Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 24 of 24
  1. #1
    Tock's Avatar
    Tock is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    7,103

    The Evil Empire supports Bush

    Someone mentioned that "the bad guys" were supporting Kerry. Well, the head of the Evil Empire, Putin, is supporting Bush.
    Seems Iran and Saudi Arabia is, as well . . . no telling who the Communist Chinese are rooting for . . .

    --Tock
    ============================================
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/18/putin.iraq/

    Putin urges voters to back Bush
    By CNN Moscow Bureau Chief Jill Dougherty
    Monday, October 18, 2004 Posted: 7:08 AM EDT (1108 GMT)

    Putin says terrorists want to inflict "maximum damage to Bush."


    MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin says terrorist attacks in Iraq are aimed at preventing the re-election of U.S. President George W. Bush and that a Bush defeat "could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world."

    Putin, speaking Central Asian Cooperation Organization summit in Tajikistan Monday, made his most overt comments of support so far for the re-election of Bush for a second term.

    "Any unbiased observer understands that attacks of international terrorist organizations in Iraq, especially nowadays, are targeted not only and not so much against the international coalition as against President Bush," Putin said.

    "International terrorists have set as their goal inflicting the maximum damage to Bush, to prevent his election to a second term.

    "If they succeed in doing that, they will celebrate a victory over America and over the entire anti-terror coalition," Putin said.

    "In that case, this would give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities, and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world."

    Putin noted that American voters will not decide the election just on Iraq.

    "Because of this we must take a realistic approach and be prepared for any development of events," he said. "We respect any choice the American people will make."

    President Putin made it clear Russia remained opposed to the war in Iraq.

    "Today, our views on that differ from the views of President Bush," he said.
    Last edited by Tock; 10-29-2004 at 09:55 AM.

  2. #2
    RockSolid's Avatar
    RockSolid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jerzey, USA
    Posts
    570
    Its obvious bro, Russia wants to be the Russia of old, the Soviet Union, directly competing with the US. The only way Russia will catch up to the US, is if the US fails. And Bush is the greatest leader in dumping this great nation to the mud.

    Bro, if this **** keeps up for another 4 years we are through, the United States of America is in deep ****, if Bush gets elected.

    How many ****ing warnings must the Americans get, come CONSERVATIVES are so **** blind it makes me puke.

    How many ****ing failures must this crappy administration go through. One after another there were so much scandals, EVERYONE KEEPS IGNORING IT. Its shocking.

    Prisoner Abuse scandal, letting Osama leave in Tora Bora, USING AFGHAN ****ING TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN, but use our whole military power in IRAQ????, ENRON, GAS PRICES BOOMING, 9/11, POST WAR IRAQ, jobs to the pits, the economy to the pits, no friends left in the world, Iraq had WMD??, Iraq wanted nuclear material from Nigeria?, NORTH KOREA GETTING A NUKE, Iran getting a NUKE, the Mid East is a mess.

    There are more but i forget, this has been one of the biggest failures in US history. But these tough guy neocons, want someone tough and steadfast? Did anyone want the captain of the Titanic be steafast when he saw the iceberg.

  3. #3
    zOaib's Avatar
    zOaib is offline VET
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Kingdom Of Heaven !
    Posts
    2,739
    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    Its obvious bro, Russia wants to be the Russia of old, the Soviet Union, directly competing with the US. The only way Russia will catch up to the US, is if the US fails. And Bush is the greatest leader in dumping this great nation to the mud.

    Bro, if this **** keeps up for another 4 years we are through, the United States of America is in deep ****, if Bush gets elected.

    How many ****ing warnings must the Americans get, come CONSERVATIVES are so **** blind it makes me puke.

    How many ****ing failures must this crappy administration go through. One after another there were so much scandals, EVERYONE KEEPS IGNORING IT. Its shocking.

    Prisoner Abuse scandal, letting Osama leave in Tora Bora, USING AFGHAN ****ING TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN, but use our whole military power in IRAQ????, ENRON, GAS PRICES BOOMING, 9/11, POST WAR IRAQ, jobs to the pits, the economy to the pits, no friends left in the world, Iraq had WMD??, Iraq wanted nuclear material from Nigeria?, NORTH KOREA GETTING A NUKE, Iran getting a NUKE, the Mid East is a mess.

    There are more but i forget, this has been one of the biggest failures in US history. But these tough guy neocons, want someone tough and steadfast? Did anyone want the captain of the Titanic be steafast when he saw the iceberg.

    say " WELCOME TO ARMAGEDDON" bro !

