Iran has been called the world's "most active state sponsor of terrorism" by the U.S. State Department.

Gotta love that.

Hey, Ness, that's straight from the horse's mouth.

No need to come to NY for that. Hopefully we'll make one out of Teheran, and he can just look out his bathroom window.

Just kidding.

Maybe.

No, really I was.

Remember people, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia not Iran. I'll bet if Saudi Prince Bandar had asked to visit 'Ground Zero', that while there might be a few comments from critics, the visit would be hailed by the Bush people as being a show of respect and support for America.

Besides, since Iran is Shia, Al Qaeda is their sworn enemy irrespective of what the Bush State Department says or would like people to believe. But then we did refuse to allow Kruschev to visit Disneyland in 1959, so I guess there is a precedent ;-)

OCU

Ahmadinejad Wants to Visit Ground Zero


Why? Is he running for the GOP presidential nomination? Looks like someone is out to steal Rudy's thunder.

I wouldn't want to be his body guard standing next to the guy. Is it hunting season yet?

I would not invite Yasser Arafat to anything, anywhere, anytime, anyplace. I don't forget.

Forget what? That the people who carried out the attacks were Saudis, not Palestinians?

You're an idiot, Bowa.

"Officials on Wednesday decided to reject the Iranian president's request to visit ground zero just weeks after the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks."
www.wnbc.com

Ahhh the power of public outrage.

That sure was a quick turnaround

Posted by Bowa at 2007-09-19 07:02 PM | Reply


Such a shame really. This would have been a PERFECT opportunity for establishing some kind of diplomatic relations with the Iranian President. Such a wasted opportunity.

Larry

I hate it when my links screw up --

first link for my above post should be:

"This is outrageous."

No, Bowa. Invading Iraq and tying it into 9/11, THAT'S outrageous.

What the goddamn problem with him visiting the site?

Such a shame really. This would have been a PERFECT opportunity for establishing some kind of diplomatic relations with the Iranian President. Such a wasted opportunity.

Posted by LarryMohr at 2007-09-19 07:11 PM

This of course presumes that the Cheney/Bush White House would actually BE interested in "establishing some kind of diplomatic relationship with the Iranian President".

OCU

OldCADuser that would have to be done by Mature people and We both know Dubya and Cheney are far from acting Maturely That is the problem.

Larry

Another possible opportunity shot to shit because The Decider and his crew of enablers are no more clever, no more mature, no more intelligent than Bowa. What a pity.

Said in the article that it was the NYPD that said he wouldn't be going. But hey--I'm sure they've been infiltrated by the cabal of Bushitlerites too.

Nanc-
Um...they were mostly from Saudi Arabia, our ally. The last time a Saudi (where women can't drive or vote) royal official visited Washington he had dinner with the president, held hands with the president, took a stroll in the rose garden while holding hands with the president, and you didn't say a fucking thing.

Did you?

I say let him visit. Give him a tourist map and let him walk from the UN to there. Let everyone in NY know about it, too. Maybe Sean Penn can hold his hand to make sure he gets there safely.

Goatman-
re: Maybe Sean Penn can hold his hand to make sure he gets there safely.

Invite an official from Saudi Arabia (where most of the 9/11 murderers came from, and where much of the funding for al Qaeda comes from), and Bush will lead him around by hand and buy him dinner.

But I forget, how many of the Sunni al Qaeda hijackers of 9/11 were from Iran?

Ahmadinejad's whole country is about to be "ground zero".

I still find it difficult to understand how much like wind-up toys people like Nanc and Goatman are. (Watch, in a moment they'll accuse me of being fans of Ahmadinejad)

But I forget, how many of the Sunni al Qaeda hijackers of 9/11 were from Iran?

I don't think any were. Didn't you know that?

Give Goatman some credit, he's an atheist that makes no bones about it. Always nice to see something different around here.

Of course, his "moderate" skit really stinks.

[I don't think any were. Didn't you know that?]

I did know that, which is why I wonder where your outrage was when Bush last had dinner with Prince Bandar.

Oh, but I see, you've been primed for war with Iran, just as you were primed for war with Iraq, and facts don't really compete with your manufactured lust and outrage.

Of course, his "moderate" skit really stinks.

The right wingers where I work say the same thing. Ask 'em. They'll tell you I am a bleeding heart liberal.

(Alexandrite- You've forgotten that Goatman is a "moderate")

The right wingers where I work say the same thing. Ask 'em. They'll tell you I am a bleeding heart liberal.

I know you don't work with Carl Rove so please tell me when you ride a whale.

Oncology-

re: Pooper, we all know that the good Reverend Jackson is your only hero

Um...I don't recall ever mentioning Jackson.

I did know that, which is why I wonder where your outrage was when Bush last had dinner with Prince Bandar.

I couldn't afford to buy front page copy of the NYT that day and voice my views. But if you had emailed me, I would've told you.

"Oh, but I see, you've been primed for war with Iran

I am?

, just as you were primed for war with Iraq,

I was?

Cooper, I've asked this of you before and you never answer, so I really don't expect you to this time, but it is hard to let a liar off the hook, so I will:

Why must you make up facts about people with whom you have issues? It's not just me, it's anyone who gets you backed into a corner and like a wounded animal you strike with whatver means which in your case is falsehoods. Lying comes so easy to you, it's scary.

I guess I just find it odd that a visit from Iran (which I wouldn't approve) elicits such outrage from the wind-up dolls, and yet Bush playing kissy-face with a royal whose country was the source of the funding and the murderers of 9/11 is greeted with silence.

Popcorn time.

Oncology is a fucktard, so please ignore "her".

and yet Bush playing kissy-face with a royal whose country was the source of the funding and the murderers of 9/11 is greeted with silence....

Good point, Cooper.

Coop- As fun as it might be to try and guess goatmans beliefs, he doesn't exactly lay them out there when it comes to Bush.(which leads me to believe he voted for the man once or twice)

Now religion on the other hand, he'll comment about openly.

I guess I just find it odd that a visit from Iran (which I wouldn't approve) elicits such outrage from the wind-up dolls, and yet Bush playing kissy-face with a royal whose country was the source of the funding and the murderers of 9/11 is greeted with silence.

Then address the issue to the people who are guilty, not the ones who aren't.

I say let him visit. Give him a tourist map and let him walk from the UN to there. Let everyone in NY know about it, too. Maybe Sean Penn can hold his hand to make sure he gets there safely.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 12:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's kinda hard to pretend to be "moderate" when you type shit like this.

Goatman-
re: I say let him visit. Give him a tourist map and let him walk from the UN to there. Let everyone in NY know about it, too. Maybe Sean Penn can hold his hand to make sure he gets there safely.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 12:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

Very funny. Did you offer a dessert suggestion the last time Bush had dinner with a Saudi royal, or perhaps you protested or offered a dish of snark when Bush walked hand in hand with a member of the royal family?

Coop- As fun as it might be to try and guess goatmans beliefs, he doesn't exactly lay them out there when it comes to Bush

It's more fun watching people invent them for me.

Seriously, not being a partisian hack, I can't say I fully support him, nor can I say I fully disapprove. However, on the big issues, (the ones that get brought up the most here, anyway) I've made myself clear and consistent.

I am against the war in Iraq. I am for the war on terror.

Hope this helps, though I'm sure I'll be explaining it again in the near future.

Me thinks Oncologyrn is in fact stirinthepot but that is just Me.

Larry

I think I see where the "moderate" comes in. A "moderate" is someone who wears wide ties or parachute pants when CNN and Fox news tell him to wear wide ties and parachute pants. A "moderate" is not extreme in either direction because he reasonably conforms to whatever bullshit is fed to him on any particular day.

Goat

You always say you don't approve of Bush but you never go any further than that. You never express disapproval of all the rotten stuff he's done or the lies and corruption he's involved with. It's only "I don't actually care for Bush" -- and that's as strong as you get in voicing any disapproval of him. Your statements claiming you disapprove of Bush and what he does are tepid, at best.

Goat- so you were against Iraq from the build-up, or when it started to go really bad? Just curious.

How about Iran?

Did you vote for W 0,1,2 times?

Seriously, not being a partisian hack, I can't say I fully support him, nor can I say I fully disapprove. However, on the big issues, (the ones that get brought up the most here, anyway) I've made myself clear and consistent.

I am against the war in Iraq. I am for the war on terror.

You are abundantly clear, "moderate".

Your statements claiming you disapprove of Bush and what he does are tepid, at best.

Posted by CalifChris at 2007-09-20 01:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Unfortunately, I have to agree

Sorry, I'm not for "the war on terror"

Nouns don't deserve to have war declared upon them. Now...terrorists? Fuck yeah. Start with Osama.

It's kinda hard to pretend to be "moderate" when you type shit like this.

Here we go again. *sigh*

It's kind of hard to call myself a conservative when I:

Support abortion rights
Support gay rights
Am against supply side economics
Am an atheist
Am against school prayer
Against the death penalty
Against amnesty for illegal immigrants

and even more issues usually associated with the left.

So you tell me, Alex. Am I a conservative? My co-workers read the above and call me a bleeding heart liberal.

Why is it so hard for partisian hacks (both sides) to understand that a person does not have to toe the party line? He can have beliefs from both sides. Sorry this is such a hard concept for you and cooper, but I see this as y'all's problem, not mine.

Alexandrite

I think two things come into play -- one, Goat is from Bush country (Texas) -- who knows, maybe he's even related. Plus Goatman has a military background so maybe it's instilled training not to bash the President -- even one like Bush. I don't know.

The dish of the day is that Iran is an existential threat that somehow is responsible in parable for 9/11, and only force will deter it. So Goatman sees Iran as an existential threat that only force can deter. Years from now, when the carnage has become too great, and the strategic fuck-up too obvious (as with the Iraq war), Goatman will change his tie and remain a moderate.

. Your statements claiming you disapprove of Bush and what he does are tepid, at best.

So my lack of passion is a sign of insincerity? I have to disagree with that assessment, CC.

Support abortion rights
Support gay rights
Am against supply side economics
Am an atheist
Am against school prayer
Against the death penalty
Against amnesty for illegal immigrants

What about the Iraq war, what about Bush's push for war with Iran, what about BUSH????

Anyone can talk about social issues. Stick to the meat and potatoes -- IRAQ, IRAN, BUSH -- the tough issues to address.

Tepid is light, cold is best!

Goat

So my lack of passion is a sign of insincerity?

You needn't use namecalling of Bush, but you don't come across as though you truly disapprove of him. Sorry, Goat, that's the way it seems.

Goatman-0 Against amnesty can be construed as an old school GOP position, too.

The reason you appear right is that you bash the left far more often, perhaps because the targets are in higher number here, but it is what it is.

I didn't ask for all that info, but thanks anyway. Seems we agree on quite a few thing, allow me to reciprocate the list:

Support abortion rights, but wish more sex safe materials were readily available to prevent abortions.
Support gay rights, marriage/civil unions
Am against supply side economics
Am a Deist.
Am against school prayer
Against the death penalty
Against amnesty for some immigrants, and not allowing anymore in.

Did you vote for W at all? Were you for the iraq war at any point? Should we invade Iran? And what's your favorite color?

getting to knoooooow youuu... lol.

Goat- so you were against Iraq from the build-up, or when it started to go really bad?

Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

How about Iran?

How about Iran? Do you mean do I support a military strike? Is this what you are asking?


Did you vote for W 0,1,2 times?

once

So my lack of passion is a sign of insincerity? I have to disagree with that assessment, CC.

Your actions are a reflection of your beliefs, regardless of your intentions.

So Goatman sees Iran as an existential threat that only force can deter.

How do you know this, cooper? Am I missing something? A conversation you had earlier?

So Goatman sees Iran as an existential threat that only force can deter. Years from now, when the carnage has become too great, and the strategic fuck-up too obvious (as with the Iraq war), Goatman will change his tie and remain a moderate.

See what I mean how it's more fun to watch other people make their own decisions about me? I find this amusing.

