We Needed A Big Gas Tax

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:
>> "Michael Johnson, PE" wrote:

>> can provide a credible source proving that Reagan/bu$h's former friend
>> and ally, Saddam, murdered hundreds of thousands if not millions of
>> people,

> A good place to start is the number of dead Iranian/Iraqi soldiers in
> the Iran-Iraq War. Credible estimates range from 500,000-1,000,000
> dead.

So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
your mentor bu$h a murderer.

>> bu$h has probably murdered more Iraqi civilians than his
>> counterpart, Saddam.

> Probably murdered?

Right. We know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
innocent Iraqi civilians, but the exact number isn't known,
since the bu$h regime, like you, doesn't care about the lives
of innocent civilians.

>>>> "* In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his chemical
>>>> weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja. In response, a
>>>> number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.), introduced the
>>>> "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which sought to impose sanctions
>>>> against Iraq. The act passed the Senate unanimously, but the Reagan
>>>> White House killed the bill in the House."

>>>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html

>> No comment, eh? How predictable. <chuckle>

Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
made excuses for them and defended their good friend and
ally. How 'bout that, Mikey? <chuckle>

>> No. Rumsfeld, bu$h, and top Military officials put
>> the blame at the bottom, when the policy was set
>> by the draft dodging war criminals at the top. You're
>> extremely ignorant about this, aren't you, Mikey?

> Far from ignorant. You are though if you really believe what
> you just typed.

Because some ignorant usenet kook says so? That's funny,
Mikey! Put up a qualified, credible reference. Like this one:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm

Seymour Hersh is an award winning journalist with
impeccable credibility global respect. He doesn't
make a claim until he knows it to be factual - his
career and reputation are at stake...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm

>> bu$h is, unfortunately, the Commander in Chief of the
>> U.S. armed forces. The policy is set from the top,
>> Mikey, and that's where the responsibility for the
>> hideous and subhuman torturing of POWs lies.

> Is Bush also responsible if the bathroom in an FBI office in
> Montana runs out of toilet paper?

The Commander in Chief sets Military policy with his
advisors, Mikey. He doesn't fill toilet paper dispensers.
Are you mentally ill, or just incredibly stupid?

>> Given the choice, I'd rather have my throat cut and
>> have it over in a few seconds than be slowly, sadistically,
>> and brutally tortured to death over a period of days or

> What!!! You are a f'cking wacko!

Because I don't want to be tortured? Okay, Mikey,
but only because you say so...

>> It's a yes or no question, Mikey. Here, try again. <g>
>> "Are you able to comprehend that 51% of the =voters= is not 51% of
>> the =population=?"

> Yes

You go boy! You finally admitted that you were spewing
nonsense when you claimed that 51% of the population supports
bu$h. BTW, do you know that his approval rating is down to 39%?
You America and freedom hating extremsits are a minority,
Mikey. A pathetic disgrace to the United States Of America
for sure, but at least your're a minority...

>> I've done exactly that, and you keep hiding from the
>> facts, truth, and the questions. Here's a repeat:

>> "Do you agree that torture is a war crime, and that
>> bu$h presided over torture of POWs?"

> Here you go. Torture (sleep deprivation etc. IS NOT TORTURE)
> is a war crime unless it is done to save a large number of
> American lives.

No one is talking about sleep deprivation, Mikey. Do try to
keep up. We're taking about brually and sadicstically beating
people to death, breaking bones, causing third degree burns etc.
That's torure, bu$h presided over it, he knew about it, and
did nothing to stop it. That makes your draft dodging AWOL hero
a war criminal, Mikey. I know you hate and fear them, but those
are the facts and truth.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0503-08.htm


-

"The tools that enable Cuba save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/


"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:

>> "Michael Johnson, PE" wrote:

>>> I usually ignore Hank (he is a political troll and
>>> cares nothing about Mustangs)

>> You're talking out of your ass and revealing more of your pitiful
>> ignorance, again, Mikey!
>> When I was too young to drive, my mother had a
>> 64 Mustang with a 260 auto, and I loved that car. At 17, I bought a
>> '65 Fastback which had a 302 in it - yes, I know that's not original.
>> I pulled that engine and shoehorned a 351 Windsor into it, and had
>> lots of fun but got lots of tickets. Then I bought a '69 Mach 1 that
>> was all stock, but sold it and bought a rust free '67 Fastback from
>> New Mexico. I put a 351 Windsor in that one, too. It was rear ended by
>> a drunk. After that, it was an '88GT and I put a Vortech on it. A trim
>> with stock injectors, so it wasn't all that potent, but on a cold day,
>> it ran damn good. Next was a '94GT that I planned to build, but I was
>> not impressed with that car, and sold it about a year later. Right
>> now, I own a pristine ''96 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo with only 19K
>> miles, but I do have my name on the waiting list for a 5.4 liter
>> Supercharged 450+HP Shelby Cobra. BTW, I did all my own wrenching on
>> those Mustangs and painted them all myself except for the '67 Fastback
>> and the '94GT.
>> You should probably stick to posting about Mustangs.
>> You've got your facts right on that subject, but you are one of the
>> most ignorant, brainwashed, and gullible fools I've ever encountered
>> when it comes to government, foreign policy, history and politics....

> i stand corrected. Maybe you do have one redeeming value (ie you do
> like Mustangs). BTW, thanks for the compliment about my knowledge on
> Mustangs.

Don't mention it! Like the rest of what I've been
writing, it's an accurate observation that can be
supported with facts and quotes. <g>

> Your last sentence pretty much sums up what I think about
> your political views too.

With one key difference - that facts back me up, and
shut you down. That's why you avoid them and provide
opinions with no references, but I can quote award winning
journalists and respectable organizations that back up
everything I say.

> I would still have a beer with you though.

Hopefully the alcohol would pry your mind open a
little. <g>

-

"The tools that enable Cuba save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/


"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

Hank wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>
>>Hank wrote:
>>
>>>"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote:
>
>
>>>can provide a credible source proving that Reagan/bu$h's former friend
>>>and ally, Saddam, murdered hundreds of thousands if not millions of
>>>people,
>
>
>>A good place to start is the number of dead Iranian/Iraqi soldiers in
>>the Iran-Iraq War. Credible estimates range from 500,000-1,000,000
>>dead.
>
>
> So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
> murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
> your mentor bu$h a murderer.

Nice try there Hanky. Don't change the subject. If YOU claim Bush is a
murderer in this way then so is Saddam. So is President Bush more evil
than Saddam? I bet you can't give a simple yes or no answer.

>>>bu$h has probably murdered more Iraqi civilians than his
>>>counterpart, Saddam.
>
>
>>Probably murdered?
>
>
> Right. We know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
> innocent Iraqi civilians, but the exact number isn't known,
> since the bu$h regime, like you, doesn't care about the lives
> of innocent civilians.

Right now we know Saddam has murdered hundreds upon hundreds of
thousands of Iraqi civilians. Thanks to President Bush there are
probably 100,000 Iraqis alive today that Saddam would have murdered over
the last two years. Looks to me like President Bush has saved 90,000
Iraqi lives.

You still don't know how mentally unstable you appear by making these
kind of remarks. You and the rabid left keep it up you'll help get
another Republican elected president in 2008. I would laugh my ass off
if Jeb Bush wins in 2008! I bet your head would explode!