  4. #4
    UrbanLegend's Avatar
    UrbanLegend is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,709
    Lot of flaming and profanity already in this thread......no wonder they're looking to close this forum down. Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda, please keep your opinions to your self if you're going to present them the way you do.
    1) We don't know for sure Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. And its not like we "let him get away...." If you're going to blameBush for what ground troops let happen, then you must credit Bush with capturing Saddam by that logic....
    2) We had our special forces there in the mountains with the Afghan soldiers. You cannot fit an army in those places. Besides, thats why we have special forces, is for situations like this. Kerry knows this too, he just pretends that if our army wasn't there, then we "outsourced" the job.
    3) You're blaming Bush for many other problems that are not related to him being in office. Gas prices went up when Clinton and others were in office, Enron took place under Clinton, it wasn't found out til Bush was in office......the fact that you blame Bush for 9-11 means you don't have a very good grasp of reality, plain and simple. The ecomonmy doesn't really have a lot to do with the president. The economy will improve no matter who is in office, Kerry might make it stumple a bit by raising taxes on businesses that are supplying jobs though......
    4) You think N.Korea has nukes? Then you must believe Iraq has WMD's, as there is more evidence pointing to the latter. Besides, if you're scared of N.Korea, then you need to keep Bush in office. Kerry wants to take China and everyone else out of the picture, and make it so we have to go at it alone, taking international pressure off of them to shape up.
    5) Iran has international pressure on it as well, so instead, why don't you make a big deal out Pakistan and India getting nukes? Oh yeah, because Kerry hasn't said thats a problem, so it must not be
    6) Bush needs to clean up his mess in Iraq. Kerry's plan is identical to Bush's, until it becomes a lot of hot air. Bush will clean it up, Kerry will make a bigger mess and then blame Bush for taking us there in the first place.

    Since when is Putin a bad guy? Russia may not be perfect, but they are not the communistic threat to world peace they were once deemed as anymore. Anyone can see that. They are working towards becoming a successful democracy, and are workign with the U.S and other countries for trade and other thigns. They aren't the bad guys. After their latest fiasco with Islamic terrorists taking over a school and killing childen is it any wonder that they support Bush? Any non-biased observer can see that Bush will not back down against terrorists just to meet the demmands of other countries. Wish it were that way for both candidates......

    As for Iran supporting Bush, thats based on that he is trying to incentivize them to quit making nuclear weapons, him and many other countries. Kerry will do more or less the same thing, except make negotians harder by pressuring human rights laws that will make cooperation difficult. So if you're worried about Iran's nuclear capabilities, then you want Bush in office. Human righs issues are important, but world peace takes precedence.

    Kerry on the other hand is endorsed by Arafat based on the fact that he will be better for the Palestinian cause agaist Isreal by being soft, and not being willing to stop the violence of terrorists. He will be a good lapdog for everyone, including terrorist nations.

  5. #5
    RockSolid's Avatar
    RockSolid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jerzey, USA
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    Lot of flaming and profanity already in this thread......no wonder they're looking to close this forum down. Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda, please keep your opinions to your self if you're going to present them the way you do.
    If there is one topic I am informed about in my life, its American Politics.

    Since when is Putin a bad guy? Russia may not be perfect, but they are not the communistic threat to world peace they were once deemed as anymore. Anyone can see that. They are working towards becoming a successful democracy, and are workign with the U.S and other countries for trade and other thigns. They aren't the bad guys. After their latest fiasco with Islamic terrorists taking over a school and killing childen is it any wonder that they support Bush? Any non-biased observer can see that Bush will not back down against terrorists just to meet the demmands of other countries. Wish it were that way for both candidates......
    Make up your mind, is Russia with us, or are they helping the Iraqis? Your buddy over in this thread, thinks Russia is pretty evil.

    So will Kerry shut his mouth now??? I doubt it. take a look at this.. missing weapons

    As for Iran supporting Bush, thats based on that he is trying to incentivize them to quit making nuclear weapons, him and many other countries. Kerry will do more or less the same thing, except make negotians harder by pressuring human rights laws that will make cooperation difficult. So if you're worried about Iran's nuclear capabilities, then you want Bush in office. Human righs issues are important, but world peace takes precedence.
    I find you people amazing, in another thread, you were suprised that Iran supported Bush, and found it so unbelivable, you asked for "facts" to back it up. Now that the facts are present, you want to MAKE EXCUSES, as to why Iran is supporting Bush, and you call me brainwashed?

    n the other hand is endorsed by Arafat based on the fact that he will be better for the Palestinian cause agaist Isreal by being soft, and not being willing to stop the violence of terrorists. He will be a good lapdog for everyone, including terrorist nations.
    Who is a greater threat to American security according to you, Iran or the Palestinians? You loyalties are shown, you care more about Israel than America. Let me remind you, this elections objective is FOR AMERICA AND NOT FOR ISRAEL.

  6. #6
    UrbanLegend's Avatar
    UrbanLegend is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,709
    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid

    Make up your mind, is Russia with us, or are they helping the Iraqis? Your buddy over in this thread, thinks Russia is pretty evil.

    So will Kerry shut his mouth now??? I doubt it. take a look at this.. missing weapons
    .
    I never thought or said the Russians WERE helping Iraqis, so I don't know why I need to make up my mind on that. I didn't even post in that thread for that matter....... The thread you post is not about the Russians helping the Iraqis either, so I'm confused as to why you would think that. Russia may have sold weapons to the Iraqis in the past; so have we, and several other countries. Are we also helping the Iraqis? Yes. We are helping them on their way to democracy........what I think you mean when you say "Iraqis" is the terrorists, and no, Russia was not supporting the terrorists in Iraq that are attacking us.

    Russia also denies any involvement in the removing of those explosives
    http://www.voanews.com/english/2004-10-28-voa49.cfm

    Russia is not a bad guy. We need their help to combat terrorism globally, and we are getting it. Same with China, only not as much so. Russia is not the Russia of old, no matter how "obvious" it may see to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    I find you people amazing, in another thread, you were suprised that Iran supported Bush, and found it so unbelivable, you asked for "facts" to back it up. Now that the facts are present, you want to MAKE EXCUSES, as to why Iran is supporting Bush, and you call me brainwashed?
    What excuses did I make? I'm still suprised the Iran supports Bush, yes, and all I posted about why they did so. They support Bush for different reasons than Arafat supports Kerry, thats what I brought up.

    And I never called you brainwashed........do you have another username that you post under on this board?

    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    Who is a greater threat to American security according to you, Iran or the Palestinians? You loyalties are shown, you care more about Israel than America. Let me remind you, this elections objective is FOR AMERICA AND NOT FOR ISRAEL.
    Iran, obviously, which is why I like the fact that Iran seems more inclined to work with Bush. Thats something Kerry supporters would want to see, its more cooperation to solve problems instead of war. Or do they just want to disagree with Bush.......I'm still confused

    My loyalties are shown huh? Jumping to conclusions is a sign of an enlightened mind I'm sure. By all means, show me where I have said that I support Bush or any other political person or idea because it favors Israel. Show me where I have shown my "loyalties" for Israel over the U.S.

    Also, Arafat is a terrorist, and supports terrorism. It would be like Kaddafi supporting Kerry, its not a good sign when terrorists countries back you because you would be better for their cause. Check out the thread I posted about Kerry being endorsed by Arafat, see for yourself the reasons for his support.

  7. #7
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    Why are all the Bush supporters always talking about Kerry???
    Kerry this Kerry that......
    WE DON'T GIVE A RATS ASS ABOUT KERRY

    The problem is BUSH

  8. #8
    BigMike J's Avatar
    BigMike J is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    Lot of flaming and profanity already in this thread......no wonder they're looking to close this forum down. Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda, please keep your opinions to your self if you're going to present them the way you do.
    1) We don't know for sure Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. And its not like we "let him get away...." If you're going to blameBush for what ground troops let happen, then you must credit Bush with capturing Saddam by that logic....
    2) We had our special forces there in the mountains with the Afghan soldiers. You cannot fit an army in those places. Besides, thats why we have special forces, is for situations like this. Kerry knows this too, he just pretends that if our army wasn't there, then we "outsourced" the job.
    3) You're blaming Bush for many other problems that are not related to him being in office. Gas prices went up when Clinton and others were in office, Enron took place under Clinton, it wasn't found out til Bush was in office......the fact that you blame Bush for 9-11 means you don't have a very good grasp of reality, plain and simple. The ecomonmy doesn't really have a lot to do with the president. The economy will improve no matter who is in office, Kerry might make it stumple a bit by raising taxes on businesses that are supplying jobs though......
    4) You think N.Korea has nukes? Then you must believe Iraq has WMD's, as there is more evidence pointing to the latter. Besides, if you're scared of N.Korea, then you need to keep Bush in office. Kerry wants to take China and everyone else out of the picture, and make it so we have to go at it alone, taking international pressure off of them to shape up.
    5) Iran has international pressure on it as well, so instead, why don't you make a big deal out Pakistan and India getting nukes? Oh yeah, because Kerry hasn't said thats a problem, so it must not be
    6) Bush needs to clean up his mess in Iraq. Kerry's plan is identical to Bush's, until it becomes a lot of hot air. Bush will clean it up, Kerry will make a bigger mess and then blame Bush for taking us there in the first place.

    Since when is Putin a bad guy? Russia may not be perfect, but they are not the communistic threat to world peace they were once deemed as anymore. Anyone can see that. They are working towards becoming a successful democracy, and are workign with the U.S and other countries for trade and other thigns. They aren't the bad guys. After their latest fiasco with Islamic terrorists taking over a school and killing childen is it any wonder that they support Bush? Any non-biased observer can see that Bush will not back down against terrorists just to meet the demmands of other countries. Wish it were that way for both candidates......

    As for Iran supporting Bush, thats based on that he is trying to incentivize them to quit making nuclear weapons, him and many other countries. Kerry will do more or less the same thing, except make negotians harder by pressuring human rights laws that will make cooperation difficult. So if you're worried about Iran's nuclear capabilities, then you want Bush in office. Human righs issues are important, but world peace takes precedence.

    Kerry on the other hand is endorsed by Arafat based on the fact that he will be better for the Palestinian cause agaist Isreal by being soft, and not being willing to stop the violence of terrorists. He will be a good lapdog for everyone, including terrorist nations.


    Who the hell are you to tell people what they can and can't post?

  9. #9
    RockSolid's Avatar
    RockSolid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jerzey, USA
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    And I never called you brainwashed........do you have another username that you post under on this board?
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda.
    Obviously you said I was brainwashed.

  10. #10
    RockSolid's Avatar
    RockSolid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jerzey, USA
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    Also, Arafat is a terrorist, and supports terrorism. It would be like Kaddafi supporting Kerry, its not a good sign when terrorists countries back you because you would be better for their cause. Check out the thread I posted about Kerry being endorsed by Arafat, see for yourself the reasons for his support.
    i dont care if Arafat is a terrorist, he had never been a terrorist in America, never targeted America, he and his "groups" have claimed their war is only with Israel, WITHIN, Israel. Again you care about a person that hates Israel, instead of worrying about America and its protection.

    Worry about terrorists targeting America, and no, terrorism is not terrorism. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka arent going to come to the US to attack the US, the IRA isnt going to attack the US, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad will not attack the US. But you will see Zionists jump and say "nonono they will, they will attack the US" I unlike alot of my fellow Americans, dont buy into their propoganda.

  11. #11
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    i dont care if Arafat is a terrorist, he had never been a terrorist in America, never targeted America, he and his "groups" have claimed their war is only with Israel, WITHIN, Israel. Again you care about a person that hates Israel, instead of worrying about America and its protection.

    Worry about terrorists targeting America, and no, terrorism is not terrorism. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka arent going to come to the US to attack the US, the IRA isnt going to attack the US, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad will not attack the US. But you will see Zionists jump and say "nonono they will, they will attack the US" I unlike alot of my fellow Americans, dont buy into their propoganda.
    And if we would keep our noses out of the mideast....Alqaeda would leave us alone.

  12. #12
    Tock's Avatar
    Tock is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    7,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Badgerman
    And if we would keep our noses out of the mideast....Alqaeda would leave us alone.


    Aside from "Tock is a handsome fellow,"
    truer words were never posted.
    -Tock

  13. #13
    bignatt's Avatar
    bignatt is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in FL (former Masshole)
    Posts
    2,431
    I dislike Bush.....i guarentee he will bring the draft into play if he is re-elected

  14. #14
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by Tock
    Aside from "Tock is a handsome fellow,"
    truer words were never posted.
    -Tock
    Thank you.....

    And I'm sure you're a handsome fella.......at least to somebody

  15. #15
    Odin is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    627
    How could anyone on a Steroid site support a president that's making the most radical laws agains steroids . You support a guy that want's your a** badly in jail. Do you guys even juice?? If so does this not bother you at all? Bush supporters please give me your take on his recent ban on all pro-hormones? Do you agree. If so you might want to quit this site and join a politcal forum, or an all-natural forum. Kerry is not good Bush is just worst. Hell Bush Get's in again and starts popping UG's then me might be paying $300 for 10ml of test before its done. Steroids today are looked at worst than Cocaine or Meth to the bush camp.

  16. #16
    zOaib's Avatar
    zOaib is offline VET
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Kingdom Of Heaven !
    Posts
    2,739
    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    i dont care if Arafat is a terrorist, he had never been a terrorist in America, never targeted America, he and his "groups" have claimed their war is only with Israel, WITHIN, Israel. Again you care about a person that hates Israel, instead of worrying about America and its protection.

    Worry about terrorists targeting America, and no, terrorism is not terrorism. The Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka arent going to come to the US to attack the US, the IRA isnt going to attack the US, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad will not attack the US. But you will see Zionists jump and say "nonono they will, they will attack the US" I unlike alot of my fellow Americans, dont buy into their propoganda.
    THERE U GO BRO ! just like u i dont want our America paying through the blood of our soldiers and fighting a PROXY war run by the zionists who live far away in the middle east ..............

  17. #17
    Tock's Avatar
    Tock is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    7,103
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tock
    Aside from "Tock is a handsome fellow,"
    truer words were never posted.
    -Tock


    Quote Originally Posted by Badgerman
    Thank you.....

    And I'm sure you're a handsome fella.......at least to somebody

    Hah . . . no one -- man, woman, or beast -- is immune from my irrestible charm . . .

  18. #18
    Will Power's Avatar
    Will Power is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    546
    Quote Originally Posted by RockSolid
    i dont care if Arafat is a terrorist, he had never been a terrorist in America, never targeted America, he and his "groups" have claimed their war is only with Israel, WITHIN, Israel.
    why dont you explain to us :
    The murder of Athletes in Minich Olympics.
    Numerous airliner hijackings around the world.
    The Cruise ship hijacking and killings.
    Cross border atacks into Israel from Lebanon.

    these sure dont seem to fit your interpretation do they?

  19. #19
    RockSolid's Avatar
    RockSolid is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jerzey, USA
    Posts
    570
    Quote Originally Posted by Will Power
    why dont you explain to us :
    The murder of Athletes in Minich Olympics.
    Numerous airliner hijackings around the world.
    The Cruise ship hijacking and killings.
    Cross border atacks into Israel from Lebanon.

    these sure dont seem to fit your interpretation do they?
    No they dont.

  20. #20
    skinjob's Avatar
    skinjob is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    219
    [QUOTE=UrbanLegend]Lot of flaming and profanity already in this thread......no wonder they're looking to close this forum down. Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda, please keep your opinions to your self if you're going to present them the way you do.

    thats you told boy. o dear.

    1) We don't know for sure Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. And its not like we "let him get away...." If you're going to blameBush for what ground troops let happen, then you must credit Bush with capturing Saddam by that logic....

    er last time i checked the president is the commander in chief... unless of course that exempts him from what happens altogether as you seem to suggest. so let me see. he sends in the boys to fix a problem but he is not accountable if it goes tits up. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    2) We had our special forces there in the mountains with the Afghan soldiers. You cannot fit an army in those places. Besides, thats why we have special forces, is for situations like this. Kerry knows this too, he just pretends that if our army wasn't there, then we "outsourced" the job.

    so he never took the eye off the ball.

    3) You're blaming Bush for many other problems that are not related to him being in office. Gas prices went up when Clinton and others were in office, Enron took place under Clinton, it wasn't found out til Bush was in office......the fact that you blame Bush for 9-11 means you don't have a very good grasp of reality, plain and simple. The ecomonmy doesn't really have a lot to do with the president. The economy will improve no matter who is in office, Kerry might make it stumple a bit by raising taxes on businesses that are supplying jobs though......

    Former US federal crimes prosecutor, John Loftus: "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence."

    mmm. and the fact that the enron boss, a personal friend of the bush dynasty had little to do with anything. like funding. or anything like that. muhahahahhahahahaha muhahahahhaha
    mmm. yes. thats reassuring in the greatest democracy on earth - the president has not a lot to do with the economy. mmm. unless its the other guy in office. in which case... he DOES cos it may 'stumple' haw haw haw


    4) You think N.Korea has nukes? Then you must believe Iraq has WMD's, as there is more evidence pointing to the latter. Besides, if you're scared of N.Korea, then you need to keep Bush in office. Kerry wants to take China and everyone else out of the picture, and make it so we have to go at it alone, taking international pressure off of them to shape up.

    mmm thats comforting. obviously china and russia have nothing to worry about then and neither do we..cos you reckon that the north koreans are a bunch of nuke-free jessies.

    5) Iran has international pressure on it as well, so instead, why don't you make a big deal out Pakistan and India getting nukes? Oh yeah, because Kerry hasn't said thats a problem, so it must not be

    er. who sold nukes to india and then pakistan.. thats pakistan the military dictatorship.

    6) Bush needs to clean up his mess in Iraq. Kerry's plan is identical to Bush's, until it becomes a lot of hot air. Bush will clean it up, Kerry will make a bigger mess and then blame Bush for taking us there in the first place.

    mmm. aye, lets clean up iraq. i just got a call from basra. my mate tom (2 para y bas) phones up to book in for me to finish his tattoo two weeks hence. i told him tom you c__t make sure you dont get any f_ck_n holes in it chap. hes like no worries chap, want any souvenirs? how about a kids leg or womans scalp? some mess.


    Since when is Putin a bad guy? Russia may not be perfect, but they are not the communistic threat to world peace they were once deemed as anymore. Anyone can see that. They are working towards becoming a successful democracy, and are workign with the U.S and other countries for trade and other thigns. They aren't the bad guys. After their latest fiasco with Islamic terrorists taking over a school and killing childen is it any wonder that they support Bush? Any non-biased observer can see that Bush will not back down against terrorists just to meet the demmands of other countries. Wish it were that way for both candidates......

    mmm.. trade and other thigns. mmmmmm. crushing logic in there. the ex-reds are goodies not baddies. cos they want they to buy stuff now. like us. hoo-rah

    As for Iran supporting Bush, thats based on that he is trying to incentivize them to quit making nuclear weapons, him and many other countries. Kerry will do more or less the same thing, except make negotians harder by pressuring human rights laws that will make cooperation difficult. So if you're worried about Iran's nuclear capabilities, then you want Bush in office. Human righs issues are important, but world peace takes precedence.

    how utterly naive. and how utterly banal.
    theres just one problem about the human rights issue. world peace, now what is that? when has that ever been? i see very little world peace before o since bush. some might even suggest, o horror, that there is yet more war. hahaha.

    (i dont believe anyone has any real rights in reality - much that i wish it were so that we all lived in world where our paper-written rights actually meant something).

    heaven help us all.
    Long Live Granny D.

  21. #21
    Odin is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    627
    I really feel their is not a threat of terroristism here in the US at all, don't you think they would have did somthing after 2 huge wars if they really had the resources too?? Saddam's son said" If you think 9-11 was bad just wait until you attack us then see what we do" Clearly Saddam boy's or Saddom him self at this stage would have had more money and resources to pull somthing off than some rag tag cave dwellers in Afganistan. OK they admit they did it. SO WHAT?? They would admit anything they could to look powerful. The only way they did it was if we let them do it, to make us 1. Get a excuse to get into a war with the arab nations, 2. To generate money for anti-terrorist group's and or military finacial increases. Always remember one thing! If something goes wrong first look at who benifits the most. That's called Motive, and this is how the find the guilty in court. If this terrorist group was smart enough to pull of this 9-11 thing, they would be smart enough to know it would hurt them more than help them. Nothing has ever happend since 9-11 and you know they are trying their best too. In fact Our country is more at risk from bored white nerds looking to make virsus on computers then terrorist's For anyone who is willing to flame me first answer this question! How could the plane they claimed hit the pentigon only cause a 20 foot hole and leave NO Plain parts behind? Joke! Don't you think if say.. firefighters in say a small town got paid for every fire they put out and money was low they would say.. start fires.? In fact their are some that do. If this group was a real threat and really had somthing worth talking about we would leave them alone just like we leave North Korea alone. So the word out on the street or should i say world, is get a nuke they will leave you alone. We have yet to attack a country who has had one. So to some it up don't worry about terrorists, worry about somthing more likely, like getting nailed with control substance on Bush's new extreme laws!

    [QUOTE=skinjob]
    Quote Originally Posted by UrbanLegend
    Lot of flaming and profanity already in this thread......no wonder they're looking to close this forum down. Rocksolid you are very misinformed and clearly only listen to propoganda, please keep your opinions to your self if you're going to present them the way you do.

    thats you told boy. o dear.

    1) We don't know for sure Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. And its not like we "let him get away...." If you're going to blameBush for what ground troops let happen, then you must credit Bush with capturing Saddam by that logic....

    er last time i checked the president is the commander in chief... unless of course that exempts him from what happens altogether as you seem to suggest. so let me see. he sends in the boys to fix a problem but he is not accountable if it goes tits up. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    2) We had our special forces there in the mountains with the Afghan soldiers. You cannot fit an army in those places. Besides, thats why we have special forces, is for situations like this. Kerry knows this too, he just pretends that if our army wasn't there, then we "outsourced" the job.

    so he never took the eye off the ball.

