You'll have to tell me what the talk radio favorites are - I assume you listen to them, I don't.

As far as what this has to do with oil -
I know for sure it is where Saddam got his wealth and power from.

As far as Bush looking fucked - I'm going to wait and see. About half of us are going to be very suprised I think - only time will tell which half huh?

Saddam said they will "fight to the last infant..." do you not see how fucking sick that is? I am VERY gratful for the people we have over there ready to take the sorry bastard out.


Like I said... we'll see.

:winkwink:

Yeah, right, to the last man, til the last man surrenders he means, like the guy that jumped into the UN jeep, or the eight Iraqis, who thought the war had started and walked across the border to surrender yesterday morning. They were sent back, since we are officially at war. giggle

If he would have last MAN - I'd be ok with it and just laugh about it too -

but he said "till the last infant" - that's different - that says a lot of who we are dealing with.

Too true. but lets negotiate with him and take him at his word......NOT!:BangBang:

I have and you need to replace the tinfoil.

I didn't make any conspiracy theory claims, just said historical facts. The only ounce of info from that that came from my own mind was the idea that sanctions are an attack on the civilians.

There is not one single thing in your post that is fact. Not a single thing. FYI power plants, dams, communications etc. are always targets on the list of military targets, with power and communications being the first to go, so you even screwed that up. We never intentionally target hospitals unless the enemy has made the hospital into a military target.

Was the children's school and hospital in Serbia a military target? Just wondering.

But isn't that technically targetting civilians? I mean they're the ones who have to go without power and clean water. I'm sure the ruling class can get theirs, but what happens to the common people?

Want to watch the beginning of Bowling for Colombine again?

I'm still pissed off with the fact the US killed more Brits in Gulf War I than the Iraqis did - so much for 'intentions'...

For the record - why didn't we just nuke Saddam back in '89? :ak47:

This is such a ridiculous argument. Civilian casualties are an unfortunate part of war. In the Gulf War more Americans were killed from friendly fire than from Iraqi troops. The U.S. would never intentionallys targets civilians. The military doesn't intentionally target allied forces. The military doesn't intentionally target it's own forces. Shit happens.

One man is responsible for sanctions: Saddam Hussein.

Likewise, there is an oil-for-food program, but guess why much of the food doesn't get to its intended recipients?

Again, one man: Saddam Hussein



Do you see a patern here?

It shouldn't surprise anyone that someone would use their position or contacts to arrange such deals with a company they used to work for. It wouldnt surprise me, that's for sure.

However, Halliburton IS one of the world's leading oil service companies with vast experience in such arrangements, a company with 85,000 employees in more than 100 companies so it's quite possible they would have been chosen anyway.

So anyway, I was looking at the Halliburton website and couldn't find anything in their releases regarding such a contract. Couldn't find anything anywhere else either. Anyone have more info? I'm interested in reading it. Only info I can find regards contracts with Iraq that were made in 1998 to repair oil fields there - a legal deal in accordance with the oil-for-food program.

Hi Tony,

Sounds interesting. Do you have any further info or links on this?

Jeremy is exactly right. The sanctions only impact the civilians because Saddam chooses it to be that way. The Oil for food program has been there since the sanctions began. Saddam was too obstinate and too proud to allow oil for food, so he turned that down for years, until he decided to kick out inspectors.

As far as the intentional targeting of civilians, there is only one kind of force that intentionally target civilians...terrorists.

Neither US nor NATO forces have ever intentionally targeted civilians. Our opponents have, from the German Stukas bombings of polish civilians and the Japanese imperial army's murder of 350,000 chinese in WWII (almost twice what the Atom bombs in Japan killed) to the Iraqi massacres in Kuwait and the Serbian ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia. America has always fought, sometimes with nothing to gain (Where was the oil in Somalia? Kosovo?) to oppose evil in the form of dictators and etnic cleansing.

Do civilians get hurt or killed in wars? Yes, even modern day weapons are not fully precise. Remember also that guys like Saddam like to disguise their soldiers as civilians, or use their civilians as soldiers. "If a bystander pulls a gun, he is no longer a bystander"

You're the one who needs to check his facts, Cluck. I'm worried that the media bullshit has taken a hold of you.:warning

Just for the record - you can thank the fucking UN for that - BELIEVE ME - I honestly think Bush Sr. and our military would have LOVED to have "finished the job". Why else wouldn't they have? - The UN mandate. That is why some of us today don't really give a shit what the UN does this time.

Then there's the question of your college tranhahahahahahas, if those really are your tranhahahahahahas. How did you get into Yale when other applicants in 1964 had higher SATs and much better grades?

