FRIHOST • FORUMS • SEARCH • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Chemical Attacks - by US Forces // Impeach Bush





bgillingham
Isn't combustion a chemical reaction?

The bomb that killed Zarqawi as well as many of the bombs that were used in Afghanistan were the type that suck all of the air out of the cave or building by means of combustion. The bomb is specially designed to leave no breathable air, and to incenerate the victim's lungs. Now, I ask you - chemical weapon or not? Definition of combustion at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_reaction.

In fact, our F-16's are equipped to carry other inhumane weapons such as cluster bombs. The use of cluster bombs is banned by The Geneva convention.

If Bush ever says anything as stupid as "Bring it on" again, somebody should be able to remove him from the controls immediately. Impeach George Bush as soon as possible. Impeach Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Gonzalez, Rove, Hughes, Addington.

Bush is as close to the freaking devil as anyone could be. I know that there is no real devil, but Bush embodies the traits described in those religious books. He manipulates everybody to make them think that he is on their side. More Americans are beginning to see that the "evil doers" (as Bush loves to say) are the ones in the white house. When will these sheep open their eyes and realize that the sheepdog is really a wolf!?

After I typed the previous paragraph, I had to search on that topic - Google for "+Bush +devil" had 14,300,000 results. Hmph. Would you allow the devil to run America - or the World? Shouldn't we (especially the evangelists to whom he lied) do everything in our power to make sure that this Bush doesn't make it any further on his apparant "Reign"?

Balthamos
Combustion is the process of burning something, so yes, it can be considered as a chemical reaction. However, a chemical weapon, as defined by Wikipedia, is " warfare (and associated military operations) using the toxic properties of chemical substances to kill, injure or incapacitate an enemy". All bombs explode, and that's combustion, and we certainly cannot classify everything as a chemical weapon. The definition is more commonly put to tear gas or other such weapons.

It's a kill or be killed world. You think the enemy follows Geneva? Hell no, the first thing they are going to shoot is the medvacs coming in for the wounded. The only concern should be to end this war as quickly as possible.

You should stand by Bush, whether you like him or not. He is our President, and we cannot be shunning him. You forget that he is managing an entire country here; something that is not easily done.

The reason you are coming up with so many devilish results with Bush's name is because he is a politician, and a vast majority of the world do not like politicians.

You also forget the fact that no one can be peaceful. Out of the entire known history, there has only been brief spurts of true peace. All the other times, someone is warring with another. The truth is that there will always be wars and killing going on, simply because we are all human.

~Balthamos
S3nd K3ys
bgillingham wrote:

If Bush ever says anything as stupid as "Bring it on" again, somebody should be able to remove him from the controls immediately. Impeach George Bush as soon as possible. Impeach Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Gonzalez, Rove, Hughes, Addington.


I'll discount the tin-foil hat stuff (which, BTW, was most of it), and only (briefly) address the part quoted above...

Please, PLEASE start the procedings already will ya??

Just ****ing do it and quit talking about it already. Seriously, this is getting old.

Rolling Eyes

I've been listening to ignorants like you for years and I have yet to see anyone do anything except spew shit from their mouths.

If Bush really is Hitler, the Devil, breaking the ****ing law or what ever, then quit talking about it and get him out already. You can do that can't you? You know, like they did to Clinton when HE broke the law?

Oh, wait.

That's right...

You can't. Bush hasn't broken the law!

DOH! Laughing Laughing Laughing
bgillingham
Quote:
I've been listening to ignorants like you for years and I have yet to see anyone do anything except spew **** from their mouths.

If Bush really is Hitler, the Devil, breaking the ****ing law or what ever, then quit talking about it and get him out already. You can do that can't you? You know, like they did to Clinton when HE broke the law?


Nobody has done anything about it yet? There is no "Kenneth Star" this time around, but there are many groups acting. Check out Wiki Movement to impeach George W. Bush. Are you saying that I am not doing anything about getting him impeached? My discussions here are one thing that millions of people across the US are taking. You are truly blind or deaf.

They will prove that Bush has broken the law. There are so many direct implications about the CIA leak case (Cheney and Bush may be indicted), as well as the Jack Abramoff case, the NSA spying case. These are direct implications, and this is the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

Don't you pay attention to the news? I believe that so many of you are wearing blinders. For some reason, you missed the fact that the headline YESTERDAY was : 408 related stories in Google News. Just read the titles of a few to get the idea that ACLU an millions of americans want the laws to be enforced. Many of these stories question the legality of it.