>>>>> "* In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his chemical
>>>>>weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja. In response, a
>>>>>number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.), introduced the
>>>>>"Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which sought to impose sanctions
>>>>>against Iraq. The act passed the Senate unanimously, but the Reagan
>>>>>White House killed the bill in the House."
>
>
>>>>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html
>
>
>>> No comment, eh? How predictable. <chuckle>
>
>
> Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
> made excuses for them and defended their good friend and
> ally. How 'bout that, Mikey? <chuckle>

You're resorting to quoting AL GORE!?!? LOL! I don't know who the
bigger idiot is, you or old red faced AlGore. This is truly a case of
the blind leading the blind! BTW, could you please explain to me John
Kerry's official position on the Iraq war? I figure if anyone could it
would be you.

>>> No. Rumsfeld, bu$h, and top Military officials put
>>>the blame at the bottom, when the policy was set
>>>by the draft dodging war criminals at the top. You're
>>>extremely ignorant about this, aren't you, Mikey?
>
>
>>Far from ignorant. You are though if you really believe what
>>you just typed.
>
>
> Because some ignorant usenet kook says so? That's funny,
> Mikey! Put up a qualified, credible reference. Like this one:

Hell, your whole political philosophy is based on kooky left-wing web
sites. I bet one of your credible references is Dan (What's the
frequency, Kenneth?)Rather. LOL!

> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm
>
> Seymour Hersh is an award winning journalist with
> impeccable credibility global respect. He doesn't
> make a claim until he knows it to be factual - his
> career and reputation are at stake...

He's just another poster child for the far left wacko fringe.

> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm
>
>
>>> bu$h is, unfortunately, the Commander in Chief of the
>>>U.S. armed forces. The policy is set from the top,
>>>Mikey, and that's where the responsibility for the
>>>hideous and subhuman torturing of POWs lies.
>
>
>>Is Bush also responsible if the bathroom in an FBI office in
>>Montana runs out of toilet paper?
>
>
> The Commander in Chief sets Military policy with his
> advisors, Mikey. He doesn't fill toilet paper dispensers.
> Are you mentally ill, or just incredibly stupid?

Well, I see we can agree on one thing. I guess he isn't responsible for
everything that happens in the Federal Government. Saying any president
is responsible and personally accountable for the actions of all
military personnel under his command shows you to be the one that is
incredibly stupid and lacking of logic. But then again, this is a
common trait of all you wingnuts in wacko left fringe groups.

>>> Given the choice, I'd rather have my throat cut and
>>>have it over in a few seconds than be slowly, sadistically,
>>>and brutally tortured to death over a period of days or
>
>
>>What!!! You are a f'cking wacko!
>
>
> Because I don't want to be tortured? Okay, Mikey,
> but only because you say so...

You would rather be video taped having your head sawed off than stripped
naked and forced to do cheerleader routines with other naked men?!?!
Either you are insane or EXTREMELY homophobic. I am comfortable enough
with my manhood to choose the latter. You really are mentally screwed
up! LOL!

>>> It's a yes or no question, Mikey. Here, try again. <g>
>>> "Are you able to comprehend that 51% of the =voters= is not 51% of
>>>the =population=?"
>
>
>>Yes
>
>
> You go boy! You finally admitted that you were spewing
> nonsense when you claimed that 51% of the population supports
> bu$h. BTW, do you know that his approval rating is down to 39%?
> You America and freedom hating extremsits are a minority,
> Mikey. A pathetic disgrace to the United States Of America
> for sure, but at least your're a minority...

You keep thinking that Hanky. Sure... you represent the majority. LOL!

>>> I've done exactly that, and you keep hiding from the
>>>facts, truth, and the questions. Here's a repeat:
>
>
>>> "Do you agree that torture is a war crime, and that
>>>bu$h presided over torture of POWs?"
>
>
>>Here you go. Torture (sleep deprivation etc. IS NOT TORTURE)
>>is a war crime unless it is done to save a large number of
>>American lives.
>
>
> No one is talking about sleep deprivation, Mikey. Do try to
> keep up. We're taking about brually and sadicstically beating
> people to death, breaking bones, causing third degree burns etc.
> That's torure, bu$h presided over it, he knew about it, and
> did nothing to stop it. That makes your draft dodging AWOL hero
> a war criminal, Mikey. I know you hate and fear them, but those
> are the facts and truth.

Damn, I give you a straight answer and you can't handle it. In fact you
cut most of my response. Now it's your turn to give a direct answer to
one of my torture questions. How many Americans (or how many of your
family members) would have to be put in danger of loosing their lives
before you would condone the use of extreme physical torture on a known
terrorist in order to get information from him to save their lives? I
bet you don't give me a direct answer like I did for you.

Hank wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>
>>Hank wrote:
>
>
>>>"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote:
>
>
>>>>I usually ignore Hank (he is a political troll and
>>>>cares nothing about Mustangs)
>
>
>>> You're talking out of your ass and revealing more of your pitiful
>>>ignorance, again, Mikey!
>>> When I was too young to drive, my mother had a
>>>64 Mustang with a 260 auto, and I loved that car. At 17, I bought a
>>>'65 Fastback which had a 302 in it - yes, I know that's not original.
>>>I pulled that engine and shoehorned a 351 Windsor into it, and had
>>>lots of fun but got lots of tickets. Then I bought a '69 Mach 1 that
>>>was all stock, but sold it and bought a rust free '67 Fastback from
>>>New Mexico. I put a 351 Windsor in that one, too. It was rear ended by
>>>a drunk. After that, it was an '88GT and I put a Vortech on it. A trim
>>>with stock injectors, so it wasn't all that potent, but on a cold day,
>>>it ran damn good. Next was a '94GT that I planned to build, but I was
>>>not impressed with that car, and sold it about a year later. Right
>>>now, I own a pristine ''96 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo with only 19K
>>>miles, but I do have my name on the waiting list for a 5.4 liter
>>>Supercharged 450+HP Shelby Cobra. BTW, I did all my own wrenching on
>>>those Mustangs and painted them all myself except for the '67 Fastback
>>>and the '94GT.
>>> You should probably stick to posting about Mustangs.
>>>You've got your facts right on that subject, but you are one of the
>>>most ignorant, brainwashed, and gullible fools I've ever encountered
>>>when it comes to government, foreign policy, history and politics....
>
>
>
>>i stand corrected. Maybe you do have one redeeming value (ie you do
>>like Mustangs). BTW, thanks for the compliment about my knowledge on
>>Mustangs.
>
>
> Don't mention it! Like the rest of what I've been
> writing, it's an accurate observation that can be
> supported with facts and quotes. <g>
>
>>Your last sentence pretty much sums up what I think about
>>your political views too.
>
>
> With one key difference - that facts back me up, and
> shut you down. That's why you avoid them and provide
> opinions with no references, but I can quote award winning
> journalists and respectable organizations that back up
> everything I say.

We have another thead going where we can hammer each other over politics.

