Islamic regime that begins in Iraq, extends into the neighboring secular nations of the region, assaults Israel and moves on from there... But let Zawahiri speak for himself. The jihadists, he writes, 'must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and then lay down their weapons, and silence the fighting zeal.' Plainly said, these boys are in it for the long haul. Just because the U.S. might decide to pull out of Iraq hardly means that al-Qa'ida will stop trying to kill Americans... If it has a familiar ring, that's because George Bush has been warning the world about it for several years." The Wall Street Journal

this is where the link printed will take you, and at the bottom, you have a choice to see the letter in Arabic and English. While it's a long read, it's fairly direct about the intentions of our Enemies.

Today the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a letter between two senior al Qa'ida leaders, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, that was obtained during counterterrorism operations in Iraq.

This lengthy document provides a comprehensive view of al Qa'ida's strategy in Iraq and globally. The letter from al-Zawahiri to al-Zarqawi is dated July 9, 2005.

The contents were released only after assurances that no ongoing intelligence or military operations would be affected by making this document public. The document has not been edited in any way and is released in its entirety in both the Arabic and English translated forms.

The United States Government has the highest confidence in the letter's authenticity. Al-Zawahiri's letter offers a strategic vision for al Qa'ida's direction for Iraq and beyond, and portraysal Qa'ida's senior leadership's isolation and dependence.

Among the letter's highlights are discussions indicating:
**The centrality of the war in Iraq for the global jihad.
**From al Qa'ida's point of view, the war does not end with an American departure.
**An acknowledgment of the appeal of democracy to the Iraqis.
**The strategic vision of inevitable conflict, with a tacit recognition of current political dynamics in Iraq; with a call by al-Zawahiri for political action equal to military action.
**The need to maintain popular support at least until jihadist rule has been established.
**Admission that more than half the struggle is taking place "in the battlefield of the media."

Let me repeat that last part:
"More than half the struggle is taking place in the battlefireld of the media."

So if there is any doubt, they know the American media is serving to divide the American populace; they are counting on it, in fact. I guess they like their news over-easy, too.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#404 Consumer Suggestion

Vera are you really nuts?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Vera;

Who in hell would read such a long post? Definately not on topic! You need to fill up your time with Church, or maybe "sacrificial offerings" to get your mind in gear.

Hon... Bi-Polar would not be a word that could describe you! You are quite frankly "nuts" & that is all I have to say on the subject!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#403 Consumer Suggestion

Vera are you really nuts?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Vera;

Who in hell would read such a long post? Definately not on topic! You need to fill up your time with Church, or maybe "sacrificial offerings" to get your mind in gear.

Hon... Bi-Polar would not be a word that could describe you! You are quite frankly "nuts" & that is all I have to say on the subject!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#402 Consumer Suggestion

Vera are you really nuts?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Vera;

Who in hell would read such a long post? Definately not on topic! You need to fill up your time with Church, or maybe "sacrificial offerings" to get your mind in gear.

Hon... Bi-Polar would not be a word that could describe you! You are quite frankly "nuts" & that is all I have to say on the subject!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#401 Consumer Suggestion

Vera are you really nuts?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Vera;

Who in hell would read such a long post? Definately not on topic! You need to fill up your time with Church, or maybe "sacrificial offerings" to get your mind in gear.

Hon... Bi-Polar would not be a word that could describe you! You are quite frankly "nuts" & that is all I have to say on the subject!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#400 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn I don't need such a long post.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Shawn;

All of your crap can be "summed up" in 2 words! Liberal & Democrat.

It has nothing to do with the issue, but go on!

Oh so you think now the USA is really "helping" other Countries? Are you that idiotic to believe that? If so... mind your own f**king business & that will stop the terrorism that comes here because of it!

Jerk off... your Section (3) of the NYB Holy act does not concern me! What concerns me is that you felt the right to invade! That you had reason to invade for want of control. For the reason to have US influence dominate all!

You have no F***king right to push your views on other Countries! Period! Who do you think you are?

No long post here needed! Work on your own Country! There is plenty of work here!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#399 Consumer Comment

Bless America

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

All I have to say is: "GOD BLESS AMERICA" Because no one else will, Not even our President.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#398 Consumer Comment

I hate to break my own word, but i feel compelled to respond...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 22, 2005

Dammit.

I hate to go against my own word, but I feel the need to respond. Ben just won't let sleeping dogs alone. In reference to your constant insistence that I'm a religious zealot who worships Falwell, Robertson AND a God that you're terrified ofwell, you're wrong on two of those three counts, Princessso move on from there. I can see why Bush Sr. feels as he does about atheistsyou're all a bunch of bitter, angry folks who seem to be mortified by the thought that they might have to be responsible for something greater than which salad dressing to use.

Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools'
There is NO such thing. Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much.
There is NO NO NO such thing in California.

So you have checked EVERY school in California in less than twenty-four hours? How far back in the curriculum did you check? Impressive. But of course, I'm being sarcastic. I don't yet know the name of the school; if I do find it, I'll let you know. Please hold your breathI'll take my time. After all, it came from a two-year old source, so they may have (hopefully, but I doubt it) ceased the little game of Dress Up.

If that's the only point you had to barb about, wellwhy bother wasting your time?

Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher.

Well, I'm sure it's nice to have someone with the proper experience in handling small parts around when you need to have your tushie powdered, your nose wiped, and your head patted when you're a good little atheist.

They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment.

Little things amuse little minds. I'm sure you were twittering when you wrote this message I'm responding to. I'll really piss her off with this oneheheheheh!
Yawn.

If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!

I'm sure I'm accurate, but I have to give credit where it's due; I'm not so flexible as you and the Twins James, that I'm capable of getting my head anywhere near my fanny.

Foist your christian propaganda elsewhere. As I said before your feeble attempts to make us look like the attackers is never going to work.

See, Dearie, I'm not the one who was the first to attack. YOURS is the initial post. See back there? Once againit's that God' thing again. That post is signed by some little micro-mind in Martinez. What's his name? Ben, is it? You were the first to strike out at the Christian faith, labeling all conservatives as Bible-Thumping War-Mongers. So, a*****e, YOU smacked ME with your little neon-orange plastic shovel. And I even tried to not respond to it! So you can take your Anti-God, Let's-Pick-A-Fight-About-Religion bullshit to another post, and leave it for others to wrestle with. Better yet, why don't you just cram it?

You seem to need to remind me of a past (Witch Trials, Crusades, the Inquisition) that I personally had nothing to do with. These were people corrupted by the power of their assigned position, posing their heresy as faith in God. Let it comfort you in knowing that the same people who tortured in the name of Christ are now being tortured, if they didn't repent and beg forgiveness of their sins.

Using your same logic, couldn't I rage on about how every homosexual man should go to jail, judged and sentenced to suffer the same punishment for the same act of sodomy, committed by men who rape little boys? How utterly rediculous. But here you've already judged and comdemned anyone who believes in God as "A Bible-thumping war-monger", and that anyone who mentions God must be a.)a Religious Zealot, b.) Right Wing! Republican and c.) a War-monger. Way to bridge the gap of understanding, Genius. ('Nother gold star for you!)

Atheism isn't anything more than a religion based on a tantrum by some fat old broad with an enormous mean streak that doesn't like Christianity. She was emboldened by her success in forcing the hand of the public schools (her, and another case, Engle V. Vitale in 1962) to eliminate prayer to God because she trumped up how her boy (who later denied the claims) was traumatized by having to say One Nation Under God and picked on/ostracized/beaten up for it

This BS that because we resist Christianity, is an attack on Christianity is just that.....BS.

You should read up on the person who started your religion more. Get both sides of the story. You'll see that this statement is nothing more than a fallacy.
The greatest flaw in your posture is that you're only attacking me because I believe in God, AND don't think our president is wrong in going to war. Otherwise, you'd be jumping down the throats of every person on this board that mentions God, instead of the one who's in solid disagreement with you. By your own actions you don't have enough strength in an argument against all those who believeyou just want to jump on the one who has the cahones to not agree with you across the board.

And frankly, based on your pure bullshit (anti-)logic and your apparent lack of being able to consult your current squeeze on grammar or writing, I'm sure I could have a better argument with a dust-mop. You started out without attacking the religious beliefs of others, and, if you're even a tenth of the big man you think you are, you'll do well to take your religious arguments elsewhere. But then, I'd be expecting too much, wouldn't I?

Once again I say to you and your Bushite religous zealots.......
All you are saying is that you are being attacked because we wont let you attack others. In other words......your saying....You feel your rights are being infringed upon because we wont let you infringe upon the rights of others.

Aww.you feel better now? If missing the mark completely is what you're after, Congrats! You did it! (Ask teacher to give you a gold star!)

Freedom from Christianity? You betcha! And freedom from Islam, freedom from Shinto, freedom from Budda, etc. etc. etc.........

Freedom from the atheists? You betcha! Freedom from your personal attacks and the right to pray in a public school because it is my choice? ABSOLUTELY!
But we know if ol' Madalyn Murray-O'w***e were alive today, she'd do her best to completely grey-down and sterilize every form of good will out there, be it Christian, Buddhist, or whatever. You say I don't have a right to shove my God down your throat, well, you sure as s**t don't have the right to shove your atheism down my throat. But you are welcome to shove it up your a*s.

Since when have you ever seen this headline.....
'BOMBING IN SUCH AND SUCH A PLACE.....ATHIEST MOVEMENT SUSPECTED!' You never have eh? And you never will.

Well, I'm sure thatpresent company excepted, of courseeven atheists aren't stupid enough to take a knife to a gun-fight. But I do believe that radical Christians were the first to be accused when the O'Hairs et.al came up missing and foul play was suspectedbefore there were any suspects. Turned out to be one of her own flock. Ain't that a kick in the head? LMAO

You people are sick. Leave us alone. And we will leave you alone....with your religon.

HIS religious leader writes articles on masturbation to a magazine that's been sued for presenting children in a sexual light (remember Hustler's infamous Chester the Molester'? The artist's depictions were things he had done to his own teenaged daughter---and been arrested for.), and those who worship God and preach a good message of forgiveness are sick. Hmmmm

And before you jump my case about being a poor representative of my religion, don't bother. I've already mentioned that I'm no saint. And I'm certainly not mulling for converts. Each person has his or her own epiphanyand I know I'm not perfect. Ironically, despite Ben's attempts to present me as the saint that ain't, I never said I was perfect.

So yes, Ben-doverDO leave me alonewith MY religion.

Get your religous a*s

You know what's funny; I can picture Ben, shaking his finger at the monitor with emphasis Get (shake) your religious (raise the finger) a*s (snap the finger down into the face of the computer)
Bennie-Bennie-Bennie! We don't pray with the same part of our bodies you think with! Get over that.


along with Bush's theocracy plans out of our lives.

We've already pointed out that it's not a theocracy Bush wants. But the simple fact that he doesn't think the atheist choice is the best choice seems to be what bothers ol' Ben, here. Not his best choice of words, but if you insist on having your rights, Bush will also be granted his. It's a double-edged sword. I'd bet that if Bush had said something to the equivalent that he's an atheist, he'd have Ben's support no matter what he did, hunh?


We dont need it for morals or family values like you week minded folk do.

I never said you had no morals, Ben. And morals don't necessarily mean family values. A person who thinks it's wrong to shoot a pre-pubescent vandal for coming into their yard and trashing their car could be the same person who takes his or her daughter to Planned Parenthood for an abortion. To me (not just as a Christian, but just as a person), I think abortion is wrong. More than teaching a person about the many conveniences available to them, should they decide to have a little post-coital birth control, I'd be more inclined to teach my kids to simply avoid that issue by not having sex until they're ready to raise a family.

It serves many purposes; it eliminates the possibility of a surprise pregnancy, reduces, if not eliminates the potential spread of disease. Not to mention, think of the money we'd save! No trips to the abortion clinic (saves gas, and the expense of the procedure), no expensive drugs to assuage the spread of diseaseand fewer welfare babies. Why am I against abortion? First, because I don't think the creation of life is accidental or inconvenient. Secondly, because I think attacking a defenseless person who has no way of defending themselves is abhorrent. There are very few cases where an abortion is the only answer...but far too often, it's used as a method of "correcting a mistake". It's not fair the child has to pay for the reproductive irresponsibility of the parent(s).

Abhorrent like the attack on the WTC on September 11, 2001. Those people didn't have any idea they were under attack. Abhorrent like the fourteen-year-old kid who straps a bomb to himself and boards a bus filled with Jewish college students looking to earn his trip to seventy-two (or seventy-three) virgins in Paradise.

To me, that's just good sense (teaching kids abstinence over sexual freedom'); the fact that it happens to line up with Biblical support is a nice plus, though. But to put it that way to you, you'd think I was trying to make you a convert---which I'm not. Nasty as you have been, I've been pretty decent to you, up until this postand I still believe you have the right to your atheistic religion.

We have enough common sense to get it on our own and teach our own children. We are not lazy like you and need to send our children to sunday school to learn how to be civil. Just because we dont have "faith" doesnt mean we have no morals.

My kids were taught good moral edict (and were quite civil, thank you) long before we ever took them to Church. The process starts with a good solid Family unit, consisting of two parents, supporting each other. And if you're teaching your kids to behave like you do, when presented with the beliefs of others, I feel sorry for your brood. You're a venomous snot, Benand I do hope you grow up before you release any progeny onto the planet.

If you think that my having my children attend Sunday school is lazy, you've got another think coming. It takes more strength to believe in God in this world, and stand in support of that belief, by faith alone, than it does to flow with the crowd. You sound so angry against the Christian faith...is it possible some nasty Christian sank his teeth in your tender flesh and shook you like a dog with is chew-toy? Jesus, you so bitter! Rest assured, all Christians are not that way. But we can be, when you piss some of us off. (I, particularly get pissed off, when someone who has no experience with a loving God knocks my Godin the Bible, it's called righteous anger.)

It started with one Family member (me) going to ChurchI invite my spouse, see if he likes it, and if he doesn't, fine. All my Family went to Church by their own choice; I didn't make them go. And they loved it.
I'd still love both of my grown Sons, even if they decide they no longer wish to attend Church.

You had your chance to run the world. You sucked at it. Hows that for morals? eh?

I've never run the world, Ben. Neither has Christianity. Again, if all you're gonna do is bring up the past, then you need to do some research. You'll find that it was the immunity given by the people (to certain hypocrites) at the time that perpetrated some of the greatest atrocities ever committed in the name of Jesus Christ. Also, do note the fact that the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, and the Crusades are now OVER. You understand that, right? Concluded. Finished. The rules were since overturned, changed, ratified, fixed. No more scary Christians, drunk on the power (and possibly, the Sacramental wine) given to them by their fellow MAN, coming at you with a convert or die philosophy.
Why don't you send some of that nasty invective to the Muslims that are committing similar atrocities here and abroad? If you think they're not in your face like the Christians are, guess again. That big empty spot in New York City speaks clearly to me: Allahu akbar! Convert or perish!

You have morals, right? Try presenting the benefits of atheistic conversion to steer others away from Christianity---with a better argument, that atheism isn't a self-centered, self-gratifying, loveless, and godless religion without being the snippy, insinuative, negative smartass you present yourself to be. Here's the trick, though; don't do it here, file your own Rip-Off Report, and be patient.
I'm sure this post will no doubt bring about more God-hating, poisonous polemic from you, so be prepared; I care neither for your opinion or your nasty screed.

And B.
I made a whoopsie. When I copied the paragraph of the comment you made regarding the framers of the Constitution, I meant to not include the final sentence, Viewed in historical context, it is fairly clear that building a wall of separation between church and state is exactly what they had in mind. Because I don't agree with that part.

The First Amendment begins with two clauses back-to-back; the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. As I have mentioned, there is no language in either---or anywhere else in the Constitutionthat mandates a wall of separationthat's mentioned in a letter by Thomas Jefferson, written many years after the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were soundly in place. Naturally, those who seek to sponsor separation will steadfastly claim (while taking that wall of separation out of context), distorting what Jefferson was writing about, that this is what the founding fathers meant by the Establishment Clause.

I feel that the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause were explicitly intended to promote, not to suppress, religious freedom. While it may be fairly obvious with the Free Exercise Clause (the language in it says as much), people tend to overlook it with the Establishment Clause. The purpose of the Establishment Clause was to prevent the federal government from espousing and promoting any one denominational choice and thus prevent any other religious freedomsit wasn't meant to keep Christianity out of the public square. Quite the inverse, in my opinion.

Yet here we areand the Establishment Clause is routinely used to prevent me and mine (or any other Christianity-based faith) from exercising my religious beliefs in public schooland public life. As always, with that puffy, self-righteous air, people will insist as if they know so much, that there's a wall of separation between church and state.

And James, Darling.

My previous post is more to converse with B.; there was only a brief comment made to you in the beginning, and of course, you had to dedicate an entire post to me about hopping off-topic. It's a strange mix; I'm flattered, that I can really get your misogyny boiling in thick curdles, and laughing (at you) that you, of all people, would have the temerity to tell me to stay on topic, considering all the posts you have dedicated to anything but the current topic. I really think it's because you're feeling left outbut with all the political party-switching and sidestepping, Bible thumping and God-denouncing self-contradiction, one would think your head would explode from all the illogic and tail-chasing. Quite the conundrum. I'll leave you to refer back to a post I put up (yes, it's the longest one, too!) where you've contradicted yourselfand I've taken the time to use your very own quotes, too. How nice of me. :) Enjoy!

As an aside, I thought I'd contribute a little humor in all this seriousness. I found an article from the Washington Post (Dated 1999). It's a poll of the Most Evil People of the Millennium. At the time, there were roughly 19,000 respondentsthe vote was conducted over the month of October of that year on the Washington Post's Internet site.

Hitler edges out Bill Clinton by only 39 votes, beating Stalin (at number three), Pol Pot, and Mengele (numbers four and five). Hillary comes in at number six, nudging out Saddam Insane, Adolf Eichmann, and Charles Manson. If their scores were to be combined (as well they should, they operate in tandem!), they'd totally wipe the floor with Hitler, coming in at a total of 2,390 votes for the pair. Hillary is the only woman on the list. (Don't all those pro-Clintonistas know how to use the computer?)

Sixteen of the twenty-five made their mark working for the government. Of all those Governments, only two were American---Bill and Hillary! Best of all, their names were put at the top of the list on WRITE-IN VOTES alone (they weren't even offered as options on the list!)! Six other American winners were all killersManson, Dahmer, Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Jim Jones, and Tim McVeigh, and their combined score was lower than that of the score for the First Couple (2,169 votes for SIX MURDERERS, 2,390 for the Clintons). Of the completed list of the twenty-five, the only ones on the list that weren't employed by some government are the six American killers, and the Marquis De Sade (at number 23, plus Jack the Ripper (number 25).

Bill Clinton got almost a thousand more votes than Saddam Insane. Well, James. you're righthe's got the highest popularity ratingbut I'm not so sure I'd be proud of it, were I he. Maybe he can take consolation in the fact that together, he AND Hillary can beat Hitler. Ah, well.Behind every great man

Now, all that having been said, can we kindly please get back to proving that the war in Iraq is NOT for oil? That's still the topic, right?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#397 Consumer Comment

You spin me right 'round baby right 'round...

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 21, 2005

You spin me right round baby, right round like a record baby, right rou.... oh is that you again James? Hunh(shoulder shrug) I guess I shoulda known that you lied when you said that you couldn't have said it better yourself! Rather than going point by point I'll just respond to your ... ahem, comments(?) In the order that you offered them( labeled as R)

1. Actually, there are 5 permanent members of the U.N. - China, France, The Russian Federation, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Each of these five members has Great Power Unanimity as it is referred to in the U.N. Charter (I believe you called it veto power) These five permanent members serve along side of 10 other countries delegates who sit on the council for a 2 year term. All procedural matters are made by a minimum vote of nine out of the fifteen countries voting to the affirmative (that's a yes vote, James.) Substantive matters need be passed with at least nine votes including ALL FIVE of the permanent members voting yes'( this is the Great Power Unanimity', or, veto' that you would suggest only the U.S. has. Oh, and James, I hope you have some time to chat with some friendly security personnel. . . that sounds like a terrorist threat! lol

2.That's what I said. . . they aren't there. . . they m-o-v-e-d them(duh) and I know you couldn't move any WMD's from state to state because we don't live under the rule of an oppressive, violent dictator that James finds kinda swell' , like Saddam Hussein..

3. I will answer this with a quote taken directly from your R' (Iam quite certain you were speaking of yourself at this point) Nope...don't think

4. Imagine a discussion . . .- now James, this is a big problem I have with you . . . you imagine things, post them, and expect everyone to think they are facts. James you have to stop getting upset when people say your s**t smells like, . . . well, . . . s**t!

5. Wow! You are talking like somebody who is sane and can rationalize - neither of these is a trait that Saddam had or has. Also, I don't know whether or not there are/were WMD's, only time will tell - What I do know is that they were only one of many reasons to oust' Hussein but you lefties want to focus on that because . . . well, that's an answer I don't have. You spin me right round baby right. . .

6. A)Our president is elected and his actions had the unanimous(minus one) votes of both the house and senate. B) I haven't forgotten Viet Nam, have you? I don't think you have a clue about Viet Nam or you wouldn't keep addressing it as a comparison. C) Ummmm, you reiterate my point and D) Stalin died in 54 let him stay dead - plus it was a different time back then . . . let's not get off topic and start bringing up Stalin's submarine ride down the St. Lawrence, O.K

7. See # 6

8. No, I am not afraid, I just didn't have time to do the research of an off point topic; but I wanted to keep it as close to your format' as possible. Let's face it, a lot of these questions were led into by left wing answer after left wing answer. They're loaded' questions set up to spin.

9. Hmmm . . . cut off trade equals . . . murder, torture, rape, mutilation, etc.??? Gee James what next? Should we compare Sheehan to the victims of the holocaust? You have no shame do you! (Rhetorical question, we all know the answer to that.)

10. See #8

11. Nice response! Doesn't make sense or have a point, but nice response anyway. Besides, I was just trying to take one illogical q & a and create a path' to the next illogical q & a as set out by your illogical format.

12. I can see your point James, just look at the hoards of Americans risking their lives to get to Cuba so they can live life in freedom and . . . heeeey, wait a minute. . . it's the other way around isn't it? Ya had me goin' there for a minute. . .hyuck!

13. A) Quit spinning, Sheehan wasn't arrested for speaking out against the government, she was BREAKING THE LAW dum-dum. Maybe we should just put a little disclaimer at the end of every law that reads unless you believe that you have a really, really good reason to break it B) They're called war criminals and we are abiding by international law - not the laws as James thinks they should be, and those responsible for the torture are being/have been tried in a court of law and they are/will face justice. I never said that I agree with these tactics either so don't try to spin this one. I was ashamed and humiliated and, to be frank, disgusted. I just don't think it's fair that you and your ilk use a few to judge the masses. Most of the right wing felt the same as I did about these idiots.

14. No, this is Shawn calling James an undereducated idiot who doesn't have the balls to do anything substantiative to fix the ills of his own government, so he hops on board with a few cronies from another country that share his views (although I don't know if you can all fit your heads up the same a*s at once) and promotes himself as the witty respondent of facts and opinions that all of their country should heed as they will one day see his abundant genius and bow before his feet in awestruck wonder. . . uuuuhhh. . . not a fu&*ing chance, eh!

15. O.K. Nothing to slam so you put words in my mouth!?! Typical move.

16. Me thinks you should read ahead before commenting, or do you actually read anything?

17. Not nearly as many as have been saved and answer number two would be not nearly enough as long as I have to keep digging out from under all your bullshit!

18. You talking with John Kerry? What is it about you liberals? You b***h an moan about the injustices in the world, but you are too d**n scared to do anything about them! Then, when someone does step up to the plate and help to correct these injustices, you b***h and moan about how it's none of their business! I got an idea, if ya ain't willing to do the work, shut the f%^& up and let those of us who are willing, do our jobs.

19. , 20., 21., 22., Sure James, repelling the Russians to (roll eyes in conjunction with head nodding slowly and slightly left, to right, and back to left, as if to say what a moron!.) I am glad you consider the war on drugs (wayyy off topic) a total failure, maybe we should all just toss our hands up in the air and give up. . . go ahead James, smoke all ya want, nobody gonna stand up for what's right anymore, we give up. . . no more laws . . . it's total anarchy starting now, enjoy.( Another nod and roll). Oh, and quit putting words in my mouth! I know that's how you work. . . if you can't respond with fact or discredit with truth, make something stupid up and say the other person said it - sounds like a democratic convention slogan to me.

23. That my be your opinion, thank God you aren't in politics, you'd be shot with an attitude like that!

24. Yes, I was getting dizzy from all your spin and decided to cut corners to get back on point. I know you like to get a hundred topics at once going so by the time your spin is pointed out and stopped you've already moved onto the next spin, but I'm not very familiar with playing like that.

25. - 31. Inclusive) Just a bunch more unsubstantiated drivel and opinionated hogwash - nice James, I see you still haven't learnt how to . . . awww I'm just getting tired of it. It's like trying to teach a fish to bark.

26. Actually, if you get past all the opinions and actually read the resolutions, you will discover that it is not illegal. I know a lot of people don't agree with this war (myself included- as mentioned several times)and a lot of people seem to equate disagreement with illegal This just isn't illegal. Several of the Security Councils Resolutions on Iraq include the use of force as a penalty for not adhereing to the resolutions. In the last resolution before we attacked Iraq, the penalty for failure to comply was a ------------------------------------------------------------. Now tell me , does that mean that if they don't comply then the U.N. will be really aggressive and mean and ...write another resolution? Also, the U.S. diplomat assigned to the U.N., nflifffdfdsf, stated prior to the vote that it was our intent to use such force is all demands are not met. The arguable point is that other members of the Council also stated that the U.S.A. must consult the U.N. security council prior to any action. Many say that since, when the U.S.A., consulted them on this matter, the Counsel did not authorize force so any actions were illegal, however, this issue was clarified previously where there was no statement to such requirements . The U.S.A. need only consult - we did, we bombed Iraq, nothing illegal about it, so stick that in your cap an smoke it!

Here is one of the more recent statements offered by the security council:The members of the Security Council look forward to continued progress in Iraq's political transition, consistent with United Nations Security Council resolution 1546 (2004). The members of the Security Council reaffirm their support for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq and for a federal, democratic, pluralist and unified Iraq, in which there is full respect for human rights.
Does this sound like a counsel certain that the actions of the U.S. were illegal? No!


27. Useless, factless opinionated drivel - but remember your estimated figures

28. Thus the need . . . who's the moron? Ya, that's it . . . look in the mirror James.

29., 30. Nice spin! Even has a quasi-factual basis!

31. I haven't even found anyone else who accused us of this - where's the proof?

32., 33. Drivel, spin, drivel

34. Proof? You found it where? No, I won't stick my head up your a*s.

35. Hahaha, I was wondering when this war is about oil useless unrealistic B.S. was going to spew from your feeble brain. Do the math dummy Over a trillion dollars for the war, less than 4% of our oil supply, hmmm - yep, after say . . . 600 or 700 years we should start to see a pretty hefty profit!

36. Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Rep, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Singapore, Thailand, United Kingdom, and Ukraine. - boy that's a lot of suck-ups to only be helping on a limited basis.

37. Funny, I thought he was voted in for a second term . . . You spin doo- doo- doo- doodoo- doo- doo. . .

38. Putting words in my mouth again cause you are too stupid and ignorant to attack what I actually say? Oh yeah . . . you don't read everything(or hardly anything) because you might learn something and you've certainly proven you're immune to that!

39. You are just jealous that you can't even take over a province in your own country (vive' le Quebec.) And James, you're the only one bent on this world domination theory. Put your radar beam deflector (aluminum foil) back on before your brain cell implodes.

40. You want to re-read it AGAIN or just go ahead and make an a*s out of yourself AGAIN or AGIAN without reading?

41. O.K. James, I guess that none of what you said should be considered or repeated because you haven't stated that you are adamant about them.

42. Get your own material dumdum, the whole head in the a*s comparison is getting old and, now that you're catching on to it, I'm done with it. You're not funny, witty, or intelligent, and from now on I will only respond to your posts that resemble fact, truth, and are on topic. In other words James, have a nice life, you bore me. Let your unimaginative cutdowns and insults be tossed . . . hoser.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#396 Consumer Suggestion

Speaking of long post's Vera...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 20, 2005

Vera;

So we are the pot calling the kettle black again, are we? Shawn took it upon himself to re-write & submit "with many holes" the passage written by the smart American who wrote "Daddy why did we invade Iraq?" &, so I had to respond to it point by point.

Sorry if that's too much reading for you, but your post just goes "on & on" about a subject which has nothing to do with this thread. Again, Vera has no real point's & so she rambles on about something irrevelant!

I agree with Ben who does not want to be fed "religeon with his politics", as I think it really has no place in the discussion either. Just as Shawn believes that God came down & helped the "founding fathers" write the Constitution (which is nuts), it really has nothing to do with the discussion.

If you felt attacked, at any time, it was for your need to put into your posts of opinion, your two cents worth of religeon. It might also have to do with your attacks on people like myself, simply because I am Canadian, as you feel Canadians should just "shut up & live with" anything the Americans feel like doing to show they can "s**t on" anyone they please. I disagree. I disagree strongly.

Your leaders have been tried in the media & lost. They are being tried in the courts as well. Meanwhile your leaders have put a man on trial in a "kangaroo court" that will not accept the wrongdoing on "both sides" at all! I think if you are going to put leaders on trial... the USA would rank "right up there" as a Country that's leaders allow atrococities to cause havoc on innocent people. From throwing people out of helicopters to burning of bodies "pointing at mecca", to the the detainment of individuals without laying charges on them, for years & the torture of these people, the USA beats the band on such issues!

Burining of villiages filled with nothing but innocent old people, women & children cannot be shown anymore, as these things were shown in Vietnam. Now Journalists can only be "inbedded" in order to get any stories out, as with Iraq & people like you just gobble up the spin. Then you point at me & accuse "me" of the spin. No spin here Vera. Just truth.

I doubt anyone on this thread cares if you pray to "Allah" or the "Devil himself", since the "real issue" is what is going on with your President & his band of thieves. The lieing & corruption abound, & all the time you do little more than defend & pray.

That is not a "personal attack" Vera, simply because it is not only you who equate "wrongfully" religeon & politics. Shawn does the same. Just as you snub your nose at the idea of "By the People & for the People" (which Bush obviously cares nothing about), but you also snub your nose at the "Separation of Church & State" as you & people like you expect everyone to turn a "blind eye" to what is going on. Just to be a good Republican!

Long as my post may have been, responding to Shawn, at least it was "on subject", of which your "equally as long post" did not have a sentance that even came close to the subject at hand.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#395 Consumer Comment

Vera.... Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much.

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 20, 2005

You quote...

"Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools "

There is NO such thing. Your either making things up, or have been listening to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson too much.

There is NO NO NO such thing in California. Two of my best friends are married to teachers here (one middle school and one high school), and I'm currently dating a kindergarden teacher. They just about hit the floor laughing at that comment. If it even has the remotest bit of truth...then it must be in a PRIVATE religous school. So you just bit yourself in the a*s!

Foist your christian propaganda elsewhere. As I said before your feeble attempts to make us look like the attackers is never going to work. This BS that because we resist Christianity, is an attack on Christianity is just that.....BS.


Once again I say to you and your Bushite religous zealots.......

All you are saying is that you are being attacked because we wont let you attack others. In other words......your saying....You feel your rights are being infringed upon because we wont let you infringe upon the rights of others.

Freedom from Christianity? You betcha! And freedom from Islam, freedom from Shinto, freedom from Budda, etc. etc. etc.........

Since when have you ever seen this headline.....

"BOMBING IN SUCH AND SUCH A PLACE.....ATHIEST MOVEMENT SUSPECTED!"

You never have eh? And you never will.

You people are sick. Leave us alone. And we will leave you alone....with your religon. Get your religous a*s, along with Bush's theocracy plans out of our lives. We dont need it for morals or family values like you week minded folk do. We have enough common sense to get it on our own and teach our own children. We are not lazy like you and need to send our children to sunday school to learn how to be civil. Just because we dont have "faith" doesnt mean we have no morals.

You had your chance to run the world. You sucked at it. Hows that for morals? eh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#394 Consumer Comment

Don't worry, "B." happy now!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 20, 2005

Since James' post is too long to bother with, and most likely full of the same spin, I won't even bother wasting my timeI'll just sit and watch him froth and choke on his own vomit over and over again. You maybe should get your buddies the Terrorists to help scoop it out there, champ.


Vera, sorry, the veil of self righteous indignation doesn't wear well on the head of the Queen of Flames.

Well, B. I'm good at what I'm good at, and have since pointed out myself that I'm a flamer. But I usually have to be attacked first. Let's face itI have a hard time being compassionate to people that sneak up and slap me on the back of the neck, then take off giggling. When I responded to this post, I knew I'd get a response from some, but I wasn't quite expecting a vicious cant from our little Anti-American friend from Canada, here. Who knew? He's the star of the lead-in personal attack...then the divert when presented with fact tactic.

You're the one who brought religion into the discussion

When? In mentioning quotes made by our founding fathers? Give me a break. So if I say, Oh, God! I love mashed potatoes! I'm bringing religion into it? Check again.I believe you'd see that honor better placed on our delicate little atheist chum (Once again, it's that God thing Or our Canuck buddy, who was the first to bring the actual quote of Matthew 6 (remember, the Preface to the Lord's Prayer?), and the Bible into our friendly little circle? If you wanna be technical, and say that mentioning God brings in the subject of religion, then perhaps if we look a bit before the flame festlessee here..Ah! There.I think it was D. of Naples, Florida who was the first to mention Godand then there was.hmm? YeahSandra, of Tampa who mentions: My family and I will pray for our men and women in uniform, we will pray for our dear President and his family, we will pray for our elected leaders that they may understand that a nation divided will not stand. We will pray for all those of you who live with so much hate in your heart that your hearts may be cleansed from all evil. Surely God's heart must be breaking. God protect our President & our soldiers. Talk about hate-filled invective! Funny, Ben can bash and attack people for the mere mention of God, his effort clearly to turn the subject into a Bush is a monster because he tries to force me to believe in a God I don't! argument. But that's okay, isn't it?

That's the very hypocrisy I've been watching, the guise of the PC crowd. In Columbine, they made commemorative tiles for the kids who were killed, but found ninety tiles containing objectionable material like 4/20/99 Jesus Wept and God is Love and promptly removed them. A federal court upheld the decision.

In Pennsylvania, the Christmas program is sterilized of any Christian connotations, and children are led to Celebrate Kwanzaa! In Texas, Christmas songs are banned, but the kids are threatened with lower grades if they don't participate in the celebrations of other religious faiths. In New York City, the Chancellor of the Dept. of Education prohibited the display of the Nativity, but expressly permitted the display of the Jewish menorah and the Islamic star and crescent. Isn't New York City already the largest display of Islam, being home to Ground Zero?

Hell, in California, they're offering three-week crash courses in Islam in some of the middle schools (seventh grade). Students are required to adopt Muslim names, plan a trip to Mecca, play a Jihad game and pray to Allah The compassionate chanting Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation (I read somewhere that Allah is not the lord of Creationthat the act of creation is viewed as presumptuous in the Islamic faith. But since I don't have all the data yet, I'll leave that to anyone who wants to know to find out for themselves.)

So as far as I can see, you could further narrow the scope of that freedom FROM religion statement to read Freedom FROM the Christian Religion. Seems to me, any religion that encourages a free will, but urges awful things like personal responsibility, self-discipline, self-control, monogamy (NT) and humility to an Entity greater than oneself is a bad thing. It is my observation that the only religion that isn't allowed in schools is Christianity.

So let's all gather round the board, and play a nice friendly game of Jihad!


and your defense is... a five paragraph 'biography' of Madalyn Murray O'Hair's dark side? (Actually, you're welcome to call it a "littany".)

She had a light side? Hunh, Ben attacks my faith and knocks it because I support how I feel. But I'm a bad person because I bring O'hair into the light? Okay. So I'm bad.

Looks like a classic James defense.

No, because I did research to find the info on Madalyn Murray-O'hair. James isn't too fond of doing factual research about anything. The constant praise and push for Michael Moore in his earliest posts had clued me in early that he's not into factually based info, but carefully edited spin. He supports his master, I support mine.

Are you so blind to the effects of indiscriminate hate speech? Here you are presented with an opportunity that cries out for witness to the power and relevance of the holy spirit, yet your ego demands you use this opportunity to jab another thorn into your savior's crown.

Nice try. But your posts haven't' been on a very Christian vein, either. Where's your sensible witness? Where's your compassion? I never said anything nasty to you, but the latest posts you have presented have been nothing, if not acrid towards Shawn and I. You see, I understood from the beginning that you and I didn't agree totally, and I respected your position (even praised your writing skills and thought process). Where have I been so uncivil to you?

I was met with hostility and incivility from James and Ben (who, by the way, was the first to not only bash religion, but to label all conservatives: I love these Bible-Thumping, war-loving conservatives!) so I deal with them on their own leveleven stating that my particular type of humor towards James was presented as such, due to the sewer-line of garbage and bent pseudo-facts he kept dumping and distracting with on this board.

Why not send your diatribe for the misrepresentation of the Twenty-Third Psalm toward Ed, of Tempe, Az.? He's using a religious connotation too. But since I'm to one who has ideas different from those who bash Bush, anything I say is subject to attack (I'm waiting for the Anti-Mashed Potatoes crowd, after this post).

Or have you never followed the logic and recognized that is where all your hateful barbs eventually land? Good job, Vera! And so I ask you, what power do you think is fuelling the facist 'neo-conservative' movement that is sweeping the land, and the 'neo-liberal' movement that is snapping at its heels?

It would have been better if politics never turned to mud-slinging and hatred in the first place. And that the leftmedia should have let both sides of the facts be seen. It is my opinion (and facts are numerous in support of this) that the media has served to divide this country more than any other source, but they get their influence form friends in higher places. Bush is no angel, we all know that.but the Left's just so far out there, as is the extreme (conspiracy- behind-every-blade-of-grass!) right. Why should I have to take such heat, because out of ten people, six might be Liberal, three, Conservative and one, a Libertarian? They'll work harder to convince the Conservatives they're wrong, starting with, but not limited to, fixing labels uptight, victimized, Bible-Thumping. Why can I not just be different? Because to them, I am contrary! Even worse, I can be just as loud as they are.

So tell me, what good is attacking me? None, unless feeling better about oneself is the objective. Is it gonna help present a solution to the current problem? Not reallyand neither are any of the many insults I've doled out, myself. But I never attacked anyone on this board, personallynot until I was attacked first. The only productivity here, is that James feels he's going to sleep better, if he prattles endlessly on some relatively obscure Report Site about a Government in another country. My suggestion still stands; he's more than welcome to write a letter to our Government, and direct them here. He certainly seems to have the time.

Thanks for sharing the quotes from senior Bush. Had I known he said those things at the time, I never would have voted for him.

Seems as though you're already suffering from a level of bitterness against Bush and Family. I refuse to accept responsibility for your personal remorse.

What privilege grants them the right to pick and choose which constitutional rights they will defend, and for which groups of citizens?

That excerpt points out how Bush Sr. felt. Just as Ben has his right to bash God, Apparently, Bush Sr. has a right to his feelings about the atheists. You and I don't have to nod our heads in agreement.
Were I at war, and had a soldier next to me who's chosen the atheist way of life, I'd defend them just a vigorouslythey are, after all, my neighbor, and people, just the same. Being my friend doesn't carry a prerequisite that you're a Christian.

With Lady Liberty in chains and Justice teetering on the brink, is it any wonder our youth have no moral compass?

What a loaded statement. Do tell, is society's moral decline the result of kids going to church, or having a faith that as you yourself have said, holds freedom of choice at its very core? Or is it possible, that mainstream media (music, tee-vee, internet, etc.) has influenced today's youth by filling the void stripped of God by the PR crowd? Is it possible, that the sexual revolution, creating untold numbers of unwed, teenaged pregnancies, divorce, and broken homes has demoralized us into thinking sex is love, that we'll seek it anywhere---because it is a basic human need to be loved?

We're creating a religion of victimhood, where all these kids are told they have all these rights, without telling them that they also have responsibilities. Has anyone ever even placed a value on the fact that a kid has the right to NOT lose his or her virginity before high school, let alone marriage? Oh, but that's Old Fashioned, Pass, and Uptight. Just like not letting grown men have sex with young male children, right? According to the NAMBLA, who want to lower the age of consensual sex. (In case you're wondering, NAMBLA is the North American Man-Boy Love Association. As you can see, these are the people that insist, along with more than half the music videos out there that sex is love.) If being appalled by the thought of a thirty-year-old man rutting against the rump of a fourteen-year-old (or younger) boy is wrong, then I don't ever, EVER want to be right. I don't support a thirty year old woman luring a fifteen-year-old (or younger) boy into her room for sex, either.

Once again I see the odious phrase, "its freedom of religion, not freedom from religion." Is your religion such that people must demand their freedom from it? And would you then deny them?

No. But the atheists want that, and they're welcome to have it.

It certainly cannot be any of the Judeo-Christian religions, for at their very core is the concept of a God who holds man's freedom of choice above all else.

My DENOMINATION is of a Judeo-Christian faith. And yes, God grants us free will. I'm not the best servant, and I could learn a lot more from Jesus Christ, to be more like himbut I'm far too human to let someone try to stomp on my foot and not get a ration when they try to do the same thing to my right to express myself. I'll take full advantage of that right til I die (or, as I'm sure James and Company hopes, until I'm killed off).


And will someone explain how you can have freedom of religion without concurrently having freedom from religion? I would love to see how you must torture logic to arrive at that conclusion.

Freedom OF Religion= The right to worship as you choose, or to not worship at all. (This is my choicenot the apparent need to stifle Christianity.)

Freedom FROM Religion= An absence of the presence of Religion (you knowlike sugar-free); any kind, as is Ben's right. But it's an issue that makes me wonder; why no nasty jab at you, B., for mentioning Allah? Would he jump my case if I said Shiva, or Baal? I doubt it. It seems that the big argument for Freedom FROM Religion is directly aimed at Christians. I can't bring a Bible to school, and kids can't display their faith in GOD, and Columbine can't have tiles to Commemorate the children who held CHRIST close to their hearts, but let's Celebrate Kwanzaa!, and let's play Muslim. It is proven fact that Madalyn Murray-O'hair had a PERSONAL bent against Christianity. Christian faith was her primary focus, her greatest scourge, and her personal thorn. (And somehow, she has been using the horrors of the Spanish inquisition, Salem Withch Trials and the Dark Ages to mean the exact same thing as Christianity's current goal. WRONG-O!)

So there you have it, my tortured logic.

Many of our founding fathers' came to America to escape the persecution of the official state religions in Europe. Most of the individual states in the US had initially sponsored a particular relegious sect. At the time of drafting the first amendment, most had recognized the problems inherent in this approach, even when most of your population belongs to that sect. All but a few had rejected the idea, and had amended their state constitutions to prohibit their government from mixing in religion. When James Madison proposed the first amendment, he based his proposal on the existing state laws, most of which had a two-pronged approach similar to the one we are familiar with. Many used wording such as 'rights of conscience' or 'freedom to pursue one's conscience' rather than the specific term religion. Madison felt his version encompassed them all, "The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed." I always liked the suggestion from New Hampshire, "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience." We ended up with, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Viewed in historical context, it is fairly clear that building a wall of separation between church and state is exactly what they had in mind.

And there, you and I are in absolute agreement. I don't want Christianity to be the only religion in America, if it's not a matter of free will. But I don't think it's very fair that if I want to be a Christian who chooses to not have my high-school-aged daughter dress like Brittney (Sp?) Spears, or act like Shakira, I'm a prude! If I don't accept the Kinseyan-based sex-education, and teach my daughter she's a l*****n struggling to be free, or that she's sexual from birth, I'm narrow minded because my views don't line up with everyone else's! I've grown so goddamned tired of the you have a free right to choose.to agree with me totally mentality so pandemic among the liberal left. I don't support the gimmee-gimmee victim mentality that the world owes me a living, but I sure as shine believe I'm owed the right to feel as I wish, without fear of being chastised by the likes of James, Ben, or even you. Yet here we are, aren't we?

I do not see where Bush is forcing Ben to believe in God; I see where Bush and Family believe in God, and don't care if atheists agree with, or like, them. I do not see anywhere in these posts that insinuates that I ever said a person who doesn't believe in God is gay, or even unpatriotic, for that matter. It must suck, that the President would ever use his right to free speech to NOT agree with or stroke the egos of, everyone. Was everyone so up in arms about how the President is a Christian when we see Clinton lugging his two-foot-by-two foot, eight inch thick novelty Bible so piously?

Not likely. After all, good showmanship is key to any presidentand we all sure needed the laugh.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#393 Consumer Comment

Liar?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

A previous Bush supporter statement......

"I still don't see how George Bush can be called a liar or a fraud based on your selected text"


Ya, so where is that uranium from Africa again that supposedly Iraq was after? The WMD's? Osama? Ok, I'll go out on a limb here and bring in good ol Bush Senior....where the hell (and just what the hell!) are these "thousand points of light"??


A previous Bush statement.......

"Mission Acomplished"


Ya....right. Lie? Ok maybe it isnt a lie, but if its not a lie...it means the guy is clueless.


Another Bush statement.....

"I will fire anyone that leaked this information"

Ok.....we....shall.....see. Going to be really hard for Bush to run things when the person that REALLY runs things (Rove) gets "fired".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#392 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn, don't put that pencil down yet.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Shawn;

Try to follow her & "R" stands for Reality.

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A:Because they broke 17 different U.N. resolutions over the past 12 years such as: The U.S. intelligence agency has reported that Heussein had enough material to produce over 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and vx nerve agent and upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering biological agents; the U.N., as little as 18 months ago, stated that they believed Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, and a failure to comply with U.N. resolutions (which he agreed to in order to save his butt) requiring total disarming and destruction of all weapons of mass destruction under the supervision of U.N. inspectors ,among others.

R: The UN's major influence is the USA. How many other Countries in the world need to follow UN resolutions simply because they retaliated against "slant drilling" into their Country? Buddy I can make anthrax! What the hell does that prove?

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis had a lot of notice prior to our invasion and were able to sneak them out of the country and also, most likely hide them within as well. We haven't had time to search for these weapons as we are still trying to restore peace to Iraq.

R: Or they simply aren't there! Try transporting anything close to WMD's just StateState & wait for the screams! Kinda impossible to do that under the "cone of silence" with satilites watching your every move now isn't it?

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To intimidate and threaten other countries, particularly their neighboring, oil rich countries.

R: Well they were done with Iran. I doubt they wanted to use em on Saudi Arabia. They didn't use them when invading Kuwait. Afganistan? Nope... don't think so. So where could the use em?

Q: Then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they hid them thinking that we would not really invade...I guess they underestimated our resolve, and overestimated themselves.

R: Imagine a discussion with one of Suddam's counterparts if you will. Suddam, when asked about when to use these WMD's he would reply "Well if they don't invade we can use them on our own people I guess, & if they do invade & take over our Country, well then we still don't wanna use em, cause um... ahh.... well we won't have a Country anymore.... but, um.... ah.... we don't wanna use em cause.... um... ahhh. s**t I dunno! Why u ask me this?" Give us all a break Shawn!

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they hide all those big weapons instead of using them to fight us back?
A: Saddam doesn't care about his people, he would rather lose thousands of his soldiers lives than to abide by the U.N. resolutions by providing proof of his disarming (which nobody believes he did anyway.).

R: Shawn you are one of the few who thinks he had these weapons in the first place! He would have used them in Kuwait & against the US invasion if he had them in the quantities that would be effective to make them worthwhile. The last thing you wanna do if you want to protect your Country is to loose all your soldiers!

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons the U.N., Britain intelligence and our intelligence said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

R: The UN had not completed their inspections & Britian backed off on their claims, as the claims made of plutonium from Africa.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, who knew no end to the abuse he inflicted on his people. which is another good reason to invade another country.

R: If it is a reason to invade a Country because of a Dictator, the USA needs to be invaded presently! Never mind all the other Countries in the world that also have one! The USA does not run Iraq & has "no say" in how that Government runs or treats their own people! Otherwise Stalin would faced invasion by the USA.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, what some fail to mention is that tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands and children in the presence of their parents. he tortured his own people.

R: You seem to forget Vietnam. Shawn! Have you been looking at what the Government in China & N. Korea is doing lately? Not a good reason to invade!

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq.

R: Shawn is afraid to go there.


Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For any number of reasons; political crimes, like criticizing the government or sometimes only because one of Saddam's followers wanted to, or because someone said they were Christian, or athiest . . . just believed differently than him.

R: Like when the USA didn't like Communism & warred in Vietnam. Like how they cut off trade with Cuba?

Q: Isn't that sorta what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different, you're comparing apples to oranges.

R: Shawn still does not wanna go there.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

R: As different as Republicans & Democrats!

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just a different culture and belief system which, when abused by those in power can be very bad, like Fidel Castro in Cuba.

R: Like Cuba hasn't proven they can survive quite well without their "previous" biggest trading parnter. The USA!

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

R: Forgetting Sheehan aren't we? What about all the people the USA is holding without formal charges? I do believe torture was shown there!

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

R: That's the pot calling the kettle black!

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws, called sanctions, that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until Castro stopped using his peoples money to increase his military powers. Some uneducated people think it was to stop Cuba from being Communists and started being capitalists like us, which is idiotic as we don't have any desire to change a countries politics besides, our economy is based on free enterprise, not capitalism!

R: Oh really... so now Shawn says he will accept other Governments! So what ya doing in Iraq? You wouldn't be trying to set up a Government for them, now would you? Yea, Cuba, big threat with a US base right on their soil! Get a brain!

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans economy?
A: No, Castro is still taking the peoples money.

R: Yea & with all this money he isn't spending it on weapons so his "tiny Country" could invade the USA... right Shawn?

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because they were harboring Bin Laden, the coward responsible for what happened to us on September 11th.

R: Who is they? Do you mean the Taliban, the USA gave millions of dollars to? Isn't Bin Laden, along with almost everyone involved in 911 from Saudi Arabia? Methinks you went after the wrong Country!

Q: What happened to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men under the direction of Bin Laden, fifteen of them Saudi Arabians, hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 innocent Americans.

R: Yes & how many people will die & have already died by the hands of the USA! The biggest terrorist Country in the world?

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.

R: The Taliban the USA supported when it was in their interest.


Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

R: What business is it of yours?

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward promised by the previous administration because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

R: And repelling the Russians... don't forget that!

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

R: The war on drugs is the "stupidest failure" of any war in history!

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

R: That was ok, as far as Shawn is concerned. Hyprocrate!

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing addictive drugs that kill thousands of American's every year, especially prevalent in lower income areas of our country, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for being infidels?
A: No, it's not O.K. with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing opium, or for any other reason, but it was an agreement made on behalf of United States of America and our present administration tries to maintain honor and dignity.

R: Again the war on drugs is a total failure & the worst epidemic on drugs right now is Meth that is made all over the USA!

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: Yes.

R: If we like them, they can do anything they want!

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: Yes. It is called a traditional Islamic body covering.

R: You removed the secondary part of this question Shawn for obvious reasons.


Q: Are the Saudi's our friends?
A: No, but we do maintain diplomatic relations and trade with them

R: You would not have a hope in hell in the Middle East without your great fiends "The Saudi's"!

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

R: Yes same people who want you out of their region.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

R: It does not matter who trained them. Many people will step up to the plate, before, during & after Bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, not originally, he was from Saudi Arabia too until he was exiled for his extremist belief system and ties to international terror regimes. He was a bad man, a very bad man.

R: He was given money & arms from the USA.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Not our freind, but he was our ally when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

R: Again none of the USA's business.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism. We call them Russians now.

R: Isn't that convenient!

Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our allies for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then we discovered that, against U.N. resolutions, they were trading weapons with Saddam Hussein in Iraq and were owed large sums of money by Saddam so they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, They are not on good terms with us since we invaded anyway and they won't be able to collect now. We're also experiencing tension with the French and the Germans because they were also trading with Iraq and thus didn't support our invasion.

R: They do not support invasion because it is illegal! Period! They also don't support your "kangaroo court" convicting Suddam! They gain nothing from supporting Suddam! He is obviously finished! Sometimes Shawn you are a real moron!

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast. Just kidding dear, I just want you to understand that republicans have a sense of humor!

R: Some republicans are blind & follow a dictator into the mouths of hell in a silly "un winable war" that will cost over a Trillion dollars & millions of lives!

Q: Wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: No, they were a strategic military location..

R: Stratigically speaking, Iraq is nowhere near the USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our ally.

R: Iran was trying to set up a democratic government, but we supported a dictator there!

Q: Why did that make him our ally?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

R: We liked dictators in the region we could control.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yes, but at the time, we had neither the knowledge of how insane and barbaric he truly was, nor the U.N. sanctions and resolutions against him that are required before we can take any legal action.

R: We just supplied the gas to gas them to Iraq is all!
.
Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our ally?
A: Quite often, yes.

R: As long as we can control them!

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Most of the time.

R: Unless we see no economic or power value in switching sides!

Q: Do American corporations make money selling weapons to these countries that are our allies?
A: Yes, just as Canadian, German, French, and many other counties corporations do.

R: Americans also made money, having trade with n**i Germany during WWII. The USA will do anything for money & power!

Q: Why do we allow our corporations to sell to both sides in a war?
A: Because we are a free country who supports free enterprise. Some left wingers will tell you that it is because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, they think that all republicans believe since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. In truth, a lot of republicans don't support this war, but we do support the troops, and our president. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

R: Actually just forget all this crap... we attacked Iraq to control the oil in the region as we control Saudi Arabia & Kuwait now!

Q: I think so. We attacked them because we had to, well, actually because nobody else was going toand they had to be stopped. Because according to U.N. resolutions we not only had the right to, but the responsibility - a responsibility which 35 other countries joined us in, but the likes of Canada, Germany, and France did not. And, daddy, I believe that God is with our soldiers?
A: Yes, dear, that's right..

R: The only Countries really helping the USA in Iraq are doing it on a limited basis & simply "sucking up".

Q: But how do we know God is with us in Iraq?
A: Well, you see, George W. Bush has always maintained that he is a Christian, he didn't hide that from anyone. He was voted into office and he allows his Christian values to guide his actions in office. He doesn't try to make anyone else believe as he does, but he does exercise his rights under the constitution to publicly have his beliefs. He uses his faith in God as his director and sets the policies of his administration accordingly. To do any different would make him a fake who lied to gain votes from Christians. So, to answer your question, he prays to God and asks for direction; then he meditates and makes the moves that his subconcious tells him to. Christians believe that this is direction from God, Athiests believe that it is thinking things over. So, in a way, I guess that the president believes that God tells him what to do.

R: I mean why should he listen to a majority of his people?

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that George W. Bush had the right, according to the U.N. resolutions; the responsibility, according to the. U.N. charter; and the peace that comes from thinking things over before taking action (or, as he would probably say, from listening to God).
A. Yes! You understand more than many adults because you looked at things from an open-minded, calm, reasonable prospective and listened only to facts, not a bunch of opinions and false information. now make yourself comfortable, thank God we live in the U.S.A. (And that our founding fathers wrote the Constitution under the direction of God), say your prayers, and go to sleep. Good night my sweet child.

R: God never did sign the Constitution. Human beings did! The USA is supposed to be "By the People & For the People". Right now it is "By God & George Bush... we will take over the World & exploit it, as we exploit everyone we deal with"!

Q: Good night, Daddy

God Bless America and our troops

R: As our troops try, but will be unsuccessful in taking over the World!

Now, take out YOUR pencil James . . .

1) I know what NAPALM is, I just never heard of NAPLAM!

R: Then how can you claim you know what something is you never heard of?

2) You might want to take off your "rose colored glasses" and put on some actual reading glasses. I still don't see how George Bush can be called a liar or a fraud based on your selected text; let's examine . . .

"The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed . . ."

". . . The British government has learned . . ."

". . . Our intelligence sources tell us . . ."

LIE: noun - an intentionally false statement.

So, which of the statements was false?

R: The British Government were never "adamant" in the first place & quickly backed away from their claims when confronted. No such deal ever existed! It was all fabricated lies!

Nice try James, but your still not making any sense. You are just proving that you really don't have any idea about . . . anything!

I'm surprised that anyone would want to be associated with you, if I were a democrat, I would vote republican just to be sure nobody got the impression that my thoughts were even remotely similar to yours.

I just heard this blonde telling a joke, it didn't make much sense but it started out "Why does James from Calgary wear shoulder pads? . . ."

R: To stop Shawn from shoving his body up Shawn's a*s, where Shawn's head is located!

Shawn - Phelan, California
U.S.A.

Write it all down Shawn, so you don't need to get my responses further about such garbage!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#391 Consumer Comment

That was a long one Shawn, but worth the read.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Amazing how some people can use FACTS to make the point, while others use FEELINGS to obscure theirs. That was an excellent missive Shawn. Much better than James' droning and made sense, as opposed to just being more drivel.

For the record James, you complained about this thread going off-topic and getting into WW2 and U-Boats, etc. Ummmm...That's because YOU are the one who brought the thread off-topic. The rest of us just saw yet another opportunity to dogpile you for all of your misrepresentations of fact.

You even claim hordes of Republicans are swarming your border to escape the evil US. Riiight. Hell, we cannot even get our liberals to leave, and they are the ones whining about how mean we are, and promising to go. What I do see however, are hordes of people from every other country on the planet, including Canada, trying to get here and live as an American. Even Chewbacca took his citizenship test this week, in Texas no less. The last time I looked at something in the news about people heading to Canada, it was Army deserters(more cowards for Canada to support) and draft dodgers(someone should tell these bumpkins there is no draft). You can keep them all. You will find out what they're worth to society.

Have fun James. I know you have to defend GC&T again. There's more customers you screwed out of their money.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#390 Consumer Comment

I think this is a little more factual James

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

A) "B" - ha ha ha I love it. . . that's what I used to love about your posts - you had wit, fact, and opinion all rolled into one - lately you've been too "serious" and it didn't seem to suit you - welcome back! (lol)

B) James, if you couldn't say it better, why are you still here?

Something written by a smart American (who lives in the real world)


DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?
DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A:Because they broke 17 different U.N. resolutions over the past 12 years such as: The U.S. intelligence agency has reported that Heussein had enough material to produce over 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and vx nerve agent and upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering biological agents; the U.N., as little as 18 months ago, stated that they believed Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, and a failure to comply with U.N. resolutions (which he agreed to in order to save his butt) requiring total disarming and destruction of all weapons of mass destruction under the supervision of U.N. inspectors ,among others.

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis had a lot of notice prior to our invasion and were able to sneak them out of the country and also, most likely hide them within as well. We haven't had time to search for these weapons as we are still trying to restore peace to Iraq.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To intimidate and threaten other countries, particularly their neighboring, oil rich countries.

Q: Then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they hid them thinking that we would not really invade...I guess they underestimated our resolve, and overestimated themselves.

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they hide all those big weapons instead of using them to fight us back?
A: Saddam doesn't care about his people, he would rather lose thousands of his soldiers lives than to abide by the U.N. resolutions by providing proof of his disarming (which nobody believes he did anyway.).

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons the U.N., Britain intelligence and our intelligence said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, who knew no end to the abuse he inflicted on his people. which is another good reason to invade another country.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, what some fail to mention is that tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands and children in the presence of their parents. he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq.


Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For any number of reasons; political crimes, like criticizing the government or sometimes only because one of Saddam's followers wanted to, or because someone said they were Christian, or athiest . . . just believed differently than him.

Q: Isn't that sorta what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different, you're comparing apples to oranges.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just a different culture and belief system which, when abused by those in power can be very bad, like Fidel Castro in Cuba.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws, called sanctions, that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until Castro stopped using his peoples money to increase his military powers. Some uneducated people think it was to stop Cuba from being Communists and started being capitalists like us, which is idiotic as we don't have any desire to change a countries politics besides, our economy is based on free enterprise, not capitalism!

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans economy?
A: No, Castro is still taking the peoples money.
Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because they were harboring Bin Laden, the coward responsible for what happened to us on September 11th.

Q: What happened to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men under the direction of Bin Laden, fifteen of them Saudi Arabians, hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 innocent Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.


Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward promised by the previous administration because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing addictive drugs that kill thousands of American's every year, especially prevalent in lower income areas of our country, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for being infidels?
A: No, it's not O.K. with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing opium, or for any other reason, but it was an agreement made on behalf of United States of America and our present administration tries to maintain honor and dignity.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: Yes.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: Yes. It is called a traditional Islamic body covering.


Q: Are the Saudi's our friends?
A: No, but we do maintain diplomatic relations and trade with them

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, not originally, he was from Saudi Arabia too until he was exiled for his extremist belief system and ties to international terror regimes. He was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Not our freind, but he was our ally when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?A: Well, not really. You see, they were our allies for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then we discovered that, against U.N. resolutions, they were trading weapons with Saddam Hussein in Iraq and were owed large sums of money by Saddam so they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, They are not on good terms with us since we invaded anyway and they won't be able to collect now. We're also experiencing tension with the French and the Germans because they were also trading with Iraq and thus didn't support our invasion.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast. Just kidding dear, I just want you to understand that republicans have a sense of humor!

Q: Wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: No, they were a strategic military location..

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our ally.

Q: Why did that make him our ally?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yes, but at the time, we had neither the knowledge of how insane and barbaric he truly was, nor the U.N. sanctions and resolutions against him that are required before we can take any legal action.
.
Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our ally?
A: Quite often, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Most of the time.

Q: Do American corporations make money selling weapons to these countries that are our allies?
A: Yes, just as Canadian, German, French, and many other counties corporations do.

Q: Why do we allow our corporations to sell to both sides in a war?
A: Because we are a free country who supports free enterprise. Some left wingers will tell you that it is because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, they think that all republicans believe since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. In truth, a lot of republicans don't support this war, but we do support the troops, and our president. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because we had to, well, actually because nobody else was going toand they had to be stopped. Because according to U.N. resolutions we not only had the right to, but the responsibility - a responsibility which 35 other countries joined us in, but the likes of Canada, Germany, and France did not. And, daddy, I believe that God is with our soldiers?
A: Yes, dear, that's right..

Q: But how do we know God is with us in Iraq?
A: Well, you see, George W. Bush has always maintained that he is a Christian, he didn't hide that from anyone. He was voted into office and he allows his Christian values to guide his actions in office. He doesn't try to make anyone else believe as he does, but he does exercise his rights under the constitution to publicly have his beliefs. He uses his faith in God as his director and sets the policies of his administration accordingly. To do any different would make him a fake who lied to gain votes from Christians. So, to answer your question, he prays to God and asks for direction; then he meditates and makes the moves that his subconcious tells him to. Christians believe that this is direction from God, Athiests believe that it is thinking things over. So, in a way, I guess that the president believes that God tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that George W. Bush had the right, according to the U.N. resolutions; the responsibility, according to the. U.N. charter; and the peace that comes from thinking things over before taking action (or, as he would probably say, from listening to God).
A. Yes! You understand more than many adults because you looked at things from an open-minded, calm, reasonable prospective and listened only to facts, not a bunch of opinions and false information. now make yourself comfortable, thank God we live in the U.S.A. (And that our founding fathers wrote the Constitution under the direction of God), say your prayers, and go to sleep. Good night my sweet child.

Q: Good night, Daddy

God Bless America and our troops

Now, take out YOUR pencil James . . .

1) I know what NAPALM is, I just never heard of NAPLAM!
2) You might want to take off your "rose colored glasses" and put on some actual reading glasses. I still don't see how George Bush can be called a liar or a fraud based on your selected text; let's examine . . .

"The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed . . ."

". . . The British government has learned . . ."

". . . Our intelligence sources tell us . . ."

LIE: noun - an intentionally false statement.

So, which of the statements was false?

Nice try James, but your still not making any sense. You are just proving that you really don't have any idea about . . . anything!

I'm surprised that anyone would want to be associated with you, if I were a democrat, I would vote republican just to be sure nobody got the impression that my thoughts were even remotely similar to yours.

I just heard this blonde telling a joke, it didn't make much sense but it started out "Why does James from Calgary wear shoulder pads? . . ."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#389 Consumer Comment

Vera, sorry, the veil of self righteous indignation doesn't wear well

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Vera, sorry, the veil of self righteous indignation doesn't wear well on the head of the Queen of Flames. You're the one who brought religion into the discussion, and your defense is... a five paragraph 'biography' of Madalyn Murray O'Hair's dark side? Looks like a classic James defense. Are you so blind to the effects of indiscriminate hate speech? Here you are presented with an opportunity that cries out for witness to the power and relevance of the holy spirit, yet your ego demands you use this opportunity to jab another thorn into your savior's crown. Or have you never followed the logic and recognized that is where all your hateful barbs eventually land? Good job, Vera! And so I ask you, what power do you think is fuelling the facist 'neo-conservative' movement that is sweeping the land, and the 'neo-liberal' movement that is snapping at its heels?

Thanks for sharing the quotes from senior Bush. Had I known he said those things at the time, I never would have voted for him. I guess its true what they say, the tree does not grow far from the rotten apple. What privilege grants them the right to pick and choose which constitutional rights they will defend, and for which groups of citizens? With Lady Liberty in chains and Justice teetering on the brink, is it any wonder our youth have no moral compass?

Once again I see the odious phrase, "its freedom of religion, not freedom from religion." Is your religion such that people must demand their freedom from it? And would you then deny them? It certainly cannot be any of the Judeo-Christian religions, for at their very core is the concept of a God who holds man's freedom of choice above all else. And will someone explain how you can have freedom of religion without concurrently having freedom from religion? I would love to see how you must torture logic to arrive at that conclusion.

Many of our "founding fathers" came to America to escape the persecution of the official state religions in Europe. Most of the individual states in the US had initially sponsored a particular relegious sect. At the time of drafting the first amendment, most had recognized the problems inherent in this approach, even when most of your population belongs to that sect. All but a few had rejected the idea, and had amended their state constitutions to prohibit their government from mixing in religion. When James Madison proposed the first amendment, he based his proposal on the existing state laws, most of which had a two-pronged approach similar to the one we are familiar with. Many used wording such as 'rights of conscience' or 'freedom to pursue one's conscience' rather than the specific term religion. Madison felt his version encompassed them all, "The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed." I always liked the suggestion from New Hampshire, "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience." We ended up with, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Viewed in historical context, it is fairly clear that building a wall of separation between church and state is exactly what they had in mind.

Shawn, your typically specious 'question'/argument to Ben is as devoid of factual basis or honest intellectual endeavor as one can possibly get without being named James. It is nothing but a web of tiny deceits and lies, strung 'round with buzzwords and empty accusations. It is so bad, in fact, one might suspect you of again 'paraphrasing' another's work. Wait, let me guess... Jim Robinson (yet another James) beamed it directly into your head, and you haven't had a chance to edit it yet.

Right off the bat, noone has even implied that your choice to follow your God, your lamb, Darth Vader, Jiminey Cricket, or Lemmings, in any way infringes their rights. Quite the opposite. Nobody, and certainly not Ben, has taken away your or your children's rights to pray in school, publicly display symbols of faith, or recognize your deity when and where you want, so long as you do not do these things in a way that infringes on others' rights. You have no right, nor should you, to dictate the curriculum of the public school system to suit your particular religious beliefs. They are not an alternative to science, they are something completely different.

Beyond this, you just seem to go nuts. You call Ben's beliefs weak. Your sophomoric attempt to associate his beliefs with pornography is total bs. The constitution protects your rights, in equal measure, to place, wherever you see fit, religious material that others find pornographic, lewd, pervasive, disgusting and immoral, in short - offensive. At least when offensive material is beamed directly into your home, you can filter it by sexual content, violence, language, age appropriateness, etc. When your Christian leaders beam their crap into my home, its all G, baby. The love right up against the hate speech, the hope right up against the impending apocalyptic war, the salvation right up against the eternal torture for thinking about sex, the charity right up against the call for assassination, not to mention the conflation of Bush's message with Jesus' message. All G, baby, all the way.

I cannot, without specific information, address the multitude of discrimination and abuse you have suffered for your faith, other than to quote Luke 21:17, "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake." You seem to be arguing that the same amendment that guarantees your right to spew your bile on others should protect you from having your beliefs challenged. It just doesn't work that way, my friend. Besides, you wouldn't want the government infringe on your religious right to be a martyr, would you?

As for getting the government out of our bedrooms... How long has it been now since SCOTUS kicked the Texas government out of people's bedrooms? And let me tell you about my friend in Oregon, the nation's most liberal state, right? The cops marched right into his bedroom, the courts put him in the state pen, and now he's a registered sex offender. His crime? He had 7 dildos, 2 more than the legal limit.

Oh, and btw, thank you for your bombastic response to my little logic lesson. I now have incontrovertible proof of the point I was making. I can just point to your post and say, "That's what I'm talkin' about!" Rather than strain my brain trying to come up with an acceptable response, I'll just post an excerpt from the song I'm listening to. It seems somehow appropriate.

Do you worry that you're not liked
How long till you break
You're happy cause you smile
But how much can you fake
An ordinary boy, an ordinary name
But ordinary's just not good enough today...
Alone alone alone alone alone alone alone alone
I'm thinking

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#388 Consumer Comment

I'm hurt!

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

"As far as bashing goes, there has only been Vera, Robert & Shawn. The majority of the rest I agree with."

James, I'm deeply hurt that you did not see fit to include my name in your last of "bad people". Is it because that every time I post on this report, it is to prove you wrong on some insignificant detail you tried to throw out to make yourself look credible (hint, hint: Lake Ontario and Avro Arrow)?

Or does that simply mean you agree with me (god forbid)?

Please feel free to include me in further bashing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#387 Consumer Comment

Shawn, your 'Kerry' memo is a fake! A rip-off!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Shawn,

Regarding your Redundancy memo, incorrectly attributed to Kerry, it is a rip-off of a memo GWB sent to the members of a committee involved in the planning stages for the Department of Homeland Security. The original memo was 2 1/2 pages long, and not nearly so clear of purpose. I believe your version may have actually been lifted from a summary provided by one of the FBI's lead translators. It received some interesting responses, for example, this response from the CIA representative:

RE: 5/21/02 memo CRRAR first meeting, 5/23/02 memo CRRAR rfc advanced meeting to plan first meeting, and 6/3/02 memo CRRAR no advanced meeting

Mr. President:

Per the procedures outlined in my 5/22/02 memo CRRAR analysis, all three memos have been forwarded to the director. The director reprioritized current departmental workflow to make all staff available for a timely analysis of the first memo. However, with a thought to budget and rapidly shifting international priorities, by hiring an outside programmer to consolidate several functions of our analysis software into a redundant loop, we were able to perform the same analysis utilizing only half our staff, resulting in a net savings of $180,376 to the taxpayers. Using the same system to analyze the second memo resulted in a net savings of $120,517. We expect the analysis of the third memo to result in a net savings of $95,000 - $110,000. I have forwarded all three analyses, with comments, to our Department of Inter-Agency Relations (DIAR), for the preparation of detailed reports. The first report should be on your desk two days following the date of the proposed advanced meeting, the other two should arrive within 2 days prior to the announced date of the actual first meeting. Per your directives on 12/04/01, copies of all three memos have been 'leaked' to the press under deep background, and to FBI translator Dickerson, to assure both our allies and the leaders of world terror know that we are serious in our endeavors. The following summarizes our analyses and actions we have taken based on those numbers.

Analysis of M1 indicated a 35.74% confidence you would convene an advanced meeting, M2 increased that likelihood to 76.8%, and M3 reduced to 22.46%. M3 analysis of our W3 counterparts predicts they will assign a higher likelihood, to 50%, and our confidence it will get to AQ is 27.31%, that they will act, 16.73%. Accordingly, we have requested the Service to increase your protection by 25% should you attend the currently cancelled advanced meeting, and arrange a counterstrike force of 10 operatives to confront the likelihood of AQ action. Confidence on your missing the actual first meeting and the need to schedule a subsequent first meeting is set at 87.40%. In all, we have identified 9 different dates at 20% or better when some form of first meeting might take place, 4 of which we assign confidence exceeding 30% on your actual appearance. Estimating potential attendees and estimating foreign intel and analysis, we have asked the Service to arrange a variety of assignments to best meet the scenarios that might develop. The reports will contain the raw numbers, including AQ behavioral estimates projected from modelled prediction of our asset deployment.

If these estimates alter your plans, we expect further savings to the taxpayer in excess of $80,000 for additional analysis.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#386 Consumer Suggestion

Ok Shawn... so now I have to be your teacher.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Shawn... pull out your pencil & sit up streight;

Let's start with Napalm:

napalm (npm)
n.
1.
a. An aluminum soap of various fatty acids that when mixed with gasoline makes a firm jelly used in some bombs and in flamethrowers.
b. This jelly.
2. An incendiary mixture of polystyrene, benzene, and gasoline.
[na(phthenate), salt of naphthenic acid (from naphthene) + palm(itate).]
napalm v.
ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Noun 1. napalm - gasoline jelled with aluminum soaps; highly incendiary liquid used in fire bombs and flame throwers
gasolene, gasoline, petrol, gas - a volatile flammable mixture of hydrocarbons (hexane and heptane and octane etc.) derived from petroleum; used mainly as a fuel in internal-combustion engines

Now inside of your post was the following statement from Bush.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

There ya go... the next time you need a lesson Shawn in the proof you give to my cause... just speak up. I am glad now you also know what Napalm is.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#385 Consumer Comment

guess Canada will just have to invade the U.S. by itself

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

James,

Go to the U.N and have them sanction the U.S with their army. Oh wait, the U.N doesn't HAVE an army! So I guess Canada will just have to invade the U.S. by itself.

Good hell.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#384 Consumer Suggestion

Well John...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

John;

Well John I am not a Democrat. If you had read enough of what I have said, you would have seen that I am Conservative. I come from the most Conservative part of my Country.

As far as bashing goes, there has only been Vera, Robert & Shawn. The majority of the rest I agree with.

I can't vote in your Country, but you can! You can stop this lunacy! I am concerned however because the terrorism has affected & will affect Canada as well.

If you look at my last few posts, you will see that I have been very civil & explained my position without insults. Although Vera keeps on trying to point out that Canadians harboring terrorists. When she says that I have to say she is full of s**t. Since she is! Like I said in the last post, if terrorists want to get into your Country... Mexico is a better entry point for sure.

Many Republicans are moving to Canada. Not just Democrats. It doesn't take brain surgury to figure out Bush is way down in popularity with this dumb war. Gas Prices & Political Appointments are part of it, but overall most Americans are against the war in Iraq.

Read again Daddy why did we invade Iraq, written by an American & think about it. It really does not make sense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#383 Consumer Suggestion

Well John...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

John;

Well John I am not a Democrat. If you had read enough of what I have said, you would have seen that I am Conservative. I come from the most Conservative part of my Country.

As far as bashing goes, there has only been Vera, Robert & Shawn. The majority of the rest I agree with.

I can't vote in your Country, but you can! You can stop this lunacy! I am concerned however because the terrorism has affected & will affect Canada as well.

If you look at my last few posts, you will see that I have been very civil & explained my position without insults. Although Vera keeps on trying to point out that Canadians harboring terrorists. When she says that I have to say she is full of s**t. Since she is! Like I said in the last post, if terrorists want to get into your Country... Mexico is a better entry point for sure.

Many Republicans are moving to Canada. Not just Democrats. It doesn't take brain surgury to figure out Bush is way down in popularity with this dumb war. Gas Prices & Political Appointments are part of it, but overall most Americans are against the war in Iraq.

Read again Daddy why did we invade Iraq, written by an American & think about it. It really does not make sense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#382 Consumer Suggestion

Well John...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

John;

Well John I am not a Democrat. If you had read enough of what I have said, you would have seen that I am Conservative. I come from the most Conservative part of my Country.

As far as bashing goes, there has only been Vera, Robert & Shawn. The majority of the rest I agree with.

I can't vote in your Country, but you can! You can stop this lunacy! I am concerned however because the terrorism has affected & will affect Canada as well.

If you look at my last few posts, you will see that I have been very civil & explained my position without insults. Although Vera keeps on trying to point out that Canadians harboring terrorists. When she says that I have to say she is full of s**t. Since she is! Like I said in the last post, if terrorists want to get into your Country... Mexico is a better entry point for sure.

Many Republicans are moving to Canada. Not just Democrats. It doesn't take brain surgury to figure out Bush is way down in popularity with this dumb war. Gas Prices & Political Appointments are part of it, but overall most Americans are against the war in Iraq.

Read again Daddy why did we invade Iraq, written by an American & think about it. It really does not make sense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#381 Consumer Suggestion

Well John...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

John;

Well John I am not a Democrat. If you had read enough of what I have said, you would have seen that I am Conservative. I come from the most Conservative part of my Country.

As far as bashing goes, there has only been Vera, Robert & Shawn. The majority of the rest I agree with.

I can't vote in your Country, but you can! You can stop this lunacy! I am concerned however because the terrorism has affected & will affect Canada as well.

If you look at my last few posts, you will see that I have been very civil & explained my position without insults. Although Vera keeps on trying to point out that Canadians harboring terrorists. When she says that I have to say she is full of s**t. Since she is! Like I said in the last post, if terrorists want to get into your Country... Mexico is a better entry point for sure.

Many Republicans are moving to Canada. Not just Democrats. It doesn't take brain surgury to figure out Bush is way down in popularity with this dumb war. Gas Prices & Political Appointments are part of it, but overall most Americans are against the war in Iraq.

Read again Daddy why did we invade Iraq, written by an American & think about it. It really does not make sense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#380 Consumer Comment

Bush supporters are NAIVE!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2005

To ALL Bush supporters:

I would like to say I am glad you have so much faith in a man who was once classified as a drunk, who also lost his a*s in a small oil company that he couldn't run. His daddy never lent him a cent to invest in this company that was lost. It was a person he served with in the Air National Guard who hyad ties with the Saudis! His name was James R. Baath! That is how the Saudis became friends with The Bush's. See GWB is in bed with the Saudi Arabians as partners. Bin Ladden is in Afghanistan and part of the Taliban, Iraq was never part of any of them. The only reason Iraq attacked Kuwait was that Kuwait was slant drilling oil from Iraq!!! War is ALL about PROFIT!!! The United States is trying to CONTROL the WORLD!!!!! Who gave the USA god powers to invade without United Nations Authority? No-body! Bush is worse than Hitler!He is trying to take over the world right under peoples eyes and ears. The problem is, some don't see this as what it really is, to gain more land for the United States, thus creating MORE POWER. Sooner or later the United States Of America if not stopped by other countries will take over the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#379 Consumer Suggestion

President Bush owes us a plan for success in Iraq. A plan with real milestones, not one with a litany of slogans.

AUTHOR: Tony - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

this past Saturday, General Clark delivered the Democratic Radio Address on Iraq

"Mr. Bush is long overdue in providing a plan to achieve Iraqi military sufficiency, to build domestic political consensus inside Iraq around a new government, to achieve regional political stability around Iraq, and to finally achieve an efficient reconstruction effort in Iraq.

"Basic questions: How many capable Iraqi forces do we need before we can bring our troops home? How are we going to forge a political consensus between those quarreling factions in Iraq? And what is our strategy for neutralizing the threatening and armed militias there?

"How can we do a better job with less corruption in the reconstruction of Iraq? And, how can we make Iraq's neighbors a part of the solution, instead of a source of the problems inside Iraq?

"Staying the course is not a strategy, it is just a slogan. What we need to do is change the course and put in place a real strategy that will not only bring us success in Iraq, but will restore to the United States of America the moral authority we've lost through our missteps over the past three years."

President Bush owes us a plan for success in Iraq. A plan with real milestones, not one with a litany of slogans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#378 Consumer Suggestion

I did give a solution Vera

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Vera;

The solution is simple! Americans complain, & protest until good ol George pulls out! Don't sit there & say you can't. Even best case senerio Bush has got ya in there for at least 10 years. Are you Americans gonna wait that long?

You pulled outta Vietnam & they survived didn't they? Doin just as good as you can expect anyway & you aren't spending Billions & Billions of dollars! Hell total cost for fixing Iraq (although you won't be sucessful anyway) will be over a Trillion!

Bush is at his "lowest points in the poles" anyway. Get enough pressure on him to resign as Nixon did. Call an election & get someone else in there to get the troops out. That's the solution. If the Government is "by the people & for the people" then you should have the power to oust Bush. Most of the people are against him. If you really believe in your freedom, junk him!

I mean ya pulled outta everywhere else you went into. Why not Iraq? You wanted Suddam gone, he's gone. They are gonna kill him. Good job!

Like I said it's not really the Politician anyway. It's the mind set! The USA is not going to be sucessful at taking over the World. It's really silly to try! Get your troops out of Iraq & Afganistan & Saudi Arabia totally. Support Isreal as usual & just back off. Back down & the terrorism goes away. Cept for the idiots who wish to do it that are Americans anyway. You know the Unibomber & such. Let them figure it out! None of your business anyway. People will die with or without your presence.

I don't like terrorists, but I know they cant be stopped. These guys really have nothing to live for. Everything for Allah! They won't stop until you do. Even then they won't stop, but at least it will not be you who is threatened. The Middle East will never be a threat to the world if they are left alone. They don't have the power as an occupying force!

Then you can concentrate on your Border Policy. I mean really, if terrorists wanna come in, they can do it through Mexico a lot easier! You can't stop the thousands of Mexicans comming over your border. How u gonna stop terrorists? If I was a terrorist, that is where I would enter the Country. Mexico! Hell they can even bribe the Mexican Government to let em in. I am sure you know how that Government can be bought. Almost every Police Officer in Mexico too!

Possibly the whole thing should be "re thought" out. Possibly a "North American" border security net, rather than trying to protect "the worlds largest border" on one side & a tiny one on the other side that you have no hope in hell of fixing.

Concentrate on "alternative fuel" sources. Stop your dependancy on oil. That might help. Then as you do that remember Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon & Bush & say "never again"! Too costly & a d**n waist of time. There's the solution Vera. Become friendly. Open up trade with Cuba. Be careful how much power you give up to places like China & trade fairly with your neighbours. Follow the rules for instance in the softwood lumber dispute. The governing body for the Free Trade Agreement has already found the USA at fault. Be nice. Play fair.

That's the solution Vera... so simple. So achieveable. So much safer. It makes so much more sense.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#377 Consumer Suggestion

James in Canada What gives you the right?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

James in Alberta:

What gives you the right to tell us how we run our country. You are probably one of those idiotic people that moved to Canada because they hate Republicans and vow to stay away until the democrats get back into power. Let's see here's how they are attempting to do it.

" We need to attack Iraq and I voted for it in the senate, but we didn;t want Bush to do it" John Kerry

"Republicans are evil an racists" Howard Dean, DNC Chairman When asked they why is George Bush the only to place African Americans in high cabinet positions the brilliant comeback was "He's still an evil racist"
NO FACTS JUST NAME CALLInG AND HATRED.

There is no democrat that gava a suggestion for solving a problem. Iraq voted in the Constitution today and in what newspaper is there even any coverage. The "liberal"ress had stated that there would be lots of casualties when the election was going on WRONG AGAIN. The source was probably some lowlife Canadian who has nothing better to do than to bash the president of another country because he doesn't have the freedom in his country to bash his leadership.

So James, where does all your hatred come from? Every person on this thread who disagreed with you you came out lashing out at them hatefully. If you have so much more information about what is going on on the US than the US politicians why don't you come t Washington and have a talk with them. I'm sure Kennedy Durban and Feinstein and a few others would welcome you with open arms.

Why don't you try to ba a little civil and quit attacking everyone who disagrees with you. I guess it may not be true in Canada but in the USA we have the freedom to say and think what we want.

God Bless the USA, but you are probably against that too because the democrats think that is politacally incorrect.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#376 Consumer Comment

Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Vera you quote,

"BenI made the mistake of assuming you were an atheist who was comfortable enough in his non-belief that you could accept the fact that I am a believer, and therefore chose not to pursue that avenue. Apparently, the fact that I'm a believer offends and terrifies you, and the fact that Bush is a believer makes you want to attack me for my beliefs."

If you believe....GREAT! More power too you! You obviously didnt read my post (or at least pay much attention to what was really said.

DO what you want. Believe what you want. We arnt trying to take your sundays, books, churches away. We are just trying to keep you from forcing your sundays, books, and churces into our lives.


JUST STOP FORCING OTHERS TO BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU DO!

Every time I turn around its some jackass saying something like "You dont believe in god??...your not a patriot, your not american, your some sort of homosexual" etc. etc. etc. Now I see a President putting forth these ideals. I see people like you accusing people like me of having no morals and trying to destroy our nation just because we dont have the same attitude about a "god" that you do. Just about every post you make Vera in defence of this shmuck President has some religous laced quote in it. And now, the ultimate insult you pull off is the greatest joke of this "religous right" movement.......

.....The switch, that people like me are "attacking YOU". What a d**n JOKE!. The only thing we are attacking is your attacks on US!!

Let me give you an example...

Two kids are playing in a sandbox. One likes the bucket, one likes the shovel. For hours they play. Both totally content with what THEY LIKE. Then suddenly the kid with the shovel wacks the other kid over the head. The kid with the bucket goes running in to get his mom. She comes out and scolds the kid with the shovel. The kid with the shovels excuse........."I didnt attack him! He's attacking my right to hit him with this shovel! He's the ATTACKER!"

Your angle Vera is disgusting. I'm am totally content with your feelings.....until you try and force them on me. And to say I am the attacker for trying to stop you from forcing them on me is a sham. One that your President now approves of.

In other words...what your trying to say is that....

Athiests infringe on your "right"......to infringe on others rights.

My answer to that......YOUR "GOD" d**n RIGHT WE DO!


I'm sorry, you Christians had your chance to run western civilization and millions died, science was stunted for over 1000 years, people have been displaced, wars have sprung up endlessly, the sun revolved around the Earth (along with everything else) and the Earth was flat, anyone that did not follow religous lines perfectly, was torched, impaled, beheaded, or just general disposed of in horrible ways.


Seems alot easier...and more fair...to just say....

If you believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that believe with you. If you dont believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that dont believe with you.

Ill say it again Vera....Have your Sundays for worship. Have your book to read. Have your holidays and celebrations. But when you bring those Sundays, books, holidays, and celebrations etc. into my life by force either directly to me, or indirectly by hijacking a government "of the PEOPLE", expect me to fight back for my freedom, and my liberty. I didnt kick in the door to your church and tell you that you cant worship anymore. But you people certainly do a good job of kicking in my front door questioning my respect, duty, and love for my country, just because I DONT believe in "god".

I see Bush's foot still sticking in the hole on my front door. At the current rate, it wont be long before the door is down and hes inside completely. So yes, it scares the hell outta me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#375 Consumer Comment

Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Vera you quote,

"BenI made the mistake of assuming you were an atheist who was comfortable enough in his non-belief that you could accept the fact that I am a believer, and therefore chose not to pursue that avenue. Apparently, the fact that I'm a believer offends and terrifies you, and the fact that Bush is a believer makes you want to attack me for my beliefs."

If you believe....GREAT! More power too you! You obviously didnt read my post (or at least pay much attention to what was really said.

DO what you want. Believe what you want. We arnt trying to take your sundays, books, churches away. We are just trying to keep you from forcing your sundays, books, and churces into our lives.


JUST STOP FORCING OTHERS TO BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU DO!

Every time I turn around its some jackass saying something like "You dont believe in god??...your not a patriot, your not american, your some sort of homosexual" etc. etc. etc. Now I see a President putting forth these ideals. I see people like you accusing people like me of having no morals and trying to destroy our nation just because we dont have the same attitude about a "god" that you do. Just about every post you make Vera in defence of this shmuck President has some religous laced quote in it. And now, the ultimate insult you pull off is the greatest joke of this "religous right" movement.......

.....The switch, that people like me are "attacking YOU". What a d**n JOKE!. The only thing we are attacking is your attacks on US!!

Let me give you an example...

Two kids are playing in a sandbox. One likes the bucket, one likes the shovel. For hours they play. Both totally content with what THEY LIKE. Then suddenly the kid with the shovel wacks the other kid over the head. The kid with the bucket goes running in to get his mom. She comes out and scolds the kid with the shovel. The kid with the shovels excuse........."I didnt attack him! He's attacking my right to hit him with this shovel! He's the ATTACKER!"

Your angle Vera is disgusting. I'm am totally content with your feelings.....until you try and force them on me. And to say I am the attacker for trying to stop you from forcing them on me is a sham. One that your President now approves of.

In other words...what your trying to say is that....

Athiests infringe on your "right"......to infringe on others rights.

My answer to that......YOUR "GOD" d**n RIGHT WE DO!


I'm sorry, you Christians had your chance to run western civilization and millions died, science was stunted for over 1000 years, people have been displaced, wars have sprung up endlessly, the sun revolved around the Earth (along with everything else) and the Earth was flat, anyone that did not follow religous lines perfectly, was torched, impaled, beheaded, or just general disposed of in horrible ways.


Seems alot easier...and more fair...to just say....

If you believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that believe with you. If you dont believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that dont believe with you.

Ill say it again Vera....Have your Sundays for worship. Have your book to read. Have your holidays and celebrations. But when you bring those Sundays, books, holidays, and celebrations etc. into my life by force either directly to me, or indirectly by hijacking a government "of the PEOPLE", expect me to fight back for my freedom, and my liberty. I didnt kick in the door to your church and tell you that you cant worship anymore. But you people certainly do a good job of kicking in my front door questioning my respect, duty, and love for my country, just because I DONT believe in "god".

I see Bush's foot still sticking in the hole on my front door. At the current rate, it wont be long before the door is down and hes inside completely. So yes, it scares the hell outta me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#374 Consumer Comment

Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Vera you quote,

"BenI made the mistake of assuming you were an atheist who was comfortable enough in his non-belief that you could accept the fact that I am a believer, and therefore chose not to pursue that avenue. Apparently, the fact that I'm a believer offends and terrifies you, and the fact that Bush is a believer makes you want to attack me for my beliefs."

If you believe....GREAT! More power too you! You obviously didnt read my post (or at least pay much attention to what was really said.

DO what you want. Believe what you want. We arnt trying to take your sundays, books, churches away. We are just trying to keep you from forcing your sundays, books, and churces into our lives.


JUST STOP FORCING OTHERS TO BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU DO!

Every time I turn around its some jackass saying something like "You dont believe in god??...your not a patriot, your not american, your some sort of homosexual" etc. etc. etc. Now I see a President putting forth these ideals. I see people like you accusing people like me of having no morals and trying to destroy our nation just because we dont have the same attitude about a "god" that you do. Just about every post you make Vera in defence of this shmuck President has some religous laced quote in it. And now, the ultimate insult you pull off is the greatest joke of this "religous right" movement.......

.....The switch, that people like me are "attacking YOU". What a d**n JOKE!. The only thing we are attacking is your attacks on US!!

Let me give you an example...

Two kids are playing in a sandbox. One likes the bucket, one likes the shovel. For hours they play. Both totally content with what THEY LIKE. Then suddenly the kid with the shovel wacks the other kid over the head. The kid with the bucket goes running in to get his mom. She comes out and scolds the kid with the shovel. The kid with the shovels excuse........."I didnt attack him! He's attacking my right to hit him with this shovel! He's the ATTACKER!"

Your angle Vera is disgusting. I'm am totally content with your feelings.....until you try and force them on me. And to say I am the attacker for trying to stop you from forcing them on me is a sham. One that your President now approves of.

In other words...what your trying to say is that....

Athiests infringe on your "right"......to infringe on others rights.

My answer to that......YOUR "GOD" d**n RIGHT WE DO!


I'm sorry, you Christians had your chance to run western civilization and millions died, science was stunted for over 1000 years, people have been displaced, wars have sprung up endlessly, the sun revolved around the Earth (along with everything else) and the Earth was flat, anyone that did not follow religous lines perfectly, was torched, impaled, beheaded, or just general disposed of in horrible ways.


Seems alot easier...and more fair...to just say....

If you believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that believe with you. If you dont believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that dont believe with you.

Ill say it again Vera....Have your Sundays for worship. Have your book to read. Have your holidays and celebrations. But when you bring those Sundays, books, holidays, and celebrations etc. into my life by force either directly to me, or indirectly by hijacking a government "of the PEOPLE", expect me to fight back for my freedom, and my liberty. I didnt kick in the door to your church and tell you that you cant worship anymore. But you people certainly do a good job of kicking in my front door questioning my respect, duty, and love for my country, just because I DONT believe in "god".

I see Bush's foot still sticking in the hole on my front door. At the current rate, it wont be long before the door is down and hes inside completely. So yes, it scares the hell outta me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#373 Consumer Comment

Vera

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Vera you quote,

"BenI made the mistake of assuming you were an atheist who was comfortable enough in his non-belief that you could accept the fact that I am a believer, and therefore chose not to pursue that avenue. Apparently, the fact that I'm a believer offends and terrifies you, and the fact that Bush is a believer makes you want to attack me for my beliefs."

If you believe....GREAT! More power too you! You obviously didnt read my post (or at least pay much attention to what was really said.

DO what you want. Believe what you want. We arnt trying to take your sundays, books, churches away. We are just trying to keep you from forcing your sundays, books, and churces into our lives.


JUST STOP FORCING OTHERS TO BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU DO!

Every time I turn around its some jackass saying something like "You dont believe in god??...your not a patriot, your not american, your some sort of homosexual" etc. etc. etc. Now I see a President putting forth these ideals. I see people like you accusing people like me of having no morals and trying to destroy our nation just because we dont have the same attitude about a "god" that you do. Just about every post you make Vera in defence of this shmuck President has some religous laced quote in it. And now, the ultimate insult you pull off is the greatest joke of this "religous right" movement.......

.....The switch, that people like me are "attacking YOU". What a d**n JOKE!. The only thing we are attacking is your attacks on US!!

Let me give you an example...

Two kids are playing in a sandbox. One likes the bucket, one likes the shovel. For hours they play. Both totally content with what THEY LIKE. Then suddenly the kid with the shovel wacks the other kid over the head. The kid with the bucket goes running in to get his mom. She comes out and scolds the kid with the shovel. The kid with the shovels excuse........."I didnt attack him! He's attacking my right to hit him with this shovel! He's the ATTACKER!"

Your angle Vera is disgusting. I'm am totally content with your feelings.....until you try and force them on me. And to say I am the attacker for trying to stop you from forcing them on me is a sham. One that your President now approves of.

In other words...what your trying to say is that....

Athiests infringe on your "right"......to infringe on others rights.

My answer to that......YOUR "GOD" d**n RIGHT WE DO!


I'm sorry, you Christians had your chance to run western civilization and millions died, science was stunted for over 1000 years, people have been displaced, wars have sprung up endlessly, the sun revolved around the Earth (along with everything else) and the Earth was flat, anyone that did not follow religous lines perfectly, was torched, impaled, beheaded, or just general disposed of in horrible ways.


Seems alot easier...and more fair...to just say....

If you believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that believe with you. If you dont believe in God....great. More power too you. Now keep it to yourself and those that dont believe with you.

Ill say it again Vera....Have your Sundays for worship. Have your book to read. Have your holidays and celebrations. But when you bring those Sundays, books, holidays, and celebrations etc. into my life by force either directly to me, or indirectly by hijacking a government "of the PEOPLE", expect me to fight back for my freedom, and my liberty. I didnt kick in the door to your church and tell you that you cant worship anymore. But you people certainly do a good job of kicking in my front door questioning my respect, duty, and love for my country, just because I DONT believe in "god".

I see Bush's foot still sticking in the hole on my front door. At the current rate, it wont be long before the door is down and hes inside completely. So yes, it scares the hell outta me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#372 Consumer Suggestion

Something written by a "Smart American"

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

I could not say it better:

DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?
DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction honey.


Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.

Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.

Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.

Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons to fight us back with?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons. We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.


Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American
corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.

Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.


Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-a*s.

Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.

Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he's not really a legitimate leader anyway.

Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.

Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.

Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.

Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.

Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men? Fifteen of them Saudi Arabians? hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.


Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands for stealing bread.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.

Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers.

Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.

Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.

Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.

Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.

Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.

Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.

Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good night.

Q: Good night, Daddy.

Good Night Americans.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#371 Consumer Comment

if you can't present hard, factual evidence that supports your claim, then shut up and let the grown-ups talk.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

Sigh....

Still have nothing to say, eh, James?

You come on here, and attack other people, telling me I'm full of s**t (I'll bet your eyes are bugged and brown). What a big man you are. Yet still, my challenges remain unapproached.

Go home and lay down before you hurt yourself.

You have proven nothing, other than you can spin the subject of the post in this direction or that by splitting hairs. Your thought process is as bent as your business ethic. Your apologies are counterproductive and as worthless as your claim that you're honorable.

So if you can't present hard, factual evidence that supports your claim, then shut up and let the grown-ups talk. We know already that you agree with the terrorists' methods of warfare, and that you think the terrorists are in the right. We already know you think "America got what's coming to it", and that you think our President is an a*****e. Move on to presenting a real solution to the problem, as you seem to think you have the right, sitting on your no doubt generous a*s up there in "The Great White North". Say something more than "Get out of Iraq!", as we have already proven the potential outcome of that measure. Come on, if you're so smart. Present you facts intelligently, and i might even read the whole post!

If you can do nothing more than flame and insult, then it should behoove you to keep your yap shut.
Even I think the flaming is getting out of hand...and I'm one of the flamers!

Maybe next time you're feeling your oats because one woman didn't return fire, you'll think twice before attacking another and expecting the same result. But then I'm making the fatal assumption you could possibly have some kind of tact, aren't I?

Put up or shut up, you shyster.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#370 Consumer Comment

Hey James, at least you're good joke material!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 17, 2005

James,

"Nukes from Africa"? "wmd's" ? "naplam" ?

What are you talking about? Where?? Where??? Have you even read the speeches?? No you didn't. By the way, I don't think there is such a thing as "Naplam". You are so stupid James, I bet you bring toilet paper to play "craps". Apparently, your reaction time is longer than your attention span! your responses are as sensible as a football bat! I feel like our exchanges are like "playing house" - you pretend to be the door then I slam you. I bet that blondes tell "stupid" jokes about you! I could go on but I imagine it's pointless. . . you don't have the intelligence to "catch on".

I'll make you a deal, James; If you post anything that is based on reality and show me where you are getting your "quotes" from, I will post a more mature response, as I would gladly debate the topic(s) of the original post in a more dignified manner, but, if you continue to mistake your anti-psychotic meds for jelly beans I can't, it's not that I don't want to, I just can't debate "points" that don't exist. So, relax, have your dog teach you a new trick or two, read . . . something, and respond in a manner that deserves a more dignified response than this, and we shall have a wonderful exchange of nothing you will ever comprehend.

Until I receive your response, (oooh, the anticipation!) I will leave a little thought provoking material for the others reading these posts. I recently came across one of John Kerry's memo's regarding the latest commitee he formed in order to examine and stop redundancy in the government. It reads as follows:

Attn.: Fellow Democrats

The Committee for the Reduction of Redundancy and the Antiproliferation of Repetition has decided not to meet until we have our first meeting and thus will not be meeting until the first time.

In our Pre-meeting Statement, we wanted to make this clear before we had our first meeting, so that it would not be unorganized or confusing.

So our first meeting will actually be our first meeting and we will not have a meeting before the first meeting.

This should avoid having people show up for our first meeting before it is held, since to do so would be confusing to those who did so and this is what we want to avoid by reducing the confusion and lessening the repetition.

Thank you,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#369 Consumer Suggestion

Vera you don't have to remind me

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 16, 2005

Vera;

I don't need to be reminded of what I have said. I have made mistakes & I have apologised for them. I know I have gone off subject & I made a point of that fact.

The thread began with & still is on the subject of Bush invading a soverign Country & how it was for the purpose of oil.

Again I guess I need to say it that you are full of s**t if you are pointing fingers at Canada as harboring terrorists. I have already given you an example where Canada has a much higher level of security than the USA does on that subject. Actually 2, as I told ya about how hard it is for me to get my own "birth certificate" & I have mentioned more than once the more Police per capita here in Canada. I guess your skull is just too thick!

Again you basically have nothing to say to support your issues. I guess that might be because you really don't have any anymore. So now your just into picking apart what I say that makes sense to the average normal person. Too bad your not one of them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#368 UPDATE EX-employee responds

Shawn... I hope you were trying to show where Bush is an absolute fraud, as that is the proof you posted.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 16, 2005

Shawn;

You just brought out the proof in the speaches good ol George made that were "total fabrications & lies" & you are using this to what goal? I hope you were trying to show where Bush is an absolute fraud, as that is the proof you posted.

No nukes from Africa! None! That has been proven! No WMD's as B already pointed out. Total lies & fabrications!

Where can you show that the USA should have these weapons & other Countries cannot? What do you think Naplam is? Is it a weapon of "mass destruction"? Is it biological? You never think about that do you? The fact is Suddam did not have these weapons. My point is "What if he did"?

The USA has no interest in the Middle East, other than oil. None! There are worse things going on right now in other parts of the world & your press doesn't even report it. Stop proving my points Shawn if you don't wanna be on my side!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#367 Consumer Suggestion

James... although I agree with you

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

James;

Bud you have every right to be so upset. I agree with what you say. However I have to cut it off at Revolution. If the rules were followed, as "B" suggests & the people actually came more into having a say in what is going on in your Country, you might have it going on!

However, in my mind, how much time you spent in the Military & whether your kids chose that for their own lives is not a real issue.

People join the Millitary for their own guided or "misguided" reasons, & many are too young to even know what they are fighting for. At least, at this point, there is no draft.

Yea I git ya! If yer so into this war that you really think you are doing the right thing... why aren't your daughers backing you up by joining the Military?

I will not be the one to dispute you on the fact that they are simply "pompass asses" who are only worried about power & oil. That should be obvious from a Govenor from Texas!

Like George did not know who "Bin Laden" was before the war? What a f**king joke! He knew very well! Even if he was dumb as a rock, he was briefed when he took office, but he claimed he did not know of the guy after he took office. Your right! He is a liar! He is a Dictator! He is destroying your Country! No putting ya down there!

The situation goes past Politics. It is now the desire of the American people to stand up & say "This is wrong & we are not standing for it anymore!". No Revolution needed.

We can do it! We ended Vietnam! We can end this too! Nixon... Bush... same people. Only Bush learned from Nixon. Bush is not really an idiot. He is doing this for his own puposes. It gains him money. Now when the dust settles, he will still be protected & rich. Never mind the people who died. He will go to his grave & guess what he will leave his ancestors? ALL OF IT!

That is what is dumb!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#366 Consumer Comment

Let the man speak!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

James(both)

I am soooo tired of your infantile comments that I am just gonna let the man speak for himself... Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the United States, George W. Bush :

This is what he said to us:

"...Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. A brutal dictator, with a history of reckless aggression, with ties to terrorism, with great potential wealth, will not be permitted to dominate a vital region and threaten the United States. (Applause.)

Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost. To spare himself, he agreed to disarm of all weapons of mass destruction. For the next 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement. He pursued chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, even while inspectors were in his country. Nothing to date has restrained him from his pursuit of these weapons -- not economic sanctions, not isolation from the civilized world, not even cruise missile strikes on his military facilities.

Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world. The 108 U.N. inspectors were sent to conduct -- were not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq's regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons, lay those weapons out for the world to see, and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened.

The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary; he is deceiving. From intelligence sources we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspection sites and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.

Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. Intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with U.N. inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.

Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate, or attack.

With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.

We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)

Tonight I have a message for the men and women who will keep the peace, members of the American Armed Forces: Many of you are assembling in or near the Middle East, and some crucial hours may lay ahead. In those hours, the success of our cause will depend on you. Your training has prepared you. Your honor will guide you. You believe in America, and America believes in you. (Applause.)

Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means -- sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military -- and we will prevail. (Applause.)

And as we and our coalition partners are doing in Afghanistan, we will bring to the Iraqi people food and medicines and supplies -- and freedom. (Applause.)

Many challenges, abroad and at home, have arrived in a single season. In two years, America has gone from a sense of invulnerability to an awareness of peril; from bitter division in small matters to calm unity in great causes. And we go forward with confidence, because this call of history has come to the right country.

Americans are a resolute people who have risen to every test of our time. Adversity has revealed the character of our country, to the world and to ourselves. America is a strong nation, and honorable in the use of our strength. We exercise power without conquest, and we sacrifice for the liberty of strangers...."
-State of the Union Address
Jan. 28, 2003




President Bush's address to the United Nations
September 12, 2002 Posted: 11:37 AM EDT (1537 GMT)


Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped by the might of coalition forces and the will of the United Nations.

To suspend hostilities, to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear to him and to all, and he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge, by his deceptions and by his cruelties, Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself.

In 1991, Security Council Resolution 688 demanded that the Iraqi regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the systematic repression of minorities, which the council said threatened international peace and security in the region. This demand goes ignored.

Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that Iraq continues to commit extremely grave violations of human rights and that the regime's repression is all-pervasive.

Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation and rape.

Wives are tortured in front of their husbands; children in the presence of their parents; and all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state.

In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke this promise.

Last year, the Secretary General's high-level coordinator for this issue reported that Kuwaiti, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini and Armeni nationals remain unaccounted for; more than 600 people. One American pilot is among them.

In 1991, the U.N. Security Council through Resolution 687 demanded that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq.

Iraq's regime agreed that broke this promise.

In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran, Israel and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder.

In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Amir of Kuwait and a former American president. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September 11. And Al Qaeda terrorists escaped from Afghanistan and are known to be in Iraq.

In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long range missiles and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections.

Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge.

From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with scud warheads, aerial bombs and aircraft spray tanks.

U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

United Nations' inspections also reviewed that Iraq like maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.

And in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War.

We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993.

Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its nuclear program, weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, and accounting of nuclear materials and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon.

Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year.

And Iraq's state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons.

Iraq also possesses a force of SCUD type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N. Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long range missiles that can inflict mass death throughout the region.

In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council Resolutions.

In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself and to buy arms for his country.

By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens. In 1991, Iraq promised U.N. inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to verify Iraq's commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and long range missiles. Iraq broke this promise, spending seven years deceiving, evading and harassing U.N. inspectors before ceasing cooperation entirely.

Just months after the 1991 cease-fire, the Security Council twice renewed its demand that the Iraqi regime cooperate fully with inspectors, condemning Iraq's serious violations of its obligations.

The Security Council again renewed that demand in 1994, and twice more in 1996, deploring Iraq's clear violations of its obligations. The Security Council renewed its demand three more times in 1997, citing flagrant violations, and three more times in 1998, calling Iraq's behavior totally unacceptable. And in 1999, the demand was renewed yet again.

As we meet today, it's been almost four years since the last U.N. inspector set foot in Iraq -- four years for the Iraqi regime to plan and to build and to test behind the cloak of secrecy. We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left?

The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein regime is a grave and gathering danger.

To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble, and this is a risk we must not take.

Delegates to the General Assembly, we have been more than patient. We've tried sanctions. We've tried the carrot of oil for food and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction.

The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming.

The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment.

Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced or cast aside without consequence?

Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding or will it be irrelevant?

The United States help found the United Nations. We want the United Nations to be effective and respectful and successful. We want the resolutions of the world's most important multilateral body to be enforced. And right now those resolutions are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime.

Our partnership of nations can meet the test before us by making clear what we now expect of the Iraqi regime.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles and all related material.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it -- as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including s**+'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkemens and others -- again, as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown.

It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues as required by Security Council resolutions.

If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people.

If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq and it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis, a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty and internationally supervised elections.

The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. They've suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal.

The people of Iraq deserve it. The security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest. And open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq.

We can harbor no illusions, and that's important today to remember. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in 1990. He's fired ballistic missiles at Iran and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel. His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15 and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. He has gassed many Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages.

My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately, decisively to hold Iraq to account. We will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolutions.

But the purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced, the just demands of peace and security will be met or action will be unavoidable and a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power.

Events can turn in one of two ways. If we fail to act in the face of danger, the people of Iraq will continue to live in brutal submission. The regime will have new power to bully and dominate and conquer its neighbors, condemning the Middle East to more years of bloodshed and fear. The regime will remain unstable -- the region will remain unstable, with little hope of freedom and isolated from the progress of our times.

With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorists allies, then the attacks of September 11 would be a prelude to far greater horrors.

If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world. These nations can show by their example that honest government and respect for women and the great Islamic tradition of learning can triumph in the Middle East and beyond. And we will show that the promise of the United Nations can be fulfilled in our time.

Neither of these outcomes is certain. Both have been set before us. We must choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security and for the permanent rights and the hopes of mankind.

-President addresses the U.N.
Sept. 12, 2002


This is the url to the joint resolution

www.merln.ndu.edu/MERLN/PFIraq/houseresolution.pdf

Now, what did you say?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#365 Consumer Comment

You have only your own half wit remarks to blame

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

James from Cgary, Ben, Jon, etc.,:

It is obvious that you are liberal, democrat supporters, just as I am certain that you find it obvious that I am a supporter of the republican party(I have not always been, it is just that I find the democrats have gone waaaaay left)Somehow, you have gotten the idea that means that I support this "war" in Iraq. The truth is, I don't!...but, I do support our troops, and our president. I don't believe that our president, or the house and senate, made the right choice when they(he) sent our troops to Iraq. I don't believe that it was a good time for us to go to "war" from either a fiscally responsible standpoint, or a foreign policy standpoint. That does not mean, however, that decision to go to Iraq was either illegal, or immoral.

