The Shotgun Blog
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Shameless Self-Promotion: Neverending Story Edition
My latest, at the Star. More about the Middle East...
Cross-posted at Wonkitties.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Shameless Self-Promotion: Neverending Story Edition:
What's more real?
The US $100 bills handed out by Hizb'allah for the victims of the bombings or their compassion?
My take is their compassion is as fake as the counterfeit money they handed out.
I did find it somewhat odd that Hizb'allah was in possession of stacks o' US hundreds. Since the US is allegedly the Great Satan, why would their money be used?
As it turns out, Hizb'allah can churn out compassion as fast as their photocopier will print the bills.
What a bunch of phonies. And, much of the western world is getting suckered in by it.
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-27 8:35:29 AM
"much of the Western world is getting suckered"
Allow me to suggest the more specific group of suckers being alluded to here ... Liberals and the Left are the suckers. Let's be clear on that.
The rest of us want more done to fight the terrorist sympathizers here at home and to do more to villify the left that continually tries to legitimized them for a few f**cking votes of all things.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 9:19:54 AM
LCOL Oliver North USMC (Retired) reports today in the US Site Military.Com that US Treasury Officials are convinced that the $50. and $100.
dollar currency handed out to thousands of Lebanese are in fact Counterfeit printed by Iran for Hezbollah and their friends in Pyonyang. Iran has produced millions in high quality counterfeit US currency over the past two decades
It will be interesting to see how long before these phoney bills start turning up in Canada. Virtually all the building lumber used in Lebanon
over the past some twenty plus years comes from
Canadian suppliers with Lebanese connections. (Will that be cash or chargex?) Helzbollah, "the army of god" was created in Iran in 1982. It's only purpose is to kill Jews and Americans and to totally destroy Israel. The only negotiations the current Mullah led Iran understands is force
which I see coming just over the horizon. MacLeod
Posted by: Jack Macleod | 2006-08-27 10:00:57 AM
Al-aqsa leader: Hizbullah defeated 'gay' Israeli soldiers
Israel 's military campaign against Hizbullah in Lebanon was a "failure" and demonstrated to Palestinian groups the Jewish state is weak and can ultimately be defeated, a senior terror leader told WorldNetDaily in an interview.
"If we do so, this Israeli army full of gay soldiers and full of corruption and with old-fashioned war methods can be defeated also in Palestine."
Posted by: Fizz | 2006-08-27 10:17:23 AM
I agree totally and even though there are many in Teheran who are west leaning, it might be wise to drop a couple of 'bright boys from space'.
"It's the only way to be sure" - Aliens 2
Too radical ... the other way is to sacrifice thousand of high quality US Military personal and I don't want to see that.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 10:55:20 AM
The US War College has published several Papers related to a "military solution" for the threat of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which most observers agree is a major threat, and virtually out of control. With such a population and land mass the use of troops is out of the question. Remember the Iranians lost more than a million killed in the War with Iraq, which did not in the least concern the Mullah's who actually believe the million or so corpses are in
"Paradise". Both the US and allies will be reflecting on the use of Thermobaric Weapons, which are "fuel-air" weapons used very successfully in Afghanistan over the last two years, which could penetrate Iranian Nuclear Sites, flatten the entire underground complexes and kill everyone in sight by massive explosive driven air pressure. Israel is/will consider Nuclear weapons of which they have a lot. On the other hand if the ability of Iran to earn dollars was terminated, the effect would possibly
be an uprising by all Iranians in the age 20 to 40 age brackets. MacLeod
Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2006-08-27 11:59:43 AM
The Leftists would ruin our world as we know it.
It's about time we start calling the shots on the terrorist Nations and terrorist groups wherever they are, instead of always REACTING to their constant threats. Let's tell them what will happen to their sorry world and sorry asses when they try to kill innocent people because of their subhuman hatred.
We have the power and it should be used to deter these wretched creeps. It has to be spelled out in their language and on a regular basis.
Why are we not putting it to these bastards?
We know who 99.9% of them are and where and what they come from. Let's have at them.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-08-27 12:25:13 PM
Please allow me to a little shameless self promotion of my own.