    3) You're blaming Bush for many other problems that are not related to him being in office. Gas prices went up when Clinton and others were in office, Enron took place under Clinton, it wasn't found out til Bush was in office......the fact that you blame Bush for 9-11 means you don't have a very good grasp of reality, plain and simple. The ecomonmy doesn't really have a lot to do with the president. The economy will improve no matter who is in office, Kerry might make it stumple a bit by raising taxes on businesses that are supplying jobs though......

    Former US federal crimes prosecutor, John Loftus: "The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence."

    mmm. and the fact that the enron boss, a personal friend of the bush dynasty had little to do with anything. like funding. or anything like that. muhahahahhahahahaha muhahahahhaha
    mmm. yes. thats reassuring in the greatest democracy on earth - the president has not a lot to do with the economy. mmm. unless its the other guy in office. in which case... he DOES cos it may 'stumple' haw haw haw


    4) You think N.Korea has nukes? Then you must believe Iraq has WMD's, as there is more evidence pointing to the latter. Besides, if you're scared of N.Korea, then you need to keep Bush in office. Kerry wants to take China and everyone else out of the picture, and make it so we have to go at it alone, taking international pressure off of them to shape up.

    mmm thats comforting. obviously china and russia have nothing to worry about then and neither do we..cos you reckon that the north koreans are a bunch of nuke-free jessies.

    5) Iran has international pressure on it as well, so instead, why don't you make a big deal out Pakistan and India getting nukes? Oh yeah, because Kerry hasn't said thats a problem, so it must not be

    er. who sold nukes to india and then pakistan.. thats pakistan the military dictatorship.

    6) Bush needs to clean up his mess in Iraq. Kerry's plan is identical to Bush's, until it becomes a lot of hot air. Bush will clean it up, Kerry will make a bigger mess and then blame Bush for taking us there in the first place.

    mmm. aye, lets clean up iraq. i just got a call from basra. my mate tom (2 para y bas) phones up to book in for me to finish his tattoo two weeks hence. i told him tom you c__t make sure you dont get any f_ck_n holes in it chap. hes like no worries chap, want any souvenirs? how about a kids leg or womans scalp? some mess.


    Since when is Putin a bad guy? Russia may not be perfect, but they are not the communistic threat to world peace they were once deemed as anymore. Anyone can see that. They are working towards becoming a successful democracy, and are workign with the U.S and other countries for trade and other thigns. They aren't the bad guys. After their latest fiasco with Islamic terrorists taking over a school and killing childen is it any wonder that they support Bush? Any non-biased observer can see that Bush will not back down against terrorists just to meet the demmands of other countries. Wish it were that way for both candidates......

    mmm.. trade and other thigns. mmmmmm. crushing logic in there. the ex-reds are goodies not baddies. cos they want they to buy stuff now. like us. hoo-rah

    As for Iran supporting Bush, thats based on that he is trying to incentivize them to quit making nuclear weapons, him and many other countries. Kerry will do more or less the same thing, except make negotians harder by pressuring human rights laws that will make cooperation difficult. So if you're worried about Iran's nuclear capabilities, then you want Bush in office. Human righs issues are important, but world peace takes precedence.

    how utterly naive. and how utterly banal.
    theres just one problem about the human rights issue. world peace, now what is that? when has that ever been? i see very little world peace before o since bush. some might even suggest, o horror, that there is yet more war. hahaha.

    (i dont believe anyone has any real rights in reality - much that i wish it were so that we all lived in world where our paper-written rights actually meant something).

    heaven help us all.
    Long Live Granny D.

  22. #22
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    November 1, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - Osama bin Laden warned in his October Surprise video that he will be closely monitoring the state-by-state election returns in tomorrow's presidential race — and will spare any state that votes against President Bush from being attacked, according to a new analysis of his statement.
    The respected Middle East Media Research Institute, which monitors and translates Arabic media and Internet sites, said initial translations of a key portion of bin Laden's video rant to the American people Friday night missed an ostentatious bid by the Saudi-born terror master to divide American voters and tilt the election towards Democratic challenger John Kerry.

    MEMRI said radical Islamist commentators monitored over the Internet this past weekend also interpreted the key passage of bin Laden's diatribe to mean that any U.S. state that votes to elect Bush on Tuesday will be considered an "enemy" and any state that votes for Kerry has "chosen to make peace with us."

    The statement in question is when bin Laden said on the tape: "Your security is up to you, and any state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."

    That sentence followed a lengthy passage in the video in which bin Laden launches personal attacks on the president.

    Yigal Carmon, president of MEMRI, said bin Laden used the Arabic term "ay-wilaya" to refer to a "state" in that sentence.

    That term "specifically refers to an American state, like Tennessee," Carmon said, adding that if bin Laden were referring to a "country" he would have used the Arabic word "dawla."

    MEMRI also translated an analysis of bin Laden's statement from the Islamist Web site al-Qal'a, well known for posting al-Qaeda messages, which agreed that bin Laden's use of the word "ay-wilaya" was meant as a "warning to every U.S state separately."

    "It means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president, it means that it chose to fight us and we will consider it an enemy to us, and any state that will vote against Bush, it means that it chose to make peace with us and we will not characterize it as an enemy," the Web site said, according to MEMRI's translation.

  23. #23
    Tock's Avatar
    Tock is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth
    Posts
    7,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Jdawg50
    November 1, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - Osama bin Laden warned in his October Surprise video that he will be closely monitoring the state-by-state election returns in tomorrow's presidential race — and will spare any state that votes against President Bush from being attacked, according to a new analysis of his statement.
    Well, that pretty well exempts the west coast.
    I wonder if he'll target rich and famous TV preachers who are most supportive of Israel, like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in Virginia, D. James Kennedy in Florida, and that gay preacher who runs the PTL satelite network (I forget his name).
    Of course, Texas is gonna go for Bush, no question about that. And being Bush's home state, I suppose the coastal Texas cities would be likely targets--probably Houston would be next on his list.

    Well, if the feds are doing their jobs right, we'll be ok . . . if not, well, may as well get ready to pull up a chair and watch another round of fireworks on TV. As a recent Texas Governor once quipped during an election campaign, "If you know you're gonna get raped, you may as well lean back and enjoy it." (Gov. Bill Clements) . . .

    Oh well . . .

    -Tock

  24. #24
    Odin is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    627
    Really and who is making these claims?? If Osama was a real threat they would have raised the Alert level, For all you know Osama is locked up right now and the Goverment is filming him? Like I said in my previous post when somthing HAPPENS BAD look who benifits the most. Ok in this case George W. Bush happens to benifit the most from this news. This whole terror thing is just a big distraction from an issue they don't like talking about " The Economy". I take this message of yours about as serious as I take those Fake beheading with no blood squirting out when the knive went through his throat which is laughable to any Doctor or anyone over a 100 IQ. Were being distracted with terrorist lies to cover up somthing else. I mean are you guy's for real?? really scared? Nothing happened in 2 years, more people have died paying taxes for anti-terrorism than have died from it. I just wish the Republicans today could stay like Ronald Reagon. O and thanx for the Pro-Bush propaganda terrorist notice, Hmmm must be the 5000inth false warning.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jdawg50
    November 1, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - Osama bin Laden warned in his October Surprise video that he will be closely monitoring the state-by-state election returns in tomorrow's presidential race — and will spare any state that votes against President Bush from being attacked, according to a new analysis of his statement.
    The respected Middle East Media Research Institute, which monitors and translates Arabic media and Internet sites, said initial translations of a key portion of bin Laden's video rant to the American people Friday night missed an ostentatious bid by the Saudi-born terror master to divide American voters and tilt the election towards Democratic challenger John Kerry.

    MEMRI said radical Islamist commentators monitored over the Internet this past weekend also interpreted the key passage of bin Laden's diatribe to mean that any U.S. state that votes to elect Bush on Tuesday will be considered an "enemy" and any state that votes for Kerry has "chosen to make peace with us."

    The statement in question is when bin Laden said on the tape: "Your security is up to you, and any state that does not toy with our security automatically guarantees its own security."

    That sentence followed a lengthy passage in the video in which bin Laden launches personal attacks on the president.

    Yigal Carmon, president of MEMRI, said bin Laden used the Arabic term "ay-wilaya" to refer to a "state" in that sentence.

    That term "specifically refers to an American state, like Tennessee," Carmon said, adding that if bin Laden were referring to a "country" he would have used the Arabic word "dawla."

    MEMRI also translated an analysis of bin Laden's statement from the Islamist Web site al-Qal'a, well known for posting al-Qaeda messages, which agreed that bin Laden's use of the word "ay-wilaya" was meant as a "warning to every U.S state separately."

    "It means that any U.S. state that will choose to vote for the white thug Bush as president, it means that it chose to fight us and we will consider it an enemy to us, and any state that will vote against Bush, it means that it chose to make peace with us and we will not characterize it as an enemy," the Web site said, according to MEMRI's translation.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •