I see no difference between an Anti-War Protester and a Saddam Supporter. Wonder if others feel the same?

Seems to me that our protesters are advocating for Saddam's interests: Trying to get our government to lay off; wanting to let the UN handle (translation: wanting to allow him to keep thumbing his nose at the UN for years and years). By their asinine behaviour in Europe, the protesters have managed to give Saddam the idea that world opinion is on his side.

We need to make clear to Saddam that world opinion is not on his side. It is only the likes of Michael Moore, Sean Penn, and Susan Sarandon that are at his side and supporting him.

And furthermore, we need to make clear to the dissident left that they are indeed supporting Saddam, through their actions and in spirit, even if not overtly proclaiming support for Saddam.

Is anyone here into kiddy porn? I prefer little boys aged 5-12. I just love their smooth little bodies!

...hire a new PR firm. Your PsyOps drivel is getting staler and staler.

Your unAmerican attempts to stifle opposing opinions by trying to pin an untrue label on them is boring and without any redeeming debate value.

In short - Get a clue.

I suspect that the point of this posting is to divert people into wasting time on an irrelevant debate and keep you from paying attention to the important stuff - like protesting the war and refuting the Bush Junta's LIES.

Man I am into kiddy porn. I would like to share mine with anyone who will let me suck a dick. I like young boys age 8 and under. Call me if you have a lead. PS I hate fox news Orilley for opposing MAMBLA because I am the President Elect. God save the North American Man Boy Love Association and Saddam the master of all boy lovers.

"I see no difference between an Anti-War Protester and a Saddam Supporter."

Can't be one without the other. Joined at the hip.

That's why I refer to them as "Saddam Appeasers", which is what they are.

I heard that it's really Saddam's all boy harem that Bush is after.

You know that Bush worships Dick.

I can't see the difference between a American Neo-Nazi and a Republican Party member ....does any one else have the same problem?

They have been the same for years. Bush is a mother fucking, right wing Nazi AND a Republican. Seems the same to me.

I've been saying this for years. These liberals are terrorist cells, right here in the motherland. We'd be wise to expatriate every last one of them.

Some are, some are just Anti-America and the rest just have their heads up their asses!

Would anyone here consider giving me a golden shower? I'd really get off on it!

Well, if you like the American way of life, civil rights, right of every child to get a good educations, making it possible for people to pursue their own happiness, how can you get behind a war that hijacks those rights at home, takes money and funding away from domestic affairs, and sends many of our best boys over seas to die for big corporations? This war is robbing every American man woman and child of basic services. How is supporting that patriotic?

Somehow the idea of the words "anti-war" and "Saddam" as synonymous is just about as crazy to me as violating the UN charter to go in and punish someone for violating UN directives. Ever heard an anti-war protester suggest we buy more weapons and chemical agents from the US? Or that we should go out and randomly slaughter thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians? Didn't think so. If there are any people I have trouble telling apart its the rogue militaristic leaders George W. Bush and Saddam Hussein. The Germans don't understand our obsession with our leaders and our flag and our saying the pledge of allegiance every day as public school students, know why? because they've found its blind allegiance to a leader that can lead to the worlds greates attrocities.

Does anyone know where I can get a Swastika tattoo? The last parlor I visited threw me out for requesting such a thing.

weeee, I'm Sheepdog's free alter ego!!!

weeee, whenever he get's his ass handed to him in an argument, I spring free!!!

weeee, lifting nicknames and defaming people is so funny!!!

Weeee.

I did not post the above response. I couldn't win an argument if my pathetic life depended on it.

anti war protestors use this logic

"being anti america is not anti americanism because "america" did somthing wrong" (even if other countries did somthing much more wrong and they ignored it).

This is the equivilent of saying "I am not racist I just dont hire east asians because they are all triads"

both are not just logically and morally flawed but also statistically flawe3d in as far as it is not relative.

I wouldn't know logic if it bit off my 1" penis.

eloquent analogy.

Would you like your golden shower now?

My best guess is that the person above talking about golden showers etc is Diogenes - due to him being the only recognisable liberal name in this thread and almost all threads where it happens - and the practice being quite common.

Perhaps Diogenes, but perhaps Sheepdog. Or perhaps Sheepdog is Diogenes. Their ages and bios seem to coincide.

Scottie, you'd better stop typing and start drinking beer! I LOVE to be drenched with your warm urine.

Would someone please help me back into my straightjacket? I also need a shot of Thorazine.

The false postings using someone elses handle, and the outrageous insults (eg: golden showers) seem like teenage pranks to me. I think Diogenes and Sheepdog are a little too old for this sort of behavior.