This is right on topic
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 1:03:47 PM
While we find it extremely difficult to get the truth out due to the leftist MSM, Hizballah invest 15 to 20 million U.S. dollars a year in its own TV station, Al Manar, whose broadcasts are pure propaganda. One has to wonder from where the money comes, since Hizballah does not earn money. These broadcasts are done in a slick professional manner and are carried worldwide via satellite and cable. Contrary to the West, they recognize that the media is a tool which can serve as a very effective weapon. Just witness the manipulation of the news/propaganda out of Lebanon that our MSM willfully spread. Yet we still seem incapable of recognizing that the media are a strategic issue.
Another thing our liberal friends cannot grasp is that Hizballah is actually Iran which continues to fuel the globalization of terror, so one must ask exactly what do they expect to negotiate.
Posted by: Alain | 2006-08-27 2:09:22 PM
didn't you learn your lesson last time LADY put uoiu in your place for childish remarks. grow up or go to myspace.com where mindless fools spew the hate you use for attention
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-27 2:19:03 PM
the IDF is one of the better armies in the world what little piss ant group do you support the losers you so proudly speak highly of or again are you doing it soley for the attention. either way you look ridiculous backing the obvious losers in this situation
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-27 2:21:55 PM
Hezbollah has been funded exclusivly by Iran since 1982, since then Hezbollah has had over one Billion dollars (US) available from Iran. The fake US Treasury Notes were in fact printed in Iran some time ago. Today Nasarallah has stated on Hesbollah owned Television that the murder and kindnapping of IDF Soldiers was a mistake which would not have happened if he had realized what the Israeli reaction would be. The reason of course is that the Iranian Mullahs are shitting in their pants now that the US and Israel are actually focused on hitting them hard
without prior warning. Only way to do it. the fools in the NDP and Liberal Party who think they can "rationalize and generate empathy with a
state run entity like "The Army Of God" are themselves a threat to Canada. To close off on this, PM Harper has the wrong guy in Foreign Relations with Peter MacKay (who has never had a real job). Kenny impresses me as a much better choice. MacLeod
Posted by: jackmacleod | 2006-08-27 2:37:10 PM
just out of curiosity who else signed the treaty and who do we hold responsible on the hezbo and lebanon situation. did the UN get a real person or country to take the blame for the hezbo's when they act up again. and where are the IDF soldiers who were taken and the MURDERS of the eight IDF soldiers taken to start this mess. we say great a cease-fire big deal all it did was stop the IDF from finishing off the hezbo's
regardless of what the idiot FIZZ says or spews
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-27 2:46:40 PM
Centanni recounted how he and Wiig were pulled out of their car on August 14 and taken at gunpoint into another car. The kidnappers blindfolded them and handcuffed their hands behind their backs with plastic ties. They were then transferred to another car and driven to a building that they later learned was a garage.
"We were pushed down onto the dirt-covered concrete floor and we were forced to lie face down with our handcuffs on," Centanni said.
"Olaf was in the same room with me. Our shoulders were wrenched back, very painful."
Both of the men were forced to convert to Islam at gunpoint, Centanni said.
"We were forced to convert to Islam at gunpoint," Centanni told FOX News. "Don't get me wrong here. I have the highest respect for Islam, and I learned a lot of good things about it, but it was something we felt we had to do because they had the guns, and we didn't know what the hell was going on."
Posted by: woodbridge | 2006-08-27 2:52:38 PM
sudan muslim arabs arrest 2 national geographic magazine journalists today in darfur for spying
iranians murdered canadian journalist
hezbollah censorship during the fight
WHERE IS THE LEFTIST PRESS' OUTRAGE?
Posted by: woodbridge | 2006-08-27 2:55:44 PM
please, it is about time we all face the facts that the liberal media will not print anything that will show it's allies in a bad light. I know a lot of the world thinks that FOX news is an arm of the Bush administration, but it is the only news in Chicago where we feel we can get a fair shake. we ask the same questions here where are the media with the reports of the madness from the enemy
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-27 3:04:18 PM
Sal asked "where are the media with the reports of the madness of the enemy?" Good question. Recently a series of photos was posted on several blogs showing a mixed-age and gender Palestinian mob desecrating the corpse of someone who had alledgedly given information to Israeli authorities.
In one photo young men in jeans and logo-ed T-shirts are seen taking pictures/video with their cell-phones while others stomp the body; in another, a remarkably spry, fat little woman steps, in a lunge position, on the dead man's windpipe.
Such behaviour is obviously representative of Palestinians as a whole, but such public displays are utterly germaine to the issue of what sort of, er, attitudes Israel is up against.
But the media does not show us such things, or even refer to them; instead, reporters speak for Palestinians in the reporter's own lexicon -- using western lefty words like "justice" and "liberation" -- instead of treating us to the actual express views of Israel's civilian neighbours about what they think about Jews, or reporting on what Palestinian schoolchildren are taught about Jews.
Gee, if Israelis emerged in numbers from their apartments and homes to join in the desecration of the corpse of someone with a pro-Palestinian point of view, right in the middle of a town square in Tel Aviv in broad daylight, *do you think it might make the news*?
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-27 3:58:11 PM
Typo: should be "...such behaviour is obviously NOT representative of Palestinians as a whole.."
Posted by: EBD | 2006-08-27 4:01:16 PM
Sal, you refered to the UN troops in Lebanon, so just thought I mention that along with Hizbollah building their positions in close proximity to those of UNIFIL (interesting that UNIFIL did not refuse to go along), the UNIFIL reported Israeli troop movements, not those of Hizbollah of course, right up to the "cease-fire". Does anyone with a minimum of intelligence, who is not anti-semitic, honestly believe that new UN troops will solve anything? They have never solved a conflict, much less a war, with Africa being a prime example. When they actually did do something, they added to the problem.
Posted by: Alain | 2006-08-27 4:35:06 PM
that is why i have my "get the US out of the UN" sticker on my bumper. they are nothing but a group of appeasers of like minded individuals
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-27 8:00:47 PM
On the UN, Mark Steyn writes ...
If you mix a quart of ice cream and a quart of dog shit, the result will taste more the latter than the former.
How true and what a great analogy of that puke hole.
Yes, get the USA out of the UN. Then it can be pure dog shit and will then not be able to fool anyone anymore. And please oh puleeeezzzz ... move it to France.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-08-27 11:03:57 PM
Good quote, Duke.
I'd like to add that it would still taste the same even if you had the dog on a steady diet of ice cream.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 10:33:36 AM
And please move it to France.
Wishful thinking Duke
My guess is it would end up in Quebec...Montreal specifically: With Quebec becoming a sovereign nation,whose soul porpoise would be to cater to the international left wing community.
After all what better role could one expect for the nouveaux Quebec but to perform tricks-on-command for the UN security council while getting welfare payments from world members.
Hey it oughta look good on them and the transition to global transfer payments from Federal trans payments won't be to disruptive to their sorry lives.
Tricks on command
UN in Quebec
We are not making this up
Are We ??!!
Posted by: Simon | 2006-08-28 10:52:20 AM
IN ALL HONESTY I THINK THEY SHOULD GO TO BELGUIM WHERE ALL OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED THINK THE SAME ANYWAY. I THINK CANADA STILL HAS A CHANCE TO SAVE HERSELF IF ONLY THE PEOPLE REALIZE THAT BEING PACIFISTS AND SOCIALISTS ONLY MAKES YOUR NATION MORE DESIREABLE TO LIBERALS AND COMMIES WHO LOVE TO ABUSE PEOPLE LIKE THAT DUE TO THE LACK OF WILL TO STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS
Posted by: SAL | 2006-08-28 11:05:58 AM
@Sal and Duke,
you are aware that there were several attempts being made (and in fact are being made) to allow the UN to be more effective, including limiting Vetoe power by a "chosen few".
Wanna guess who is blocking most of those attempts? Well? Any guesses? Come on, can't be that hard.
I give you a tip, the Nation is abbrevated by three letters.
Wanna guess WHY? No? Think about it, I am sure you can figure it out.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 2:55:11 PM
Would that be the Nation who created the UN, carries out UN military initiatives almost solely by it's own strength and treasure, and keeps navigation free and open on the blue waters of the world with it's own Navy at it's own expense?
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 3:03:10 PM
Bangladesh? No I wasn't refering to them.
Oh, you doubt my words? Have a look at the latest numbers:
According to that list the United States rank at #33 out of a 108 nations having troops serving under UN authority.
Contries like Niger, Ukraine, Chile, Egypt, Sri Lanka, Brazil, Kenya etc. are supplying more troops, even France has more troops involved (#22).
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 3:41:12 PM
Oh, and on another note, don't confuse NATO and UN, two different things.
The Mission in Afghanistan is a NATO mission, not a UN mission.
The occupation of Iraq is not a NATO or UN mission either (though there was some initial NATO support).