>>I would still have a beer with you though.
>
>
> Hopefully the alcohol would pry your mind open a
> little. <g>
>

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:
>
>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>>
>>> Hank wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> "Michael Johnson, PE" wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> I usually ignore Hank (he is a political troll and
>>>>> cares nothing about Mustangs)
>>
>>
>>
>>>> You're talking out of your ass and revealing more of your pitiful
>>>> ignorance, again, Mikey!
>>>> When I was too young to drive, my mother had a
>>>> 64 Mustang with a 260 auto, and I loved that car. At 17, I bought a
>>>> '65 Fastback which had a 302 in it - yes, I know that's not
>>>> original. I pulled that engine and shoehorned a 351 Windsor into it,
>>>> and had lots of fun but got lots of tickets. Then I bought a '69
>>>> Mach 1 that was all stock, but sold it and bought a rust free '67
>>>> Fastback from New Mexico. I put a 351 Windsor in that one, too. It
>>>> was rear ended by a drunk. After that, it was an '88GT and I put a
>>>> Vortech on it. A trim with stock injectors, so it wasn't all that
>>>> potent, but on a cold day, it ran damn good. Next was a '94GT that I
>>>> planned to build, but I was not impressed with that car, and sold it
>>>> about a year later. Right now, I own a pristine ''96 Nissan 300ZX
>>>> Twin Turbo with only 19K miles, but I do have my name on the waiting
>>>> list for a 5.4 liter Supercharged 450+HP Shelby Cobra. BTW, I did
>>>> all my own wrenching on those Mustangs and painted them all myself
>>>> except for the '67 Fastback and the '94GT.
>>>> You should probably stick to posting about Mustangs.
>>>> You've got your facts right on that subject, but you are one of the
>>>> most ignorant, brainwashed, and gullible fools I've ever encountered
>>>> when it comes to government, foreign policy, history and politics....
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> i stand corrected. Maybe you do have one redeeming value (ie you do
>>> like Mustangs). BTW, thanks for the compliment about my knowledge on
>>> Mustangs.
>>
>>
>>
>> Don't mention it! Like the rest of what I've been writing, it's an
>> accurate observation that can be supported with facts and quotes. <g>
>>
>>> Your last sentence pretty much sums up what I think about your
>>> political views too.
>>
>>
>>
>> With one key difference - that facts back me up, and
>> shut you down. That's why you avoid them and provide
>> opinions with no references, but I can quote award winning
>> journalists and respectable organizations that back up
>> everything I say.
>
>
> We have another thead going where we can hammer each other over
> politics.

Oops, I meant another part of this thread.

>>> I would still have a beer with you though.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hopefully the alcohol would pry your mind open a little. <g>
>>

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:

>> So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
>> murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
>> your mentor bu$h a murderer.

> Nice try there Hanky. Don't change the subject. If YOU
> claim Bush is a murderer in this way then so is Saddam.

I will readily acknowledge that bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's
former friend and ally Saddam are both war criminals and
murderers. Will you, Mikey?

>> Right. We know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
>> innocent Iraqi civilians, but the exact number isn't known,
>> since the bu$h regime, like you, doesn't care about the lives
>> of innocent civilians.

> Right now we know Saddam has murdered hundreds upon hundreds of
> thousands of Iraqi civilians.

We know that you're pulling numbers our of your ass again.
We also know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
innocent Iraq civilians and tortured POWs. If your point
is that both bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's former friend and ally
Saddam, are war criminals, we're in agreement.

> Looks to me like President Bush has saved 90,000 Iraqi lives.

You misspelled "destroyed".

http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

>> "* In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his chemical
>> weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja. In response, a
>> number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.), introduced the
>> "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which sought to impose
>> sanctions
>> against Iraq. The act passed the Senate unanimously, but the Reagan
>> White House killed the bill in the House."

>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html
>> Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
>> made excuses for them and defended their good friend and
>> ally. How 'bout that, Mikey? <chuckle>

> You're resorting to quoting AL GORE!?!? LOL!

WTF? There is no Al Gore quote there, Mikey. Gotta recent
bu$h quote for ya, though - "You're doin' a heckuva job,
Brownie!" That's what bu$h told his incompetent FEMA chief
a few days before he was forced to resign because of gross
incompetence. As usual, the truth was the exact opposite
the idiocy spewed by your hero bu$h.
You really need to learn how to read, Mikey. Here, try again.
This isn't an Al Gore quote.
"In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his
chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja.
In response, a number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.),
introduced the "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which
sought to impose sanctions against Iraq. The act passed the
Senate unanimously, but the Reagan White House killed the bill
in the House."
Sooooo, Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while
Reagan/bu$h made excuses for them and defended their good
friend and ally. What do you "think" about that, Mikey?

> Hell, your whole political philosophy is based on kooky
> left-wing web sites.

Seymour Hersh isn't a "kooky left-wing web site", kook.
He's a globally respected award winning journalist.
If what he writes wasn't true, you'd be able to refute at
least =one= of the many facts he's presented. Instead, all
you can do is bitch, whine, scream and cry incoherently.
You're a laughable joke and a clueless mess, Mikey.

>> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm

>> Seymour Hersh is an award winning journalist with impeccable
>> credibility global respect. He doesn't make a claim until he knows it
>> to be factual - his career and reputation are at stake...

> He's just another poster child for the far left wacko fringe.

If you weren't such a simple minded and brainwashed moron
and radical right wing extremist kook, you'd realize that
embracing a proven liar and a tragic failure like bu$h,
while rabidly attacking and rejecting award winning
journalists, only proves that you're an ignorant and
gullible fool.

>> The Commander in Chief sets Military policy with his
>> advisors, Mikey. He doesn't fill toilet paper dispensers.
>> Are you mentally ill, or just incredibly stupid?

> Saying any president is responsible and personally accountable
> for the actions of all military personnel under his command
> shows you to be the one that is incredibly stupid and lacking
> of logic.

But you're the only one saying that, Mikey. You say a lot of
very stupid things.

> You would rather be video taped having your head sawed off than
> stripped naked and forced to do cheerleader routines with other
> naked men?!?!

Where did you get that crazy idea? You sure do have some
bizarre fantasies, Mikey. I hope that one didn't come to
you in a wet dream! <g>

>> You go boy! You finally admitted that you were spewing
>> nonsense when you claimed that 51% of the population supports
>> bu$h. BTW, do you know that his approval rating is down to 39%?
>> You America and freedom hating extremsits are a minority,
>> Mikey. A pathetic disgrace to the United States Of America
>> for sure, but at least your're a minority...

> You keep thinking that Hanky. Sure... you represent the majority.
> LOL!

bu$h's approval rating is down to 39%, Mikey boy! Your
misguided, hateful, extremist, and anti-American views
represent a minority of radical extremists. To your many
betters, you're naught but a silly joke, a disgrace, and
an embarrassment.

>> No one is talking about sleep deprivation, Mikey. Do try to keep up.
>> We're taking about brually and sadicstically beating people to death,
>> breaking bones, causing third degree burns etc.
>> That's torure, bu$h presided over it, he knew about it, and did
>> nothing to stop it. That makes your draft dodging AWOL hero a war
>> criminal, Mikey. I know you hate and fear them, but those are the
>> facts and truth.

> Damn, I give you a straight answer and you can't handle it.

Still waiting for your answer, Mikey. Since bu$h set the
policy and condoned the torture of POWS, which is a war
crime, that makes him a war criminal. Do you agree?

> In fact you cut most of my response.

I cut the moronic juvenile rants and grade school insults,
but that was the majority of your response...

> Now it's your turn to give a direct answer to
> one of my torture questions. How many Americans (or how many of your
> family members) would have to be put in danger of loosing their lives
> before you would condone the use of extreme physical torture on a known
> terrorist in order to get information from him to save their lives? I
> bet you don't give me a direct answer like I did for you.

Torture doesn't produce accurate information. Torture victims
will say anything to end the torture. Also, according to our own
military, over 70% of bu$h detainees were guilty of nothing.
bu$h is a known and proven terrorist, who has killed almost
two thousand U.S. soldiers, as well as tens of thousands of
innocent Iraqi civilians. But I don't believe he should be
tortured. He should be tried and convicted of war crimes,
and spend the rest of his life in a steel and concrete
cage. If we lower ourselves to the level of terrorists and
war criminals by resorting to torture, we sacrifice our humanity
and our dignity.


-

"The tools that enable Cuba save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/


"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

Hank wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>
>>Hank wrote:
>
>
>>> So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
>>>murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
>>>your mentor bu$h a murderer.
>
>
>>Nice try there Hanky. Don't change the subject. If YOU
>>claim Bush is a murderer in this way then so is Saddam.
>
>
> I will readily acknowledge that bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's
> former friend and ally Saddam are both war criminals and
> murderers. Will you, Mikey?

