Bush reveals Osama capture before election

[Speaker]

Now, i have a theory... We have already captured Osama Bin Laden, yet it is still under cover. Bush wants it under cover until during the elections and he will reveal to the nation that he has indeed captured Bin Laden. He will do this so the people will see that he is a ''GOOD'' president and has great accomplishments such as the capture of Sadam and Bin Laden. Therefore he will have more votes and stay in office...

 

[Lights]

Ok? This isnt your theory, this is a VERY old idea that has been used for quite awhile. Jimmy Carter supposedly did the same thing during his term. And, more recently, Bush supposedly did the same with Saddam; he didnt leak the news until it was at an all-time low. Meh if he did. I surely dont know. Either way, Saddam was caught.

If Osama has been caught, the only reason he wouldnt have been announced is for security reasons. Well not really security, but they would want to milk as much out of him before going public. Besides, even if this theory was true, is it so bad? Is it wrong for somone to make good use of his accomplishments? I dont think so, as long as he is being securely held.

 

[TrongaMonga]

Lights, your sign is above the allowed limits.

And it's not wrong to use your accomplishments, but it's wrong to use the american people accomplishment for yourself. Speccially by lying to them.

 

[bamthedoc]

I don't think you realize exactly how that would play out, either. It would be bad for PR, and, in this type of case, it would be political suicide. The military men and women wouldn't want such a huge accomplishment, especially a one that is a possible stabalizing force, to go unnoticed for such a long time. Afterall, they won him the 2000 election.

If Bush did something so blatently stupid, no politician in thier right mind is going to want to aid him, and, thus, such an action would alienate him. Holding off on information for varification, purposes, however, is another matter. Saddam Hussien's identity had to be verified, first.

Holding off on Osama bin Laden would, and should, only be for verification. It should also be handled the same way -- hiding information on where-abouts.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Don't under estimate the stupidity of bush, they could hold off the "verification" until a better time to release this news into the general public. Lights will support Bush no matter what it seems, is his sig supposed to take the piss outa bush or is he always that gormless. He could of gotten away with plenty of "hold offs" do we really know when saddam was captured? They had all them tapes of saddam ready. I think it was pretty obvious who it was.

 

[bamthedoc]

DNA verification, however, was more powerful and more releasing to the Iraqi people than the tapes were. The tapes primary purpose was to show humility to the Iraqi people, to show a man who they needn't fear. Besides that, I'd tell you not to underestimate his intelligence. An IQ score does not a man make, nor does it make intelligence.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that, since military and their families won Bush the 2000 election, it would not be wise to alienate oneself from such a large support base. Bush is a lot more intelligent, or at least wiser, than you give him credit. He's dealt with difficult cicumstances, and that includes an awkward balance in the Senate and the House.

I may know I'm voting for Bush in November 2004, but that doesn't mean I have a blind faith in his ability to be president. I'm critical of him everyday, and he's proving himself every bit better than Clinton. At least, now, we know who his opponent will be. Kerry is a joke, and I really hope the American public is not as stupid as he makes them out to be by voting for him (Kerry).

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Don't unestimate kerry, I know hes a moron but so is bush period. Bush has proved himself the fool, I really hope you and lights are the only ones voting for bush. I live in fear every day while bush is controling the US. I really don't want another world war, be hopeful you're goverment can keep him under control. IQ doesn't make a man, it makes a smart man. I really can't see how bush is any better than clinton.

 

[Nuts]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
Don't unestimate kerry, I know hes a moron but so is bush period. Bush has proved himself the fool, I really hope you and lights are the only ones voting for bush. I live in fear every day while bush is controling the US. I really don't want another world war, be hopeful you're goverment can keep him under control. IQ doesn't make a man, it makes a smart man. I really can't see how bush is any better than clinton.

Unfounded assertions are lovely during the late Winter months, but I prefer factual presentations of the truth.

 

[bamthedoc]

Oh? I suppose that's why Clinton was so moronic? Clinton was a politician, and nothing else. He had not militaristic or economic sense, and that's what's needed in a president. Bush isn't much in the way of a military mind, but, at least, he's willing to admit that and let his military advisors, well, advise.

