Since you're all clueless heres some info about the port issue: - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

Do you honestly think that the UAE is going to ship over thousands of Arabs to take over day to day management of the ports?

Follow your own advice.

I'm sure that would go over well.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

Yea and who's more likely to allow a bribed shipment container to enter the port with a dirty bomb.. A company ran by British owners or one owned by a Middle Eastern country..

Don't be dumb.

Take your own advice, and don't be stupid. That shipping company has a PERFECT track record with us. They were the FIRST to manually search EVERY outgoing container from the ports they run.

If someone DOES get a dirty bomb into this country, the odds of it coming through a naval port are roughly that of Paris Hilton being elected to the Senate. The security we have in place in our ports is just to tight and too sophisticated. What you SHOULD be worrying about is a bomb coming ashore off a drug smuggling boat, or accross the Mexican or Canadian border.

It is categorically NOT a security issue, it is a political one.

You fucking idiots who decry this administrations lack of concern about security crack me the fuck up.

Why weren't you crying like bitches when Clinton was closing bases, cutting budgets of vital agencies like the CIA or NSA, and saying "nah" to killing Bin Laden when we had several oppurtunities to do so?

Grow the fuck up.

Congress has NO authority to act on this, so skate it off.

minusonebit · 02-22-2006, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

HOW ABOUT THE BIGGER QUESTION...

WHY THE FUCK ARE WE OUTSOURCING THE MANAGEMENT OF OUR PORTS IN THE FUCKING FIRST PLACE????

This is just plain fucking stupid! When the government of the United States is not 'buying American', what do they expect the citizens to do?

Why are we NOT employing Americans to do this job? What losers is allowing this kinda shit to happen and not give a damn?

If you think this is OK, you should be shot for treason!

A-fucking-men! And stupid is one hell of an understatement.

Fred Quimby · 02-22-2006, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

You fucking idiots who decry this administrations lack of concern about security crack me the fuck up.

President Bush was unaware of the pending sale of shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates until the deal already had been approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&feed=rss.news

Thanks for the laughs this morning

Kevsh · 02-22-2006, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

This is exactly why I used the word "clueless" in the title of this thread.

93: wtc bombing by Yousefs people.
95: Oklahoma city, McVeigh.
01: wtc again.

Edit: My point is that alot of the people arguing so vehemently about how evil and moronic the Bush administration is, don't even have a rudimentary grasp of recent HISTORY much less geopolitics.

For once, at least, we agree ... actually, my math did not include the Unabomber, not considered a "terrorist" by definition to some, but did include the '96 Olympic Park bombing and of course Oklahoma City.

So, the score is 2-2 then - which means Americans have committed terrorist acts against their own country as often as foreigners have.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

The Coast Guard and Homeland Security are required by federal law to run security at our ports. That will not change. Nor will ANYTHING change except that now a new corporation will be in charge of administration.

The company that runs those ports now is a UK based one, and was recently purchased by the Dubai interest. Why hold them to a different standard than the UK? It's nonsense.

Congress has NO business whatsoever interfering with the sale. They have no oversight authority for business dealings made between two foreign nations, and Bush would be absolutely correct in slamming a veto on any effort to do so.

Anyone who claims this is a security threat is a fucking dipshit, no offense.

Thank you, please come again.

A) Bush's cock must taste good to you.

B) Congress has enough votes to override any veto.

Fact is all any dem has to do to beat a incumbant republican who doesn't vote against this is to make campaign ads showing how they agreed with Bush in letting a bunch of arab terrorist sympathizers take over our ports. Of course you don't agree with that assestment of those people but that's how it will play to ma and pa voter. And really that is all that counts

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevsh

For once, at least, we agree ... actually, my math did not include the Unabomber, not considered a "terrorist" by definition to some, but did include the '96 Olympic Park bombing and of course Oklahoma City.

So, the score is 2-2 then - which means Americans have committed terrorist acts against their own country as often as foreigners have.

actually 3-2

McViegh, Unibomber, Eric Rudolph. Foreingers lead in overal body count though. Of course if you consider the KKK a terrorist organization then considering all the people they've killed over the last 140 years then home grown American terrorists lead the way.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

B) Congress has enough votes to override any veto.

Bullshit. You must have been skipping civics classes.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:28 AM

And lets start calling "gang bangers" terrorists too. That makes about as much sense...

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

Bullshit. You must have been skipping civics classes.

Are you saying a veto cannot be overridden or that they can't get enough votes? I'll hold my laughter till you respond.

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadglni

Are you saying a veto cannot be overridden or that they can't get enough votes? I'll hold my laughter till you respond.