None of you have taken the time to look at things from an objective viewpoint and judge the facts in an honest and open-minded manner. Instead, you are spewing hate-filled irrelevant "information" that I "fell for" hook, line, and sinker. You have managed to have me waste my time responding to your lies, rather than offering my own insights on the original text of this "posting." Instead of "breezing by" your "points of ponderance," I, for some unknown reason, felt the need to "correct" your false statements, half-truths, and outright lies. You have managed to drag me into such irrelevant topics such as the politics of Canada (which you are wrong about, James - read a book! ,)to some out of context statements made by Delay(who is a little far right for most of my beliefs anyway.) In fact, you have managed to keep me so far off topic that, as already mentioned, I have not yet responded to the original post and it's obvious misrepresentation of our president and vice president.

So, to all of you I have this to say: If you want to continue "patting each other on the back"(or kissing each other's backsides is more like it) for each time one of you finds some "new" lie or half-truth posted on the internet or "blurbed" on some left-wing "news" program, or even better, a "quote" which, when heard on its own without ANY knowledge of the context in which it was spoken, makes the orator sound to be "stupid, or "radically right". . . go ahead!!

Even though being corrected, and exposed for the liars, spinners, and uneducated armchair political (non)analysts that you are, upsets you to the point that you feel the need to personally attack those who contest you with fact, reason, and truth, I will still be here. Your lies and misquotes will not "scare me away." Your name calling and unsubstantiated ridicule for my honesty and factual input will not "scare me away." Certainly, reading your opinionated, unsubstantiated, mis representative lies without any basis of fact will not "scare me away." Instead, these are the reasons that I keep coming back! I cannot leave you and your kind to continue spewing forth your hatred and lies in the hopes that some poor, wretched soul of low intellectual capacity (I imagine this would be someone you can identify with) should stumble upon this post and, just as you at one time did (and still do,) accept it as truth without any further research or alternate opinion being offered. These are the reasons that I must stay . . . to offer an alternate point of view, one that is based solidly on fact and truth, resulting from research performed with an intellectual capacity which allows for an objective, open-minded approach.

In short, if you truly do take offense to my "two cents" being posted on this thread, your solution is quite simple . . . quit lying, spinning and misrepresenting, then I will no longer be able to challenge anything you write, and thus my "posts" will only be of use to "back you up," in which case I imagine you would be happy to hear my "side.

One final note on this subject and then I will "move on." It has been my experience, that those who are honest and write only of that which they know, do not generally mind being questioned on their writings. On the other hand, those that deceive and try to hide the truth, most often become defensive and agitated at another input, especially when it is not in line with their own.

Now, if you don't mind, I will first place my logical, fact-based opinion regarding the original post, then, should time permit, tear your lies apart and expose them for the liberal, hate filled spew that they are.

Holy sh*#! I just now noticed that it was "Tupper Lake James" that started all this. I didn't realize that it was such a brilliant mind that made this original statement. (Take note of the sarcasm - just like "honor others have bestowed on us") Now James, when gas prices went from $1.15 to $2.25 a gallon during Clinton's second term in the oval office did you blame him? The truth is that the president (whether he is democrat or republican) does not control the price of gasoline. That is controlled by the world market, generally set by O.P.E.C. at the price per barrel (crude) level, and then the refineries located here take that, refine it, and sell it to their independently owned "gas stations" at an (albeit sometimes ridiculously high) mark up, and they in turn sell it to us the consumers at a, once again, marked up price. The president of the United States, nor any other country, has anything to do with the price.

"Oh, but 'they' are all his friends!" I'm sure would be your rant. I know several people in the retail business that I consider friends, I too am in the retail business and ya know what James . . . nobody but me sets the prices on my merchandise. Nope, not even if the president told me to raise or lower my prices would I have to. There are some factors that are beyond my control which I must take into consideration . . . like taxes, my costs on a large number of items, not the least of which is my mortgage and my merchandise, let's not forget about staff, and payroll taxes. Then there are also those who have additional costs due to environmental regulations, affirmative action, and other government forced "programs" which of course were put in place by the "constitutionally armed" left wing. After that, it is a delicate balance between remaining competitive in my chosen market, and maximizing my profits. It does not matter how large or how small of a business it is, nobody has to ask the president to raise or lower their prices. Although I am certain that you would like to blame George W. Bush for the high price of gas your postings are not reflective of anything bearing resemblance to a true statement and thus, a non issue.

Regarding the "surplus" that was left behind by Clinton: Yes, it is true that there was a surplus left behind, let's analyze it shall we? In 2000, Clinton and the democrats estimated that there would be a budget surplus of approximately 187 billion dollars at the end of fiscal year 2002. In truth, after all was said and done, the budget surplus was only 47 billion dollars of which the actual figures totaling a little more than a 100 million-dollar deficit. Now, subtract the amount that was needed to replenish our dwindling munitions and other military shortcomings left high and dry by slick willy (approximately 49.6 billion dollars) and we were waaaaay far into a deficit. Don't forget that we haven't even begun to add the costs of 9/11. So, your argument about Bush taking . . . Clinton's huge surplus and putting us in the red . . . is void of fact and thus, a non issue.

I won't even bother with your stealing the election B.S. as we all know that's just a b***h and moan third grade equivalent to a do over because the democrats LOST, but your bit about our president's claim that there were weapons of mass destruction and that was untrue I do think I can shed some light on. To start with, that was only one of many reasons that were given for the need to go into Iraq, but that is the one point that all you Bush haters seem to think you've got under your belt that proves our president to be a liar. Yes, think you have. If you would take note of his state of the Union speech, you would realize that he never stated that Iraq definitely without question had weapons of mass destruction. He said that he believed that they did, he said that intelligence reports that they did, he even went as far as to say that they must be disarmed of any, and all weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, later on in his speech he said:

Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we don't know exactly, and that's the problem.

He made the same statement before the house and senate. So, as you can see, he did not snow the American people such as those who lie, spin, and misinform would have you believe, he stated several times that he did not know. Thus your statement about him lying about wmd's is false and therefor, a non issue.

I will sum the rest of this up really quickly . . . 1. Bush is not a dictator, that would be the Iraqi leaders definition, Bush was elected by the American people and serves this republic legitimately as our president. 2. Just your opinion, I won't argue that, but next time you want to toss around the word a**hole, you should probably have a mirror close by. 3.This is the United States of America dumdum, and we haven't had the draft in many, many years. Maybe you should make yourself aware of the present year before you open your mouth. Therefore, upon examination of these points, well . . . nonissues.

So, although I do not agree that we should be in this war, although I think it a shame that our troops are in Iraq and we are losing lives every day, although I don't agree that there was as much a threat to the United States of America as George W. Bush thought there was, and, although I think that this war is costing us more than we can afford to pay, I do think that your rambles are nothing more than those of a left-wing, Bush-hating, self-righteous, ignorant hack who takes joy and pride in the lies and venomous spew you regurgitate without fact or foundation, and therefore I believe that you, and your opinions, are nonissues.

Now on to the lighter side of our pleonastic polemic. I know this has been a generous post, but you have left me no alternative . . .you attack, I respond. You lie, and I correct.

Ashley, welcome. I am happy to have another view interjected into this string of posts. I am, however, disappointed that anyone would be happy to see the leader of our country indicted on any charges. Looking back, at the time of Clinton's impeachment, I was quite upset with the republican party for what they did. Not that I don't think Willy was guilty, it's just that it brought such shame to all of the United States and we, her people. If your statement is true, it should be a sad day for all Americans, party lines aside. This would only send a statement to the world that says none of our politicians can be trusted (not that I would find that statement untrue, but that is not what we should present to the rest of the world.) I could not help but detect your joy at this . . . how full of hate do you have to be? Tsk tsk.

B I thank you for your intellectual insight and auspicious orthography. Surely your witticism and pedagogy coalesce with your genius ( of which I am in awe . . . , and your modesty, to downplay it prior to penning your actual IQ . . . simply brilliant! By the way, tell MENSA that I said hello. The only problem that I have found with your last post is the logic of which you wrote seemed to be in a deficiency of such. Please do not misconstrue my explication de text as an assault against your person, but alternatively, an accessorial perspective scribed by a surreptitious protagonist. I have savored perusing your posts as they were e'er set up with perceptible forethought giving show of a compos mentis. Tho' oftentimes close-minded, the cornerstone for your sterile, yet amusive postings were mostly offered. Your example of logic was naive' and infantile at best, although (and the assumption made here is that we are dealing with normal' people) correct. However, I discovered that when absorbing offered information from the blatantly biased advocates of left ideology, the general consensus of understood logic by which the sane populous must cipher statements belched by said democratic party proponents should be as follows; if p' is true and q' is false, then p' and q' are some good statements to make as p' will certainly divert others attention from q', AND if q' is noticed as false and p' is not reaffirmed in the positive, then p' is to be reiterated and proposed as equal to any nonexistent proof that q' is indeed true. By the way B', we are not a gaggle of the under educated thoughtless masses that I'm certain you are usually able to baffle with your bullshit. We (excluding the two James') have the ability to look past your wordy prose to see that most of your statements are void of any relevance and seething with an animosity toward anyone that challenges your swollen pseudo intellect. I do thank you for your err in assuming that the statement you were so quick to judge my logic on was entirely that of my own thought process, but alas, I was merely paraphrasing the works of William Dembski in the interest of saving space/print. I guess I should have known that you would take anything written and try to rip into any small portion not specifically proven as fact (which I am not, nor have I ever claimed to be, the only one in possession of, but I have alluded to the suggestion that, unlike the left' on this site, I choose to use it as a basis of my opinions.)

James from Calgary: I would have a more reasoned response to you but, to be quite frank, I don't know what the hell you are trying to prove, disprove, make point of, or even comment on! You have attributed several quote throughout these posts as mine (which most weren't) and then maliciously and libelously attacked on those basis. Basically, in response to all of your spew, I have but one comment with which to answer your posts, and I want to assure you, that I have taken all the time and consideration that you apparently do before sitting at your pc and sharing your thoughts. So, James, to you I say this . . . purple plastic pants parted previously promised political pundits!??! (:-) -???

Ben, it is obvious to me that you are an intelligent, educated man with a passion for your ideology. I have no quarrels with you (except that my name is Shawn, not Jason.) I just hope that, although it comes from the other side, you can take one piece of advice from me - stop trying to discredit your opponents with trashy blurbs which you have found on the internet. It is obvious by your writings (the few that were your own) that your intellect and ability to communicate your thoughts in a reasoned manner make you by far the most capable member of the left side to debate thoughts and opinions of others, without turning to insult and malicious conjecture as your only choice of rebuttal. I do also wish to take up a point is I may and ask you for your reasoning behind the following question:
How is it that by me choosing to recognize my God and follow His teachings I am infringing on your rights? Nobody (in government) has told you that you have to believe as I/they do. On the other hand, you have repeatedly called my beliefs foolish(paraphrase) and taken away my rights to, and to have my children: pray in school, publically display symbols of faith, have my beliefs taught as an alternative to Darwinism, etc. Is your belief that there is no God so fragile that you fear the very mention of Him in your presence? I have many times been challenged on my beliefs, been forced' to listen to and learn theory which has been proven wrong, ridiculed, discriminated against, and abused both verbally and physically, yet I do not see any constitutional protection that allows me and my children to recognize our deity when and where we want, no protection from my children being taught( by the public school system) that which is contrary to our beliefs, and no protection from those of you who challenge' my beliefs. Furthermore, how is it that the constitution can protect the rights of those who wish to place, wherever they see fit, material which I find pornographic, lewd, pervasive, disgusting and immoral, in short - offensive, yet it does not offer me those rights as soon as it is a Bible I wish to place in those same locations?
One final thought (No, not trying to be like Jerry) You state that the government has no business in our bedrooms!' and I agree 100%. I don't however understand what that means because as far as I can tell, the government doesn't go into anybody's bedrooms (and I think your inferences to the inquisition are a little out dated) instead, we have hoards of people out parading down the street chanting their sexuality. It sounds to me like they are bringing their bedrooms into the government. Maybe there should be a separation of sex and state.

P.S. The belief that there was at any time some constitutional amendment or law passed by house, senate, and president, that there is to be a separation of church and state is false. Therefore, as a matter of law, any decisions of the courts based on that statement are not legally binding or enforceable. Post the ten commandments wherever, whenever you want - we have a constitutional right to do so! :)

God Bless America

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#364 Consumer Comment

James needs to take a Ba'ath. the Big Wind from Up North

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

More of the Big Wind from Up North...one long post, of nothin' nothin' nothin' (especially if you strip it of the insults and personal attacks.).

"Ok well first of all, let me thank "B" for explaining the rules as far as Presidents going to war. They just ignore them. Hmm typical!"

Yet technically, it doesn't really incriminate the President. Funny thing though, the majority of those who voted to undergo the war process are the largest detractors. Honestly, I think it's all about the Left's agenda to divide America (which doesn't mean "Canada"), making it easier to manipulate.

"I have to agree with you on the IQ thing. I have never found a human being that could "honestly" understand the power of the human brain, & so I find it hard to believe it can be measured."

Interesting. Besides...you wouldn't want to potentially offend a person whom you view as a supporter of your own ideas. Funny thing is, as I have mentioned, "B." appears to be in total agreement with neither you nor I; but since he has mentioned how I'm "unpatriotic" by stating that those who don't like it here have the option to leave, he seems to think I support "exclusivism" or "elitism". Really, I don't. And I don't want to change, alter, or trample the Constitution, either. (What part of "excercising their option" did you not understand? I didn't threaten "If Bush gets elected, I'm leaving the country!" Like some of the Glitterati has.)

I'm just sick of hearing the whining and the bullshit coming off all these Leftie-Oriented losers, "Pull out! Get out of Iraq!" As "B." has stated, it would only serve to make matters worse, if we were to pull out now. (And yes, Clinton proved that, as Bin laden has said "America is no more than a paper tiger, that flees at the sight of it's own blood." That's why I used it in one of my posts.)

Here's a thought: how about presenting an idea that'll actually work! It has to create a solution for both sides, not just the whiny lefties! I don't know exactly what to do, myselfbut I know bitching accomplishes NOTHING.

"Oh for Vera & Shawn & all the others that want facts... I am not sure of the facts you need."

What a surprise. What, you can't read/understand when a question is presented? It starts with, for example, "Prove to me, unequivocally, that Iraq has no means by which to produce ANY kind of WMD. Prove to me, they never had them." You get to figure out where to find the info, like the rest of us do. But you're too damned lazy or content in your position...God forbid, you actually find out you might be in err!

Then why are you posting here? I'll take your stance, in your approach to Patrick from Az., and Wally, From Australia: "You have nothing to do with Bush, America, or the War. So butt out of the Posts." (Funny, the UK isn't part of North America, but since his opinion matches yours, Liam is welcome here. Isn't that odd? And don't try the whole "England is part of the War!" Bit; Wally said he's got countrymen there, too, and you rebuffed him, James. What makes the losses of Australia's countrymen somehow lesser than the losses of England? Canada? The US?) But you can't stay away...that ugly gash under your nose seems to need to open, spilling its venomous sewage onto a post that doesn't concern you.

"Do I have to bring out the books & quote them to you? If I did go to all that trouble, I can assure you that either Vera or Robert or Shawn would shoot back that it was "Leftist Propaganda" which does not fit with Republican thought in any way!"

Help! I've been plagiarized!!! Darlin', come up with your own material. I said that many moons ago.

"This thread is not about Clinton vs Bush or Kerry for that matter. It's not about "latch key kids" or birth control. It's not about the right to bear arms or whether evolution is taught in schools. It's not about appointments to the Supreme Court or how Canada's government is run differently than the USA. Its not about who has got the highest IQ, or who made the first Supersonic Jet. Its not about n**i Germany or guns shipped to Niqarauga. Its not about Nuclear bombs or Neutron bombs or WMD's" (Many of these subjects, by the way, were primarily introduced by YOU, James.)

God dangit! I told you to get your own material. The only reason this thread has changed at all, is because people like you (James of Canada) take a vague reference and run with it, distracting the other people's posts with it. If you want attention, talk to a therapist. You clearly need the help.

I'm not the one trying to force anyone to agree with me; I posted once, was attacked, and you clearly didn't expect me to fight back. That's the only reason people like you attack in the first place...because you're the King of the sucker punch. It's not my fault you blinked. You remind me of a guy that can't fight for himself, only acting tough when enough of his friends intervene and you know you're safe from harm.

"What this thread is about is the direction the USA is going & whether it is a correct course to go on or not."

Wrong again, Genius...it's about some a*****e in Tupperville whining about the prices of gas, and the fact that he thinks this war is exclusively for oil. Then the little chimp tries to take some sort of artificial stand on how the President is "...dumb, a moron, a drunk, a killer, a greedy rich-guy..." the list goes on. Read the title, O Educated Man of Cana-DUH. Doesn't leave much to interpret. But considering the way you understand things, you'll read all that and more into it.

"The young woman asks why people don't write in or call their Politicians & voice their opinions, rather than post comments about these things on this thread."

I have done this...several times. E-mails, and handwritten letters. I have signed petitions--many of them, all in support of our Constitutional rights, issues, and so forth. What have you done, besides piss and moan, calling Americans cowards? Can you imagine the sheer number of e-mails and letters that arrive daily, with the same message, begging for a different solution to our current crises?

"This is something I have personally promoted, as I "myself" do not have a say in American politics. However as a Canadian I am affected much the same."

Not really. Canada gives free room to terrorists. Like I've said. You're a criminal's best friend. If you're affected much the same, stop lending aid and comfort to our enemies.

"Therefore "for me" this is the best forum to make my voice heard on the subject."

You think our government reads the Rip Off Reports? Here's a thought. Write a letter to our Government to direct them here. After they see your bleating and farting, I'm sure they'll make a correction to policy! "Oh, NO! Some shyster car-ad salesman from Calgary thinks our work is crooked! Oh, Dear Oh, Dear Oh, Dear!"

"Oh well, & finally for Patrick. I tried replying probably 6 times. The posts will not go up. Vera (knowing she has lost the battle here) went there to drum up support for her issue, as she has so few people on her side in this thread."

Post what I wrote, James--ALL of it...I don't see anywhere in my posts over there that state I'm losing and I need help. I don't see a "lose" or a "win" side in a debate such as this. There is your beliefs, my beliefs, Robert's beliefs, "B." has his beliefs, Ben has his, and so on. I'm not trying to make you believe as I do; I'm showing you why I believe as I do. I don't believe any ONE source is all-knowing and correct, news-wise. I believe, that I invited Wally here to see how you think, get a laugh, and welcomed his post--WHETHER OR NOT IT AGREED WITH MINE, I didn't care.

Your stupidity is like some apocalyptic beacon...it has a tendency to draw attention to itself. Those that want to help are naturally attracted...you know, the whole train-wreck thing.

"I therefore wish to stay on topic & I ask those who believe I need some sort of "proof" that occupying someones homeland causes terrorism, that you instead give me proof why it does not."

We've done so (even "B." has..you called him a "plant", then backpedaled because you didn't want him to turn his wrath on you.). You choose to ignore it or call it "spin". Don't bother asking me "where" as I'll only tell you to re-read the whole thread to find it for yourself.

To the vaudevillian commentary of Tupper Lake's pride: Bush you will GO TO HELL whenever you die!
Last time I checked, that's not a decision that's up to you.
Still waiting for the facts you have to present, proving that this war is for the reasons you stated in the original post. I'll bet I've got one hell of a long wait in front of me, hunh? I won't hold my breath.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#363 Consumer Comment

From "Anybody but Bush" to "Anybody but God". Give me a break.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

President Bush, on Athiests:

When George Bush Esq. was campaigning for the presidency in August of 1987, one of his stops was in Chicago, where he held a formal outdoor news conference. (Robert I. Sherman is a reporter for the American Atheist news journal.)

Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are Atheists?

Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the Atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are Atheists?

Bush: No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.

Sherman: (somewhat taken aback) Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?

Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on Atheists.

After Bush won the election, American atheists asked that he consider being sworn into office with his hand resting reverently upon the Constitution instead of the Holy Bible, and also asked him to retract his statement from August of 1987. Bush had one of his administrative assistants write back: "As you are aware, the President is a religious man who neither supports atheism nor believes that atheism should be unnecessarily encouraged or supported by the government."
So my kid can't pray in school, and it's a crime to say, one nation under God in the eyes of an atheist. Fine. Stop trying to force others to believe there is no God. If you don't like prayer, don't go to Church, and if possible, excuse yourself from the presence of prayer. Is it that hard?
See again, my post regarding actual mention of a wall of separation between Church and State; it is the freedom from the very oppressive religion and government of England. Freedom OF, not from, religion. It isn't mentioned in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence that religion is a no-no. That's the data I got, and if you don't like it, too bad.
Some kids will take lumps for being atheists, and some will take lumps for believing in God. But it's okay to be killed because you believe in God, right? But not if you're an atheist, oh, no!
No wonder atheists hate the Bush family! Their personal beliefs in a Sovereign God are more important to them than the votes of the Godless. Good for them! I don't agree with our current's choice in Ms. Meirs, (at least B. and I can also agree there) but I sure am glad my Commander-In-Chief believes in God. I can only hope the remains of Madalyn Murray-O'hair are rattling away in a snake-filled vault (as I heard she's terrified of snakes, but who cares if that's true?)!

Even when that foul-mouthed, overbearing witch was interred, her son William, whom she had disowned for having accepted Jesus Christ respected her choices in life so much as to have no religious connotations in her entombment (she was put in a vaultdo we still call that buried?). Ironically, Madalyn considered herself a free-thinker; as long as that freedom of thought was used to agree with her. I suppose that's why she disavowed her own flesh and blood, and likened it to a post-partum abortion, on the part of the Mother, I guess; I repudiate him entirely and completely, for now and all timeshe is beyond human forgiveness.

So repulsive, she even ousted fellow atheists for not following her ideas the way she thought they should. Again, that free-thinking reaches around to bite her on that copious rump of hers. Even the organization she founded, American Atheists is seeking to distance itself from being associated with her, she is so utterly repugnant.

When she dropped off the planet in late '95, the rumor was that they had fleeced the organization; then they tried to blame it on Christians. As it had turned out, an Office manager named David waters had been found, pled guilty to a lesser charge, and told where he and his accomplices had hidden the bodies (then, later, he told them where to find the bodies of his accomplices). The O'hairs had been so badly brutalized, the Son and William's daughter had to be identified by their dental records, and Madalyn was identified by the serial number on her prosthetic hip.

So it wasn't the Christians (fundamental or otherwise) who were responsible for the murders, and the half-mil-or-so that was embezzled by David Waters was stolen by some teenagers who'd found where he had hidden it. Madalyn Murray-O'hair was done in by one of her own. When O'Hair found out he [Waters] had stolen some bonds long before the murders, she could find all the dirt on Waters she wanted. Too bad she couldn't have pulled a preemptive strike, and done that before she had hired him. I guess, if you're Madalyn Murray-O'hair, it's more important to be able to run a smear-campaign. She was quite good at that. I guess we could call it a post-theft background check on the part of the Mother of the atheistic credo.

Looks like even the atheist religion has its Judas.

Last I checked, too. Jesus wasn't some foul-mouthed amoral lackwit who wanted to steal Hustler Magazine, and as I recall, I don't think Jesus had written any articles to same about masturbating (of which I'm sure, Madalyn was an axpert.).

Ultimate justice? If I could find it, I would hope that when David Waters died of lung cancer in 2003, he confessed his sins and accepted Jesus Christ before succumbing to the beckonings of death. Priceless.

I'll tell you the same thing, Bennieread the original post's title. This isn't about God, it's about Bush's presidency taking us to war over oil and high gas prices. I don't care if you're mad that Bush and his family don't care about the atheist votes. Take it up with them, instead of attacking me out of frustration. I don't give a d**n about the atheist vote, either. Vote what you like. I'll vote what I like.
If you're not happy with that, sound against a wallit'll do just as good.

I apologize of only one thing to you, BenI made the mistake of assuming you were an atheist who was comfortable enough in his non-belief that you could accept the fact that I am a believer, and therefore chose not to pursue that avenue. Apparently, the fact that I'm a believer offends and terrifies you, and the fact that Bush is a believer makes you want to attack me for my beliefs. Pardon me for assuming you were decent enough to respect my position, as I was decent enough to respect yours. If you want to pick a fight about God, might I suggest, you file your own Rip-Off Report?

Egg away, Babythis will be my last comment to you on the Christian Vs. atheist vein. God morrow, Gentle Sir.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#362 Consumer Comment

Crude, crude everywhere and not a drop of gas to burn!! Oil companies + politics = broke Americans!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

Wow, I been gone for awhile and I see that Canada and the US may go to war over these posts and that half the homes in the US could be warmed with the heat from these posts! Too bad we cannot run our vehicles on the heat generated here...

Back to the beginning....oil prices.

In the early seventies the major oil companies met to form their own cartel. The decision was made to never let gasoline in the US be at 0.32/gallon or below ever again.

How to do this? There is no shortage of crude, but refining capacity in the US could easily be limited, especially with the help of the Federal government.

Fact: Between 1981 and 1989, the number of U.S. refineries fell from 324 to 204. More have closed since 1989. A blend of strongarm EPA rules and government acceptance of mega-mergers have put smaller oil producers out of business and created an oil monopoly mega-company that has only a semblance of being made up of separate entities. It is a cartel, meaning the "Big Five" work together to ensure that prices will remain high.

Fact: Oil companies have exploited their strong market position to intentionally restrict refining capacity by driving smaller, independent refiners out of business. A congressional investigation uncovered internal memos written by the major oil companies operating in the U.S. discussing their successful strategies to maximize profits by forcing independent refineries out of business, resulting in tighter refinery capacity. From 1995-2002, 97% of the more than 920,000 barrels of oil per day of capacity that have been shut down were owned and operated by smaller, independent refiners. Were this capacity to be in operation today, refiners could use it to better meet today's reformulated gasoline blend needs.

Fact: The largest five oil refiners in the United States (ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, BP, Valero and Royal Dutch Shell) now control over half (56.3%) of domestic oil refinery capacity; the top ten refiners control 83%. Only ten years ago, these top five oil companies only controlled about one-third (34.5%) of domestic refinery capacity; the top ten controlled 55.6%. This dramatic increase in the control of just the top five companies makes it easier for oil companies to manipulate gasoline supplies by intentionally withholding supplies in order to drive up prices.

Fact: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded in March 2001 that oil companies had intentionally withheld supplies of gasoline from the market as a tactic to drive up pricesall as a profit-maximizing strategy. A May 2004 U.S. Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) report also found that mergers in the oil industry directly led to higher pricesand this report did not even include the large mergers after the year 2000, such as ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips. Yet, just one week after Hurricane Katrina, the FTC approved yet another merger of refinery giantsValero Energy and Premcorgiving Valero 13% of the national market share. These actions, while costing consumers billions of dollars in overcharges, have not been challenged by the U.S. government.

Bush needs to go for the life-altering lies he told, but he is not entirely responsible for the spike in fuel prices (although he does happily benefit from them, as do others in high places).

Both big parties have been complicit in and learned to profit from the systematic rape of Americans at the fuel pump and the banks. The government is aware according to its own agencies and reports, but the oil companies and banking cartel contribute too much political money to be let down.

The entire system as it exists today is broken. Time for a real change, America. Slopping around in a Democratic pigpen or slopping around in the Republican pigpen is one and the same: both are still pigpens! Filthy with corruption and rife with immorality, the US government is the biggest pigpen in the world and the filth is beginning to slop over and foul the rest of the world.

Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it say that corporations are to be allowed to rule this country. If you look around you, you will see on a daily basis how many laws the banking and oil cartels are pushing through Congress every year.

When will we cry "ENOUGH" and rid ourselves of this mess? What will it take to wake everybody up to what is going on? We have few civil liberties left, free speech is gasping and in critical condition, freedom of religion is pretty much dead in America, we cannot do with our own property what we would like due to the myriad layers of legislation and regulation that bind us and have turned us into serfs rather than real property owners.

So, while I still can speak out openly, I would like to say a few words in closing (who knows how soon this right to speak will be squashed in the name of "Homeland Security?):

Bush is a puppet for the corporations and the lies he tells are always geared to benefit those corporations. He has openly and in full view of the American public told lies that have cost innocent men and women their lives. So far, he suffered nothing for doing so, but I hope that will change soon.

I believe that Bush has a spine made of overcooked spaghetti and will mouth what he is told to mouth without knowing or caring too overly much about the effect on America or her citizens. He neither knows or cares about the Constitution or the Republic, but continues to dwell in his ivory tower "democracy" because he is too stupid or misguided to study history and see that democracies have been proven historically to be unsustainable. (Isn't he married to a former librarian who could easily lead him to the "history" section?)

He will continue the policies of picking citizen's pockets to redistribute wealth as the Party sees fit (a huge Constitutional no-no bordering on Communism). He will continue to mouth his belief in God while committing actions that are more akin to devil worship. Actions speak louder than words. The next President will also continue those policies, whether Democrat or Republican, until all the fruits of our labors are the property of the US Government.

Therefore, Bush does not understand or care about his sworn duties or the oath he took as President. He is a traitor and should be impeached as such.

God bless America and Canada and all the nations of the world.

And God bless each and every poster here. While I do not understand all your views and do not agree with some of them, I do fully support your right to air them. The fact that so many people have taken the time to look at and respond to these posts gives me hope that there is an awakening taking place in this country. I am willing to bet that many of you have more innate common sense than those in Washington DC.

I love America; I loathe our government as it exists today. I will continue to give both sides of the duopoly a big middle finger at the voting booth when I cast all my votes for "other" parties.

I think I have tried to make my point for the last time here, but am enjoying the exchange of ideas and viewpoints (except for the flame-fest that has developed among some posters). Try to remember we are all human beings with valid ideas and the flaming really contributes nothing to the solution of the problem.

My asbestos suit will be coming out of the closet now...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#361 Consumer Comment

Oh, great, here's another one

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

Well, Matt from Flora, Mississippi, I guess you are just a mindless MORON who's had his head buried in the sand for the last couple of years. READ MY LIPS! Iraq had nothing, even remotely, to do with the destruction of the WTC on 9/11. This is not spin, this is fact, President George has admitted this.

The fact that he continues to suck in fools like you with his broad, encompassing gestures and his punch line, "Iraq is part of a global war on terror," proves that you are all sheep willing to follow his lies right off the edge of the cliff. Wise up. This president has no respect for you. He has just made you the laughing stock of this thread. Are you just going to sit there and take it?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#360 Consumer Comment

Bush needs to be IMPEACHED!!! He is a KILLER!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

People wake your asses up! Do you think the world is better off now that we have that drunk, f**k-nut George W. Bush at the top office?? He cares about making money! He cares nothing about our troops! He was AWOL during his national guard troop. War is making big $$$$$$$$$ for corporations during war. Poor people are preyed upon by the rich- You will never see rich people fight in a war these days. Well, I say the poor need to REBEL and START A REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#359 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

Bush Jr.

He is a drunk and has two twin drunks and druggies as daughters, Jenna and Barbara- Why arent there useless lives over in Iraq??? Because their daddy is a fake president for big business, plus is making big money for the war. Well, The people of the United States are getting sick of the lies! I am talking about the poor and middle class that keep getting screwed by you rich assholes that send us poor to war so we may make you rich. Then of course like Iraq, you make a false new government-controlled by the USA and then you are thinking kill all resistance and Iraq will be part of the USA. Meanwhile we are taking them over, we control their oil so we send the oil to our country-USA.
Bush you will GO TO HELL whenever you die!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#358 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

Bush Jr.

He is a drunk and has two twin drunks and druggies as daughters, Jenna and Barbara- Why arent there useless lives over in Iraq??? Because their daddy is a fake president for big business, plus is making big money for the war. Well, The people of the United States are getting sick of the lies! I am talking about the poor and middle class that keep getting screwed by you rich assholes that send us poor to war so we may make you rich. Then of course like Iraq, you make a false new government-controlled by the USA and then you are thinking kill all resistance and Iraq will be part of the USA. Meanwhile we are taking them over, we control their oil so we send the oil to our country-USA.
Bush you will GO TO HELL whenever you die!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#357 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush is the worst -U.S. President in history!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 15, 2005

Bush Jr.

He is a drunk and has two twin drunks and druggies as daughters, Jenna and Barbara- Why arent there useless lives over in Iraq??? Because their daddy is a fake president for big business, plus is making big money for the war. Well, The people of the United States are getting sick of the lies! I am talking about the poor and middle class that keep getting screwed by you rich assholes that send us poor to war so we may make you rich. Then of course like Iraq, you make a false new government-controlled by the USA and then you are thinking kill all resistance and Iraq will be part of the USA. Meanwhile we are taking them over, we control their oil so we send the oil to our country-USA.
Bush you will GO TO HELL whenever you die!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#356 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

AUTHOR: Matt - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

How can you call him a poor excuse for a President. I guess you are just another gutless SOB that keeps on bitching about the war. Did you expect us to just lay down and do nothing after 9-11. I guess if we hadn't gone to war and we were terrorized again, you would fault him for NOT going to war. You need to get out of your simple, useless little world and quit trying to find something to b***h about just because you do not like the President personally. I guess if Clinton or Gore happened to be in office during the same time, you would probably praise them for going to for having the same reaction. GET A LIFE AND GET OVER IT!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#355 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

AUTHOR: Matt - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

How can you call him a poor excuse for a President. I guess you are just another gutless SOB that keeps on bitching about the war. Did you expect us to just lay down and do nothing after 9-11. I guess if we hadn't gone to war and we were terrorized again, you would fault him for NOT going to war. You need to get out of your simple, useless little world and quit trying to find something to b***h about just because you do not like the President personally. I guess if Clinton or Gore happened to be in office during the same time, you would probably praise them for going to for having the same reaction. GET A LIFE AND GET OVER IT!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#354 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

AUTHOR: Matt - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

How can you call him a poor excuse for a President. I guess you are just another gutless SOB that keeps on bitching about the war. Did you expect us to just lay down and do nothing after 9-11. I guess if we hadn't gone to war and we were terrorized again, you would fault him for NOT going to war. You need to get out of your simple, useless little world and quit trying to find something to b***h about just because you do not like the President personally. I guess if Clinton or Gore happened to be in office during the same time, you would probably praise them for going to for having the same reaction. GET A LIFE AND GET OVER IT!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#353 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush ripoff Bush is a repulsive president who lied to invade a sovereign nation for OIL and hikes the gas prices for Americans! Washington DC

AUTHOR: Matt - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

How can you call him a poor excuse for a President. I guess you are just another gutless SOB that keeps on bitching about the war. Did you expect us to just lay down and do nothing after 9-11. I guess if we hadn't gone to war and we were terrorized again, you would fault him for NOT going to war. You need to get out of your simple, useless little world and quit trying to find something to b***h about just because you do not like the President personally. I guess if Clinton or Gore happened to be in office during the same time, you would probably praise them for going to for having the same reaction. GET A LIFE AND GET OVER IT!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#352 Consumer Suggestion

Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

Gee & so many of them;

Ok well first of all, let me thank "B" for explaining the rules as far as Presidents going to war. They just ignore them. Hmm typical!

I have to agree with you on the IQ thing. I have never found a human being that could "honestly" understand the power of the human brain, & so I find it hard to believe it can be measured.

However, I might point out that I find "Genius" to be more something we would adorn someone like "Einstien" with, certainly not Nixon! I think good ol Bill is a pretty smart cookie, but genius? Nahh I don't think so. Carter? Well he is a good man, I would not really consider him to be Genius. Regan? An honest man, pretty smart too, but no Genius there can I see. Bush Sr & Jr... not a chance! Not even moderate intelligence. Money, influence from the right circles & friends in the right places, could be their only sucess formula, in my mind.

Oh for Vera & Shawn & all the others that want facts... I am not sure of the facts you need. If you punch someone in the nose... it hurts them. Can I prove it? I guess I probably could. Do I really need to? Do I need to say it is better to "mind your own business" in the world today, else you can cause trouble? Yes I guess I do, because some people don't understand it. Do I have proof? Yes I do. 911 is proof. Every day a car bomb goes off & kills more people... that is proof. The history of the Middle East Region & their wars over occupiers of their land for 2000 years is proof of what they can & will do if faced with such a dilemma.

Do I have to bring out the books & quote them to you? If I did go to all that trouble, I can assure you that either Vera or Robert or Shawn would shoot back that it was "Leftist Propaganda" which does not fit with Republican thought in any way!

I noticed a post from a young girl on here.. just learning Politics. She wonders if this is really a debate, or just "mud slinging". I can certainly see where she gets such an opinion. I am certainly guilty of it myself. What should we say to her?

Well I know one thing to say...

This thread is not about Clinton vs Bush or Kerry for that matter. It's not about "latch key kids" or birth control. It's not about the right to bear arms or whether evolution is taught in schools. It's not about appointments to the Supreme Court or how Canada's government is run differently than the USA. Its not about who has got the highest IQ, or who made the first Supersonic Jet. Its not about n**i Germany or guns shipped to Niqarauga. Its not about Nuclear bombs or Neutron bombs or WMD's

What this thread is about is the direction the USA is going & whether it is a correct course to go on or not. Whether the USA should have a right, or does have a right to invade other Countries. It's about the money it costs Americans & about the cost of American lives. Its about terrorism & how it affects "everyone in the world" includeing, but not "only" the USA. Its about the reasons for this terrorism, the "root causes" & how those causes were affected & are affected today by the USA & its foriegn policies.

The young woman asks why people don't write in or call their Politicians & voice their opinions, rather than post comments about these things on this thread. This is something I have personally promoted, as I "myself" do not have a say in American politics. However as a Canadian I am affected much the same. Therefore "for me" this is the best forum to make my voice heard on the subject. Most other Americans could do what she said & contact their leaders, as this would be the best way to make changes in Government policy.

It's so simple to me. If you kick a dog, it might bite you. Then you could shoot it, but unless you quit kicking dogs, you are liable to get bit again. The solution is not to kill all the dogs, but to quit kicking them. I don't know why that is so hard for people like Vera, Robert & Shawn. Why they can't get it... nobody will probably ever know.

Oh well, & finally for Patrick. I tried replying probably 6 times. The posts will not go up. Vera (knowing she has lost the battle here) went there to drum up support for her issue, as she has so few people on her side in this thread. I am sorta sick of it anyway Patrick. All you do is repeat the same questions I give you answers to, over & over again.

As for this thread, I would rather that we stay on topic. You can talk about all issues concerning that "other stuff" on other threads that are not revelant to this one. This is a long thread. Very long indeed. It is, I think because it is a major issue. One that will affect our lives & the lives of our children. This issue, if nothing else, needs to be addressed, as it is quite obvious with the length of it, that it is a major issue indeed.

I therefore wish to stay on topic & I ask those who believe I need some sort of "proof" that occupying someones homeland causes terrorism, that you instead give me proof why it does not.

With people like "B" who have commented here, he has been able to show with "more than enough proof" & quite obviously knowing what he is talking about that:

There was no justifiable reason for the USA to invade Iraq, There were no WMD's found in Iraq of any real issue, And finally that Iraq did not provoke the USA into such aggressive action which in any way makes it justifiable this invasion.

The only place where B & I really differ is in what should be done now. B thinks the USA should "stay the course" & finish the job now that it has been started. I think the USA is "stupid to believe" it can be solved with US intervention, as it was caused by US intervention in the first place!

B will ask... "So what... just pull out & leave them to their own uprisings?" I would say "yes, as USA has caused enough trouble already". Now who cares more? B or I? Gee that is really hard to decide, as we both have our points. However it really doesn't matter does it B? It is not you or I making these decisions. Its a guy called George W. Bush & he does not have even 50% of his Country on his side on the issue. That makes him in "my mind" a Dictator. I therefore would suppose the "real question" should be, whether you wish to have your lives run by a Dictator. I certainly know how this Dictator has affected my life! I can't even vote against him, but I say "definately no"!

Vera, Robert & Shawn can back him all they want! I am sure some people back Castro. I am sure every leader will & has been backed. Even Stalin! People wept when he died, even though he was responsible for killing more of his own people than all of the people killed during WWII during battle. Some people will back anyone. Some people will also back Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#351 Consumer Suggestion

Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

Gee & so many of them;

Ok well first of all, let me thank "B" for explaining the rules as far as Presidents going to war. They just ignore them. Hmm typical!

I have to agree with you on the IQ thing. I have never found a human being that could "honestly" understand the power of the human brain, & so I find it hard to believe it can be measured.

However, I might point out that I find "Genius" to be more something we would adorn someone like "Einstien" with, certainly not Nixon! I think good ol Bill is a pretty smart cookie, but genius? Nahh I don't think so. Carter? Well he is a good man, I would not really consider him to be Genius. Regan? An honest man, pretty smart too, but no Genius there can I see. Bush Sr & Jr... not a chance! Not even moderate intelligence. Money, influence from the right circles & friends in the right places, could be their only sucess formula, in my mind.

Oh for Vera & Shawn & all the others that want facts... I am not sure of the facts you need. If you punch someone in the nose... it hurts them. Can I prove it? I guess I probably could. Do I really need to? Do I need to say it is better to "mind your own business" in the world today, else you can cause trouble? Yes I guess I do, because some people don't understand it. Do I have proof? Yes I do. 911 is proof. Every day a car bomb goes off & kills more people... that is proof. The history of the Middle East Region & their wars over occupiers of their land for 2000 years is proof of what they can & will do if faced with such a dilemma.

Do I have to bring out the books & quote them to you? If I did go to all that trouble, I can assure you that either Vera or Robert or Shawn would shoot back that it was "Leftist Propaganda" which does not fit with Republican thought in any way!

I noticed a post from a young girl on here.. just learning Politics. She wonders if this is really a debate, or just "mud slinging". I can certainly see where she gets such an opinion. I am certainly guilty of it myself. What should we say to her?

Well I know one thing to say...

This thread is not about Clinton vs Bush or Kerry for that matter. It's not about "latch key kids" or birth control. It's not about the right to bear arms or whether evolution is taught in schools. It's not about appointments to the Supreme Court or how Canada's government is run differently than the USA. Its not about who has got the highest IQ, or who made the first Supersonic Jet. Its not about n**i Germany or guns shipped to Niqarauga. Its not about Nuclear bombs or Neutron bombs or WMD's

What this thread is about is the direction the USA is going & whether it is a correct course to go on or not. Whether the USA should have a right, or does have a right to invade other Countries. It's about the money it costs Americans & about the cost of American lives. Its about terrorism & how it affects "everyone in the world" includeing, but not "only" the USA. Its about the reasons for this terrorism, the "root causes" & how those causes were affected & are affected today by the USA & its foriegn policies.

The young woman asks why people don't write in or call their Politicians & voice their opinions, rather than post comments about these things on this thread. This is something I have personally promoted, as I "myself" do not have a say in American politics. However as a Canadian I am affected much the same. Therefore "for me" this is the best forum to make my voice heard on the subject. Most other Americans could do what she said & contact their leaders, as this would be the best way to make changes in Government policy.

It's so simple to me. If you kick a dog, it might bite you. Then you could shoot it, but unless you quit kicking dogs, you are liable to get bit again. The solution is not to kill all the dogs, but to quit kicking them. I don't know why that is so hard for people like Vera, Robert & Shawn. Why they can't get it... nobody will probably ever know.

Oh well, & finally for Patrick. I tried replying probably 6 times. The posts will not go up. Vera (knowing she has lost the battle here) went there to drum up support for her issue, as she has so few people on her side in this thread. I am sorta sick of it anyway Patrick. All you do is repeat the same questions I give you answers to, over & over again.

As for this thread, I would rather that we stay on topic. You can talk about all issues concerning that "other stuff" on other threads that are not revelant to this one. This is a long thread. Very long indeed. It is, I think because it is a major issue. One that will affect our lives & the lives of our children. This issue, if nothing else, needs to be addressed, as it is quite obvious with the length of it, that it is a major issue indeed.

I therefore wish to stay on topic & I ask those who believe I need some sort of "proof" that occupying someones homeland causes terrorism, that you instead give me proof why it does not.

With people like "B" who have commented here, he has been able to show with "more than enough proof" & quite obviously knowing what he is talking about that:

There was no justifiable reason for the USA to invade Iraq, There were no WMD's found in Iraq of any real issue, And finally that Iraq did not provoke the USA into such aggressive action which in any way makes it justifiable this invasion.

The only place where B & I really differ is in what should be done now. B thinks the USA should "stay the course" & finish the job now that it has been started. I think the USA is "stupid to believe" it can be solved with US intervention, as it was caused by US intervention in the first place!

B will ask... "So what... just pull out & leave them to their own uprisings?" I would say "yes, as USA has caused enough trouble already". Now who cares more? B or I? Gee that is really hard to decide, as we both have our points. However it really doesn't matter does it B? It is not you or I making these decisions. Its a guy called George W. Bush & he does not have even 50% of his Country on his side on the issue. That makes him in "my mind" a Dictator. I therefore would suppose the "real question" should be, whether you wish to have your lives run by a Dictator. I certainly know how this Dictator has affected my life! I can't even vote against him, but I say "definately no"!

Vera, Robert & Shawn can back him all they want! I am sure some people back Castro. I am sure every leader will & has been backed. Even Stalin! People wept when he died, even though he was responsible for killing more of his own people than all of the people killed during WWII during battle. Some people will back anyone. Some people will also back Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#350 Consumer Suggestion

Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

Gee & so many of them;

Ok well first of all, let me thank "B" for explaining the rules as far as Presidents going to war. They just ignore them. Hmm typical!

I have to agree with you on the IQ thing. I have never found a human being that could "honestly" understand the power of the human brain, & so I find it hard to believe it can be measured.

However, I might point out that I find "Genius" to be more something we would adorn someone like "Einstien" with, certainly not Nixon! I think good ol Bill is a pretty smart cookie, but genius? Nahh I don't think so. Carter? Well he is a good man, I would not really consider him to be Genius. Regan? An honest man, pretty smart too, but no Genius there can I see. Bush Sr & Jr... not a chance! Not even moderate intelligence. Money, influence from the right circles & friends in the right places, could be their only sucess formula, in my mind.

Oh for Vera & Shawn & all the others that want facts... I am not sure of the facts you need. If you punch someone in the nose... it hurts them. Can I prove it? I guess I probably could. Do I really need to? Do I need to say it is better to "mind your own business" in the world today, else you can cause trouble? Yes I guess I do, because some people don't understand it. Do I have proof? Yes I do. 911 is proof. Every day a car bomb goes off & kills more people... that is proof. The history of the Middle East Region & their wars over occupiers of their land for 2000 years is proof of what they can & will do if faced with such a dilemma.

Do I have to bring out the books & quote them to you? If I did go to all that trouble, I can assure you that either Vera or Robert or Shawn would shoot back that it was "Leftist Propaganda" which does not fit with Republican thought in any way!

I noticed a post from a young girl on here.. just learning Politics. She wonders if this is really a debate, or just "mud slinging". I can certainly see where she gets such an opinion. I am certainly guilty of it myself. What should we say to her?

Well I know one thing to say...

This thread is not about Clinton vs Bush or Kerry for that matter. It's not about "latch key kids" or birth control. It's not about the right to bear arms or whether evolution is taught in schools. It's not about appointments to the Supreme Court or how Canada's government is run differently than the USA. Its not about who has got the highest IQ, or who made the first Supersonic Jet. Its not about n**i Germany or guns shipped to Niqarauga. Its not about Nuclear bombs or Neutron bombs or WMD's

What this thread is about is the direction the USA is going & whether it is a correct course to go on or not. Whether the USA should have a right, or does have a right to invade other Countries. It's about the money it costs Americans & about the cost of American lives. Its about terrorism & how it affects "everyone in the world" includeing, but not "only" the USA. Its about the reasons for this terrorism, the "root causes" & how those causes were affected & are affected today by the USA & its foriegn policies.

The young woman asks why people don't write in or call their Politicians & voice their opinions, rather than post comments about these things on this thread. This is something I have personally promoted, as I "myself" do not have a say in American politics. However as a Canadian I am affected much the same. Therefore "for me" this is the best forum to make my voice heard on the subject. Most other Americans could do what she said & contact their leaders, as this would be the best way to make changes in Government policy.

It's so simple to me. If you kick a dog, it might bite you. Then you could shoot it, but unless you quit kicking dogs, you are liable to get bit again. The solution is not to kill all the dogs, but to quit kicking them. I don't know why that is so hard for people like Vera, Robert & Shawn. Why they can't get it... nobody will probably ever know.

Oh well, & finally for Patrick. I tried replying probably 6 times. The posts will not go up. Vera (knowing she has lost the battle here) went there to drum up support for her issue, as she has so few people on her side in this thread. I am sorta sick of it anyway Patrick. All you do is repeat the same questions I give you answers to, over & over again.

As for this thread, I would rather that we stay on topic. You can talk about all issues concerning that "other stuff" on other threads that are not revelant to this one. This is a long thread. Very long indeed. It is, I think because it is a major issue. One that will affect our lives & the lives of our children. This issue, if nothing else, needs to be addressed, as it is quite obvious with the length of it, that it is a major issue indeed.

I therefore wish to stay on topic & I ask those who believe I need some sort of "proof" that occupying someones homeland causes terrorism, that you instead give me proof why it does not.

With people like "B" who have commented here, he has been able to show with "more than enough proof" & quite obviously knowing what he is talking about that:

There was no justifiable reason for the USA to invade Iraq, There were no WMD's found in Iraq of any real issue, And finally that Iraq did not provoke the USA into such aggressive action which in any way makes it justifiable this invasion.

The only place where B & I really differ is in what should be done now. B thinks the USA should "stay the course" & finish the job now that it has been started. I think the USA is "stupid to believe" it can be solved with US intervention, as it was caused by US intervention in the first place!

B will ask... "So what... just pull out & leave them to their own uprisings?" I would say "yes, as USA has caused enough trouble already". Now who cares more? B or I? Gee that is really hard to decide, as we both have our points. However it really doesn't matter does it B? It is not you or I making these decisions. Its a guy called George W. Bush & he does not have even 50% of his Country on his side on the issue. That makes him in "my mind" a Dictator. I therefore would suppose the "real question" should be, whether you wish to have your lives run by a Dictator. I certainly know how this Dictator has affected my life! I can't even vote against him, but I say "definately no"!

Vera, Robert & Shawn can back him all they want! I am sure some people back Castro. I am sure every leader will & has been backed. Even Stalin! People wept when he died, even though he was responsible for killing more of his own people than all of the people killed during WWII during battle. Some people will back anyone. Some people will also back Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#349 Consumer Suggestion

Well we certainly have some intelligent posts this time.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 14, 2005

Gee & so many of them;

Ok well first of all, let me thank "B" for explaining the rules as far as Presidents going to war. They just ignore them. Hmm typical!

I have to agree with you on the IQ thing. I have never found a human being that could "honestly" understand the power of the human brain, & so I find it hard to believe it can be measured.

However, I might point out that I find "Genius" to be more something we would adorn someone like "Einstien" with, certainly not Nixon! I think good ol Bill is a pretty smart cookie, but genius? Nahh I don't think so. Carter? Well he is a good man, I would not really consider him to be Genius. Regan? An honest man, pretty smart too, but no Genius there can I see. Bush Sr & Jr... not a chance! Not even moderate intelligence. Money, influence from the right circles & friends in the right places, could be their only sucess formula, in my mind.

Oh for Vera & Shawn & all the others that want facts... I am not sure of the facts you need. If you punch someone in the nose... it hurts them. Can I prove it? I guess I probably could. Do I really need to? Do I need to say it is better to "mind your own business" in the world today, else you can cause trouble? Yes I guess I do, because some people don't understand it. Do I have proof? Yes I do. 911 is proof. Every day a car bomb goes off & kills more people... that is proof. The history of the Middle East Region & their wars over occupiers of their land for 2000 years is proof of what they can & will do if faced with such a dilemma.

Do I have to bring out the books & quote them to you? If I did go to all that trouble, I can assure you that either Vera or Robert or Shawn would shoot back that it was "Leftist Propaganda" which does not fit with Republican thought in any way!

I noticed a post from a young girl on here.. just learning Politics. She wonders if this is really a debate, or just "mud slinging". I can certainly see where she gets such an opinion. I am certainly guilty of it myself. What should we say to her?

Well I know one thing to say...

This thread is not about Clinton vs Bush or Kerry for that matter. It's not about "latch key kids" or birth control. It's not about the right to bear arms or whether evolution is taught in schools. It's not about appointments to the Supreme Court or how Canada's government is run differently than the USA. Its not about who has got the highest IQ, or who made the first Supersonic Jet. Its not about n**i Germany or guns shipped to Niqarauga. Its not about Nuclear bombs or Neutron bombs or WMD's

What this thread is about is the direction the USA is going & whether it is a correct course to go on or not. Whether the USA should have a right, or does have a right to invade other Countries. It's about the money it costs Americans & about the cost of American lives. Its about terrorism & how it affects "everyone in the world" includeing, but not "only" the USA. Its about the reasons for this terrorism, the "root causes" & how those causes were affected & are affected today by the USA & its foriegn policies.

The young woman asks why people don't write in or call their Politicians & voice their opinions, rather than post comments about these things on this thread. This is something I have personally promoted, as I "myself" do not have a say in American politics. However as a Canadian I am affected much the same. Therefore "for me" this is the best forum to make my voice heard on the subject. Most other Americans could do what she said & contact their leaders, as this would be the best way to make changes in Government policy.

It's so simple to me. If you kick a dog, it might bite you. Then you could shoot it, but unless you quit kicking dogs, you are liable to get bit again. The solution is not to kill all the dogs, but to quit kicking them. I don't know why that is so hard for people like Vera, Robert & Shawn. Why they can't get it... nobody will probably ever know.

Oh well, & finally for Patrick. I tried replying probably 6 times. The posts will not go up. Vera (knowing she has lost the battle here) went there to drum up support for her issue, as she has so few people on her side in this thread. I am sorta sick of it anyway Patrick. All you do is repeat the same questions I give you answers to, over & over again.

As for this thread, I would rather that we stay on topic. You can talk about all issues concerning that "other stuff" on other threads that are not revelant to this one. This is a long thread. Very long indeed. It is, I think because it is a major issue. One that will affect our lives & the lives of our children. This issue, if nothing else, needs to be addressed, as it is quite obvious with the length of it, that it is a major issue indeed.

I therefore wish to stay on topic & I ask those who believe I need some sort of "proof" that occupying someones homeland causes terrorism, that you instead give me proof why it does not.

With people like "B" who have commented here, he has been able to show with "more than enough proof" & quite obviously knowing what he is talking about that:

There was no justifiable reason for the USA to invade Iraq, There were no WMD's found in Iraq of any real issue, And finally that Iraq did not provoke the USA into such aggressive action which in any way makes it justifiable this invasion.

The only place where B & I really differ is in what should be done now. B thinks the USA should "stay the course" & finish the job now that it has been started. I think the USA is "stupid to believe" it can be solved with US intervention, as it was caused by US intervention in the first place!

B will ask... "So what... just pull out & leave them to their own uprisings?" I would say "yes, as USA has caused enough trouble already". Now who cares more? B or I? Gee that is really hard to decide, as we both have our points. However it really doesn't matter does it B? It is not you or I making these decisions. Its a guy called George W. Bush & he does not have even 50% of his Country on his side on the issue. That makes him in "my mind" a Dictator. I therefore would suppose the "real question" should be, whether you wish to have your lives run by a Dictator. I certainly know how this Dictator has affected my life! I can't even vote against him, but I say "definately no"!

Vera, Robert & Shawn can back him all they want! I am sure some people back Castro. I am sure every leader will & has been backed. Even Stalin! People wept when he died, even though he was responsible for killing more of his own people than all of the people killed during WWII during battle. Some people will back anyone. Some people will also back Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#348 Consumer Comment

Why so defensive?

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Ben, if you will notice, I did not say that the "spin" you have put on these topics was from writing anything that was untrue or unsaid, but the "spin" is from leaving out the context in which it was spoken.

Often-times, the greatest deceit lay in truth left untold. If you want to play a "stupid things people say" game, we can sit here for endless hours tossing insults back and forth and regurgitating each others "favorite politicians" stupid comments.

I don't believe that either one of us has the time to do that. I am just trying to "shed some light" on some of the irrelevant and incomplete posts made by several people on "your side"(Admittedly, there have been some from "my" side as well, but you guys keep me busy enough!)

James, I have yet to "introduce" any topics so your accusation of my posts being irrelevant is untrue, I have merely been responding to "posts from the left." In other words, you and your supporters are the ones that have introduced these "irrelevant" points.

I would love to add more, but I will have to save it for later...unexpected business.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#347 Consumer Comment

Nice, I present facts, you spin it into a personal attack...typical

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Hey Calgary boy, what's your point? More useless drivel. You haven't managed to disprove one single point I've made nor prove one that you have made, yet you call my posts ridiculous? How typical, you can not have an intelligent discussion with anyone that has a different view than yours without turning to personal attacks and insults. I guess that it shows exactly how intellectually sound you are. Maybe you should see about having your dosage increased before you lose it completely. Once again, no facts. You are even creditting quotes of others as mine! Nice research. Maybe you should check out your own government structure before you "discuss" such topics. I don't think that you have much of a brain do you? What was it, drugs? an accident? Did somebody beat you profusely about the head and neck? Proof is in the pudding halfwit.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#346 Consumer Comment

Vera Vera Vera.....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

You state....

" I stand on the fact that I have answered your questions sufficiently, and all you have left to do is knock God. I've heard so much of it before, and I won't bother to entertain you. This report is about Bush, not God."


Yes this thread is about Bush. And my greatest fear of Bush, along with his cronies, Falwell, Robertson and their ilk is that they want to turn this country into a theocracy. They obviously cant stand that fact that people like myself even exist. If your fine with religon, more power too you. Why Bush cant have the same attitude towards me when I DONT believe in religon is just wrong.

So yes, it is about Bush, when I speak of your God. You have your churches, you have your Sundays, you have your "Book". I dont see any of us so-called evil athiests trying to take those away. What we DONT want is you forcing this crap on us and pushing into the government. We certainly arnt forcing you to do ANYTHING except keep out of our d**n lives. We dont need your book or your churches to get common sense and morality like you week minded people do. Why you religous nuts think you have to do some holy crusade and convert us is totally beyond me. Our constitution provides the protections of "freedom for religon". I will not cross that line. But just remember that those same protections offer "freedom FROM religon" as well. I see those eroding day by day under you buddy Bush. So it IS about BUSH!

Just remember, once upon a time, most of the western civilized world was run by the "church".

It was called "The Dark Ages".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#345 Consumer Comment

The Grand Juries are in, Bush & Cheney have been indicted... waiting for major media announcement

AUTHOR: Ashley - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

So all you Bush lovers....wait until you hear the charges against this "president."

BUSH INDICTED!!!....Via Teresa Nielsen Hayden, I see that the top search term on Technorati at the moment is "Bush indictment." Oh happy day!

[Based on testimony from Colin Powell], sources close to the federal grade jury probe also allegedly told Heneghen a host of administration figures besides Bush were also indicted, including Vice-President Richard Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Senior Cheney advisor Mary Matalin.

Just Google "Bush Indictment" and you'll see (tee hee)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#344 Consumer Comment

Vera, the magnitude of your patriotism is amazing

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Awwww, Vera, I was with you right up to the point where you said, "That's the beauty of our Democracy.all these bleating, whining liberals and Lefties have the option to LEAVE if they don't like it! Yet I notice, they stay. Why?"

Well, dearie, let me tell you. They love their country so much they're willing to put up with your s****.> _____
Shawn, you're in no danger of 'getting into' anything resembling facts, in this or any other post. When you do occasionally stray across one, you just whiz right on by in your attempt to 'prove' that everybody but your heroes is a vicious, two-faced evildoer. If you have the facility to differentiate fact from conjecture, you have yet to demonstrate it. Instead of logic, you substitute... I'm not sure, is that adolescent hyperbole or an attempt to string together other people's spin and pass it off as your own original thought? Case in point: "...was teen violence more common before the "latchkey kid" generation? Nope. Should we teach that the world is flat? Why not? Darwin disproved his own theory (of evolution) before he died, Darwin stated "my discoveries hold true based on natures order of progression being from the simplistic, to the complex." As anyone with half a brain knows, the natural order is from the complex, to the simplistic." I realize you are unable to recognize this as illogical since you have no understanding of logic. Let me give you a first primer. If p is true and q is false, then p AND q is false, and p OR q is true. See, its not that hard at all. Feel free to post your illogical opinions at will, but please spare us the bullshit rhetoric that you are the only one in possession of 'the facts.'

_____
James, IQ purports to be a measure of something so elusive as to be nearly meaningless. Ambition, courage, temperament, values, self-image, even just dumb luck are far more likely to determine what kind of person you will become, and how successful you will be in life. I've seen several different scales ranking IQ. I tend to picture it as a bell curve. At the middle of the curve you have a range that is 'normal'. Within that range, the higher the number, the more likely the person is to have better skills for coping with reality and integrating into society. Outside that normal range, at either end, the further from the center, the more likely you are to be obsessed with your own mental processes and the less likely you are to be socialized. Some people at the extremes exhibit the facility for remarkable mental feats, others exhibit madness or drooling stupidity. But its just test results, and not a very precise test at that. My own tests have varied from 132 at age 13 to 151 the last time a test was administered, about 12-15 years ago. Am I getting more brilliant as time passes? No, actually my mind is far less agile now than when I was a young teen, but I am getting better at taking the tests. My dad had no formal education beyond age 14, and always considered himself a stupid hick as a result. He would have scored poorly on most IQ tests, because he just didn't think in those ways. Yet to anyone but himself, it was obvious that he was a genius at negotiation and other social skills, and above average in a few other areas as well. So, take from that what you will, I have yet to meet anyone who is perfect, and the more convinced you are of your own perfection, the harder you're going to slam into that beam in your eye someday.

This is what our Constitution says about military powers:

Article I, Section 8: (Grants Congress the powers, among others:)
To declare War; To raise and support Armies; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Article II, Section 2: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices

In practice, some of our presidents have seen fit to mobilize our armed forces without regard to Congressional approval. Late in Nixon's presidency, the Congress passed the War Powers Act (US Code, Title 50) in an attempt to specify under what conditions the president may mobilize the armed forces. Basically, it says that in cases of extreme emergency (such as invasion of the US) the president may utilize the armed forces and report to Congress within 48 hours, in all other circumstances Congress must authorize their use beforehand. Subsequent presidents have ignored this act, declaring it an unconstitutional restriction of their powers. To the best of my knowledge, it has never been brought before the court. President George has stated that his constitutional appointment as Commander in Chief gives him broad powers (unspecified) in commanding the armed forces. So much for his strict constructionist' interpretation of the constitution.

In the particular case of Iraq, PG asked Congress to declare their intention to go to war so that he could better argue the case in the UN Security Council. They agreed it was a bad situation and granted him authority to mobilize the armed forces at his discretion, provided that there was immediate danger to the US and that Iraq was actively cooperating with terrorist groups, and that he then justify his actions within 48 hours.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#343 Consumer Comment

My nominations.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

James,

Here are my nominations for the dumbest posts on these reports so far:

"Big Daddy, as you call yourselves did virtually nothing when the n**i subs were cruising down the St. Lawerence & into Lake Ontario, waterways shared by the "both of us"," (I think we all remember how this ended)

"Never mind the fact that Canadians invented & flew the "first supersonic jet fighter", the Avero Arrow, just at the end of WWII, which was "much superior" to anything the USA had developed at the time." (Granted, this was on the other Bush report, but the topic trickled over to this one)

"We could concentrate on family & forget who is in power in the USA. We could also complain about "gas prices" while ignoreing the "global warming" that is causeing hurricanes & a vast change in the "global climate"." (This theory has been debunked by several scientists. Hurricane seasons are cyclic, as history has shown)

Yes James, all posted by you. You seem so content to just post whatever you believe to be true, without first checking your facts to see if indeed you are correct. So if you ask me, James takes the Gold, Silver AND Bronze!

Still waiting for some answers on the GC&T posts, by the way.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#342 Consumer Comment

Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Google search for FAILURE - it is funny!

All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone. He's kinda like Nelson in the Simpsons in that he's the kinda guy who'd sneak people into the back door of the theater, or climb through the window at a party he was not invited to, so he can let his friends in through the front door.

He's now trying to do this in the supreme court, and has successfully (to the extent more than any other president in history---documented) done this with cabinet appointments and all other staff appointments that are within the scope of the presidency to appoint. We are seeing the ramifications of this with FEMA and other agencies whom he has appointed totally unqualified b***s to run...either through directly knowing who they were, or a friend of a friend who gave a crapload of cash or otherwise helped out in the campaign.

He really screwed the pooch with this latest nomination, and then trying to put religion into the mix by cleary stating her (private) religious beliefs - HE WILL GET HIS WAY if someone doesn't step up to the plate and say something in the senate/congress level about this...and why it is a horrid idea he even brought up her religion. We all know the goal...to have the religious right win the battle of "who's values are more important than who's".

It's not a matter of whether or not they are right or not...they just want to have their way because they (apparently) can. This party just wants to show the world that their small-minded views are better than you or my small-minded views. Tell ya this GW-AS$wipe that there are a hell of a lot more other religions in the world than Christian...and they all think they're right too.

Please...tell me this...why is is that NOBODY else in this country somehow more qualified to run it than a freaking BOOSHBAG. This isn't England with the royal family for Christ's sake. We are already being ridiculed by other countries far worse than we are ridiculing Big-Eared Charles over there in jolly ol' England...and the rest of the in-bred bunch.

Why can't we find others than a BUSH to either be a president or Governor? Why? WHY? If a Bush is the most qualified person to run anything this important, than we are doomed to a Kingdom or the next closest thing to it. Money buys elections...we haven't had a poor congressman/woman or elected official of any importance in generations!

I'm surely not the only person to notice that we once had great presidents even as recently as the 1940's - 1960's....and if this is like any other process of evolution - just like people in general....we are de-evolving and this is clear evidence of it. Proof of the pudding in Kansas trying to block all mention of evolution...neanderthals, the whole lot of them.

They think just like a guy I know who swore up and down that radio-carbon dating was scientific hoaxing and that the earth was no oder than 10,000 years old...and that fossils can't be proven to be millions of years old because the world didn't exist then. Just like those in Kansas who want to block evolution being taught (and next to overturn Roe-v-Wade) he thought those who show fossils and dinosaur bones to be millions of years old are lying and colluding our poor children away from the proper teaching. This is Bush's world. This is the world we are setting up if we continue down the road of Bush and his cronies.

This is the world our children are going to inherit if we keep the GOP and right wingers in there. Do you really want that? I sure as hell don't, and it's not within your rights to force it upon me either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#341 Consumer Comment

Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Google search for FAILURE - it is funny!

All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone. He's kinda like Nelson in the Simpsons in that he's the kinda guy who'd sneak people into the back door of the theater, or climb through the window at a party he was not invited to, so he can let his friends in through the front door.

He's now trying to do this in the supreme court, and has successfully (to the extent more than any other president in history---documented) done this with cabinet appointments and all other staff appointments that are within the scope of the presidency to appoint. We are seeing the ramifications of this with FEMA and other agencies whom he has appointed totally unqualified b***s to run...either through directly knowing who they were, or a friend of a friend who gave a crapload of cash or otherwise helped out in the campaign.

He really screwed the pooch with this latest nomination, and then trying to put religion into the mix by cleary stating her (private) religious beliefs - HE WILL GET HIS WAY if someone doesn't step up to the plate and say something in the senate/congress level about this...and why it is a horrid idea he even brought up her religion. We all know the goal...to have the religious right win the battle of "who's values are more important than who's".

It's not a matter of whether or not they are right or not...they just want to have their way because they (apparently) can. This party just wants to show the world that their small-minded views are better than you or my small-minded views. Tell ya this GW-AS$wipe that there are a hell of a lot more other religions in the world than Christian...and they all think they're right too.

Please...tell me this...why is is that NOBODY else in this country somehow more qualified to run it than a freaking BOOSHBAG. This isn't England with the royal family for Christ's sake. We are already being ridiculed by other countries far worse than we are ridiculing Big-Eared Charles over there in jolly ol' England...and the rest of the in-bred bunch.

Why can't we find others than a BUSH to either be a president or Governor? Why? WHY? If a Bush is the most qualified person to run anything this important, than we are doomed to a Kingdom or the next closest thing to it. Money buys elections...we haven't had a poor congressman/woman or elected official of any importance in generations!

I'm surely not the only person to notice that we once had great presidents even as recently as the 1940's - 1960's....and if this is like any other process of evolution - just like people in general....we are de-evolving and this is clear evidence of it. Proof of the pudding in Kansas trying to block all mention of evolution...neanderthals, the whole lot of them.

They think just like a guy I know who swore up and down that radio-carbon dating was scientific hoaxing and that the earth was no oder than 10,000 years old...and that fossils can't be proven to be millions of years old because the world didn't exist then. Just like those in Kansas who want to block evolution being taught (and next to overturn Roe-v-Wade) he thought those who show fossils and dinosaur bones to be millions of years old are lying and colluding our poor children away from the proper teaching. This is Bush's world. This is the world we are setting up if we continue down the road of Bush and his cronies.

This is the world our children are going to inherit if we keep the GOP and right wingers in there. Do you really want that? I sure as hell don't, and it's not within your rights to force it upon me either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#340 Consumer Comment

Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Google search for FAILURE - it is funny!

All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone. He's kinda like Nelson in the Simpsons in that he's the kinda guy who'd sneak people into the back door of the theater, or climb through the window at a party he was not invited to, so he can let his friends in through the front door.

He's now trying to do this in the supreme court, and has successfully (to the extent more than any other president in history---documented) done this with cabinet appointments and all other staff appointments that are within the scope of the presidency to appoint. We are seeing the ramifications of this with FEMA and other agencies whom he has appointed totally unqualified b***s to run...either through directly knowing who they were, or a friend of a friend who gave a crapload of cash or otherwise helped out in the campaign.

He really screwed the pooch with this latest nomination, and then trying to put religion into the mix by cleary stating her (private) religious beliefs - HE WILL GET HIS WAY if someone doesn't step up to the plate and say something in the senate/congress level about this...and why it is a horrid idea he even brought up her religion. We all know the goal...to have the religious right win the battle of "who's values are more important than who's".

It's not a matter of whether or not they are right or not...they just want to have their way because they (apparently) can. This party just wants to show the world that their small-minded views are better than you or my small-minded views. Tell ya this GW-AS$wipe that there are a hell of a lot more other religions in the world than Christian...and they all think they're right too.

Please...tell me this...why is is that NOBODY else in this country somehow more qualified to run it than a freaking BOOSHBAG. This isn't England with the royal family for Christ's sake. We are already being ridiculed by other countries far worse than we are ridiculing Big-Eared Charles over there in jolly ol' England...and the rest of the in-bred bunch.

Why can't we find others than a BUSH to either be a president or Governor? Why? WHY? If a Bush is the most qualified person to run anything this important, than we are doomed to a Kingdom or the next closest thing to it. Money buys elections...we haven't had a poor congressman/woman or elected official of any importance in generations!

I'm surely not the only person to notice that we once had great presidents even as recently as the 1940's - 1960's....and if this is like any other process of evolution - just like people in general....we are de-evolving and this is clear evidence of it. Proof of the pudding in Kansas trying to block all mention of evolution...neanderthals, the whole lot of them.

They think just like a guy I know who swore up and down that radio-carbon dating was scientific hoaxing and that the earth was no oder than 10,000 years old...and that fossils can't be proven to be millions of years old because the world didn't exist then. Just like those in Kansas who want to block evolution being taught (and next to overturn Roe-v-Wade) he thought those who show fossils and dinosaur bones to be millions of years old are lying and colluding our poor children away from the proper teaching. This is Bush's world. This is the world we are setting up if we continue down the road of Bush and his cronies.

This is the world our children are going to inherit if we keep the GOP and right wingers in there. Do you really want that? I sure as hell don't, and it's not within your rights to force it upon me either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#339 Consumer Comment

Sneaking into the movie theater - All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone.

AUTHOR: Joe - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

Google search for FAILURE - it is funny!

All things aside, Bush is a flaming MORON...but has a sneaky side to him to rival anyone. He's kinda like Nelson in the Simpsons in that he's the kinda guy who'd sneak people into the back door of the theater, or climb through the window at a party he was not invited to, so he can let his friends in through the front door.

He's now trying to do this in the supreme court, and has successfully (to the extent more than any other president in history---documented) done this with cabinet appointments and all other staff appointments that are within the scope of the presidency to appoint. We are seeing the ramifications of this with FEMA and other agencies whom he has appointed totally unqualified b***s to run...either through directly knowing who they were, or a friend of a friend who gave a crapload of cash or otherwise helped out in the campaign.

He really screwed the pooch with this latest nomination, and then trying to put religion into the mix by cleary stating her (private) religious beliefs - HE WILL GET HIS WAY if someone doesn't step up to the plate and say something in the senate/congress level about this...and why it is a horrid idea he even brought up her religion. We all know the goal...to have the religious right win the battle of "who's values are more important than who's".

It's not a matter of whether or not they are right or not...they just want to have their way because they (apparently) can. This party just wants to show the world that their small-minded views are better than you or my small-minded views. Tell ya this GW-AS$wipe that there are a hell of a lot more other religions in the world than Christian...and they all think they're right too.

Please...tell me this...why is is that NOBODY else in this country somehow more qualified to run it than a freaking BOOSHBAG. This isn't England with the royal family for Christ's sake. We are already being ridiculed by other countries far worse than we are ridiculing Big-Eared Charles over there in jolly ol' England...and the rest of the in-bred bunch.

Why can't we find others than a BUSH to either be a president or Governor? Why? WHY? If a Bush is the most qualified person to run anything this important, than we are doomed to a Kingdom or the next closest thing to it. Money buys elections...we haven't had a poor congressman/woman or elected official of any importance in generations!

I'm surely not the only person to notice that we once had great presidents even as recently as the 1940's - 1960's....and if this is like any other process of evolution - just like people in general....we are de-evolving and this is clear evidence of it. Proof of the pudding in Kansas trying to block all mention of evolution...neanderthals, the whole lot of them.

They think just like a guy I know who swore up and down that radio-carbon dating was scientific hoaxing and that the earth was no oder than 10,000 years old...and that fossils can't be proven to be millions of years old because the world didn't exist then. Just like those in Kansas who want to block evolution being taught (and next to overturn Roe-v-Wade) he thought those who show fossils and dinosaur bones to be millions of years old are lying and colluding our poor children away from the proper teaching. This is Bush's world. This is the world we are setting up if we continue down the road of Bush and his cronies.

This is the world our children are going to inherit if we keep the GOP and right wingers in there. Do you really want that? I sure as hell don't, and it's not within your rights to force it upon me either.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#338 Consumer Comment

Once again...Blahh-Blahh-Blahh and no facts.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

James, you wone the "Stupidest Posts" contest ages ago. (James of Tupper came in a close second, but you've got him licked in sheer numbers.) Laughing my a*s off at your stupidity.

But still, I'm waiting for your facts. Quit changing the subject.

You know, I'm willing to bet that you don't have any facts to present...that's why you write your constant subject changes. You can't present any, so keep them running in circles.

This isn't about the President's IQ, or stupid comments he's made, or about anyone's religious beliefs.

Time to start practicing what you preach (especially when you get proven wrong or find facts uncomfortable). Present your facts. I want to see them. And since you think you can do such a better job than I, I expect it to be done in a better fashion than you normally present.

James of Tupper, I present you with the same challenge. I don't want your little spun excerpts...I want links or URLs (from unbiased sources), so I can read the info for myself, and challenge accordingly. No Michael Moore-On, because he's not a reliable source for anything, let alone information. If I want to know how much food a human being can glut down in a two-hour meal, I'll ask Mike Moore...I wouldn't trust him on much else.

Still waiting.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#337 Consumer Comment

Harriet Miers - another Bush rip-off?

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 13, 2005

What exactly does President George mean when he says, "I have no litmus test"? Does he mean Harriet Miers is neither red nor blue, but some delicate shade of neutral? Does he mean in choosing her, he will avoid any unconstitutional religious test?

Let's examine PG's reasons for selecting Ms. Miers, not that I'm suggesting he need follow any particular criteria, nor choose the best qualified candidate, he is constitutionally justified in nominating the person of his choice, at his discretion, so long as he doesn't pierce that wall of separation between church and state. One reason becomes clear in his statement, "I also remind them that I think it's important to bring somebody from outside the judicial system, somebody that hasn't been on the bench. And, therefore, there's not a lot of opinions for people to look at." Well, at least he's honest about it. Apparently its ok for PG to know her heart, while the members of Congress, supposedly co-equals in the appointment process, must make their decision in the dark. A minor rip-off.

"Over the past three decades, Harriet Miers has built a stellar record of accomplishment in the law. She's been a model of service to her country and to our citizens." "She's a woman of principle and deep conviction." "She's an enormously accomplished person who's incredibly bright." So she's no constitutional expert and not on the Republican Patry's A list, but obviously no frump of an intern that goes all doe-eyed in HIS Prez'nce. And she's proven her ability to invade and hold her own in traditional bastions of masculinity.

But is there some quality that sets her apart in his mind from other, perhaps better qualified individuals? "She shares my philosophy that judges should strictly interpret the laws and the Constitution of the United States and not legislate from the bench." "Secondly, she knows the kind of judge I'm looking for." "There should be no doubt in anybody's mind what I believe the philosophy of a judge. And Harriet Miers shares that philosophy." "She shares my judicial philosophy." "I don't want to put somebody on the bench who's this way today and changes. That's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in finding somebody who shares my philosophy today and will have that same philosophy 20 years from now." "Thirdly, I know her well enough to be able to say that she's not going to change; that 20 years from now she'll be the same person, with the same philosophy that she is today." "I'm interested in people that will be strict constructionists."

What do these phrases mean, "legislate from the bench," and "strict constructionist?" Is he looking for judges who will force the legislature and the executive to strictly adhere to the articles of the constitution in such areas as obeying the law of treaties and protecting individual rights to freedom and expression? Hardly! This is Republicanese for judges who will overturn anti-abortion rulings, prevent gay anything, and follow the party line in every case. Seven of nine Supreme Court Justices have been appointed by Republican Presidents. Hmmm... 7 of 9... Where have I heard that before? Anyway, this is not enough for the Republican apparat. They have made no secret of their plans to stack the judiciary with right-wing idealogues and specifically to constitute a Supreme Court who will do their bidding. And while I think I can argue a fairly good case for this being a conspiracy to commit treason against the US government, that is another matter. They seem to be particularly disappointed with Justices Kennedy and Souter, who have done specifically what they said they would do, administer the law without regard to partisan interests, at least in areas of constitutional interpretation. In other areas, they definitely reveal their leaning toward the right. What more could you hope for than Justices who follow the dictates of their conscience and the established guidelines of jurisprudence? Quite a bit, apparently.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, er, white house... Karl Rove and other WH staff are frantically phoning the who's who in the party to reassure them about Bush's nomination. Setting up conference calls with Senators, evangelical leaders, and other Republican bigwigs. Shouldn't the Judicial Committee be aware of the content of these 'back room' discussions? After a personal phone call from Karl Rove, James Dobson, head of "Focus on the Family", an evangelical multimedia powerhouse, and a perennial thorn in my... um, to the south of me, had this to say to his radio audience, "When you know some of the things that I know - that I probably shouldn't know - you will understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe Harriet Miers will be a good justice." He later added, "if I have made a mistake here, I will never forget the blood of those babies that will die will be on my hands to some degree."

Even if we cannot know with any real certainty that PG has a hidden requirement that this Justice will overturn Roe vs Wade, which to my mind would be a definite religious requirement, it is apparent there is another hidden religious test. This nominee must pass muster with George's religious 'base'. This test, which some may consider to be secondary, is nonetheless a prohibited religious test. Is George capable of nominating anyone without this test? Hard to tell, but the Judicial Committee should refuse to even consider the current one on these grounds.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#336 Consumer Suggestion

My two cents

AUTHOR: Tracy - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

I have been trying to keep up with this report to see all of the different opinions that everyone has. Some of you seem to know a lot about politics and sure are quick to find quotes and facts. With all of the energy you put into your responses, why don't you use that to send letters to your government to try and change things? All we seem to do is complain to each other about each other. I am a conservative and I don't like Bush but I feel pressured to because I can't stand liberal thinking sometimes and I almost feel like I have to pick a side. It's also upsetting to me to have people from other countries tear us apart, but we deserve it and for the most part they are right! We are acting like children and the rest of the world is watching us. Neither side is better than the other. Bush is an idiot...so what do we do about it???

If it's not obvious by my post, I am young (25) and am only starting to understand a little bit about politics and from what I can see, it's just a bunch of bickering back and forth without any action...big bark, no bite.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#335 Consumer Suggestion

It's the most idiotic posts contest!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Now who will be the winner? Let's look at some idiotic posts shall we?

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now, a rogue state with WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, ready to use them, or, provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

Oh thats good... doesn't top it though! Look at this one:

had to go through alot of my books and searched the internet for quite some time, but this is what I have discovered and believe to be true ( I can not verify some of these as "fact" as the sources that I found them at/in (although they were both left and right) did not have a direct source for thier statements, however, THEY have presented them as fact and there are several in (close)agreement.

presidents IQ's:

George W. Bush - 117 - 121
Bill Clinton - 137 - 141
George Bush Sr.- 119 - 122
Ronald Reagan - 116 - 127 (widest spread I found and it's funny, but the highest score came from a "left" report and the lowest from a "right" one!?!
Carter -139
J.F.K. -119
Nixon(highest published presidential IQ in history - factual and verifiable . . . .
-143

Now, can anybody please explain to me where the facts show George W. Bush to be a "moron"? I know I must piss off you "democrats" when even your venemous hatred get's thrown back at you PROVEN and INARGUABLY . . .UNTRUE.

Compared with:

Q Basics
IQ Range. Classification. 140 and over, Genius or near genius. 120-140, Very superior
intelligence. 110-120, Superior intelligence ...

So Clinton & Nixon were Genius. Bush is just with Superior intelligence? He He... read on:

that not ALL things in Canada are decided on a majority vote. Some require as much as 2/3 vote to pass.

Canada is a Democracy, but it is NOT representative of the people

The United States is not, was not, and never will be the "school yard bully," this country did not name itself the world police, but rather the rest of the world did so. Throughout history, every time someone was being bullied, or their borders were under seige, they ccried out in terror, "please help us, in the name of God save us from this enemy!" Ya know what James, the good ol' U.S. of A. never turned her back on anyone in need.

(sure needed in exactly where?) n**i Germany ya were kinda late... he he read on:

Do guns make people violent? I grew up in a home with guns and to this day I haven't killed anyone.

I don't agree with everything that any one person says

The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

Hang on!!!!! Stop Laughing... there's more! Read on:

the Attorney General (who is the Queen's representative and, by the way, has a higher authority than the Prime Minister) who has final approval

In other words, if the Queen of England were to order you to war tomorrow, guess what bud, you'd be going to war

(Oh I loved that one!) The Queen can't even send England to war anymore. How the hell is she gonna send Canada? Ok now get off the floor... there's more!

And, finally, I have yet to find one little mention from ANY politician in the U.S. where they refer to us as "the world police" ...that is an honor bestowed upon us by others.

(Oh really? Who?)

Pick up something that is (if it is available in Canada) non-bias and don't bother typing until you can toss a few facts this way

____________
Yep overall Shawn is the winner of the most idiotic posts on this thread! Ahh I hope it was all a good laugh. Now you can just ignore Shawn & go on, unless you need a good chuckle!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#334 Consumer Suggestion

Ok guys I don't have all the facts in front of me... but...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

B;

Maybe you can help. I don't know the exact "time frame" by law that the President is allowed to order aggressive action "before" a vote is tabled. However I do know of such a time frame existing. If you might bring that to my attention, it would be helpful & I point out once again that our Prime Minister does not have that leway.

Oh Shawn Shawn Shawn! Let's look at one of your foolish statements shall we?

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Um Shawn... does Canada not have daycare? Does Canada not teach evolution? Does Canada not have birth control pills? What about England, or France, or any other Country in the world that does not allow guns in their Constitution?

How come then Canada does not have the gun related deaths the USA has if those are the "root causes"? England? Framce? Germany? Don't be a fool!

Shawn... you are so dumb when you make statements like that, it isn't funny! Let's go on:

The Governor General has no such power! If so, show me where it has ever been used against the decisions of Parliment. It hasn't Shawn!

You rip into Ben & the rest of them who simply make sense & while you do it, you show yourself as the "redneck" you are!

Vera... you don't get it do ya. The USA is not a Democracy! It's a Republic! If it was a Democracy, you would not be involved in the Middle East at all.

To all of you "bone heads" who think differently, if you can walk down the street in another Country & not be shot as an American, you are simply "lucky"! It should be understandable too, as you can end up dead in America by simply being a Jew, black, a Muslim or even gay. Eaiser when people who might hate you for being any of those things also have a right to carry a gun. People without guns normally just beat you up.

Ben I dis agree with you on one thing. Suddam did not have to be removed. No more than Lee Ill. No more than any other Dictator running any Country in the world! It is not the job of the USA to force what you call "Democracy" (although definately not that at all) down the throats of any people of another Country. I would feel an issue of Suddam would be better taken that the USA had no right to help him get into power!

For all of the comments on Canada not being able to protect themselves, I simply ask... are we under attack? Do we give anyone reason to attack us? The answer to that unfortunately is "yes". We give other Countries reason to attack Canada simply because we are "best friends" with the USA! If the USA is gonna cause all this s**t, they can certainly protect us from the people who might like to invade us because of what the USA does.

Cuba has a dictator. Why not invade Cuba? I am sure you could spin some bad stuff on Castro if ya wanted. China has a dictator, why not invade China? Iraq? N. Korea?

Oh & do not sit back & say "we might"! Don't you think the USA has caused enough trouble already? Yes B, I doubt your people will let Bush expand anymore. I am sure your President will go down in history as the one that "cooked your goose" in world opinion. Tony Blair has a lot of egg on his face, but I am sure history will also prove you were simply being fooled.

Now again, how many months leway is a President allowed to force the Country into an agressive act without approval from the House? I am sure you know the answer. It is the reason why the USA is in this situation in the "first place".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#333 Consumer Comment

Ben from Cali Was right on Point...But...

AUTHOR: Kevin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

These neocons are whack jobs and there is no way of changing their demented minds. If Bush were Pontius Pilot they would find some way of justifying the crucifixtion of Christ...and attempt to blame it on Bill Clinton. Good try though Ben.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#332 Consumer Comment

Jason? Spin?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Jason, you have got to be kidding me. I posted actual quotes. They are fact. Now how you digest them is your problem, but they were still said by these people.

Spin? I dont think so. I would be "spin" had I added other comments after each...LIKE YOU DID. I posted what was said and at what time.

About Delay and his "violence is caused by birth control".....

No amount of YOUR "spin" is going to change the fact that this idiot said this. And no amount of your "spin" is going to change exactly what he ment. He said that its because of women using birth control. Instead of saying I'm "spinning" it by just posting what was said why dont you try and support it. You dont, because you cant. There are no outragous facts to back up that claim. Its just plain silly and you know it. Admit it.

The comment about "people living on $4.25 an hour dont exist" was also a direct quote. Face it man, the guy said it. No amount of "spin" on any side is going to change the fact this guy lives in la la land.

About Bush and the "world is more peaceful under me" garbage........I believe your resonse was "well that was at the BEGINNING of Iraqi Freedom". Well....YES it was. Kinda funny eh? I think the Prez there put his own foot in his mouth. Next time tell your dictator to actually WIN a war before saying there is a peace.


Spin...me? I dont think so. I posted what was said, nothing more. You, my dear conservative patriot(act), spun your whole post to try and justify obviously stupid quotes by your insane leaders.

Now if I were to post that Dan Quayle said "I love California, I was practically raised in Pheonix", I bet you would twist and contort that into some sort of "spin" job by me? Get working! I need the laugh of watching you try and difuse that one. (Quayle did say that by the way!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#331 Consumer Comment

Jason? Spin?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Jason, you have got to be kidding me. I posted actual quotes. They are fact. Now how you digest them is your problem, but they were still said by these people.

Spin? I dont think so. I would be "spin" had I added other comments after each...LIKE YOU DID. I posted what was said and at what time.

About Delay and his "violence is caused by birth control".....

No amount of YOUR "spin" is going to change the fact that this idiot said this. And no amount of your "spin" is going to change exactly what he ment. He said that its because of women using birth control. Instead of saying I'm "spinning" it by just posting what was said why dont you try and support it. You dont, because you cant. There are no outragous facts to back up that claim. Its just plain silly and you know it. Admit it.

The comment about "people living on $4.25 an hour dont exist" was also a direct quote. Face it man, the guy said it. No amount of "spin" on any side is going to change the fact this guy lives in la la land.

About Bush and the "world is more peaceful under me" garbage........I believe your resonse was "well that was at the BEGINNING of Iraqi Freedom". Well....YES it was. Kinda funny eh? I think the Prez there put his own foot in his mouth. Next time tell your dictator to actually WIN a war before saying there is a peace.


Spin...me? I dont think so. I posted what was said, nothing more. You, my dear conservative patriot(act), spun your whole post to try and justify obviously stupid quotes by your insane leaders.

Now if I were to post that Dan Quayle said "I love California, I was practically raised in Pheonix", I bet you would twist and contort that into some sort of "spin" job by me? Get working! I need the laugh of watching you try and difuse that one. (Quayle did say that by the way!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#330 Consumer Comment

Jason? Spin?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Jason, you have got to be kidding me. I posted actual quotes. They are fact. Now how you digest them is your problem, but they were still said by these people.

Spin? I dont think so. I would be "spin" had I added other comments after each...LIKE YOU DID. I posted what was said and at what time.

About Delay and his "violence is caused by birth control".....

No amount of YOUR "spin" is going to change the fact that this idiot said this. And no amount of your "spin" is going to change exactly what he ment. He said that its because of women using birth control. Instead of saying I'm "spinning" it by just posting what was said why dont you try and support it. You dont, because you cant. There are no outragous facts to back up that claim. Its just plain silly and you know it. Admit it.

The comment about "people living on $4.25 an hour dont exist" was also a direct quote. Face it man, the guy said it. No amount of "spin" on any side is going to change the fact this guy lives in la la land.

About Bush and the "world is more peaceful under me" garbage........I believe your resonse was "well that was at the BEGINNING of Iraqi Freedom". Well....YES it was. Kinda funny eh? I think the Prez there put his own foot in his mouth. Next time tell your dictator to actually WIN a war before saying there is a peace.


Spin...me? I dont think so. I posted what was said, nothing more. You, my dear conservative patriot(act), spun your whole post to try and justify obviously stupid quotes by your insane leaders.

Now if I were to post that Dan Quayle said "I love California, I was practically raised in Pheonix", I bet you would twist and contort that into some sort of "spin" job by me? Get working! I need the laugh of watching you try and difuse that one. (Quayle did say that by the way!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#329 Consumer Comment

Jason? Spin?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Jason, you have got to be kidding me. I posted actual quotes. They are fact. Now how you digest them is your problem, but they were still said by these people.

Spin? I dont think so. I would be "spin" had I added other comments after each...LIKE YOU DID. I posted what was said and at what time.

About Delay and his "violence is caused by birth control".....

No amount of YOUR "spin" is going to change the fact that this idiot said this. And no amount of your "spin" is going to change exactly what he ment. He said that its because of women using birth control. Instead of saying I'm "spinning" it by just posting what was said why dont you try and support it. You dont, because you cant. There are no outragous facts to back up that claim. Its just plain silly and you know it. Admit it.

The comment about "people living on $4.25 an hour dont exist" was also a direct quote. Face it man, the guy said it. No amount of "spin" on any side is going to change the fact this guy lives in la la land.

About Bush and the "world is more peaceful under me" garbage........I believe your resonse was "well that was at the BEGINNING of Iraqi Freedom". Well....YES it was. Kinda funny eh? I think the Prez there put his own foot in his mouth. Next time tell your dictator to actually WIN a war before saying there is a peace.


Spin...me? I dont think so. I posted what was said, nothing more. You, my dear conservative patriot(act), spun your whole post to try and justify obviously stupid quotes by your insane leaders.

Now if I were to post that Dan Quayle said "I love California, I was practically raised in Pheonix", I bet you would twist and contort that into some sort of "spin" job by me? Get working! I need the laugh of watching you try and difuse that one. (Quayle did say that by the way!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#328 Consumer Comment

Your lips keep moving, but all I hear is "Blahh..Blahh..Blahh..."

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

That's about what it amounts to, and little more. After all, the reasoning here is to repeat, repeat, repeat, over and over again.

So I'll keep it simple.

Jon...nice social life. Glad to know you're true to your convictions.

James of Calgary...still no facts from you, that prove anything. Blah-blah, bleat. You don't even have the right to discuss IQ issues...you're sorely underqualified.

Ben, don't bother trying to attack my faith in a loving God, because I've heard it all before. I stand on the fact that I have answered your questions sufficiently, and all you have left to do is knock God. I've heard so much of it before, and I won't bother to entertain you. This report is about Bush, not God. (Like I care what you think about my faith, calling the Bible a nursery rhyme book.)

Outside of all that, we'll all learn in the end who is right. If I'm wrong, then so be it...I've lived a good life, and wish to leave behind no regrets. If y'all are right, take your "neener-neenering" to the grave, where it'll matter no more than it does here.

Robert and "B.", once again, you both have my respect. You have presented some wonderful info, and have a good, solid direction. You and Robert both, even if you don't agree with each other all the time, seem to have a clear grasp of the fact that we don't have to agree to get along. At least neither one is truly vicious.

Shawn, don't let James suck you in...we've already seen how he handles facts...sorta like the way he handles business at Great Cars And Trucks (of which, at present, there are sixteen individual complaints on the Rip Off Reports, God knows how many there are elsewhere!). No matter how correct the Customers are, the same rhetoric is bandied back at them..."It's your fault....you didn't follow directions and jump through the impossible hoops to get your refund!" But I digress...you wanna see what I mean, just type in the business name. People are so sick of responding to him, they've just about given up. Those poor folks.

And yeah, I'll be sure to keep that jab consistent. Eventually, those that seek out "Great Cars and Trucks" will get to read this Report, as well (because GC&T is mentioned in the post), and they'll get a look into the mind of the "Service Representative" that's bashing them, and then they'll KNOW to take their business elsewhere.

Back to Shawn:
You're doing a fine job at comparing governments, the likenesses and differences. I don't know much about Canadian government, but you make it sound interesting...I might just read some on the subject ("Social Studies" has been a LONG way off for me, LOL!). Thanks for your contribution.

Stay safe and blessed to you all (whether you believe in God or not).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#327 Consumer Comment

Just my thoughts

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Hello all, while this is my first post in this thread I have been reading it daily. I am not a republican, nor a Liberal, not right or left, not a Democrat, I am an American. I enjoy the freedoms like all of us have on this thread. The freedom to comment, put down, spew trash, and read it all.

What I don't understand is why one side hates the other? why cant they work together? Why the name calling? why the hatred? I think all sides have their good points and bad points.

I don't think it is right for our president to quote anything religious while he is in the public eye, however I do believe in GOD. I don't think it is right for him to push his religion on us. After all, wasn't that one of the reasons we came to this continent in the first place? Now don't get me wrong here, why in the heck cant the 10 commandments be in schools, be in the courts? I cant think that anyone would have any problem with them except maybe for the first.. assuming you don't believe in any GOD. Now for the people don't think they should be a basis for law.. can I take your wife? your property? Kill? come on.. how does it hurt your children to read such things?

About the morning after pill.. ok give me a break on that one..its the morning after how many cells does it take before you call it a person? one? two? I am assuming that all the people against this don't use any kind of birth control? Now, I do have a problem past a certain point, and no that is not too far into pregnancy, but I am not going to debate that.

About the United States.. Does history mean anything to people? Do we and the Roman Empire have any similarities?

I think we live in ONE of the greatest countries in the world. I think our reputation has been tarnished by many bad decisions in the past and will in the future. No body freed us from the times in Europe, we did. Over the course of American history, many lives have been lost to get where we are now and that was OUR choice. I do not think we have the right to force our choice on other people.

Unfortunately, like our president, I do not have all the answers and I can not see the future. But I can tell you this, I KNEW that Iraq would not just be a simple task, and would not be over like we were led to believe in the beginning. Heck, look at history!.. The bad side, our government knew it too. Unfortunately, they did not want to tell the public then, because like now, the MAJORITY would not have let it happen.

The bad part of all of this, is that the individuals who do and don't support the government.. Republicans, Demos.. etc etc.. are all being shafted. There are so many things that we the average person don't know about. Is it for the better? presently yes, 40 years from now? I cant see how. Not that I believe in UFO's or such, but heck 50 years later what can be in those papers that they still need to black out? or loose? cant be the stealth fighter..

I think we should not keep the dang nativity scenes off of public land.. give me a break! even if I didn't believe, or I did, what does it hurt me? Personally I love seeing them at Christmas.. they bring such peace in a world of confusion. Why, I cant I get up and see the 10 commandments at town hall? school? hey makes me feel good that maybe the idiot who wants to take my things or wife for that matter changed his mind after seeing them. On the flip side, if I want to use birth control, that's MY choice, in MY HOME. Stay out, what I do there is my business as long as its legal.

Heck, who are we to say two woman or men cant do what they want behind closed doors? What makes YOUR GOD right and mine wrong? What makes your beliefs right and mine wrong? The fact is no one will know until it is their time. When my time comes, I hope that I made all the right choices to be at peace. While I am not ignorant, I make mistakes, I would like to think I understand. If I want to tell you about GOD and you want to listen.. Great!, but if you don't, I shall smile pleasantly and accept what the founders of this nation and GOD gave you FREE WILL!

In closing, I don't want a president, a Liberal, a Democrat, and Republican, left wing, right wing, a homosexual, a human or whatever taking away my free will. As long as I use the majority of the 10 commandments as basis for my life, I think I will do fine. I don't have to believe in GOD, or Allah or whomever.. I would like to see everyone's points, and even I know our president can be wrong, just like I can, we are all human. I guess I could go on, but I have things to do.... Until the next post.. I hope everyone has a great day..

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#326 Consumer Comment

Just my thoughts

AUTHOR: Jeff - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Hello all, while this is my first post in this thread I have been reading it daily. I am not a republican, nor a Liberal, not right or left, not a Democrat, I am an American. I enjoy the freedoms like all of us have on this thread. The freedom to comment, put down, spew trash, and read it all.

What I don't understand is why one side hates the other? why cant they work together? Why the name calling? why the hatred? I think all sides have their good points and bad points.

I don't think it is right for our president to quote anything religious while he is in the public eye, however I do believe in GOD. I don't think it is right for him to push his religion on us. After all, wasn't that one of the reasons we came to this continent in the first place? Now don't get me wrong here, why in the heck cant the 10 commandments be in schools, be in the courts? I cant think that anyone would have any problem with them except maybe for the first.. assuming you don't believe in any GOD. Now for the people don't think they should be a basis for law.. can I take your wife? your property? Kill? come on.. how does it hurt your children to read such things?

About the morning after pill.. ok give me a break on that one..its the morning after how many cells does it take before you call it a person? one? two? I am assuming that all the people against this don't use any kind of birth control? Now, I do have a problem past a certain point, and no that is not too far into pregnancy, but I am not going to debate that.

About the United States.. Does history mean anything to people? Do we and the Roman Empire have any similarities?

I think we live in ONE of the greatest countries in the world. I think our reputation has been tarnished by many bad decisions in the past and will in the future. No body freed us from the times in Europe, we did. Over the course of American history, many lives have been lost to get where we are now and that was OUR choice. I do not think we have the right to force our choice on other people.

Unfortunately, like our president, I do not have all the answers and I can not see the future. But I can tell you this, I KNEW that Iraq would not just be a simple task, and would not be over like we were led to believe in the beginning. Heck, look at history!.. The bad side, our government knew it too. Unfortunately, they did not want to tell the public then, because like now, the MAJORITY would not have let it happen.

The bad part of all of this, is that the individuals who do and don't support the government.. Republicans, Demos.. etc etc.. are all being shafted. There are so many things that we the average person don't know about. Is it for the better? presently yes, 40 years from now? I cant see how. Not that I believe in UFO's or such, but heck 50 years later what can be in those papers that they still need to black out? or loose? cant be the stealth fighter..

I think we should not keep the dang nativity scenes off of public land.. give me a break! even if I didn't believe, or I did, what does it hurt me? Personally I love seeing them at Christmas.. they bring such peace in a world of confusion. Why, I cant I get up and see the 10 commandments at town hall? school? hey makes me feel good that maybe the idiot who wants to take my things or wife for that matter changed his mind after seeing them. On the flip side, if I want to use birth control, that's MY choice, in MY HOME. Stay out, what I do there is my business as long as its legal.

Heck, who are we to say two woman or men cant do what they want behind closed doors? What makes YOUR GOD right and mine wrong? What makes your beliefs right and mine wrong? The fact is no one will know until it is their time. When my time comes, I hope that I made all the right choices to be at peace. While I am not ignorant, I make mistakes, I would like to think I understand. If I want to tell you about GOD and you want to listen.. Great!, but if you don't, I shall smile pleasantly and accept what the founders of this nation and GOD gave you FREE WILL!

In closing, I don't want a president, a Liberal, a Democrat, and Republican, left wing, right wing, a homosexual, a human or whatever taking away my free will. As long as I use the majority of the 10 commandments as basis for my life, I think I will do fine. I don't have to believe in GOD, or Allah or whomever.. I would like to see everyone's points, and even I know our president can be wrong, just like I can, we are all human. I guess I could go on, but I have things to do.... Until the next post.. I hope everyone has a great day..

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#325 Consumer Comment

Dateline: Kabul, Afghanistan

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005

The remnants of the Taliban launched a mortar attack that hit the CANADIAN Embassy, which is in an enclave housing all of the embassies and government buildings.

It is a MILE away from the US Embassy, which was unharmed as were ALL OTHER buildings...ONLY the Canadians were targeted.

Gee, how can this be James? You said everyone loves you Beady-Eyed Devils up there? Apparently not, eh?

This happened hours before my Sec of State arrived in Kabul, so that eliminates your upcoming rant about how they were trying to kill her. Must be real tough being able to attack women though...Muslims do it so well. Or NOT! The very same cowards you defend commit crimes against women and then say something stupid about the Quoran allowing it under Islam...that's the religion of peace, you know.

In Bam, Iran, when they had their big earthquake in 2003, many women were allowed to die because they were found alive, but not covered head to toe...a crime according to Islam. They also had no medical care for them, as men are not allowed to treat women and women are not allowed to be educated, much less become Doctors...a crime according to Islam.

I wonder how many are going to die in Pakistan because of this same ignorance. I have yet to see a single frame of footage showing women getting medical treatment due to their earthquake. Lot's of men though. Must be rough living in a country that has no women. Maybe that's why they get so mad...we have all the babes.

You can see what I am talking about at grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/002188.html. You can find out all you want to know about these great defenders of women's rights by accessing the Persian News.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#324 Consumer Comment

Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Vera states....

"Ben, You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party."


Ok, fine Vera. But I have a few questions. What exactly is it that this "Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists" has done to you? Or anyone for that matter? All I've seen them do is b***h about this travesty of reality that the nutcases in power have gotten us into. (Oh and I'm not admitting to that "satan" comment....spare me the stories of evil elves from your Mother Goose book....er...I mean..The Bible)

As for your "homophobe-religious zealots".......

I see them invading peoples privacy (patriot act).

I see them invading peoples bedroom (homophobia).

I see them invading other countries for fake reasons and getting a buttload of our children killed (Iraq).

I see them eroding our civil rights like the McCarthy era (War on Terror).

I see them forcing religon in peoples faces (religon in government).

I see them be the utimate hypocrites about making BIG government smaller and out of our lives as they spend like drunken sailors in a two dollar w***e house.

And, I see their leader in charge of my country, the most powerful on earth, and make it the most loathed entity in the history of planet.


So Vera, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view? Are you a Jerry Falwell follower and really believe that the people that pulled off 9/11 satanist, liberal lesbians, that kill their children?

Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet? (and I'm not talking the d**n enviroment here people....I mean the WHOLE freaking planet! Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#323 Consumer Comment

Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Vera states....

"Ben, You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party."


Ok, fine Vera. But I have a few questions. What exactly is it that this "Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists" has done to you? Or anyone for that matter? All I've seen them do is b***h about this travesty of reality that the nutcases in power have gotten us into. (Oh and I'm not admitting to that "satan" comment....spare me the stories of evil elves from your Mother Goose book....er...I mean..The Bible)

As for your "homophobe-religious zealots".......

I see them invading peoples privacy (patriot act).

I see them invading peoples bedroom (homophobia).

I see them invading other countries for fake reasons and getting a buttload of our children killed (Iraq).

I see them eroding our civil rights like the McCarthy era (War on Terror).

I see them forcing religon in peoples faces (religon in government).

I see them be the utimate hypocrites about making BIG government smaller and out of our lives as they spend like drunken sailors in a two dollar w***e house.

And, I see their leader in charge of my country, the most powerful on earth, and make it the most loathed entity in the history of planet.


So Vera, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view? Are you a Jerry Falwell follower and really believe that the people that pulled off 9/11 satanist, liberal lesbians, that kill their children?

Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet? (and I'm not talking the d**n enviroment here people....I mean the WHOLE freaking planet! Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#322 Consumer Comment

Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Vera states....

"Ben, You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party."


Ok, fine Vera. But I have a few questions. What exactly is it that this "Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists" has done to you? Or anyone for that matter? All I've seen them do is b***h about this travesty of reality that the nutcases in power have gotten us into. (Oh and I'm not admitting to that "satan" comment....spare me the stories of evil elves from your Mother Goose book....er...I mean..The Bible)

As for your "homophobe-religious zealots".......

I see them invading peoples privacy (patriot act).

I see them invading peoples bedroom (homophobia).

I see them invading other countries for fake reasons and getting a buttload of our children killed (Iraq).

I see them eroding our civil rights like the McCarthy era (War on Terror).

I see them forcing religon in peoples faces (religon in government).

I see them be the utimate hypocrites about making BIG government smaller and out of our lives as they spend like drunken sailors in a two dollar w***e house.

And, I see their leader in charge of my country, the most powerful on earth, and make it the most loathed entity in the history of planet.


So Vera, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view? Are you a Jerry Falwell follower and really believe that the people that pulled off 9/11 satanist, liberal lesbians, that kill their children?

Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet? (and I'm not talking the d**n enviroment here people....I mean the WHOLE freaking planet! Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#321 Consumer Comment

Vera , Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Vera states....

"Ben, You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party."


Ok, fine Vera. But I have a few questions. What exactly is it that this "Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists" has done to you? Or anyone for that matter? All I've seen them do is b***h about this travesty of reality that the nutcases in power have gotten us into. (Oh and I'm not admitting to that "satan" comment....spare me the stories of evil elves from your Mother Goose book....er...I mean..The Bible)

As for your "homophobe-religious zealots".......

I see them invading peoples privacy (patriot act).

I see them invading peoples bedroom (homophobia).

I see them invading other countries for fake reasons and getting a buttload of our children killed (Iraq).

I see them eroding our civil rights like the McCarthy era (War on Terror).

I see them forcing religon in peoples faces (religon in government).

I see them be the utimate hypocrites about making BIG government smaller and out of our lives as they spend like drunken sailors in a two dollar w***e house.

And, I see their leader in charge of my country, the most powerful on earth, and make it the most loathed entity in the history of planet.


So Vera, just what was it? Just what was it that these folks did that put you over the edge and dive head first into the Twilight Zone? Was it that you people just cant handle the fact others have the right to oppose your view? Are you a Jerry Falwell follower and really believe that the people that pulled off 9/11 satanist, liberal lesbians, that kill their children?

Just what was it that makes you people just want to rape the planet? (and I'm not talking the d**n enviroment here people....I mean the WHOLE freaking planet! Not even the sex habits of lichen in the Russian tundra is safe from regulation and ridicule by these nuts! I'm sure they could find something against "god" in the way those cells multiply.)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#320 Consumer Suggestion

Hey Jon .. come back to these posts in a year, two years, 3 years from now & see who was right

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Jon;

I may be pretty pissed at those guys & I know we agree for the most part, but I still need your help.

If it was not for people like you & I, these guys would spread their "puss" further out into the American Society & nobody would get it!

Honestly, come back to these posts in a year, two years, 3 years from now & see who was right. Something you can show your Grandchildren about. See son... I did put my two cents in to try to stop it! How many more people are dead? How much more money was spent? How safe does your Grandchild feel leaving your borders?

Then you can point to the jerks & let the kids look at the posts. Show em how Vera is totally out to lunch. Show em how Robert is nothing less than everything the USA is hated for all over the world. Show em how Shawn babbles on about things he knows nothing about & quotes statistics that have no revelence to the main issue.

Let them know that even a simple genius IQ search on google will give you the following results:

IQ Basics
IQ Range. Classification. 140 and over, Genius or near genius. 120-140, Very superior
intelligence. 110-120, Superior intelligence ...

Show em how this Shawn guy wants you to think all these Presidents are Genius or at least with "Superior intelligence". Show em how silly these people are.