Goat

I've had my say so I'll just sit back in the spectator seat, observe, and munch on popcorn. Maybe there is some reason you don't feel comfortable discussing Bush so I'll leave it alone.

Goatman-
You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

What about the Iraq war, what about Bush's push for war with Iran, what about BUSH????

I answered that a few posts back, Chris.

But I have a question for you, now. Is a person's political ideology defined only by their view of war? Don't social issues play a part as well?

In 2000 goatman? We have a lot of folks here that did that.(cali chris I think) If you say you voted for him in 2004 though...well, I'd have to beat you with a live piranha.

Do you support pre-emptive attacks or bombing sites in Iran? I don't.

And I was against iraq invasion from the start.

getting to knoooooow youuu...getting to know all abooout youuu... : D

Goatman-
You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:17 AM |

You needn't use namecalling of Bush, but you don't come across as though you truly disapprove of him.

That's because I don't on all issues.

Goatman-
Seriously. You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

On what grounds?

And for the record, in case there was any confusion on this point, goatman:

I think Bush is an inept, arrogant, and sheltered loser who is also one of the worst presidents of all time. And that's how I feel about him when he hasn't done something to piss me off that day.

Forgive me, Goatman, but I find that difficult to believe. But I really want to believe.

The reason you appear right is that you bash the left far more often, perhaps because the targets are in higher number here

That's certainly one reason, Alex, but another (as I've pointed out many times before) is that I support truth. When people come out and say outrageous things like, "Bush is worse than Hitler", or "Bush is a pedophile" I counter that. It's not because I like Bush, it's because I like the truth.

I know a lot of the readers hear have heard this many times and I'm sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record, but some people just don't get it. I suppose some never will.

But I have a question for you, now. Is a person's political ideology defined only by their view of war? Don't social issues play a part as well?

At this point in our history, what social issue can be taken with sincere honesty when so much of our economic funds are being wasted on a lying failed war cause.

There is so much of your posting that has so few facts but rhetorical hyperbole spouted by the right repocons. Yet you seem to say the same just with a lighter twist of words.

Ambiguously moderate in tone but very much to the far right in intention.

Goatman-
You wouldn't be sounding like a broken record if you stated why you were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

...just 'cause I've never heard you say that before.

Goat- frankly, I'm hard pressed to say when I agreed with Bush. I mean, sometimes his speech writers have some pretty and plain rhetoric that calls to our basic values as human beings...

But he never really acts on them. In fact, he seems rather disinterested in making his rhetoric any sort of functioning reality. Too much hard work.

The man is an oddity. W sees these noble and manly qualities in himself that that vast majority of his own country, and the world, simply cannot see.(they don't exist) He is very much a "do as I say, not as I do" type.

When people come out and say outrageous things like, "Bush is worse than Hitler", or "Bush is a pedophile" ...

Quit saying that, Alexandrite!

That's certainly one reason, Alex, but another (as I've pointed out many times before) is that I support truth.

No, you like your own version of truth, all other versions are dismissed out of hand.

You don't listen to the message if it doesn't comform to your version of solipsic truth.

You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:19 AM


Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:14 AM

You underscore my assertions that you don't fully read my posts.

Oncology- I don't hate Bush. Frankly, I pity him.

I don't pity you, however...because unlike bush, you are ONLY filled with bile and detritus. Your function here is to suck the blood out of higher organisms like the tick you really are. Negative attention is all you're able to garner with your limited mental and emotional range, hence the "seriousness" of the posts vomited on us by the little hate monger named OncologyRN.

Fuck off, troll.

Ambiguously moderate in tone but very much to the far right in intention.

As I said above, I work with a bunch of people who think I'm a bleeding heart liberal, so it makes sense that in the eyes of a true liberal, I am right wing. It's whatever eyes you choose to look at me through.

When people come out and say outrageous things like, "Bush is worse than Hitler", or "Bush is a pedophile" I counter that.

Oh please. Only a handful of idiots here say shit like that, and it doesn't excuse you targeting the rest of libs all the damn time.

I can probably name the dumbasses who said that crap, and I don't like them either.

No, you like your own version of truth, all other versions are dismissed out of hand.

You don't listen to the message if it doesn't comform to your version of solipsic truth.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-09-20 01:28 AM

So you think Bush is worse than Hitler? You think he is a pedophile? Talk about one's own version of the truth! You and Buffalo Bob. Good one, Moneywar!

Me thinks stirinthepot has come for a visit under the handle OncologyRn but that is just me.

Larry

so it makes sense that in the eyes of a true liberal

The simple fact that you made this statement clearly indicates the distance your ideals of rightwinged intentions are really.

Stop blaming others, it is so Bushite!

Goatman-
I hate to say it, but the thing is that I don't believe that you were against the 2003 occupation of Iraq. I think that you look back on it now and have found that you were against it "deep down", if even that.

Like Algore. Oh i get it now....

Posted by OncologyRN at 2007-09-20 01:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

I was referring to the way Bush talks about democracy in Iraq in glowing terms, then does all he can to limit it here through spying, free speech zones, loyalty oaths, cronyisms...

Jeez, do I even need to list the 800 ways this guy has pissed on the law and the constitution, not to mention the will of the people? We're heading toward year 7, if you don't get it now you never will.

But go ahead and be a partisan troll and talk about Al Gore,(like I care)

You've lived down to my expectations as usual, oncologyrn.

PS moneywar -- on personal truths: Didn't I just see you on another thread a few hours ago claim the earth is 12 billion years old and mankind has been around for 12 million? I'll answer. Yes you did.

So please, tell me more about YOUR version of the truth. I find it hilarious.

Buffbob said bush FORTY ONE was a pedophile. Now, he's stupid, but he didn't say W was a pedo.(unless I missed that one)

Who said bush was worse than hitler? Bani? Jeffndenmark?

So you think Bush is worse than Hitler? You think he is a pedophile? Talk about one's own version of the truth! You and Buffalo Bob. Good one, Moneywar!

So, where in my posts have I said any of these things.

Your far right intentions are based upon the reality of casting these lying rhetorical ideals upon others shows your true thoughts.

But I have a question for you, now. Is a person's political ideology defined only by their view of war? Don't social issues play a part as well?

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01

Sorry, got called away. Yes, social issues are important but the way they were used by Rove, Limbaugh, and the spin machine to push dumb Republican kool-aid drinkers to vote Bush back into office allowing him to continue killing tens of thousands more people with his illegal war made me mad. Where's their priorities? I am against gay marriage but I'm not so stupid as to let some social issue like that drive me to the polls to re-elect Bush again! If it wasn't for the Bush spin machine beating the drums on social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc.) many Repubilcans would have not gone to the polls and Bush wouldn't have been re-elected. We are in the 4th year of a never ending war and Bush is back in office because some hickS in Iowa didn't want Steve to marry Harry?

I voted for Bush in 2000 as a registered Republican and wanted him so badly to win the election decision in Florida. I look back in amazement sometimes. But I LEARNED. I knew I made a big mistake and I knew (by really studying Bush and his excuses) that when Powell sold his soul that day at the UN with that phoney presentation that we were in for big trouble. I left the Republican party not long after although most of my view are fairly conservative.

Maybe that's why I'm so vehemently anti-Bush now. I had hopes in him and he has ruined (or sure trying to) everything I care about in this country and has tried his damdest to destroy it. That's why I don't have much patience with "luke warm" when it comes to him.

okay, I'm off my soapbox. will sit back and watch.

Goatman-
Again, why were you against the 2003 occupation of Iraq?

I hate to say it, but the thing is that I don't believe that you were against the 2003 occupation of Iraq. I think that you look back on it now and have found that you were against it "deep down", if even that.

Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:14 AM

You underscore my assertions that you don't fully read my posts.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:30 AM

If I say it a third time, do you think it'll sink in, Cooper? Probably not.

Again, why were you against the 2003 occupation of Iraq?

Nothin', huh?

Buffbob said bush FORTY ONE was a pedophile. Now, he's stupid, but he didn't say W was a pedo.(unless I missed that one)

My bad. He said W is gay.

Who said bush was worse than hitler? Bani? Jeffndenmark?

Probably. I don't remember who, but I do remember it being said -- more than once, in fact.

Goatman- Pinche Mao said Kerry was an "impotent Stalin" the other night. Go hump his leg for awhile.

Goatman-
Allow it to sink in: I don't believe you. I think that you are among the many rats abandoning the sinking ship, and that the Iraq war was fine with you until it became out of fashion and clear that it was a strategic disaster that was carried out by party stooges without the slightest clue as to what they were doing (from Bush on down).

Goat- there are rumors about W being gay. Buffalo Bob is one of the BAD kind of conspiracy theorists. Believe me, you haven't been here so let me fill you in:

Boyd, I, and many others have spent afternoons schooling him with the facts to an embarrassing level. His comments on 9-11 and pedophilia are probably not taken seriously by most here.

PS moneywar -- on personal truths: Didn't I just see you on another thread a few hours ago claim the earth is 12 billion years old and mankind has been around for 12 million? I'll answer. Yes you did.

Oh, please give us the truth.

How old is the earth?

How old is mankind?

Evolution and the quest to gain its data never changes does it?

Think you better do some research my dear boy, when skulls are found dating near 12 million years it is a pretty good guess that man was around that long ago.

So far the universe has a date that we(scientist) can measure is around 12 billion years old. But I am sure as the technology and science improves the date will get older than this.

See, not in your solipsic nature to understand the truths as they unfold.

So, where in my posts have I said any of these things.

I don't know for sure that you did. That's why I was asking. (note the punctuation. They are a clue as to whether a sentence is indicative or interrogative)

Probably. I don't remember who, but I do remember it being said -- more than once, in fact.

Well, that's practically you, Alexandrite.

Again, why were you against the 2003 occupation of Iraq?

Nothin', huh?

Not unless third time is a charm.

Goatman- Pinche Mao said Kerry was an "impotent Stalin" the other night.

What does what Pinche says have to do with me?

Allow it to sink in: I don't believe you.

It sank in the first twenty times you've told me that. So why do you keep on saying it?

Goatman-
You stated blithely that you were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq. I've asked you why several times, but you seem unwilling or unable to answer.

No offense CC, but I can't grasp how even a republican wanted Bush in 2000.

Article after article, interview after interview, all showing a man who was literally robert redford in "the candidate". Bush was so unimpressive I longed for Quayle.br />

He was being heavily coached, didn't even know who world leaders were, and when he finally said their names they were mispronounced. Badly.

Maybe his IQ isn't below average, but he had little aptitude for politics, world events, or thinking outside of a very little box. It didn't even take long for him to get bored with the job he didn't really desire to begin with.

His debates were terrible, but since W hadn't taken a dump on the podium the "liberal" media generally gave him a pass and continued eviscerating Gore.

How most people couldn't see all this, I'll NEVER understand.

So, really Goatman, why were you against it?

Goatman- Pinche Mao said Kerry was an "impotent Stalin" the other night.

What does what Pinche says have to do with me?

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

You only attack the crazy left wingers from what I've seen.

Alexandrite -
Did you just say that GHW Bush was a pedophile?

Oh, please give us the truth.

How old is the earth?

How old is mankind?

The generally accepted age of the earth is 4.5 billion years.

homo sapiens have been around for about 130,000 -- not 12,000,000. Hell, there wasn't even a bipedal primate on the planet until about 3.2 million years ago.

Well, that's practically you, Alexandrite.

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Goat never really went after me like he does with bani and co. But he has given me crap for little reason.

At least, I think that's what you're trying to say...

Goatman- Why were you against the Invasion of Iraq? It's a good question.

Seriously, Goatman. Humor me. Why were you against the 2003 occupation of Iraq from the get go?

I don't know for sure that you did.

Fucking liar!

You know but your far rightwing mental state had to cast that out to give a tone I said this.

Your disengenuous honesty of false bravado reveals your true nature and political leanings.

Why not just be honest and stop PC stepping reality of who you are and what you truely believe.

You are difficult to take serious with such shallow tones of dishonesty. If I didn't know better, I could compare you to Bill Clinton and two stepping around answers.

