ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Your mouth don't move but I can hear you speak!

Remembering the Tour - show by show marathon
Idaho Center, Boise, Idaho - 14th November 2006
© Idaho Statesman with thanks to Jeep!
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2007 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIT TORRENT HELP ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Michele Obama Appy Thread (NSC) Return to archive Page: 1 2 3 4
24th February 2008 04:38 PM
monkey_man
quote:
Riffhard wrote:



It's just that Media Matters only goes those media outlets that it perceives as being conservative. What's their take on the sham McCain vs NYT story? They don't have one! They would never take on the NYT against McCain.



Riffy



Actually Riffy, if you read Media Matters from time to time, you will see that they take on the NY Times regularly when the facts are misrepresented.
MM

Here is their take on the McCain NY Times article:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802220015?f=h_top
[Edited by monkey_man]
25th February 2008 01:51 AM
pdog
quote:
gimmekeef wrote:


Well lets put Obama in W's chair with the school kids minutes after the 9-11..W finally did get up.Obama would too but he'd need a newspaper to cover his wet pants.That do it for you?



Maybe Obama, like 99% of the Un-Retarded would've paid attention to the intel reports that Condi and others had... Hindsight is 20/20, but we have many events, that have shown how unprepared and unqualified Bush is... In my heart, have no doubt, that if McCain or Gore was at the helm instead of Bush, we might still might think of 911 as a phone number!
25th February 2008 08:58 AM
gimmekeef
quote:
pdog wrote:


Maybe Obama, like 99% of the Un-Retarded would've paid attention to the intel reports that Condi and others had... Hindsight is 20/20, but we have many events, that have shown how unprepared and unqualified Bush is... In my heart, have no doubt, that if McCain or Gore was at the helm instead of Bush, we might still might think of 911 as a phone number!



pdog....Im no W supporter in any way and wish your clock could go faster....I just think Obama is a snake oil salesman
25th February 2008 09:02 AM
sirmoonie
quote:
pdog wrote:


Maybe Obama, like 99% of the Un-Retarded would've paid attention to the intel reports that Condi and others had... Hindsight is 20/20, but we have many events, that have shown how unprepared and unqualified Bush is... In my heart, have no doubt, that if McCain or Gore was at the helm instead of Bush, we might still might think of 911 as a phone number!


Absolutely true. Only the most biased of Bush Geeks can deny. What's really fucked up is that George Walker Bush III is as weak on terror as he was pre-9/11.
25th February 2008 11:48 AM
Riffhard
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:

Absolutely true. Only the most biased of Bush Geeks can deny. What's really fucked up is that George Walker Bush III is as weak on terror as he was pre-9/11.



I know that you have an unhealthy hate filled attitude towards our president, but throwing out a pure bullshit line like this is beyond absurd. The facts just don't support this ridiculous biased claim. It's a bold faced lie is what it is!


And just who was president during the time that 19 terrorists were getting flight training? Who was president during the first bombing of the WTC in 1993? Who was president when in 1995 a bomb filled van blew up in Riyadh killing five US servicemen? Who was president when the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were blown to bits. Who was president when the Kobar Towers were blown to bits? Who was president when the USS Cole was attacked killing 17 US servicemen?

To date over 75% of known al Queda leadership is either in jail, or more than likely, dead. To date over 19,000 Islamic fucks have met their virgins in Iraq. The DOJ has confirmed that the enemy casualty rate is roughly 12 to 1.

Oh, and then there's this.

12,000-13,000 killed (Afghanistan Insurgency)[5]
2,592-2,792 killed (Waziristan Insurgency)[9]
15,947-21,776 killed (Iraqi insurgency)[23]
7,600-10,800 killed (Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi Army)[3]
625 killed (Philippines insurgency)[13]
119 killed (Saudi militants)[19]
250-600 killed (Hezbollah)[10]
17 killed (Amal)[10]
12 killed (LCP)[10]
2 killed (PFLP-GC)[10]
316 killed(2007-08 Hamas and other militiants allied to hamas)
over 8,500 killed (Somali ICU)[14]
226 killed (Fatah al-Islam)[11]
5 killed (Jund al-Sham) 7 killed (bomber cells)[11]
300+ killed (Algerian GSPC)[16]
19 killed (Moroccan militants)
7 killed (Egyptian militants)
4 killed (Turkish militants)
3 killed (Kenyan militants)
6 killed (Yemeni militants)[24]
5 killed (Spanish militants)

Total: From 54,114 to 58,864


How many Islamic fucks do ya think good ol' Bubba sent to reside with Allah? Nowhere near as many as Bush has. That I can fucking promise you!

