RRC Archives

You are right. Suprised was the wrong word. But on with the fight...

Americans that Saddam Hussein was chatting on the cell phone with the guys that piloted the planes on 9/11 and then idiots like YOU keep propogating these lies

Man, maybee I'm getting old, but I really don't recall saying or implying that.
While there are conspiracies that bush indeed was one of the islamic terrorist and a clone has taken his place, it's fairly fair to say that terrorists were directly involved in 9/11.

While I did not say that saddam was on the cell phone with the 9/11 dudes, I do have a book from 1991 about saddam's tradition of state-sponsered terrorism. For I minute I thout that would help, but then I realized: The BUSH EVIL EMPIRE was in power at that time. Therefore, the book is of no account (for political argument).

Here is an excerpt from the back cover: "Adnan, the highest ranking terrorist ever to defect to the West, is the major intellegence asset to the US...It is not only the personal story of the making and unmaking of an Iraqi terrorist. It is also the storyof american complicity in the creation of the Iraqi terror empire...Iraq had developed the most far-flung terrorist organization in the world, supassing Libia and Syria..."

While I don't take the book at its word, it is not exactly fiction, and was published LONG before 'Shrub' Jr. went into Iraq.

You vote, don't you?

Yes, I voted for Harry Brown in 2000. So you should thank me for not voting for bush, and everyone else (all 10 of us) who voted for him...cause you know we wouldn't be voting democrat! Just think, if brown had dropped out, Bush might have won the popular election!

Which would have been better. Cause then the democrats would have focused on a new canidate right away. But they held onto the voting black hole that is al gore.
Then I would have had someone to vote for this fall.

So far I see kerry's plan as this:
Escalate war in Iraq
Send 40,000 soliders (god bless them)
Make unemployment 0% (uh, sure...)
Repeal no child left behind act (hey, now were talkin')
Increase all budgets
Increase all taxes
Repeal tax cuts
Spurt red catsup all over his staff while viciously wagging a bottle between his legs and shout "I have an infection!, I have an infection!!"
Call his wife names in public
oh, and how could I forget:
Cause all democrats to lose faith in their party!

stupid motherfuckers that believe those prisoners were "terrorists" and deserved what happened to them will keep bringing shame on our great country

Definitly agree here. I won't condemn them outright cause I wasn't there, but I must say the electric chair was made for a reason. Parhaps punishing those who abuse prisoners should be one of them.

Admittedly you're only about 1/135,000,000th of the problem

Tell me, oh wise one, which connection I must cease to make in order become the solution. And I want it to be so that I can singlehandedly change the world. Come on. Let's go.

You've gotta give up that ketchup fetish. Man, that's just nasty.

It doesn't matter anyway, we're going to run out of oil, the world's climate is going to go so fucking haywire we'll all be running around with sticks and rocks, stealing each other's polluted carrots and dying very young and ugly and burning our horses to stay warm and fed.

And it's all Bush's fault! Barbara Bush, that is. She's the wicked witch that's whipping the hounds of war behind it all. If you kill her you'll change the world. There.

huggybear wrote: Increase all budgets
Increase all taxes

It's funny how the right wingers always go on about balanced budgets but every time they take control they run the deficit through the upper layers of the atmosphere. I'm blaming you for that, too.

I could go on for hours proving that progressive taxation is not only fair but is essential to the high quality of life we Americans enjoy. Especially during a war we shouldn't be cutting the taxes on the ultra-wealthy. During WWI and WWII and Korea and Viet Nam, the taxes on the top brackets were increased to up to 90% to pay for it. The Bush people seem to think it's best to just spend money we don't have on a war that shouldn't have occurred and in the meantime they'll bankrupt local and state governments with unfunded mandates like the "no child left behind" program. They manage to convince people that a tax like the estate tax is going to effect them when there are less than a thousand people a year that paid the tax. The double taxation argument is bogus and the family farm argument is a lie (there has never been a farm sold as a result of the estate tax). But Rush Limbaugh convinced millions that when Grandpa dies and leaves them $10,000 the government is going to take it all when, in fact, the Federal gov't won't touch a penny.
But I don't feel like arguing about this because, like I said, I could go on for hours.