So far the universe has a date that we(scientist) can measure is around 12 billion years old. But I am sure as the technology and science improves the date will get older than this.


How can the earth be the same age as the universe? Are you not familiar with the formation of the elements that the earth is made of. Get a clue, man!

Well, that's practically you, Alexandrite.

Yeah, it was a joke - or at least my attempt at one.

You stated blithely that you were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Show me where I said that. Put up or shut up.

Thought so.

Goatman- You're counting HOMO SAPIENS as the only viable "men".

Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

Am I speaking to 'goatman', or are you a new personality I haven't met yet?

Cooper-You stated blithely that you were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Goatman- Show me where I said that. Put up or shut up.

Thought so.



You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:19 AM


Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:14 AM

Oops.

Against it from the start with 43.

What does this mean, Sybil?

I'm really confused now, goatman.

You only attack the crazy left wingers from what I've seen.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2007-09-20 01:52 AM


As I said, people see what they want to see. You are no different Alex. I spent a couple of hours attacking right wing religious zealots (most notably billjohnson) earlier today.

I didn't see Pinche's post or I probably would've said something about that. Well, maybe not. We met in person a couple of days ago. I'll cut him some slack for a little while. *grin*

I think perhaps that "Goatman" has lost his mind, or is at least sharing it with someone else.

I need a score card.

Larry

Seriously, Goatman. Humor me. Why were you against the 2003 occupation of Iraq from the get go?



Seriously, Cooper, show me where I said I was and I'll answer. Why are you not getting this?

Alexandrite

No offense CC, but I can't grasp how even a republican wanted Bush in 2000.

It's sort of funny -- I came across a big manila envelope a couple weeks ago that had all the Bush 2000 presidential propanda in it (even a bumper sticker agggghhh). At least I did try to stay informed about the candidates (even though all I received from his campaign were lies). No nation building, he'll do this, he'll do that -- all false.

I think for too long I listened to the far right about Clinton and all their stuff. I see now how they spin and lie and now can separate the untruths and spin and am a lot more savvy now but couldn't back then. At least give me a little bit of credit for seeing the error of my ways.

Also -- I was never on a computer (and internet) until 2003 when I got the one I'm using now. That made a tremendous difference in my ability to learn about other viewpoints as all talk radio (which I listened to a lot then) back then was dominated by the rightwing. I'm not dumb -- was just "innocent" -- or temporarily stupid (dumb *grin*)



P.S. to GOATMAN -- I will truly forever be grateful to you for introducing me to, and letting me use, your "**grin**" symbol -- I never could stand those happy faces.

This is weird. He did the same thing the other night. He repeatedly accused Clinton of committing perjury, and then challenged me to prove where he had said that - when he said it just a few minutes ago.

It was freakin' odd.

Goatman- I showed where you said you were against the Iraq war.

Now you're not? WTF.

And I hope Pinche was not a loon in person, cuz he most certainly is here.

Goatman-
I don't mean to spook you, but does this ring any bells?

"Against it from the start with 43."

Pre-Human Walked Upright 6 Million Years Ago--Study
Thu Sep 2, 5:55 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A chimp-sized human ancestor walked upright 6 million years ago, far earlier than anyone had been able to show before, researchers reported on Thursday.

Specialized X-rays called CAT scans of the top of a fossil thighbone show clear evidence that the creature walked upright, like pre-humans, and not like apes, the researchers said.

Their findings, published in Friday's issue of the journal Science, take the dawn of human gait back another 3 million years from "Lucy," the earliest known pre-human to have walked on two legs.

You were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq?

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:19 AM


Against it from the start with 43. I had no issue with what 41 did.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:14 AM

Goatman-
You stated blithely that you were against the 2003 invasion of Iraq. I've asked you why several times, but you seem unwilling or unable to answer.

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 01:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Show me where I said that. Put up or shut up.

Thought so.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 01:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

I am confused.

A chimp-sized human ancestor walked upright 6 million years ago,

Moneywar...But not well. Early man ran at about half the speed we do now. (maybe 10 miles an hour) as their Achilles Tendons were not very developed.

But that's damn interesting stuff.

I have no idea how long ago but I do know man is over 12 million years old, as recent bones indicate.

Goatman- You're counting HOMO SAPIENS as the only viable "men".

Most people refer to "man" as homo sapiens. But OK, even if you want to make ape-men into "men" most anthropologists agree the earliest of them was a. afarensis, most famous member of which was Lucy. They were the first bipedal priimates and lived 3.2 million years ago -- far short of the 12 million year old "man" that moneywar claims. 12 million years ago there was not a living thing that any self respecting anthropoligist would even come close to claiming was a "man"

Jay- that's HOMO SAPIENS. We're talking older now. Hominids.

Alexandrite-
Are you getting this?

What does this mean, Sybil?

It means in the hurry to keep up with the flurry of posts (I'm one person respondingn to 3 or 4) I made a mistake. So to clear it up:

I was against the 2003 invasion led by 43. I had no problem with the 1993 attack on Iraq by 41.

Sorry for the mistake

Goatman-
You understand that you said this regarding the new war in Iraq?

"Against it from the start with 43."


And that I asked you why?

12 million years ago there was not a living thing that any self respecting anthropoligist would even come close to claiming was a "man"

Yeah. So he got his terminology screwed up and said "man" instead of Hominid. Biochemical tests are thought to prove the last common ancestor of hominids and apes happened about 5-10 million years ago.

Oldest FOUND Hominid is about 7 million years old. Sahelanthropus tchadensis.

And what's up with your Iraq flip flop? Please explain.

I'm still askin' why you were against it, Goatman.

I never could stand those happy faces.

They are asinine, aren't they?

This is weird. He did the same thing the other night. He repeatedly accused Clinton of committing perjury, and then challenged me to prove where he had said that - when he said it just a few minutes ago.

It was freakin' odd.

What was odd is that you accused me of "flat out" saying he did. When I pressed your feet to the fire to prove it, you conveniently retired for the night.

The posts are still there. Show me where I "flat out" said that.

What's NOT freakin' odd are you lies. I'm getting used to them.

I was against the 2003 invasion led by 43. I had no problem with the 1993 attack on Iraq by 41.

Sorry for the mistake

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 02:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

You can imagine that I was puzzled to say the least. But I get it now.

I was against the gulf war LATER, when i realized it wasn't really a war. We lost like, what, 150 guys? They lost way way more than that. Hardly what I'd call a war.

Was against Iraq in 2003 because I didn't believe there to be any credible evidence of new WMD purchases. Old stuff had a shelf life, and sanctions, inspections, and missile strikes had pretty much kicked Saddam's ass.

Plus W had a transparent boner for pre-emptive attack, and an Oedipal complex to beat the band.

Alexandrite-
I don't think he knows. I don't think he knows whether he was for or against it, or why. He'd be for it on another blog, and against it on this one, and would deny both.

Hard to believe an adult male in his fifties who was also POTUS said "he tried to kill my daddy!"

Ugh.

Goatman says, "I was against the 2003 invasion led by 43. I had no problem with the 1993 attack on Iraq by 41."

Ah, another one trying to gain some "face" in the land of the Lilliputians -- you must have some small buried deep inside you, eh, eager for recognition by your fellow diminuitives?

World's oldest human remains unearthed in Ethiopia

The 160,000-year-old fossils

Cooper, Goatman-

I see you both accusing each other of lies and whatnot. Seems more like a misunderstanding from my perspective.

My head is spinning -- I feel like I'm at some tennis match in the Twilight Zone --


Neanderthals
Iraq war
ape/monkeys
Iraq war
hominids
Iraq war
Sahelanthropus tchadensi
Iraq war
chimp-sized human ancestors
Iraq war

whew!

Goat,

You also seem to take things out of context to perform your intended purpose of rightwingdom.

And if you met with Mao, you surely lie by saying you are a moderate.

Funny as it may seem, you meeting with Mao must of been quite boring for the man. I see nothing of your intellectual value in keeping with mao.

He has a brain.

Tadowe- Ever read Gulliver's travels? Beware the little people.
:-p

And what's up with your Iraq flip flop? Please explain.

I did. It was a mistake. I explained the mistake. Do I need to grovel for a few days before you accept it, or what?

Alex gets personal (go figure), "Ever read Gulliver's travels? Beware the little people."

Are you actually this stupid, Alex?

And if you met with Mao, you surely lie by saying you are a moderate.

Maybe they met in the restroom only.

Kidding. As I've said before, I think Mao is probably a decent guy in reality, and he comes here to be a total asshole, blow off some steam, or just be that strong bully he can't be in the real world.

What? They are not 12,000,000 years old? Tell 'em moneywar -- they are wrong!

First off goatroper,

The conversation was with BB and to show that one can believe in God and evolution but since you were unable to understand what BB clearly understood places you where on the intellectual scale.

Certainly below Buff. Bob!

Alexandrite-
re: You can always tell the true liberals and the ones who know Clinton did wrong during that time. They always refer to it as "his blowjob", not perjury by lying to a federal grand jury.

Whatever.

Whatever

And if you met with Mao, you surely lie by saying you are a moderate

People that one meets define their political stance? What an ignorant assumption.

Goatman-
Damn! Any enemy of the troll Tadowe is a friend of mine, dude.

Goatman-
Have you met Tad?

Goatman says, "I did. It was a mistake. I explained the mistake. Do I need to grovel for a few days before you accept it, or what?"

You will "grovel" forever! You pretended to be some sort of conservative, and yet was against the evil, fascistic and nazi-like war of 43!?!

You are actually a liberal and join them in hating the war on terror and terrorist supporting nations (unless you change your emotional mind as they do when a Democratic wants a war ...)

Next, you'll want to withdraw from Iraq ... like the cowards of the Leftist/Democratics do ... for votes ...

You deserve the company you agree with, Goat ...

Certainly below Buff. Bob!

But above you, mr. "the earth is 12 billion years old" moneywar

Goat- Well, I would never wish to meet certain extreme right wingers on this site, even if I thought they were shamming to appear tougher. Or merely using their anonymity to mouth the inner thoughts they never espoused in their real lives.

I have no desire to meet the man behind the curtain if the image of OZ is an authoritative a-hole.

Tadowe is for any wars that kill ragheads, and sees any deviation from this as treasonous to humanity itself

You pretended to be some sort of conservative, and yet was against the evil, fascistic and nazi-like war of 43!?!

Shit, goatman...you got some tad on you. Try the wipes.

You pretended to be some sort of conservative

Love it. Am I going to hell for enjoying this moment?

But above you, mr. "the earth is 12 billion years old" moneywar

Still can't grasp the concept of the conversation.

And I can see the world is still flat for you!

Tadowe- Cooper has been saying that Goatman was a conservative pretending to be a moderate.
Now you're saying he WAS a conservative at some point.

Why are you agreeing with Cooper, a subversive traitor wishing to see his country lose to the enemy? Are you now a leftist/democrat?

*grins*

I've got a glass of ice-water here for you, and Jesus is laughin' it up (man, he's got the best laugh...)

Goatman states flat-out that Clinton was guilty of perjury,

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-16 10:25 PM

This is your version of "flat-out"? Since I now understand you cannot admit a mistake, I'll chalk it up as your vain attempt at saving face. So I'll be a nice guy and let you off the hook, Cooper.

You can always tell the true liberals and the ones who know Clinton did wrong during that time. They always refer to it as "his blowjob", not perjury by lying to a federal grand jury

Cooper- I've come to the conclusion that Goat is more conservative than he lets on, since the W vote in 2000 really kills him. Gore ran such a bad campaign he held his nose. Can sorta relate since I did the same with Kerry in 2004.

I kinda like Goatman, even if you want to attack him every night.

Alexandrite-
Nothing short of lock-step submission and polished boots will assuage the wrath of Tadowe.

I kinda like Goatman,...

Lemme get back to you on that.

Still can't grasp the concept of the conversation.


obviously

Nothing short of lock-step submission

How about if we simultaneously tap our feet in adjacent stalls?

Sorry, but the Craig thing is so funny it'll never get old. I had no idea gay public sex addicts had Nike Morse code. The revelation is more than my funny bone can bear.