There was a law. Bush claimed to not have to adhere to laws anymore becuase he supposedly got Congress' permission to use "Any means necessary" to defeat the terrorist enemy. The problem is, why dodge the process of getting warrants? You will learn more over the next few weeks about what ELSE the NSA is spying on.

So, when asked before about spying on Americans, Bush once said (paraphrasing, but you should reckognize the words) "Nothing has changed, when you hear that we are going after terrorists there is a warrant involved. The fact is, at the time, he knew full well that warrantless wiretapping was going on. That was a lie. There are no two ways about it. He broke the law - no argument should be needed.

Go ahead and keep buying the lies of the devil. I think that it even says in those religious books that even in the face of truth, people will continue to be led astray by him.
S3nd K3ys
bgillingham wrote:


Go ahead and keep buying the lies of the devil. I think that it even says in those religious books that even in the face of truth, people will continue to be led astray by him.


Laughing Laughing Laughing

So Bush really IS the Anti-Christ????

Laughing Laughing Laughing

That's funny shit right there! I spewed coffee thru my nose!

So anyway, like I said, if he'd done all this bad stuff, then IMPEACH him already. Oh, wait, according to the link YOU provided....
Quote:
The United States House of Representatives has taken no formal actions toward the impeachment of President Bush, nor are they scheduled to do so.


Fact is, Bush has not broken the law. The left is still all butte-hurt because they keep losing. But they are too ignorant to realize the reason they are losing is because they talk so much shit and try to spread so many lies. People are tired of it and it is showing in the elections.

This is entertaining, please do keep it up! Wink
bgillingham
You are 100% wrong. There may be no actions yet, but I proved to you that many people are taking action to impeach him. That was one of the larger Wikipedia pages I've seen.

Does anybody else want to chime in here - and make this less of a "Yes you are! / No I am not!" type of thread?

To get back to my initial topic, our weapons are weapons of terror. We terroize the terrorists I guess it is like "fire fighting fire". Our initial attack on Iraq was named "Shock and Awe", right? Isn't that another way to say "Attack of Terror"?
S3nd K3ys
bgillingham wrote:
You are 100% wrong. There may be no actions yet, but I proved to you that many people are taking action to impeach him. That was one of the larger Wikipedia pages I've seen.


Many people try take action against many Presidents.

Like Clinton. Shocked

Only Clinton really DID break the law and really DID get impeached. Laughing

There are no legal precedings being taking against Bush. Period. I don't care if your neighbor's friend's thrice-removed cousin said so. Laughing

Quote:
Does anybody else want to chime in here - and make this less of a "Yes you are! / No I am not!" type of thread?


Yeah. Lets beg for someone to come help you with your OPINIONS with more OPINIONS so we can get the FACTS from all these OPINIONS. Rolling Eyes

Quote:
To get back to my initial topic, our weapons are weapons of terror. We terroize the terrorists I guess it is like "fire fighting fire". Our initial attack on Iraq was named "Shock and Awe", right? Isn't that another way to say "Attack of Terror"?


Yep. Weapons of terror. Smart bombs meant to destroy entire civilizations instead of pinpointing a single structure. Soldiers taking a handicap by protecting women and children when the terrorists hide behind them and amung them (when they're not killing them, that is).

Your ignorance truly is monumental.

Also:

Quote:
The bomb that killed Zarqawi as well as many of the bombs that were used in Afghanistan were the type that suck all of the air out of the cave or building by means of combustion. The bomb is specially designed to leave no breathable air, and to incenerate the victim's lungs.


Combustion of ANYTHING will suck the air out of a building/cave. Duh.

He lived for nearly an hour after the attack. (Maybe he's a fish and doesn't need air? Laughing )

His insides were probably liquified.

His ears were bleeding. (A good indication of extreme pain Very Happy )
bgillingham
There is a better way to fight the extremist Islam, it would be to assist the respectable peace-loving arab leaders. Our attack does nothing to replace the leaders we kill with respectable arabs.

Quote:
Yep. Weapons of terror. Smart bombs meant to destroy entire civilizations instead of pinpointing a single structure. Soldiers taking a handicap by protecting women and children when the terrorists hide behind them and amung them (when they're not killing them, that is).