The history books will note that Iraq was invaded illegally. They will clearly point out that how WMD's were never found in Iraq. The history books will quote the date when the United States of America begain their "Quest for World Domination" & you can point out that you were one of the voices that stood up against it.

Don't cop out now Jon. Your Grandchildren, if they live, will like to know.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#319 Consumer Comment

Ben, Forget about Vera and her underlings.

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Ben, I indicated in my last post that it would be my last time to visit this subject. But at that point I hadn't read your posts. So, now that I have I wish to make one last parting post here to commend your outstanding and insightful posts. I totally agree with your opinions and observations on this subject. Maybe you can convince Vera too. If you can ever keep her mouth shut for more than two minutes. Actually I just think she's very bitter because Clinton turned her down in favor of Monaca or some other tramp brighter than her.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#318 Consumer Comment

How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

To start with:

Ben, I really didn't want to "get into" anything but the facts when I started discrediting you "liberals" on this post, but since you all seem to ignore facts and spew your vehement nonsense, I have little choice but to respond in manners which you might understand.

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Do guns make people violent? I grew up in a home with guns and to this day I haven't killed anyone. I don't like guns, but I also want to make sure that should I need a gun, I have that right and it won't take me "14 days" to obtain one. Can you actually look atr yourself in the mirror each morning and say that you disagree - was teen violence more common before the "latchkey kid" generation? Nope. Should we teach that the world is flat? Why not? Darwin disproved his own theory (of evolution) before he died, Darwin stated "my discoveries hold true based on natures order of progression being from the simplistic, to the complex." As anyone with half a brain knows, the natural order is from the complex, to the simplistic. Gotta admit, I don't think birth control pills have anything to do with it, but then I don't agree with everything that any one person says, and besides, I think his point here was about the unsupervised children - the birth control bit was just a misplaced "jab" at the left.

"I don't spend a lot of time thinking about ...why I do things." - George Bush speaking on Air Force One June, 4,2003.

C'mon, quit the spin game. Put it in context and it isn't as "powerful" as you would have others believe. Do you REALLY sit around and ponder what you did yesterday? How would you get anything done today? If you spend alot of time thinking about what you have already done, it's too late! and a waste of time! and you should get psychiatric help!!! Quit spinning.

"The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

Look at the date, this statement was made during the early stages of "Iraqi Freedom". At this point G.W.B. (and a majority of the country) truly believed that this was to be a shorter "war" than it has turned out to be. Most everybody(except the far left and thier pessimistic supporters) believed that this was also true in the sense that a dangerous man was (in the process of ) being removed as the threat that he was and others like him would view this swift act of defense/retaliation by the U.S. and "think twice" before acting likewise. Spin it how you want, at that time it was true.

"Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

Ha ha ha SPIN SPIN SPIN... I notice how all these Democrat support sites "forget" to put the rest of his comments in where he explains that he "doesn't believe they exist" because no family CAN LIVE on min. wage, that's not enough money. These are the families with malnurished children etc.

No, I am not "correcting" every statement you liberals make as my time is too important to me. I spend enough time doing my own research and don,t think it right to have to do the research you should be doing for yourselves as well. I only wish to demonstrate to you that by simply regurgitating what you read on these anti-american, "bush bashing sites that you rely on for "information, you only help spread the lies and half truths that keep you and the rest of the misinformed left from making your choices based on reality. Maybe if you and all those like you would stop taking those lying Democrat's
words at face value, and researched the veracity of such slanderous comments before spreading your vehement spew, the truth would be easier to discern from the left's propoganda and your left-wing polititions would stop B.S.ing you.

Now for James from Calgary. James, James, James, what are we going to do about you - our friend with the frost bitten brain? You don't know much about our government for someone who "claims" to live in Calgary.

Yor "elected" officials are those that sit in th "house of representatives". the party with the most members in the house has a "leader" who is refered to as the "Prime Minister" who APPOINTS your senate. This is the basic structure(short formed) of our/the Canadian government. For any actions of war or even new law to become official, it must first be voted on and passed by a majority of the house of representatives, then the senate, at which point it gets passed on to the Attorney General (who is the Queen's representative and, by the way, has a higher authority than the Prime Minister) who has final approval. If he does not sign, it is not law, or there can be no action taken on the "proposal" at hand. In other words...you were right, I was mistaken - the Prime Minister does not have veto power, it is the attorney General. If he does not agree, he simply does not sign thereby effectively vetoing any proposal. He, like our President in the United States can not enact law without it first passing through the house AND senate (which is elected in the U.S. - appointed in Canada.) Niether of them can make a decision to Go to war and such as you claim our President can. Just as G.W. went to the house and senate and had an almost unanimous vote to support the war in Iraq BEFORE we sent our troops in, he must do so before taking ANY action on behalf of the United States of America. Seems to me that Canada, although independant from "the Crown" for all intensive purposes, is still attached to her and, if ordered, must adhere to her orders.

In other words, if the Queen of England were to order you to war tomorrow, guess what bud, you'd be going to war. This is just a fact, I don't care what your opinion is on this matter, I don't care if that is not what you remember "learning" in school, I don't even care if it pokes a hole in that self righteous bubbleof yours...maybe you should take off your rose colored glasses and research for yourself. Oh, and James...before you respond with a bunch of half-true bullshit to try to rally your supporters around your false ideology and untrue dreamland explanations, do a little research so that they know what they are truly supporting. I think you would probably make a good democrat if you were to run for office down here, you seem to have a knack for lying through your teeth and backing it up with non existant facts that nobody will bother to check on.

As far as your a few of your other assinine comments let me enlighten...take off those damned glasses!...you, th U.S. is not trying to take over the world...yet...but I do believe that that is Mrs. Clinton's goal. Don't believe me? Research her ideas on the U.N. and using it as a "world government"...and guess who she thinks should be in the "President's" seat? Herself of course. Does she understand world economy? I don't think so, she wants to have a single world currency(probably with her ugly hate filled picture on the front - who knows, maybe you can have your picture on the back side, it seems that you are already snuggled up pretty close to that anyway.) Also, Canadian soldiers were also sent to Viet-Nam so I'd watch your mouth about "baby-killers" and such...your fagness, John Kerry" is the only one I know that cowardly shot the defenseless(and then wants everyone else to take the blame while he buys himself a few medals.) And, finally, I have yet to find one little mention from ANY politician in the U.S. where they refer to us as "the world police" ...that is an honor bestowed upon us by others. So James from Calgary...please do me a favor...take your friend from Tupper Lake, Ben, Jon, and the rest of you liberal, constitution trampling, lying, misinformed but too lazy to discover the truth, hate mongering, libel spewing hacks and pick up a few books before responding. maybe try something other than "the world according to the Clinton's " or "john Kerry's "the way I woulda done that". Pick up something that is (if it is available in Canada) non-bias and don't bother typing until you can toss a few facts this way. I'm tired of your drivel, we all know your unsupported and biased opinions on your dilusional world. Time to join the adults and support your discussion topics with facts. Now go to bed and think about reality - don't worry, I'm sure mommy will change your sheets when you piss your pants in fear from the real world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#317 Consumer Comment

How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

To start with:

Ben, I really didn't want to "get into" anything but the facts when I started discrediting you "liberals" on this post, but since you all seem to ignore facts and spew your vehement nonsense, I have little choice but to respond in manners which you might understand.

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Do guns make people violent? I grew up in a home with guns and to this day I haven't killed anyone. I don't like guns, but I also want to make sure that should I need a gun, I have that right and it won't take me "14 days" to obtain one. Can you actually look atr yourself in the mirror each morning and say that you disagree - was teen violence more common before the "latchkey kid" generation? Nope. Should we teach that the world is flat? Why not? Darwin disproved his own theory (of evolution) before he died, Darwin stated "my discoveries hold true based on natures order of progression being from the simplistic, to the complex." As anyone with half a brain knows, the natural order is from the complex, to the simplistic. Gotta admit, I don't think birth control pills have anything to do with it, but then I don't agree with everything that any one person says, and besides, I think his point here was about the unsupervised children - the birth control bit was just a misplaced "jab" at the left.

"I don't spend a lot of time thinking about ...why I do things." - George Bush speaking on Air Force One June, 4,2003.

C'mon, quit the spin game. Put it in context and it isn't as "powerful" as you would have others believe. Do you REALLY sit around and ponder what you did yesterday? How would you get anything done today? If you spend alot of time thinking about what you have already done, it's too late! and a waste of time! and you should get psychiatric help!!! Quit spinning.

"The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

Look at the date, this statement was made during the early stages of "Iraqi Freedom". At this point G.W.B. (and a majority of the country) truly believed that this was to be a shorter "war" than it has turned out to be. Most everybody(except the far left and thier pessimistic supporters) believed that this was also true in the sense that a dangerous man was (in the process of ) being removed as the threat that he was and others like him would view this swift act of defense/retaliation by the U.S. and "think twice" before acting likewise. Spin it how you want, at that time it was true.

"Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

Ha ha ha SPIN SPIN SPIN... I notice how all these Democrat support sites "forget" to put the rest of his comments in where he explains that he "doesn't believe they exist" because no family CAN LIVE on min. wage, that's not enough money. These are the families with malnurished children etc.

No, I am not "correcting" every statement you liberals make as my time is too important to me. I spend enough time doing my own research and don,t think it right to have to do the research you should be doing for yourselves as well. I only wish to demonstrate to you that by simply regurgitating what you read on these anti-american, "bush bashing sites that you rely on for "information, you only help spread the lies and half truths that keep you and the rest of the misinformed left from making your choices based on reality. Maybe if you and all those like you would stop taking those lying Democrat's
words at face value, and researched the veracity of such slanderous comments before spreading your vehement spew, the truth would be easier to discern from the left's propoganda and your left-wing polititions would stop B.S.ing you.

Now for James from Calgary. James, James, James, what are we going to do about you - our friend with the frost bitten brain? You don't know much about our government for someone who "claims" to live in Calgary.

Yor "elected" officials are those that sit in th "house of representatives". the party with the most members in the house has a "leader" who is refered to as the "Prime Minister" who APPOINTS your senate. This is the basic structure(short formed) of our/the Canadian government. For any actions of war or even new law to become official, it must first be voted on and passed by a majority of the house of representatives, then the senate, at which point it gets passed on to the Attorney General (who is the Queen's representative and, by the way, has a higher authority than the Prime Minister) who has final approval. If he does not sign, it is not law, or there can be no action taken on the "proposal" at hand. In other words...you were right, I was mistaken - the Prime Minister does not have veto power, it is the attorney General. If he does not agree, he simply does not sign thereby effectively vetoing any proposal. He, like our President in the United States can not enact law without it first passing through the house AND senate (which is elected in the U.S. - appointed in Canada.) Niether of them can make a decision to Go to war and such as you claim our President can. Just as G.W. went to the house and senate and had an almost unanimous vote to support the war in Iraq BEFORE we sent our troops in, he must do so before taking ANY action on behalf of the United States of America. Seems to me that Canada, although independant from "the Crown" for all intensive purposes, is still attached to her and, if ordered, must adhere to her orders.

In other words, if the Queen of England were to order you to war tomorrow, guess what bud, you'd be going to war. This is just a fact, I don't care what your opinion is on this matter, I don't care if that is not what you remember "learning" in school, I don't even care if it pokes a hole in that self righteous bubbleof yours...maybe you should take off your rose colored glasses and research for yourself. Oh, and James...before you respond with a bunch of half-true bullshit to try to rally your supporters around your false ideology and untrue dreamland explanations, do a little research so that they know what they are truly supporting. I think you would probably make a good democrat if you were to run for office down here, you seem to have a knack for lying through your teeth and backing it up with non existant facts that nobody will bother to check on.

As far as your a few of your other assinine comments let me enlighten...take off those damned glasses!...you, th U.S. is not trying to take over the world...yet...but I do believe that that is Mrs. Clinton's goal. Don't believe me? Research her ideas on the U.N. and using it as a "world government"...and guess who she thinks should be in the "President's" seat? Herself of course. Does she understand world economy? I don't think so, she wants to have a single world currency(probably with her ugly hate filled picture on the front - who knows, maybe you can have your picture on the back side, it seems that you are already snuggled up pretty close to that anyway.) Also, Canadian soldiers were also sent to Viet-Nam so I'd watch your mouth about "baby-killers" and such...your fagness, John Kerry" is the only one I know that cowardly shot the defenseless(and then wants everyone else to take the blame while he buys himself a few medals.) And, finally, I have yet to find one little mention from ANY politician in the U.S. where they refer to us as "the world police" ...that is an honor bestowed upon us by others. So James from Calgary...please do me a favor...take your friend from Tupper Lake, Ben, Jon, and the rest of you liberal, constitution trampling, lying, misinformed but too lazy to discover the truth, hate mongering, libel spewing hacks and pick up a few books before responding. maybe try something other than "the world according to the Clinton's " or "john Kerry's "the way I woulda done that". Pick up something that is (if it is available in Canada) non-bias and don't bother typing until you can toss a few facts this way. I'm tired of your drivel, we all know your unsupported and biased opinions on your dilusional world. Time to join the adults and support your discussion topics with facts. Now go to bed and think about reality - don't worry, I'm sure mommy will change your sheets when you piss your pants in fear from the real world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#316 Consumer Comment

How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

To start with:

Ben, I really didn't want to "get into" anything but the facts when I started discrediting you "liberals" on this post, but since you all seem to ignore facts and spew your vehement nonsense, I have little choice but to respond in manners which you might understand.

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Do guns make people violent? I grew up in a home with guns and to this day I haven't killed anyone. I don't like guns, but I also want to make sure that should I need a gun, I have that right and it won't take me "14 days" to obtain one. Can you actually look atr yourself in the mirror each morning and say that you disagree - was teen violence more common before the "latchkey kid" generation? Nope. Should we teach that the world is flat? Why not? Darwin disproved his own theory (of evolution) before he died, Darwin stated "my discoveries hold true based on natures order of progression being from the simplistic, to the complex." As anyone with half a brain knows, the natural order is from the complex, to the simplistic. Gotta admit, I don't think birth control pills have anything to do with it, but then I don't agree with everything that any one person says, and besides, I think his point here was about the unsupervised children - the birth control bit was just a misplaced "jab" at the left.

"I don't spend a lot of time thinking about ...why I do things." - George Bush speaking on Air Force One June, 4,2003.

C'mon, quit the spin game. Put it in context and it isn't as "powerful" as you would have others believe. Do you REALLY sit around and ponder what you did yesterday? How would you get anything done today? If you spend alot of time thinking about what you have already done, it's too late! and a waste of time! and you should get psychiatric help!!! Quit spinning.

"The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

Look at the date, this statement was made during the early stages of "Iraqi Freedom". At this point G.W.B. (and a majority of the country) truly believed that this was to be a shorter "war" than it has turned out to be. Most everybody(except the far left and thier pessimistic supporters) believed that this was also true in the sense that a dangerous man was (in the process of ) being removed as the threat that he was and others like him would view this swift act of defense/retaliation by the U.S. and "think twice" before acting likewise. Spin it how you want, at that time it was true.

"Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

Ha ha ha SPIN SPIN SPIN... I notice how all these Democrat support sites "forget" to put the rest of his comments in where he explains that he "doesn't believe they exist" because no family CAN LIVE on min. wage, that's not enough money. These are the families with malnurished children etc.

No, I am not "correcting" every statement you liberals make as my time is too important to me. I spend enough time doing my own research and don,t think it right to have to do the research you should be doing for yourselves as well. I only wish to demonstrate to you that by simply regurgitating what you read on these anti-american, "bush bashing sites that you rely on for "information, you only help spread the lies and half truths that keep you and the rest of the misinformed left from making your choices based on reality. Maybe if you and all those like you would stop taking those lying Democrat's
words at face value, and researched the veracity of such slanderous comments before spreading your vehement spew, the truth would be easier to discern from the left's propoganda and your left-wing polititions would stop B.S.ing you.

Now for James from Calgary. James, James, James, what are we going to do about you - our friend with the frost bitten brain? You don't know much about our government for someone who "claims" to live in Calgary.

Yor "elected" officials are those that sit in th "house of representatives". the party with the most members in the house has a "leader" who is refered to as the "Prime Minister" who APPOINTS your senate. This is the basic structure(short formed) of our/the Canadian government. For any actions of war or even new law to become official, it must first be voted on and passed by a majority of the house of representatives, then the senate, at which point it gets passed on to the Attorney General (who is the Queen's representative and, by the way, has a higher authority than the Prime Minister) who has final approval. If he does not sign, it is not law, or there can be no action taken on the "proposal" at hand. In other words...you were right, I was mistaken - the Prime Minister does not have veto power, it is the attorney General. If he does not agree, he simply does not sign thereby effectively vetoing any proposal. He, like our President in the United States can not enact law without it first passing through the house AND senate (which is elected in the U.S. - appointed in Canada.) Niether of them can make a decision to Go to war and such as you claim our President can. Just as G.W. went to the house and senate and had an almost unanimous vote to support the war in Iraq BEFORE we sent our troops in, he must do so before taking ANY action on behalf of the United States of America. Seems to me that Canada, although independant from "the Crown" for all intensive purposes, is still attached to her and, if ordered, must adhere to her orders.

In other words, if the Queen of England were to order you to war tomorrow, guess what bud, you'd be going to war. This is just a fact, I don't care what your opinion is on this matter, I don't care if that is not what you remember "learning" in school, I don't even care if it pokes a hole in that self righteous bubbleof yours...maybe you should take off your rose colored glasses and research for yourself. Oh, and James...before you respond with a bunch of half-true bullshit to try to rally your supporters around your false ideology and untrue dreamland explanations, do a little research so that they know what they are truly supporting. I think you would probably make a good democrat if you were to run for office down here, you seem to have a knack for lying through your teeth and backing it up with non existant facts that nobody will bother to check on.

As far as your a few of your other assinine comments let me enlighten...take off those damned glasses!...you, th U.S. is not trying to take over the world...yet...but I do believe that that is Mrs. Clinton's goal. Don't believe me? Research her ideas on the U.N. and using it as a "world government"...and guess who she thinks should be in the "President's" seat? Herself of course. Does she understand world economy? I don't think so, she wants to have a single world currency(probably with her ugly hate filled picture on the front - who knows, maybe you can have your picture on the back side, it seems that you are already snuggled up pretty close to that anyway.) Also, Canadian soldiers were also sent to Viet-Nam so I'd watch your mouth about "baby-killers" and such...your fagness, John Kerry" is the only one I know that cowardly shot the defenseless(and then wants everyone else to take the blame while he buys himself a few medals.) And, finally, I have yet to find one little mention from ANY politician in the U.S. where they refer to us as "the world police" ...that is an honor bestowed upon us by others. So James from Calgary...please do me a favor...take your friend from Tupper Lake, Ben, Jon, and the rest of you liberal, constitution trampling, lying, misinformed but too lazy to discover the truth, hate mongering, libel spewing hacks and pick up a few books before responding. maybe try something other than "the world according to the Clinton's " or "john Kerry's "the way I woulda done that". Pick up something that is (if it is available in Canada) non-bias and don't bother typing until you can toss a few facts this way. I'm tired of your drivel, we all know your unsupported and biased opinions on your dilusional world. Time to join the adults and support your discussion topics with facts. Now go to bed and think about reality - don't worry, I'm sure mommy will change your sheets when you piss your pants in fear from the real world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#315 Consumer Comment

How Rude! Please pull your head outta your a*s before speaking.

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

To start with:

Ben, I really didn't want to "get into" anything but the facts when I started discrediting you "liberals" on this post, but since you all seem to ignore facts and spew your vehement nonsense, I have little choice but to respond in manners which you might understand.

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

Do guns make people violent? I grew up in a home with guns and to this day I haven't killed anyone. I don't like guns, but I also want to make sure that should I need a gun, I have that right and it won't take me "14 days" to obtain one. Can you actually look atr yourself in the mirror each morning and say that you disagree - was teen violence more common before the "latchkey kid" generation? Nope. Should we teach that the world is flat? Why not? Darwin disproved his own theory (of evolution) before he died, Darwin stated "my discoveries hold true based on natures order of progression being from the simplistic, to the complex." As anyone with half a brain knows, the natural order is from the complex, to the simplistic. Gotta admit, I don't think birth control pills have anything to do with it, but then I don't agree with everything that any one person says, and besides, I think his point here was about the unsupervised children - the birth control bit was just a misplaced "jab" at the left.

"I don't spend a lot of time thinking about ...why I do things." - George Bush speaking on Air Force One June, 4,2003.

C'mon, quit the spin game. Put it in context and it isn't as "powerful" as you would have others believe. Do you REALLY sit around and ponder what you did yesterday? How would you get anything done today? If you spend alot of time thinking about what you have already done, it's too late! and a waste of time! and you should get psychiatric help!!! Quit spinning.

"The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

Look at the date, this statement was made during the early stages of "Iraqi Freedom". At this point G.W.B. (and a majority of the country) truly believed that this was to be a shorter "war" than it has turned out to be. Most everybody(except the far left and thier pessimistic supporters) believed that this was also true in the sense that a dangerous man was (in the process of ) being removed as the threat that he was and others like him would view this swift act of defense/retaliation by the U.S. and "think twice" before acting likewise. Spin it how you want, at that time it was true.

"Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

Ha ha ha SPIN SPIN SPIN... I notice how all these Democrat support sites "forget" to put the rest of his comments in where he explains that he "doesn't believe they exist" because no family CAN LIVE on min. wage, that's not enough money. These are the families with malnurished children etc.

No, I am not "correcting" every statement you liberals make as my time is too important to me. I spend enough time doing my own research and don,t think it right to have to do the research you should be doing for yourselves as well. I only wish to demonstrate to you that by simply regurgitating what you read on these anti-american, "bush bashing sites that you rely on for "information, you only help spread the lies and half truths that keep you and the rest of the misinformed left from making your choices based on reality. Maybe if you and all those like you would stop taking those lying Democrat's
words at face value, and researched the veracity of such slanderous comments before spreading your vehement spew, the truth would be easier to discern from the left's propoganda and your left-wing polititions would stop B.S.ing you.

Now for James from Calgary. James, James, James, what are we going to do about you - our friend with the frost bitten brain? You don't know much about our government for someone who "claims" to live in Calgary.

Yor "elected" officials are those that sit in th "house of representatives". the party with the most members in the house has a "leader" who is refered to as the "Prime Minister" who APPOINTS your senate. This is the basic structure(short formed) of our/the Canadian government. For any actions of war or even new law to become official, it must first be voted on and passed by a majority of the house of representatives, then the senate, at which point it gets passed on to the Attorney General (who is the Queen's representative and, by the way, has a higher authority than the Prime Minister) who has final approval. If he does not sign, it is not law, or there can be no action taken on the "proposal" at hand. In other words...you were right, I was mistaken - the Prime Minister does not have veto power, it is the attorney General. If he does not agree, he simply does not sign thereby effectively vetoing any proposal. He, like our President in the United States can not enact law without it first passing through the house AND senate (which is elected in the U.S. - appointed in Canada.) Niether of them can make a decision to Go to war and such as you claim our President can. Just as G.W. went to the house and senate and had an almost unanimous vote to support the war in Iraq BEFORE we sent our troops in, he must do so before taking ANY action on behalf of the United States of America. Seems to me that Canada, although independant from "the Crown" for all intensive purposes, is still attached to her and, if ordered, must adhere to her orders.

In other words, if the Queen of England were to order you to war tomorrow, guess what bud, you'd be going to war. This is just a fact, I don't care what your opinion is on this matter, I don't care if that is not what you remember "learning" in school, I don't even care if it pokes a hole in that self righteous bubbleof yours...maybe you should take off your rose colored glasses and research for yourself. Oh, and James...before you respond with a bunch of half-true bullshit to try to rally your supporters around your false ideology and untrue dreamland explanations, do a little research so that they know what they are truly supporting. I think you would probably make a good democrat if you were to run for office down here, you seem to have a knack for lying through your teeth and backing it up with non existant facts that nobody will bother to check on.

As far as your a few of your other assinine comments let me enlighten...take off those damned glasses!...you, th U.S. is not trying to take over the world...yet...but I do believe that that is Mrs. Clinton's goal. Don't believe me? Research her ideas on the U.N. and using it as a "world government"...and guess who she thinks should be in the "President's" seat? Herself of course. Does she understand world economy? I don't think so, she wants to have a single world currency(probably with her ugly hate filled picture on the front - who knows, maybe you can have your picture on the back side, it seems that you are already snuggled up pretty close to that anyway.) Also, Canadian soldiers were also sent to Viet-Nam so I'd watch your mouth about "baby-killers" and such...your fagness, John Kerry" is the only one I know that cowardly shot the defenseless(and then wants everyone else to take the blame while he buys himself a few medals.) And, finally, I have yet to find one little mention from ANY politician in the U.S. where they refer to us as "the world police" ...that is an honor bestowed upon us by others. So James from Calgary...please do me a favor...take your friend from Tupper Lake, Ben, Jon, and the rest of you liberal, constitution trampling, lying, misinformed but too lazy to discover the truth, hate mongering, libel spewing hacks and pick up a few books before responding. maybe try something other than "the world according to the Clinton's " or "john Kerry's "the way I woulda done that". Pick up something that is (if it is available in Canada) non-bias and don't bother typing until you can toss a few facts this way. I'm tired of your drivel, we all know your unsupported and biased opinions on your dilusional world. Time to join the adults and support your discussion topics with facts. Now go to bed and think about reality - don't worry, I'm sure mommy will change your sheets when you piss your pants in fear from the real world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#314 Consumer Comment

Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

John, I am so sick of this vacuous argument. How many viable solutions do you suppose there are in this fascist society you and your ilk have created? In theory our men and women in uniform are fighting to defend our country and our constitution, while you mock and publicly vilify this woman for daring to express her opinion that your bloodlust is not worth her son's life. And what was Valerie Plame's crime, that she was dragged naked through the Public Square?

Think about what you are advocating. We should all just shut up and cheer every time this rip-off president and our so-called representatives want to pick up Thor's hammer to bash in the head of some petty dictator who questions our absolute authority? Should we all cheer and glorify the torturing of POWs? Should we form a circle and cheer on the soldier who rapes the village daughter, delighting in our own little frisson as he cuts her throat when he's finished with her? Do we put another ribbon in our war bonnet every time a piece of flying, jagged steel rips into the soft flesh of a 5-10 year old girl, leaving her torn body to agonizingly spurt the final remains of her life into the gutter? Does your lofty ideal of patriotism include the images of American soldiers banging down people's doors in the dead of night, lining their families up at gunpoint, and taking some of them away?

Perhaps the only viable solution is to keep our leaders from starting these illegal, immoral wars in the first place. They probably won't get the message if we shut up or cheer on the troops whenenver they start one. Maybe President George should have thought beyond his 'base' just this one time.

_____
Shawn, Ha ha ha tee hee hee, your posts are so funny, because you are our biggest pile of B.S. We keep trying to shovel you out of the way, but you keep expanding. I hope you're not going to make a big mess when your bubble bursts. Ha ha.

_____
Well, Robert, as I said before, if you can cite one specific paragraph in the Security Council resolutions that authorized the US to invade Iraq, I'm willing to reconsider my opinion. But I've read them all numerous times and seen nothing to that effect. If your best argument is to wave your arms, call out random resolution numbers, and accuse me of being a bedwetter, you might as well save your breath.

_____
James, you've missed the point. Our president cannot go to war and then ask the Congress for permission. In this case, just as in all others, he had to ask permission first. The difference in this case is they didn't just say sure, give em hell, they said when and if these 2 conditions happen we think its time to go to war. He went to war and gave them some bullshit justification. They can't very well "take it back," but I'll bet its the last time you'll ever see the US Congress extend that kind of authority.

Your history lesson is just dandy, but you and Jon both persist in this unsane mindset that there is some cause or some justification for world terrorism. Its just total bullshit. Its worse logic that the s**t President George uses to justify his actions. So, let's say for argument's sake, that I hate the French. They've invaded and taken over part of "my" continent. So first off, I'm gonna send some guys to Germany to blow up some buildings because those lousy Krauts agree with the dirty Frenchies. Then I'm gonna round up a posse of some of my gun-totin buddies, and we're comin up there to kick some French butt! And maybe we'll blow up some people in Bali just for good measure. We gotsta git them Frenchies off our continent! They evil! Just look what they do in Viet Nam!

_____
Ben, lol! I don't know which is funnier, the politicians who come up with this spam, or the little wounded one! right! wing! parrots who come spreading it like the gospel. I can remember in my own youth, I was absolutely enraged at the thought that hippos and horses might have evolved from the same ancestor. And the bc pills, my god, I thought I'd bust another vein every time I saw somebody popping one of those things. And they wonder that they can't get people to take them seriously! ROFL! Of course there were some other things that made me a little angry, like the growing realization that most of the politicians I'd been taught to respect were either crooks or stooges, like the fact that my older relatives and friends were dying in a useless not-war, like the recognition that constitutional rights were class and color coded. But these paled beside the wanton carnage I was exposed to in day care!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#313 Consumer Comment

Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

John, I am so sick of this vacuous argument. How many viable solutions do you suppose there are in this fascist society you and your ilk have created? In theory our men and women in uniform are fighting to defend our country and our constitution, while you mock and publicly vilify this woman for daring to express her opinion that your bloodlust is not worth her son's life. And what was Valerie Plame's crime, that she was dragged naked through the Public Square?

Think about what you are advocating. We should all just shut up and cheer every time this rip-off president and our so-called representatives want to pick up Thor's hammer to bash in the head of some petty dictator who questions our absolute authority? Should we all cheer and glorify the torturing of POWs? Should we form a circle and cheer on the soldier who rapes the village daughter, delighting in our own little frisson as he cuts her throat when he's finished with her? Do we put another ribbon in our war bonnet every time a piece of flying, jagged steel rips into the soft flesh of a 5-10 year old girl, leaving her torn body to agonizingly spurt the final remains of her life into the gutter? Does your lofty ideal of patriotism include the images of American soldiers banging down people's doors in the dead of night, lining their families up at gunpoint, and taking some of them away?

Perhaps the only viable solution is to keep our leaders from starting these illegal, immoral wars in the first place. They probably won't get the message if we shut up or cheer on the troops whenenver they start one. Maybe President George should have thought beyond his 'base' just this one time.

_____
Shawn, Ha ha ha tee hee hee, your posts are so funny, because you are our biggest pile of B.S. We keep trying to shovel you out of the way, but you keep expanding. I hope you're not going to make a big mess when your bubble bursts. Ha ha.

_____
Well, Robert, as I said before, if you can cite one specific paragraph in the Security Council resolutions that authorized the US to invade Iraq, I'm willing to reconsider my opinion. But I've read them all numerous times and seen nothing to that effect. If your best argument is to wave your arms, call out random resolution numbers, and accuse me of being a bedwetter, you might as well save your breath.

_____
James, you've missed the point. Our president cannot go to war and then ask the Congress for permission. In this case, just as in all others, he had to ask permission first. The difference in this case is they didn't just say sure, give em hell, they said when and if these 2 conditions happen we think its time to go to war. He went to war and gave them some bullshit justification. They can't very well "take it back," but I'll bet its the last time you'll ever see the US Congress extend that kind of authority.

Your history lesson is just dandy, but you and Jon both persist in this unsane mindset that there is some cause or some justification for world terrorism. Its just total bullshit. Its worse logic that the s**t President George uses to justify his actions. So, let's say for argument's sake, that I hate the French. They've invaded and taken over part of "my" continent. So first off, I'm gonna send some guys to Germany to blow up some buildings because those lousy Krauts agree with the dirty Frenchies. Then I'm gonna round up a posse of some of my gun-totin buddies, and we're comin up there to kick some French butt! And maybe we'll blow up some people in Bali just for good measure. We gotsta git them Frenchies off our continent! They evil! Just look what they do in Viet Nam!

_____
Ben, lol! I don't know which is funnier, the politicians who come up with this spam, or the little wounded one! right! wing! parrots who come spreading it like the gospel. I can remember in my own youth, I was absolutely enraged at the thought that hippos and horses might have evolved from the same ancestor. And the bc pills, my god, I thought I'd bust another vein every time I saw somebody popping one of those things. And they wonder that they can't get people to take them seriously! ROFL! Of course there were some other things that made me a little angry, like the growing realization that most of the politicians I'd been taught to respect were either crooks or stooges, like the fact that my older relatives and friends were dying in a useless not-war, like the recognition that constitutional rights were class and color coded. But these paled beside the wanton carnage I was exposed to in day care!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#312 Consumer Comment

Just another liberal overreaction to the war...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

John, I am so sick of this vacuous argument. How many viable solutions do you suppose there are in this fascist society you and your ilk have created? In theory our men and women in uniform are fighting to defend our country and our constitution, while you mock and publicly vilify this woman for daring to express her opinion that your bloodlust is not worth her son's life. And what was Valerie Plame's crime, that she was dragged naked through the Public Square?

Think about what you are advocating. We should all just shut up and cheer every time this rip-off president and our so-called representatives want to pick up Thor's hammer to bash in the head of some petty dictator who questions our absolute authority? Should we all cheer and glorify the torturing of POWs? Should we form a circle and cheer on the soldier who rapes the village daughter, delighting in our own little frisson as he cuts her throat when he's finished with her? Do we put another ribbon in our war bonnet every time a piece of flying, jagged steel rips into the soft flesh of a 5-10 year old girl, leaving her torn body to agonizingly spurt the final remains of her life into the gutter? Does your lofty ideal of patriotism include the images of American soldiers banging down people's doors in the dead of night, lining their families up at gunpoint, and taking some of them away?

Perhaps the only viable solution is to keep our leaders from starting these illegal, immoral wars in the first place. They probably won't get the message if we shut up or cheer on the troops whenenver they start one. Maybe President George should have thought beyond his 'base' just this one time.

_____
Shawn, Ha ha ha tee hee hee, your posts are so funny, because you are our biggest pile of B.S. We keep trying to shovel you out of the way, but you keep expanding. I hope you're not going to make a big mess when your bubble bursts. Ha ha.

_____
Well, Robert, as I said before, if you can cite one specific paragraph in the Security Council resolutions that authorized the US to invade Iraq, I'm willing to reconsider my opinion. But I've read them all numerous times and seen nothing to that effect. If your best argument is to wave your arms, call out random resolution numbers, and accuse me of being a bedwetter, you might as well save your breath.

_____
James, you've missed the point. Our president cannot go to war and then ask the Congress for permission. In this case, just as in all others, he had to ask permission first. The difference in this case is they didn't just say sure, give em hell, they said when and if these 2 conditions happen we think its time to go to war. He went to war and gave them some bullshit justification. They can't very well "take it back," but I'll bet its the last time you'll ever see the US Congress extend that kind of authority.

Your history lesson is just dandy, but you and Jon both persist in this unsane mindset that there is some cause or some justification for world terrorism. Its just total bullshit. Its worse logic that the s**t President George uses to justify his actions. So, let's say for argument's sake, that I hate the French. They've invaded and taken over part of "my" continent. So first off, I'm gonna send some guys to Germany to blow up some buildings because those lousy Krauts agree with the dirty Frenchies. Then I'm gonna round up a posse of some of my gun-totin buddies, and we're comin up there to kick some French butt! And maybe we'll blow up some people in Bali just for good measure. We gotsta git them Frenchies off our continent! They evil! Just look what they do in Viet Nam!

_____
Ben, lol! I don't know which is funnier, the politicians who come up with this spam, or the little wounded one! right! wing! parrots who come spreading it like the gospel. I can remember in my own youth, I was absolutely enraged at the thought that hippos and horses might have evolved from the same ancestor. And the bc pills, my god, I thought I'd bust another vein every time I saw somebody popping one of those things. And they wonder that they can't get people to take them seriously! ROFL! Of course there were some other things that made me a little angry, like the growing realization that most of the politicians I'd been taught to respect were either crooks or stooges, like the fact that my older relatives and friends were dying in a useless not-war, like the recognition that constitutional rights were class and color coded. But these paled beside the wanton carnage I was exposed to in day care!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#311 Consumer Comment

h*o, Boy!!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

In regard to the Forceing anyone to do anything against their will is barbaric to say the least post, that sounded downright shrill, and girly as hell.

I am glad that I come from a Country that does not go around the world waving guns & weapons... showing off, don't you get it?

Canada doesn't have the military power to defend itself very adequately for one, should there be a large-scale attack, and no one's really afraid of Canada. Don't you get it?

You know what's crazy? If something like a terrorist attack occurred on Canadian soil, the US would act to defend youprobably even more vigorously than your own military. We'll leave it up to those gung-h*o Americanswe're a peaceful' country. Right? But the terrorists aren't gonna strike at someone who's already on their side.

We also have a higher percentage of soldiers that stick it out in battle than cowardly Americans, percentage wise when we do fight side by side.

Proof, please! Just facts, not opinions! And it has to be an equal number of soldiers, not a percentage. How many Canadian soldiers were present? How many American soldiers were present? Considering the size of Canadian forces and the size of American forces, a smaller number on the Canadians' part would boost that percentage. And they have to be unbiased factsI wanna know where you get your data fromOrwell, or Crichton?

Outside of most big cities in Mexico, you have as little of chance of survival as a Jew in a Concentration camp! Go take a walk on the beach on the Gulf of Mexico & find out! You moron!

The fine folks of Mexico love the US.why do you think we have such troubles with illegal aliens? And Americans can travel freely in and out of Mexico easily, and go as far South as they like. Ohand I lived on the Gulf of Mexico for nearly a decade. Loved it.

And are you happy with what Hitler did to the Jews? You seem to use Hitler as a reference A LOT.

As a matter of fact Canadians can travel anywhere in the world being respected because we are not rifleheads as you are!

Okay, but since you're such a Christian, why don't you go tell a radical Muslim your feelings on Jesus Christ, since you can travel abroad without fear. See what happensremember, I'll get the camera.

we are not rifleheads as you are!
Hmmmthen why this?
! I will shoot you just because my President says so & I don't care if all you have is a stick to fight back with!
How barbaric! Even worse, poor Robert only gets a stick to fight back with? This must be your version of a fair fight.
I feel so sorry for you James.you're gonna get the snot stomped outta you.

Is that because I'm bigger, so I'm better & you have to kiss my a*s!
(Seems the Americans aren't the only ones who think Might Makes Right.)

Your full of crap Robert & I would not be proud to have an attitude like you! I'm bigger, so I'm better & you have to kiss my a*s! I will shoot you just because my President says so & I don't care if all you have is a stick to fight back with! I am superior to you! Robert well kiss mine, as those who live by the sword die by it... thank God! People like you deserve it! It's just too bad you have to drag a bunch of "intelligent" Americans down with the label you put on them with your attitude!

Haaaa--hahahahahahahahahahahhahah!!! d**n, that's funny! :)

You give me an oppertunity of travelling anywhere in the World as a Canadian alone & I can bet you I have little to fear if I really like living & living in peace. As long as people know I am Canadian. Americans cannot say that...

You live in the wealthiest Province. Buy your own d**n ticket. Seriously, thoughI have two Nephews who live abroad. One is, as I have mentioned, in the US Air Force. Like his brother, they are clearly American, of Anglo descent, and they walk freely where ever they wish to go. One lives in Japan, the other in China. In both cases, they create a ripple when they walk the streets because they are tall, fair-skinned and have sandy-blond hair, and the Asian folks seem to find them fascinating. They can communicate freely in either of their local tongues, English and Japanese or Chinese, and are well received when they go to Italy, the UK, Thailand, India, and such. They don't hide the fact that they're Americans, either. They are forthright and civil, and have never been perceived as War Mongers and Rifle-Heads

That's the beauty of our Democracy.all these bleating, whining liberals and Lefties have the option to LEAVE if they don't like it! Yet I notice, they stay. Why? If we're such monsters, then why not distance yourselves as far from us as possible? I love America! And apparently, so does Michael Moore-On, Madonna, Ben Affleck, Sean Penn, and all the other elitist, leg-humping masses. They couldn't live and act the way they do in the Muslim world! They're infidels, too!

Nother bad day at the Keyboard, Dear?
My God, you're an idiot.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#310 Consumer Comment

My thoughts are exactly that

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Hi James,
My thoughts are exactly that; my thoughts. It is up to you to agree or disagree.

I am sure there are a lot more important issues that whether or not a sitting president is a "rip off" or not.

In 2008 we will get another president. Who knows if this person will be better or worse. So just deal with who we have now and quit crying about it.

Anyway, I appreciate your views and comments. Thanks!

P.S I don't know why this thing still has me in Bountiful. I have moved south of there to West Jordan.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#309 Consumer Suggestion

For your information Vera

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Vera;

I have to go through "hoops" since 911 to even get something as simple as a replacement birth certificate! Simply because Canada has & needs to have a higher security level than the USA just so we don't get blamed for the next attack caused by morons driving other people mad 1/2 way across the world, like you! I had to get the hell out of Ontario before something like a bomb goes off in New York! I moved back out west mainly for my own safety after 911! I just hope they don't see anything in the west as a "major target"!

Your stupid war on terrorism does affect me! I didn't even get the oppertunity to vote for your stupid Bush or not! Yet he can stump my ability to travel & make life d**n inconvenient for me just the same! I'm not responsible for this & neither is my Country!

Neither are the dead people in England, or Spain, or Germany or wherever the terrorists strike next in retaliation for your d**n Country not minding its own business on the other side of the World! So don't you bother even thinking it is none of my d**n business! It sure as hell is! It is the "whole Worlds" business now! Simply since it is your Country responsible for this terror in the first place! Provoking others for no d**n good reason!

If you & your kind could concentrate on what happens here on this Continent, my children, your children & our Grandchildren might not have to live in fear all their lives! Your Grandchildren might be able to "freely travel" without the fear of being shot on site in any other Country in the world!

Yes you answered the question Vera! Terrorism will not end when your d**n Country leaves Iraq! 300 million people in the USA & 30 million people in Canada now have to live in fear because of people like you who cant mind your own business!

New York has not gone through its last terror alert! Many people will be imprisioned unfairly because of the Patriot act! Don't go to a sex shop & buy a d***o, cause your bag might get searched on the way back! How would you feel then? Is it gonna end? No! People will continue to die, whether it is your own police who gun them down in suspicion or it be a bomb going off! It's you Vera... the person to blame! You , Robert & Shawn & everyone like you. You & your d**n leader Bush!

Sometimes when others are fighting over silly reasons it takes a senseable individual to break it up! How many senseable Countries have to tell you & your kind to break it up before you listen? Is it gonna take 2000 years you stubburn SOB?

That is how long these terrorists have been fighting with the Jews so far! You & you attitude have expanded it to the world & now you want us all to shut up about it! Well sorry Vera! It affects me! It affects the World! We will not shut up!

A majority of the people on this thread are telling you that! Almost 70% of your fellow Americans are telling you that! Either get it through your head that you are the "root of the problem" or at least do us all a favor by shutting the hell up!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#308 Consumer Comment

The Iraq war...... an equation...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Ok ok folks...conservative, liberal, pro-war, anti-war, it makes no difference. Lets go over some (very few...all that is needed) facts, and put them in an equation.

The run up.....justification.....

1.Iraq had weapons of mass distruction.
Answer: No (3 years and none found...thus FACT)

2.Iraq supported Al-Quada.
Answer: No (fact again...no proof whatsoever...also more proof they hated eachother was found)

3.Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Answer: No (FACT, if its false...then who the hell is this Osama guy??!)

4.Saddam was a terrible guy, for shame, we must oust him.
Answer: Yes (yup the guy stunk...he had to go! FACT)

So, now we have the "justification" part of the equation. The pro-war side gets one out of four. Not very good standing so far. Now lets use those numbers with the next part of the equation, presentation of the "facts" to the public.....

Did our government lead or mislead our nation into a war for reasons based upon the 4 "justifications" above?
Answer: Mislead (Only 1 out of the 4 reasons were based on fact, thus 3 reasons had no foundation whatsoever. And thus, there is no possible way our government effectively "led" us into this war based on only one reason when they gave us four!)


Now, based on the information above, without taking any political affiliation into account, or even touching on the "did they lie or not" factor, how should any rational person feel towards this war?

For me, what political party someone is from has nothing to do with it. Bush was/is President of this country and pushed for this war. The House and Senate has many Republicans and Democrats (and a few other oddballs), and they voted for this war. These people regardless of their political affiliation were responsible for this war. A war easily shown above to be a complete joke of reality. I question with great hostility ANY of these people. I question Bush, I question any Rep and Senator.

It is my duty as an American to question my government when it makes such poor policy.

So, on Iraq, for me it was worthless, counter-productive, and a waste. I put blame on no political party for it. Just the players themselves. But lets not forget that there are FAR more consevatives than liberals still supporting this pathetic reasoning. Which does bring into question their governing skills. (that will be an equation for the future, the..."who would you trust" equation....should be shorter...alot shorter)

Somehow, now that I put this all down, and thinking of the war, I can easily say.....yes....we got ripped off!

And some of you actually attack our "patriotism" for questioning the government!!??? Being a good "patriot" means we have to support this ripoff!??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#307 Consumer Comment

The Iraq war...... an equation...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Ok ok folks...conservative, liberal, pro-war, anti-war, it makes no difference. Lets go over some (very few...all that is needed) facts, and put them in an equation.

The run up.....justification.....

1.Iraq had weapons of mass distruction.
Answer: No (3 years and none found...thus FACT)

2.Iraq supported Al-Quada.
Answer: No (fact again...no proof whatsoever...also more proof they hated eachother was found)

3.Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Answer: No (FACT, if its false...then who the hell is this Osama guy??!)

4.Saddam was a terrible guy, for shame, we must oust him.
Answer: Yes (yup the guy stunk...he had to go! FACT)

So, now we have the "justification" part of the equation. The pro-war side gets one out of four. Not very good standing so far. Now lets use those numbers with the next part of the equation, presentation of the "facts" to the public.....

Did our government lead or mislead our nation into a war for reasons based upon the 4 "justifications" above?
Answer: Mislead (Only 1 out of the 4 reasons were based on fact, thus 3 reasons had no foundation whatsoever. And thus, there is no possible way our government effectively "led" us into this war based on only one reason when they gave us four!)


Now, based on the information above, without taking any political affiliation into account, or even touching on the "did they lie or not" factor, how should any rational person feel towards this war?

For me, what political party someone is from has nothing to do with it. Bush was/is President of this country and pushed for this war. The House and Senate has many Republicans and Democrats (and a few other oddballs), and they voted for this war. These people regardless of their political affiliation were responsible for this war. A war easily shown above to be a complete joke of reality. I question with great hostility ANY of these people. I question Bush, I question any Rep and Senator.

It is my duty as an American to question my government when it makes such poor policy.

So, on Iraq, for me it was worthless, counter-productive, and a waste. I put blame on no political party for it. Just the players themselves. But lets not forget that there are FAR more consevatives than liberals still supporting this pathetic reasoning. Which does bring into question their governing skills. (that will be an equation for the future, the..."who would you trust" equation....should be shorter...alot shorter)

Somehow, now that I put this all down, and thinking of the war, I can easily say.....yes....we got ripped off!

And some of you actually attack our "patriotism" for questioning the government!!??? Being a good "patriot" means we have to support this ripoff!??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#306 Consumer Comment

The Iraq war...... an equation...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Ok ok folks...conservative, liberal, pro-war, anti-war, it makes no difference. Lets go over some (very few...all that is needed) facts, and put them in an equation.

The run up.....justification.....

1.Iraq had weapons of mass distruction.
Answer: No (3 years and none found...thus FACT)

2.Iraq supported Al-Quada.
Answer: No (fact again...no proof whatsoever...also more proof they hated eachother was found)

3.Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Answer: No (FACT, if its false...then who the hell is this Osama guy??!)

4.Saddam was a terrible guy, for shame, we must oust him.
Answer: Yes (yup the guy stunk...he had to go! FACT)

So, now we have the "justification" part of the equation. The pro-war side gets one out of four. Not very good standing so far. Now lets use those numbers with the next part of the equation, presentation of the "facts" to the public.....

Did our government lead or mislead our nation into a war for reasons based upon the 4 "justifications" above?
Answer: Mislead (Only 1 out of the 4 reasons were based on fact, thus 3 reasons had no foundation whatsoever. And thus, there is no possible way our government effectively "led" us into this war based on only one reason when they gave us four!)


Now, based on the information above, without taking any political affiliation into account, or even touching on the "did they lie or not" factor, how should any rational person feel towards this war?

For me, what political party someone is from has nothing to do with it. Bush was/is President of this country and pushed for this war. The House and Senate has many Republicans and Democrats (and a few other oddballs), and they voted for this war. These people regardless of their political affiliation were responsible for this war. A war easily shown above to be a complete joke of reality. I question with great hostility ANY of these people. I question Bush, I question any Rep and Senator.

It is my duty as an American to question my government when it makes such poor policy.

So, on Iraq, for me it was worthless, counter-productive, and a waste. I put blame on no political party for it. Just the players themselves. But lets not forget that there are FAR more consevatives than liberals still supporting this pathetic reasoning. Which does bring into question their governing skills. (that will be an equation for the future, the..."who would you trust" equation....should be shorter...alot shorter)

Somehow, now that I put this all down, and thinking of the war, I can easily say.....yes....we got ripped off!

And some of you actually attack our "patriotism" for questioning the government!!??? Being a good "patriot" means we have to support this ripoff!??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#305 Consumer Comment

The Iraq war...... an equation...

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Ok ok folks...conservative, liberal, pro-war, anti-war, it makes no difference. Lets go over some (very few...all that is needed) facts, and put them in an equation.

The run up.....justification.....

1.Iraq had weapons of mass distruction.
Answer: No (3 years and none found...thus FACT)

2.Iraq supported Al-Quada.
Answer: No (fact again...no proof whatsoever...also more proof they hated eachother was found)

3.Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks.
Answer: No (FACT, if its false...then who the hell is this Osama guy??!)

4.Saddam was a terrible guy, for shame, we must oust him.
Answer: Yes (yup the guy stunk...he had to go! FACT)

So, now we have the "justification" part of the equation. The pro-war side gets one out of four. Not very good standing so far. Now lets use those numbers with the next part of the equation, presentation of the "facts" to the public.....

Did our government lead or mislead our nation into a war for reasons based upon the 4 "justifications" above?
Answer: Mislead (Only 1 out of the 4 reasons were based on fact, thus 3 reasons had no foundation whatsoever. And thus, there is no possible way our government effectively "led" us into this war based on only one reason when they gave us four!)


Now, based on the information above, without taking any political affiliation into account, or even touching on the "did they lie or not" factor, how should any rational person feel towards this war?

For me, what political party someone is from has nothing to do with it. Bush was/is President of this country and pushed for this war. The House and Senate has many Republicans and Democrats (and a few other oddballs), and they voted for this war. These people regardless of their political affiliation were responsible for this war. A war easily shown above to be a complete joke of reality. I question with great hostility ANY of these people. I question Bush, I question any Rep and Senator.

It is my duty as an American to question my government when it makes such poor policy.

So, on Iraq, for me it was worthless, counter-productive, and a waste. I put blame on no political party for it. Just the players themselves. But lets not forget that there are FAR more consevatives than liberals still supporting this pathetic reasoning. Which does bring into question their governing skills. (that will be an equation for the future, the..."who would you trust" equation....should be shorter...alot shorter)

Somehow, now that I put this all down, and thinking of the war, I can easily say.....yes....we got ripped off!

And some of you actually attack our "patriotism" for questioning the government!!??? Being a good "patriot" means we have to support this ripoff!??

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#304 Consumer Suggestion

Forceing anyone to do anything against their will is barbaric to say the least.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Robert;

You can take your "war mongoling" ideas & shove them back into your "cave brain" where they belong! Forceing anyone to do anything against their will is barbaric to say the least. I am glad that I come from a Country that does not go around the world waving guns & weapons... showing off, don't you get it?

It doesn't make you any better if you do! Go to Holland & Norway & ask what they think of Canadian Troops. As a matter of fact Canadians can travel anywhere in the world being respected because we are not rifleheads as you are! We also have a higher percentage of soldiers that stick it out in battle than cowardly Americans, percentage wise when we do fight side by side. Hell the Americans did not even have the balls to help liberate Holland at all! Thank God we only do it for good reasons! Maybe that is why we don't run like cowards from a fight when we know we are doing the right thing! We only do the right thing! Unlike bastards like you who probably laughed throwing old ladies out of helicopters in Vietnam!

You give me an oppertunity of travelling anywhere in the World as a Canadian alone & I can bet you I have little to fear if I really like living & living in peace. As long as people know I am Canadian. Americans cannot say that... even if they were merely traveling to a country as close as Mexico! Outside of most big cities in Mexico, you have as little of chance of survival as a Jew in a Concentration camp! Go take a walk on the beach on the Gulf of Mexico & find out! You moron! No thanks! I don't want to think as you do! I would not wanna travel alone as an American either! Its because of people like you that Americans need to live in fear outside of their own Country.

Your full of crap Robert & I would not be proud to have an attitude like you! I'm bigger, so I'm better & you have to kiss my a*s! I will shoot you just because my President says so & I don't care if all you have is a stick to fight back with! I am superior to you! Robert well kiss mine, as those who live by the sword die by it... thank God! People like you deserve it! It's just too bad you have to drag a bunch of "intelligent" Americans down with the label you put on them with your attitude!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#303 Consumer Comment

James is delusional as always

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

So you think the US needs the Canadians in order to fight a war? Huh? Are you still stoned?

Your country has fewer troops in ANY of it's branches than my country has in a typical Regiment. Add up all of your military members, and you have ONE Division...tops. There are more Marines based at Camp Lejeune than you have in your entire military. Get a grip. The day I wake up and see Canadians fighting along side US troops, is the day I build a Time-Machine and go back to about 1944. Even then, your government was UNWILLING to send troops to the fight. After the horrendous pounding at Dunkirque, the only ones in Europe were volunteers who found their own way to England...and those who went with the First Special Service Force(The Devil's Brigade).

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#302 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn & B

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Well Shawn you still don't concentrate on Iraq. However you are a little misguided on what you do know.

First 2/3rds is a Majority. A Majority is 51%. The Prime Minister has no "veto power" as can be proven by Mulroony's need to stack the Senate to get Free Trade passed, the G.S.T. & his "failed attempt" with the Meech Lake accord. Even if you can pass something in Parliment, it still has to pass the Senate. The Prime Minister can submit anything he wants, but it has to have a vote to pass. Where you ever got the idea that our Prime Minister has "veto power" is beyond me! If he produces something that goes to a vote & it fails, it is called a "non confidence vote" which ousts his party out of power & an Election must be called, just as it happened with Joe Clark. You say you lived in Canada? You certainly don't know the Government! Hell your even lost on the amount of GST!

As for B, the Prime Minister cannot order troops into any Country before he approaches the floor calling for that resolution. That is what is different. Your President can go to war "first" & take up his case with the elected representives later.

In the case with Iraq, he "buffalo'ed" them after the invasion was already complete & I really don't think your elected representitives really wanted to do much about it after all was said & done. Call for another vote today! Your troops would be home tomorrow! A majority of Americans are against this war with Iraq. Look at any poll you desire. Now as far as proof...

B, look at history in the Middle East. You can go back to before the Crusades. The English walked back into the Middle East in 1914 & trouble began there again. Until then the Muslims had "total control" of the region since Richard the Lionhearted failed to take the region the last time & failed. As soon as some other power trys to occupy, terrorism begins. Increased with the creation of the State of Isreal & compleatly supported by the USA. Bases have been in Saudi Arabia for years owned by the USA. Just those things alone caused terrorism. On a much smaller scale.

In my opinion, there is a good possibility Isreal can survive there & is powerful enough to hold onto what they have. The USA is different. For each increase of USA presence in the region, terrorism increases. Turning it back over to Iraqi devices? Oh it might sound bad, but only a dictator like Suddam could handle all 3 factions properly. It will be proven out in the end. The US backed up Govenment in Iraq will fail. Mark my words. The whole exercise in the region is a "waist of time".

History is all the proof you need B. To hell with it being a dumb idea, it is costly! Whether the next big attack will be a nuclear bomb or anthrax... it does not matter! Terrorism will not end until the USA backs down. It probably won't either until something else "big" happens to the USA & people get sick of a war that can go on for over 2000 years! Any Country in the world who feels occupied will rebel. History will teach you that.

Oh & Shawn... nobody labeled the USA as the "worlds Policemen" but yourselves. You did not help anyone in Vietnam, Nicarauga, Bosnia, Iraq or Afganistan! You have not won a single war on your own in your entire history! The world does not look up to "s**t disturbers" & Countries that do not mind their own business, just as the USA used to think about Britian. The USA is looked at by the rest of the world as a "bully"! The most successful Countries to ever attempt to take over the world were the Romans, the Kurds & the English. Each tried & failed. Each ended in destruction with the exception of the English who "got smart" & gave back their conqured regions to the people who rightfully own it. Just as they did with Canada.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#301 Consumer Comment

Well B, you and James are the only two who can't seem to read

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

UNSCR1441 specifically recalls the obligations of Iraq under UNSCR's678 and 687. It also specifically mentions the obligations of Iraq under the terms of the Cease Fire. If you then go back to UNSCR678, you will find the conditions once again for the Cease Fire and the FACT that if they are violated, the fighting will begin again. Like I said, YOU read it...then change your sheets, they are wet.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#300 Consumer Comment

Poor James....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

You keep convincing yourself that I actually care about your opinion. How can anyone be so utterly deluded?

And I gave you facts. You chose to ignore them, so you can keep the people on this board focused on you. You need help, my Dear. Quit filibustering every time you get proven wrong.

And Shnookums, you couldn't possibly grasp what I believe...so take your little laundry list back to your Mommy. Don't try to "tell me my side"...you can't comprehend anything beyond yourself.

So let's boil it down for you:

YOU Believe that the terrorists are good guys and you're happy to see America finally "get what she deserves." (I'll remember to cheer the next time the terrorist cells you Canadians allow to flourish there blow up a Canadian landmark or Financial Center...maybe a brothel, brewery, or casino.)

Can this war end terrorism? Most likely not. But I think a quick military response will let future endeavors know it's a dire mistake to pick on the US.

YOU Believe, even though you have been repeatedly challenged and proven wrong, that the US is in Iraq illegally, and that all we want is oil.

And I've already told you (see the long post you won't read, Genius), that I wasn't the one who stated that I knew of and WMD in Iraq. But you still haven't given any REAL research that they don't have the capability, and never have had WMD, so if you don't want to, then fine. Shut the f**k up, if you won't be willing to verify your belching with reseachable data.

YOU Believe, that there's no proof that Saddam Insane is funding terrorism (guess that makes him a great guy, in your eyes. Good for you!). There is proof, and even Google will show it to you...but you're obviously either too lazy, or too scared to see for yourself that it's true.

YOU Believe that Iraqis would rather watch their homes raided, their woment raped, and their children forced to serve a terrorist regime than be democratically free, and more able to steer themselves in a direction they choose (Hey, I hear rent's cheap in Iraq...why don't you go live there?).

And I really don't care if the world thanks the US for anything...we've already seen how flighty the world's gratitude is.

"Now does that sum up your position Vera?"
No, not at all.
"Did I read your side properly?"
No, not really.
"I think I did..."
And I'll bet you even think you're smarter than I, but no. You're just a legend in your own mind.
"...didn't I Vera?"
Nope. You couldn't understand me if I tattooed my intent on that parking lot you call a forehead.

When will you learn, that you're never going to silence my opinion, and that I'm not alone. And here's a little secret...most Americans (me included, even moreso, since I've met the Rectum Of Calgary) don't give a flying crap about what Canadians think of America. So why don't you just go back to your little corner of the basement, and mind your own business? Isn't shafting people out of their hard-earned money entertaining enough for you? Christ!

Apparently, "Great Cars And Trucks" can't be all that "Great". Do us all a big favor, Jim...don't ever breed.

And yeah, my posts are insulting to you. I didn't like being singled out and attacked in the first place, and since you don't want to read beyond the jabs, that's all you see. It's called "selective vision". If you read your own posts, you'll see what I mean.

In the meantime, the option to go screw yourself is still out there for you...give yourself a taste of what those poor "Great Cars And Trucks" customers of yours must be experiencing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#299 Consumer Comment

Poor James....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

You keep convincing yourself that I actually care about your opinion. How can anyone be so utterly deluded?

And I gave you facts. You chose to ignore them, so you can keep the people on this board focused on you. You need help, my Dear. Quit filibustering every time you get proven wrong.

And Shnookums, you couldn't possibly grasp what I believe...so take your little laundry list back to your Mommy. Don't try to "tell me my side"...you can't comprehend anything beyond yourself.

So let's boil it down for you:

YOU Believe that the terrorists are good guys and you're happy to see America finally "get what she deserves." (I'll remember to cheer the next time the terrorist cells you Canadians allow to flourish there blow up a Canadian landmark or Financial Center...maybe a brothel, brewery, or casino.)

Can this war end terrorism? Most likely not. But I think a quick military response will let future endeavors know it's a dire mistake to pick on the US.

YOU Believe, even though you have been repeatedly challenged and proven wrong, that the US is in Iraq illegally, and that all we want is oil.

And I've already told you (see the long post you won't read, Genius), that I wasn't the one who stated that I knew of and WMD in Iraq. But you still haven't given any REAL research that they don't have the capability, and never have had WMD, so if you don't want to, then fine. Shut the f**k up, if you won't be willing to verify your belching with reseachable data.

YOU Believe, that there's no proof that Saddam Insane is funding terrorism (guess that makes him a great guy, in your eyes. Good for you!). There is proof, and even Google will show it to you...but you're obviously either too lazy, or too scared to see for yourself that it's true.

YOU Believe that Iraqis would rather watch their homes raided, their woment raped, and their children forced to serve a terrorist regime than be democratically free, and more able to steer themselves in a direction they choose (Hey, I hear rent's cheap in Iraq...why don't you go live there?).

And I really don't care if the world thanks the US for anything...we've already seen how flighty the world's gratitude is.

"Now does that sum up your position Vera?"
No, not at all.
"Did I read your side properly?"
No, not really.
"I think I did..."
And I'll bet you even think you're smarter than I, but no. You're just a legend in your own mind.
"...didn't I Vera?"
Nope. You couldn't understand me if I tattooed my intent on that parking lot you call a forehead.

When will you learn, that you're never going to silence my opinion, and that I'm not alone. And here's a little secret...most Americans (me included, even moreso, since I've met the Rectum Of Calgary) don't give a flying crap about what Canadians think of America. So why don't you just go back to your little corner of the basement, and mind your own business? Isn't shafting people out of their hard-earned money entertaining enough for you? Christ!

Apparently, "Great Cars And Trucks" can't be all that "Great". Do us all a big favor, Jim...don't ever breed.

And yeah, my posts are insulting to you. I didn't like being singled out and attacked in the first place, and since you don't want to read beyond the jabs, that's all you see. It's called "selective vision". If you read your own posts, you'll see what I mean.

In the meantime, the option to go screw yourself is still out there for you...give yourself a taste of what those poor "Great Cars And Trucks" customers of yours must be experiencing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#298 Consumer Comment

Poor James....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

You keep convincing yourself that I actually care about your opinion. How can anyone be so utterly deluded?

And I gave you facts. You chose to ignore them, so you can keep the people on this board focused on you. You need help, my Dear. Quit filibustering every time you get proven wrong.

And Shnookums, you couldn't possibly grasp what I believe...so take your little laundry list back to your Mommy. Don't try to "tell me my side"...you can't comprehend anything beyond yourself.

So let's boil it down for you:

YOU Believe that the terrorists are good guys and you're happy to see America finally "get what she deserves." (I'll remember to cheer the next time the terrorist cells you Canadians allow to flourish there blow up a Canadian landmark or Financial Center...maybe a brothel, brewery, or casino.)

Can this war end terrorism? Most likely not. But I think a quick military response will let future endeavors know it's a dire mistake to pick on the US.

YOU Believe, even though you have been repeatedly challenged and proven wrong, that the US is in Iraq illegally, and that all we want is oil.

And I've already told you (see the long post you won't read, Genius), that I wasn't the one who stated that I knew of and WMD in Iraq. But you still haven't given any REAL research that they don't have the capability, and never have had WMD, so if you don't want to, then fine. Shut the f**k up, if you won't be willing to verify your belching with reseachable data.

YOU Believe, that there's no proof that Saddam Insane is funding terrorism (guess that makes him a great guy, in your eyes. Good for you!). There is proof, and even Google will show it to you...but you're obviously either too lazy, or too scared to see for yourself that it's true.

YOU Believe that Iraqis would rather watch their homes raided, their woment raped, and their children forced to serve a terrorist regime than be democratically free, and more able to steer themselves in a direction they choose (Hey, I hear rent's cheap in Iraq...why don't you go live there?).

And I really don't care if the world thanks the US for anything...we've already seen how flighty the world's gratitude is.

"Now does that sum up your position Vera?"
No, not at all.
"Did I read your side properly?"
No, not really.
"I think I did..."
And I'll bet you even think you're smarter than I, but no. You're just a legend in your own mind.
"...didn't I Vera?"
Nope. You couldn't understand me if I tattooed my intent on that parking lot you call a forehead.

When will you learn, that you're never going to silence my opinion, and that I'm not alone. And here's a little secret...most Americans (me included, even moreso, since I've met the Rectum Of Calgary) don't give a flying crap about what Canadians think of America. So why don't you just go back to your little corner of the basement, and mind your own business? Isn't shafting people out of their hard-earned money entertaining enough for you? Christ!

Apparently, "Great Cars And Trucks" can't be all that "Great". Do us all a big favor, Jim...don't ever breed.

And yeah, my posts are insulting to you. I didn't like being singled out and attacked in the first place, and since you don't want to read beyond the jabs, that's all you see. It's called "selective vision". If you read your own posts, you'll see what I mean.

In the meantime, the option to go screw yourself is still out there for you...give yourself a taste of what those poor "Great Cars And Trucks" customers of yours must be experiencing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#297 Consumer Comment

Poor James....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

You keep convincing yourself that I actually care about your opinion. How can anyone be so utterly deluded?

And I gave you facts. You chose to ignore them, so you can keep the people on this board focused on you. You need help, my Dear. Quit filibustering every time you get proven wrong.

And Shnookums, you couldn't possibly grasp what I believe...so take your little laundry list back to your Mommy. Don't try to "tell me my side"...you can't comprehend anything beyond yourself.

So let's boil it down for you:

YOU Believe that the terrorists are good guys and you're happy to see America finally "get what she deserves." (I'll remember to cheer the next time the terrorist cells you Canadians allow to flourish there blow up a Canadian landmark or Financial Center...maybe a brothel, brewery, or casino.)

Can this war end terrorism? Most likely not. But I think a quick military response will let future endeavors know it's a dire mistake to pick on the US.

YOU Believe, even though you have been repeatedly challenged and proven wrong, that the US is in Iraq illegally, and that all we want is oil.

And I've already told you (see the long post you won't read, Genius), that I wasn't the one who stated that I knew of and WMD in Iraq. But you still haven't given any REAL research that they don't have the capability, and never have had WMD, so if you don't want to, then fine. Shut the f**k up, if you won't be willing to verify your belching with reseachable data.

YOU Believe, that there's no proof that Saddam Insane is funding terrorism (guess that makes him a great guy, in your eyes. Good for you!). There is proof, and even Google will show it to you...but you're obviously either too lazy, or too scared to see for yourself that it's true.

YOU Believe that Iraqis would rather watch their homes raided, their woment raped, and their children forced to serve a terrorist regime than be democratically free, and more able to steer themselves in a direction they choose (Hey, I hear rent's cheap in Iraq...why don't you go live there?).

And I really don't care if the world thanks the US for anything...we've already seen how flighty the world's gratitude is.

"Now does that sum up your position Vera?"
No, not at all.
"Did I read your side properly?"
No, not really.
"I think I did..."
And I'll bet you even think you're smarter than I, but no. You're just a legend in your own mind.
"...didn't I Vera?"
Nope. You couldn't understand me if I tattooed my intent on that parking lot you call a forehead.

When will you learn, that you're never going to silence my opinion, and that I'm not alone. And here's a little secret...most Americans (me included, even moreso, since I've met the Rectum Of Calgary) don't give a flying crap about what Canadians think of America. So why don't you just go back to your little corner of the basement, and mind your own business? Isn't shafting people out of their hard-earned money entertaining enough for you? Christ!

Apparently, "Great Cars And Trucks" can't be all that "Great". Do us all a big favor, Jim...don't ever breed.

And yeah, my posts are insulting to you. I didn't like being singled out and attacked in the first place, and since you don't want to read beyond the jabs, that's all you see. It's called "selective vision". If you read your own posts, you'll see what I mean.

In the meantime, the option to go screw yourself is still out there for you...give yourself a taste of what those poor "Great Cars And Trucks" customers of yours must be experiencing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#296 Consumer Comment

hee hee hee

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

I am still laughing...I can't help it, I am sooo funny! tee hee tee hee...c'mon people, let's everybody join hands and sing. We'll make a "chain of people" that stretches around the world in protest to this war. Ya, and we'll call it..."the rose colored, chain of left-wing peace" can't you see it? No? Well here, put these rose colored glasses on..now James, share. Yes, you can close your eyes while you let someone else try your glasses, after all, we wouldn't want you to wet your pants now would we?

Ha ha ha ha . . .I just can't help it . . . honestly, I am sorry, but I just can't stop from being as rediculous as all you liberal hacks. I mean, why not, you don't give any facts, why should anyone else?

I will try to be more reasonable next time, I just hope I can stop laughing by then! Ha ha ha tee hee hee(as the sound of laughter slowly diminishes, you know I have made my departure, and it is once again safe to come out from behind your big piles of B.S. and start shoveling them onto this post once again.....tee hee

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#295 Consumer Comment

The Two Main Reasons Why 9/11 Took Place (My opinion)

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

The fact that the U.S. contiues supports Israel is one of the most likely reasons that the terrorists have targeted America. Why do we continue to support Israel, given the fact that they have spied on us and stolen have from our Government? Forget the ally propaganda, we, the U.S. Government, not the American people, do so because their political lobby wields tremendous pressure on our weak, spineless and greedy politicians. Besides, almost every politician here is simply terrified of being labeled as an anti-Semite. Another reason is assicated with our dependence on oil. Anyone who claims that our decision to enter the Middle East was not influenced by the extremely large oil reserves there is either blind or insane. Bush, as well as many other leaders have openly stated that we must protect and defend our interests in the Middle East. I don't believe they were referring to camels or flying carpets. Would it not be a much wiser course of action to do as the Brazilians have done and wean are selves from our dependence on oil. Nope, there's still too much money to be made by the big corporations by exploiting the people of American and other countries.

By-The-Way, this will be my last post on this subject, as I do have a social life.

Good Luck to James and Liam on your efforts to enlighten Vrea and Gang.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#294 Consumer Suggestion

Then what is your suggestion?? You all b***h and moan and do everything but come up with a viable solution.

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

i am writing this to any one who has written that they are against the war. You are entitled to your opinion, but why do you make comments and hold protests that if anything hurt the troops that are over there?

How do you think they feel when all they hear from you liberals that the war is wrong and you are calling our leaders EVIL, Terrorists, war mongers?

They are fighting blindly for your freedom and you still badmouth and make dumb a*s comments that hamper the war effort.

If you are so d**n correct, then what is your solution? Your patriarch Nancy Sheehan says all the soldiers died for nothing and are fighting for nothing and we should bring them all home. That is obviously asinine since all it will do is tell the terrorist groups that you win we quit.

So, WHAT IS THE SOLUTION? You all b***h and moan and do everything but come up with a viable solution. this not only applies to the idiots on this post but your democratic leaders as well. They harp that the president is evil, and wrong, but they voted in favor of the war. You can't vote for something and then say it is wrong (John Kerry).

i would be willing to listen to any reasonable solution that you have but i will probably only see some more mudslinging and no suggestions.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#293 Consumer Comment

Get real....

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Here are some choice quotes from the "conservative" establishment.......

"Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

"I don't spend a lot of time thinking about ...why I do things." - George Bush speaking on Air Force One June, 4,2003.

"So many minority youths had volunteered that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like myself." --Tom DeLay, explaining at the 1988 GOP convention why he and vice presidential nominee Dan Quayle did not fight in the Vietnam War.

"The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership" George Bush Oct. 28,2003

"Nucular......Nucular.....Nucular.....Nucular.....Nucular......Nucular.....Nucular.....Nucular...." - George Bush speaking in Crawford Texas, May 23, 2003

"Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

Good lord these guys are scary!!!!!!

Other than telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, now, die, I think the Republicans have done a fine job of getting government out of our personal lives......NOT!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#292 Consumer Comment

UNSCR687 does not authorize any military response

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 10, 2005

Ok, Robert, I have just re-read UNSCR687 for the bazillionth time, and I find nothing to support your theory. In fact, I find only 2 paragraphs that have anything to do with military operations:

(B) 6. Notes that as soon as the Secretary-General notifies the Council of the completion of the deployment of the United Nations observer unit, the conditions will be established for the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678(1990) to bring their military presence in Iraq to an end consistent with resolution 686 (1991);

(I) 33. Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the above provisions, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);

Which makes it pretty clear that the UNSC intends there will be no military presence after the observer team is in place and Iraq has accepted the terms of the cease-fire. And the charter makes it pretty clear that no member nation may take it upon themselves to open hostilities without the express resolution of the Security Council. There is certainly nothing even remotely suggesting, "those violations would allow the US to go back in to finish the job, once and for all." If you can quote specific paragraphs to the contrary, I will be happy to reconsider; until then it is my opinion the US was in clear violation of the law when it invaded Iraq.

James, I am not attacking you, I'm trying to educate you. If I ever decide to attack you, you probably will leave and never come back; there will certainly be no doubt left in your mind that I am attacking you. I was merely responding to some of your sillier statements regarding the technology, like the idea of a suitcase bomb destroying all of New York City, or the following recent statement:

"B, far be it for me to call you a "moron", but if you were to even "test" a nuclear bomb in the Middle East, the entire region, including Isreal would become uninhabitable for the next 1000 years! The Nuclear cloud would travel around the earth causing cancer in Memphis! Have you driven past the "Love Canal" lately in New York? That was just a "minor accident"! Anyone ignorant enough to drop a nuclear bomb in the region of Iraq would be responsible for the deaths of "millions"! The Atom bomb was not even 1/100th the power of the smallest nuclear bomb!"

And as for your absurd 'cart before the horse' assertion that "the US presence in the Middle East promotes & is the "root cause" of the terrorism," well you've said it so many times in so many ways I think we all understand that is your position. No one is going to agree with that position because you offer no evidence and no logical reasoning, but mainly because its absurd. Its like saying the root cause of rape is the presence of women, and the solution is to get rid of all the women. A very male argument (and very traditional Islamist I might add), to blame the victim for the crime, but one that has no place in contemporary society.

I'll go so far as to agree that is probably the reason given to the foot soldiers, the children and young adults who blow themselves up in the hope of taking out a few of the 'enemy', but you're a blind fool if you believe the 'generals' are motivated by some lofty religious principle. That would be as absurd as asssuming that George Bush actually shares and is motivated by the same principles as the far right 'Christian army' that he 'commands'. This is all about a minority population that has ruled its country for years through brutality and intimidation, viciously fighting to avoid being marginalized by a government of the majority. So, while I think the invasion was illegal and probably the stupidest way to handle the situation, I do recognize that we are where we are, we can't unbreak eggs or unburn bridges. To simply pull out and let the old regime regain power would probably lead to an even more repressive and dangerous leadership, and would be far more criminal than invading in the first place.

And I do want to clear up the misconception you seem to have that our president has the power to take us to war on his own authority. He had the nearly unanimous vote of our Legislature to use our Armed Forces in Iraq. He obviously has great powers of persuasion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#291 Consumer Comment

James you're dilusional!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 09, 2005

.....and pathetic! You are looking at life through "rose colored glasses" and you expect the rest of us to do the same!

A true Democracy (which is what Canada is close to, but...)is one where everything is decided on a majority vote. I know, as I am certain you are aware, that not ALL things in Canada are decided on a majority vote. Some require as much as 2/3 vote to pass. Also, your "Prime Minister" (Ithink that is what you called him) does have veto power just as our president does. Veto power does not give power to create action, it merely gives the power to reject action. But, Idigress, I did not and do not wish to get into a discussion on the finer points of difference between our two governments.

The point I was starting to make is that, yes, Canada is a Democracy, but it is NOT representative of the people. Ours is a Republic, with democratically elected representatives, thereby making it truly representative of the people, or, as put by our fouders, a government "by the people, for the people." You disagree? Why doesn't that surprise me?

Let's face it James, you and I will never agree until you believe that facts are relevant. As long as you will discuss opinion only issues, there will only be confrontation and disagreement. I could school you all day long on governments of the world , world history, and both Canadian and U.S. foreign policy and you wouldn't learn a thing. Why? Because you don't want to look at anything objectively. One of your mentors told you about the "perils of the right" and you haven't even glanced that way since. Your mentor gave you those rose glasses and you won't take them off for fear that you'll discover the truth about the world. Here's an opinion based on facts that I have gathered.

The United States is not, was not, and never will be the "school yard bully," this country did not name itself the world police, but rather the rest of the world did so. Throughout history, every time someone was being bullied, or their borders were under seige, they ccried out in terror, "please help us, in the name of God save us from this enemy!" Ya know what James, the good ol' U.S. of A. never turned her back on anyone in need (except when "slick willy" was in office,) and now, due to an over abundance of rose colored glasses I guess, when someone is in trouble, and the U.S. helps...you and your "reality impaired" (Idunno, is that politically correct enough) friends label this country as the bully. That shouldn't surprise me, you are the same type of person that we have here who screams and rants that they want safer streets, and a more "civilized" community, but then shouts and screams "bloody murder" at the police when they show up to arrest your neighbor or child for dealing drugs, or child pornography, or ....

Ya know what? Forget it. Until you and those like you learn to take responability for more than wiping the tears off each others faces, you'll never understand reality. I'm sorry guys(and girls,) who are in disagreement with my opinions as I have laid them out. I have honestly tried to look at things from your prospective - that is, the prospective of the "left" or "liberal", the only problem that I was having with it was, well, to be quite frank...I couldn't get my head up my a*s... never mind my shoulders too!

lol...lol...lmao...rotflmao...i think i tinkled in my undies...omg, I can't help it...I just can't stop laughing...I am soooooooooo funny...lol...

Whew!(wiping sweat from brow) I know I didn't offer much for researched fact this time, but I figured, "what the H-E- double toothpicks, everyone else gets to offer their opinions, I'm gonna offer mine for once." So there it is, maybe next time I'll offer some facts on Iraq, but then, this opinion thing is fun too!

(Sidenote: Come on people, if any of us were to meet elsewhere we would probably get along fine...who knows, we may be very good friends under different circumstances, so don't take things too personally. Maybe the next time I drive through Calgary (on my way to visit my son in Edmonton,) I'll stop and buy you a beer James. We can talk about my childhood years in Saskatchewan, my University education in Edmonton, and my work experiences from as far west as Calgary, to as far east as Toronto!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#290 Consumer Suggestion

Hey B. I don't think Nuclear Bombs in the Middle East going off is really an issue.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 09, 2005

B;

Man I don't know why you attack me. Man we are in total agreement. I don't think Nuclear Bombs in the Middle East going off is really an issue. It's not gonna happen & yes I know they would use the Neutron Bomb if they were gonna use anything.

My issue is now, as it always has been, that the US presence in the Middle East promotes & is the "root cause" of the terrorism that will continue. I don't really care about Article 648(Sec 73) of the XYX act of anything. I just want people to see that continued presence in the region by the USA is more than merely dangerous, but very deadly. Costly too. It also will not solve anything.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#289 Consumer Comment

Good one "B"

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 09, 2005

Now YOU try reading them. UNSCR687 gave us the authority to go in again and use force to get the job done. It states quite clearly the obligations of Iraq under the CEASE-FIRE and how those violations would allow the US to go back in to finish the job, once and for all. The job was inspecting Iraq for WMD's. UNSCR1441 simply reminded everyone that Iraq had not complied with their obligations and UNSCR687 was still in effect. How amazing is it the two countries most beholden to Iraq under Hussein abstained from the vote. They were also the first two with their hands out after we got the place up and working again. I cannot make it any clearer for you.

As for James' rant about Canada and the US being able to destroy the world...put down the pipe James. The whole of Canada's unwilling military would comprise just one US Army division. You have fewer than 50K troops, total. We don't need you guys, thanks anyway.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#288 Consumer Suggestion

You sure do your research Shawn, but still you say nothing about Iraq. Not a d**n word!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 09, 2005

I never said Canada was not Socialist. Yes meaning we have many "Social Programs" that the USA for one would like to have. Hillary tried the "Health Care" trip & failed, but it will happen eventually.

Yes overall Canadians pay more in taxes & you would be hard pressed to find a Canadian that does not want Social Health Care. It is expensive yes! However you don't plan on getting sick & when it does happen, you normally are not in a position where you can afford to pay for it yourself.

A family of 4 will pay far more for health care insurance in the USA than any amount of taxation imposed in Canada. You pay for it anyway. Just in a different way is all. You have Welfare & Medicare & all the things we have in Canada. You just don't pay your Government for it all. You pay a higher price than we do for your "free enterprise insurance" than we pay for our "social insurance".

You would be "hard pressed" finding anyone in Canada paying 50% income tax. No one is that dumb! If you are in that tax bracket, you would be way smarter to incorperate & only pay 11% income tax on the Corperation. GST is 7% & brought in to replace the "Manufacturing Sales Tax" of 15% that was hidden & applicable on things we bought from the USA like cars & stoves & fredges etc. The drop in price of these items was fanominal once the GST came in.

Alberta is the richest Province in Canada & it is mainly because of the Conservative Government that has been running this Province for decades! You will never be on the street in Alberta because the Oil Companies donate large sums to places like our Drop In Centre, which keeps the homeless off the streets. You will not go without food in Alberta, as there is food donated to many places that feed the homeless. You can get Welfare in Alberta, but it is such a small amount, no one could live on it & the Government makes it very hard to get.

The Government looks after the roads in Canada much better than in the USA & it is rare to even find a "pot hole". The streets are cleaner here as well. I lived in Denver for a couple of years & i know what the lifestyle is like in the USA. When all is said & done, you generally come out the same in lifestyle in either Country. The only difference is that you have a safety net if anything goes wrong in Canada. It is also cleaner & safer to live in Canada, as we have a much higher percentage of Police paid for by the govenment than you have in the USA.

Socialist does not mean non Democratic. We elect our leaders the same as you do, we just don't elect a President. The head of the Majority Party becomes the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister cannot do "anything" without a vote! Therefore we cannot have a Dictator like you do with Bush who can invade Iraq without a "majority vote". There is no Veto in Canada. Majority vote on everything! We just had a majority vote on Gay Marriages. Something your President could easilly veto. That gives your President more power than a Democracy allows & that is why your Country is not a Democracy, but a Republic.

So yes Canada is a "Social Democracy" & we like it fine that way! No one can put us into a situation where we are in a dumb war for no good reason, as it has to be decided by the Majority.

When the USA called for help against Terrorism, our Parliment did vote on what to do. Simply because the "facts" could be presented on the floor regarding WMD's & Suddam's ties with Bin Laden (or lack thereof), it was decided by the Majority not to back the USA in their invasion of Iraq, but it "barely passed" us helping in Afganistan in a peace keeping role. Many voices were heard reminding these voters that Bin Laden was not in control of the Govenment of Afganistan & how we really did not have a right to invade such a Country. However it was the Conservatives that pushed to help the US in some way, as they are our biggest trading partner & we could not totally turn our backs on our neigbour to the south.

If there were "real facts" that gave the USA any right to invade Iraq, those facts would be tabled at Parliment. There were none! Therefore a Majority vote to accompany the USA into Iraq could not be made.

The minutes of the debate are published & all the facts can be looked at in those documents. That is proof. A Majority of Canadians do not want to support a large Military & that is why we do not have the troops or weapons. However if there was a major threat to this Country, the weapons could be made in short order & we do have reserves ready willing & able. It did not take us long to come up with a sizeable force for WW1 or WW2. Many of the weapons we simply buy from the USA as it is easier than setting up factories to do that. However, today we manufacture cars & trucks of all kinds & those factories can be switched to weapons very easily. We are better prepared than we have ever been in our history.

Now you wanted facts. Those are facts. Only your Country can choose to invade another Country without a popular vote! You cannot convince a Majority using lies & bullshit, as your President is able to do without even a vote.

If Canada is not fighting by your side... you have no good reason for being there. Nothing that can be proved to the Majority anyway. That is all the proof you really need.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#287 Consumer Suggestion

Well as usual....

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, October 09, 2005

Vera as usual has nothing really to say but to slam others for their spelling.

You tell Liam that you know so much better about the ties between Saddam & Bin Laden & you don't have any idea what you are talking about! I would rather have bad spelling & grammar, than make idiotic claims which you know nothing about!

Sometimes we need to go to war eh? When is that Vera? When you want oil? Oh don't try to claim again that Bin Laden is in control of Iraq & that is why the USA is there! Even you can't be that dumb!

What will the war accomplish "best case senerio" Vera? Do you really think there will be peace in the region when the USA is done? Answer that Vera! Just that question alone!

As far as me not reading your side... let me tell you your side then...

You believe Bin Laden & Suddam were working together on 911. You believe that this war can end terrorism.
You believe that Iraq had WMD's & that the USA had every right to invade because Suddam was not following the resolutions of the UN.
You believe most Iraqe's will be happy with the new government the USA is setting up for them.
You believe the entire world will end up thanking the USA when this is all over.
You believe that the world should "thank it's lucky stars" for having the US handle these problems & that the world will be a safer place because of US intervention.

Now does that sum up your position Vera? Did I read your side properly? I think I did, didn't I Vera?

The only thing is Vera that not one of those statements that you believe in is in any way true! Your a fool for believing it! Now I would just let you be a fool in your little fool world if you were not so outspoken about it. It's outspoken people like you who give dumb Americans a feeling of justification & feeling no need to attempt to put an end to this craziness!

Now close to 70% of Americans know this war is wrong! I won't be happy until 90% of Americans know the truth! Sure there will always be that 10% of the dummies who are more redneck than into any of that "book learnin", but those dummies I can live with.

I don't expect you to change your opinion. I just want to call you on the mis information you spew! You have no evidence of Suddam & Bin Laden even talking because it never happened! You have no evidence of WMD's in Iraq because they are not there! You have no evidence that it was necessary for the USA to invade Iraq because there is none!

Every time you say it I am going to call you on it because it is simply bullshit! Just answer the question Vera! Just that one! Then you can keep your misinformation for yourself & hopefully nobody else with the exception of a dog.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#286 Consumer Comment

A little background on UNSC resolutions

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Robert, you're so full of crap. Case closed, indeed! "Read them and weep"? You must cull your dialog from the same fiction novels James uses for scientific background. Perhaps a little background is in order. The Security Council is the only body in the UN whose resolutions have the force of binding law on member states. All states accept this when they accept membership. The SC is comprised of 5 permanent members, US, UK, France, China, Russia, and 10 members that are elected to 2 year terms. For a resolution to pass, it must have 9 votes, including all 5 permanent members; if any of them votes no, the resolution does not pass.

When Iraq invaded Kuwait, both were members of the UN. The SC passed res 660, condemning Iraq for the invasion and demanding they cease and withdraw immediately. When this did not happen, the SC passed a series of resolutions forbidding member states from aiding or even selling goods to Iraq, reminding Iraq of its responsibilities as a member and as a signatory to various treaties, condemning their treatment of Kuwaiti civilians and consular dignitaries, leading to resolution 678 which authorized member states to take action IN COOPERATION WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF KUWAIT to repel the invaders. Resolution 686 outlined the general terms of a cease-fire. Until this point, it had all been about leaving Kuwait, one might assume there would be no need for a cease-fire once this had been accomplished. Nonetheless, res 686 outlined things Iraq had reportedly agreed to, like returning property, returning or helping to identify the fate of hostages, payment of damages, identifying locations of mines and other weapons that might cause harm in Kuwait and in areas of Iraq occupied by member forces. Res 687 ordered Iraq to further submit to destructions of WMD and inspections, under penalty of invasion. One can hardly feel sorry for Saddam, he lined his forces up on the Saudi border, threatened to use chemical and bio agents, fired missiles into Israel.

Resolution 1441 was another in a series of resolutions passed to remind Saddam he had not complied with all the requirements of the cease-fire and demand immediate compliance. It was authored by the US and UK, and argued in Council in basically the same way the authorization for war was argued to the US Congress. We have to let him know we are serious. It directed the weapons inspectors to notify the Council if Iraq refused cooperation at any point, in which case the Council would immediately convene for further determination. The resolution does not authorize any intervention by member states, including the US. When the US petitioned the Council to authorize invasion, the Council refused to pass the resolution, and the inspection team advised that inspections were back on track and they expected full compliance within weeks. The US and UK with their Coalition of the Willing decided to invade anyway, a flagrant violation of the UN charter IMO.

To summarize, the UNSC authorized member states to assist Kuwait in expelling the Iraqi invaders, the UNSC dictated the terms and accepted the cease-fire, the UNSC had the only authority to lift that cease-fire. The US argues that res 1441, which underlined the fact that res 678 was still in effect, gave them the right to resume hostilities. However, since the UNSC made it clear that was not their intent, I don't think this argument would stand in court. And if the US could not convince the Security Council there was an immediate danger, I doubt we could justify this invasion under any legal theory. So, it would be my opinion that the US, among others, illegally invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq.

But before you start jumping up and down, James, let me point out that the Security Council made the question moot, in passing res 1483 and subsequent resolutions, recognizing the coalition as a legal occupying authority, and then recognizing the interim government as the official government of Iraq. Since that point, we are no longer operating unilaterally, we are again part of a multinational UN peacekeeping force, and our presence is at the specific request of the legally recognized government of Iraq.

Was this another Bush rip-off of the American people? I suppose only time will give us the final answer. We know that Bush was planning an Iraq invasion during the first weeks of his presidency, but that might have just been contingency planning. We know from the Katrina disaster, the recently released info on avian flu planning, and that whole rainbow warning thing that this administration is really big on contingency plans. We have memos from shortly after 9/11 asking if Iraq could be tied in, but really, that might just be a roundabout way of asking if Saddam was involved. We have the WMD speech, but hey, he might just be that dumb. Clinton was obviously fooled, but of course, we shouldn't let his legal and poli sci education distract us from the fact that he was a complete maroon. The generals and commanders supervising the no-fly zones have told us that, before Congress was even asked to authorize the war, they were ordered to strike command and control targets that were absolutely no threat to them whatever. But this wouldn't be the first time the generals on the ground have disagreed with this CIC's decisions.

And then we have the little matter of obtaining Congressional authority for this war. Contrary to Vera's shameless distortion of the facts, the Congress did not give the President carte blanche. The authorization to use US armed forces required the president to first exhaust all diplomatic efforts and to show that Iraq was actively aiding international terrorist groups. I understand his written justification to Congress was a real piece of work. If anyone has a link to a copy, I would love to see it. In fact, Bush's most vocal critics immediately following the start of the war were not liberals, rather they were Republican Congressmen who felt they'd just been pissed on by one of their own. Bush's argument for seeking the authorization in the first place was that he did not plan to actually use force, but needed to be able to show the US committment when he rattled his sabre in Saddam's face. Had this president been a Democrat, you can be sure the impeachment proceedings would have begun the next day. So Vera, the next time you are lining straw dogs up in the Public Square, you may want to wipe the filth off to see whose face is really under there.

And speaking of lefties, I can see you're one of the first in line to reach across that great divide and pull America back together. Please tell me you don't buy into this spin that any communication channel in which the right can't control 90% of the message 90% of the time is, defacto, a 'liberal rag.' I mean, surely you can see that most of those red and blue states are really mostly purple? Like, otherwise how could we have had that lovely battle in Florida that gave Bush the White House and Gore the popular vote? How many liberals do you think are out there who fit your asinine stereotype? How many conservatives do you think are out there who are actually mindless religious zealots who think all our social ills are the result of men kissing men? Yikes! Who knew? Forget I said anything.

Shawn, there's really no need to post your sources until you learn to differentiate between fact and opinion.

James, just a quick primer on nuclear weapons. The largest nuclear weapon ever exploded, the Soviet Tsar Bomba, code named Ivan, had a 50-something megaton yield. It would have vaporized Baghdad, done some heavy damage in Fallujah, maybe caused some "sunburn" in Tikrit and Najaf, would have been slightly visible in Israel. It is impratical as a deployable weapon. The largest deployed weapons are in the 10 megaton range, might cause "sunburn" in Fallujah, wouldn't completely vaporize Baghdad. None of these would be used in this case. Sub-kiloton "tactical" nukes would be used in this theater. Neutron weapons would be best, because they kill the people, but the land and facilities are useable again within a week, 2 to be safe. Also goes right through tank armor. Of course, since we have none in our arsenal, we would have to borrow some from another country who has none in its arsenal. Back in the 60s we had some projectile weapons with a 10-250 ton warhead, the Davey Crockett. Purely fission, with a blast radius of less than 100 meters, it would deliver a fatal dose of radiation in about a 300-500 meter radius. As for fallout, over 2000 nuclear tests have been conducted to date. You think one more is going to break the camel's back?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#285 Consumer Comment

Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

I have been reading over the posts from the last week or so and you know what...none of you have written any verifiable facts in any of your posts! Actually I am hard pressed to find anything in your posts that you even claim to be fact. This leads me a choice, a choice of only two possible conclusions which may be drawn from these observations:

Choice 1) All of you are truly intellectual giants whose resources are not only comprised of sites and information resources that restrict access by and to those of lesser world understanding such as Vera, Dale, Robert, and myself (why else wouldn't you list them so we could verify "your" facts for ourselves,) but also your massive brainpower and understanding of the worlds peoples gives each of you (and apparently most democrats) the ability to derive a truthful, unbiased, and unflawed understanding of any and every topic brought forth without the constraints of having to read or understand any ONE source of your information, but rather your basis' are founded on a conglomerate of information throughout which your high faculty of reasoning and understanding naturally separates fact from fiction without error and you are therefore blessed with this innate capability to merely place your words on paper and have them accepted as fact, and therefore there is no individual source for your venemous spew that you can list.

OR

Choice 2) As typicallly stereotyped (left-wing, ultra-liberal, whiny, and misinformed) Bush haters, you feel there is no need to base your opinion on fact ("facts are not really relevant") as facts are contrary to your opinions. Furthermore, if there is any chance for you to have and intellectual (sounding) post that doesn't support a more logical or "Republican" point of veiw than yours, you will have to fill it with lies, half-truths and embellishment, therefore, to provide sources (other than what we all know to be ultra liberal, left-wing publications)would either be impossible, or self-defeating (as we could read the WHOLE article and thus prevent quotes from being represented out of context and such.)

Now, for those who are heedless in thier chosen words, and abrupt to offer thier mendacious sentiment of George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, especially regarding his sapience, I wish to council you as to the veracity of your promulgation and libelous spew. Let me begin with the definition of the word often used to describe "G.W." throughout your posts - MORON: lacking intelligence, or common sense

This "term" so commonly used in your description of George Bush stems from a "report" comparing IQ's of our current and past presidents. The truth is, although this report was used as reference on several news reports, blog spots, democratic advertisements and postings all over the internet, it never existed! The "report" was (and to this day is) being creditted to the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, Pennsylvania, who did a four month study on the IQ of "G.W.", as they have been doing on all presidents since 1973. The problem with this report is quite a simple and provable fact, that is, there is no such place, company, institute, or foundation as "The Lovenstein Institute." This "institute" was, and is, a fallacy - a front, to create and publish a false (non)study of George Bush in order to discredit any conception of reality regarding his intellect. Basically, it was created to counteract the educational differences between Al Gore and George Bush during thier "intelligence battle." (Both Dems. and Reps. claimed the "smarter" man)


Anybody with "half a brain" could have picked this out as a fake by simply reading. The report stated that it had done studies on presidents of the last 50 years and yet it included Roosevelt, who died in office in 1945. Also, it said that all presidents prior to "G.W." had several books published prior to them being elected into office, and George had none. The opposite is true - few presidents had published books prior to taking office, but our president did - "A Charge to Keep" 1999. Furthermore, the "Swanson/Crane" system for evaluating IQ's doesn't exist, and only the biased would believe that almost all of the democratic presidents had exceptionally high iq's while the republican presidents all(but 1) scored closer to average or less than (George Bush - 91?? c'mon now, he may not be the most affluent speaker but that is borderline retarded - if you believe this there is "no hope" to overcome your bias.)

I had to go through alot of my books and searched the internet for quite some time, but this is what I have discovered and believe to be true ( I can not verify some of these as "fact" as the sources that I found them at/in (although they were both left and right) did not have a direct source for thier statements, however, THEY have presented them as fact and there are several in (close)agreement.

presidents IQ's:

George W. Bush - 117 - 121
Bill Clinton - 137 - 141
George Bush Sr.- 119 - 122
Ronald Reagan - 116 - 127 (widest spread I found and it's funny, but the highest score came from a "left" report and the lowest from a "right" one!?!
Carter -139
J.F.K. -119
Nixon(highest published presidential IQ in history - factual and verifiable . . . .
-143

Now, can anybody please explain to me where the facts show George W. Bush to be a "moron"? I know I must piss off you "democrats" when even your venemous hatred get's thrown back at you PROVEN and INARGUABLY . . .UNTRUE.

As long as I am at it, before you start shouting impeachment you might want to check out the requirements to impeach a president. Only a moron would think that they can be impeached simply because you don't agree with thier policies or actions while in office. That is what the electorial process is for. If Every president that did something that you, or even a majority of people, didn't agree with could be impeached, there wouldn't be one that made it through his entire term. Policies are decided at the voting booths! If, according to the laws of the United States of America, he has committed an indictable offense, by all means, have a go at impeachment, but remember how difficult that is, Clinton was "as guilty a sin" and although impeached by the house, the senate wouldn't, well, you know the rest.

Last (for now), but not least, James from Calgary. I can only imagine that you have gotten your liberal views by being raised in, and living in, and probably not venturing outside of, Alberta. What some on this post may not realize is that Alberta is by far Canada's wealthiest province. They have the lowest unemployment rate and the lowest tax rate (0% provincial sales tax) and yet they still have all the benefits of a social society (yes James, Canada is a socialist country - it just disguises itself under the false pretense of democracy). When you speak for"all of Canada", or even "most" of it, you might want to consider those from other provinces too.
Let's take, for example, Saskatchewan(the province located directly east of you.) thier PST (provincial sales tax) last I heard was around the 9% mark, this added in with the GST (goods and services tax) of,... what is it? 7.5% (I may be a little off on that) and you are paying an extra 16.5 cents on every dollar you spend! This is after you get deducted from your paycheck: Employment Insurance Premium - (these numbers ar "Guesstimates" based on personal experience - howzit goin' eh?:)) 1- 1.5%, CPP .75% and, depending on your income bracket - Income tax 15% - 50%. Yes, I know I wrote FIFTY percent. Add that all up and your looking at 32.5% - 66.0% of your paycheck going directly to the government.

What does the government do with this money? Well, how else do you expect "free" medicine and all the other "benefits" of a "social society"? How else do you expect someone who has never held a job (above the "table") to own: a) a 3 bd 2bth house with a full basement remodeled and rented out for additional "cash income" b) 2 cars - one older truck and a sports car less than 2 yrs old c) a motorcycle, d) ski-doo, e) and last I talked to him he was looking into buying a cabin at a popular vacation destination. All the while some poor "sap" who was raised to work hard for what you want, be honest, and don't abuse available programs, works two jobs (which puts him in a higher tax bracket), attends University (which he pays for because he "makes too much to qualify for even a student LOAN"), owns one financed 1987 Ford Malibu ,and rents a basement "suite" off of some welfare "victim". After groceries, bills, and 1 night out for a "nice dinner" with friends, this "sap" is left with "gas money" and a couple hundred bucks to "budget" for the next automobile breakdown or other emergency (which tends to happen about once every 4 months and requires yet another loan from the parents.)

What's this mean? It means that we need only look to the North of us to see the evils of socialism (it starts with one "social program" and spreads like a disease.) This is the goal of the left-wing.

This is why all these lazy liars whine about "the rich"(or anyone who has worked hard and been wise with thier money). The left wants us to be more like Canada - where the lazy, and unwilling will sit back and reap the spoils of the hard working and honest. Where those who "have", support the "have nots", and in return get a lower quality health system, an increased number of alcohol and drug abusers, a larger government, decreased choices (of leadership - at least we have both right and left to choose from, in Canada it has turned out to be choice between left, far left, and extreme left with the occasional moderate running for office and being labeled a biggot, racist, and "dingbat", yet still managing to recieve 25% of the popular vote - the 25% that work I imagine)

The military? Canada'a largest ship pales in comparison to one of our little destroyers, and, aside from the F-18, the airforce lacks anything that could be reasonably considered as high tech. Maybe this is the reason they didn't join us, the government probably forgot to pay thier bill for the 7 new muskets they strapped to the wings and they got reposessed by Pierre, but, since it's a socialist government( don't be fooled James, it is), they won't tell the people the truth, but rather use the controlled media to spread half-truths and false propoganda to support thier inaction regarding a very real threat to you me and all of us in North Amaerica! But, I digress...

Until the next foolish, inaccurate, unverifiable post filled with hatred, anger, and propoganda is placed(or should I say spewed) by yet another ultra left wing liberal who guises thier "me, me, me" attitude uder a pretense(unknowingly false) of "what's best for us all" (I'll decide what's best for me, thank you anyway)- Don't worry, I don't blame you personally for falling prey to the left wing media and repetative propoganda, I ALMOST started to believe some of it myself! Then I remembered that I, like you, have the ability to research and check facts for myself. It was only then that I ceased being a social puppet, and became independant, and free.

God Bless America (see: Constitution on the United States of America; First Amendment)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#284 Consumer Comment

Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

I have been reading over the posts from the last week or so and you know what...none of you have written any verifiable facts in any of your posts! Actually I am hard pressed to find anything in your posts that you even claim to be fact. This leads me a choice, a choice of only two possible conclusions which may be drawn from these observations:

Choice 1) All of you are truly intellectual giants whose resources are not only comprised of sites and information resources that restrict access by and to those of lesser world understanding such as Vera, Dale, Robert, and myself (why else wouldn't you list them so we could verify "your" facts for ourselves,) but also your massive brainpower and understanding of the worlds peoples gives each of you (and apparently most democrats) the ability to derive a truthful, unbiased, and unflawed understanding of any and every topic brought forth without the constraints of having to read or understand any ONE source of your information, but rather your basis' are founded on a conglomerate of information throughout which your high faculty of reasoning and understanding naturally separates fact from fiction without error and you are therefore blessed with this innate capability to merely place your words on paper and have them accepted as fact, and therefore there is no individual source for your venemous spew that you can list.

OR

Choice 2) As typicallly stereotyped (left-wing, ultra-liberal, whiny, and misinformed) Bush haters, you feel there is no need to base your opinion on fact ("facts are not really relevant") as facts are contrary to your opinions. Furthermore, if there is any chance for you to have and intellectual (sounding) post that doesn't support a more logical or "Republican" point of veiw than yours, you will have to fill it with lies, half-truths and embellishment, therefore, to provide sources (other than what we all know to be ultra liberal, left-wing publications)would either be impossible, or self-defeating (as we could read the WHOLE article and thus prevent quotes from being represented out of context and such.)

Now, for those who are heedless in thier chosen words, and abrupt to offer thier mendacious sentiment of George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, especially regarding his sapience, I wish to council you as to the veracity of your promulgation and libelous spew. Let me begin with the definition of the word often used to describe "G.W." throughout your posts - MORON: lacking intelligence, or common sense

This "term" so commonly used in your description of George Bush stems from a "report" comparing IQ's of our current and past presidents. The truth is, although this report was used as reference on several news reports, blog spots, democratic advertisements and postings all over the internet, it never existed! The "report" was (and to this day is) being creditted to the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, Pennsylvania, who did a four month study on the IQ of "G.W.", as they have been doing on all presidents since 1973. The problem with this report is quite a simple and provable fact, that is, there is no such place, company, institute, or foundation as "The Lovenstein Institute." This "institute" was, and is, a fallacy - a front, to create and publish a false (non)study of George Bush in order to discredit any conception of reality regarding his intellect. Basically, it was created to counteract the educational differences between Al Gore and George Bush during thier "intelligence battle." (Both Dems. and Reps. claimed the "smarter" man)


Anybody with "half a brain" could have picked this out as a fake by simply reading. The report stated that it had done studies on presidents of the last 50 years and yet it included Roosevelt, who died in office in 1945. Also, it said that all presidents prior to "G.W." had several books published prior to them being elected into office, and George had none. The opposite is true - few presidents had published books prior to taking office, but our president did - "A Charge to Keep" 1999. Furthermore, the "Swanson/Crane" system for evaluating IQ's doesn't exist, and only the biased would believe that almost all of the democratic presidents had exceptionally high iq's while the republican presidents all(but 1) scored closer to average or less than (George Bush - 91?? c'mon now, he may not be the most affluent speaker but that is borderline retarded - if you believe this there is "no hope" to overcome your bias.)

I had to go through alot of my books and searched the internet for quite some time, but this is what I have discovered and believe to be true ( I can not verify some of these as "fact" as the sources that I found them at/in (although they were both left and right) did not have a direct source for thier statements, however, THEY have presented them as fact and there are several in (close)agreement.

presidents IQ's:

George W. Bush - 117 - 121
Bill Clinton - 137 - 141
George Bush Sr.- 119 - 122
Ronald Reagan - 116 - 127 (widest spread I found and it's funny, but the highest score came from a "left" report and the lowest from a "right" one!?!
Carter -139
J.F.K. -119
Nixon(highest published presidential IQ in history - factual and verifiable . . . .
-143

Now, can anybody please explain to me where the facts show George W. Bush to be a "moron"? I know I must piss off you "democrats" when even your venemous hatred get's thrown back at you PROVEN and INARGUABLY . . .UNTRUE.

As long as I am at it, before you start shouting impeachment you might want to check out the requirements to impeach a president. Only a moron would think that they can be impeached simply because you don't agree with thier policies or actions while in office. That is what the electorial process is for. If Every president that did something that you, or even a majority of people, didn't agree with could be impeached, there wouldn't be one that made it through his entire term. Policies are decided at the voting booths! If, according to the laws of the United States of America, he has committed an indictable offense, by all means, have a go at impeachment, but remember how difficult that is, Clinton was "as guilty a sin" and although impeached by the house, the senate wouldn't, well, you know the rest.

Last (for now), but not least, James from Calgary. I can only imagine that you have gotten your liberal views by being raised in, and living in, and probably not venturing outside of, Alberta. What some on this post may not realize is that Alberta is by far Canada's wealthiest province. They have the lowest unemployment rate and the lowest tax rate (0% provincial sales tax) and yet they still have all the benefits of a social society (yes James, Canada is a socialist country - it just disguises itself under the false pretense of democracy). When you speak for"all of Canada", or even "most" of it, you might want to consider those from other provinces too.
Let's take, for example, Saskatchewan(the province located directly east of you.) thier PST (provincial sales tax) last I heard was around the 9% mark, this added in with the GST (goods and services tax) of,... what is it? 7.5% (I may be a little off on that) and you are paying an extra 16.5 cents on every dollar you spend! This is after you get deducted from your paycheck: Employment Insurance Premium - (these numbers ar "Guesstimates" based on personal experience - howzit goin' eh?:)) 1- 1.5%, CPP .75% and, depending on your income bracket - Income tax 15% - 50%. Yes, I know I wrote FIFTY percent. Add that all up and your looking at 32.5% - 66.0% of your paycheck going directly to the government.

What does the government do with this money? Well, how else do you expect "free" medicine and all the other "benefits" of a "social society"? How else do you expect someone who has never held a job (above the "table") to own: a) a 3 bd 2bth house with a full basement remodeled and rented out for additional "cash income" b) 2 cars - one older truck and a sports car less than 2 yrs old c) a motorcycle, d) ski-doo, e) and last I talked to him he was looking into buying a cabin at a popular vacation destination. All the while some poor "sap" who was raised to work hard for what you want, be honest, and don't abuse available programs, works two jobs (which puts him in a higher tax bracket), attends University (which he pays for because he "makes too much to qualify for even a student LOAN"), owns one financed 1987 Ford Malibu ,and rents a basement "suite" off of some welfare "victim". After groceries, bills, and 1 night out for a "nice dinner" with friends, this "sap" is left with "gas money" and a couple hundred bucks to "budget" for the next automobile breakdown or other emergency (which tends to happen about once every 4 months and requires yet another loan from the parents.)

What's this mean? It means that we need only look to the North of us to see the evils of socialism (it starts with one "social program" and spreads like a disease.) This is the goal of the left-wing.

This is why all these lazy liars whine about "the rich"(or anyone who has worked hard and been wise with thier money). The left wants us to be more like Canada - where the lazy, and unwilling will sit back and reap the spoils of the hard working and honest. Where those who "have", support the "have nots", and in return get a lower quality health system, an increased number of alcohol and drug abusers, a larger government, decreased choices (of leadership - at least we have both right and left to choose from, in Canada it has turned out to be choice between left, far left, and extreme left with the occasional moderate running for office and being labeled a biggot, racist, and "dingbat", yet still managing to recieve 25% of the popular vote - the 25% that work I imagine)

The military? Canada'a largest ship pales in comparison to one of our little destroyers, and, aside from the F-18, the airforce lacks anything that could be reasonably considered as high tech. Maybe this is the reason they didn't join us, the government probably forgot to pay thier bill for the 7 new muskets they strapped to the wings and they got reposessed by Pierre, but, since it's a socialist government( don't be fooled James, it is), they won't tell the people the truth, but rather use the controlled media to spread half-truths and false propoganda to support thier inaction regarding a very real threat to you me and all of us in North Amaerica! But, I digress...

