Gavin in Va Beach Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 They reportedly started before the current President's first term - but that be news to some folks. 271276[/snapback] Yeah but the UN was on top of it so there was nothing to worry about... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 They reportedly started before the current President's first term - but that be news to some folks. 271276[/snapback] WHAT? You mean to tell me that there were problems in the world when Democrats were in the White House? AmeriKKKa was always an imperialist power that channeled the Nazis on a daily basis? That's nuts; everyone knows this is all Bush and Rumsfeld's fault, along with everything that has ever gone wrong in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 They reportedly started before the current President's first term - but that be news to some folks. 271276[/snapback] I don't know what you are talking about. Before Bush took office we had eight years of "peace and prosperity". There were no global problems for the US until Bush came in and ruined everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 I think this list needs a smily to use when people AREN'T being sarcastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 WHAT? You mean to tell me that there were problems in the world when Democrats were in the White House? AmeriKKKa was always an imperialist power that channeled the Nazis on a daily basis? That's nuts; everyone knows this is all Bush and Rumsfeld's fault, along with everything that has ever gone wrong in the world. 271293[/snapback] Don't forget Haliburton!! They started receiving no-bid contracts when Cheney became Vice President. The no-bid contracts they received before Cheney was Vice President were just an illusion. It actually started when Cheney took office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 "Iraq is a long way from the U.S., 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." - Secretary of State Madeline Albright (February 18, 1998) "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 William Jefferson 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 William Jefferson Clinton (Feb. 17, 1998) "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton Administration National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 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, Secretary of State (Nov. 10, 1999) "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and 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." - Former Vice President 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." - Former Vice President 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 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 always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (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 "Without 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 "So Iraq has abused its final chance. " http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/199...ts/clinton.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 "Iraq is a long way from the U.S., 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." - Secretary of State Madeline Albright (February 18, 1998) "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 William Jefferson 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 William Jefferson Clinton (Feb. 17, 1998) "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton Administration National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 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, Secretary of State (Nov. 10, 1999) "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and 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." - Former Vice President 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." - Former Vice President 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 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 always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (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 "Without 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 271348[/snapback] Uhhhh...They were misquoted? Next, you are going to say that Iraq harbored terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PTS Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 ***PetrinoInAlbany*** ACLU = RJ YOUR POSTS = RJ YOU = RJ JOHN KERRY = RJ JK's QUOTE = RJ They are terrorists, who the hell cares about their rights. They do not fight under the rules of war so they don't get the benefits of the rules of war. Remember 9/11. Bush is the President, deal with it or move to Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 Uhhhh...They were misquoted? Next, you are going to say that Iraq harbored terrorists. 271362[/snapback] At least Clinton knew that our soldiers are basically the same as the Nazis, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 No, in this case it's about choosing what you stand for. Torturing & abusing civilians in the name of "liberating" them ... in the name of anything, really ... is wrong. Killing and war as the "first choice" is wrong. If that belief constitutes me wearing "blinders", then so be it. At least when God asks me on my day of judgement exactly where I stood, I will be able to say - as you have graciously pointed out - that I was consistent and unwavering. But thanks again for pointing it out ... 