If you're going to throw around baseless inaccurate information due to your unhinged view of Bush I will respond with indisputable facts.


Riffy

[Edited by Riffhard]
25th February 2008 01:29 PM
sirmoonie
quote:
Riffhard wrote:


I know that you have an unhealty hate filled attitude towards our president, but throwing out a pure bullshit line like this is beyond absurd. The facts just don't support this ridiculous biased claim. It's a bold faced lie is what it is!


And just who was president during the time that 19 terrorists were getting flight training? Who was president during the first bombing of the WTC in 1993? Who was president when in 1995 a bomb filled van blew up in Riyadh killing five US servicemen? Who was president when the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were blown to bits. Who was president when the Kobar Towers were blown to bits? Who was president when the USS Cole was attacked killing 17 US servicemen?

To date over 75% of known al Queda leadership is either in jail, or more than likely, dead. To date over 19,000 Islamic fucks have met their virgins in Iraq. The DOJ has confirmed that the enemy casualty rate is roughly 12 to 1.

Oh, and then there's this.

12,000-13,000 killed (Afghanistan Insurgency)[5]
2,592-2,792 killed (Waziristan Insurgency)[9]
15,947-21,776 killed (Iraqi insurgency)[23]
7,600-10,800 killed (Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi Army)[3]
625 killed (Philippines insurgency)[13]
119 killed (Saudi militants)[19]
250-600 killed (Hezbollah)[10]
17 killed (Amal)[10]
12 killed (LCP)[10]
2 killed (PFLP-GC)[10]
316 killed(2007-08 Hamas and other militiants allied to hamas)
over 8,500 killed (Somali ICU)[14]
226 killed (Fatah al-Islam)[11]
5 killed (Jund al-Sham) 7 killed (bomber cells)[11]
300+ killed (Algerian GSPC)[16]
19 killed (Moroccan militants)
7 killed (Egyptian militants)
4 killed (Turkish militants)
3 killed (Kenyan militants)
6 killed (Yemeni militants)[24]
5 killed (Spanish militants)

Total: From 54,114 to 58,864


How many Islamic fucks do ya think good ol' Bubba sent to reside with Allah? Nowhere near as many as Bush has. That I can fucking promise you!

If you're going to throw around baseless inaccurate information due to your unhinged view of Bush I will respond with indisputable facts.


Riffy
[Edited by Riffhard]


Why did you start talking about Clinton?

Or more correctly, its RO so you can transition to whatever the hell you want, but why would you think talking about Clinton, would have anything to do with the intel that PDog was clearly referring to, as was I? If you don't know what we both were referring to, let me know, and I'll post some links for you.

What "baseless, inaccurate information" did I throw around? What "bold faced lie" did I state?

Why did you say I have an "unhealthy, hate filled attitude towards our president" when I have never even suggested once that I hate him? I never even met the idiot. Between the two of us, I think you are the only one who hates a U.S. president.

What did any of your "indisputable facts" have to do with anything I said?

Just a thought: I know you have a bizarre love of everything George Walker Bush III tries to say he does, but simply saying "Bubba" everytime you want to try to defend him, looks weak. And unhinged.

Why do you keep calling him "Bubba" by the way? I never understood that term for him.
25th February 2008 02:03 PM
Fiji Joe I loved this guy in Johnny Quest






25th February 2008 02:09 PM
Riffhard
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:

What's really fucked up is that George Walker Bush III is as weak on terror as he was pre-9/11.



This line moonie. That is a flat out lie. While Bush has made some mistakes he certainly has given al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations all the fight that they can handle.


I brought up Bubba because so many seem to fawn over his great legacy . Plus some here seem to think that Condi Rice and Bush misread some intel that lead us into Iraq. That too is bullshit. The intel that they used was provided to them by the Clinton WH.