No, I don't think any President of this country is, or has ever been, a
war criminal. I'm just trying to find out who you think is more evil,
Saddam or President Bush. I would think you could answer a simple
question with a simple answer but that seems to be the way it is with
you liberals. You hide your hate America first, socialist agenda. The
weaker the USA is the better you far left wing liberals feel.

>>> Right. We know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
>>>innocent Iraqi civilians, but the exact number isn't known,
>>>since the bu$h regime, like you, doesn't care about the lives
>>>of innocent civilians.
>
>
>>Right now we know Saddam has murdered hundreds upon hundreds of
>>thousands of Iraqi civilians.
>
>
> We know that you're pulling numbers our of your ass again.
> We also know that bu$h has murdered tens of thousands of
> innocent Iraq civilians and tortured POWs. If your point
> is that both bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's former friend and ally
> Saddam, are war criminals, we're in agreement.

If I'm pulling numbers out of my ass then so are you. Just out of
curiosity I Googled the words "Iraq mass graves" Here are the top five
hits:

http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/...cs/0000374.php
http://massgraves.info/
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdoc...0403190916.asp

The lowest estimate in these top five sites are 300,000 in mass graves
alone. Estimates of another 290,000 missing and presumed dead show up a
few times. The first site estimates 5 million dead. It seems the
general consensus is around 400,000 confirmed in graves and another
200,000-300,000 missing never to be found. There, I gave you numbers
that aren't pulled out of my ass. Are these numbers not a fairly
accurate estimate?

I'm not denying innocent people died in the liberation of Iraq but a
hell of a lot more people would have died if Saddam had remained in
power. Maybe it's OK for you if it is Iraqis killing Iraqis.
Personally, I think we did the right thing and there are many Iraqis
alive today that wouldn't be otherwise. Many more alive than were
killed in the last three years.

>>Looks to me like President Bush has saved 90,000 Iraqi lives.
>
>
> You misspelled "destroyed".
>
> http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

So you think the Iraqis are worse off today than they were under Saddam?

>>> "* In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his chemical
>>>weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja. In response, a
>>>number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.), introduced the
>>>"Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which sought to impose
>>>sanctions
>>>against Iraq. The act passed the Senate unanimously, but the Reagan
>>>White House killed the bill in the House."
>
>
>>>http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html
>>> Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
>>>made excuses for them and defended their good friend and
>>>ally. How 'bout that, Mikey? <chuckle>
>
>
>>You're resorting to quoting AL GORE!?!? LOL!
>
>
> WTF? There is no Al Gore quote there, Mikey. Gotta recent
> bu$h quote for ya, though - "You're doin' a heckuva job,
> Brownie!" That's what bu$h told his incompetent FEMA chief
> a few days before he was forced to resign because of gross
> incompetence. As usual, the truth was the exact opposite
> the idiocy spewed by your hero bu$h.

Al gore and his boss let Bin Laden run amuck through the 1990s. Even
after they tried knocking down one of the twin towers in 1993.
Clinton/Gore wanted to prosecute them. Give me a break. If they had
done their jobs and protected us, Bin Laden should be taking a dirt nap
right now. He was handed to them on a silver platter and Clinton told
Sudan and Yemen to let him go. We have over 3,000 dead Americans as a
direct result of that stupid ass decision. Yeah, Al Gore is a real good
person for you to use to support an argument regarding terrorism. If Al
Gore were president, Bin Laden would still be in Afghanistan lounging
around planning his fifth attack on our soil by now.

Let's keep it on Iraq. Bush stood up and took responsibility today for
any mistakes the Federal government made. You want him to cut off a
limb or flog himself? Get real. Feel good while it lasts because this
will pass very quickly.

> You really need to learn how to read, Mikey. Here, try again.
> This isn't an Al Gore quote.
> "In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his
> chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja.
> In response, a number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.),
> introduced the "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which
> sought to impose sanctions against Iraq. The act passed the
> Senate unanimously, but the Reagan White House killed the bill
> in the House."
> Sooooo, Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while
> Reagan/bu$h made excuses for them and defended their good
> friend and ally. What do you "think" about that, Mikey?

Oh yeah, Al Gore had a wonderful idea about using sanctions to prevent
genocide. It really worked great. Ask those 400,000 people lying in
the mass graves, or their families, how well that idea worked. Never
mind the UN taking all that bribe money from Saddam in the Oil for Food
Scandal. Yeah, those sanctions were a real ball buster for Saddam.

>>Hell, your whole political philosophy is based on kooky
>>left-wing web sites.
>
>
> Seymour Hersh isn't a "kooky left-wing web site", kook.
> He's a globally respected award winning journalist.
> If what he writes wasn't true, you'd be able to refute at
> least =one= of the many facts he's presented. Instead, all
> you can do is bitch, whine, scream and cry incoherently.
> You're a laughable joke and a clueless mess, Mikey.

One man's "globally respected award winning journalist" is another man's
"poster child for the far left wacko fringe". Let me guess, Michael
Moore is another of your heroes?

>>> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm
>
>
>>> Seymour Hersh is an award winning journalist with impeccable
>>>credibility global respect. He doesn't make a claim until he knows it
>>>to be factual - his career and reputation are at stake...
>
>
>>He's just another poster child for the far left wacko fringe.
>
>
> If you weren't such a simple minded and brainwashed moron
> and radical right wing extremist kook, you'd realize that
> embracing a proven liar and a tragic failure like bu$h,
> while rabidly attacking and rejecting award winning
> journalists, only proves that you're an ignorant and
> gullible fool.

I guess you're not too smart either wasting all your precious time
replying to such a person. Looks like you would have bigger fish to fry
than mess with little old me.

>>> The Commander in Chief sets Military policy with his
>>>advisors, Mikey. He doesn't fill toilet paper dispensers.
>>>Are you mentally ill, or just incredibly stupid?
>
>
>> Saying any president is responsible and personally accountable
>>for the actions of all military personnel under his command
>>shows you to be the one that is incredibly stupid and lacking
>>of logic.
>
>
> But you're the only one saying that, Mikey. You say a lot of
> very stupid things.

So you're saying President Bush isn't personally responsible for the
actions of every military personnel? You are just too fickle there Hanky.

>>You would rather be video taped having your head sawed off than
>>stripped naked and forced to do cheerleader routines with other
>>naked men?!?!
>
>
> Where did you get that crazy idea? You sure do have some
> bizarre fantasies, Mikey. I hope that one didn't come to
> you in a wet dream! <g>

At least keep up with the current post. You're delving two posts back.
If you can't think fast enough then maybe you shouldn't post anything
at all.

>>> You go boy! You finally admitted that you were spewing
>>>nonsense when you claimed that 51% of the population supports
>>>bu$h. BTW, do you know that his approval rating is down to 39%?
>>>You America and freedom hating extremsits are a minority,
>>>Mikey. A pathetic disgrace to the United States Of America
>>>for sure, but at least your're a minority...
>
>
>>You keep thinking that Hanky. Sure... you represent the majority.
>>LOL!
>
>
> bu$h's approval rating is down to 39%, Mikey boy! Your
> misguided, hateful, extremist, and anti-American views
> represent a minority of radical extremists. To your many
> betters, you're naught but a silly joke, a disgrace, and
> an embarrassment.

Guess what, he's still president and will be for the next three years
and four months. That must really chap your ass.