Until the next foolish, inaccurate, unverifiable post filled with hatred, anger, and propoganda is placed(or should I say spewed) by yet another ultra left wing liberal who guises thier "me, me, me" attitude uder a pretense(unknowingly false) of "what's best for us all" (I'll decide what's best for me, thank you anyway)- Don't worry, I don't blame you personally for falling prey to the left wing media and repetative propoganda, I ALMOST started to believe some of it myself! Then I remembered that I, like you, have the ability to research and check facts for myself. It was only then that I ceased being a social puppet, and became independant, and free.

God Bless America (see: Constitution on the United States of America; First Amendment)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#283 Consumer Comment

Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

I have been reading over the posts from the last week or so and you know what...none of you have written any verifiable facts in any of your posts! Actually I am hard pressed to find anything in your posts that you even claim to be fact. This leads me a choice, a choice of only two possible conclusions which may be drawn from these observations:

Choice 1) All of you are truly intellectual giants whose resources are not only comprised of sites and information resources that restrict access by and to those of lesser world understanding such as Vera, Dale, Robert, and myself (why else wouldn't you list them so we could verify "your" facts for ourselves,) but also your massive brainpower and understanding of the worlds peoples gives each of you (and apparently most democrats) the ability to derive a truthful, unbiased, and unflawed understanding of any and every topic brought forth without the constraints of having to read or understand any ONE source of your information, but rather your basis' are founded on a conglomerate of information throughout which your high faculty of reasoning and understanding naturally separates fact from fiction without error and you are therefore blessed with this innate capability to merely place your words on paper and have them accepted as fact, and therefore there is no individual source for your venemous spew that you can list.

OR

Choice 2) As typicallly stereotyped (left-wing, ultra-liberal, whiny, and misinformed) Bush haters, you feel there is no need to base your opinion on fact ("facts are not really relevant") as facts are contrary to your opinions. Furthermore, if there is any chance for you to have and intellectual (sounding) post that doesn't support a more logical or "Republican" point of veiw than yours, you will have to fill it with lies, half-truths and embellishment, therefore, to provide sources (other than what we all know to be ultra liberal, left-wing publications)would either be impossible, or self-defeating (as we could read the WHOLE article and thus prevent quotes from being represented out of context and such.)

Now, for those who are heedless in thier chosen words, and abrupt to offer thier mendacious sentiment of George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, especially regarding his sapience, I wish to council you as to the veracity of your promulgation and libelous spew. Let me begin with the definition of the word often used to describe "G.W." throughout your posts - MORON: lacking intelligence, or common sense

This "term" so commonly used in your description of George Bush stems from a "report" comparing IQ's of our current and past presidents. The truth is, although this report was used as reference on several news reports, blog spots, democratic advertisements and postings all over the internet, it never existed! The "report" was (and to this day is) being creditted to the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, Pennsylvania, who did a four month study on the IQ of "G.W.", as they have been doing on all presidents since 1973. The problem with this report is quite a simple and provable fact, that is, there is no such place, company, institute, or foundation as "The Lovenstein Institute." This "institute" was, and is, a fallacy - a front, to create and publish a false (non)study of George Bush in order to discredit any conception of reality regarding his intellect. Basically, it was created to counteract the educational differences between Al Gore and George Bush during thier "intelligence battle." (Both Dems. and Reps. claimed the "smarter" man)


Anybody with "half a brain" could have picked this out as a fake by simply reading. The report stated that it had done studies on presidents of the last 50 years and yet it included Roosevelt, who died in office in 1945. Also, it said that all presidents prior to "G.W." had several books published prior to them being elected into office, and George had none. The opposite is true - few presidents had published books prior to taking office, but our president did - "A Charge to Keep" 1999. Furthermore, the "Swanson/Crane" system for evaluating IQ's doesn't exist, and only the biased would believe that almost all of the democratic presidents had exceptionally high iq's while the republican presidents all(but 1) scored closer to average or less than (George Bush - 91?? c'mon now, he may not be the most affluent speaker but that is borderline retarded - if you believe this there is "no hope" to overcome your bias.)

I had to go through alot of my books and searched the internet for quite some time, but this is what I have discovered and believe to be true ( I can not verify some of these as "fact" as the sources that I found them at/in (although they were both left and right) did not have a direct source for thier statements, however, THEY have presented them as fact and there are several in (close)agreement.

presidents IQ's:

George W. Bush - 117 - 121
Bill Clinton - 137 - 141
George Bush Sr.- 119 - 122
Ronald Reagan - 116 - 127 (widest spread I found and it's funny, but the highest score came from a "left" report and the lowest from a "right" one!?!
Carter -139
J.F.K. -119
Nixon(highest published presidential IQ in history - factual and verifiable . . . .
-143

Now, can anybody please explain to me where the facts show George W. Bush to be a "moron"? I know I must piss off you "democrats" when even your venemous hatred get's thrown back at you PROVEN and INARGUABLY . . .UNTRUE.

As long as I am at it, before you start shouting impeachment you might want to check out the requirements to impeach a president. Only a moron would think that they can be impeached simply because you don't agree with thier policies or actions while in office. That is what the electorial process is for. If Every president that did something that you, or even a majority of people, didn't agree with could be impeached, there wouldn't be one that made it through his entire term. Policies are decided at the voting booths! If, according to the laws of the United States of America, he has committed an indictable offense, by all means, have a go at impeachment, but remember how difficult that is, Clinton was "as guilty a sin" and although impeached by the house, the senate wouldn't, well, you know the rest.

Last (for now), but not least, James from Calgary. I can only imagine that you have gotten your liberal views by being raised in, and living in, and probably not venturing outside of, Alberta. What some on this post may not realize is that Alberta is by far Canada's wealthiest province. They have the lowest unemployment rate and the lowest tax rate (0% provincial sales tax) and yet they still have all the benefits of a social society (yes James, Canada is a socialist country - it just disguises itself under the false pretense of democracy). When you speak for"all of Canada", or even "most" of it, you might want to consider those from other provinces too.
Let's take, for example, Saskatchewan(the province located directly east of you.) thier PST (provincial sales tax) last I heard was around the 9% mark, this added in with the GST (goods and services tax) of,... what is it? 7.5% (I may be a little off on that) and you are paying an extra 16.5 cents on every dollar you spend! This is after you get deducted from your paycheck: Employment Insurance Premium - (these numbers ar "Guesstimates" based on personal experience - howzit goin' eh?:)) 1- 1.5%, CPP .75% and, depending on your income bracket - Income tax 15% - 50%. Yes, I know I wrote FIFTY percent. Add that all up and your looking at 32.5% - 66.0% of your paycheck going directly to the government.

What does the government do with this money? Well, how else do you expect "free" medicine and all the other "benefits" of a "social society"? How else do you expect someone who has never held a job (above the "table") to own: a) a 3 bd 2bth house with a full basement remodeled and rented out for additional "cash income" b) 2 cars - one older truck and a sports car less than 2 yrs old c) a motorcycle, d) ski-doo, e) and last I talked to him he was looking into buying a cabin at a popular vacation destination. All the while some poor "sap" who was raised to work hard for what you want, be honest, and don't abuse available programs, works two jobs (which puts him in a higher tax bracket), attends University (which he pays for because he "makes too much to qualify for even a student LOAN"), owns one financed 1987 Ford Malibu ,and rents a basement "suite" off of some welfare "victim". After groceries, bills, and 1 night out for a "nice dinner" with friends, this "sap" is left with "gas money" and a couple hundred bucks to "budget" for the next automobile breakdown or other emergency (which tends to happen about once every 4 months and requires yet another loan from the parents.)

What's this mean? It means that we need only look to the North of us to see the evils of socialism (it starts with one "social program" and spreads like a disease.) This is the goal of the left-wing.

This is why all these lazy liars whine about "the rich"(or anyone who has worked hard and been wise with thier money). The left wants us to be more like Canada - where the lazy, and unwilling will sit back and reap the spoils of the hard working and honest. Where those who "have", support the "have nots", and in return get a lower quality health system, an increased number of alcohol and drug abusers, a larger government, decreased choices (of leadership - at least we have both right and left to choose from, in Canada it has turned out to be choice between left, far left, and extreme left with the occasional moderate running for office and being labeled a biggot, racist, and "dingbat", yet still managing to recieve 25% of the popular vote - the 25% that work I imagine)

The military? Canada'a largest ship pales in comparison to one of our little destroyers, and, aside from the F-18, the airforce lacks anything that could be reasonably considered as high tech. Maybe this is the reason they didn't join us, the government probably forgot to pay thier bill for the 7 new muskets they strapped to the wings and they got reposessed by Pierre, but, since it's a socialist government( don't be fooled James, it is), they won't tell the people the truth, but rather use the controlled media to spread half-truths and false propoganda to support thier inaction regarding a very real threat to you me and all of us in North Amaerica! But, I digress...

Until the next foolish, inaccurate, unverifiable post filled with hatred, anger, and propoganda is placed(or should I say spewed) by yet another ultra left wing liberal who guises thier "me, me, me" attitude uder a pretense(unknowingly false) of "what's best for us all" (I'll decide what's best for me, thank you anyway)- Don't worry, I don't blame you personally for falling prey to the left wing media and repetative propoganda, I ALMOST started to believe some of it myself! Then I remembered that I, like you, have the ability to research and check facts for myself. It was only then that I ceased being a social puppet, and became independant, and free.

God Bless America (see: Constitution on the United States of America; First Amendment)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#282 Consumer Comment

Jon, James, James,and now Liam - what facts support your opinions??

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

I have been reading over the posts from the last week or so and you know what...none of you have written any verifiable facts in any of your posts! Actually I am hard pressed to find anything in your posts that you even claim to be fact. This leads me a choice, a choice of only two possible conclusions which may be drawn from these observations:

Choice 1) All of you are truly intellectual giants whose resources are not only comprised of sites and information resources that restrict access by and to those of lesser world understanding such as Vera, Dale, Robert, and myself (why else wouldn't you list them so we could verify "your" facts for ourselves,) but also your massive brainpower and understanding of the worlds peoples gives each of you (and apparently most democrats) the ability to derive a truthful, unbiased, and unflawed understanding of any and every topic brought forth without the constraints of having to read or understand any ONE source of your information, but rather your basis' are founded on a conglomerate of information throughout which your high faculty of reasoning and understanding naturally separates fact from fiction without error and you are therefore blessed with this innate capability to merely place your words on paper and have them accepted as fact, and therefore there is no individual source for your venemous spew that you can list.

OR

Choice 2) As typicallly stereotyped (left-wing, ultra-liberal, whiny, and misinformed) Bush haters, you feel there is no need to base your opinion on fact ("facts are not really relevant") as facts are contrary to your opinions. Furthermore, if there is any chance for you to have and intellectual (sounding) post that doesn't support a more logical or "Republican" point of veiw than yours, you will have to fill it with lies, half-truths and embellishment, therefore, to provide sources (other than what we all know to be ultra liberal, left-wing publications)would either be impossible, or self-defeating (as we could read the WHOLE article and thus prevent quotes from being represented out of context and such.)

Now, for those who are heedless in thier chosen words, and abrupt to offer thier mendacious sentiment of George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, especially regarding his sapience, I wish to council you as to the veracity of your promulgation and libelous spew. Let me begin with the definition of the word often used to describe "G.W." throughout your posts - MORON: lacking intelligence, or common sense

This "term" so commonly used in your description of George Bush stems from a "report" comparing IQ's of our current and past presidents. The truth is, although this report was used as reference on several news reports, blog spots, democratic advertisements and postings all over the internet, it never existed! The "report" was (and to this day is) being creditted to the Lovenstein Institute of Scranton, Pennsylvania, who did a four month study on the IQ of "G.W.", as they have been doing on all presidents since 1973. The problem with this report is quite a simple and provable fact, that is, there is no such place, company, institute, or foundation as "The Lovenstein Institute." This "institute" was, and is, a fallacy - a front, to create and publish a false (non)study of George Bush in order to discredit any conception of reality regarding his intellect. Basically, it was created to counteract the educational differences between Al Gore and George Bush during thier "intelligence battle." (Both Dems. and Reps. claimed the "smarter" man)


Anybody with "half a brain" could have picked this out as a fake by simply reading. The report stated that it had done studies on presidents of the last 50 years and yet it included Roosevelt, who died in office in 1945. Also, it said that all presidents prior to "G.W." had several books published prior to them being elected into office, and George had none. The opposite is true - few presidents had published books prior to taking office, but our president did - "A Charge to Keep" 1999. Furthermore, the "Swanson/Crane" system for evaluating IQ's doesn't exist, and only the biased would believe that almost all of the democratic presidents had exceptionally high iq's while the republican presidents all(but 1) scored closer to average or less than (George Bush - 91?? c'mon now, he may not be the most affluent speaker but that is borderline retarded - if you believe this there is "no hope" to overcome your bias.)

I had to go through alot of my books and searched the internet for quite some time, but this is what I have discovered and believe to be true ( I can not verify some of these as "fact" as the sources that I found them at/in (although they were both left and right) did not have a direct source for thier statements, however, THEY have presented them as fact and there are several in (close)agreement.

presidents IQ's:

George W. Bush - 117 - 121
Bill Clinton - 137 - 141
George Bush Sr.- 119 - 122
Ronald Reagan - 116 - 127 (widest spread I found and it's funny, but the highest score came from a "left" report and the lowest from a "right" one!?!
Carter -139
J.F.K. -119
Nixon(highest published presidential IQ in history - factual and verifiable . . . .
-143

Now, can anybody please explain to me where the facts show George W. Bush to be a "moron"? I know I must piss off you "democrats" when even your venemous hatred get's thrown back at you PROVEN and INARGUABLY . . .UNTRUE.

As long as I am at it, before you start shouting impeachment you might want to check out the requirements to impeach a president. Only a moron would think that they can be impeached simply because you don't agree with thier policies or actions while in office. That is what the electorial process is for. If Every president that did something that you, or even a majority of people, didn't agree with could be impeached, there wouldn't be one that made it through his entire term. Policies are decided at the voting booths! If, according to the laws of the United States of America, he has committed an indictable offense, by all means, have a go at impeachment, but remember how difficult that is, Clinton was "as guilty a sin" and although impeached by the house, the senate wouldn't, well, you know the rest.

Last (for now), but not least, James from Calgary. I can only imagine that you have gotten your liberal views by being raised in, and living in, and probably not venturing outside of, Alberta. What some on this post may not realize is that Alberta is by far Canada's wealthiest province. They have the lowest unemployment rate and the lowest tax rate (0% provincial sales tax) and yet they still have all the benefits of a social society (yes James, Canada is a socialist country - it just disguises itself under the false pretense of democracy). When you speak for"all of Canada", or even "most" of it, you might want to consider those from other provinces too.
Let's take, for example, Saskatchewan(the province located directly east of you.) thier PST (provincial sales tax) last I heard was around the 9% mark, this added in with the GST (goods and services tax) of,... what is it? 7.5% (I may be a little off on that) and you are paying an extra 16.5 cents on every dollar you spend! This is after you get deducted from your paycheck: Employment Insurance Premium - (these numbers ar "Guesstimates" based on personal experience - howzit goin' eh?:)) 1- 1.5%, CPP .75% and, depending on your income bracket - Income tax 15% - 50%. Yes, I know I wrote FIFTY percent. Add that all up and your looking at 32.5% - 66.0% of your paycheck going directly to the government.

What does the government do with this money? Well, how else do you expect "free" medicine and all the other "benefits" of a "social society"? How else do you expect someone who has never held a job (above the "table") to own: a) a 3 bd 2bth house with a full basement remodeled and rented out for additional "cash income" b) 2 cars - one older truck and a sports car less than 2 yrs old c) a motorcycle, d) ski-doo, e) and last I talked to him he was looking into buying a cabin at a popular vacation destination. All the while some poor "sap" who was raised to work hard for what you want, be honest, and don't abuse available programs, works two jobs (which puts him in a higher tax bracket), attends University (which he pays for because he "makes too much to qualify for even a student LOAN"), owns one financed 1987 Ford Malibu ,and rents a basement "suite" off of some welfare "victim". After groceries, bills, and 1 night out for a "nice dinner" with friends, this "sap" is left with "gas money" and a couple hundred bucks to "budget" for the next automobile breakdown or other emergency (which tends to happen about once every 4 months and requires yet another loan from the parents.)

What's this mean? It means that we need only look to the North of us to see the evils of socialism (it starts with one "social program" and spreads like a disease.) This is the goal of the left-wing.

This is why all these lazy liars whine about "the rich"(or anyone who has worked hard and been wise with thier money). The left wants us to be more like Canada - where the lazy, and unwilling will sit back and reap the spoils of the hard working and honest. Where those who "have", support the "have nots", and in return get a lower quality health system, an increased number of alcohol and drug abusers, a larger government, decreased choices (of leadership - at least we have both right and left to choose from, in Canada it has turned out to be choice between left, far left, and extreme left with the occasional moderate running for office and being labeled a biggot, racist, and "dingbat", yet still managing to recieve 25% of the popular vote - the 25% that work I imagine)

The military? Canada'a largest ship pales in comparison to one of our little destroyers, and, aside from the F-18, the airforce lacks anything that could be reasonably considered as high tech. Maybe this is the reason they didn't join us, the government probably forgot to pay thier bill for the 7 new muskets they strapped to the wings and they got reposessed by Pierre, but, since it's a socialist government( don't be fooled James, it is), they won't tell the people the truth, but rather use the controlled media to spread half-truths and false propoganda to support thier inaction regarding a very real threat to you me and all of us in North Amaerica! But, I digress...

Until the next foolish, inaccurate, unverifiable post filled with hatred, anger, and propoganda is placed(or should I say spewed) by yet another ultra left wing liberal who guises thier "me, me, me" attitude uder a pretense(unknowingly false) of "what's best for us all" (I'll decide what's best for me, thank you anyway)- Don't worry, I don't blame you personally for falling prey to the left wing media and repetative propoganda, I ALMOST started to believe some of it myself! Then I remembered that I, like you, have the ability to research and check facts for myself. It was only then that I ceased being a social puppet, and became independant, and free.

God Bless America (see: Constitution on the United States of America; First Amendment)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#281 Consumer Comment

Oh, Brother... give 'em facts, and they claim boredom...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

I s'pose that's because they don't want to know the feelings of those they claim to support. Oh! I must be forgetting! What liberals say in the past doesn't count! It's "non-existent", once the interest drifts to another topic.

Funny, isn't it, that when you present unedited, factual excerpts (and plenty of them!) All of a sudden, the post is "too long to read." (Personally, I was careful to insert spaces so that it'd be easier to read, but I guess the Editor saw fit to move the spaces out.) This from a moron who's got close to sixty posts on the board that say nothing more than that which can be summed up in a few sentences. Notice, also, that as Shawn suggests, he reads what he wants and stops when it gets uncomfortable for him. We already know you like any attention, Pookles...even negative attention.

Robert, you and I both know he'll read only things that present America negatively...because that's what he wants. ('Round and 'Round and 'Round it goes....) "Hey, Mr. Ladin...can I call you 'Bin'?...'Nother back-bacon sandwich for you...Oh, yeah...Muslims don't eat pork, do they? Duuuude, sorry! Beauty!)

I've presented my support for my President, my reasons why, and my resources on which I base this reasoning. And I've been attacked for it. If you don't like it, that's too d**n bad. Call me a muppet if you want; wrong as it is, that's your choice.

Congrats, Liam...you've got a following of fellow liberal bootlicks...just enough for a game of Bridge. You can sit and badmouth me and America all you like, and be proud of yourselves. Oughtta make of one interesting rubber! (You can serve little finger sandwiches! And bangers and dicks for breakfast the morning after!) Personally, I don't give a d**n about Starbuck's Coffee, or Iraqi ice-cream. Nice to know you have something positive to contribute to our view of the Middle-East...wouldn't it be nice to see the rest of the story, where US soldiers are helping bring in clean water, building better schools, and helping repair the damage (not all of it was inflicted by the US)? I'm so d**n sick of the LeftMedia depicting their own countrymen as berserking monsters.

By the way, I don't look at the world down a rifle's sites. You need to broaden your own scope beyond the Media alone. Not all Americans are gun-toting Rednecks. With your post, how dare you try coming off as a peacekeeper? So you don't agree with what the US is doing. Have you even bothered to notice that I myself have said, in past posts, that I don't like war either? But sometimes, it's a necessary event, whether or not you like getting your fingernails dirty. Also notice, that I never badmouthed the French; in fact, I am aware of the contributions the French had made to America...we couldn't have pulled through our own Revolution without 'em.

"America has titled itself the worlds policeman but you are not. You are the big kid in the playground that nobody likes but we have to cosy up to you for protection."

I don't think we gave ourselves that title...I think we got that from the Europeans. Not sure. So you'd rather cuddle up to Communist Russia, or China? Okay...but you're gonna have to make some changes...changes, I'd say, that are far more drastic than anything the US might suggest. As an aside, you treat asking US help as though it's like extortion. How bad do you think it'd be if we said "No, you do it yourselves." When you needed help? There is nothing that America can do to appease. If we back out quick, we're "A paper tiger that flees at the sight of its own blood.", and we're "forwarding the terrorist regime."

"If you know anything about Islam, you would know Bin Laden and Saddam would never have anything to do with each other."

Please, enlighten me. From what I see about Osama Bin Laden, he'll ask anyone for the help he needs to further his own interests. Pride be damned, he even cried on America's sandals once. Rest assured, I will do some more reading on the so-called "Religion of Peace."

James:
You can stroke Liam's and Jon's ego (...or whaterver else...) all you like; you won't change my view, as I have stated repeatedly, usually followed by "now leave me alone". But you're either too stupid, or too obsessed with a woman you can't argue down. Get over it. My challenge still stands. Proof. Show me. I want to see proof that we are illegally there. I want to see proof that Iraq doesn't have at least the capability to make WMD, and never has had them. How about how the war is exclusively for oil, and that there is NO democracy being opened up for the people. "Just the facts, please!" And Michael Moore isn't a useable source; he's as biased as he is ignorant, decietful, gluttonous, and ugly. Think you can do that without being the usual narcissistic, subversive, seditionist?
"Sitting on the edge of my seat."

The poor spelling (...."there pore, but they can buy weapons from the good ol' US of A"...) was merely an example of how I percieve your writing and spelling skills. And judging by your last hazes, I can see it's a fair representation of your reasoning skills, as well. Do you think you stroked Liam's ego hard enough? I recognize a cry for "help" when I see one. And I won't back down, no matter how much you bore me. Try leaving me be...you know, like I had suggested by (I think) my fourth post! (Oh Liam! Be my GENERAL baby! Lead me! COMMAND Me! Yes!) Your dialect even comes off like some American hick trailer-trash woman (read: MOUNTAIN FOLK)..and a poor representation of the group.

Oh...and on the subject, what is "morfed"? How you use it...is that some Canadian way of spelling "morphed" as in "transformed"?

John; we already know Google's opinion of the president. Here's one for you: go to any given online thesaurus, and type in "John"...you'll get everything from "nameless individual" (You've heard of "John Q. Public"?) to "Toilet" or "Prostitute's Customer". Whether it's "Jon" or "John", it's pronounced the same. And like James, your writing skills are just as poor. All that aside, Where is that info you posted from? I'd like to read the articles, please. Your post on Louisiana has that pig-shitty reek of Mike Moore. I love how you whoopsied the letters in Liam's name to spell "Laim" ("Lame"). I'll bet he's real flattered. Good job.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#280 Consumer Comment

The Most Realistic Post So Far

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Thanks Laim! I'm sure there are some people that would label your post anti-American. They couldn't be more wrong! I'd much rather have a drink with Bill also for the same reason. Believe me there are many Americans here that share your opinions. They are the ones that are bright enough to recognize BS when they hear and see it, and certainly not profiting from it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#279 Consumer Suggestion

Vera calling the kettle black!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Oh dear Vera;

Who in hell is gonna read such a long post?

Can I quote you?

Here Vera:

There pore, but they can buy weapons from the GOOD Ol US of A! (Mis-spellings and bad grammar intentional.)

You point fingers & mis spell in the same sentance! All calling the kettle black!

Vera spend more time reading Liam's post.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#278 Consumer Comment

Hey Genius!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Try reading the UNSCR's I gave you. They state in plain Canadian how and why the United States was allowed to go back in. Try reading it. Then clean up your sheets.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#277 Consumer Comment

Hey Genius!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Try reading the UNSCR's I gave you. They state in plain Canadian how and why the United States was allowed to go back in. Try reading it. Then clean up your sheets.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#276 Consumer Comment

ARE YOU FOR REAL???????

AUTHOR: Vern - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

YOU GRIPIN BOUT OIL/WAR OR OUR PRESIDENT????????????????? THATS FIRST. WHATS UP????

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#275 Consumer Suggestion

Vera ..you take the cake!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Vera;

I did not read all of your letter. Hon I am sorry... I sorrta got bored!

I mean I must get boreing... but you take the cake!

My best General would be "liam"! please listen to him. He makes sense!

I am so tired of argueing with you! If the USA was attacked on a real facit, both Canada & the Us would team up together & destroy those muther f**kers! Never mind "Cave Man" age! We would erraticate those bastards from our soil! We would be so good at it as we would never be attacked again!

If Canada & the USA ever joined forces, we could take over the world! No Problem! Without Canada? Good f**king try!

Canada does not wanna take over the World! Get it? We are not behind you on this issue! Yes we can do it! No Problem! A United States & Canada Coalition with all of our resourses & all of our abilities in the manufacturing world... we can do it!

We can destoy any enemy! We can create better forces than the world has ever known! Helicopters! Space Weapons! We are tje best!

When the smoke settles... USA & Canada will survive to pick up the pieces! Yea we can! No problem!

If we joined forces we could do it just from a threat! We would not have to fire a shot! We have more than the rest of the world combined! We are the most powerful! For sure!

Now... what are we doing in Iraq?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#274 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Liam

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Liam:

Good job bud! You just put it on the mark! f**k are you good! I salute you my friend! You have it all wrapped up!

Now will these guys listen? Doubtful! d**n ignorant Americans!

However we can't git to them that way!

d**n I can hear your accent all throught your letter! Ahh nobody could ever accuse you of not being an Englishman!

You put it to the point & I am "morfed" at your explanation! So to the point it was & so "Global" that the Americans cannot understand! Man yer good!

Well Liam, I can only give you backup, as everything you said was "more than" true! Good Man you are!

I thank you Liam for putting some sense into this as I cannot do as much as you did!

Congrats to Liam! Go Buddy! Be my GENERAL! Monty would be morphed by you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#273 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Liam

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Liam:

Good job bud! You just put it on the mark! f**k are you good! I salute you my friend! You have it all wrapped up!

Now will these guys listen? Doubtful! d**n ignorant Americans!

However we can't git to them that way!

d**n I can hear your accent all throught your letter! Ahh nobody could ever accuse you of not being an Englishman!

You put it to the point & I am "morfed" at your explanation! So to the point it was & so "Global" that the Americans cannot understand! Man yer good!

Well Liam, I can only give you backup, as everything you said was "more than" true! Good Man you are!

I thank you Liam for putting some sense into this as I cannot do as much as you did!

Congrats to Liam! Go Buddy! Be my GENERAL! Monty would be morphed by you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#272 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Liam

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Liam:

Good job bud! You just put it on the mark! f**k are you good! I salute you my friend! You have it all wrapped up!

Now will these guys listen? Doubtful! d**n ignorant Americans!

However we can't git to them that way!

d**n I can hear your accent all throught your letter! Ahh nobody could ever accuse you of not being an Englishman!

You put it to the point & I am "morfed" at your explanation! So to the point it was & so "Global" that the Americans cannot understand! Man yer good!

Well Liam, I can only give you backup, as everything you said was "more than" true! Good Man you are!

I thank you Liam for putting some sense into this as I cannot do as much as you did!

Congrats to Liam! Go Buddy! Be my GENERAL! Monty would be morphed by you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#271 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Liam

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 08, 2005

Liam:

Good job bud! You just put it on the mark! f**k are you good! I salute you my friend! You have it all wrapped up!

Now will these guys listen? Doubtful! d**n ignorant Americans!

However we can't git to them that way!

d**n I can hear your accent all throught your letter! Ahh nobody could ever accuse you of not being an Englishman!

You put it to the point & I am "morfed" at your explanation! So to the point it was & so "Global" that the Americans cannot understand! Man yer good!

Well Liam, I can only give you backup, as everything you said was "more than" true! Good Man you are!

I thank you Liam for putting some sense into this as I cannot do as much as you did!

Congrats to Liam! Go Buddy! Be my GENERAL! Monty would be morphed by you!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#270 Consumer Comment

Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

For those with blind faith to our current regime Just go to the google web page and type in the word Moron and click on "I feel lucky" and just weep away: Your hero is a GREEDY, NOT TO SMART, TOTAL LOSER. Again my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#269 Consumer Comment

Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

For those with blind faith to our current regime Just go to the google web page and type in the word Moron and click on "I feel lucky" and just weep away: Your hero is a GREEDY, NOT TO SMART, TOTAL LOSER. Again my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#268 Consumer Comment

Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

For those with blind faith to our current regime Just go to the google web page and type in the word Moron and click on "I feel lucky" and just weep away: Your hero is a GREEDY, NOT TO SMART, TOTAL LOSER. Again my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#267 Consumer Comment

Forget Clinton & Kerry, Never Mention their Name Once

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

For those with blind faith to our current regime Just go to the google web page and type in the word Moron and click on "I feel lucky" and just weep away: Your hero is a GREEDY, NOT TO SMART, TOTAL LOSER. Again my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#266 Consumer Comment

LINING POCKETS, NOT LEVEES

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

Gee Vera, or what ever your name may be. Anyway, the one who was so full of praize for the Prez and his goodwill trip to save the south. Although they were so very transparent anyone with a complete brain cell could see it for what it truely was, a show and nothing else.

I wonder who they could be refering to:
There is no tragedy we can not turn into a boondoggle for my "base".

BATON ROUGE, LA - On the eve of President MORON's fifth trip to this region looking for his "bullhorn (that's bullshit with a microphone attached) moment," the true nature of his rebuilding plan has come to light. Once again, anyone who actually thought "taking responsibility" meant something new, was duped. His Do-Whatever-It-Takes policy has that same hateful hollow ring as his brilliantly executed Iraqi war plan of the same name. President MORON has put Karl Rove in charge of reconstruction! What this means is that the hurricane ravaged region will now become a Banana Republican idiocy zone where anything goes (like Mardi Gras, only with middle-class Americans' tax dollars instead of beads). Anyone who has given campaign contributions to The MORONARCHY will be free to: implement private school vouchers, ignore environmental regulations, trample on prevailing wage standards, receive huge no-bid construction contracts, and receive even more Tax Cuts For The stinking Rich! Nothing ever changes (except for the deficit which seems to climb every time President MORON opens his mouth). Unfortunately, the real looting in the Gulf will not be covered by TV-news helicopters: the Banana Republicans are now getting while the getting's good because as their approval ratings plummet, they know their days are numbered.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#265 Consumer Comment

Yet another response to the Disinformatzia....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

Hi Shawn! I'm glad to see that my post wasn't perceived as an attack, and taken in the good nature for which it was intended. Truly, you have an outstanding sense of social decency...and a nice sense of humor, to boot. You present yourself well, also. But be preparedJames of Canada will call you a liar, a spin doctor, and wrong, just because your information doesn't match his. You see, while our friend from Tupper has presented absolutely NO information to prove his statements true (even though he has been asked repeatedly to point us to where he gets his info from), James of Canada has seen fit to echo and amplify his panting agreement, citing Michael Moore, Chinese newspapers, and interviews given by Stephan O'Phallus to his former employer, that amounted to nothing more than a long winded ego-jaculation of bullshit from the Former Prez.

When his [the resident Canuck's] spin is challenged, his subject will change. Think! he'll cry, his liberal bleat reaching frantic, My simple point is this! and he'll babble anything and everything.

Let's see.we've covered The War is for oil and to fill politicians' coffers! Which, by the way, IS THE ORIGINAL SUBJECT ON WHICH THIS REPORT WAS WRITTEN, not Weapons of Mass Destruction, not Ford Trucks, not Hitler, not WWII, not the depth of Lake Ontario, or whether a sub can cruise in it, not global warming, not power grid failures, not Jet Fighter planes, Hurricane Katrina, not slant-drilling, the Bible, not VHS Vs. Beta, and not Gay marriage (if I've missed any, YOU KNOW James will correct mehe seems to like to think he's informed on everything!) Each time he gets slammed and proven wrong, he goes into a tirade of meaningless belligerence and sexual insults. His approach and writing style is the very reason I address him as the juvenile, anal (hence, the bathroom humor baseline in my rebuttals), inaccurate, and self-serving twit he writes himself to be. What myself or Roberteven B. merely mention in passing as a reference, he sees fit to dedicate endless rebuttals on (and then Robert pounds sand up his butt).

The only things that he remains consistent on are G.W.Bush is an a*****e! and We need to get the U.S. outta Iraq! This war makes no SENCE! It's ILLEGAL! coupled with There TERRORISTS Vera! That's what they do! It's about time the U.S. got they'res! There pore, but they can buy weapons from the GOOD Ol US of A! (Mis-spellings and bad grammar intentional.) Like he's done some personal number-crunching or any research. (And on each of these, he has been solidly slapped back down to the floor.)

Funny thing; in one post, it's I see a few Democrat post's here. Most are Republican or Libitarian or neither as I am. And in another, it's I personally am a Conservative, and if I lived in the States I would most likely be Republican. Still another, and it's Where are the Democrats out there? When he's looking for a pat on the back. Let's also bear in mind, that he supports the terrorists. Regarding Hillary Clinton: She'll be your next president, and will remove the troops from Iraq if they haven't' come home already. And in the very next paragraph, he says But that won't fix anything. Just as her huspand did not, she will not remove the presence of the USA in the region James, with all your self-contradiction, do you ever bump into your own a*s while you're running in circles? Do you have a tendency to be startled by, or quarrel with, mirrors?

His posts go from We could all be worried about me-me-me and that's bad, but if a suitcase nuke' goes up in New York or New Jersey, it'll be in my neighborhood, too!
Then, he rejoices Go sing Proud To Be An American in another country and see if a bullet doesn't cut your visit short! Tee Hee.
On one hand, he whines that the average American doesn't know much about the world beyond its borders, but insists that we stay home and take care of our own yards before we go to fix anyone elsesyet again, Poo, you've made yourself a plantar wart on this particular post.

Apparently, I'm the English Teacher and Secretary when I correct his spelling, then attacks the other posters' paragraph structure, grammar, and typing of all caps. What about that werile practice of misusing quotation marks as emphasis?
Let's remember, he was the first to single me out, but accuses me of attacks and insults, having no evidence. Look at how he treats Robert and Patrickeven B. ---the minute B. shows any difference in opinion.

As I recall, it wasn't necessarily me who came out with the whole Liberal/Conservative, Right/Left, and Republican Democrat bit, but I'll take credit for it if it makes you happy. (I don't remember writing I am sorry US citizens are mainly ruled by two Parties. Your either left or Right.) If I did, it was merely to point out differences. Which there are. And they're vast. Vast I say.

But, to even further tear apart your posts, let's do the whole recount thing, shall we (Liberals and their need for the proverbial Mulligan, sheesh! Where have I heard this one before?)? Let's DO.
From the first post made by James of Tupper, to the Post by Shawn of Phelan (Typical James, read enough to support you then stop) I count about forty-three individual persons. Of that forty-three, I count eighteen posts that agree with what you say completely, to twenty-one that agree with what I say. I don't necessarily count B., Dan, or Knenina to be for either you or I. B., while he agrees with you that Bush is an a*s, he doesn't agree with your Let's go belly-up and coddle the terrorists. Which I wholeheartedly agree with him (or he agrees with me, which ever way you want to put it), that the terrorists aren't justified in their dastardly actions. Dan and Knenina have both chosen to wisely stay neutral, as they just want to make a point, leave us to mull it over, and depart in peace. So add not being able to count (ever volunteer as ballot-counter in Florida or Ohio?) right next to not able to write or not able to present intelligent, factual argument among your no doubt impressive list of can't-do-ables and Canadians are better educated ribbons. (Dawn of Whitesboro is simply telling the people of Tupper to get lives, not responding to the actual thread.)
Even if you were to have the three wild cards on your side of the tally, that puts us neck-and-neck, not you in the lead.

Also, here are a few keynotes I'd like to mention

Gas prices and Global Warming:
As we know, war is expensive. It's even more expensive, since the Clinton Administration saw fit to lower the budgets across the board for our military, right down to pay raises for the Enlisted. Since our military was needy when we needed it, this war is particularly spendy. Because exorbitant expense, there's no point to assume that the war is all about making a buck-forty (plus) extra per gallon. The profits made on the whole Blood For Oil dispute are lost by incurred military spending.

While I do agree that global warming is an apparent issue, it isn't the reason Hurricanes like Katrina, Erin, Opal, or any others are out there. If you check the NOAA website and look at the total compiled data over several decades, you'll see that hurricanes are cyclic. We have mild, bad, and awful decades. You might wanna check the records, but Global warming isn't exclusively America's fault, or Bush's fault. Every country produces greenhouse gasses (yes, USA is among the top, but we're also at the top of research to amend the problem by producing alternate fuels for cars and homes, using solar energy, and so on.).

I don't believe I've ever stated that Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction at present. I know the inspections didn't turn up anything of real merit, and even the President says he doesn't know for absolute sure. What I do know, is that Weapons inspections could have been more thorough. Some believe we can address this danger by simply resuming the old approach to inspections, and applying diplomatic and economic pressure. Yet this is precisely what the world has tried to do since 1991. The U.N. inspections program was met with systematic deception. The Iraqi regime bugged hotel rooms and offices of inspectors to find where they were going next; they forged documents, destroyed evidence, and developed mobile weapons facilities to keep a step ahead of inspectors. Eight so-called presidential palaces were declared off-limits to unfettered inspections. These sites actually encompass twelve square miles, with hundreds of structures, both above and below the ground, where sensitive materials could be hidden.

The world has also tried economic sanctions -- and watched Iraq use billions of dollars in illegal oil revenues to fund more weapons purchases, rather than providing for the needs of the Iraqi people. The world has tried limited military strikes to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities -- only to see them openly rebuilt, while the regime again denies they even exist.
The world has tried no-fly zones to keep Saddam from terrorizing his own people -- and in the last year alone, the Iraqi military has fired upon American and British pilots more than 750 times. (President Bush, in his Oct. 7, 2002 speech in Cincinnati)

The 2002 NIE was declassified and released in July of 2003; it says:

**"Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade." (The classified version of the NIE gave an estimate of five to seven years.

**"Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; most analysts assess [that] Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."

**"If Baghdad acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material from abroad, it could make a nuclear weapon within a year ... Without such material from abroad, Iraq probably would not be able to make a weapon until the last half of the decade." As "Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX ... Saddam probably has stocked a few hundred metric tons of CW agents."

**"All key aspectsR&D, production, and weaponizationof Iraq's offensive BW [biological warfare] program are active and most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf war ... Baghdad has established a large-scale, redundant, and concealed BW agent production capability, which includes mobile facilities; these facilities can evade detection, are highly survivable, and can exceed the production rates Iraq had prior to the Gulf war."

And for the Naysayers that wish to further decry the whole WMD issue:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." (President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998)

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." (President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.)

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

(Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.)
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

(Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.)

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

(Letter to President Clinton) signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." (Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.)
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
(Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.)
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
(Letter to President Bush) Signed by Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John McCain (Rino-AZ) and others, Dec. 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
(Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.)
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
(Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.)
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
(Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.)
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
(Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.)
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
(Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.)
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I b elieve that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
(Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.)
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
(Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.)
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
(Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002)
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." ( Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.)
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." (Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.)
"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." (Sen. John F. Kerry, (D, MA) Jan. 23, 2003)
These are his trusted advisors, the people who also try to discredit the President at every turn. Far as I can see, the President acted on the information given.
Prove to me with certainty that Iraq has absolutely no capability to create Weapons of Mass Destruction. Even if they don't have them now, that doesn't mean they won't, ever. The UN has pictures of trucks leaving the sites just prior to inspection. A trucker's Picnic? Come on. Even you can't be THAT stupid.
Feel free to also prove, that Saddam Insane hasn't broken the rules governing Cease Fire, murdered countless of his own people, and that all the monies from his illegitimate oil deals went to support and care for the people whom he was supposed to lead. Show me where the US went to war without UN permission (notice that it's okay fro Clinton, wrong for Bush)---no wait, that's already been debunked by Shawn and Robert! So we had the right by UN statute to RESUME war. So under those circumstances, we don't need the Official Thumbs Up from the UN milkies.
But since you wanna stay on the subject an' all, where is there any mention of WMD in the original post's title or content?
This whining polyp is pissing and moaning because he has to pay three bucks a gallon to keep his '72 hooptie-mobile on the road. Notice, that since his opinion agrees with yours, that you say he's spot on? Notice, too, that despite requests to put his money where his mouth is, he has nothing to offer? Where is his solid, irrefutable proof that we're in this war for oil?
He doesn't care about people dyinghe's just mooing about the fact that he can't pay for gas to get to his favorite local bar/brothel. He has to choose: Do I want gas to go from point A to point B? He wonders, clutching the wrinkled bills in his nicotine-yellowed fingers, Or do I want to buy more film so I can live the lives of others vicariously through my photo-voyeuristic tendencies? His brow is furrowed and sweaty. d**n that Bush! Thus ends the illustrious career/hobby of taking pictures of mentally incapacitated folks and half-drunk, half-dressed teenage whores in Tupper. Might get a hobby checking the laws on involuntary surveillance, Kidit'll do ya good.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#264 Consumer Comment

Take a look at yourselves

AUTHOR: Liam - (United Kingdom)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

You Americans would be funny if you weren't so goddamn tragic. Like the little thug in the school yard who cannot keep his hands to himself, perhaps you fail to realise the impact your policies have on the rest of the world.

Yes there is a world beyond your boarders, some muppet about twenty reports back was telling a Canadian to move out of his parents home and try living. I dare say that muppet has never left the 'Good Ol US of A.' Why? 'Cause I got everything I need within the boarders of this great country.' I take it this fella has never been to Iraq, great ice cream served by the happiest little chap you ever met. Syria perhaps, Damascus the oldest continuously inhabited city in the world, or what about big bad Beirut, where I met a twenty something peroxide blonde arab lad dancing to techno funk behind the counter at the Hard Rock Cafe. Wow, not bad for a bunch of Terrorists. I figure the only time anyone from America will ever see these things though is down the barrel of a gun. Then when the smoke clears we'll have a starbucks on every corner.

America has titled itself the worlds policeman but you are not. You are the big kid in the playground that nobody likes but we have to cosy up to you for protection. If anybody on this site can tell me with a straight face, George Bush included that they HONESTLY believed Iraq had WMD and posed a clear and immediate threat to the USA then I am absolutely stunned you can face the right way sitting on the toilet.

To suggest that Saddam was sponsoring Bin Laden. Lunacy, rubbish made up to frighten the poor ignorant American masses, who of course swallowed it and demanded war. If you know anything about Islam, you would know Bin Laden and Saddam would never have anything to do with each other. Englands sons are dying aswell. Also there are Australians, my home country, fighting alongside. Cause of some madman.Bush/Saddam/Laden/Cheny/Rumsfeld.

During the last couple of years I have read alot of negative press on France. You Yankee boys just love to make fun of the French. But where would America be without them. Still under British rule is one. You would not have the Statue of Liberty, a gift from the French. Anybody can stand there and say Come on George, I'll fight with you but it takes a real friend to say, 'nope, you've done well in the past and I've listened to your thoughts but this time you are wrong.'

Anyway just thought I'd write to let you know we are still here, this goes beyond Bush/Clinton, (no preference, but I think I'd rather have a drink with Bill just because he looks like a funny guy) and if this war was not about the Oil then there are plenty of not Oil rich nations who really could use Americas Miltary might to gain there freedom. Now that would be policing.

And just for the record the rest of the world was very dissappointed to see Powell so blatantly lie to the UN that fateful day. We had faith in him. Stepping down was for the best.

Sorry America. Keep it at home and we can all have a good laugh at you, but stay out of world affairs until the smart people call you because it's just dangerous.

Cheers Mate.

Liam, from all over the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#263 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn & Robert The USA was not about to be invaded!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

Shawn;

Oh I understand the point about "you being invaded", the only thing is that it does not apply here. The USA was not about to be invaded!

Now Kuwait was & for Robert, he feels that means somehow when you look his whole philosophy that the USA can invade Spain... but let's look at that.

Kuwait was invaded & Suddam torched the oil wells there in retaliation for their illegal slant drilling into Iraq. A US lead coalition then forced Suddam back into Iraq where he surrendered.

Job done right? Now you go to the World Court & see if Kuwait's illegal act was equal to Iraq's illegal act & we work this out in a civil way right?

Nope! The USA demands cease fire terms which are simply outrageous! Robert seems to think a cease fire allows any terms the USA can come up with. Hell if we demand all their women to walk around nude & be submissive & the men to have a daily diet of urine, that should be ok too!

The USA keeps these outrageous terms including crippleing sanctions & intrusive inspections going for 10 frigging years! 10 years! How outrageous!!! All the time all the US has to do is pay an inspector a little cash to say "Suddam won't let me check" to which Suddam replies "yes I will" & big bully Robert with his terms yells "Let's invade! We have the right under the cease fire agreement"!

Cept Robert was not in charge. Bush was! Now look how this includes Spain. Bin Laden was in Afganistan when he planned 911, but he was not the President or Prime Minister of any Country. He was not even in a position of Government. Now because he simply lived there in Afganistan, after 911 the UN gave permission to invade Afganistan. Right?

Ok well there are terrorists in Spain who made bombs that killed people who are also not part of the Government. So the USA now has the right with UN backing to invade Spain! No Problem!

However the USA had no legal right to invade Iraq! Now that we have looked at what can be done legally, opposed to what can be done illegally, can we really see a difference in the "vast scheme of things"?

Not much! The USA wants to take over the World piece by piece & will do it legally or illegally, it does not matter! As they do it, terrorism will increase & continue for 2000 years if need be until the USA gets it through their "thick skulls" that they have their own country! They have their own continent! They need to go live on it & leave other countries alone!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#262 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn & Robert The USA was not about to be invaded!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, October 07, 2005

Shawn;

Oh I understand the point about "you being invaded", the only thing is that it does not apply here. The USA was not about to be invaded!

Now Kuwait was & for Robert, he feels that means somehow when you look his whole philosophy that the USA can invade Spain... but let's look at that.

Kuwait was invaded & Suddam torched the oil wells there in retaliation for their illegal slant drilling into Iraq. A US lead coalition then forced Suddam back into Iraq where he surrendered.

Job done right? Now you go to the World Court & see if Kuwait's illegal act was equal to Iraq's illegal act & we work this out in a civil way right?

Nope! The USA demands cease fire terms which are simply outrageous! Robert seems to think a cease fire allows any terms the USA can come up with. Hell if we demand all their women to walk around nude & be submissive & the men to have a daily diet of urine, that should be ok too!

The USA keeps these outrageous terms including crippleing sanctions & intrusive inspections going for 10 frigging years! 10 years! How outrageous!!! All the time all the US has to do is pay an inspector a little cash to say "Suddam won't let me check" to which Suddam replies "yes I will" & big bully Robert with his terms yells "Let's invade! We have the right under the cease fire agreement"!

Cept Robert was not in charge. Bush was! Now look how this includes Spain. Bin Laden was in Afganistan when he planned 911, but he was not the President or Prime Minister of any Country. He was not even in a position of Government. Now because he simply lived there in Afganistan, after 911 the UN gave permission to invade Afganistan. Right?

Ok well there are terrorists in Spain who made bombs that killed people who are also not part of the Government. So the USA now has the right with UN backing to invade Spain! No Problem!

However the USA had no legal right to invade Iraq! Now that we have looked at what can be done legally, opposed to what can be done illegally, can we really see a difference in the "vast scheme of things"?

Not much! The USA wants to take over the World piece by piece & will do it legally or illegally, it does not matter! As they do it, terrorism will increase & continue for 2000 years if need be until the USA gets it through their "thick skulls" that they have their own country! They have their own continent! They need to go live on it & leave other countries alone!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#261 Consumer Comment

Typical James, Read enough to support you then stop

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

James from Calgary, I really didn't intend for this to be a 1 on 1 debate with you but I really must not let you get away with that "spin". If you actually read International Law" you will find getting the U.N.'s "permission" is only ONE legal method of invading your enemies. If you continue your studies (I know it's cold up there but ask your mommy to throw another log on the fire,) and stop relying on your left of center "spin doctor's" to educate yourself on reality, you will find that the U.N.'s "permission is not necessary. Actually, what I am certain is much to your dismay, there are several different actions which can potentially "legalize" an offensive strike against a foreign enemy. Not to "get into it" with you as I am pressed for time this evening, but actually, all that is required to legally launch an offensive strike is a reasonable fear or belief that an enemy is both capable of and planning to attack your country.. This was placed in law for the purposes of each nation having a right to defend thier borders prior to thier borders actually being breached.

Let's put that in "Canuck" terms (no offense intended, I never have thought "Canuck" was an insult,) If you were arguing with someone, and they told you that on the count of three they were going to hit you. . . and you felt they were strong enough, courageous enough(or stupid), and "emotional" enough to do so, are you going to stand there and let him hit you? NO WAY! When they reaches 2, yous is gonna drop your gloves, pull his jersey over his head like so, and windmill him until he either drops to the ice, or the linesmen pulls you off right? F'in eh right!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#260 Consumer Suggestion

Is this your proof Robert?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

Robert;

Well since you don't wanna learn to "cut & paste" your proof, I did the searching for ya in USA Today. Now they wanna charge ya for the whole text... but here is what comes up on a search under "Iraq WMD" in USA Today:

Intelligence community: Not perfect, but not bad; [FINAL Edition]
John McLaughlin. USA TODAY. McLean, Va.: May 16, 2005. pg. A.13

Subjects: Intelligence gathering
People: Negroponte, John D
Document types: Commentary
Column Name: The Forum
Section: NEWS
ISSN/ISBN: 07347456
Text Word Count 685
Document URL:

Abstract (Document Summary)
Moreover, in the summer of 2003, the CIA embarked on its own "lessons-learned" exercise on Iraq WMDs. The agency scrubbed every source and every line of analysis that contributed to that failure and turned everything over to the Senate committee and WMD commission. The CIA undertook this critical self-examination long before the Senate Intelligence Committee report last July and close to two years before the

That's all ya git! Sounds like to me they quote a "failure" there to find WMD's, Robert. Hmm... tis yer source. I just report & you git it wrong huh?

Oh well Robert's proof still in the toilet.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#259 Consumer Suggestion

Stay abreast of the news folks

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

Forget Clinton... he's past.

Robert B already looked at your evidence & found none.

Keep up on the facts:

View: Text & Photos | Photos only | Text only 1 - 4 of 4 First | | Last
Our Quest of World Domination will Never End!

Bush: Terrorism thrives like a parasite..................Jim Stewart: The ambitions of the United States Government to control other countries thrives... like a parasite.




President Bush is delivering what the White House bills as a major speech on the progress of the war in Iraq and the broader conflict against terrorism. Bush said that Osama bin Laden and his terrorist organization regard Iraq as their "central front" in the war on humanity -- and that the U.S. must recognize the country's central role in the war on terror. The president said worldwide terrorism thrives "like a parasite."

Jim Stewart says that President Bush & his World Domination backers regard Iraq as their "central front" in the war to control oil -- and that the insurgants do recognize the country's central role in the war of "Total World Domination" that the US desires. Jim Stewart says that the ambitions of the United States Government to control other countries thrives "like a parasite".

Did you watch the speach? I did! Almost everything he said could be turned in the reverse to make as much or more sense. Like:

Those who feel our presence in Iraq causes a rise in terrorism need to be reminded that terrorism did exist before 911. Can be changed to:

Our presence in the region prior to 911 was the reasoning for such terrorist attacks expanding, even on to our own soil & as we increase our presence in the region, the terrorism expands to now include the entire world.

These terrorists help Bush's cause, as he can now claim the right to invade almost any country, citing the terrorist cells the US must erradicate there. Yet some Americans go for this "hook line & sinker"!

All the time, these people refuse to admit:

Their invasion of Iraq was illegal.

The instability of the region has increased since their invasion.

It is very costly to try to take over the World.

Thank God this dictator has "term limits" & has already proven to the American people that he is the dumbest President in history!

In my opinion.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#258 Consumer Comment

James and James Go to United Nations Security Council Resolution

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

Here you go...one last time, hopefully. Go to United Nations Security Council Resolution numbers UNSCR678, 687, and 1441. These give full authority to the United States to USE FORCE to make Iraq comply with the terms of the Cease Fire they asked for in 1991. Read them and weep. A Cease Fire is not a surrender, and therefore, there is no "new" invasion of a sovereign country. They were in violation of their obligations. Case CLOSED!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#257 Consumer Suggestion

Wow... I can only listen but so much.

AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

James from Tupper Lake:

Wow, you must have some issues. Everyone has the right to freedom of speech, however, you're not speaking, you're more trying to put your points of view in the heads of others.

I've spent the last hour reading through these posts. What I come out with; you have a weird fascination with JFK. Do you know something we all don't? I doubt it.

You insinuate that the rich go to college and the poor go into the Military to get an education. Man, are you way off. That's nothing but a typical cop-out. The rich go to war, like anyone else. If you were a JFK fan, you should already have known that. Most of our presidents have gone to war or served our country. Anyone in the US can obtain a college education without joining the Military. There are countless grants and scholarships for the poor and everyone else. Is it OK for poor people to use this excuse to not obtain good grades to get these scholarships? NO! No one and I mean no one will ever get something for nothing. Don't expect anything else, you have to work for what you get. More than half the rich population either worked their asses off for what they have or they obtained a good education by not using a cop-out.

Clinton??? You actually want to base your argument on Clinton? What the hell are you thinking? Clinton KNEW where Bin Laden was during his entire administration. The threats started while HE was in office and he did NOTHING! So, who were blaming for everything? And Bush stole the election, wow. For someone so hung up on JFK, you actually have the guts to say Bush stole the election. It seems to me, you see things in a square box and throw out anything that doesn't make cense or doesn't fit into your ideal world.

Like most everyone, I DO have family and friends serving our country. I agree, this war was technically over long ago, but we continue to lose lives. But, your argument is that Iraq is defending itself against us. Again, in your thinking in your box and seeing only what you want. The bombings are not aimed at the US alone, but anyone other country including their own, that doesn't support Hassan's dictatorship. I don't like my tax money paying for another country's problems, but eventually it would have been ours. No doubt Korea is waging their own little surprise and eventually we will see the 3rd WW. But for now, all we can do is try to make friends along the way. My children's futures mean more to me than your political views. Do you actually believe they never had WMD? I guarantee they did. God help us if we never find were they went.

Gas prices will always go up and down, it doesn't matter who's in office or what kind of companies they're in bed with. Our latest price hikes are a result of the hurricanes, not our president. You can not blame our financial problems solely on the president. Everyone has something to do with it, one way or another. We have corporations, like Sony releasing over 6,000 employees, Macy's corporation brought our Hecht's announcing a huge reorganization. Companies like SMECO and PEPCO indulge high rates because there's no one else. Verizon and the big Bells, Comcast Communication, the list goes on. Companies are profiting hugely because the corporations their opposite are selling out. If you want to state your argument on facts, that's one things, but you actually sound like a broken record.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#256 Consumer Comment

Good one Daniel

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

I typed "Rapist" into both Yahoo and MSN Search and got Bill Clinton. What is your point? The parameters for the search engines are set by the company that does the search. The owners of Google are graduates of Stamford University. That is not a bastion of conservative thought.

As for James(take your pick...they share the same malfunctioning brain), I am bored by you. You asked for proof, and I provided it for you. Just because you prefer to read communist newspapers, does not mean the sources I gave are incorrect. One of them was USA Today, one of the most liberal rags there is. You are so sad. And Vera, you had me laughing with your last two posts. The wit is devastating.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#255 Consumer Suggestion

Your forgetting one thing Shawn

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

Shawn;

The one thing you are forgetting, if you go by international law is that in order to invade a Country, you need UN approval. That is what the UN was set up for in the first place!

Even though the UN is by a "large part" US controlled, the UN still gave no approval for the invasion of Iraq ever! The UN gave approval for the US to force Iraqi forces out of Kuwait, but that is it!

So therefore what Bush did "was" an illegal act & even doing what Clinton did was also illegal. Illegal for good reason too! The USA has no right forceing any other Country to abide by terms that are unfair & overly excessive, simply put in place to provoke. For 10 years the USA tweeked Suddam's nose provoking him & Suddam did nothing! His nose was tweeked by 2 administrations before Bush. Bush just showed he could be the "big bully" out of the 3 & invade anyway with no cause is all.

It doesn't matter how many Presidents did wrong & illegal things from Kennedy to Bush! The issue here Shawn is what is being done wrong "now" by the current administration that is in power.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#254 Consumer Comment

"The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

I am VERY concerned about how ignorant some of the people of The United States are, as they will believe anything their SUPPOSED President says. People, OPEN your eyes, and see whats really going on here! Iraq has never attacked the United States! Why are we invading them and killing them??? Pure and Simple, we are making billions on war, gas prices in America, we are reducing the United States population, thus saving social security from paying out on alot of people. I would like to say that the United States is secretly taking over the world, country by country. They attack the weak countries with NO WMD first and send in the inexperienced soldiers as The National Guard to deal with them. See US loses population while killing the country you are taking over. Our US Policy was to attack when we were attacked! If any President ever needed to be IMPEACHED it is this MORON- GEORGE WALKER BUSH! PEPOLE OF THE UNITED STATES!! d**n IT WAKE UP!!!!!! Oh, Jeb , forget it!!! YOU WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#253 Consumer Comment

"The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

I am VERY concerned about how ignorant some of the people of The United States are, as they will believe anything their SUPPOSED President says. People, OPEN your eyes, and see whats really going on here! Iraq has never attacked the United States! Why are we invading them and killing them??? Pure and Simple, we are making billions on war, gas prices in America, we are reducing the United States population, thus saving social security from paying out on alot of people. I would like to say that the United States is secretly taking over the world, country by country. They attack the weak countries with NO WMD first and send in the inexperienced soldiers as The National Guard to deal with them. See US loses population while killing the country you are taking over. Our US Policy was to attack when we were attacked! If any President ever needed to be IMPEACHED it is this MORON- GEORGE WALKER BUSH! PEPOLE OF THE UNITED STATES!! d**n IT WAKE UP!!!!!! Oh, Jeb , forget it!!! YOU WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#252 Consumer Comment

"The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

I am VERY concerned about how ignorant some of the people of The United States are, as they will believe anything their SUPPOSED President says. People, OPEN your eyes, and see whats really going on here! Iraq has never attacked the United States! Why are we invading them and killing them??? Pure and Simple, we are making billions on war, gas prices in America, we are reducing the United States population, thus saving social security from paying out on alot of people. I would like to say that the United States is secretly taking over the world, country by country. They attack the weak countries with NO WMD first and send in the inexperienced soldiers as The National Guard to deal with them. See US loses population while killing the country you are taking over. Our US Policy was to attack when we were attacked! If any President ever needed to be IMPEACHED it is this MORON- GEORGE WALKER BUSH! PEPOLE OF THE UNITED STATES!! d**n IT WAKE UP!!!!!! Oh, Jeb , forget it!!! YOU WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#251 Consumer Comment

"The Bigger The Lie, The More People Who Believe It! It

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, October 06, 2005

I am VERY concerned about how ignorant some of the people of The United States are, as they will believe anything their SUPPOSED President says. People, OPEN your eyes, and see whats really going on here! Iraq has never attacked the United States! Why are we invading them and killing them??? Pure and Simple, we are making billions on war, gas prices in America, we are reducing the United States population, thus saving social security from paying out on alot of people. I would like to say that the United States is secretly taking over the world, country by country. They attack the weak countries with NO WMD first and send in the inexperienced soldiers as The National Guard to deal with them. See US loses population while killing the country you are taking over. Our US Policy was to attack when we were attacked! If any President ever needed to be IMPEACHED it is this MORON- GEORGE WALKER BUSH! PEPOLE OF THE UNITED STATES!! d**n IT WAKE UP!!!!!! Oh, Jeb , forget it!!! YOU WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#250 Consumer Comment

War on Iraq is not entireley illegal

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 05, 2005

I just finished perusing a little book that gave me some new information. I suggest that all of you read it (left or right) before commenting on the legalities of our "war in Iraq". It's called "international law".

I am not claiming to be an expert on international law or anything, but my take on it is that we are not in violation of this law simply by our war in Iraq. We were in violation of international law when we were bombing Iraq for the sole purpose of pressuring Hussein into abiding by U.N. sanctions. It states quite clearly (pg 269) that military force can not be used to intimidate others or force them into the adherance of sanctions against them, unless those sanctions are created with such a response noted should they fail to comply. None of the sanctions against Iraq were created with military enforcement attached.

Our "war", was for a number of other given reasons (no, not oil - do the math)such as WMD's, terrorist threats, etc.,( yes, we all know your opinions on these "reasons", I am just saying that these are the reasons that were given - agree with them or not) all of which would provide us with the legal right, according to international law.

Therefore I conclude that, yes, George W. Bush did break international law at the start of this "campaign", but that can not be proven. He only has to say that the military strikes were for any other number of reasons, and would therefore be "legal". However, if you wish to jump on the "this is illegal" bandwagon, don't forget that Bubba spent 8 years doing the exact same thing!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#249 Consumer Suggestion

Here we go continueing the spin

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Robert could post no proof on WMD's found in Iraq & merely pointed to a website "B" visited. He found no evidence. We know the USA gave Suddam WMD's to fight the Iran / Iraq war & if he did not use em all up on Kurds... Bush might have thought it to be a "slam dunk" as Clinton did to claim he had them.

Ahh but none were found. One little reason for going into Iraq in the first place shot right in the toilet! But he should have em! We gave them to him as our little "plant" to go in when we wanted! Sheesh where are they? They have to be around here somewhere... just let me invade & show you all!

Bush did & found none. First reason for going into Iraq in the toilet.

Ahh but now Vera has proof that Suddam & Bin Laden are related! Let's look at her proof shall we?

Here it is:

Incidentally, the Government HAS found links between Saddam funding suicide bombings, and having meetings with Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda operatives. When the Madrid bombings took place in Spain, an European Al Qaeda militant leader sent a videotaped message This is to punish Spain for it's support of the US in the War. I suppose it would have been a good idea for the liberals to have drawn the connection earlier, but it didn't serve their agenda at the time. [Shrugging] So much for there not being an Iraq/Al Qaeda connection.

That's her proof. Ok let's tear this apart a little:

the Government HAS found links between Saddam funding suicide bombings, and having meetings with Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda operatives.

Um... where are these links? When did Saddam meet with Bin Laden? My info says they did not even like eachother. Oh well I am sure Vera will show us the real proof of this later. Until then we will just have to disregard it.

European Al Qaeda militant leader sent a videotaped message

Um that was not Bin Laden was it? Nope no connection yet... let's go on:

This is to punish Spain for it's support of the US in the War."

So that is good proof yes! Al Qaeda thinks the war should not be supported & now they have clearly shown they were always "best friends" with Suddam! Or was that Al Qaeda & Iraq? Not Suddam & Bin Laden? Oops... somehow methinks this proof has holes.

Well that's two reasons for going into Iraq "still believed" by some Americans down the toilet. Only one left.

Can either of you show where Suddam used WMD on the USA as they invaded Iraq twice? Then we could put all 3 in the toilet where they belong & read again the report on Fox News entitled

"We Report You Get It Wrong"

, that clearly shows how many dumb Americans actually believe this crap!

Spin spin spin for a d**n good reason that does not exist! Not one shown by Robert or Vera anyway.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#248 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Gee... & People Call Me Lost!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Can I sum everyone up at once?

Canadian yes! Part of North America yes! The biggest trading partner in the World for the USA yes! Part of the land mass that will be affected by terrorist attacks yes! A Country that has every right, rhyme & reason to be concerned yes!

The Country has had more Liberal Governments in it's history than Conservative yes! It however is not Socialist. The one Socialist Party in Canada is called the NDP. They hold few seats in the Federal Government & even far less in any Provincial Government.

However, for those people like Vera, let me say that I have never voted Liberal or NDP ever in my life! Every time I vote it is Conservative & I live in a Province that has the "most successful Conservative Government" ever in Canada! More Conservative than any other Province in history!!

So Vera when you copy my posts & decide not to respond to them because you have nothing to say... don't just pass them off as "Liberal spew" as they are not! To be Conservative you need not to be pro war!

Since we should be all in agreement here that it does not matter which brand of Government is in power in the USA, Liberal or Conservative, each will cause war & death on someone else's soil than their own & continue to put us "all" in harms way! Yes Canadians & Americans too!

Therefore the "issue is" not Liberal or Conservative, or Socialist, or either Clinton, or Kerry. Right now you can point fingers at the dumbest American in the USA... George W. Bush, simply because he ignores & promotes the opposite of the issue!

The issue is what right you have in your neighbors home! In this case it is what right you have in the home of some people who live in not just the next town, but the town in the furthest region of the world from you that you could possibly get to.

Answer the issue. Give some reasons why you should have the right in their home. Forget if you jumped on Robert, he is part of the problem! Robert wants cameras not only in those peoples homes, he would not be satisfied until they focused on the bedrooms! Then he would pass laws against fornication, as he only believes in the Missionary position & is worried about sexual diseases being transmitted to their neigbours!

Do you have to be Liberal to say this is "None of Your Business"? Can you not be Conservative & say "Clean up your own back yard before you attempt to clean mine"?

Can you as a tax payer afford the 800 Billion it is going to cost to force others to do as you do! Oops... not as you do, as then next Iraq would have to concentrate on the USA! Can you afford this silly war? Can't you finish that war on Drugs first Vera? You know the one that is supposed to protect people from themselves? The one that is afraid of you suffering from "reefer madness"? Yea that's the war you should finish first!

If it is not the Government who is to blame... then who is it? Huh Vera, Robert? Our two most outspoken "war mongerers"? Who's fault might it be? Could it be these people who are so "well read" that they have now the right to impose their beliefs on others Militarily? Vera & Robert we all vote for you to lead us through the gates of destruction, as we know your way is right! We are so sure of it, we are willing to kill anyone who opposes us!

Or you can be part of the "Majority" on this thread who think the war in Iraq is rediculous! Cutting our noses off to spite our faces! Not Liberal & wanting to mind our own business!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#247 Consumer Comment

Google link works

AUTHOR: Daniel - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, October 05, 2005

I typed the word failure in the google search box, and I hit " i'm feeling lucky and the Biography of the president of the US came right up.

Nice...........

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#246 Consumer Comment

We all are intitled to our beliefs, Right or Wrong!

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 04, 2005

FYI:

I should not have singled out Robert as it just wasn't right or fair. For that I apologize. I believe a President should be rated based on what he or she has been able to accomplish for all of his/her country's citizens and the world in general. Not just a select privileged few, whether they are rich or poor, etc. Not the Corporations and their greedy stockholders that take so much and contribute so little. Not the special interest groups and those who fund your election campaigns expecting favors in return. And sometimes its not even what they achieved but what they have at least attempted to achieve for their citizens. I didn't say that Bush was a bad man. I don't know the man George Bush nor do I know the man Ronald Reagan. But as Presidents, in my opinion, they both failed terribly as most have in one way or another. It appears that every action that has been taken by at leaset these two ultimately benefited the rich or wealthy of this nation. Just like Ronald's trickle down economics which also benefited the wealthy and never quite filtered down to the middle class and poor. Seems like a more appropriate name would have been: trickle on given the facts. As for receiving a liberal label associated with my comments. Well it just doesn't make sense.

Politicians whether Democrat or Republican, etc. are equally non-effective in book in carring out their jobs. If it weren't so important I'd just sit back in laugh. By-the-way I'm not going to address everyone's favorite subject here, the war issue, because I, just like most of the citizens out there I'm not privy to one tenth of facts that determine if a war should or should not be engaged.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#245 Consumer Comment

My God, what a TOOL....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 04, 2005

James;

You certainly have long posts to say not very much.

Golly, Beav! You sure have lots of posts that either rant and say nothing, or just say nothing. (To date, there are fifty-four, to my thirteen. Quality, Baby!) Admit it. You love the attentionalmost like having a social life!

Sheesh! Um like I said about the terrorists, they have a reason. A d**n good one!
Dragging corpses & stuff? Hell how can you be a "terrorist" if you do not cause "terror"? Do you expect them to go around giving people lethal injections?

And there you have it. Support of the terrorists. By his own words.

Has it ever occurred to you to understand that This is the way WE (the US) handles IT'S problems? It's what WE know? Whether or not you agree, it's the way our President has chosen to deal with a global threat! And yes, they do present a worldwide problem. If they succeed into forcing the people on their side of the globe to cower to their demands (Like Spain has), what the hell makes you think they'll be happy with just that portion of the world? Why don't you get a one-way ticket to the Middle East. I'm sure there are lots who'll chip in! Go tell them they are dummies and idiots, and offer them your special brand of diplomacy.

We know your Canadian a*s would be whelping at our door if they unleashed their brand of Terror on you---and you know for sure America would defend you to her last man. Addendum: Sure, let the terrorists give lethal injectionsat least the populace would have fewer civilian deaths! And I want to see some stinking terrorist come at me with a needleI'll rip his arm off and beat him to death with it. No joke.it wouldn't be the first time I've defended myself or someone else, and as long as I can figure, it sure as shootin' won't be my last.

But that's just the way it is with them. They are raised to hate, and taught to fight like cowards, hiding and sneaking like roaches. They use murder and violence to make their voices heard...even by their own standards, if this is the only way they know, they obviously haven't learned that violence only pisses people off.

Vera they are doing these things because the USA is on their soil & trying to control the region. USA starts minding its own business & then the terrorists will do the same.

Sorta like you, trying to monopolize this board. You act as though it's your job to moderate here, just because James of Tupper is too lazy to do his own research. And there are PLENTY of people here that think you are wrong. Which you are.
And no, the terrorists will never mind their own businessthey'll go back to oppressing Israel.
I'm sure that's okay with you, right?

In case you missed it, the piece on Fox News I got from a Chineese Newspaper. That is Chineese opinion.

And many CHINESE think America is awesome. Many AMERICANS see Canadians as pompous, uptight, arrogant assholes. Does that make it right? Only in your case. Everyone has a right to his or her opinion, no matter how deluded it is. Case in point: You.

I can guarantee you it is also Canadian opinion as well! The CBC did a big documentry on Fox News!

Bully for the LIBERALLY owned CBC. And I can guarantee that not every poor Canadian is like you. Many are people! :)
Suggestion: Move outta mom and Dad's basement and experience the REAL world. You need to have your eyes opened.

It is not a difference between Liberal Media & Conservative Media, but a fact that Suddam had no links to Bin Laden, a fact that they did not find any WMD's in Iraq & a fact that Suddam did not use WMD's to repel the Americans at all.

You know, it's funny.first, the Liberals don't want us to go to war, because it could cause a retaliatory strike! After all, Saddam has Weapons of Mass Destruction, Anthrax, and Gas bombs! He gassed the Kurds (that's using WMD), didn't he?? The UN repeatedly found Saddam's WMD after the Gulf War in 1991. Right up until he pitched them in 1998. After all, how else was Clinton to justify his Impeachment day bombing (in fact, this is the only evidence that Saddam DIDN'T have WMD: Clinton said he did.) Incidentally, the Government HAS found links between Saddam funding suicide bombings, and having meetings with Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda operatives. When the Madrid bombings took place in Spain, an European Al Qaeda militant leader sent a videotaped message This is to punish Spain for it's support of the US in the War. I suppose it would have been a good idea for the liberals to have drawn the connection earlier, but it didn't serve their agenda at the time. [Shrugging] So much for there not being an Iraq/Al Qaeda connection.

The piece simply points to the percentage of "dumb Americans" who think differently & believe this crap!

Aww. I guess that's why they call it Free Speech. Look it up. Say, y'know what? I can go to a thousand places on the Web, and find you a million places that refute the Bible, and preach that Satan is the saviour. Does that make it correct? NO, not necessarily (and you know I'm waiting for you to tell me how their beliefs are okay, you being a Christian and all, but Anti-Religion), if you know the Bible as your source. You can put two unrelated words together, like kitten and stew, and damned if you won't get a recipe! Will that spur me to make kitten stew? Not likely.

Also, try to remember, that the Chinese are just as inclined to be in error. After all. they're human, like the rest of us. But just to repeat myself, as you seem to think all I ever watch is Fox News, I don't watch Fox News (wonder how many times I'll have to repeat it til you get it?)I don't very much like Bill O'Reilly, and I could care less about some article in a Chinese Newspaper. Actually, I enjoy reading the Canada Free Press, once in a while, I like World Net Daily, and I watch the CBS evening News as well. Unlike you, I get information from multiple sources that support both sides of the story, and form my own opinion. Clearly, my ardent support of my own opinion bothers you to some degree, and you seem bent on proselytizing me to your way of thought. Not gonna happen, Sweetie.
Otherwise, you would have heeded my three requests that you leave me be (four!). I know it must bother you to see an intelligent woman strong in her stance, so I'll just give you a nice, patronizing pat on the noggin, y'poor thing.

Then you go on to quote me about the weapons made in Quebec, but fail to post the rest of it where I said they do not sell WMD's & they do not sell "major weapons" like rocket launchers!

Hmm.so they don't include rocket launchers and WMDs. Good. Okay. Aren't bullets just as lethal, when they hit their target? They accomplish the same thing, one-by-one. Or do you think a homeowner is gonna whip out a rocket launcher from under the bed when faced with a robber (Hasta la vista, BayBee! To hell with the dog, BEWARE OF OWNER!)? Far as I can see, lethal is lethal, no matter who turns the buck. By the wayI never said they made WMDs, either.

Quit pointing at Canada as supporting any of your American problems!

Why not? You do it so well! You offer murderers and Arab terror cells safe haven, free of reprisal, you wouldn't let a known rapist get taken back to the country where he committed the most atrocious crimes, and you're great at helping other factions sneak drugs and God knows what else into our country through yours. No wonder the world loves Canadabetween illegal activities your government turns a blind eye to, and the gambling and drugs, hell, you guys are the best friends a criminal could have. Just because the Terrorist Cells you lend haven to havent tried a crack at America from your borders, doesn't mean they won't.

Canada is just the voice that tries to be senseable when America does dumb things like in Vietnam & Iraq!

Uh-hunh. And you know there's a dirty w***e under the mother-hen costume. I've already stated the differences between Vietnam and Iraq.but I know how liberals like to fling Vietnam in America's face. Check it; piss off a LiberalDefend America!

If you can't get Canada to fight beside you, there probably is a "good reason"!

More than likely, self-preservation for the Canadian. Y'all don't wanna look brave in front of the French now, do you?

Here comes Bush after 911 screaming for the world to join him & that they are either "with him or with the terrorists"! Well just look at the amount of Countries who basically told him to go to hell! Canada is just one! We are beside you in Afganistan! Simply because it was where the 911 terrorist leader was based. Not in Iraq! Even there I think Canada was wrong! The terrorists come mostly from Saudi Arabia.

Well, you've done an outstanding job of contradicting yourself there, so why should I bother. THAT is a fact. And like you said "...Canada is only protecting their interests...if the American [economy] fails, so does that of canada....yadda-yadda-yadda...."

I know you said you don't believe in everything Bush has done, but hell do you have a injury that prevents you from seeing these facts?

Wow. You finally got the messageand it only took me umpteen repeats. And is there some mental block that you have, that tells you keep on calling them liars and stupid, they'll eventually see your perfect reason? Do you have any defect in you that tells you, they have a right to their own opinion, but I can't be wrong! I read every liberal fishwrapper there is, and Michael Moore loves us Canadians sooooooooo much! He has to be right, he just HAS TO! (picture yourself running, teary eyed and wailing, down the basement stairs and flopping across your bed in a quivering heap of sobs.)

Do you think Iraq will have it's problems solved after Bush leaves? Come on Vera... think!

I do thinkand apparently, that's your problem. Liberals are doing the same thing now that they did when we were in Vietnam; they are demoralizing the populace, dividing the country. In effect, they are aiding and abetting the very terrorist regime the President seeks to destroy. And as we know, A house divided cannot stand. And here's another from the good ol' Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth primer. Faith without action is dead. Not that the Liberals understand anything beyond the Religion Of Peace. And don't expect a Liberal to see any power greater than themselves.

Every day another car bomb goes off over there & it is not going to stop when the US leaves! I don't have to be a terrorist lover to see that! I don't have to be Liberal either! The terrorism will continue because of US presence in the region & will not stop until that presence is gone!

Terrorism was a problem long before either of the Bush boys were holding office. But like Reagan, they have nobler causes other than preventing their own impeachment to fight the issues over there.

Its like the Blonde who goes to the doctor & says "Every time I move my arm like this it hurts! What should I do?" The doctor replies "stop doing that"! USA needs to stop being a blonde & stop doing that!

Wow. Comparing the US to a Dumb Blonde. Impressive. Should I now compare Canada to a drunken, amoral French prostitute with unshaven armpits and body odor? I'll remember to regard your comments from here on in with the proper civility, then.

Hillary Clinton will probably be your next President.

I vote we re-instate the Zero Factor! Last thing I'd want is a Feminazi carpet munching old sow like her in office. She's done nothing good for her constituency, and she'll do nothing good for the United States. Even more imperative to not elect that anti-Semitic b***h, is that she's adored by Canadians and Tupper Lakers like the James Twins.

If the troops are not home by then I am sure she will bring them home.

Only because she thinks that's what the (Liberal) people of the US want. She doesn't care about anything beyond her own personal agenda.

However she will not fix the problem either! Just as her huspand did not, she will not remove the presence of the USA in the region & the terrorism will continue. It does not matter if the President is Republican or Democrat! Neither will fix the problem. Only the American people can fix it by keeping the issue visible & bugging their leaders.

Good Lord! We actually agree! Where we part is on the whole War issue, though. You don't seem to take your own advice very well. You know, the whole Get your nose out of the business of others bit? Yet, here your snout still remains, tightly wedged in like a wart on the a*s of the Rip-Off Reports.

It's not outrageous either Vera. What would you do if Iraq set up bases in Mexico, Canada & the USA? ((*Or maybe, a 7-11 store!*)) If the USA did not have the weapons to defend themselves as a Government, then the people would do what? Commit terrorism Vera! Its so d**n simple! Just as France did with the n**i's! Just as the Polish did with the n**i's! It is not your region! It's theirs! The terrorists want the USA out & they will continue. Nothing Liberal about it!

Last time I checked, we Americans are smart enough and have enough ingenuity to figure out ways of dealing with an oppressive regime. If necessary, that selfsame wit and wisdom will defray the current bastardization of the Tet offensive the Leftmedia is using to divide America. They don't want us to know the Liberals were strong to vote the war into reality. But now, since all those lauded predictions have fizzledMISERABLY, I might add.now they're saying well, we didn't know that the President wasn't gonna check and see with the UN if it was okay! We don't know what war entails! So much for the Service records of our noble Lefties. And there's plenty of Liberal about it. Their logic worked for Communist China, Supported the mindset of the USSR, and their admiration for European s****.> So here's another nice long rebuttal for you, Kiddoand I'm sure there will be plenty more, as you continue to take up ravenous gulps and megabytes of space with your agree with the left, say nothing about right (as in correct) posts. Next, instead of VCRs, you'll be talking about four-slice versus two-slice toasters, and how does the Bagel Sized slot fit in to all this? Good luck with that.

Until next post, Keep your stick on the icewe're pullin' for ya.
(And we know you wouldn't have it any other way!)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#244 Consumer Comment

You got me, but that don't change the facts!

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 04, 2005

James,
You are right(for once), I thought I would try to stay neutral and stress the apparently unimportant fact that. . . we are. . . . all. . . . . Americans. Hey, when did we invade Canada? I don't remember Calgary being on a map of the states. Oh well, yoos guys is pretty close to us anyways eh.

Vera,
You have exposed me as a hypocrite! I am sorry for that, I have apparently not started off on the right foot. I am not usually so hypocritical, but rather I have been caught trying to be someone I am not, and the results were somewhat disasterous! I guess I will stop trying to "play nice nice" as the Socialist(Canadian)put it and give you all some facts.

As far as my "research" goes, I will supply you with a list of books, web sites, and articles that I have taken my information from. Just so you know, if I couldn't find the information in BOTH a left and right wing publication, or at least have it backed up by government public records, I haven't written it down.(well, maybe some opinion but it is easily discernable from what I am stating to be fact)

Now, for those of you so quick to bash our president for his actions while in office I ask you this, were you so quick to judge your "Good ol' Boy" Clinton when he did the same things you are accusing G.W.B. of doing? I don't have the time or energy to link each fact to each person's individual comments, but you know what you've said, and if you want to know the truth about Clinton, here's a few inarguable facts:

-Clinton wasn't impeached for getting a "B.J.", he was impeached when independant council Kenneth Starr, in agreement with then Attorney General, Janet Reno, found Clinton's actions to fulfill the requirements of "perjury", and "obstruction of justice". Congress agreed with Starr and impeached Clinton, however, the Democratically controlled Senate acquitted him. Still, he was disbarred from practicing law for five years, by the State of Arkansas, and the U.S. Supreme Court suspended him. Rather than appealling the Courts decision, he resigned.

- Just a few other scandals of this "great" president are: Travelgate, Filegate, Chinagate, Pardongate, and let's not forget my favorite, Whitewater. Really, do you think he was forthcoming on everything?

- We never went to war when Clinton was in office? Just how far up your butthole does your head have to be to believe that? Let's see, do you remember when he led us to war with Kosovo under the FALSE pretense of genocide? Sure ya do, that's when he spoke of "at least 100,000 (Kosovar Albanians) missing". Hmmmm, seems to me that MATO's official count was 2,788 with Slobodan Milisovic being charged with the murders of only 600 of them. Isn't it strange how Clinton's bombing campaign killed 5700 civilians in Kosovo (claimed number by Yugoslavia - United Nations suggests that the number of civilian deaths is "closer to 2500 or so") yet Milosevic was only charged with 600? Who was the real criminal there?

Let's not forget about Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, and Afghanistan - all without permission from the U.N. and all in violation of international law!Oh yeah, did I mention SEVERAL bombing campaigns and military strikes on Iraq for Huessein's failure to adhere to U.N. sanctions? I guess I didn't - probably because none of these "strikes" or "bombings" were voted on in congress or the senate, nor did the U.N. give thier "permission".

- Most all of our elected officials believed that Iraq had WMD's, including Clinton. The information that Bush received regarding such came from an official whom Clinton himself had appointed. Don't forget, the U.K. and Canada had both also received intelligence that there were WMD's in Iraq at the same time as G.W.B. did. Clinton made a statement to the Joint Cheifs of Staff in February of '98 stateing that Iraq had WMD's:

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now, a rogue state with WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, ready to use them, or, provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and CLEAR EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION".

- About the only war that we had the right to enter during his leadership was Rwanda, oh, that's right, Clinton had his head buried in the sand and couldn't see the genocide taking place there, so we didn't go! Although he now identifies this as one of his major foreign policy failures, he still has not publically acknowledged that genocide was occurring.

- Never been attacked by terrorists before?
- 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Center
- 1996 bombing of the military quarters at the Khobar Towers
- 1998 bombings of U.S. embassy's in Kenya and Tanzania
- 2000 bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen

How did our "great leader" respond to these attacks? Did he hunt down those responsible? Did he vow to avenge the deaths of the innocent lives lost? Did he visit surviving families to comfort them, or offer them assistance in any way? NO, NO, NO, NO - he gave a speech and basically told them they shouldn't do that again, and again, and again, and again.

- Here's one for ya' all - Clinton's tax increase in '93 was not the largest in history, after adjusting it as a percentage of the GDP it was "only" 39.6% - the third largest tax increase in history.

- You challenge George Bush's character and claim him to be a religeous zelot who's trying to convert everyone to Christianity all the while lifting Clinton high on your shoulders and looking past the fact that he was a pot smoking draft dodger in his early years ( so George got a D.W.I. - alchohol isn't illegal and he got an honorable discharge from the Nation Gaurd - AWOL - rumors placed in the media by the Kerry campaign)and then later (both before and during presidency) he was accused of several "sex crimes", ranging from harassment to rape, by no less than 8 women. It is also suggested that he had several affairs throughout his marriage of which at least three have been made public knowledge.

- Just a few other facts that I'm sure you liberals hate to hear;

- Clinton was in favor of, and signed the "Defense of Marriage Act" Sept. 21, 1996

- He was in favor of the death penalty and signed legislation which increased it to include some 60 new offenses (Maybe George couldn't have had all those executions in Texas without Bill's help)

- This communications decency act that nailed that tall goofy pervert - that was Bill's doing Feb 1, 1998 - and on the 8th of the same month he signed the Telecom Reform Act which eliminated major ownership restrictions for radio and television groups.

So to all of you who have the nerve to sit there and bash my President like he's some evil monster, all the while holding on to your dear Bubba as the great leader of America, I have this to say to you... Get your heads outta your asses and look at reality for a change...the world will never be perfect and neither will any of our elected officials. At least Bush got the approval of Congress and the Senate before he sent our troops to war. Also, maybe if Clinton hadn't cut the Defense Budget, or if he would have replaced some of the munitions and supplies that he used during his 8 years of free ridin' on the taxpayer, this war wouldn't be costing us so much. By the way, how much do you think freedom is worth? $5? - $100? - $1000000? - $1000000000? - would it be worth more if you didn't have it? I bet the Iraqi's haven't given it a dollar value yet.

-Information obtained and verified by:

"My Life" Bill Clinton - 2004

"The Clinton Wars" Sidney Blumenthal - 2003

"Uncovering Clinton, A Reporter's Story" Michael Isikoff - 1999

"First in His Class, a Biography of Bill Clinton" David Maraniss - 1996

"Paying the Price for the Clinton Years" Rich Lowry - 2003

"Encyclopedia Britannica" 2004

"Wall Street Journal, L.A. Times, New York Times,and Time magazine" Various issues

So, that's my research on Clinton (or some of it) I could have written more facts that prove hi,m to be scum but I think this was long enough( perhaps too long - I know you democrats don't like to read too much factual information unless it boosts your guy, not tears them apart and shows them for the crooked, lying wimps they truly are. Hope everyone has a Great day and as our founding Fathers would have said - "God bless America"

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#243 Consumer Comment

I've been ripped off

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 04, 2005

I posted yesterday, the line about closing my shop in honor of Ronald Reagan's birthday, Feb 6. Somehow, it got contaminated by James' drivel. I should be crying now, or wetting my bed over this outrage. But I shall just hold my head high and carry on...as any real man would.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#242 Consumer Suggestion

Well Vera lets count your supporters shall we?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Vera;

Just from this thread alone I see less people who agree with Bush & what is going on in Iraq, than you could count on 2 hands!

However people who do not support any of this silliness are:

James, Rebecca, Ben, Robert from Dallas, Ted, B, April, Kevin, Brenda, Monan, Paul, Ashley, Greg, Ed, Knenina, Jon & myself. That should bring it to 17-less than 10 just on this thread alone!

On your side, you have the religeous zealots who believe they should back their leader nomatter what, people who think Liberals are the same as n**i's, People like Robert who has no proof of WMD's as B pointed out, & people like you who think everything is either Liberal or Conservative. To you there are no other issues. Facts are either Liberal or Conservative & should be disregarded if you are on the other side of the fence!

The "name calling" on your side of the fence is rampant! Liberal! Cannuck! Tupper Lake Genes! Kerry is an a*****e (as if that makes any difference, as he has nothing to do with this issue).

Meanwhile here is Bush saying the Iraqi's are getting trained & making headway, even though when the Generals are questioned, they said "months ago" that soon Iraq should have 3 divisions ready to protect themselves & just last week the same Generals admit there is only 1! These are the same Generals that are saying they will need at least 10 divisions to be ready to hold their own & the same ones that say this should be expected to take at least 8-10 years!

That cannot be slanted Liberal Vera! The Generals are speaking publically to the issues. There is no spin!

Vera what is 10 times 80 billion huh? It is then that the USA should be able to pull out comfortably? Will it end the terrorism? Not a d**n chance & you d**n well know it! How much will it save on oil? Since that is the real reason for being there when the smoke clears, this makes the idea in the first place dumb!

I already pointed out where it does not matter who is in power, Republican or Democrat, the terrorism will continue either way! I mentioned that it was "for good reason" & why! How you would do the same if put into the same situation! Obviously!

Who cares who "dodged the draft" or did not fight in a dumb, silly exercise like Vietnam? It was a dumb idea in the first place! I hope both Bush & Kerry would be smart enough to stay out of a killing field that had no purpose & something you could not win!

However if I even "hinted" that Bush had brains, i am extreamly sorry for that! Give me one thing Bush has done during his Presidency that has made your lifestyle go up or make you feel more secure? Just one! He appointed all his "friends" into posts they had no real knowledge of as he is still doing today! His top people are under inditement? Giving contracts to companies his Vice President was the CEO of before the Bush rise to power? Ratting out peoples wives if they expose lies about this regime? Spinning lies about WMD's to get backing from the American people to go into Iraq? Continueing to lie to you to your face about the preparedness of Iraqi Troops when his Generals publically voice the opposite?

Most States are red? Well Vera if it is almost a forgone conclusion that votes were fixed during his first election, why would you think more of the same was not done during the second? People that did vote Bush simply did not like Kerry! They really did not see a choice! That does not say they agreed with him! People might have had misguided faith in Bush when they voted, but they did "not" vote in favor of the occupation of Iraq! Well over 60% of Americans are against this occupation, & that is a present fact!

Almost every other President in recent history had a "clear majority" & this one has a hard time doing it even with "spin". Lies! Deception! The proof is on this thread.

Most people responding to this thread are not with you Vera. Most Countries in the World as a whole are not with Bush! More than 60% dis agree with you on this thread! You really have to take your head out of the sand Vera!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#241 Consumer Comment

To our chest-beating (Legends In Their Own Minds) friends....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, October 03, 2005

From the one who howls stay on the subject!, we get:

Facts are not really relevant.
(Because they don't match up with mine.) His only podium from which to preach. After all, didn't The U.S. Gave the enemy their WMDs!?
Beyond that, we aren't supposed to know about how the French UN Ambassador dismissed aerial photos of a convoy of Iraqi military trucks fleeing weapons sites just prior to UN Inspectors arriving there as Perhaps a Trucker's Picnic.' My Hubby is a trucker.I've never known any company to have picnics on the move.

And:
Robert: It is a fact that BETA is better than VHS, but who uses it?

Hunh? When did we bring in the virtues of Betamax Vs. VHS?
Psssstt.James! C'mover here.have you got the latest 8-track? Aren't those DeeVeeDees radioactive or something?

It's what the "world thinks" there Robert

No, it's not. It's what YOU and other liberal wishy-washies think.
Liberals claim that Republicans/Conservatives are the lowest-educated demographic, even citing a directly proportionate relationship between poor education and the Red states Versus Blue states votes. Then here we have James and his mighty Grocery List of Who's Who on the Left (PIPA) that implies, in a nutshell, that about seventy-five percent of the United States is liberal, or, that at least anyone who watches anything less than CNN, MSNBC (I liked that PMSNBC zing made by another respondentthat was cute!), CBS, or ABC is a total mouth breathing moron because they don't believe in the Great Liberal Way. So which is it? The bulk of the states in the Map of the US are Red (Bush). But PIPA, in its infinite view, says most of us are liberal. NOT according to the votes. And I don't really care if y'all think the election was stolen; I know Republicans didn't break into Democrat Voting Headquarters and trash the place.

You cannot change world opinion on this issue, as your so called "facts" do not have any merit that would catch anyones eye.

His facts caught the eye of everyone who read this Report, and they either responded in support, or counterpoint. So much for your theory. (And again.and again.and againit's the same old same old: Your Info Is WRONG! Your Info is SPIN! Your info is LIES! Liberalese. Christ, Jameshow many times are you gonna say it? We've heard it before! Can't you at least.ohh, I dunnoh.juggle or sing while you type it? Dress it up a little! :D )

However I do say I "whittled you down" just a little (That makes you the ONLY one.)

And no, you didn't. He's just as solidly placed as ever in his opinion. As are the rest of us that disagree with you. Except, of course, your little bootlicking Yes-Man in Tupper.

& you will know now to "watch your mouth" in public on this issue, as you should know for sure that most of the people in the world "do not agree" with you!

God, I hope not. people like Robert, Michael, Craig, R.s., (to name a few) and myself need to speak out against anyone who thinks rolling over and going belly-up for terrorists is a good idea (that means you, Jimmie-Poo).

I am talking peace & security. You are talking war & death. I think my end will win out in the end.

You are talking placation and complacency, not peace and security. Robert is talking about how we shouldn't let the actions of terrorists go without response, and certainly, unavenged. I know, that if someone were to takeI dunnohsay, my neighborand rape her, then beat her, then behead her naked form publicly, I'd do all I had in my power to seek out restitution. You bet your a*s, kiddo.
Of course, we wouldn't want to have you sacrifice your cognitive/speech center, Darling...so don't bet your a*s.

To Jon of California,

He is not what he claims to be: "A president of the people". With him at the helm the rich will get richer and the middle class and poor will continue to become slaves for the rich. He and Ronald were much a like when it comes to their contempt for the middle class and poor.

Contempt? I didn't see any contempt for the middle class and poor, when he made multiple trips to Louisianaand Mississippi was that hardest hit by Katrina. But no one wants to see a bunch of everyday Joes like you and mewhite, black, Asian, and the likethe Press wants us to focus on those people of New Orleans, so poor, and.so black. (Wolfe, in his report got caught on-air.) When ABC News culled a group evacuees who had fled to the Houston Astrodome, none of those people said that they were unhappy with what Bush said in his speech. They even mention that they believe in him, despite the fact that the questions that were asked in the interview were meant to draw out anything that even lightly reeked of anti-Bush tenor. (See WorldNetDaily's Evacuees surprise ABC with Bush praise; Reporter apparently sought critical remarks after speech.)


But let's look at a man of the PeopleJohn Kerry, for example, and how well he can relate to us.
His Homes are, in no particular order, Fox Chapel, in Pennsylvania, valued at $3.7 mil, Ketchum, Idaho (the Kerry Family Ski Retreat):$4.9 Mil., Washington, DC, Georgetown: $4.7 Mil., Nantucket, on Brant Point (cozy waterfront cottage):$9.2 Mil., Boston, Massachusetts' Beacon Hill home: $6.9 Mil. Total value of the homes,$29.4 Million, and these are the US homes alone (The place in Italy wasn't sold to a movie star by Kerryit was sold by a member of the Heinz FamilyTeresa's (Tah-RAY-sas's) Grandma or Mother or something, so I won't bother to include it.) Bush has one home (You've seen Cindy Sheehan at the gates!): a 1,600-Acre Ranch, worth a little less than One million.

My God, the similarities between him [Kerry] and the common people are so glaringly clear; I just wilt at the thought! Boy is he a Man of the People! I mean, just yesterday, while planning my trip to take a month off of work and go to the Riviera, I was discussing selling OUR Nantucket retreat!
But then the alarm went off, and I awoke in my modest, three-bedroom home, and prepared for my day of household duties, planning dinner, and trying to figure out where to get a nice dress at a good price for my Daughter's Homecoming dance.

And what is Also, GB was AWOL in the NG that's a fact! mean?

Is that George Bush was absent without leave in the. National Guard?

And I'm sure you've been well informed on John Kerry's service, and how popular he is among his fellow Americans, the Swift-Boat Vets, Vietnamese Americans For Truth, Vietnam Veterans, and former POWs. You know, he put himself in for those medalsand I don't know too many people who can serve four months and get all that silverware. It was real brave of him to chase down an unarmed, wounded man corner him in a hut and shoot him. But the Liberal Jock-Whiffers of Veteran Issues don't want that sort of info out there, I understand.

Let's let Senator Kerry speak for himself: I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing. (Boston Globe)

And if GW was AWOL, why did he get an Honourable Discharge? He served in the NG from November of '72, to May of '73---certainly ample enough time, compared to Kerry, Clinton, Schumer and a few other Shmoes! Nine times he's provided his information; since the Leftmedia can't prove anything, the Liberals squint their eyes shut, shaking their fists and crying Not enough information!

If Ignorance is bliss, Robert must be feeling very blissful. I bet he believes Ronald was a fabulous president as well.

Well, he did break the Zero Factor.but that's more a matter of good fortune (Funny, I don't remember him getting any Hearts or Stars [Or Blue Diamonds! Hehe!] over not only getting shot, but in getting up and walking away.). But I doubt Reagan was so great as to get a hummer while he was talking about deploying troops. Reagan was a good man, apparentlyhe has made more positive progress in responding to a hostile enemy than some other members of congress, or a former president or two. May he rest in peace, he was a very courageous man.

And by the wayI know that a person receives a Purple Heart when they are wounded during Service while in Combat. Just so you know I am aware.

Ignorance isn't blissit's perfect Liberalism. And you have my deepest sympathies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#240 Consumer Suggestion

USA starts minding its own business & then the terrorists will do the same.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 03, 2005

Vera;

You certainly have long posts to say not very much. Sheesh! Um like I said about the terrorists, they have a reason. A d**n good one!

Dragging corpses & stuff? Hell how can you be a "terrorist" if you do not cause "terror"? Do you expect them to go around giving people lethal injections?

Vera they are doing these things because the USA is on their soil & trying to control the region. USA starts minding its own business & then the terrorists will do the same.

In case you missed it, the piece on Fox News I got from a Chineese Newspaper. That is Chineese opinion. I can guarantee you it is also Canadian opinion as well! The CBC did a big documentry on Fox News! Showing proof of lies Bill O -Really spouted! Outright lies Vera! Talking about trade with France falling when it has increased for one! The guy is just full of it! Lie after lie after lie on the "no spin zone"! Anyone who argues with him, he loudly berates & kicks off the air! You can't get both sides of any arguement with only one side presented & peppered with outright lies!

It is not a difference between Liberal Media & Conservative Media, but a fact that Suddam had no links to Bin Laden, a fact that they did not find any WMD's in Iraq & a fact that Suddam did not use WMD's to repel the Americans at all. The piece simply points to the percentage of "dumb Americans" who think differently & believe this crap! There is nothing Liberal or Conservative about it! If someone said the sky is blue would you say that was their "Liberal slant" on it? Gee Vera! Everything is not either Republican or Democrat! Facts are Facts!

Then you go on to quote me about the weapons made in Quebec, but fail to post the rest of it where I said they do not sell WMD's & they do not sell "major weapons" like rocket launchers! Quit pointing at Canada as supporting any of your American problems! Canada is just the voice that tries to be senseable when America does dumb things like in Vietnam & Iraq! If you can't get Canada to fight beside you, there probably is a "good reason"!

Here comes Bush after 911 screaming for the world to join him & that they are either "with him or with the terrorists"! Well just look at the amount of Countries who basically told him to go to hell! Canada is just one! We are beside you in Afganistan! Simply because it was where the 911 terrorist leader was based. Not in Iraq! Even there I think Canada was wrong! The terrorists come mostly from Saudi Arabia. Another fact! No & it is not a Liberal slant that makes it a fact!

I know you said you don't believe in everything Bush has done, but hell do you have a injury that prevents you from seeing these facts? Do you think Iraq will have it's problems solved after Bush leaves? Come on Vera... think! Every day another car bomb goes off over there & it is not going to stop when the US leaves! I don't have to be a terrorist lover to see that! I don't have to be Liberal either! The terrorism will continue because of US presence in the region & will not stop until that presence is gone! Period!

Its like the Blonde who goes to the doctor & says "Every time I move my arm like this it hurts! What should I do?" The doctor replies "stop doing that"! USA needs to stop being a blonde & stop doing that!

Hillary Clinton will probably be your next President. If the troops are not home by then I am sure she will bring them home. However she will not fix the problem either! Just as her huspand did not, she will not remove the presence of the USA in the region & the terrorism will continue. It does not matter if the President is Republican or Democrat! Neither will fix the problem. Only the American people can fix it by keeping the issue visible & bugging their leaders.

It's not outrageous either Vera. What would you do if Iraq set up bases in Mexico, Canada & the USA? If the USA did not have the weapons to defend themselves as a Government, then the people would do what? Commit terrorism Vera! Its so d**n simple! Just as France did with the n**i's! Just as the Polish did with the n**i's! It is not your region! It's theirs! The terrorists want the USA out & they will continue. Nothing Liberal about it!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#239 Consumer Suggestion

Hey Jon

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, October 03, 2005

Jon;

You betcha...best of the best. My shop is closed every Feb 6 in honor of the man.

Well actually I liked Ray Gun. At least he won his election fair & square. He started in a ressession & he brought us out of it. I say "us" cause Canada's economy is directly related to the USA. He got the hostages back without fireing a shot too. I really think he was the President responsible for ending the Cold War. He was honest & sure as hell not "dumb as a post" like Bush.

I never was a Democrat, but I sure did like Clinton. Probably the best President I have ever seen down there. The good ones get dumped on. Just like here. The best Prime Minister in Canada in my opinion was Mulroney. He organized free trade.

What bugs me about Bush economically is that he is spending like crazy & this Iraq thing just does not make sense. 80 billion this year for Iraq. 200 Billion for New Orleans Where the hell is all this money gonna come from? Tax cuts for the rich? Ahh they do that here too. The pompasness of it all is displayed by George's Mom. When the smoke clears, they will probably rename New Orleans to "Bushville".

Yet people like Robert are just lost as hell, backing this dummy like he actually has a good plan! He really has no right to even be in that office! He lost at least one of his two elections in my opinion & used war to expand his popularity.

I know Americans that have moved to Canada, just because of Bush. I haven't seen that since Nixon! Sheesh another President that won "fair & square", although I am 50/50 on whether he was a good President or not.

Bush will pull out the troops & Iraq will burn because of him going in there in the first place. Terrorism will intensify & all the money he spent you will pay for as he goes down in history as the worst President your Country ever had!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#238 Consumer Comment

Ignorance is Bliss

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 02, 2005

If Ignorance is bliss, Robert must be feeling very blissful. I bet he believes Ronald was a fabulous president as well.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#237 Consumer Comment

It's Reallty Pretty Simple - Every action he has taken specifically benefits the rich & wealthy in this and other nations.

AUTHOR: Jon - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, October 02, 2005

Just take a look at what he has done so far:

Every action he has taken specifically benefits the rich & wealthy in this and other nations.

He is not what he claims to be: "A president of the people". With him at the helm the rich will get richer and the middle class and poor will continue to become slaves for the rich. He and Ronald were much a like when it comes to their contempt for the middle class and poor.

Also, GB was AWOL in the NG that's a fact!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#236 Consumer Suggestion

Facts are not really relevant

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

Robert;

It is a fact that BETA is better than VHS, but who uses it? It's what the "world thinks" there Robert & not just you in your little world.

You cannot change world opinion on this issue, as your so called "facts" do not have any merit that would catch anyones eye.

Hell even George Bush will admit they found no WMD's in Iraq & it is you pushing the envelope on your own now.

Oh you do have some points. The cease fire agreement & all. Yep Robert I will give ya that. Sorta, cause anyone can see it was too drastic!

However I do say I "whittled you down" just a little & you will know now to "watch your mouth" in public on this issue, as you should know for sure that most of the people in the world "do not agree" with you!

I am talking peace & security. You are talking war & death. I think my end will win out in the end. Yours will go down into history books as the "cavemen" of our time. Supported by Fox News!

You are as entitled to your opinion as is Sheehan. I just know, as most other people do also, that you are wrong.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#235 Consumer Comment

Wow! I've been away a while, and LOOK...!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

I see we've got a few more new faces here...hello and welcome!

Let's get started, shall we..?

"I honestly don't like either party. Alot of reps are pushing their religious views as a political platform. That is a serious no-no by constitutional standards. And the dems are getting to far to the left to bear with. They seem to want to bash everyone's views rather than come up with their own.

Look, I am not here insulting anyone. Trust me I don't need this crap right now. I am just suggesting that you stop for a second and look at the other side's point of view for a change. No one is telling you to change your beliefs. Just try it. You may learn something about yourself."

Dan - Glen Burnie, Maryland

DanI couldn't agree more about what the two parties have been doing to each othernever has a Nation been more divided than it is today. Your views can be taken even on a much more diminutive level, as an example, the issues between James of Canada and myself (the exception being that James is a Canadian, and I, an American).

Probably in three posts I have myself stated that I'm not happy with everything Bush doesand in one, I even used it as the title (come to think of it, this makes the third time I have mentioned that). I don't feel that the Reps alone are pushing the whole Religion platformbut I do notice that a lot of conservatives are folks that believe in a sovereign God, and they approach their issues with that kind of mindset. In reference to your mentioning that a religious bent is a no-no by Constitutional standard, the whole separation of church and state issue actually isn't in the Constitution, the Bill Of Rights, or the Declaration Of Independence. (One of my posts actually covers that issue.)

Please don't take my replying to you as a personal attack; I think, for the most part, your statement is valid and has merit. I just don't wholly agree with you on the whole division between church and government.

James;
What did they do to you Vera (& I am talking about Americans) before you stuck your nose in the middle east? They knew as little of you & your culture as you knew them. Yet no they don't have the nice houses & fancy cars & they generally cannot eat what they wish, as their natural resourses allow them only a "certain lifesyle" & as you may have noticed, we live "abundantly surrounded" by them.

What did I do to them, that makes them drag American corpses, while they burn, behind their vehicles? What did I do to them, that made them the terrorists they are today (and of yesterday?)? What justifies their horrendous behavior? So, because my kidlet has a laptop, we have a rec-room in our basement, and there's an extra car in my garage, I have to feel that the murderous actions of other people that just don't understand are okay? Yeah, I can see that happening! For that matter, what did America do to Canada, in that you feel you need to personally address the issue? Aren't you doing the very thing you condemn us for doing ("Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.")? Don't give me the whole "suitcase nuke" crap...they would attack us mainly on the bent that We, not being of their Faith, are INFIDELS by wrote.

By the way.didn't Celine Dion (ANOTHER fine Canadian) make that same comment? (We need to understand them because they never even get to touch these things.) But we're getting back to that whole Spin thing, aren't we?

A majority of weapons made in Canada are made in Quebec.

Quebec is still Canada, just like California (or any other state, for that matter) is still the United States. Like I've said; the more frequently aired opinion, the one that makes the movies, and the more famous the individual doesn't necessarily mean the whole of the United States feels that way. I just can't afford the airtimeLord knows, I'm certain I'm not the only American that feels like I do.

Sorry to "blow your bubble" Vera, but the guys from 911 did not get into your County through Canada.

I know this. Where did I imply that the terrorists that pulled off 9-11 came here from Canada? Try not slipping off the dock, next time you miss the boat. Hate to "Bust Your Bubble."

We have very large Muslim communities here & you might be amazed at the peacefulness of them.

And that's just swell. Man, you should have seen the people of the Muslim communities dancing in the streets of New Jersey when the Towers were hit.
But, you know, they're peaceful. Yeah.
If Islam is a religion of peace, don't you think they'd agree with me and MILLIONS of others, when we say Stop the murders! Stop dragging burnt carcasses in the street! Stop stringing them (corpses) over bridges on the Euphrates! Stop kidnapping and killing ANY American you find in your streets! Stop cutting off soldiers' heads! Stop flying planes into buildings!

As long as liberals insist that Americans refer to Islam as some religion of peace, it would be a HUGE leg up if the Muslims would stop killing other folks. Their PR people need all the help they can get, too.

And as far as your whole post on We report, you get it wrong By Jim Lobe, it can be replied to thus; I could say the same about those who think nbc, cbs, abc, and cnnall of which are stations supported by primarily liberal interests. So they're just as likely to be spun. (And once again, you're just attacking the sources of information that don't support that which you want to hear.) Also, I'm glad to know that even this liberal news source isn't saying that nobody believes the conservatives anymore. That gives me hope in knowing at least twenty-five percent of the nation as a whole isn't brainwashed. There are just as many sources out there that don't think the liberal way is the only way, thank God.

As far as the responses luminously elicited by both Robert of Florida, and John of White, Georgia, I have to agree wholeheartedly (in fact, I alluded to the whoopsies when Kerry thought he was the winner, according to the polls).


To Shawn, of Phelan, Califiornia

I can't beleive I just wasted all this time reading all of your useless, blithering, nonthought-provoking OPINIONS.

Then, why did you get this far? Why do you feel compelled to respond?

Furthermore, if you would all do a little bit of research (no, that doesn't mean watch the news or ask your best freind's opinion----RESEARCH), you would relize that the opinions you are tap, tap, tapping into this "forum" are about 90% wrong! No idiot! I don't mean when you said you "feel" or "think"...everyone is entitled to feelings and thoughts of their own (but then every one has an a-hole to!), but i AM referring to your ohhh so insightful arguments of what you try to put across as fact! I am not talking to "them" you ignorant moron...this message is for you to so wipe that smirk off of your face and listen up.

