good question

[joblo7]

france has a new us-butt-kissing-in- chief, its ok to eat french fries again.!!

their politics have changed. not our barbaric policies.

 

i repeat! there is no WAR in iraq!!!

 

we are invading and pillaging.

like the other 30 countries we have 'helped' since ww2

 

 

 

 

[joblo7]

i am surprised that a leader like that thing-guy-monkey-moron could cause problems for humanity.!!

 

 

[JayB]

speaks a lot more truth than busch/chainy duet.

 

of course, the hollow coast has been eggs-zajerated.

of course, the manhattan renov project is that.

of course, we are the all-conquering-imperialist-regime.

of course, we will invade iran.

of course, you will believe 'your' 'leaders'.

of course, every mfjo paper in the land will tell you what to believe.

of course , you will follow.

 

free speech is .

 

Serious questions:

 

1)Where were you educated?

2)How would you rate your ability to translate your thoughts into written English?

dont go off topic just yet.

read it again.-

ctp belief, differ rant is not wrong by deaf-a-nation.

 

3)(When you can summon a moment of coherence - take your time)If you work, do you work in a field which requires you to communicate with others in written English?

 

[cj001f]

JayB-

channeling my channels of suckdom. Feed that East Coast rage! Feel the power!

[KaskadskyjKozak]

speaks a lot more truth than busch/chainy duet.

 

of course, the hollow coast has been eggs-zajerated.

of course, the manhattan renov project is that.

of course, we are the all-conquering-imperialist-regime.

of course, we will invade iran.

of course, you will believe 'your' 'leaders'.

of course, every mfjo paper in the land will tell you what to believe.

of course , you will follow.

 

free speech is .

 

Serious questions:

 

1)Where were you educated?

2)How would you rate your ability to translate your thoughts into written English?

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

france has a new us-butt-kissing-in- chief, its ok to eat french fries again.!!

their politics have changed. not our barbaric policies.

 

The barbarians are at the gate and they wear turbans. if you pulled your head out of your ass you might see things the way they are, rather than upside down.

 

i repeat! there is no WAR in iraq!!!

 

You repeat? No, sir, you babble. Endlessly and incoherently.

 

we are invading and pillaging.

 

We are not "invading". That's present tense. We have invaded, past perfect.

 

Pillaging? You stupid little monkey. Read a history book to find out what pillaging actually entails.

 

like the other 30 countries we have 'helped' since ww2

 

As for the "we" - fuck off - you're not one of "us" - Americans, that is.

[mattp]

I'm not sure what the term is, though, for someone who argues that we should support repressive regimes even when they are not on our side, and doing so is contrary - if not detrimental - to our national interests.

 

The term is obvious: traitor. A good example is the Bush administration. An example of that regime is the house of Saud.

 

Am I wrong?

[JayB]

Why don't you start by telling us why it is that you have concluded that you are right in this case.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Why don't you start by telling us why it is that you have concluded that you are right in this case.

 

lawyers don't answer questions; they ask them.

 

 

[mattp]

Why don't you start by telling us why it is that you have concluded that you are right in this case.

 

Lets see. (1) The Bush team has expressed consistent support for a repressive regime (Saudi's) even when it was not on our side, and (2) doing so has been contrary - if not detrimental - to our national interests.

 

Isn't that what you asked about?

[Dechristo]

"The meeting and their approach showed that Americans, even in a cultural position, are cowboys and nothing more," said Rasoul Qaresi, shopping at a grocery store in Tehran.

[Dechristo]

Refers to Israel as "Zionist regime" and "illegal".

[joblo7]

Refers to Israel as "Zionist regime" and "illegal".

 

he is largely correct. american zionist jews dont really agree with him.

[joblo7]

speaks a lot more truth than busch/chainy duet.

 

of course, the hollow coast has been eggs-zajerated.

of course, the manhattan renov project is that.

of course, we are the all-conquering-imperialist-regime.

of course, we will invade iran.

of course, you will believe 'your' 'leaders'.

of course, every mfjo paper in the land will tell you what to believe.

of course , you will follow.

 

free speech is .

 

Serious questions:

 

1)Where were you educated?

2)How would you rate your ability to translate your thoughts into written English?

dont go off topic just yet.

read it again.-

ctp belief, differ rant is not wrong by deaf-a-nation.

 

3)(When you can summon a moment of coherence - take your time)If you work, do you work in a field which requires you to communicate with others in written English?

you cannot stay on topic, simply because truth is ignoring you.

[joblo7]

france has a new us-butt-kissing-in- chief, its ok to eat french fries again.!!

their politics have changed. not our barbaric policies.

 

The barbarians are at the gate and they wear turbans. if you pulled your head out of your ass you might see things the way they are, rather than upside down.

 

yes, my 'media-fed-truth-avoiding-mf'r' , the iraqi war machine is occupying brooklin . they are at the gates of manhattan .there are tanks everywhere. yet bhagdad is free.

did you say upside down???