Your ignorance truly is monumental.
With all due respect, the bombs that have been designed do an extremely good job of sucking ALL of the air out. Being designed as such, I think that they should be classified as "Chemical Weapons" and not standard explosives. The fact that Zarqawi lived for 52 minutes (also, consider that this may not really be a fact) does nothing to prove that he wasn't without air for the first minute. I know that the blast liquified some of his insides, but there are special chemical components in the explosives of these bombs that are not 100% conventional - that's all I am trying to say.

Quote:
Yeah. Lets beg for someone to come help you with your OPINIONS with more OPINIONS so we can get the FACTS from all these OPINIONS. Rolling Eyes

I am not spreading opinions, you are. My language has been carefully selected to avoid the "I think". I am not begging by any means. Your language approaches begging Please, PLEASE start the procedings already will ya??. The reason that I want to have somebody else's input on this is for two reasons: 1) I am tired of reading your conservative "Bush is GOD!" empty comebacks and counter (non-)points. 2) Other people will have something objective to say other than "I'm right!" / "No, I'm right".

I provided the Wiki link for the "Movement to impeach George W. Bush" to show you some facts - to counter your statement "nobody is doing anything". You are simply wrong about nobody doing anything. So as soon as I give you the link, you attack a separate fact (that he isn't directly being tried - little do you know, John Conyers is attempting to have hearings on impeaching BUSH, - that would certainly qualify as a legal proceedings not precedings being taken against Bush). This is how you conservatives fight facts.

I don't want Bush to "protect" us the way that is going about it. Our foreign policy is not making things better. How has the trend been going for the resistance over the last 5 years??? If you think that it's getting better, you need to reconsider taking your leaders' words as fact - it was a lie when VP Cheney said: "The resistance is in it's last throes". If it is smart policy for the Bush administration to continue down this war path, I should start throwing rocks through my neighbors' windows to protect my house.

Your priorities are messed up; I really feel bad for you since you are so sensitive to Clinton's lie about infidelity. I'd rather have the President break a law like Clinton did. He was guilty of hurting how many people???
bgillingham
Balthamos wrote:
You should stand by Bush, whether you like him or not. He is our President, and we cannot be shunning him. You forget that he is managing an entire country here; something that is not easily done.

No you shouldn't stand by the President - especially when you think that he is making a huge mistake. Thomas Jefferson believed that for a healthy democracy, it should have a rebellion every so often.

I guess that you are saying "It's hard work". Just like Bush said some 20 times during the first debate with Kerry.
S3nd K3ys
bgillingham wrote:
There is a better way to fight the extremist Islam, it would be to assist the respectable peace-loving arab leaders. Our attack does nothing to replace the leaders we kill with respectable arabs.


Funny, but I don't see many Arab leaders, or Muslims in general for that matter, that denounce what terrorists have been doing for over a thousand years... Confused


Quote:
My language has been carefully selected to avoid the "I think".


It failed.

Quote:

Your priorities are messed up; I really feel bad for you since you are so sensitive to Clinton's lie about infidelity. I'd rather have the President break a law like Clinton did. He was guilty of hurting how many people???


Orly?

So you want to talk about Clinton eh?

Ok. Before I get to the the body count, lets look at some other achievements he's made...

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
- Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15
- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6
- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million
- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million

CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED

Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.

Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar.

Bill Kennedy 116
Harold Ickes 148
Ricki Seidman 160
Bruce Lindsey 161
Bill Burton 191
Mark Gearan 221
Mack McLarty 233
Neil Egglseston 250
Hillary Clinton 250
John Podesta 264
Jennifer O'Connor 343
Dwight Holton 348
Patsy Thomasson 420
Jeff Eller 697

FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES: In the portions of President Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition that have been made public in the Paula Jones case, his memory failed him 267 times. This is a list of his answers and how many times he gave each one.

