Do >>NOT<< look at these images

S
Posted By
Scotty
Oct 24, 2004
Views
2649
Replies
113
Status
Closed
http://mindprod.com/iraq.html

Do NOT look at these images

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 24, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:39:27 GMT, "Scotty"
wrote:

http://mindprod.com/iraq.html

Do NOT look at these images

Good, we will not look at those images.
Firstly nobody here is interested in iraq photos
and secondly, is you are trying to launch a trojan,
fuck off to the childrens playground. This ng is for
grown-ups.

Dave
K
Kingdom
Oct 24, 2004
DD wrote in news::

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:39:27 GMT, "Scotty"
wrote:

http://mindprod.com/iraq.html

Do NOT look at these images

Good, we will not look at those images.
Firstly nobody here is interested in iraq photos
and secondly, is you are trying to launch a trojan,
fuck off to the childrens playground. This ng is for
grown-ups.

Dave

I looked, I think the the whole world should look and ask why?


Youth is wasted on the young!
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
The reason why is our continued policy of insanity of killing innocent people because someone else killed innocent people here. Party A kills Party B so we retaliate on Party C, who then attacks party D, who gets pissed off and attacks party E, ad infinitum. Scapegoating is the path of least resistance, and gives the illusion that something is actually being done. If gas on the fire only increases the flames, we must’ve not used enough.

To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these [terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.

Peadge :-\

"Kingdom" wrote in message
DD wrote in news::

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:39:27 GMT, "Scotty"
wrote:

http://mindprod.com/iraq.html

Do NOT look at these images

Good, we will not look at those images.
Firstly nobody here is interested in iraq photos
and secondly, is you are trying to launch a trojan,
fuck off to the childrens playground. This ng is for
grown-ups.

Dave

I looked, I think the the whole world should look and ask why?

Youth is wasted on the young!
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
Peadge wrote:

The reason why is our continued policy of insanity of killing innocent people because someone else killed innocent people here. Party A kills Party B so we retaliate on Party C, who then attacks party D, who gets pissed off and attacks party E, ad infinitum. Scapegoating is the path of least resistance, and gives the illusion that something is actually being done. If gas on the fire only increases the flames, we must’ve not used enough.
To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these [terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.
Peadge :-\
/snip/

Youth is wasted on the young!
So in other words, it ‘s okay to stand by and do nothing while people are fed alive into a wood chipper? While people are being tortured, starved, raped, gassed gunned down and put in mass graves? That’s all right and the person who tried (and mostly succeeded) to stop it is a terrible person for refusing to do what the rest of the "civilized" world was doing about it, NOTHING? Do I have that right?

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight. But that’s okay, right? Since it’s Bush and he’s a baaad man.

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 24, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:54:42 -0700, "Peadge"
To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these [terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.
Peadge :-\

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, yĆ²u are two faced. You and your kind are supporting those killing bastards. Only listen to your kind:-( The only critisism is against Bush:-( Those bastards even kidnapped French people although France did not support Bush. If it was not for terrorist supporters like you, the world would have been a much better place. I wish you could understand my language, then I could have expressed how I feel about people like you.

Dave
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 24, 2004
"Peadge" wrote:

Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.

LOL.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 24, 2004
DD wrote:

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, y
DT
deco_time
Oct 24, 2004
In news:DD typed:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:54:42 -0700, "Peadge"
To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these
[terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can
donate it.

Peadge :-\

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, y
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
deco_time wrote:

In news:DD typed:

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:54:42 -0700, "Peadge"

To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these
[terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can
donate it.

Peadge :-\

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, yĆ²u are two faced. You and your kind are supporting those killing bastards. Only listen to your kind:-( The only critisism is against Bush:-( Those bastards even kidnapped French people although France did not support Bush. If it was not for terrorist supporters like you, the world would have been a much better place. I wish you could understand my language, then I could have expressed how I feel about people like you.

You mean to tell me all theses little kids in the photos were terrorist? I think you’re mistaken, It’s theses kids father and brothers who now have become potential terrorist.
Terrorism is a mindset, which you cannot fight with guns; yes you can fight terrorist with guns, the way it is done now is the wrong way to go about it, but fighting terrorism with guns is like fighting fire with fuel.

War is messy. Sometimes the innocent are killed. But Saddam (with the sanctions)was responsible for the deaths of 15,000 kids under the age of 5 a year according to the UN. And that’s just a fraction of the killing and mayhem he was committing.

The alternative to fighting against it was to stand by and do nothing, which is what the world was doing (and many, like France profited from it). I don’t think the Pacifist view you espouse is morally defensible. Do you have a solution that no one has thought of? (Don’t say "diplomacy" PLEASE)

Things in Iraq are better with the potential to get much better. You don’t see it in the media, which is very biased, but many, perhaps most people there appreciate what the US has done.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 24, 2004
edjh wrote:

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight.

The destruction of buildings was much worse during the invasion. The car bombings, civil unrest and beheadings that you are so blithely ignoring were never a factor before. The torture of prisoners continued under US occupation, as it had under Saddam. The civil unrest in Iraq has no end in sight, and US troops are there indefinately. "Insurgents" are becoming a growing threat, so much so that even our own troops have begun to desert. Iraq is an unequivocal disaster.

More of our babies die in Iraq every day, and you pontificate about the morality of acting. feh. Our actions with this tar baby were predicted by our leadership and the entire world community warned us not to do it. Now we eat it.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
DT
deco_time
Oct 24, 2004
In news:edjh typed:
So in other words, it ‘s okay to stand by and do nothing while people are fed alive into a wood chipper? While people are being tortured, starved, raped, gassed gunned down and put in mass graves? That’s all right and the person who tried (and mostly succeeded) to stop it is a terrible person for refusing to do what the rest of the "civilized" world was doing about it, NOTHING? Do I have that right?
Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight. But that’s okay, right? Since it’s Bush and he’s a baaad man.

Ho, I know Iknow Let’s go kill all the Somalian.

It’s for their own good

For humanitarian reason, it’s ok.

Let’s throw in all the Palestinian too, for good mesure.

I know I know

Canadians are cold in the winter

Let’s kill them too

for humanitarian reason, they’ll thank us later.
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:

edjh wrote:

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight.

The destruction of buildings was much worse during the invasion.

What about the destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure under Saddam? Yeah, buildings were destroyed. That happens in war. Our guys have been very careful in trying to minimize the damage. We’ve even refrained for leveling a few mosques which would have been fully justified.

The car
bombings, civil unrest and beheadings that you are so blithely ignoring

What gives you the idea that I am ignoring it? You don’t know what you are talking about.

were never a factor before. The torture of prisoners continued under US occupation, as it had under Saddam.

That is plain bull. The "torture" by some US soldiers was nothing compared to what Saddam was doing. Not even in the same universe. And those Americans are being punished for it, as they should be.

The civil unrest in Iraq has no end

So you say. I doubt you are correct. The civil unrest is only a small fraction of what most of the people in Iraq are doing. And much of that "civil unrest" is being done by foreign fighters who have been come to Iraq to cause trouble.

in sight, and US troops are there indefinately.

Nonsense.

"Insurgents" are
becoming a growing threat,

Actually they are being put down rather efficiently.

so much so that even our own troops have
begun to desert. Iraq is an unequivocal disaster.

Again, you don’t know what you are talking about. How many deserters have there been? Three? You’re just parroting the media bull. The truth is that Iraq was a disaster under Saddam.
More of our babies die in Iraq every day,

I suppose you are calling the soldiers "babies". How condescending. The truth is that the casualties in this war have been rather low compared to other wars.

and you pontificate about the
morality of acting.

YOU accuse ME of pontificating???!!!!!

feh. Our actions with this tar baby were predicted
by our leadership and the entire world community warned us not to do it.

Untrue.

Now we eat it.

So you DO think it’s okay to feed people alive into a wood chipper? Rape rooms in dungeons are fine by you? Gassing entire villages is no big deal? Just want to be clear on that.
The Doormouse


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 24, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:07:21 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

DD wrote:

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, yĀ•u are two faced. You and your kind are supporting those killing bastards.

Your argument is essentially, "those who do not agree with me 100% are against me". That is not a viewpoint that can be supported in a world of many nations.

The Doormouse

"This is someone who lived in Iraq for 30 years, someone who is immensely respected, someone who is doing her level best to help the country. It shows you the type of people we are up against." —British Prime Minister Tony Blair, on the abduction by gunmen in Iraq, of aid worker Margaret Hassan, 58, who is married to an Iraqi and has dual British and Iraqi citizenship.

Dave
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
Don’t be putting word in my mouth. My tongue will soon tire of your limited vocabulary.

People fed into a wood chipper? I think you’ve mistaken Fargo, North Dakota for Iraq.

I was against Reagan and Bush giving Saddam the means to make WMDs. I was against sending him super computers and chemical reagents. I was against sending him deadly biological components. Yet even after he gassed the Kurds, "our" policy was to just send him more. Remember when Saddam told Bush Sr. that he was planning on invading Kuwait? Bush told him it was really none of our concern and that we would not interfere. What if Bush would’ve been honest? Imagine the outcome of that. If Bush told Saddam that he would be bitch-slapped six ways from Sunday, this entire fiasco as well as the original Gulf War would never have happened.

But our continued policy of shoring up brutal dictators and dictatorships…Noriega, Pinochet, Duvalier, Hussein, etc., is the likely root cause of our woes. Since the mid 50’s we’ve overthrown numerous democracies and inserted military dictatorships, all in the name of preserving access to natural resources and cheap labor. And this has been a bipartisan policy. Remember pointing our accusing finger at Pol Pot’s genocide while we were doing the same thing in East Timor?