Have we lit the candles in the triangle?

Is the circle secure?

(Shit...then where is that Tadowe?)

Love it. Am I going to hell for enjoying this moment?

I'm enjoying it, too. reminds me of my friends back on the rig.

Alexandrite-
I do question whether going to war against a country that wasn't a threat based on bullshit from radical fear-mongers is a "conservative" position, especially if one is primed to repeat it, but whatever.

You got to give the Goat some credit for hanging in there with people coming at him from all sides and with every subject.

You can stay and play in the treehouse now, Goat - *grin*

Posted by tadowe at 2007-09-20 02:24 AM

G'morning, Tadowe. To what do we own the honor of this visit?

Oh man...my friends and I are so vile to each other sometimes(It's the competition of the games we play) I'm surprised no one has exchanged blows yet.

But as evil as a bunch of guys can be for fun, women are 1000 times worse to each other. And they mean it!

Especially women that work together. Jesus...

Sorry, but the Craig thing is so funny it'll never get old. I had no idea gay public sex addicts had Nike Morse code. The revelation is more than my funny bone can bear.

Posted by Alexandrite at 2007-09-20 02:43 AM | Reply

I don't know if I should tell You this. It may blow a gasket but here goes. There are Print books that tell where the "Cruisy" spots are for Gay Sex. Tis true Alexandrite.

Larry

Could someone maybe cut a finger or something? The Tadowe, as all amoral carnivores, is attracted by weakness -perhaps the scent of blood will call him up from the depths of hell.

Alex can't stop, "... you're saying he WAS a conservative at some point."

Why are you always trying to put words in my mouth, Alex? You can only understand what you read after it has passed through your spin-filter and becomes that which you want it to mean. What I say can't change any reality ... so why do you think that it does for you?

Goatman is what he is, and that appears to be someone who is seeking status, apparently, and since he feels impelled to agree with those who will use it to revile him and support their cowardly retreat and desire for loss in Iraq. That so they can "win" in votes and poltical power. Right along with the terrorists who will also "win" in defeating the world's most powerful nation: the USA.

A handful of goatherder's and human sacrificing murderers winning a victory over the USA with the help of their allies The Democratic Party of the United States.

How proud all you who were against this war by 43 will be when the USA suffers a defeat in Iraq!

You got to give the Goat some credit for hanging in there with people coming at him from all sides and with every subject.

Call it "tough love" but each of us here tonight has been through the retort meat grinder.

Goat- Well, I would never wish to meet certain extreme right wingers on this site, even if I thought they were shamming to appear tougher. Or merely using their anonymity to mouth the inner thoughts they never espoused in their real lives.

He really is a nice guy and he does know what it constitutes a good mexican restaurant.

After the 08 elections, if I'm still around here, I'll let you in on another far right winger I know who despite his politics is a very nice person.

How about if we simultaneously tap our feet in adjacent stalls?

I'll pass on that, thanks.

I wonder what Alexandrite would think if He knew that there was a Hanky code as well.

Larry

You got to give the Goat some credit for hanging in there with people coming at him from all sides and with every subject.

I thrive under pressue. *grin*

What we need is bait!

Here we go.

Yeah man, I bought that new John Lennon CD...had a wonderful version of Imagine that really brought out the soul of the whole generational feel, I thought...

What? Nothing?

After the 08 elections, if I'm still around here, I'll let you in on another far right winger I know who despite his politics is a very nice person.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 02:50 AM |

Oh, geeze, don't tell us your related to Rove -- your being from Texas and all...

But as evil as a bunch of guys can be for fun, women are 1000 times worse to each other. And they mean it!

Especially women that work together. Jesus...

My wife used to tell me the exact thing. She also said she would much rather work for a man than a woman.

The guys who wrote your bible were goat herders, tad.

when the USA suffers a defeat in Iraq

That already happened, and just like Vietnam, our refusal to admit reality will cost more soldiers lives.

Although you could say the mission was already a success, too: Saddam has no WMD's, his sons are dead, and so is he. The baathist govt is gone.

So why the fuck are we still there? No one interrupted our civil war to bring democracy via gun barrel. Who the fuck do we think we are?

Oh, there he is!

who?

I wonder what Alexandrite would think if He knew that there was a Hanky code as well.

Larry

Posted by LarryMohr at 2007-09-20 02:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hanky code? I'm in a morbid mood, so fill me in.(uh, I mean tell me what it means)

(I assume that you've all kept your circles secure so that the slime from the Tadowe won't infect your soul)

There are Print books that tell where the "Cruisy" spots are for Gay Sex.

Let me guess one spot: The GOP cloakroom.

you're saying he WAS a conservative at some point."

Truth be known, I was at one point -- a long time ago. But I went through a political evolution like a lot of people did.

As a lot of young people, I was quite liberal when I was 18. Then I joined he Navy and that shifted towards the right. When I got out of the Navy, Reagan was president and I liked him a lot (no, this isn't an invite for debate) and that reinforced my conservative leanings. But they moved closer to center (but not much) with 41. After '92 I started mellowing out (or getting smarter) and I came to the realization that neither the far left nor the far right has all the answers. I also concluded that if either ideology had full control, the country would be a pretty fucked up place. I still believe that.

In case you missed it, goatman...Tad once trolled this place so heavily and ruined so many threads, that I decided to pick on him with an urban dictionary entry.

Being a narcissist, he was elated...it was a win/win. Though I do regret referring to him as a "genius". I mistook being bitten by a radioactive(and japanese translated) thesaurus for actual intelligence. My bad.

Larry- Dare I ask how you know this stuff?

Oh, geeze, don't tell us your related to Rove -- your being from Texas and all

Someone higher up, but I'm leaving it at that.

Joseph Goebbels couldn't have done it better! (Well, except I'd be called-up by my own use of a liberal baby's blood shed on the evil altar of Yaweh ...)

I make my bows to such applause from Leftist/Democratics! Ask Alex!

WOW! This demon has quite an persecution complex, but don't let his insane babble and pitiful writhing convince you to invite him in. Just keep the circle secure, question him in the triangle, and then send him back to hell.

oh dear god. I thought the hanky code meant if was in one pocket you were top, the other pocket, bottom. I had no idea this whole range of things sexually advertising accessories existed.

Alex whines, "The guys who wrote your bible were goat herders, tad."

What is my "bible", Alex? I'm not of any religion, not even born to one!

"That already happened, and just like Vietnam, our refusal to admit reality will cost more soldiers lives."

What "defeat" have we suffered in Iraq, Alex. Please explain a bit more thoroughly than that we've lost some soldier's lives.

"Although you could say the mission was already a success, too: Saddam has no WMD's, his sons are dead, and so is he. The baathist govt is gone."

Genocide has ended, democracy prevailed and allowed a constitution and two vital elections to establish a democratic form of government. Something that Leftist/Democratics wish to abandon, along with the millions of innocents who will be subjects held in domination by the force coming from the barrel of a terrorist's AK-47.

"So why the fuck are we still there? No one interrupted our civil war to bring democracy via gun barrel. Who the fuck do we think we are?"

That's right, Alex! Only fools and stupid idiots honor their promises to millions of Iraqis hoping for firm stability so that they can assure the future of their children! Only rightwing conservatives are so dumb and crazy loyal to foreigners, that they hope to support them and aid them in the fight against terrorism!

Nothing like the "independent" hater of Bush and this war that you are ... along with the cowards and scumsucking war profiteers of the Leftist/Democratic traitors!

I ain't saying shit Man. Last time that happened I got in dutch. Trust Me though ALexandrite I don't go "Cruising for Sex nor do I go to airport bathrooms to "Get off" Last time I had sex was May 23 2002 at 3 AM I haven't had any since.

Larry

In case you missed it, goatman...Tad once trolled this place so heavily and ruined so many threads, that I decided to pick on him with an urban dictionary entry.

I finally figure that out this week. That site is another one that is blocked on the rig's server. Everytime I saw it linked, I got blocked. Now that I am home, I finally get to see it. I understand now.

Though I do regret referring to him as a "genius".

Yeah, I really have no idea what you were thinking, unless it was along the lines of "that new virus is genius in action".

I'm sure that Tadowe, now within your circle (hey, I warned you!) is even now petitioning his fellow demons to allow Iraqi refugees into the US.

Last time I had sex was May 23 2002 at 3 AM I haven't had any since.

Why is that, Larry? It must've been special for you to remember the precise hour.

(BTW, I;m not being snarky -- I am genuinely curious)

I plead the fifth Goatman.

Larry

Tadowe-

No? No sympathy for the goat-herders?

Though I do regret referring to him as a "genius".

Regardless of his politics, I think it's fair to say he's not a stupid man. Once you get past the content, he writes quite eloquently, I think.

I plead the fifth Goatman.

fair enough. It was a personal question.

Once you get past the content, he writes quite eloquently, I think.

Damn! I must admit I like you every now and then, Goatman.

I can see that I've upset a demon, and set him/her/it on a rant. Bummer.

Oh, geeze, don't tell us your related to Rove -- your being from Texas and all

Someone higher up, but I'm leaving it at that.

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-20 03:05 A

I knew it! I had a hunch. Just don't put Jeb Bush in as President or VP in 2008 or I'll come and hunt you down in Texas. We don't want to get Bushwacked again.

Shit. the popcorn is ready.

AUM.

Damn! I must admit I like you every now and then, Goatman.

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-20 03:20 AM |

I'm glad you two are playing nice and learned to share your toys.

We don't want to get Bushwacked again.

We'll leave that to the voters.

(here's the part where you inject a sentence containing the words, "stolen" and "election". *grin*)

Goatman says, "Regardless of his politics ... Once you get past the content ..."

Are you now against the war in Afghanistan and Iraq? If so, then discuss why you feel it to be wrong to have invaded those countries and remain there.

Goatman- See, I'd debate what tad says if it came from someone else. And I have.

But after all these years I know my honest answers in a debate would just turn into this from tadowe:

"It's all about me. I am obsessed with myself. And anyone to the left of me is a traitor." So I don't bother with anything more than mockery. Which admittedly, is more than he deserves at this point. But I like to throw a dog a bone, even the junkyard variety.

Diebold (no *grin*)

popcorn.

I just realized I haven't eaten dinner. Damn you guys. I'm gonna go nuke some leftover spaghetti.

I'll tell you right now we are NOT turning this country over to another Bush -- I don't care if you're one of the Bush brothers in disguise -- we'll run that family out of town on a rail before we turn this country over to the likes of them again. now I'm pissed off.

Tally HOoooooo!!

Tadowe

Do you have a 'Leftist/Democrat" command key programmed?

If so, is it on the right or left side of your keyboard?

Alex provides a fine excuse, "Goatman- See, I'd debate what tad says if it came from someone else. And I have. But after all these years I know my honest answers in a debate would just turn into this from tadowe: [Words put into my mouth by the obsession of this Lilliputian]"

This is a good reason not to explain your feelings about 43's wars, Goat, and I suggest you take it, because you know that the reasons for invading prove more compelling than our invasion of Bosnia and airwar/invasion of Serbia.

That will allow you to join the collective and become their friend by being my enemy ... me ... just little old me ...

You will surely be proud of yourself, then, and that's for sure ... if you need the "company" ...

This is a good reason not to explain your feelings about 43's wars

Thanks fuckface. :-)

because you know that the reasons for invading prove more compelling than our invasion of Bosnia and airwar/invasion of Serbia.

AU wonders, "Do you have a 'Leftist/Democrat" command key programmed?"

Why? Would it be an insult, if I did? Something you could be "original" in using to make me the subject of your Leftis/Democratic conversations?

Ask, Goat, why not?

"I wonder if that content-lacking tadowe has a command key programmed for 'Leftist/Democratic', what do you think, enemy of tadowe ... my friend?"

Bosnia/Serbia was to stop a humanitarian crisis - Iraq started one

Why? Would it be an insult, if I did?

Of course not. You use it so much I figured you'd have to have a command key programmed.