I did not have sexual relations with that woman - 1
I don't remember - 71
I don't know - 62
I'm not sure - 17
I have no idea - 10
I don't believe so - 9
I don't recall - 8
I don't think so - 8
I don't have any specific recollection - 6
I have no recollection - 4
Not to my knowledge - 4
I just don't remember - 4
I don't believe - 4
I have no specific recollection - 3
I might have - 3
I don't have any recollection of that - 2 I don't have a specific memory - 2
I don't have any memory of that - 2
I just can't say - 2
I have no direct knowledge of that - 2
I don't have any idea - 2
Not that I recall - 2
I don't believe I did - 2
I can't remember - 2
I can't say - 2
I do not remember doing so - 2
Not that I remember - 2
I'm not aware - 1
I honestly don't know - 1
I don't believe that I did - 1
I'm fairly sure - 1
I have no other recollection - 1
I'm not positive - 1
I certainly don't think so - 1
I don't really remember - 1
I would have no way of remembering that - 1
That's what I believe happened - 1
To my knowledge, no - 1
To the best of my knowledge - 1
To the best of my memory - 1
I honestly don't recall - 1
I honestly don't remember - 1
That's all I know - 1
I don't have an independent recollection of that - 1
I don't actually have an independent memory of that - 1
As far as I know - 1
I don't believe I ever did that - 1
That's all I know about that - 1
I'm just not sure - 1
Nothing that I remember - 1
I simply don't know - 1
I would have no idea - 1
I don't know anything about that - 1
I don't have any direct knowledge of that - 1
I just don't know - 1
I really don't know - 1
I can't deny that, I just -- I have no memory of that at all - 1

Here's what happened to the Democrats under Clinton:

- GOP seats gained in House since Clinton became president: 48
- GOP seats gained in Senate since Clinton became president: 8
- GOP governorships gained since Clinton became president: 11
- GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254
as of 1998
- State legislatures taken over by GOP since Clinton became president: 9
- Democrat officeholders who have become Republicans since Clinton became
president: 439 as of 1998
- Republican officeholders who have become Democrats since Clinton became president: 3

Now for the body count...

Quote:
The Clinton Body Count

A number of people connected to Bill Clinton have turned up dead.

James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation. Was James McDougal Murdered In A Federal Prison To Silence Him?
Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.
The Botched Ron Brown Investigation
An Interview with AFIP Forensic Photographer Kathleen Janoski
by Wesley Phelan
Vince Foster - Former white House councelor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide. Snippets From The Vince Foster Death Investigation


Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just as she was to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.
Mary C. Mahoney and Eric Butera

Was this just a robbery gone bad? - See: Starbucks Suspect Faces Host of Charges By Bill Miller Washington Post, August 5, 1999


C. Victor Raiser II - & - Montgomery Raiser: Major players in the Clinton fund raising organization died in a private plane crash in July 1992.

Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, September 1992. Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor".

Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in Virginia of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.

Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.

James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people containing names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.

James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an aparent hanging suicide. He was reported to have ties to Whitewater.

Kathy Ferguson - Ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson died in May 1994 was found dead in her living roon with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she was going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones.

Bill Shelton - Arkansas state Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the gravesite of his fiancee.

Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton friend Dan Lassater died by jumping out a window of a tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.

Florence Martin - Accountant - Sub-contractor for the CIA related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. Died of three gunshot wounds.

Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time of her death.

Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.

Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparent suicide in the middle of his investigation.

Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had delivered a report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death.

Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15,1993 Was investigating Morgan Guarantee scandal.

Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.

Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.

Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.

Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena Arkansas, Death was no accident.

Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Clinton in the trunk of a car left in his repair shop. Died when his car hit a utility pole.

Stanley Huggins - Suicide. Investigated Madison Guarantee. His report was never released.

Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.

Kevin Ives & Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena arkansas airport drug operation. Controversal case where initial report of death was due to falling asleep on railroad track. Later reports claim the 2 boys had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury. see: The Train Deaths - plus some comments from a mother of one of the boys about the connection to Bill Clinton..
THE FOLLOWING SEVEN PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES / HENRY CASE:

Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck July, 1988

Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988

Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.

Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.

James Milan - Found decapitated. Coroner ruled death due to natural causes.

Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.

Richard Winters - Was a suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. Was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989.
THE FOLLOWING CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD
Major William S. Barkley Jr.
Captain Scott J. Reynolds
Sgt. Brian Hanley
Sgt. Tim Sabel
Major General William Robertson
Col. William Densberger
Col. Robert Kelly
Spec. Gary Rhodes
Steve Willis
Robert Williams
Conway LeBleu
Todd McKeehan

Source for above: "Steven Levine" [sjl@learnhow.com]


More deaths connected to Clinton and his Administration ...