Bush doesn't want world conquest. All he wants is for terrorists to be dealt with. I'm more afraid of what would have happened had Al Gore been elected or if someone like Kerry is elected. Bush is not a moron, period. You live in another country, and you don't experiance anything "first hand" in regards to the US. I don't know why you think Bush wants to conquer the world or start a third world war. That sounds like media brainwashing, rather than perspective view of current events and history.

IQ has absolutely no bearing. It is a biggoted way of looking at some one, as most people don't reflect their scores. Clinton certainly didn't. As I said already, he was an idiot. So is Kerry, and so isn't Bush (hmm? "isn't" sounded odd in that grammarical usage).

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Nuts, posting is for when you have more to say than "liar, liar"

Oh? I suppose that's why Clinton was so moronic? Clinton was a politician, and nothing else. He had not militaristic or economic sense, and that's what's needed in a president. Bush isn't much in the way of a military mind, but, at least, he's willing to admit that and let his military advisors, well, advise.

If clinton was a politician and nothing else what exactly is bush? During clintons reign there was an good ecomony, and he stayed nice and peaceful. Bush isn't much in the way of anything. Giving a warning to terrorists that hes going to "start a war with them" just made America the biggest target. I keep on hearing about terrorist attacks on the forces in afghanistan, it could of been done a lot better, thats why he admits that his advisors advise him.

You live in another country, and you don't experiance anything "first hand" in regards to the US. I don't know why you think Bush wants to conquer the world or start a third world war. That sounds like media brainwashing, rather than perspective view of current events and history.

Well the rest of you're paragraph was about being afriad of what al gore might of done, you should be more afraid of what bush has already done or what he will. I'm in another country so I can see past patronism enough to see that the president of the United States Of America is an idiot. Every time hear anything about bush's activitys I am once reasured that he is a dolt.
Yes the media would say our allies president is an dolt.

Clinton certainly didn't. As I said already, he was an idiot.

And how exactly was he an idiot. At least he didn't ask the leader (leader = lack of a better word) of brazil if he had black people in his country.

 

[Lights]

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC
" If clinton was a politician and nothing else what exactly is bush?

Bush served in the National Guard, that alone puts him above Clinton military wise.

During clintons reign there was an good ecomony, and he stayed nice and peaceful. Bush isn't much in the way of anything.

Thats silly. During Clintons reign there was not an attack on the American home-front like the attacks on the World Trade. There has never been an attack like that one. Not to mention the problem of Saddam and everything that had to happen with that.

Its very hard to compare the two's terms, as they are under completely different circumstances.

Giving a warning to terrorists that hes going to "start a war with them" just made America the biggest target. I keep on hearing about terrorist attacks on the forces in afghanistan, it could of been done a lot better, thats why he admits that his advisors advise him.

Hah. Could you imagine the media frenzy if he didnt give a warning?! It would be chaos. There was no positive way to go about this, for it is not a positive thing to have to do.

Why wouldn't he admit he is being advised? There is no shame in that. Anyone in a powerful position has advisors. :\

Its all about the media. If the media was supportive of this, everyone would be happy. But no, everything Bush does is wrong. Everything he stands for is wrong. For some reason you insult me for agreeing with what he does, but you are not different. Nothing Bush does would be "ok" in your eyes.

Well the rest of you're paragraph was about being afriad of what al gore might of done, you should be more afraid of what bush has already done or what he will.

What has he done that is so bad?
Stand up for this country and go against the terrorists?
Completely obliterate the Taliban?
Free two, yes two, opressed countries?
Bring down a tyrannical dictator?
Give American people tax cuts?
Done everything in his power to help the economy?

I mean honestly, does he have his faults? Yes, no one is perfect. But he isn't the disease that is destroying the world.

Originally posted by ORC-r0x0r-ROC

Lights will support Bush no matter what it seems, is his sig supposed to take the piss outa bush or is he always that gormless.

Riiight.
My sig is an honor to my country of which I love. Im sorry if you dont want me to have pride in where I live, but I guess you can get over it?


Err...it would seem my sig isnt working at the moment. >.<

 

[bamthedoc]

If clinton was a politician and nothing else what exactly is bush? During clintons reign there was an good ecomony, and he stayed nice and peaceful. Bush isn't much in the way of anything. Giving a warning to terrorists that hes going to "start a war with them" just made America the biggest target. I keep on hearing about terrorist attacks on the forces in afghanistan, it could of been done a lot better, thats why he admits that his advisors advise him.

Sorry, but I couldn't help but laugh at all this nonsense. Let me point out a few things...

During the Clintonic era, several trillion dollars worth of jobs disappeard, and they were the high-paying variety. Only a few million dollars worth of jobs were created, being of the minimum wage variety. That's not good economic sense, and it's definetly not thriving. This is what you call "a crash waiting to happen", and the crash happened -- only it was after his "reign".

During the Clintonic era, the UN caused more military actions than any single organization in history. Syria is one very good example. The UN thought they could use the US military forces effectively, and they only ended up getting their butts handed to them by terrorists.

Bush is a lot more "peaceful" worthy than Clinton. I now quote one of the greatest military, dimplomatic, political, and economical minds of all time. Let's see if you can guess who this is: The best way to promote peace is to always be prepared for war.

As per the Afganistan "problem", it is one of the most secure nations in the region, at the moment. If the UN was handling it, it might be a worse blunder than the Syrian incident. Can you say "Blackhawk Down"?

Well the rest of you're paragraph was about being afriad of what al gore might of done, you should be more afraid of what bush has already done or what he will. I'm in another country so I can see past patronism enough to see that the president of the United States Of America is an idiot. Every time hear anything about bush's activitys I am once reasured that he is a dolt.
Yes the media would say our allies president is an dolt.

I ran a scenario based on what Clinton did and what Gore wanted to do.

Military and Intelligence funding gets cut further. Al Gore sees no major problems, except for an economic crash, during his first term. During his second term, however, a major terrorist attack takes out Wasthington, DC -- or at least the White House, the Senate and House, and the Supreme Court.

With Bush in charge, funding would have eventually prevented such an attack. I have a feeling that the terrorists pushed up their plans, as it has been proven they'd been planning these attacks for more than a decade.

Bush is not a "dolt", and only those brainwashed by the media would believe that. You should trust in your own ability to dynamically apply current events and history to make your own deductions. You aren't doing that, yet.

And how exactly was he an idiot. At least he didn't ask the leader (leader = lack of a better word) of brazil if he had black people in his country

Okay? He gave control of the US military forces over to the UN to handle all of the stupid little incidents that the UN caused, and that could have been handled better either diplomatically or with US led forces rather than "led by the hand". Yugoslavia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, China, North Korea, several providences breaking from Russia, Czechloslavakia, and a whole lot of incidents in Africa could have been either avoided or handled better. Yeah, the UN is real good :rolleyes

Let's see you try to tell me those weren't proof enough.

FYI: As further proof that IQ and other such tests doesn't matter, I'll give you some info on me.

High School GPA: Weighted ~4.17 Unweighted ~3.85
ASSET: 82
SAT: 1100 (550 + 550)
ACT: 32
Biology AP Exam: 4
Calculus AP Exam: 3
Associate of Science GPA: 3.88

I've never taken an IQ exam, so I couldn't tell you that. I think I'd score pretty low, though. I don't know why people think I'd get a "genious" score...

 

[CelestialBadger]

1) Any argument about any media bias is unfounded. According to everyone I talk to about politics the media is both conservatively AND liberally biased. How incredible.

2) Your situation on national security is just that. A situation that you've completely made up. Okay, that situation is plausible. How about a situation where when Bush had choked on a pretzel he died. Terrorists saw their chance and blew the state of Maine into the Atlantic Ocean? Aren't we all so good at writing fiction. What's the point though?

3) How is your last paragraph proof of anything? You're assuming that you wouldn't do well on an IQ test and trying to pass that off as some sort of conclusive evidence?

By the way, 500+550=1050!=1100

 

[bamthedoc]

Baka, that was a typo. I thought I hit the "5" there.

I was talking about Clinton and Bush there. During Clinton's time, I would never have attributed more than an 80 to him on IQ. Admittedly, I'd never attribute more than a 90 to Bush, but, at least, his compromises show more wisedom than Clinton ever will.

I'll add more in a bit...

1) Any argument about any media bias is unfounded. According to everyone I talk to about politics the media is both conservatively AND liberally biased. How incredible.

There are more (numerical) liberal media outlets out there. New York Times. Charlotte Observer. FOX. NBC. I'd go on, but MSNBC is the only conservative news source that I've really found.

2) Your situation on national security is just that. A situation that you've completely made up. Okay, that situation is plausible. How about a situation where when Bush had choked on a pretzel he died. Terrorists saw their chance and blew the state of Maine into the Atlantic Ocean? Aren't we all so good at writing fiction. What's the point though?

Made up? Would you rather the circumstances necessary for it actually occur? I'd rather not take the chance, but that doesn't mean I'm "warmongering" or the like. Besides, if Bush had actually choked on it to death -- unlikely -- Chaney would do a better job than Gore, anyday.

3) How is your last paragraph proof of anything? You're assuming that you wouldn't do well on an IQ test and trying to pass that off as some sort of conclusive evidence?

I'd put Forest Gump as more intelligent and worthy of presidency than Clinton. I'm not insulting Gump, as he's quite an interesting person. Clinton, on the other hand... I'm not commenting. I was also commenting that, though some people might think I'd score high, I'd probably score lower than they'd thought or think.

 

[Ciphus]

I think I know what Gore would have done if he were president during 9/11. Now this is just an assumption going off of Clinton Foreign Policy. Not a thing! He would not have went after terrorism like Bush did. Bush has taken a lot of flak for taking the fight to the terrorists, but that's sure better than waiting for them to bring it to us...again.

Now I don't think I can come up with much else, it's all been said. The only thing I can add is that Americans are smart. They can look at Kerry's voting record and what he has said and that will speak for itself. Votes for the way in Iraq, now he speaks out against it. Votes for the Patriot act, now speaks out against it....even though he wouldn't get rid of it. He went to fight in Vietnam, then he came back and trashtalked it along with Fonda. I believe if he became president he would serve for 4 years, then talk about how he hated the government. It would only go along with everything else he did.

I'm a republican at heart, but I was really pulling for Edwards. I think he stood a better chance at beating Bush. Kerry can pull the Democratic votes, but Edwards could get the independants and Republicans too. I just hope Kerry has Edwards as his VP....that would make me feel a little better if he becomes president.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

Well, It seems I can’t convince you. You’re digging your own graves by voting for bush, almost everyone hates him. The thing is: even Americans despite loving their country ect HATE HIM.

I think I know what Gore would have done if he were president during 9/11. Now this is just an assumption going off of Clinton Foreign Policy. Not a thing! He would not have went after terrorism like Bush did. Bush has taken a lot of flak for taking the fight to the terrorists, but that's sure better than waiting for them to bring it to us...again.

I really don't think he would have done anything, the whole world would be on him, and it would be a time for mourning. If someone gives another theory about what al gore or Kerry would've done ill just leave this forum, stop guessing what they would've of done. The fact is: You don't know jackshit about what’s going around in their heads http://maddox.xmission.com/limits_to_freedom.html

Now I don't think I can come up with much else, it's all been said. The only thing I can add is that Americans are smart. They can look at Kerry's voting record and what he has said and that will speak for itself.

Urm, haven't you seen all them threads ect with documented proof that America sucks regarding education you know science in America blah, blah. ttp://nslog.com/harchives/2003/03/29/bush_the_dolt.php
]

I'm a republican at heart, but I was really pulling for Edwards. I think he stood a better chance at beating Bush. Kerry can pull the Democratic votes, but Edwards could get the independants and Republicans too. I just hope Kerry has Edwards as his VP....that would make me feel a little better if he becomes president.

**** knows why "being" a republican is so good and why is it supposed to make you vote for a certain person. You should vote for a president whether he’s good or not, not whether the president is a demo or a repub. All republicans and democrats can EAT MEhttp://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=3740887664
.

Baka, that was a typo. I thought I hit the "5" there.

Another person who watches anime because its a cartoon picture and wants to be Japanesehttp://maddox.xmission.com/anime_nerd.html

There are more (numerical) liberal media outlets out there. New York Times. Charlotte Observer. FOX. NBC. I'd go on, but MSNBC is the only conservative news source that I've really found.

Will you **** off with this media bitching already, geez things are biased, period. Yeah CNN and a lot of American news channels are crappy: http://maddox.xmission.com/cnn_sucks.html

I'd put Forest Gump as more intelligent and worthy of presidency than Clinton. I'm not insulting Gump, as he's quite an interesting person. Clinton, on the other hand... I'm not commenting. I was also commenting that, though some people might think I'd score high, I'd probably score lower than they'd thought or think.

Forest Gump is a film character, an actor wouldn't really do a good job. Bush is there mainly because his father and relatives were in government. IQ is definitely put bush in his place, its just one pretty accurate method of measuring intelligence. http://www.bushisanidiot.20m.com/

As per the Afganistan "problem", it is one of the most secure nations in the region, at the moment. If the UN was handling it, it might be a worse blunder than the Syrian incident. Can you say "Blackhawk Down"?

Say, why don't I| base my arguments on films? How very odd that you say you never listen to media and shouldn't ever listen to them :rolleyes. Jesus Christ, stop guessing what the UN would of done, YOU DON’'T HAVE A CLUE! Wasn’t it the UN that had to rescue the US forces.
http://www.merip.org/newspaper_opeds/Dan_Con_war_clouds_somalia(You're going to have to cut and paste this one I cba giving instructions on how to fix the link)http://www.somaliawatch.org/archivedec01/011218201.htm

Bush served in the National Guard, that alone puts him above Clinton military wise.

Obviously... This proves so much. Well hating Clinton is no reason to vote for someone
worse

Give American people tax cuts?

That’s the main reason why you support him. Make the rich richer, the poor poorer. http://www.zearle.com/Bush_top_ten_lists.htm

Done everything in his power to help the economy?

Yeah, done everything to keep him and his buddies rich. http://www.525reasons.com/archives/000541.html

I mean honestly, does he have his faults? Yes, no one is perfect. But he isn't the disease that is destroying the world.

A lot of people would disagree with you there, he has faults yes, too many. This was really the only thing I can agree with you on.http://whistleass.typepad.com/boot_george_in_2004/2004/01/kerry_beats_bus.html Kerry’s a idiot but it can't get much worse than bush eh? bush is the village
idiot, he is the butt of everyone’s jokes. These are just the start, there are millions of sites that criticise his inability to run a country.

 

[bamthedoc]

Well, It seems I can’t convince you. You’re digging your own graves by voting for bush, almost everyone hates him. The thing is: even Americans despite loving their country ect HATE HIM.

His approval rating is higher than expected.

I really don't think he would have done anything, the whole world would be on him, and it would be a time for mourning. If someone gives another theory about what al gore or Kerry would've done ill just leave this forum, stop guessing what they would've of done. The fact is: You don't know jackshit about what’s going around in their heads http://maddox.xmission.com/limits_to_freedom.html

...

That was one of the worst, biggoted articles I've ever read, and I've read a lot.

Urm, haven't you seen all them threads ect with documented proof that America sucks regarding education you know science in America blah, blah. ttp://nslog.com/harchives/2003/03/29/bush_the_dolt.php

Education is where it is thanks to the liberals.

Education in America... Worthless unless you've been to college since 1950.

**** knows why "being" a republican is so good and why is it supposed to make you vote for a certain person. You should vote for a president whether he’s good or not, not whether the president is a demo or a repub. All republicans and democrats can EAT MEhttp://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=3740887664

Meh, I don't like parties, either. I'm more for what General George Washington said upon leaving office (note: not a quote but a paraphrase):

A partisan system will be bad for democracy. It will split the nation and create issues that have no bearing in the governmental arena.

Foreseen Issues: Socialistic Issues, Big Brother Issues, Government streching outside military and public protection

Another person who watches anime because its a cartoon picture and wants to be Japanesehttp://maddox.xmission.com/anime_nerd.html

Um? No... If you want to say something so inflamitory, go to the asylum. I like anime just, well, because. I don't want to be Japanese, but I do respect their culture. You need to grow up.

Forest Gump is a film character, an actor wouldn't really do a good job. Bush is there mainly because his father and relatives were in government. IQ is definitely put bush in his place, its just one pretty accurate method of measuring intelligence. http://www.bushisanidiot.20m.com/

:rolleyes You don't think I know Forest Gump isn't real? I can't believe how many idiots you like to link us to. Chalk up another lost point for you.

Will you **** off with this media bitching already, geez things are biased, period. Yeah CNN and a lot of American news channels are crappy: http://maddox.xmission.com/cnn_sucks.html

Stop linking to maddox. Their one of the worst idiots out there. Propoganda machines have no bearing here.

Say, why don't I| base my arguments on films? How very odd that you say you never listen to media and shouldn't ever listen to them :rolleyes. Jesus Christ, stop guessing what the UN would of done, YOU DON’'T HAVE A CLUE! Wasn’t it the UN that had to rescue the US forces.
http://www.merip.org/newspaper_oped..._clouds_somalia(You're going to have to cut and paste this one I cba giving instructions on how to fix the link)http://www.somaliawatch.org/archivedec01/011218201.htm

In Somolia? No. They sent in US troops into a bad situation with no back-up, and the US had to dig everyone out of a doomed project. I used a movie as an example because, at the very least, it was a somewhat historically accurate film. If you believe the UN could do anything without the US, you're wrong. If you believe the US got into trouble because of our tactics, you're dead wrong. The UN said, "Don't fire unless fired on." We had to leave civis to die because the UN is hairbrained. We could have done the job a lot faster and cleaner if the UN wasn't running the show.

I speculate because I can. You can't? Oh well...

Obviously... This proves so much. Well hating Clinton is no reason to vote for someone
worse

I thought we went over the environment thing, before. It's true that Bush gave corperations a little more leway, but what all these articles you link to forget is that Bush also told those same corperations that they'd be under a magnifying glass. They are alleviated so that they may have time to improve. You don't want a company to go under just because they can't keep up with regulations. It's called economic sense. Clinton was an idiot. People liked him for some odd reason that I have yet to figure out. Oh well...

That’s the main reason why you support him. Make the rich richer, the poor poorer. http://www.zearle.com/Bush_top_ten_lists.htm

Is ignorance really that blissful? If you cut taxes across the board, that means you'll be including the so-called "rich". Incremental tax cuts are, guess what, common and good. It's better than incremental tax increases. The tax cuts benefit everyone, and you should stop giving us such idiotic links. It gets annoying reading such ignoramouses.

Yeah, done everything to keep him and his buddies rich. http://www.525reasons.com/archives/000541.html

Tax cuts across the board means, get this, TAX CUTS ACROSS THE BOARD!! Incremental tax cuts is nothing as it most benefits those who actually make money. Most of the true "rich" *thinks Warbucks* have no actual income. They have all their money in the banks and stocks and INVISIBLE to the IRS. The people who are earning their million dollars a year lose half of it to the government, and they need someo of it back to improve their business. I propose that everyone making above 30k a year pays a flat tax of 17%. Why? It works better. Incremental tax brakets are stupid and waste money.

A lot of people would disagree with you there, he has faults yes, too many. This was really the only thing I can agree with you on.http://whistleass.typepad.com/boot_..._beats_bus.html Kerry’s a idiot but it can't get much worse than bush eh? bush is the village
idiot, he is the butt of everyone’s jokes. These are just the start, there are millions of sites that criticise his inability to run a country.

You're point? Let them play, I won't listen to people who don't get their facts straight before writing their opinion. Hmm? That might include you soon enough. Oh! I'll comment on something I don't like about Bush as soon as you leave ignorance and enter into willingness to LEARN about pressing issues rather than shape them based on ignoramouses.

 

[ORC-r0x0r-ROC]

If foriegners voted bush wouldn't stand a chance, he has been skimming it so far and a suprising amount of people in america hate him. Why do Americans use slang words like "biggoted" and have to put " round dolt, like it wasn't a proper word. Tell me why the article is stupid, big deal you've read alot doesn't mean you don't know whats good or not. Just because you disagree with it. If you send him a hate mail that guy would easily rip up whatever arguement you try to use against it.

I couldn't care less if it was the liberals, demos or repubs fault bush is doing jackshit about it. As for the grow up thing, when bush becomes a good president I'll grow up (never). I generally don't like anime fans, I find them very, very sad. Click the link.

Maddox isn't a propaganda machine hes just a guy like you or me, just because he doesn't like bush and decided to make a website doesn't make him any different. What he says has nothing to do with propaganda, propaganda would be used to get you to vote for a certain person or make you support a certain cause. Maddox does nothing of the sort.

You dismiss everthing as either and idiot wrote it or something else try argueing agaisn't it, and a person wrote everything, just because its wrote in an unformal manner doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Its just like you to blame everything bad on the UN I wouldn't expect anything else from a yanke bush supporter. Bush's father, President George H. W. Bush, sent U.S. troops to Somalia in December 1992, he said the mission would only last a month...Everything he does helps himself and his men, he starts a war on terrorism just when his country gets attacked, what a dick. Bush says some companys under a magnifying glass, so hes supposed to have ecomical sense? He ****s up time and time again, its not like a normal job. This actually matters.

Any dimwit and speculate, here: Bush is going to **** up even more and cost more lives how about that? Hmm not much to say about the last post, except it was a stupid flame in deguise, if you and lights are never going to relise that bush is the most pigthick president or leader I can think of.

 

[bamthedoc]

If foriegners voted, bush wouldn't stand a chance, a suprising amount of people in america hate him. Why do Americans use slang words like "biggoted" and have to put " round dolt, like it wasn't a proper word. Tell me why the article is stupid, big deal you've read alot doesn't mean you don't know whats good or not. Just because you disagree with it. If you send him a hate mail that guy would easily rip up whatever arguement you try to use against it.

The article is stupid because it ignores 75% of the issues it is attempting to comment on in order to make their arguement look good. The reason I read a lot is to get my hands around each issue and read everything rather than snippits. I was surprised that those sites were worse than the New York Times, and some even bordered on "news papers" like Star Journal.

I couldn't care less if it was the liberals, demos or repubs fault bush is doing jackshit about it. As for the grow up thing, when bush becomes a good president I'll grow up (never). I generally don't like anime fans, I find them very, very sad. Click the link.

That link is blocked on my ISP. I'm assuming they did something COL didn't like. As for the "grow up" comment, I meant that you need to become more worldly.

Maddox isn't a propaganda machine hes just a guy like you or me, just because he doesn't like bush and decided to make a website doesn't make him any different. What he says has nothing to do with propaganda, propaganda would be used to get you to vote for a certain person or make you support a certain cause. Maddox does nothing of the sort.

Propaganda is the spreading of false, mis-, or otherwise misleading information in order to promote a certain idea. That is exactly what he is doing, and he needs to learn to read up on stuff before he comments.

You dismiss everthing as either and idiot wrote it or something else try argueing agaisn't it, and a person wrote everything, just because its wrote in an unformal manner doesn't necessarily mean anything.

No, I dismiss everything that ignores all/most sides of an issue just to make their argument look good.

Its just like you to blame everything bad on the UN I wouldn't expect anything else from a yanke bush supporter. Everything he does helps himself and his men, he starts a war on terrorism just when his country gets attacked, what a dick. Bush says some companys under a magnifying glass, so hes supposed to have ecomical sense? He ****s up time and time again, its not like a normal job. This actually matters.

Another laughable comment, oh well...

Bush made sure that there were plenty of environmental restrictions for companies to follow, and he made sure they had time to adapt and comply. They are being watched carefully so that they don't take advantage of this. Bush compromises so that both sides win, but he triest to make sure it benefits the US. It's hard to do such.

Any dimwit and speculate, here: Bush is going to **** up even more and cost more lives how about that? Hmm not much to say about the last post, except it was a stupid flame in deguise, if you and lights are never going to relise that bush is the most pigthick president or leader I can think of.

I can name worse leaders, and list off a few hundred without breaking a sweat. Want me to try? You're speculation is not even comperable to mine as I dynamically apply history to current events to bring out the most likely situation. Perhaps I should have said "educated speculation", but it should be the same difference. Dimwitted speculations aren't based on anything but perceptions of what one thinks to be real when it is obvious that reality is not what exists in their minds.

If there were some one better than Bush running, I'd vote for them. Kerry doesn't come close to fitting the bill. I didn't even pull for Bush during the Republican Primaries. Why? I didn't feel he was the best qualified. However, I did like all of the 2000 Republican Primary Candidates more than the 2000 Democrate Primary Candidates.

 

[Nuts]

ORC-r0x0r-ROC, are you by chance the village idiot in Britain? Every other word that you post is purely conjecture and opinion. You never post proof, you never post supporting articles or polls, and you rarely use factual evidence to support your wild ideas.

You are truly, without question, one of the most ignorant people I have ever had the displeasure to converse with. I'm dumber for having known you, thank you.