>>> No one is talking about sleep deprivation, Mikey. Do try to keep up.
>>>We're taking about brually and sadicstically beating people to death,
>>>breaking bones, causing third degree burns etc.
>>>That's torure, bu$h presided over it, he knew about it, and did
>>>nothing to stop it. That makes your draft dodging AWOL hero a war
>>>criminal, Mikey. I know you hate and fear them, but those are the
>>>facts and truth.
>
>
>>Damn, I give you a straight answer and you can't handle it.
>
>
> Still waiting for your answer, Mikey. Since bu$h set the
> policy and condoned the torture of POWS, which is a war
> crime, that makes him a war criminal. Do you agree?

I have told you I don't think he, or any president, is or has been a war
criminal. Are you having some reading comprehension problems?

>>In fact you cut most of my response.
>
>
> I cut the moronic juvenile rants and grade school insults,
> but that was the majority of your response...

You cut anything you can't handle with a canned, preprogrammed lunatic
left wing response. Typical left wing wacko fringe operating procedure.
Should I expect anything different?

>>Now it's your turn to give a direct answer to
>>one of my torture questions. How many Americans (or how many of your
>>family members) would have to be put in danger of loosing their lives
>>before you would condone the use of extreme physical torture on a known
>>terrorist in order to get information from him to save their lives? I
>>bet you don't give me a direct answer like I did for you.
>
>
> Torture doesn't produce accurate information. Torture victims
> will say anything to end the torture. Also, according to our own
> military, over 70% of bu$h detainees were guilty of nothing.
> bu$h is a known and proven terrorist, who has killed almost
> two thousand U.S. soldiers, as well as tens of thousands of
> innocent Iraqi civilians. But I don't believe he should be
> tortured. He should be tried and convicted of war crimes,
> and spend the rest of his life in a steel and concrete
> cage. If we lower ourselves to the level of terrorists and
> war criminals by resorting to torture, we sacrifice our humanity
> and our dignity.

You dodged the question. How many Americans have to be at risk of dying
before you would condone torture to save their lives? Don't be afraid
to say "There are not enough Americans on the planet" if that is what
you believe. Be a man and give me a straight forward, truthful answer.

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:
>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>>> Hank wrote:

>>>> So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
>>>> murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
>>>> your mentor bu$h a murderer.

>>> Nice try there Hanky. Don't change the subject. If YOU claim
>>>Bush is a murderer in this way then so is Saddam.

>> I will readily acknowledge that bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's
>> former friend and ally Saddam are both war criminals and
>> murderers. Will you, Mikey?

> No

Then you are denying reality and revealing more of your
ignorance. bu$h murdered tens of thousands of innocent
Iraqi civilians during his illegal and immoral terror
attack on The People of Iraq.

> I'm just trying to find out who you think is more evil,
> Saddam or President Bush.

Tough call, Mikey. Both are clearly a disgrace to the human
race. Makes you wonder why your mentors coddled and
catered to Saddam for over a decade, gave him billions of
U.S. tax payer dollars, and sold him WMD technology, and
made excuses for his atrocities, eh?

> I would think you could answer a simple question with a simple
> answer but that seems to be the way it is with you liberals.

What part of my answer above did you find confusing?

> I'm not denying innocent people died in the liberation of Iraq

Iraq hasn't been liberated - it was the victim of an
illegal invasion by war criminals and terrorists out
to steal Her vast oil reserves. It's now occupied by a
foreign army, and The Iraqi People strongly resent it.
There are curfews, check points, mandatory ID cards,
censorship of the press, bombings, crime, chaos,
and midnight warrantless searches followed by detainment
without charge or representation. If you "think" that's
liberation, then you really are mentally ill.

>>> Looks to me like President Bush has saved 90,000 Iraqi lives.

>> You misspelled "destroyed".

>> http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

> So you think the Iraqis are worse off today than they were
> under Saddam?

That's what the U.S. Congress, former weapons inspector Hans
Blix, and the majority if Iraqis say. Do you "think" you know
better than them, ya silly, brainwashed, extremist kook? LOL!

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0629-10.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0406-01.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1013-02.htm

Why do you support terrorism and war crimes, but reject
freedom and human rights, Mikey? Do you hate America, too?

>>> You're resorting to quoting AL GORE!?!? LOL!

>> WTF? There is no Al Gore quote there, Mikey. Gotta recent bu$h quote
>> for ya, though - "You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" That's what
>> bu$h told his incompetent FEMA chief a few days before he was forced
>> to resign because of gross incompetence. As usual, the truth was the
>> exact opposite the idiocy spewed by your hero bu$h.

> Al gore and his boss let Bin Laden run amuck through the 1990s.

Easy, Mikey, take a few deep, slow breaths. Okay, now - do you
realize that there was no Al Gore quote, and that Reagan/bu$h
continued to coddle their good friend and ally Hussein after he
gassed his own People, while Al Gore and others condemned his
behavior? Yes or no answer, Mikey boy!

> Yeah, Al Gore is a real good person for you to use to
> support an argument regarding terrorism.

I know, that's why I used him. bu$h, of course, is probably
the worst. He abandoned the fight against terrorism after
taking office, and let us get hit on 9-11. That, in spite
of numerous urgent and very specific warnings. In fact, he
went on a month long vacation right after receiving a CIA
warning that bin Laden is determined to strike inside the U.S..
And most recently, he stayed on vacation while a hospitals
full of nurses and dying patients were left for days without
food, water, or electricity. Whatta leader!

> Let's keep it on Iraq.

What about your crazy obsession with Al Gore and the non
existent quotes you brought up? <chuckle>

>> You really need to learn how to read, Mikey. Here, try again.
>> This isn't an Al Gore quote.

>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html

>> "In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his
>> chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja.
>> In response, a number of senators, including Al Gore
>> (D-Tenn.), introduced the "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which
>> sought to impose sanctions against Iraq. The act passed the Senate
>> unanimously, but the Reagan White House killed the bill in the House."
>> Sooooo, Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
>> made excuses for them and defended their good friend and ally. What do
>> you "think" about that, Mikey?

> Oh yeah, Al Gore had a wonderful idea about using sanctions
> to prevent genocide.

And Reagan/bu$h did nothing but continue to coddle Saddam and
make excuses for the atrocities of their good friend and ally.
Makes me wonder whose side you and your heroes are on, Mikey
boy - Saddam's, or the The United States of America....

>> Seymour Hersh isn't a "kooky left-wing web site", kook. He's a
>> globally respected award winning journalist.
>> If what he writes wasn't true, you'd be able to refute at least =one=
>> of the many facts he's presented. Instead, all you can do is bitch,
>> whine, scream and cry incoherently. You're a laughable joke and a
>> clueless mess, Mikey.

> One man's "globally respected award winning journalist" is
> another man's "poster child for the far left wacko fringe".

There are no men who view Seymour Hersh as a far left
whacko. Only a radical right wing extremist kook would
do that.
Mikey, when you have to lash out at and reject the quality
research of award winning journalists who have established and
maintained integrity and credibility over a period of decades,
but mindlessly embrace the moronic propaganda of proven liars
like bu$h, there is no stronger proof that you're on the wrong
track. If you were anything but an ignorant and brainwashed
radical right wing extremist nutter, you'd understand that.

>>>> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm

> I guess you're not too smart either wasting all your precious time
> replying to such a person.

Liberals are compassionate and optimistic - think of us
as Christ-like in our compassion and tolerance for the
unfortunate, misguided, and disadvantaged... <g>

> So you're saying President Bush isn't personally responsible
> for the actions of every military personnel?

Right, if a soldier of conscience refuses to commit war crimes
for bu$h, bu$h is not responsible for that man's courageous
personal decision. But bu$h is clearly responsible for the
widespread and systematic policy of torturing POWs. He and his
advisors set the policy, and did nothing to stop it when it
was exposed. Get it yet, Mikey?