Chinese journalists killed in the bombing on May 8, 1999 of the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia
(left to right): Shao Yunhuan, of Xinhua News Agency, Xu Xinghu and his wife, Zhu Ying, reporters at Guangming Daily. [NATO bombed the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia]

76 deaths as a result of the government siege on the Branch Davidians coumpound at Waco Texas. [Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum: Death]
April 19, 1995 - bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City results in the death of 168 people
Yugoslav civilian death toll estimated at 500 to 2000 in 78 days of Nato bombing of Yugoslavia [24 March and 10 June 1999] - Clinton said he supported NATO bombing of Serb television stations, despite criticism from some NATO allies who believe these are civilian targets. "Serb television is an essential instrument of Mr. Milosevic's command and control," Clinton said. Clinton Urges Patience With NATO Bombing Campaign - Washington Post April 25, 1999
Links: NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and its aftermath
Iraq .. the total death toll in Iraq from bombing and sanctions is put at between 1.2 and 1.7 million people. It is now of the five greatest genocides of the 20th century, with the number of casualties rivalling that of Pol Pot’s Cambodia.
A chronology of sanctions on Iraq 1990 - 2000

more ...

* THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT [parthenocarpy.org]
* Arkancide - Clinton's Death List


All of these people have been connected with the Clintons in some form or another. We have not included any deaths that could not be verified or connected to the Clinton scandals. All deaths are listed chronologically by date. This list is current and accurate to the best of our knowledge as of August 1, 2000.
http://etherzone.com/body.html
The Progressive Review's
Arkansas
Sudden Death Syndrome
A number of persons associated with WJ Clinton or Arkansas politics in some way have died of unnatural causes over the past six years. While lists compiled by conservatives run as high as 61 deaths, the following is limited to those deaths with clear anomalies that, based on the information available to TPR, require further investigation.
bgillingham
S3nd K3ys wrote:
bgillingham wrote:
There is a better way to fight the extremist Islam, it would be to assist the respectable peace-loving arab leaders. Our attack does nothing to replace the leaders we kill with respectable arabs.


Funny, but I don't see many Arab leaders, or Muslims in general for that matter, that denounce what terrorists have been doing for over a thousand years... Confused


Quote:
My language has been carefully selected to avoid the "I think".


It failed.

Quote:

Your priorities are messed up; I really feel bad for you since you are so sensitive to Clinton's lie about infidelity. I'd rather have the President break a law like Clinton did. He was guilty of hurting how many people???


Orly?

So you want to talk about Clinton eh?

No - you should check the topic of this post. If you really want to dump text from places like "The Clinton Legacy" in this forum, perhaps you should credit them before you plagiarize. You would have people here believe that you typed in all of that copied text? Here is where you likely copied it from : http://www.prorev.com/legacy.htm

I am completely done talking to "S3nd K3ys". Go ahead and try to get a response out of me now. You can go ahead and believe that you won, but I simply refuse to address any more text from you, Mr. Plagairizer. Why should anybody need to read your crap responses?
bgillingham
People should also be told that the whole "Clinton Body Count" ordeal is an urban legend. I found this at snopes.com's Inboxer Rebellion page - which is a collection of tales circulated via the internet to stir up morale outrage. The whole Clinton Body Count - is a big fat internet tale which is mostly lies.

Peace out!
S3nd K3ys
From Truthorfiction.com

Quote:


The People President Clinton Didn't Have to Pardon...Because They're All Dead-Truth! & Fiction!





Summary of the eRumor: This a list of people associated with Bill Clinton...all of whom have died, some of them under mysterious circumstances.

Note: Our research on some of this story is still continuing, but because of the number of requests, we are posting what we have. Check back for updates.

The Truth: This has also become known as "Clinton's Body Count." We'll go through the entire list and evaluate each one, but it is true that some of them had some connection with Bill Clinton, or with someone who was in Clinton's sphere, and that many of them died violently or by suicide. That raises the question of whether their deaths were related and whether any of the deaths can be linked in any way to Bill Clinton.

There is no credible evidence that any of the deaths is related or can be attributed to Bill Clinton. Some of the descriptions of the deaths are not accurate.


The last paragraph should be applied to Bush as well. Get my point now??