What's happening inside Iraq right now is incredible. Yet nobody seems to care about Iraq anymore for this very reason. I come from a military family. I have cousins that served in Iraq for multiple tours of duty. Any truth that I need concerning Iraq I get from them. I can tell you that as much as you and others love to slam Bush he is greatly respected by the troops, and the generals leading them. I'll take their words concerning how good of job Bush is doing over anyone on a fucking message board. They don't deal in biased hate filled rehtoric. They just tell it like it is. And the news out of Iraq is good from what they say. They have you and every other "Bush sucks" geek trumped ten thousand fold.


Riffy
25th February 2008 02:18 PM
Fiji Joe Hey Riff...check it out

25th February 2008 03:41 PM
Joey " What's happening inside Iraq right now is incredible. Yet nobody seems to care about Iraq anymore for this very reason. I come from a military family. I have cousins that served in Iraq for multiple tours of duty. Any truth that I need concerning Iraq I get ...... "




25th February 2008 04:46 PM
gypsy
quote:
Joey wrote:
" What's happening inside Iraq right now is incredible. Yet nobody seems to care about Iraq anymore for this very reason. I come from a military family. I have cousins that served in Iraq for multiple tours of duty. Any truth that I need concerning Iraq I get ...... "








I hear ya, little buddy.
25th February 2008 04:57 PM
Joey
quote:
gypsy wrote:


I hear ya, little buddy.




That's right my Princess ...................


This ain't no www.MaxLugar.com ( ...Three Hits a Day ----- Everyday )

J'Lo


25th February 2008 05:14 PM
Mikey
quote:
Riffhard wrote:


And just who was president during the time that 19 terrorists were getting flight training? Who was president during the first bombing of the WTC in 1993? Who was president when in 1995 a bomb filled van blew up in Riyadh killing five US servicemen? Who was president when the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were blown to bits. Who was president when the Kobar Towers were blown to bits? Who was president when the USS Cole was attacked killing 17 US servicemen?


[Edited by Riffhard]



C'mon man, while I agree that things (finally) seem to have settled down somewhat, let's not lick W's popsicle on Iraq, as we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Secondly, to argue that any sitting President is responsible for terrorist acts that directly or indirectly involve Americans abroad, especially in Islamic nations, is naive at best. So, God forbid, if al-Queda blew up a bomb in Iceland and 3 Americans were killed, we would be justified in blaming W? I'm no W fan, for sure, but I could not and would not make that argument. How can you blame Clinton for the Cole attack? What more could he have done to protect an armed, US warship.

I know what you're going to say - that of course a President can't be anywhere and everywhere to protect Americans abroad, but its his job to send the message that if such an act occurred, that those responsible will feel the wrath of the US. Is this something you don't believe happened under Clinton? If so, you might have a point (Somalia). But haven't recent reports surfaced that said that despite the carnage inflicted upon Islama-fascists during W's, "war on terror", that al-Queda is actually stronger today?

And yes, "Bubba" was in Office during the 93 WTC bombings....but we caught the guy in 95. Where's his credit and what's your point there? IMO, a guy like Yousef spending the next 40 years of his life in Supermax, in the US, is a fate far worse than death.
25th February 2008 05:48 PM
lotsajizz why I otherwise agree with your post, I think 'death' was an appropriate penalty
25th February 2008 06:12 PM
Joey
quote:
lotsajizz wrote:
why I otherwise agree with your post, I think 'death' was an appropriate penalty




Hi Jizzy ............


Guess what ?! ; I got ' Police Tickets '


www.thepolicetour.com


Jacky !




25th February 2008 06:19 PM
lotsajizz awesome...they were a blast! have fun!
25th February 2008 07:56 PM
pdog If we're going to talk about Clinton and A.Q., let's be clear on one thing. during his years, they were a very small, organized and highly financed group. They numbered in the hundreds. Now, let's look at how since Sept. 11th, and the failure to destroy them when we had them, and then invading another mid east country, has increased their numbers, and other islamic groups who oppose U.S. occupation in their lands. Remember, the only thing Bin Laden had against us, was our occupation Saudi Arabia. They don't hate our freedom. They could care less if we drink beer and watch porn or whaever. They hate us b/c when armies of Judeo-Christian countries are in their lands, it brings up some bad memories. Anyone who thinks it's more complex than that, is someone who doesn't understand something as simple as our econimic problem. We borrow from china and buy oil from the mid-east. Boom. Not too hard to figure that one out either....
25th February 2008 10:06 PM
sirmoonie
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
This line moonie. That is a flat out lie. While Bush has made some mistakes he certainly has given al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations all the fight that they can handle.