 

i repeat! there is no WAR in iraq!!!

 

truth requires effort.

 

we are invading and pillaging.

 

We are not "invading". That's present tense. We have invaded, past perfect.

 

Pillaging: 'steal using violence, esp in war time.'

 

if that does not apply to what we are doing in iraq, then the dictionary is wrong.

 

like the other 30 countries we have 'helped' since ww2

As for the "we" - fuck off - you're not one of "us" - Americans, that is.

 

always avoid the substance.

we are all americans.iraqis.towelheads.niggers.jews.turks and balinese.

 

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

Why don't you start by telling us why it is that you have concluded that you are right in this case.

 

Lets see. (1) The Bush team has expressed consistent support for a repressive regime (Saudi's) even when it was not on our side, and (2) doing so has been contrary - if not detrimental - to our national interests.

 

Isn't that what you asked about?

 

I was hoping for something a tad more substantive, like the manner in which the Bush administration's policies towards the Saudi's differs from those of the Clinton administrations (or those of any sitting president of your choosing), what new policy initiatives or modifications would constitute an improvement in your view, etc.

 

My own view is that there's a genuine case to be made that the status quo that prevails in Saudi Arabia has the potential to result in outcomes that are not in the interest of the Saudi Royal Family or the remainder of the population, and that there are changes that could be made which benefit both Saudi Arabia and the US. In particular, I think that this administration or any that succeeds it should argue that in the absence of substantial political and economic reforms, there's a very real chance that the chickens of jihad that the Saudi state is setting loose - through the direct funding of violent, extremist Islam, the export of jihadis, domestic repression, failure to cultivate economic development in non-state sectors, etc - could eventually come home to roost in a manner that would make the Bolshevik's treatment of the Romanov's look like a cotillion by comparison, and that this outcome is all the more likely if Iraq goes under.

 

I think that this is but one of many ways in which the US could manage the relationship with the Saudi's differently, but I'm more interested in hearing what course of action you'd advocate.

[tvashtarkatena]

"The meeting and their approach showed that Americans, even in a cultural position, are cowboys and nothing more," said Rasoul Qaresi, shopping at a grocery store in Tehran.

 

Why, I'd like to brake that cocksucker's back....

Edited September 26, 2007 by tvashtarkatena

[tvashtarkatena]

2)How would you rate your ability to translate your thoughts into written English?

 

...said the sophist to the freak.

[joblo7]

isnt that like calling blacks, kettles.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Pillaging: 'steal using violence, esp in war time.'

 

if that does not apply to what we are doing in iraq, then the dictionary is wrong.

 

Based on your incoherent blathering am not surprised that you don't know the meaning of "pillage".

 

Main Entry: 2 pillage

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): pil·laged; pil·lag·ing

transitive verb : to plunder ruthlessly : LOOT

intransitive verb : to take booty

synonym see RAVAGE

- pil·lag·er noun

 

I reject the idea that we are "pillaging" Iraq by definition.

[No. 13 Baby]

Tucker, you really ought to rethink the spelling bee approach to Spray.

 

 

 

 

[Peter_Puget]

What no followup? or Media Bias Part XXXII

[joblo7]

Pillaging: 'steal using violence, esp in war time.'

 

if that does not apply to what we are doing in iraq, then the dictionary is wrong.

 

Based on your incoherent blathering am not surprised that you don't know the meaning of "pillage".

 

Main Entry: 2 pillage

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): pil·laged; pil·lag·ing

transitive verb : to plunder ruthlessly : LOOT

intransitive verb : to take booty

synonym see RAVAGE

- pil·lag·er noun

 

I reject the idea that we are "pillaging" Iraq by definition.

 

THEN YOU MUST LOOK CLOSER.!!!!!!!!!!!!

(dont ask the guys doing the pillaging if its true!!!)

[underworld]

Pillaging: 'steal using violence, esp in war time.'

 

if that does not apply to what we are doing in iraq, then the dictionary is wrong.

 

Based on your incoherent blathering am not surprised that you don't know the meaning of "pillage".

 

Main Entry: 2 pillage

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): pil·laged; pil·lag·ing

transitive verb : to plunder ruthlessly : LOOT

intransitive verb : to take booty

synonym see RAVAGE

- pil·lag·er noun

 

I reject the idea that we are "pillaging" Iraq by definition.

 

THEN YOU MUST LOOK CLOSER.!!!!!!!!!!!!

(dont ask the guys doing the pillaging if its true!!!)

 

no matter who is asked...if YOU disagree with them - they have an agenda and/or are evil and/or are blind and/or just plain stupid

 

we can quote news outlets, blogs, iraqis...etc etc... it won't matter to you.

[No. 13 Baby]

virendra7 is the Ornette Coleman of Spray.

 

EHTdc36627k