It was also Bush Sr. who illegally lobbied Congress to allow the dumping of obsolete, toxic, outlawed pharmaceuticals onto unsuspecting Third World countries. Drugs that have been proven to cause disease, death, deformity, and birth defects…so much so that they were banned in our own country. Being the former director of Eli Lilly, Bush couldn’t let stock holders "eat" these toxic chemicals. Sell them to illiterates in the Third World and let them eat ’em. Sure, Saddam used toxic chemicals against his own people, but at least he didn’t send them a bill afterwards!

George Dubya may just be trying to clean up the "Frankenstein" mess Reagan and his father created when our big fear was Iran. But as far as things getting worse, as you claim, things were actually getting better. In case you haven’t noticed, UN inspections worked! Saddam had no more WMDs. But
G.W.Bush, after a feeble attempt to find Osama after giving him a 2-month
head start, decided it’s a good idea to cut the head off the proverbial Hydra [Saddam]. At least we knew where he was. Now we have dozens of little Saddam-wanna-be’s who are virtually invisible to us. Innocent Iraqis have a hard time rationalizing their loved ones being killed by anyone. I seriously doubt they’re saying, "At least my baby was killed by Americans and not Saddam!" Saddam was in his final moments in history anyway. ("I’m meeeelllllttttiiinnngggg!") It may’ve been better to watch him die under the collective microscope of the world while tightening sanctions, increasing UN inspections, and garnering world support than to single-handedly create all these off-shoot terrorist organizations that didn’t exist beforehand.

I’m not saying that George Dubya hasn’t done any good things. It takes a special person to make Dan Quayle look like Hawking or Einstein. And the increased hopes of young children who have witnessed the lowering of the bar to such an easy level. Anyone can be president! You don’t have to do well in school. You don’t have to complete things you start…National Guard Duty. You can run every company you’ve ever touched into the ground. None of it matters. Hopes are high.

I’m not saying stand by and do nothing. I’m just saying that our goal shouldn’t be to push Saddam out of the way just to take his place and continue the brutality on the innocent. If we’re going to do the right thing, Let’s cease and desist on all the wrong things first. Trying to move in opposite directions at the same time is pointless. I’m not saying Saddam wasn’t an terribly evil person. I’m just saying that the same blood that is on his hands also drips from our accusing finger. Trying to cover this blood with more innocent blood, or even mixing it with the blood of the guilty does not make it go away.

You should pay more attention and watch less Fox News. Try the Daily Show for fake news. And lay off the tap water.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
Peadge wrote:

The reason why is our continued policy of insanity of killing innocent people because someone else killed innocent people here. Party A kills
Party
B so we retaliate on Party C, who then attacks party D, who gets pissed
off
and attacks party E, ad infinitum. Scapegoating is the path of least resistance, and gives the illusion that something is actually being
done. If
gas on the fire only increases the flames, we must’ve not used enough.
To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these [terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.
Peadge :-\
/snip/

Youth is wasted on the young!
So in other words, it ‘s okay to stand by and do nothing while people are fed alive into a wood chipper? While people are being tortured, starved, raped, gassed gunned down and put in mass graves? That’s all right and the person who tried (and mostly succeeded) to stop it is a terrible person for refusing to do what the rest of the "civilized" world was doing about it, NOTHING? Do I have that right?
Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight. But that’s okay, right? Since it’s Bush and he’s a baaad man.

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
Re: "The alternative to fighting against it was to stand by and do nothing"

Anytime an argument is broken down to an either-or scenario, the person arguing has run out of ammunition. Two dimensional solutions do not work in a four dimensional world.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
deco_time wrote:

In news:DD typed:

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:54:42 -0700, "Peadge"

To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these
[terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can
donate it.

Peadge :-\

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, y
DT
deco_time
Oct 24, 2004
In news:edjh typed:
deco_time wrote:

War is messy. Sometimes the innocent are killed. But Saddam (with the sanctions)was responsible for the deaths of 15,000 kids under the age of 5 a year according to the UN. And that’s just a fraction of the killing and mayhem he was committing.

The alternative to fighting against it was to stand by and do nothing, which is what the world was doing (and many, like France profited from it). I don’t think the Pacifist view you espouse is morally defensible. Do you have a solution that no one has thought of? (Don’t say "diplomacy" PLEASE)

Things in Iraq are better with the potential to get much better. You don’t see it in the media, which is very biased, but many, perhaps most people there appreciate what the US has done.

There you go, apposing label, I now have a "pacifist" view. My view is no more "pacifist" than your views "criminal". I just think that the current course of action is not only NOT morally defensible, but it also gonna yield opposite result to what the objective are; of course, if we take as objective the end of terrorism and the liberation of oppressed populations.

Of course, I will refrain to mention that Bush initial excuse to invade Irak had nothing to do with terrorism or oppressed population, heck, even the real reason to go, getting cheap oil, has failed.
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
Sean Hannity, is that you?

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
The Doormouse wrote:

edjh wrote:

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight.

The destruction of buildings was much worse during the invasion.

What about the destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure under Saddam? Yeah, buildings were destroyed. That happens in war. Our guys have been very careful in trying to minimize the damage. We’ve even refrained for leveling a few mosques which would have been fully justified.
The car
bombings, civil unrest and beheadings that you are so blithely ignoring

What gives you the idea that I am ignoring it? You don’t know what you are talking about.

were never a factor before. The torture of prisoners continued under US occupation, as it had under Saddam.

That is plain bull. The "torture" by some US soldiers was nothing compared to what Saddam was doing. Not even in the same universe. And those Americans are being punished for it, as they should be.
The civil unrest in Iraq has no end

So you say. I doubt you are correct. The civil unrest is only a small fraction of what most of the people in Iraq are doing. And much of that "civil unrest" is being done by foreign fighters who have been come to Iraq to cause trouble.

in sight, and US troops are there indefinately.

Nonsense.

"Insurgents" are
becoming a growing threat,

Actually they are being put down rather efficiently.

so much so that even our own troops have
begun to desert. Iraq is an unequivocal disaster.

Again, you don’t know what you are talking about. How many deserters have there been? Three? You’re just parroting the media bull. The truth is that Iraq was a disaster under Saddam.
More of our babies die in Iraq every day,

I suppose you are calling the soldiers "babies". How condescending. The truth is that the casualties in this war have been rather low compared to other wars.

and you pontificate about the
morality of acting.

YOU accuse ME of pontificating???!!!!!

feh. Our actions with this tar baby were predicted
by our leadership and the entire world community warned us not to do it.

Untrue.

Now we eat it.

So you DO think it’s okay to feed people alive into a wood chipper? Rape rooms in dungeons are fine by you? Gassing entire villages is no big deal? Just want to be clear on that.
The Doormouse


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
deco_time wrote:

In news:edjh typed:

deco_time wrote:
/snip/

Sorry, your post did sound very Pacifist. In any event I think you are completely wrong.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
Peadge wrote:

Sean Hannity, is that you?

Peadge šŸ™‚

/snip/

Sorry. I really don’t think this is a subject to make a joke of.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
The Wasp Nest (An Analogy):

A bunch of people are camping at a state park –families with small children, retirees with motor homes, teenagers with skateboards. The rangers warn every body that there is a big wasp nest in a nearby tree but they’re watching it and trying not to bother it too much. He says that wasps can be very dangerous and can even kill some people, especially the young, the old and those who are allergic. Knowing this, parents warn their children to stay away from the nest while some prudent parents take turns watching the nest. The retirees close the screen doors and the teenagers challenge each other to see who can get the closest without getting stung. in the vicinity are also numerous hornets’ nests, yellow jackets, etc, but this single wasp nest has managed to bogart all current attention. Everything is OK until this cocky Texan in his Airstream swaggers over and says "My daddy showed me how to throw rocks at wasp nests back in Texas. Hey Dick, gimme that big ol’ rock right there. Lemme show these folks how it’s done."

The mighty Texan sails the rock clean through the wasp nest on the first throw, much to the dismay of the wasps. Soon, the wasps retaliate by stinging anything and everything within range. But fear not. The Texan had the foresight to bring his gun. He begins shooting at the wasps as they buzz by his head and accidentally shoots some innocent people who themselves are trying to flee from the wasp attack. However, he does manage to shoot down the rest of the wasp nest, but not without more innocent casualties.

The wasps became so discombobulated they could not regroup as a single entity. So in their fractured state, each group made it’s own nest and vowed vengeance against all rocks and those who would throw them. But, alas! Where are these new nests? In our panic, and focused attempt to destroy the single well-known, much watched large wasp nest, no one paid any attention to find where the other wasps had gone to make new nests. These cunning creatures had gone covert. They remained hidden, perhaps in the chthonic realm, poised to strike at any moment.

Some say things are better now that the nest is gone. Others miss their loved ones. Some say that they would’ve eventually gotten stung anyway, it was just a matter of time. The Texan says he will find the other wasp nests and do the same thing all over again. He guaran-damn-tees it!

Ya’all sleep tight, now, ya hear?

Peadge šŸ™‚

"DD" wrote in message
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:54:42 -0700, "Peadge"
To keep this thread on topic to the newsgroup, maybe we should use our Photoshop skills to replace the limbs, faces, etc. of these [terrorist] victims. Bush has at least one extra face…maybe he can donate it.
Peadge :-\

would the world have been better, safer, without people like Bush, who do not fall on their knees in front of terrorists like you do? No, y
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
I agree, Sean Hannity is a joke. I apologize. That was low. But humor is often a matter of perspective.

Peadge šŸ˜®

"edjh" wrote in message
Peadge wrote:

Sean Hannity, is that you?

Peadge šŸ™‚

/snip/

Sorry. I really don’t think this is a subject to make a joke of.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 24, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:40:20 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

Ya’all sleep tight, now, ya hear?

Peadge šŸ™‚

‘kay, o’kay Peadge:-)
I did deserve a much more harsh answer then this. You accused someone else of having a limited vocabulary, and that could have being said to me as well, because English is not my home language.
(I can talk four languages, but there is of course a difference between talking and discussing:-)
The reason for my attack is because I live in a city (and country) where, if I walk down the street now after dark, any further then to only the cafe over the street, I must carry a gun. Carry a gun or the wasps will attack. A country where murders and hi-jacks are every days events. A country where inocent people get murdered and beheaded for the sake of muti (witch medicine ((wrd)) ).