And what research did you do, that warrants such a retort? Would that be a response based more on your personal feelings? Try not to hold back, now. ;)

Stop your arguing, whining, "my opinion is more correct than your opinion" attitudes and DO SOMETHING that will HELP ALL AMERICANS - SHUT UP!

Feel free to follow your own advice, there.

STOP CALLING EACH OTHER NAMES

You mean, like Idiot and Moron, or Stupid, right?
You'll not hear me say it often, but here is possibly the ONLY point on which the Canadian and I can agree: please make your point, or move on. You're defeating the purpose and spirit under which the Rip-Off Reports are intended.to allow the Consumer an opportunity by which to openly express their opinion on a company, service, or individual in a public forum. And typing in caps only makes it hard to read or follow your statement's impact. We can tell you're intensebut as to your posture on the subject at hand. well, we'd love to hear from you.

Dawn, of Whitesboro, N.Y.

We've been telling them this for a while nowbut honestlyif they're on the computer, they ain't breeding! (ssshhhhhhh.)
I guess we can count out blessings, ESPECIALLY in this Tuppervillian's case. :D

Back to James of Canada:

The study was done in the USA & backed up by an honest institution. You can call it Liberal if you wish. It really does not matter as that is what "World Opinion" is.

Really? What honest Institution might that be? The Canadian Foundation For Islamic Awareness? PUH!
And have you checked with everyone in the World? Or just those in your world?
I'd love you to go overseas to the troops stationed in the MidEast and spout the way you doI'll even give you a nice videocam, if you promise to send me a copy.

Michael of Bountiful, Utah
Welcome back to the board!
But if having him as president scares you, this will scare you more:
President Hillary Clinton.

The woman is paranoid, power hungry, bi-polar and self-destructs at the slightest bit of pressure. Exactly the type of person we need running the country.

Not to mention, Anti-Semitic. When she's around, the buzz is to keep the hallways clear unless cameras are onshe'll attack anyone for any reason when she knows she's not being watched. Just ask anyone in her personal entourage.

And as far as that wench, Sheehan is concerned; the polls indicate that she'll probably have a meltdown and commit suicide once the spotlight fades. How noble is Kerry's posture, where he has to use a grieving Mom as a buckler. The people all around Sheehan are confused; they wonder why a once proud Mom can seek to disgrace her son's memory by even thinking of siding with the Liberal cause. Talk about the ultimate manifestation of Munchausen's Syndrome By Proxy. Sadvery, very sad.

James, of Tupper Lake
Bush has lied from start to finish! Look at ALL transcripts!
You'll have to be more specific than that. Which transcripts?

Of course, we could always be snappy answer-ers like Kerry:
Reporter: Senator Kerry.are you for, or against, the war in the Middle East?
The Senator's response: Yes.

OhMyGohdd....talk about a visionary.

*sigh!*

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#234 Consumer Comment

You're getting boring now

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

Not one of your statements warrants a reply. You have your opinion, and I have mine. The only difference is, my opinions are always backed up by cold, hard facts. Maybe one day, you'll actually do some research on the topics at hand before posting any further. Have fun in LALA Land. Say hi to your counterpart in Tupper Lake.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#233 Consumer Suggestion

However you are repeating yourself. We moved on to Sheehan!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

James from Tupper Lake

Hey James;

I agree with you. However you are repeating yourself. We moved on to Sheehan!

Robert thinks Sheehan needs a permit to rebel against a silly war that killed her son! Trying to do his "duty" as others think you need to do that to support your Country, he got killed!

Now what was this Country supporting & why did he give his life for it?

It's a Joke James! None of it makes sense! Definately not to Sheehan! Call her down Robert! She loved her son! Now she is doing something in his memory! How dare you call her down for doing something you would do for your son!

Arrested? Come on Robert? Is this Bush or Nixion? Either one will go down in history as being an a*****e!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#232 Consumer Suggestion

Robert

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

Oh... dear Robert;

It is not me that is judgeing you. Yet the world. Not you yourself either. Thank God you have a President to blame.

You cannot get sick unless you are negative & so I don't think I need health care. However if I did, I would feel much more secure in Canada.

What does that have to do with the price of cheese?

Bomb... close to you... you wave flag... you figure it out!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#231 Consumer Suggestion

Micheal from Bountiful

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

Micheal;

Well first of all I have to commend you for your intelligent post! I definately think it good & it puts a 'real spin" on your issue!

I dis agree of course! I may think you are "nuts" for thinking that way when most of the World is against your ideas.

Well read, you speak to the "other side". I appreciate your comments.

Do you think the USA will gain anything from being in Iraq?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#230 Consumer Suggestion

James they attack before we invaded

AUTHOR: Craig - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

James blame use for everything right,first they attacked us 5 times then 9/11,why because we buy oil and support Israel?,second the terrorist hate the Saudi royal family who have done alot for there country,and how are they in are back pocket if there supporting terrorism?Should we let the terrorist drive Israel into the sea?. are you one of those liberals who dont want to drill for oil in alaska or anywhere for that matter then complains about buying it from the middleast and then bitchs when the price goes up? your living in a dream world.If i were president i would have attacked Iran there the biggest supporters of terrerism,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#229 Consumer Comment

Bush needs to be IMPEACHED!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, October 01, 2005

He has never told the truth since his ad for election!!!!! Bush has lied from start to finish! Look at ALL transcripts! He needs to be held accountable. Bush is oil executive as his vice president d**k Cheney, who also has a silent profit from his old company(Halliburton) as he owned the company for a long time!Halliburton is in Iraq for Clean-up, if you buy that. The Halliburton group is making Billions on clean-up in Iraq and making billions of dollars. People wake up! The BIG Business, and Military Industrial Complex signed on together to take the control of the United States and use the United States of American Presidents as spokes people only for their interest. We are silently being overthrown!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#228 Consumer Suggestion

Shawn & Robert & Craig

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, September 30, 2005

Shawn;

It is real nice you have something to say. Even better you can prove you can write in capitals. Now all we have to do is to get you a point. You say "nothing". No evidence for anything you do say, except that we all are Americans (which is true) & that everyone should play nice, as I guess you have a right. If you have an issue with something that is said, make it!

Robert;

Oh yea, so the "no fly zone" over Germany included civilian craft & lasted from what 1946-1956? Is that what you are saying? Sure seems to be a bigger Country than Iraq... shouldn't the "no fly rules" last longer than Iraq? At least with Germany they might have a reason, as they were a threat! What threat was Iraq?

Possibly you should read my posts from the beginning where I pointed out that the only WMD's that Iraq ever had were the ones given to Suddam to fight the Iran / Iraq war. I don't know where you get your evidence that he used them on anyone other than the Kurds, but again... who cares? A real big threat to the USA, now wasn't it?

Craig;

Oh good excuse! USA comes into the region, interested in Oil & buys a friend in Saudi Arabia. Which by the way is the Country supplying most of the terrorists from the first place. They push their influence, setting up Isreal & instead of backing off, now they have Saudi Arabia in their back pocket, they invaded Iraq! Never mind Afganistan! So it is "your opinion" that the terrorists have no issues?

When attacked by Japan, the USA should have ended the agression by invading Hong Kong? Is this your opinion? Iraq had nothing to do with any of this! The only thing they ever had was most of the oil, next to Saudi Arabia! That same Saudi Arabia that supplies most of the terrorists!

The people who live in the region have no other real industry! They cannot turn to another & ignore what the USA is doing in the region if they care about their homeland. They are not powerful enough to fight the USA, so they cause terror! So would you, if some other Country invaded your region from the "other side of the World" & began to exploit you! Of course you would & you would have good reason!! Never mind the fact that here we have other industries. You would simply be outraged! So are the terrorists & the solution is not to occupy more of the region & try to Americanize the entire region!

Robert, how many decades was the "no fly zone" for civilian aircraft too, in N. Korea? Huh Robert? Talk about giving terrorists every d**n reason for rebelling! Never mind the outrageous sanctions! Many people died over those sanctions! Never mind the inspections that went on for "how long" Robert? Robert how long were these cease fire regulations in place before the USA let up? How long Robert? 1991-2002 Robert? Or was it 1992-2002? Me thinks dats around 10 years huh?

Sledgehammer to kill a fly! Yes Robert it is time for you to read what I posted from the beginning. That is how you git edumicated dare Robby boy! Still you don't touch on Sheehan. Freedom of Speach! Hell only for Fox News if they are "pro Bush"? You will follow this President into the mouths of Hell won't you Robert?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#227 Consumer Comment

Putting people in jail?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 30, 2005

That dingbat Cindy Shehan "honors" her son by protesting and smiling gleefully when she gets arrested. He family has left her. She's a nut.

Once again James, you have chosen another worthless dreg as your source of proof. She was arrested after being told three times to move along. She was protesting without a permit. That is the law.

Again, try using a source in America for your "proof" of how terrible we are. Do not use one that is beholden to the Liberals in this country. USe an objective one, like Gallup or Zogby. You won't, because you won't like their findings. Look at a map of the elections in this country. You'll see a picture of America that is colored red except for a few small blue dots. Those are the inner cities, the welfare communities. Sad isn't it. Half this country is on the dole. The other half pays for it. Area-wise, the country is red while a few small spots are blue. Sort of like a cancer.

You are too pathetic at this point. It's like kicking someone while their down. Get up, brush yourself off, and get some medical attention. I'd suggest coming down here since your heathcare system will require you to wait about 6 months before you can be seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#226 Consumer Comment

Putting people in jail?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 30, 2005

That dingbat Cindy Shehan "honors" her son by protesting and smiling gleefully when she gets arrested. He family has left her. She's a nut.

Once again James, you have chosen another worthless dreg as your source of proof. She was arrested after being told three times to move along. She was protesting without a permit. That is the law.

Again, try using a source in America for your "proof" of how terrible we are. Do not use one that is beholden to the Liberals in this country. USe an objective one, like Gallup or Zogby. You won't, because you won't like their findings. Look at a map of the elections in this country. You'll see a picture of America that is colored red except for a few small blue dots. Those are the inner cities, the welfare communities. Sad isn't it. Half this country is on the dole. The other half pays for it. Area-wise, the country is red while a few small spots are blue. Sort of like a cancer.

You are too pathetic at this point. It's like kicking someone while their down. Get up, brush yourself off, and get some medical attention. I'd suggest coming down here since your heathcare system will require you to wait about 6 months before you can be seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#225 Consumer Comment

Putting people in jail?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 30, 2005

That dingbat Cindy Shehan "honors" her son by protesting and smiling gleefully when she gets arrested. He family has left her. She's a nut.

Once again James, you have chosen another worthless dreg as your source of proof. She was arrested after being told three times to move along. She was protesting without a permit. That is the law.

Again, try using a source in America for your "proof" of how terrible we are. Do not use one that is beholden to the Liberals in this country. USe an objective one, like Gallup or Zogby. You won't, because you won't like their findings. Look at a map of the elections in this country. You'll see a picture of America that is colored red except for a few small blue dots. Those are the inner cities, the welfare communities. Sad isn't it. Half this country is on the dole. The other half pays for it. Area-wise, the country is red while a few small spots are blue. Sort of like a cancer.

You are too pathetic at this point. It's like kicking someone while their down. Get up, brush yourself off, and get some medical attention. I'd suggest coming down here since your heathcare system will require you to wait about 6 months before you can be seen.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#224 Consumer Comment

Maybe vaporizing some of their holy land will keep them in their caves for a while.

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 30, 2005

A few things:

Just put a couple of submarines in the Gulf and start targeting cities. Maybe vaporizing some of their holy land will keep them in their caves for a while. I am willing to bet that by the time the second weapon goes off Bin Laden and Al-Zarkowi are in handcuffs and standing in front of the White House.

Iraq is not a sovereign nation so quit listening to the Communist News Network (CNN), PMS-NBC or reading the Washington Times. We only signed a cease fire which technically made us still at war just not a shooting one. North and South Korea have the same deal.

The cease fire gave us the right to hold Hussein accountable by force if necessary, for his violations of the cease fire (which were numerous). We invaded Iraq because of that alone. Not for oil. If it were a war-for-oil then how come gas is almost 3 bucks a gallon?

We are not sending our sons and daughters to die in the desert. The American military is an all volunteer force. There is no draft. The men and women wearing a uniform are doing so because they want to. People that bad mouth the military but refuse to serve in it are, in my opinion, cowards.

President Bush is a great man. I am proud to have him as our president. But if having him as president scares you, this will scare you more:
President Hillary Clinton.

The woman is paranoid, power hungry, bi-polar and self-destructs at the slightest bit of pressure. Exactly the type of person we need running the country. Good hell.

Actually all the whining I hear across the country is rather funny. It just shows people's ignorance and makes for great sound bites! But I have to ask: if those who are whining about how things are supposedly so bad in America then why are you still here?

Things arent't so bad after all, eh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#223 Consumer Comment

REALITY CHECK

AUTHOR: Knenina - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

PEOPLE THE TRUTH OF MATTER IS:

The general public are footing the Bills ie...Gas prices...Taxes...Rebuilding other countries...not the federal government yet WE can't agree that makes us Powerless.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#222 Consumer Suggestion

Robert, Throwing people in jail to attempt to silence them? Come on, I thought your worst President for pulling tricks like that was Nixon!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

Ahh... Robert;

An "unfair" cease fire agreement that "no Country" in the World would go along with. Simply meant to provoke! Rediculous!

China, my friend is the World's next "Super Power" & the ones who's opinion you should be most concerned with, if you are thinking "Militarily" at all.

The study was done in the USA & backed up by an honest institution. You can call it Liberal if you wish. It really does not matter as that is what "World Opinion" is. That is definately Canadian opinion & also a majority of US opinion as more people in the USA are opposed to this occupation of Iraq, than are for it.

Throwing people in jail to attempt to silence them? Come on, I thought your worst President for pulling tricks like that was Nixon! Bush will not be topped I guess! Ok, notice on how he now is talking about how well the Iraqi's are comming along? He has to spin it to get the troops out & he knows it! For every Iraqi soldier & politician put into place, 10 Iraqi's die. Yea sure George, they are able to handle it themselves soon now. What a "spin" man he is! It's like someone comes into your house & gives you a "first aid" course & then pours gasoline on your home as they leave, posting signs for a "smoke in" just outside your home! Well "gee wiz man" we did the best we could! How were we to know someone would be careless with their smoke?

If the bomb goes off in your neigbourhood, you can run around all you want waving that American Flag & proclaiming you are a Bush backer, that believes in Fox news! You will never be able to live it down! Not for the dead thousands anyway.

From 911 to Iraq to vote fixing, to dropping the ball on Katrina, to throwing people in jail that object. From the people who lied, squealed, & performed illegal acts, to the deficit, buddy appointments, & loss of jobs, this President has proven to be the worst one yet! Dumb as a fence post too! I just don't know Robert how you can continue to back him.

Thank God he cannot run again. You will pay for it monitarily for years to come. Hopefully it also will not be also with your family or friends lives, possibly your own.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#221 Consumer Comment

Are you trying to be serious James?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

You state Iraq did NOT use WMD's against Iran in their 8 year war. PUT DOWN THE PIPE!

Iraq invaded Iran(they seem to make this a habit) and Iran repelled them with conventional and chemical weapons. This counter attack brought the line to a standoff and while Iran used chemicals for the duration of the war, Iraq began to use Mustard and Tabun in 1982.

This is just one more WRONG bit of MISinformation you believe, that has been trashed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#220 Consumer Comment

James, stop PLEASE!!!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

There was a Cease-Fire in Germany for a few days. Then Karl Donitz signed the surrender papers. During the cease-fire, there were no German troops of any sort allowed to carry arms at all. No German planes in the air, and all German naval vessels had to come back to their bases, with no distractions.

There were few vilotions, and the troops that did violate their orders, were immediately dealt with and eliminated. When the papers were signed for their UNCONDITIONAL surrender, the German troops were then allowed to rearm, as they were supervised by Allied troops at all times. The De-Nazification of Germany began and we weeded out the criminal elements of the military and government. The Germans then began to rebuild their military, just as Iraq is doing.

Please, for your benefit alone, GET AN EDUCATION!

There were no N0-Fly zones in Germany because they SURRENDERED and laid down their arms. They were no longer a hostile threat. They were able to understand how it works, they had discipline. Apparently, some people don't know how to honor an agreement, or how to understand what will happen if they don't.

Hussein took out his vengeance for losing the Gulf War by attacking the Kurds in the North, and the Shiites, in the south. The no-fly zones were set up so Iraqi aircraft could not attack them from above. This also prevented them from attacking our aircraft. Iraqi radar sites locked on and fired missiles at our aircraft(VIOLATION!) several times. We finally went after them and obliterated anything that even resembled a threat. Must have sucked to be in his military with s**t "raining down on their parade". The no-fly zones were just one of the terms of Cease-Fire Hussein agreed to, but ignored.

Could you please, just once, get SOMETHING right? We'll all be waiting, with breathless anticipation.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#219 Consumer Comment

town full of computer owning unemployed rednecks?

AUTHOR: Dawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

People of Tupper Lake...GET LIVES

Ya know, I read this thing and Im starting to wonder...do the people of Tupper Lake have ANYTHING ELSE to do? Is this a town full of computer owning unemployed rednecks? Dear god, the stories I've read on here about this ones husband, and leave my man alone and now this...

You all need to get some education and find something constructive to do

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#218 Consumer Suggestion

everyone thought he had WMD - Terrorist are like the old southern ractist, they're raised to hate

AUTHOR: Craig - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

Bill Clinton,Al Gore,John Kerry and the UN all thought he had WMD thats why they wanted inspections, and i love the line James, doing things that made the terrorists mad in the first place, thats a great policy, lets let the terrorist run the Middleast that will surly bring peace. Terrorist are like the old southern ractist, they're raised to hate, they will always find something to kill for

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#217 Consumer Comment

Do you ever read what you write before posting it?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

You now admit Hussein had WMD's since the US gave them to him. Great, now you are on the right side of that issue. He had them, we gave them to him, along with France, Germany, Russia, China, etc.

Since you fully admit he had them, we'll be waiting to hear you admit you were MISleading everyone with your MISinformation.

Do you even try to read what you are about to post. You'd do your side of the debate a better deal if you did. You are like the guy who took me to trial for threatening to beat his a*s. He took the stand, and pretty much convinced the Judge and the Prosecutor that he need it done. I walked out without a conviction. Sometimes people should think twice before talking. Perhaps you should read twice before posting.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#216 Consumer Comment

Not one person's statement/s are 100% correct

AUTHOR: Shawn - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

I can't beleive I just wasted all this time reading all of your useless, blithering, nonthought-provoking OPINIONS. I haven't read such a B.S. filled page since I opened the warranty book on my car! Why don't you all face the fact (something there has been very little of on this comment page) that your opinions don't amount to a hill of beans inb the big scheme of things. Furthermore, if you would all do a little bit of research (no, that doesn't mean watch the news or ask your best freind's opinion----RESEARCH), you would relize that the opinions you are tap, tap, tapping into this "forum" are about 90% wrong! No idiot! I don't mean when you said you "feel" or "think"...everyone is entitled to feelings and thoughts of their own (but then every one has an a-hole to!), but i AM referring to your ohhh so insightful arguments of what you try to put across as fact! I am not talking to "them" you ignorant moron...this message is for you to so wipe that smirk off of your face and listen up.
A little insight to all of you, republican and democrat alike - WE ARE ALL AMERICANS!!!! Stop your arguing, whining, "my opinion is more correct than your opinion" attitudes and DO SOMETHING that will HELP ALL AMERICANS - SHUT UP! Don't you understand that as we outwardly express our discontent with one "group of American citizens or another, we weaken the very thread that holds us together as such a great nation? No, you don't have to agree with everything that our elected officials do and say, but stop trying to CREATE shortcomings in them. Nobody is perfect... I beleive that Clinton was a very good President in many ways, but a lousy schmuck in in others; John Kerry would have had his strong points had he been elected, but he also would have failed terribly in several areas of this countries needs; George W. Bush is no saint...he has made mistakes as our President and he will continue to do so until the next election, but he has also served us very well in alot of areas (if you don't want to agree with me then that's fine...keep your head up your a*s, at least that way nobody can hear your useless blabber).

If you truly do believe yourself to be a proud American, one who approaches questions and opinions with an open mind and an attitude of doing your best to find a solution that suits EVERYONE'S "best interest", then you should take heed of my advice....

STOP CALLING EACH OTHER NAMES AND TRYING TO WIN OVER OTHERS WITH INSULTS AND "LOW BLOWS". STOP REGURGITATING WHAT YOU HEARD FROM "A FREIND OF A FREIND", ON THE LOCAL NEWS, OR FROM (INSERT YOUR FAVORITE POLITICIAN'S NAME), AND TRYING TO PASS IT OFF AS A FACT THAT YOU KNOW TO BE TRUE WHEN THE TRUTH IS YOU ARE ACCEPTING IT AS FACT ONLY BECAUSE IT HELPS TO JUSTIFY YOUR OPINION OR DISQUALIFY THE OPINION OF SOMEONE YOU DISAGREE WITH! MAYBE IF YOU ALL DID A LITTLE RESEARCH AND DISCOVERED THE FACTS YOU COULD COME TOGETHER AND DISCUSS POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO OUR GREAT COUNTRY'S PROBLEMS RATHER THAN SHOVING HER FAILURE'S DOWN EACH OTHER'S THROATS WITH A BIG OL' HELPING OF BLAME. LET'S FACE IT...NO PROBLEMS GET SOLVED BY FOCUSING ON THE PROBLEM ITSELF, WE HAVE TO PULL OUR HEADS OUT OF OUR RESPECTIVE SAND PITS AND FOCUS ON SOLUTIONS. IF WE CAN DO THIS AS NEIGHBORS, BLOCKS, TOWNS, CITIES, ...A CIVILIZED SOCIETY, THEN MAYBE OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL TAKE NOTICE AND DO THE SAME! IT IS TIME WE ALL START FOCUSING ON SOLUTIONS, NO MATTER WHAT THE PROBLEM, IT WILL NOT BE SOLVED UNTIL WE STOP "POINTING", AND START TALKING.

I know this has been a little long winded, and for that I apologize. I only hope you don't disregard the suggestions within only for the amount of text required to put them down, I tend to ramble on when I get emotionally "charged" about a topic. I'll shut up now - May the creator whom I choose to call GOD Bless America.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#215 Consumer Suggestion

& to you John;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

John;

You really should read past posts, as these issues have already been responded to, from others, not only me. However I will address your post a little.

John, when "pray God" in history have terms on a cease fire with a Country been so stringent? I mean the worst scenerio in history so far (as far as attocities go), was Germany.

Did anybody put a "no fly zone" over Germany after the war? Can you give me a war, where the terms of a cease fire included such a zone? Sanctions comming out of the "ying yang" along with "ongoing inspections" which were so intrucive, it wasn't funny! All because Suddam attacked Kuwait after they had been warned "numerous times" to stop their "slant drilling" projects?

I mean come on! Isn't that kind of like using a "sledge hammer" to kill a fly? Also, just like I said to Robert, who cares about WMD's even if they were found? Does the USA have WMD's? What other Countries have WMD's? John, Anthrax can be made inside an apartment. I also would not think it would be hard to buy "Nuclear Waist", for a Country to use in a "dirty bomb".

John point #1 is that Saddam had no ties to Bin Laden. Point #2 is that no WMD's were found & Point #3 is that Suddam did not use WMD's against anyone in any war effort. Hell he did not even do anything to fight back against such rediculous terms of a cease fire, imposed on Iraq unfairly. The only WMD's he ever used were against the "rebel Kurds" who were trying to overthrow him. He did not even use the WMD's supplied to him by the USA for use in the Iran / Iraq war in that war! He used those on the Kurds already in his Country!

I don't care how you "spin it", World opinion is not on the USA's side on this issue, no more than it was during Vietnam. It was an illegal invasion, not UN sanctioned & it really is causeing more problems than it could possibly solve. There is very little chance you can set up a working Iraqi Government, backed by the USA that works, & definately not one that will end terrorism against it! In the meantime, it is just an endless "money pit" that also causes death to many innocent people. Never mind US soldiers lives.

Sheehan was just arrested for what? Sitting on a sidewalk? Isn't that a public place there John? Is Bush gonna now make it fair by arresting all the homeless? Or was it simply because she was voiceing her right to "free speach"? Are you willing to tear down your Constitution now to support Bush? What about Sheehan's 1st Amendmant rights? Think now John, think.

Finally John, there is enough evidence that Bush won both elections unfairly & I really doubt Kerry or Gore would have invaded Iraq. There will be more 911's because of this act of Bush, but the solution is not to "expand upon" doing things that made the terrorists mad in the first place. The issue to them is the US presence in the Middle East.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#214 Consumer Comment

James, you need to learn about International Law and what a CEASE-FIRE is

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 29, 2005

International LAw says flat out that a Cease-Fire is not the end of the war. If the party asking for the cease-fire violates the terms of the cease-fire, the hostilities are free to resume. That is the point. That is why we had every right to go back in. PERIOD! Please get an education.

Stop reading Red Chinese newspapers. Nobody here gives a rat's a*s about what the Red Chinese think about our government. I notice the Red Chinese are getting the clue and becoming market capitalists of a sort. After you work all day for the "state", you can work for yourself and earn some money to feed your family. At least they left Hong Kong alone. Try reading a Chinese newspaper from Taiwan, the Republic of China. I know, that paper won't fit your view of the world. Taiwan is friendly to America. That comes with being a free society, not a socialist one.

Every source you name is easily discounted. Try using a source here in America that isn't beholden to the Democratic Party. There are some. You may have to look, but you will find a few.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#213 Consumer Suggestion

Well I could forgive John;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Robert;

Ok, you can respond to a post that is a copy of a document just released by someone other than me if you wish. John should read back. Yet Robert you should know better.

I made 2 Posts to you Robert & then copied that study. Guess where I got it? From a Chineese newspaper! Whether you agree with how they conducted their study or who they are or not, the point is the same. The percentage of Americans that belive or don't believe is something that is a "pile of crap", is not the issue.

What is the issue is the pile of crap. Did you address the other posts I wrote to you Robert? No! Not one word. How about the end of the first one Robert, that said...

So even if the USA had every right to go into Iraq (which they didn't). Even if the USA has every good reason for staying there at such a great cost (which they don't). Even if the USA is sucessful in setting up a working Iraqi Government (which is doubtful). The USA is definately moving in the wrong direction if they are thinking about their health, future, economic well being, & safety if they continue to be concerned with "more oil" rather than less!

So Robert it is a bad idea to stay in Iraq & it is time to get out & to concentrate on fixing things here on our own Continent. It is your tax dollars that are paying towards your own destruction.

That is my point in a nut shell!

or the end of my second letter that said...

Somehow I don't see US invading there. Ever think why? Guess. Could it be that they "have no oil" & that the USA has quit fighting Communism for years?

What would the USA care less about if Suddam had WMD's Robert? It shouldn't matter since they already gave him some! The only "possible" reason for US interest in Iraq is oil.

Those are the ones I wanted you to respond to Robert, as I did not write the one that was a study & will be respected all over the World. Harvard stuff usually is.

However if you want to live in some "dream world" where you believe in Bill O-Really, then I leave you to bow to your God. I hope they send you a Fox mug, so you can save the pennies you have left, after you have supported "silly wars". Most people realise that War is bad mkay.

John might be saved however if he read up about 5 or more posts. You may have some "brain cells" left that have not been totally brainwashed by Fox.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#212 Consumer Comment

James, Do you put all your faith in Polls?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 28, 2005

James-

What percentage of the population was used in the study?

i can go out and get 100 people and ask them the same questions. I can ask another 100 people the exact same questions and i bet I will ger adversely different answers.

This survey is as good as the exit polss that said John kerry was going to be president.

First of all, if iraq had gotten rid of the WMD's whivh the inspection committes said they had, all they needed to do was provide documentation of what was done with them and this war may have never happened. If you have nothing to hide, why refuse to cooperate? All they had to do was let the inspectors in and show us what they did with the gases and other materials that are used in WMDs which they refused to do.

Just because they weren,t found doesn't mean they weren't there.

You want to talk about the press, what about the coverage of Cindy Sheehan. All you hear on most news networks is how she speaks for most families that have lost someone in the war. Yert many of them have come forward and said they support the president and the war. You won't hear that on CNN. Isn't that a misconception that they push because they refuse to address both sides?

I really don't think that someone who doesn't even live in the US has the right and is a jerk for blasting our country and its policy. Whether you agree with our leaders or not, they were elected and we should not undermine what they are trying to do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#211 Consumer Comment

That's the best one yet, James!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 28, 2005

PIPA is a who's-who of left wing sponsors and academics who claim to know what's-what. Never heard of these guys? There's a reason. At least Harvard's hobby is a little rag called the Lampoon, it's supposed to be funny, and it is. UM(University of Maryland) has PIPA, and it's supposed to be serious. I asked my buddies(libs and cons) up there, along with family members...not one has heard of this group. One would think that at least one out of 20 living in the DC Metropolitan Area, would have at least HEARD of this well reknowned group of thinkers.

They claim 94% of Americans want to pay more for everything if it will make the rest of the world happier(say Kyoto protocol). HOLY MOLY! They claim in all of there "studies" the exact opposite of what REAL Americans want. They get all of their answers from students at UM. For those who were not raised in Maryland(I was-18 years), this is the state where a Democrat Legislator wanted to make squirt guns illegal because they taught children to be "gun violent". This is as left-wing a place as you can imagine. It is an absolute horror house of stupidity on a grand scale when it comes to screwing the law abiding, and coddling the criminals, and the lazy. And the University uses these offspring of their Marxist parents as the sources for their "studies".

How many here want America to increase Foreign Aid? Hands please...I don't see any. Put your hand down James...Canadians don't count.This was a question for the Americans only. According to PIPA, Americans want to increase Foreign Aid, and especially to all the countries we don't like, too. Every one of their "studies" is some bedwetter's dream of a Utopian Socialist Society. I have yet to meet a single American who wants a PENNY of his tax money going overseas. Welfare? Not a one there either. PIPA says the majority of us love to provide for the lazy, and think we should give them more of our earnings.

They did do one pro-war study though. It involved our involvement in Bosnia. It got a big attaboy, while every other conflict got a frownie-face. Let's see, who was in office for Bosnia...that's right, the hero of Somalia(they gave tacit approval for the deaths of our "invaders" and subsequent withdrawl), Bill Clinton. His little war in Bosnia(we're still there) gets a good review, while the ones that actually accomplish something get bad ones. You are too much, James. Do you even think about these things before typing them?

You have got to stop using conspiracy nuts and liberal nonsense for your sources. My U-Boot info comes from a RELIABLE source...uboat.net. You'll have to become a member to get the info though. That will cost money, since the webmaster is not trying to pay for the bandwidth all by himself. Maybe he should get PIPA to do a study and show every American wants to get everything for free, then even James would be able to access the information for free. Liberals don't like borders, you know.

The reason Fox News has more viewers than any other source is simple. People are tired of getting "spin" on the news. Only Fox gives both sides of the issues. The others will have a constant barrage of drivel followed by a brief interlude of common sense. I noticed that when people get older and more experienced in life, they become less willing to have their earnings blown on stupid stuff.

Winston Churchill said it best. I'll paraphrase for you..."If you're young and not a liberal, you have no heart. If you're old and not a conservative, you have no brain". The Brits kicked him out of office right after Germany surrendered. That's gratitude for you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#210 Consumer Comment

Both parties are guilty of the same thing- stereotyping to the extreme

AUTHOR: Dan - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 28, 2005

This is getting ridiculous. Both parties are guilty of the same thing- stereotyping to the extreme. Democrats say that all republicans are redneck christian conservatives that are all rich. Republicans say the dems are liberal wine suckers who have no morals.

Truth is, both parties have their strengths and weaknesses. There was a time in this country when problems were resolved in a civil manner. People didn't throw child-like insults back and forth. They got together and met at a middle point on the issue at hand.

Have you nothing better to do than trash each other on a constant basis? Sure, we all have different opinions as to what is going on. That's the beauty of living in this country. But instead of talking about how stupid the other guys' opinions are, we should find the their strong points. Then we should find our opions' weak points. Get where this is going? Did Bush make a mistake? Did he lie? Yeah, hello. He is a politician. That's what they do. But Kerry would have done the same thing. Maybe not in the same way, but he would have done the same thing.

I honestly don't like either party. Alot of reps are pushing their religious views as a political platform. That is a serious no-no by constitutional standards. And the dems are getting to far to the left to bear with. They seem to want to bash everyone's views rather than come up with their own.

Look, I am not here insulting anyone. Trust me I don't need this crap right now. I am just suggesting that you stop for a second and look at the other side's point of view for a change. No one is telling you to change your beliefs. Just try it. You may learn something about yourself.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#209 Consumer Suggestion

For those that trust Bush & Fox News

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Robert;

You might want to take note of this:

We report, you get it wrong
By Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON - The more commercial television news you watch, the more wrong you are likely to be about key elements of the Iraq War and its aftermath, according to a major new study released in Washington on Thursday.

And the more you watch the Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News channel, in particular, the more likely it is that your perceptions about the war are wrong, adds the report by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

Based on several nationwide surveys it conducted with California-based Knowledge Networks since June, as well as the results of other polls, PIPA found that 48 percent of the public believe US troops found evidence of close pre-war links between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist group; 22 percent thought troops found weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq; and 25 percent believed that world public opinion favored Washington's going to war with Iraq. All three are misperceptions.

The report, Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War, also found that the more misperceptions held by the respondent, the more likely it was that s/he both supported the war and depended on commercial television for news about it.

The study is likely to stoke a growing public and professional debate over why mainstream news media - especially the broadcast media - were not more skeptical about the Bush administration's pre-war claims, particularly regarding Saddam Hussein's WMD stockpiles and ties with al-Qaeda.

"This is a dangerously revealing study," said Marvin Kalb, a former television correspondent and a senior fellow of the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

While Kalb said he had some reservations about the specificity of the questions directed at the respondents, he noted that, "People who have had a strong belief that there is an unholy alliance between politics and the press now have more evidence." Fox, in particular, has been accused of pursuing a chauvinistic agenda in its news coverage despite its motto, "We report, you decide".

Overall, according to PIPA, 60 percent of the people surveyed held at least one of the three misperceptions through September. Thirty percent of respondents had none of those misperceptions.

Surprisingly, the percentage of people holding the misperceptions rose slightly over the last three months. In July, for example, polls found that 45 percent of the public believed US forces had found "clear evidence in Iraq that Hussein was working closely with al-Qaeda". In September, 49 percent believed that.

Likewise, those who believed troops had found WMD in Iraq jumped from 21 percent in July to 24 percent in September. One in five respondents said they believed that Iraq had actually used chemical or biological weapons during the war.

In determining what factors could create the misperceptions, PIPA considered a number of variables in the data.

It found a high correlation between respondents with the most misperceptions and their support for the decision to go to war. Only 23 percent of those who held none of the three misperceptions supported the war, while 53 percent who held one misperception did so. Of those who believe that both WMDs and evidence of al-Qaeda ties have been found in Iraq and that world opinion backed the United States, a whopping 86 percent said they supported war.

More specifically, among those who believed that Washington had found clear evidence of close ties between Hussein and al-Qaeda, two-thirds held the view that going to war was the best thing to do. Only 29 percent felt that way among those who did not believe that such evidence had been found.

Another factor that correlated closely with misperceptions about the war was party affiliation, with Republicans substantially "more likely" to hold misperceptions than Democrats. But support for Bush himself as expressed by whether or not the respondent said s/he intended to vote for him in 2004 appeared to be an even more critical factor.

The average frequency of misperceptions among respondents who planned to vote for Bush was 45 percent, while among those who plan to vote for a hypothetical Democrat candidate, the frequency averaged only 17 percent.

Asked "Has the US found clear evidence Saddam Hussein was working closely with al-Qaeda"? 68 percent of Bush supporters replied affirmatively. By contrast, two of every three Democrat-backers said no.

But news sources also accounted for major differences in misperceptions, according to PIPA, which asked more than 3,300 respondents since May where they "tended to get most of [their] news''. Eighty percent identified broadcast media, while 19 percent cited print media.

Among those who said broadcast media, 30 percent said two or more networks; 18 percent, Fox News; 16 percent, CNN; 24 percent, the three big networks - NBC (14 percent), ABC (11 percent), CBS (9 percent); and three percent, the two public networks, National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).

For each of the three misperceptions, the study found enormous differences between the viewers of Fox, who held the most misperceptions, and NPR/PBS, who held the fewest by far.

Eighty percent of Fox viewers were found to hold at least one misperception, compared to 23 percent of NPR/PBS consumers. All the other media fell in between.

CBS ranked right behind Fox with a 71 percent score, while CNN and NBC tied as the best-performing commercial broadcast audience at 55 percent. Forty-seven percent of print media readers held at least one misperception.

As to the number of misconceptions held by their audiences, Fox far outscored all of its rivals. A whopping 45 percent of its viewers believed all three misperceptions, while the other commercial networks scored between 12 percent and 16 percent. Only nine percent of readers believed all three, while only four percent of the NPR/PBS audience did.

PIPA found that political affiliation and news source also compound one another. Thus, 78 percent of Bush supporters who watch Fox News said they thought the United States had found evidence of a direct link to al-Qaeda, while 50 percent of Bush supporters who rely on NPR/PBS thought so.

Conversely, 48 percent of Fox viewers who said they would support a Democrat believed that such evidence had been found. But none of the Democrat-backers who relied on NPR/PBS believed it.

The study also debunked the notion that misperceptions were due mainly to the lack of exposure to news.

Among Bush supporters, those who said they follow the news "very closely", were found more likely to hold misperceptions. Those Bush supporters, on the other hand, who say they follow the news "somewhat closely" or "not closely at all" held fewer misperceptions.

Conversely, those Democratic supporters who said they did not follow the news very closely were found to be twice as likely to hold misperceptions as those who said they did, according to PIPA.

So... take this for what it is worth

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#208 Consumer Suggestion

Oh Robert... about N. Korea;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 27, 2005

I forgot you mentioned N. Korea Robert;

You have never had weapons inspectors in N. Korea. You never did do in N. Korea what you did to Saddam. N. Korea is the same "tinderbox" as when you left it Canadians fought along side you on that one. Totally different scenerio! Also more dangerous than Iraq. At least we have trade with Korea for one. Two, they were close to, or do have Nuclear Weapons as you might have heard lately & third they just said that if any sanctions were declared, that would be a declaration of war!

Somehow I don't see US invading there. Ever think why? Guess. Could it be that they "have no oil" & that the USA has quit fighting Communism for years?

What would the USA care less about if Suddam had WMD's Robert? It shouldn't matter since they already gave him some! The only "possible" reason for US interest in Iraq is oil.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#207 Consumer Suggestion

For once Vera you make some points

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Vera;

First of all, before I begin, may I say that in a majority of my post's I may be talking about what one person said, or the other & even in "your case" I was not meaning to be personal. What I was doing was "generalizing" & talking about Americans in General. I will have to "watch that" when I respond to you in the future.

Now let's look at some of your points.

Meanwhile many Americans drive around in their new cars, live in their nice houses, eat what they wish, go shopping for the "newest style" & do not realise that people in the middle east do not live this way!

So because we do it, it's wrong? Is this what justifies the way they treat us?

A: What did they do to you Vera (& I am talking about Americans) before you stuck your nose in the middle east? They knew as little of you & your culture as you knew them. Yet no they don't have the nice houses & fancy cars & they generally cannot eat what they wish, as their natural resourses allow them only a "certain lifesyle" & as you may have noticed, we live "abundantly surrounded" by them. It isn't like North Americans are that much smarter than them, or have more abilities. We have no extra "arms or legs" either. We just are fortunate to have all of these things we are surrounded with. They have one thing. Oil.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

Well here's a helpful hint: stop providing places for terrorists to operate in comfort within your country, and tighten your border's security

A: Sorry to "blow your bubble" Vera, but the guys from 911 did not get into your County through Canada. It may be true that some of these terrorists are setting up shop here, as they are in your Country. I certainly would think there is more we could do to "beef up" security, & I don't think it is "our border" so much that is a major problem. I personally would like to see a "North American" border security system that would look after all 3 Countries, allowing more freedom of travel throughout the Continent as in Europe. However as far a security goes, Canada has more Police per capita than the US by far! We actually pay more for Police here than we pay for the entire Welfare System combined. That's without jails! Just Police Officers. Our security has tightened up so much since 911 that I personally cannot get my Birth Certificate until I find a "guarnatour", ie (someone who can swear they have known me for a few years) & hell I was born in Ontario! Without this Birth Certificate, I cannot get a Drivers Licence in any other Province. Since I have not lived in Ontario for almost 20 years, I know of no one who knows me long enough in Ontario who could do this for me. So, I guess I am stuck driving in Alberta until go through "hoops" in order to get ID for another Province. Now is your security that tight?

The fact is "Dear Patrick", that the USA has never really done anybody any real favors! They made money selling weapons

Sorta like SNC Lavalin, hunh? Another issue you fail to address.

A: A majority of weapons made in Canada are made in Quebec. They are sorta like their "own Country" inside of ours & we have limited regulations we can put on them as a whole. However Canada does not sell WMD's or big weapons of any kind. Even our Armed Forces gets these weapons from the States. Our entire Air Force is US made. We could make these weapons but we do not. Hell in Canada it is even illegal to have mace!

So you cannot understand their lifestyle! You cannot understand their religeous beliefs! You cannot understand what is important to them!

And you do? I find that hard to believe. You think all the educational systems here are Propaganda-based, if they don't agree with your scrutiny!

A: We have very large Muslim communities here & you might be amazed at the peacefulness of them. You will never see a Muslim begging on the street, or will rarely see them in jail or on the Welfare system. Very decent people who treat others with respect. I have never seen a Muslim divorce (not that it cannot happen) & I see a very "family oriented" culture. Americans have a different culture as well from Canadians. Americans for the most part are more patriotic & the schooling systems reinforce that patriotic attitude more. The Germans are very patriotic as well & you have seen what that can lead to. I personally do not think that "overall" being Patriotic, necessarily is a positive attribute. It makes you think you are superior to others, which for the most part, is simply untrue. The only thing making Americans superior are the natural resourses they are surrounded by.

These people don't know what "By the People, For the People" means. All they see is a "Dictator" forceing the populace of America into a war against them, even though he has not got the approval of the majority of US citizens.

They'll learn what By The People, For the People means, as they observe their new Democracy unfolding before them.

A: First of all you do not have a Democracy, but a Republic & that is what you wish to pass on to Iraq. Second, in Iraq there are 3 factions that "will not agree" & their differences are much larger than simply the differences between Republicans & Democrats. Their past law will not even allow their leaders to "shake hands" with a woman for instance, & they have many firm beliefs that rule their everyday lives. For 2000 years these people have fought with one another & they are not about to stop doing that because the USA wants them all to get in one room & solve their differences. You can try. I say it's futile. I could be wrong. I don't think it is possible that I am. However, what do you have to gain if you are sucessful? In Iraq I mean? What would that do for the average American today, or even tomorrow? What really is the point "other than oil"?

Now you made other points & if I addressed them all, this post would never end. Your quotes I mentioned on the Bible basically agree with what I said. Believe it or not, they might all say "King James Version", but they still differ from book to book on their exact wording.

I personally am Christian, but "anti Religeon", as I believe Jesus was as well. I don't think Jesus would approve of the occupation of Iraq & I doubt many Christians would disagree with that statement.

My point here is, as it has always been Vera that we have enough on "our plate" right here on this Continent. Canadians & Americans might "fight like dogs" sometimes, but we are actually "best friends" as I am sure you know. We are basically the same kind of people with different upbringing & laws. Canada is more Liberal, & I will not deny that. Each Country has it's strong points & weak ones.

Overall the USA is threatened more by terrorism than Canada. I can only point to one major reason why. We don't invade. Just like the reason why we have less gun deaths is that we have less guns. Just the "gun mentality" alone can make people as a whole more agressive.

If you are religeous, you should know that you will "reap what you sow" & it is "my opinion" that the USA is promoting terrorism with their actions Globally without good reason to do it.

Oh & Vera... Canadians don't want your dollar to shrink, as our economy gets much better if the Canadian Dollar is worth less & less than the US dollar. That is just our economy. Go figure.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#206 Consumer Comment

Okay Finnigan let's begin again...

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Okay Finniganlet's begin again. Here's a few (ha-ha) responses to your clever quips. The responses are ordered, according to the post they are excerpted from, or referenced.

Meanwhile many Americans drive around in their new cars, live in their nice houses, eat what they wish, go shopping for the "newest style" & do not realise that people in the middle east do not live this way!

So because we do it, it's wrong? Is this what justifies the way they treat us? You have yet to even respond with your perception on this issue. I'm willing to bet that their monstrous behavior wouldn't be okay if they behaved like this in Canada. Maybe then, they wouldn't have their strongest foothold within Canada's borders. If you doubt, check with the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service. They've been aware and on alert since the early 1990s that Canada was being used by Jihadi Terrorists as a financial and logistical base for international terrorists seeking to attack the United States.

And in response to that whole it's none of your business what I do simpering, I offer the same in your opinion of how we Americans drive around in nice cars and live in nice homes.blah-blah-blah. And it's inappropriate that you seem to find it permissible to single people out and attack them and their sources, then piss and groan when it's done to you.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

Well here's a helpful hint: stop providing places for terrorists to operate in comfort within your country, and tighten your border's security. That oughtta help reduce the possibility that a suitcase nuke could slip in past your bordersto hear you tell it, you'd think your Canadian country is above reproachand surely, with perfect security, there should never be such a problem. I've said it before; the one who appeases the crocodile is merely the last to get eaten. People have been dying as a result of terrorism long before either of the Bush boys were in office.

And why is it you haven't once heard me sayeven though I have used it as a rebuttal TITLE in one post---that I agreed one-hundred percent with our President's actions? Because I HAVEN'T SAID IT! Show me where (and like before, using it in this context does NOT count!).

The fact is "Dear Patrick", that the USA has never really done anybody any real favors! They made money selling weapons

Sorta like SNC Lavalin, hunh? Another issue you fail to address. Let me guessthat's spin and bullshit, right? Whatever. I got that from a Vancouver newspaper regarding your Prime Minister's cuddling up to the war in the Middle East. Hunh. Condescension. How diplomatic.

The point is that the USA has no business in Iraq or even Afganistan!

I'd be inclined to express the same regarding you and your apparent need for attention by posting here and attacking other people, me included. So you've spoken your point. I'm sick of your windand I'll bet I'm not alone.

So I bring up some of those "little known points" that you do not get taught in American Propaganda School

Nah, we're not versed in the Canadian propaganda system of proselytization. Keep your opinion to yourself. How the hell do you even know what is taught in schools here in the States? You don't.

So you cannot understand their lifestyle! You cannot understand their religeous beliefs! You cannot understand what is important to them!

And you do? I find that hard to believe. You think all the educational systems here are Propaganda-based, if they don't agree with your scrutiny! And I take exception to the fact that you think you know how I feel regarding the Islamic Faith. You're clueless as to what I do and don't know, and I don't know the complete extent of your capacities. I can say this much; you've got more than thirty-six posts to my ten, including this one, so you ARE more verbose than I, even though you don't appear to be as well written.

You "eat up" Bush spin, on how many people he has killed, but how many has the USA killed? How many in Vietnam

You can't even compare this to Vietnam, in reality. The differences are huge, and as far contrasted as eggs and baseballs.

The Iraqi insurgency has no great Philosophy by which to mobilize the whole of its people; the Viet Cong were communists. Communism was a fanciful concept of a Utopian equality among man and the philosophy was embraced by a substantial following on nearly every continent.
The Iraqi insurgency is primarily a Sunni Arab tribal affair, and Shiites and Sunnis are not converting one another at all. (As far as I know, they haven't in a very, very long time, either!)

Whereas the Commies had never ruled South Vietnam, the Baathist have indeed ruled in Iraq. The closest thing to h*o Chi Minh is the Shiite Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistaniand he's on the side of Democracy.

But moving on

These people don't know what "By the People, For the People" means. All they see is a "Dictator" forceing the populace of America into a war against them, even though he has not got the approval of the majority of US citizens.

They'll learn what By The People, For the People means, as they observe their new Democracy unfolding before them.

And for the umpteenth time, our Military is VOLUNTARY. There's not been a draft in years.

Also, the limited population of the Media, Movie-Stars and fat pieces of pigshit that make movies does not a majority make. Just because your opinion is more frequent, more public, and better paid doesn't make you the Voice Of The People. How many of these noble protestors are actually donating their time to something more constructive than Vote Or Die, Kentucky Fried Cruelty, and other public whine-fests? (Refer to my post regarding Sean Penn. What good did that do for the people of Louisiana?)

We have many "loosers" responding to this thread. Never mind Vera! She is already lost! Any sane human being can see that, except for "Patrick" who is proud of the Iraqis he killed! (I can pick out a Cnadian Loser.)
And don't forget:
Still... you have to keep yourself on a "higher plane" if you wish to dispute these idiots!
Then, of course, there's:
Don't make it long, as they will pick up on sentances to degrade you! Don't make it too outrageous, as they will only look at you as a fool!

Talk about the blind leading the blind.

(And Jim of Tupper hasn't posted a SINGLE source for his info, yet you readily lick it up, praising it as factual.)

And it wasn't me who introduced the slant drilling argument; it was you.
A-One...
Kuait was "slant drilling" into Iraq. That was illegal!
And A-Two...
Patrick... Kuwait was "slant drilling" stealing Iraqi oil! Did you miss that? It was illegal!
And A-Three
You have nothing real to say. Something about "slant drilling" which I am sure no one can understand. Rest assured; none of us understood when you threw it in earlier, until I found another post about it by someone else, named Chris.

Here you bring up the past, not thinking about what you can do to help the problem NOW!, paraphrasing you. And the second time, Vietnam is thrown into our faces. It might help if you shout QUAGMIRE! next time.

Were any of them thrown out of helicopters as in Vietnam? Oh what a good war that was! Oops... I forgot, it was not a war! Just something the USA stuck their nose in... "I forget"... and I mean nobody really cares about the Americans who died fighting such a stupid war or (non war), now do they?

So why do you care about the people dying now? Is it because you're worried that a suitcase bomb might harm your personal little corner of the world, or is it that you like your cozy little job as armchair General/dot-com Ambassador of Badwill? Did the Anglophones care about the Francophones as they stuffed whole villages of people into barns and burned them alive?

I have mentioned; my Brother-In-Law served a long term in Namand he has his crippled, mangled body to show for it. I love that man. I care about him, even if you don't. And even though I don't like your cavalier attitude regarding those that servedthen or nowI understand that you possess the right to voice it. Just as I have the right to contest you shoving your snout into American affairs and spouting the way you do.

Now, for Religion According To James (Let's remember, shall we, that while I have mentioned God in my posts, quoting statemnts made by the founding fathers of my country, it is you who brought the Bible to the table here.)

None of them seem to listen to Jesus words when he said "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged"!

And apparently, you missed that whole Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. thing, right?

What really bugs me is that they really don't follow what that good book says. Mathew 6 is the preface to the "Lords Prayer" & Jesus tells them how to pray. He told them to pray in a closet'.

Actually, the NIV says, in Matthew 6;6 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. Incidentally, it's not a Preface; Matthew 6 is a Chapter in the Bible.

That doesn't mean all aspects of religion should be sequestered, it means that you need to have a PERSONAL-level relationship with God, as well as a FELLOWSHIP relationship (church and church-related activities) outside of the home. Beyond that, your prayer isn't meant to be excessive, loud, and public, as those who do so are not made spectacles of, but that they appear pious. The recognition they receive for public prayer is their reward, rather than a Heavenly reward.
Of course, let's not forget to bring up Revelations 22; 18 and 22; 19:
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

On the issue of Separation of Church and State, to the surprise of the majority
of Americans, the phrase separation between church and state is not contained
in the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution or any amendment to it, or any other official document upon which our nation and government was founded. The belief that our governing documents mandate a wall of separation between church and state and that our founding fathers sought to separate Christian influence from our government is a myththe myth that changed America. From where, then, did this myth originate?
President Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase wall of separation between church and state in a personal letter to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut, dated January 1, 1802. The Danbury Baptist Association was concerned that a state denomination, similar to the Church of England, might be
adopted in Connecticut. They did not want the government establishing a single denomination (Episcopalians, Congregationalist, Anglicans, etc.) as a state religion. Jefferson's letter was written to assure the Danbury Baptist Association that the First Amendment prohibits the government from controlling or interfering with the decisions and affairs of the churches of America. To communicate his point, he used the metaphor a wall of separation between church and state. Jefferson referred to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment that states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Understand that it's Freedom OF Religion, not Freedom From Religion.

To become American they are forced to learn English. Should they need to pick a Church as well?
People who come into this country are taught English because that is the primary Language in this country. They are not forced to speak only English; otherwise, America wouldn't be such a multicultural nation. However, when people come to our country from other countries to LIVE on our soil or get their free education, they are told they must renounce allegiance to their other country's edict and sovereignity to become an American Citizen legally. This is not so much a form of proselytizing, as it is meant to keep the lines of loyalty clear. If they don't want to renounce allegiance, they can return to their home country with no ill will from us. If they just want a little college time, or to work with other members of their American-Side Families, they can get Visas. So you see, we are not the Conform Or Perish country you think we are.

The "lords prayer" is being taken out of schools & eventually no one will have to proclaim their beliefs to anyone in society...
Worse than taking the Lord's name in vain, is the blasphemy of treating it with contempt on a public venue. So which is it, James? You quote Matthew 6 out of one side of your mouth, and then with the other side, you praise the elimination of the concept God in your schools and public proclamation. Circle-Talk.

The one thing I have always respected about Americans is how kind they can be to "one another". Pitching in & helping when the "chips are down", just as you can see them doing in the aftermath of Katrina. People opening up their homes & wallets to help these people hit so badly. People helping from every corner of the Country! I really do like seeing that.
So glad you approve. See? We aren't all monsters. And I don't think Canada is populated with stuck-up Frenchies and Dog-sledding Canucks.

As I have stated repeatedly before, though, I have presented information from credible sources. But it seems you just want to pick out the more negative aspects of my commentary and dwell exclusively on them. In each of my responses to you, yes, I was insulting. But it's you who insists that just because the info I present doesn't agree with yours, it's all nonsense, my education is worthless, I'm a liar, and so forth. You've also been pretty insulting to other people as well as myself. As far as any other evidence, if you look at my other posts that are 100% bashing with no evidence given, you'll see that I have provided excerpts from your own posts as to what issues you might have with me, personally. What books are you getting your political info from? Perhaps I might read them and better understand your views on things. What are your News sources? And why don't you use the whole story?

As you've pointed out It's obvious that you hate [Clinton]---you can say that in two sentences.
As you could have stated, regarding Bush. But you, too, have covered this board with your endless banter (Some thirty-six rebuttals, roughlythis one here is only my tenth. Once again.).

Clearly, as I have (again!) stated previously, I've given you opportunity to leave me be; I will NOT budge in my posture, and I'm sure you feel likewise. I am prepared to accept this fact, but you seem to find it necessary to invite my reply by attacking my character or my sources. You don't seem to like it when I do it back to you, though, I've noticed.

So just like you think your pathetic little dot-com rip-off company, Great Cars And Trucks is a fine, upright and splendid company, I happen to think that my President, while certainly not perfect, was the better choice between Kerry and the other candidates, and that he is doing the best he can with what he has. I DO NOT expect everyone to feel the same. I AM NOT a war-mongering, Bible-thumping homophobe who has a Nuke em all, let God sort em out! mindfix.

And I AM OKAY with the fact that you don't agree, Robert from Texas doesn't agree completely, and that B. doesn't agree with me completely.

Thing is, Robert and B. seem to be the only ones among those mentioned that seems to comprehend that. That difference is that the three Americans can get along and play nice. You come at me with your nasty invective, and expect me to sit in silent awe (or passive submission) of what you try to schlep off as your vast and diverse resources of knowledge and wisdom.

Well Honey, that just ain't gonna happen.

Vera will you sleep with him if he finds proof? Come on... one for the gipper! Or for the thread. Think of that Robert! Vera too!

How is this a Joke? How tasteless.
Face it. You got ticked off and attacked again, because I didn't agree with your view, or just lie down and accept your doctrine. Here in America, a joke like that can cost a person their jobor at least, get them investigated (unless you're the President, lmao!). And just so you know, my return-fire wasn't just me joking.

When the USA has a recession, Canada does too & so again it does concern me.
Why? Will it dent the number of refunds on bad ads your company withholds? Or will it hurt Canada's gambling and tourist trades? The prescription drug and illegal drug trades? You yourself bugled that the US dollar is shrinking. Apparently, it's not a real loss to you, is it?

So yes, let's stick to the subject; you quit flaming me (that includes your cute little joke about the sexual interests of strangers) and calling Patrick and Robert of Florida morons (and lord knows what else), and just focus on the issues. Apparently, you can't agree to disagree and leave it at that without the petty insults, either. Another case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Most sincerely,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#205 Consumer Comment

Right! Liberalism IS a Mental Disorder.

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

To Robert in Jacksonville, Florida. AMEN! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Michael Savage is right: Liberalism IS a Mental Disorder.
Quite frankly, the only rip off here is the person who was allowed access to a computer to make the rediculous original post.

Michael - West Jordan, Utah

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#204 Consumer Suggestion

your tax dollars that are paying towards your own destruction.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Robert

Buddy I was watching the News as Katrina came in;

The Mayor did ask for help more than once! He argued with the Govenor, he even went on radio & really flipped out. The day after Katrina the Military said they were all prepared, but had not had the order yet! Bush was in charge of the head of FEMA & he admitted they dropped the ball. The head of FEMA resigned, as he had "no idea" what he was doing! Where do you get your info? This is general information in all circles.

Now let's look at this Iraq thing:

>>>>>>>>>>>Before
What right did the UN have for passing resolutions on Iraq? What did Suddam do that was wrong? Kuwait was "slant drilling" & it was agreed upon by a majority of the UN that the slant drilling was wrong. He did threaten first. He did ask for US opinion before he went into Kuwait. He had every right! Why is it then he must commit to UN resolutions? Is that mostly because the USA controls the UN? Because he surrendered? He had no choice! Why was the USA attacking Iraq in the first place? The UN did not order the USA in. Even if they suggested it, it was certainly not a fair vote. Ok let's get past that. Let's say the US had a right to kick Suddam out of Kuwait & Suddam returned to his soil. He surrendered & allowed inspections for what reason? He was out of Kuwait wasn't he?

Yet still he complied. The only places he would not allow inspectors into were his Palaces. Did they find anything in them when they invaded? No! Suddam knew his biggest foe could be the US. That is why he asked before he went in.

Now lets say "hypathetically" the US had a problem with Mexico where they were supplying terrorists coming into the USA with weapons from warehouses located on their border with the USA. The USA puts troops on Mexico's borders & demands Mexico come to terms. Mexico ignores the USA. So the USA asks the UN if they can invade Mexico.

Now if the UN said & I quote "The UN has "no opinion" on your border disputes with Mexico", would that be giving the USA the thumbs up on going into Mexico?

So what if they did & the UN then screamed "NO!!! Get out of Mexico!"? However the USA had already mobilized & were into the process of destroying the warehouses containing the weapons Mexico was suppying to terrorists. Would the USA stop? I don't think so! Not until the warehouses are destroyed! So as the USA blows up these warehouses & begins to retreat, the UN places forces in Mexico & kicks their a*s as they withdraw! The USA withdraws from Mexico, calls for a cease fire & agrees to terms.

Would you now agree the USA should have a "no fly zone" over their country? Should UN inspectors be able to constantly search Bush's ranch? Should the UN have open rights to the White House?

The only difference in these 2 senerios is that in one situation Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil, (Their life blood, as that is all they have to live for) & in the other situation Mexico was threatening USA on much the same in importance.

>>>>>>>>>>>>Now
Now let's take away this whole situation Robert & just look at what the USA is thinking they are accomplishing now by continueing to occupy Iraq. Oh they are wanted there I assure you, just as South Vietnam would still like the USA there today.

Will it help matters? What happens when the US leaves? Do you think terrorism will end? What good did it accomplish? Will there be less terrorism & less deaths in Iraq after the US leaves compared with the amount of the same before the US invaded?

>>>>>>>>>>The Future
Only one difference Robert. The bill! The cost! Monitarily & in human life. At what date do you think the USA will no longer have to support this Government they set up in Iraq? Is it even possible that a Government forced to rule in Iraq by the United States will even work? These are questions that can either be answered in the negative or cannot be answered at all!

However the cost needs to be answered to! Can the USA afford this? It's your taxes you pay for it. It's your jobs you are loosing in the meantime. Its a question "you" need to address.

Think about the cost of the Hurricanes of this year before you answer. Think if you believe this weather situation is going to get better in the future, or worse? If you think it is going to get worse, what is causing it? Or is that too deep for you?

All the scientists have been warning of this for years! Hell Bill Nye the Science Guy was just on Larry King tonight talking about it. The reason Robert is "Global Warming" caused by your dependance on.... ok.... I will give ya 3 guesses.... & the first two don't count.... caused by what Robert?

Your dependancy on Oil! What does Iraq have that you want? Wheat Fields maybe? Lot's of cattle? Sand to make glass? Oil Robert, Oil!

So somebody here is "cutting off their nose" to spite their face! Someone is not thinking here! Someone is not thinking of the cost involved! Someone is not thinking of the benifits compared to the costs. Hell Robert, what are the benifits at all? Gimme one!

>>>>>>>>>>What Can be Done
So even if the USA had every right to go into Iraq (which they didn't). Even if the USA has every good reason for staying there at such a great cost (which they don't). Even if the USA is sucessful in setting up a working Iraqi Government (which is doubtful). The USA is definately moving in the wrong direction if they are thinking about their health, future, economic well being, & safety if they continue to be concerned with "more oil" rather than less!

So Robert it is a bad idea to stay in Iraq & it is time to get out & to concentrate on fixing things here on our own Continent. It is your tax dollars that are paying towards your own destruction.

That is my point in a nut shell!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#203 Consumer Comment

James, you haven't proved anything...

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Except that Canada has a worse education system than our own, and you don't know when you are beaten.

Posting fraudulent information does not mean you have made your point. Everything you posted was immediately flamed as false by everyone, except your counterpart in Tupper Lake. That's the guy you want on your side, h*o boy! I'll tell you what, you give the sources for your fantasies, and I'll give you the sources for the correct information. I already did that for the WMD thing. You just chose to not like the sources because they are not leftwing rags, except maybe USA Today.

Moving on. The original rant here was that the US was engaged in a war for oil. That is false. If it were true, we'd be swimming in it now.

We had every right to go back into Iraq. Saddam Hussein violated EVERY condition of the Cease-Fire that ended the first Gulf War in 1991. The mere fact that he violated even ONE of the conditions, is enough to go back in. He violated ALL of them. A Cease-Fire is NOT a surrender, and it is NOT the end of hostilities. It is the end of the wholesale destruction of the country on the losing end, provided that country obeys the terms of the Cease-Fire.

We have a Cease-Fire with the North Korean Government. This dates back to 1953. They have never been in violation of the Cease-Fire in 52 years. Hussein couldn't last one year without a violation. By all rights, if Kim Jong Il gets stupid and does something that DOES violate the Cease-Fire, we and the South Koreans are allowed by international law, the same law that allowed us to go back into Iraq, to go back into the North and stomp that regime.

The ONE LINE about WMD's(out of thousands in the resolution voted on unanimously by the US Senate and passed with a great majority by the United Nations FOURTEEN times), is meaningless. International Law allowed us to go in for ANY violation, without anyone's consent, period!

The stuff has been found. Just because the liberal wings of our media giants won't report it, does not mean it was not there. The Iraqi government says it was there, as did all of their scientists, and the truckloads of the stuff that was taken, speaks for itself. The liberal wing of the American media, and that includes just about everything except FoxNews, will not put anything out that will make Bush look good. They even tried to blame Bush for the Katrina snafu.

That was a LOCAL and STATE failure, not a Federal one. The Governor waited 5 days before she asked the Feds for assistance. During that 5 days, ALL of the damage was done. The Feds had their problems too, but it started at the Local levels. I still haven't heard anyone from NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, etc say word one about Mayor Nagin or Governor Blanco's part in it. Fox News did though.

Maybe that's why you haven't heard anything about the truth.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#202 Consumer Suggestion

I personally am Conservative & if I lived in the States I would most likely be Republican. However I could not back George Bush! He has been ripping off the American people since his first election

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Greg;

You might have noticed for the "most part" that I keep on trying to bring the subject back to the "issue at hand". However people like "Robert" keep nit picking on issues that have no revelance on the case.

I have to agree with you on the "Regan point" you made. I personally am Conservative & if I lived in the States I would most likely be Republican.

However I could not back George Bush! He has been ripping off the American people since his "first election" that in my opinion he did not win! The vote counting in Ohio on his second election are also still in dispute. Meanwhile he has "buddies" who have no qualifications for their jobs running things that directly affect the security of the USA inside of it's own borders.

Moore made 2 documentries on the issue. One in bowling for Columbine & the last one dealing directly with these issues we are discussing right now. Tell me another President that has had such documentries made about "his administration" during his administration! Not one! What gets me is that quite a few people get the idea that Moore is Canadian, simply because he makes comparisons to Canada that make sense! Moore is American! One killing with guns in the last 5 years just over the border from Detroit... your gun Capital & next to Washington, your death from gun capital! Then you have Robert in the face of this proclaiming on how much safer the USA is with all it's guns.

If guns make you safer, then the USA should be the safest Country on earth, as they have more guns per capita than anywhere else in the World, includeing terrorist supporting Countries! However it isn't. His last movie makes it clear about Haliberton. How your Vice President is the past CEO of the Corperation & supports it still, by giving large contracts to it. Iraq & Katrina are only 2 examples of the Bush Regime "Pork for Pals" rip off of Americans!

The Iraq thing is an "endless money pit" & only makes sense to idiots who don't know what they are talking about. All from Bush & something that you will be still paying for decades after the end of his Presidentry! No for sure Greg you do not have to be "Anti Republican" to be "Anti Bush".

It clearly is also not a situation where you could point at the fact that Bush won his elections "fair & square" either! It's a definate "rip off" of Americans & the only people that can fix it, are Americans!

This is why I say again, as I have said before, if you can see the points in the "Anti Bush" posts written here & you can produce nothing to dispute them, it is "your duty" as an American to call, write & badger anyone who represents you in your town, city or State to complain. It is more of your duty as an American to do something about this lunacy, than it is even to shelter fellow Americans hurt so badly by the Hurricanes.

You don't have to wait for Fox News to report on it, before you question the "root cause" of the Hurricanes to be the "Global Warming" caused by the thirst for oil your President viemently promotes with his "forced presence" in Iraq of "YOUR TROOPS"!

You are being "ripped off" on truth, money, & lives of your people all because of the policies of G.W. Bush & his stupid dreams & goals that make no sense. Definately the "stupidest President" the USA has ever had!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#201 Consumer Comment

Original Topic Lost in the FLAMES

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Somewhere this has turned into a bash James from Canada, dispute WW2 incidents and a bunch of other nonsense that is hard to keep track of.

It's just been reported that over 80% of the contracts to clean up or rebuild after Katrina are no-bid contracts, a Haliburton offshoot got a big contract as well as other companies who, no doubt, "Pay to Play".

Bush has made his number one hatchet man, Karl Rove, in charge of Gulf Coast rebuilding. Forget the fact that Rove has limited (if any) experience at such a task, what about the fact that he is a major figure being investigated in leaking the identity of a CIA agent? Where's the shame in this administration? Forget the the fact that they are Republicans, I felt that Reagan was a great leader and got the feeling he was a downright decent person and he was a Republican. I don't get that with these guys in office. How can you defend a sociopath, Republican or Democrat?

Frist is being investigated by the SEC over his stock sale, Delay is under fire, these guys are all CROOKS and they are robbing this country blind. If you are not in that ONE PERCENT who have greatly benefitted under this administration, how can you possibly defend these people?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#200 Consumer Suggestion

And to Vera;

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Vera;

As usual, all you can do is insult. You have nothing real to say. Something about "slant drilling" which I am sure no one can understand. Did you never watch the news back in the 90's Vera? It never was a secret that Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq & that is why he invaded. It also was "no secret" that Suddam called for US opinion before he did invade. He merely did what he "planned on doing" from the beginning, which was to set the Kuwait oil fields on fire & he did that & left. He would have left whether the USA came in to drive him out or not!

That is the only thing you speak to, as I said nobody could understand it anyway, the rest of it is just personal attacks which really are silly.

For your information I did not make 5 posts back to back. I responded to things said, yet this rip off report did not post them. I made a couple in the morning, one or two in the afternoon & finally a last one at the end of the night. The next morning "they posted" them all in sucession. I have no control over the rip off report or how often they post things.

The amount of free time I have is "none of your business" & I so happen to think that this is an important subject. I would like to see things change & unlike many people who do not stand up for what they believe in, I do!

If you cannot read in B's post where he was talking about installing a President in Canada on a "hypothetical situation", then I leave you to your ignorance on the subject. However I am not mistaken that "most Americans" do not even know what really lies outside of their borders & have "no idea" of Iraq!

When I make a joke about Robert posting proof on WMD's & say that if he did it, lot's of women would love him & want to sleep with him, hey maybe even Vera, you & B wish to take it out of context, even though you know quite well it was a joke.

Also something that I could kid with almost anyone during a conversation, without them taking it the wrong way. However "that is your point" isn't it? To find things to insult about. Insult personally! So of course you jumped on it! I really don't care.

Finally, again I will attempt to explain to you that if a Nuclear Bomb goes off on this Continent, it does concern me. When the USA has a recession, Canada does too & so again it does concern me. When "Global Warming" starts radically affecting this Continent, it also concerns me! So since the "source of these problems" lie with the American people, I am also in the proper venue to stand up for what I believe in.

What you do for a living, what Robert does, or B, or Patrick or even myself, is no ones business but theirs! How much money I make, where I live & also how much spare time I have & what I wish to do with it is "None of your d**n Business"!

Now in the future, if you have a point to make, please make it. I might not agree & might debate it. However I would appreciate it if you kept your personal insults to yourself.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#199 Consumer Suggestion

Robert I posted proof of what is true

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

Robert;

I don't care if it was in the St. Lawerence, Lake Ontario, or it was in Lake of the Woods! The only point is that n**i Subs were destroying Canadian vessels inside of our Continental waters while the USA was selling all kinds of things to n**i Germany. That's it! Prooved it by posting it.

If you need to learn to cut & paste, its simple. Left click & highlight what you want to copy, click edit at the top of your toolbar, select copy... then begin a letter on this thread & left click again, select paste & it will show up on your letter.

Now sorry but we have moved on past U Boats. B went to the site you claimed showed proof & did not find any proof of WMD's in Iraq. You should know that because George Bush has personally admitted it! If you are not happy with his take on it, then I suggest you show us all where he is wrong. He got what I got & both of us are in agreement that no WMD's were found in Iraq from "your evidence".

No one believes you on this thread at all. That means either you can produce proof or drop the subject. As I said, it really would not matter & still would give the USA no reason to invade Iraq if they found WMD's which they didn't. The cost to the US is too high & futile. Terrorism will only increase with US presence in the region "even it" they set up a Government & leave.

That's it Robert. The USA has not used proper morals in dealing with any Government they have supported, even n**i Germany. That is the point! There is nothing to disprove. The facts are there for you to read. That is the point & I am entirely correct, & agreed with by everyone on this thread except you who have not shown any proof.

I can't go any further than that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#198 Consumer Comment

George W. Bush has always liked killing!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 26, 2005

George W. Bush as Governor of The State of Texas, Gee(oil State) was the politician to kill the most people facing the death penalty in the United States history. George seems to love killing people, death row inmates in his state, his own soldiers, and of course anyone like the Iraquis! Bush is a fake a*s President with ONE thing in mind! MONEY, Cha, Ching!!!! I bet MOST of you Bush supporters would see things different if you were from poor family and your children were trying to get an education by joing the National Guard. What the hell is the National Guard doing there anyway??? They are supposed to be part-time soldiers, and protect the homeland. Why not send the regular services to war alone?? Is Bush trying to get soldiers killed for population control???? IMPEACH THAT SON OF A b***h! HE deserves it! Clinton only lied about a bj, his wife has moved on why not us. Republicans will do anything to keep their party ahead, and keep their RICH Corporations and Banks in power with NO checks and balances! Example-Outrageous gas prices, which I heard they are raising the gas prices up to $5.00 per gallon and they are OF COURSE blaming hurricane Katrina and the latest hurricane. I don't buy this! Prices of gas were way up before either hurricanes!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#197 Consumer Comment

Five posts in succession! A personal best for James!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 25, 2005

Are you feeling your warm-fuzzies? I'll bet your folks and that sorry little dot-com of yours are tickled delerious!

Goody for you! Now you're talking to yourself. Hey, maybe James of Tupper Lake will give you some nice head-nods, and say "yeah-yeah-yeah!" for you. You need a yes-man.

Yet still, your "proof" amounts to little more than a hill of beans. It's all the same with you...carefully culled, cut and pasted bits of not only flawed information, but excerpts from other posts on similar subjects submitted by other people. In case our reading populace has any wonder on this, notice that Jimmy-poo inserts that slant-drilling is going on illegally, using information culled from another "Anti-Bush/Anti-War" post, by a young fellow named Chris. (Type in "George Bush" and look for the post about slant-drilling...you'll see an eerie similarity. Man, can't even do his own homework.)

See, not all of James' sources are that far away...and as long as they're Anti-Bush, they're above question, as they agree with James' occluded view of the United States.

Case in point, "B.", you even mentioned Canada's Prime Minister BY NAME, as have I, and this f**ktard sees fit to see ALL of America as being ignorant. And still, he accuses those of us who respond counter to his opinion of having wet mush for brains.

As to my "sleeping with other posters, for the Gipper!", well, you should stick to pimping your own Mother....I hear every dime helps, Darling.
Perhaps you're upset because Big Jaques didn't leave the pocket change on the nightstand for you.

I can tell you're frustrated, Pooky. You're questioning the virtue of a stranger, hoping to hurt some feelings. But you can't hurt my feelings any more than you can change my stance. You have to understand; in order for me to get hurt feelings on the issue, I'd have to respect you as a person. Your error is in assuming I care, in addition to your bad information.

I too, am getting terribly bored with this thread; pretty soon, we'll come back in a month and see fifty posts from Alberta, Canada...all arguing with each other. ROFLMAO

Seems like James gets off on hearing (or reading) his own blather.

You know, there is a certain degree of savoir-faire involved in calling a woman a w***e but letting her know you respect her other qualities as well, and frankly, pal, I think you sat on your tact.

Thank you, "B."--that's very genteel of you. Perhaps you should give James a lesson or two in urbanity. Lord knows, he could use it.

In the meantime, I'm sure James witll continue to tastelessley impugn our info, reciting the same hash of s**t repetitively. He's not the only one who can say "your info is spin!"

Outside of that, James, why don't you put your opinion back where it came from...? Yo might have a clue as to why you've got all this time to spout your oral farts here on ROR. I'm sure that there's plenty of hot gas to run:
"...Every home

Every Fridge

Every Stove

Every Car

Every Air Conditioning unit

Every Generator

in the USA & Canada combined..."

Careful, the big bad monster George Bush might hear you!

After all, we know you wouldn't have the balls to say your s**t from anywhere but a keyboard. Like I said: "Check the back of the sack...d'you see 'Microsoft' printed there? It's only a matter of taking your next gulp of air for you to find out."

Now go back to your shady little dot-com business, and keep your mouth out of affairs that you claim Canada isn't a party to. Ya mooncalf.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#196 Consumer Comment

I'll try this again - Every single point you try to make gets easier to disprove

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 25, 2005

James, I have already told you where to look for the proof. You've even addressed it by claiming the artillery shells were to be used for pudding delivery. I don't cut and paste(don't know how, don't care). My library is in my house in NC, not here in FL. I am not going to ask my wife to do research for you James. You claim you do it, yet all of your MISinformation is so poorly construed, it is easy to prove false.

So far, EVERY single "fact" you claim has been flamed. When you get dogpiled on the issues, you admit you MAY be mistaken. The word is WRONG, James. You attempt to still take a victory out of defeat. You'd make a fine Democrat. They don't know how to concede defeat either. "We may have lost all 3 branches of Federal Government and the majority of State and Local governments, but we got more votes than any other LOSERS ever did". This is the mindset of the Dems. So sad.

You are amazing.

I found a "Battle of Bowmanville" that may be of interest to you. It was another scheme of Otto Kretschmer in the POW Camp. The same Kretschmer who organized the escape plan that you though took place in Lake Ontario, but actually took place in the Gulf of St Lawrence at Chaleur Bay. It involved a 2 day(10-12 October, 1942) skirmish between the guards and the prisoners over the use of shackles. The Canadian officers made sure the guards had no live ammo and the fighting ensued. I'll cut to the chase for you. The guards won, but there were no more shackles used on the POW's afterward.

Could this be your big battle? It, at least, has the honor of taking place near Lake Ontario, and by U-Boot captives.

As for "how did the supplies make it to the Atlantic" or something to that effect, easy. "LAKERS" are a shallow draft vessel. Do you think the boats made for the Mississippi would fare very well in the ocean? No. This was the reason the river was dredges in 1954...Haven't I covered this already?

Every single point you try to make gets easier to disprove as the days wear on. If you are an example of the Canadian Education System, you might wish to enroll down here in a Pre-K class and get a "headstart" toward a lifetime of learning skills.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#195 Consumer Suggestion

About Isreal

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 25, 2005

B;

When I said:

Just the fact that Isreal is there caused terrorism. It still does, however on a much smaller scale.

You may have misunderstood & thefore others might, & so I had better explain.

I was not Blameing Isreal. Perhaps that came out wrong.

It should have been said in this way:

Just the fact that Isreal is there was a reason for terrorists to cause terror, They still cause terror there, however on a much smaller scale. US occupying Iraq & Afganistan will simply cause more terror. The US needs to leave.

Isreal is a state. It is backed by the USA. Jews have been hated by the people of that region since time began.

I have spoken to Muslim's who back the 911 attack. What they told me, was that it wasn't really an attack on America. They said it was an attack on the Jews. Their take on the "Twin Towers" was that they were a symbol of Jewish wealth & control of the United States. In their mind, terrorism would continue until Isreal was removed,

Now I personally look at that as absurd! I don't think Isreal is going anywhere & I think they are strong enough to look after themselves.

However the Muslims I was talking to feel this is the issue. They believe that the USA is controlled by the Jews & they believe this very strongly. They point to the fact that Jews run most of the media in the USA & the Jews hold the money & the banks in the USA.

Hitler believed the same. He wrote about it in Mein Kampf. I personally do not really understand this hatred of the Jews. It smacks to me as jealousy. I certainly am not Anti Semetic. I also do not think "all Muslims" are extreamists! Most I have been involved with are very peaceful indeed. However I also believe that the "border line" Muslim's are more apt to be Anti American now, that the USA is occupying their land.

Anyway I just wanted to clear that up, as it was not my intention to make it sound as it came out. I guess I have B to thank for bringing it to my attention.

By the way I am sorry if I went off the edge earlier. I was in a terrible mood & I said things that I did not mean. I made 2 mistakes before & I guess I felt a little bit picked on. Mistake #1 I said that the Arrow was the first supersonic fighter jet. I was mistaken on that. I do believe it was superior to anything the USA had at the time, but it was not the first. Mistake #2 I have no evidence, as I already said about subs in Lake Ontario. My only evidence I showed was proof they did enter the St. Lawerence. The issue was about the USA selling things to n**i Germany while there were n**i subs in our Continental waters.

Now with that said, you will have to admit that you were picking on me a little over it, as was Robert & Patrick. That I guess is what "set me off".

So I hope you accept my apology B. I doubt you are a plant & you needed not to be "outed" & you have every right to talk on this thread. I enjoy your posts. I also should not have swore. I was "under attack" in other situations at the time & I guess my anger just flowed onto a post that should not have been written.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#194 Consumer Suggestion

As far as Robert's Proof Goes....

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 25, 2005

Ok well I wanted Robert to post it. He obviously refused.

So yes as you see by looking at Roberts proof there is none really at all. Like I said the only WMD's found were Made in the USA & the information on them was supressed, as it would bring up too many questions for Americans about what your President did.

A Majority of Americans do not know or do not remember that the USA supplied WMD's to Suddam during the Iran / Iraq war.

I would suspect Suddam to have good weapons. Iran is still a threat to Iraq & as it has been reported, some of these terrorists are getting supplied by Iran.

I have no doubt that Iran will continue to work on their nuclear program & will produce a nuclear bomb. Simply to protect themselves against Isreal who has had no problem bombing them in the past. So what?

Isreal cannot use a nuclear bomb in the region as they would be killing themselves just as they would kill anyone else. Same goes for Iran.

Basically nuclear weapons have never been used & those countries that have them have few worries of being invaded. The only thing that will happen when Iran does produce a nuclear bomb, is that they will be able to stop the USA from invading them for "any reason".

Meanwhile Iran will continue to supply terrorists with weapons & bombs & there is basically nothing the USA can do about it. So what difference would it have made if they did find WMD's in Iraq? Iran has them "for sure" & will use them if invaded. Once they have tested their Nuclear Bomb, they will have no further worries of invasion at all.

The only kind of Government that could be successful in Iraq would be one lead by a dictator such as Suddam. The 3 opposing factions will not agree & never have agreed on anything in order to make a Democracy work, or a Republic for that matter. There is however a possibility of forming a Government in Afganistan. That Government will be despised by the other Countries of the region & will continue to have terrorist attacks against it.

So there is no evidence supporting the USA invasion of Iraq. The USA presence there will not change a thing in relation to terrorism. Nuclear weapons cannot be used in the region by "anyone". It is simply futile. When the USA does leave the region, the terrorism will continue, as the Governments left behind will be in violation of their culture & also displaying a US presence in the region that will further enrage the terrorists.

The damage is already done. However the USA is nowhere even close to paying for it yet. 80 Billion this year. Even if there was a pullout right now, it will be necessary for the USA to support the Governments of Afganistan & Iraq indefinately.

I sure would like to see the figures meshed between the amount of oil there & the savings made from it when you put the cost of troops & weapons into the senerio. Overall, the USA I bet would be getting off cheaper by buying Canadian oil at World Price.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#193 Consumer Suggestion

Robert, You are the only one on this thread that still believes Iraq had WMD's Now all I ask is for proof.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 25, 2005

Robert;

What am I mis informed about? US need for oil? All the "other things" the UN demanded from Iraq? Can you show me something signifigant? Something that Iraq did not comply with that the USA would if asked? WMD's? Robert you still have not pasted any proof on that.

I guess we can only assume you are misinformed yourself.

Look Robert, I don't think you are a fool. I enjoy your posts expecially on issues you do have a vast knowledge of.

Since we began posting on this subject Robert, the protests have begun. There was one in Washington just yesterday.

You are the only one on this thread that still believes Iraq had WMD's Now all I ask is for proof. Do I have to be misinformed to ask for that?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#192 Consumer Suggestion

Oh & B... about 911

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

B;

As far as 911 goes, my reaction to it was "it's about time" not because I was happy about it or anything. It is because the USA has been killing people "all over the World" on their soil for years! It's about time they got attacked on "their soil", is what I meant!

I am amazed that it has taken "this long" for something to happen! The USA began this stuff since they became a Nation. They wanted Toronto, they stole a "big piece" of Mexico, they funded leaders in Mexico, South America, Vietnam, Afganistan, Bosnia, Nicaragua, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Serbia, & even n**i Germany!

If you are gonna kill people "indescriminately" all over the World just to have your hands in the control of that Country, you had better expect that "sooner or later" it will come back to you!

911 was just a "wake up call" & there will be more, nomatter how much George Bush wants to supress the media. Just like there were no SARS cases in New York City! No people from Hong Kong only travel to Toronto right? The big blackout of the eastern seaboard was just a lightning storm right? Good ol George will not be able to supress a nuclear bomb! It is not a matter of "if". It is simply a matter of when!

Am I happy about it? Of course not B! Why do you think I write on this thread? Huh?

The reason why the hurricanes are getting bigger & destroying your Country is because of "Global Warming". Caused primarily by the "gas guzzelers" Americans drive & promote. The ignorance of the people who continue to concern themselves with "gas prices" is only proof that the USA is simply blind! Canada has plenty of oil! Only one problem. Canada want's World Price & the USA does not want to pay that much. Canadians have been paying over $5 per gallon for quite a while now. Europe pays much more than that!

Getting out of the middle east is only primary in the "overall" problem that the USA is pushing the envelope on! The ignorance of these same people who do not see the "root cause" of the problem is shown by their ignorance in even suggesting using nuclear weapons in order to make the problem "much bigger" than it is even right now.

So it was "about time" & you still have not learned anything yet! Instead of working towards preventing future attacks, you do the opposite by intensifying your resolve to make things worse than they were before! It is going to unfortuneatly take more attacks like 911 & more terrorism to go on until some people get their heads out of their butts & see the forest for the trees!

Oil is not your solution. Oil is your problem! Until you wake up & see that, you can expect more of the same. Will this thread change anything? Probably not! However if everyone smart enough to see the "forest for the trees" does something like write on this thread & point out the "truth in the matter", I hope eventually it may change.

It is begun by getting out of the middle east. It can be furthered by reforming the UN. It will get better if the government begins to pass laws, as they did in California dealing with the percentage of the vehicles you can sell that are not useing "alternative fuels".

Believe it or not, the USA has "no reason" to contiue down this Path. Alberta Canada has enough Natural Gas "capped" right now to turn over:

Every home

Every Fridge

Every Stove

Every Car

Every Air Conditioning unit

Every Generator

in the USA & Canada combined, to last this Continent for the next 100 years! Just capped! That's just one Province! The by / product of Natural Gas is pure "water"! Now that is something California could definately use!

911 should have woken you up, but instead it put your head further up your butts!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#191 Consumer Comment

seriously misinformed

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

ITHank you B

couldn't have said it better.

I am pretty much done with this thread since James seems to be a bit "off". He is entertaining at best, but seriously misinformed.

He seems to make more sense when I drink. Why is that?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#190 Consumer Comment

James: For Your Eyes Only

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

All right, James, you've unmasked me. Please, for the sake of the entire free world, don't expose me to... THEM. What are your terms?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#189 Consumer Suggestion

Ok B, you have points

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

B;

Yes you have points, but let me funnel some stuff into your "well educated" mind.

First of all, Canada has no President! We have a "Prime Minister" & although my "personal belief" is that the "parlimentary system" works ok for an island like England, it sure does not fit with a "vast Country" the size of Canada, however it is still better than having a Dictator!

There is a "radical difference" between St. Johns, Montreal, Toronto, Saskatoon, Calgary & Vancouver, not only monitarily, but socially as well. Same as you could not compare Delaware with Florida, or Richmond with Vancover Washington!

You see... just on our own Continent we have such "vast differences". Does that give Ontario the right to go to war against Alberta? Hey they might fight like "cats & dogs" but I don't see a hostile takeover going on, do you?

In Canada we have merely 9 Provinces. You have over 40 States! Why? Think about it! Each State wants different things that are unique.

To be fair, in Iraq, you would probably need 3 States, as their differences are "much greater" than North & South Carolina! How outrageous would it be for Florida to take over Georgia? Any more outrageous than USA taking over Iraq? The USA doesn't know the "first thing" about Iraqi culture! Not even a "little bit"!

As Einstien said, "things will never change (discussing war) until we have a One World Government! There will always be wars! For that he is correct. I can see a war between Iraq & Iran. I can see a war between Germany & Poland. However a war between USA & Iraq does not seem to make any sense! If there is a chance of a "One World Government", it would be a lot easier to fathom the UN being it's head, than the USA who for the "most part" does not even know the difference in a President & a Prime Minister!

Lemme give you a "real difference". A President can unilaterally decide to take a nation to war at will, while a Prime Minister needs a majority of votes to even consider it! One system is a democracy & the other is a Republic. A republic is not too short of a Dictatorship, which your Country has allowed with George Bush!

Now you have not been able to fix problems well enough in your own Country, but you think you have the smarts to rule another one, on the other side of the World!?!

Not only are you "stupid" if you think so, but your are really ignorant when it comes to the Middle East! You don't even know what they eat for dinner, but you want to tell them how to do it well!

B, far be it for me to call you a "moron", but if you were to even "test" a nuclear bomb in the Middle East, the entire region, including Isreal would become uninhabitable for the next 1000 years! The Nuclear cloud would travel around the earth causing cancer in Memphis! Have you driven past the "Love Canal" lately in New York? That was just a "minor accident"! Anyone ignorant enough to drop a nuclear bomb in the region of Iraq would be responsible for the deaths of "millions"! The Atom bomb was not even 1/100th the power of the smallest nuclear bomb!

So here people "like you" spout... hell if we have a major problem, we will just "nuke em" & you are beyond nuts for saying that in the "first place"! What the hell is Iraq to you other than oil? Do you do a lot of trade there? No! Do you even know what they eat for lunch? No! You are so ignorant about anything that happens outside of your borders, that you think Canada has a President!

Most Americans don't even know that everything "South of Denver" was stolen from the Spanish! The Alamo was not a victory, but a final place where Mexico had, had enough! Even there the USA has had it's hand in changing the "wheels in power". Who's d**n Country is it? I sure as hell aint yours! Neither is Canada & you would have a "hope in hell" of ever making this your 51st State, nomatter what Bill O=really thinks!

So, where do you get the idea now where you can invade & set up a government in the Middle East & make it work? Just cause you did it in Japan? Unless you nuked it like Japan, you have little chance of doing that & if you did, the region would be more of a wasteland than it already is!

Isreal "barely survives" with a Military might almost "equal" if not compareable to the might of the entire USA! Just look at the history of the region!

One of your greatest Presidents said (quoting Harry Truman), "Those who refuse to learn by history, will have to re live it"! Hell Americans for "the most part" don't even know the truth of their own history! Never mind Iraq!

Now as a "final note", as far a Vera & Robert go, it was a joke. Can you form your mouth into a "smile" once in a while B? I certainly hope so, aboard that spaceship & all!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#188 Consumer Comment

Planes, subs, WMD and tact

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

Robert,

Thanks for clearing up the sub issue. Another childhood illusion shattered - though in this case, I think, only because I misinterpreted what I was taught. Hadn't realized the St. Lawrence was that shallow. I suppose you could lie on the bottom all day & only run at night, but sheesh, that's a week in and another out. Can't think of anything that would be worth that effort.

As for the Mustangs, until somebody shows me contradictory math, I will go with the first-person accounts. However, given the math, I would grant it more weight.

On the WMD, though, sorry to report you'll have to go back to square 1. Went to Boortz, he reports on the weapons caches you mention, 500 ton of yellowcake, 2 tons of partially enriched uranium, hidden centrifuge parts and blueprints, and two dozen artillery shells loaded with Sarin and mustard gas. We knew about the uranium. At the end of the Gulf War, Saddam's stash of enriched uranium was sent to Russia for destruction, the rest was left there under IAE lock and seal. The centrifuge parts were turned over by one of Saddam's scientists to the CIA's ISG a few days after they started the search for WMD. They had been buried in his back yard for over 10 years. The government's reaction was that they were not proof of WMD, but certainly showed that Saddam had planned to restart his programs once the weapons inspectors had gone away. The 'mobile labs' turned out to be mobile facilities for producing hydrogen for balloons involved in some kind of aerial sighting system. The ISG examined all the weapons caches and found them all to be conventional weapons, with explosive artillery shells. A few dozen chemical shells were found mixed in with conventional shells stored in facilities that were 'cleaned' under supervision at the end of the Gulf War. It is assumed they were simply overlooked in the gathering and destruction of thousands of shells. The ISG has been scouring Iraq for WMD for over two years. One of the big complaints of the military commanders has been that thousands of intelligence officers that could have made a big difference in the battle were assigned and sometimes re-assigned to help with the search for WMD. To date they have reported no stockpiles of WMD and no active facilities for their manufacture. I have seen reports on some liberal sites that some WMD were found, but reporting was supressed because they were US manufactured. I have been unable to corroborate this with mainstream sources, and it doesn't jibe with previous reports that what we gave them was intelligence and raw materials.

At the end of the Gulf War, the UN agreed to suspend hostilities against Iraq in return for, among other things, the destruction of all WMD, and full, unfettered access for verification of their destruction. Saddam claimed to have destroyed them all, but never allowed full, unfettered access for verification. The UN Security Council passed several resolutions over the years demanding such access and authorizing the group assigned to monitor weapons inspections to take police action if necessary. That group never authorized this action. But finally the US, led by a Drunken Deserter, defied the UN and unilaterally invaded a sovereign nation.

Luckily there are a number of us who can be anti-war without being anti-military. In fact, one might say it would be extremely stupid to waste hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives in a war, when the same objectives could be achieved with only the threat of war. Of course, that assumes you have no hidden agenda and you are stating your actual objectives. And if you had half a brain you might realize that every time you challenge my right to question my government you give real aid and comfort to ALL of America's enemies.

The magic 100K dead Iraqis comes from a study completed last year about this time, under the auspices of Johns Hopkins. They reported 100,000 but when you look at the actual numbers, the margin of error is over 90%. Slate has a very good article about problems with the study and the numbers reported. There is a site (iraqbodycount.org) that keeps a running total of 'verifiable' civilian deaths, currently between 25K and 30K, and is backed by a database showing the sources for each one. There is another figure floating around that puts the number of civilians Saddam had murdered at 300K. Any idea where that figure comes from?


James,

Don't be absurd, of course we can nuke the middle east, we've already gotten over the hard part - nuking the first one. Of course, I was only talking about the Sunnis in Iraq, and I did say literally or figuratively, which pretty much means any way we can render them ineffectual.

I really wish you would leave Vera & Robert's sex life or lack thereof out of this conversation. You know, there is a certain degree of savoir-faire involved in calling a woman a w***e but letting her know you respect her other qualities as well, and frankly, pal, I think you sat on your tact.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#187 Consumer Suggestion

Now if you are a little bit curios

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

Guys;

Think about this post by B.

Allah, be praised! I now understand.


Calgary James,

I personally am sure you forgot to take your meds this morning. I am an alien trapped inside a jar of Vegemite, communicating to you via direct mental beam technology. You really think you're reading this, don't you? Look, Jimbo, I really need for you to do something for me. Take the Stealth Bomber out of the garage and fly to coordinate 52,114 at an altitude of 243 Km and drop a bomb.

My invisible ship's computer will analyse you as a dangerous interloper and miniturize your ship into an internal holding gizwat. Step from your plane and say the words, "Klaatu Ee'dplebnista norkohn forkohn perfectunun." A door will open to your left. No, it does not matter in which direction you are oriented. In a perfect universe, all doorways open to the left, James, remember that. Step into the doorway and say the words, "Klaatu Lingwa Canada Anglophone." The ship will now understand your native language. Always preface each conversation with the word Klaatu so the ship will know you are addressing it. Say, "Klaatu bridge."

This is either someone insane or really smart. Your take!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#186 Consumer Suggestion

Hey B. If you ever thought you got by me, you were mistaken.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 24, 2005

Sheesh B;

I can see that "mine bomb" you put in & I am not gonna fall for it,

You wish to get the subject off of why we are in Iraq & make a "big deal" out of U boats in the Great Lakes! As if it even makes a difference where they were on the Coninent!

Your "mine bomb" failed, cause I saw it before you placed it! Suck up to Vera all you want! Are you that "desperate" to get laid?

MMM MMM you are "quivering my heart". Will you take a knife to my "trophy bag"? Oh you are so suttle!

Yes you are "so intelligent" & I will never dispute that! However so is Patrick! So is Robert! So is Kevin & Greg! Each has an intelligence that does not wanna get into Vera's pants! Cept you!

B, jerk off in a corner & come out with something real! Not like you can't! I know you can! Never mind the Spaceship & drinking great Columbian Coffee! Get Real!

Why are the US troops in Iraq? Why don't they leave? Why are terrorists causing problems? What is the solution?

Come on now B! Don't be as secrative as your name! Tell us why you talk on this thread! Is your only purpose to get into Vera's pants?

You had something going on with Vera... didn't you. Maybe she was the one who had the "landing strip" for your Spaceship, as you came in.

Did you have U-Boats painted on the side? Was the nose-cone painted in "Lake Ontario: colors? Are you part of it?

Did George W. Bush send you into this thread to degrade the people that were in it? Is you stand up routine just something off the top of your head? Do you really wanna ram Vera?

I am no fool. I knew who you were from the beginning. Why don't you just take a "long hard suck on my arse" & get the f**k off of this thread? I just "outed" you my friend! You are a "plant"!

Now have a nice day & go to hell!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#185 Consumer Comment

James, your slip is showing

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 23, 2005

James,

Let me see if I can summarize your position. You rejoiced when terrorists murdered thousands of our citizens because 'it was about time.' You obviously sympathize with their mission to indiscriminately murder innocent civilians all over the world, under the absurd guise of defending their country. And you seem foolish enough to believe that because I oppose some of our Presidents' policies, I am a fellow supporter of terrorism. Well, James, I suggest you examine your allegiance before some French-Canadian puts you on a list of sympathizers. Oh, and as I recall, you said you were a Scot also... Any chance you were in Lockerbie the week before Christmas in 1988?

Now, I will try to put some of these things in a context you can understand. Suppose someone, Rollie Keith would be a good candidate, assassinates Paul Martin, proclaims himself president of Canada, and the military backs him. For the next 40 years he rules the country with an iron fist, murdering hundreds of thousands of 'enemies of the NDP', suppressing all dissent. All government positions and all Canadian industry are put in the hands of loyal NDP members. An unlikely scenario, but not impossible. So, 40 years from now, the United States has had it with this guy and his regime, they come in with big military and oust his butt. They want to restore order and help Canada elect a new government. Members of the old Liberal Party, Conservative Party, and Conservative Alliance start work on drafting a Constitution and electing a representative government. For some reason, the NDP doesn't think representative government is in their best interests, so with weapons and financing from some guy in Russia, they start killing everybody in sight, blowing up schools, police stations, just anything, really. Do you support their terrorism?

You say just the fact that Israel is there CAUSED terrorism. Kinda like saying a black family moved in next door so I HAD to start killing them. Anyway, let's put this in perspective. Say the descendants of the Hurons scattered throughout the US and Canada started a big political campaign. Some wacko combination in government decides to turn that little bit of land around Toronto into a new Province called New Huron and invites all the Huron descendants to move there. By your lights, this would FORCE all of Canada to attempt to kill them off. Right.

Oh, and while I think Pat Robertson saying, "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it," in an editorial piece is in extremely bad taste, its hardly the equivalent of buiding an army and supervising their attempt to commit assassination and randomly kill the local citizenry.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#184 Consumer Comment

Yea, though I walk through the valley of pollution and war, I will find no exit, for thou art in office.

AUTHOR: ED - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 23, 2005
Bush is my shepherd, I dwell in want.
He maketh logs to be cut down in national forests.
He leadeth trucks into the still wilderness.
He restoreth my fears.
He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of pollution and war, I will find no exit, for thou art in office. Thy tax cuts for the rich and thy media control, they discomfort me.
Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the presence of thy religion.
Thou anointest my head with foreign oil.
My health insurance runneth out.
Surely, megalomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the days of thy term.
And my jobless child shall dwell in my basement forever.

Author Unknown
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#183 Consumer Suggestion

& for you Patrick, Back to the discussion. WMD's & the fact that the USA is illegally in Iraq & causing terrorism.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, September 23, 2005

Patrick;

If you remember, it was "you" who said that the forum we were talking on had nothing to do with Bush or Politics. If you remember correctly, it was me then that agreed with you & I stopped.

You don't see me pointing to posts you made on other threads now do you? Do you know why Patrick? It is because that forum is for that purpose & has "nothing to do" with another forum. Those that "begin with a thread" & end with that thread, expect "all of the thread" to be taken into consideration.

I don't expect anyone here to read all 200+ posts on the subject & unless they do, I do not want their input on "pieces of it".

The thread(s) you are referring to, are threads begun over 2 years ago, when "all of a sudden" rip off reports began appearing on a "google search" under the name of the company that was being searched on.

At that time, I took it to Management & the Owner. I felt it was liable. Definately slander! I proposed that they quit paying for a position on Google, If Google did not remove the rip off report in that position. Furthermore I suggested legal action.

Although "upper Management" did not seem to care, as they felt that "any advertising" was good advertising in the end, it "was a problem" for honest sales reps who had been working on the credit of the site for a number of years! Yes there were some "bad apples" & we weeded them out, but overall, we had a core of "honest people" trying our best to design a site that was more than just fair!

Well nobody wanted to do anything about it. The good sales reps just complained & complained about Management not doing anything about it. Good people were so mad, they wanted to quit & some did! So I took it upon myself to defend the reputation of the Company & to "out" these assholes that were complaining basically about "nothing"!

They either did not follow instructions properly, or they did not read the instructions at all! They blamed others for things that were "totally in their own control" , they asked for things "not offered" , quite often were mistaken, & we had enough problems just convincing people we had a "website", let alone deal with these people that are jerks! For 2 years we operated without a single bad report with the BBB. Now we had a flood & all promoted by the rip off report, not responded to.

Since I began handleing these problems, sales have been made "after" customers read the reports & as shown in the last report, when I call people on their issue, to show evidence, vowing to give them a refund "personally", they climb back into their "worm shell", where they belong. Simply because they were full of sh*t in the first place!

The point is Patrick, I stay on subject for the "most part" & may go down another path for a post or two, but I return to the subject at hand.

Anyone that wants to read the thread(s), please notice where I had to repeat to Patrick, over & over again, the same response that not only makes sense, but also it is true. However if you do read the thread, please do not respond on "this one", as I will handle you on that one & you had better have a "good issue". I don't like to repeat myself, & I think i have already discussed all of the issues, but I would be glad to "cut & paste" past responses for you to evaluate that it has already been discusssed.

Now on another thread, you said that I might use something against you that you said. I vowed that I would not & actually I agreed with you. As you notice, I do not bring up stuff from other threads I have had a relationship with you on & I would appreciate the same respect.

Back to the discussion. WMD's & the fact that the USA is illegally in Iraq & causing terrorism.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#182 Consumer Comment

Unbelievable attitude.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 23, 2005

Here's a quote from the esteemed Governor of Louisiana as reported by MSNBC:

"As for those who refuse to leave, Gov. Kathleen Blanco advised: Perhaps they should write their Social Security numbers on their arms with indelible ink."

She didn't really say that, did she? No wonder there were so many problems with Katrina. It wasn't the fault of President Bush, FEMA, or the US Government, the fault actually lies with Madam Governor and Mayor Ray Nagin.

I may not agree with everything Bush says or does, but I just simply can't see why he should be to blame for the mess in New Orleans.

Here's hoping for the safety of those who may still be there as now one of the repaired levees in the 9th Ward has broken again. And for all those in the path of Rita.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#181 Consumer Suggestion

Well I sure have lots to respond to...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, September 23, 2005

Let's start with Vera;

Ladies first! Vera I post on many different issues & I try to keep each to their subject. I have posted on people "calling down" a good Company, a great idea & a viable alternative to the Auto Trader, yes. I also have commented on religeon. Problems with Walmart, deadbeat dads... heck Vera I am a "many facited man.

Each I prefer to keep in their own context & if you have something to say about them, please respond to them directly there. Even when I talked to Robert, on another thread, I referred to this one, being extreamly coy. Each thread has it's own points & should be discussed in that forum.

Greg, he did respond to some of your points. Yet I think B was doing his standup routine.

B, I see 1 viable option you suggest. The other is silly. You cannot nuke the middle east. Can we please get off this U boat thing? If you guys are waiting for me to say that "yes you are right", there were no U boats in Lake Ontario, you are wrong. I won't, however I cannot show any evidence to back it up. The point is that the U boats were in the waters of our Continent, while the USA was selling weapons to n**i Germany. That's it. I am not going to get into things I cannot prove unlike...

Robert! Fox news? Are you friggin kidding me? Don't make me call you a moron! Just leave Fox outta this please before we find you & send you to a home! I had a bunch of "normal Canadians" almost on the floor with Bill O-really! The "no spin zone" what a friggin joke! Wake up before we put you in a rubber room!

Now I said "find it & post it" just like I did with the proof of subs in the St. Lawerence & weapons sold to n**i Germany! Post it Robert so that we all can dispute it! If it is there... you look it up! Cut & paste what you feel is proof & present it! Is that too hard?

Gee Robert & I am not touching this P 51 thing with a "10 foot pole"! You & B can discuss that. Wow... anything but the subject!

Stick to the issues Robert! By the way, something that is "sorta on the subject" is this idea that you still have that it would be good to "back up Bush" by enlisting! Well Robert is this not what we are talking about? Whether Bush needs any backing at all?

I personally think that people who want to enlist should join up in a group with a big sign saying "We will enlist if not sent to the Middle East" & let your dear Fox News cover that! That way they would be showing that they were "real Americans" who care about their Country & it's future!

Trucks that were "mobile labs"? I saw a VW going down the street the other day. Do you think there might have been Reigh Leaders in it planning the takeover of the USA? You know what really was hidden & was the reason they were following OJ in that Bronco? It was that he had a bunch of "aids filled" hookers in the back seat that he was driving to the Pentegon! They just put him on trial to "cover it up". He had "male pages" too!

Shells Robert Shells? What can you put in Shells? Jello Pudding? Yes I guess you "could put in WMD's" but first you would have to have WMD's in that were found, wouldn't you?

Come on Robert! You can do better than that! Proof Robert Proof! Remember the girls Robert! All the girls Robert! All wanting to sleep with you & all the free beer! It's worth it Robert! Post the proof!

Vera will you sleep with him if he finds proof? Come on... one for the gipper! Or for the thread. Think of that Robert! Vera too!

Or don't you really have any huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#180 Consumer Comment

Aww, shucks, Vera

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

(Standard shucks & aww greeting)

Vera,

You must stop. That's twice you've called me brilliant. My head's going to swell up as big as James'. And with all that brilliance shining through, you'll have to just plunk me down on the coast of Lake Ontario to warn the passing U-boats.

I do believe you are a gentle, sweet soul, and you probably have a soft belly too. Its your other side that terrifies me! LOL I'd rather have the one of you covering my back than 3 of him, any day.

To tell the truth, these days my trophy bag just sits unused in a locker with my other... sports equipment. Sigh! I guess that's what happens when a man's... intellect isn't sufficiently propagated and nurtured.

Tom,

The thing that frustrates me is that we probably could already have those objectives and more for a hundredth the cost, and possibly no loss of life. Yet there we are, reusing the same strategies that failed us in Viet Nam, and it would seem, with half as much intelligence and no will to win. I just grind my teeth sometimes.

I'm praying, but I see only 2 winning strategies. One would be to turn the whole thing over to someone they would see as a neutral authority, the Sauds maybe, and just get out of it. The other is to completely nuke the Sunni triangle either literally or figuratively. And I just don't see Bush choosing either avenue at this point.

Do you have any insight into why Bush & Co chose this war? Why was it so critical to 'go for it' rather than waiting to see the results of other, less drastic, efforts?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#179 Consumer Comment

Buy a map everyone!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

The reason I have ignored your blathering about this Great Escape using U-Boots in Lake Ontario is because IT NEVER HAPPENED!

What you people are trying to refer to is the escape attempt by Otto Kretschmer and 3 others to escape their confinement at POW Camp#30 located in the area of Lake Ontario(Bowmanville), and maneuver through the countryside to Pointe Maisonnette, in the Chaleur Bay. This is located in the Gulf of St Lawrence...right near the Atlantic Ocean(where the U-Boots could actually operate). No wonder I had no idea what you were talking about. It's not like trying to compare one end of Rhode Island to the other. We're talking about a difference in distance of 800 miles. Holy Moly! And it never took place in Lake Ontario or the St Lawrence River(which could not be navigated by ocean going ships, and was therefore too shallow to use a submarine). The U-Boot would have to run 800 miles surfaced or with it's decks awash. At a speed of 8-12 knots(taking into account current and engine maintenance) it would mean the sub would be open for attack, with nowhere to escape, for about 3 days, each way. Good plan. I think that's the reason the Germans decided to go on foot to the ocean.

Why wouldn't I think about that being the case, when you kept saying the U-Boot was IN Lake Ontario. Gee, I guess I feel stupid now. Lake Ontario/Atlantic Ocean...same thing I guess. Good grief. One more loss for Canada's education system.

As for you wanting proof of WMD's in Iraq, that's easy. Go to boortz.com and look in his Nuze archives August 29, 2005. That's your start. Go to USA Today and search, or Foxnews.com and search. It's in there. Only the blind want to believe they had none. Even Bill Clinton said they had them, until we went back in to finish the job that was started in 1991. The stuff was found, and even shown on TV during the run to Baghdad. You don't need shells to deliver what you don't have. You don't need mobile labs to mix what you don't have.

Wait, apparently Canada has schools, but doesn't use them to educate.

A cease fire(what Iraq had) is not a surrender or a peace treaty. Iraq ignored 14 UN resolutions demanding full and complete access to the entire country to search for WMD's and Hussein refused to comply. That was easy to do while the UN had no balls, and the US had a Draft Dodger in office who refused to use the force the UN authorized 14 times. We finally got a real President in office, and the rest is History.

