Off Topic Messages

Can it be justified that various people are being held, during the course of the "WAR on terror", but are NOT classified as WAR criminals ?!

Poll ended at Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:55 pm

Yes
8
47%
No
9
53%
 
Total votes : 17

Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:38 am

likethebike wrote: Just because someone says Bill Clinton did something doesn't mean he did it.



whoa, friend, don't guzzle too much of that psychedelic kool-aid.

:roll:

Sat Dec 31, 2005 3:17 am

likethebike wrote:the arsenic in the drinking water


I must admit I have never heard this one before! Can anyone tell me more about this?

Sun Jan 01, 2006 3:50 pm

In March 2001 the Bush administration suspended new rules for the level of acceptable arsenic in drinking water. A Clinton era regulation, backed by years of research, lowered the acceptable of arsenic in drinking water from 50 particles per billion to 10 particles per billion starting in January of that year. This was so Simon LeGree like in its cartoonish corruption that Bush eventually backed off and six months later allowed the new limits to stay in place.

Sun Jan 01, 2006 5:23 pm

as far as the thread title goes, what war ?

Is it still on ?

Bush said the war was over.

Then he said the war on terror was on - (just when campaigning started for re-election)

Then he said the war on terror could never end.

Has Bush re-confirmed this at any point that he went to war with a war that although he said was over is one he has since said cannot end ?

Although i say he said it he might not have. :oops:

Sun Jan 01, 2006 8:33 pm

These governments of ours like to make us think were permanently at war...they need us to be scared top keep us under control.....why don't they just bring in the NEW WORLD ORDER and have done with it.....Cos that's what it's all about.

Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:27 am

Steve_M wrote:as far as the thread title goes, what war ?

Is it still on ?

Bush said the war was over.

Then he said the war on terror was on - (just when campaigning started for re-election)

Then he said the war on terror could never end.

Has Bush re-confirmed this at any point that he went to war with a war that although he said was over is one he has since said cannot end ?

Although i say he said it he might not have. :oops:


This is another straw man the Left likes to prop up and knock down to boost their position.

Bush NEVER said the War was over. He said the mission (toppling the Hussein regime) was accomplished. He said (in the very speech you cite) that the War was ongoing and could stretch on for many years.

It never ceases to amaze me that after those terrible attacks in London and Madrid Europe still fails to see that this war is real.

Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:38 pm

so if the war in Iraq is still on does that mean that peace can never begin there until the war on terror that won't end is over ?

Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:56 pm

Who ever said that? Bush has always stated that they need some kind of government in place. When it is stable..then we will MOSTLY pull out. No more, no less.

Tue Jan 03, 2006 1:00 am

Hell, WWII has been over for 60 years and we still spend billions per year to keep Europe safe for Socialism :lol:

Tue Jan 03, 2006 1:42 am

ok.. I`ll put the cat in with the pidgeons.....Can anyone tell me just how your health care could have improved if all the money...spent on the "war" had been used for the public good.....? :wink:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:16 am

Stop arguing and watch the 1998 movie "Enemy Of The State"....starring Gene Hackman and Will Smith

Image


The movie explains "Big Brother" better than anyone here can.


A quick summary of the movie:

The background of the story is that there is a Bill in Congress to reform the intellegence gathering in the nation to make it easier to track down terrorists.....the main author of this Bill is being interviewed early on in the movie on the "Larry King" show.....Larry King ask's him "why is this Bill necessary, and wouldn't people be against it?". The Congressman say's...."People may be against it now, but wait until a couple of buildings are blown up, then they will start to think differently."

Later on in the movie, we see Gene Hackman pull up the file of the head of the NSA, and it shows a date on him, the month and day shown? You guessed it 9-11. What is the next scene shown about 30 seconds later in the movie? A building, not just being blown up, but being imploded, being brought down to the ground..........This movie was released in 1998! :shock: :shock: :shock:

**** unbelievable movie.


America- Land Of The Free??.......yeah right!

Isn't the American President supposed to be the leader of the "Free World" ?? hahaha

Shame on GWB.