And we hate this kind of living. Hijackers have tried to hijack me. In less then six week apart, two break-ins in my car for the sake of a radio. I am lucky. Other people can tell weird stories. This is a place where you dare not to stop for a hitchiker. I stopped for two ladies with a small child at eleven at night, at been attack by men hiding in the bushes. I got away. Even saved my car:-)

The world is sick. My heart goes out to an Palestinian girl with her baby sister or brother in her hands running over the street with blood on their faces. So do I feel about Iraqi women and children. So do I feel about woman and children in my own country fleeing from the wasps.

Peace Peadge:-)

Dave
E
edjh
Oct 24, 2004
Peadge wrote:

You left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

__________________________________

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
You’re right. I just get a little peeved when others twist my words around or "put words in my mouth" and reduce everything to an unreal 2-dimensional plane. For instance, you claiming "me and my kind" support "these killing bastards." I don’t support killing of any kind. I don’t even know what "my kind" means. When someone says there are only two choices, I also find that offensive to the discussion. And yes, much of my concern is for Bush’s lame way of dealing with this. And his Father’s policy…and Reagan’s. They are the ones who built Saddam up giving him the weapons to do the terrible things he did. But none of that mattered as long as we had access to cheap oil. Rather than giving him the means to do these things they could’ve taken them away.

But let’s take a look at your situation, which I’m sure you do not deserve. Is this not exactly what I’ve been discussing? Is this not person A attacking person B, person B retaliating by attacking person C, who then attacks person D? I admire you for having the conscience not to attack back but to flee with your life and luckily, some possessions. I just don’t think we can teach people to not kill innocent children by killing innocent children. If person A attacks person B, and person B retaliates, shouldn’t person B retaliate against Person A? Doesn’t that make much more sense? Why take it out on others?

And about this muti, or witch medicine. Do you live in South Africa? Why does murder have to happen for this medicine? Is it in short supply? Is it considered illegal? Here in the United States we have a similar war. It’s called the War on Drugs. It is a war on drugs that are derived from Nature. Plant based drugs mostly. We don’t like these drugs because they are not patentable. We prefer to use drugs that are derived from petroleum. Petroleum-based drugs are patentable and have great value. They may not work as well, or may be much more toxic than the natural ones, but they possess the ability to put vast sums of money into the fewest number of pockets.

If you look at these natural drugs and their origins, you will find that their use parallels many religions. The Incas had coca, from which we get cocaine. Scientists have synthesized patentable forms of cocaine, like xylacaine, benzocaine, lidocaine, Novocain, procaine, but only cocaine is derived from Nature. The others are synthetic and cannot compete economically with the natural versions.

Ancient Greece had the religion of the Eleusinian Mysteries and drank a potion called kykeon. Strong evidence points to kykeon being a tea made from the ergot fungus from which Albert Hoffman synthesized LSD.

Judeo-Christianity had wine and something called "strong drink." We don’t even really know what "strong drink" was, but we do know what it wasn’t. It wasn’t distilled liquor since distilling wasn’t discovered for over a 1000 years. The Bible also mentions cannabis, the Hebrew word kannabosm, which has been translated into "incense." Scientists have synthesized the THC molecule too, but it also cannot compete economically with the natural plant, which grows for free, so it has been outlawed.

Hinduism had the sacrament soma, which was likely the Amanita Muscaria mushroom, which also appears cryptically in Judeo-Christianity. So muti and the witchcraft association fall into this same category of "medicines’ that have been subjected to the Pharmacratic Inquisition, of which the Bush family are major players.

My guess is that muti is a drug that may have enormous medical value, but has not yet been synthesized. Once synthesized, the price will skyrocket and natural muti will be outlawed, if it isn’t already.

We don’t need to kill bugs with a sledge hammer, especially if the bugs are on children. And we need to identify which bugs are harmful and which bugs aren’t.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"DD" wrote in message
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:40:20 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

Ya’all sleep tight, now, ya hear?

Peadge šŸ™‚

‘kay, o’kay Peadge:-)
I did deserve a much more harsh answer then this. You accused someone else of having a limited vocabulary, and that could have being said to me as well, because English is not my home language.
(I can talk four languages, but there is of course a difference between talking and discussing:-)
The reason for my attack is because I live in a city (and country) where, if I walk down the street now after dark, any further then to only the cafe over the street, I must carry a gun. Carry a gun or the wasps will attack. A country where murders and hi-jacks are every days events. A country where inocent people get murdered and beheaded for the sake of muti (witch medicine ((wrd)) ).

And we hate this kind of living. Hijackers have tried to hijack me. In less then six week apart, two break-ins in my car for the sake of a radio. I am lucky. Other people can tell weird stories. This is a place where you dare not to stop for a hitchiker. I stopped for two ladies with a small child at eleven at night, at been attack by men hiding in the bushes. I got away. Even saved my car:-)

The world is sick. My heart goes out to an Palestinian girl with her baby sister or brother in her hands running over the street with blood on their faces. So do I feel about Iraqi women and children. So do I feel about woman and children in my own country fleeing from the wasps.

Peace Peadge:-)

Dave

C
Corey
Oct 24, 2004
It was an analogy about Saddam and Iraq, not the streets of America.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
Peadge wrote:

You left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

__________________________________

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
S
Scraphead
Oct 24, 2004
"Peadge" wrote in message
You’re right. I just get a little peeved when others twist my words around or "put words in my mouth" and reduce everything to an unreal
2-dimensional
plane. For instance, you claiming "me and my kind" support "these killing bastards." I don’t support killing of any kind. I don’t even know what "my kind" means. When someone says there are only two choices, I also find
that
offensive to the discussion. And yes, much of my concern is for Bush’s
lame
way of dealing with this. And his Father’s policy…and Reagan’s. They are the ones who built Saddam up giving him the weapons to do the terrible things he did. But none of that mattered as long as we had access to cheap oil. Rather than giving him the means to do these things they could’ve taken them away.

But let’s take a look at your situation, which I’m sure you do not
deserve.
Is this not exactly what I’ve been discussing? Is this not person A attacking person B, person B retaliating by attacking person C, who then attacks person D? I admire you for having the conscience not to attack
back
but to flee with your life and luckily, some possessions. I just don’t
think
we can teach people to not kill innocent children by killing innocent children. If person A attacks person B, and person B retaliates,
shouldn’t
person B retaliate against Person A? Doesn’t that make much more sense?
Why
take it out on others?

And about this muti, or witch medicine. Do you live in South Africa? Why does murder have to happen for this medicine? Is it in short supply? Is
it
considered illegal? Here in the United States we have a similar war. It’s called the War on Drugs. It is a war on drugs that are derived from
Nature.
Plant based drugs mostly. We don’t like these drugs because they are not patentable. We prefer to use drugs that are derived from petroleum. Petroleum-based drugs are patentable and have great value. They may not
work
as well, or may be much more toxic than the natural ones, but they possess the ability to put vast sums of money into the fewest number of pockets.
If you look at these natural drugs and their origins, you will find that their use parallels many religions. The Incas had coca, from which we get cocaine. Scientists have synthesized patentable forms of cocaine, like xylacaine, benzocaine, lidocaine, Novocain, procaine, but only cocaine is derived from Nature. The others are synthetic and cannot compete economically with the natural versions.

Ancient Greece had the religion of the Eleusinian Mysteries and drank a potion called kykeon. Strong evidence points to kykeon being a tea made
from
the ergot fungus from which Albert Hoffman synthesized LSD.
Judeo-Christianity had wine and something called "strong drink." We don’t even really know what "strong drink" was, but we do know what it wasn’t.
It
wasn’t distilled liquor since distilling wasn’t discovered for over a 1000 years. The Bible also mentions cannabis, the Hebrew word kannabosm, which has been translated into "incense." Scientists have synthesized the THC molecule too, but it also cannot compete economically with the natural plant, which grows for free, so it has been outlawed.

Hinduism had the sacrament soma, which was likely the Amanita Muscaria mushroom, which also appears cryptically in Judeo-Christianity. So muti and the witchcraft association fall into this same category of "medicines’ that have been subjected to the Pharmacratic Inquisition, of which the Bush family are major players.

My guess is that muti is a drug that may have enormous medical value, but has not yet been synthesized. Once synthesized, the price will skyrocket
and
natural muti will be outlawed, if it isn’t already.

We don’t need to kill bugs with a sledge hammer, especially if the bugs
are
on children. And we need to identify which bugs are harmful and which bugs aren’t.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"DD" wrote in message
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:40:20 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

Ya’all sleep tight, now, ya hear?

Peadge šŸ™‚

‘kay, o’kay Peadge:-)
I did deserve a much more harsh answer then this. You accused someone else of having a limited vocabulary, and that could have being said to me as well, because English is not my home language.
(I can talk four languages, but there is of course a difference between talking and discussing:-)
The reason for my attack is because I live in a city (and country) where, if I walk down the street now after dark, any further then to only the cafe over the street, I must carry a gun. Carry a gun or the wasps will attack. A country where murders and hi-jacks are every days events. A country where inocent people get murdered and beheaded for the sake of muti (witch medicine ((wrd)) ).

And we hate this kind of living. Hijackers have tried to hijack me. In less then six week apart, two break-ins in my car for the sake of a radio. I am lucky. Other people can tell weird stories. This is a place where you dare not to stop for a hitchiker. I stopped for two ladies with a small child at eleven at night, at been attack by men hiding in the bushes. I got away. Even saved my car:-)

The world is sick. My heart goes out to an Palestinian girl with her baby sister or brother in her hands running over the street with blood on their faces. So do I feel about Iraqi women and children. So do I feel about woman and children in my own country fleeing from the wasps.