271185[/snapback] Civilians. uh-huh. Someone with a rocket launcher ceases to be a civilian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 "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 William Jefferson 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 William Jefferson Clinton (Feb. 17, 1998) 271348[/snapback] that depends on what your definition of is is "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Former Vice President Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 AlGore knows. They're hidden in his lockbox "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 So says Mr George, Ted's imaginary drinking buddy "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 Overheard at a West Virginia KKK rally? "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 Will that be before or after you vote against it? "Without 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 If you substitute George W Bush with Saddam Hussein, this sounds an awful like Kerry used the same speech writer during the 2004 campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted March 11, 2005 Share Posted March 11, 2005 From the reports obtailed by the ACLU using FOIL ... I like the way your opening phrase, posted in a 'public' meeting place, obliterates your whole Americans=Nazis now theoretical BS post. Unless I missed something about Nazi freedom of speech, a Nazi Civil Liberties Union, a Nazi Freedom of Information Act, and Nazi prosecution of Nazis for crimes committed against prisoners. Big fan of irony, are you? There's your irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 Responding to Petrino is like responding to a one year old. There is no way you can use thirty dollar words with him because, all he's got are ten cent answers. Don't waste your time gentleman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweet baboo Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 this is how to do it http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2715 Welcome to the Hitlernet! 4) AT SOME POINT IN TIME, CLAIM THE OTHER PERSON IS A NAZI. Every, and I repeat EVERY Internet argument should involve at least one comparison to either Hitler or the Nazis. This is one of the most basic requirements of an average Internet debate, and although ignorant outsiders may find it silly to compare a person arguing on the Internet with an individual responsible for the execution of millions, this action represents one of the most traditional pillars of every online debate. The earliest recorded instance of the infamous "Nazi clause" can be traced to Greg "suprsk8r" Henderson, who used Q-Link in July of 1986 to call Alex "Dr_Millions" Wilson "the Adolf Hitler of preseason NCAA fantasy league basketball" over People Connection. FLAME: uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no i dont think taht GI Joe could beat the Transformers in a battle cuz Optomus prime would like totally kill the sh-- out of duke and waht do u know about anything anyway u reteard INCORRECT RESPONSE: Dear Internet cur, I'll have you know that your churlish actions and replies reek of an insolent ignoramus! Why, upon reading your cretinous claim, I let out a mighty scoff and nearly choked upon my brandy! CORRECT RESPONSE: FUK U HITLER!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Consistency helps, indeed. But consistent or not, perhaps the greatest strength lies in the fact that I'm right. Case in point: I've read the responses, but narry one saying that these acts we are committing over there are just & moral. Maybe it's just a question of relevance. 271162[/snapback] Just and moral? Relative to what? Dragging bodies through the street, stringing them up by their necks and setting them on fire? Videotaping the beheading of a person who did nothing but spend 30 years of their life helping others? Hanging people from meat hooks? I'll say one thing for ya, Petrino. You are liberal to the core, dude. Right to the core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Consistency helps, indeed. But consistent or not, perhaps the greatest strength lies in the fact that I'm right. Case in point: I've read the responses, but narry one saying that these acts we are committing over there are just & moral. Maybe it's just a question of relevance. 271162[/snapback] There not, because we should have done a lot more sooner. If someone is supporting that terroist government or the current insurgents, they should have been shot on the spot, not sent to prison. I am also sure these "six witnesses" were probably Good Americans No they are probably insurgants and Saddam loyalists. Real good witnesses there. Just like here that SOB who killed the deputy, judge and court reporter is now going to spend 10 years going through court systems, appeals, etc... before he sees the chair if he even does then. This county will be spending millions to defend his ass. Sorry there are some cases where justice should be swift and severe. Those supporting Saddam, Al Qeada, Bin Laden, etc... have no defense and have no rights. What ever happens to those animals is not enough. If your so damned concerned about them, why don't you join the military as a prison guard and then you can go look out for their rights. Sit around sing kumbaya, hold hands with them and watch them slit your !@#$ing throat when they get a chance. They hate you as much as they hate every one else here. They are just using you and the liberal !@#$ing media to serve their purpose. They could care less if the Washington Post and NewYork times were nuked tomorrow. Oh and if you unwilling to put you ass on the line and join the military to "protect" these misguided peoples right, then STFU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Just like here that SOB who killed the deputy, judge and court reporter is now going to spend 10 years going through court systems, appeals, etc... before he sees the chair if he even does then. 272762[/snapback] No, no, NO! You got it all wrong man. The SOB ALLEGEDLY killed all those people. Don't you know how the game is played? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 No, no, NO! You got it all wrong man. The SOB ALLEGEDLY killed all those people. Don't you know how the game is played? 273089[/snapback] I'll be outraged if his civil rights are violated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted March 13, 2005 Share Posted March 13, 2005 Just and moral? Relative to what? Dragging bodies through the street, stringing them up by their necks and setting them on fire? Videotaping the beheading of a person who did nothing but spend 30 years of their life helping others? Hanging people from meat hooks? I'll say one thing for ya, Petrino. You are liberal to the core, dude. Right to the core. 272736[/snapback] So, what you are saying is that the US should take it's moral lead from a lynchmob in Fallujah? Besides, as the US itself has admitted, not everyone in it's custody is guilty of anything, which is why they release large numbers of them at regular intervals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts