Who knew that Lair had fucked his sister and sent their kid to California.
-
-
Thanks!
Do you understand that there is a place for war?
I am not saying I back every agressive move we have ever made, but I do believe that there is a place for it. Intellegence and all that stuff we have (that the general public does not and cannot hear) exists for a good purpose, and if we have solid reason to believe an attack will happen then I want us to be the first to move.
If I knew someone was going to come into my house and try and kill my family I wouldn't let them take my son and stop them before they take my wife. I'll get em on the porch or at their house before they come close to my family. With that said, I would try to do it without violence, but there are people in this world that just don't reason like that (look at all the problems we have with husbands and wives beating each other up). That is my point.sigpicComment
-
Build your own dreams, or someone else will hire you to build theirs!
Your signature picture has been removed since it contained the Photobucket "upgrade your account" image.Comment
-
Build your own dreams, or someone else will hire you to build theirs!
Your signature picture has been removed since it contained the Photobucket "upgrade your account" image.Comment
-
No, unfortunately I don't. However, not being necessarily from Bin Laden himself doesn't weaken the point of the letter, he didn't pull the entire thing off single-handedly.
I know the letter surfaced a year after 9/11, that's why I mentioned the protests that occurred in the 90's. The letter is just the most concise and well-written summary of the entire sentiment that I can think of. Think of it as the wikipedia entry for 'Why The Middle East Is Pissed Off At The US'.Comment
-
Build your own dreams, or someone else will hire you to build theirs!
Your signature picture has been removed since it contained the Photobucket "upgrade your account" image.Comment
-
Lol, DMVs in NC are private run, and they still suck.
I don't think the plan is for doctors to compete. The whole point of people selecting their physicians is a condition in both Obama and McCains plans.
Difference is that Obama wants to reform current system by mandating universal coverage. In that theory, every person buys in. But that theory fail at understanding, that people who don't currently buy in, don't go to doctors. If every person, who'll throw part of his paycheck in the pot, will expect medical care in return.
In that scenario, insurance rates would go up to meet the demand for health care. Relying on private sector and trying to regulate it would by just as desastorous as current mortgage crisis. This leaves out pharmasutical companies which usher to stock market, what makes you think they'll lower their prices if suddenly everyone needs medical care.
It's a solid theory, but it's naive. It's exactly why Clinton and Edwards made a laughing stock out of him in the primaries debates. It's going to turn into soup-kitchen.
I am not a big fan of McCain plan, either. I think McCains plans has little chanse to succeed in todays Wall Street. But at least McCains plan goes after the financial gain and not physical therapy. McCains plan does create more competion among drug companies. It's partially a continuation of Bush plan. As much as it hurts me to say it, in the past few years generic drugs have become more available and that has only been a start. Pharmacies (NC at least) began having electronic charts and prescriptions, and that helps not sitting in a waiting room for hours. That also created more jobs in pharmasutical field. McCains plan is the way to make market work against itself. Capitalism in action. To me it's naive, because who says that competing companies won't shake hands, like Ford and General Motors did for a long time, but then we'd end up with foreign companies trying to cash in on the lack of competition. Corrupt politics and paying lobbyists could screw this up.Comment
-
Lol, they hate our freedom-fries.
Protests in the 90's occurred all over world, except in US (we were busy getting busy). Those protest are also a direct result of what we did in the 80's. That still doesn't justify Muslim Brotherhood which gave it's way to most anti-western beliefs. It started that way, and terrorist masterminds cashed in on it. We gave them weapons, we gave the reason, now we give them an enemy. We're talking about behind-closed-doors politics and none of us know everything about. I am sure president, whoever he may be is better informed and can make better judgment. It may be wrong.
Spreading democracy is dangerous, and we all know that. Some people don't deserve freedom, and their definition of freedom maybe praying five times a day. It's a Mary-go-round debate, because our cultures are so fundamentally different.
If you're talking about protests in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and so forth. Then hell yeah, they're protesting today to. They are throwing rocks at armed soldiers and wonder why they get shot. They invade a country and lose their own land. They select a leader who screams "death to Israel" then hides while impressionate young men are throwing themselves under tanks. I don't always support Israel, but if a country is forced to live in homes with bunkers, then country desrves to whoop ass of anything that poses them a threat. (Hope I didn't open another can with Israel)Comment
-
Attack you say? How is questioning the credibility of his source an attack? Did you see me further question when stated he cited the dictionary, no because I was content that he found a RELIABLE source? Apparently, you missed that Vedubin acknowledged the questionable integrity of Wikipedia and again, even made it a point to use a second reference as a contingency. The fact that you are stating Wikepidia is a reliable/credible source shows how much you know about its content and how it can be edited by anyone at anytime, it is not governed nor fact checked against or even verified. And you call that an attack?
I will also leave my warning directly at you and keep Vedubin and Aptyp
Of course I read the thread before I joined it, another poor assumption on your part. But I was also under the impression that moderators were not dictators...You single ME out? And then reinforce that you will KEEP the ones who are with you? Ban me dude, it will only reinforce how biased and abusive you are as a moderator. Go ahead, set the record straight so that everyone who opposes you or your views on this board will be banned. DO IT, DO IT!!!!!!Comment
Comment