Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 15:55

I guess everyone in the government was in on it to?  All our boys dressed in Chem gear in 90 degree heat.... It means Colin Powell willfully lied to the U.N. It means all the top generals and naturally everyone involved in our government lied.... Lemme nough

Ah, you're finally getting the picture.

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 17:09

Henchman also challenged me to "suit up for the game".  The guy knows nothing about me.   It is nice to be called a ignorant mother fukker and have your countrymen that step forward to serve called cannon fodder....nice...

That's what they are. They might as well be walking around in big orange jumpsuits with fucking bullseye's painted on them and a sign that says "Shoot me".

Wether you like it or not, this isn't a war that can be won. And every soldier over there is just a sitting duck whome's death will serve absolutely no purpose. And THAT pisses me off.
And to support a president and government who allows this to continue is pathetic.

They should have gone in, dragged Saddam and his main henchman's sorry asses off to international court and tried them for crimes against humanity. Instead of having photo ops with the guy.

[t(h)ik]

Henchman...

The first thing you notice is that this "communique" is written in the past tense...and I don't mean as in the meeting but as in the regime....WTF???

Got any explanation...also when you have sources with flag burning advertisements on the same page....please...

But I am still studying it..

Think it's going to be in the "we sold Saddam WMD file"

[t(h)ik]

Alright...am I that dumb?

They even state "if Saddam uses WMD"

It's your source!

WTF?

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 17:09

Frankly, I don't understand the logic.  If you have a studio in Denmark and Henchie has a studio in Canada and we all have an opinion, what difference does it make where my home of record is or why I came here...WTF?

I am an American who grew up in Holland, thinking Americ was teh cat's ass. I save dmy money and moved to San Francisco, only to learn firsthand what a pathetic place it has become.

People living on the streets and in skums you wouldn't let a dog live in. And a dog eat dog attitude.
I was lucky to have toured the US, and visited numerous cities. Most fo them are shitholes.

I moved to Canada, and now am looking at moving back to Europe, to live with normal people again.
I do not want to live in the US again, as it is filled with the same egotistical, selfish, what's in it for me kind of people like sixtiksix.

[t(h)ik]

Selfish...

Um..


And you base this insult on?



The U.S. is filled with _________. Hooray, they're people just like you and me.

This is your argument?

Along with the downing street memo where it clearly states their concern about Saddam using WMD in the first day of the attack...

Didn't read that?:

henchman provided "secret Downing Street Memo on Mon, 04 July 2005 02:53

"For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary"

Um, usually when you are a argumentative and the insulting type you don't cite sources that disagree precisely with your MAIN POINT!!!!

[t(h)ik]

Also on the thread about taking a job in America I believe you said it mattered how much the job paid....let's just see if we can find it....

How can this be?

A principaled man like you going to a country full of horrible people just for money?

henchman wrote on Fri, 13 May 2005 20:09

Plush wrote on Fri, 13 May 2005 10:01 No doubt a low pay job. 3-4 years experience is nothing. Keep on dreaming for the $80K---absolutely no way! slave job! Well, it's what I am worth. So as I said, I wouldn't move for less than that.

henchman wrote on Mon, 04 July 2005 02:53

I do not want to live in the US again, as it is filled with the same egotistical, selfish, what's in it for me kind of people like sixtiksix.

So let's see

Egotistical: "it's what I am worth"

Selfish: "I wouldn't move for less than that"

What's in it for me kind of people: "EIGHTY THOUSAND U.S. DOLLARS BABY!!!


You are dismissed...

Tik

[JackJohnston]

Quote:

OK man, Richard Clark...He was at the top of the food chain in the intelligence chain when 9-11 happened. And in his book he blamed Bush. That's cool. He's probably right but that's quite a lot of arrogance to be cashing in when he fukken blew the biggest intel scoop of his lifetime. Am I close?

No, he wanted to do a snatch and grab of Osama. Clinton said he didn't think he had the political capitol and it would hurt the party. Bush ignored Clarke. Everything Clarke said was accurate, they just choose to ignore him. The Bush administration, other than Clarke, even made it easier for terrorists to get inside the US by supporting the Visa Express program. Clarke knew Saudi Arabia had been playing both sides and supporting schools that teach strong anti-American sentiments, creating a breeding ground for terrorists.

Clarke didn't make an intelligence failure, they rest of the administration simply ignored him. The White House would like to pretend that he made an intelligence failure because Wolfowitz lied and is trying to cover his tracks. The Bush administration has been doing a good job of getting some of the major jackasses out of the administration. But that's not the case with Clarke at all. It's not just Clarke who says this, he has tons of supporters within the political system that support his claims.