No lie. In relative terms, he's as limp-wristed as he was pre-9/11. He talks a lot though. Dates back to his cheerleader days. You may be caught up on that.

He pardons terrorists, he negotiates with terrorists in Iraq, he lets Iran laugh at him while they fund the very terrorists he bargains with, the 9/11 recs are long forgotten, airline security remains bogus, he tried to hire the United Arab Emirates to run the seaboard, bin Laden is running around Pakistan doing videos and George Walker Bush III says he doesn't care, he pets goats, he finds ways to suck.






quote:

I brought up Bubba because so many seem to fawn over his great legacy . Plus some here seem to think that Condi Rice and Bush misread some intel that lead us into Iraq. That too is bullshit. The intel that they used was provided to them by the Clinton WH.

The only person on this board that I can ever recall fawning over Clinton was JB/Josh, and as far as I can tell, he did a farewell a long time ago. The only remaining people who mention Clinton are the half dozen or so people who habitually mention a 7-years gone president when fawning over and trying to defend George Walker Bush III. That, of course, makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

Anyway, why do you call him "Bubba"?






quote:
What's happening inside Iraq right now is incredible. Yet nobody seems to care about Iraq anymore for this very reason.

What is happening that is incredible in this 5 year action? The civil war has been slowed, due to increased U.S. patrols. Assuming that qualifies as incredible, what else? I'm serious, explain it to me. Just so you know, the reason no one talks about it anymore is because George Walker Bush III never mentions it anymore. He's done with it, washed his hands, its the next guy's problem. And its difficult to express just how massive a problem it is.

What are the incredible happenings, and why would they matter even assuming you could actually list them? I actually agree with the George Walker Bush III on this one, Mission Accomplished years ago! Saddam is gone, WMDs searched for, we are done, and we won. The rest of this trillion dollar exercise in nation-building is some Utopian, Birkenstock-wearing, flower-throwing, tea and crumpets, 60's thought crime re-invented by Bush Geeks.

Like most things in life, you do a cost-benefit analysis. Are whatever billions of $$$$$ (the Large Green) we spend every day in Iraq worth investing in this bizarre Islamic "democracy", assuming such a pipe dream could even exist? Highly doubtful. Not to a real conservative anyway. This thing, incredible happenings or not, just begs for a declare victory and go home (and still keep the air force bases, of course).






quote:
I come from a military family. I have cousins that served in Iraq for multiple tours of duty. Any truth that I need concerning Iraq I get from them. I can tell you that as much as you and others love to slam Bush he is greatly respected by the troops, and the generals leading them. I'll take their words concerning how good of job Bush is doing over anyone on a fucking message board. They don't deal in biased hate filled rehtoric. They just tell it like it is. And the news out of Iraq is good from what they say. They have you and every other "Bush sucks" geek trumped ten thousand fold.

With all due respect to your family in Iraq, I'll go by all the military leaders, including those unfortunate enough to serve under the nation's lamest commander in chief ever, that have said George Walker Bush III is an idiotic leader. I can list them for you, if you want. Them and the dozens of people in his adminstration who departed saying the same thing. I can list those people too, if you want.

Anyway, I hear the troops have absolutely no respect for George Walker Bush III and the way he has run the Iraq invasion or occupation. And they can hardly wait until a real military commander like John McCain takes over. That's what I hear.
[Edited by sirmoonie]
25th February 2008 11:11 PM
Fiji Joe I wonder how this man ever gets out of the house with socks on...


CINCINNATI (Reuters) - Republican presidential front-runner John McCain on Monday retracted his earlier statement he would lose the November election if he did not convince Americans they were winning the war in Iraq.
ADVERTISEMENT

"I don't mean that I'll, quote, lose," McCain told reporters on his campaign bus. "I mean that it's an important issue in the judgment of the American voters."

"It's not often I retract a comment," said the likely Republican nominee.

McCain, a staunch supporter of the Iraq war, said earlier in the day he would lose the election if he did not convince the American public the U.S. military was succeeding in Iraq.

Most Americans now say the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a bad idea and disapprove of the way President George W. Bush has waged it.

Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both advocate withdrawing U.S. troops if they are elected president.

McCain, a former Navy aviator who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam, often says on the campaign trail that withdrawing from Iraq prematurely would amount to surrender and give Islamic extremists a propaganda victory.

The Arizona senator has criticized how the war was waged under former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who was replaced in late 2006. McCain says the country has made important strides in security and political stability since the United States increased its troop presence last year.

McCain has said U.S. troops may have to maintain a presence in Iraq for up to 100 years, a statement that has drawn criticism from Democrats. McCain has added he expects casualties to decline as Iraqi troops take on more security duties.

On his campaign bus on Monday, McCain pointed out U.S. troops were still stationed in Japan, Germany, South Korea and Bosnia although those wars have ended.

"We will succeed in Iraq and the Iraqis will take over their responsibilities. Americans will withdraw. But Americans may have, as they have in so many other countries, a security arrangement far into the future," he said.
25th February 2008 11:27 PM
Fiji Joe Is this retard breaking his own law?


Tomorrow morning the Democratic National Committee will file a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission against John McCain. Why? In the words of DNC Chair Howard Dean:

"We want John McCain to obey the law with his own name on it."

This afternoon Dean and officials at the DNC held a conference call in which they spelled out why they will file a complaint with the FEC against McCain. The background is that in December and January, McCain was broke and had to tap in to a massive amount of lobbyist money to keep his campaign afloat. Doing so put him in danger of exceeding the spending limits attached to participation in the federal matching funds program, in which an eligible candidate can receive monies voluntarily contributed by taxpayers to match low-donor campaign contributions in exchange for abiding by spending limits.

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani had opted out of the federal matching funds program. John Edwards and several other candidate had opted in, but since there was insufficient money in the fund, they had to secure a loan against the money they were certified to receive.

McCain publicly declared that he would accept the matching funds (and therefore abide by the spending limits). But since he was broke, he had to go to a bank and secure a loan under dubious conditions. Since he appears to have secured the loan by using his eligibility to accept the federal matching funds, it seems fairly clear that he is committed to the federal matching funds system.

The DNC's complaint will allege the following. Fist, that McCain used his status as a candidate operating under the federal matching fund program to gain access on state ballots without having to spend any money to submit signatures. From the DNC's press release:

The McCain campaign has incorrectly stated that McCain is doing what Dean did when he withdrew from public financing in his presidential bid, but they have the facts wrong. Dean did not use the promise of matching funds as collateral for a loan. Dean withdrew before the FEC determined eligibility for funds, unlike McCain. And he spent millions of dollars to get his name on the ballot after withdrawing, unlike McCain, who had free ballot access in many states because he pledged to accept matching funds.

That is a material gain from pledging to accept the matching funds. Another material gain from pledging to accept the matching funds is the ability to use his eligibility as collateral, which he did to secure his loan.

Finally, by receiving these material benefits from his pledge to enter the matching funds system, he is bound to abide by the spending limits. The matching funds program requires one to spend no more than approximately $57 million dollars for the entire campaign up until he officially becomes the nominee in September. Through January, he had already spent over $46 million.

If you follow the implications, since he entered the federal matching funds program, John McCain is now essentially at the spending limit, and is legally prohibited from spending any more money until September. To spend more money would be to break federal law.

That law, by the way, is sometimes named after its Senate sponsors: McCain-Feingold.
[Edited by Fiji Joe]
26th February 2008 07:47 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
26th February 2008 08:35 AM
sirmoonie
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:



You raise some VERY interesting points there, Teriyaki-san. About a month ago, while Christian Mike Huckabee was defending his pardon of Keith Richards, Mormon Willard Romney was busy preaching balls out socialism to a throng of deluded Bush Geeks in Michigan. Did he actually say the federal government was to blame for their woes, because it didn't involve itself in their economy enough? And then promise to do more when he got control of the federal government's $$$$$ (i.e., the taxpyer's Green Largesse)? Yes. Yes, of course fucking he did. Mormon Willard is a KENO (Kenservitive in Name Only). Those guys say whatever the hell feels good.