And no, you're not my enemy

AU rushes to Goat's assistance, "Bosnia/Serbia was to stop a humanitarian crisis - Iraq started one"

This must be the way you see it, right Goat? See, how easy it is when you are a member of the collective? You don't even need to respond, yourself, to any challenge to discuss these issues!

Relax, you've joined the Georgie Porgy Intellectuals Anonymous club ...!!!!

[Words put into my mouth by the obsession of this Lilliputian]

Lilliputian. You got that from Dennis Miller when he visited Bill O'Reilly last. Dennis is a smug, narcissistic blowhard with a vocabulary he can't comprehend or wield properly. However he does like to pretend that misanthropic nastiness is funny, and has a pathological compulsion to prove his "dizzying" intellect to the audience.

Holy...I think Tadowe is Dennis Miller.

See, how easy it is when you are a member of the collective?

All hail to the proletariat!!! Lenin lives !!

(well he doesn't look as bad as most dead people. GREAT embalming job!! See him myself I have....)

AU explains, "Of course not. You use it so much I figured you'd have to have a command key programmed."

Sorry, then, and since I just couldn't understand your effort to question my computer set-up, and making me the subject of discussion, thereby.

"And no, you're not my enemy"

No, I see that, now. You are simply obsessed with the minutia of my life and insist on using a news blog to find this vital information out ...

You are definitely one of the Lilliputia!

TAD

OK I"ll admit it. I'm a member of the Lilliputia. You nailed me!!

Leftist/Democrat/
CommandKeyAskesthQuestionith I am

Now LAY DOWN so we can get these ropes around you dammit!! LOL

The Habeas Restoration Act Failed Cloture, Tadowe.

How do you suggest we bring democracy to Iraq when we are destroying it at home?

56 Yea

43 Nay

1 Unclear

4 votes shy to stop the republican filibuster so our we can once again follow legal civility. Laws older than the very country itself.

I just couldn't understand your effort to question my computer set-up

Logic (Dr. Spock type) would dictate that as much as you use 'Leftist/Democrat' you might have a command key programmed for easier typing.....that's all.

Those 44 senators that voted Habeus Corpus down are the real traitors to this country.

And yes, I mean they should be prosecuted and possibly jailed. Let's see how they feel about Gitmo with no Habeus Corpus rights.

Of course "independent" Leiberman voted with republicans for the webb bill AND this cloture vote.

Zell 2.0

Alex says, "Thanks fuckface. :-)"

You're very welcome, Alex. BTW, looks like Goatman is a bird of your feather, Alex ... one of the "independent" who desire that Islamic fundamentalist use of human sacrifice succeed in Iraq.

You'll all be so proud when Iraq falls to Iran and Syrian support of al Qaeda!

Alex says, "The Habeas Restoration Act Failed Cloture, Tadowe. How do you suggest we bring democracy to Iraq when we are destroying it at home?"

When was Habeas corpus suspended, Alex? Please post a quote or reference to this supposed fact.

Stay the coarse?

AU continues to steal the thread, "Logic (Dr. Spock type) would dictate that as much as you use 'Leftist/Democrat' you might have a command key programmed for easier typing.....that's all."

Listen, why don't you start a thread about me? That way, others could continue their discussions without having to see this neurotic obsession with the small things in my life.

Okay?

Are you now against the war in Afghanistan and Iraq?

As always, no, yes.

Goatman in brief, "As always, no, yes."

Okay, supporter of terrorism ...

My mistake, actually, and since I thought you were actually someone with some intellectual courage. I see that that isn't so, though.

Have a good life, Mr. One-liner.

Listen, why don't you start a thread about me?

I'm waiting for you to start one about me, Tad. ^ of your posts in the last 1.5 hours have my name them.

^=6

Goatman does a little dance, "I'm waiting for you to start one about me, Tad. ^ of your posts in the last 1.5 hours have my name them."

I've asked you for your reasoning behind your claim that you were against 43's wars ...

My comments are to encourage your reply. However, I can see that that won't be happening. However, I don't really mind a bit, an no matter that I'm disappointed that someone I thought was conservative and reasonable, instead turns out to be someone looking for "friends" and to build "face" in agreement with them.

Such discoveries of the snakes-in-the-grass aren't surprising, and since there are a number of "independents" in here, already, and agreeing with the Leftist/Democratics ... when push-comes-to-shove!

And your "shove" is to support the goals of international terrorism and their world spanning desire to defeat the USA; in any way possible!

They can do that with the help of traitors, here in the USA, who work to destroy any hope for victory against inhuman sacrifice, so that they can gain power and influence for their party when the USA is defeated.

Party over nation and something you've just admitted to supporting their goals in achieving: Defeat for the USA and a Victory for Democratics!

I'm sure your "face" is filled with joy and pride ...

Or else, explain yourself.

Tadowe

You forget that Iraq was the largest secular Arab country. Most religions were allowed to freely practice. Catholic, baptist, you name it. Saddam was a madman, but for all your talk about supporting "Islamics" NOTHING helped them more, or Islamic radicals for that matter, than the invasion of Iraq.

You forget that Iraq was the largest secular Arab country. Most religions were allowed to freely practice. Catholic, baptist, you name it. Saddam was a madman, but for all your talk about supporting "Islamics" NOTHING helped them more, or Islamic radicals for that matter, than the invasion of Iraq.


Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2007-09-20 04:49 AM | Reply

While Saddam Hussein was a Madman in Our eyes. That is Precisely what the Country that is Iraq needed then and needs today. I believe many of the Rightwingers are seeing that is the case today and would have before Dubya invaded had they done even the basic of readings. Saddam held the Country together by brute force and with an Iron Hand. That is what these people understand that is what these people need in order to function in their society. It is appalling to an AMerican when that truth is placed upon them but Not everyone on Planet earth behaves like NORMAL Americans do. It is a sad reality that many of the Pro Iraq War supporters are facing today. While Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator pray tell Me where in the middle east Women could own property drive a car be treated equal amongst the men. Many of the HIGHEST educated Women came from Saddam's Iraq. They were not required to wear the Burka that You find the Women in Iraq wearing today because Saddam Hussein was a Secularist. Think of Him as a Godfather wannabe for His "Mafia" He wasn't interested in Islamics He was out for numero uno Himself. He was a worshipper not of a God/Allah but of the Almighty Buck. That is the crux of the whole thing. Oh and the only reason We are in Iraq today is Black Gold Texas/Iraq tea NOTHING more. If Iraq had cabage and was doing the exact same thing as He was doing we would not give two shits about Iraq. Guaranteed.

Larry

AU says, "You forget that Iraq was the largest secular Arab country. Most religions were allowed to freely practice. Catholic, baptist, you name it. Saddam was a madman, but for all your talk about supporting "Islamics" NOTHING helped them more, or Islamic radicals for that matter, than the invasion of Iraq."

It is a sophomoric tactic in debate, to try and isolate one bit of reasoning as justification for all inclusive conclusions; pro or con.

This one is startling, because it has to ignore the actual genocide being conducted against the Kurdish population, and the occasional attempts to attack certain Shi'ite factions/tribes genocidally, or using them as test subjects for nerve gasses of various sorts -- all confirmed by the UN.

It also has to ignore the other, daily abuses of his population which took place at abu Ghraib, and being found in mass graves in various districts of the nation (count over 1/2 million so far I believe in over 53 mass graves).

This makes Bosnia/Serbian massacres (adding such graves from both sides) appear to be that of a piker -- when compared to Saddam Hussein's reign of terror.

Then, forget that Saddam's hope for the genocide of Israel was actively being pursued and terrorism supported there, as well as for those fighting in Afghanistan against the UN effort to rebuild that country.

Destabilization being actively pursued by Saddam, Syria and Iran in support of al Qaeda and the Taliban ...

That doesn't count all the benefits that have come from the invasion and depostion, notwithstanding the end of Saddam's horrendous genocides.

This one is startling, because it has to ignore the actual genocide being conducted against the Kurdish population, and the occasional attempts to attack certain Shi'ite factions/tribes genocidally, or using them as test subjects for nerve gasses of various sorts -- all confirmed by the UN.

Sure - BEFORE the 'no fly' zones were enacted. I have lots of Kurdish friends who emigrated here from Iraq. After 'no fly' no problem. Same 'no fly zone' in the Shiite south. The only place Saddam was allowed to move was in a narrow band running parallel to Baghdad. So, moot point.

as well as for those fighting in Afghanistan against the UN effort to rebuild that country.

Sorry, nada. Post proof of your claim. Saddam had NO interest in Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Al Qaeda posed a threat to his regime. He didin't want them anywhere near him, nor did he support them in any way.

That doesn't count all the benefits that have come from the invasion and depostion

You mean how Iraqis are WORSE off now than before the invasion? MORE without basic essentials, as many killed as during his regime, etc etc. I don't know where you get your facts, but I get mine from credible sources.

By the way, several hundred thousand Iraqis were massacred AFTER Bush 41 called on the Iraqis to rebel and after they did he didn't see it neccessary to answer they urgent pleas for help.

Excuse me, but isn't the President of Iran the same one who called for death to America in one of his speeches? Why does he want to go? To gloat?

AU says, "Sure - BEFORE the 'no fly' zones were enacted. I have lots of Kurdish friends who emigrated here from Iraq. After 'no fly' no problem. Same 'no fly zone' in the Shiite south. The only place Saddam was allowed to move was in a narrow band running parallel to Baghdad. So, moot point."

You don't have any experience with chemical weapons, and just don't understand that once they are created, they can't be destroyed without leaving identifiable residue(s). None have been found in Iraq.

No fly zones do not remove the potential for genocide; which was sufficient to start a European war/invasion of a country that did not attack us.

"You mean how Iraqis are WORSE off now than before the invasion? MORE without basic essentials, as many killed as during his regime, etc etc. I don't know where you get your facts, but I get mine from credible sources."

I think you are begging the question of being "better off". Was the revolutionists of our country "better off" under King George?

"By the way, several hundred thousand Iraqis were massacred AFTER Bush 41 called on the Iraqis to rebel and after they did he didn't see it neccessary to answer they urgent pleas for help."

So, it was really Bush who murdered several hundred thousand Iraqis? It was really Bush who was doing genocide, and not your buddy Saddam who you wish was still the leader for life in Iraq ...

What a pack of scumsucking traitors infest this site -- yearning for the good-old-days of Saddam and UN corruption starving further hundreds of thousands!

Amazing examples of American cowardice and love of party over nation!

So, it was really Bush who murdered several hundred thousand Iraqis?

Obviously.

It was really Bush who was doing genocide, and not your buddy Saddam

No, Bush created his pile of dead Iraqis after Saddam created his pile of dead Iraqis.

why did everybody like dennis miller when he was swinging to the left?

strange behavior you earthlings.

NANC - excellent question. Miller has always been funny but now that he is associated with Fox News, I'm afraid many will start to pick away at him.

I think Miller is a funny, cranky, snarky and yes, sometimes arrogant commentator. It's just part of his schtick, but 99 times out of 100, when you wade through said schtick, he is right on the money on a given issue.

NANC - excellent question. Miller has always been funny but now that he is associated with Fox News, I'm afraid many will start to pick away at him.
.

Funnier than that -- I saw Alan Greenspan go from asshole, to hero, back to asshole in just over a week.

First he was the DR pariah because he was "responsible" for the subprime crisis. (not the borrowers or lenders, mind you)

Then he was walking on water when he came out last week saying the Iraqi war as about oil.

Then someone pulled up a quote of his back in 2003 where he said a war was necessary (paraphrasing)

It was a riot watching this group change their minds at the speed of sound

proper italics

NANC - excellent question. Miller has always been funny but now that he is associated with Fox News, I'm afraid many will start to pick away at him.
.

Funnier than that -- I saw Alan Greenspan go from asshole, to hero, back to asshole in just over a week.

First he was the DR pariah because he was "responsible" for the subprime crisis. (not the borrowers or lenders, mind you)

Then he was walking on water when he came out last week saying the Iraqi war as about oil.