What we most likely have here is a mentally deficient teenager.

"...a mentally deficient teenager" -------> Bush Admirer.

Geeeeeeez, don't go away mad, just GO AWAY.

I don't need to use your tactics.

It just seems that you are NOT so popular.

Popularity is not a goal for me where the audience is a bunch of Michael Moore types. I certainly don't aspire to be popular with the radical left.

I'm flattered.

Obviously we rightwingers have their attention. It annoys the shit out of them and it's funny as hell.

Keep up the good work guys.

Well you are at least half right.

I am almost never for war. However we would not be where we are today(the best nation in the world) if we did not engage ourselves when needed. We will not know if this is the right thing to do for years to come.

As far as the money thing goes........... If you think if we did not spend the money on the war it would somehow make it into our schools and other social services, you are dead wrong. It is of course wishful thinking. 70-80 Billion is a drop in the bucket compared to what we give away each year to countries who hate us. I say cut off some of that money and put itinto our own peoples hands.

Except sheepdogs smell better than cunts.

His moniker used to be "Fuck Bush", but that sounded too derrogatory.

Can I Mr Bush? I bum young kids, and used to play soccer. I also eat bananas. Look me up on the net. I'm real, baby.

To American voice.

I'm actually going to begin making a reasonable argument here.

I would agree that America's system of government is the best in the world albeit not by a huge margin. I can tell you that from experience because I have lived in two different countries for good portions of my life.

On a different note.

Do you not think it is hypocritical and absurd that most war proponents condemn Saddam for his actions while they neglect to acknowledge the role that the US played in Iraqi history and Saddam's reign of terror?

It is textbook fact that the US provided Saddam with chemical and biological weapons during the 1980s in spite of his despicable human rights record. Even after the massacre of Kurds in 1988, the US continued to supply Saddam and offer support as well as friendship. By adopting this policy, the US effectively condoned, supported and, in essence, rewarded Saddam for his actions, all because they saw him as a convenient and useful "counterweight" to Iran's emergence as a regional power.

look at what "Mia P." - representing war advocates - wrote a few posts up:



"Well first of all, if you dumbasses even took a look at what americans are fighting for... FREEDOM. I think Americans are brave for not minding their own business and taking matters into their own hands. WOuld you just sit back and watch another country destroy itself by a dictator who executes his own family and friends and uses chemical weapons on his own people? Saddam only cares for himself, and thats where Americans come in. THey will not just sit back and watch people cry out and afraid for their lives, not from the u.s., but from their own fucking leader! thats why so many have surrendered and so many run up and hug and kiss american soldiers because they know that they are coming to "resuce" them and fight for their rights. So how are they dumbasses? if they got it, they should use it. We are a nation under God, and God would want world wide peace, but unfortunately, peace will not come that easily, so war is the answer. YOu keep talking about how we should leave Saddam alone, until he send biological weapons to your fucking country, will you step up and defend yourself? or ask the dumb ass americans to help you! we're not just doing this for ourselves, but for your dumbass too! God bless the u.s.a!



Please explain to me why only now, 16 years too late, Americans are condemning Saddam? Why did they not stand up to him 16 years ago? Why did they not protest America's support of such a brutal dictator? Why, now, do they refuse to condemn their own government for the human rights abuse that it sponsored during those years - the very human rights they are currently using to dehumanize Saddam?

In other words, how can war advocates claim to be fighting for liberty and justice while excusing the U.S. government for its past actions?

I would greatly appreciate any responses that address the facts of my argument.

sincerely,

The New X

To American voice.

I'm actually going to begin making a reasonable argument here.

I would agree that America's system of government is the best in the world albeit not by a huge margin. I can tell you that from experience because I have lived in two different countries for good portions of my life.

On a different note.

Do you not think it is hypocritical and absurd that most war proponents condemn Saddam for his actions while they neglect to acknowledge the role that the US played in Iraqi history and Saddam's reign of terror?

It is textbook fact that the US provided Saddam with chemical and biological weapons during the 1980s in spite of his despicable human rights record. Even after the massacre of Kurds in 1988, the US continued to supply Saddam and offer support as well as friendship. By adopting this policy, the US effectively condoned, supported and, in essence, rewarded Saddam for his actions, all because they saw him as a convenient and useful "counterweight" to Iran's emergence as a regional power.

look at what "Mia P." - representing war advocates - wrote a few posts up:



"Well first of all, if you dumbasses even took a look at what americans are fighting for... FREEDOM. I think Americans are brave for not minding their own business and taking matters into their own hands. WOuld you just sit back and watch another country destroy itself by a dictator who executes his own family and friends and uses chemical weapons on his own people? Saddam only cares for himself, and thats where Americans come in. THey will not just sit back and watch people cry out and afraid for their lives, not from the u.s., but from their own fucking leader! thats why so many have surrendered and so many run up and hug and kiss american soldiers because they know that they are coming to "resuce" them and fight for their rights. So how are they dumbasses? if they got it, they should use it. We are a nation under God, and God would want world wide peace, but unfortunately, peace will not come that easily, so war is the answer. YOu keep talking about how we should leave Saddam alone, until he send biological weapons to your fucking country, will you step up and defend yourself? or ask the dumb ass americans to help you! we're not just doing this for ourselves, but for your dumbass too! God bless the u.s.a!



Please explain to me why only now, 16 years too late, Americans are condemning Saddam? Why did they not stand up to him 16 years ago? Why did they not protest America's support of such a brutal dictator? Why, now, do they refuse to condemn their own government for the human rights abuse that it sponsored during those years - the very human rights they are currently using to dehumanize Saddam?

In other words, how can war advocates claim to be fighting for liberty and justice while excusing the U.S. government for its past actions?

I would greatly appreciate any responses that address the facts of my argument.

sincerely,

The New X

Where only the rich get elected and people cannot even use their ballot papers properly. This is the worst country.

Then go to the best country, we will not miss you.

'Cause even the ugliest, thickest dullards stand out to be exceptionally better than the local trash here. Plus, all the girls are right dirty sluts, and the men thick.

hehehehehehe

omg man.

looks like other people have taken over my previous job.

either way, still awaiting a response to my argument.

I hear Belgium is really nice in summer.

I guess our best answer to that is analogy with WWII.

The allies were in a sense partly responsible for the rise of hitler (by their attitude towards germany)

the US was also late entering the war.

you could have accused them of hypocracy I guess.. but that doesn't really detract much from the fact that they had to act.

WWII was admitedly a more significant event than Iraq is likely to be or become but the principle is the same.

"I suspect that the point of this posting is to divert people into wasting time on an irrelevant debate and keep you from paying attention to the important stuff - like protesting the war and refuting the Bush Junta's LIES."



Your'e lack of critacal thinking skills and high school rebuttals are truly entertaining. A true Rupert Pupkin in EVERY sense of the word.

The New X

by The New X • Wednesday March 26, 2003 Wedt 11:12 PM



To Mia P,

I am disturbed and saddened by your comments. With regard to US support of Saddam's atrocities, you said "let the past be the past, focus on the FUTURE." If that is what you truly believe, then you must also forgive Saddam for his actions in the same way that you so eagerly forgave your fellow countrymen. If you believe that U.S. officials should be forgiven simply because they are American and therefore above the law, then you do not believe in justice. Else you hold a rather twisted view of justice.

As for the "FUTURE" statement and as to why human rights abuse and US support of it during Saddam's rule in the 1980s is even an issue, it is because as the United States goes to war to rid the world of a "brutal dictator" who is guilty of war crimes, it is still funding brutal regimes and dictators throughout the world. For example, the Turkish government, who is responsible for despicable atrocities against the Kurds (the Kurds being among the people groups you claim to be liberating), has been offered financial aid in the form of grants and loans in exchange for support of the US war. The Turkish government continues to discriminate and even persecute the Kurds. So in lieu of your argument about focusing on the FUTURE, it becomes obvious that the US government, in spite of your having forgiven them, has not learned its lesson about supporting brutal regimes around the world.

Saudi Arabia serves as yet another example of a brutal regime supported by the US.

Angola, a country which the US has welcomed with open arms into the "coalition of the willing", is currently ruled by a government that is guilty of the EXACT SAME repression of political dissidents that Saddam is. It is a shame that the US even associates with such a government.

Israel is a country that has repeatedly violated UN resolutions, and a country that frequently violates the Geneva convention (be aware that Rumsfield - representing the U.S. - recently condemned the Iraqis for violating the Geneva convention with regard to the treatment of US P.O.W.s. The US has never condemned Israel for its violation of the Geneva convention). In spite of these facts, the US not only provides financial aid, but also military aid to Israel - a country that discriminates heavily against its even its own Israeli-Arab population.

Meanwhile, as the CIA have said, as the FBI has said, and as British intelligence have said, there is no link whatsoever between Osama Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein. Bush, by saying Al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein in the same sentence numerous times, has managed to convince 51% of Americans that Iraq was inherently responsible for the September 11th attacks. A significant number of Americans also believe that over half the number of hijackers were Iraqi, when in fact none of them were.

