| From | Message | |
| eki 5/06/2008 12:30:56 IP: 98.19.67.46 |
 Subject: War for oilMessage: "My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East. That will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East." -- John 'Insane' McCain John McCain himself, admitting the real reason why we are in Iraq - ROFLMAO. See it for yourself here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMAlV3Fif8U | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 13:18:14 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: eki, may I ask, what was the FIRST IRAQ WAR ABOUT? WAS IT NOT TOO ABOUT OIL | |
| eki 5/06/2008 13:32:08 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: LOL - i don't know how you intend to spin this one boetie, but we're there because of the oil, my china. Not because they needed to be liberated from Saddam, not because of supposed WMD, not because of so-called terrorism. This is a war FOR OIL. Sometimes politicians actually tell the truth. And this one will come back to bite McCain on the bum. | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 13:34:31 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Do you think the First Iraq WAR was about OIL? YES OR NO | |
| eki 5/06/2008 13:52:41 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: You can stamp your little afrikaner foot at me all you like and demand yes or no answers. Your hero fucked up by telling the truth about what he really knows the war to be about. It's about the OIL. It's always been about the oil. That's all there is to it. Simple. | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 14:44:01 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: OK you don't want to argue the case BECAUSE you know you will LOSE the argument...I thought you had more goedspa in you but aparently not. | |
| eki 5/06/2008 15:02:16 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Just say what you want to say, Boetie. Why must your argument be reliant on a yes or no answer from me??? There is no way McCain can get out of this one. Watch the whole thing in context, and you will know he was saying that we are there for the oil. To say otherwise is just ridiculous. | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 15:48:39 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Ofcourse we are there for OIL...to say otherwise IS ridiculous...TRUE...it would be imprudent to have allowed a CONVICTED DICATOR (he was convicted thru LOSING the Kuwait WAR)to continue to rule after 8 years of giving the finger to the treaty he signed with the US. REMEMBER: Saddam invaded Kuwait FOR OIL...we went their to get that OIL back to the people it belonged to THE KUWAITES HE was A THIEF AND A MURDERER(amongst other things)...and should have been thrown in JAIL, or given the death penalty, the first time round. HE WAS PAROLLED by treaty with the US (remember Swartskopf at the signing). SADDAM VIOLATED that TREATY (remember the OIL for FOOD scam that the french, russians and EVEN your ANC government were involved in) THIS WAS A VIOLATION of HIS PAROLE. He refused ACCESS to UN inspectors who were looking FOR Biological and WMD. Giving ACCESS to inspectors WAS part of his PAROLE TERMS with the US after the first GULF WAR. HIS mass MURDER of Shiites in THE south, after the first war, was in VIOLATION of his PAROLE TERMS with the US. His VIOLATION of the NO FLY ZONES in IRAQ were VIOLATIONS of HIS PAROLE terms with the US. After George Bush left office President CLINTON took over. FOR 8 LONG years he failed to ENFORCE the PAROLE terms of SADDAM. Then George W. Bush took over...HE ENFORCED the terms of the TREATY that SADDAM made with the US. Saddam thought the world would not take ACTION against him in the first IRAQ war. He thought he could MURDER and STEAL from the Kuwaites... HE thought WRONG. He thought (like the sly arab bastard that he was) he could VIOLATE the treaty he made with the US--afterall he had been getting away with murder (literally) for 8 years. HE thought WRONG. BUT to answer your question whether the US is soley BENEFITTING from the OIL profits the ANSWER is ABSOLUTELY NOT. THE IRAQI's (or their government) are the benefactors of the OIL sales. They are the ones receiving the REVENUES from the OIL NOT the USA... So go get fucked with your BULLSHIT. IF anything the FAILURE of the USA was that they did not act sooner to get rid of that USELESS BASTARD. | |
| eki 5/06/2008 16:22:17 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: "He refused ACCESS to UN inspectors who were looking FOR Biological and WMD. Giving ACCESS to inspectors WAS part of his PAROLE TERMS with the US after the first GULF WAR." --- i don't know where you come up with this bullshit, Boetie. "BUT to answer your question whether the US is soley BENEFITTING from the OIL profits the ANSWER is ABSOLUTELY NOT." ---- i never asked that question. Now you're making up lies about what i said. Of course the american people are not the beneficiaries, with gas at $4 per gallon. Who do you think, genius, is benefitting??? At least you admitted the war is for oil. Funny, every time i said that before, you thought i was a tinfoil-hat liberal. Now that McCain himself has admitted it, all you conservatives have to change your talking points. ROFLMAO. | |
| Fred 5/06/2008 16:27:53 IP: 122.57.129.40 | RE: War for oil Message: eki you need to get out and take your cat for a walk once in a while. You are living in this perfect little world in your head and its not good for you. | |
| GM 5/06/2008 16:57:08 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: You Fred need to give your head a shake and realise that the Vark who was the mastermind behind apartheid was an evil SOB who indoctinated you and your family for thinking the way you do. | |
| Fred 5/06/2008 17:00:43 IP: 122.57.129.40 | RE: War for oil Message: Im a big boy GM and i dont need anybody to tell me what the black culture is like. I found that out for myself. Maybe it is time for you to face the realities about what they are and what they are capable of doing and what they are capable of not doing. | |
| GM 5/06/2008 17:06:56 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: I don't care what culture anyone is. There is no way anyone should be treated like they were. | |
| Snowy Smith 5/06/2008 17:34:34 IP: 196.207.35.245 | RE: War for oil Message: War for oil??? After the Religious nutcases, scumbags attacked the Towers in New York Bush immediately said "Who has Oil lets attack them" War for oil??? You are a dumb arse fucken idiot for believing that Propaganda. | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 17:36:45 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Oil-for-Food Scandal Draws Scrutiny to U.N. Monday , September 20, 2004 By David Asman ADVERTISEMENT NEW YORK — It began as a U.N. humanitarian aid program called "Oil-for-Food," but it ended up with Saddam Hussein (search) pocketing billions to become the biggest graft-generating machine ever and enriching some of America's most forceful opponents at the United Nations (search). Plus, some evidence suggests that some of the money ended up in the hands of potential terrorists who are opposed to the United States. [Editor's Note: This is one in a series of articles about the U.N. Oil-for-Food program. Check back tomorrow for the next installment. For background information mentioned on FOX News Channel's "Breaking Point," click here.] The roots of the scandal date back to 1991, when a U.N.-backed and U.S.-led coalition expelled Saddam from Kuwait following his hostile takeover of the neighboring country. Although Saddam lost the war, he walked away with one important victory -- he got to stay in power in Iraq. Thirteen years later, a second U.S.-led coalition made of a smaller group of nations than the first effort finally knocked Saddam out of business. And it did so without the help of the United Nations, which failed to pass a resolution backing the U.S. effort. As the death toll rises in Iraq -- the number of U.S. military casualties is now above 1,000 and Iraqi citizens continue to die daily from insurgent attacks -- the question arises: Can the United Nations help now? A new FOX News poll finds that 54 percent of the U.S. public believes the United Nations does not reflect the values of average Americans. Only 29 percent say that U.N. policies reflect said values. “I believe the U.N., parts of it, have been corrupt for years. But this went to a whole new level,” said Rep. Christopher Shays (search), R-Conn., chairman of the House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations. Shays is leading one of several Oil-for-Food probes by the federal government. The General Accountability Office has already pegged Saddam’s Oil-for-Food take at $10.1 billion. It could end up being a lot more. Shays says Iraqis aren't the only victims -- Americans are too. “We're talking about American lives that are being lost in an attempt to bring democracy to Iraq,” Shays said. If France, Russia, China and Germany had told Saddam it was time to back down and honor his commitments, Shays said it’s possible the United States may not have needed to go to war against Saddam. But why did these countries really object to a second U.S.-led war against Iraq? Some evidence suggests that those countries that said they were opposing the Bush administration on principle were actually making billions from Oil-for-Food. “I think clearly, American blood is in the hands of a number of European countries, who could have put pressure on Saddam, who could've looked him in the eye and said, ‘the United States is coming in,'" Shays said. “And to me, some of the explanation clearly has to be the Oil-for-Food program.” Shays added that there is a chance some of the insurgents now operating against the United States and the new Iraqi government are using Oil-for-Food money in their terror campaign. “I think it's not only possible that insurgents are using Oil-for-Food money -- I think it's very likely,” Shays said. One casualty was Ihasan Karim (search), the Iraqi official heading an inquiry into the Oil-for-Food program. On July 1, a bomb placed under his car exploded in Baghdad, killing him, and U.S. officials in Iraq told FOX News that they believe Oil-for-Food was the motive in the assassination. That wouldn't surprise Shays. “I don’t know who murdered him. But I can tell you this: There are a lot of people who don't want this story to come out,” Shays said. Shays places part of the blame on people inside the United Nations, even though U.N. officials authorized an independent investigation into the scandal. “They’re doing this investigation, but only after they were outed by an Iraqi free press, and a government leak from the Iraqi governing council,” Shays said. Shays said the man heading up the probe, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker (search), has a tough job ahead. “Paul Volcker is going to succeed or fail based on his power of persuasion and the good will of the U.N., but you're basically asking the member states to sign their own death warrant, and so it's kind of hard for me to imagine he's going to get the cooperation he wants,” Shays said. Volcker said it will take until at least next spring to finish his report, and in the meantime, he doesn't seem willing to give Congress the cooperation it wants. "There is a lot of smoke," Volcker told FOX News on June 23, when asked if he thinks the Oil-for-Food program was corrupt. "There are obviously big problems, and we want to see how big they were and why did they happen. Why did all this happen, in some sense, under everybody's noses?" Shays and Sen. Norm Coleman (search) -- leaders of two of at least five federal Oil-for-Food investigations -- have started firing off subpoenas. “We have just begun this process,” said Coleman, R-Minn. “But we’re trying to sort out this hornet's nest of corruption, of evil. And it’s going to take a little bit of time [and] patience.” The problems at the United Nations have led some to question its value. A FOX News poll found that 64 percent of Americans say the United Nations has not been an effective partner in the War on Terror. Yet Shays and Coleman both said in interviews they believe a role exists for an organization like the United Nations. “I think we need the U.N. But we need it to be an honest institution,” Shays said. “When there are mistakes made, you have to uncover them and deal with them.” Shays said that the very least, a major shakeup needs to take place. “The U.N. is so important, we’ve been willing to look the other way when we see things we don't like. I think the Oil-for-Food program busted that.” Coleman said he believes the United Nations had redeemable qualities, and he hoped the investigation would lead to greater transparency and more credibility for the world body. “I’m not willing to kind of cash it in … they’re not the Evil Empire, the United Nations,” Coleman said. For more information — including government documents, U.N. | |
| eki 5/06/2008 17:40:35 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Snowy, old chap, you are going to have to change your tack now that McCain has admitted the war is for oil.... Even your pal Boetie has admitted that! (hehehehahahaha) Did you even READ this thread? And by the way, it might be news to you, but Iraq was NOT involved in the 9/11 bombings. But how can we expect you to believe that when you have your head so firmly up your arse? | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 17:51:57 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: "He refused ACCESS to UN inspectors who were looking FOR Biological and WMD. Giving ACCESS to inspectors WAS part of his PAROLE TERMS with the US after the first GULF WAR." --- i don't know where you come up with this bullshit, Boetie. READ AND LEARN Eki... Saddam Hussein's Defiance of United Nations Resolutions -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated sixteen United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) designed to ensure that Iraq does not pose a threat to international peace and security. In addition to these repeated violations, he has tried, over the past decade, to circumvent UN economic sanctions against Iraq, which are reflected in a number of other resolutions. As noted in the resolutions, Saddam Hussein was required to fulfill many obligations beyond the withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Specifically, Saddam Hussein was required to, among other things: allow international weapons inspectors to oversee the destruction of his weapons of mass destruction; not develop new weapons of mass destruction; destroy all of his ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometers; stop support for terrorism and prevent terrorist organizations from operating within Iraq; help account for missing Kuwaitis and other individuals; return stolen Kuwaiti property and bear financial liability for damage from the Gulf War; and he was required to end his repression of the Iraqi people. Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated each of the following resolutions: UNSCR 678 - November 29, 1990 Iraq must comply fully with UNSCR 660 (regarding Iraq's illegal invasion of Kuwait) "and all subsequent relevant resolutions." Authorizes UN Member States "to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area." UNSCR 686 - March 2, 1991 Iraq must release prisoners detained during the Gulf War. Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War. Iraq must accept liability under international law for damages from its illegal invasion of Kuwait. UNSCR 687 - April 3, 1991 Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities." Iraq must "unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material" or any research, development or manufacturing facilities. Iraq must "unconditionally accept" the destruction, removal or rendering harmless "under international supervision" of all "ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 KM and related major parts and repair and production facilities." Iraq must not "use, develop, construct or acquire" any weapons of mass destruction. Iraq must reaffirm its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Creates the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to verify the elimination of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs and mandated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verify elimination of Iraq's nuclear weapons program. Iraq must declare fully its weapons of mass destruction programs. Iraq must not commit or support terrorism, or allow terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq must cooperate in accounting for the missing and dead Kuwaitis and others. Iraq must return Kuwaiti property seized during the Gulf War. UNSCR 688 - April 5, 1991 "Condemns" repression of Iraqi civilian population, "the consequences of which threaten international peace and security." Iraq must immediately end repression of its civilian population. Iraq must allow immediate access to international humanitarian organizations to those in need of assistance. UNSCR 707 - August 15, 1991 "Condemns" Iraq's "serious violation" of UNSCR 687. "Further condemns" Iraq's noncompliance with IAEA and its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iraq must halt nuclear activities of all kinds until the Security Council deems Iraq in full compliance. Iraq must make a full, final and complete disclosure of all aspects of its weapons of mass destruction and missile programs. Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. Iraq must cease attempts to conceal or move weapons of mass destruction, and related materials and facilities. Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors to conduct inspection flights throughout Iraq. Iraq must provide transportation, medical and logistical support for UN and IAEA inspectors. UNSCR 715 - October 11, 1991 Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors. UNSCR 949 - October 15, 1994 "Condemns" Iraq's recent military deployments toward Kuwait. Iraq must not utilize its military or other forces in a hostile manner to threaten its neighbors or UN operations in Iraq. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors. Iraq must not enhance its military capability in southern Iraq. UNSCR 1051 - March 27, 1996 Iraq must report shipments of dual-use items related to weapons of mass destruction to the UN and IAEA. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. UNSCR 1060 - June 12, 1996 "Deplores" Iraq's refusal to allow access to UN inspectors and Iraq's "clear violations" of previous UN resolutions. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. UNSCR 1115 - June 21, 1997 "Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access" to UN inspectors, which constitutes a "clear and flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview. UNSCR 1134 - October 23, 1997 "Condemns repeated refusal of Iraqi authorities to allow access" to UN inspectors, which constitutes a "flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687, 707, 715, and 1060. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. Iraq must give immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to Iraqi officials whom UN inspectors want to interview. UNSCR 1137 - November 12, 1997 "Condemns the continued violations by Iraq" of previous UN resolutions, including its "implicit threat to the safety of" aircraft operated by UN inspectors and its tampering with UN inspector monitoring equipment. Reaffirms Iraq's responsibility to ensure the safety of UN inspectors. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. UNSCR 1154 - March 2, 1998 Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access, and notes that any violation would have the "severest consequences for Iraq." UNSCR 1194 - September 9, 1998 "Condemns the decision by Iraq of 5 August 1998 to suspend cooperation with" UN and IAEA inspectors, which constitutes "a totally unacceptable contravention" of its obligations under UNSCR 687, 707, 715, 1060, 1115, and 1154. Iraq must cooperate fully with UN and IAEA weapons inspectors, and allow immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access. UNSCR 1205 - November 5, 1998 "Condemns the decision by Iraq of 31 October 1998 to cease cooperation" with UN inspectors as "a flagrant violation" of UNSCR 687 and other resolutions. Iraq must provide "immediate, complete and unconditional cooperation" with UN and IAEA inspectors. UNSCR 1284 - December 17, 1999 Created the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission (UNMOVIC) to replace previous weapon inspection team (UNSCOM). Iraq must allow UNMOVIC "immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access" to Iraqi officials and facilities. Iraq must fulfill its commitment to return Gulf War prisoners. Calls on Iraq to distribute humanitarian goods and medical supplies to its people and address the needs of vulnerable Iraqis without discrimination. Additional UN Security Council Statements In addition to the legally binding UNSCRs, the UN Security Council has also issued at least 30 statements from the President of the UN Security Council regarding Saddam Hussein's continued violations of UNSCRs. The list of statements includes: UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 28, 1991 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, February 5, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, February 19, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, February 28, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, March 6, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, March 11, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, March 12, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, April 10, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 17, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, July 6, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, September 2, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, November 23, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, November 24, 1992 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, January 8, 1993 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, January 11, 1993 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 18, 1993 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 28, 1993 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, November 23, 1993 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, October 8, 1994 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, March 19, 1996 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 14, 1996 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, August 23, 1996 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, December 30, 1996 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, June 13, 1997 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, October 29, 1997 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, November 13, 1997 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, December 3, 1997 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, December 22, 1997 UN Security Council Presidential Statement, January 14, 1998 | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 17:54:32 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: FOR OIL YES AND FOR WORLD DOMINATION,THERE IS PROVE OF THAT THE USA,WANTS TO DOMINATE THE WORLD,Anyone that stood or stands in the way of the USA HAS BEEN DEALT WITH,JUST READ THE HISTORY OF SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES AND EVEN SOUTH AFRICA,THE BELGIAN CONGO THE MIDDLE EAST | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 17:58:00 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Boetie I CAN ALSO WRITE SUCH A LONG LIST OF COUNTER CLAIMS,THAT WILL SINK YOURS,BUT WHY, YOU HAVE PROVEN FUCKALL IN ANY CASE,you are just a RIGHTWING BASTARD | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 18:07:50 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Eki GIVEN the attacks by kaffir muslims on 911, given the fact that SADDAM brazenly defied the UN for 8 years, given the fact HE then corrupted the UN through the OIL for FOOD scam (Saddam made BILLIONS from this. Kof Anan didn't do too badly as well.) GIVEN the UN failure to enforce the treaty and their own shenanegans, Given Saddam's HATRED for the USA surely you SHOULD see that HE WAS a threat to DEMOCRACY everywhere... with those BILLIONS he could have caused a lot of heartache around the world... The US was not WITHOUT cause to take remove SADDAM from power...SADDAM had violated the TREATY he signed with the US. but defend SADDAM all you want...I am glad to see the BASTARD hung by the neck... Perhaps you see it differently BUT Chamberlain also saw Hitler differently and Churchill and the world had to clean up the mess. | |
| Fred 5/06/2008 18:34:30 IP: 219.89.27.239 | RE: War for oil Message: You wont get through to eksie as long as she is living in lala land. She has this theory about the perfect world and that has become her reality. I wish it was that easy for us all to. We consentrate on the 10% that makes sense to us and live our lives according to that. TIME FOR YOUR NEW LOVESTORY LIEWE HEKSIE !!! | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 19:17:26 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Boetie you insist with your BULLSHIT ABOUT SADDAM,that COCK AND BULL STORY HAS LONG BEEN PROVEN TO BE UNTRUE..and even now,more and more prove of why the USA WENT TO WAR AGAINST Iraq was a PLANNED WAR,and SADDAM was the SCAPEGOAT.Boetie by now if you have a brain,should know this......YOU CAN FOOL A LOT OF PEOPLE ALL THE TIME,BUT IN THAT TIME THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE THAT CAN SEE RIGHT THROUGH THE SHAM,and TODAYS GENERATION WILL NEVER BE FOOLED BY THAT MOB OF GANGSTERS THAT USED TO FOOL PEOPLE IN MAKING THEM BELIEVE IN A GOD THAT STOOD BY THESE MOBSTERS BIG POWER WAR MONGRELS ..GEDAAN EN KLAAR | |
| waresuidafrikaner. 5/06/2008 19:20:51 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Fred you tell Boetie..that he wont get through to eki......WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET THROUGH TO YOU..BUT YOUR BRAIN IS FUCKED,but not the brain............................. of eki | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 19:41:57 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: As I said WSA you can defend SADDAM all you want BUT I am glad the Useless Murdering Bastard was hung by the NECK. | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 19:53:12 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Just SHOW ME WERE AND WHEN DID I EVER DEFEND SADDAM,PROVE IT TO ME ..MATE....AND IF YOU CANNOT THEN WHATEVER YOU POST IN THE FUTURE WILL BE TAKEN BY ME A BULLSHIT | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 20:13:51 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Iraq was a PLANNED WAR,and SADDAM was the SCAPEGOAT. Your words not mine... | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 20:25:09 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Yes not your words,yes indeed not,but you cannot leave it at that,after your so long long post in defense of the war in Iraq.line after line after line about...UN SECURITY COUNCIL STATEMENT..??????? | |
| Boetie 5/06/2008 20:30:21 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Ja WSA, SADDAM was the poor Innocent SCAPEGOAT of EVIL George W Bush's irrational hostility...LOL | |
| Fred 5/06/2008 20:37:16 IP: 219.89.27.239 | RE: War for oil Message: That is the mentality of the ostrich liberals. They will either defend out of ignorance of ignore the facts but whatever the cost they will persist with their perfect little world. | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/06/2008 21:29:58 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: Now. YUSNOW? can I SAY not my words but.....Yours.....Boetie | |
| Fred 5/07/2008 00:04:45 IP: 219.89.27.239 | RE: War for oil Message: What a stupid topic if you really think about it. Everybody knew the answer even before the first shots were fired and still narrow minded people like eksie still dwells on it. EISH !!! If Saddam were left to exterminate his own people she and people like her would've cried foul towards the same Mr. Bush for not doing something........STUPID STUPID people. | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/07/2008 00:30:21 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: MR BUSH SE GAT EN JOU GAT IS JOU KOP...Fred | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/07/2008 01:51:23 IP: 121.219.160.63 | RE: War for oil Message: IS DIT WAAR | |
| peter 5/07/2008 06:43:57 IP: 80.89.212.33 | RE: War for oil Message: in the very near future, the usa will not go to war over oil, but FOOD. | |
| eki 5/07/2008 10:30:02 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Ja Boetie, you can cut 'n paste all the kak you like, it still doesn't change the fact that the war was and is about OIL. If it were about removing a dictator, then why doesn't USA take out Mugabe? Because there's no oil over there. Ja, Boetie and Fred, you should try using logic sometimes. | |
| Snowy Smith 5/07/2008 10:53:43 IP: 196.207.35.245 | RE: War for oil Message: But defend SADDAM all you want...I am glad to see the BASTARD hung by the neck... Boetie Agreed What that scumbag dictator SADDAM did to his own people I am very glad they hung him, arrogant bastard. The hanging was far too swift they should have tortured him like he did to his own people. ROBERT dictator scumbag you are next. | |
| eki 5/07/2008 11:06:44 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Don't hold your breath, snowy. | |
| GM 5/07/2008 11:11:03 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: ja....and the shooter should've shot that Varkvoet dead the first time around. Varkvoet, the white supremacist, evil bastard, architect of apartheid. | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 11:15:20 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: eki you seem shocked and hurt that the 'evil" USA doesn't send troops into zimboobwe...its called real politik...ever heard of that before...the boons have nothing to offer ANYONE...besides the US did try a purely "humanitarian" military mission in efrica--remember Somalia...they are not going to go and do it again...unless it is mutually beneficial for all. BESIDES the Efrican Union said they could take care of it, your president Mbeki said he'd take care of it....LOL Saddam was a threat not only to oil supply but to world stability and peace I suppose you would prefer to have Saddam murdering BASTARD still in power? Eki are Saddams biggest supporter? Ag Shame | |
| eki 5/07/2008 11:27:21 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Every time someone has something to say against the war, you automatically assume they were in favour of Saddam. I was never in favour of Saddam, and have never said so. Get that straight in your brain. I seem shocked and hurt that the USA won't take out Mugabe? Don't make me laugh. I know it's never going to happen. YOU are the one who continues to entertain the notion that USA has honorable intentions when it goes to war, that the real reason they went to war was to take out the evil saddam.... Come on, give it up already, you clown, McCain has already admitted we're in the middle east for the oil. | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 12:05:55 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Do you think it was a good thing that Saddam was hung by his neck and that a democratic state was formed in Iraq? Personally I do. Perhaps you don't. You yourself have said the US has not BENEFITTED from the Iraqi oil thus the 3.50 per gallon prices. So it is not DIRECT cause for the WAR but an UNDERLYING cause. Saddams VIOLATION of the 1991 treaty WAS the DIRECT cause of the war. The WORLD need to protect the OIL supply is an underlying cause. (I hope this is not to complicated for you to understand). I think it a WISE thing to remove a DICTATOR who had meglomaniac tendancies, like Saddam had, from power ESPECIALLY since he could single handedly disrupt the WORLD oil supply. Perhaps you think differently? It is one of the reasons why I favor that the USA becomes energy INDEPENDENT--especially from the camel jockey bastards in the middle east. We need to explore for more oil on ALASKA's north shore, build more nuclear plants, invest in Solar and wind energy, and build more energy efficient homes and cars. Perhaps you think differently? Since Saddam had violated the 1991 treaty numerous times I see no problem with the invasion or the war because the US had every right to do so. Perhaps you see differently? | |
| eki 5/07/2008 12:47:37 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: Ah, where do i begin ... "Do you think it was a good thing that Saddam was hung by his neck and that a democratic state was formed in Iraq?" ------- A democratic state was formed... oh really? You planning your next holiday in sunny democratic Iraq? You're still holding fast to your ideas that the war was to take out an evil dictator, even though you admit the "underlying" reason was oil... "We need to explore for more oil on ALASKA's north shore, build more nuclear plants, invest in Solar and wind energy, and build more energy efficient homes and cars." --------- I agree we need more nuclear plants, to invest in solar and wind energy and to build more energy efficient homes and cars. (wow, we can agree on SOMETHING). But Boetie, Bush himself has admitted USA is addicted to oil. And he's wasted 8 years in office doing nothing about the energy crisis we now face. How stupid is that? Dumbest president ever. Imagine how much better off we would be now if he had put his arse into gear and invested in the above like they have in Europe. Ah, but there are no mega profits for mega-corporations in that, is there? | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 12:50:54 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: are you holding up Europe as an example--with their $9.45 a gallon for petrol...LOL eki writes: democratic state was formed... oh really? You planning your next holiday in sunny democratic Iraq? NO neither am I ever going to go back to DEMOCRATIC souf efrica...your point? | |
| eki 5/07/2008 13:12:44 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: "are you holding up Europe as an example--with their $9.45 a gallon for petrol...LOL" Yes i am. At $9.45 per gallon, people can choose to use public transport. When it goes up to $9.45 per gallon in the USA, what are the people going to do with their big SUVs, living out in the suburbs far away from jobs and shops without public transport? Hulle gaan kak. The europeans are already used to high gas prices and have an alternative in place. And exactly what is YOUR point that you wouldn't go on holiday in DEMOCRATIC South africa either? Nevermind ... i don't care. | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 13:59:55 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: nevermind that SA has the highest crime rate in the world, and has one of the most inept corrupt governmunts in the world--hey its DEMOCRATIC...LOL See you and me are on the same page about "DEMOCRACY"--just different countries...You think Iraq isn't democratic, I think Souf Efrica isn't democratic... AS to you HIGH prices are GOOD theory...that is just typical socialist bullshit...having your governmunt TAX you death is not FREEDOM... Let the MARKET decide...people are already switching to smaller cars with better milage WITHOUT GOVERNMUNT help... BESIDES: there is so much oil in the world...they have just discovered the LARGEST ever deposit in history off the coast of Brazil... And if they tap the North Shore of Alaska the US will be in the clover... What the market will bear is the price of OIL...and I think it is reaching its high point... | |
| eki 5/07/2008 15:01:20 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: "having your governmunt TAX you death is not FREEDOM..." Taxes are the price of civilization, Boetie. Take a look at what people get for their taxes instead of fearing the taxman. It pays for the roads, schools, police force etc. In Europe they don't have to pay out of their ears for healthcare and education. Hell, in USA they don't even come and pick up the trash, you have to pay someone to do it. Ja, you've got freedom alright. You're free to go bankrupt paying for healthcare and for your children to go to college. But heaven forbid they should tax the mega-corporations a bit more so that people can have free healthcare and send their children to college. Oh no, that would be "socialist"... | |
| EKLAB 5/07/2008 15:13:30 IP: 41.242.66.161 | RE: War for oil Message: Boetie wins 10 - 0. Sorry Eki you lose. Some advice- When confronted with a logical argument hurling abuse devoid of substance or fact WILL lose you the argument. A good counter argument seems to work for most not an abusive emotional retort devoid of factual content or basic logic. Think very hard about what McCain said. I will give you a little clue in order not to tax that ever so small brain of yours. "My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East. That will prevent US FROM HAVING EVER TO SEND OUR YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN INTO CONFLICT AGAIN IN THE MIDDLE EAST." -- John 'Insane' McCain Think hard young Eki - the answer lies within my capital emphasis - and think, think, think..... | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 16:06:34 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: eki writes: "Taxes are the price of civilization, Boetie." YES they are BUT being taxed to death IS certainly NOT the price of Civilization or FREEDOM...it is the price of Socialist Tyranny!!! I do not need or want a nanny state, telling me what to do, and when to do it, and how to do it...No I can, and have always relied on MYSELF and my abilities. Why can't the hangers on and the free loaders do the same as the rest of us? | |
| GM 5/07/2008 16:36:29 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: I guess Boetie will not want to live in Canada. Thank goodness. hehehehe | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 16:55:18 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Canada, where is Canada? LOL Too fucken cold and the govmunt takes 70% of your money... | |
| GM 5/07/2008 17:02:10 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: Don't exaggerate now. We live in harmony and we take care of all our people. | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 17:14:16 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: "We live in harmony and we take care of all our people." well good for you...ja right... ok then 62% great... | |
| GM 5/07/2008 18:03:14 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: You are still a bit high. | |
| eki 5/07/2008 18:32:17 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: As usual, Boetie doesn't have the facts. Ask any Canadian or Brit if they'd like to swap taxes and have our healthcare system here in the USA. They will laugh their arses off. | |
| Fred 5/07/2008 18:49:13 IP: 219.89.25.99 | RE: War for oil Message: As usual eksie is happily cruising along in Lala land and quite happy to keep her eyes closed to the realities. Wish I could live in my own theoretical world !!! | |
| eki 5/07/2008 21:11:00 IP: 98.19.67.46 | RE: War for oil Message: As usual, freddy has nothing to contribute but drivel. | |
| GM 5/07/2008 21:20:31 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: Yes, we are spoilt. It gets even better when we turn 65. It's almost all FREE. | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 21:35:31 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: There are no free lunches--somebody is paying...but from what I hear its NOT you...you are Freeloading off other peoples MONEY...way to go!!! | |
| GM 5/07/2008 21:39:55 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: Right now someone's freeloading off my money. I will get my turn to be a free loader. Thats the way it works here. Got a problem with that? | |
| Boetie 5/07/2008 21:42:44 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: If everyone is paying the same amount its ok--but that is not the case is it now...some pay much more than others...isn't that true...as well...SUCKERS!!! | |
| GM 5/07/2008 21:46:19 IP: 67.70.21.195 | RE: War for oil Message: Ofcourse, we like to share the wealth. Got a problem with that? | |
| EKLAB 5/08/2008 02:14:01 IP: 41.242.66.161 | RE: War for oil Message: Eki "My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East. That will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East." -- John 'Insane' McCain Where do you see McCain saying the US waged war in the Middle East for oil? He does NOT say this. What he does say is the US will never be forced to use men and women ("send our young men and women") in a war in the middle east if oil is removed from being a strategic mineral. We can draw from this that any potential future war would be missile, etc., dominated, and not troop (men and women) dominated once dependence on oil is removed from the equation. In the run up to the Iraq war the US considered many types of warfare strategies and chose troop invasion to protect the oilfields (amoungst other reasons). Not to steal the oil! not to secure the oil for selfish interest!.... but to PROTECT the oil as an internationally strategic mineral.(rememeber the Iraq Kuwait war and the many burning oil wells which took months to subdue and even longer to extinguish?) McCain does NOT say the war was about oil! McCain does not say that without oil there would be no war! Eki - don't do as that complete bonehead Michael Moore and twist and lie! | |
| RSApost 5/08/2008 04:28:01 IP: 196.35.158.180 | RE: War for oil Message: Eki. Who would have thought that your small factual posting would bring out the wrongly guided patriotism in certain individuals? It is forgotten that Kuwait was historically an enclave of Iraq. Sadam was given card blanche by the USA for decades, supplied with sophisticated weapons; and when he dropped mustard gas on the Kurd’s, no one blinked an eye. When asked to kiss the USA’s ass in more ways then one he made the mistake of telling them to fuck off as by right he was a legitimate leader of his country. His other mistake was in telling the USA that 9/11 was the deserved wrath of God, orchestrated by Zionist forces and its MOSSAD terrorist handle. The rest is now history. No connection to Al Qaida has been produced. No WMD’s where ever found or produced. No plane parts, bodies or luggage was ever discovered or produced in the Pentagon crash. (The wings of the alleged plane disappeared mysteriously in to blue smoke!!!) Jews dancing and filming the trade tower attack from across the Bay in New York (found in possession of box cutters and huge amounts of cash and in depth knowledge of the impending attack where shuttled of to Israel in the cover of darkness) Most Jewish and Israeli individuals where pre-warned of the twin tower attack hence the limited fatality of this particular group. Bush held meetings with family members of Bin Laden in hours prior to the attack - allegedly discussing business deals!? (Maybe they made the mistake to tell him to fuck off – and we all know what happens then?!) Oil, lies, greed and revenge were the reason for the war in Iraq. More civilians have since being slaughtered then ever during Sadam’s rule. In excess of 3000 young Americans have been sacrificed on the altar of greed, profiteering and shallow egos; a nd the show goes on. What did the USA do regarding renegade countries and leaders in Burma, North Korea, Egypt, Israel, Zimbabwe, and so forth? Finger up the ass policies from a country whose presidents get blowjobs from Interns and contracts are handed to friends and anyone that kisses ass. USA and Israeli companies are shovelling billions from Iraq contracts. Direct pipeline from Iraq to Israel, once defunct, is pumping like crazy. Bush and his ilk and kin are cashing in big time. Leaders of the USA are a vile excuse of a white ethnic group; proof that white savages unfortunately still do exist in our time. They have their young butchered on foreign battlefields like chickens in a mass hatchery. It is the blood stained American dream. | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/08/2008 04:34:40 IP: 124.181.130.159 | RE: War for oil Message: RSApost,JUST WHAT ARE YOU ON ABOUT,all I CAN READ IS A LOT OF SHIT OF NO INTEREST | |
| RSApost 5/08/2008 04:42:56 IP: 196.35.158.180 | RE: War for oil Message: Was not directed at paedophiles! | |
| EKLAB 5/08/2008 05:00:11 IP: 41.242.66.161 | RE: War for oil Message: RSApost. What utter drivel! Hardly worth a respopnse. "Eki. Who would have thought that your small factual posting...". Wrong. What fact did Eki post? "It is forgotten that Kuwait was historically an enclave of Iraq." Perhaps it is and perhaps it isn't BUT what point are you making. That somehow Iraq must have some ancestoral right to invade Kuwait? My goodness are we going to go back in time and unravel this world based on some biblical heritage. Certainly Israel could be onto a good thing here. "Sadam was given card (sic) blanche by the USA for decades, supplied with sophisticated weapons; and when he dropped mustard gas on the Kurd’s, no one blinked an eye." - Again your point being? .....the world certainly DID MORE than "blink an eye". The USA invaded Iraq if you recall which culminated in Hussein being hanged! The rest of your drivel is so revealing of your own bias and inability to deal with the truth . We have to live on this planet with complete fanatical morons like RSApost. "None so blind as those who refuse to see. | |
| RSApost 5/08/2008 15:57:39 IP: 196.35.158.180 | RE: War for oil Message: eklab. Eki posted all the facts. There was not more to add. >That somehow Iraq must have some ancestral right to invade Kuwait?< Yes! That is the point! The Jews are doing it, and by the way, having no reason for it what so ever, other then this shit-load of nonsense from the Bible and their very own invention, the Torah. With Kuwait we are not talking biblical times – look it up. Land pocketed by some smart ass Sheik – stolen with USA help from Iraq. >he dropped mustard gas on the Kurd’s, no one blinked an eye."< >The USA invaded Iraq if you recall< Yes, we all recall, years after the event. Also remember, you ignorant soul, last week Turkey attacked the Kurd’s and killed 100, in Iraq. Any objections?? It was then and is now that the Kurdish population falls under the invisible group by the USA – “for Oil and Country”; the Kurd’s stand in the way. Even Adolf Hitler on his little cloud in heaven must be smiling for being outdone by Bush, the supreme leader of doff and doffer. Dealing with truth is never a good thing but when founded on facts like I have done, it makes interesting reading and as in this string of debate, exposes the USA and Israel for what they are: “UN legitimised terrorists, murderers of innocent civilians, butchers of woman and children, cheating, abomination of perverse proportions”. When all fails pull out: “fanatic, blind, conspiracist, anti-semite, racist, fascist, Nazi”, (I can live with that!) and indoctrinated falsehood turns magically in to the yellow brick road for people like you. >..non so blind< This is exactly what bites arrogant asses, and the USA must not complain when it is their turn. The crawling onslaught has already begun. For any woman or child killed, two Americans will live in a cardboard box under a bridge or flyover. (See Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Houghton, Washington, Detroit – see the foreclosures of properties – see the creeping demise of the Industry – see the blood stained body bags coming home from foreign shores) It is you next – BOH! | |
| EKLAB 5/08/2008 16:24:03 IP: 41.242.73.140 | RE: War for oil Message: IDIOT! | |
| RSApost 5/09/2008 04:15:23 IP: 196.35.158.180 | RE: War for oil Message: eklab. I thought as much. You did not have to confirm it. You know you could get help? Some idiots even made it from under a USA bridge in to the night shelter. If they are young of cause they get send to foreign shores to be butchered. But then again, getting a free body bag is possible better then the cardboard box under the flyover. The Land of opportunity and of the free!? My foot! | |
| EKLAB 5/09/2008 11:08:18 IP: 41.242.73.140 | RE: War for oil Message: RSApost - There is no point in try to enter into discussion with someone so avasive of the facts. Try, just for a start to explain where the airplanes and their occupants disappeared to. | |
| RSApost 5/09/2008 13:20:55 IP: 196.35.158.179 | RE: War for oil Message: Eklab, what is the sense in asking me the question when I had ask for an answer? But lets see what you have to say. The plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon did clearly left a hole not big enough to have the entire plane slip into. Other then it folding up before impact, larger segments of the wings would have remained outside. As the wings carry the fuel and the plane was full to the prim, large amounts of kerosene would have been splattered all over, as the explosion would have created a massive splash driving it outwards. No kerosene splashes or even minor residue was found on the ground outside the building or on the walls. The explosion itself was indisputably ID’d by a number of experts as being entirely inconsistent with a kerosene explosion, which does manifest itself in a very black cloud with a greyish outline pillowing extensively for some time. The Pentagon explosion clearly shows a red/orange/white explosion, consistent with high liquid explosives consistent with missile impacts combined with the remaining missile fuel in such a projectile. The camera taking the film from the Garage across the open space show no slowed down plane or its shadow coming in. The lamp poles on the highway meters away remain untouched, in spite of allegations that the plane came in at near to standard landing position. Taking the scenario that the plane found itself high enough to clear the lamp poles, it would have meant that the pilot had to nose-dive the plane in its final descent. This in turn would have resulted in the plane diving downwards in to the building. This again in turn would have resulted in the plane not projecting itself horizontally in to the building and travel to the buildings inner perimeter, but it would have struck slightly nose down. The result would have been more debris at the immediate outskirt of the building. A flip over of the plane would have been more likely. As no parts other then one (later produced in photo evidence) landing wheel with one stabilizer attached and one remnant of a jet turbine ring and shell piece (identical to a lot of jet driven devices) where found, it was concluded by independent experts that the crash scene was not in line with a crash site of an alleged Airbus. No luggage, other then one orange suitcase was found. The suitcase could not be identified or matched to a passenger (if the flight and the plane would have been the correct scenario). No human remains where recovered from the site. The argument that the explosion, heat, and fire would have burnt the alleged victims to ash has bee dispelled conclusively by experienced medical people, coroners, and specialists in cremation methods. This is like the Holocaust fable – 6 million (oops, now adjusted to 4 million) unfortunate victims) – not enough remains to make a thousand and a half and no cremation facilities to do the magic David Copperfield disappearance trick! I rest my case. (For now if need be.) The USA public is so stupid, and I can speak from experience, as I have to visit that piece of “make belief” continent regularly, that I know they would eat chicken shit if the government tells them so. They would even drape it in the star spangled dishcloth and stand to attention before swallowing it. Who else would let a government send its children to be slaughtered in foreign countries and kiss the flag when the body bags come home? USA – land of the dumbest asses on the globe. | |
| Erika 5/09/2008 17:47:23 IP: 205.188.117.132 | RE: War for oil Message: Eki...who cares if the war is for oil or not...the world goes round and round only because everything we use needs oil. Who are all these libs trying to fool... Are u saying you don't drive a car? don't use any plastics? Don't buy anything that comes from more then 5 miles away from your house? Don't use a lawnmower? the entire world revolves around oil...so if you said no to any of the above...wtf are you doing living in the States...Go live in Borneo and get your protein from bugs under leaves. | |
| Fred 5/09/2008 18:05:37 IP: 122.57.135.175 | RE: War for oil Message: Like I said its a real stupid topic. Liberals like eki spends their whole life ignoring the realities. They make a habit out of blaming other people that has the guts to do something about a specific problem that they themselves rather would've ignored (until it was to late that is). | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/09/2008 20:40:05 IP: 124.180.54.210 | RE: War for oil Message: YES YES ,it was for oil and for the increase of political Domination of the world,but bear this in mind Erika No nation ever in the history of the world,did so by BOMBING KILLING MURDERING INNOCENT CIVILIANS ON SUCH A MASSIVE SCALE AS THIS, WAS DONE BY THE USA | |
| Erika 5/09/2008 21:08:20 IP: 64.12.117.132 | RE: War for oil Message: Thats because in the *ou Dae* they didn't have bombs like they do now, they just had pots of boiling oil and canon balls... | |
| waresuidafrikaner 5/09/2008 21:16:58 IP: 124.180.54.210 | RE: War for oil Message: The reply of and by, a stupid Bastard | |
| RSApost 5/10/2008 13:16:26 IP: 196.209.29.205 | RE: War for oil Message: >>>The reply of and by, a stupid Bastard<<< LEGAL SPEAK by the Wertheim imposter. Would like to be recognized as a "legal eagle"!!? Belly landing accomplished! | |
| eki 5/10/2008 17:02:46 IP: 75.117.192.136 | RE: War for oil Message: Well, Erica, all i can say is it shouldn't come as a surprise to me to hear that you don't care that a war is being waged over oil since the world needs it to go round... After all, you and Fred and all the people on this board who support the war thought the apartheid government was also fine and dandy. You only think of material gain, and never the human suffering it entails, so that some people can get what they want. You're selfish, hedonistic, egotistical white supremecists. I despise you. | |
| Boetie 5/10/2008 17:29:03 IP: 24.206.230.64 | RE: War for oil Message: Boetie: "Well, Erica, all i can say is it shouldn't come as a surprise to me to hear that you don't care that a war is being waged over oil since the world needs it to go round... You only think of material gain, and never the human suffering it entails, so that some people can get what they want." Eki think about a world WITHOUT OIL? GET REAL... You'll Shit yourself...back to the fucken stone age... | |
| Erika 5/10/2008 20:39:15 IP: 205.188.117.132 | RE: War for oil Message: Eci...You have a vein throbbing in your temple...I can see it from here...ag sies man, calm down. I despise you !! Aren't you being just a tad melodramatic. How can you call people such names when you don't even know them.....white supremists ? Geez what can I say.... Maybe you should take up some Bikram Yoga to get rid of all your screaming liberal hysteria... Or better still join an NGO and go and feed those starving and mutilated people all over the world while us poor suckers try and make a living so that we don't end up like them. The thing is, you scream at everyone but I haven't heard you come up with one good idea that we can implement (in our daily humdrum of suburbia) to make the world a better place...SOOOO maybe you can tell us some of the things YOU do in your daily life to help the less fortunate in the world....in that way we can follow your example and learn to become better and more benevolent citizens of the world. I'm sure all the other hedonistic, egotistical, selfish white supremists would agree with me....I'm sure you would also want to add *rednecks* to your list as I'm sure the redneck like the *rockspider* would also like to see the second coming of the apartheid regime... | |
Post a reply to this message: |