Then someone pulled up a quote of his back in 2003 where he said a war was necessary (paraphrasing)

It was a riot watching this group change their minds at the speed of sound

i've always liked dennis miller - even when i disagreed with every thing that flew out of his mouth.

i'll never understand people on the left after having been in a large family of them for over fifty years.

so why not let him go there-he ain't a suicide bomber
jasman

because there is NO need for him to go there - NONE! ask the good people of new york if they want him there - he is being a spiteful brat.

If Ahmadinejad wants to go to ground zero, let him rent a taxi and go. There's no need to have the NYPD be a party to his cynical photo-op. After all, if he wanted to visit a site of Islamic terrorism, he could have gone to a thousand places closer to home. Lebanon, for example, where his government slaughtered 300 US Marines in 1983.

RiR,

Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was president of Iran in 1983 and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (presently dead) was the supreme cleric in 1983, so while the Iranian government of 24 years ago was responsible for the US Barracks bombing in Lebanon it is misleading in the extreme to claim that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Government "slaughtered 300 US Marines in 1983".

Unless, of course you meant the Iranian government in general and weren't trying to associate the current president of Iran with actions that took place over twenty years ago. In which case, the above facts serve as a friendly clarification.

"Such a shame really. This would have been a PERFECT opportunity for establishing some kind of diplomatic relations with the Iranian President. Such a wasted opportunity."

Larry - Try to be objective. This man has made a career out of anti-American grandstanding. He has zero interest in civil diplomatic talks with us.

Just because Bush is a destructive idiot and this guy talks bad about Bush doesn't mean that he's isn't a total asshole himself. Although he may just be playing to popular sentiment, he capitilazes on anti-American bigotry and there is no reason to grant him this photo op as he would certainly spin it for some sick purpose once he returns home.

Why so many live under the delusion that in every conflict or arguement there is a good guy and a bad guy is beyond me. Reality shows that this is almost never the case. We don't live in a world of absolutes.

I'm surprised Ahmadinejad wanted to lay a wreath at ground zero. I guess no one told him jews died there too.

What would y'all think if you found out that much of the statements Adjadinejad supposedly made have been purposefully mis-translated?? Or would that be too unAmerican to contemplate??
How about the fact that Iran offered to help us track Osama after 9-11??
What if you found out that IRan, though a possible threat, is not necessarily quite as irrational as we are led to believe??

"I'm surprised Ahmadinejad wanted to lay a wreath at ground zero. I guess no one told him jews died there too." - Alexandrite

Alexandrite, maybe he was told but he denied it.

"Larry - Try to be objective. This man has made a career out of anti-American grandstanding. He has zero interest in civil diplomatic talks with us." - Sully

Sully, with respect, Bush made a career out of anti-Iraqi, Iranian and North Korean sentiment.

Ahmadinejad doesn't have as much power as people attribute to him. And I'm sure his gov't is playing this to their advantage - they would in any case. Ahmadinejad is merely the elected representative of the people of Iran. In essence, he wants to lay a wreath to express the sentiments of his countrymen. By denying him this chance the people who really do have power in Iran can now say that the Americans denied them out of racism.

In a way it's a lose lose scenario. But you can lose with grace or be petulant brats. The choice is up to your government and I think we all know how they lose.

"Senator Hillary Clinton released the following statement:

"It is unacceptable for Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who refuses to renounce and end his own country's support of terrorism, to visit the site of the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil in our nation's history."

If he donates to her campaign, she will give him a personal tour.

It seems pretty ridiculous (Hillary too) for everyone to be somehow connecting Ahmadinejad to the 9-11 attacks. His government offered to help us go after Al Quada immediately after 9-11. He was willing to help until Bush labeled his nation part of the axis of evil. It seems clear to me that Americans don't want to understand the truth. You guys seem so intent on demonizing Ahmadinejad that you don't even question what you have been told he said, and it is ironic because the same people telling you what he said are the ones who lied to you to justify invading Iraq. WAke up.
We are considering bombing Iran, Barrack Obama mentioning going into Pakistan to get Bin Laden, now Bin Laden is going to declare war on Mushareff...where there are nukes....now which threat is the most dangerous...Iran or Pakistan...and wasn't Obama's comments right on the money and when would be a better time than when Bin Laden is going to try to overthrow Mushareff????
Buy y'all worry about Iran.
Five or six years from now I can hear Bernake saying "of course it was for the oil, everyone knew that."

Senator Hillary Clinton released the following statement:

"It is unacceptable for Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who refuses to renounce and end his own country's support of terrorism, to visit the site of the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil in our nation's history."



Ahhhh, Hillary.... hoping for presidential victory in 08 steps up to the plate (smelling the true sentiments of real Americans) admitting Iran's involvement in Iraq.

This bitch should be thrown into some cold dark room, thereby, affording her the time to contemplate, in solitude, the subversive tactics she's employed over the past several years that have given aid and comfort to our enemies all for the sake of her political gain.




She's lower than well shit.

Well, that IS what a Nazi would do.

Remember people, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia not Iran.

Posted by oldCADuser at 2007-09-19 03:59 PM | Reply
------
The country of Saudi Arabia that helped finance and send 16 of its citizens over to kill more than 3000 Americans

Posted by CalifChris at 2007-09-19 07:21 PM | Reply
------

These kind of comments are either ignorant or disingenuous. Middle East Muslims do not adhere to Western concepts of nationality. They are Muslims first, then Arabs or Persians.

So it doesn't matter which country the terrorists came from. Unless you're just trying to throw around the same old political shit.

Al Quaeda is a Wahabi Sunni Muslim organization.
Iran is a Shia Muslim nation.

Hello???
Anyone home???

Al Quaeda hides in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Ahmadinijad offered to help us against Al Quaeda after 9-11.
He asked to place a wreath at Ground Zero and was loudly rebuked. Er....why??? do any of you ever ask yourself what he and Iran have really done to the US???
Your enemy is Al Quaeda, why do we keep letting ourselves be misdirected towards other nations???

Hmmmm Bin Laden famile...Bush family....quite a coincidence doncha think????

""So it doesn't matter which country the terrorists came from.""

Now that is some doublespeak nonsense if I ever heard some doublespeak nonsense.
OF COURSE IT MATTERS WHERE THEY CAME FROM YOU IDIOT!!!
AND OF COURSE IT MATTERS WHERE THEY DID NOT COME FROM!!

"She's lower than well shit.

Posted by Incubus_Con"

That may be true but she's still standing on Bush Jr. and Cheney's shoulders.

danni the dhimmi - are ALL translators in err? that's what you're implying - why do you want to give ahmadhimminutjob so much benefit of the doubt?

are you hoping the gator eats you last?

""danni the dhimmi - are ALL translators in err? that's what you're implying - why do you want to give ahmadhimminutjob so much benefit of the doubt?

are you hoping the gator eats you last?""

Do a little research NANC. I think, if you are honest with yourself, you will be a bit surprised and that really much of what he is reputed to have said was misquoted. Don't take my word for it, do the research. I notice you make fun but you haven't even checked. Me thinks you are a sheep.
Baaaaah. That's Farsi for baaaaaah.

Baaaaah. That's Farsi for baaaaaah.


Posted by danni


To be fair: As bad as this whole Iran thing has gotten during Ahmadinejad's reign, it goes back 28 years to the hostage-taking and subsequent ongoing "America is The Great Satan" mantra. It's not just a case of a couple of translating errors.

True Mr. Fair, but if you are going to go back that far then you might as well continue on back to the Shah and then America doesn't look like such a victim. BTW, the hostages weren't harmed.
When we are talking about war on another nation we should be careful to really understand what theyare saying and this administration has gone out of its way to make sure that not only we but they too don't even listen to what they are saying.
Ahadinijad is in NY and no one will talk to him????
Who is running our foreign policy??? A nine year old???
WE can bomb but we can't talk.
That is crazeeeeeeee!

" it goes back 28 years "

It goes back to the Shah.

So it doesn't matter which country the terrorists came from.
Posted by vernon at 2007-09-20 03:40 PM |


"Unless you're just trying to throw around the same old political shit."

That's the one.


Most of the people on this board are intransigent guppies(party first for politcal domestic gain, eg; socialists.) Willingly ignorant and woefully scared to face the reality that Islam is the problem. To admit it means you have to face it and that would mean that Bush has been right all along, and that's unacceptable... Party first ya know.

I just now read where the Iranian president said he's not going to push for the visit to Ground Zero if it's inconvenient for us -- he just wanted to show his respect.

lip service.

Party first ya know.

Wrong. COUNTRY first, ya know.

When lions are thrown their red meat for the day they eat it, yawn, sleep and STFU. Judging by the amount of noise still coming from the rightnuts after having their red eat thrown to them today we can only conclude that they bear little or no similarity to lions. Pussies, maybe.

True Mr. Fair, but if you are going to go back that far then you might as well continue on back to the Shah and then America doesn't look like such a victim. BTW, the hostages weren't harmed.
When we are talking about war on another nation we should be careful to really understand what theyare saying and this administration has gone out of its way to make sure that not only we but they too don't even listen to what they are saying.
Ahadinijad is in NY and no one will talk to him????
Who is running our foreign policy??? A nine year old???
WE can bomb but we can't talk.
That is crazeeeeeeee!

Posted by danni

Danni - most of your post is for another thread. This thread deals with the Iranian president wanting to visit Ground Zero. Forget about war, diplomacy, etc. The average NYPD or man on the street will say "Ahmadinejad visit Ground Zero? No f***ing way."

I am stunned that there are Americans actually defending Ahmadinejad. Sick, Sick people. No, he did not have anything to with 9/11, but...he has called for the destruction of Israel and the US. He has been sending bombs and weapons into Iraq that have killed US soilders. He has been funding terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

Do not let your hatred of President Bush blind you as to who our enemies really are.

Do not let your hatred of President Bush blind you as to who our enemies really are.

Posted by ChiTownGuy at 2007-09-20 06:30 PM

If this guy Ahmadinejad is so evil why don't we just capture him and send him to one of those secret prisons Bush is so fond of and torture him? Wouldn't that just piss off the Iranians so much that they would attack US making all of Bush's wet dreams come true? Then we would have a good excuse to Nuke the crap outa them!

One less evil-doer!

Wouldn't that just be fine and dandy since this is a War for Civilization and the gloves are off?


The reason that this won't happen is because this War bullshit is just that.....bullshit. But, yet we are willing to give up our Constitutional rights for a little security! So what is it? Are we at War or not?

Oh, I know what it is...

Bullshit.

Have nice day!

Number of countries invaded

Ahmadinejad 0
Bush 2

I can just see Ahmadinejad standing in front of where the Towers once stood and taking a picture with that same thumbs up and shit-eating grin that all deer hunter's take after a kill.

The reason that this won't happen is because this War bullshit is just that.....bullshit. But, yet we are willing to give up our Constitutional rights for a little security! So what is it? Are we at War or not?

Oh, I know what it is...

Bullshit.

Have nice day!


Posted by donnerboy at 2007-09-20 08:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Someone said he should be waterboarded until he admits he wear platform shoes.

And Bloomberg was actually thinking about letting this enemy go to Ground Zero?

What a baffoon.--Let's all hope he runs for President.

Safety reasons indeed--someone will go there and shoot him in the head--that's why they cancelled his request.

And Bloomberg was thinging about it??

And Danni writes---"BTW, the hostages weren't harmed."

Are you referring to the Iranian hostages held for 444 days?

Good grief girl--get a brain and start reading--start with google--"Iranian hostages tortured".

Apologist--that is what you are.

Murphy

Murphy-
Speaking of "apologists" such as Danni, how do you feel about the Reagan administration secretly selling high-tech weaponry to Iran in the 80's?

BTW, the hostages weren't harmed.

444 days captivity, paraded around blindfolded wasn't harmful? Then neither was what happened at abu ghraid. I wonder why did every one make such a deal about it?

If it weren't for our dastardly deeds done to Iran there would have been no 52 Hostages nor 444 days waiting for them to be released. Ever think about THAT???

Larry

If it weren't for our dastardly deeds done to Iran there would have been no 52 Hostages nor 444 days waiting for them to be released. Ever think about THAT???

Actually, Larry, I am trying to figure out what "dastardly deeds" those 52 hostages committed. I googled, but couldn't find where they were guilty of any. Want to enlighten me, or just play the blind partisian apologist?

Goatman-
re: 444 days captivity, paraded around blindfolded wasn't harmful? Then neither was what happened at abu ghraid. I wonder why did every one make such a deal about it?

Which, of course, is why the Reagan administration secretly and illegally sold them high-tech weapons in order to fund a secret and illegal proxy war in Nicaragua, but you don't seem to have any outrage left for that. I do suppose it's easier to attack the stupid comments of a lone poster on a little blog of no importance.

Actually, Larry, I am trying to figure out what "dastardly deeds" those 52 hostages committed. I googled, but couldn't find where they were guilty of any. Want to enlighten me, or just play the blind partisian apologist?

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-21 12:25 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

They were AMericans and by Proxy was responsible for the dastardly deeds done to Iran by Americans. THAT was the sentiment from Iran.

Larry

Murphy and Goatman-
How did you sensitive and easily offended folk feel about secretly and illegally selling sophisticated weapons to Iran in the 80's?

Which, of course, is why the Reagan administration secretly and illegally sold them high-tech weapons in order to fund a secret and illegal proxy war in Nicaragua, but you don't seem to have any outrage left for that.

Did Cooper write this? No, he coudln't have. Cooper is so outraged when someone brings up Clinton's unrelated indescritions and calls them deflections. But of course bringing up what Reagan did several years after the Iranians took hostages isn't the same, is it?

Besides, how do you know I wasn't outraged? What a presumpuous, hypocritical dick.

You are here by awarded the Orwellian "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" award. It is a statue of a pig in a starched white shirt.

Congratulations

How did you sensitive and easily offended folk feel about secretly and illegally selling sophisticated weapons to Iran in the 80's?

you've already declared what your beliefs are, (i have no outrage) so what difference would the truth make? Would it change your made and force an apology?

No, I didn't think so, either. So why should I bother to answer?

made = mind

Goatman-
When you get your italics under control, just let me know by not posting in italics. Otherwise, when speaking of the past (late seventies and early eighties), it's not odd to refer to the activities of that time.

They were AMericans and by Proxy was responsible for the dastardly deeds done to Iran by Americans. THAT was the sentiment from Iran.

Again, I ask, Larry, what did those 52 hostages do to Iran that was so dastardly? Why were they punished?

I guess I'm right. No answer logical here -- just an Iranian apologist.

Goatman-
re: No, I didn't think so, either. So why should I bother to answer?

I was just curious, but you seem more than a bit touchy about it.

Goatman-
Hey, answer this question or not, man:

How did you sensitive and easily offended folk feel about secretly and illegally selling sophisticated weapons to Iran in the 80's?

Goatman,

How's that bathroom coming?

As I said, Cooper -- some animals are more equal than others. You and your ilk apparently cosider yourselves to be among those "more equal". What can be said to your type?

But maybe those hostages in 1979 should've somehow predicted that not only was Reagan goint to be president, but he would engage in an illegal arms deal with the Iranians and Nicauraguans.

C'mon Coop -- you're well known for your deflections, but even you have to admit this one's pretty weak.

Goatman-
BTW, did Larry ever secretly and illegally sell Iran advanced weapons?

Do some research REAL research not lying about doing research and THEN come back to Me.

Operation Ajax where they removed the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED Leader of Iran and re installed the shah of Iran because the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED Leader was going to NATIONALIZE the Oil Industry and BP and other Oil Industry folks just could not have that. They would have lost Money over it. THEN Research when the United States helped with the exile of the SHah of Iran and then maybe THEN You can see why they were so mad at us. It will suprise You. That is IF You do any research at all.

Larry

How's that bathroom coming?

I start it this weekend.

Goatman-
re:But maybe those hostages in 1979 should've somehow predicted that not only was Reagan goint to be president, but he would engage in an illegal arms deal with the Iranians and Nicauraguans.

I never said anything about the hostages.

Not Hardly Cooper in the 80's I was spending a fair amount of time in the Principals office. I had no chance to sell anything to anybody.

Larry

Goatman-
When we have the fun new war with Iran, how many US soldiers do you suppose will be killed by Danni and Larry's stupid comments, versus the number killed by Reagan's illegal arms sold to Iran?

Correct me if I'm wrong, Larry, but wasn't operation Ajax in the '50s? So why were 52 americans punished for it in 1979? Why were they punished without a trial? Is this your idea of justice? I did the research and I just fail to find the connection. I keep asking, maybe you'll eventually tell me. What did those 52 hostages do that was so offensive to Iran? Not Eisenhower or the shah -- those 52 hostages? Do you understand the question?

What stupid comment did I make Cooper??

Larry

When we have the fun new war with Iran, how many US soldiers do you suppose will be killed by Danni and Larry's stupid comments, versus the number killed by Reagan's illegal arms sold to Iran?

probably about as many that are killed by your hypocrisy and presumtions, little piggy in your starched white shirt.

They were AMericans within reach Goatman Don';t You understand this??

Larry

Oh and Goatman I don't think YOU understand anything about Our dastardly dealings with the Iranians.

Larry

To win the "GWOT" you should first live free and without fear.

If you are incapable of doing that, surrender now because you've already lost all the battles and the war.

Yes, but if you are incapable of power-washing your ideological, hippie bullshit away from your perceptions of how the real world operates, you've also lost all the battles and the war.

Cocksuckers like Ahmadinejad don't hate the West because of some notions of abstract "imperialism" and "oppression" that were spoon-fed to them in academia by self-loathing professors enamored with 19th century texts written by self-loathing philosophers.

Cocksuckers like Ahmadinejad hate the West because it tolerates the mainstream existence of same ideological, hippie bullshit expressed on this website on a daily basis.

Cocksuckers like Ahmadinejad don't put large, standing armies in the field to defeat their enemies anymore. They take advantage of their enemy's tolerance and self-perceived open-mindedness to carry out acts of mass killing for political purposes.

Because they know that their enemy's populace is full of people like "Donnerboy"---and his stupid fucking simplistic platitudes about how "war is bullshit"..

"War" is not "bullshit" to people who would kidnap you and videotape themselves hacking your fucking head off.

"War" is not "bullshit" to people who would kill themselves flying fuel-laden airliners into skyscrapers with the intent of killing as many civilians as possible.

There are a lot of people in the world who still truly believe it God's Will to do these sorts of things. It is my government's job to prevent them from doing so.

And it seems the only explanantions we hear regarding the price we have to pay for for our government doing that job are the specious, hysterical and politically-based rants offered by people like "Donnerboy", who, without a hint of irony, bitch about their government's "oppressive" policies with impunity---in a public forum.

probably about as many that are killed by your hypocrisy and presumtions, little piggy in your starched white shirt.

???

Whatever, dude.

What stupid comment did I make Cooper??

Cooper, being the apologist that he is, won't answer even though he knows. So allow me. When I asked what the 52 hostages did to deserve to be taken hostage in 1979, you bring up an event that happened in the '50s.

That's stupid! Just about as stupid as Cooper relating it to an event that happened 8 years AFTER the event.

I still want to know what those 52 hostages did? Are you saying they should've stopped operation Ajax but didn't?

I think I can guess how Pinche Mao felt about the illegal arms sales to Iran in the 80's:

It pissed the libs and Dems off, so he was all for it.

Oh and Goatman I don't think YOU understand anything about Our dastardly dealings with the Iranians.

I don't think you understand my simple question:

What did those 52 hostages do that was so dastardly?

You are a lost cause Goatman I am afraid. If You do not have basic common sense I can not help You with that.

Larry

Goatman-
re: Cooper, being the apologist that he is, won't answer even though he knows. So allow me. When I asked what the 52 hostages did to deserve to be taken hostage in 1979, you bring up an event that happened in the '50s.

No, I didn't.

You are a lost cause Goatman I am afraid

I am. That's funny. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is you who justifies taking 52 people hostage for something that happened when a lot of them were babies.

Am I right or wrong, Larry? IT's a simple question.

They were AMERICANS Goatman THATS what they did wrong. They were punished for what Their Government had been doing to the Iranians since 1953. We sided with the Shah before anyone else. We allowed the atrocities to happen under the Shah because He was Our puppet Our "Toy" if You will. Oh and just a tidbit of information. The State Department officially declares Iran to be a STate SPonsor of Terror Yet Dick CHeney when He was the CEO of Halliburton did Business with Iran a STate Department Declared State SPonsor of Terror. You tell Me We don't fuck ourselves in the ass because of Our Dastardly deeds performed in the Middle East.

Larry

If You do not have basic common sense I can not help You with that.

But I do have it Larry. However, if you idea of common sense is to take hostages for something that someone else did 25 years earlier, I'll thank you for not imparting it on me.

Thank you for keeping your "common sense" to yourself, Larry.

They were AMERICANS Goatman THATS what they did wrong

Gotta love it. As someone said earlier today: You can't make this shit up. This is priceless. They were Americans.

God love you, Larry.

Larry you obviously feel a lot of guilt over that. I mean you must, being guilty of operation Ajax since you are an American and all. So why don't you turn yourself over to the Iranian authorities and accept your punishment?

When I asked what the 52 hostages did to deserve to be taken hostage in 1979, you bring up an event that happened in the '50s.

Why does the ME "deserve" to be meddled with by Western powers for the last 70 years or so?

Assasinations, dictators supported over democracies? Corporate strongarm tactics backed up by military and black ops?

As you reap so shall you sow.

Spud aint Iranian or American so Spud sez both sides behaved badly but that the US has the longer list of more egregious behaviours.

Right now Iran is supporting the "insurgency" in Iraq by supplying arms, money and other support. Considering the power vacuum deliberately manufactured by BushCo this was inevitable.

They have about as much right to do this as America has to be in Iraq, which is to say none.

Be Well.

See Goatman You have no clues all You do is spew. You never want to understand anything You just want to bloviate some Bullshit and deride what You don't understand or WON'T understand.

Larry

I think I can guess how Pinche Mao felt about the illegal arms sales to Iran in the 80's:

It pissed the libs and Dems off, so he was all for it.

If it furthered the interests of the United States at the time (which it did), I have no problem with it.

What I do have a problem with is little dumbasses like yourself who make lame attempts to reconfigure the point of contention in a thread about the Iranian President in 2007--- to a 20+ year-old leftist talking point.

You're a douche, Boyd.

Now go publish 3 posts a minute of irrelevant bullshit in the form of Socratic inquiries.

I never thought someone would beat BBOB at his own game

I didn't either, RN, but have you been reading Larry's latest posts? Must be something in the loony tune air tonight.

They were AMERICANS Goatman THATS what they did wrong.

Tell us again how your support the troops larry.

When you get your italics under control, just let me know by not posting in italics. Otherwise, when speaking of the past (late seventies and early eighties), it's not odd to refer to the activities of that time.

Posted by Cooper at 2007-09-21 12:37 AM


Coop -- Iran contra was in 1987, not early '80s. It happened 6 years after the hostage crisis was over. I've got the italics under control. Want to get your version of history under control, too?

Tell us again how your support the troops larry.

Posted by Bowa at 2007-09-21 01:08 AM | Reply

By wanting them home safe and sound where they belong Lokisfur instead of in Iraq where they DO NOT Belong. You Dig That Lokisfur??

Larry

Why does the ME "deserve" to be meddled with by Western powers for the last 70 years or so?

Assasinations, dictators supported over democracies? Corporate strongarm tactics backed up by military and black ops?

LOL :)

Its like a fuckin' drum machine.

Please bow your heads.

"God, Please bless me with the ignorance to tie all of your Creation into neat little knots of class and race-based narratives that explain everything to me in terms I might understand.

In your name we Pray."

Amen.

Goatman, after reading Larry's posts for 9 months now, I think I can safely say that he does not believe America deserves to win any war we engage in because he believes we brought all the hatred directed at us upon ourself. In other words, he believes that every attack on America and it's troops is justified.

In the same breath he will also tell you that he is a true american and a patriot. He is also quick to call anyone who disagrees with him "unamerican".

That's Larry in a nutshell.

more popcorn

By wanting them home safe and sound where they belong

You mean we shouldn't turn them over to the Iranian authorities to be punished for operation Ajax? They are Americans (and therefore guilty) after all, Larry.

What I do have a problem with is little dumbasses like yourself who make lame attempts to reconfigure the point of contention in a thread about the Iranian President in 2007--- to a 20+ year-old leftist talking point.

Really? Spud has a bigger problem with morons like Mousey Tongue, the Mange from Onco, Bleatmoan and NANCyboy ignoring history on a regular basis when it's inconvenient fer 'em (which is practically all the time).

'Course with y'all haffin' a history-challenged chimp as yer personal hero and saviour the notion does make a little more sense to Spud.

Which is to say, "some".

Be Well.

Spud has a bigger problem with morons like Mousey Tongue, the Mange from Onco, Bleatmoan and NANCyboy ignoring history on a regular basis when it's inconvenient fer 'em (which is practically all the time).

Don't forget to mention cooper, Spud. He twisted history more recently than anyone else on this thread. scroll up a few screens and see for yourself.

Oh, I forgot. He's a liberal. He gets a pass.

You mean we shouldn't turn them over to the Iranian authorities to be punished for operation Ajax? They are Americans (and therefore guilty) after all, Larry.

Goatman, you are correct. larry doesn't want the troops home for them to be safe -- he wants them to be prosecuted as "war criminals" - because, as he will tell you, since we are engaged in an Illegal war in Iraq -- whenever our troops kill...it's murder. Larry also believe we are responsible for every death that has taken place in Iraq at the hands of the insurgents, al-quada or anyone else since we entered Iraq in 2003.

Goatman-
re: "Don't forget to mention cooper, Spud. He twisted history more recently than anyone else on this thread. scroll up a few screens and see for yourself."

Care to elaborate?

First off Hmmmmmmmm Let's see

lokisfur

Contact User
Visit Home Page

Joined 2004/09/07
Visited 2006/09/06


Status: user


2004 and this is 2007 that makes it 3 YEARS since You have been Here Lokisfur aka Bowa. Now for Your other STatements. I do not belive the United STates should win wars that We do not hold the Legal Moral ethical High Ground when going into them. I am all for winning wars that We engage in Lawfully Morally and Ethically. Oh and Yes we have brought alot of Middle Eastern Hate upon Ourselves with Our Dastardly deeds.

Larry

Cocksuckers like Ahmadinejad hate the West because it tolerates the mainstream existence of same ideological, hippie bullshit expressed on this website on a daily basis.

They Hate out Freedoms!

Waaaaaaahhh!!

Wow, that was lame even by Mao standards.

(Yes, Mao does haff standards it's just really, really hard to tell most days)

Be Well.

Goatman-
Coop -- Iran contra was in 1987, not early '80s. It happened 6 years after the hostage crisis was over. I've got the italics under control. Want to get your version of history under control, too?

It gained attention in '87. The arms sales were in the early 80's.

Ahmadinejad hate the West

Ahmadinejad hates the US because we support Israel.

ignoring history on a regular basis when it's inconvenient fer 'em

The "history" is, that at any given time, the United States government acted in what it thought was in the best interests of the United States.

What dumbasses do is view those actions through a prism of 20, 30, or 50 years past and pretend as if their contemporary critique is somehow a validation of their ideology.

when speaking of the past (late seventies and early eighties), it's not odd to refer to the activities of that time.


Activities: We were talking about the hostage crisis and Iran Contra, right?

One was late seventies, early '80s. The other 1987.

Or are you going to spin and tell me you were referring to two different events? Those were the last two we were talking about, so I assumed these were the two you were referring to.

Mao's Prayer...

Please bow your heads.

"God, Please bless me with the ignorance...

Stop right there.

God has apparently seen fit to answer yer prayers there. You are abundantly blessed in the ignorance department, Mao.

Yer cup runneth over, in fact.

Be Well.

Goatman-
Also mid-80's.

To me the absolute worst thing to come out of the Iranian hostage incident was having to listen to Tony Orlando and Dawn sing "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree."

They Hate out Freedoms!

They hate our freedoms.

You really do need to come to terms with that.

To me the absolute worst thing to come out of the Iranian hostage incident was having to listen to Tony Orlando and Dawn sing "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree."

For me it was having to listen to my brother sing an off key rendition of Tony Orlando singing "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree."

Goatman-
Your point is that the Reagan administration illegally sold high-tech weaponry to Iran after the anti-American nuts took over in '79?

This is good how?

It gained attention in '87. The arms sales were in the early 80's.

Nice spin. But I'd expect nothing less from you, coop. Reagan was born in 1911. Why don't we just pretend it started then?

"Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree."

That song was in my head as I made my last post---because I heard it today.

Then I read it.

That's fucking weird.

Really weird.

Your point is that the Reagan administration illegally sold high-tech weaponry to Iran after the anti-American nuts took over in '79?

This is good how?

I give up, coop. I'll bite. How is it good?

Nice spin. But I'd expect nothing less from you, coop. Reagan was born in 1911. Why don't we just pretend it started then?

Posted by goatman at 2007-09-21 01:40 AM | Reply |

What?

Goatman-
re: Your point is that the Reagan administration illegally sold high-tech weaponry to Iran after the anti-American nuts took over in '79?


That's NOT good, in case you were still wondering.

Hey Spud, me and the wife are going to Seattle, Bellingham, etc. this winter or spring----because I want her to see that country, she ain't never seen it.

I want me and you to eat oysters and drink beer.

Hey Spud, me and the wife are going to Seattle, Bellingham, etc. this winter or spring----because I want her to see that country, she ain't never seen it.

I want me and you to eat oysters and drink beer.

Reagan was born in 1911.

The same year that the .45 automatic was adopted by the US Military as their official sidearm which stayed in service till about the end of Reagan's presidency

C: It gained attention in '87. The arms sales were in the early 80's.

Nice truth.

G: Nice spin.

Truth is not spin.

Be Well.

PS:Then I dont know what the world is coming to....Idiocracy I guess Fucking Potato HEAD.BwahahBwHAhhaAHBwaHAhaha

Two things.

First, it's pretty freakin' obvious to anybody with even half a brain that you "don't know what the world is coming to" or much of anything else.

Second.

They call me MISTA POTATOHEAD, ya skanky troll.

Learn these things or Spud'll have to tutor you in the ways of righteousness and in yer case that could take a while.

S'rsly.

"Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree."

That song was in my head as I made my last post-

Then I read it.

That's fucking weird.

Really weird.

Posted by Pinche_Mao at 2007-09-21 01:

That is odd, Pinche. You're thinking of the song in your mind in Texas the exact same time I'm typing out the words to it here in California and put it on the same thread. what are the chances of that.

That's NOT good, in case you were still wondering.

Thank you, coop. Neither are brussel sprouts.

Pinche-
re: The "history" is, that at any given time, the United States government acted in what it thought was in the best interests of the United States.

...and I suppose whether that activity was explicitly illegal or not doesn't matter as long as they had the best of intentions while secretly breaking the law and selling weapons to the nuts in Iran.

Pinche

Hey Spud, me and the wife are going to Seattle,...

I love Seattle. Washington is God's country -- beautiful and so green.

Goatman-
If you were asked, would you consider the existence of brussel sprouts better or worse than the executive branch secretly and illegally selling high-tech weapons to Iran?

I want me and you to eat oysters and drink beer.

Mmmmmm Beeeeeeer! Is there nothing it can't do?

Spud heard once that Oysters were supposed to be some kind of great aphrodisiac so Spud ate a dozen raw ones while out on a date but afterwords only 3 of them worked.

Guess the rest musta been duds or sommat.

Spud appreciates the offer but Spud aint going over the line until Dumbya is out of office. Spud hasn't been over the border since 1999 largely fer that reason. One potato protest kinda thing.

Of course, now that the Canadian dollar has achieved parity kinda it does make the offer rather more tempting.

Bee meet Bonnet.
Bonnet meet Bee.

Spud is think about it. Ta again.

Be Well.

You guys are ALL wrong. This whole thing started with the first Persian Empire. So there.

Cooper, do you believe the US is the only nation on earth that engages in covert operations?

Truth is not spin.

No it's not. But if we are going to ignore the year normally associated with the event, why not make it 1911? Reagan was born then and he was a key player in the event.

I think you missed the beginning of this, spud, so you're forgiven. Or if you didn't miss it and you know the full thread and are siding simply because of your politics (which you've been known to do), you are not forgiven. Anyway, in case of the former: The hostages were brought up. Cooper tied it into the Iran Contra issue, which clearly happened after the event was over. Doesn't matter if you call it 1981 or 1987 -- the hostages had been released. Therefore, there was no connection between the two. Cooper is putting his well honed spinning gears into motion by obfuscating with what year the Iran contra really took place.

You guys are ALL wrong. This whole thing started with the first Persian Empire. So there.

You're right. They're still pissed off about that Alexander the Great thing.

Cooper, do you believe the US is the only nation on earth that engages in covert operations?

Posted by Bowa at 2007-09-21 01:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Bowa-
Engaging in "covert operations" and intentionally defying the law by selling weapons to islamists in order to fund an illegal war elsewhere are two different things.

You're thinking of the song in your mind in Texas the exact same time I'm typing out the words to it here in California and put it on the same thread. what are the chances of that.

Maybe we were queer lovers in a past life.

I dunno.

One of them wierd Co-inky-dinks.

I gonna go to bed.

Ya'll be good.

Engaging in "covert operations" and intentionally defying the law by selling weapons to islamists in order to fund an illegal war elsewhere are two different things.

This explains why you so vociferously denounce the Bay of Pigs.

I love Seattle. Washington is God's country -- beautiful and so green.

It's a pretty city, the Emerald city.

Course it's got a lot of junkies too.

So does Vancouver, of course. Port Cities are always reknowned fer hookers and droogs. In Seattle's case Spud always reckoned part of the problem had to do with the Space Needle. Must be awfully hard to quit junk if everytime you look up you see a Needle as big as a freakin skyscraper.

That sed, Spud used to luff to go down and check out the Mariners, or the T-hawks or a Rolling Stones concert or sommat. Spud especially liked Whitby Island and used to go enjoy the annual airshow there fairly regularly.

It were the Land of Cheap Beer and legal, insanely kickass fireworks to a younger, sillier Spud.

Be Well.

How many US soldiers do you suppose will be killed by these in a war with Iran?


You like mentioning this hypothetical war with Iran as much as Buffy likes to talk about mind controlled sex slaves. Why don't you just wait until it happens and stop the stupid questions?

But, as Pinche Mao assures us, presidents only break the law for our own good (unless it involves sex, in which case even lying about a consensual affair is the height of evil).

Hey, I just realized that today (friday) is the day that someone is making billions from a stock trade that depends on a 9/11 type disaster. I wonder how many of those idiots who believed this will have the cajones to come out and admit how stupid they were this time tomorrow?

Why don't you just wait until it happens...

Because I'd rather it not happen, though you don't seem to care one way or the other. You seem to view constitutional democracy as a spectator sport, being a "moderate" and all.

You're thinking of the song in your mind in Texas the exact same time I'm typing out the words to it here in California and put it on the same thread. what are the chances of that.

My sister bought a house in OKC in the '80s. The first time she was showing it to me, we opened a closet and found a box full of old 45s. I was going through them and found one by the Lemon Pipers, "Green Tambourine". I said to my sister, "I haven't heard this song in a long time". The second I finished that sentence, that song came on the radio. True story.

To this day when my sister and I have a "moment", she'll start humming Green Tambourine and we'll both laugh.

Engaging in "covert operations" and intentionally defying the law by selling weapons to islamists in order to fund an illegal war elsewhere are two different things.

Cooper, That's not what I asked.

I'll ask again.

do you believe the US is the only nation on earth that engages in covert operations?