>>> You would rather be video taped having your head sawed off than
>>> stripped naked and forced to do cheerleader routines with other naked
>>> men?!?!

>> Where did you get that crazy idea? You sure do have some bizarre
>> fantasies, Mikey. I hope that one didn't come to you in a wet dream! <g>

> At least keep up with the current post.

No worries there on my end, Mikey. You, on the other hand,
seem to have a rather wild imagination, and make up some weird
****!

>> bu$h's approval rating is down to 39%, Mikey boy! Your
>> misguided, hateful, extremist, and anti-American views
>> represent a minority of radical extremists. To your many
>> betters, you're naught but a silly joke, a disgrace, and an
>> embarrassment.

> Guess what, he's still president and will be for the next three
> years and four months. That must really chap your ass.

So you don't deny that most Americans don't support bu$h or
his failed policies, and that you and your radical extremism
are an extremist fringe minority. Good!

>> Still waiting for your answer, Mikey. Since bu$h set the policy and
>> condoned the torture of POWS, which is a war crime, that makes him a
>> war criminal. Do you agree?

> I have told you I don't think he, or any president, is or has been
> a war criminal.

So, you don't "think" that torture is a war crime, eh? More
proof of your extreme ignorance and brainwashing - not that
we needed more...

> You dodged the question. How many Americans have to be at
> risk of dying before you would condone torture to save their
> lives?

That's a very stupid question, Mikey - even for you.
Each situation must be evaluated carefully on its own
merits, and each fact examined before such a decision can
be made. You offer no details, and your vague fantasies
are silly and pretty much meaningless.


-


"You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" - bu$h, a few days
before his FEMA chief, Micheal Brown was forced to resign
because of his gross incomptence.

"The tools that enable Cuba save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

Hank wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>
>>Hank wrote:
>>
>>>Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hank wrote:
>
>
>>>>> So, any world leader who sends troops to battle is
>>>>>murdering his people, eh? Looks like you're calling
>>>>>your mentor bu$h a murderer.
>
>
>>>>Nice try there Hanky. Don't change the subject. If YOU claim
>>>>Bush is a murderer in this way then so is Saddam.
>
>
>>> I will readily acknowledge that bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's
>>>former friend and ally Saddam are both war criminals and
>>>murderers. Will you, Mikey?
>
>
>>No
>
>
> Then you are denying reality and revealing more of your
> ignorance. bu$h murdered tens of thousands of innocent
> Iraqi civilians during his illegal and immoral terror
> attack on The People of Iraq.

There is one thing we have clearly established, it the wacko left wing
fringe who doesn't live in reality. Bush murdered no one. You however
are murdering me with this monotonous droning of left wing
BS.

>>I'm just trying to find out who you think is more evil,
>>Saddam or President Bush.
>
>
> Tough call, Mikey. Both are clearly a disgrace to the human
> race. Makes you wonder why your mentors coddled and
> catered to Saddam for over a decade, gave him billions of
> U.S. tax payer dollars, and sold him WMD technology, and
> made excuses for his atrocities, eh?

Well at least it is a tough call for you. Maybe we are in the midst of
watching you go through an enlightenment. BTW, you can thank Carter for
our need to arm Saddam. While in office he was just a weak kneed idiot
that was a foreign policy pussy. Now he is just another member of the
wacko left wing fringe. Shows you what happens when a liberal is in charge.

>>I would think you could answer a simple question with a simple
>>answer but that seems to be the way it is with you liberals.
>
>
> What part of my answer above did you find confusing?

Well not confusing as much as stereotypical and boring. You hide behind
the "I hate Bush" mantras when you can't give a detailed answer. What's
wrong? You have too many USENET threads going to give a cogent answer
in this one? It must suck for you having to defend such a f'ed up
viewpoint.

>>I'm not denying innocent people died in the liberation of Iraq
>
>
> Iraq hasn't been liberated - it was the victim of an
> illegal invasion by war criminals and terrorists out
> to steal Her vast oil reserves. It's now occupied by a
> foreign army, and The Iraqi People strongly resent it.
> There are curfews, check points, mandatory ID cards,
> censorship of the press, bombings, crime, chaos,
> and midnight warrantless searches followed by detainment
> without charge or representation. If you "think" that's
> liberation, then you really are mentally ill.

They resented it so much that 8 million of them voted in the last
election. WTF planet are you on? If you really think they aren't
liberated you are an idiot.

>>>>Looks to me like President Bush has saved 90,000 Iraqi lives.
>
>
>>> You misspelled "destroyed".
>
>
>>> http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
>
>
>>So you think the Iraqis are worse off today than they were
>>under Saddam?
>
>
> That's what the U.S. Congress, former weapons inspector Hans
> Blix, and the majority if Iraqis say. Do you "think" you know
> better than them, ya silly, brainwashed, extremist kook? LOL!

Blix is an idiot. If the Iraqis were unhappy they would be marching in
the streets by the millions. Guess what, they aren't. You really have
your finger on the pulse of every Iraqi, Hanky. Please note the sarcasm
in that last sentence.

> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0629-10.htm
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0406-01.htm
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1013-02.htm
>
> Why do you support terrorism and war crimes, but reject
> freedom and human rights, Mikey? Do you hate America, too?

Why do you support keeping people in repression? If you had your way
the women in Afghanistan would still be enslaved and shot in the head
for just having an affair. Goes to show just how hypocritical you
liberals can be. If an action doesn't benefit a liberal politically,
then let letting people be repressed and murdered is acceptable. Only
you and your wacko left wing, liberal buddies could claim a war of
liberation to be a murdering torture fest by our military. Way to win
friends and influence people there Hanky. And you claim to be the smart
one. LOL!

>>>>You're resorting to quoting AL GORE!?!? LOL!
>
>
>>> WTF? There is no Al Gore quote there, Mikey. Gotta recent bu$h quote
>>>for ya, though - "You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" That's what
>>>bu$h told his incompetent FEMA chief a few days before he was forced
>>>to resign because of gross incompetence. As usual, the truth was the
>>>exact opposite the idiocy spewed by your hero bu$h.
>
>
>>Al gore and his boss let Bin Laden run amuck through the 1990s.
>
>
> Easy, Mikey, take a few deep, slow breaths. Okay, now - do you
> realize that there was no Al Gore quote, and that Reagan/bu$h
> continued to coddle their good friend and ally Hussein after he
> gassed his own People, while Al Gore and others condemned his
> behavior? Yes or no answer, Mikey boy!

I understand your need to distance yourself from old wacko Al. I would
be doing the same thing. Al Gore complains in 1988 but when he has a
chance to influence the Clinton administration in the 1990s to actually
do something he either didn't care or failed miserably. Al Gore
condemned his behavior? So what. It didn't save one Iraqi life. It
only allowed Saddam to bribe the UN and continue filling the mass
graves. So I guess you now agree there are hundreds of thousands in
Iraqi mass graves? I guess you cut anything out of my response you
can't refute. Typical liberal tactics. Run from what you can't handle.

>> Yeah, Al Gore is a real good person for you to use to
>>support an argument regarding terrorism.
>
>
> I know, that's why I used him. bu$h, of course, is probably
> the worst. He abandoned the fight against terrorism after
> taking office, and let us get hit on 9-11. That, in spite
> of numerous urgent and very specific warnings. In fact, he
> went on a month long vacation right after receiving a CIA
> warning that bin Laden is determined to strike inside the U.S..
> And most recently, he stayed on vacation while a hospitals
> full of nurses and dying patients were left for days without
> food, water, or electricity. Whatta leader!