Other operations, like patrolling the tip of South Africa is under UN Manadate and countries like Germany have ships in the region, same goes for the Suez Strait and some other areas.
And don't tell me the US is trying to keep those sea ways open because she is alturistic. No Nation is.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 3:44:48 PM
This is an interesting table too, it lists all the UN fatalities by Country:
Considering the size and equipment difference between Canada and the US I find this a bit surprising.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 3:48:45 PM
Oh, so Bangladesh fought North Korea and the Peoples Republic of China to a standstill in the 1950s, I did not know that. Maybe Bangladesh threw Saddam Hussien out of Kuwait, I did not know that either.
You obviously don't know what a military initiative is. 'Peace keeping' ain't it.
I'm not the confused one, you are Snowrunner.
Did I say the U.S. was alturistic? Nope. So the U.S. doesn't guard Europe's oil supply all alone. Some nations put in a few token ships now and then to supplement the U.S. Navy which is on station ALL of the time with no help to defray the cost and NO GRATITUDE either.
Got any more strawmen for me, Snowrunner, or are you tired of saying nothing.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 4:07:43 PM
1. We had it about the current situation. Stop living in the past and come into the NOW.
2. The invasion of Iraq was not a UN mission, and we were talking about the UN.
3. The US is the largest consumer of the resources in the middle east, why should other pay as much if they get a lot less? Doesn't make economic (pardon capitalistic) sense.
4. Europe receives a lot of its oil from either their own Oilfields or from Russia, the latter one is becoming even more important, most of the Natural Gas is already coming into Europe from the Russians as they are "next door" and you can just build a pipeline. Long Term Europe is not looking at the middle east as a solution for their Energy problems. In fact countries like Denmark are heavily investing into alternative energies and already have large windfarms (I think Denmark receives 25% of it's electricity from wind farms).
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 4:15:47 PM
As misguided as the US action into Iraq was (the guys the people put in power in two elections are also from the kill-all-non-Muslims camp), the US stepped up to enforce 14 (count them ... FOURTEEN) UN resolutions.
All those resolutions ... don't take my word for it, look it up yourself ... sprung from Saddam's agreement to reveal where his weapons of mass destruction were hidden.
France was on board with the US until it realized is Saddam were toppled, it would cost the French treasury billions of upaid bills for aircraft manufactured by their natinalized aerospace industry.
Saddam granted French oil company Total Elf Fina exclusive development rights to an undeveloped Iranian oilfied in part payment of the munitions.
A major shareholder of Total Elf Fina (some say up to 40%, but I don't know that for a fact) is Canada's Power Corporation.
The CEO of Power Corporation is Paul Desmarais, whose father-in-law happens to be a guy named Jean Chretien.
See, Snowy, if you follow the money, you'll understand exactly why Chretien did not want to sent troops to Iraq ... other than the fact Canadian foreign policy mimicked France's foreign policy.
It did, in fact, cost Chretien and his entorauge a whole whack of future profits he may have been able to extract.
I know we're being monitored by Quebeckers and I would like to know how many of these facts they know about and if they did know these facts, why turn wilfully blind to them?
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-28 4:31:22 PM
Good call, Set you free. That wasn't Bangladesh enforcing UNSC 1441 was it?
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 4:37:33 PM
what does that have to do with who is offering most troops to UN missions?
What you describe is politics and Greed, that is as old as commerce, in Canada, Europe and yes, even in the Good Ole US of A.
Think of it this way: If you'd be Saddam, who would you make business with? Someone like France who isn't directly threatening you and who didn't attack you once before? Or someone who wants your head and who clearly has business interests as well?
The talk we had was about the UN and it's role, Resolutions are ignored on a daily basis, by pretty much anybody who thinks they can get away with it. This won't change until the UN and the security council are taken seriously again, and that won't happen as long as the Security Council is the playground of a handful of wannabe powers who think they can use it to make foreign policy for them.
A first step would be to remove Veto Power for ANY Nation sitting on the council, maybe that would level the playingfield again.
As you say Canada didn't join in Iraq because Cretchien wanted to make money, if you'd be PM, would YOU have committed Canadians to the Invasion of Iraq? If so, why? If not, why not?
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 5:06:06 PM
It's good to see you arguing against yourself.
First, you bring up the ‘how many are killed as UN soldiers' argument, then you say the UN is irrelevant.