PEACE OUT. Wink
IceCreamTruck
Subject: Being an idiot is not a crime!!

I would agree with most of you on this. Bush is an idiot, and shouldn't be in ANY position of power. But the fact of the matter is you people elected him, and he's here to stay because he is not guilty of a crime that we know of.

Hey I'll even give him the fact that he did cocaine in college, and say that shouldn't effect his presidency, but I still can't figure out how he got through his speaches well enough for the good majority to not figure out how nuts he really is. Being an idiot shouldn't be a crime because it would just be another reason to fill our jails with more people to sustain a difficult judicial system.

I used to have the google add-on that quoted bush on a daily basis with different things he's said over the years, but I took it off because of how mad it made me every time I read it. He says one thing to one group of people (ie. church and state should be seporate to a secular croud) and says another to a different group of poeple when it suits his interests (ie. said that there is a bridge between church and state to an amish group). But, I digress, none of this is a crime, it's just politics, so we are all going to hell in a hand basket until we choose a wise and respected leader.

Choose wisely next election cause the eyes of the world are upon us, and you've seen and dealt with a world that isn't pleased with our image over the last six years. Hey one upside is that Bush will say anything he needs to say to any group of people based on who they are, and not what the truth really is.
S3nd K3ys
IceCreamTruck wrote:
Subject: Being an idiot is not a crime!!

I would agree with most of you on this. Bush is an idiot, and shouldn't be in ANY position of power. But the fact of the matter is you people elected him, and he's here to stay because he is not guilty of a crime that we know of.

Hey I'll even give him the fact that he did cocaine in college, and say that shouldn't effect his presidency, but I still can't figure out how he got through his speaches well enough for the good majority to not figure out how nuts he really is. Being an idiot shouldn't be a crime because it would just be another reason to fill our jails with more people to sustain a difficult judicial system.

I used to have the google add-on that quoted bush on a daily basis with different things he's said over the years, but I took it off because of how mad it made me every time I read it. He says one thing to one group of people (ie. church and state should be seporate to a secular croud) and says another to a different group of poeple when it suits his interests (ie. said that there is a bridge between church and state to an amish group). But, I digress, none of this is a crime, it's just politics, so we are all going to hell in a hand basket until we choose a wise and respected leader.

Choose wisely next election cause the eyes of the world are upon us, and you've seen and dealt with a world that isn't pleased with our image over the last six years. Hey one upside is that Bush will say anything he needs to say to any group of people based on who they are, and not what the truth really is.


That's a pretty fair post. I wouldn't go so far as to call him an 'idiot', but there are some uncanny resemblances to certain monkey pictures I've seen Shocked

Yes we, the majority, elected him. Given the same choices with the same circumstances, we'd do it again I'm sure.

Bush will be on his way back up in the polls soon because, no matter how hard the left tries to hide it, we are successful in Iraq and against the Terrorists. Bush has proven again and again that he will not flip-flop. He says what he is gonna do, and (generally) does it. The left hates it.

The only thing that will bring him down now IMNSHO is his complete lack of balls on the border issue and giving amnesty to lawbreakers coming here illegally. The (legal) US citizens will not tolerate it.
IceCreamTruck
Thanks for the positive reply, but don't get me started on the border issue...grrrrrrrrr. Evil or Very Mad
Balthamos
bgillingham wrote:
Balthamos wrote:
You should stand by Bush, whether you like him or not. He is our President, and we cannot be shunning him. You forget that he is managing an entire country here; something that is not easily done.

No you shouldn't stand by the President - especially when you think that he is making a huge mistake. Thomas Jefferson believed that for a healthy democracy, it should have a rebellion every so often.

I guess that you are saying "It's hard work". Just like Bush said some 20 times during the first debate with Kerry.


You try running a country. It's not all flowers and parties. Just for one moment try to imagine all the stress is put on this guy. He's trying to do a good job and here you are complaining about everything he does. There is no pleasing you. News flash: humans are fallible. There will never be a President or anyone who you like. They are always going to do something that you don't agree with. And if you don't stand by your government, that makes you no better than the terrorists that we fight against.