Am I happy with everything Bush has done in office? Nope. He's better than Kerry, and the Libertarian candidate was on the wrong side of reality concerning war in general. Sometimes, you have to fight to keep the peace.

Speaking of which, to the genius who asked why "we"(the Bushites) don't make our kids go to war...I thought I had answered that already. The US military is an all volunteer force. I suggested to my 22 year old he should join, but he says he has no interest in the military. There is no draft, and all the branches seem to be able to keep getting the quota numbers they need. Apparently, there are enough who want to do what's right. I served in the Marines for 9 years. Since the basic concept with the Anti-War crowd is only they have the moral authority to know what's right, I'll offer this. If you are Ant-War, you're also anti-military. If you were really in support of the troops, you would shut the hell up and stop trying to give aid and comfort to the enemy. I'm still waiting to see where this magic "100K dead Iraqi civilians" comes from. I want a CREDIBLE source, not moveon.org or some other group from the lunatic-fringe.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#178 Consumer Comment

For more yuks about our friend in the Great White North.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

OK, so we have all seen the political side of James, but what about the business side?

If you want to see how truly twisted he is, search for Great Cars and Trucks on this site. James is an "Independent Contractor" (read: salesman) for this "wonderful" company.

Take a few minutes to read some of his drivel there, and how he likes to put all blame on the customer for their problems, even if they were overcharged for services.

Oh, and regarding this report. Notice how James suddenly backs off the WWII information once he has been proven wrong? Now, all he can say is "show me proof of the WMDs".

Wanker.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#177 Consumer Comment

Things that make ya go "hmmmmmmh"....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

How-do, all...I hope things are going peachy.

Something I think that warrants a little attention, and maybe it's to my benefit, or maybe it isn't. I'll leave it to the readers of this forum, as they are able-minded enough, to make their own inferences.

All this noble posturing from James of Calgary about how Bush is such an a*****e, doesn't care about his countryment, "it's all a bout money" for the president, and so forth.

And for what appears to be an error on my part... James apparently has a job, of sorts. He's a dot-com car advertising salesman, apparently, and he must be the Rip Off Report/Customer (Dis-)Service division.

To see what I'm getting at, type in "Great Cars And Trucks" or "greatcarsandtrucks.com" into the search-bar of this website, and see what happens. Read those reports, and the responses illicited by James. They are nothing short of misleading, contrary, and some are downright abusive.

Looks like turning a buck on your own countrymen (and those of other countries), and mistreating others is okay only if you're James of Calgary, Alberta, Canada....but not Bush. Hmmm.

Time to represent, chum.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#176 Consumer Comment

Typical Defense of the Bushites

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

is to avoid the real issues and bring up something else. Why hasn't anyone defending our President offered up any explaination for the comments or actions I stated?

I forgot to add a few things in the earlier post.

"Brownie, you are doing a heck of a job!" Of course "Brownie" later resigned in disgrace and went home for a marguerita and a nap.

Laura Bush, on a CNN interview, refered to Katrina as "Corrina". Are the people that run our country so out of touch that they could not remember one name? (OK, Laura does not run the country but in the position she is in, she should not make that mistake.)

I'm waiting for any intelligent replies.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#175 Consumer Comment

Here ya go B

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

Read all of Adolf Gallands books. You can find them. He includes all of his debriefing reports in them from when he was in command of his Luftwaffe units. He describes the vibrations and subsequent loud POP, then smooth control of the aircraft during a hard(nearly perpendicular) dive. From what I have gathered, as did he, that was breaking through the sound barrier. The whole time this was happeming, he says in his reports the P-51's were still "with" the Me-262's and firing guns. It stands to reason therefore, if the lead plane breaks through and the following plane is right there with the first, they will both break it. What do I know? I only read the books written by the people who were there.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#174 Consumer Suggestion

Not much new here... still sitting on the edge of my seat.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2005

Vera makes 3 posts, really saying nothing. Pointing out spelling mistakes as usual. Thank's teacher. I sure do like having you scan my letters for free! Yep I can be "Popeye" or Jim the Cannuck, dogslead & all. Anything to liven it up a little.

B, I am sure you were trying out your "stand up routine" replying to Greg. Yes I do notice that you "backed me up" on this Sub thing, but again, it is really "old news". It's nice that you are intelligent enough to think "outside of the box" when it comes to propaganda.

Now as far as your note to me, I am going to sum it up with a note to a newcommer. However I will say this...

When you said:

And yes, the US has taken that evil and given it more power. But even where we have not, the evil still exists.

I have to reply that yes... we have extreamizm all over the place. Pat Robertson calling for assassinations is no reason for us to take all those religeous zealot's off the air & burn their Churches.

Imagine if you will, Pat alone in a room armed with a knife & nothing but peaceful Muslims in it? Imagine again if it was a US Statesman that put him in that room & gave him that knife? Then after the carnage, your government then burns the Churches? Hey the evil existed before in Pat. Is burning all the Churches a good response?

Apples & Oranges? I don't think so. If you have a "Mad Dog" as a puppy & you train it to kill... get it into that mind set over a few years, then throw it in a room full of strangers... expect a bite. I think Pat is a "moderate comparison".

Stll read on because I would like to welcome someone.

Hi Tom! Welcome to the discussion.

Well Tom, at least you are intelligent enough to see where this will leave us all in a recession. Yes me too Vera, cause economically what happens in USA happens in Canada.

However Tom, ending terrorism? Let's look at first "what it is & why it is" before we look at how to end it.

What it is Tom is a "response" that any normal person that feels unjustly opressed will do. In France, the underground rebels did it to n**i's. Bombed bridges & blew up buildings. Some innocent people were killed too. Or is anyone innocent in a War Zone? French killed French who were German sympathisers. Do we call them terrorists today? No! We call them "freedom fighters". It really walks a fine line but that is what it is.

Now we ask the real question... "why it is". Same as in France during WWII, it is because some "outside force" is occupying your Country & forceing their beliefs & ways "down your throat"!

They in "either case" fight with what they have & will continue to fight until this power is "out of their Country". When you look at the middle east, that is clearly obvious. Their wars over the last 2000 years have been based "primarily" on this issue. What is mine & what is yours & what you have or have not a right to occupy.

So Tom, the solution to terrorism is not to kill the terrorists! You can't get em all! Every time you kill one, 5 of their family members are affected & at least one of them takes up arms against you, if not "all 5".

I don't care where you "base it" Tom, whether it is Iraq, or Afganistan, or Saudi Arabia... as long as you are there, there will be terrorism. Just the fact that Isreal is there caused terrorism. It still does, however on a much smaller scale. Each Country you occupy, you achieve an "equal amount" of terrorists compared to the amount of people who are being opressed.

Now that being said, you have to sit back & wonder... why are we there in the "first place"? Are we Pat Robertson armed with a knife in a room of Muslim's? Why is Pat even there?

Simple Tom. Pat is there because there is "oil in the room" & he wants it! He also wants to bring all these poor Muslim's to the Lord.

The solution to terrorism therefore is to leave that room! Just as the best case senerio for the French was to have Germany leave their soil. Poland too! Here there are different demographics, so the solution is here to get out of Iraq, Afganistan & possibly even Saudi Arabia. That would definately "minimize terrorism". For the rest of the World anyway. This is exactly the same reason why WWI & WWII was fought in the first place.

I am sorry if it will not change much for the people that live there, but who said it was "our problem" anyway? I mean we could do, as we did with the North American Indian, but I don't think we really achieved much in the way of our souls for what we did there either. Better off to leave their culture to them.

So there is the solution. You may wish to debate it, but the fact is that Iraq is a soverign nation & the USA had no right to invade.

Now Robert from Florida is gonna show us all how WMD's were found in Iraq. We are just waiting for his proof. Sitting on the edge of our seats.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#173 Consumer Comment

Loose ends for Calgary James & Florida Robert

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

James,

Huh? What spaceship? Take your meds.

Robert,

Odd that with all your everything ww2, you don't have any mention of the thwarted POW rescue attempt by sub in Lake Ontario, nor apparently anything mentioning the positive contributions Canada made to the war effort. I can't imagine that you would be selectively suppressing information, so we will have to allow the possibility that your books might contain bleached history. It took me a couple of years of confronting things I thought I knew, before I realized we were being fed as much 'propoganda' as our comrades in 'eastern' Europe. And that is still the case.

On the subject of planes, if the math says its physically impossible for a prop job to exceed the speed of sound, sorry, I'd have to say its you who are mistaken. Without seeing the math, its hard to say, but it seems unlikely to me that you'ld be able to re-vector enough of the forward momentum for gravity to make up the difference, at least not without destroying the plane in the process. So we might look for other explanations. Maybe when you have this big object suddenly change direction, it leaves a bit of a vacuum behind. Air rushing in might create a bit of noise. Kind of like popping your cheek, only higher.

The point? Well, this all got me to thinking. I remember my friend's father. When my friend told his father about the distances between the planets that they were learning in school, his dad said it was all lies, man couldn't know the distance between heavenly bodies because it wasn't in the bible. I remember our Campus Life leader who could tell you verbatim anything you wrote on a piece of paper and sealed in an envelope. We tried writing things in another language, writing them backward, anything we could think to trip him up. I had a chance to discuss it with him at a YFC retreat one afternoon. Imagine my shock when he told me it wasn't clairvoyance, nothing like esp at all, it was God telling him what was written on that paper. And I think about the ID people who want to teach little kids that creationism is science. It might well turn out to be correct, but it certainly isn't science. I think about the Christians against stem-cell research and how foolish they are. And I think we may have another Bush rip-off, because he knows better, yet rather than telling these people the truth, he panders to their deception. It occurs to me that this may be the greatest sin, subtly molding the truth, as the serpent did in the garden, to make others do your bidding. And I think I'm starting to ramble a bit - must be bedtime.

James again,

Hmmm... yes, I think you got more from my post than most will. But you did not articulate one aspect. There is a true evil in these Muslim terrorists, not much different from the evil I've seen in Christian terrorists throughout the ages. If Muhammed came back and set up a little camp in some remote corner of the desert, they would come and tear him to shreds because his teaching did not match whatever interpretations their sect had made over the years. And yes, the US has taken that evil and given it more power. But even where we have not, the evil still exists. They would rather commit wholesale slaughter than adapt to change. Their goal is not to get the US off their soil, it is to remake the entire world into their image. And I'm not saying this is true of all of Islam, nor all of Christianity, just the extreme fringe.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#172 Consumer Comment

See what I mean?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Well, it's not a surprise, as I've mentionsed it a couple times already.

To "B"...did you notice that the INSTANT you questioned his logic, James begins with comments like "Gee whizz B, and here I thought you were a smart guy!"

....until you dared to disagree with me.

"Doesn't get much more "Black and White" than that.

Thanks for proving my point, James.
ANd if you think this Post is a long thread, you should hear him inflict his political opinion on a few other posts.

F*cking hack.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#171 Consumer Comment

i hope it is worth it.

AUTHOR: Tom - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

hi gang
my name is tom -i have an undergraduate degree in poltical science.

I may not be privvy to what Noam Chompsky calls the 'economic elite' that controls the information exchange in this country, but i do believe i have some insight into this.

The Bush Administration belives in Iraq -they belive that it is the foothold they desperately need to counter offensive terrorism. Iraq is no small potatoes 3rd world country. It is very advanced and posesses quite a trade for its size.

Afganistan is a waste zone. The mountains make the terrain difficult for mobilization. Setting up forces or bases as a jump off point is useless. It is also very poor and hostile. Not a very important region.

The point is that they may have very well miscalculated how long it would take to control Irag and bring about stabilization. The western bloc of Europe is sitting back stockpiling reserves for when the baby boomers retire -and watch us dump billions per week out to this effort. The whole world benefits from a stable middle east -but it seems europe and china get a free ride. We gotta fight it and pay for it too.

And i hope the unaviodable recession that is coming was worth it. If we cannot stabilize Iraq and put a solid foot hold in the region -then terrorists will continue to be able to organize.
All that money wasted and the US much weaker for the effort.

I hope it works out -the bed has been made. Lets pray.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#170 Consumer Comment

Good Grief!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Well, James, I have to say one thing...you sure spend alot of time on the Internet.
Somehow I get the notion that you're some Moore-worshipping jobless hack that's got the Canadian version of AOHell from Mommy and Daddy for Christmas. Do you really have nothing better to do than cut and paste bits of news, quote Michael Moore, and spend all your days and evenings on the Internet? I guess it could be worse. You could be breeding...but I don't think any woman in her right mind would want that. (Pardon me...I threw up in my mouth a little bit. Now my breath smells like your opinion.)
I mean, Holy Canucks Batman! In the half-hour I've taken to rebut, you've added a couple more posts to the already too-long list!

I didn't post my web addresses because the Rip Off Reports have an explanation as to why they don't usually show links in many of the posts and rebuttals. I try to pay respect to that, even if it's been one hell of a long time since I've perused the particulars.

Even when I posted early on and mentioned the Federalist Patriot as a source, I didn't actually put the whole link, out of regard to the Forum I'm posting in. I got their permission to put it here, and one of the conditions is that I insert "FederalistPatriot.US"

But you know, I can post lists of all the links that I've used, or type in what I read from local papers and such, but I've pointed out a few sources, and you call 'em "spin". So I'll do the same. You print what you do like, throw out what you don't, and call yours "fact" and everyone else's "nonsense".

In your pathetic writing posture, it serves you well to "cut and paste"...after all, I couldn't possibly expect an intelligently written and well composed message to come out of you. 'Coz one minute you're the drum-beating Canadian hippie, and the next you're Popeye. And you're right to wait for intelligent replies to Greg...you can't offer any, and won't because he agrees with your choices.

Something I've also pointed out, ad nauseum.

So I, too, sit in piqued anticipation of a reasonable rebuttal...and not an attack on the sources of all who don't agree with James of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#169 Consumer Comment

"Semper viglio, paratus, et fidelis...." By golly!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

R.s. from Duson, Louisianathank you for bringing a PERSONAL perspective on Katrina to the table from a resident's standpoint. Very well done! :D I don't suppose there are many here that can refute what you point out as experience, but I'm sure that James up in the Nosebleed section will try. You see, he's Enlightened. I sincerely hope that the city of New Orleans will be restored quickly, and that the people can return to their homes. May God bless and keep them in their times of need.

To the boy in Tupper-Bubble: Yes, I DO have Family involved. Do you? My relative is a Staff Sergeant in the USAF. He's in his early twenties. What support or help has anyone in your Family Weed contributed? And Internet whining and ROR pissing matches don't count as a noble effort.
Incidentally, I have read this post from start til current, and have seen you do nothing more than rant with the help of your Canadian pal. Seems like he's the one doing all the work of presenting anything, and much of his info is spun and half-baked anyway.

Vera, you & Archie Bunker are "one of the same" & I am not talking about predjudice. I am talking about him thinking how good an American he was.
Yes. I am a good American. But that doesn't make me like Archie Bunker who was fictional, I hope you know. (Incidentally, prejudiced only has one d. Sucks to be you.) Why do I feel the way I do? Well, why do you feel you're a good Canadian? Where have you ever heard me state that I fully approve of the war? I stated that sometimes, it's necessary---and even if I don't agree with it. When we were attacked, I saw good in it. When I heard that fateful announcement We got im! [Referring to Saddam Insane], I saw good in it. I still want to see Osama Bin Laden's head on a pikeand that won't ever change. Ever.

,,,If you were more like B,
I think even B is starting to see you for the under-dosedcall it intuition. ;)
So yeah, I could very well have something in common with him. I'm flattered you noticed. Thank you. I've said before, I think B is quite brilliant, even if I don't agree with 100% of what he says.

Oh, and B, I'd never hurt yourtrophy bag.LOL! It's perfectly safe. Agree or don't, intellect is something that needs to be propagated and nurtured! :) BesidesI'm really a gentle, sweet soul who wouldn't hurt anyone.

That is until some moron---I'll quote another poster---walks up on my porch and kicks my dog in the nuts while he's asleep Others had made comments that they, too, supported Bush, yet I was the one who was singled out and attacked. I guess he wasn't expecting me to return volley. In all his excessive commentary, notice that he dodges the fact that Canada is involved; first he says We refuse to take part in this, then he says We're over there helping them with the new Democracy. And he knows SNC Lavalin is selling bullets to the US, along with other caliber products. Or maybe he doesn't know.is it possible? James, not going in with the whole story? Say it ain't so! Other things, like equal fact, or the rest of the story, aren't even regarded half the time.

' I have a problem with people who support and defend, using "Muslim" as a blanket term to identify ALL of the pepple from the Mid-East.'
Excuse me Vera but the last time I heard, people was not spelled "peeple"
Jesus Christ. You can't even spell MY mistakes right. Gee, you sure are smart. So you got me on one. Can you find the other two? Feel free to scan. It's no sweat to me.I know I'm human, and don't have a problem with it. By the bye (and yes, it's spelled like that), I don't do a lot of spell-checking and re-proofing my own stuff when I write it every time.I know I don't write like a third grader, much less, like a Canadian third-grader.

Very few of the other religeons at all,
In the Mid-East, for some reason, other religions have a way of ceasing to exist. They call anything that's non-Muslim infidel. Reactions vary, from the more peaceful reasoning to the extremist eradication. Religeons? Well, they say that the human mind can translate, as long as the first and last letters are where they need to be..


Robert. Ohh Robert from Florida. Hey-hey! Type with BOTH hands, please.

I simply states the truth me frien' & you want to dispute the place it came from Hunh?? You're..Popeye, nowright?

This "R" guy comes on & has a lot of "finger pointing" to make.
And apparently, he's REAL good at pounding sand up your a*s. Good Job, R.s.! I told you he'd have something to say! And he's apparently unaware of the fact that you actually LIVE in the Gulf States! (I lived in Pensacola.my God, I miss it. My Son's over there helping rebuild the docks in some of the neighboring States.)

Are there no Democrats left anymore that could respond to this thread? It sure would be "fresh air" if we heard from one
Translation: Are there any others out there that can see things from my point of view? Anyone? Hey! I need to hear an Amen! I'm rowing in circles without someone with more credibility than the Government ex-employee from Tupperville.

Hell, you could spend the "rest of your life" exploreing USA & Canada & you could not live long enough to run out of land, not seen yet!
Well, we can agree on that. So why don't you get started, and I'll help you pack. Start by dropping the e before you add ing and go Exploring. And here, this is a Franklin Pocket Speller. ;)

I will end on that note.
You promise?

Lord knows, I've offered you plenty of opportunities to let me be, but you're just as insipid as ever. Look on the back of the sack.do they have Microsoft stamped on them? Having your head as well oriented as it is, I'd suspect it'd be only a matter of your next gulp of air before you let me know.

And Sugar, I know you will.

Until next time I get bored and have time to spare, God Bless.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#168 Consumer Suggestion

Gee Robert from Florida... is that the best you can do?

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Robert... we moved on.

We are not talking about war weapons from WWII anymore. Gee sorry. We have something better to pick your brain about.

Come on Robert, show us that proof of WMD's in Iraq! We are all sitting on the edges of our seats! I bet Patrick, Vera & R's are too! Thrill us with your "vast knowledge" that nobody "even Bush" knows. Somebody could email him with your proof & he could be on T.V. tonight about it!

Or is there possibly some conspiracy going on where he cannot release this information to all of us? Could it be that he found because some but the labels said "Made in the USA"?

Bring out the proof Richard & paste it here. I will personally email it to every newspaper in the Country. Hey, it's a computer world. It sure is easy!

I will also look after the Canadian Media. Hey if it was as Vera thinks, we only have one channel up here anyway! CBC! Yea that "government funded" channel, sorta the same as your PBS. Yet no, we have more. One in every major City now! Cept sometimes nobody is on em, as the snow is too high & the dogs legs are not big enough.... you know the ones that run our "dog sleds".

Vera wonders why a Canadian would even care if the USA is unjustifiably in another Country & causing terrorism. She does not realise that those "nuclear bombs" melt our igloos & make the dogs cough! Hack Hack Hacking away... they wake us up after less than a 6 pac! Sheesh, sure bugs me!

So you post the info there Robert & I will spread the word North of the Border, so that us Cannucks will understand that "Big Brother" has it all under control & we have nothing to fear. Heck a few Americans might breathe a sigh of relief too!

Then it's just a matter of getting it all out to the rest of the World, so all of us can get our Army's together & we will "mutually kill" every Muslim in sight! Wait... is the plan just "Bin Laden"? Well what the heck are we doing in Iraq then? Oh well I am sure you will figure it out.

There ya go Robert. I leave Peace in the World in your "capeable" hands! The girls will be saying "We love you Robert, will you sleep with me" & the guys will all buy you a beer.

Sittin on the edge of my seat there Robert. Hey & remember (bout those girls) you will remember that I always backed you right?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#167 Consumer Comment

I'll take that challenge ..Please explain Bush's poor attempt at humor when he joked about not finding WMD's under a podium at a black tie dinner attended by "The Have's".

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

I must be a Bushite! Kitchen, Living Room, Bedroom, Back Yard, just like any good Devocrat, I support Bush whenever the, uh, opportunity presents itself. Whatever. I'm taking your challenge.

>Please explain Bush's poor attempt at humor when he joked about not finding WMD's under a podium at a black tie dinner attended by "The Have's".

When the skies are the darkest, its the president's job to keep up the people's spirits, to be a dynamic cheerleader, and keep the team rowing. And besides, when you stop to realize these people were in on the joke from the beginning, it is purdy funny, idn it?

>Please explain why the reason we went to war in Iraq has repeatedly changed since there were no WMD found.

That's one o them whatchacallitz where the question contains the answer, right. What is that... a hemorrhage... hemorrhoid... homophobe... Homophobe. I think that's it.

>Please explain why, when NOLA was drowning, our President was eating cake with Senator McCain and playing air guitar at an AFB.

You know, its hard being president. Its like hundreds of things going on all day at the same time... and... and in that kind of time zone, it can be... it might seem like the president is using the wrong clock, but really all of it needs to be done, just not at the same time... and that's what they call time management. Now, in this particular case, Senator McCain had some interesting ideas about how Arizona could be helpful in the upcoming relief mission. And that cake was... just not a good cake. And about that other thing... Troop morale! Like I told you earlier, very important. And your president learned all the air chords for that song, Stairway To Heaven.

>Please explain why political hacks with no experience in disaster management were appointed to positions that greatly impacted the safety of our country.

The president appointed Mr. Brown because he found him to be a... resourceful man, who had always delivered when the president needed him. And nobody could have predicted in these times the head of FEMA would need to apply his limited resources to disasters of such great proportions. I think he did one heck of a job. Given these circumstances, nobody could have done any better, I truly don't believe.

>Please explain why our President felt a photo-op with Trent Lott in Miss. was an appropiate way to visit a disaster area. People died and he jokes about sitting on his porch someday????

Well, its not like your president phoned those reporters and said meet us in Mississippi, they just turn up wherever he goes. Trent had some very helpful ideas about fixing things better than they were before. Its the Boy Scout creed. Whenever somethings broken, fix it better than the way it was before... you found it. Hey, all the Senators and the... people... with the Congress... had good suggestions on fixing things. And, hey, your president is an upeat, joking kind of guy. And that's sometimes what you need in these situations. He's always been that way, that isn't going to change, especially for mother nature.

>Please explain our President's comment "Nobody could have anticipated the breach of the levees" when there were published reports about this very scenario.

Now, Fox News, in addition to being very fair and balanced, has always been renowned for their predictions on weather. We rely on them for truthful and timely reportage on these matters, and it simply wasn't forthcoming this time. I'm not sure what the problem was. Maybe you should ask the president of Fox. Yuk, yuk, yuk.

>Please explain the comments from our President's mum, ""Almost everyone I've talked to says we're going to move to Houston."
Then she added: "What I'm hearing which is sort of scary is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality.
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you
know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them."
Does the apple fall far from the tree??

Well, I'm not sure exactly what she meant, but I'm sure people are misinterpreting it. They usually do. But I've learned that she is very wise beyond her years and you should almost always just do... just believe what she says. And I'm not exactly sure what you mean by falling apples. Is that Newtonian philosophy? Yuk, yuk, yuk.

>Please explain how the hell we are going to pay for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast if our President refuses to even offer a small idea of how we will raise the funds?

Your president has spent many hours talking to the Congress about this, and senator Kerry has been particularly helpful. Of course many of his ideas will have to be modified as the facts change... as our viewpoint is updated. And former president Bush and president Clinton have had a lot of work and input on this idea. And Greg, this is truly important... when you asked before about WMD... well, you know that wasn't the only reason. There was like this whole list of things for... why we had to take down Saddam. And WMD was just one. And now we have, this other list... and as people guess reasons that were on the first list, we put them on the second list... and that is the list everyone knows. But the first list is longer, and that's why its so important. I guess its kind of like a game show... but much more seriously, you know? And when people guess guesses that are wrong, like saying d**k Cheney had some unfinished business, we don't put those on either list.

>BTW, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a propeller driven aircraft to reach the sound barrier. It's against the laws of physics. The P51 was a fine aircraft but let's not get carried away here.

Greg, nothing is impossible with God's help. And this administration like no other in the past needs... and... asks for God's help. With him, all things are possiblistical.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#166 Consumer Suggestion

Proof you guys!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Come on, all of you!

If you really have "proof" that USA is being driven in the "right direction", forget insult's! Give us some proof!

If you believe there were WMD's found in Iraq... Give us some proof.

If you have any evidence that supports Kuwait in their "slant drilling projects", give us some proof!

If you think there were "honest plans" to deal with the disaster of Katrina... give us some proof!

Forget the Subs in the St; Lawernce during WWII while the US was selling trucks to Germany, & who had the first supersonic jets, & the weapons you sold to n**i Germany during WWII, as that is only proof of "past inadequatcies" your government has proven to the world.

Show us where you think you have "every reason" to rule the World today!

To take an excerpt from Kevin, who has some proof... dispute this if you cannot produce any proof at all!:

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

Where did the money go? Over $200 BILLION has so far been spent on a war in the wrong country... From Colin Powell's aid, it is now known that Bush twisted intelligence to create justification to take our country to war. http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/index.html

Similarly, Bush twisted the findings of Ambassador Joseph Wilson's trip to determine if Iraq had tried to buy nuclear fuel in Africa. And in his 2002 State of the Union address Bush gave America the impression that Iraq had nuclear weapons that they were going to use against us. When Wilson publicly exposed that Bush had intentionally misrepresented his report in order to take our country to war, in political retrobution, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's aid, "Scooter" Libby, leaked to the press that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a covert CIA operative - thus destroying her career ..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-17-libby-cooper_x.htm

We now know that there never were any Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, just as the UN inspectors reported. Whoops? We invaded the wrong country based on faulty intelligence that was created to meet the objectives of our President? And in the process we destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians? Well, then the White House simply switched the justification for the war to being "Regime Change". Saddam needed to be taken out. But, unfortunately, "He needed killin'" is not a legitimate reason to go to war - except in Texas...

Bush's own staff (Richard Clark and Paul O'Neill) brought to light that Bush started invasion plans of Iraq - SEVEN months before 9/11. Bin Laden was not in that country. But Bush was determined to go to war. Why? Because of war profiteering. Halliburton got BILLION dollar no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq. And after the Army said that Halliburton billed millions for meals that were never delivered, 15% of the payment was suspended pending an investigation. The next day Vice President Cheney, Halliburton's former CEO, stepped in and then the payments were made...

http://www.serco.com/media/industrynews/ItemPage.asp?ItemID=3246307

See? Kevin has proof! Robert dig up that proof on the WMD's found in Iraq, so we can all see it! I showed proof of weapons sold to n**i Germany & the Subs in the St. Lawerence during WWII, all while the USA sat back & made money!

Now you show your proof where this Government has actually "done anything" positive for you today! Show us "proof" where they care about the poor! Show us proof that the USA is only interested in everyone being "happy happy happy" with their Government in Iraq! Show us proof where the USA knows how to run "desert countries" so well that they should be in charge!

Many people here have shown "proof" of lies, deception & intollerance. Actual Proof!!

If you can't find any, or you are not satisfied with what you have been shown, then it is time to stop digging & start writing. Your Congressman, your Govenor, your Reigh Leader! I don't care... stop the insanity!

Patrick, Vera, Robert, R's, B,.... pick up your pens & write or... show us the beef!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#165 Consumer Suggestion

Gee "B" & I was praising your intelligence

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

B;

Now your on a "spaceship" & showing us the way? Ok you were doing fine until you took those drugs!

Um... I think the point in the letter is that Bin Laden is bad. Mmmk.... bad.

Yep he is bad. Got no arguement from me here. Bad Bad Bad! When those "Nasty Russians" were invading Afganistan, the US found their man in "Bin Laden". A nasty little puppet as was Suddam. Bush liked him so much he met him personally. Took his family to Texas too. Invested money with him. Did he just turn bad? Was he bad back then? Is Bush bad too?

From him to the Shaw of Iran... the US has had Puppets in the middle east. I think that is part of the "job description", you have to be "bad".

I believe it was when Iran was trying to have Democratic Elections when they "ousted the Shaw"? Gee did I get that wrong? Am I wrong too that it was the USA that backed the Shaw to oust those awful people trying to set up a Democratic Government? Hmm MKay... I might need a nap.

Or maybe I "Woke Up"! Ok... lemme get this right:

If ya wanna be friends with the USA, you gotta be "bad bad bad".

That is so that when the USA wants to take you out, they have something to point at right? Ok so I get it. The Puppets are only there, supported by the USA until they proove that they are as "bad bad bad" as they were hired to be, & then the USA will come in & "save the World".

Now I got it! Sheesh, coffee smells fine! Forget reforming the UN to make it fair. Why don't we just hand over the entire World to the USA & make things "shorter".

Meanwhile in the Gool ol' USA, if your party does not have enough votes comming out of a place that was just hit by a hurricane... let's drag our feet! Hey they are only "poor niggers" anyway! We need new 1/2 Million dollar homes sold to the nice "White Guys" with the money in New Orleans. That'll Republican it up! Sure we will have to keep a few of them there. Gotta keep the Jazz Music goin right?

Ahh I see it now. Who cares about poor people anyway. Whether they are in Iraq, or Iran, or Afganistan, or New Orleans. Either a "natural disaster" will come along & put us in control, or we will "create one". Come over here Suddam.... psst psst psst MKay? Ok Mr. Bush... Suddam will do. Ok good Puppet.

Soon we will "Rule The World"....Ahhhh haahh hahhh hahhh!

Well "Good Luck" with that.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#164 Consumer Comment

Sorry Greg, you are mistaken

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

The Sabres(YF-86/YF100A) were the first production jet fighters to break the sound barrier. The Bell X-1 was the first American plane to break the barrier in LEVEL flight. The Komet was the first, PERIOD. The ME-262 could break it in a DIVE and was nearly always running from a P-51D. The P-51D could keep up with the Messerschmitt in a dive and thus, was able to get the BOOM along with the Jet. This is not debatable. Enough Me-262's were shot down in this way to provide all the proof you need. Adolf Galland knew the end was near when they couldn't escape the Mustangs. In fact, the Mustangs were so fast that they were still used in different Air Forces around the world into the 1980's. They may not have the level flight stats of a jet, but they can still do serious damage on a dive and close support operations. In case you haven't guessed this, I have one of the largest collections of WW2 EVERYTHING there is. I have a library filled with books, from memoirs to technical schematics. Keep them coming guys, I love this stuff.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#163 Consumer Suggestion

Gee another "smart American"

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Heck they are "comming out of the woodwork".

Welcome Greg!

I hope you get some answers to your questions. Sitting on the "edge of my seat" waiting for a good reply!

Umm, Robert from Florida:

Exactly! U don't pay, u don't vote. The only way to enforce UN fairness & get the money for the troops needed. Then we might get a "fair" ruleing body that sends their inititaves to the Security Council, which passes "fair resolutions" & ends terrorism.

Then they could hire you to answer Greg's questions. Waiting for the spin...

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#162 Consumer Comment

Bushites, Please Explain....

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

And don't stray from the subject by bringing up Clinton or Kerry, etc. There are forces at work in this country that go beyond Democrats & Republicans, red or blue states, liberals and conservatives.

Please explain Bush's poor attempt at humor when he joked about not finding WMD's under a podium at a black tie dinner attended by "The Have's".


Please explain why the reason we went to war in Iraq has repeatedly changed since there were no WMD found.

Please explain why, when NOLA was drowning, our President was eating cake with Senator McCain and playing air guitar at an AFB.

Please explain why political hacks with no experience in disaster management were appointed to positions that greatly impacted the safety of our country.

Please explain why our President felt a photo-op with Trent Lott in Miss. was an appropiate way to visit a disaster area. People died and he jokes about sitting on his porch someday????

Please explain our President's comment "Nobody could have anticipated the breach of the levees" when there were published reports about this very scenario.

Please explain the comments from our President's mum, ""Almost everyone I've talked to says we're going to move to Houston."
Then she added: "What I'm hearing which is sort of scary is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality.
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you
know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them."
Does the apple fall far from the tree??

Please explain how the hell we are going to pay for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast if our President refuses to even offer a small idea of how we will raise the funds?

Now remember, stick to the issues above and don't stray from the subject.

BTW, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a propeller driven aircraft to reach the sound barrier. It's against the laws of physics. The P51 was a fine aircraft but let's not get carried away here.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#161 Consumer Suggestion

Wow... a lot of garbage, with 1 smart person injecting

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

B; seems to be the only one I need to apologise to.

B at least has something "real" to say & actually has points. So here we go.

B, the posts I made were "quotes" from other "fact based" entities that are "not wrong". Many people died in the St. Lawerence during WWII, while the USA was selling weapons to the enemy. I have "no idea" what you would call the "political system" in the US, other than a Republic. For sure it is no Democracy. I maybe "pushed the envelope" a little with Patrick, but I sure would not be proud of helping kill Iraqi's or even saying that I was part of a Military doing Bush's bidding right now. Just trying to put Patrick in his place. Oh & Suddam "is" an a*****e, put in power by the good ol USA as most of their "puppets" seem to be.

Now as for Patrick, man all this stuff was already discussed. I specifically took a "back seat" to Robert on the Arrow, as he proved me wrong on one aspect of it. Sorry I estimated 15 feet high for a sub, but there is enough room in Lake Ontario for a 45 foot high one too. I don't remember the original statement saying anything about Germany, who yes was far advanced in supersonic tech, before the war ended. Nope yer finally right on that one Patrick.

Vera, you & Archie Bunker are "one of the same" & I am not talking about predjudice. I am talking about him thinking how good an American he was. If you were more like B, you would have some issues that make sense. Yet all you can do is go on about "spelling". Here's one for you Vera...

I have a problem with people who support and defend, using "Muslim" as a blanket term to identify ALL of the pepple from the Mid-East.

Excuse me Vera but the last time I heard, people was not spelled "peeple", but yes... a majority of the people in the middle east are Muslim. Very few of the other religeons at all, & as a "matter of fact" the Muslim's number far more compared to Christians. They can easily see this as nothing more than another Crusade. Not that it is. No, I would dis agree! I think it is an "oil grab" & a control move, meant to have everyone in the World eventually bow down to the "mighty USA".

The "mighty USA" cannot even figure out how to respond to Katrina when the "chips are down" & you don't need to send many "side curves" towards the good ol USA, before you catch her "off guard", because she is so "wrapped up" on spin, she obviously does not know how to respond when faced with a "real issue". Unless she can "buy her way out", as her economy dwindles.

Robert. Ohh Robert from Florida. I simply states the truth me frien' & you want to dispute the place it came from, how it was written & why. All from a guy who still believes WMD's were found in Iraq. Where is your proof Robert? Copy & paste something like I did to back up your belief.

All I hear from you, Patrick & Vera is "Oh no! Our sh*t don't stink, our sh*t don't stink... it really doesn't!" To quote Vera... I guess it's "dem towelheads" to blame! Robert, I could not say it much better than (B) & so I will just leave it alone.

This "R" guy comes on & has a lot of "finger pointing" to make. Can you show us some facts? Another Republican I guess. Are there no Democrats left anymore that could respond to this thread? It sure would be "fresh air" if we heard from one. Ahh maybe (B) was one.

Jump on the bandwagon there "R". Can you speak to the issue as to why the USA has troops in Iraq & what right they had being there in the "first place"? Can you do anything else but threaten & make us all "quiver in our boots" with your big macho power? How about a reason for being there in the first place huh? Haven't we enough on this Continent for you to concentrate on? Hell, you could spend the "rest of your life" exploreing USA & Canada & you could not live long enough to run out of land, not seen yet!

What the hell then is the interest in Iraq? If it did not exist, if the middle east did not exist, would that make a "hill of beans" to any of you?

R, you reminded me of one thing that these people should get an ear full of & I will end on that note.

Forget about Iraq... pull out the troops & then please... all of you...:

Take off! To the Great White North, Take off! It's a "beauty way to go". Take off, "You Hosers". Sorry B, I didn't mean you even though being a Hoser is sometimes not a bad thing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#160 Consumer Comment

James, James, James - Nobody complains about the other 150+ countries who are delinquent, just if the US is overdue.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Every member nation DOES have a seat in the UN. Only the winners of WW2 are on the security council, plus France, Communist China and Russia. Since you want the votes to come from members who are paid up in full, great idea. That would eliminate every country in the UN from voting ever. Nobody complains about the other 150+ countries who are delinquent, just if the US is overdue. That is one of the reasons Jesse Helms made sure we didn't foot the entire bill for the UN, which we do cover at least 1/3 of the costs. One country covering 1/3 and you wonder why we think we own the world.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#159 Consumer Comment

Allah, be praised! I now understand.

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Calgary James,

I personally am sure you forgot to take your meds this morning. I am an alien trapped inside a jar of Vegemite, communicating to you via direct mental beam technology. You really think you're reading this, don't you? Look, Jimbo, I really need for you to do something for me. Take the Stealth Bomber out of the garage and fly to coordinate 52,114 at an altitude of 243 Km and drop a bomb.

My invisible ship's computer will analyse you as a dangerous interloper and miniturize your ship into an internal holding gizwat. Step from your plane and say the words, "Klaatu Ee'dplebnista norkohn forkohn perfectunun." A door will open to your left. No, it does not matter in which direction you are oriented. In a perfect universe, all doorways open to the left, James, remember that. Step into the doorway and say the words, "Klaatu Lingwa Canada Anglophone." The ship will now understand your native language. Always preface each conversation with the word Klaatu so the ship will know you are addressing it. Say, "Klaatu bridge."

You will find that you are sitting before a control console. Press the blue button on the inside wall. Remember, Jim, blue button - inside wall. Then say, "Klaatu Barada Nikto." You will be surrounded by a supressor cage to protect you in the event of collision. You will then hear a monotone voice counting backward from 5 minutes. Sit back, order a ham sandwich and a Molson. For amusement, ask Klaatu to read you the ebook, "To Serve Man." When the countdown is finished, you're almost done. Press the green button and wake up, James, WAKE UP!

Wake up and smell the coffee. Smells good, huh? Well it should, its made from our premium bean fields in the state of Columbia. Here, have a cup. Wouldn't you like a little sugar from our exceptional beet farms in MexAmerika? This busty babe has a teaspoon every morning! And I know you're going to love it when THIS gorgeous number serves your breakfast in bed, comprised of two eggs, hand selected by THIS beauty at our chicken ranch in the glorious state of Egypt, and two strips of bacon fresh from our meat market in Whoa!... Sorry, no Sari! Well, James, all of this can be yours, the food, the bed, the house, and the women, James, the women, all of them can be yours if you sign your name right here where it says, "I pledge allegiance..." Come on, James, you're the last holdout. Just close your eyes, imagine you're lying in that magnificent hydromassage bed, Heidi's fingers gently massaging your temples, as you slowly wake up, James, WAKE UP!

You think bin Laden flew those planes into the WTC and the Pentagon because, what, he couldn't sleep nights imagining he could hear the American planes protecting Kuwait and Northern Iraq, 4000km away? "Allah!", he thinks, "What can a poor ex-freedom fighter do to protect our families and our sacred lands from the deadly threat of those planes? Planes? Planes! Thank you, my wonderful and greatest God for revealing your great Plane, uh... Plan to this poor and humble servant."

Or maybe its just that we're allies with Israel and the next time Egypt and Lebanon try to push the Jewish infidels into the sea, we might bomb Afghanistan in retaliation. Or maybe he was terrified that as he and his merry band of Taliban spread like a cancer throughout the holy land, the US would try to stop them. But that doesn't quite explain the attacks in the 90's in Europe, Africa, Phillipines, Egypt, Saudi Arabia... Wait! He's probably afraid of countries with names begin with a letter in the range of A-Z. That must be it, and he's just protecting his family and country the only way he knows how, by killing thousands of innocent civilians around the world. Its all so sensible when you think about it logically! Poor, misunderstood terrorists.

I can just picture the poor things training in their little desert camps, "Grab beard, pull back, slit. Again. Grab beard, pull back, slit. And do not be afraid as you gun down your brothers in Islam. They will be martyrs to his holy jihad. They will be in his wonderful care. Praise Allah! Praise Allah! Praise Allah! Death to Clinton! Death to America! Death to the world! Grab beard, pull back, slit. Again." Yes, you have a remarkable understanding of these fine, homespun folk, James. Heck, here in the wild west, we see a dog foaming at the mouth like that, we just shoot 'em. I feel so bad.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#158 Consumer Comment

To Bush supporters: Are your offspring in war?

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Let me ask you rich assholes? How many of your siblings are in the military services protecting your assets??? I bet None, but thats because they are in college while the poor have no choice but to serve in military if they want a good college education! I have produced soo much evidence that it's plain to see, but I still have rich people who put doubt in my truth. The Truth will prevail, one way or another! The United States is owned by rich people!The President is a spokesperson, as I have said before! PEOPLE WAKE UP, OUR RIGHTS ARE BEING VIOLATED!!!!!THE UNITED STATES IS TURNING INTO A COMMUNIST COUNTRY!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#157 Consumer Comment

Little do ye know

AUTHOR: R.s. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

I unlike the rest of you are from Louisiana. None of you writing about what really happened in New Orleans knows the REAL truth.
1. Louisiana has been governed by democrats for 40 years.
2. These people have been reduced to the "everything will be given to me" mentality for 40 years.
3. The State/Local government is geared towards "stealing" any dime they can get their hands on to come through with teir "promises"
4. You now have an entire segment of a population that is dependent on government handouts.
5. The same Local govenrment aka: Ray Nagin/Kathleen Blanco/Mary Landrieu that can get hundreds of school buses to take negroes to the polles on election day cannot get the same buses rolling to evacuate the same negroes out 60 hrs. before Katrina hits.
6. The Superdome has been a shelter for years, but Ray Nagin did not provide water/food/transportation/toilets(where does the s**t go if you're below sea level)
7. Governor Blanco called out 2,000 unarmed nat'l guard (out of 60,000 avail. in the state that were'nt even put on alert) to protect a city of 1.5 m people. (I see where GW failed in all of these instances)
8. Our illustrious Governess then NEVER declared martial law like the other 2 governors to our east did. But then I can see where that too is GW's fault.
9. The Red Cross was at the entrance to N.O. within hrs to help but were turned back because Local Gvmt. "Didn't want a bunch of people at the Superdome" (a rescue shelter)
10. The state/local gvmt. failed at a miserable level & did not follow their own city emergency evacuation plan, they depended on the federal gvmt. to do it for them. If anyone doubts this just look at the news interviews given by Blanco/Nagin/Landrieu & you will see the "deer in the headlights look" in all of their eyes.

These people planned to handle this themselves to "show up" the fed. gvmt. & lost it. On to plan "B"---blame it on someone else...GW.

Do any of you really think our troops could have come into N.O. with less than an overwhelming force & plenty of food & water for all without having to quell a riot? Just think,shooting people in the streets of N.O.

Had the situation been handled properly by Blanco plenty of La. Nat'l. Guard would have already been on scene cotrolling the situation.

It's not the fed. gvmt folks it's the dems. that have no clue how to handle power.

Not to mention the political corruption, $30 million dollar grants from FEMA for "levee upgrades" that are "unaccounted for", 45% of all Orleans parish public officials under federal indictments, (all Democrats)and 40 years of knowing that the levees would only withstand a cat 3 hurricane, and not evacuating every person when you knew it was a cat 5, 60 hrs. BEFORE it hit. Ray Nagin. Not mobilizing 50% of your Nat'l. Guard & declaring martial law 2 hrs. after the storm passed. Katleen (deer in the headlights) Blanco. Someone to blame it all on...priceless...GW. Hell, lets just blame everything on him, my hair is turning gray & falling out I figure it's global warming, that danm GW wouldn't sign the Kyoto(sp) accord. I figure when my sperm count drops I could have a conveinient scapegoat for that too.

Just had to add this in there...TAKE OFF YOU HOSER! (you know who you are)We pompass asses down south REALLY could give a $hit less of what you and your socialist gvt. thinks of us. And thats part of what makes us what we are...unique, and THE most powerfull, economically & militarily and that's what the rest of this world cannot stand. Even though you beleive that we are pussies don't ever think that we CAN'T do it, just haven't felt the need to go that far. But hey we're right across the border from you, so mount up the huskies and give it your best shot anytime you tend to be feeling your oats. Just remember what happens, you walk up on my porch and kick my dog in the nuts while he's asleep don't come crying to me when his jaws lock around your throat and you're wanting to be friends.

Others have come before and felt the rath, we may be divided as a people right now but don't ever lull yourself into thinking we can be had, when the time comes this great country of ours will come to be as one and pity be unto the unwitting that attempt to bring her down. YOU KNOB.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#156 Consumer Comment

Whoa, its flyin' so thick I can't even see the point anymore

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

James (from Alberta),

Stop it! You're scaring me. You're beginning to sound as fringe as James (from New York). I know of one incident where a n**i sub sailed into Lake Ontario attempting to rescue some of the important POWs that were housed there. With all the sub activity up & down the Atlantic coast, I'll even believe there were a couple more, but you make it sound like a daily activity. And your trial and conviction attack on Patrick is very mean spirited, not to mention absurd. Talk about someone trying to put their morality over on someone else! There is no court in the world that would find a foot soldier guilty of war crimes he did not personally commit (with the possible exception of the court of al-Zarqawi). Let the facts speak for themselves. You will not convert Patrick any more than Bush will convert the middle east. Tho' I will admit to a certain confusion that over the last couple of centuries so much war and slaughter has been done in the name of the man/god who advocated turning the other cheek.

You oversimplify our governmental structure. Our predominant religious culture appears to believe it is a sort of colonial tribal communism, presided over by an absolute patriarchy that rules from another dimension. Structurally (constitutionally) it is a democratically elected federated republic. Operationally it currently borders on a facist imperialism. 'nuf said


Vera,

I'm just trying to keep the discussion honest. I don't bother with people like Robert from Florida, who's already sold his soul and is willing to distort the truth and outright lie in an attempt to somehow enforce his version of "reality". But you seem like a nice little girl who's just been fed a lot of bad information. LOL! Like I'd trust you with a sharp knife around my trophy bag.

So, let's see, we agree that Clinton should have caged ol' one-eye long ago, that his affair was disrespectful of his office, his wife & family, and set a deplorable example. Beyond that, we part company. Clinton was a public official whose actions may have been embarrassing, but were not illegal. He was publicly humiliated and forced to defend himself against a purely political impeachment. Jim Bakker was a private citizen. He was publicly humiliated. His "brother", the right rev Fallwell, rather than reaching out to his fallen "brother", vilified him in the community. Then he went to jail for 5 years for committing fraud. Both men paid the same price for their indiscretion, public humiliation. Both were further attacked by their "Christian" bretheren while they were on their knees. Bakker went to jail for committing a crime. Clinton was acquitted because he committed none. And as to his timing, what would you suggest? He is 'on the clock' 24/7, he lives in the white house, and he can't leave home without a chaperone. Guess he should have just said no.

And while we're examining ethical behavior... Ken Starr spent a couple of years & millions of taxpayer dollars combing over every detail of the Clintons' finances. When he found no, zip, 0,
impropriety, he started threatening their former associates to perjure themselves or else. He put one woman in isolation for months, charging her with perjury because she wouldn't play ball and offer false testimony. Then he tampered with the Paula Jones case to try to entrap Clinton into perjuring himself. He threatened a reporter who wrote an expose with obstruction of justice charges. He admitted to a judge, and testified before the House Judicial Committee, that he illegally leaked sensitive information to the press. The list goes on. He will never pay for his crimes. And let's not even go into the ethical behavior of the House Judicial Committee. Where's the outrage?

Clinton did not "smoke pot", he admitted to having tried a puff. He did not "dodge the military", it dodged him. Bosnia will never be remembered as "Monica's little war", there is simply no connection whatever. Clinton used his veto power to insist the Congress run a balanced budget, proposed no cuts in military spending, fought for increased school funding. The idea that funding for Clinton's programs didn't take effect until Bush was in office is pure misdirection, ranking right up there with Robert's diatribe on short and long term bonds. Do you guys even bother trying to think these things through before you post them?

All of the votes are counted (except the ones Jeb 'accidentally' put on the no-vote list, and a few others). So, MOST of the votes are counted, but ONLY the electoral votes count. Or did you miss the fact that Gore got half a million more votes than Bush?

Does everything have to be black or white with you? I have not seen one person post anything that would remotely suggest they think Saddam is a good guy (tho' James the Canuk is getting dangerously close). I think Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney were obsessed with Iraq when they took the reins of power, some kind of unfinished bidness. When I say invading Iraq was a stupid, incompetant decision, the worst possible option, I don't mean I think Saddam was a good ol' chap who should be left alone to terrorize his neighbors as he sees fit. When I say GWB deliberately misled the American public and the Congress so he could pursue his own agenda, it doesn't mean I think every child should be left behind or that I support abortion. When I say the threat from Saddam was relatively minor, and there were lots of less costly ways to deal with him, I don't mean I think BJ Clinton was an angel who could do no wrong. Although, who knows, maybe Bush really is part of some larger conspiracy; maybe this costly, deadly infighting is exactly what he wants; maybe in a couple of years it will all become clear and lead to something we all want; maybe it will be the start of 7 years of unrivalled world peace and prosperity.

So, let's say 90% of the men in Tupper Lake for the last century have fathered a child with their daughter. Does that mean that if James does so, its to be expected, its ok, or maybe not quite ok, but, hey, whatchagonnado? That seems to be what you are suggesting when you say, "And as far as not offering any coherent evidence that Bush is a rip-off, well, you all haven't offered any evidence that Kerry or Clinton was any better." But that's not the point is it? This is a forum for posting pros and cons about business and individuals, and this particular report is cases where Bush is a rip-off, and the last I checked, Clinton's rip-offs don't excuse or in any way mitigate Bush's. If you want me to respond to Clinton or Kerry rip-offs, start a complaint, I'll respond. We seem to be discussing everything from the founding of the country to the present, everything but Bush.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#155 Consumer Comment

I found James' book of "facts"

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

It's titled "working For The Enemy". It claims Henry Ford and Adolf Hitler were best friends and even kept pictures of each other on their desks. I am not making this up. Too fuuny. THis book claims all sorts of wierd stuff, and mirrirs nearly everything James has been spouting as Historical Fact.

As an aside James, the report that I wrote about by the Post War commission, also exonerated GM and Ford for any complicity with wartime German production. Prewar does not matter at all, as until hostilities begin, we're all just one big happy. In fact, it stated clearly that the subsidiaries were all autonomous from the parent corporations and pretty much did as they wanted, or had to. Ford and GM both made ZERO profit from the factories in occupied Europe, and spent millions repairing postwar, therefore, once again nullifying your entire argument. The numbers are all extremely accurate since the n**i's were impeccable papershufflers. The FRench cannot count so who really knows what they turned out. Ninety-Three in French is spoken Nine-Ten-Three. How's that for a number system.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#154 Consumer Comment

Can you EVER be correct James?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

According to the Allied Command along with the Germans themselves at the end of the war, the actual figures for wheeled prime movers(trucks) is between 87K-92K. This figure includes ALL made by Ford-Werke and Opel, German and French. Some number crunching was done due to the fact that the French cannot count. This is, once again well below the made up figures(350K) you cite. If they had that many trucks, they could have just driven over us and won the war. The US built 434K trucks by comparison. At the end of the war, just as at the beginning, the bulk of the German Army was still being pulled by horses.

This is is beginning to really look like a one sided battle, since you came unarmed for combat. You cite "facts" that are untrue, as is provable by anyone doing a search, and when all else fails you, you accept the loss with a disclaimer. The space/time continuum doesn't even affect your theories. Your theory about the Arrow being the first because someone drew a design on paper before anyone else(not provable) is like what I am about to say. I am the inventor of the first rocket-car, personal space transmogrifier, and quantum worm hole accelerator. None of this means a thing since none of it has been made. If you don't make it, you don't get the credit for it. In reality, the first supersonic plane at all was the Komet...a rocket fighter the Germans used. Several sonic booms were heard when ME-262's would dive to escape with P-51's hot on their tails. This means the Mustangs were hitting the sound barrier also.

Good luck though James, this is kind of fun. Keep throwing them out, and I'll keep hitting them out of the park.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#153 Consumer Comment

Someone should feel sorry for me? Why? Do I have a relative in Canada I don't know about?

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Dear Lord...is that relative named "James"?
Time to prune the ol' Family Tree.

"100% of your post only bashes "with no evidence given" everyone who at least is staying on topic "for the most part".
Interesting. I've stated Vancouver sources, sources from ABC News, and others. Read outside of Move On, and Michael Moore-On (or other movies), you might learn a thing or two. Maybe three. All you've done is present a bunch of factless half-baked info, according to what your one news source tells you.

"When you are not bashing someone "personally", you are bashing the Democrats. Bashing the Canadians, bashing people who live in a different part of the Country than you do."
Jesus, for someone who's so well-read as you claim to be you can't write worth a Tinker's d**n.
And tell me, what are you doing, sticking your nose into American Affairs and presenting your diluted non-accurate spew. Fine case of the pot calling the kettle black.

"The subject is the USA's right to be in Iraq & Afganistan..."
Funny, seems to me that there's mention of President Bush in the main title, accompanied by the opinion of some mental midget that lives in Tupper Lake who's afraid to criticize his local Government. Tell me, Darlin', what facts has HE presented? I'm sure you'll say "plenty", as his view is as occluded as yours. See? I can insist that your information is non-factual repeatedly, as well. Does it make you feel less "right" in your puffing and posturing? No, I'm sure. Remember that it works two ways.

Odd, too, is the fact that I don't remember bringing in topics ranging from Ford trucks to U-Boats, Blackouts, and the depth of a lake. Now, who was it who did that?

"Think Globally, act Locally", to coin the phrase of the millennium.

"Without debating these issues... some people will never be able to get a "real grasp" of all the issues, before making a stand. A stand they should make!" (Yehss, young Jedi!)
Speaking of attacks on character, how many times are you gonna call people like me "uninformed and dumb" in off-color ways? Get over yourself. Incidentally, I do have a grasp of what's going on in the world and it's quite good; I just choose to form my own opinions. If that bugs you, tough. Why don't you go take another class from the local University of Terrorist Sympathy, sit down, shut your cake hole and let the Americans discuss their issues among their own people.

I do not wish to be infected with your bent logic.
Your information only serves you the way you like, and you edit out the parts you don't like.

"Protesters are not just in their 20's my dear."
Have you ever taken a course in "Logic". Where did I say that "All protestors are in their 20's"? I believe the statement was to the effect (not AFFECT) of: "As a result, your average 22 year old protester..."

" Finally they got successful too. When those "drafted troops" came..."
Yeah, Jane Fonda did put a nasty spin on things, in addition to most of the Great Unwashed.
My Brother In law served in 'Nam. He remembers the "Welcome Home" very well.

"However the people of "my generation" at least had the intestinal fortitude to hold some protests..." Wow. Great fortitude to march in circles in a country that's really not all that much involved anyway (Respected? More like a benign---not BENEVOLENT---presence.). Sorta like watching a rock concert with the volume turned off.

James, talking to you is like watching a train wreck in slow-motion. You know the outcome, but still, morbid curiousity forces one to sit glued.

"As the UN wanted, we are helping set up this new government that they wanted."
A 'New Government' that wouldn't be possible without US helping them by toppling Saddam (not "Suddam"). A Democracy created with the help United States Presence. Please tell me, that these people would have been able to "vote" out Saddam. Better yet, try telling me that you haven't seen the Votes. Or did your precious CBC only show you the US Monster, Berserking in The streets, killing and stomping? Smashin' daisies?

"Archie Bunker and I would make great friends"?
I don't have problems with Muslims, per se. I know that the REAL Muslim religion is very quiet, spiritual, and peaceful. I don't have a problem with blacks, Hindus, Chinese, Japanese, Hispanics, and so on. What I have a problem with, Angel, is the terrorist regime. I have a problem with the cowardly warfare they institute. I have a problem with people who support and defend, using "Muslim" as a blanket term to identify ALL of the pepple from the Mid-East. Just because they cry "Allah" doesn't mean they are the same Muslims that pray peacefully, and devote themselves to a spiritual persuit.

Your diatribe is as Anti-American as mine is Anti-Terrorist and Anti-Michael Moore-On.

"sometimes the voting populace here needs a "brick to fall on their head" before we turf a party out of office."
Sorta like Kerry did, Hunh?

"Yet, I speak to "another subject" here."
Oh, no! Not again! Robert (fla.)...he's gonna soil the carpet again!

"...simply because they were either "pompass", or "self righteous blindly following Bush" or simply "name callers" as you just spent 100% of your post on."
There's that word again. It's "POMPOUS"! Feel free to use, hopefully spelled correctly, in the next bout of explosive verbal diarrhea. And when is "pompous" not "name-calling"? Please tell me where you see me stating (in UNALTERED print, directly form one of my posts) that I believe Bush is one hundred percent correct (cutting and pasting this part doesn't count, Wiseguy.)...and he's not. I don't agree with everything he does. I'm just sick of the pandering "Anybody But Bush" crowd pissing and moaning. In three years, there will be a new President in office, and y'all can bemoan him.

And again, 100% of my rebuttals aren't insulting. You're just pissed because I'm a better speller than you.

Okay, one more...
"...If you have a "point" Vera, make it." Okay. if you'll look to the top of your head (take off the maple-leaf patterned Musher's cap, rofl!)....see that cone-shape? (Really, I couldn't resist.) There's my point, Jimbo.

Seriously...I could say the same...if you have a VALID POINT, feel free to make it. Without Ford Trucks, power-grid failures, submarines, and carefully edited and spun information. Just like you're accusing me of doing.

Outside of alla that...leave me alone. It wouldn't have gone this far, had you not specifically singled me out. (You'll note that my first Rebuttal is titled "You didn't ask for it, but here's my take". It was merely an "insertion of my opinion".) I know it's tough for you to accept, but not everyone thinks like that mouth of yours. Can'tcha just agree to disagree, instead of trying to force me to believe you as correct? "Peace-Loving"? Please. You're virtually frothing in some of your rebuttals. You're only "peaceful" when others agree with you. Typical. [eyeroll]

To Robert (fla.) and Patrick (ariz.), thanks for your input and support. Your presentation of THE REST OF THE STORY, rather than James' little "excerpts", was insightful and appreciated.
Rock on, mi Amigos...rock on. You guys are awesome. Even Ben's pretty cool, and whether or not he believes in the Almighty, that's his choice. We'll all find out the Answer in the End. I'm not a religious zealot, or a homophobe, I'm just a taxpaying (we pay too much) "little guy" like everyone else, I'm sure.

And remember; "If the women can't find you handsome, they might as well find you handy. Keep your stick on the ice, we're pullin' for yah."
[Pinky wave and a smile!]
"Semper Ubi Sub Ubi!"

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#152 Consumer Comment

Here's to the Canadian education system!

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Oh my gosh. James, you are so wrong on so many things, where oh where do I begin? Let's see...

James says I was the first one to name call. WRONG! You did that on Adam's GC&T report by calling me the president of "Club Moron".

James says that, and I quote, "Canadians invented & flew the "first supersonic jet fighter", the Avro Arrow, just at the end of WWII". WRONG! I have already shown that the F-86 Saber was the world's first supersonic jet fighter, and was flown 11 years prior to the Arrow. Now, if you had only said that, at the time, Canada had the best fighter, that might have been a topic of debate. But you said "invented and flew the first" which is absolutely false. Oh, and don't think I didn't notice how you changed the spelling on Avro this time, James.

James says there were n**i U-boats operating in Lake Ontario. WRONG! There is no way a U-boat could have made it all the way up the St Lawrence submerged. Robert in Jacksonville has already addressed this. Oh, but then James changes his tune to say can't verify his claim. Yeah, right.

James says that n**i U-boats were only 15 feet high. WRONG! Most mini-subs of today are that high or higher. As Robert said, U-boats were about 45 feet high from keel to mast, depending on the boat.

James says that Germany and Japan rebuilt themselves after losing WWII. WRONG! Were it not for the massive support of the US, neither of these countries would be where they are today.

James, is this what we can expect from the Canadian education system?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#151 Consumer Suggestion

Horray Beth Quinn!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Greg;

Thank you for that piece of "sane logic" from a true American who can see the forest for the trees.

Yet how do you impeach a President who holds a majority of the seats in the House? Congress too!

I doubt that is possible, & probably barking up the wrong tree!

People put down Moore, but he sure made a "big deal" over this Haliberton thing! How could intelligent Americans not scream after this company get's yet another contract?

Money, money, money & where is the pot it is taken from? All of you "Bush backers" are gonna pay through the nose for this! When you are really broke & in the depths of recession, as terrorism just will not seem to quit... will you wake up then? What will it take? Do all of you need to loose your job's first? Good ol George is working on that too if you don't live in his 1%.
If the guy was not as "dumb as a lamp post", you might see a bright future "somehow" in what he is doing.

Don't you understand that if you even "nuked" the middle east (as if you could without killing off all of Isreal), that you still would have merely "skimmed the surface" of the Muslim's you have so enraged? Like "as if" the oil there would be any use to you anyway! Oh no! Then it would not be worth fighting over! As if in "reality" it ever was worth concentrating on it, rather than "alternative fuels".

Meanwhile the places up for sale in New Orleans are going (with flooded basements) now for over $400,000.00! How many of you "middle class" could afford that? They might rename it "Bushville" when done! Lot's of protection for the rich too. All in a Country that is built on the words: "By the People & for The People". Now someone just needs to insert "rich" into that logo.

For those of you "smart enough" to grasp all of this, call your Congressman! Call your Mayor! Call anyone & write anyone who has political standing in your area & tell them that this "Bushland" is not your vision of America. There are not going to be too many argueing with you. You might get awarded for making a stand! Don't forget Iraq when you do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#150 Consumer Suggestion

Robert from Florida - Why shouldn't "every Country" in the World have a seat in the UN, & equally pay for it's upkeep

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Robert;

Ok you open up a "new issue"... so I will go along.

Why shouldn't "every Country" in the World have a seat in the UN, & equally pay for it's upkeep by the percentage of people they represent accordingly?

Nobody get's Veto power, but no Country get's a vote if they are not paid up with their obligations on a "monthly basis"?

Then, if a Country like Iraq needs to be invaded, by vote of the majority of the security council, it is UN troops that do it?

Wouldn't that put terrorists in their place? It sure would give them a hard time figureing out who to point fingers at... expecially if the vote was a "secret ballot".

I know that idea does not go over well for Countries that want to take over the World, but for the rest of the World it might! It definately would go a "long way" to ending "all wars".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#149 Consumer Comment

seditionist pig

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

James in Tupper Lake, New York

You really are a seditionist pig. I thought you were just in love with yourself. I wonder where YOU were on 9/11. Maybe the FBI ought to check into your whereabouts during that time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#148 Consumer Comment

Too funny

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

It's just soooo funny to see the rantings of a liberal sometimes. They blame everything thing they can on the President for the sole purpose of making the Republican Party look bad. A sad pathetic tactic to use in getting more votes for their party. Tell me now, did the President do a rain dance, or did he borrow a research plane and seed the clouds to create Hurricane Katrina? You Democrats are just digging yourselves deeper and deeper into a cesspool of contempt and discredit.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#147 Consumer Comment

Oh Really?...Just the facts please!

AUTHOR: Kevin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush

Oh really?

Bush cut the funding for the levee maintenance program by 80%. In fact, Bush fired Michael Parker, a former Republican Mississippi congressman who headed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from October 2001 until March 2002, when he was ousted after publicly criticizing a Bush administration proposal to cut the corps' budget. He was given 30 minutes notice to either retire, or be fired... Parker's transgression? He had testified before a Senate subcommittee that the levees needed to be upgraded to avoid a catastrophic flood. He had brought in two identical pieces of steel - except that one was new and strong, while the other had been corroded by 30 years of being under water. He showed that the levees were in drastic need of repair. But Bush fired him and cut the funding. http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0905/090105jv1.htm

On June 8, 2004, Walter Maestri, emergency management chief for Jefferson Parish, Louisiana; told the Times-Picayune: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001051313

Where did the money go? Over $200 BILLION has so far been spent on a war in the wrong country... From Colin Powell's aid, it is now known that Bush twisted intelligence to create justification to take our country to war. http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/index.html

Similarly, Bush twisted the findings of Ambassador Joseph Wilson's trip to determine if Iraq had tried to buy nuclear fuel in Africa. And in his 2002 State of the Union address Bush gave America the impression that Iraq had nuclear weapons that they were going to use against us. When Wilson publicly exposed that Bush had intentionally misrepresented his report in order to take our country to war, in political retrobution, Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's aid, "Scooter" Libby, leaked to the press that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a covert CIA operative - thus destroying her career .. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-17-libby-cooper_x.htm

We now know that there never were any Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, just as the UN inspectors reported. Whoops? We invaded the wrong country based on faulty intelligence that was created to meet the objectives of our President? And in the process we destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians? Well, then the White House simply switched the justification for the war to being "Regime Change". Saddam needed to be taken out. But, unfortunately, "He needed killin'" is not a legitimate reason to go to war - except in Texas...

Bush's own staff (Richard Clark and Paul O'Neill) brought to light that Bush started invasion plans of Iraq - SEVEN months before 9/11. Bin Laden was not in that country. But Bush was determined to go to war. Why? Because of war profiteering. Halliburton got BILLION dollar no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq. And after the Army said that Halliburton billed millions for meals that were never delivered, 15% of the payment was suspended pending an investigation. The next day Vice President Cheney, Halliburton's former CEO, stepped in and then the payments were made... http://www.serco.com/media/industrynews/ItemPage.asp?ItemID=3246307

Oh, and who stands to benefit big time from the mess in New Orleans? Halliburton...
http://houston.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2005/09/05/daily5.html

Meanwhile, FEMA recognized the potential catastrophe and held a disaster preparedness drill to focus directly on the problem. A fictional Category 3 Hurricane Pam, with "winds of 120 mph, up to 20 inches of rain... and a storm surge that topped the levees," was the picture presented to officials from 50 federal, local and volunteer organizations, according to a Federal Emergency Management Agency dispatch from July 23, 2004.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/02/hurricane.drill/

So the comment, "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." by President Bush on Good Morning America 9/1/2005 really is beyond belief.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/katrina/stories/090205dntexkatgovt.17ab5516.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2005/09/01/BL2005090100915.html?nav=rss_politics

Hence, Bush is a failure... Or at least Google, and two-thirds of America think so...

(Go to Google.com, type in "failure" (without the quotation marks), and press the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button instead of the "Google Seach" button.)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#146 Consumer Comment

George is worst natural disaster to hit country

AUTHOR: Greg - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

This is one writer's opinion. I think it sums it up.

By Beth Quinn, Times Herald-Record

Well, folks, the only thing left up in the air now is whether George Bush is the worst president ever. Herbert Hoover has held the title since 1933.

It's been neck and neck for a while, but I think Bush pulled ahead with his spectacular failure in handling Katrina.

George Bush is a walking catastrophe. Far more than even Katrina, he is one of the worst disasters to ever hit America. His performance these past two weeks seemed a showcase for his utter stupidity and indifference, complete with flood, fire and floating bodies.

It was an epic performance that, more than anything else thus far, has revealed his true, craven self.

And now he wants to lay it on us. Soon we'll be seeing bumper stickers that say, "Buy gasoline or the hurricane will have won."



Somehow, all Americans are now "in this together" and we have to make up for his bumbling incompetence, beginning with picking up the tab for rebuilding the Gulf states.

To paraphrase the words of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, "Holy bullcrap!"

I've got to tell you, I get a lot of e-mails from folks who claim they're offended when I criticize this guy. But now I'm the one who's offended. Really.

I'm offended that Bush has only just now discovered that there are poor, black people in America.

I'm offended by the entire Bush family, who have established a culture of greed in this country and have been unable to disguise their contempt for the poor an attitude evidenced in all its wild glory by George's mama when she said a week after Katrina hit:

"So many of the people in the (Houston) arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this this (she chuckled slightly) is working very well for them."

Oh those greedy poor people who just want to take advantage of living like cattle in an arena.

I'm offended that Bush, upon his return to the White House finally! two days after Katrina hit, spent his first few hours back making yet another recess appointment of a federal judge, one whom the Senate had already rejected as too weird.

I'm offended that, when Bush finally realized he should at least pretend some concern for the dead and dying in the Gulf states, he carefully rolled up his sleeves for his photo op as though he were going to be fishing dead bodies out of the water his very own self.

I'm offended that, somehow, Halliburton won again when one of its subsidiaries was automatically granted a $29.8 million government contract to clean up New Orleans. Don't we have a bidding process in this country anymore? Everything has to go to Cheney's cheating company?

I'm offended by Bush's unwillingness to name a bipartisan panel to investigate just what what! the hell went wrong in our hurricane response.

I'm offended that those who lost everything in Katrina will be unable to declare bankruptcy because they can't possibly gather up all their drowned and burned paperwork to prove they've got nothing left.

I'm offended that Bush went on television to lay out a $200 billion rebuilding plan without saying a single word about how that might get paid for just as the No Child Left Behind Act is unfunded; just as the Medicare prescription plan is unfunded; just as his insane war in Iraq is unfunded and raising our deficit to dizzying heights.

I'm offended that Bush has bankrupt our nation of money, goodwill and morality.

I'm offended that no one in Congress has yet called for his impeachment.

Most of all, I'm offended by those Americans who still insist that this sociopath is a swell guy, a terrific leader, a fine thinker. What is wrong with you people?!

And if this column offends you, I don't care. Anyone offended by the truth is living in a bubble world, kind of like the Superdome. And we all know what happens when the roof gets blown off a bubble world.

Reality. Yuck. How offensive.

Copyright Orange County Publications.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#145 Consumer Comment

Wow James! Now it's trucks.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Ford trucks, eh? Okay, I'll bite. They were actually built in both France and Germany under licensing agreement with Ford, just like the JU-52 transport planes. These agreements were made during the 1920's, before Hitler was even thought of. Since you are from Canada, I'll teach you a little about business. Just because your country is at war, does not mean you have to stop building stuff for your government. What did you think they were going to do? Design a whole new truck and retool the factory just so they'd be "clean" in the twisted mind of some guy in 2005? France built them too, but I guess that's okay since it's France.

Of course, France provided the Wehrmacht with more "foreign" volunteers than any other country, another shining moment in French History. France(Canada's pretty sister) was so enamored by the n**i's that only half the country was occupied. The southern half was happy to be part of the team. The French Navy even fought AGAINST the British and Americans rather than join the real Allies.

The real question you should be asking James, is NOT whay America has veto power, but why does France even sit on the Security Council at all? They, like Communist China, did NOT win the war. The Security Council was set up so the winners had power. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia should be out too. The Republic of China(Taiwan) should have the seat for the Chinese, since this is where the Nationalists went after the war. Why in heavens' name does France have their seat at all. They were on both sides of the war, and a very unwilling ally to us in their entirety.

Tell you what Mr Wizard...You give us some actual verifiable evidence, and we'll check it and say you got us. This does not include the ramblings of other conspiracy kooks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#144 Consumer Comment

Wow James! Now it's trucks.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Ford trucks, eh? Okay, I'll bite. They were actually built in both France and Germany under licensing agreement with Ford, just like the JU-52 transport planes. These agreements were made during the 1920's, before Hitler was even thought of. Since you are from Canada, I'll teach you a little about business. Just because your country is at war, does not mean you have to stop building stuff for your government. What did you think they were going to do? Design a whole new truck and retool the factory just so they'd be "clean" in the twisted mind of some guy in 2005? France built them too, but I guess that's okay since it's France.

Of course, France provided the Wehrmacht with more "foreign" volunteers than any other country, another shining moment in French History. France(Canada's pretty sister) was so enamored by the n**i's that only half the country was occupied. The southern half was happy to be part of the team. The French Navy even fought AGAINST the British and Americans rather than join the real Allies.

The real question you should be asking James, is NOT whay America has veto power, but why does France even sit on the Security Council at all? They, like Communist China, did NOT win the war. The Security Council was set up so the winners had power. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia should be out too. The Republic of China(Taiwan) should have the seat for the Chinese, since this is where the Nationalists went after the war. Why in heavens' name does France have their seat at all. They were on both sides of the war, and a very unwilling ally to us in their entirety.

Tell you what Mr Wizard...You give us some actual verifiable evidence, and we'll check it and say you got us. This does not include the ramblings of other conspiracy kooks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#143 Consumer Comment

Wow James! Now it's trucks.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Ford trucks, eh? Okay, I'll bite. They were actually built in both France and Germany under licensing agreement with Ford, just like the JU-52 transport planes. These agreements were made during the 1920's, before Hitler was even thought of. Since you are from Canada, I'll teach you a little about business. Just because your country is at war, does not mean you have to stop building stuff for your government. What did you think they were going to do? Design a whole new truck and retool the factory just so they'd be "clean" in the twisted mind of some guy in 2005? France built them too, but I guess that's okay since it's France.

Of course, France provided the Wehrmacht with more "foreign" volunteers than any other country, another shining moment in French History. France(Canada's pretty sister) was so enamored by the n**i's that only half the country was occupied. The southern half was happy to be part of the team. The French Navy even fought AGAINST the British and Americans rather than join the real Allies.

The real question you should be asking James, is NOT whay America has veto power, but why does France even sit on the Security Council at all? They, like Communist China, did NOT win the war. The Security Council was set up so the winners had power. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia should be out too. The Republic of China(Taiwan) should have the seat for the Chinese, since this is where the Nationalists went after the war. Why in heavens' name does France have their seat at all. They were on both sides of the war, and a very unwilling ally to us in their entirety.

Tell you what Mr Wizard...You give us some actual verifiable evidence, and we'll check it and say you got us. This does not include the ramblings of other conspiracy kooks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#142 Consumer Comment

Wow James! Now it's trucks.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Ford trucks, eh? Okay, I'll bite. They were actually built in both France and Germany under licensing agreement with Ford, just like the JU-52 transport planes. These agreements were made during the 1920's, before Hitler was even thought of. Since you are from Canada, I'll teach you a little about business. Just because your country is at war, does not mean you have to stop building stuff for your government. What did you think they were going to do? Design a whole new truck and retool the factory just so they'd be "clean" in the twisted mind of some guy in 2005? France built them too, but I guess that's okay since it's France.

Of course, France provided the Wehrmacht with more "foreign" volunteers than any other country, another shining moment in French History. France(Canada's pretty sister) was so enamored by the n**i's that only half the country was occupied. The southern half was happy to be part of the team. The French Navy even fought AGAINST the British and Americans rather than join the real Allies.

The real question you should be asking James, is NOT whay America has veto power, but why does France even sit on the Security Council at all? They, like Communist China, did NOT win the war. The Security Council was set up so the winners had power. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia should be out too. The Republic of China(Taiwan) should have the seat for the Chinese, since this is where the Nationalists went after the war. Why in heavens' name does France have their seat at all. They were on both sides of the war, and a very unwilling ally to us in their entirety.

Tell you what Mr Wizard...You give us some actual verifiable evidence, and we'll check it and say you got us. This does not include the ramblings of other conspiracy kooks.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#141 Consumer Suggestion

Robert from Florida

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Robert;

Let's have a little "cut & paste" section on what was actually said, although I still see it as symantics. However maybe I can admit where I was wrong & you might do the same, then we could move on to the real issue at hand.

I said:

WWII was "already over" as far as Germany is concerned before Germany declared war on the USA! Which is the "only reason" why the US quit selling weapons to Germany. Rommel was on his knees, as Montgomery put him there, way before the USA entered the war. Russia was driving the n**i's back as well. Henry Ford had a photo on his desk of Adolf & "visa versa".

You said:

I know you went to a government school up there because you have a thoroughly deluded vision of history. My country did NOT sell any arms to Germany. Where did you ever get the impression we did? The closest we got was the design of the JU87(StuKA). It was designed and offered to our government, but we turned it down for political reasons. The design was then sold to Junkers and they made it work. Sopwith designed the AM6(ZEKE/ZERO) which was sold to Japan and built by Mitsubishi. This was after the British government turned it down... prefering wood and canvas over aluminum, which was in short supply. I guess everyone makes mistakes. Henry Ford supported the NAZIs during the 30's, but stopped when they went into Poland. It was first, a business decision, then a moral one

I have shown you where you are "compleatly wrong" about Ford & you know nothing about the other companies that sold to Germany during WWII. As posted USA was still selling to n**i Germany in the 40's while n**i u boats were fighting Canadian shipping on the St. Lawerence. That is still in "our" shared waters. Definately part of the Continent.

Then I said:

The USA was so "righteous" as they sold weapons to n**i Germany almost during the "entirety" of the war. Definately while German subs were cruising their way through Lake Ontario, destroying shipping from Canada to that war effort. Uh... many Americans forget that Canada was at war with Germany from the beginning!

Obviously it was a 2 part statement referring to the amount of help USA really gave to us during a "righteous war", but in the end claiming that they "won it for us" which definately makes you pompass if you believe that. Point 1 already shown to you. I cannot show you "sub remains" from WWII in Lake Ontario. However that was not my point! My point was in the first & second part, that the USA not only was helping the n**i's while they were at war with Canada, but they also gave a "rat's a*s" that n**i subs invaded our Continent while the USA was selling the n**i's weapons. Point proven... but...

You said:

My sides are splitting. You are getting goofier with every post. Now the U-Boots were operating in the Great Lakes? What are you smoking? Maybe that's what happened to the Edmund Fitzgerald. A U-Boot was still hanging around 30 years later and sank the freighter. You are a riot. James, nobody here is saying Canada wasn't in WW2 before the US entered it.

Well I am glad it is so funny Robert, but it also is a fact! I don't have proof of Lake Ontario of any U-Boot's as I don't know exactly what they are, nor do I know if those boots come in all sizes, but I do have proof of U Boats in the St. Lawerence. The point is the same. When we had a threat on our Continent, the USA sat back & sold weapons to the Enemy.

Then my exact quote on the Arrow was:

Never mind the fact that Canadians invented & flew the "first supersonic jet fighter", the Avro Arrow, just at the end of WWII, which was "much superior" to anything the USA had developed at the time.

My claim that it was superior I guess is a matter of debate. In my mind it was. Since we have little more than "blue prints" to make a comparison to what the USA had at the time, & nothing could be "tested" today in any kind of competition... I will have to call a "draw" on that one. I might even have to take a "back seat" on the issue Robert, as it was clearly not the "first", as you pointed out, even if I do think it was superior.

Now what does this all have to do with anything Robert? You were clearly trying to put down Canada's achievements & I was pointing out that the USA not only made money from "both sides" during WWII, but did not seem to mind when our enemies came into & destroyed shipping in "our mutual" waters.

I would think the USA would be "irate" if Canada sold weapons to Bin Laden before 911 & that the USA would be "more than livid" if we sold them trucks & tech's after!!! Or Suddam for that matter! Even if we did not do it "purposely", as we were the first to blame after 911 for letting these terrorists into your Country. Even if it has been shown now, not to be the case. The USA had years to think about selling things to the n**i's after those subs invaded our Continent. I quote:

Of the 350,000 trucks used by the motorized German Army as of 1942, roughly one-third were Ford products. Imagine the surprise of American troops when they saw the enemy--the Wehrmacht_driving around in Ford vehicles. "They were understandably an unpleasant sight to men in the US Army," reported Silverstein.

That is what makes the USA pompass! If you were on the other side of the coin, you probably would be thinking that way.

Now I am Scottish as well. If you remember, it was our ancestory that were the Pipers. The Ladies from Hell. We never lost, but we "hated like hell" to be put into battle against our beliefs. If for that reason only, for our heritage, we should not be fighting people who did not "attack or opress us" first. Can we not agree on at least that?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#140 Consumer Suggestion

Oh & poor Dear Vera... 100% of your post only bashes "with no evidence given"

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Vera;

Hon someone should feel sorry for you. 100% of your post only bashes "with no evidence given" everyone who at least is staying on topic "for the most part".

When you are not bashing someone "personally", you are bashing the Democrats. Bashing the Canadians, bashing people who live in a different part of the Country than you do.

The "funny thing" is that I see few "Democrat Post's" here. Most are Republican or Libitarian or "neither" as I am.

The subject is the USA's right to be in Iraq & Afganistan & the fact that these "unjustified wars" are costing a lot of money & killing people. Never mind the "assured future terrorism" we can all look forward to, as you sit there screaming about "everything else" but the subject.

Some people think Suddam is a Monster for going into Kuwait, but don't remember that Kuwait was "slant drilling illegally".

Some people believe Suddam did have WMD's but don't realise this was only a "smoke screen" to make an invasion possible.

Some people are horrified at the attrocities committed by people from the middle east, but don't understand they have no other way of defending their culture.

Without debating these issues... some people will never be able to get a "real grasp" of all the issues, before making a stand. A stand they should make!

Protesters are not just in their 20's my dear. How old do you think the people are who took up the cause of the Veitnam War? Finally they got successful too. When those "drafted troops" came home, it was the "war mongers" who could not debate a good reason for them to stay, that treated them like crap! You & Archie Bunker would be great pals! You seem to think alike.

However the people of "my generation" at least had the intestinal fortitude to hold some protests & do something about it. I wonder where they have gone. Bring out the beads! Time for another Woodstock! At least know what you are talking about.

Never mind bashing of Canadians who do not like wageing war! You will rarely find us in anything but a "peace keeping" role & that is how we like it! We are respected "all over the world" because of it. Sure we make guns & bullets. We sell them to the USA too. We also have Nuclear Bombs on our soil & are friendly with Americans when it comes to protecting "our Continent". The Canadian Government cannot stop "private business" from doing business with anyone in the world... unlike the USA. We need a "declaration of war" to do that.

However although we did not follow you into Iraq, we are in Afganistan doing a "peace keeping role", as it was UN sanctioned. As the UN wanted, we are helping set up this new government that they wanted. Our Government is as frustrating as your own at times, & in many ways just as much as a "rip off". Piles of money is waisted on "dumb things" & sometimes the voting populace here needs a "brick to fall on their head" before we turf a party out of office. We have gotten rid of "good Govenment's too". In my opinion the "good ones" were the ones that you would call "Republican".

Yet, I speak to "another subject" here. People! Most Canadians & Americans dis agree with troops in the middle east. In "both Countries", the populace is more concerned with terrorism, than the government obviously is.

So, it is up to us "people" to stop this silliness & make a "big deal" out of it, until the politicians get the point as they finally did with Vietnam.

Debates, not "name calling" on websites like this are the best way to do it. I have "name called back" at people who assaulted me first like, Patrick, Robert from Florida. & yourself simply because they were either "pompass", or "self righteous blindly following Bush" or simply "name callers" as you just spent 100% of your post on.

If you have a "point" Vera, make it. You made points about the Muslims & it was debated. You made points about BJ's & it was debated. You made points about 911 & it was debated. You made points about religeous beliefs & it was debated. Debate Vera, just not "un backed & without facts or proof" name calling would be nice.

Try Tweeting that... it might be a more pleasant song.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#139 Consumer Comment

Ackk. You're boring me now, James.... now, you just sound more like a loon.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Eighteen posts in, and you still don't get it, do you? I've had gas that's more pleasant than you (and doesn't smell half as bad as your opinion). You're like a case of the mudd-butt, James.

You mentioned Countries that do no have Veto power as the United States "pompassly has".
'Kay. Show me. (Psstt...it's "Pompously".)
Remember SPEEL CHEKUR IZ UR FREND. {wink!}

So Hitler and Ford made money together. History has shown us, that appeasing the crocodile only means you're the LAST to get eaten. Add to that, it was the fact that Ford's treatment of his employees was so monstrous, it bought about the formation of Labor Unions.

"You don't seem to remember he was a "s**t". You don't seem to remember that Thomas Jefferson raped his slave girls!" Yep, sure...or might that be Canadian propaganda? (Looking back and forth with quick, darting glances.) I stated that "Our hisorical heroes were human." Incidentally, Sampson (of Bible fame) had concubines...and I still liked him, too. Remember me mentioning that Clinton, while not my choice as President, was a likeable guy?

"...The Blackout of the Eastern Seaboard...It was a "thunder storm" right?"
Was it? I dunnoh. I haven't researched it. I was in Ohio, and from what I recall, the fault lay in some three transmission lines somewhere in Ohio. We lost power too. Do I play the victim card? No. But if it was a big bad TStorm, did Mommie come in and tuck in your blankie? Talk about an apples to oranges comparison! As if Canada was the only place affected! (There's that 'revolting hubris' again!) How can you even make this connection!??! It's not like a downed power grid is the start of the war, genius. (Better get your tinfoil hats out, just in case the aliens come.)

"Yes I did mean sense there Vera & sorry I mispelled it. I don't know who you should have voted for. Maybe Libitarian! I just know the war is wrong!" (A-ahem...."Libertarian".) What's this got to do with the price of fish? Oh--before I forget: I don't need YOU to know whom I shouldvote for....I know whom I shoould have (and did) vote for.

Anyway, apology accepted. That wasn't hard, now, was it?

"They are "terrorists Vera" & that is the only way they can fight back."
Why? You and others here have pointed out all this money and help they've gotten from the US. Why not just fly in some of the planes we sold 'em, or use some of our own nukes/chemical weapons we've sold them? After all, according to you and your ilk, we've sold them so much!

"They have to do it the "old fashioned" way..."

Oh, YES, let's DO! The old-fashioned way, when armies FACED EACH OTHER! Not slinked around like rats with payloads that wipe out women and children as well as parts of the intended target. What the hell kinda threat does a bus full of Jewish College Students represent? They bombed those in Gaza. What threat is a Turkish Coffee House? A Cafe? They bomb those too. Real heroic. These are the "poor people" you defend. If they're so doggone poor, how can they afford to "buy" weapons from the US?

"...Or would you feel 100% wrong..."
Truthfully, I wouldn't feel anything; vaporization happens fairly fast in the presence of a nuclear detonation. But I can picture you, pausing just long enough to feel self-righteous.
To each his own 'Mecca". If that's what makes the wave of rapture overtake you, then so be it. Let the warm spunk flow. I still remain unbudged.

Oh, and don't forget...
Say my name, say my name...you know, you're gonna repeat my name enough and it'll come out at night....be careful! Your inflatable sheep might get upset.

James of Tupper Lake....by the way, why don't you look up what Teddy Kennedy (You might know him as the "Voice of the Democratic Party") did on a drunken ride one night, while riding around the Chappaquiddick on July 19, 1969. Look up the police reports, and tell me how humane it was for him to leave Mary Jo Kopechne there to die while he formulated an alibi. He called the police and his car was pulled out of the river after a substantial time had passed. I'm willing to bet you're too lazy to do it, but I thought I'd throw it out there, anyhoo.

Now, it's late, I'm tired, and you two bookends bore me. Don't bother flaming, it's a waste of your time and mine. Just go back to your lives of self-gratification and "Athelete's Fist".

'Night Pookles. ;)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#138 Consumer Suggestion

Umm... Robert from Florida ..Better go back to the books there Robert!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 20, 2005

I think I "originally said" that Canada had the first supersonic jet "fighter" as the Arrow was & "way before" the USA ever had anything compared to it "as they didn't" Your Bell aircraft was not a fighter & couldn't be one as it had to be launched from a plane.

I am sorry to hear that all those years before St. Lawerence was dredged, that no shipping could make it down the St. Lawerence. Gee I wonder how they ever set up Toronto or Hamilton... hmm.

Better go back to the books there Robert! The artical tells how far they went down & further.

Now what about your Ford Trucks never sold to Germany or IBM or Dupont stuff huh? It is you my friend that needs an education.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#137 Consumer Comment

I can't Understand your accent. Try talking AROUND the turd.

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

James of Cana-DUH:

I'm Long-Winded, hunh? Is that why there are SIXTEEN of your posts to my four? That's a four-to-one ratio! (And they are nearly as long! By the time this post makes it, I'm sure there will be more verbal diarrhea from you.) Hell, you've got three or four in a row, and all spout the same drivel. Hmm. Prepare yourself. Here comes another gale.

Okay then, let's get started.

I, like no doubt many of these other people, had a life to take care of this weekend; it's clear our Canadian friend has had nothing to do but post rebuttals (even to augment his own babble). Why don't you take your Michael Moore-On history blogging elsewhere? And you call my info propaganda-based. How absolutely laughable! Talk about SPIN! Your info is as deluded and off-the-mark as you accuse mine of being. And two words, Sunshine; SPELL-CHECK. Christ, it's like working with an elderly mental patient.

You're on and on endlessly about how we should leave the war and mind our own. How America's Profiteering from the war, both past and present. Why don't you take your own advice and butt out? Leave the Americans to discuss how they feel about their own President, and you can focus on your own Prime Minister, Paul Martin. Incidentally, isn't SNC Lavalin a big Company up there that's providing the bullets to the United States in addition to Winchester? According to a Vancouver source, SNC is providing 300 to 500 million bullets annually to the Troops deployed there. They've provided products of various calibers for many other US efforts, too.

And perhaps there are some Americans out there (perhaps the American version of you. We call em rednecks, but youyou're special.like Mountain-Folk!) that think most Canadians are Dogsledders living in Igloos and speaking mainly French, but I can't pick them out. I do know that the Canadians who speak French (do they still call em Francophones and Anglophones anymore?) have wanted to be separated from you for endless years. But who can blame them? I'd feel that way if my villages were rounded up and packed in barns to be burned alive.

And from what I do understand about Canadians, you haven't treated your indigenous peoples much better than we've treated ours. But we all have our blunders, right?

Speaking of blundershow did that Tsunami Relief turn out? Last I heard, your clever Canadian government had overloaded the planes with everything but fuel; they had to turn around mid-flight and head back home. Next time, try the train. ;)

And I can understand why you can't fathom the war effort. From what I've read about your Naval attempts, your military can't seem to launch its charges past its own hull (or at least, far enough away that they won't float back). Y'all only sunk your own warship once, right? And this was the result of trying to make practice maneuvers feel more Realistic. Bet the clean up was real enough for you. Have you all considered the Kamikaze possibilities? What is there to say to that? Was my face RED! Maybe the CBC hasn't told you about some of thisI mean, it must be difficult, waiting for your one news source to tell you how to think each day.

Liberalism really has two faces. One face is the embodiment of our free societies and its central tendency to choose elected leaders who tend to want to drive back tyranny and spread freedom. This I might call the liberalism of the people. And then there is another face of liberalism, the un-elected, self-appointed intellectuals. These are the jealous and powerless liberals who lament that they have all the brains, yet the people give all the power to GW Bush liberals. They don't appeal to the people at large, but form a private, jet-setting club of intellectuals, hostile to the elected liberal government and always at odds with society's central tendency. These people act as a check on the spread of the people's liberalism through out the world.

It is my belief that the protesters you see are the first generation of children raised in an atmosphere of disdain for religion and a systemic embracing of multiculturalism. In this environment, multiculturalism, and its touchstone "tolerance", have replaced religious values. As a result, your average 22 year old protester has their whole self-worth wrapped up in how tolerant they are...for the underdog, for the environment, for racial equality, or for whatever movement they are aligned with (at that moment)-as defined by the leaders the respective movement.

The selfishness of such people knows almost no bounds because there is little in the way of real right and wrong. It's all about feeling good about oneself...that one did the right thing in being against abstract notions of "war" and "death" and being in favor of "freedom" and "the environment".

Having genuflected at the alter of these beliefs, one can go about the day blissfully ignorant of the real world tradeoffs that move society and culture forward. In many ways, this is why such people are so loud. And it's why they get so ticked off when freedom of choice is used to NOT agree with them.

And on to a more recent Technicolor burp you have posted, regarding a chat between Stephanophalous (sp? Looks enough like Stephan-o'phallus to me!) and his ex-employer, Fmr. Prez, Clinton, in the ego-pumping department:

How does Clinton figure we've never borrowed money from another country for help in Military efforts? Weren't we taught in Grade School that we borrowed money from the French to help us finance our own Revolution? More recently, during the Cold War of the 70's and 80's as our Nation was running regular deficits, much of our Treasury's notes, bonds, and bills were purchased abroad by banks, investors, and insurance companies in Japan and Germany. In addition, as we were selling such treasures during the first Gulf War, foreigners were buying our debt then.

We depend on China, Japan, the UK, Saudi Arabia and Korea. blah-blah-blah.
Hmmwhen Clinton took office, in '93, the Gross National Debt was four Trillion dollars; when he left, it was five-point-six Trillion. That means that the Clinton Administration increased the GND by one-point-six Trillionwhich also means that countries like China, Japan, the UK, et al were purchasing our debt while Clinton was in office, too. But it must have been okay-er back then, hunh?

Stephanephalumps-and-woozles seems to want the Ex-Prez on the whole Bush is a Racist Card, urging agreement with the leftmedia's bent on Bush's reaction to Katrina victims. He presents marginal information on some statistics.
But during the Clinton Administration, there were statistically fifteen-point-one million African-Americans employed as of December of 2000. Presently, there are fifteen-point-five million African-Americans employed.

In regard to poverty, during Clinton's watch, black poverty averaged twenty-seven-point-five percent as compared to its current rate of twenty-four-point-seven. Yes, there was a brief period when black poverty was at its lowest under Clinton; the stock bubble years of 1999 and 2000. (Two years out of eight. Hmm. That's only 25% of his presidency.)
In California alone, the revenue from capital gains and stock options fell an astonishing $9 billion, in just one year - and continued to drop for another year, before leveling off. Folks, all of these so-called technical changes to the budget, were before the Bush tax cuts. Californians, wearing their Michael Moore beanie hats, still blame Bush for the states massive economic crash following Clinton's bubble disaster. Of course, they blame Bush for the 2000 energy crisis also.
Ref. Dean Baker - March 2001 "....As a result, millions of families have seen their dreams of a secure retirement or their children's college education vanish with the stock market bubble. The level of negligence of the Nation's political leaders in ignoring the stock bubble exceeds anything since the days of Herbert Hoover."

And...

From: THE NEW ECONOMY GOES BUST: WHAT THE RECORD SHOWS By Dean Baker October 29, 2001
"The first step in dealing with the current recession is to recognize clearly its cause. On this point, there can be little ambiguity. The cause of the recession was the collapse of the stock market bubble."
"The decision by the Federal Reserve Board and the Clinton Administration not to take any actions to try to limit the run-up of the stock bubble was a mistake that the nation will suffer from for many years to come."
"Even the most cursory review of the data shows that the new economy' was mostly hype."

Ohyeah. And about black home-ownershipaccording to the Census Bureau, this rate was at forty-seven-point-two percent in 2000, compared to 2004's forty-nine-point-one percent.

Now, James of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Try as you might, you won't change my stance on that which I believe, and your clear avoidance, fact-warping and circle-talking isn't going to change that. I refuse to see the world from your view, mainly because I couldn't possibly get my head that far up my own a*s. Can you taste your breakfast yet?

Ben, from Martinez, all I can say is this: You can have the Republican Party back from the homophobe-religious zealots as soon as the Hollywood-Posturing homosexual hypocritical satanists let go of the Democratic Party.

Like I've said beforeLiberals are okay with Freedom Of Speech and Freedom of Choice, as long as your opinions and choices match up with theirs. Anything else is heretical.

James of Tupper Lake, New YorkAre You Sphincting To Me?
You have got to be kiddingwhat, you pulled your head out of the bottle long enough to type with BOTH hands, and call Bush an alkie? Is that your best shot? You've made a bunch of random rants with absolutely NO factual information presented. You think your wit is like the flash of your camera, don't you? Remember, we're not those people you've been taking pictures of at Sunmount (Remember, James Of Canada backs you ALL THE WAY!). Our Family Trees (for the most part) can't be representd by a dandelion. If you want to call out, look at your own local government. But then you'd have to run the risk of someone finding out and tattling on you, hunh? Then the local Barney Fifes'd have their way with you in those woods, wouldn't they? (Do I hear faint dulcid banjo strains from Deliverance?) By the waywhy DO Tuper-Lakians call a deer's rectum it's touch-hole (pronounced tetch-hole)? Do they like to'tetch' em?

And don't try to have a battle of wits with me, DearieI won't fight an unarmed man.

I'm ready for my verbose hummer now, Loves. >:}

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#136 Consumer Suggestion

As for you Vera...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Vera, let's look at some of your points:

What countries did I mention had veto power in the UN? Can you show me that paragraph?

You mentioned Countries that do no have Veto power as the United States "pompassly has".

Do you bother to mention that each had a picture of the other, to keep a square look at the face of their particular monster? Or do you want our gentle readers to believe that these two men admired each other?

Yes I did Vera, if you noticed I said Ford had a Pic of Hitler on his desk & "visa vera" which means they both had. Read how I responded to Robert from Florida as to how they must have admired each other, as they sure made a lot of money together!

You know, it's funny how I'm supposed to ignore Billy's BJ and take offense to Ben Franklin's (whose intelligence made him one of the most feared men alive, in Europe.) faux pas.

Vera I have read 7 books on Franklin & respect him very much. He was in many ways "responsible" for drafting your independance & your constitution. You don't seem to remember he was a "s**t". You don't seem to remember that Thomas Jefferson raped his slave girls! We know both these facts today, but all you concentrate on Clinton is a BJ!

"Did Bin laden fly those planes himself?"
No. Bin Laden doesn't have the balls. Bin Laden orchestrated the disaster of Sept. 11, 2001, and claims it with pride sparking in his dark little pig-eyes. But since it didn't happen in your country, I couldn't expect you to know what it's like to feel that spectrum of strangeness creep over you, when you watch something like the Towers sinking into a cloud of dust.

No Vera I was only in Toronto during the "blackout of the Eastern Seaboard" & I want you to remember that it "was not" a terrorist attack! It was a "thunder storm" right? Possibly you might do some research on how much control Bush has over your media. However if instead of planes, it was a "nuclear bomb"... I would be affected as well! Don't hold your breath Vera... if you guys don't get out of the middle east... it might happen! I remember what I said when woken up & told that the US was under attack. I said "it's about time"! It's also about time that the "people" in the USA get rid of your troops in the middle east!

"....war makes 'sence'?"
Hey, can you tell me what sence is? Do you mean sense? Well, to remain focused, I truly don't know what's going on with the votes, personally. But I'd bet if Kerry won, those that didn't prefer Bush in office would take the same stance. Quit whining and accept that the votes are what they are!

Yes I did mean sense there Vera & sorry I mispelled it. Most people in America are against the war, if you haven't noticed. They did not vote for that! I don't know who you should have voted for. Maybe Libitarian! I just know the war is wrong!

A question that resonates painfully, time and time again, however, is that it seems that you (and other like-minded) are completely alright with what the Enemy has done, and that you don't seem to have a problem with the fact that these people are killing their own just as often with their bombs in public places. What ennobles them, and vilifies us?

They are "terrorists Vera" & that is the only way they can fight back. What if some Country invaded the USA, killed both of Bush's daughters & set up a new government for you all, citeing Veitnam, Niquauga, Bosnia, Iraq & Afganistan? What would you do? I am sure you have a "Stealth Bomber" in your garage, but what would the neigbours do? You fight with what you have Vera.

"Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada." (Your witticism)

Keep dreaming. Better yet, invade. See what happens. I'll be waiting. I'll make sure I'm on the front line, and I hope you'll do the same. From what I understand, your back-woods a*s would most likely enjoy living in Tupper Lake, for some reason (see the Editor's note on the number of Canadians who migrate to Tupper Lake). [Evil cackle]

Who said anyone was invading there Vera? Why do you want to be on the "front lines" with Canada? Gee I hope we aren't manufacturing WMD's or anything! What does Tupper Lake, or Canada, or anything you said have anything to do with my question? It's an honest one! Should George Bush take over the entire world? Not an outrageous question Vera. Should he? What will you say if he also goes into Iran & N. Korea? Have you not had "enough" with him just in Iraq & Afganistan?

"...if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!"

I could say the same for you, except that you're a complete loss. What, is Canada such a snore, that you have to pretend you're an expert in American History?

Vera if you don't even know who the Prime Minister is, or you cant name the Capital City of Canada off the top of your head, then what right do you think you have understanding the middle east? I know the "un propagandaized" version, of American History. Not the one in which you were taught that you were the "World's Savior".

But hey [shrugging], if I'm mistaken, that's cool---I never assumed I was 100% correct.I just love the right to state my opinion!). And our Bombing is not indiscriminate; it's targeted. Just like the WTC in 2001 was targeted. Just like the Pentagon was targeted.

I'm glad you feel that way Vera. Unfortuately the terrorists are not equipped with "smart bombs" as your military is. They have to do it the "old fashioned" way. I am sure that one day they will get their hands on one of those "nuclear bomb" suitcases which might be "modern enough" for you. Would you be happy then Vera?

Or?

Would you feel 100% wrong?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#135 Consumer Comment

More false information from James

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Alright smart guy, you wanted me to research stuff for you. Here you go genius.

The Bell X-1 reached supersonic flight on Oct 14, 1947. The Avro Arrow flew for the FIRST time on March 25, 1958. Now, where I come from(Earth), 1958 is AFTER 1947. But of course, I only went to a school that wasn't real big on giving us misinformation and calling it an education. Upon further research, I found that your government cancelled the entire project and caused the firing of 14525 workers, after the flight was a great success. That's just like Canada(France's ugly sister)...cancel the thing because it works too well. The first production fighter to go super-sonic was the YF-100A, and did it on it's first flight, May 25, 1953. Again James, 1958 is AFTER 1953. You need to get out of that smoke induced time machine of yours...it's causing you cerebral harm. The company that manufactured your precious Arrow tried in vain to get MY government to buy them. The problem there was cost, it cost $3.5M per Arrow, versus $3.3M for the F-106. It basically bacame $400M worth of scrap metal. Some of these ended up in Lake Ontario(maybe the U-Boots helped sink them).

This is just one more "FACT" you have completely wrong James. Please give me some more stuff to look up for you.

It turns out the St Lawrence River was dredged out in 1954(9 years after the end of WW2) so ocean going ships could navigate it. This goes back to my telling you THERE WERE NO U-BOOTS IN LAKE ONTARIO! Give this up you nitwit. Your government screwed you out of an education, come down here and get a good one.

As for Americans wanting to be Cannucks, HA! The only ones I ever heard of were draft dodgers and deserters. You can have them, we don't want them. FYI, my family migrated from Scotland to Canada. They got tired of dealing with you people and headed south. We've been happy ever since.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#134 Consumer Suggestion

Robert from Florida

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Now when you get on to stuff the US sold to Germany during WWII... you again should do some research before you call someone "dumb", there Robert.

You should realize that you come from a "long line" of pompas asses that think that the US sh**t doesn't stink, when it comes to supporting things they should not, & doing things against others when it is clearly "none of their business". Here's an example of that Robert:

Sympathy for Ford's Devil

Hitler's ghost is present in the assembly lines of America's automotive manufacturers. It's amusing listening to the Ford advertising campaign that features the Rolling Stones song, Start Me Up. More appropriate, it seems, would be the Stone's classic recording of Sympathy for the Devil. From 1939 to 1942, Ford Motor Company produced thousands of combat vehicles for the n**i's at its Cologne, Germany production facility reaping enormous profits that would ultimately be used to design the next-generation of Ford's driven by Americans in the 1950's. During the height of WWII, Ford shipped raw materials from America to the Cologne plant to ensure that production would not be interrupted by Allied bombing and that Hitler would remain a happy customer. According to Ken Silverstein, Ford vehicles were crucial to the revolutionary n**i military strategy of blitzkrieg. Of the 350,000 trucks used by the motorized German Army as of 1942, roughly one-third were Ford products. Imagine the surprise of American troops when they saw the enemy--the Wehrmacht_driving around in Ford vehicles. "They were understandably an unpleasant sight to men in the US Army," reported Silverstein.

IBM received lucrative contracts from the n**i's to build databases that would be used to determine population demographics and track down Jews, Christians and other threats to the n**i Party. Profits from those efforts, like Ford's, were sent home to America to perform research and development for new profit-making technologies. It's the same story for General Motors, Kodak, Dupont, and General Electric (owner of NBC news).

Yep Robert, a little research might do you a little good! I know it would take away from your "side splitting" laughter, as you muse yourself with your own ignorance.

The USA has only cared about "profit" from the beginning, just as that is their only real reason for being in Iraq & Afganistan.

They teach their "hoards" lot's of propaganda, so the average American can believe that the USA is just "helping" & being the "Policeman of the World". Some moron's gobble up this spin like you! Some "laugh out loud" when confronted with the truth! No that has to be bull! Not "my Country"!!

Yes your Country Robert!! It might be time for you to take a nap, after you first learn how to write in paragraphs!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#133 Consumer Comment

For the idiot James in Canada.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

James,

First, I'm going to say that I won't even bother responding to your idiocy stating that just because I served in my country's military, it means that I had a "blood lust" for killing innocent Iraqis. I feel very sorry for you if that is how you truly feel.

Now, I went and read ALL of that post that you copied by Peter Black. What I found interesting is that NOT ONCE was it ever mentioned that U-boats ever made it all the way into Lake Ontario. Sure, lots of action around the coasts of New England, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and even into the St Lawrence. But nothing mentioned about Lake Ontario. Please tell us where you are getting your information, because I just can't find it (and this after also searching other Google results on n**i U-boats in Canada).

Now, with regards to your claims on the other Bush report that Canada was the first to build and fly a supersonic jet fighter. I hate to break it to you, but that distinction goes to the F-86 Saber, built by North American (USA). The prototype (YF-86) made it's maiden flight on October 1, 1947, and there is even speculation that the test pilot, George Welch, may have broken the sound barrier twice before Chuck Yeager officially did it on October 14, 1947 in the Bell X-1. But since he did not have the proper recording instruments, nothing was made official. And then there is the Avro Arrow. Jeesh, you can't even spell it right (you said "Avero"), let alone get your facts straight. The Arrow made it's maiden flight on March 25, 1958, almost 11 years AFTER the first flight of the F-86. I'm sorry James, who did it first again?

Since you can't even get your historical facts straight, what makes you think anyone should believe anything else you say?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#132 Consumer Comment

My God your daft

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

The battle of St Lawrence was done in the BAY, not in the river. Ocean going subs required enormous amounts of room to maneuver. They are also NOT 15 ft high. Typical U-Boot was roughly 45 ft from keel to top of bridge. Not exactly a small boat to be stuck in a river with people trying to kill you. Here's a thought for you James, since you possess none of your own...Go to www.uboat.net and look up all the CORRECT information you'd like to find. This argument went into WW2 because YOU decided to take it there. I have been correcting ALL of your false conspiracy theories. Nobody has said YET that Canadians did not die in WW2. We all agreed that until the US stepped in and saved the world, you were losing long before we entered. The point really still remains though, why do you care about what happens here? Unless we decide we want a 51st state, we don't really care about what you're doing up there.

Ashley in Illinois...You need to put down the crack pipe too. If you have proof of what you say, print it. If it was a "FACT" as you say, then there would be evidence of that. There is none, and you just hate Bush et al.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#131 Consumer Comment

Robert from Dallas

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

I never said you DID say anything you have attributed to me. I only stated that Clinton DID say Iraq had WMD's. Perhaps I misinterpreted your quoting him now saying there was no evidence of same WMD's as an endorsement by you. Sorry for the error.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#130 Consumer Suggestion

Robert from Florida

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Robert;

Now that you know how deep Lake Ontario is... is it possible that they might have hid those WMD there?

Here is something on a "google search"... top of the list for you to expand yer "dwittle mind" with.

SEPTEMBER 2005 LOG CABIN CHRONICLES UPDATED DAILY
Peter Black's Take on Quebec Affairs

Peter Black

is the producer of CBC Radio's Breakaway program, based in Quebec City, a columnist on Canadian affairs, and a freelance writer.
Black's previous columns are archived HERE.

Posted 10.08.04
Quebec City
PETER BLACK

New WW2 book recounts how n**i subs sank boats, killed Canadians and others - in Canada

It's a bit of a sad coincidence that a new book about killer submarines comes out at the same time as the deadly incident on the HMCS Chicoutimi.

There is no direct link between a peace-time incident aboard a submarine and marine warfare six decades ago, except the fact that Canada, through the purchase of the used British vessels, is in theory preparing itself for mortal combat under the seas.

Nathan M. Greenfield's The Battle of the St. Lawrence: The Second World War in Canada is as chilling a tale as its title is startling. It may come as a surprise to many Canadians unfamiliar with the details of the Second World War, but the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the river itself were the theatre of a deadly struggle between Allied vessels and n**i U-boats.

The essential fact, Greenfield writes, is "...(B)etween 1942 and 1944, more than 28 ships were torpedoed, 24 of these sunk, and more than 270 Canadians and scores of others did die - in Canada."