Is your google broke?

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:33 AM

They can't get enough votes for that.

Troll.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:38 AM

Interesting thought:

Even IF they can come up with a 2/3 majority in both houses to over ride (which they wont); who thinks the Supreme Court would even find the law constitutional?

The CFI has rigid standards on what they consider to be legitimate investments, and I'm sure they dotted all their "i's" and crossed all their "t's" on this one.

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:38 AM

Bush is an idiot, end of story.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

Bullshit. You must have been skipping civics classes.

OK let's see Dems make up 49% of the House all ALL of them will vote to block this meaning only about 1/3 of the republicans need to vote against this to have enough votes to override a veto. I already seen several on the news that are against this deal.

In the senate. The 42 dems and 1 independent will vote against this deal. So less than 1/3 of the republicans in the senate need to vote against it to override a veto.

why don't you take MATH calss

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadglni

Bush is an idiot, end of story.

apparently so according to Fox News

"FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
White House: Bush Didn't Know About Port Deal
Wednesday, February 22, 2006

WASHINGTON ? President Bush was unaware that a controversial deal to sell shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a United Arab Emirates-owned firm was in the works until it was approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday. "

So apparently Bush doesn't have a fricken clue to what goes on around him.

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

apparently so according to Fox News

"FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
White House: Bush Didn't Know About Port Deal
Wednesday, February 22, 2006

WASHINGTON ? President Bush was unaware that a controversial deal to sell shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a United Arab Emirates-owned firm was in the works until it was approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday. "

So apparently Bush doesn't have a fricken clue to what goes on around him.

I'm not even talking about that, we all know he doesn't give a shit what's going on. The fact that he would be so adament about this deal going through given the situation is enough to call him a total idiot.

broke · 02-22-2006, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

So apparently Bush doesn't have a fricken clue to what goes on around him.

I know it is difficult, but just maybe the POTUS doesn't sit in front of MSNBC and follow every international business deal done. When Clinton approved the sale of US ports to foreign interests, the executive's oversight was severly limited.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

OK let's see Dems make up 49% of the House all ALL of them will vote to block this meaning only about 1/3 of the republicans need to vote against this to have enough votes to override a veto. I already seen several on the news that are against this deal.

In the senate. The 42 dems and 1 independent will vote against this deal. So less than 1/3 of the republicans in the senate need to vote against it to override a veto.

why don't you take MATH calss

God you hade a shitty education.

ONE HUNDRED or so republicans in the House would have to vote with the dems to override (HALF of the republicans in the house), and 30 or so in the Senate (again HALF).

If you think that's gonna happen you are fucking INSANE.

northboy · 02-22-2006, 09:49 AM

cash money, Bush is definitely getting some sort of cut from this deal. Let's see if he buys any new cars soon.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

I know it is difficult, but just maybe the POTUS doesn't sit in front of MSNBC and follow every international business deal done. When Clinton approved the sale of US ports to foreign interests, the executive's oversight was severly limited.

Mmmm mmm Bush must have a tasty cock for so many to be sucking it.

Anyways considering we live in a POST 9-11 world and Bush won because he said he can protect better than Kerry, you'd think something like PORT SECURITY would be on his mind quite a bit.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:52 AM

Why don't you go back to ButtFuck Community College and study spelling, fractions and government 101.

Thanks.

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

God you hade a shitty education.

ONE HUNDRED or so republicans in the House would have to vote with the dems to override (HALF of the republicans in the house), and 30 or so in the Senate (again HALF).

If you think that's gonna happen you are fucking INSANE.

OMG LMAO

and haha.

No half of the republicans do not need to side with the Dems to get the majority. And you're preaching math.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 09:54 AM

Chad you really are an IDIOT.

It TAKES A 2/3 majority in BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE to over ride a fucking veto.

Do I need to get the crayons and draw it out for you?

Kevsh · 02-22-2006, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

actually 3-2

McViegh, Unibomber, Eric Rudolph. Foreingers lead in overal body count though. Of course if you consider the KKK a terrorist organization then considering all the people they've killed over the last 140 years then home grown American terrorists lead the way.

Like I pointed out, I didn't count the Unabomber - some would claim he's better defined as a serial killer than terrorist. But certainly he could be considered both.

And yes, by the morbid "body count" foreign terrorists are way ahead - but not necessarily by intent: McVeigh, Rudolf and the Unabomber all intended to kill as many as possible, just like the foreign attackers. They were, as bad as this sounds, more small-scale in their thinking (i.e. they didn't go after a target as massive as the WTC).

jjjay · 02-22-2006, 09:56 AM

god almighty, reading the moronic lefty posts in this thread makes me despair about the future of the US. some people should have been aborted

broke · 02-22-2006, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Mmmm mmm Bush must have a tasty cock for so many to be sucking it.

Anyways considering we live in a POST 9-11 world and Bush won because he said he can protect better than Kerry, you'd think something like PORT SECURITY would be on his mind quite a bit.

You ignorant assholes already depend on the UAE for rail and highway security in the POST 9-11 world, but are so angry about the ports. That's why we laugh at you.

This will play out well in the election cycle, too bad our elected officials are too busy campaigning to govern.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

God you hade a shitty education.

ONE HUNDRED or so republicans in the House would have to vote with the dems to override (HALF of the republicans in the house), and 30 or so in the Senate (again HALF).

If you think that's gonna happen you are fucking INSANE.

Are you retarded? 2/3 vote needed to override a veto moron. That's 290 votes in the house and 67 in the senate. Do the math.

Hmmm 201 dems and 1 democrat leaning independant. So only 82 of 231 republcians( 35% ) need to vote against this.

Senate 42 Dems and 1 dems leaning independant. So only 24 of 57 republicans( 42% ) need to vote against this.

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 09:58 AM

Beat by GatorB

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

You ignorant assholes already depend on the UAE for rail and highway security in the POST 9-11 world, but are so angry about the ports. That's why we laugh at you.

This will play out well in the election cycle, too bad our elected officials are too busy campaigning to govern.

We? Meaning terroists sympathizers like yourself?

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

Why don't you go back to ButtFuck Community College and study spelling, fractions and government 101.

Thanks.

when you show me a copy of your mensa mebership THEN you can brag about your brains

Dollarmansteve · 02-22-2006, 10:00 AM

Wow this whole thread is silly. This is not a political issue at all, since when does the government meddle in private business? Here are some facts:

1. All the employees at the ports are American
2. There is no change to security (coast guard, homeland security still runs that)

There are thousands of foreign owned corporations operating in the united states. Are those of you who are so vocal against this transaction also opposed to car plants owned by honda, toyota, BMW, etc.. What about DamilerChrysler? The Germans could be using those plants to build tanks and bombs!!

Anyone who opposes this deal is a xenophobic protectionist and has to skew facts and manufacture lies to support their position.

This should not even be an issue on the US governments radar, the fact that it is is laughable. I thought Americans loved liberty and freedom? Apparently not, you want your government to stick its nose into everyone's business whenever it feels like it. You complain about domestic NSA wiretaps invading privacy.. and then there is support for squashing a private business deal that the government has no business being involved in! lol.. y'all crack me up.

KRL · 02-22-2006, 10:01 AM

Jim, I assume you are a solid Republican?

chadglni · 02-22-2006, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRL

Jim, I assume you are a solid Republican?

Are Republicans usually bad at math? Jim will respond after finishes writing out basic math problems in crayon.

stickyfingerz · 02-22-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

Take your own advice, and don't be stupid. That shipping company has a PERFECT track record with us. They were the FIRST to manually search EVERY outgoing container from the ports they run.

If someone DOES get a dirty bomb into this country, the odds of it coming through a naval port are roughly that of Paris Hilton being elected to the Senate. The security we have in place in our ports is just to tight and too sophisticated. What you SHOULD be worrying about is a bomb coming ashore off a drug smuggling boat, or accross the Mexican or Canadian border.

It is categorically NOT a security issue, it is a political one.

You fucking idiots who decry this administrations lack of concern about security crack me the fuck up.

Why weren't you crying like bitches when Clinton was closing bases, cutting budgets of vital agencies like the CIA or NSA, and saying "nah" to killing Bin Laden when we had several oppurtunities to do so?

Grow the fuck up.

Congress has NO authority to act on this, so skate it off.

I fookin hate agreeing with you Jim.

broke · 02-22-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

We? Meaning terroists sympathizers like yourself?

That's funny -- can't imagine what I'll be next...

A Bush cocksucker, a terrorist sympathizer... maybe an ass-licking sociopath?

"We" are the people that actually follow the news and don't get all worked up by campaign soundbites.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjjay

god almighty, reading the moronic lefty posts in this thread makes me despair about the future of the US. some people should have been aborted

A) it's the RIGHT that has been in control of everything the last few years.

B) isn't abortion against your beliefs?

Also you don't have to be a "lefty" or a Democrat to be against Bush. I have NEVER been a democrat I have however been a registered republcian. You don't have to be a Bears fan to hate the Green Bay Packers. It's idiots like you that believe you have to belong to one of the two idiot parties out there which is why this country is fucked up. Any TRUE republcian would be voting LIBERTARIAN.

elighten yourself http://lp.org/

broke · 02-22-2006, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve

This should not even be an issue on the US governments radar, the fact that it is is laughable. I thought Americans loved liberty and freedom? Apparently not, you want your government to stick its nose into everyone's business whenever it feels like it. You complain about domestic NSA wiretaps invading privacy.. and then there is support for squashing a private business deal that the government has no business being involved in! lol.. y'all crack me up.

A-fucking-men!

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadglni

Are Republicans usually bad at math?

Have you seen the budget the last few years?

broke · 02-22-2006, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Any TRUE republcian would be voting LIBERTARIAN.

elighten yourself http://lp.org/

Didn't know you were one of us...

Both my wife and I voted Badnarik in the last election.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

That's funny -- can't imagine what I'll be next...

A Bush cocksucker, a terrorist sympathizer... maybe an ass-licking sociopath?

"We" are the people that actually follow the news and don't get all worked up by campaign soundbites.

Sure you aren't some liberal elitist? because you sure sound like one.

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broke

Didn't know you were one of us...

Both my wife and I voted Badnarik in the last election.

Didn't say I was. I'm an idependant thinker. I choose not to be a member of ANY party, though I agree with the libertarian point of view more than the other 2 parties. All I'm saying is that any non-jesus freak republican should NOT be voting for republicans because the republican party of today bares little likeness to it's true beliefs.

jacked · 02-22-2006, 10:15 AM

the company has been tied to the terrorists that funded 9/11, i live in jersey and they had a whole front page article on it... the long shoremen are pretty pissed they interviewed a lot of them and couldn't even put some of the shit they were saying in the papers the workers are not happy with this move... but it's all about the money... thats what it comes down to...

the thing is though dubai will have not just access at port newark, theres 8 other cities in the country where they will take over control... that could lead to some serious security issues as to whats being brought into this country you never know these days...

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Are you retarded? 2/3 vote needed to override a veto moron. That's 290 votes in the house and 67 in the senate. Do the math.

Hmmm 201 dems and 1 democrat leaning independant. So only 82 of 231 republcians( 35% ) need to vote against this.

Senate 42 Dems and 1 dems leaning independant. So only 24 of 57 republicans( 42% ) need to vote against this.

82 is pretty close to a hundred, and 24 is pretty damn close to being half the republican senate. Arguing a few % points is idiotic.

I stand by what I said, if you think that those kind of numbers would vote to override a Bush veto then you are on crack.

broke · 02-22-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Didn't say I was. I'm an idependant thinker. I choose not to be a member of ANY party, though I agree with the libertarian point of view more than the other 2 parties. All I'm saying is that any non-jesus freak republican should NOT be voting for republicans because the republican party of today bares little likeness to it's true beliefs.

Fair enough.

I sway as well. I'm just in the lp camp right now.

jjjay · 02-22-2006, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

82 is pretty close to a hundred, and 24 is pretty damn close to being half the republican senate. Arguing a few % points is idiotic.

I stand by what I said, if you think that those kind of numbers would vote to override a Bush veto then you are on crack.

he is on crack

only explanation for the drivel he spouts

jacked · 02-22-2006, 10:18 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/nyregion/17ports.html

theres a NY times article about it...

GatorB · 02-22-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimthefiend

82 is pretty close to a hundred, and 24 is pretty damn close to being half the republican senate. Arguing a few % points is idiotic.

I stand by what I said, if you think that those kind of numbers would vote to override a Bush veto then you are on crack.

Um you said HALF. 35% is closer to 33% than 50% moron. In the Senate 42% is 8 away from 50% and 9 away from 33%. So I'd call that a draw.

Pornwolf · 02-22-2006, 10:36 AM

Why are people so afraid of Jews?

Zionism is at it's premise the belief that there is supposed to be a Jewish homeland in Israel. Personally I don't give shit if they have a homeland in Israel or not. They can be Zionist all they want. If they can duke it out with the Muslims and keep their homeland so be it.

But what I have noticed from my many years in THE MEDIA BUSINESS is that when they are in power positions, which is not all the time mind you, they tend to be more fair than black or white people in similar positions. They are all about green, not advancing thier race. The only time you see a change in policy for them is where Jewish charitable causes are concerned and all races support their own.

jimthefiend · 02-22-2006, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Um you said HALF. 35% is closer to 33% than 50% moron. In the Senate 42% is 8 away from 50% and 9 away from 33%. So I'd call that a draw.

I bet you pee sitting down.

02-22-2006, 09:38 AM	#64
chadglni Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: PEI, Canada Posts: 6,924	Bush is an idiot, end of story. __________________ Sign up here - Dating Site affiliate program

02-22-2006, 09:58 AM	#79
chadglni Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: PEI, Canada Posts: 6,924	Beat by GatorB __________________ Sign up here - Dating Site affiliate program

02-22-2006, 10:00 AM	#82
Dollarmansteve Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: T.O. Posts: 2,849	Wow this whole thread is silly. This is not a political issue at all, since when does the government meddle in private business? Here are some facts: 1. All the employees at the ports are American 2. There is no change to security (coast guard, homeland security still runs that) There are thousands of foreign owned corporations operating in the united states. Are those of you who are so vocal against this transaction also opposed to car plants owned by honda, toyota, BMW, etc.. What about DamilerChrysler? The Germans could be using those plants to build tanks and bombs!! Anyone who opposes this deal is a xenophobic protectionist and has to skew facts and manufacture lies to support their position. This should not even be an issue on the US governments radar, the fact that it is is laughable. I thought Americans loved liberty and freedom? Apparently not, you want your government to stick its nose into everyone's business whenever it feels like it. You complain about domestic NSA wiretaps invading privacy.. and then there is support for squashing a private business deal that the government has no business being involved in! lol.. y'all crack me up. __________________ I died.

02-22-2006, 10:01 AM	#83
KRL Entrepreneur Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: USA Posts: 31,429	Jim, I assume you are a solid Republican? __________________ If you would like to develop your domains, you can lease inexpensive foreign labor from the leaders in the field at iWebmasters.com TO LOWER YOUR COSTS AND INCREASE YOUR PRODUCTION! * * * * * * * * * * * * Domains Adult News KRL's Newsletter Biz Tips Just Listed Domains

02-22-2006, 10:15 AM	#93
jacked sperm tail Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: nj Posts: 11,019	the company has been tied to the terrorists that funded 9/11, i live in jersey and they had a whole front page article on it... the long shoremen are pretty pissed they interviewed a lot of them and couldn't even put some of the shit they were saying in the papers the workers are not happy with this move... but it's all about the money... thats what it comes down to... the thing is though dubai will have not just access at port newark, theres 8 other cities in the country where they will take over control... that could lead to some serious security issues as to whats being brought into this country you never know these days... __________________ Got Cam Models? icq: 361-607-616

02-22-2006, 09:28 AM	#59
jimthefiend So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: icq: 121189 Posts: 18,889	And lets start calling "gang bangers" terrorists too. That makes about as much sense...

02-22-2006, 09:33 AM	#62
jimthefiend So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: icq: 121189 Posts: 18,889	They can't get enough votes for that. Troll.

02-22-2006, 09:49 AM	#70
northboy Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Frost Posts: 807	cash money, Bush is definitely getting some sort of cut from this deal. Let's see if he buys any new cars soon.

02-22-2006, 09:52 AM	#72
jimthefiend So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: icq: 121189 Posts: 18,889	Why don't you go back to ButtFuck Community College and study spelling, fractions and government 101. Thanks.

02-22-2006, 09:54 AM	#74
jimthefiend So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: icq: 121189 Posts: 18,889	Chad you really are an IDIOT. It TAKES A 2/3 majority in BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE to over ride a fucking veto. Do I need to get the crayons and draw it out for you?

02-22-2006, 09:56 AM	#76
jjjay Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 1,813	god almighty, reading the moronic lefty posts in this thread makes me despair about the future of the US. some people should have been aborted

02-22-2006, 10:18 AM	#97
jacked sperm tail Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: nj Posts: 11,019	http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/17/nyregion/17ports.html theres a NY times article about it... __________________ Got Cam Models? icq: 361-607-616

02-22-2006, 10:36 AM	#99
Pornwolf Drunk and Unruly Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hollywood Posts: 22,712	Why are people so afraid of Jews? Zionism is at it's premise the belief that there is supposed to be a Jewish homeland in Israel. Personally I don't give shit if they have a homeland in Israel or not. They can be Zionist all they want. If they can duke it out with the Muslims and keep their homeland so be it. But what I have noticed from my many years in THE MEDIA BUSINESS is that when they are in power positions, which is not all the time mind you, they tend to be more fair than black or white people in similar positions. They are all about green, not advancing thier race. The only time you see a change in policy for them is where Jewish charitable causes are concerned and all races support their own. __________________ I've trusted my sites to them for over a decade... Webair, bitches.