Look back in Vietnam. Bunch of protesters didn't like the war, rebelled and would not go to Vietnam. Hated the President for his actions and called the soldiers baby killers and whatnot. When they got back the protesters shunned them and gave them a not-so-warm welcome when they came back. Now look at this. You have been fighting over in Vietnam, completed your second tour, your best friend killed, and now your coming back home and your country doesn't even want you back. This traumatized those soldiers. And that's what good rebellion brought.

Presidents in the past have broken laws as well for the good. FDR helped out tremendously in the Great Depression. Controlled farms and markets to stimulate the economy. That is highly illegal, and very Communistic, but it helped to get us out of the Depression.

LBJ; huge Texan. Used fear to get what he wanted, and it worked. That's illegal, but he passed a lot of things that normally wouldn't have been.

You see, no one is perfect. I hope that you can realize that by looking further in the past.

~Balthamos
S3nd K3ys
Balthamos wrote:

You try running a country. It's not all flowers and parties. Just for one moment try to imagine all the stress is put on this guy. He's trying to do a good job and here you are complaining about everything he does. There is no pleasing you.




Nailed it.

No matter what has or will happen, it will be wrong. Even if it's good. If it's too good and the left can't make it look bad, they'll bury it.
bgillingham
Balthamos wrote:
(paraphrasing) ...Bush is doing a hard job. You complain and you are just as bad as the terrorists that we fight against.

~Balthamos


Rovie! I had no idea that you were a Frihost forums user. Welcome to the group. Interesting handle - it seems "Balthamos" has nothing to do with Rove. Is it some kind of nick-name?

I get your point. I've heard it before. It's hard work. Wahhhh. That's why you have advisors. I can be critical of somebody who has been known for not taking the advice of his advisors. Also, there are many stories about advisors being afraid to tell the truth; this could be due to the number of stories of people losing their jobs when they recommend anything contrary to the mission.

Ha! You simply don't touch the fact that Jefferson really believed the benefits of dissenting voices even in armed rebellion. So, you say "...here you are complaining about everything he does" and finish with "that makes you (me) no better than the terrorists that we fight against." <sarcasm>Yep, I am affiliated with all of those terrorist groups</sarcasm>. Fascists were fameous for suggesting those who oppose the ruling party are traitors. You couldn't point your finger at the problem. When you conclude that I am "as bad as the terrorists that we fight against", your aim is as bad as Cheney's.

Getting back on the topic of Chemical Weapons used by the US, look up other info on the use of white phosphorus and a weapon similar to napalm. Global Security: US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq.

If you are brave, you can watch an Italian documentary about the illegal use of white phosphorus in the attacks on Baghdad and Fallujah. Watch from any source.
Balthamos
Personally, I hate politics, and I try to avoid discussions such as. Who cares what weapons we use? Our soldiers were beheaded over there, and you think you still want to keep it clean? However the job gets done.

Neither of us should have ANY say in this war, mostly because we aren't over there risking our asses for our country. Now if you served in Iraq or somewhere over there, you didn't like the cluster bombs, then I'll believe you. However, if you are sitting in your nice chair in a warm, protected house and you are complaining about things that don't even concern you, then there is a problem.

~Balthamos
HoboPelican
Balthamos wrote:
....

Neither of us should have ANY say in this war, mostly because we aren't over there risking our asses for our country...


I hate to disagree, but I think that is completely ridiculous. First off, it's debatable that they are risking their lives for our country. And I'm not making light of our soldiers dedication and bravery or the danger they face daily. I'm saying that they are there because Bush ordered them there and they are doing the job they are told to but it has little to do with protecting our country. In fact, our being there is a just making us more and more enemies. And THAT affects the safety of everyone in the US.

So I think we most definately should have a say.
fritz
Lets return to the topic for a sec.. "Chemical Attacks - by US Forces // Impeach Bush":
Isn't the frequent use of depleted uranium in tank shells an even bigger war crime?
I know that the military spokespersons are claiming that those things are almost harmless for the people in Baghdad who have to live with the radioactive dust for decades to come.

But at the same time i suspect that if a fleabag would release the same amount of radioactive dust, as contained in one single tank shell, in Washington DC there would be cries of "dirty bombs" from the US.