Peace Peadge:-)

Dave

H
Hecate
Oct 25, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:42:36 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

edjh wrote:

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight.

The destruction of buildings was much worse during the invasion. The car bombings, civil unrest and beheadings that you are so blithely ignoring were never a factor before. The torture of prisoners continued under US occupation, as it had under Saddam. The civil unrest in Iraq has no end in sight, and US troops are there indefinately. "Insurgents" are becoming a growing threat, so much so that even our own troops have begun to desert. Iraq is an unequivocal disaster.

More of our babies die in Iraq every day, and you pontificate about the morality of acting. feh. Our actions with this tar baby were predicted by our leadership and the entire world community warned us not to do it. Now we eat it.
One comment:

Saddam was in power for 35 years. Human rights groups give a conservative estimate of the number of people killed during that period (not including the million + killed during the Iraq/Iran war) as 300, 000. That works out at approx. 8571 per year and 24 per day. That’s 24 people per day killed 24/7/365 for 35 years. Well, I’m sorry but that’s a damn good reason for getting rid of Saddam. On top of which, the more often that kind of action happens, the less likely megalomaniac dictators are to think that as long as it’s carried out within their own borders, they can kill as many people as they want.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 25, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:38:17 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

Re: "The alternative to fighting against it was to stand by and do nothing"
Anytime an argument is broken down to an either-or scenario, the person arguing has run out of ammunition. Two dimensional solutions do not work in a four dimensional world.
The only problem with that comment is that I have seen no solution offered by those who oppose the war which would entail getting rid of Saddam immediately or in the very near future. All we ever hear is "you can’t invade a sovereign country". That means that you can commit any atrocities you want as long as it’s within your own borders. That is *not* an answer as far as I’m concerned.

Oh, and I can’t stand Bush, btw.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 25, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:40:20 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

The Wasp Nest (An Analogy):
Games are all very well, but in the real world, so, here’s a what if for you to match your game:

Hitler doesn’t invade Poland or anywhere else. He just stays where he is and kills every single Jew, Gypsy, communist, social democrat, catholic, etc within the borders of the countries he occupies after Munich.

According to your game we should let him do it.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
DT
deco_time
Oct 25, 2004
In news:Hecate typed:
The only problem with that comment is that I have seen no solution offered by those who oppose the war which would entail getting rid of Saddam immediately or in the very near future. All we ever hear is "you can’t invade a sovereign country". That means that you can commit any atrocities you want as long as it’s within your own borders. That is *not* an answer as far as I’m concerned.

Oh, and I can’t stand Bush, btw.

I don’t think any sensible human being will or has disagreed that Saddam had to go; it’s the method that Bush chose that is wrong. This should have been an international cooperative action under the UN flag, with humanitarian relief organized ahead of time and a clear plan to stabilize the country after the demise of Saddam. Instead we’ve got this blind assault, which borders on terrorism itself, without ANY clear plan on how to manage the after-war, giving us this total mess of an operation. For Gods sake, we’re not talking about a bunch of hoodlum terrorizing a neighborhood here, but a whole country that had the whole lot of its institution and political system dismantled.

And yes, Bush is a complete moron.
C
Corey
Oct 25, 2004
Hey, I’m very happy Saddam is no longer in power. Cool beans! I had my own little parade when they caught him. My beef is partly with all this hypocrisy regarding our own role in all the evil things he’s done. Why all of a sudden is this stuff a big deal? It didn’t matter when we were arming him. He was still the same #$%&ing bastard when we sold him chemical and biological weapons. He was still the same #$%&ing bastard when we sold him even more after he used all the first ones up on the Kurds and Iranians. It didn’t matter when Bush Sr. said the war is over and that Kuwait was again free. Saddam remained in power. It took Saddam 35 years to kill less people that tobacco does in a single year…and that’s just in just the United States. OK..sure there’s a difference. I see that. The tobacco industry charges for the service.

But the main part of my beef is trying to rationalize the killing of innocent children, or any innocent person for that matter by saying Saddam was a bad guy. He’s caught. He’s locked up. His days are numbered. And hopefully he’ll get what he deserves. And still the children die. To think that Saddam is worth the life of one child, much less over 1000 US service men and women is just plain wrong. His is a bug’s life. A virus.

You’re right, it may act as a deterrent to other megalomaniac dictators. But why do we have to build these guys up into such monsters in the first place? Is it really necessary? With hindsight, did we really need folks like Duvalier, Aristide, Pinochet, Noriega, Hussein, Franco or Thatcher? And don’t even get me going on the Christianity vs Islam aspect!

I’m going back to help people with REAL Photoshop questions.

Peadge :-/

"Hecate" wrote in message
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:42:36 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

edjh wrote:

Your little equation is faulty in that the death and destruction were much worse before the invasion and there was no sign of an end in sight.

The destruction of buildings was much worse during the invasion. The car bombings, civil unrest and beheadings that you are so blithely ignoring were never a factor before. The torture of prisoners continued under US occupation, as it had under Saddam. The civil unrest in Iraq has no end in sight, and US troops are there indefinately. "Insurgents" are becoming a growing threat, so much so that even our own troops have begun to desert. Iraq is an unequivocal disaster.

More of our babies die in Iraq every day, and you pontificate about the morality of acting. feh. Our actions with this tar baby were predicted by our leadership and the entire world community warned us not to do it. Now we eat it.
One comment:

Saddam was in power for 35 years. Human rights groups give a conservative estimate of the number of people killed during that period (not including the million + killed during the Iraq/Iran war) as 300, 000. That works out at approx. 8571 per year and 24 per day. That’s 24 people per day killed 24/7/365 for 35 years. Well, I’m sorry but that’s a damn good reason for getting rid of Saddam. On top of which, the more often that kind of action happens, the less likely megalomaniac dictators are to think that as long as it’s carried out within their own borders, they can kill as many people as they want.


Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
She lived in Iraq for 30 years, safely, under Saddam Hussein. It is only now that her life has been put into jeopardy. Indirectly, Bush is responsible for her abduction by creating the situation that is the "New Iraq".

Do you understand the broader implications of destabilizing an entire nation with no clear authority? It is a recipe for violence and civil unrest.

Either Bush is mostly incompetent, or his handlers feel that Iraq is best kept destabilized. I bet that lots of Iraqs’ resources will go missing, with no accountability. Money, oil, whatever.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 25, 2004
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:19:05 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

She lived in Iraq for 30 years, safely, under Saddam Hussein. It is only now that her life has been put into jeopardy. Indirectly, Bush is responsible for her abduction by creating the situation that is the "New Iraq".

Do you understand the broader implications of destabilizing an entire nation with no clear authority? It is a recipe for violence and civil unrest.

Either Bush is mostly incompetent, or his handlers feel that Iraq is best kept destabilized. I bet that lots of Iraqs’ resources will go missing, with no accountability. Money, oil, whatever.

The Doormouse

It is so funny that you have got ni criticism for Sadam & kie. For the murderes that behave like animals. This maybe shows where your simpathy are

Dave
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
"Peadge" wrote:

I’m going back to help people with REAL Photoshop questions.
Peadge :-/

Point.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
DD
Dave Du Plessis
Oct 25, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:37:07 -0400, "Scraphead" <Watashee@{deletethis}one.net> wrote:

"Peadge"

Dave

Why? Is this your NG? You must have scrap in your head:-(

DD
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
edjh wrote:

You don’t know what you are talking about.

You say that many times, as if it will become true. Ten years from now, you will know that I was right.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
"Peadge" wrote:

If we’re going to do the right
thing, Let’s cease and desist on all the wrong things first. … You should pay more attention and watch less Fox News. Try the Daily Show for fake news. And lay off the tap water.

I knew it. You rock. šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
DD wrote:

It is so funny that you have got ni criticism for Sadam & kie. For the murderes that behave like animals. This maybe shows where your simpathy are

If anyone has ever thought that I am a mean person, at least the smart ones will recognize the slack that you are getting right now.

Plus, it’s off-topic.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
Peadge wrote:

It was an analogy about Saddam and Iraq, not the streets of America.
Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message

Yes and as I said,you left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

Do you deny that happened under Saddam in Iraq?


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:

edjh wrote:

You don’t know what you are talking about.

You say that many times, as if it will become true. Ten years from now, you will know that I was right.

The Doormouse
I hope it won’t take you ten years to figure out what’s going on.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
A
al-Farrob
Oct 25, 2004
edjh wrote:

Peadge wrote:

It was an analogy about Saddam and Iraq, not the streets of America.
Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message

Yes and as I said,you left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

Do you deny that happened under Saddam in Iraq?

I actually think this is completely off-topic unless because of the use of 2 bit b&w šŸ™‚
I just want to give to you this quote, though I think it is useless, it needs ability to think to understand:)

"Naturally the common people don’t want war… but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." — Hermann Goering, Nazi and war criminal, 1883-1946

ah.. and in case you think I am arab, what could condition you reaction:), I am not


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html


al-Farrob

"16 photographs by al-Farrob"
http://www.al-farrob.com
S
Scraphead
Oct 25, 2004
Do you think she used Photoshop?
šŸ˜‰
"The Doormouse" wrote in message
She lived in Iraq for 30 years, safely, under Saddam Hussein. It is only now that her life has been put into jeopardy. Indirectly, Bush is responsible for her abduction by creating the situation that is the "New Iraq".

Do you understand the broader implications of destabilizing an entire nation with no clear authority? It is a recipe for violence and civil unrest.

Either Bush is mostly incompetent, or his handlers feel that Iraq is best kept destabilized. I bet that lots of Iraqs’ resources will go missing, with no accountability. Money, oil, whatever.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
YEP………

It wasn’t a noble thing to rush into Iraq like we did, and handle the post battle like we have,
the way the whole issue was handled was an utterly selfish thing to do….. And now we will have to battle the terrorists of the world all alone..

History will see the Bush Admin and the worst ever to date. Dangerous to our security
and Reckless with our country.