Michael Moore, chapter "Dear George" from Stupid White Men


Is it true that the bin Laden family has been funding the Bush family for over twenty years? According to the New York Times, your very first oil venture in 1979, a company called Arbusto, was financed, in part, by the bin Ladens. The bin Ladens have been investors in your father's company, the Carlyle Group, one of the largest military contractors in the U.S. Such odd coincidences deserve an explanation.

Michael Moore, from the Epilogue of Stupid White Men

Legacy applicants have easier admissions criteria than regular admissions. Quite normal.

Bush's SAT scores have been reported as a little higher than 1200 which is on the low end of admissions but not unheard of in any way.

Very true!

Also, it should be noted that in many U.S. engagements from Somalia to Iraq, enemy fighters use civilian shields. It's a disgusting practice, but they do it. In a most extreme example, in Somalia fighters would shoot at American soldiers behind the shield of a woman or child. In such a situation, what do you do?

Likewise, weapons/soldiers/terrorists/warlords are hidden in schools, places of worship, civilian houses, etc. Then when we get intelligence about that there X is in location Y, we attack and then low and behold there is a civilian casualty (or casualties) but it wasn't our fault. But of course we shoulder the blame.

There's yet another tactic rival warlords use it to manipulate U.S. intelligence. They will inform intel that there are weapons or what-not at a particular location. U.S. attacks. Turns out it was a warlord's rival village. There motivation was to get the U.S. to bomb a rival faction. They know how to manipulate the system. Sad but true.

You found yourself admitted to an exclusive New England boarding school simply because your name was Bush. You did not EARN your place there. It was bought for you.

When they let you into Yale, you learned you could bypass more deserving students who had worked hard for twelve years to qualify for admission to college. You got in because your name was Bush.

You got into Harvard Business School the same way. After screwing off during your four years in Yale, you took the seat that rightfully belonged to someone else.

You then pretended to serve a full stint in the Texas Air National Guard. But one day, according to the Boston Globe, you just skipped out and failed to report back to your unit - for a year and a half! You didn't have to fulfill your military obligation, because your name was Bush.

Michael Moore, chapter "Dear George" from Stupid White Men


i don't find this quite normal, do you?

100 BIATCH!

Not normal, and probably not true either. Micheal Moore is a fuckin hypocrite and named his book after himself. His theory is that the white man is responsible forall the problems. Bullshit.

Water is wet, sky is blue, women have secrets, and money makes the world go round. Stop whining and move on with your life, as opposed to constantly complaining that "things aren't fair"

Tell that to an iraqi being beaten and tortured in baghdad. Like he cares wether someone goes to yale or not.

Kind of sounds like affirmative action.....


sorry, couldn't resist.....



Anyways, Bush, smush.......I'm not going to defend Bush. I voted for John McCain in the primary anyways, but I do support regime change. That Bush got into schools b/c of familial ties doesn't negate the need for regime change in Iraq. John F. Kennedy was beneficiary of the same kind of upper class affirmative action.

However, I will concede that Bush Jr. has made a lot of mistakes with respect to Iraq. Moreover, Bush's lack of worldly knowledge (i.e. geography, political leaders) doesn't bode well with many of our allies. If John McCain or Colin Powell--people that have extensive international experience--were in office pushing this agenda, they would have likely fared better. Having spent real time in combat and knowing where the middle east is on a map is an important step in establishing credibility.

Bush Jr., like his father, should have sent personal envoys to meet with leaders at the beginning of the crisis, rather than waiting until opposition mounted. Unfortunately, he relied on telemarketing and now we're paying the price. That being said, the FRoG (France-Russia-Germany) axis would have been opposed no matter what. The FRoG axis have far more sinister reasons for not participating in a military strike on Iraq:

Aside from being the biggest culprits in arming Iraq, violating the U.N. embargo, Iraq has long promised the axis preference for leasing contracts on Iraqi oil fields--a reward for their loyalty to the King. Moreover, how the hell will Russia get the billions owed to them from Iraq if Saddam is no longer there?

:winkwink:

I knew I liked you Jeremy. As usual, a smart and to the point observation.

....but two wrongs don't make a right. Exactly:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

Check your ICQ man.

i'm assuming you've never read the book because it is not about white man being responsible for all the problems, it's merely a dialogue on the state of the nation...a well researched one at that


good points JeremySF
:thumbsup

I've seen the movie "bowling for columbine" and his research might be good, but his conclusions suck. He operates under the beilief that people left to their own devices, will do the right thing.

That kind of thinking let Hitler take europe in 39-41, and is going to lead to an even greater mess now, if the US wasn't involving itself

I actually enjoy Michael Moore. I think he raises some good questions, but like Snapper I find his conclusions flawed.

:thumbsup :thumbsup

You don't want the truth? How about you go join the mass graves with the kurds you fucking bandwaggoner.

No, he doesn't. Stop pestering the liberals with truth, it inconveniences their soapbox arguments.

I posted this on another thread, but it fits here also...
http://www.geocities.com/bushwhacked2003/

I was a student at Yale. IMX, who also posts at GFY, is a current student at Yale. After having swindled the admissions office there into "letting me in", I consider myself to be quite knowledgable on what makes a successful admissions application.

No doubt, legacy students do have more lenient admissions criteria at Yale than regular admissions students. This is a tradition that is hundreds of years old. 1701, baby! In Bush's day, there was an even greater emphasis placed on legacy student admissions. Hopefully, my children will one day be a benefactor of that same system.

I should point out though that I had friends at Yale with SAT scores similar to Bush's that were NOT legacy students.

Regardless, the question is - is it normal? I would guess that any Legacy student with a 1200 SAT and decent grades would have been accepted at Yale in the 1960's. I've never seen Bush's high school grades so I can't comment on them.

Was Bush privileged? Yes, in the sense that his father was a graduate and that pulls a lot of weight in your admissions. He was actually third generation @ Yale. Dad was also "Skull and Bones". Thousands of students are admitted into Ivy League schools every year as Legacy students. So it's quite normal in that respect. At Yale, that is normal - not abnormal.

Was his father's political power a factor in his admissions? Hardly, his father was a local Texas politician at the time of his admissions.

I've read things about the Skull and Bones... sounds like some kind of elitist group. Is it like the things associated with the movie Dead Poet's Society? - I've even read some cospiracy based stuff that points it's roots at stuff like the Stonemasons and other such cult like activity.

Juggernaut,

One of my best friends in college was tapped for "Skull & Bones". They meet in a really mysterious looking building - no windows. Every student knows the building. I heard just one story - about their first day. You have to sit in front of everyone else in the group and talk about yourself for something like three straight hours non-stop; the good, the bad, your deepest secrets, aspirations, successes, failures, your biggest fears.

I have no idea what happened after that. She never would tell me anymore. Guess they sunk their claws into her.

There are other secret societies. "Book and Snake" is another. If you have a roommate that always has something to do on Tuesday nights you start to get a little suspicious.

The Stonemasons temple has no windows.

I've yet to come to a firm understanding about the Skull and Bones... I've been reading, some of the information I've read; is pretty accurately correlated with the timeline of prominent members associated with this group.

I have no doubt the inner workings of any such society, must be kept secret, but I'm also thinking that it can't be all that secret if it's pretty well known by such a huge school like Yale.

I want to learn a bit more about it's origins and principles before I try and make sense of what it's members have to do with it... Interesting stuff, none the less.

This is an excerpt I've read, kind of chilling.

George Bush's crowning as a Bonesman was intensely, personally important to him....

Survivors of his 1948 Bones group were interviewed for a 1988 "Washington Post" campaign profile of George Bush. The members described their continuing intimacy with and financial support for Bush up through his 1980s vice presidency. Their original sexual togetherness at Yale is stressed:

The relationships that were formed in the "Tomb" ... where the Society's meetings took place each Thursday and Sunday night during the academic year, have had a strong place in Bush's life, according to all 11 of his fellow Bonsemen who are still alive.

Several described in detail the ritual in the organization that builds the bonds. Before giving his life history, each member had to spend a Sunday night reviewing his sex life in a talk known in the Tomb as CB, or "connubial bliss"....

"The first time you review your sex life.... We went all the way around among the 15, said Lucius H. Biglow Jr., a retired Seattle attorney. "That way you get everybody committed to a certain extent.... It was a gradual way of building confidence."

The sexual histories helped break down the normal defenses of the members, according to several of the members from his class. William J. Connelly Jr. ... said, "In Skull and Bones we all stand together, 15 brothers under the skin. [It is] the greatest allegiance in the world."....

why go to war.. saddam is 60+.. 10 more years and he'll go from natural causes. why go kill 1000's of innocent people and kids.


:ak47: :ak47: :ak47: :(

Groups forming alliances for their mutual benefit makes sense - that they would be secret makes sense too.

There have even been "secret societies" of adult webmasters. I've known of two though neither group lasted longer than a year. One of them was supported by one of the top ten sponsors - at least I think that one was secret. I can't remember ;-)

I think the same argument has been used for The Beard, but a lot of people have grown old and died waiting for Castro to kick.

With all the medical help the French have been giving Saddam, he'll likely be with us for years to come (unless of course we eliminate him).

Secret societies with members in that much power are a dangerous thing. You don't think they cover each others asses and let each other get away with hell? The best part is that their members are not only right wing, but left wing as well. They've got some strong political influence on either side.

The war might not be about oil but it is certainly a cause->effect relationship. War will make oil prices high and make me more pissed off.

And to all the people who think that we are humanitarians going to help the poor iraq citizens, you may want to rethink that. Look at how much we care for the poor Haitians. We don't. Rather we did but they no longer provided us with enough benifits and we said peace out.