Quote:

he fukken blew the biggest intel scoop of his lifetime.

This is absolute proof that you have not read his book, or you just don't, and probably never will understand the current political circumstances.

Jack

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 17:59

Selfish...

"So you brought up the homeless.

Weren't they called hobos in the seventies?

Are there churches that offer to take them in?

Private citizens?

Action groups?

Should we go out with tranquilizer darts and send them to an island?

Teach me something here. I hung out with the hobos in San Fran and they were all drunks. I offered to buy them Scotch but they insisted on Thunderbird, so that's what we drank..mmmm mmmmm...

Do you seriously want me to believe there are bums people because a lay-about from Texas who had more money than his competitors became president....and if he wasn't there the homeless people would be small business owners?

Henchie...help me out here...

Tell me about the families where the kids are catching the school bus from sewer grate #34...

If there is such a thing maybe we could adopt a family...meaning the REP forum."

This says enough about you and your narrowminded,black and white look of the world.

You are the kind of person who wants people to thinkt hat there aren't whole families livign inexterem poverty on the streets in the US.

I judge a country on how it treats it's poor. Not how it treats it's riich. And for me, of all the countries I've lived in, the US is last.

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 17:51

Alright...am I that dumb? They even state "if Saddam uses WMD" It's your source! WTF?

Yes you are that dumb. It clearly states "IF" not "When". Very big difference. And they're not even talkign about them being used against another country, but obviously about using them, against an invading force.

I guess you skipped this part:

"The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, WMD capability was less than that of Libya,North Korea or Iran. .
We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force."

Notice how they ahven't invaded Libya, North Korea or Iran. Yet.

[t(h)ik]

JackJohnston wrote on Mon, 04 July 2005 03:44

This is absolute proof that you have not read his book, or you just don't, and probably never will understand the current political circumstances. Jack

You're right on both counts.

It would be cool if his story was closer to "I delivered the FBI e-mails to the commander and cheif" though.

I have no doubt that power struggles and politics weaken national security.  And you seemed very well informed on this issue.

I really have to yield to your position.

It would be like telling you how to work with Zack Wylde...I have no idea...

But one can only hope...

Lemme nough

Tik

[t(h)ik]

henchman wrote on Mon, 04 July 2005 04:03

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 17:51 Alright...am I that dumb? They even state "if Saddam uses WMD" It's your source! WTF? Yes you are that dumb. It clearly states "IF" not "When". Very big difference. And they're not even talkign about them being used against another country, but obviously about using them, against an invading force. I guess you skipped this part: "The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, WMD capability was less than that of Libya,North Korea or Iran. . We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force." Notice how they ahven't invaded Libya, North Korea or Iran. Yet.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Lemme nough

The point is Henchman...They thought he had them (WMD)....

sheesh....

Thanx for bringing up Libya...Khadaffi Duck coughed his shit up after the hammer came down....

Guess that's another feather in the US's hat...Less WMD's more stability...

An invading force...like the Kurds?

Gotta love it..


Uh

Dismissed..

[bblackwood]

You guys knock yourselves out, but further personal/character attacks on other posters will be removed, and will likely mean removal of said poster.

Keep it on topic, not on each other.

[henchman]

sixtiksix wrote on Sun, 03 July 2005 19:12

The point is Henchman...They thought he had them (WMD)....

Thinbking they have them and having them isn't a reason for an invasion.
Unless you think that the cops "thinking" you have a gun in your car are allowed to blow you away, before searching for it.

I guess you also missed the date on the memo:


DAVID MANNING
(Prime Minister Tony Blair's foreign policy adviser)

From: Matthew Rycroft
(Manning's aide)

Date: 23 July 2002

[t(h)ik]

Henchie,

That is a logical point.

Totally agree

I think based on this point you can call into question the government's and the president's competence.

There is a chasm between assumption and lying.

Would you agree?

To ask in another way.

You are using this memo as the lynchpin for argument.

Don't even know if this is real but nevertheless let's say it is.

In this memo they talk "as" he had WMDs

A lie would be something like:

"Let's invade Iraq Tony, even though we know he doesn't have WMD's and won't use them, but tell the public otherwise".

This would be grounds for arrest and prosecution in my opinion.

George Bush in Jail, Tony Blair in jail.

If the letter is even real.

But there is no evidence of lying because they didn't know he had WMD's they assumed based on:

Gassing the Kurds (pretty strong evidence)
Constantly playing cat and mouse with the inspectors.
Intelligence reports
The fact that he is an evil fukkstain and they wanted to have any    excuse to flush the cocksucker down the toilet.

That is the cool thing about this forum.  You learn and in this case I am even more convinced than ever because of your diligent research.



Lemme nough