/f
-----
Anyone who uses any kind of force with the intention of overthrowing the government of a sovereign country is, per definition, a terrorist. It does not matter if the country is run by a dictator who eats small babies for breakfast.
bgillingham
fritz wrote:
Lets return to the topic for a sec.. "Chemical Attacks - by US Forces // Impeach Bush":
Isn't the frequent use of depleted uranium in tank shells an even bigger war crime?
I know that the military spokespersons are claiming that those things are almost harmless for the people in Baghdad who have to live with the radioactive dust for decades to come.
While I agree that the use of depleted uranium is certainaly a war crime, if not just another extremely inhumane weapon. Some even argue fairly convincingly that the bulk of the radiation sickness (awww - it was called "gulf war syndrome" - not radiation exposure) was caused by the use of mini nukes launched by Israel defending against the Scuds in the 1990's. I don't know that I believe that, but there are places in the Iraqi countryside with deadly radiation - where nobody should go for many many years.

If you believe that DU is good to use as a weapon, please watch this Flash animation - 950+kb, but worth it : POISONOUS LEGACY, or any of the fantastic animations at Bush Flash: Flash Animations: Bushflash.com- Anti-War, Anti-Bush media worldwide!.
ibay
May I add a few points in this VERBAL BRAWL? I saw a video about Fallujah in which it was shown how US Army used Phosphorous to burn ordinary civilians, many of them children.
If anyone of u see those dead bodies with burnt flesh still hanging on their skeletons, then u will definately forget (at least for a moment) about Clinton and Muslim terrorism of Thousands of Years (why not millions of years?)
Soulfire
So, you're saying impeach Bush because he used a weapon to kill a terrorist. I'm not so sure your definition of the weapons used is correct, and I can't be sure of what you're talking about - I would have to check that with some other sources most likely, but don't all bombs use some sort of chemical make up, so could they all be defined as chemical weapons?

I guess I'm not so sure what the fuss is about.
bgillingham
Soulfire wrote:
So, you're saying impeach Bush because he used a weapon to kill a terrorist. I'm not so sure your definition of the weapons used is correct, and I can't be sure of what you're talking about - I would have to check that with some other sources most likely, but don't all bombs use some sort of chemical make up, so could they all be defined as chemical weapons?

I guess I'm not so sure what the fuss is about.
Religious people can be so racist and they seldom know it...

I believe that many people agree that Bush should be impeached for many other things, but not killing terrorists.... The previous post describes killing of innocent children and women (*that you'll just call terrorists - see the racism?) with white phosphorous.

Geeze! Have you ever played with phosphorous in chemistry class? Imagine being pelted with many little bits of this stuff as it explodes upon the sweat on your body. Unless you are a complete nimrod, you don't need to be told that white phosphorous is a CHEMICAL WEAPON.
Soulfire
I'm racist because I support the war in Iraq? Right. In times of war, there will always be civilian casualties. You should praise the U.S. for it's attempts to not kill civilians, most other countries wouldn't even care. We try not to, it doesn't mean it will always happen.

And we knocked off a terrorist who has killed thousands with probably more than just chemical weapons, and saved thousands more in the future.
bgillingham
Soulfire wrote:
I'm racist because I support the war in Iraq? Right.
I rest my case.

According to just about every sane person's analysis, the fighting that we're doing in Iraq is insuring a less-stable future for us.

Bushie, you can't justify your war - you've cried "WOLF!" far too many times.
Soulfire
So now you're calling me insane because I don't agree with your opinions? What a stupid topic this is. The fact is we are in Iraq. You can moan and groan all you want, but at the end of the day, Bush is still in the White House and we're still in Iraq. Go on and continue your complaints. Instead of focusing on a long-term plan for Iraq, let's just sit and cross our arms because we're there.

I fully support the troops, and war in Iraq. And I should be able to do that without being called racist or insane.

And when you quoted me, the "right" was sarcasm. I thought you'd pick up on that, but I guess not.
HoboPelican
Soulfire wrote:

I fully support the troops, and war in Iraq. And I should be able to do that without being called racist or insane.


I think it would be nice to not be called racist or insane, but on a forum like this you are dreaming...nice dreams, but a dream none the less. I also fully support our troops but that doesn't proclude me from NOT supporting the war and a President I think is wrong and pushing the limits of legality on numerous fronts.

I don't know if you are a racist. I'm pretty sure you're sane. But on this topic I have to disagree with your reasoning and beliefs. No disrespect. Just disagreement.

Peace all. Wink
Biodiesel
Wow, boorrring
Related topics
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.