Greenfield explains that it's not surprising that for most Canadians the Battle of the St. Lawrence is an "unknown war" despite the fact much was reported at the time and a fairly extensive body of articles and books about it have been produced since.

The Ottawa-based author suggests two reasons for the lack of ballyhoo about such an intense and deadly campaign, one which saw both merchant and navy vessels sunk by U-boats that penetrated as far as Rimouski and beyond in the St. Lawrence.

One is that the Battle of the St. Lawrence was a defeat for the Allied forces, represented by Canada's navy, which was overstretched and hampered by the ineffectiveness of sonar in the brackish waters of the river.

Not one n**i sub succumbed to counterattack, while the U-boats were able to pick off ships almost at will.

During a spree of destruction beginning in May, 1942, and ending in October of the same year, U-boats sunk 21 ships and damaged another three. On September 7 alone they sunk four ships including HMCS Raccoon, killing 36 sailors.

That year's spree ended with the sinking of the ferry boat SS Caribou on Oct. 14, 1942, killing 136 people, many of them civilian women and children, bound from Sydney, Nova Scotia, to Port Aux Basques, Newfoundland.

The n**i subs would be back, though, with a vengeance. Indeed, the last torpedoed fired in the Battle of the St. Lawrence, on November 25, 1944, took out HMCS Shawinigan off the south coast of Newfoundland, killing all 91 hands. The captain of the U-boat had stumbled upon the ship as he was preparing to return across the Atlantic for repairs.

The other reason why the Battle of the St. Lawrence is still little known, says Greenfield, is the fault of Canadian schools.

"The nation's curriculum writers have been engaged in an ongoing act of forgetting. Forgetting that in the darkest days of the Second World War, hundreds of men, women and children were killed by Nazis who plied our inland waters."

Greenfield's detailed and well-researched telling of the military aspect of the battle, complete with many accounts from the German side, makes a fascinating read. But equally interesting is his depiction of the political context of the battle, in which politicians in Quebec reflected the growing panic among the residents of the Gasp&ea;cute; and St. Lawrence estuary.

(That reason for that panic is substantiated in one of the photos in the book depicting servicemen and local children gathered round a n**i torpedo that had gone aground at St. Yvon, on the Gasp coast. The torpedo is now in the Quebec Naval Museum in Quebec City.)

At one point then-defence minister James Ralston chided Gasp&eacutge; MP Sasseville Roy for a question he had raised in the House of Commons about n**i submarine attacks in the river in July, 1942. Ralston said Roy had given "a gift to Hitler's men because it meant that the U-boat if it is still in the St. Lawrence does not have to surface to send a message and thus reveal itself."

The incident is just one scary anecdote in Greenfield's thorough retelling of the terror and tragedy of the only Second World War campaign fought inside North America. The book, as he notes, is "an act of historical recovery" which may help shed light on this remarkable chapter in Canada's history.

Just for those Americans like yourself that think anyone not schooled in your "propaganda" is simply dumb.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#129 Consumer Comment

Okay Sheeple of the United States

AUTHOR: Ashley - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. were the masterminds behind 9/11

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. have been indicted for 9/11 complicity and crimes against humanity by Patrick Fitzgerald U.S. Attorney-Chicago. Fed. Magistrate R. Filip is squashing publication of the real papers of indictment. It all will come out soon. The dominos will tumble baby...

IT IS A FACT WMDs were a figment of George W. Bush & Co.'s imagination.

IT IS A FACT he and his gang will be impeached and I hope to God that hanging is still the preferred method of execution for treason.

You just need to do a little digging. Oh yeah, Michael, I graduated from Bountiful High School.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#128 Consumer Comment

Okay Sheeple of the United States

AUTHOR: Ashley - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. were the masterminds behind 9/11

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. have been indicted for 9/11 complicity and crimes against humanity by Patrick Fitzgerald U.S. Attorney-Chicago. Fed. Magistrate R. Filip is squashing publication of the real papers of indictment. It all will come out soon. The dominos will tumble baby...

IT IS A FACT WMDs were a figment of George W. Bush & Co.'s imagination.

IT IS A FACT he and his gang will be impeached and I hope to God that hanging is still the preferred method of execution for treason.

You just need to do a little digging. Oh yeah, Michael, I graduated from Bountiful High School.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#127 Consumer Comment

Okay Sheeple of the United States

AUTHOR: Ashley - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. were the masterminds behind 9/11

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. have been indicted for 9/11 complicity and crimes against humanity by Patrick Fitzgerald U.S. Attorney-Chicago. Fed. Magistrate R. Filip is squashing publication of the real papers of indictment. It all will come out soon. The dominos will tumble baby...

IT IS A FACT WMDs were a figment of George W. Bush & Co.'s imagination.

IT IS A FACT he and his gang will be impeached and I hope to God that hanging is still the preferred method of execution for treason.

You just need to do a little digging. Oh yeah, Michael, I graduated from Bountiful High School.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#126 Consumer Comment

Okay Sheeple of the United States

AUTHOR: Ashley - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. were the masterminds behind 9/11

IT IS A FACT George W. Bush & Co. have been indicted for 9/11 complicity and crimes against humanity by Patrick Fitzgerald U.S. Attorney-Chicago. Fed. Magistrate R. Filip is squashing publication of the real papers of indictment. It all will come out soon. The dominos will tumble baby...

IT IS A FACT WMDs were a figment of George W. Bush & Co.'s imagination.

IT IS A FACT he and his gang will be impeached and I hope to God that hanging is still the preferred method of execution for treason.

You just need to do a little digging. Oh yeah, Michael, I graduated from Bountiful High School.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#125 Consumer Suggestion

Robert from Florida

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Robert;

Perhaps before you call someone "dumb", you should do a little research. I told you where to find the Avro Arrow, now you think that Lake Ontario is not deep enough to support subs..

No thought even crosses your mind that n**i's could not exactly fly over Canada to see what was there & what they were up against, & that using subs was a good way to scout. It is all "symantics" anyway, as my "point was" that you know "very little" other than what you have been taught of your own propaganda.

However... just to give you the "facts"... here are the stats on Lake Ontario that you can also find on a "google search".

Overview
Lake Ontario is similar to Lake Erie in length and breadth (193 miles by 53 miles). Yet with its greater average depth (approximately 283 feet), Lake Ontario holds almost four times the volume (395 cubic miles) and has a retention time of about 6 years. The drainage basin covers parts of Ontario and New York, and a small portion of Pennsylvania. Major urban industrial centers, such as Hamilton and Toronto, are located on its shore. The U.S. shore is less urbanized and is not intensively farmed.

Again something that is not necessary to debate, as the whole "real issue" here is the attitude of American's who believe that they have a "right" to invade other peoples Countries, set up governments & cause "vast terrorism", when they know "so little" about what even lies on either sides of their own borders.

Do you think 283 feet is deep enough for a sub less than 15 feet high? I really do not wish to respond to any more of your symantics. Before you start calling someone "dumb", possibly you could do research.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#124 Consumer Comment

From Robert TX to Robert FL..... what part of "not endorsing" do you not understand?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

Robert FL...Read the quotes below from previous posts and surely you can deduce that I am already a card-carrying Libertarian. Sheesh!

As for the rest of your post, I am still trying to figure out how Nagin justifies his "mandatory evacuation" order and his ensuing disappearance while so many buses "drowned" in the flood. I am not unaware of how the system was supposed to work.

Political heads will roll in LA next election day. Both Nagin and Blanco will have to live out their lives wondering how many deaths their inaction or stupidity caused. Not my problem as I have to assume that LA will take care of its political problems itself. TX cannot vote in LA, you know.

Problem is, from my POV, that the ineptitude travels up and down the lines from local to state to federal levels and back again at light speed.

The Katrina mess is just such a small part of the whole problematic picture. As for "survival", no one really knows until it comes up. I think I might just make it...

Be ready...nuke drills are being stepped up now. We need another disaster to distract us and I am pretty sure that Bush believes in human sacrifice.

Clues:

"I am not a Democrat, either. Clinton was not my idol. I dance to the tune of neither party because I believe in the Constitution. I am an "America First" person."

Have you ever read the Constitution? The very fact that I believe in that document precludes me from joining either of the Communist/Socialist parties that operate in this country as the Big Two. My party is smaller, but is gaining steam. So you can vilify the Democrats and Clinton to the end of time and it will never bother me. I did not approve of the intervention in Bosnia, either, but no one asked me. You just seemed confused as to why it took place."

"The federal government cannot perform. It has killed the Republic and replaced it with a web of expensive incompetence. It needs to return the states powers to the states as the founding fathers required it to be. It needs to stop brainwashing its citizens with this "democracy" crap; the United States of America is not a democracy. The idea of democracy is what allows them to continue their takeover of all rights, so it is in its own interest to spread that disinformation."

"Again, I am not endorsing Clinton, but perhaps this clear concise statement will open your eyes as to what Bush is doing."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#123 Consumer Comment

Now, there's a serious interview for ya

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 19, 2005

George Snufalufagus interviewing Bill Clinton, WOW! What a media coup! Let's take a former President, and have him get interviewed by his Press Secretary. Extraordinary! Maybe we can go back and see if there are any tapes of Goebbels interviewing Hitler.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#122 Consumer Suggestion

As a matter of fact... Just look at the end of Clinton's talk

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

This should make it really "clear" to all Americans.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: So we're losing in Afghanistan, at risk of losing in Iraq. What do we do right now? What should the new strategy be?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well as I said, I don't know, because I'm not President, I don't know what his military options are. I don't know how many troops he's got where. But I know my view is if there is a reasonable chance that this constitutional process can be completed and that it will not be rejected under the terms that govern the vote, once that happens, I think that will give another boost to the civilian government. Then, I think that we will know how long it takes to train enough and equip enough forces that they ought to be able to defend themselves. When that happens, I think we can begin drawing down our presence.

But my problem with setting a date certain for withdrawal now is I always assumed that whoever I was competing against was smart. And suppose you were running the Iraqi insurgency, and I know you, and I know how smart you are. If I told you I was going to leave in six months, 12 months, or 18 months, and you could survive that long, there's no way in the wide world you would join the political process.

Now, let's look at the other thing: when the IRA says they're going to give up arms, and they want the international body to observe the blowup, and they want the representative of the Catholics and Church of England, the Protestants to observe the blowup, what does that say? They say they've decided they've got more to gain from the political process than from continuing the conflict.

When 13,000 armed guerrillas and paramilitaries in Colombia give up their weapons and rejoin civil society, and President Uribe, who's been so tough on them, offers them a chance to reconcile, why are they doing that? Because they know they're not going to win anymore, and they want to be part of a political process. When the Hutu soldiers came home in response to President Kigami's welcome and rejoined civil society and did their community atonement work, why did they do that? Because they knew they couldn't win anymore.

So the reason I don't want to see an announcement made is I see no reasonable prospect that this insurgency can be transformed into a political process, and the Sunnis who are alienated will come back if they know all they have to do is wait. It may not work. I've never known whether it would work. All I know is a majority of the Iraqis would like it to work. We'd be better off, and the Middle East would be better off if it did work.

A lot of good Americans have given their lives; thousands of others have been horribly wounded. So I have been in a position where I wanted the strategy to work. Whether it will or not, I don't know. But the only thing I would sacrifice it to is if I thought we were going to lose in Afghanistan. We cannot lose in Afghanistan. We cannot let the Taliban come back. We cannot let Karzai fail. We cannot relax our efforts to try to keep undermining Al Qaeda, because that's still by far a bigger threat to our security.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, we're just about out of time. What's the Democratic bumper sticker in 2008?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Let's get the country back together, move the country forward again.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not buy one, get one free?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: No; get the country back together, move the country forward again. I have no idea what's going to happen, but my family has an election in 2006, and I don't want to look past it. You know, I always say if you look past the next election, you may not get past the next election.

The country in 2008, and I think in 2006, will be in a desperate mood to come together and move forward. I think they're going to reject ideological solutions that are not fact-based, and I think they're going to want a government that works.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. President, thank you very much.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Thanks. Thank you.

Everything Robert from Texas posted was true! The US is borrowing money daily from the rest of the World, expecially China to pay for this silly war & now Katrina. All while the USA is loosing jobs.

Your Dictator is putting you all in a hole that you may never be able to climb out of. Even Clinton is not so sure any of Bush's strategies will work in the middle east. Remember he himself had his hand in bombing Iraq for no good reason! It therefore would be hard for him to call it "immoral or illegal" as it definately is! I personally am sure that the middle east is "none of your business". Yes it is time for Americans to "wake up"! Bin Laden would be no threat if you simply got out of the middle east & concentrated on America! Clinton obviously want's that too. Again I quote his final words:

The country in 2008, and I think in 2006, will be in a desperate mood to come together and move forward. I think they're going to reject ideological solutions that are not fact-based, and I think they're going to want a government that works.

I am sure you can "read between the lines".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#121 Consumer Suggestion

Good for Clinton!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

It's about time someone like him stood up & made the issue!

I am proud of him for doing that!

Go Clinton Go!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#120 Consumer Comment

Excuse me Robert in Texas

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

Bill Clinton himself stated Iraq had the WMD's. He said that every time he launched missiles into the country. In fact, Clinton expended our entire stockpile of cruise missiles. At $500M each, they got pretty expensive.

Now for a lesson in Government. The President does not spend a penny from the Treasury. Only one group does...the House Ways and Means Committee. Nobody else has the ability to spend anything. Nobody. Bill Clinton did not balance any budgets. He submitted pork laden budgets and the Republicans shot them down. Too bad they don't still do that. I agree that Bush is screwing us up financially, but only because he is doing the same thing his father did. They both try to appease the lefties by spending everything that comes through. Bush has yet to veto a single spending bill. That is the real problem. I could give you all a lesson in "short vs long" term bonds(the things the debt is based on), but it would do no good. Clinton used short term bonds. Those bonds are coming due right after he left office. On paper, he had good numbers. Right after he left office, the chickens came home to roost, and Bush is stuck with the results.

As for Katrina help. FEMA is Federal. The Local and State governments must ASK for Federal assistance before any will be sent. The Mayor of NO and the Governor of LA hauled a*s and were nowhere to be seen for days. So was the Congressman and Mary Landreu(Senator). They counted on the majority of Americans to have been educated by public schools and therefore understand nothing about how the country operates. They were correct. Everyone whines about Bush not helping, while ignoring their local and state governments' inaction. Tsk Tsk Tsk. For the record, I don't like Bush either. He's better than Kerry though, and I'd rather kill terrorists in their country than kill them in mine.

Vote Libertarian if you truly want Constitutional Government. You'll have to fend for yourself in all aspects of life though, except one...national defense. Can you survive on your own? I can, and do.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#119 Consumer Comment

NEWS FLASH: How a former President sees what Bush is doing to America. This country will be ka-trillions of dollars in debt when Bush is through with it.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

For those of you who say no one knows how a President should act unless they have held that office....

Again, I am not endorsing Clinton, but perhaps this clear concise statement will open your eyes as to what Bush is doing. This country will be ka-trillions of dollars in debt when Bush is through with it. If we capture and kill bin Laden (a "disowned" son of the Saudi royal family), will we be cut off from funds?? Oh, dear. Dilemma, dilemma.

Outrageous!! Other countries now own the USA!! Wake up people!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050918/wl_afp/usweatheriraqeconomy_050918200308

Clinton launches withering attack on Bush on Iraq, Katrina, budget
1 hour, 52 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Former US president
Bill Clinton sharply criticised George W. Bush for the Iraq War and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and voiced alarm at the swelling US budget deficit.

Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."

The Iraq war diverted US attention from the war on terrorism "and undermined the support that we might have had," Bush said in an interview with an ABC's "This Week" programme.

Clinton said there had been a "heroic but so far unsuccessful" effort to put together an constitution that would be universally supported in Iraq.

The US strategy of trying to develop the Iraqi military and police so that they can cope without US support "I think is the best strategy. The problem is we may not have, in the short run, enough troops to do that," said Clinton.

On Hurricane Katrina, Clinton faulted the authorities' failure to evacuate New Orleans ahead of the storm's strike on August 29.

People with cars were able to heed the evacuation order, but many of those who were poor, disabled or elderly were left behind.

"If we really wanted to do it right, we would have had lots of buses lined up to take them out," Clinton.

He agreed that some responsibility for this lay with the local and state authorities, but pointed the finger, without naming him, at the former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

FEMA boss Michael Brown quit in response to criticism of his handling of the Katrina disaster. He was viewed as a political appointee with no experience of disaster management or dealing with government officials.

"When James Lee Witt ran FEMA, because he had been both a local official and a federal official, he was always there early, and we always thought about that," Clinton said, referring to FEMA's head during his 1993-2001 presidency.

"But both of us came out of environments with a disproportionate number of poor people."

On the US budget, Clinton warned that the federal deficit may be coming untenable, driven by foreign wars, the post-hurricane recovery programme and tax cuts that benefitted just the richest one percent of the US population, himself included.

"What Americans need to understand is that ... every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, and our tax cuts," he said.

"We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else."

Clinton added: "We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#118 Consumer Comment

James, you just get dumber with every post.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

Nowhere in these threads have I ever stated the U-Boots stayed close to home. They were in all theaters of operations during the war, including the Pacific. This does not mean they were in Lake Ontario. The great Lakes are not very deep. Why would a sub commander risk his boat and crew to go up a shallow river and look for shipping in a shallow lake. The targets are in the ocean. Ocean goind vessels are much larger than "lakers", and that means better attaboys. The entire point of sinking ships was to starve England, not keep Cleveland from getting more coal. I now know your problem James. You cannot read what is written. This goes back to that sky/seawater thing I tried to explain to you. NOT going into the Lakes, does not equate to staying in German Territorial waters. Operation Pauchenschlag was the "Golden Time" of WW2 for U-Boot crews. This took place off the coast, not in a lake. Put down the pipe.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#117 Consumer Suggestion

Say Ben... good post! I don't know how these Religeous Zealots have gotten in the drivers seat of the Republican Party!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

Ben;

Yes you did say it really well. I don't know how these Religeous Zealots have gotten in the drivers seat of the Republican Party!

Here you have "Pat Roberson" calling for assasination & these "bible thumpers" want to start another Crusade in the rest of the World.

None of them seem to listen to Jesus words when he said "Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged"! I think they might be thinking he said "Judge everyone in the World by our ruler & make em fall in line"!

What really bugs me is that they really don't follow what that good book says. Mathew 6 is the preface to the "Lords Prayer" & Jesus tells them how to pray. He told them to "pray in a closet" as if they make a "spectical out of themselves" they have already won their reward.

You should care about Iraq though Ben. It is comming down to the only reason the USA is still there is the reasoning that "these heathens need to get fixed" & I am sure these bible thumpers would like to Christianise the entire Middle East if they could.

I am not Muslim, but I know them to be very "peaceful people". If not pushed, they will rarely strike. However what else can they do if they are being "oppressed" by some country on the other side of the world with "Christian values"?

People come to the USA from all over the world. To become American they are forced to learn English. Should they need to pick a Church as well?

I think it would be a good idea for the US to have a 3rd party. They could call it the "We wanna be nice party" & have it be neither Republican or Democrat, but just good people who do not want to be judged or judge others. It could be "anti war" & wish to concentrate only on the Continent we live on. There sure is "plenty to fix".

The one thing I have always respected about Americans is how kind they can be to "one another". Pitching in & helping when the "chips are down", just as you can see them doing in the aftermath of Katrina. People opening up their homes & wallets to help these people hit so badly. People helping from every corner of the Country! I really do like seeing that.

Religeon & Politics "do not mix". What I want from a Politician is to keep the economy moving smoothly. Politicians should be more into the economy & government services for the people & not forceing people to live "spiritually" the way they want.

It will improve though Ben. Soon Bush will be out & hopefully your next President can get the troops back home & concentrate on America! Republican or Democrat, I do not expect your next President to wish to follow "Bush dreams". It is then that you can be sure that "terrorism" will decline & the US will be able to get "back on track" working on the economy.

Gays can now be legally married in Canada. The US is going to have a hard time claiming their marriages are not legitamate. The "lords prayer" is being taken out of schools & eventually no one will have to proclaim their beliefs to anyone in society... except possibly your President. A President's policies should not have to reflect religeous beliefs, as a President should be working for "All Americans", nomatter their beliefs spiritually.

That's the way it should be, as praying is something that should be practiced as Jesus said... "in a closet".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#116 Consumer Suggestion

Robert & Patrick... 2 peas in a pod!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Sunday, September 18, 2005

You two are meant for eachother!

Patrick... Kuwait was "slant drilling" stealing Iraqi oil! Did you miss that? It was illegal! Suddam "warned them" several times that he would invade if they did not stop! Suddam called for US opinion before he went in! He wanted to "make sure" he would not get into trouble with the US if he invaded.

The "female embassador" from the United States said & I quote "The United States has no opinion on your border disputes with Kuwait".

So he went in to Kuwait for "good reason"! You were part of the force then that destroyed his troops! Never mind it was none of the US's business! Never mind that Suddam had every right to invade! The US not only kicked his a*s out of Kuwait, but they then put up sanctions against Iraq & enforced a "no fly zone" over Suddam's Country! Would you go for a "no fly zone" over let's say New York City?

However the USA wasn't done yet! They accused him of manufacturing WMD's which he was not! They had inspectors bugging him for years! He had no WMD's, as the only ones he ever had came from the United States of America to help him in fighting the Iran / Iraq war!

Saddam was a "dictator", just like George Bush! George Bush has never held a vote on your war with Iraq & if he ever did, you would not have troops there anymore! George Bush has never come out & said that they found WMD's in Iraq, becase they haven't! He clearly would say they were found if they were!

Even if they did, tell me what gives the USA the right to have WMD's & not Iraq? Both Countries are runned by Dictators! How you kill someone who is innocent is not the point! What is the point is whether you had the right to kill anyone in the first place!

Suddam had "no right" to kill Kuwait'is or Kurds! George Bush Senior or Junior have no right killing Iraqi's! I don't care how many pages of a UN declaration stated that George Bush did not listen to anyway! The USA has no right being there! The UN was set up in the first place to handle such problems. One of it's headquarters is on your soil! What is the point in having a UN if Bush can simply do as he likes?

Robert you can believe that the USA is the "best & fairest Country in the World" all you wish! You can believe that all n**i subs stayed close to home too if you wish. You can "close your mind" & not listen to facts all you wish! A simple "google search" would show you the Avro Arrow, but you would not want any opposing information even if it is available to you! Every time someone mentions Canada, both you & Patrick immediately think "French" as you show your ignorance. Canadians can travel anywhere in the World & be respected. Many American travelers claim to be Canadian & even buy Canadian flags before they travel. Guess why?

Patrick, I don't care if you flew a transport plane to deliver food to troops. Your hands are dirty Patrick! You helped George Bush in an "immoral" venture involving killing Iraqi's. I only say immoral, as it was the second invasion that was illegal! Worse yet Patrick, you were not even drafted to do it! You helped to kill Iraqi's as your "matter of choice" & you therefore are no better than any other "murderer".

In case you don't know US law Patrick, if you are involved in a robbery & someone get's killed, it does not matter if you pulled the trigger or not! You will be tried & convicted as a murderer! The only issue in law where you can get away with murder is if you did it in "self defence". Who attacked you Patrick? Or your Country?

You are never going to convince anyone that it was not "your fault" as you could have stayed home in the "good ol USA" & pretty much "minded your own business", but instead you had a thirst for blood!

You can see what you reaped on 911 from your efforts! Thousands of more people are dead now because of your efforts Patrick! I really don't care if you liked it or not! You still did it & are guilty!

Did Iraq or Afganistan ever attack the USA? No! So what the hell are you doing on their soil killing them? The people who flew the planes on 911 came from your "buddies in crime" Saudi Arabia! Iraq has never done "anything" to hurt the USA! Period! Not before the war or after Desert Storm or at any time that would give the USA justification.

Maybe I should not put you in the same boat as Robert. Robert... your not a murderer are you?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#115 Consumer Comment

James, Stop! You are getting goofier with every post. What are you smoking?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

My sides are splitting. You are getting goofier with every post. Now the U-Boots were operating in the Great Lakes? What are you smoking? Maybe that's what happened to the Edmund Fitzgerald. A U-Boot was still hanging around 30 years later and sank the freighter. You are a riot. James, nobody here is saying Canada wasn't in WW2 before the US entered it. We have all agreed that you were losing it long before we came to the rescue and saved the entire world. Nobody has denied it. The question still remains, where do you get whatever it is you are on that makes you think these things happened in History? And again, WMD's were found in Iraq. The only people who are still denying it are the drones from moveon.org and their ilk. Good news about the war doesn't help the liberals in this country, and that includes nearly all of the media types. For the record, the UN gave authorization 14 times to use all neccessary force to remove Hussein if he did not abide by the terms of the CEASE-FIRE that he begged for. The UN never dreamed that we would have a President who would actually do it though. The stuff about WMD's was one line in a resolution more than a dozen pages long. One line out of about a thousand. Have fun James. Please send me some of that stuff you are using. It has got to be some top of the line weed.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#114 Consumer Comment

To James in Calgary.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

"We have many "loosers" responding to this thread. Never mind Vera! She is already lost! Any sane human being can see that, except for "Patrick" who is proud of the Iraqis he killed!"

James, you're a f--king idiot! Please tell me 1) where I ever said I killed any Iraqis, and 2) that I enjoyed doing it.

All I said was that I proudly served my country for six years in the Air Force, part of which was during Desert Storm where we drove an invading country (Iraq) back across the border from Kuwait.

During that campaign, we did not even march to Bagdad. We were content with driving them out of the country they invaded. And they were so scared of us, that Iragi soldiers were surrenduring to TELEVISION CREWS, and Saddam even set his own oil rigs on fire to cover the retreat of the Red Guard!

So, anyone that disagrees with your opinion is "lost", eh James? So tell me, what makes you think that your opinion is correct?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#113 Consumer Suggestion

It is about money! However you do not have to make anyone do anything to call him a "terrorist".

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

Dear Paul

I can relate to much of what you say;

It is about money! However you do not have to make anyone do anything to call him a "terrorist".

Just look at Suddam. Fighting a war against Iran in the 80's, he was given "chemical weapons" by the good ol USA to continue the fight.

Those weapons were "ok to use" on Iranians. Not Kurds though right?

Kuait was "slant drilling" into Iraq. That was illegal! Even most of the UN agreed! After Suddam warned them "many times", he produced troops on their border & called for US reaction!

He was told by the embassy that the US had "no opinion" on the issue. Sounds like a "green card" to me!

All of a sudden, Desert Storm & accusations of WMD! None found but lots of oil for sure!

No Suddam did not have to be labeled a "terrorist" to start a war with him. He just simply had to be "lied about". A "spin" had to be fed to the American people & some of them are still gobbleing the spins up.

Stacey mentions people from her family killed in WWII. Were any of them thrown out of helicopters as in Vietnam? Oh what a good war that was! Oops... I forgot, it was not a war! Just something the USA stuck their nose in... "I forget"... for what reason? Possibly as Paul says to "test new weapons" at someone else's life expense. I mean nobody really cares about the Americans who died fighting such a stupid war or (non war), now do they?

Is the problem that Suddam was a dictator? I don't see anyone invading Cuba so far. Isn't China a dictatorship? What about N. Korea? Do they have attrocities like Suddam was labeled as having? Does any average American even know?

The USA was so "righteous" as they sold weapons to n**i Germany almost during the "entirety" of the war. Definately while German subs were cruising their way through Lake Ontario, destroying shipping from Canada to that war effort. Uh... many Americans forget that Canada was at war with Germany from the beginning!

Nope, you are right Paul, it is over money. A spin can be put on anything to justify the US need to invade anywhere! They do not need to "breed terrorists", as even if people are not, they can be claimed as being so.

One question should be confronted. Is it your Country? If not, it is probably "none of your business" unless you can get a "UN resolution" to do something about it, as the USA rarely waits for. There is a "World Court" & a World Bank & a UN to handle problems fairly.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#112 Consumer Suggestion

James, Calm down! - The war in Iraq is a "loosing battle" & that is it!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

James I back you;

What you are saying is "true". I do not dispute it. However you are not going to get to the Majority of Americans if you use CAPITALS!

Everything you say is "right on the money", but you do not need to be like "Vera" who is so long winded.

Be to the point my friend. The war in Iraq is a "loosing battle" & that is it! It has been proven that there was "no need" to go into Iraq as they never found any WMD's!

So they had "no right" to be there in the beginning & no right to stay there in the interm! Concentrate on that James! That is where it is at!

We have many "loosers" responding to this thread. Never mind Vera! She is already lost! Any sane human being can see that, except for "Patrick" who is proud of the Iraqis he killed!

Some people wish to "blindly" follow George Bush & they are "nuts", as you know!

Still... you have to keep yourself on a "higher plane" if you wish to dispute these idiots! Don't make it long, as they will pick up on sentances to degrade you! Don't make it too outrageous, as they will only look at you as a fool! Even if your not.

Just say what you have said & make it a "small sentance". The US is being conned by their Politicians! Period!

Hopefully some people will wake up! Some might look at the deficit! Some might ask... "What the hell are we doing in Iraq or Afganistan?". A few might say "Don't we have enough problems in the place we live right now?

As no "real awnsers come across" they will begin to realise that here is no reason for being there... other than George Bush's dream! American's are dieing for his dream. Many others are too. Soon there will be more, & it will go on until the American People "end it".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#111 Consumer Suggestion

James, Calm down!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

James I back you;

What you are saying is "true". I do not dispute it. However you are not going to get to the Majority of Americans if you use CAPITALS!

Everything you say is "right on the money", but you do not need to be like "Vera" who is so long winded.

Be to the point my friend. The war in Iraq is a "loosing battle" & that is it! It has been proven that there was "no need" to go into Iraq as they never found any WMD's!

So they had "no right" to be there in the beginning & no right to stay there in the interm! Concentrate on that James! That is where it is at!

We have many "loosers" responding to this thread. Never mind Vera! She is already lost! Any sane human being can see that, except for "Patrick" who is proud of the Iraqis he killed!

Some people wish to "blindly" follow George Bush & they are "nuts", as you know!

Still... you have to keep yourself on a "higher plane" if you wish to dispute these idiots! Don't make it long, as they will pick up on sentances to degrade you! Don't make it too outrageous, as they will only look at you as a fool! Even if your not.

Just say what you have said & make it a "small sentance". The US is being conned by their Politicians! Period!

Hopefully some people will wake up! Some might look at the deficit! Some might ask... "What the hell are we doing in Iraq or Afganistan?". A few might say "Don't we have enough problems in the place we live right now?

As no "real awnsers come across" they will begin to realise that here is no reason for being there... other than George Bush's dream! American's are dieing for his dream. Many others are too. Soon there will be more, & it will go on until the American People "end it".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#110 Consumer Comment

Who gave the United States the authority to rule the world?????

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 17, 2005

Why is it that the United States think they can give orders to and invade countries for profit. The united States is not the United Nations! People wake up, The United States is trying to overtly take over the world!!!!!! People act now and speak up!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#109 Consumer Comment

Huh, it is so funny that George Bush Jr. was a drunk!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

I love the fact that George W. Bush was a NOTED drunk. His two daughters were caught underage in a nightclub-drinking illegally-of course probation was given. The story was swept under the rug. Now Jeb Bush's son was arrested for public intoxication and resisting arrest! People do you know whats going on in this COUNTRY? Us citizens are beiong railroaded, and screwed. This Iraq war is so false and wrong it is ridiculous. Bin Laddin does not live in Iraq!!!! He does live in Afghanistan though! why isn't the war in Afghanistan?????? Bush wanted to attack an oil rich country which he thought was weak. I guess he and the American Country was wrong. I know the majority of American people hate this war, as their is no weapons of any destruction. The people of Iraq are trying to save their country from an unjustified invasion from the USA. The UN never approved this war. I say with gas prices sooo high , who gains from this, big business, oil companies, Halliburton, Bush family, and Cheney family of course as they are both oil executives. AMERICANS STAND UP AND FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS, AND ELECTED OFFICIALS!!!!!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#108 Consumer Suggestion

Clinton left with the "highest popularity rating" of any President

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

Vera;

You are entitled to your opinion. Although "long & drawn out".

It's obvious you hate Clinton. That could be said in 2 sentances. Don't worry Vera. He won't be comming back, simply because your laws do not allow him to run "ever again". Even though he left with the "highest popularity rating" of any President. So "get over it" Vera, Clinton is gone. Most Americans obviously dis agree with you, but still he is gone.

Now again do I have to point out that the USA gave Suddam any WMD's he ever had? They were meant to fight Iran. He used them on Kurds. Possibly you should worry about the weapons the USA gives to other Countries to do their bidding, rather than pointing fingers at people who "follow orders" from the USA.

No before you jump on that, USA did not order him to kill Kurds. They ordered him to kill Iranians. Does it matter? Can you not see how Suddam was "set up"?

Now Bush uses him as a "reason" to spend 100's of Billions to invade & "fix Iraq". Iraq is not Japan! Japan has proven to be able, "before and after" your war against them to build industry & become viable, without any natural resources & importing & exporting everything they make. They know business! The middle east does not.

The only other Country you could point to would be Germany. Again a Country that has no problems standing on their own two feet without "any help". It sure is nice that the USA has proven that they can back the people who do not need backing!

However, in the Middle East, they do not have this kind of business sense. They live, surrounded by sand, in the desert & until "oil" came into their Countries, they were nothing more than a "meek living" civilization that have warred over the "little they have".

So you cannot understand their lifestyle! You cannot understand their religeous beliefs! You cannot understand what is important to them! However you support a "Dictator" who decides at the "drop of a hat" to invade their Country & tell them how to do it. USA's interest in the Middle East is only oil!

You "eat up" Bush spin, on how many people he has killed, but how many has the USA killed? How many in Vietnam, or Nicarauga, or Afganistan? How many & for what point? You honestly think you can fight a war on terrorism & win? Do you really?

Terrorism is a reply from people feeling invaded by a superior might. What would you do if the Muslims came into the USA & set up a new Government for you, siteing your crimes of humanity outside of your borders? Would Americans turn to terrorism?

These people don't know what "By the People, For the People" means. All they see is a "Dictator" forceing the populace of America into a war against them, even though he has not got the approval of the majority of US citizens.

So, Vera... rather than go "on & on" about the past, & things you cannot change, why not think about what "can be changed now"?

The USA can get out of Iraq & Afganistan & concentrate on New Orleans & what goes on here on this Continent. That would make more sense!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#107 Consumer Suggestion

Once again.....its that "God" thing again......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

Vera states about Clinton's b*****b.....

"It's the whole principle. "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God." --George Washington

Please please please PLEASE can we have the REAL Republican party back? Being a "middle of the road" kind of person, I totally acknowledge the need for at least two polictical parties in this country. This complete hijacking of the Republican party is so wrong and totally evil. I just cant stand it anymore. While I respect George Washington and fondly think of him as a founding father, one must remember this is not the 1700's.

If this puritanical ranting and overdone religious zealot attitude continues, then this country is done for.

This country was NOT founded on "god" or "religion". It was founded on the freedom OF and/or FROM religion.....period. FREEDOM people FREEDOM!!

Bush and his religious cronies are out to make this country into something even more vile than the Taliban in Afganistan. Im not worried anymore about his obvious and blatant tax rip offs and the war in Iraq. This religion thing scares me to death.

And for the dork that comes back saying "if your religious then you have no morals!". Well ya dork, heres a wake up call for you.....you dont have to have religion for morals. I dont need a d**n book written by a bunch of pent up monks in the 1200's telling me that "killing is bad" and "cheating on your spouse is bad", or "stealing is bad". If you cant figure that out on your own without having to devote your life to some religion then your a weak person to begin with. Let alone your parents should have taught you such things while you were still in your play pen.

So, can we please have the REAL Republican party back from you religious zealots? There are lots of things we need to do in this country more important than toiling over your fear of gay marrage and the like. Along with lots of good we can do in the world more important than toiling over your fear that US aid in third world countries will go towards abortions.

If your religious, more power to you. Now go to YOUR church (or whatever it may be) yourself and stop trying to drag the entire country there with you. If you need it for "morals" so be it, we have the same morals as well. We just didnt need to get them in a place of "god".

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#106 Consumer Comment

Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

First, let me get a few things out in the open air:

I don't watch Fox News, I look at many information sources. Like most, I form my own opinions, I don't let some porker movie maker give them to me. Incidentally, even Michael Moore-On admits candidly that his film "Isn't really a documentary, but more of an Op-Ed piece."
Anyone that gets their information on politics from the funny pages, well...."cute and fuzzy, Boys...cute and fuzzy." :D

But honestly, B., From Colorado, I've seen your posts in other places (assuming that you're the same "B." I've seen, that is.) And I have naught but to appreciate the intelligence in which you present your info. I don't agree on several points, and a few I do agree on. But my comparisons weren't as "apples to oranges" as you might think; I was comparing two men in very public, very trusted positions. My opinion on Jim Bakker is that what he did was wrong, and he was punished...Clinton--again In MY OPINION--got little more than a nasty rebuke. He knew that a President couldn't be impeached during any police action...I think he acted on that knowledge.

Should anyone who commits adultery loose everything? No. But does it really have to take place at one's job? Couldn't he have been more inclined to take Monica elsewhere and do this, not on the taxpayer's coin? You and I both know that if he were to divorce, Hillary would have his fuzzy nut-sack mounted on a hunter's plaque above her degrees: "I got those in the settlement, too." Would be her statement during water-cooler chats.

And there's the vibe: The President smoked pot, so it's okay...the President dodged the military, so it's okay...the President has sex at work, cheats on his wife, so it's okay. Where is the intern? Making money from a book. Where is the Former President? Still a media favorite...and making money off a book.

I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either...and I'm okay with the fact that not everyone agrees with me (unlike certain "liberal" minded folks here, but it's all good.) I hate the whole Halliburton affair...and the fact that we're outsourcing jobs to save money. Both are bad calls.

I do not love the fact that we are at war (once again, I must ask, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves before they grasp and understand: "Conservative" doesn't mean "war-mongering religious heretic" any more than white guy with no hair equals "skinhead" or "n**i Youth". I support the troops...and wish with all my heart that they return safe. I do pray for our troops...conservative or liberal, right or left, 86% of us believe in God...and we should all pray, rather than complain. Give your Spirit a bullhorn.

You people that purport that Clinton was such a great guy, fine...but you must also acknowledge that he was no angel either...and I mean in many other areas than under/on the desk at the Oval office. Why do I need to know whether or not my President wears boxers or briefs? Is he great because he fled to Canada when he was under potential draft? How much do you think it cost him to get the Doctor to say his eardrum was perforated? Clinton's personal whoopsies are just as evident. Many exceptions were made for him to be in office. When he was elected, I simply accepted the fact that he wasn't my favorite President, even if he was a likeable guy.

Still I find myself wondering, why am I a beast because I am as passionate about my opinion as those who think Michael Moore-On is a genius, Clinton was the Son of The Almighty, and that Hillary is the very personification of civility and moral fortitude (My God, writing that actually made heartburn rise up!) Why again, hasn't the Resident Brain Trust responded to my Query regarding the Enemy's actions? (Here's a note, you shouldn't go to the local Blockbuster video to bone-up on American political information, James of Canada.)

So it's okay for Saddam to kill over 300,000 of his own people (and displace over 900,000)? It's okay for him to throw a global tantrum and dump millions of gallons of crude into the Persian Gulf to smoke his retreat? Eco-Terrorism is all right? Violating Geneva Codes by using illegal chemical weapons is acceptable, also?
Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths....and how is this okay? Do you honestly think, given the chance, that if Saddam were allowed to broaden his reach, he'd want anything less for the surrounding countries?
This is a man who used kids (between the ages of 14 and 21) to blow up restaurants, buses, and public gatherings in Israel---he even held a ceremony, presented certificates and gave $25,000.00 checks to each of the families of those that performed their act of "Martyrdom". Saddam has been funneling money into terrorist coffers for ages...and he was in support of what has happened in America; pre-and post-911.

Most recently, in yet another flip-flop (how surprising), Kerry himself said that it's a good thing that Saddam was removed from power.

Now, to those of you who think Bush is responsible for Hurricane Katrina.

Please tell me, is Bush able to command the winds and weather? Sounds to me like you guys are the ones giving him that god-complex you speak of.
And let's face itno matter what he does, there's nothing that Bush can do that will make an unhappy, whining liberal into a happy Camper.
Some of you are the types that would stand waist-deep in sewage whining about you local officials before you'd seek a way to get yourselves out.

The levees in New Orleans are old. The local Government had previously turned down the US Corps of Engineer's bid to bolster the levees, and these levees have needed repair for DECADES. The City of New Orleans is built like a bowl (below sea level), and they have been warned time and time again that to put money into city-wide sprawl is a fool's errand. They didn't listen! Is that Bush's fault? What did Clinton do to improve the conditions in his own beloved South---oh, that's right! Nothing. I suppose the fact that New Orleans is 80-plus percent black had little to do with it.
Naw, that's not it! I'll quote Michael Moore-On: C'mon, they're black! You wouldn't expect a white man to sit on his roof, starving in the hot sun for days, would you? Ooh. Your genius is showing.

No, I don't think the black person loots while the white person gathers food for the Family, and I don't think Kayne (sp?) West's take on the situation was at all accurate. I think that like all of us, Mr. West could have checked out the information from both sides. One point in this thread that's been presented ad nauseum.

Say, did anyone notice the bang-up job to help offered by Sean Penn? Here's a quote from the Federalist Patriot, an online newspaper: (Reprinted with permission, FederalistPatriot.US)

Captain Sean Penn to the rescue...er...uh...HELP!
Hollywood celeb activist Sean Penn showed up in New Orleans this weekend in order to take charge of the evacuation operations. Unfortunately, after he launched his cute little camo duck boat (PETA take note) filled with his entourage, including personal photographer, he discovered that his public relations manager forgot to install the drain plug -- and the boat immediately began taking on water.
Penn had to suspend his plans to rescue all the stranded children while he bailed with a red cup -- previously occupied with a Pat O'Brian Hurricane. Then Penn's boat motor would not start (did anyone check for fuel) so the whole crew had to paddle around in circles for a while hoping to get some good press.
One bystander queried Penn and all his golden boys, "How are you going to get any people in that thing?" Of course, that was never the objective.
So is the paparazzi-pandering Hollywood posturing doing any better? And this is only ONE example of many.

"The downpour of Hurricane Katrina brought with it a scourge of sickness, homelessness, injury and death. But the aftermath of Katrina has wrought its own special plaguea celebrity hurricane of opportunism and bad taste. While most of America is embracing New Orleans' tragedy as a chance to pull together and demonstrate a still-strong Christian character of caring for the least of these, Hollywood is embracing it as an opportunity to display their foolishness, egotism and utter lack of sensitivity... Once, Jane Fonda's involvement in Vietnam stood out to Americans as a shameful anomaly. Today, there is no national event, whether tragic or triumphant, into which a horde of entertainers do not see fit to insert themselves. It would be one thing if actors and musicians would show up with a bit of humility and pass out water, food, and clothingnot to mention some funds from their ample bank accountsto needy citizens. If they did this (and a few do) Americans would welcome them in the spirit of brotherly love and patriotic pride. Instead, most of them show up with camera crews (As Sean Penn did in his failed 'rescue' trip to New Orleans) and attitudes of privilege. Their hubris is revolting."Megan Basham (freelance writer).

Let's also not forget that when Amtrak offered to help, the City of New Orleans officials turned them down in favor of a fleet of buses---all of which are sitting, unused, and up past their windows in filthy water. Meanwhile, some nine hundred seats offered by Amtrak rolled away emptya day and a half before Katrina made landfall.

This wasn't Bush's fault, neither was Katrina. Again, I'd have valid reason to believe, that if this all happened on Kerry's watch, he'd still be asking everyone How do you think I should respond? He was a weak opponent, and was voted down, thank God. Despite some leftmedia mudslinging at it's finest.

As I'm sure this rebuttal will no doubt bring in lots of vicious diatribe from the anybody but bush crowd, I will restate that it is my right to feel as passionate and devoted about my opinion as you do about yours. And as far as not offering any coherent evidence that Bush is a rip-off, well, you all haven't offered any evidence that Kerry or Clinton was any better. Truthfully, if we had any surplus as a result of Clinton's presence in the White House, it's mainly because of all the budget cuts to the military and schooling that had been diverted elsewhere.
And again, there's the matter of how some things that passed during Clinton's time were scheduled to take effect in the next presidential term. What would have been Kerry's response to that sort of thing, Had he been voted in? I wonder (I get visions of Alfred E. Newman, of Mad Magazine fame: Whatme worry?).

Now I'll sit back and relax. because I'm sure I'll get quite a flurry of Well.I dunnoh, but I'll bet he would've done a better job than Bush has!! finger shaking and belt-loop tugging.

Besos y abrazos, baby!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#105 Consumer Comment

Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

First, let me get a few things out in the open air:

I don't watch Fox News, I look at many information sources. Like most, I form my own opinions, I don't let some porker movie maker give them to me. Incidentally, even Michael Moore-On admits candidly that his film "Isn't really a documentary, but more of an Op-Ed piece."
Anyone that gets their information on politics from the funny pages, well...."cute and fuzzy, Boys...cute and fuzzy." :D

But honestly, B., From Colorado, I've seen your posts in other places (assuming that you're the same "B." I've seen, that is.) And I have naught but to appreciate the intelligence in which you present your info. I don't agree on several points, and a few I do agree on. But my comparisons weren't as "apples to oranges" as you might think; I was comparing two men in very public, very trusted positions. My opinion on Jim Bakker is that what he did was wrong, and he was punished...Clinton--again In MY OPINION--got little more than a nasty rebuke. He knew that a President couldn't be impeached during any police action...I think he acted on that knowledge.

Should anyone who commits adultery loose everything? No. But does it really have to take place at one's job? Couldn't he have been more inclined to take Monica elsewhere and do this, not on the taxpayer's coin? You and I both know that if he were to divorce, Hillary would have his fuzzy nut-sack mounted on a hunter's plaque above her degrees: "I got those in the settlement, too." Would be her statement during water-cooler chats.

And there's the vibe: The President smoked pot, so it's okay...the President dodged the military, so it's okay...the President has sex at work, cheats on his wife, so it's okay. Where is the intern? Making money from a book. Where is the Former President? Still a media favorite...and making money off a book.

I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either...and I'm okay with the fact that not everyone agrees with me (unlike certain "liberal" minded folks here, but it's all good.) I hate the whole Halliburton affair...and the fact that we're outsourcing jobs to save money. Both are bad calls.

I do not love the fact that we are at war (once again, I must ask, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves before they grasp and understand: "Conservative" doesn't mean "war-mongering religious heretic" any more than white guy with no hair equals "skinhead" or "n**i Youth". I support the troops...and wish with all my heart that they return safe. I do pray for our troops...conservative or liberal, right or left, 86% of us believe in God...and we should all pray, rather than complain. Give your Spirit a bullhorn.

You people that purport that Clinton was such a great guy, fine...but you must also acknowledge that he was no angel either...and I mean in many other areas than under/on the desk at the Oval office. Why do I need to know whether or not my President wears boxers or briefs? Is he great because he fled to Canada when he was under potential draft? How much do you think it cost him to get the Doctor to say his eardrum was perforated? Clinton's personal whoopsies are just as evident. Many exceptions were made for him to be in office. When he was elected, I simply accepted the fact that he wasn't my favorite President, even if he was a likeable guy.

Still I find myself wondering, why am I a beast because I am as passionate about my opinion as those who think Michael Moore-On is a genius, Clinton was the Son of The Almighty, and that Hillary is the very personification of civility and moral fortitude (My God, writing that actually made heartburn rise up!) Why again, hasn't the Resident Brain Trust responded to my Query regarding the Enemy's actions? (Here's a note, you shouldn't go to the local Blockbuster video to bone-up on American political information, James of Canada.)

So it's okay for Saddam to kill over 300,000 of his own people (and displace over 900,000)? It's okay for him to throw a global tantrum and dump millions of gallons of crude into the Persian Gulf to smoke his retreat? Eco-Terrorism is all right? Violating Geneva Codes by using illegal chemical weapons is acceptable, also?
Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths....and how is this okay? Do you honestly think, given the chance, that if Saddam were allowed to broaden his reach, he'd want anything less for the surrounding countries?
This is a man who used kids (between the ages of 14 and 21) to blow up restaurants, buses, and public gatherings in Israel---he even held a ceremony, presented certificates and gave $25,000.00 checks to each of the families of those that performed their act of "Martyrdom". Saddam has been funneling money into terrorist coffers for ages...and he was in support of what has happened in America; pre-and post-911.

Most recently, in yet another flip-flop (how surprising), Kerry himself said that it's a good thing that Saddam was removed from power.

Now, to those of you who think Bush is responsible for Hurricane Katrina.

Please tell me, is Bush able to command the winds and weather? Sounds to me like you guys are the ones giving him that god-complex you speak of.
And let's face itno matter what he does, there's nothing that Bush can do that will make an unhappy, whining liberal into a happy Camper.
Some of you are the types that would stand waist-deep in sewage whining about you local officials before you'd seek a way to get yourselves out.

The levees in New Orleans are old. The local Government had previously turned down the US Corps of Engineer's bid to bolster the levees, and these levees have needed repair for DECADES. The City of New Orleans is built like a bowl (below sea level), and they have been warned time and time again that to put money into city-wide sprawl is a fool's errand. They didn't listen! Is that Bush's fault? What did Clinton do to improve the conditions in his own beloved South---oh, that's right! Nothing. I suppose the fact that New Orleans is 80-plus percent black had little to do with it.
Naw, that's not it! I'll quote Michael Moore-On: C'mon, they're black! You wouldn't expect a white man to sit on his roof, starving in the hot sun for days, would you? Ooh. Your genius is showing.

No, I don't think the black person loots while the white person gathers food for the Family, and I don't think Kayne (sp?) West's take on the situation was at all accurate. I think that like all of us, Mr. West could have checked out the information from both sides. One point in this thread that's been presented ad nauseum.

Say, did anyone notice the bang-up job to help offered by Sean Penn? Here's a quote from the Federalist Patriot, an online newspaper: (Reprinted with permission, FederalistPatriot.US)

Captain Sean Penn to the rescue...er...uh...HELP!
Hollywood celeb activist Sean Penn showed up in New Orleans this weekend in order to take charge of the evacuation operations. Unfortunately, after he launched his cute little camo duck boat (PETA take note) filled with his entourage, including personal photographer, he discovered that his public relations manager forgot to install the drain plug -- and the boat immediately began taking on water.
Penn had to suspend his plans to rescue all the stranded children while he bailed with a red cup -- previously occupied with a Pat O'Brian Hurricane. Then Penn's boat motor would not start (did anyone check for fuel) so the whole crew had to paddle around in circles for a while hoping to get some good press.
One bystander queried Penn and all his golden boys, "How are you going to get any people in that thing?" Of course, that was never the objective.
So is the paparazzi-pandering Hollywood posturing doing any better? And this is only ONE example of many.

"The downpour of Hurricane Katrina brought with it a scourge of sickness, homelessness, injury and death. But the aftermath of Katrina has wrought its own special plaguea celebrity hurricane of opportunism and bad taste. While most of America is embracing New Orleans' tragedy as a chance to pull together and demonstrate a still-strong Christian character of caring for the least of these, Hollywood is embracing it as an opportunity to display their foolishness, egotism and utter lack of sensitivity... Once, Jane Fonda's involvement in Vietnam stood out to Americans as a shameful anomaly. Today, there is no national event, whether tragic or triumphant, into which a horde of entertainers do not see fit to insert themselves. It would be one thing if actors and musicians would show up with a bit of humility and pass out water, food, and clothingnot to mention some funds from their ample bank accountsto needy citizens. If they did this (and a few do) Americans would welcome them in the spirit of brotherly love and patriotic pride. Instead, most of them show up with camera crews (As Sean Penn did in his failed 'rescue' trip to New Orleans) and attitudes of privilege. Their hubris is revolting."Megan Basham (freelance writer).

Let's also not forget that when Amtrak offered to help, the City of New Orleans officials turned them down in favor of a fleet of buses---all of which are sitting, unused, and up past their windows in filthy water. Meanwhile, some nine hundred seats offered by Amtrak rolled away emptya day and a half before Katrina made landfall.

This wasn't Bush's fault, neither was Katrina. Again, I'd have valid reason to believe, that if this all happened on Kerry's watch, he'd still be asking everyone How do you think I should respond? He was a weak opponent, and was voted down, thank God. Despite some leftmedia mudslinging at it's finest.

As I'm sure this rebuttal will no doubt bring in lots of vicious diatribe from the anybody but bush crowd, I will restate that it is my right to feel as passionate and devoted about my opinion as you do about yours. And as far as not offering any coherent evidence that Bush is a rip-off, well, you all haven't offered any evidence that Kerry or Clinton was any better. Truthfully, if we had any surplus as a result of Clinton's presence in the White House, it's mainly because of all the budget cuts to the military and schooling that had been diverted elsewhere.
And again, there's the matter of how some things that passed during Clinton's time were scheduled to take effect in the next presidential term. What would have been Kerry's response to that sort of thing, Had he been voted in? I wonder (I get visions of Alfred E. Newman, of Mad Magazine fame: Whatme worry?).

Now I'll sit back and relax. because I'm sure I'll get quite a flurry of Well.I dunnoh, but I'll bet he would've done a better job than Bush has!! finger shaking and belt-loop tugging.

Besos y abrazos, baby!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#104 Consumer Comment

Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

First, let me get a few things out in the open air:

I don't watch Fox News, I look at many information sources. Like most, I form my own opinions, I don't let some porker movie maker give them to me. Incidentally, even Michael Moore-On admits candidly that his film "Isn't really a documentary, but more of an Op-Ed piece."
Anyone that gets their information on politics from the funny pages, well...."cute and fuzzy, Boys...cute and fuzzy." :D

But honestly, B., From Colorado, I've seen your posts in other places (assuming that you're the same "B." I've seen, that is.) And I have naught but to appreciate the intelligence in which you present your info. I don't agree on several points, and a few I do agree on. But my comparisons weren't as "apples to oranges" as you might think; I was comparing two men in very public, very trusted positions. My opinion on Jim Bakker is that what he did was wrong, and he was punished...Clinton--again In MY OPINION--got little more than a nasty rebuke. He knew that a President couldn't be impeached during any police action...I think he acted on that knowledge.

Should anyone who commits adultery loose everything? No. But does it really have to take place at one's job? Couldn't he have been more inclined to take Monica elsewhere and do this, not on the taxpayer's coin? You and I both know that if he were to divorce, Hillary would have his fuzzy nut-sack mounted on a hunter's plaque above her degrees: "I got those in the settlement, too." Would be her statement during water-cooler chats.

And there's the vibe: The President smoked pot, so it's okay...the President dodged the military, so it's okay...the President has sex at work, cheats on his wife, so it's okay. Where is the intern? Making money from a book. Where is the Former President? Still a media favorite...and making money off a book.

I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either...and I'm okay with the fact that not everyone agrees with me (unlike certain "liberal" minded folks here, but it's all good.) I hate the whole Halliburton affair...and the fact that we're outsourcing jobs to save money. Both are bad calls.

I do not love the fact that we are at war (once again, I must ask, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves before they grasp and understand: "Conservative" doesn't mean "war-mongering religious heretic" any more than white guy with no hair equals "skinhead" or "n**i Youth". I support the troops...and wish with all my heart that they return safe. I do pray for our troops...conservative or liberal, right or left, 86% of us believe in God...and we should all pray, rather than complain. Give your Spirit a bullhorn.

You people that purport that Clinton was such a great guy, fine...but you must also acknowledge that he was no angel either...and I mean in many other areas than under/on the desk at the Oval office. Why do I need to know whether or not my President wears boxers or briefs? Is he great because he fled to Canada when he was under potential draft? How much do you think it cost him to get the Doctor to say his eardrum was perforated? Clinton's personal whoopsies are just as evident. Many exceptions were made for him to be in office. When he was elected, I simply accepted the fact that he wasn't my favorite President, even if he was a likeable guy.

Still I find myself wondering, why am I a beast because I am as passionate about my opinion as those who think Michael Moore-On is a genius, Clinton was the Son of The Almighty, and that Hillary is the very personification of civility and moral fortitude (My God, writing that actually made heartburn rise up!) Why again, hasn't the Resident Brain Trust responded to my Query regarding the Enemy's actions? (Here's a note, you shouldn't go to the local Blockbuster video to bone-up on American political information, James of Canada.)

So it's okay for Saddam to kill over 300,000 of his own people (and displace over 900,000)? It's okay for him to throw a global tantrum and dump millions of gallons of crude into the Persian Gulf to smoke his retreat? Eco-Terrorism is all right? Violating Geneva Codes by using illegal chemical weapons is acceptable, also?
Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths....and how is this okay? Do you honestly think, given the chance, that if Saddam were allowed to broaden his reach, he'd want anything less for the surrounding countries?
This is a man who used kids (between the ages of 14 and 21) to blow up restaurants, buses, and public gatherings in Israel---he even held a ceremony, presented certificates and gave $25,000.00 checks to each of the families of those that performed their act of "Martyrdom". Saddam has been funneling money into terrorist coffers for ages...and he was in support of what has happened in America; pre-and post-911.

Most recently, in yet another flip-flop (how surprising), Kerry himself said that it's a good thing that Saddam was removed from power.

Now, to those of you who think Bush is responsible for Hurricane Katrina.

Please tell me, is Bush able to command the winds and weather? Sounds to me like you guys are the ones giving him that god-complex you speak of.
And let's face itno matter what he does, there's nothing that Bush can do that will make an unhappy, whining liberal into a happy Camper.
Some of you are the types that would stand waist-deep in sewage whining about you local officials before you'd seek a way to get yourselves out.

The levees in New Orleans are old. The local Government had previously turned down the US Corps of Engineer's bid to bolster the levees, and these levees have needed repair for DECADES. The City of New Orleans is built like a bowl (below sea level), and they have been warned time and time again that to put money into city-wide sprawl is a fool's errand. They didn't listen! Is that Bush's fault? What did Clinton do to improve the conditions in his own beloved South---oh, that's right! Nothing. I suppose the fact that New Orleans is 80-plus percent black had little to do with it.
Naw, that's not it! I'll quote Michael Moore-On: C'mon, they're black! You wouldn't expect a white man to sit on his roof, starving in the hot sun for days, would you? Ooh. Your genius is showing.

No, I don't think the black person loots while the white person gathers food for the Family, and I don't think Kayne (sp?) West's take on the situation was at all accurate. I think that like all of us, Mr. West could have checked out the information from both sides. One point in this thread that's been presented ad nauseum.

Say, did anyone notice the bang-up job to help offered by Sean Penn? Here's a quote from the Federalist Patriot, an online newspaper: (Reprinted with permission, FederalistPatriot.US)

Captain Sean Penn to the rescue...er...uh...HELP!
Hollywood celeb activist Sean Penn showed up in New Orleans this weekend in order to take charge of the evacuation operations. Unfortunately, after he launched his cute little camo duck boat (PETA take note) filled with his entourage, including personal photographer, he discovered that his public relations manager forgot to install the drain plug -- and the boat immediately began taking on water.
Penn had to suspend his plans to rescue all the stranded children while he bailed with a red cup -- previously occupied with a Pat O'Brian Hurricane. Then Penn's boat motor would not start (did anyone check for fuel) so the whole crew had to paddle around in circles for a while hoping to get some good press.
One bystander queried Penn and all his golden boys, "How are you going to get any people in that thing?" Of course, that was never the objective.
So is the paparazzi-pandering Hollywood posturing doing any better? And this is only ONE example of many.

"The downpour of Hurricane Katrina brought with it a scourge of sickness, homelessness, injury and death. But the aftermath of Katrina has wrought its own special plaguea celebrity hurricane of opportunism and bad taste. While most of America is embracing New Orleans' tragedy as a chance to pull together and demonstrate a still-strong Christian character of caring for the least of these, Hollywood is embracing it as an opportunity to display their foolishness, egotism and utter lack of sensitivity... Once, Jane Fonda's involvement in Vietnam stood out to Americans as a shameful anomaly. Today, there is no national event, whether tragic or triumphant, into which a horde of entertainers do not see fit to insert themselves. It would be one thing if actors and musicians would show up with a bit of humility and pass out water, food, and clothingnot to mention some funds from their ample bank accountsto needy citizens. If they did this (and a few do) Americans would welcome them in the spirit of brotherly love and patriotic pride. Instead, most of them show up with camera crews (As Sean Penn did in his failed 'rescue' trip to New Orleans) and attitudes of privilege. Their hubris is revolting."Megan Basham (freelance writer).

Let's also not forget that when Amtrak offered to help, the City of New Orleans officials turned them down in favor of a fleet of buses---all of which are sitting, unused, and up past their windows in filthy water. Meanwhile, some nine hundred seats offered by Amtrak rolled away emptya day and a half before Katrina made landfall.

This wasn't Bush's fault, neither was Katrina. Again, I'd have valid reason to believe, that if this all happened on Kerry's watch, he'd still be asking everyone How do you think I should respond? He was a weak opponent, and was voted down, thank God. Despite some leftmedia mudslinging at it's finest.

As I'm sure this rebuttal will no doubt bring in lots of vicious diatribe from the anybody but bush crowd, I will restate that it is my right to feel as passionate and devoted about my opinion as you do about yours. And as far as not offering any coherent evidence that Bush is a rip-off, well, you all haven't offered any evidence that Kerry or Clinton was any better. Truthfully, if we had any surplus as a result of Clinton's presence in the White House, it's mainly because of all the budget cuts to the military and schooling that had been diverted elsewhere.
And again, there's the matter of how some things that passed during Clinton's time were scheduled to take effect in the next presidential term. What would have been Kerry's response to that sort of thing, Had he been voted in? I wonder (I get visions of Alfred E. Newman, of Mad Magazine fame: Whatme worry?).

Now I'll sit back and relax. because I'm sure I'll get quite a flurry of Well.I dunnoh, but I'll bet he would've done a better job than Bush has!! finger shaking and belt-loop tugging.

Besos y abrazos, baby!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#103 Consumer Comment

Okay, now that that's outta the way. I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

First, let me get a few things out in the open air:

I don't watch Fox News, I look at many information sources. Like most, I form my own opinions, I don't let some porker movie maker give them to me. Incidentally, even Michael Moore-On admits candidly that his film "Isn't really a documentary, but more of an Op-Ed piece."
Anyone that gets their information on politics from the funny pages, well...."cute and fuzzy, Boys...cute and fuzzy." :D

But honestly, B., From Colorado, I've seen your posts in other places (assuming that you're the same "B." I've seen, that is.) And I have naught but to appreciate the intelligence in which you present your info. I don't agree on several points, and a few I do agree on. But my comparisons weren't as "apples to oranges" as you might think; I was comparing two men in very public, very trusted positions. My opinion on Jim Bakker is that what he did was wrong, and he was punished...Clinton--again In MY OPINION--got little more than a nasty rebuke. He knew that a President couldn't be impeached during any police action...I think he acted on that knowledge.

Should anyone who commits adultery loose everything? No. But does it really have to take place at one's job? Couldn't he have been more inclined to take Monica elsewhere and do this, not on the taxpayer's coin? You and I both know that if he were to divorce, Hillary would have his fuzzy nut-sack mounted on a hunter's plaque above her degrees: "I got those in the settlement, too." Would be her statement during water-cooler chats.

And there's the vibe: The President smoked pot, so it's okay...the President dodged the military, so it's okay...the President has sex at work, cheats on his wife, so it's okay. Where is the intern? Making money from a book. Where is the Former President? Still a media favorite...and making money off a book.

I don't believe President Bush is perfect, but I don't think he's a monster, either...and I'm okay with the fact that not everyone agrees with me (unlike certain "liberal" minded folks here, but it's all good.) I hate the whole Halliburton affair...and the fact that we're outsourcing jobs to save money. Both are bad calls.

I do not love the fact that we are at war (once again, I must ask, how many times do we have to repeat ourselves before they grasp and understand: "Conservative" doesn't mean "war-mongering religious heretic" any more than white guy with no hair equals "skinhead" or "n**i Youth". I support the troops...and wish with all my heart that they return safe. I do pray for our troops...conservative or liberal, right or left, 86% of us believe in God...and we should all pray, rather than complain. Give your Spirit a bullhorn.

You people that purport that Clinton was such a great guy, fine...but you must also acknowledge that he was no angel either...and I mean in many other areas than under/on the desk at the Oval office. Why do I need to know whether or not my President wears boxers or briefs? Is he great because he fled to Canada when he was under potential draft? How much do you think it cost him to get the Doctor to say his eardrum was perforated? Clinton's personal whoopsies are just as evident. Many exceptions were made for him to be in office. When he was elected, I simply accepted the fact that he wasn't my favorite President, even if he was a likeable guy.

Still I find myself wondering, why am I a beast because I am as passionate about my opinion as those who think Michael Moore-On is a genius, Clinton was the Son of The Almighty, and that Hillary is the very personification of civility and moral fortitude (My God, writing that actually made heartburn rise up!) Why again, hasn't the Resident Brain Trust responded to my Query regarding the Enemy's actions? (Here's a note, you shouldn't go to the local Blockbuster video to bone-up on American political information, James of Canada.)

So it's okay for Saddam to kill over 300,000 of his own people (and displace over 900,000)? It's okay for him to throw a global tantrum and dump millions of gallons of crude into the Persian Gulf to smoke his retreat? Eco-Terrorism is all right? Violating Geneva Codes by using illegal chemical weapons is acceptable, also?
Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths....and how is this okay? Do you honestly think, given the chance, that if Saddam were allowed to broaden his reach, he'd want anything less for the surrounding countries?
This is a man who used kids (between the ages of 14 and 21) to blow up restaurants, buses, and public gatherings in Israel---he even held a ceremony, presented certificates and gave $25,000.00 checks to each of the families of those that performed their act of "Martyrdom". Saddam has been funneling money into terrorist coffers for ages...and he was in support of what has happened in America; pre-and post-911.

Most recently, in yet another flip-flop (how surprising), Kerry himself said that it's a good thing that Saddam was removed from power.

Now, to those of you who think Bush is responsible for Hurricane Katrina.

Please tell me, is Bush able to command the winds and weather? Sounds to me like you guys are the ones giving him that god-complex you speak of.
And let's face itno matter what he does, there's nothing that Bush can do that will make an unhappy, whining liberal into a happy Camper.
Some of you are the types that would stand waist-deep in sewage whining about you local officials before you'd seek a way to get yourselves out.

The levees in New Orleans are old. The local Government had previously turned down the US Corps of Engineer's bid to bolster the levees, and these levees have needed repair for DECADES. The City of New Orleans is built like a bowl (below sea level), and they have been warned time and time again that to put money into city-wide sprawl is a fool's errand. They didn't listen! Is that Bush's fault? What did Clinton do to improve the conditions in his own beloved South---oh, that's right! Nothing. I suppose the fact that New Orleans is 80-plus percent black had little to do with it.
Naw, that's not it! I'll quote Michael Moore-On: C'mon, they're black! You wouldn't expect a white man to sit on his roof, starving in the hot sun for days, would you? Ooh. Your genius is showing.

No, I don't think the black person loots while the white person gathers food for the Family, and I don't think Kayne (sp?) West's take on the situation was at all accurate. I think that like all of us, Mr. West could have checked out the information from both sides. One point in this thread that's been presented ad nauseum.

Say, did anyone notice the bang-up job to help offered by Sean Penn? Here's a quote from the Federalist Patriot, an online newspaper: (Reprinted with permission, FederalistPatriot.US)

Captain Sean Penn to the rescue...er...uh...HELP!
Hollywood celeb activist Sean Penn showed up in New Orleans this weekend in order to take charge of the evacuation operations. Unfortunately, after he launched his cute little camo duck boat (PETA take note) filled with his entourage, including personal photographer, he discovered that his public relations manager forgot to install the drain plug -- and the boat immediately began taking on water.
Penn had to suspend his plans to rescue all the stranded children while he bailed with a red cup -- previously occupied with a Pat O'Brian Hurricane. Then Penn's boat motor would not start (did anyone check for fuel) so the whole crew had to paddle around in circles for a while hoping to get some good press.
One bystander queried Penn and all his golden boys, "How are you going to get any people in that thing?" Of course, that was never the objective.
So is the paparazzi-pandering Hollywood posturing doing any better? And this is only ONE example of many.

"The downpour of Hurricane Katrina brought with it a scourge of sickness, homelessness, injury and death. But the aftermath of Katrina has wrought its own special plaguea celebrity hurricane of opportunism and bad taste. While most of America is embracing New Orleans' tragedy as a chance to pull together and demonstrate a still-strong Christian character of caring for the least of these, Hollywood is embracing it as an opportunity to display their foolishness, egotism and utter lack of sensitivity... Once, Jane Fonda's involvement in Vietnam stood out to Americans as a shameful anomaly. Today, there is no national event, whether tragic or triumphant, into which a horde of entertainers do not see fit to insert themselves. It would be one thing if actors and musicians would show up with a bit of humility and pass out water, food, and clothingnot to mention some funds from their ample bank accountsto needy citizens. If they did this (and a few do) Americans would welcome them in the spirit of brotherly love and patriotic pride. Instead, most of them show up with camera crews (As Sean Penn did in his failed 'rescue' trip to New Orleans) and attitudes of privilege. Their hubris is revolting."Megan Basham (freelance writer).

Let's also not forget that when Amtrak offered to help, the City of New Orleans officials turned them down in favor of a fleet of buses---all of which are sitting, unused, and up past their windows in filthy water. Meanwhile, some nine hundred seats offered by Amtrak rolled away emptya day and a half before Katrina made landfall.

This wasn't Bush's fault, neither was Katrina. Again, I'd have valid reason to believe, that if this all happened on Kerry's watch, he'd still be asking everyone How do you think I should respond? He was a weak opponent, and was voted down, thank God. Despite some leftmedia mudslinging at it's finest.

As I'm sure this rebuttal will no doubt bring in lots of vicious diatribe from the anybody but bush crowd, I will restate that it is my right to feel as passionate and devoted about my opinion as you do about yours. And as far as not offering any coherent evidence that Bush is a rip-off, well, you all haven't offered any evidence that Kerry or Clinton was any better. Truthfully, if we had any surplus as a result of Clinton's presence in the White House, it's mainly because of all the budget cuts to the military and schooling that had been diverted elsewhere.
And again, there's the matter of how some things that passed during Clinton's time were scheduled to take effect in the next presidential term. What would have been Kerry's response to that sort of thing, Had he been voted in? I wonder (I get visions of Alfred E. Newman, of Mad Magazine fame: Whatme worry?).

Now I'll sit back and relax. because I'm sure I'll get quite a flurry of Well.I dunnoh, but I'll bet he would've done a better job than Bush has!! finger shaking and belt-loop tugging.

Besos y abrazos, baby!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#102 Consumer Suggestion

The fact is "Dear Patrick", that the USA has never really done anybody any real favors!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Friday, September 16, 2005

As usual you miss the point Patrick

Patrick;

I was merely combatting the attitude like:

What do you care? Your Canadian!

Or

Ahh shut up! We saved the World, once twice or 3 times & you should just give us a long rope!

Or

We are just protecting "our interests".

The fact is "Dear Patrick", that the USA has never really done anybody any real favors! They made money selling weapons rather than entering WWII with the rest of the allies. Are you going to deny that?

If you know nothing of the weapons & trucks sold to Germany during WWII from the USA, then my dear Patrick, you are simply ignorant. However this is not the point!

The point is that the USA has no business in Iraq or even Afganistan! Terrorism is growing & will continue to grow as long as the USA remains there. What the USA is trying to set up will not work, as the people there do not have the same value system as Americans do. So, not only is it a waist of time & effort, it also is expensive & merely promotes terrorism.

That is my point Patrick, but every time I bring it up, some dumbass decides to point out just how superior American's are to every other Country in the world & how they therefore have the right to do as they please!

So I bring up some of those "little known points" that you do not get taught in American Propaganda School, that point out that the USA is not such the Savior Nation as the populace is taught & that in "itself" is a pompas attitude. I think during these times the USA could do a little thinking about what other Countries are thinking about their overseas policies.

In this case that "pompas attitude" could cause more hatred & terrorism than this world has ever seen, if the USA does not keep their minds in check. They need to understand that Bush is not Jesus & he really has made more than 1 little mistake during his Presidency, which is very threatening indeed. I point at Bush, as he is the one who's election results are in doubt, along with his policies. Those who back him have a little waking up to do.

So sorry Kerry was not your man. Maybe Gore was. Who knows, but it isn't George Bush!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#101 Consumer Comment

Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Vera & Robert,

What can I say? Very well done indeed.

However, I will agree with James (gasp!) on one thing. He is correct in that we did deliver arms daily to Germany during the 40's. What he left out was that they were delivered via B-17's from about 20,000 feet. LOL.

James, the US officially entered WWII on December 7, 1941. The day Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. And even with that devastating blow to the Pacific Fleet, we still kicked their butts all the way back to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I'm sure you are familiar with the picture of the four Marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima? If you look up their names, you will find that one of them was family member of mine. Here's a hint to help you figure out which one it was. Think about what I had told you previously about my (God forbid) french-canadian ancestors.

And you say we swooped in after the war to reap the spoils? Well, who was it then that spent the next 50 years rebuilding both Germany and Japan? That's right, the US. How much money have we spent by maintaining bases and personnel in those countries over the years? Billions in today's dollars.

I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates. I don't agree with everything he does and says, but I support him as the leader of our country. And I support our troops who are out defending our way of life, even if it is halfway around the world.

God bless.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#100 Consumer Comment

Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Vera & Robert,

What can I say? Very well done indeed.

However, I will agree with James (gasp!) on one thing. He is correct in that we did deliver arms daily to Germany during the 40's. What he left out was that they were delivered via B-17's from about 20,000 feet. LOL.

James, the US officially entered WWII on December 7, 1941. The day Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. And even with that devastating blow to the Pacific Fleet, we still kicked their butts all the way back to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I'm sure you are familiar with the picture of the four Marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima? If you look up their names, you will find that one of them was family member of mine. Here's a hint to help you figure out which one it was. Think about what I had told you previously about my (God forbid) french-canadian ancestors.

And you say we swooped in after the war to reap the spoils? Well, who was it then that spent the next 50 years rebuilding both Germany and Japan? That's right, the US. How much money have we spent by maintaining bases and personnel in those countries over the years? Billions in today's dollars.

I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates. I don't agree with everything he does and says, but I support him as the leader of our country. And I support our troops who are out defending our way of life, even if it is halfway around the world.

God bless.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#99 Consumer Comment

Kudos to Vera and Robert. - I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates.

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Vera & Robert,

What can I say? Very well done indeed.

However, I will agree with James (gasp!) on one thing. He is correct in that we did deliver arms daily to Germany during the 40's. What he left out was that they were delivered via B-17's from about 20,000 feet. LOL.

James, the US officially entered WWII on December 7, 1941. The day Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor. And even with that devastating blow to the Pacific Fleet, we still kicked their butts all the way back to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I'm sure you are familiar with the picture of the four Marines raising the American flag on Iwo Jima? If you look up their names, you will find that one of them was family member of mine. Here's a hint to help you figure out which one it was. Think about what I had told you previously about my (God forbid) french-canadian ancestors.

And you say we swooped in after the war to reap the spoils? Well, who was it then that spent the next 50 years rebuilding both Germany and Japan? That's right, the US. How much money have we spent by maintaining bases and personnel in those countries over the years? Billions in today's dollars.

I voted for Bush. My opinion was that he was the better of the two candidates. I don't agree with everything he does and says, but I support him as the leader of our country. And I support our troops who are out defending our way of life, even if it is halfway around the world.

God bless.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#98 Consumer Suggestion

I bring up the past, as you people "down south" have such a misguided "Propaganda system" that you go on believing, that you have been the "saviors of the world" & that you continue to be, as you invade, Vietnam, Nicarauga, Iraq, Afganistan.. who's next!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Dear Robert;

If you learned how to use paragraphs, reading the crap you write might become easier.

I don't know where you get your information, but the USA did sell weapons & trucks to n**i Germany way after the Poland invasion. Certainly not as much as they wanted, It was an issue to the American people & I do not deny that. There was trade between US & Germany after the invasion of Poland! The big tanks & "super weapons" they were happy manufactureing themselves.

Not saying that the USA was not beneficial in helping the allies with their "Lend Lease" policy, but let's face it. If Germany did not declare war on the USA, Americans would probably have been happy to merely be silent & sell arms.

When the US campaign started against Rommel, Rommel was in "desperate need" of supplies, of which could not be afforded by the Reich, as for their "loosing battle" in Russia. Hitler's Barbarosa campaign lost it's steam within the first 6 months. Montgomery, who "never lost a battle" against Rommel had already near to "obliterated" his force. That is when the USA entered the arena.

Think of the "big battles" of WWII. Battle of Britian? Who supplied the planes? The pilots? Who trained them? Where was the "Flying Fortress" made? Who broke the "inigma machine" so vital in winning the war in the Atlantic?

Big Daddy, as you call yourselves did virtually nothing when the n**i subs were cruising down the St. Lawerence & into Lake Ontario, waterways shared by the "both of us",

Do I dispute the USA had industrial might? No. Do I dispute the USA helped in WWII? No. Do I dispute the USA had a "major part" in D-Day? No.

My only dispute it this. USA did not "save the world" during WWII & only entered the war "after war was declared on them". Beforehand, they simply "sat back" & got rich selling weapons! That my dear Robert is a fact you "cannot dispute".

As for Canada, neither Britian or France really gave a "rats a*s" about this "cold wasteland" as they called it & really thought Jamacia as a better land to fight over. With 1/10th the population of your "vast Country", Canadians have done very well to help when the "chips were down" & have no problem joining in the fight when it can be shown to be just!

Next subject. They found WMD's did they? Your full of it Robert! What the hell are they argueing about then in England right now? If Bush could show them, he would. Are you saying that the USA is not able to report the finding of WMD's in your "free Country"? Can not Bush simply "plant them"? I find it funny that he did not "plant them", I mean some were given to Iraq from the USA. Can't the USA keep track of them? They cannot seem to find these WMD's. What Bush is unable to lie to his people about them? Would that be maybe that he has already pushed the "envelope too far", invading Iraq without UN approval? Would that be because the rest of the World would not back him up in his lie?

A drink might be a good idea. Possibly a "deep breath" & a thought to what the hell the USA is trying to accomplish in Iraq that is worth the billions of dollars & the terrorism that comes with it.

My posts on this site are "supposed to be", what is insane today! I only bring up the past, as you people "down south" have such a misguided "Propaganda system" that you go on believing, that you have been the "saviors of the world" & that you continue to be, as you invade, Vietnam, Nicarauga, Iraq, Afganistan... who's next? What the hell are you guys doing?

One "suitcase sized" nuclear bomb, is enough to destroy the entire city of New York! Many of these bombs "already manufactured" are missing already from Russia & you guys continue to "piss people off"! I would not care, but Canada is at risk as well!

Britian saw the "futility" of taking over the entire world. Russia finally got the idea as well. When will the United States of America wake up? I would not care as a Canadian, if I did not see the risk of terrorism that you are bringing to my Country with these silly wars you keep getting into!

We don't have to really debate who did what or who sold what to who in WWII. What we do need to debate is your "pompas attitude", as you feel you have enough power to push people around & really know little of what you are doing.

The average American can name every President & every State in the Union, but they could not tell you the Capital City of Canada, or who the Prime Minister is! Although only "one Province" in Canada has a majority French population, (which we fight with constantly), the average American thinks the entire Country is "filled with them"! Hell lot's of your populace still believes we live in igloo's & use "dog sleds". With this amount of "vast knowledge", you feel the right to understand Iraq?

Don't try to shove off Canada as "insignifigant" either there Robert. We own almost "all" of the Platonium you need, far more vast reserves of oil, steel, nickel, copper & probably every other mineral you could think of. Never mind our vast water supply. Being "peaceful" works in our favor, as World opinion would never allow you to invade Canada to get any of what she has! Yet when the "chips are down"... who do you call on? Mexico would not be too much help, as you have already "exploited the hell" out of them! Never mind the land you stole! Canada is your "life's blood" for natural resources when the "chips are down".

So, "big Daddy", quit pissing off the people down the street, as they have already shown what they can do on our block! 80 billion dollars worth of food for Iraq would make more sence this year, now wouldn't it? How about a "free vote" on this stupid war huh?

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#97 Consumer Suggestion

Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Shari;

I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach. My Country does not go around the World looking for other Contries to take over either.

I also do not have to present my SSN everwhere I go & I have the freedom to do business with "any Country" in the world I wish as a Canadian, without my Government telling me I can't as it is with you & Cuba, for instance.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. We do have "free elections" here & no Prime Minister, can do things that "Dictators" like George Bush can do. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

So my only way of making a difference is to try to "talk sence" into American's who think that what Bush is doing... is not only ok, but justified.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#96 Consumer Suggestion

Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Shari;

I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach. My Country does not go around the World looking for other Contries to take over either.

I also do not have to present my SSN everwhere I go & I have the freedom to do business with "any Country" in the world I wish as a Canadian, without my Government telling me I can't as it is with you & Cuba, for instance.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. We do have "free elections" here & no Prime Minister, can do things that "Dictators" like George Bush can do. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

So my only way of making a difference is to try to "talk sence" into American's who think that what Bush is doing... is not only ok, but justified.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#95 Consumer Suggestion

Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Shari;

I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach. My Country does not go around the World looking for other Contries to take over either.

I also do not have to present my SSN everwhere I go & I have the freedom to do business with "any Country" in the world I wish as a Canadian, without my Government telling me I can't as it is with you & Cuba, for instance.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. We do have "free elections" here & no Prime Minister, can do things that "Dictators" like George Bush can do. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

So my only way of making a difference is to try to "talk sence" into American's who think that what Bush is doing... is not only ok, but justified.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#94 Consumer Suggestion

Dear Shari.. I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach.

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Shari;

I am Canadian & I "do" live in a land with free speach. My Country does not go around the World looking for other Contries to take over either.

I also do not have to present my SSN everwhere I go & I have the freedom to do business with "any Country" in the world I wish as a Canadian, without my Government telling me I can't as it is with you & Cuba, for instance.

If the USA keeps provoking terrorists, sooner or later a "Nuclear Bomb" is gonna go off in N. York or Los Angeles. That "will" affect me as a Canadian. We do have "free elections" here & no Prime Minister, can do things that "Dictators" like George Bush can do. People are dieing & terrorists are getting madder!

So my only way of making a difference is to try to "talk sence" into American's who think that what Bush is doing... is not only ok, but justified.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#93 Consumer Comment

I applaud the ones who recognize the truth! ..WAR is ALL about Big Business, making millions and billions on our troops deaths

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

I really appreciate those who are not afraid to say the truth, thanks, and ALL that you have said is very true. We have to stop this before we are ALL under the BIG BUSINESS controll. WAR is ALL about Big Business, making millions and billions on our troops deaths,while making a huge profit on the war. I would love to expose the criminal empire of big business. See people with money, own this country! Plain and simple!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#92 Consumer Comment

As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

AUTHOR: Shari - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

go blow your horn in your country about YOUR problems! Leave the United States alone!

Secondly, those who slam Bush.........go to another country and see if you have free speech! It doesn't exist in very many other countries you know. None that I know of anyway! If you didn't live in America you would not be the FREE person you are today!

Thirdly, those who slam Bush for deploying our troops...............go hide somewhere else or give live in Communist China and see how free you are! Our Military has signed up on their own free will to defend our precious FREEDOM! Did you forget that?

Fourthly, I love this country! No, I don't agree wholeheartedly with all of Bush's decisions and things he says....but I must respect his authority and his position. Those who slam authority from Bush probably have problems with authority in other areas of their lives and probably can't hold a job because of their lack of respect for AUTHORITY!

Ta ta for now. I will come back and read more on this post and laugh like I have been up to this point about people's pure ignorance!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#91 Consumer Comment

As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

AUTHOR: Shari - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

go blow your horn in your country about YOUR problems! Leave the United States alone!

Secondly, those who slam Bush.........go to another country and see if you have free speech! It doesn't exist in very many other countries you know. None that I know of anyway! If you didn't live in America you would not be the FREE person you are today!

Thirdly, those who slam Bush for deploying our troops...............go hide somewhere else or give live in Communist China and see how free you are! Our Military has signed up on their own free will to defend our precious FREEDOM! Did you forget that?

Fourthly, I love this country! No, I don't agree wholeheartedly with all of Bush's decisions and things he says....but I must respect his authority and his position. Those who slam authority from Bush probably have problems with authority in other areas of their lives and probably can't hold a job because of their lack of respect for AUTHORITY!

Ta ta for now. I will come back and read more on this post and laugh like I have been up to this point about people's pure ignorance!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#90 Consumer Comment

As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

AUTHOR: Shari - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

go blow your horn in your country about YOUR problems! Leave the United States alone!

Secondly, those who slam Bush.........go to another country and see if you have free speech! It doesn't exist in very many other countries you know. None that I know of anyway! If you didn't live in America you would not be the FREE person you are today!

Thirdly, those who slam Bush for deploying our troops...............go hide somewhere else or give live in Communist China and see how free you are! Our Military has signed up on their own free will to defend our precious FREEDOM! Did you forget that?

Fourthly, I love this country! No, I don't agree wholeheartedly with all of Bush's decisions and things he says....but I must respect his authority and his position. Those who slam authority from Bush probably have problems with authority in other areas of their lives and probably can't hold a job because of their lack of respect for AUTHORITY!

Ta ta for now. I will come back and read more on this post and laugh like I have been up to this point about people's pure ignorance!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#89 Consumer Comment

As for the Canadians that respond to what our President does ..why do you care in the first place?

AUTHOR: Shari - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

go blow your horn in your country about YOUR problems! Leave the United States alone!

Secondly, those who slam Bush.........go to another country and see if you have free speech! It doesn't exist in very many other countries you know. None that I know of anyway! If you didn't live in America you would not be the FREE person you are today!

Thirdly, those who slam Bush for deploying our troops...............go hide somewhere else or give live in Communist China and see how free you are! Our Military has signed up on their own free will to defend our precious FREEDOM! Did you forget that?

Fourthly, I love this country! No, I don't agree wholeheartedly with all of Bush's decisions and things he says....but I must respect his authority and his position. Those who slam authority from Bush probably have problems with authority in other areas of their lives and probably can't hold a job because of their lack of respect for AUTHORITY!

Ta ta for now. I will come back and read more on this post and laugh like I have been up to this point about people's pure ignorance!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#88 Consumer Suggestion

Good Job "B"!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

At least "B" is an educated person from Colorado!

Yep, I definately did miss two points that you brought up "brilliantly". Suddam & Bin Laden were put in to power by that "Good ol Republican", Ronald Regan. Bin Laden has had business dealings & money with George Bush for years, as shown in Moore's film.

I am sorry US citizens are mainly ruled by 2 parties. Your either "Left or Right", Republican or Democrat.

Not to say the "Parlimentary system" is a whole lot better, but it is run under a "non confidence vote". If Bush were Prime Minister of Canada, rather than the President of the USA, the war in Iraq would have already been voted down. Clinton would most likely have been taken out of office as well. Although I would call myself "Conservative", I do think Clinton was a good President, except when he felt the pressure to send in troops to places without a UN resolution. In that way, he was the same as Bush.

Tony Blair is simply "hanging on by his coattails" as a non confidence vote over Iraq could come as soon as tomorrow.

You hear these people B? Some are saying, "we should have nuked them in the first place"!

What these people do not seem to understand is, not only is that immoral, but if done, the nuclear cloud would kill off everyone in it's path around the world!

Originally the "terrorists" had a problem with Isreal only. They did not like the support the USA gave Isreal & they did not like them having bases in Saudi Arabia.

Like you said "that great Country that is friends to the USA", is the same one that produced the terrorists of 911. Bin Laden himself put into power by the USA to repel the Russians from Afganistan. This is not the "first time" that the USA has backed, then "attacked" someone they put into power.

Now we have a situation of a "never ending occupation" of Iraq, which clearly causes "more terrorism"! For 2000 years these people have been solving their problems in the "exact same way" & will not be stopped by "forced Democracy", if that is really what it is. Please realise that the USA is a Republic & not a Democracy. That is why your President weilds such "broad powers" & can force the Country into his own agenda.

What is wrong with people that cannot see that if some Country invaded yours, set up a Government & shot people who rebelled, that you would also probably fight this power for 2000 years also?

At least if you feel you have a point, then point out in which Country this idea has ever worked in? Are the Scott's or the Irish happy now to be British as a whole? How long has that been since England invaded? Britian gave up it's colonies for the most part. Why? Simply because it did not make sence.

You don't have to be Democrat or Republican to see the futility in this silly war! You don't have to be either to see that George Bush is simply conning you American's who believe it is your duty to be the "Worlds Policemen".

Meanwhile many Americans drive around in their new cars, live in their nice houses, eat what they wish, go shopping for the "newest style" & do not realise that people in the middle east do not live this way! They cannot see what you are talking about, as they have "nothing". The USA is not developing their industry, or their farming might. They can't even look after those industries well enough in the good ol USA!

As the US dollar shrinks & as a majority of the jobs are exported to China, Bush thinks that stealing oil is the one thing that might save you all. I pitty those who gobble up such spin! I pitty those who have only been educated in American Propaganda.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#87 Consumer Comment

Yes, I do have much to say...and wait! Heres More!

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

To "James, of Calgary Canada"

Here goes an ordered response to the flexing sphincter you deem as your "opinion".

Did you read the whole thread, are you too hung up on the last few posts because that's all you felt was necessary to read? Are you implying by your subject header that tyranny is the life you support?? I'm not the only person here that feels the way I do, and yet you chose to single me out. Interesting. Well, grab your strap-onit's time to buckle in. >:}

Do you bother to mention that each had a picture of the other, to keep a square look at the face of their particular monster? Or do you want our gentle readers to believe that these two men admired each other? We sold weapons to the British and Russian Allies, not the Germans. Never mind that United States presence helped to turn the tide of the war (Arsenal of Democracy), and you'd better believe that there were more from other countries fighting than from the US! It was their land we helped them to defend! I used the vast numbers of the American graves on French soil as a commentary of how many have defended this and other countries. But what would you know? No one has ever called on Canada and gotten helpful results from them. What does Canada offer the world at large anyway? Asylum from the death penalty for any raping, murdering swine that can set foot over their border. Oh, and then there's the gambling---can't do without that. So it looks like the US isn't the only one sweeping the numbers and cleaning up. Eh? I hear that the drug trade is booming there just as well as it is here. What are you, personally doing to stem the tide? Not a d**n thing, I'd wager.

What countries did I mention had veto power in the UN? Can you show me that paragraph? And if the US has all the control over the UN, why can't we just force the hand of the other countries and lift all the sanctions that present an obstacle to the US, alone? Seems you didn't like the idea that you favorite President did the same thing you accuse Bush of doing. Just on that whole indiscriminate note. Historians will remember Bosnia as Monica's Little War.

Amazingso you're saying.that I should ignore what Clinton did, and only note the shortcomings of the Founding Fathers and everyone that the Liberal Media thinks is not okay? How Moore-ish of you. In addition, it's adulteryand it sent a ripple over the whole Nation. It did set back the tenets of sexual harassment, and it was thoroughly inappropriate to do while on the job, let alone holding the most prestigious office in the World. NOTHING about that is okay, and lying (perjury) in court is illegal, too. But like OJ, MJ, Martha, and any other Media Darling, Clinton was exempt from ridicule.

Do tell, what Church is Jim Bakker in, now? Tell me, what made it okay for Martha Stewart (innocent as MJ and OJ) to rake in on her unfair advantage? And you mean to tell me, there wasn't a little something shady going on in Clinton's finances? (Invisible money, right? Besides, who's gonna stop a military convoy on the Governor of Arkansas when he orders it?) Why don't you do a little more research on Hillary Rodham-Clinton's college dissertation? She'd do anything to get a good grade---even (gasp!) act like she has integrity!

You know, it's funny how I'm supposed to ignore Billy's BJ and take offense to Ben Franklin's (whose intelligence made him one of the most feared men alive, in Europe.) faux pas. Talk about selective vision! Yes, I am aware of the mistakes made by the founding fathers, and they will answer for them, each according. But you see, here we have people with the mindset that we're so much more advanced than those times, proving otherwise. Sadly, far too many are convinced that what the media and the micro- mind big budgets have to say. Do you recall what happened when we were attacked at Pearl Harbor? Even Admiral Yamamoto (who earned his education at Harvard, and respected the United States greatly) stated: I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant, and filled him with a horrible resolve. He was only following orders. Any war that is fought is on a world scale and involves multiple factions.

"Did Bin laden fly those planes himself?"
No. Bin Laden doesn't have the balls. Bin Laden orchestrated the disaster of Sept. 11, 2001, and claims it with pride sparking in his dark little pig-eyes. But since it didn't happen in your country, I couldn't expect you to know what it's like to feel that spectrum of strangeness creep over you, when you watch something like the Towers sinking into a cloud of dust. Honestly, I couldn't expect a self-centered puppet like you to appreciate it if it actually did happen in your country. I do know this; Canada doesn't have this righteous indignation when the take American money. Canada likes the American money. It's worth more.

"....war makes 'sence'?"
Hey, can you tell me what sence is? Do you mean sense? Well, to remain focused, I truly don't know what's going on with the votes, personally. But I'd bet if Kerry won, those that didn't prefer Bush in office would take the same stance. Quit whining and accept that the votes are what they are! So I stand on that same. Quicherbitchin. It's not like Canada voted in our election. All votes count, not just the Electorals. As far as the war itself is concerned, I will reiterate (that means repeat in verbatim, if you think like you spell); Honestly, I don't agree with everything our President has done.I don't like the fact that we're at war, but I accept that sometimes it's the only recourse. It's not a glory thing. I'm not into the whole pantheon mentality, and I don't think we should turn the whole of the Middle East into a smoldering crater.

A question that resonates painfully, time and time again, however, is that it seems that you (and other like-minded) are completely alright with what the Enemy has done, and that you don't seem to have a problem with the fact that these people are killing their own just as often with their bombs in public places. What ennobles them, and vilifies us? Because they die for their Allah, their Government, their way of life? Funny, you call us religious fanatics and war-mongers, say we have messiah-complexes for the same reasons. We can't take their picture, pointing at their underwear or nakedness, but they can televise the live execution of an American, and we're the evil ones. Not that I condone the behaviour of those at Abu-Gharib...I do think that it was blown way out of proportion by comparison to a live execution. Imagine what the family members of that murdered man must have felt, seing their loved one made an example. How vile is the Enemy for that!

"Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada." (Your witticism)

Keep dreaming. Better yet, invade. See what happens. I'll be waiting. I'll make sure I'm on the front line, and I hope you'll do the same. From what I understand, your back-woods a*s would most likely enjoy living in Tupper Lake, for some reason (see the Editor's note on the number of Canadians who migrate to Tupper Lake). [Evil cackle]

"...if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!"

I could say the same for you, except that you're a complete loss. What, is Canada such a snore, that you have to pretend you're an expert in American History? Or is it that your own country's history is both short and uneventful? How many of your country's historical figures had skeletons in their closets? Our historians were men, and men only. You leap at the chance to criticize the humanity of the ones you don't like, calling me short-sighted because my opinion doesn't match yours.

Where did you hear me state that our government was perfect? Incidentally, it's The United States Government, not the USA Government. Try not to be too lazy to type your witless prattle with at least touch-and-go-accuracy. And please tell me, is Canada planning to assume some position as a Super-Power? (Isn't that really an old-school term? The world itself is far less segregated, continentally, than it used to be. But hey [shrugging], if I'm mistaken, that's cool---I never assumed I was 100% correct.I just love the right to state my opinion!). And our Bombing is not indiscriminate; it's targeted. Just like the WTC in 2001 was targeted. Just like the Pentagon was targeted.

Looks like I'm not the only one who needs to straighten up to the facts. ROFLMAO.

Oo! Cuddles!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#86 Consumer Comment

Bush supporters unable to offer any coherent evidence he is not a rip-off!

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

You make a great cheerleading squad for fearless leader, but I have not seen much in the way of factual rebuttal to the charges levelled. I've seen that a lot of you think he's great. I've seen that Clinton sucks and liberals love dictators. I've even seen the mother of a fallen soldier labelled a disgrace for having the unmitigated audacity to get in the president's face and say this war sucks.

1. The president squandered the budget surplus left by the previous administration.

2. The president misrepresented the threat from Iraq and the reason for invading them, resulting in the unnecessary deaths of over 100,000 people.

3. The president and his disaster management team failed to deliver promised services to Louisiana for 5 days, despite repeated pleas that their local resources were overwhelmed.

4. The president misrepresented his tax cuts as benefitting the average taxpayer, but the lion's share of the benefit is for the extremely wealthy.

I'm sure if I've missed any, others will point them out. So, does anyone have any concrete evidence or rebuttal to these specific reports of rip-off, or should we just assume they are true?

Oh, and Vera, wtf are you talking about? Clinton WAS impeached, for committing perjury, and he was acquitted. What crimes do you allege, and how could you possibly describe what he went through as getting off "scot-free"? And how do you compare this with Jim Bakker, who spent 5 years in jail for defrauding his "flock" of millions? Are you suggesting a public policy that anyone who is adulterous should lose everything? Now, read my lips, Iraq and Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with flying planes into the WTC, despite what fearless leader may have led you to believe. Most of that group were from Saudi Arabia, operating under the leadership of an exiled Saudi named Osama bin Laden.

And before you start labelling this as Clinton's slack, someone should probably point out that both these monsters, Osama and Saddam, were "created" by president Reagan. You should really pry yourself away from Fox News long enough to read the comic strips; you might then have at least a few facts to base your conversations on.

Oh, and in your bizarre apples & oranges time comparisons, you forgot one. It took less time to secure Baghdad than it took George Bush to come home from vacation and deal with the people dying in New Orleans.

Oh yeah, and about that taking Iraq thing... in case Fox didn't tell you... we're still fighting that war.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#85 Consumer Comment

I've been silent up to now

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Vera! You are pure brilliance. Your presence in Ohio has got to be the only thing keeping the rest of the state off the short bus. You cannot possibly be from there originally. You make your points with pure civility, and a little bit of zing. I love it. I would have just ripped on these bedwetters, but you are a gem. Keep it up. James in Canada, who gives a rats' a*s what you think about our President. Your country can't even defend itself. I make reference to the movie "Canadian Bacon" for one reason...it's accurate. I know you went to a government school up there because you have a thoroughly deluded vision of history. My country did NOT sell any arms to Germany. Where did you ever get the impression we did? The closest we got was the design of the JU87(StuKA). It was designed and offered to our government, but we turned it down for political reasons. The design was then sold to Junkers and they made it work. Sopwith designed the AM6(ZEKE/ZERO) which was sold to Japan and built by Mitsubishi. This was after the British government turned it down... prefering wood and canvas over aluminum, which was in short supply. I guess everyone makes mistakes. Henry Ford supported the NAZIs during the 30's, but stopped when they went into Poland. It was first, a business decision, then a moral one. Henry Ford was not our government, nor were the myriad other businesses that traded openly with both Germany and Japan. It's called capitalism, look it up. You mention Canada fighting the war before we got involved. Good point. Here's another one. My country provided yours with nearly all of your equipment, from small arms and uniforms, to the entire fleet of Corvettes, used to destroy the U-Boot fleets and protect the convoys. Lend-Lease was good for your country. Your country and England were getting stomped by the WehrMacht untill we jumped in and rescued you...remember Dunkirque, and the Africa Campaigns? If it wasn't for the 8th Army Air Force, you'd all be goose-stepping your way down the avenues. We put the pressure on Gemany from the air, and we invaded Africa(Torch) and Italy, well before the Normandy invasion. Keep in mind, we invaded Normandy because Germany was NOT releasing it's grip on Europe, nor being beaten back by the Soviets. They were more than capable of holding on with a 1-front war. We left Italy and chose another beach-head because we could not get past their defenses. The only way to beat Germany was with two fronts, and MY country provided it. The war in the Pacific? That was almost entirely an American effort. England supplied a few ships, as did Australia, but we supplied roughly ALL of the troops. I love the "diggers" from NZ, and the Aussies in general, but Americans carried the ball for that campaign. Get off your high horse and face reality. We are your "Daddy" and without us, you'd be a 3rd world country still living under British rule. Remember, we pretty much kicked them off the continent, twice. As for James in Tupper Lake, good grief...where do I begin? Please do the rest of the world a favor, and do not breed. Your blathering is mind boggling. At least James in Canada makes his points(misguided as they are) with eloquence. Yours' are the rantings of a madman. You keep whining about President Bush not sending his daughters to war and how they are old enough for the draft. Newsflash for you, there is NO draft. Women also have no place in combat, so what is your point exactly? I forgot, you have none. None of your points make any sense. The impeachment proceedings had nothing to do with a b*****b. They had to do with "subordinating perjury", a felony. For you James, that means he got people to lie for him under oath. WMD? Found them. Lots of them. Why haven't you heard about it? That's simple...reporting good news about Bush doesn't help the likes of NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN et al, in their efforts to make Bush look bad. They blame Bush for everything, including making Hurricanes. What a bunch of idiots. I could explain to you in detail how the rules of "supply and demand" work, but I digress. It will not stick to you and you will always be a tard. Go down to the bar and get hammered James, I know it's past your start time.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#84 Consumer Suggestion

They bend and twist to every little special interest group that comes along

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

I hate politics and politicians. They do nothing but interfered with progress. They bend and twist to every little special interest group that comes along and then tell they rest of us that this is main stream.

Then they wonder why they lose elections.
I'll stick to blondes with big hooters and cold beer.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#83 Consumer Suggestion

To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Vera;

You have so much to say, it is impossible to respond to it all... but here goes.

WWII was "already over" as far as Germany is concerned before Germany declared war on the USA! Which is the "only reason" why the US quit selling weapons to Germany. Rommel was on his knees, as Montgomery put him there, way before the USA entered the war. Russia was driving the n**i's back as well. Henry Ford had a photo on his desk of Adolf & "visa versa". France got "more help" from almost any other Country that you could imagine compared to the USA. Germany, on the other hand got "more help" from the USA before they declared war on them, than almost any other Country known. The USA did "clean up" in the end. Man did they ever "Clean $$ Up!$!".

I don't care "what President" went a shootin before a UN declaration. It is illegal & unwarrented without it. Even if the USA controls most of the UN, & is one of the only Countries you mentioned with Veto power! Kinda "unfair odds" isn't it?

Jim Baker did not get fired! He was convicted & thrown in jail for ripping people off, not adultry! Who Clinton had sex with or did not, married or unmarried is none of your business. It also is not a standard that applies to keeping your job as President. Not in "your Country" or any other Country in the world! Do I need to bring up Thomas Jefferson to you?

You may consider that as you quote people who lived during Ben Franklin's time, as he was one of the "biggest male s**t's" going! The people you did mention are people who tried to take over Canada 3 times & failed. Yea they sure had good war sence! Where do you "get off" claiming any war is senceable, & what war has the USA ever "won" on their own? They sure seem to be almost alone in Iraq, don't they?

The only reason for "middle east terrorism" is the fact that the USA is present in the middle east & trying to control what is done there. Are you in agreement with Pat Robertson that the US government should take up the practice of "assasination"? Did Bin Laden fly those planes himself?

The count of votes is still "up in the air" in Ohio, & the "Electoral College votes" make no sence at all! Bush's unjustified war with Iraq is probably the only reason why he was able to win another election, even if you did think the counting was fair. All from a man who promised he would not be bringing up 911 during election platforms. Terrorism has certainly gone down since 911, hasn't it? Just like drug use is down after his fathers "war on drugs" right?

Iraq was not responsible for 911. Neither was any government body. Do you really want to expand the war to include "all Muslims"? Who has WMD's? Guess what? Canada does, as the USA put them there! Just as they did in Iraq to fight Iran with. So does China, N. Korea, Pakistan, Inda, Great Britian, France, Russia. Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada.

Oh there is too much in your letter to touch on, but if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!

The USA Government is not "God's Gift to Humanity" & the sooner you realise that, the happier you might be. The days of the USA being the World's Superpower are at an end. More indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American... yes I will say what it is... Tyranny! Even if Great Britian is dumb enough to back it up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#82 Consumer Suggestion

To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Vera;

You have so much to say, it is impossible to respond to it all... but here goes.

WWII was "already over" as far as Germany is concerned before Germany declared war on the USA! Which is the "only reason" why the US quit selling weapons to Germany. Rommel was on his knees, as Montgomery put him there, way before the USA entered the war. Russia was driving the n**i's back as well. Henry Ford had a photo on his desk of Adolf & "visa versa". France got "more help" from almost any other Country that you could imagine compared to the USA. Germany, on the other hand got "more help" from the USA before they declared war on them, than almost any other Country known. The USA did "clean up" in the end. Man did they ever "Clean $$ Up!$!".

I don't care "what President" went a shootin before a UN declaration. It is illegal & unwarrented without it. Even if the USA controls most of the UN, & is one of the only Countries you mentioned with Veto power! Kinda "unfair odds" isn't it?

Jim Baker did not get fired! He was convicted & thrown in jail for ripping people off, not adultry! Who Clinton had sex with or did not, married or unmarried is none of your business. It also is not a standard that applies to keeping your job as President. Not in "your Country" or any other Country in the world! Do I need to bring up Thomas Jefferson to you?

You may consider that as you quote people who lived during Ben Franklin's time, as he was one of the "biggest male s**t's" going! The people you did mention are people who tried to take over Canada 3 times & failed. Yea they sure had good war sence! Where do you "get off" claiming any war is senceable, & what war has the USA ever "won" on their own? They sure seem to be almost alone in Iraq, don't they?

The only reason for "middle east terrorism" is the fact that the USA is present in the middle east & trying to control what is done there. Are you in agreement with Pat Robertson that the US government should take up the practice of "assasination"? Did Bin Laden fly those planes himself?

The count of votes is still "up in the air" in Ohio, & the "Electoral College votes" make no sence at all! Bush's unjustified war with Iraq is probably the only reason why he was able to win another election, even if you did think the counting was fair. All from a man who promised he would not be bringing up 911 during election platforms. Terrorism has certainly gone down since 911, hasn't it? Just like drug use is down after his fathers "war on drugs" right?

Iraq was not responsible for 911. Neither was any government body. Do you really want to expand the war to include "all Muslims"? Who has WMD's? Guess what? Canada does, as the USA put them there! Just as they did in Iraq to fight Iran with. So does China, N. Korea, Pakistan, Inda, Great Britian, France, Russia. Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada.

Oh there is too much in your letter to touch on, but if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!

The USA Government is not "God's Gift to Humanity" & the sooner you realise that, the happier you might be. The days of the USA being the World's Superpower are at an end. More indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American... yes I will say what it is... Tyranny! Even if Great Britian is dumb enough to back it up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#81 Consumer Suggestion

To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Vera;

You have so much to say, it is impossible to respond to it all... but here goes.

WWII was "already over" as far as Germany is concerned before Germany declared war on the USA! Which is the "only reason" why the US quit selling weapons to Germany. Rommel was on his knees, as Montgomery put him there, way before the USA entered the war. Russia was driving the n**i's back as well. Henry Ford had a photo on his desk of Adolf & "visa versa". France got "more help" from almost any other Country that you could imagine compared to the USA. Germany, on the other hand got "more help" from the USA before they declared war on them, than almost any other Country known. The USA did "clean up" in the end. Man did they ever "Clean $$ Up!$!".

I don't care "what President" went a shootin before a UN declaration. It is illegal & unwarrented without it. Even if the USA controls most of the UN, & is one of the only Countries you mentioned with Veto power! Kinda "unfair odds" isn't it?

Jim Baker did not get fired! He was convicted & thrown in jail for ripping people off, not adultry! Who Clinton had sex with or did not, married or unmarried is none of your business. It also is not a standard that applies to keeping your job as President. Not in "your Country" or any other Country in the world! Do I need to bring up Thomas Jefferson to you?

You may consider that as you quote people who lived during Ben Franklin's time, as he was one of the "biggest male s**t's" going! The people you did mention are people who tried to take over Canada 3 times & failed. Yea they sure had good war sence! Where do you "get off" claiming any war is senceable, & what war has the USA ever "won" on their own? They sure seem to be almost alone in Iraq, don't they?

The only reason for "middle east terrorism" is the fact that the USA is present in the middle east & trying to control what is done there. Are you in agreement with Pat Robertson that the US government should take up the practice of "assasination"? Did Bin Laden fly those planes himself?

The count of votes is still "up in the air" in Ohio, & the "Electoral College votes" make no sence at all! Bush's unjustified war with Iraq is probably the only reason why he was able to win another election, even if you did think the counting was fair. All from a man who promised he would not be bringing up 911 during election platforms. Terrorism has certainly gone down since 911, hasn't it? Just like drug use is down after his fathers "war on drugs" right?

Iraq was not responsible for 911. Neither was any government body. Do you really want to expand the war to include "all Muslims"? Who has WMD's? Guess what? Canada does, as the USA put them there! Just as they did in Iraq to fight Iran with. So does China, N. Korea, Pakistan, Inda, Great Britian, France, Russia. Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada.

Oh there is too much in your letter to touch on, but if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!