Who gutted the CIA in the 1990s? It was Clinton/Gore. Who didn't hunt
down Al Qeada with a vengeance after the 1993 World Trade Center
bombing. It was Clinton/Gore. Under whose watch did most of the
terrorists get into the USA? It was Clinton/Gore. Who let Bin Laden
lounge around in Afghanistan to plan 9-11? It was Clinton/Gore. Keep
using Gore there Hanky. He sure is the poster child for anti-terrorism.
LOL! I know he is a fitting one for all you left wing, socialist,
wacko, liberal mind numb idiots.

>>Let's keep it on Iraq.
>
>
> What about your crazy obsession with Al Gore and the non
> existent quotes you brought up? <chuckle>

You brought up psycho AL in one of your spittle spewing diatribes on how
the sanctions worked against Saddam. Having an Alzheimer's moment there
Hanky?

>>> You really need to learn how to read, Mikey. Here, try again.
>>>This isn't an Al Gore quote.
>
>
>>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html

Can you do nothing but link left wing wacko fringe websites? If that is
the best you can do then don't waste your time. BTW, shouldn't you, as
a liberal, be out doing something more constructive like helping the
needy than sitting at a computer spewing your wacko left garbage?
You're a typical liberal, you talk a mean game but have no substance
behind your beliefs.

>>>"In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his
>>>chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja.
>>>In response, a number of senators, including Al Gore
>>>(D-Tenn.), introduced the "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which
>>>sought to impose sanctions against Iraq. The act passed the Senate
>>>unanimously, but the Reagan White House killed the bill in the House."
>>> Sooooo, Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
>>>made excuses for them and defended their good friend and ally. What do
>>>you "think" about that, Mikey?
>
>
>>Oh yeah, Al Gore had a wonderful idea about using sanctions
>>to prevent genocide.
>
>
> And Reagan/bu$h did nothing but continue to coddle Saddam and
> make excuses for the atrocities of their good friend and ally.
> Makes me wonder whose side you and your heroes are on, Mikey
> boy - Saddam's, or the The United States of America....

Are we going back to the 1980s again?!?! You do have a limited
intellect and **** poor debating skills.

>>> Seymour Hersh isn't a "kooky left-wing web site", kook. He's a
>>>globally respected award winning journalist.
>>>If what he writes wasn't true, you'd be able to refute at least =one=
>>>of the many facts he's presented. Instead, all you can do is bitch,
>>>whine, scream and cry incoherently. You're a laughable joke and a
>>>clueless mess, Mikey.
>
>
>>One man's "globally respected award winning journalist" is
>>another man's "poster child for the far left wacko fringe".
>
>
> There are no men who view Seymour Hersh as a far left
> whacko. Only a radical right wing extremist kook would
> do that.
> Mikey, when you have to lash out at and reject the quality
> research of award winning journalists who have established and
> maintained integrity and credibility over a period of decades,
> but mindlessly embrace the moronic propaganda of proven liars
> like bu$h, there is no stronger proof that you're on the wrong
> track. If you were anything but an ignorant and brainwashed
> radical right wing extremist nutter, you'd understand that.

Old Seymour sure is the Dali Lama of journalists. LOL! Please note the
sarcasm.

>>>>>http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0521-23.htm
>
>
>>I guess you're not too smart either wasting all your precious time
>>replying to such a person.
>
>
> Liberals are compassionate and optimistic - think of us
> as Christ-like in our compassion and tolerance for the
> unfortunate, misguided, and disadvantaged... <g>

You and your wacko buddies are Christ-like?!?! What a crock!!! I'm sure
Christ went around condoning sucking fetuses out of women's wombs. You
are a complete idiot.

>>So you're saying President Bush isn't personally responsible
>>for the actions of every military personnel?
>
>
> Right, if a soldier of conscience refuses to commit war crimes
> for bu$h, bu$h is not responsible for that man's courageous
> personal decision. But bu$h is clearly responsible for the
> widespread and systematic policy of torturing POWs. He and his
> advisors set the policy, and did nothing to stop it when it
> was exposed. Get it yet, Mikey?

You really had to twist your mind into a knot to come up with that
reply. Did it leave you with a headache? So according to your logic
our men and women in uniform are his accomplices and are by association
war criminals themselves? Oh yeah, that view will win your side a ton
of support from the public. It would be my dream for you to give the
response for the Dems after Bush's next speech.

>>>>You would rather be video taped having your head sawed off than
>>>>stripped naked and forced to do cheerleader routines with other naked
>>>>men?!?!
>
>
>>> Where did you get that crazy idea? You sure do have some bizarre
>>>fantasies, Mikey. I hope that one didn't come to you in a wet dream! <g>
>
>
>>At least keep up with the current post.
>
>
> No worries there on my end, Mikey. You, on the other hand,
> seem to have a rather wild imagination, and make up some weird
> ****!

I must keep you entertained. After all you keep responding.

>>> bu$h's approval rating is down to 39%, Mikey boy! Your
>>>misguided, hateful, extremist, and anti-American views
>>>represent a minority of radical extremists. To your many
>>>betters, you're naught but a silly joke, a disgrace, and an
>>>embarrassment.
>
>
>>Guess what, he's still president and will be for the next three
>>years and four months. That must really chap your ass.
>
>
> So you don't deny that most Americans don't support bu$h or
> his failed policies, and that you and your radical extremism
> are an extremist fringe minority. Good!

I don't agree or deny. Fact is you or I don't know what level of
support he has. All I can say is he won re-election last November and
that is all that counts.

>>> Still waiting for your answer, Mikey. Since bu$h set the policy and
>>>condoned the torture of POWS, which is a war crime, that makes him a
>>>war criminal. Do you agree?
>
>
>>I have told you I don't think he, or any president, is or has been
>>a war criminal.
>
>
> So, you don't "think" that torture is a war crime, eh? More
> proof of your extreme ignorance and brainwashing - not that
> we needed more...

I've told you my view on torture. IMO, there are circumstances when I
can condone its use. AS SOP for the military, no it isn't OK. As you
state below, it has to be judged on a case by case basis.

>>You dodged the question. How many Americans have to be at
>>risk of dying before you would condone torture to save their
>>lives?
>
>
> That's a very stupid question, Mikey - even for you.
> Each situation must be evaluated carefully on its own
> merits, and each fact examined before such a decision can
> be made. You offer no details, and your vague fantasies
> are silly and pretty much meaningless.

So, do I infer from this answer that you would torture someone under the
right conditions?

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> Hank wrote:
>> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>>> Hank wrote:

>>>> I will readily acknowledge that bu$h and Reagan/bu$h's
>>>> former friend and ally Saddam are both war criminals and
>>>> murderers. Will you, Mikey?

>>> No

>> Then you are denying reality and revealing more of your
>> ignorance. bu$h murdered tens of thousands of innocent
>> Iraqi civilians during his illegal and immoral terror
>> attack on The People of Iraq.

> Bush murdered no one.

So, you "think" these photos are all fakes,

http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

and the widely reported civilians deaths in Iraq are part
of a vast left wing conspiracy?

> BTW, you can thank Carter for our need to arm Saddam.

You're not quite sane, are you Mikey?

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html

>> Iraq hasn't been liberated - it was the victim of an
>> illegal invasion by war criminals and terrorists out
>> to steal Her vast oil reserves. It's now occupied by a
>> foreign army, and The Iraqi People strongly resent it.
>> There are curfews, check points, mandatory ID cards,
>> censorship of the press, bombings, crime, chaos,
>> and midnight warrantless searches followed by detainment
>> without charge or representation. If you "think" that's
>> liberation, then you really are mentally ill.

> They resented it so much that 8 million of them voted in
> the last election.

They voted because they hoped establishing their own
government might end bu$h's brutal military occupation
of their Country.

>>> So you think the Iraqis are worse off today than they were
>>> under Saddam?

>> That's what the U.S. Congress, former weapons inspector Hans
>> Blix, and the majority if Iraqis say. Do you "think" you know
>> better than them, ya silly, brainwashed, extremist kook? LOL!

> Blix is an idiot.

In your "mind", everyone who doesn't support bu$h's lies,
mass murder, war crimes, torture, and terrorism is an idiot.
And they tend to be the most intelligent, informed, credible,
and respected people on the planet. You embrace liars, war
criminals, and terrorists while rabidly rejecting the best
and brightest. Like I said, you are clearly less than sane.

> If the Iraqis were unhappy they would be marching in
> the streets by the millions.

They get gunned down when they protest the occupation.
They have no freedom or rights.

>> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0629-10.htm
>> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0406-01.htm
>> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1013-02.htm

>> Why do you support terrorism and war crimes, but reject
>> freedom and human rights, Mikey? Do you hate America, too?

> Why do you support keeping people in repression?

You supported the decade plus of coddling and catering to
Saddam by your right wing heroes. Liberals have always opposed
Hussein and his brutal regime. Now you support terrorist war
criminal bu$h and his brutal occupation. Why do you hate freedom,
human rights, justice, and everything America is supposed to represent?

>> Easy, Mikey, take a few deep, slow breaths. Okay, now - do you
>> realize that there was no Al Gore quote, and that Reagan/bu$h
>> continued to coddle their good friend and ally Hussein after he
>> gassed his own People, while Al Gore and others condemned his
>> behavior? Yes or no answer, Mikey boy!

> I understand your need to distance yourself from old wacko Al.

You're getting psychotic again, Mikey. I'm not distancing myself
from Al Gore, but you're cowering and hiding from my question, Here
it is again. Borrow a spine and integrity from a Liberal and
try to answer it this time. <chuckle>
"Do you realize that there was no Al Gore quote, and that
Reagan/bu$h continued to coddle their good friend and ally
Hussein after he gassed his own People, while Al Gore and
others condemned his behavior?" Yes or no answer, Mikey boy!

>> What about your crazy obsession with Al Gore and the non
>> existent quotes you brought up? <chuckle>

> You brought up psycho AL in one of your spittle spewing
> diatribes on how the sanctions worked against Saddam.
> Having an Alzheimer's moment there Hanky?

Show us the Al Gore quote that wadded up your panties, Mikey.
What's that, there was none, and you were just making **** up
again? We knew that! <chuckle>

>>>> You really need to learn how to read, Mikey. Here, try again.
>>>> This isn't an Al Gore quote.

>>>> http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_page.html

> Can you do nothing but link left wing wacko fringe websites?

Can you do nothing but cower and hide from indisputable
facts as presented by the most widely admired, respected,
credible, and award winning journalists on the planet?
You sure do know how to make yourself look like an ignorant,
laughable, and helpless fool, Mikey boy!

>>>> "In 1988 it became known that Saddam Hussein had used his chemical
>>>> weapons against Iraqi Kurds in the town of Halabja.
>>>> In response, a number of senators, including Al Gore (D-Tenn.),
>>>> introduced the "Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988," which sought to
>>>> impose sanctions against Iraq. The act passed the Senate
>>>> unanimously, but the Reagan White House killed the bill in the House."
>>>> Sooooo, Al Gore condemned Hussein's atrocities, while Reagan/bu$h
>>>> made excuses for them and defended their good friend and ally. What
>>>> do you "think" about that, Mikey?

>>> Oh yeah, Al Gore had a wonderful idea about using sanctions to
>>> prevent genocide.

>> And Reagan/bu$h did nothing but continue to coddle Saddam and
>> make excuses for the atrocities of their good friend and ally.
>> Makes me wonder whose side you and your heroes are on, Mikey
>> boy - Saddam's, or the The United States of America....

> Are we going back to the 1980s again?!?!

Are you cowering and hiding from the facts and truth again?
Oh well, at least you're not denying that your heroes coddled
and catered to Saddam for over a decade - while he was committing
his worst human rights atrocities. Why do you hate freedom,
human rights, justice, and America, Mikey, and why do you and
your heroes coddle the world's most despicable and brutal dictators?

>> There are no men who view Seymour Hersh as a far left
>> whacko. Only a radical right wing extremist kook would
>> do that.
>> Mikey, when you have to lash out at and reject the quality
>> research of award winning journalists who have established and
>> maintained integrity and credibility over a period of decades,
>> but mindlessly embrace the moronic propaganda of proven liars
>> like bu$h, there is no stronger proof that you're on the wrong
>> track. If you were anything but an ignorant and brainwashed
>> radical right wing extremist nutter, you'd understand that.

> Old Seymour sure is the Dali Lama of journalists.

Then why do you hate him and make a fool of yourself by
calling him silly names while avoiding the facts? Are you
mentally ill?

>> Liberals are compassionate and optimistic - think of us
>> as Christ-like in our compassion and tolerance for the
>> unfortunate, misguided, and disadvantaged... <g>

> You and your wacko buddies are Christ-like?!?!

You did offer to have a beer with me, but I wouldn't
yet say we're buddies - although you're definitely
whacko!
Jesus was The Ultimate Liberal. Like us modern day
Enlightened Liberals, he supported human rights, freedom,
justice and peace. He abhorred violence, deception, greed,
privilege, and pretty much everything else bu$h represents.
He would be repulsed by your hate, your support for the
senseless, illegal, and immoral mass murder of innocent
women and children, your support for torture, and your
rabid worship of the lying thieving terrorists on the
bu$h regime. You and your heroes represent everything
that Christ spoke out against - the worst humanity has
to offer....

>> Right, if a soldier of conscience refuses to commit war crimes
>> for bu$h, bu$h is not responsible for that man's courageous
>> personal decision. But bu$h is clearly responsible for the
>> widespread and systematic policy of torturing POWs. He and his
>> advisors set the policy, and did nothing to stop it when it
>> was exposed. Get it yet, Mikey?

> You really had to twist your mind into a knot to come up with that
> reply.

Should we conclude from your avoidance of the facts that
you agree bu$h is responsible for his policy of torture?

>> So you don't deny that most Americans don't support bu$h or
>> his failed policies, and that you and your radical extremism
>> are an extremist fringe minority. Good!

> I don't agree or deny. Fact is you or I don't know what level
> of support he has.

Speak for yourself, Mikey boy! Anyone who stays informed
knows for a fact that bu$h's support has dropped dramatically.
Only the most ignorant, brainwashed, gullible, and radical
right wing extremists still support him.

> All I can say is he won re-election last November and
> that is all that counts.

That's all you can say, eh? So if bu$h were to be convicted
of war crimes, or commit and act of treason so blatant that
even an extreme bu$h apologist like you could see it, you'd
still worship him, because at one point, he won an election.
Wow, I haven't seen that sort of extreme blind faith since
reading up on Hitler and the Nazis!

> So, do I infer from this answer that you would torture someone
> under the right conditions?

I suppose it's possible...

-

"You're doin' a heckuva job, Brownie!" - bu$h, a few days
before his FEMA chief, Micheal Brown was forced to resign
because of his gross incomptence.

"The tools that enable Cuba save lives and preserve
human dignity during hurricanes are socialist values
and organization." - Dr. W.T. Whitney Jr

Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/
http://thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/

"They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
warfare or morality."
-bu$h describing his own illegal invasion of Iraq.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
-- George W. Bush

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
-- Adolf Hitler

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
-- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...