I want to fight about stupid fucking jocks buttfucking prisoners!

On a side note, I was kind of convinced back before the war started that we were about to witness the most amazing political meltdown in recent history. When Saddam started releasing prisoners and running around with his head covered I had this feeling that if the pressure continued his government would just fall apart. We might have been able to help things along by supporting the opposition (which we failed to do under Bush I resulting in thousands of deaths) rather than sending our troops in (until requested as a peace keeping mission) and in the meantime we could be sifting through the dust of Afghanistan and Pakistan to find Osama Bin Laden and put his fucking head on a stick.

But we don't know what we don't know. Some things are unknowable. There are things we know we don't know and there are other things we don't know we don't know.

http://www.poe-news.com/features.php?feat=31845

It's funny how the right wingers always go on about balanced budgets but every time they take control they run the deficit through the upper layers of the atmosphere

You are correct. THe problem is that repulicans only TALK about ' big government'
They never do anything about it, just like they never do anything to reduce illigal imigrants (cheap labor- anyone?). They only use the 'big government' idea because
1) Most people fear the word 'big'
2) They want to avoid having to really justify any cuts that are made, so that they can cut service programs and funnel more money into devloping buisness.
3) Because it's easy to get people wipped up over the fact that, for a middle class person like myself, I lose 30% of my income to taxes. You can argue that it is right, but you can never argue that people will like it.

Didn't Saddam offer to pay $25,000 to each palestinian homicide bomber or thier family when they bombed Israelies?

Doesn't that make Saddam a terrrorist?

He did gas the Kurds for fun didn't he?

Texas Pete wrote:Didn't Saddam offer to pay $25,000 to each palestinian homicide bomber or thier family when they bombed Israelies?

Doesn't that make Saddam a terrrorist?

He did gas the Kurds for fun didn't he?

Hey! Lookie here! Someone watches the Fox News show "How to Regurgitate the White House Talking Points"! I hear that it takes the average Fox viewer several hours of programming to be able to barf back just one talking point, and this guy not only barfed back 3 whole items, he went for the extra credit with the propogandistic phrasing "homicide bomber". Shit, even the White House press secretary gave up on that one!

Or is it really Dick Cheney logging in from his 'undiscolosed location'?

Pete, since you watch so much FNC, did they cover the Secretary of State's recent admission that the whole "mobile biological lab" thing was make-believe? Remember that right after the invasion, Dick Cheney was going around making statements claiming that we actually found one of them? 100% doo-doo! Why do I get the feeling that Hannity isn't going to lead with this tonight. (Also, I like how they stuck Powel with having to deliver the bad news. Just like Viet Nam movies, they always put the black guy on point to wander into the boobytraps. Or it would be if anyone in the White House had served in Viet Nam except Powel himself....)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3596033.stm
or is the Beeb yet more 'liberal-biased media'?

Kinda pokes a hole in "U.S. Confident Saddam Had Mobile WMD Lab":
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,87997,00.html

"But!," you say, "They just found WMDs in the shells that were rigged as roadside IEDs!" The thing that you aren't going to hear on Fox (unless you listen very, very closely) is that they were very, very old shells that appear to have been mislabeled. To quote the small type far down the page on the Fox site "Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war. Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time." These shells simply do not represent the immenent threat that Bush hyped as the basis for the invasion.

But, to actually address your points. Yes, Sadam was a horrible, bad person. While he didn't gas Kurdish towns "just for fun", he certainly did commit crimes agains humanity. That's why it's so repulsive that Don Rumsfeld actually went to Iraq in the 80s (after it was know that Sadam was gassing Kurds) to negotiate oil deals with him.

Here's a link from the National Security Archives.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Nice shit-eatin' grin, Rummy!

Rumsfeld's briefing papers for the trip were released a few months ago, and what he was told to tell Sadam was: 'Yeah, in public the US is going to gripe about you gassing Kurds, but in private, we like you and we want to do business.' Nice! How's that for the moral high-ground.