The USA Government is not "God's Gift to Humanity" & the sooner you realise that, the happier you might be. The days of the USA being the World's Superpower are at an end. More indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American... yes I will say what it is... Tyranny! Even if Great Britian is dumb enough to back it up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#80 Consumer Suggestion

To people like Vera... ..indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American. Tyranny!

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Vera;

You have so much to say, it is impossible to respond to it all... but here goes.

WWII was "already over" as far as Germany is concerned before Germany declared war on the USA! Which is the "only reason" why the US quit selling weapons to Germany. Rommel was on his knees, as Montgomery put him there, way before the USA entered the war. Russia was driving the n**i's back as well. Henry Ford had a photo on his desk of Adolf & "visa versa". France got "more help" from almost any other Country that you could imagine compared to the USA. Germany, on the other hand got "more help" from the USA before they declared war on them, than almost any other Country known. The USA did "clean up" in the end. Man did they ever "Clean $$ Up!$!".

I don't care "what President" went a shootin before a UN declaration. It is illegal & unwarrented without it. Even if the USA controls most of the UN, & is one of the only Countries you mentioned with Veto power! Kinda "unfair odds" isn't it?

Jim Baker did not get fired! He was convicted & thrown in jail for ripping people off, not adultry! Who Clinton had sex with or did not, married or unmarried is none of your business. It also is not a standard that applies to keeping your job as President. Not in "your Country" or any other Country in the world! Do I need to bring up Thomas Jefferson to you?

You may consider that as you quote people who lived during Ben Franklin's time, as he was one of the "biggest male s**t's" going! The people you did mention are people who tried to take over Canada 3 times & failed. Yea they sure had good war sence! Where do you "get off" claiming any war is senceable, & what war has the USA ever "won" on their own? They sure seem to be almost alone in Iraq, don't they?

The only reason for "middle east terrorism" is the fact that the USA is present in the middle east & trying to control what is done there. Are you in agreement with Pat Robertson that the US government should take up the practice of "assasination"? Did Bin Laden fly those planes himself?

The count of votes is still "up in the air" in Ohio, & the "Electoral College votes" make no sence at all! Bush's unjustified war with Iraq is probably the only reason why he was able to win another election, even if you did think the counting was fair. All from a man who promised he would not be bringing up 911 during election platforms. Terrorism has certainly gone down since 911, hasn't it? Just like drug use is down after his fathers "war on drugs" right?

Iraq was not responsible for 911. Neither was any government body. Do you really want to expand the war to include "all Muslims"? Who has WMD's? Guess what? Canada does, as the USA put them there! Just as they did in Iraq to fight Iran with. So does China, N. Korea, Pakistan, Inda, Great Britian, France, Russia. Should George Bush take over the entire world? Or possibly only those with "less weapons" & lots of oil! Oops, as a Canadian I guess I should "soft peddle" that. Ahh "what the heck", Bush's approval rating is so low now, he would really get destroyed if he declared war on Canada.

Oh there is too much in your letter to touch on, but if you understood the facts that I just pointed out, you might have the 1/2 of it correct. The other 1/2 could be achieved with a little "outside research" & a lot less American propaganda!

The USA Government is not "God's Gift to Humanity" & the sooner you realise that, the happier you might be. The days of the USA being the World's Superpower are at an end. More indescriminant bombing of other Countries that the USA has no right pulling "rank" in, will only bring that conclusion faster to the rest of the world. For many Countries, "terrorism" is the only way to fight American... yes I will say what it is... Tyranny! Even if Great Britian is dumb enough to back it up.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#79 Consumer Comment

You didn't ask, but here's my take....

AUTHOR: Vera - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 13, 2005

Waitaminnit---Surplus? What Surplus?

All Clinton did was set the tenets of sexual harassment back a couple hundred years, commit perjury on two separate occasions, and threaten war if he was to be impeachedwhich he should have been. Not because of a b*****b, but because he committed offenses that would have landed John Q. Public in jail and got off scot-free.

He violated the sanctity of his own marriage on a National venue, and got to keep his jobReverend Jim Bakker did the same thing and got fired, lost his livelihood and his wife. Jim Bakker's church organization was nowhere near as big as the United States---and adultery is adultery, deception is deception, no matter the position.

It's the whole principle. "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God." --George Washington

President Clinton went to war on Bosnia. Bosnia never attacked us. Clinton was offered the head of Osama Bin Laden THREE TIMES and did NOTHING. An ounce of prevention is worth a TON of cure in this case. Ohand by the way.? Clinton didn't check with the U.N. or France to see if it was okay to attack Bosnia..he never received their consent.
Michael Moore-On never made a movie about that, I noticed. I guess that back then, he was okay with deaths in Bosnia.

And Bush didn't start this war. The country that hijacked the planes and sent them flying into buildings did. Quoting Oliver North, This is an enemy [the Jihadi terrorists] that refuses to observe any conventions, treaties or rules of warfare. They lie, cheat and violate agreements. They slice off heads like raw meat. They murder women and children. They fly airplanes into buildings. But we're the bad guys." I can think of at least 2,749 lives that would be a lot better if Clinton would have seized the chance to rid the world of Osama Bin Laden. Even more, now that Bush has to take up his [Clinton's] sLACK.

Suicide bombers kill as many civilians as they do Military personnel, taking directives from some filthy towelhead cowering in some remote cave, commanding them to die in the name of his cause or his version of God. This monster wants to keep things in his country the way he likes them, where might makes right and he who has the gold makes the rules. Either way, this craven a*****e is in charge, his countrymen hopeless, poor, and therefore, manageable; his women in suffering and bondage.

President Bush has liberated two countries,
crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took to count the votes in Florida!

Speaking of which, you whine that it was because of Jeb Bush's presence in Florida that Bush stole the election. If this is the case, what relative did he have in his pockets when the votes needed counting in Ohio? I stayed up the whole night watching the coverage; even watched Kerry try to act as if the election was his [WRONG answer!]. Bush won because the people were sick of Kerry's mud-slinging (which began FIRST).

Look in those Cemeteries in France--Aisne-Marne, Epinal, Brittany, Meuse-Argonne, Lorraine, Rhone Dragungan and the infamous Normandy, to name a few. These weren't the result of fighting for oil, or a popularity contest. More men have died and been buried on foreign soil, than have been deployed in this war. It would seem that the French aren't the only ones who have forgotten that, eh?
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." --Thomas Jefferson

Really, do you want a third of the World's oil at the disposal of a man like Bin Laden?

Why don't you ask yourself, Why do they hate us so?
Do you think that if you were on their soil, that regardless of your view, you wouldn't be called infidel and killed?
Are you like all those Celiberals, who said If Bush gets Elected, I'll leave the country!?
Why are you still here? Oh that's right! You like your freedom to spout your bullshit, that's right! Meanwhile, the Sons, Daughters, and Children of others are fighting the battle to preserve that right.
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!!" --Samuel Adams

Honestly, I don't agree with everything our President has doneand not everything he says is brilliant and golden. I respect his office, and I know he's doing the best he can. After all, Kerry and many other demos voted down the budgets on the military, and incidentally, that big tax increase that hurt medical care for the elderly was voted in during Clinton's watch, and took effect in the next projected term. I'm so glad Kerry wasn't in office when this happenedhe'd still be polling the people for the right reaction.

Ohand before I forget:
As far as Why Bush Acts So Macho, and all those out-of-context pictures, I'd be willing to wager that the originator of this post has something in common with our President. You know.seein's how you thought it would be cute to revert to the vaudevillian p***s joke. (When is a cigarnot a cigar? I'd have to ask Clinton, don't you think?)

Well if I end up dead someday, I was killed for my mouth. Yeah--rightand those Microsoft Testicles had nothing to do with it, kay? And for someone who's not a religious zealot like the Republicans, some of your posts are on the cusp of a Pentecostal Push. I'm sure some of us will remember you in therapy as the frothing liberal. LMAO

Robert, from Dallas, Texasyou and I agree on a few good points, and I must say your presentation of information was well constructed and brilliant. I'm not necessarily a hard-core/religious zealot" conservative, as I have a relatively mild take on things. I have to say, though, that your responses shine in comparison to so many of the others, both liberal and conservative alike. To debate, I think I'd better make d**n sure all my duckies are present and in-line. :D

Sherri, From Piedmont, California, YOU ROCK. In Technicolor!
When I saw you put him in his place, I haveta say, I did that little power-fist gesture and laughed. High Fives! And a raised glass in your honor for two reasons. You served [In the USAF] andhe GOT SERVED.

Let the festivities...begin.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#78 Consumer Suggestion

Yes Stacey, we could all do that...

AUTHOR: James - (Canada)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 13, 2005

Stacey;

We could concentrate on family & forget who is in power in the USA. We could also complain about "gas prices" while ignoreing the "global warming" that is causeing hurricanes & a vast change in the "global climate".

We could let "people alone" who get elected in "shady elections" & just send our children to their death in defence of these people in power. Their war on terrorism/needing more oil.

We can all "sit back" & believe Bush is doing a "good job", as I am sure that anyone can point out the "drop in terrorism" since 911 & his war began. Just as you could point to the decline in drug use, since his fathers "war on drugs".

Or...

We could lobby politicians to search for alternative fuels that do not destroy the climate for the world as a whole.

We could protest against sending troops to places where interests could "only concern oil reserves" & point out that we are simply "cutting our own throats".

We could lobby to get rid of things like the Electoral College, in which votes are manipulated without accountability.

We could try to get politicians to concentrate on "our own borders" & what we can do to fix "our doorstep" before we concentrate on other people, on the other side of the world.

We could make Bush understand that it is hard now for Americans to travel, as the last thing you would want to "sing out" upon landing in any other Country right now are the words... "I'm proud to be an American", as I am sure you would not hear the shot that would end your visit so abruptly.

We could look at "other Countries" who have "less crime, & less problems with drugs" & attempt some of their solutions that have been proven to work.

We could push politicians to force companies who sell vehicles in the USA, to sell a certain "percentage" of their overall gross sales, as "alternative fuel vehicles" which generally do not harm the environment.

Or we could do "as you said" & turn a "blind eye" to facts of our present & future, merely concentrating on family, as long as we still have one left. Forget the "grandchildren", as they will probably need "underground shelters" & pumped in oxygen to survive with their children.

Yes we could concentrate merely on "ME ME ME" & hope it all turns out in the end, without forums like this.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#77 Consumer Comment

I know why Bush was elected now!!!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, September 09, 2005

To all readers:



I now know why Bush Jr, was elected president besides stealing the election, having Katherine Harris-vote counter, Jeb Bush-brother and Governor of the State in question-Florida, and of course daddy who was in the C.I.A. when Our President Kennedy was ASSASSINATED.



Well, it is amazing how George H. Bush became President later on and how his two sons became governors. One in Texas(where JFK was killed) and Florida(where they trained Cuban exhiles) It is also no secret that Lyndon "a*****e" Baynes resided in Texas. He had lots to gain by Keneddys death. It seems all evil do-ers reside in Texas. Texas is what? Oh yeah, THE OIL STATE. Now with gas prices at 3.59 per gallon, they are making trillions at our expense. STAND UP TO BUSH AND CHENEY, AND THE OIL COMPANY EXECUTIVES!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#76 Consumer Comment

Missing the BIG picture.

AUTHOR: Stacey - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 08, 2005

The only people posting here that have made any sense are Sandra from Tampa and Krista from Smyrna. Thank you for reminding us that there are more important things in life than politics. I'm praying for those who are name calling that they enjoy life. We are only given one and it doesn't last long. It could be over in an instant such as the poor souls in LA and MS who lost there lives this last month. Family and friends are much more imporant than who is in office now. There will always be some scandal and "this side/that side" I suggest that we turn off the news for a week and just enjoy the company of our loved ones before time catches up with us.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#75 Consumer Comment

a conservative NOT bitching about the bj

AUTHOR: Krista - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 08, 2005

Give me a break. Every liberal thinks they know what conservatives are thinking and bitching about and vice versa.



I don't give a rats a*s about that blow job. I was disgusted with him for it and even more so with the sluty intern, but that's their life. That's why doors have those things called hinges... and close. What happens behind closed doors need to STAY that way!



What I moan and gripe about is the obvious lack of morality in the US. Morality doesn't always come hand in hand with christianity so don't even start with that. I have known many non-religious people that had a high standard of morality. Yes I am a christian, I would love to see a country full of God-fearing and loving folks where the bible was still the way of the life but I know that isn't going to happen but I DO have a problem with inconsiderate people, those that feel they are owed something, or those that feel that rules and laws and common descency doesn't apply to them!



I have a problem with my sister teaching her heart out and REALLY caring about these kids and struggling to make bills each month. I have a problem with the obviously non-caring attitude towards the environmental issues and slacking regulations. I have a problem with the president (whether be rep. or dem.) playing God. I'm not sure I agree with the war, I do agree with war on terror but not with trying to conform the world to the US's standards. I have a problem with giving each month out of my paycheck to pay for lazy people that keep having babies for more money. I have a problem with people playing the blame game for EVERYTHING! Take some responsibility for goodness sakes!! Bush did not cause Katrina, I don't know if he could have reacted faster, I'm not a part of the Bush administration so I can't make that sort of assumption correctly. I have a problem with being forced to "accept" different lifestyles because it's constantly thrown in everyone's faces. If you don't want to be treated differently don't treat yourself differently. I have a problem with the race card CONSTANTLY being played. Give it a rest already. I'm not immune to the fact that rascism still exists but it goes BOTH ways. Example: I was good friends with a black male in high school (actually several of them), eons ago, and we were cutting up in the hall and this black girl came up to me and told me to leave him alone and to never talk to him or any other "brother"(her words)again. If that's not a form of rascism.. I don't know what is. I was what you would call a 'goody goody' then and never had enemies so that was an eye opener for me.



I have a problem with generalizations being made...example: all liberals b***h about Bush, all conservatives b***h about a blow job. Sorry...but that's just not true! I also have a HUGE problem with judgemental people that feel they have the right to critisize and put down and verbally abuse people that don't agree with their ideals and then have the NERVE to say that Bush thinks he's the almighty because funny thing is I thought God was the only one with the right to judge.



hypocracy is unfortunately something that EVERYONE has been guilty of, no matter how small it may be, it's still the same.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#74 Consumer Comment

Coming Up on 2020 - TOMORROW! Friday, Sept. 9, at 10 p.m. ET ,,,DEAD WRONG! ...Colin Powell the president's point man, see him tell how he was DUPED! ..another Republican lie that killed American innocent Americans!

AUTHOR: Bush lied - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 08, 2005

Coming Up on 2020

This Friday, Sept. 9, at 10 p.m. ET



EXCLUSIVE: Barbara Walters talks with former Secretary of State Colin Powell about being the president's point man, making the case for invading Iraq. Now, out of office, he talks freely about being wrong, being loyal -- and his next move.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#73 Consumer Suggestion

Conservative moaning

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 07, 2005

In response to "liberal whining and moaning".



At least liberals b***h and moan about real serious issues. Like an unjustified war on another country propped up by lies. (where are those WMD's?? That WAS the reason we went right?)



Conservatives bitched, moaned, and whined for years. Over what?.......





A b*****b.



So when I hear one of these so called "conservatives" trash liberals and moderate conservatives for "whining", I give them no credit. It shows just how hypocritical they really are.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#72 Consumer Comment

Whee! Some of you almost get it! As G.W. would say "We are making real progress now".

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, September 07, 2005

Wow! A distinct dislike for Ms. Sheehan here. OK, good. It doesn't matter whether we agree or disagree with her message. The point is that her right to state it publicly must be protected. Let her speak out however she likes, and let all of us speak out publicly about our thoughts concerning her message. That is public discourse at its best. (Personally, I am neutral, just happy to see that the CIA hasn't offed her as a nuisance.)



Erik has an opinion about bitching and moaning, fine. What he fails to see is that American intervention in other countries' problems is not Constitutionally acceptable. This country was not founded to deal with all the world's problems, only our own.



Yes, there are hateful people all over the world. There are cruel despots who rape, murder and maim their own people daily. It is painful to hear about it and to see it. We are all correct in hating it. Being the nosy Parker of the world, America feels it must know everything and take action.



Please tell me what right this country has to interfere in the lives of others? If I recall correctly we fought our own war of Independence some years ago. Any population pushed hard enough and long enough will fight its governing body eventually. I am not against offering aid to those who choose to rise up against cruel dictators, but feel that the uprising must be an action chosen by the populace. This dangerous line of thinking means that we must now invade Cuba, because one of the most murderous dictators on this planet lives within miles of our very shores! Where does this line of thinking end?



Do we invade and conquer the whole world? Then what? This is exactly the very dangerous line of thinking practiced by Bush and there is no Constitutional support or excuse for it. Bush seems to embrace it on religious precepts: "God doesn't like what Saddam was doing. He is a bad person". I agree. I do not agree with the lies and disinformation he used to trick our legislators into voting for this war because it has been proven time and again that Iraq was not part of 9-11. America is not defending itself in Iraq; it has mounted an invasion!



According to Biblical writings, what God does not like, God takes care of in His own time. Bush is not God, nor is he directed by God. I am sure that God retains a healthy supply of fire and brimstone for those who anger Him.



How do we know that we are not angering God by what we are doing? We don't, do we? America should deal with its own morals first before attempting to impose them on the world.



And Michael is correct in his statement that the local and state governments are responsible for their own individual populations.



The problem lies in the fact that the Federal government has done all it can over time to supersede the states' rights. It funnels money from taxes that rightfully belong to the individual states to itself and sets itself up as the "Saviors" of us all when disasters occur. It has turned us all into a population that depends on it for almost everything. It attempts to regulate and legislate everything in order to keep us dependent on it. It insists upon being a huge presence in our everyday lives. We are under its huge thumb every minute of every day!



Every three months, it is a huge presence in my wallet when I write that large check to the US Treasury. Like any other "company" I pay, when the time comes to deliver, I expect performance on a scale that tells me that company is up to the job it promises and appreciates my business.



So, you tell me: who turned this hurricane into a political issue? Me? Rip-off Report? Liberals? Conservatives? Not hardly. The Federal government did it to itself by insisting on taking over everything "for our own good", of course. It refuses to let free enterprise operate on its own. It dictates which companies live and which companies die with its subsidies. The ones chosen to succeed hold us in financial bondage.



If the Federal government is going to bleed individuals and states dry financially, it has no choice but to perform as it promises when the time comes. It did not perform in the best interests of the thousands of individuals affected, but reacted more like a stunned wounded snail. Not acceptable.



Our enemies, those terrorist guys and gals, are now celebrating publicly our inability to react. Now they know with certainty that America is still unprepared. The world is watching, and that includes our enemies. Therein lies my outrage, that our weaknesses have been exposed so publicly to those who have ill-will toward us.



Which brings us back to the point that the federal government is a huge ripoff! It extorts money from its citizens, lies by telling all of us that this money is "earmarked" for this and that, and then gets shown up for the liar it is when the time comes to perform. This crosses party lines and includes the Democrats and the Republicans. Both parties share equal guilt and blame for many years back.



The federal government cannot perform. It has killed the Republic and replaced it with a web of expensive incompetence. It needs to return the states powers to the states as the founding fathers required it to be. It needs to stop brainwashing its citizens with this "democracy" crap; the United States of America is not a democracy. The idea of democracy is what allows them to continue their takeover of all rights, so it is in its own interest to spread that disinformation.



Too bad the clause to dismantle the government was never included in the Constitution after all. It was certainly talked about by the founding fathers, who recognized that at some point in the future the federal government might overstep its bounds and cease working for the people of this nation and begin working for itself.



We passed that point years and years ago.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#71 Consumer Comment

I also find it funny that people are blaming Hurricane Katrina on Bush. Dummies, the morons that are in charge on Louisiana have only themselves to blame for that fiasco.

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2005

I have been reading and participating in this supposed rip-off for a while now. If nothing else it is entertaining. But it is also sad that there are some people who are clearly not thinking.



Mostly Liberals. There are Conservative Democrats and Liberal Republicans so I don't draw the line there. I use Liberal and Conservative.



Anyway, someone mentioned that Cindy Sheehan (sp) is an embarrassment and she is. She is completely disrespectring the tragic death of her son. But he did volunteer for military service with the knowledge that he might be sent to war.



You have a better chance of getting killed on the freeway than in combat.



Terrorists in Iraq? Yes. Who do you think are planting all the bombs that are killing our troops?



I find it sad that people are blaming Bush for the World Trade Center. Dummies, that happened 9 months after he took office. The terrorists had planned that attack for years.



The last time the WTC was attacked, who was in charge and what was done? Throwing a few missiles at empty tents in the desert. Yeah, that did some good.



I also find it funny that people are blaming Hurricane Katrina on Bush. Dummies, the morons that are in charge on Louisiana have only themselves to blame for that fiasco. The Mayor (a Liberal Democrat) blew it. He is too busy pointing fingers at everyone else. Instead he should be trying to help his city recover. The dykes that were holding back a lake and a river were in need of repair for DECADES and nothing was done about it.



So blaming this whole thing on Bush is just plain crazy. And that witch Hilary isn't helping by trying to appoint a special investigation into why the Feds took so long to respond. Average response time is three days after a disaster and IF the affected State (s) request help to begin with. Prepositioning folks and supplies would have just made THEM victims and THEY would need rescuing. So the response by the Fed's was just the way it should have been. It is only an issue because you are making it an issue.



How come its only Lib's that take the personal tragedy's of their fellow citizens and make it a political issue?



If I were you I would be embarrassed about that.



And yes, I know Mecca is in Saudi Arabia. Nuke it anyway. It is where those rag heads pray to and if their prescious little city were vaporized then they might just stay in their caves and never come out. And if you so love them then please join them.



The war is just and good. I do not LIKE war but if it must be fought then fight it. I support the troops. They are doing a job that most are too cowardly to do. I got sent over there twice.



So keep on saying things that are ignorant and without merit. You spew all these facts and figures but where do you get these facts and figures?. CNN? Michael Moore? Larry King? I can only imagine.



The best thing to do to a person that wants to make a fool out of themselves is to get out of the way and let them do it.



I am holding the door wide open for you.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#70 Consumer Comment

LMAO - The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president

AUTHOR: Erik - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Liberals crack me up. They b***h, whine, and moan about everything under the sun but then don't offer any reasonable solutions to problems.

The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president overall, but he says some pretty stupid things sometimes. But, Bush is a good man with good intentions. He doesn't do everything right, but he does most of everything right... he's done a hell of a lot better things than clinton every could have. Bush took over a failing economy, and then was hit with 9/11 soon after. His presidency was struck by nothing but bad luck. You liberals that think the war is about oil have your heads buried in the sand. REMOVE YOUR KNOWLEDGE DEFLECTOR SHIELDS FOR A MOMENT and try to think rationally and logically... if you have the ability. Iraq is liberated, women can walk around outside without veils over their faces, everybody can vote, and Saddam is behind bars. It's just a matter of time before we get the rest of the insurgency and Osama. It may take a couple of years, but it's well worth it. People like Cindy Sheehan are a disgrace to the world. Nobody forced her son to join the military. He did it voluntarily. When you join the military there are inherent risks involved... a couple of those risks are that there is a chance you can die, or become maimed or disabled. You know this when you join and you accept that risk. The entire liberal agenda is a sickening manifestation of ignorance, rebellion, stupidity and hate. If you want to distribute condoms to children, ban prayer in public schools, have abortions because the life you created is an "inconvenience" to you, remove "In God We Trust" from out currency, remove religious slogans from Federal buildings, support gay marriage, and buring of the United States flag... MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#69 Consumer Comment

LMAO - The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president

AUTHOR: Erik - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Liberals crack me up. They b***h, whine, and moan about everything under the sun but then don't offer any reasonable solutions to problems.

The war is not about oil. I'm not a cheerleader for Bush. I think he's a good president overall, but he says some pretty stupid things sometimes. But, Bush is a good man with good intentions. He doesn't do everything right, but he does most of everything right... he's done a hell of a lot better things than clinton every could have. Bush took over a failing economy, and then was hit with 9/11 soon after. His presidency was struck by nothing but bad luck. You liberals that think the war is about oil have your heads buried in the sand. REMOVE YOUR KNOWLEDGE DEFLECTOR SHIELDS FOR A MOMENT and try to think rationally and logically... if you have the ability. Iraq is liberated, women can walk around outside without veils over their faces, everybody can vote, and Saddam is behind bars. It's just a matter of time before we get the rest of the insurgency and Osama. It may take a couple of years, but it's well worth it. People like Cindy Sheehan are a disgrace to the world. Nobody forced her son to join the military. He did it voluntarily. When you join the military there are inherent risks involved... a couple of those risks are that there is a chance you can die, or become maimed or disabled. You know this when you join and you accept that risk. The entire liberal agenda is a sickening manifestation of ignorance, rebellion, stupidity and hate. If you want to distribute condoms to children, ban prayer in public schools, have abortions because the life you created is an "inconvenience" to you, remove "In God We Trust" from out currency, remove religious slogans from Federal buildings, support gay marriage, and buring of the United States flag... MOVE TO CANADA OR FRANCE you Godforsaken, America-Hating, ignorant hillbilly jerkoffs. GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY! NOW.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#68 Consumer Comment

Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2005

My eldest son is in the US Navy....have I supported the troops enough to suit you now? I have not danced in years.



I am not a Democrat, either. Clinton was not my idol. I dance to the tune of neither party because I believe in the Constitution. I am an "America First" person.



Have you ever read the Constitution? The very fact that I believe in that document precludes me from joining either of the Communist/Socialist parties that operate in this country as the Big Two. My party is smaller, but is gaining steam. So you can vilify the Democrats and Clinton to the end of time and it will never bother me. I did not approve of the intervention in Bosnia, either, but no one asked me. You just seemed confused as to why it took place.



Our government is charged with the responsibility of protecting this country first and foremost. Protection of American soil and American people is the only reason it exists at all. When our resources are halfway around the world and disaster strikes our shores we get treated to a show of stunning incompetence. (Who the heck appoints a horse show supervisor to head up a major disaster relief agency? G.W. Bush, evidently?!!)



Steph, you are very much a product of that upper class inbreeding that produced the Billary, a true free thinker who honestly believes that it is America's job or right to interfere in the affairs of any and all countries. I am here to tell you that is the thinking that has gotten America into a whole lot of troubles over the past fifty years or so.



As long as your income is assured and protected you will spout off complete inanities and marry your cousins to "keep it in the family". Too bad they don't teach you to read and comprehend in your part of Illinois. Bombing Kosovo had little to do with the bomb in the White House at the time; it was not over the infamous blow job. And the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with freeing the people of Iraq from Saddam.



The piece is about Bush. The man is dangerous and traitorous. He is as misguided a person to come down the political pike in ages. He does not work for America or government, he works for his God and his desire to go down in history as the man who saved the world. I almost expect him to say any day that God came to him in a dream and told him to invade Iraq. Or Iran...



Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing. Half the world or more now sees America as a terrorist state. Bush has put us in that position by fabricating the "evidence" presented to Congress to dupe the lawmakers into voting for his God-folly in Iraq.



Subside back into your safe world of bon-bons, satin sheets and slaving over a hot television. Leave the thinking for those that are better able. You must have failed debate as well as your history lessons. Splutter on, dear lady. You amuse me.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#67 Consumer Comment

Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2005

My eldest son is in the US Navy....have I supported the troops enough to suit you now? I have not danced in years.



I am not a Democrat, either. Clinton was not my idol. I dance to the tune of neither party because I believe in the Constitution. I am an "America First" person.



Have you ever read the Constitution? The very fact that I believe in that document precludes me from joining either of the Communist/Socialist parties that operate in this country as the Big Two. My party is smaller, but is gaining steam. So you can vilify the Democrats and Clinton to the end of time and it will never bother me. I did not approve of the intervention in Bosnia, either, but no one asked me. You just seemed confused as to why it took place.



Our government is charged with the responsibility of protecting this country first and foremost. Protection of American soil and American people is the only reason it exists at all. When our resources are halfway around the world and disaster strikes our shores we get treated to a show of stunning incompetence. (Who the heck appoints a horse show supervisor to head up a major disaster relief agency? G.W. Bush, evidently?!!)



Steph, you are very much a product of that upper class inbreeding that produced the Billary, a true free thinker who honestly believes that it is America's job or right to interfere in the affairs of any and all countries. I am here to tell you that is the thinking that has gotten America into a whole lot of troubles over the past fifty years or so.



As long as your income is assured and protected you will spout off complete inanities and marry your cousins to "keep it in the family". Too bad they don't teach you to read and comprehend in your part of Illinois. Bombing Kosovo had little to do with the bomb in the White House at the time; it was not over the infamous blow job. And the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with freeing the people of Iraq from Saddam.



The piece is about Bush. The man is dangerous and traitorous. He is as misguided a person to come down the political pike in ages. He does not work for America or government, he works for his God and his desire to go down in history as the man who saved the world. I almost expect him to say any day that God came to him in a dream and told him to invade Iraq. Or Iran...



Faith is a good thing. Extremism is a dangerous thing. Half the world or more now sees America as a terrorist state. Bush has put us in that position by fabricating the "evidence" presented to Congress to dupe the lawmakers into voting for his God-folly in Iraq.



Subside back into your safe world of bon-bons, satin sheets and slaving over a hot television. Leave the thinking for those that are better able. You must have failed debate as well as your history lessons. Splutter on, dear lady. You amuse me.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#66 Consumer Comment

More hate spewing from the liberals

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, September 05, 2005

So now Robert you're saying only a democrat has the right to stop genocide?



Again your support of Saddam is showing. You say the war in Iraq is wrong but you support what happened in Kosovo?



You think Bush should be impeached but Saddam should have been allowed to stay in power despite all the genocide.



Not to mention the women being raped but I'm betting you think rape of women is okay. It is wrong to say that rape was illegal in Iraq. It was but not to rape but to be raped.



Thank you by the way for spewing all the hate. It was hate like yours that is the reason Bush is still in office.



Liberals making comments like "he's not my president" (thereby announcing they don't consider themselves americans sorry saddam and bin laden lovers if you are an american like him or not he is your president) is ultimate proof that liberals support Saddam and Bin Laden.



Clinton did nothing against Bin Laden for 8 years. 8 years.



You dance when a member of our troops die.



Typical of the retarded liberal is the original post had Washington Avenue as the presidents address. Everyone knows the White House in on Pennsylvania Ave and probably 90 percent know it's 1600.



As far as Hillary I bear the shame of being from the hometown of the only first lady to be more corrupt than her husband. But she and Bill have an agreement. They both can have all the women they want!



And there was a senatorial election both in Illinois and Arkansas in 2000 but unlike New York we are too smart to vote for a carpetbagger. Although in reality she'd have more reason to legitimately run out of Arkansas or Illinois than New York.



Typical liberals are when a real woman like Libby Dole runs out of her state of birth they called it carpetbagging although she lived there most of her life.



True hate is the liberal. Hate of America. Hate of religion. Hate of morals.



Typical liberal after the hurricane blames Bush and does nothing to help.



Typical conservative is raising money or doing other things to help.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#65 Consumer Comment

Bush the Elder sanctioned genocide...Clinton took care of it!

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

Poor, poor Steph. Born yesterday and was tossed off the turnip truck immediately after birth or she has failed her history courses miserably.



Read up...the US is fighting in Bosnia FOR the Muslims who want us all dead. The genocide began on George Senior's watch and Clinton took control of the situation as he promised he would during his campaign. How many campaign promises has Bush lived up to?



The details are below. Bush Sr. failed to stop Saddam and he failed to stop the genocide in Bosnia. Therefore, Bush Jr. must fight both those issues in a Crusade that will crush all in his way. "Daddy" cannot be criticized.



Bush Jr. has a Messiah complex that is bigger than Texas. He will save the world if he has to kill all of us to do it! There is no dealing with a mentally imbalanced, chemical-deprived,lying, God-driven lunatic bent on his own agenda. Wait! IS it his own agenda?



They never show the back of Bush Jr. at a press conference....hmmmm....I often wonder if that is because we would all see the hand in Bush's back making his lips move. Who's hand would we see? Cheney's? Rumsfeld's? Daddy Bush himself? Or do they all take turns being the ventriloquist and puppeteer depending on who is needing to get richer this week?



The US did not enter Bosnia with the goal of taking it over as we did with Iraq, but with the goal of stopping mass murders. The US did not dismantle these people's way of life, we just tried to bring some order to it. And, if you read this carefully, you will see that the UN is, was, and always will be a scam of epic proportions unable or unwilling to do its job, too. Another leech on the American taxpayer.



Who says Rip-off Report is not educational? The government is the biggest rip-off going in all fifty states...how can anyone think these reports do not belong in a consumer complaint forum? I get my wallet mugged every three months by the government and am allowed to say publicly that I detest the way they spend MY money!



Bushites are running out of arguments...I signed the impeachment petition. Out, damned Bush and begone with you. There is no justification for Bush...Iraq is more important to him than America. That makes him a traitor who has failed all of us, not just New Orleans.



Bush is undoubtedly pissed that cleaning up an American city is taking time and resources away from his latest plan to invade Iran ASAP...because Bush KNOWS Iran has WMD...and God told him to rid the world of Iran...



Bosnia Genocide - 1992-1995 - 200,000 Deaths



In the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, conflict between the three main ethnic groups, the Serbs, Croats, and Muslims, resulted in genocide committed by the Serbs against the Muslims in Bosnia.



The response of the international community was limited. The U.S. under President George Bush chose not to get involved militarily, but instead recognized the independence of both Slovenia and Croatia. An arms embargo was imposed for all of the former Yugoslavia by the United Nations. However, the Serbs under Milosevic were already the best armed force and thus maintained a big military advantage.



The end of 1991 brokered a U.S.-sponsored cease-fire agreement between the Serbs and Croats fighting in Croatia.



In April 1992, the U.S. and European Community chose to recognize the independence of Bosnia, a mostly Muslim country where the Serb minority made up 32 percent of the population. Milosevic responded to Bosnia's declaration of independence by attacking Sarajevo, its capital city, best known for hosting the 1984 Winter Olympics. Sarajevo soon became known as the city where Serb snipers continually shot down helpless civilians in the streets, including eventually over 3,500 children.



Bosnian Muslims were hopelessly outgunned. As the Serbs gained ground, they began to systematically roundup local Muslims in scenes eerily similar to those that had occurred under the Nazis during World War II, including mass shootings, forced repopulation of entire towns, and confinement in make-shift concentration camps for men and boys. The Serbs also terrorized Muslim families into fleeing their villages by using rape as a weapon against women and girls.



The actions of the Serbs were labeled as 'ethnic cleansing,' a name which quickly took hold among the international media.



Despite media reports of the secret camps, the mass killings, as well as the destruction of Muslim mosques and historic architecture in Bosnia, the world community remained mostly indifferent. The U.N. responded by imposing economic sanctions on Serbia and also deployed its troops to protect the distribution of food and medicine to dispossessed Muslims. But the U.N. strictly prohibited its troops from interfering militarily against the Serbs. Thus they remained steadfastly neutral no matter how bad the situation became.



Throughout 1993, confident that the U.N., United States and the European Community would not take militarily action, Serbs in Bosnia freely committed genocide against Muslims. Bosnian Serbs operated under the local leadership of Radovan Karadzic, president of the illegitimate Bosnian Serb Republic. Karadzic had once told a group of journalists, "Serbs and Muslims are like cats and dogs. They cannot live together in peace. It is impossible."



When Karadzic was confronted by reporters about ongoing atrocities, he bluntly denied involvement of his soldiers or special police units.



On February 6, 1994, the world's attention turned completely to Bosnia as a marketplace in Sarajevo was struck by a Serb mortar shell killing 68 persons and wounding nearly 200. Sights and sounds of the bloody carnage were broadcast globally by the international news media and soon resulted in calls for military intervention against the Serbs.



The U.S. under its new President, Bill Clinton, who had promised during his election campaign in 1992 to stop the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, now issued an ultimatum through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) demanding that the Serbs withdraw their artillery from Sarajevo. The Serbs quickly complied and a NATO-imposed cease-fire in Sarajevo was declared.



The U.S. then launched diplomatic efforts aimed at unifying Bosnian Muslims and the Croats against the Serbs. However, this new Muslim-Croat alliance failed to stop the Serbs from attacking Muslim towns in Bosnia, which had been declared Safe Havens by the U.N. A total of six Muslim towns had been established as Safe Havens in May 1993 under the supervision of U.N. peacekeepers.



Bosnian Serbs not only attacked the Safe Havens but also attacked the U.N. peacekeepers as well. NATO forces responded by launching limited air strikes against Serb ground positions. The Serbs retaliated by taking hundreds of U.N. peacekeepers as hostages and turning them into human shields, chained to military targets such as ammo supply dumps.



At this point, some of the worst genocidal activities of the four-year-old conflict occurred. In Srebrenica, a Safe Haven, U.N. peacekeepers stood by helplessly as the Serbs under the command of General Ratko Mladic systematically selected and then slaughtered nearly 8,000 men and boys between the ages of twelve and sixty - the worst mass murder in Europe since World War II. In addition, the Serbs continued to engage in mass rapes of Muslim females.



On August 30, 1995, effective military intervention finally began as the U.S. led a massive NATO bombing campaign in response to the killings at Srebrenica, targeting Serbian artillery positions throughout Bosnia. The bombardment continued into October. Serb forces also lost ground to Bosnian Muslims who had received arms shipments from the Islamic world. As a result, half of Bosnia was eventually retaken by Muslim-Croat troops.



Faced with the heavy NATO bombardment and a string of ground losses to the Muslim-Croat alliance, Serb leader Milosevic was now ready to talk peace. On November 1, 1995, leaders of the warring factions including Milosevic and Tudjman traveled to the U.S. for peace talks at Wright-Patterson Air Force base in Ohio.



After three weeks of negotiations, a peace accord was declared. Terms of the agreement included partitioning Bosnia into two main portions known as the Bosnian Serb Republic and the Muslim-Croat Federation. The agreement also called for democratic elections and stipulated that war criminals would be handed over for prosecution. 60,000 NATO soldiers were deployed to preserve the cease-fire.



By now, over 200,000 Muslim civilians had been systematically murdered. More than 20,000 were missing and feared dead, while 2,000,000 had become refugees. It was, according to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke, "the greatest failure of the West since the 1930s."

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#64 Consumer Suggestion

sure, blame the other side.

AUTHOR: Manan - (Virgin Islands (U.S.))

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

Steph I do not know how to describe your "constructive criticism on this rip-off report" - calling it a mindless rant would be doing it justice.

You continuosly blame the liberals and ASSUME they support saddam and terrorists.. and blah blah.. "smart people who did not vote for her" - what are you talking about??? She ran in the state of New York - the people of New York had the only right to vote or not vote for her; and she was elected unanimously.. OFCOURSE the people of Arkansas and Illonois had NO vote.. they couldnt.. but ofcourse you would argue against this dire fact since you believe every baseless lie told by the Republicans.



Thanks for a good laugh, and further reassurances as to WHY i m not on the same page as you - conservatives who think Saddam caused 9 11 JEEEEEZ..

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#63 Consumer Suggestion

Liberals prove it again

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

More hate spewing of Bush by the liberal pansy crowd.



And see the moron lead Bin laden supporter from Tupper Lake is talking about Hillary.



Hey MORON! The reason she carpet bagged in New York was the people of her state of birth (Illinois) and state of most of her adulthood (Arkansas) are too smart to vote for her. And Illinois is very democrat right now. The reason this once great state is going right into the crapper.



Liberals the people of hate.



Yes you do love Saddam. The reason I say that is you opposed getting rid of him. THE UN Is a laugh!



I realize you think the only reason to drop a bomb on a sovreign nation is because the president can't keep his pants on (the reason we bombed Kosovo).



You support genocide because you think we should have allowed Saddam to continue.



The Pro Saddam rallies (these aren't anti=war they are to show love of Saddam and terrorism see the posters they carry with their pictures of Bin Laden and Saddam) have killed people. In Chicago they blocked ambulances from getting through. Because of the detours 2 people died when the minutes they spent doing that if they had gotten to the ER earlier they had a 85 percent chance of making it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#62 Consumer Suggestion

Liberals prove it again

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

More hate spewing of Bush by the liberal pansy crowd.



And see the moron lead Bin laden supporter from Tupper Lake is talking about Hillary.



Hey MORON! The reason she carpet bagged in New York was the people of her state of birth (Illinois) and state of most of her adulthood (Arkansas) are too smart to vote for her. And Illinois is very democrat right now. The reason this once great state is going right into the crapper.



Liberals the people of hate.



Yes you do love Saddam. The reason I say that is you opposed getting rid of him. THE UN Is a laugh!



I realize you think the only reason to drop a bomb on a sovreign nation is because the president can't keep his pants on (the reason we bombed Kosovo).



You support genocide because you think we should have allowed Saddam to continue.



The Pro Saddam rallies (these aren't anti=war they are to show love of Saddam and terrorism see the posters they carry with their pictures of Bin Laden and Saddam) have killed people. In Chicago they blocked ambulances from getting through. Because of the detours 2 people died when the minutes they spent doing that if they had gotten to the ER earlier they had a 85 percent chance of making it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#61 Consumer Suggestion

Liberals prove it again

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

More hate spewing of Bush by the liberal pansy crowd.



And see the moron lead Bin laden supporter from Tupper Lake is talking about Hillary.



Hey MORON! The reason she carpet bagged in New York was the people of her state of birth (Illinois) and state of most of her adulthood (Arkansas) are too smart to vote for her. And Illinois is very democrat right now. The reason this once great state is going right into the crapper.



Liberals the people of hate.



Yes you do love Saddam. The reason I say that is you opposed getting rid of him. THE UN Is a laugh!



I realize you think the only reason to drop a bomb on a sovreign nation is because the president can't keep his pants on (the reason we bombed Kosovo).



You support genocide because you think we should have allowed Saddam to continue.



The Pro Saddam rallies (these aren't anti=war they are to show love of Saddam and terrorism see the posters they carry with their pictures of Bin Laden and Saddam) have killed people. In Chicago they blocked ambulances from getting through. Because of the detours 2 people died when the minutes they spent doing that if they had gotten to the ER earlier they had a 85 percent chance of making it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#60 Consumer Suggestion

Liberals prove it again

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

More hate spewing of Bush by the liberal pansy crowd.



And see the moron lead Bin laden supporter from Tupper Lake is talking about Hillary.



Hey MORON! The reason she carpet bagged in New York was the people of her state of birth (Illinois) and state of most of her adulthood (Arkansas) are too smart to vote for her. And Illinois is very democrat right now. The reason this once great state is going right into the crapper.



Liberals the people of hate.



Yes you do love Saddam. The reason I say that is you opposed getting rid of him. THE UN Is a laugh!



I realize you think the only reason to drop a bomb on a sovreign nation is because the president can't keep his pants on (the reason we bombed Kosovo).



You support genocide because you think we should have allowed Saddam to continue.



The Pro Saddam rallies (these aren't anti=war they are to show love of Saddam and terrorism see the posters they carry with their pictures of Bin Laden and Saddam) have killed people. In Chicago they blocked ambulances from getting through. Because of the detours 2 people died when the minutes they spent doing that if they had gotten to the ER earlier they had a 85 percent chance of making it.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#59 Consumer Comment

Yes, this belongs in Ripoffreport!

AUTHOR: Dave - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

I just paid $3.299 for gas this morning (by now it's probably up again).



Venezuela pays 16 cents a gallon, Moscow, $1.45, Shanghai, $1.48, and Bangkok, $1.60. Unconfirmed, I read in Saudi Arabiz, it's 6 cents a gallon.



In the US, record prices and record profits are happening!



Yes, I'd say it's a ripoff of magnificent proportions.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#58 Consumer Comment

Bush

AUTHOR: Brenda - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

Robert, Ted, James, Ben, I agree with almost everything you said. I do not understand how anyone can defend Bush's actions.



I believe daddy and Cheney are running the show, because junior is a moron. The man can hardly speak, and he for sure can't think. Does anyone else think Barbara was hitting the sauce a little hard when carrying him?



Michael, the key statement is, "WE threw the British out", if Iraq wants freedom, they can do it themselves. We need to get out of there, NOW.



Why is the NATIONAL GUARD over there, not here where they are badly needed for Katrina victims?

Why are we forever running overseas and throwing money at people that hate us? Or are we, maybe "foreign aid" is another way for the crooks to steal our money.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#57 Consumer Comment

Serious Lack of Leadership II

AUTHOR: Cory - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

First I addressed the lack of leadership over the gas/oil situation. A day or so later the President agrees to release some of the US oil reserve. Not really going to help the problem because a lack of oil isn't the problem, the refinining into gasoline is. This after he said, There's not much I can do I'm only the President. Now we have the situation in New Orleans. How is it that 24 hours after the tsanumi(sp) 13,000 miles away, we are making airdrops of food and water and it take 5 to 6 days to start in NO, a couple of hundred miles away? Watched Sunday morning news TV. They had the head of Homeland Security on one program and Orin Hatch on another. BOTH said, we shouldn't be worried about what happened or why it took so long, we need to concentrate on helping the survivors. That's right, avoid the question of what happened and why it took so long. They were interviewing the head of FEMA, FEMA, on Friday morning. He said they had no idea that things were so bad until Thursday night, Friday morning. The person interviewing him asked him, "Haven't you been watching any of the news broadcasts over the last 5 days"? He had no answer. I don't have any interest in rehashing old news, 9/11, the election, it's all history. Now, within a week, the President has shown a serious lack of leadership not once but twice. The first time is costing us billions of dollars at the pump. The second time has cost us billions more and now hundreds, if not thousands of lives. I'm sorry he had to cut short his 5 week vacation by 2 days. God bless our troops and those navy guys too.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#56 Consumer Comment

Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

As you know the republican party has always been for BIG BUSINESS, and their evil cause of getting alot richer. s**t, these SATANS are very open, but try to mask there actions. I agree George the Pecker Bush is very dangerous to this country. Well if I end up dead someday, I was killed for my mouth. Look at ALL the people killed to silence John Kennedys Assassination from coming out. Also, This is why Lyndon Johnson, Gerry Ford,

George H. Bush, George W. Bush :became President Of The United States. They were promised the power to keep the secret. JFK was killed by three assassins and the Gov't and C.I.A were involved, as well as the Mafia, as a lowrider. I swear the real government resides in Texas and not Washington D.C.!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#55 Consumer Comment

Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

As you know the republican party has always been for BIG BUSINESS, and their evil cause of getting alot richer. s**t, these SATANS are very open, but try to mask there actions. I agree George the Pecker Bush is very dangerous to this country. Well if I end up dead someday, I was killed for my mouth. Look at ALL the people killed to silence John Kennedys Assassination from coming out. Also, This is why Lyndon Johnson, Gerry Ford,

George H. Bush, George W. Bush :became President Of The United States. They were promised the power to keep the secret. JFK was killed by three assassins and the Gov't and C.I.A were involved, as well as the Mafia, as a lowrider. I swear the real government resides in Texas and not Washington D.C.!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#54 Consumer Comment

Robert- Dallas ,Texas you are soooo right!

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, September 04, 2005

As you know the republican party has always been for BIG BUSINESS, and their evil cause of getting alot richer. s**t, these SATANS are very open, but try to mask there actions. I agree George the Pecker Bush is very dangerous to this country. Well if I end up dead someday, I was killed for my mouth. Look at ALL the people killed to silence John Kennedys Assassination from coming out. Also, This is why Lyndon Johnson, Gerry Ford,

George H. Bush, George W. Bush :became President Of The United States. They were promised the power to keep the secret. JFK was killed by three assassins and the Gov't and C.I.A were involved, as well as the Mafia, as a lowrider. I swear the real government resides in Texas and not Washington D.C.!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#53 Consumer Comment

Bush-whacked brain dead people; tell it to New Orleans! "King George", in all his incompetence, lets people die while he fiddles.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, September 03, 2005

OK, Bush-heads, tell me again how great Bush is. Tell me again how America is "so prepared" for terrorist attacks when Homeland Insecurity cannot deal promptly and efficiently with a natural disaster that had several days advance warning.



For all the millions, if not billions, of dollars spent on this preparedness crap, all we seem to have gained from it is a colorful danger scale.



Did New Orleans fail to pay proper monetary homage to the Republican Party? Or is it that the people there are too poor and too black to count? Not enough big-money campaign money flowing from there?



Even Bush's beloved dyed Fox News is sending out cries of pain and indignation over the sad mess that is now New Orleans. Tell me which station to watch now, blind fools.



Katrina is going to be the undoing of King George. The man is a self-centered egotistical moron who is wholly convinced that all he does is writ by the hand of his God. He is a dry drunk who turns his cravings for alcohol into religious zealotry on a level of the Muslim suicide bombers. He is as dangerous as any other fanatic and should be treated to years of therapy to make him understand that the red phone is not a hotline to God.



George W. Bush is dangerous to America and to the world. He should be plopped down on a rooftop in New Orleans to bake for a few days in the hot sun without food or water or shade. He should be forced to view and smell the dead. He should be forced to watch the people around him die and watch the rats eating the corpses.



He should be shot at by desperate people in a hopeless situation. Maybe then he (and his die-hard supporters) will begin to understand the fury this maniac has set loose on the world.



Justify all this incompetence to me quickly; otherwise, I am on my way to sign the online impeach Bush petition....this man scares the hell out of me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#52 Consumer Comment

Bush Lied; Thousands Died

AUTHOR: Kevin - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

Don't much care for warmongers. Never have. Never will.

Warmongers march under the flag of false patriotism to justify unleashing the greatest military firepower in the history of the world on some primitive backwater for the misused claim of freedom.



They craft careful, public relations-designed names to their efforts: Operation Just Cause, Operation Iraqi Freedom, as if words can justify the meaningless slaughter of human beings.



They claim this is payback for September 11, 2001, but the sad truth is that the 100,000 Iraqi civilians who have died so far in that useless war had nothing to do with the attacks against us nearly four years ago. The real culprits continue to plan future attacks because the leaders of this country recklessly diverted resources from capturing them to a hopeless conflict that cannot, and will not, be won.



So far, more than 1,800 Americans gave their lives for these warmongers. How many more must die before somebody has the courage to say enough?



All too often, war is waged by those who themselves never served in combat. They see war as some grand cause, a chest-thumping exercise of divine right because they have never endured the horrors of war. George W. Bush avoided combat in the Air National Guard. Vice President d**k Cheney used student deferments to stay home where it was safe.



And, when you question those who most fervently support the war in Iraq you all too often find an even larger collection of chicken hawks who can talk big about war as long as they never had to go.



They don't know what it is like to take another human being's life, to sneak up behind them in the dark, grab their chin, plunge a K-bar knife into their throat and then feel them go limp as the air gushes out of a severed windpipe. They haven't smelled the coppery odor of blood or the stench of voided bowels. They haven't looked into the face of their enemy to discover that he was just as young and scared as they.



Unfortunately, there are times when war is necessary. Pearl Harbor made it necessary for us to enter World War II. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 made it necessary for us to go into Afghanistan to track down the people responsible.



But Iraq, like Vietnam, is a war based on lies, on a President's obsession that has nothing to do with truth, justice or the American way.



Launched under false pretenses, Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks against this country. Bush began planning for the war immediately after he won the disputed election in 2000. One of his first orders after taking the Oath of Office on January 20, 2001, went to the Pentagon, telling them to draft plans for an invasion of Iraq. He hinted at it in his first inaugural address and those who have left the administration admit war with the country was discussed in cabinet meetings months before the terrorist attacks.



Had the attacks not occurred, Bush would have found another reason to invade. Before the war, our sources within the CIA warned us that the White House demanded manufactured intel to justify an invasion. We printed that story. Few believed it then but now know it was all too true.



Bush warned us that an evil empire was out to destroy America.



He was right.



Only, he has turned America into that evil empire and, in the end, it will be he and his followers who destroyed this once-great nation.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#51 Consumer Suggestion

Commies? CNN?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

Good grief!



Get real man! This is 2005 not 1955. McCarthy is no longer in Congress. The commies that are left cant hurt you. Go back to sleep.....be a good consumer....dont question your government....buy more goods.....reproduce.....sleeeeeeep.



Let me see....CNN has reports on the disaster in the gulf plastered all over its website. Are you telling me that the hurricane really never happened and it some made up story? Its some conspiracy by the "commies"?



And you conservative nuts say WE are the ones looking for a conspiracy under every rock?!



A friend of mine from Utah once told me they put things in the water there to make people loony. I thought HE was a nut with theories like that. Now after that CNN post from another screwball from Utah.......maybe my friend was telling the truth.





Sleep....little capitalist....sleep....do whatever Bush tells you.....buy more goods.....reproduce....be a good consumer....sleep......shhhhh...dont mind those commies.....Bush and Fox news will protect you.



Fox news? More like Fox in the hen house. Those liars cant get anything "balanced".



Hehe that slays me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#50 Consumer Suggestion

Commies? CNN?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

Good grief!



Get real man! This is 2005 not 1955. McCarthy is no longer in Congress. The commies that are left cant hurt you. Go back to sleep.....be a good consumer....dont question your government....buy more goods.....reproduce.....sleeeeeeep.



Let me see....CNN has reports on the disaster in the gulf plastered all over its website. Are you telling me that the hurricane really never happened and it some made up story? Its some conspiracy by the "commies"?



And you conservative nuts say WE are the ones looking for a conspiracy under every rock?!



A friend of mine from Utah once told me they put things in the water there to make people loony. I thought HE was a nut with theories like that. Now after that CNN post from another screwball from Utah.......maybe my friend was telling the truth.





Sleep....little capitalist....sleep....do whatever Bush tells you.....buy more goods.....reproduce....be a good consumer....sleep......shhhhh...dont mind those commies.....Bush and Fox news will protect you.



Fox news? More like Fox in the hen house. Those liars cant get anything "balanced".



Hehe that slays me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#49 Consumer Suggestion

Commies? CNN?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

Good grief!



Get real man! This is 2005 not 1955. McCarthy is no longer in Congress. The commies that are left cant hurt you. Go back to sleep.....be a good consumer....dont question your government....buy more goods.....reproduce.....sleeeeeeep.



Let me see....CNN has reports on the disaster in the gulf plastered all over its website. Are you telling me that the hurricane really never happened and it some made up story? Its some conspiracy by the "commies"?



And you conservative nuts say WE are the ones looking for a conspiracy under every rock?!



A friend of mine from Utah once told me they put things in the water there to make people loony. I thought HE was a nut with theories like that. Now after that CNN post from another screwball from Utah.......maybe my friend was telling the truth.





Sleep....little capitalist....sleep....do whatever Bush tells you.....buy more goods.....reproduce....be a good consumer....sleep......shhhhh...dont mind those commies.....Bush and Fox news will protect you.



Fox news? More like Fox in the hen house. Those liars cant get anything "balanced".



Hehe that slays me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#48 Consumer Suggestion

Commies? CNN?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

Good grief!



Get real man! This is 2005 not 1955. McCarthy is no longer in Congress. The commies that are left cant hurt you. Go back to sleep.....be a good consumer....dont question your government....buy more goods.....reproduce.....sleeeeeeep.



Let me see....CNN has reports on the disaster in the gulf plastered all over its website. Are you telling me that the hurricane really never happened and it some made up story? Its some conspiracy by the "commies"?



And you conservative nuts say WE are the ones looking for a conspiracy under every rock?!



A friend of mine from Utah once told me they put things in the water there to make people loony. I thought HE was a nut with theories like that. Now after that CNN post from another screwball from Utah.......maybe my friend was telling the truth.





Sleep....little capitalist....sleep....do whatever Bush tells you.....buy more goods.....reproduce....be a good consumer....sleep......shhhhh...dont mind those commies.....Bush and Fox news will protect you.



Fox news? More like Fox in the hen house. Those liars cant get anything "balanced".



Hehe that slays me!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#47 Consumer Comment

The Communist News Network (CNN)

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, September 01, 2005

You believe CNN? The Communist News Network?

I wouldn't believe them if Ted Turner's tongue came notarized!

They have been busted many times for fabricating story's. So has NBC and CBS. Remember the forged documents about Bush's militray service?

The news shows and tell you what THEY want to show and tell you.

I watch CNN if I want a good laugh. Though I admit that one of their hottie anchors, Robin Meade, is very easy on the eyes. I just mute the volume.

What I am saying is take the news with a grain of salt. Espcially CNN. Fox seems to do a decent job of showing both sides of a story.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#46 Consumer Suggestion

Attacks?...since 9/11??

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 31, 2005

If this doesnt take the whole frosted "war on terror" cake......



"how many terrorist attacks have happened in America since 9/11....Bush is doing great!"



Classic! Here's a good question for you.... How long was it BEFORE 9/11 that we had an attack?



Other than a totally vile act by one of our own (Oklahoma City....mind you another RIGHT WING conservative religious zealot!) it had been almost 10 years.



Looking at the massive escalation in terrorist attacks around the world in the last near 4 years, a much bigger picture appears.



Now I would be willing to bet....my next tax refund check from the GOP congress and good ol' boy Bush, that if 9/11 never happened....there would have been more Oklahoma City scenarios play out in its place.



And by who....



You guessed it, conservative, religous zealots, that QUESTION their government. (And they b***h we are "questioning Bush's ability to lead"....sheesh!!! At least we just talk....they blow people up!!...ok ok...maybe one wacky mother goes camping in Crawford, Texas)



About the only difference between these living examples that evolution and the theory that man came from ape are fact, and the general Middle Eastern Terrorist, is that they know how to just leave the d**n bomb, and run, instead of blowing up with it.



Now that I,m done with that, does anyone know what happened with that whole anthrax thing right after 9/11? Hmmmm wonder....who that...was.....



And dont tell me I'm "looking for conspiracy theories under every rock". I think that one got dumped by a truck on my doorstep just like 9/11 (along with the rock). Maybe if you took those black and white only glasses off, along with the blinders, you might remember it. People died then too.



Just like Madrid, London, Tel Aviv, Bali, Belsan, Bagdad, Kabul...........

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#45 Author of original report

Members of Bush Administration needed to replace a lightbulb

AUTHOR: April - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 30, 2005

How many members of the Bush Administration are needed to replace a light bulb?



Answer: 10



1. One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed.



2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs to be changed.



3. One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb.



4. One to tell the nations of the world that they are either for changing the light bulb or for darkness.



5. One to give a billion dollar no-bid contract to Halliburton for the new light bulb.



6. One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a step ladder under the banner, "Light Bulb Change Accomplished."



7. One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush was literally "in the dark."



8. One to viciously smear #7.



9. One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies on how George Bush has had a strong light-bulb-changing policy all along.



10. And, finally, one to confuse Americans about the difference between screwing a light bulb and screwing the country.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#44 Consumer Comment

Once again James..... how shallow the gene pool is in Tupper Lake

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Once again James you are showing how straight the family trees are AND how shallow the gene pool is in Tupper Lake. The sad thing is that Hillary IS the ONLY candidate the Democrats have. And IF she does get in, GOD HELP US ALL.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#43 Consumer Comment

I think I would run on the "America First" platform, not the "Nuke the World" platform.

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Michael is a great example of Bushite aggression. Nuke the world, oh boy!



For starters, Mecca is in Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, so we would have to go to war with the entire Middle East to accomplish the aim of nuking Mecca.



How about the politicos putting America first for awhile? Sealing the borders, controlling immigration and worrying about Americans who are being fleeced by scams and put out of work through outsourcing.



Is that too much to ask of politicians who claim to be Americans? Stop playing Big Brother to the world and concentrate on the people who elected you.



There is suffering in this country, lots of it. More every day. And the d**n bureaucrats remain stone deaf to it. How about cleaning up Wall Street and Big Business? How about some jobs?



How about TELLING THE TRUTH to the American people? What a refreshing change that would be!



It boils down to this: the reason that Americans no longer trust their government is because the government no longer trusts its people with the truth. Decisions based on lies and deception are not the way to win back the trust.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#42 REBUTTAL Owner of company

You foolish people believe what you want! Bush-pig will be soon gone and My Lady Hillary Clinton will be the new president.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 30, 2005

I say,



Bush-pig will be soon gone and My Lady Hillary Clinton will be the new president. I love it, the Republicans get in long enough to stuff their pockets and then they give the election to the Democrats so it doesn't look so bad. After Hillary serves one or two terms another Republican will take over. I unfortunately have to say Democrats are second to republicans since the Gov't, Military, and big business killed JFK, and Robert Kennedy after he was running for president. God help the world. Bush I dare you to mess with Iran or North Korea, They are the ones building nuclear arms dumnb a*s! I think he is afraid.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#41 Consumer Comment

how many terrorist attacks have happened in America since 9/11? Bush is doing great!

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

I think this has gone on long enough. At least for me.



You think Bush should be impeached? Then run for president if you can do better. What platform would you run on though? The mind wonders.



President is a demanding job. We can armchair quarterback all we want but unless we are in the job we have no right to complain.



My life has enough drama in it to worry about someone who thinks there is a conspiracy under every rock and behind every tree.



As far as Iraq goes, we should have used nukes. What the hell do we have them for if we don't use them? Mecca should disappear under a mushroom cloud. Then maybe the terrorists will think again about blowing up innocent people.



Which brings me to a question: how many terrorist attacks have happened in America since 9/11? Bush is doing great!



I hope he blasts the bastards back to the stoneage.



Michael - West Jordan, Utah

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#40 Consumer Suggestion

Black and White?

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

I love these bible thumping, war loving, "conservatives".



This quote really kills me....



"Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam."



Ya, thats a winner! Sure guy, all liberals must love Bin Laden and Saddam. I'm really bothered by the coarse black and white mentality that has swept the conservative end of the spectrum these days. I do remember a certain President saying "I'm a uniter...not a divider". Guess that was all BS eh? Bush certainly divided this country as best he could.



Here is are a few choice tidbits that I have picked out from the "Love Bush" crowd that are completely sick twisted contortions of reality.....



"If you dont like Bush.....then you loved Kerry!"

My response: I didnt like either of them, they are both crooks, both politicians, both born with spoons in their mouths, and both have no intention of doing anything for the common person in this country and only want to further their own bank accounts. Kerry was just the lesser of two evils to me. But not by much. In 2000 I flipped a coin. In 2004, I just flipped out.



"If you didnt support the invasion of Iraq....you were a Saddam supporter!"

My response: Well I agreed that Saddam had to go, I knew the UN was dragging its feet, I only had what Bush told us to go on (lies) that he still had WMD's, but I didnt think that it was the right time to go ahead and invade since we had other more pressing things to do. Of course now near 3 years on, we have no connection to 9/11, no WMD's, and one hell of Vietnam like scenario playing out. So supporting Saddam? Hell no! you freak! Its just that there were plenty of better more efficient and less costly (in lives!) ways to go about it. Wisdom and Strength are NOT opposing values ya moron! Did ya think that maybe you should check to see if there was any water in that pool before you jumped in head first? Guess not, cause the country now has a huge welt on the top of its head. Hopefully it didnt break its neck. If it did, we are screwed because Bush nixed the funding for stem cell research.



"If you dont support Bush....your not a Christian"

My response: Hmmmm, well no, I'm not a "Christian". I'm not anything. I dont believe in religon, never have. If others want it, more power to ya. Its your business. Just dont make your business my business. By linking who/how I vote for the President a religious issue your forcing your religious values on me. Thus your no better than the Taliban in my eyes. So my answer to you is...."If you support Bush forcing the bible on me.....You support the Christian Taliban". Next some dork is going to say "well if your not a Christian then you must support SATAN!". I hear that quite a bit too. Someone please explain to me how, if im not religous at all, dont believe in ANY religon, and never have, that suddenly I'm going to believe in satan?! Gotta be a Christian in the first place to believe in Satan now dont ya? Guess the Christian Taliban didnt think that far ahead (still not looking for water in that pool are you folks before ya jump eh?).



"If you dont like us being in Iraq.....then you dont support our troops!"

My response: My oh my! thats a good one! Gee wiz! Lets see, I think jumping into Iraq was bad and that staying there will get more of our people killed. So I want them to come home. And that makes me against them? So to be for them, I want them to die?? Get real! I support our troops so d**n much I dont want them to die! Nuff said!



I can go on and on. I think there are alot of conservative moderates out there that really wish Bush would just go. This Black and White mentality the nation has fallen into is scary. The attitude that "If you dislike A then you MUST be for B" is so very very very wrong, and dangerous. Life is much more complicated than that. It IS possible to like/support both, or dislike/not support both.



So next time someone posts "I dont like Bush" that doesnt mean automatically they are "liberal" or even voted for Kerry. And it sure as hell doesnt mean they support Bin Laden, Saddam, or Hitler. Thats a sick way to go about things. And to be honest, reminds me of grade school mentality. Grow up.



I was a registered Republican all the way up to 2000. Unfortunately the Republican party has been hijacked by these fundamentalist Christian nuts bent on making this country into something similar to what the Taliban wanted in Afganistan with Islam. There are lots more "conservatives" like me out there. Examples being Powell, McCain, Wilson etc. But their voices have been drowned out because of the loud mouths of these few religious zealots.



Of course some nut is now going to post.....



"Yer no conservative.....if you dont like Bush,and are not Christian ....you HAVE to be LIBERAL, love Bin Laden, be homosexual, and support women becomming lesbians then trying to kill their babies"



Well...my response: Get a life moron, I see in color, not just BLACK AND WHITE LIKE YOU. And even if I was completely colorblind, I can still see shades of grey......you a*****e, how dare you.





Dissing Bush Jr. does not mean your liberal, it does not mean you dont support our troops (where ever they may be!), it does not mean you support our enemies, and it does not mean you dont love our country.



It just means you DONT LIKE BUSH....period.



And yes, he did win the election. So be it. That doesnt mean we have to like him. Or be happy with it. Hell the Republicans bitched and moaned for years when Clinton was in office. All because of a blow job? Our current President sent 1800+ people to their deaths and all of a sudden we dont have the right to question it?? Heck give all the Presidents blow jobs from now on if it means we dont have to send our children to their doom in some worthless sand pit to fill some grubby greedy corporate CEO's bank account.



McCain/Powell in 2008.....and get them both a blow job when they arrive!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#39 Consumer Comment

Remembering this is a Consumer rip-off forum...

AUTHOR: B. - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

This is kind of a tough one, since we the corporation's consumers are also its owners, holding 100% of the voting stock. It is also difficult because the products and services are not pocket fishermen and strip-o-grams, they are the stuff of our lives and dreams and hopes, making the facts hard to distinguish from the emotional rhetoric. But lets see what we can do... (This got rather long, please bear with me)



The initial complaint seems to have 2 parts, 1) the president/CEO misappropriated "huge sums" of operating capitol; and 2) the president/CEO and the corporation misrepresented and continue to misrepresent a product or service. Lets take a quick look at some facts and then discuss options.



The Government Accounting Office used to have a link on its web page to a report on expenditures for the first couple of years of GWB's presidency. The link is gone, but I'm sure a little searching will turn up the report. Interesting, factual reading. The so-called surplus at the end of Clinton's term was a budget surplus, the difference between taxes collected and current expenditures; the corporation's outstanding debt was still a couple of trillion or more. GWB, with authorization from the board, both duly elected by the stockholders, returned that surplus and then some, as a sort of special dividend. Many of his early "expenditures" were simply restructuring existing debt. Many made sense if you buy into the "trickle down" theory of what Bush, Sr. called "voodoo economics;" the idea that as the rich get richer they leave bigger table scraps for the rest of us to fight over. Or something like that. So, misappropriation - no, mismanagement - open to speculation but impossible to prove.



It is also worth noting that the "deep recession" many cite at the end of Clinton's presidency is a red herring. It was a short (3-4 months), natural market re-indexing that had little, if anything, to do with his economic policies and was over before Bush had a chance to catch his breath.



Did the CEO and the executive committee for strategic initiatives misrepresent the Iraq war to the board, the stockholders, and the world? Yes, the hidden shipping charges alone are going to eat us alive. The market response was grossly overrated, production costs completely off the mark, the suggested market to profit window was ludicrous, and the promised WMD never delivered. Was it "blood for oil?" Only in the sense that we did not want the world's second largest oil reserves in the hands of an unpredictable madman with delusions of grandeur. It seems obvious from the selective suppression of information and contrary opinion that the decision to go to war had already been made, probably for a variety of reasons, of which WMD was the biggest selling point. It is, I think, indicative of this administration's contempt for the US voter that they continue to change the justification for starting the war and continuing the war, sometimes on a daily basis. For some reason they cannot or will not recognize the difference between the loss of thousands of US soldier's lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives for a real, immediate threat as opposed to a "good cause."



Having answered the misrepresentation question in the affirmative, we must also face some other facts. We have been at war with Saddam for over a decade. He has continued to defy the world over the conditions of the armistice he agreed to when we drove him out of Kuwait. He was obviously a source of continued unrest and a threat to his own people and his neighbors. Even if we reached an uneasy peace, we would probably have had to deal with him again within the next decade. Was this the right time? Was it worth squandering the worldwide sympathy and the anti-terrorist momentum we had engendered? There's no absolute answer here. While I think it was stupid, and that other options should have been considered, I have to recognize that it wasn't completely uncalled for or insane. Furthermore, having made the commitment, simply pulling out now would be criminally negligent.



So, what can we do to avoid future rip-offs? First of all, use one of our biggest strengths, the ability to talk about it. But really discuss it, put our own emotional response and prejudices aside for a moment and really listen to what others are saying. Try to understand why they feel the way they do, how it is they can possibly disagree over something so obvious. Both of us may learn something useful from the exchange. And to those of you jumping up to say we can't publicly disagree with the president, it disgraces the office and emboldens our enemies, I say, "CRAP." After watching the Republican apparat waste 5 years and 100s of millions of taxpayer dollars digging through every detail of the Clintons' lives, trying to convict him through manufactured evidence and innuendo, and eventually disgracing not only the executive office, but our congressional process and judicial process, by impeaching the president because he minced words with a grand jury who interrogated him about non-criminal but predictably embarrassing personal affairs, your words ring a bit hollow. Whew! Let me catch my breath.



Second, use our political voice. We must continually tell our congressmen know we will not continue to support those who foster an unresponsive and unrepresentative government. Let them know we consider the people of the United States to be more important than the multinational corporations they've sold out to. Let them know we will not support those who support a corrupt executive branch. Or vice versa. Let them know what 'trips your trigger', and why. Join the crowd outside the ranch in Crawford. But not just to add one more voice to one camp or the other. Listen to what people are saying and decide what it is that you want to say, then make sure it gets said.



Third, shoe leather. We must become more active in the political process at the home level. We have to find people who will truly represent the people rather than the body politic, who are willing to compromise, but not roll over. And then we must propel these people to attain the highest offices.



Fourth, VOTE! We have to take the time to learn about the issues and candidates, and share our information, not empty rhetoric, with our friends and our opponents, remembering they're not really opponents, they're fellow citizens with opposing points of view. Then we all need to get out and vote! If we can find a candidate who represents the 50-something percent who didn't vote in the last election, that candidate can win.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#38 Consumer Comment

For Steph in IL. I am pro-Bush, and I fully support our troops around the world

AUTHOR: Patrick - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

Steph,



Tell me, just which psych ward did you escape from?



I don't think there is a single America citizen (outside of a few islamics in Seattle) who think that 9/11 was OK. I think someone needs to up your dosage.



Now, I am pro-Bush, and I fully support our troops around the world. I was active Air Force during Desert Storm. However, I would never say things like the venom you are spewing.



Please, seek the proper psychiatric help you so desperately need.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#37 Consumer Comment

the f head you are referring to...

AUTHOR: Krista - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

quote: "that f head knew ahead of time about the attacks and did nothing"



That f head...was Clinton. Not Bush. HE knew there were threats. HE knew what was coming. HE is the one that mulled over fact after fact of terror attacks in the USA and did NOTHING about it except talk out of his as-. Bush sr. started something that Clinton didn't finish. MAYBE if Clinton had concentrated on something other than getting head, 9/11 wouldn't have happened. Or maybe what a lot of you don't understand is that this is on the beginning of the rapture and it wouldn't matter who did what, we'd still be in this place! Here's an idea...take care of yourself and start worrying about if YOU are going to be one left behind or not. I honestly believe (call me a sap or niave if you want) that Bush has done everything he can and everything he is allowed to do. Has no one noticed how much he has aged since being in office. Do you think he sits up there smoking cigars, drinking a fine port and laughing while spewing gas everywhere thinking "OH this went EXACLTY like I planned...EXCELLENT"! I don't think so.



I would happily join the military and honestly started packing my bags after 9/11 but wouldn't be accepted because of physical disabilities (I had open heart surgery when I was 22). No need to play that "you go to war" card with me.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#36 Consumer Comment

most "liberals" are the most intolerant people I know

AUTHOR: Sherri - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Monday, August 29, 2005

JAMES, DON'T KNOW HOW TO BREAK THIS TO YOU...



But I did six years active duty and four reserve in the USAF as a flight nurse, including during Desert Storm and I am very proud of my military service. It also gave me the confidence and ability to become a Nurse Practitioner. Am I rich? Nope, but I do make a comfortable living and don't have to involuntarily donate all of my salary for "giveaway" programs.



You preach about peace and tolerance, and I hate to say this, but most "liberals" are the most intolerant people I know.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#35 Consumer Comment

Sherri- California- are you willing to go to Iraq?

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, August 28, 2005

Sherri,



you are either rich or have no conscience, as this is a false war against a sovereign nation that GWB had ties to. Michael Moore is a great man and he has the proof of Bush dealing with both Iraqis and the Bin Laddens. This goes way back to that idiot George Hebert Bush, DADDY!

Anyway back to you Sherri, you like the way we live today? you are foolish, do me a favor and go join military. You can experience this firsthand.



If you don't join, shut the hell up, as you have no reason to input here. I hate people who think Bush protected us during 9/11 as that f head knew ahead of time about the attacks and did nothing. I look forward to disputing your new arguments.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#34 Consumer Comment

WHINE, WHINE, GET OVER IT!

AUTHOR: Sherri - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, August 28, 2005

Bush won the election because the MAJORITY (keyword here) of registered voters re-elected him. As stated before, many middle-of-the-road Democrats were afraid of John Kerry. Truth of the matter is, the Democratic Party could not have possibly picked a weaker candidate. What turned me to vote Republican in the last election? The fact that I think Bush did a fabulous job after 9-11, the fact that I am better off economically than I was when Clinton was in office (and I liked the man in general), and the fact that the Democrats veered off from being a party of the people to a party of "anyone but Bush", and has ventured a bit too far to the left for my comfort.



Whatever happened to all of the people who whined, "Bush is NOT my President...I'm going to Canada"? Still here? Like it or not, George W. Bush IS your President. Want to get the Democrats back in power? Then go back to moderate politics that everyone can live with, not the "in your face" mode they seemingly have converted to.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#33 Author of original report

To all you dumb idiots that support dumb Bush. Watch the CNN feature on this liar called DEAD WRONG!

AUTHOR: Ted - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

First there was the Michael Moore feature, and you Bush supporters did not like what he did.



OK, now look at what CNN did. Not sure how long this feature will be running.

It's called Dead Wrong I think they are referring to ole' GW



Why is it, when you talk to a Bush supporter, no matter what he or his administration does, or how dumb he comes across, you Bush supporters cannot admit the obvious.



Bush should be impeached, and the Vice President and their full staff should be booted out of Washington.



The Republicans went after Clinton for getting a little under the desk, that was none of anyone business.



Bull-shitting Americans causing innocent Americans to dye, Bush should be thrown in jail..



Watch the CNN Report, you will see. Well, Bush supporters will not see, they need to take their ear plugs out and stick them where the sun don't shine and then come forward on this website and admit you were wrong to support this liar.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#32 Consumer Comment

How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

His lips are moving, fools!



Has America learned her lesson yet?



Do not elect the sons or daughters of former Presidents when there is a matter of "Daddy's" honor at stake, when there is "unfinished business". Don't elect them at all. We are a Republic, not under a "Divine Right of Kings" mandate.



Do not elect the wives or husbands of former Presidents, either, because there are dues to be paid and old scores to be settled. People will die.



And if you believe that China is suddenly "dying for and demanding oil at a triple rate driving up your fuel prices", I have a nice ocean front property in Arizona that I will sell to you "dirt cheap".



Wake up, America. W's entire second term has been nothing but paying off promises to his big contributors and the enriching of his own portfolio.



Roland Arnall is a crook from hell, not an ambassador, but off to the Netherlands he goes to spread his corruption overseas. W will retire the richest ex-president in US history because "China demands fuel", he he. And the new bankruptcy laws, well, those are for his buddies in high finance.



Good people have been sacrificed, friend and foe alike, over "Iraq-gate". Three-inch aluminum tubes do not a nuclear program make...unless you are W. Then it all points to nukes because you want it to.



Wake up and smell the coffee, people. You have been pre-packaged and sold out to big business. Our kids are dying in a war built on false pretenses to clean up the record of a former President.



The only thing W needs is a good impeachment. Either the guy is so burnt out from years of substance abuse or he is truly in league with the architect of Armageddon, Karl Rove, that he does not know what he is doing and is kissing the devil's fanny daily. Either way, America does not need these kinds of "leaders".



Impeach G.W. Bush and expose his lies for the history books. Show him as the example of the kind of "leader" America regrets ever having. Expose him for the liar he is and curse him, not the poor guy running the service station, for your price at the pump!



G.W. Bush has done more to harm the United States than all preceding Presidents combined. This nation is now scorned by many countries.



The sad thing is that I cannot blame them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#31 Consumer Comment

How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

His lips are moving, fools!



Has America learned her lesson yet?



Do not elect the sons or daughters of former Presidents when there is a matter of "Daddy's" honor at stake, when there is "unfinished business". Don't elect them at all. We are a Republic, not under a "Divine Right of Kings" mandate.



Do not elect the wives or husbands of former Presidents, either, because there are dues to be paid and old scores to be settled. People will die.



And if you believe that China is suddenly "dying for and demanding oil at a triple rate driving up your fuel prices", I have a nice ocean front property in Arizona that I will sell to you "dirt cheap".



Wake up, America. W's entire second term has been nothing but paying off promises to his big contributors and the enriching of his own portfolio.



Roland Arnall is a crook from hell, not an ambassador, but off to the Netherlands he goes to spread his corruption overseas. W will retire the richest ex-president in US history because "China demands fuel", he he. And the new bankruptcy laws, well, those are for his buddies in high finance.



Good people have been sacrificed, friend and foe alike, over "Iraq-gate". Three-inch aluminum tubes do not a nuclear program make...unless you are W. Then it all points to nukes because you want it to.



Wake up and smell the coffee, people. You have been pre-packaged and sold out to big business. Our kids are dying in a war built on false pretenses to clean up the record of a former President.



The only thing W needs is a good impeachment. Either the guy is so burnt out from years of substance abuse or he is truly in league with the architect of Armageddon, Karl Rove, that he does not know what he is doing and is kissing the devil's fanny daily. Either way, America does not need these kinds of "leaders".



Impeach G.W. Bush and expose his lies for the history books. Show him as the example of the kind of "leader" America regrets ever having. Expose him for the liar he is and curse him, not the poor guy running the service station, for your price at the pump!



G.W. Bush has done more to harm the United States than all preceding Presidents combined. This nation is now scorned by many countries.



The sad thing is that I cannot blame them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#30 Consumer Comment

How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying?

AUTHOR: Robert - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

His lips are moving, fools!



Has America learned her lesson yet?



Do not elect the sons or daughters of former Presidents when there is a matter of "Daddy's" honor at stake, when there is "unfinished business". Don't elect them at all. We are a Republic, not under a "Divine Right of Kings" mandate.



Do not elect the wives or husbands of former Presidents, either, because there are dues to be paid and old scores to be settled. People will die.



And if you believe that China is suddenly "dying for and demanding oil at a triple rate driving up your fuel prices", I have a nice ocean front property in Arizona that I will sell to you "dirt cheap".



Wake up, America. W's entire second term has been nothing but paying off promises to his big contributors and the enriching of his own portfolio.



Roland Arnall is a crook from hell, not an ambassador, but off to the Netherlands he goes to spread his corruption overseas. W will retire the richest ex-president in US history because "China demands fuel", he he. And the new bankruptcy laws, well, those are for his buddies in high finance.



Good people have been sacrificed, friend and foe alike, over "Iraq-gate". Three-inch aluminum tubes do not a nuclear program make...unless you are W. Then it all points to nukes because you want it to.



Wake up and smell the coffee, people. You have been pre-packaged and sold out to big business. Our kids are dying in a war built on false pretenses to clean up the record of a former President.



The only thing W needs is a good impeachment. Either the guy is so burnt out from years of substance abuse or he is truly in league with the architect of Armageddon, Karl Rove, that he does not know what he is doing and is kissing the devil's fanny daily. Either way, America does not need these kinds of "leaders".



Impeach G.W. Bush and expose his lies for the history books. Show him as the example of the kind of "leader" America regrets ever having. Expose him for the liar he is and curse him, not the poor guy running the service station, for your price at the pump!



G.W. Bush has done more to harm the United States than all preceding Presidents combined. This nation is now scorned by many countries.



The sad thing is that I cannot blame them.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#29 Consumer Comment

We are a Capitalist Society

AUTHOR: Sandra - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

All of you who hit out in anger against each other and against your different parties (am pro Bush and support our soldiers wholeheartedly) need to understand that the only results that will come of your actions is to fuel the hatred that the enemy of freedom has against us. With each news piece covering the hatred of our president by our own citizens, the enemy grows stronger. You all must remember that we are not a communist or socialist society and those who hate our president and hate our military are attempting to convert our very life style to that of a communist and socialist society. Dig deep and you will find communist party members behind each and every anti-Bush anti-war agenda. I have been to several ralllies and stood silently and prayed silently all the while having the opponent spit and spew forth verbal filth. The opponents chanted no blood for oil - yet when they drove away, they drove away in vehicles other than those made here in America. One "peace" loving sole even said to her friend as she was walking away, "We should have brought our f _ _ _ you signs." At these same protests I saw many homeless and downtrodden being used by the hate filled communists. They were given just enough to sate their craving for alcohol. Those who hate our President use the weak and defenseless. I would not sit back and watch someone being abused and simply do nothing. Our President has chosen to defend the defenseless. Have you bothered to view the mass graves that our dear soldiers have uncovered in Iraq? Mass graves that held thousands of innocent men, women and children - mothers clutching their babies and their bodies riddled with bullets. My baby, my son whom I love with all my heart, he is my angel, yet he has chosen this time to enlist and join the fight against evil. My heart aches for those who have died, my heart aches for those who have lost loved ones, my heart aches for those innocent Iraqis slaughtered by their own government. But above all this heartache, I realize that evil must be confronted and it must be stopped. Only good can stop evil. George Bush is not evil. Saddam Hussein is truly an evil man. Those who continue his terrorism upon their own citizens are truly evil. The good must no longer be silent. We must and will continue to stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. My family and I will pray for our men and women in uniform, we will pray for our dear President and his family, we will pray for our elected leaders that they may understand that a nation divided will not stand. We will pray for all those of you who live with so much hate in your heart that your hearts may be cleansed from all evil. Surely God's heart must be breaking.

God protect our President & our soldiers.

Love,

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#28 Consumer Suggestion

Remember

AUTHOR: Steph - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

As every liberal democrat who has responded proves:



Liberals support Bin Laden and Saddam.



Conservatives support Bush.



Have a question for you liberal hate filled dancing in the streets when a soldier dies Bin Laden loving pieces of dog trash -



Who do you love the most?



Hitler



Saddam



Bin Laden



Don't deny you love all 3.



And stop calling these protests anti-war. They are PRO GENOCIDE AND TERRORISM.



And does anyone notice the moron who only stopped beating his wife and kids to post this used the President's address as Washington Ave?



What a complete and total moron. Everyone knows the White House is on Pennsylvania Ave. and 99 percent of us know it's 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.



Remember everyone liberals think 9/11 was okay. They think Saddam is wonderful. They believe child molestation as their support of the ACLU proves is okay.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#27 Consumer Comment

Can any Liberals speak civillaly?

AUTHOR: John - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Saturday, August 27, 2005

Let's get a few facts straight:



Quote in LA Times:



Iraq is a danger to the US. They have the means to launch a nuclear attack on the US at a moments notice. We must use force to remove Sadaam from power to make Americans Safe.



I bet you liberals believe that this quote was from a Republican:



WRONG



This is from tha man you wanted in the white house John Kerry. So, you all vbote for John Kerry even though he "LIED" to you according to your own quotes above.



All you democrats instead of spewing hatred why don't tou come up with solutions. Every quote in the press from the democratic leaders are spewing hatred and are saying they will do everything they can from our president to get things done. The president has even pleaded with them to come up on solutions. The only comment you get from them on social securityy is Bush's plan is evil and we will not allow any american to decide what to do with even a portion of their own money.



Let's make sure you all are in line when a democrat gets elected and we will have to join the islam relifion because they hate any christioan principle and any one with free thinking. The democrats are telling us what we should do.



If Al Gore had been president when 9/11 happened we would still be "DEBATING" on whether or not to do anything.



You democrats say we shouldn't do anything because France and Germany were "illegally" dealing with Iraq when the UN sanctions were in force.



Is there a democrat out there who thinks before they speak.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#26 Consumer Suggestion

Funny....I thought.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

An above quote....



"Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already?"



Funny, I remember that day well. I also remember a person by the name of Osama Bin Laden took credit and still takes credit for it.



I also remember that he was in Afganistan.....not Iraq.



I also remember that the general attitude was we went to Iraq for WMD. Which, none have been found.



So...about this "war against the terrorists" you speak of.....where is it again? Because it certainly isnt Iraq. And since we have put Afganistan on the back burner, and thats where Bin Laden is, we are obviously not fighting the terrorists anymore.



1800+ lives is hardly worth boosting the stock value or yearly CEO bonus for Halliburton, Exxon, Shell, Standard Oil, and every other d**n defense contractor or big corporation.



And if your worried that the economy will tank if we dont "feed" these greedy corporations then you should seriously think about your own morality. Your just trying to justify war as a means to prop up an economy....and thus make money. Thats just plain evil. Find an honest job. Find an honest life!



Bush took the war to the terrorists alright, didnt find them, gave up and went on an oil drilling expedition using 1800+ American lives to boost the coffers of his cronies in the oil and defense industry. And if you dont believe it, and you think that the outragous gas prices are a result of the times, then explain to me in October when the oil giants post record PROFITS for the end of the year.



An extra $10 on a $50 barrel of oil is a far cry percentage wise from the extra 80 cents on a $2 gallon of gas. Do the math. Someone is getting screwed, and it isnt the oil industry. Its you and me.



But I guess its all good. We can use that wonderful $300 tax refund we got just before 9/11. You know? That refund Bush ram-rod through Congress when he took office? The one that hosed the largest surplus this country had ever seen?



Oh wait, I forgot, I spent that on the outragous electricity costs here in CA when that wonderful company Enron gouged us. You know, that company that supported Bush in 00'? The one that d**k Cheney supported, and had back door "energy" meetings with? The meetings he refuses to let us see the records of? The one that caused the 2nd largest bankruptcy in the history of this country?



""I don't spend a lot of time thinking about why I do things."" ----George W. Bush June 4, 2003



Yup...he will be remembered alright!



I'm now interested in learning how I can forget him. Forgiving him is out of the question.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#25 Consumer Suggestion

Funny....I thought.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

An above quote....



"Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already?"



Funny, I remember that day well. I also remember a person by the name of Osama Bin Laden took credit and still takes credit for it.



I also remember that he was in Afganistan.....not Iraq.



I also remember that the general attitude was we went to Iraq for WMD. Which, none have been found.



So...about this "war against the terrorists" you speak of.....where is it again? Because it certainly isnt Iraq. And since we have put Afganistan on the back burner, and thats where Bin Laden is, we are obviously not fighting the terrorists anymore.



1800+ lives is hardly worth boosting the stock value or yearly CEO bonus for Halliburton, Exxon, Shell, Standard Oil, and every other d**n defense contractor or big corporation.



And if your worried that the economy will tank if we dont "feed" these greedy corporations then you should seriously think about your own morality. Your just trying to justify war as a means to prop up an economy....and thus make money. Thats just plain evil. Find an honest job. Find an honest life!



Bush took the war to the terrorists alright, didnt find them, gave up and went on an oil drilling expedition using 1800+ American lives to boost the coffers of his cronies in the oil and defense industry. And if you dont believe it, and you think that the outragous gas prices are a result of the times, then explain to me in October when the oil giants post record PROFITS for the end of the year.



An extra $10 on a $50 barrel of oil is a far cry percentage wise from the extra 80 cents on a $2 gallon of gas. Do the math. Someone is getting screwed, and it isnt the oil industry. Its you and me.



But I guess its all good. We can use that wonderful $300 tax refund we got just before 9/11. You know? That refund Bush ram-rod through Congress when he took office? The one that hosed the largest surplus this country had ever seen?



Oh wait, I forgot, I spent that on the outragous electricity costs here in CA when that wonderful company Enron gouged us. You know, that company that supported Bush in 00'? The one that d**k Cheney supported, and had back door "energy" meetings with? The meetings he refuses to let us see the records of? The one that caused the 2nd largest bankruptcy in the history of this country?



""I don't spend a lot of time thinking about why I do things."" ----George W. Bush June 4, 2003



Yup...he will be remembered alright!



I'm now interested in learning how I can forget him. Forgiving him is out of the question.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#24 Consumer Suggestion

Funny....I thought.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

An above quote....



"Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already?"



Funny, I remember that day well. I also remember a person by the name of Osama Bin Laden took credit and still takes credit for it.



I also remember that he was in Afganistan.....not Iraq.



I also remember that the general attitude was we went to Iraq for WMD. Which, none have been found.



So...about this "war against the terrorists" you speak of.....where is it again? Because it certainly isnt Iraq. And since we have put Afganistan on the back burner, and thats where Bin Laden is, we are obviously not fighting the terrorists anymore.



1800+ lives is hardly worth boosting the stock value or yearly CEO bonus for Halliburton, Exxon, Shell, Standard Oil, and every other d**n defense contractor or big corporation.



And if your worried that the economy will tank if we dont "feed" these greedy corporations then you should seriously think about your own morality. Your just trying to justify war as a means to prop up an economy....and thus make money. Thats just plain evil. Find an honest job. Find an honest life!



Bush took the war to the terrorists alright, didnt find them, gave up and went on an oil drilling expedition using 1800+ American lives to boost the coffers of his cronies in the oil and defense industry. And if you dont believe it, and you think that the outragous gas prices are a result of the times, then explain to me in October when the oil giants post record PROFITS for the end of the year.



An extra $10 on a $50 barrel of oil is a far cry percentage wise from the extra 80 cents on a $2 gallon of gas. Do the math. Someone is getting screwed, and it isnt the oil industry. Its you and me.



But I guess its all good. We can use that wonderful $300 tax refund we got just before 9/11. You know? That refund Bush ram-rod through Congress when he took office? The one that hosed the largest surplus this country had ever seen?



Oh wait, I forgot, I spent that on the outragous electricity costs here in CA when that wonderful company Enron gouged us. You know, that company that supported Bush in 00'? The one that d**k Cheney supported, and had back door "energy" meetings with? The meetings he refuses to let us see the records of? The one that caused the 2nd largest bankruptcy in the history of this country?



""I don't spend a lot of time thinking about why I do things."" ----George W. Bush June 4, 2003



Yup...he will be remembered alright!



I'm now interested in learning how I can forget him. Forgiving him is out of the question.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#23 Consumer Suggestion

Funny....I thought.......

AUTHOR: Ben - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

An above quote....



"Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already?"



Funny, I remember that day well. I also remember a person by the name of Osama Bin Laden took credit and still takes credit for it.



I also remember that he was in Afganistan.....not Iraq.



I also remember that the general attitude was we went to Iraq for WMD. Which, none have been found.



So...about this "war against the terrorists" you speak of.....where is it again? Because it certainly isnt Iraq. And since we have put Afganistan on the back burner, and thats where Bin Laden is, we are obviously not fighting the terrorists anymore.



1800+ lives is hardly worth boosting the stock value or yearly CEO bonus for Halliburton, Exxon, Shell, Standard Oil, and every other d**n defense contractor or big corporation.



And if your worried that the economy will tank if we dont "feed" these greedy corporations then you should seriously think about your own morality. Your just trying to justify war as a means to prop up an economy....and thus make money. Thats just plain evil. Find an honest job. Find an honest life!



Bush took the war to the terrorists alright, didnt find them, gave up and went on an oil drilling expedition using 1800+ American lives to boost the coffers of his cronies in the oil and defense industry. And if you dont believe it, and you think that the outragous gas prices are a result of the times, then explain to me in October when the oil giants post record PROFITS for the end of the year.



An extra $10 on a $50 barrel of oil is a far cry percentage wise from the extra 80 cents on a $2 gallon of gas. Do the math. Someone is getting screwed, and it isnt the oil industry. Its you and me.



But I guess its all good. We can use that wonderful $300 tax refund we got just before 9/11. You know? That refund Bush ram-rod through Congress when he took office? The one that hosed the largest surplus this country had ever seen?



Oh wait, I forgot, I spent that on the outragous electricity costs here in CA when that wonderful company Enron gouged us. You know, that company that supported Bush in 00'? The one that d**k Cheney supported, and had back door "energy" meetings with? The meetings he refuses to let us see the records of? The one that caused the 2nd largest bankruptcy in the history of this country?



""I don't spend a lot of time thinking about why I do things."" ----George W. Bush June 4, 2003



Yup...he will be remembered alright!



I'm now interested in learning how I can forget him. Forgiving him is out of the question.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#22 Consumer Comment

fair enough

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Ok, I am a dumbass. What else is new? As far as winning an argument goes I could really care less. I am just trying to have an open exchange of dialogue in an adult manner. That's all. Besides, one can tell when one side is losing the argument; they resort to screaming and name calling instead of trying to reinforce their point.

All I am saying is that your arguements are a little off. (That's a nice way of saying WRONG). He is your president like it or not. You live in the U.S so Bush is your president. It's like saying the world is round. Everybody knows it. In three years we will have a new president so just settle down. I didn't much care for Clinton but I'm still alive.

Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already? The twin towers didn't fall down by themselves.

Clinton will be remembered for being a pedophile, draft dodging pot smoker who got head in the oval office from some intern pig.

Yup, I can see how Clinton would appeal to you.

Look, you don't like Bush, fine. Don't like him. But he is not a rip off. It is rediculous to say so and it shows your ignorance. And I feel sorry for you for that.

Besides, what you gonna do, ask for a refund? In-store credit?



Have a good weekend ! :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#21 Consumer Comment

fair enough

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Ok, I am a dumbass. What else is new? As far as winning an argument goes I could really care less. I am just trying to have an open exchange of dialogue in an adult manner. That's all. Besides, one can tell when one side is losing the argument; they resort to screaming and name calling instead of trying to reinforce their point.

All I am saying is that your arguements are a little off. (That's a nice way of saying WRONG). He is your president like it or not. You live in the U.S so Bush is your president. It's like saying the world is round. Everybody knows it. In three years we will have a new president so just settle down. I didn't much care for Clinton but I'm still alive.

Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already? The twin towers didn't fall down by themselves.

Clinton will be remembered for being a pedophile, draft dodging pot smoker who got head in the oval office from some intern pig.

Yup, I can see how Clinton would appeal to you.

Look, you don't like Bush, fine. Don't like him. But he is not a rip off. It is rediculous to say so and it shows your ignorance. And I feel sorry for you for that.

Besides, what you gonna do, ask for a refund? In-store credit?



Have a good weekend ! :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#20 Consumer Comment

fair enough

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Ok, I am a dumbass. What else is new? As far as winning an argument goes I could really care less. I am just trying to have an open exchange of dialogue in an adult manner. That's all. Besides, one can tell when one side is losing the argument; they resort to screaming and name calling instead of trying to reinforce their point.

All I am saying is that your arguements are a little off. (That's a nice way of saying WRONG). He is your president like it or not. You live in the U.S so Bush is your president. It's like saying the world is round. Everybody knows it. In three years we will have a new president so just settle down. I didn't much care for Clinton but I'm still alive.

Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already? The twin towers didn't fall down by themselves.

Clinton will be remembered for being a pedophile, draft dodging pot smoker who got head in the oval office from some intern pig.

Yup, I can see how Clinton would appeal to you.

Look, you don't like Bush, fine. Don't like him. But he is not a rip off. It is rediculous to say so and it shows your ignorance. And I feel sorry for you for that.

Besides, what you gonna do, ask for a refund? In-store credit?



Have a good weekend ! :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#19 Consumer Comment

fair enough

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Ok, I am a dumbass. What else is new? As far as winning an argument goes I could really care less. I am just trying to have an open exchange of dialogue in an adult manner. That's all. Besides, one can tell when one side is losing the argument; they resort to screaming and name calling instead of trying to reinforce their point.

All I am saying is that your arguements are a little off. (That's a nice way of saying WRONG). He is your president like it or not. You live in the U.S so Bush is your president. It's like saying the world is round. Everybody knows it. In three years we will have a new president so just settle down. I didn't much care for Clinton but I'm still alive.

Bush will be remembered for defending this country and taking the war to the terrorists after 9/11. Or has 3000 innocent American deaths escaped your memory already? The twin towers didn't fall down by themselves.

Clinton will be remembered for being a pedophile, draft dodging pot smoker who got head in the oval office from some intern pig.

Yup, I can see how Clinton would appeal to you.

Look, you don't like Bush, fine. Don't like him. But he is not a rip off. It is rediculous to say so and it shows your ignorance. And I feel sorry for you for that.

Besides, what you gonna do, ask for a refund? In-store credit?



Have a good weekend ! :)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#18 Consumer Comment

Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Listen you dumb a*s,



When Clinton was in office for 8 years the poor got a fair break and the USA had a huge surplus and when Bush pecker got in he lowered that to a huge deficit within 6 months. Clinton did not go to war. Bush did. whose the best president? Obviously Bill Clinton. Who put the cap on welfare bums? Bill Clinton did!! You will not win this argument. Oh why were the republican assholes so eager to impeach Prez Clinton? Because he was a good president and they had no chance to assassinate him. He doesn't ride around in an open limousine like JFK.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#17 Consumer Comment

Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Listen you dumb a*s,



When Clinton was in office for 8 years the poor got a fair break and the USA had a huge surplus and when Bush pecker got in he lowered that to a huge deficit within 6 months. Clinton did not go to war. Bush did. whose the best president? Obviously Bill Clinton. Who put the cap on welfare bums? Bill Clinton did!! You will not win this argument. Oh why were the republican assholes so eager to impeach Prez Clinton? Because he was a good president and they had no chance to assassinate him. He doesn't ride around in an open limousine like JFK.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#16 Consumer Comment

Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Listen you dumb a*s,



When Clinton was in office for 8 years the poor got a fair break and the USA had a huge surplus and when Bush pecker got in he lowered that to a huge deficit within 6 months. Clinton did not go to war. Bush did. whose the best president? Obviously Bill Clinton. Who put the cap on welfare bums? Bill Clinton did!! You will not win this argument. Oh why were the republican assholes so eager to impeach Prez Clinton? Because he was a good president and they had no chance to assassinate him. He doesn't ride around in an open limousine like JFK.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#15 Consumer Comment

Michael, from Utah, When Clinton was prez life was better.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, August 26, 2005

Listen you dumb a*s,



When Clinton was in office for 8 years the poor got a fair break and the USA had a huge surplus and when Bush pecker got in he lowered that to a huge deficit within 6 months. Clinton did not go to war. Bush did. whose the best president? Obviously Bill Clinton. Who put the cap on welfare bums? Bill Clinton did!! You will not win this argument. Oh why were the republican assholes so eager to impeach Prez Clinton? Because he was a good president and they had no chance to assassinate him. He doesn't ride around in an open limousine like JFK.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#14 Consumer Comment

you have the nerve to call Republicans stupid

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 25, 2005

Rebecca and James, So you are saying that you would have wanted to have Al Gore in the White House when September 11th happend? And John, you have the nerve to call Republicans stupid when you live in the town with the shallowest gene pool in the world. I look forward to your responses.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#13 Consumer Comment

not your president?

AUTHOR: Krista - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 25, 2005

I hear there are real cheap one way tickets to France. I'll pay to have your stuff shipped to you. You may not have voted for him but he IS your president. As I heard someone say before, you may not respect the man but you should respect the possition. I actually would like to have a time machine and go back to before 9/11 and put one of the people that I have heard complaining about everything into office totally wiped of any memory of what is about to come and see how they react and act as president. Get over it and move on!



*a VERY conservative republican who stands by Bush every step of the way*

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#12 Consumer Comment

getting out of hand

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 25, 2005

The Feds have been screwing over the tax payers for a lot longer than Bush Junior or Senior have been around. If memory serves me right, Clinton signed the biggest tax increase in history.

But onto Iraq. I feel that if you hate this country so much and Iraq is just being picked on, then you should move to Iraq to help those poor people out. It's only fair. They are a struggling country trying to decide on what is best for them. We did it when we booted the British out.

So yeah, move to Iraq. I will even pay for the one way ticket. It isn't brave to exercise your protected rights. Go to another country where you don't have these rights and bad mouth that country's leader. You will either be hauled off to prison or shot. Maybe both.

The American military has given you the right to say what you want without fear or retribution. No one is asking you to be greatful but at least appreciate their sacrafices for you.

President Bush is not perfect. He is a man like you and me. Well, at least me anyway. He is prone to mistakes just like anyone else. Have you had a perfect life? Never ran a light? Never sped? Never late for work? I don't think so.

Clinton had Somalia. Why aren't you saying anything about that?

So please do us all a favor and quit watching the network news. They are slanting your view of what is really going on over there in Iraq.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 Consumer Comment

getting out of hand

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 25, 2005

The Feds have been screwing over the tax payers for a lot longer than Bush Junior or Senior have been around. If memory serves me right, Clinton signed the biggest tax increase in history.

But onto Iraq. I feel that if you hate this country so much and Iraq is just being picked on, then you should move to Iraq to help those poor people out. It's only fair. They are a struggling country trying to decide on what is best for them. We did it when we booted the British out.

So yeah, move to Iraq. I will even pay for the one way ticket. It isn't brave to exercise your protected rights. Go to another country where you don't have these rights and bad mouth that country's leader. You will either be hauled off to prison or shot. Maybe both.

The American military has given you the right to say what you want without fear or retribution. No one is asking you to be greatful but at least appreciate their sacrafices for you.

President Bush is not perfect. He is a man like you and me. Well, at least me anyway. He is prone to mistakes just like anyone else. Have you had a perfect life? Never ran a light? Never sped? Never late for work? I don't think so.

Clinton had Somalia. Why aren't you saying anything about that?

So please do us all a favor and quit watching the network news. They are slanting your view of what is really going on over there in Iraq.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Consumer Comment

getting out of hand

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, August 25, 2005

The Feds have been screwing over the tax payers for a lot longer than Bush Junior or Senior have been around. If memory serves me right, Clinton signed the biggest tax increase in history.

But onto Iraq. I feel that if you hate this country so much and Iraq is just being picked on, then you should move to Iraq to help those poor people out. It's only fair. They are a struggling country trying to decide on what is best for them. We did it when we booted the British out.

So yeah, move to Iraq. I will even pay for the one way ticket. It isn't brave to exercise your protected rights. Go to another country where you don't have these rights and bad mouth that country's leader. You will either be hauled off to prison or shot. Maybe both.

The American military has given you the right to say what you want without fear or retribution. No one is asking you to be greatful but at least appreciate their sacrafices for you.

President Bush is not perfect. He is a man like you and me. Well, at least me anyway. He is prone to mistakes just like anyone else. Have you had a perfect life? Never ran a light? Never sped? Never late for work? I don't think so.

Clinton had Somalia. Why aren't you saying anything about that?

So please do us all a favor and quit watching the network news. They are slanting your view of what is really going on over there in Iraq.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Suggestion

I can't believe how stupid some of you people are.

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Geeze,



There are sure some dumnb Republicans around this country. Oh, my mistake, maybe they prefer getting rich over the loss of life. People either have to be blind, stupid, or part of the profit market. Bush(not my president) and d**k (head)Cheney are oil executives and Cheney has interest in Halliburton, gee, guess where Halliburton is?? I will tell you in Iraq making millions on supposed clean-up! you people need to wake up before your sons or daughters die needlessly. Here is an idea- Why doesn't Bush send his daughters into the field of war???

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

REBECCA, OBVIOUSLY NO ONE IS "HOLDING BACK"

AUTHOR: Sherri - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

You are aware that there were anti-war protests throughout the country and some of them still continue (though on a minor scale and less destructively)? You are aware that in a dictatorship, one would not be allowed to express any opposition to the leader's policies without potential of great bodily harm or imprisonment?



I have traditionally been a very "middle-of-the-road" Democrat, considered liberal on some issues, moderate-to-conservative on others. But I could not bring myself to vote for Kerry in any way, shape or form. I'm not a Bush fan, but feel that he is a much stronger leader than Kerry could ever hope to be and I am personally much better off than I was when Clinton was in office.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Consumer Comment

Steal the election?

AUTHOR: D - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

PRESIDENT George Bush DID NOT steal the election, WE in Florida GAVE it to him. HOW? Those idiots in Palm Beach don't know how to read OR ask questions and ended up voting for THE BETTER MAN. GOD BLESS GEORGE BUSH and THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

I totally agree!

AUTHOR: Rebecca - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

I would have to agree with you 100 percent. Bush totally cheated the first election. Anyone who watched the election closely would have to agree, how could they not? One minute the state of Flordia, where his brother just happens to be the governor, wasn't for him then 10 minutes later they gave Flordia to him and came up with some excuse about votes were miscounted. Get real! He should have never stepped foot in office. It is pretty bad that Bush couldn't even keep a small business running, before he was elected, and yet he thought he could run the world! His family has too much control over him. If his father and brother weren't who they are Bush would not be where he is today. More power to you for having the courage to speak up! More people to need to voice their opinions about this without holding back.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Consumer Comment

Isn't it odd

AUTHOR: Kate - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Isn't it odd that the US in my parents and grandparents times have rescued people in third world countries, France, Germany and the 'World'? As in World War I and World War II? Isn't it funny that they paid the bills for these wars because evil was winning over the underdog? And we believed if we were the big kid on the block we'd ought to be able to save innocents from the bullies?

Isn't it odd that the US is the only country who has consistently had a military policy that prohibits and arrests soldiers if they try to take the 'spoils of war'?

Isn't it odd that the US media takes the bad behavior of a few soldiers and positions this to the whole world as though this is what America is? You and me? That we terrorize people?

Isn't it odd that people say we went to war over oil, yet we didn't take ANY? That the high price of gasoline is the worst thing to happen to the Republican party in 50 years? Isn't it odd to be accused of withholding the solution to a problem that in reality is sending you down in flames?

Isn't it odd that even when they're caught lying to American people time and time again, so many Americans still believe anything that comes in newsprint or out of Hollywood?

Isn't it odd that the only country who defended the weak, paid the tab for it is accused by it's own media of not doing any of it? And odder still that you will believe any fool thing anybody tells you.



Shame on ya'.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Consumer Comment

Blind Trust

AUTHOR: Cory - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

All of President Bush's holdings are held in a blind trust until he leaves office. When he leaves office, he will be the richest president in history. When the soldier asked the president about the high price of gas, a couple of months ago, he said something to the effect "I'm only the President, there's not much I can do". By his doing nothing, the price of oil/gas has skyrocketed. All his family, friends and associates are in the "oil" business. He doesn't have to do anything to keep getting richer. We're spending billions in Iraq each month and have lost many thousands of US lives and for what. Has anyone heard one word out of anyone in D.C. about the high prices of gas and oil. I remember the late 70's, early 80's when the whole country was up in arms. They lowered the speed limits to 55mph, they had a type of rationing, MWF/TThSat, government mandated fleet mileage regulations were enacted. Today not a single word. No talk of conservation, no nothing. If we can't look to our president for some type of leadership role, where can we look? Something's up. God bless our troops and those navy guys.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

You pathetic Moron

AUTHOR: David - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

This is a place to post complaints about companies. Please refrain from polluting this forum with your lame a*s pathetic oral diarreah you liberal hack. You sicken us with this subversive, hate mongering drivel. Take your stupid anti-American brain vomit and go play in traffic.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

If we just wanted the oil...

AUTHOR: Larry - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Wouldn't the easiest (and cheapest) way to get it have been to just get the U.N. to lift the sanctions? They were more than willing to. We could have avoided all this trouble.



The blood for oil argument is usually heard from people who couldn't point Iraq out on a map, let alone understand what's at stake.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 Consumer Comment

Your argument about oil is rediculous.

AUTHOR: Michael - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Wednesday, August 24, 2005




I respect you opinion about our president. Every president will have people who do not agree with their respective policies. But you have to respect the office if not the man that holds the office. Clinton was no saint.



Your argument about oil is rediculous. We get 30% of our oil from Saudi Arabia but we didn't invade Saudi, we invaded Iraq. A nation that had a brutal dictator. Hitler didn't do anything to us directly but we kicked his a*s too. The "blood-for-oil" is just plain B.S. If it were true then gas would be 10 cents a gallon.



Like I said, I respect your opinion. But President Bush is not a dictator. I have a lot of respect for someone who does what he feels is in best interest for us, the citizens of this great nation. He sent me to war and I have no regrets.



If he could run for a third term I would vote for him again.



But he is clearly not a rip-off. Besides, from what I have been reading about Tupper Lake, you guys need to clean your OWN house first.
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Featured Reports

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.