And the utter gall of the guy not being able to admit or see even one mistake made is sickening
and very very scarey…. They will ride roughshot over the country and our safety with impunity
for the next 4 years…. if elected. JMO.


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
That’s a catastrophic understatement…
The guy is a pox on the country.
And Ann Coulter needs to learn to take a load of cream
in the face like all the other whores have to. Whether
it’s a crack whore or a media/attention whore. LOL

Believe it or not I’m not left wing or Democrat. I just
am appalled by the NeoCons and the Religious Evangelical Right Wing pushing the country around and their values on us and giving the Republican party a terrible name..

Peadge wrote:

I agree, Sean Hannity is a joke.


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
And you can’t eliminate the fact that the key figures in the Bush Admin literally believe in the theory of Heretics (just look at his environmental policies
for instance) and literally believe in the Rapture and that there will be a second coming
(that just so happens will occur in the middle east)…

The Doormouse wrote:

She lived in Iraq for 30 years, safely, under Saddam Hussein. It is only now that her life has been put into jeopardy. Indirectly, Bush is responsible for her abduction by creating the situation that is the "New Iraq".

Do you understand the broader implications of destabilizing an entire nation with no clear authority? It is a recipe for violence and civil unrest.

Either Bush is mostly incompetent, or his handlers feel that Iraq is best kept destabilized. I bet that lots of Iraqs’ resources will go missing, with no accountability. Money, oil, whatever.

The Doormouse


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
I have always said he should of waited til the Iraq summer was over and we had our troops out of Turkey,
gathered some intel on the ground. Then went in after the terrible hot summer was over. That would of given
us some credibility with the rest of the world also…. We had Saadam boxed in, he wasn’t going anywhere…

In his linear thinking narrow mind he actually thought the country of Iraq would kiss his feet and he
never even gave a second thought to the post war….. and you had Cheney constantly tapping him
on the shoulder "better go now, better go now, better go now"….. all Cheney could see was
ching ching, cash in……. Dangerous dangerous IDIOT.

deco_time wrote:

In news:Hecate typed:

The only problem with that comment is that I have seen no solution offered by those who oppose the war which would entail getting rid of Saddam immediately or in the very near future. All we ever hear is "you can’t invade a sovereign country". That means that you can commit any atrocities you want as long as it’s within your own borders. That is *not* an answer as far as I’m concerned.

Oh, and I can’t stand Bush, btw.

I don’t think any sensible human being will or has disagreed that Saddam had to go; it’s the method that Bush chose that is wrong. This should have been an international cooperative action under the UN flag, with humanitarian relief organized ahead of time and a clear plan to stabilize the country after the demise of Saddam. Instead we’ve got this blind assault, which borders on terrorism itself, without ANY clear plan on how to manage the after-war, giving us this total mess of an operation. For Gods sake, we’re not talking about a bunch of hoodlum terrorizing a neighborhood here, but a whole country that had the whole lot of its institution and political system dismantled.

And yes, Bush is a complete moron.


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson

TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
edjh wrote:

I hope it won’t take you ten years to figure out what’s going on.

It did not.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
"Scraphead" <Watashee@{deletethis}one.net> wrote:

Do you think she used Photoshop?

Let’s hope so. šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 25, 2004
RicSeyler wrote:

he never even gave a second thought to the post war

Quite true. Powell told him, "better have an exit strategy", but was silenced quickly.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
Priorities don’t mean anything?????
Using your reasoning, Saadam wasn’t the biggest threat to his own people and our people compared to others in the world right now!….. He was cherry picked for absolute personal reasons..

That’s a Neo Con Talking Point with no real merit…
Like the silly "We fight them over there so we don’t have to over here" Terrorists aren’t myopic like the Bush Admin they can actually do more than one thing at a time. Silly silly silly……

edjh wrote:

Peadge wrote:

You left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

__________________________________

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
R
RicSeyler
Oct 25, 2004
Poor Colin Powell, you can just see on his face that he knows he hitched his wagon to the wrong team… He could of been a great figure in our national history and now he is shackled with that image of him holding that vial of Ricin and talking about a fleet of mobile WMD labs that never existed… A tragic story.

They killed his career and his legacy.

The Doormouse wrote:

RicSeyler wrote:

he never even gave a second thought to the post war

Quite true. Powell told him, "better have an exit strategy", but was silenced quickly.

The Doormouse


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson

M
mrclean
Oct 25, 2004
In article <NL8fd.198174$>,
says…
YEP………

It wasn’t a noble thing to rush into Iraq like we did, and handle the post battle like we have,
the way the whole issue was handled was an utterly selfish thing to do….. And now we will have to battle the terrorists of the world all alone..
History will see the Bush Admin and the worst ever to date. Dangerous to our security
and Reckless with our country.

And the utter gall of the guy not being able to admit or see even one mistake made is sickening
and very very scarey…. They will ride roughshot over the country and our safety with impunity
for the next 4 years…. if elected. JMO.
It’s only because Clinton was a PUSSY and Gore would have been a BIGGER PUSSY.

Clinton was all but handed Osama Bin Laden and he turned his head to ignore it.

Do you recall Clinton admitting to even one mistake of his? Hell, we all knew about the blowjobs and he couldn’t even admit that he got one from Lewinsky.

If Kerry is elected, I predict he’ll somehow be erased and then Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:
edjh wrote:

I hope it won’t take you ten years to figure out what’s going on.

It did not.

The Doormouse
You haven’t figured it out yet.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
RicSeyler wrote:

Priorities don’t mean anything?????
Using your reasoning, Saadam wasn’t the biggest threat to his own people and our people compared to others in the world right now!….. He was cherry picked for absolute personal reasons..

That’s a Neo Con Talking Point with no real merit…
Like the silly "We fight them over there so we don’t have to over here" Terrorists aren’t myopic like the Bush Admin they can actually do more than one thing at a time. Silly silly silly……

edjh wrote:

Peadge wrote:

You left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

__________________________________

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
al-Farrob wrote:

edjh wrote:

Peadge wrote:

It was an analogy about Saddam and Iraq, not the streets of America.
Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message

Yes and as I said,you left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

Do you deny that happened under Saddam in Iraq?

I actually think this is completely off-topic unless because of the use of 2 bit b&w šŸ™‚
I just want to give to you this quote, though I think it is useless, it needs ability to think to understand:)

"Naturally the common people don’t want war… but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." — Hermann Goering, Nazi and war criminal, 1883-1946

ah.. and in case you think I am arab, what could condition you reaction:), I am not


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 25, 2004
RicSeyler wrote:

Poor Colin Powell, you can just see on his face that he knows he hitched his wagon to the wrong team… He could of been a great figure in our national history and now he is shackled with that image of him holding that vial of Ricin and talking about a fleet of mobile WMD labs that never existed… A tragic story.

They killed his career and his legacy.

Yeah he shouldn’t of done that. He could of done something else. He could of been a contender.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
edjh wrote:

You haven’t figured it out yet.

One of us has not. šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
C
Corey
Oct 26, 2004
"edjh" wrote in message:

Yes and as I said,you left out the minor detail about the wasps killing, torturing, maiming and raping people by the tens of thousands each year. But they were being watched, so that didn’t matter.

Do you deny that happened under Saddam in Iraq?

———————————————

I also left out the part about the mighty Texan’s dad helping build up and fortify the wasp’s nest nearly two decades earlier when the killing, torturing, maiming and raping was near their peak. Yet for some reason you remain silent on this. Are you implying that George Bush Sr. was a voyeur? Did it really take you that long to figure out Saddam was evil? Did you speak up then as I did? And if so, how does his being evil justify the killing of innocent children by us? Please explain. Inquiring minds want to know.

Peadge šŸ™‚
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
edjh wrote:

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?

Your argument lacks any merit and it would be wise of you to stop.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
H
Hecate
Oct 26, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:26:47 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

But the main part of my beef is trying to rationalize the killing of innocent children, or any innocent person for that matter by saying Saddam was a bad guy. He’s caught. He’s locked up. His days are numbered. And hopefully he’ll get what he deserves. And still the children die. To think that Saddam is worth the life of one child, much less over 1000 US service men and women is just plain wrong. His is a bug’s life. A virus.

There’s a difference. Leaving Saddam in power means a lot more children killed than the have been, or will be killed due to the invasion.

You’re right, it may act as a deterrent to other megalomaniac dictators. But why do we have to build these guys up into such monsters in the first place? Is it really necessary? With hindsight, did we really need folks like Duvalier, Aristide, Pinochet, Noriega, Hussein, Franco or Thatcher? And don’t even get me going on the Christianity vs Islam aspect!

I agree with that completely šŸ™‚

I’m going back to help people with REAL Photoshop questions.
LOL!



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 26, 2004
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:19:05 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

Either Bush is mostly incompetent, or his handlers feel that Iraq is best kept destabilized. I bet that lots of Iraqs’ resources will go missing, with no accountability. Money, oil, whatever.
I favour choice number 1. They didn’t think through what would need to be done afterwards, though that doesn’t make the initial invasion wrong in my view.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 26, 2004
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:25:50 -0400, "deco_time" wrote:

In news:Hecate typed:
The only problem with that comment is that I have seen no solution offered by those who oppose the war which would entail getting rid of Saddam immediately or in the very near future. All we ever hear is "you can’t invade a sovereign country". That means that you can commit any atrocities you want as long as it’s within your own borders. That is *not* an answer as far as I’m concerned.

Oh, and I can’t stand Bush, btw.

I don’t think any sensible human being will or has disagreed that Saddam had to go; it’s the method that Bush chose that is wrong. This should have been an international cooperative action under the UN flag, with humanitarian relief organized ahead of time and a clear plan to stabilize the country after the demise of Saddam.

I agree, but the UN would do what it always has done, and will do, sit on it’s arse and let people die because the other dictatorships in the UN will never let the UN act against one of their own for fear they were next.