I happen to agree on the latter point ... that the UN is a playground for wannabe powers. And these piss-ant totalitarian ‘countries' end up chairing human rights commissions and chair other committees who blah, blah, blah a lot of words and act differently in their own country.
I believe I stated my position on the invasion in the second word of my last post ... misguided ... and went on to explain why.
There are too many idiots in Iraq, who do not even understand the fundamental nature of forgiveness ... even though they purport to be a religion.
The way I figure it, they threatened to behead somebody if they didn't call it a religion. In this case, it's just the texts for a warrior cult.
The Sunnis and Shiites are still killing each other over nothing more serious than who the rightful successor of Muhammad was.
Now, if that's not the definition of idiotic, I don't know what is ... these people have no history of tolerance, of curiosity about science or introspection.
Fundamentally, they are a bunch of dumbf'**k savages who believe being angry is a good thing because it frightens other people into submission.
Like all human beings, they were given the gift of free will and have demonstrated quite clearly they are incapable of independent or creative thought.
Hizb'allah's idea of compassion is handing out US $100 bills as fast as they can print them out on their photocopier.
I guess there is some humanity there somewhere. Unfortunately, any human decency among the general populace is seen as some kind of threat to the order of the mullahcracy.
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-28 5:32:08 PM
we do not give troops to the UN cause they are all busy doing what the UN cannot willnot and shouldnot. look what the UN is doing in the darfur region. not keeping the peace that is for sure. instead thay are raping and kiling. the UN is over run with like minded dictators and despots that are worried, after we get finished with iraq iran sytia afghanistan and clean up bill clintons mess in north korea, they will be next you donot have to like the US just stay out of the way and let us work. just say thank you when you wake up every morning and don't have to pray to mecca. typical hater, just try to find smack cause your party can't run water if they turned on a faucet
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-28 5:37:10 PM
It's good to see you found your CapsLock key and turned it off, Sal. What was the deal with stealing my nic on the other thread?
Learn to structure sentences, put in a few paragraph breaks, and you just might become readable. Are you an immigrant or the product of the U.S. public school system?
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 5:48:16 PM
Snowrunner makes no distinction between Security Council Resolutions and plain Jane everyday UN resolutions about the latest socialist engineered 'emergency' in some third world toilet. Nobody follows the non-security council resolutions except socialists who want to con their people into believing the live in the best country in the world, a la Chretien.(of course when Canada dropped to number three Chretien was silent)
You do know what the UNSC prefix means don't you, Snowrunner? The SC means Security Council. The 'SC' on a resolution means it can be enforced with military might.
There is a reason why the 5 permanent members of the Security Council are nuclear powers. Once you get them to pass an 'SC' resolution it matters not who carries it out, they are de facto doing the will of the UN.
Posted by: Speller | 2006-08-28 5:49:25 PM
sorry hard to type and answer the phone handout work read this blog and ten other things while at work. I didn't realize i was being critiqued on this. hope it didn't hurt your brain.
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-28 5:57:12 PM
I am not arguing against myself. Yes, the UN has no cloud because countries like the US, Russia, France, basically all countries with Veto power, have made it a farce. That is as far as the Security Council and their interests go. That it can work differently has been shown too, the UN did had successful missions, mainly where none of the Veto powers had their own interests. Hence, they should remove all Veto powers.
I do not have an issue with the UN, in fact I do believe we need a UN, but it has to be an organization that allows equal access to all parties involved and not have a "class" system. If we really are for freedom and democracy, maybe we should have a more democratic UN first.
As for Iraq, the reason why Saddam was so long in power was because he pretty much ran a secular state. There was a reason why people considered Iraq for a long time one of the most advanced countries in the region. Imagine you had Sunni and Shiite in Saudi Arabia what would be going on there then.
My understanding is that ANY military force (be it peace keeping or anything else) is a SC resolution. Other resolutions coming out of committes have different aims.
As for "Third World Toilets", let's face it, we dump our shit there too, so maybe we should care a bit more about them than you would like.
And Nuclear Power is pretty much uninteresting these days, so far only one country in the world has used Nuclear Power as a Weapon against an enemy, if someone would try that again I doubt they'll get away with it, there are still too many nervous people on this planet who can press a button.
As for the UN and Military, you ARE aware that the UN does not have a Military force, but rather relies on member nations to supply these troops? If the SC is really the end all / be all of Military might, how come that most of the men and equipment seem to come from Nations that aren't permanent members of the SC?