As for Bin Ladin's hostility towards the United States, please keep in mind the following: Osama Bin Ladin and the Saudi Arabian regime are at odds - Bin Ladin views the Saudi Regime as corrupt and wishes to overthrow the Saudi government. The U.S. supports the Saudi regime. In addition, the U.S. stations troops in Saudi Arabia who, admittedly fairly enough, Bin Laden and religious figures in the Middle East claim "desecrate" the Holy Land. Also keep in mind that the troops are there for no other reason than to protect the Saudi regime.

Some people have claimed Osama Bin Ladin is simply jealous of the American lifestyle and that is why he is hostile towards the US. By "American lifestyle," I assume they mean the standard of living and equality one can experience in America. Let it be known that Osama Bin Ladin was part of the Bin Ladin family, which owned Bin Ladin Construction, a highly successful, multi-million dollar construction company. Bin Ladin's own wealth was estimated to be somewhere between $100-300 million. Being a rich, prominent, MALE, in OIL RICH Saudi Arabia, one can expect nothing less than the MOST luxurious lifestyle IN THE WORLD. One can expect to be treated like a god. This is a lifestyle that Osama willingly gave up.

So the main points of my argument are:

1) Human Rights abuse should be condemned as those guilty of war crimes should be punished. EVEN if they are American. Being American does not make you above the law... unless you don't believe in justice.

2) The United States will be engaged in a hypocritical war for as long as it neglects to acknowledge its role in the murders of thousands under Saddam's rule during the 1980s.

3) The United States, in lieu of its founding principles, should immediately stop supporting brutal regimes - meaning cease all political, economic, moral and military to support to guilty states.

4) The link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein does not exist.

once again sincerely,

The New X

I'm a useful idiot with an ususually small penis. I will mock you all into submission.

Wow! You know how to copy and paste the same message over and over on multiple threads? I was never able to master that. It is beyond my mental capabilities. Wait a second. I'll get my third grade buddy to show me how. After that, I'll screw his tight little butthole.

...does not make it true.

So, the US provided (sold) Chemical and Biological weapons to Iraq . That sir is a BIG LIE. It has been illegal and against all policy to sell Chemical and Biological to foreign nations since their development. Pound your lies up your ass FOOL.

Really we've just NOW started opposing Saddam?

Please explain to me why only now, 16 years too late, Americans are condemning Saddam? Why did they not stand up to him 16 years ago? Why did they not protest America's support of such a brutal dictator? Why, now, do they refuse to condemn their own government for the human rights abuse that it sponsored during those years - the very human rights they are currently using to dehumanize Saddam?

Can you say DESERT STORM??????

To Really,

The United States supplied Iraq with chemical and biological weapons. It provided Saddam with moral and political support.

Please read the following article. Consider it as one of the many sources available that outline US involvement and sponsorship or Saddam's Human Rights Abuse.

It is illogical to deem a fact a lie simply because you do not like the way it sounds.

As to the first Gulf War. US forces were sent in to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. The war was simply about oil and expelling Iraqi forces from Kuwait so that Kuwait could resume its oil exports.

Saddam was never punished for his actions. US goverment sentiment at the time was not to punish a war criminal, but to "expel Iraqi forces".

- please reply soon

The New X

I fail to see a reference or article please prove to me that the US supplied Chem and Bio weapons to Saddam/

Repeating a lie does not make it truel. Please stop lying.

Really, don't ask them for documentation.

Facts are such an uncomfortable thing for Leftists.

They FEEL it's true, so it's gotta be true.

And that should be good enough for anyone.

Please. Get out of my country, Freeper fuckers. Can't your monkey fingers use Google? Do a Google search for Iraqgate. Find the Congressional investigation. Remember? The congressional investigation? Or didn't Limbaugh tell you about it?

YOU made the accusation, now back it up, Junior.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

I expect you'll opt for option 'c': bitch and whine.

Did Limbaugh really tell us about it? Oh no, I missed it! Please, somebody tell me what he said so that I know what to think on the issue! Please, the thought of having to do my own thinking is unbearable!!!

Sadam is a person or an administration and the USA is a country. therefore Sadam can be guilty of a crime but the USA cant be. just like the germans of today are not "guilty" of WWII.

There are also practical considerations.

If it was a fair analogy then the answer would not to "take the bus junta to the war crimes tribunal" it woud instead be to forgive sadam.