I tell ya, I've heard your man-child Obama called a Marxist, but I don't think even he would have gone all commie like that.
26th February 2008 10:18 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:

You raise some VERY interesting points there, Teriyaki-san. About a month ago, while Christian Mike Huckabee was defending his pardon of Keith Richards, Mormon Willard Romney was busy preaching balls out socialism to a throng of deluded Bush Geeks in Michigan. Did he actually say the federal government was to blame for their woes, because it didn't involve itself in their economy enough? And then promise to do more when he got control of the federal government's $$$$$ (i.e., the taxpyer's Green Largesse)? Yes. Yes, of course fucking he did. Mormon Willard is a KENO (Kenservitive in Name Only). Those guys say whatever the hell feels good.

I tell ya, I've heard your man-child Obama called a Marxist, but I don't think even he would have gone all commie like that.



Makes perfect sense to me.
26th February 2008 11:21 AM
Ten Thousand Motels ==========================================================
Oh, and then there's this.

12,000-13,000 killed (Afghanistan Insurgency)[5]
2,592-2,792 killed (Waziristan Insurgency)[9]
15,947-21,776 killed (Iraqi insurgency)[23]
7,600-10,800 killed (Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi Army)[3]
625 killed (Philippines insurgency)[13]
119 killed (Saudi militants)[19]
250-600 killed (Hezbollah)[10]
17 killed (Amal)[10]
12 killed (LCP)[10]
2 killed (PFLP-GC)[10]
316 killed(2007-08 Hamas and other militiants allied to hamas)
over 8,500 killed (Somali ICU)[14]
226 killed (Fatah al-Islam)[11]
5 killed (Jund al-Sham) 7 killed (bomber cells)[11]
300+ killed (Algerian GSPC)[16]
19 killed (Moroccan militants)
7 killed (Egyptian militants)
4 killed (Turkish militants)
3 killed (Kenyan militants)
6 killed (Yemeni militants)[24]
5 killed (Spanish militants)
--------------------------------------------------------

Do you hate all muslims, or just the ones that won't do as they're told?


26th February 2008 11:28 AM
Riffhard
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
==========================================================
Oh, and then there's this.

12,000-13,000 killed (Afghanistan Insurgency)[5]
2,592-2,792 killed (Waziristan Insurgency)[9]
15,947-21,776 killed (Iraqi insurgency)[23]
7,600-10,800 killed (Saddam Hussein-era Iraqi Army)[3]
625 killed (Philippines insurgency)[13]
119 killed (Saudi militants)[19]
250-600 killed (Hezbollah)[10]
17 killed (Amal)[10]
12 killed (LCP)[10]
2 killed (PFLP-GC)[10]
316 killed(2007-08 Hamas and other militiants allied to hamas)
over 8,500 killed (Somali ICU)[14]
226 killed (Fatah al-Islam)[11]
5 killed (Jund al-Sham) 7 killed (bomber cells)[11]
300+ killed (Algerian GSPC)[16]
19 killed (Moroccan militants)
7 killed (Egyptian militants)
4 killed (Turkish militants)
3 killed (Kenyan militants)
6 killed (Yemeni militants)[24]
5 killed (Spanish militants)
--------------------------------------------------------

Do you hate all muslims, or just the ones that won't do as they're told?







LOL! You need to get a bit of clue there Mainey. Those listed were terrorists. And yes, I hate all terrorists, and you?



Riffy
26th February 2008 11:42 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
Those listed were terrorists. And yes, I hate all terrorists, and you?
Riffy



That all depends on how one defines "terrorist." ...which isn't exactly the same thing as an "enemey combatant" or "insurgent."

26th February 2008 11:47 AM
Riffhard
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:


That all depends on how one defines "terrorist." ...which isn't exactly the same thing as an "enemey combatant" or "insurgent."





Uhh yeah. Whatever you say. Kill em all for all I care.



Riffy
26th February 2008 11:51 AM
Ten Thousand Motels I really don't care either. It's human nature.
26th February 2008 01:28 PM
monkey_man
Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early
26th February 2008 03:43 PM
glencar
quote:
monkey_man wrote:


Actually Riffy, if you read Media Matters from time to time, you will see that they take on the NY Times regularly when the facts are misrepresented.
MM

Here is their take on the McCain NY Times article:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802220015?f=h_top
[Edited by monkey_man]

Bob Somerby is quoted in that article & therefore the whole article is discredited.
Page: 1 2 3 4

Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)