The SC is a remnant of the cold war, where the USA and USSR could "fight it out", in it's current structure it is utterly useless.
if your wish comes true expect the US to get the draft back, you need a lot of boots on the Ground to keep a country under control, when was the last time an army (of any kind) successfully invaded and controlled a country for any amount of time?
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 6:00:27 PM
Oh yeah, I am a product of the public school system. They didn't care for us and as a teenager I thought I was smart and didn't need an education becaause I was making big bucks working construction by sixteen. I try sorry I don't have your intellect but I try. I think it is more impotant to speak your mind, I'm sure you were not born with all your knowledge, but then maybe you are a prodigy. Sorry to waste your time.
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-28 6:04:06 PM
First of all we don't the draft, We have an all volunteer army. And the numbers are still high for new recruits. Second if the rest of the world would get behind the US the Islamos would see that this is for real an I guarantee it would all end quick. But when you have so many parties around the world acting like the US is trying to colonize the world all it does is give the enemy fire to fight on. I sure your smart enought to see that most of Europe is purely jealous that we did more in 200 plus years then they in their whole existance. Most of the shit thrown at the US is pure envy.
Posted by: sal | 2006-08-28 6:12:20 PM
25% energey from wind. that is alot of air. Sounds like you Denmark and have a lot in common.
Posted by: missing link | 2006-08-28 6:23:12 PM
Bang on about the envy part.
It's all spelled out in the Tenth Commandment.
Apparently, that was too much for the Marxists to read.
So, instead of celebrating success and successful people (which apparently hurt the feelings of society's also-rans), the concept of equality came into being.
That's opposed to the concept of egalatarianist ... that is, equality of opportunity. Nobody's against the equality of opportunity, but when some people get the opportunity, then botch it due to their own failings, it's easy enough to blame others.
Equality, as it worked in the laboratory of the Soviet Uniot, went something like this:
A guy busts his ass off at work and looks around at the lazy lout next to him.
Under the concept of equality, both the hard worker and the lazy lout get paid the tame. Pretty soon, the hard worker says: ‘hey, why should I bust my ass off when I can be a layabout and get the same amount of money.'
Eventually, you get the Russia of today.
In the US, the guy who works his ass off, surprise surprise, takes home more money.
In Canada, under the system of state compassion, the guy who works his ass off has most of his money confiscated and redistributed to the ‘poor.' Some compassion. Some country.
Posted by: Set you free | 2006-08-28 6:24:40 PM
Set you free
You said it brother. Only here we have a twist, the unions. Everyone works like sloths and get paid big dollars. Slowly the unions are being left out due to the fact of pricing themselves out of the work force.
Posted by: Sal | 2006-08-28 6:30:00 PM
read my text again, out loud if you must to understand what I was writing.
@Missing Link (to what?)
Afraid that your oil stock tanks if other countries use more renewables? Or why so Hostile?
The Tax Burden in Canada is not as hgh as people want to make it out to be, the amount of money one gets on wellfare also doesn't allow one to live in Riches. Too much Kool-Aid?
As for Envy: Again, too much Kool-Aid, if the Envy part would be true, why are so few Europeans trying to emigrate to the US?
Wonder who on here's the Egolomaniac.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 6:43:57 PM
If we all were on the same page on the war on terror, which is the worlds problem not just the US we would not need the draft. But the US haters keep stoking the Islamo fire by acting like we are doing this cause GWB is avenging Saddam putting a hit on his pop, or that it is for the oil. If we wanted the oil don't you think we could wipe out Iraq and take what we want. Ihear the colonization talk and that we are pushing our weight around. Bull elieve me we would rather be spending our tax dollars on better things. But we must not let 9/11 happen again. Neville Chamberlain was wrong then and the US haters are wrong now
Posted by: Sal | 2006-08-28 6:54:26 PM
so you're telling me you (as in the US) got into Iraq because of the War on Terror?
Two notes here:
1. Even Bush said there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11
2. Terrorism is not something you can declare war on, it's a crime, and cops usually deal with crime not soldiers, when was the last time you've seen a soldier direct traffic or investigate a murder?
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 7:10:00 PM
Me thinks the likes of SR should have stayed in Eurabia.
Posted by: Alain | 2006-08-28 7:12:40 PM
Ah, Freedom only as long as you approve? How.... Saddamesce of you.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2006-08-28 7:18:07 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.