Instead we’ve got this
blind assault, which borders on terrorism itself, without ANY clear plan on how to manage the after-war, giving us this total mess of an operation. For Gods sake, we’re not talking about a bunch of hoodlum terrorizing a neighborhood here, but a whole country that had the whole lot of its institution and political system dismantled.

Actually, we’re talking about a bunch of hoodlums who terrorised a whole country rather than just a neighbourhood.

And it didn’t have any institutions or political system other than you do what Saddam says or you die (but not until you’re screaming in agony from the torture).

And yes, Bush is a complete moron.

Dictionary definition:

A mentally retarded person who has a potential mental age of between 8 and 12 years and is capable of doing routine work under supervision

I don’t think he has the mental capacity to be regarded as a moron.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
C
Corey
Oct 26, 2004
RicSeyler writes:

Poor Colin Powell, you can just see on his face that he knows he hitched his wagon to the wrong team..

I respond, a bit hoarsely:

He thought he had hitched up to thoroughbreds, but they ended up just being asses!

Peadge šŸ™‚
"RicSeyler" wrote in message Poor Colin Powell, you can just see on his face that he knows he hitched his wagon to the wrong team… He could of been a great figure in our national history and now he is shackled with that image of him holding that vial of Ricin and talking about a fleet of mobile WMD labs that never existed… A tragic story.

They killed his career and his legacy.

The Doormouse wrote:

RicSeyler wrote:

he never even gave a second thought to the post war

Quite true. Powell told him, "better have an exit strategy", but was silenced quickly.

The Doormouse


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove -SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson

C
Corey
Oct 26, 2004
The Brita filter really helps!

Peadge šŸ™‚

"The Doormouse" wrote in message
"Peadge" wrote:

If we’re going to do the right
thing, Let’s cease and desist on all the wrong things first. … You should pay more attention and watch less Fox News. Try the Daily Show for fake news. And lay off the tap water.

I knew it. You rock. šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
E
edjh
Oct 26, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:
edjh wrote:

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?

Your argument lacks any merit and it would be wise of you to stop.
The Doormouse
Nonsense. Why don’t you address the fact that the invasion stopped these things?


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
S
Scraphead
Oct 26, 2004
They should have upgraded to CS.

"Peadge" wrote in message
The Brita filter really helps!

Peadge šŸ™‚

"The Doormouse" wrote in message
"Peadge" wrote:

If we’re going to do the right
thing, Let’s cease and desist on all the wrong things first. … You should pay more attention and watch less Fox News. Try the Daily Show for fake news. And lay off the tap water.

I knew it. You rock. šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

C
Corey
Oct 26, 2004
It didn’t stop them. It merely allowed countless others the opportunity to do the same, and more. I don’t recall Saddam posting beheadings on the Internet. The "nonsense" you mention may merely be your impaired vision. It can be alleviated by corrective lenses. But beware of the neo-crypto-hitlerian-myopic distortion inherent in the corporate media lenses.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
The Doormouse wrote:
edjh wrote:

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?

Your argument lacks any merit and it would be wise of you to stop.
The Doormouse
Nonsense. Why don’t you address the fact that the invasion stopped these things?


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
R
RicSeyler
Oct 26, 2004
Jon Stewart has more credibility in his little finger
than Britt Hume and Fred Barnes will ever have..

Peadge wrote:

You should pay more attention and watch less Fox News. Try the Daily Show for fake news. And lay off the tap water.

Peadge šŸ™‚


Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
R
RicSeyler
Oct 26, 2004
Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?


Ric Seyler
R
RicSeyler
Oct 26, 2004
Gotta give the NeoCons credit, their stuff really works on many..

edjh wrote:

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?

No it’s not OK by me………….



Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove ā€“SPAM- from email address
————————————–
"Homer no function beer well without."
– H.J. Simpson
TM
The Magician
Oct 26, 2004
In article , says…

And yes, Bush is a complete moron.

Dictionary definition:

A mentally retarded person who has a potential mental age of between 8 and 12 years and is capable of doing routine work under supervision

I don’t think he has the mental capacity to be regarded as a moron.

Nope…more like the mental capacity of a cueball… and the all charm to match.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
edjh wrote:

Nonsense. Why don’t you address the fact that the invasion stopped these things?

The documented torture and rape of Iraqis that occured under orders at the Abu Gharaib prison is one direct and obvious example that these things did not stop – the uniforms merely changed.

There are other examples, but you seem fairly oblivious.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
RicSeyler wrote:

Gotta give the NeoCons credit, their stuff really works on many..

Well, sure. It appeals to the first basic emotional responses that one might have. "Of course I’m against <list moral outrage here> …"

Lazy thinkers, of which there are MANY, can then stop thinking at that point.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
The Magician wrote:

. and the all charm to match.

He seems to have charmed the socks off his neocon handlers šŸ™‚

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TM
The Magician
Oct 26, 2004
In article , says…
The Magician wrote:

. and the all charm to match.

He seems to have charmed the socks off his neocon handlers šŸ™‚
The Doormouse
Not trying to be a smartass…but "neocon"…is this some new yuppy political buzzword…?
I’m not real big into politics, but watch a fair share of news etc. Wut da Hell is a "Neocon" anyhoo…???
I’m a bit like George Carlin, in the sense that I find some of these new yuppy, corporate, advertising, "PC" and political buzzwords really annoying.
Like…"Insurgients". Izzaat some new "warm & fuzzy" buzzword word to mask the fact that we pissed a lot of people off by invading & occupying their
country?
Wut da frick ever happen to…"The enemy".
"Insurgients"…!
Wut a hoot!
R
RicSeyler
Oct 26, 2004
Neo Conservatives – the far far right of the right wing and sometimes associated
with the far religious right fundamentalists / evangelicals also.

They are the "you completely agree with us or you are the enemy and treasonous" group.

Ann Coulter and Hannity are examples of Neo Con Nuts.

The Magician wrote:

Not trying to be a smartass…but "neocon"…is this some new yuppy political buzzword…?


Ric Seyler

S
Scruff
Oct 26, 2004
"RicSeyler" wrote in message
Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..
We probably would be and should be, if the majority of the rest of the free world weren’t utter chicken shits. The US can’t do it all alone, and it’s why we’re in this crappy mess in the first place.
R
RicSeyler
Oct 26, 2004


Scruff wrote:

"RicSeyler" wrote in message

Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..
We probably would be and should be, if the majority of the rest of the free world weren’t utter chicken shits. The US can’t do it all alone, and it’s why we’re in this crappy mess in the first place.
At least doing something about it… and I’m afraid we will be utterly alone in this
for the next 4 year if Bush gets reelected. I’m not zealot enough to think Kerry has a lock
on getting more to help, but I think we have a MUCH better chance of others helping if Bush
is gone. Then you have to think about the Military is now stretched beyond safety, by ALL accounts,
except Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld, but listen to the actual military pros and they all say we are in a very
critical situation.


Ric Seyler

DT
deco_time
Oct 26, 2004
In news:Hecate typed:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:25:50 -0400, "deco_time" wrote:

In news:Hecate typed:
The only problem with that comment is that I have seen no solution offered by those who oppose the war which would entail getting rid of Saddam immediately or in the very near future. All we ever hear is "you can’t invade a sovereign country". That means that you can commit any atrocities you want as long as it’s within your own borders. That is *not* an answer as far as I’m concerned.
Oh, and I can’t stand Bush, btw.

I don’t think any sensible human being will or has disagreed that Saddam had to go; it’s the method that Bush chose that is wrong. This should have been an international cooperative action under the UN flag, with humanitarian relief organized ahead of time and a clear plan to stabilize the country after the demise of Saddam.

I agree, but the UN would do what it always has done, and will do, sit on it’s arse and let people die because the other dictatorships in the UN will never let the UN act against one of their own for fear they were next.

Sorry, but I disagree. Maybe it’s the Canadian blood in my vein, but I strongly believe in the UN; I will go farther than that and say it’s probably the only hope for mankind, especially now that we have an idiot, bigot and religious fanatic sitting on top of the biggest military arsenal that ever existed in human history.

Instead we’ve got this
blind assault, which borders on terrorism itself, without ANY clear plan on how to manage the after-war, giving us this total mess of an operation. For Gods sake, we’re not talking about a bunch of hoodlum terrorizing a neighborhood here, but a whole country that had the whole lot of its institution and political system dismantled.

Actually, we’re talking about a bunch of hoodlums who terrorised a whole country rather than just a neighbourhood.

And it didn’t have any institutions or political system other than you do what Saddam says or you die (but not until you’re screaming in agony from the torture).

Hey, we’re back to normal, I disagree again. We have quite a few refugees here in Montreal and Toronto, and they seem well educated; a testimony to the education system in Irak that was at least up to University level. They also had hospital, road building and maintenance, museum, energy management, police, judicial system etc… And yes, the political system was a one sided dictatorship, but it’s been replaced by a void. Not good.

And yes, Bush is a complete moron.

Dictionary definition:

A mentally retarded person who has a potential mental age of between 8 and 12 years and is capable of doing routine work under supervision

I don’t think he has the mental capacity to be regarded as a moron.

I stand corrected šŸ˜‰
S
Scruff
Oct 26, 2004

"RicSeyler" wrote in message

…listen to the actual military pros and they all say we are in a very critical situation.


Ric SeylerThey always say that. Most of their mindset is to over-manpower it.Technology is where future combat lies and that’s where we need to head.You know, smarter, not bigger. But ultimately, the rest of the world needs to get their ass in gear.Even if it’s just maintaining their own damned countries.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 26, 2004
The UN is pathetically ineffective. If we (America) want soemthing, it’s ours. No "if’s". No "and’s". No "buts". Now that’s scary.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
E
edjh
Oct 26, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:
RicSeyler wrote:

Gotta give the NeoCons credit, their stuff really works on many..

Well, sure. It appeals to the first basic emotional responses that one might have. "Of course I’m against <list moral outrage here> …"
Lazy thinkers, of which there are MANY, can then stop thinking at that point.