Yes, Sadam offered money to the families of suicidal Palestinian militants. No one is confused that that was a very bad thing to do. From our perspective that certainly does make him party to "terrorism." But that's the problem with the word 'terrorist'. Don't forget that from the perspective of a lot of people in Central America who lost loved ones, Ollie North (and Ronald Regan) funding right-wing death squads makes them, and by extension the US, a bunch of "terrorists". It's a worthless word, because your friends are always 'freedom fighters' and your enemies are always 'terrorists'.

We are never going to win a military "war on terrorism".

But we CAN starve the extremists of support and send them back to the dark corners of the world by acting justly around the world.

come on over and play with us, fellas.

http://seclimbers.nuivo.com/phpBB2/

Texas Pete wrote:Didn't Saddam offer to pay $25,000 to each palestinian homicide bomber or thier family when they bombed Israelies?

Doesn't that make Saddam a terrrorist?

He did gas the Kurds for fun didn't he?

Holy Cow Tom! This guy is definately an insider... and look he is from Texas! I bet he is George's Daddy's Brother's Daughter's Friend's Husband.

Wow, somehow I missed Tom's post. Dude, if I was gay, I'd gladly give you a reach around. But I'm not, so don't ask.

So much has happened in the last couple of weeks...

What does everyone think about the way Shrub and Cheney are still claiming there's a strong connection between Al Qaida Iraq? And why hasn't anyone called them on the fact they've been implying a direct connection by mentioning 9/11 in the same sentence as Iraq in every response to questions about Iraq? It's the constant drum of the right wing machine. Iraq, 9/11, terrorist(ism), and Al Qaida have been repeated in close proximity to each other for over two years now by every member of the administration that had a microphone in their face. But they all knew perfectly well there was no connection but they needed to create one. Always "on point," always "on message." It's creepy, really.

Even Fox News has given a huge thumbs up to Farenheit 9/11. Anyone going to see it next weekend?

Another thing that's been bothering me a lot lately is how little attention has been given to what Shrub has done to our environmental laws and enforcement. It's been a long, slow process but any of you that can remember a major city in the late 70's will know we've done a lot of good for a lot of people by improving vehicles and other pollution sources. We don't have rivers and lakes catching fire any more, for instance. But Shrub has been working from the first stroke of his pen to block, de-fund, or destroy by decree the entire system we've built up over a half a century. It never satisfied the far left and it never satisfied the far right but it took care of the desires of most everybody else which is the way a democracy is supposed to work. By Executive Order and manipulation of legislation these people have set back the environmental clock to a place where it will take at least ten years to bring it back up to where it was before Shrub. We should be forcing the Paradise coal plant and other ancient coal plants to completely replace their facilities with state of the art. In the long run this would pay off in increased efficiency, more jobs created to do the work, etc. but our laws don't reward farsighted-ness. But what Shrub has done is basically allow these plants to just build bigger pipes and larger ovens. Scrubber?!? Ha! Unproven "scientifically" (ok, let's jump really aside here and note that the scientific community has made the unprecedented step of condemning a sitting President for ignoring and manipulating scientific findings) at least by the industry paid labs. Need to reduce the amount of mercury we're eating? Fuck that! Burn more coal! That's the Shrub way! Cheney says let's remove more mountain tops rather than use less air conditioning or maybe turn shit off when we leave the room. God forbid we don't run to the store in our GODDAMNED SUBURBAN even though it's only a half mile away. Why not ride your fucking bicycle to get a quart of milk? It's because Saddam Hussein is a member of Osama Bin Laden's bridge club. That's why. Fuck bicycles. Saddam is a pilot. Pilots crashed into the Twin Towers. Saddam is in Al Qaida. Makes perfect sense.

here's some right-wing propoganda for you, Alan:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial ... =110005237

I hope you're whining that we're in the Balkans, too.

btw, I'm not "right wing", I'm a capitalist.