Wed Jan 04, 2006 5:38 am

Rusty Martin* wrote:ok.. I`ll put the cat in with the pidgeons.....Can anyone tell me just how your health care could have improved if all the money...spent on the "war" had been used for the public good.....? :wink:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


I think keeping the rest of our buildings upright and our citizens alive qualifies as the "public good" as well as health care.

As for the health care system........there must be some reason so many from Britain fly over here to get theirs :wink: . Better than dying while in the interminable line that one has to wait in over in that worker's paradise :lol:

Britain is on the verge of bankruptcy due to its nanny care and its love of paying people to sit upon their expanding duffs rather than work. Not to mention the money shovelled into the laps of the immigrants, illegal and otherwise.

As for our so-called health care crisis.......bullocks. It is illegal to turn away ANYONE for health care because of an inability to pay.

The number of uninsured plastered about in the media is also a load of trash........that inflated number includes all those without healthcare AT ANY POINT OF THE ENTIRE YEAR.......even if only uninsured for one day due to a job change, or a lapse in payments, or a decision to go with a new provider.

That number of people is added up at the end of the fiscal year and touted as "The Great Mass of the UNinsured". In other words......if I changed jobs on January 1st, then started my new job on Jan. 3rd, I would be uninsured for one day. But I would be counted at the end of the year as one of the Americans who went without health insurance. It's a deceptive way of juggling the statistics in order to scare the ignorant into accepting more government and less freedom.

If we really desire a healthcare crisis........let the Government create a huge monolithic health care leviathan. Now THAT's a health care crisis for 'ya........

Wed Jan 04, 2006 5:52 am

With all due respect, when Bush came out with that "Mission Accomplished" sign everyone took it that he meant the campaign in Iraq was for all intents and purposes over. We were only supposed to be there a few months. It was most definitely not a straw man. Jon Stewart on the Daily Show has done a great job of knocking down any other impression by simply using news clips by Bush and the cronies stating "Well we should be home by..."

As for healthcare I would counter that there are just as many people left out of the equations as arbitrarily left in. Further the amount of uninsured in this country is a disgrace. If people die in Europe from waiting in these alleged lines for healthcare they almost certainly die in the United States by not getting any healthcare at all. Many people are not aware that they can't be turned by financial reasons however they are also that their basic livelihood can be destroyed by an extended hospital stay.

I do agree that insurance is not the fix all. We need more doctors. We need to emphasize more natural cures. We need to allow nurses to handle more routine duties that currently take up too much time of the doctors. We need to lower malpractice insurance although this issue is not as bad as the medical establishment makes it seem. If a doctor leaves a scalpel in your stomach, he deserves to pay.

Wed Jan 04, 2006 6:31 am

likethebike wrote:With all due respect, when Bush came out with that "Mission Accomplished" sign everyone took it that he meant the campaign in Iraq was for all intents and purposes over. We were only supposed to be there a few months. It was most definitely not a straw man. Jon Stewart on the Daily Show has done a great job of knocking down any other impression by simply using news clips by Bush and the cronies stating "Well we should be home by..."

Straw man.......since Bush mentions IN THE SAME SPEECH that the war effort is far from over. In fact, I can't remember a speech where he doesn't mention that. Stewart is generally full of excrement anyway. A real cut-n-paste artist. A bit here........a clip there......no context to be found. He makes the NY Times look fair and objective. :lol:

As for healthcare I would counter that there are just as many people left out of the equations as arbitrarily left in.

Link???

Further the amount of uninsured in this country is a disgrace. If people die in Europe from waiting in these alleged lines for healthcare they almost certainly die in the United States by not getting any healthcare at all.

Bullocks.......somebody is clogging up the waiting rooms and emergency rooms.

Many people are not aware that they can't be turned by financial reasons

Whose responsibility is it to dispel their own ignorance.......is that the Govt's job too?? People do have SOME resposibility for their own lives.......right??


however they are also that their basic livelihood can be destroyed by an extended hospital stay.

There are safety nets Bike......but it's not the Govts responsibility to make life smooth for everyone.


I do agree that insurance is not the fix all. We need more doctors. We need to emphasize more natural cures. We need to allow nurses to handle more routine duties that currently take up too much time of the doctors. We need to lower malpractice insurance although this issue is not as bad as the medical establishment makes it seem. If a doctor leaves a scalpel in your stomach, he deserves to pay.



Agreed........but the way to fix the problem is to let market forces into the equation. We never had a health care crisis so-called until the Govt started lending its expertise in SNAFUs

Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:39 pm

Scatter wrote:
likethebike wrote:With all due respect, when Bush came out with that "Mission Accomplished" sign everyone took it that he meant the campaign in Iraq was for all intents and purposes over. We were only supposed to be there a few months. It was most definitely not a straw man. Jon Stewart on the Daily Show has done a great job of knocking down any other impression by simply using news clips by Bush and the cronies stating "Well we should be home by..."

Straw man.......since Bush mentions IN THE SAME SPEECH that the war effort is far from over. In fact, I can't remember a speech where he doesn't mention that. Stewart is generally full of excrement anyway. A real cut-n-paste artist. A bit here........a clip there......no context to be found. He makes the NY Times look fair and objective. :lol:

As for healthcare I would counter that there are just as many people left out of the equations as arbitrarily left in.

Link???

Further the amount of uninsured in this country is a disgrace. If people die in Europe from waiting in these alleged lines for healthcare they almost certainly die in the United States by not getting any healthcare at all.

Bullocks.......somebody is clogging up the waiting rooms and emergency rooms.

Many people are not aware that they can't be turned by financial reasons

Whose responsibility is it to dispel their own ignorance.......is that the Govt's job too?? People do have SOME resposibility for their own lives.......right??


however they are also that their basic livelihood can be destroyed by an extended hospital stay.

There are safety nets Bike......but it's not the Govts responsibility to make life smooth for everyone.


I do agree that insurance is not the fix all. We need more doctors. We need to emphasize more natural cures. We need to allow nurses to handle more routine duties that currently take up too much time of the doctors. We need to lower malpractice insurance although this issue is not as bad as the medical establishment makes it seem. If a doctor leaves a scalpel in your stomach, he deserves to pay.



Agreed........but the way to fix the problem is to let market forces into the equation. We never had a health care crisis so-called until the Govt started lending its expertise in SNAFUs


Gosh! I'll bet we could find lots to debate in there Scatter...nah, I'll stick to enjoying your company. :lol:

Geoff

Thu Jan 05, 2006 4:44 am

That's probably best,Geoff my friend........I really haven't got the energy anyway.

OK LTB.........UNCLE!!!!!! :lol: :wink:

Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:09 am

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." George W. Bush May 1 2003. "In the battle of Iraq the United States and our allies have prevailed." Real straw man there.

Given his pea brain I acknowledge that he probably actually thougt. This is a perfect example of the fact that this man never thinks anything through.

Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:23 am

Scatter wrote:

As for our so-called health care crisis.......bullocks. It is illegal to turn away ANYONE for health care because of an inability to pay.


Er, I think the word you are looking for is 'bollocks' :wink:

Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:48 am

You're right T.J. Personally, Americans should never try to appropriate British words or phrases. So Scatter should have said bullshit instead of bollocks. :lol:

Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:16 am

For all the pages this thread went I haven't had one person explain to me the problem with getting a warrant.

Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:39 am

The President got his warrant on September 11, 2001.

The feds aren't interested in your phone call to Aunt Mary in Phoenix. They're not interested in your e-mail to cousin Jenny in Cleveland. They're interested in communications between Americans and people with contacts to terrorism...and they should be. We haven't had one attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, thank God, and I don't have any problem allowing Mr. Bush to tap calls made from either native born or naturalized traitors to their counterparts overseas. If that's the way we're going to round them up and terminate them, so be it. Locate and kill every Goddamned one of them.

Tue Jan 10, 2006 10:46 am

No. He most certainly get his warrant on 9/11. The reason process exists is not to stop the government from gaining information on criminals or terrorists it's to make sure that the government's power are not being abused. With nobody to check on what one branch of the government is doing, they can do ANYTHING they want. Does anyone want that? This idea that the president has carte blanche in war time is completely erroneous and downright.