The Doormouse
So you are against these things but it’s okay to do nothing about them? Do I have that right?

Rather than call me names, why not address the issues at hand? Are you able to? Or are you a lazy thinker who has stopped thinking?

By the way, posting grisly pictures, is that an appeal to intellect or emotion?

I guess anyone that disagrees with you must be an idiot. What a world to live in.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 26, 2004
Peadge wrote:

It didn’t stop them. It merely allowed countless others the opportunity to do the same, and more.

Sorry, that’s just not true. The level of violence and torture were much much higher under Saddam than what’s going on now. Don’t believe me, check the UN or Human Rights organizations. You are just flat out uninformed.

Whether he showed that stuff on TV is irrelevant. He used to have live executions in stadiums fer cryin’ out loud.

By the way, this was all part of the testimony before the UN and Parliament leading up to the war. WMD was NOT the sole or even the main issue.

__

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 26, 2004
The Doormouse wrote:

edjh wrote:

Nonsense. Why don’t you address the fact that the invasion stopped these things?

The documented torture and rape of Iraqis that occured under orders at the Abu Gharaib prison is one direct and obvious example that these things did not stop – the uniforms merely changed.

There are other examples, but you seem fairly oblivious.
The Doormouse
You really think the Abu Ghraib scandal comes close to what Saddam was doing? You are the oblivious one. Again, you don’t knew what you are talking about.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
E
edjh
Oct 26, 2004
RicSeyler wrote:

Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?
Oh, good reason to do nothing!By the way I am not a neocon.


Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
C
Corey
Oct 26, 2004
NeoCon success….it’s basically an off shoot of the old-world "evil eye." That’s how they do it. Intensely focused blankness.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"RicSeyler" wrote in message

Gotta give the NeoCons credit, their stuff really works on many..
edjh wrote:

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?

No it’s not OK by me………….



Ric Seyler
Online Racing: RicSeyler
GPL Handicap 6.35

http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler
remove
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
I suppose that killing LESS children is better if that’s the perspective you find comfortable. Kinda like the serial rapist who cuts back to raping on just the weekends, right? Oh, how his soul glows warmer and brighter. I just fail to see why killing any children is necessary. There are scary similarities between our killing them and Saddam killing them. When we kill them it’s not really murder it’s merely "collateral damage" which is "legal" and therefore "OK." When Saddam killed them it was part of his leadership policy, which was "legal" and therefore "OK." In both cases guilt and punishment are minimized and discarded. Sad. From a parent’s perspective both killers probably look the same.

Peadge :-\

"Hecate" wrote in message
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:26:47 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

But the main part of my beef is trying to rationalize the killing of innocent children, or any innocent person for that matter by saying
Saddam
was a bad guy. He’s caught. He’s locked up. His days are numbered. And hopefully he’ll get what he deserves. And still the children die. To
think
that Saddam is worth the life of one child, much less over 1000 US
service
men and women is just plain wrong. His is a bug’s life. A virus.

There’s a difference. Leaving Saddam in power means a lot more children killed than the have been, or will be killed due to the invasion.

You’re right, it may act as a deterrent to other megalomaniac dictators.
But
why do we have to build these guys up into such monsters in the first
place?
Is it really necessary? With hindsight, did we really need folks like Duvalier, Aristide, Pinochet, Noriega, Hussein, Franco or Thatcher? And don’t even get me going on the Christianity vs Islam aspect!

I agree with that completely šŸ™‚

I’m going back to help people with REAL Photoshop questions.
LOL!



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
Omigod, Doormouse! I think someone used the Liquify Command and puckered DD’s head. Bloat tool STAT! Now fill, quickly. Color, gradient, pattern, Andy font text..anything!

Peadge :o)

"The Doormouse" wrote in message
DD wrote:

It is so funny that you have got ni criticism for Sadam & kie. For the murderes that behave like animals. This maybe shows where your simpathy are

If anyone has ever thought that I am a mean person, at least the smart
ones
will recognize the slack that you are getting right now.
Plus, it’s off-topic.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
I think the UN is like an old fashioned stove. First you have to find some suitable wood, cut the wood, light it, get it up to temperature, and keep an eye on it, add more wood, adjust the damper, etc., or else you end up with something distasteful, which seems to be frequent. This may also be due to the "too many chefs" syndrome. But that doesn’t mean good results cannot be achieved. After all, the UN Inspectors did manage to rid Saddam of the WMDs. We just refused to believe it.

There seems to be an invisible tension between Third World and First World perceptions and expectations. I think the bigger problem, or at least more manageable problem, is our First World’s temporal myopia. We no longer have the patience for old fashioned wood stove antics. We barely tolerate electric and gas ovens. We want microwaved results. We wanted it ten minutes ago, hold the onions, extra cheese, no ice.

Did I throw in too many metaphors??? Not enough garlic?

Peadge šŸ™‚

"The Doormouse" wrote in message
The UN is pathetically ineffective. If we (America) want soemthing, it’s ours. No "if’s". No "and’s". No "buts". Now that’s scary.
The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
The levels were much higher when he was our friend and we were supplying him with the WMD materials. The levels dropped after the first [easily avoidable] Gulf War, or perhaps just became less overt. Yet your silence on our own guilt/participation is deafening.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
Peadge wrote:

It didn’t stop them. It merely allowed countless others the opportunity
to
do the same, and more.

Sorry, that’s just not true. The level of violence and torture were much much higher under Saddam than what’s going on now. Don’t believe me, check the UN or Human Rights organizations. You are just flat out uninformed.

Whether he showed that stuff on TV is irrelevant. He used to have live executions in stadiums fer cryin’ out loud.

By the way, this was all part of the testimony before the UN and Parliament leading up to the war. WMD was NOT the sole or even the main issue.

__

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
Not a neocon? Does paleocon fit better?

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
RicSeyler wrote:

Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?
Oh, good reason to do nothing!By the way I am not a neocon.

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 27, 2004
edjh wrote:

Rather than call me names, why not address the issues at hand?

The facts about murder and torture were trotted out, again, and you ignored them. The issues have been addressed, repeatedly, and you ignored them.

This discussion is over.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 27, 2004
"Peadge" wrote:

Bloat tool STAT!

I think that he found the bloat tool on his own. šŸ˜‰

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 27, 2004
"Peadge" wrote:

We want microwaved results. We wanted it ten minutes
ago, hold the onions, extra cheese, no ice.

LOL. I would just settle for a Palestinian state.
That’d be … a mostly-eaten plain hot dog?

Officially, they have one. Sort of. …. if Israel isn’t feeling all gunship-py that weekend, and if the settlers don’t mind.

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
H
Hecate
Oct 27, 2004
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:12:09 -0700, "Peadge"
wrote:

I suppose that killing LESS children is better if that’s the perspective you find comfortable. Kinda like the serial rapist who cuts back to raping on just the weekends, right? Oh, how his soul glows warmer and brighter. I just fail to see why killing any children is necessary. There are scary similarities between our killing them and Saddam killing them. When we kill them it’s not really murder it’s merely "collateral damage" which is "legal" and therefore "OK." When Saddam killed them it was part of his leadership policy, which was "legal" and therefore "OK." In both cases guilt and punishment are minimized and discarded. Sad. From a parent’s perspective both killers probably look the same.
No, killing children, whether intentionally or not is wrong. That doesn’t mean that letting Saddam go doing it is right. If you took that attitude generally, then you would never stop anyone doing anything in case it had the side effect of a lesser evil. Would you have preferred it if Hitler had been allowed to carry on killing people?



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
Hecate wrote:
No, killing children, whether intentionally or not is wrong. That doesn’t mean that letting Saddam go doing it is right. If you took that attitude generally, then you would never stop anyone doing anything in case it had the side effect of a lesser evil. Would you have preferred it if Hitler had been allowed to carry on killing people?

Peadge responds:
I guess the words "allow" or "let" don’t ring as truthfully in my ear as does the word "enable." Ask your question using "enable" and you’ll see where I’m coming from. It’s a fine distinction, but one of major significance, at least for reducing ambiguity.

Peadge šŸ™‚
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
I suppose "assist" would even be more accurate than "enable." So the questions become:

"Would you have preferred it if Hitler had been assisted [by us] to carry on killing people?"

My answer, a resounding "NO!" (No to the original question too, by the way!)

Ed Hannigan has asked repeatedly:
"So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you, right?"
Which can be re-worded and maintain the same meaning into: "So ‘allowing’ Saddam to murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you, right?"
Which I would change to make more historically honest:
"So ‘assisting’ Saddam to murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you, right?"

Again a resounding "NO!" It’s actually no to all three questions.

I’m not trying to put words in anyone’s mouth, I’m just rewording the question to remove ambiguity on my position.

And this may be destined for the department of redundancy department, since I’ve stated it so many times, but I just find that trying to rationalize the killing of innocents by citing Saddam’s past atrocities misses the point entirely, especially since he’s no longer in the picture. (Did someone merely turn the eye off on Saddam’s layer or did we delete it?)

Peadge šŸ™‚

"Peadge" wrote in message
Hecate wrote:
No, killing children, whether intentionally or not is wrong. That doesn’t mean that letting Saddam go doing it is right. If you took that attitude generally, then you would never stop anyone doing anything in case it had the side effect of a lesser evil. Would you have preferred it if Hitler had been allowed to carry on killing people?

Peadge responds:
I guess the words "allow" or "let" don’t ring as truthfully in my ear as does the word "enable." Ask your question using "enable" and you’ll see where I’m coming from. It’s a fine distinction, but one of major significance, at least for reducing ambiguity.

Peadge šŸ™‚

E
edjh
Oct 27, 2004
I won’t trouble anyone any more with further replies to this topic. I said my piece and I stand by it. I could not let the load of bullshit that has become the accepted wisdom pass without standing up.