The main purpose of a legal system is NOT punishment it is instead to improve the standard of living of its citizens through the mechanisms below.

in this order of importance

1) discouraging (or preventing) others from comitting the crime

2) discouraging (or preventing) the person who commited the crime from doing it again

3) Reasurung the public that they can act without excessive fear of specific crimes.

some people might include the debatable 4th point - making victims feel better by hurting the criminal.

please don't tell me you're deluded enough to believe we're going to set up a democrative government in Iraq and ensure that all the profits from the sale of their oil benifit the people of Iraq. Our current military presence in Colombia is to fight their drug lords and to help them manage all the oil that was discovered there, but the country has continued to fall further and further into poverty. "After a U.S.-backed military coup, Dominicans rose up to demand the reinstatement of the overthrown president (who they had elected in a popular vote). Washington, however, was determined to keep it men in power, no matter who the Dominicans voted for. 22,000 U.S. troops were sent to suppress the uprising. 3,000 people were gunned down in the streets of Santo Domingo. ( Joel Andreas pg. 13 refrenced from "The Carribean: Struggle, Survival, and Sovereignty" by Catherine Sunshine and "The Good Neighbor" by Geore Black). Don't believe the hype, believe the history, the precedent, and what we're doing at this very moment in other countries. And if what you know of our military involvement abroad comes from high school history classes and the popular media which is owned by the GE corporation that gets big bucks for putting guidance systems in each bomb we use in such involvements (this is not a conspiracy theory, this is a simple explanation of a conglomeration and the war industry), then you're really in no position to speak of the truth in my statements. For the record, of course America is the best country in the world, I never said it wasn't. Just open your eyes and don't take slogans and promises from a president approaching a campaign year as the way things really are.

It doesnt take alot for the USA to be better than Sadam he has set the bar pretty low.

The USA could rape and pillage Iraq and still be doing the world a service by preventing sadam from doing worse.

Usually capitalism works with some of the profits benifiting those who aranged the deal - but also in the end everyone (overall) benifits.

Of course probably the USA and Britain will end up doing somthing less cynical

So, Channel One, which is an educational morning

program that's broadcast to high schools across the

country, did a poll here recently on what high school

students think about the protests.

Keeping in mind that we're talking about teenagers

here. Historically the most liberal and anti-war out of

all of us.

32,000+ teens were asked the question, "What do you

think about anti-war protests going on across the

country?"

75% answered that they felt that the protests were

unpatriotic.

A virtually exact same split has been seen in a recent

poll by the, highly respected, Gallup organization in

1,021 adults over 18.

Similarly, Gallup results are showing that 80% of

Americans feel that celebrities have NO influence on

political views.

These numbers are cold, hard fact.

You can look them up yourself. You can insist that,

since the numbers don't support your stance, they

must obviously be bogus. You can insult and call me

names.

But the fact is: You are in the MINORITY.

The MAJORITY of Americans do not support you. They

are not listening to you. You are having no effect on

swaying anyone's opinion.

You are having NO positive effect toward your goal.

I agree that the war protests determine little if anything when it comes to US policy. That is always determined by the demonic possession of the Government leaders. People think they influence the way things go, but if they have any real voice, they wil be taken out of the way.

Channel one.

Yes i’ve watched it at my children's school.

A love fest among the soft drink military recruiting and pro war interests.

A disgrace to any school which accepts its ‘gifts’ of communication intercom equipment for their ailing budgets.

Just keep telling us ‘we are surrounded’ and hope we believe it.

Blow it out your slimy ass, traitor, we don’t buy your shit.

On with the righteous struggle, people we ARE growing in numbers and all

the lies will collapse of this criminal cabal. under the truth.

Better find a place to hide when it does.

I need someone to stick their finger up my hershey highway right now. Please.

You can insist that, since the numbers don't support

your stance, they must obviously be bogus.

"Just keep telling us ‘we are surrounded’ and hope we

believe it."

You can insult and call me names.

"Blow it out your slimy ass, traitor, we don’t buy your

shit."

But the fact is: You are in the MINORITY.

Yes, I actually listen to polls taken with little kids. I also use the opinions of little kids to form my political philosophy.

Did you read far enough into the post to see that the

same poll conducted among adults over 18 came up

with nearly the same 75%/25% split?

Of course not. You only read enough to realize that

someone had posted a rational thought, backed up

with facts, which you couldn't possibly argue against

with similar substance.

So, instead, you choose to make a fool of yourself.

Way to go.

Truth be told, I wouldn't know a rational thought if one bit me on my pock-marked ass.

Anti-war does not equal Pro-Saddam. That is simply illogical. One can be against the horrors of war, and also be against the atrocities committed by a brutal dictator. And while it may be naive, one might hope to find a peaceful resolution.

Blessings. Let the healing begin.

Allie . . . .

Fuck off, towelhead.

This site is such a joke.

Out.....

Good riddance, you liberal!

This site has turned to trash.

I'm outta here too.

Good riddance, you liberal!