I think my opponents are good people who mean well but are misled by their prejudice and political mythology. All for now.

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
A
al-Farrob
Oct 27, 2004
edjh wrote:

I won’t trouble anyone any more with further replies to this topic.

An inteligent decision, at last :)))


al-Farrob

"16 photographs by al-Farrob"
http://www.al-farrob.com
TD
The Doormouse
Oct 27, 2004
Hecate wrote:

Hitler

Godwin! ;P

The Doormouse


The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.
C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
I too will agree to disagree. That’s one of the great things about freedom. I enjoyed the different perspectives offered. In the grand scheme of things maybe we’re all like the six blind guys describing an elephant.

Here’s the opinion of someone who firmly believes in president Bush and why:

http://gadflyer.com/articles/?ArticleID=249

Take care,

Peadge šŸ™‚

"edjh" wrote in message
I won’t trouble anyone any more with further replies to this topic. I said my piece and I stand by it. I could not let the load of bullshit that has become the accepted wisdom pass without standing up.
I think my opponents are good people who mean well but are misled by their prejudice and political mythology. All for now.

Comic book sketches and artwork:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/edjh.html
Comics art for sale:
http://www.sover.net/~hannigan/batsale.html
R
RicSeyler
Oct 27, 2004
edjh wrote:

RicSeyler wrote:

Linear Thinking, Myopic talking point….
I understand the point your trying to make but
those NeoCon talking points aren’t your strongest argument… But when you’ve been deluged with them it’s easy to repeat.

Why aren’t bombing the Sudan RIGHT NOW!!
It’s a travesty there right at this moment in time,
how bout all the massive suffering in N. Korea
happening right now..

So then murder, torture, rape of people in the thousands is okay by you. right?
Oh, good reason to do nothing!By the way I am not a neocon.

OK, I don’t want to ever label someone with something they don’t agree with. Sorry…
NeoCons thrive on defining and boxing people with their own narrow views and I don’t
want to be a hypocrite. But you seemed to be buying into their ridiculous rhetoric. again Sorry.

But hey, as far as your statement above… we are doing NOTHING RIGHT NOW under the Messiah’s leadership
but providing unprecedented profits for Halliburton and getting out kids killed. And if you look around we are not "winning" anything in Iraq at this point and the Iraqi on the street hates us…..



Ric Seyler
S
Scruff
Oct 27, 2004
…….Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think
so.

Is that ever the scariest thought you could imagine? The only real reason needed to keep Kerry out of there.
R
RicSeyler
Oct 27, 2004
LOLOL
Hannabot, is that you?? Spoofing ID’s again šŸ™‚

Mr.Clean wrote:

In article <NL8fd.198174$>,
says…

YEP………

It wasn’t a noble thing to rush into Iraq like we did, and handle the post battle like we have,
the way the whole issue was handled was an utterly selfish thing to do….. And now we will have to battle the terrorists of the world all alone..
History will see the Bush Admin and the worst ever to date. Dangerous to our security
and Reckless with our country.

And the utter gall of the guy not being able to admit or see even one mistake made is sickening
and very very scarey…. They will ride roughshot over the country and our safety with impunity
for the next 4 years…. if elected. JMO.
It’s only because Clinton was a PUSSY and Gore would have been a BIGGER PUSSY.

Clinton was all but handed Osama Bin Laden and he turned his head to ignore it.

Do you recall Clinton admitting to even one mistake of his? Hell, we all knew about the blowjobs and he couldn’t even admit that he got one from Lewinsky.

If Kerry is elected, I predict he’ll somehow be erased and then Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.


Ric Seyler

R
RicSeyler
Oct 27, 2004
LOL
And if The Teflon Messiah wins we won’t have to worry about what’s going on. He will answer NARY a question to us citizens for the next 4 years.. Like he did the first 3 years..
And will ride roughshot over the world with impunity, now that’s truly scary.

And I got a creepy feeling he will pull it off the election. Don’t know why, I just do. <shutters>
You should read some of the stuff his best buddy Tim Lahaye writes. sheesh people really look
around at where we are going with this guy……..

Scruff wrote:

…….Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think
so.

Is that ever the scariest thought you could imagine? The only real reason needed to keep Kerry out of there.


Ric Seyler

C
Corey
Oct 27, 2004
Did you see where Bush’s hometown newspaper doesn’t even endorse him.

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/xArchives/Issue39/default.ht m

Messiah or pariah?

Maybe if Bush got a BJ in the White House, he might not be so angry.

Peadge šŸ™‚

"RicSeyler" wrote in message LOL
And if The Teflon Messiah wins we won’t have to worry about what’s going on. He will answer NARY a question to us citizens for the next 4 years.. Like he did the first 3 years..
And will ride roughshot over the world with impunity, now that’s truly scary.

And I got a creepy feeling he will pull it off the election. Don’t know why, I just do. <shutters>
You should read some of the stuff his best buddy Tim Lahaye writes. sheesh people really look around at where we are going with this guy……..

Scruff wrote:

……..Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.

Is that ever the scariest thought you could imagine? The only real reason needed to keep Kerry out of there.


Ric Seyler

H
Hecate
Oct 28, 2004
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:33:33 GMT, The Doormouse
wrote:

Hecate wrote:

Hitler

Godwin! ;P
LOL!



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 28, 2004
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:10:00 -0500, Mr.Clean <&g.com> wrote:

If Kerry is elected, I predict he’ll somehow be erased and then Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.

I take it that’s "clean" as in brainwashed?



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
M
mrclean
Nov 2, 2004
In article <NL8fd.198174$>,
says…
YEP………

It wasn’t a noble thing to rush into Iraq like we did, and handle the post battle like we have,
the way the whole issue was handled was an utterly selfish thing to do….. And now we will have to battle the terrorists of the world all alone..
History will see the Bush Admin and the worst ever to date. Dangerous to our security
and Reckless with our country.

And the utter gall of the guy not being able to admit or see even one mistake made is sickening
and very very scarey…. They will ride roughshot over the country and our safety with impunity
for the next 4 years…. if elected. JMO.
It’s only because Clinton was a PUSSY and Gore would have been a BIGGER PUSSY.

Clinton was all but handed Osama Bin Laden and he turned his head to ignore it.

Do you recall Clinton admitting to even one mistake of his? Hell, we all knew about the blowjobs and he couldn’t even admit that he got one from Lewinsky.

If Kerry is elected, I predict he’ll somehow be erased and then Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.
R
RicSeyler
Nov 2, 2004
I don’t see where I mentioned Clinton anywhere in this post……… LOLOL What Clinton did has absolutely no bearing on what Bush and Cheney are doing to me, I didn’t vote Clinton, but grew to like him in the end… When you guys gonna let it go?
And Bush will have a hard time blaming everything on Clinton this term. But I’ll bet
he won’t need to if he wins, because we won’t hear ANY explanation for anything he
would do.. His first 3 years of attitude times 10.

I’d say it would be a compounded nightmare if Cheney got into the seat, but in reality I wouldn’t be surprised if he isn’t the one with his finger on the button
anyway…..

Edwards would do just fine in my eyes, so your scare tactic isn’t working on me…..at all.
Nice try though.. LOLOL

I already voted this morning so it’s a done deal with me. Emphatically AGAINST Bush/Cheney.
That’s all I can do.

Mr.Clean wrote:

In article <NL8fd.198174$>,
says…

YEP………

It wasn’t a noble thing to rush into Iraq like we did, and handle the post battle like we have,
the way the whole issue was handled was an utterly selfish thing to do….. And now we will have to battle the terrorists of the world all alone..
History will see the Bush Admin and the worst ever to date. Dangerous to our security
and Reckless with our country.

And the utter gall of the guy not being able to admit or see even one mistake made is sickening
and very very scarey…. They will ride roughshot over the country and our safety with impunity
for the next 4 years…. if elected. JMO.
It’s only because Clinton was a PUSSY and Gore would have been a BIGGER PUSSY.

Clinton was all but handed Osama Bin Laden and he turned his head to ignore it.

Do you recall Clinton admitting to even one mistake of his? Hell, we all knew about the blowjobs and he couldn’t even admit that he got one from Lewinsky.

If Kerry is elected, I predict he’ll somehow be erased and then Edwards will be in charge, do you REALLY want that? I don’t think so.


Ric Seyler

R
RicSeyler
Nov 5, 2004
Just want to say congrats on your guy winning…..

I’m a big "Fairness and Rules" kinda guy and Bush won the election by the rules.. It was a fair election
(won’t say that about the his campaign šŸ™‚ but the election was.

It pains me to see Bush in there for another 4 years but the rules work both ways and he got it. And lets hope for the best.

Again congrats to all you Bush supporters.


Ric Seyler
R
RicSeyler
Nov 5, 2004
To all the Bush supporters in the thread…..
Just want to say congrats on your guy winning.

I’m a big "Fairness and Rules" kinda guy and Bush won the election by the rules.. It was a fair election
(won’t say that about the his campaign but the election was.

It pains me to see Bush in there for another 4 years but the rules work both ways and he got it. And lets hope for the best.

Again congrats to all you Bush supporters.

Scotty wrote:

http://mindprod.com/iraq.html

Do NOT look at these images


Ric Seyler

D
DD
Nov 6, 2004
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 09:21:37 -0600, RicSeyler
wrote:

To all the Bush supporters in the thread…..
Just want to say congrats on your guy winning.

I’m a big "Fairness and Rules" kinda guy and Bush won the election by the rules.. It was a fair election
(won’t say that about the his campaign but the election was.
It pains me to see Bush in there for another 4 years but the rules work both ways and he got it. And lets hope for the best.
Again congrats to all you Bush supporters.

Scotty wrote:

….wish all of us could display your kind of acceptance, Ric šŸ™‚ You really deserve to call yourself ‘a big
Fairness and Rules kinda guy’.
Thanks for your attitude.

šŸ™‚
Dave Du Plessis
one of uncle George’s supporters
in South Africa

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections