Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> News and Hot Topics >> RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election Page: <<   < prev  165 166 [167] 168 169   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 1:07:26 PM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

So you only saw some bits of it and it's his weakest work? Are you saying it's inaccurate?


Yes, though I'm actually saying it's by far his weakest argument from what I've seen. Other commentaries on the films seem to support that

Yeah but you've not even seen the whole thing how can you comment. And like I said has anything he's stated been proved false?

quote:

What's hard to grasp is the fact that they are clearly involved in radicalising muslims outside of Saudi Arabia - and yet America do nothing. It's not just about an internal struggle by the Saudis, it's their direct impact on external terrorism.


BECAUSE. THEY. ARE. ALSO. FIGHTING. ISLAMIST. CELLS. IN. AID. OF. THE AMERICANS. The Saudi government, like most governments, is not one Borg collective, there are differing views within it and different allegiances.

Read the Wikileaks link I provided to Sharkboy - they are the no.1 financers of Islamic terrorism - they are categorically not being brought to book for this by the Americans.

quote:

The problem is you peddle is the standard line of those who back dictatorships. They are better off under one because they can't govern themselves, they'll turn instantly to terrorism etc. etc. It's codswallop.


Not it isn't, it's damned real thing that those who are under control of the government tend to be even more radicalised than what is on shown in government. The Americans were invited there by the King himself for a reason while keeping them at 5,000 to prevent more anger aimed towards it.

The king invited the Americans there? Do you have any grasp whatsoever of US foreign policy or history in the middle east? They are puppets - they cannot kick the Americans out because then they risk being attacked.


Also, please don't tell me about backing dictatorships when you were the guy who said that the Iraqis preferred Hussien or keep criticizing the Western forces for taking out dictatorships.

I've seen interviews with Shia muslims who preferred it under Saddam! Simply because while Saddam was a brutal dictator the level of killing, horror and lawlessness unleashed on Iraq after 9/11 far outstripped what he did to his people. That's how bad Iraq is now.


quote:

The Saudi government are a US backed dictatorship involved in radicalising muslims. Does this not filter into your mind? What 'liberal' front are they trying to satisfy here, women can't even drive in this country alone.


And recently, women got the chance to vote after protests. Gee, I wonder why they did that, I think THE PROTEST bit is a reason why. Again, SAUDI ARABIA. IS. PLAYING. A. DOUBLE. GAME. It's doing its best to satisfy every front. It's fighting the militant Islamists (who have attacked the country), it's fighting those who want to throw the monarchy, the country is a politically instable one. Again, its official position, the one of the Royal Family, is that it is fighting the terrorists.

No.1 financiers of islamic radicalistion on the planet. Damn right they are playing a double game and America know all about it of course because the Saudis are their puppets.

quote:

The whole destabilisation of Syria smacks of foreign involvement. You saying these heavily armed rebels just popped up out of nowhere? And lest we forget Gaddafi was a tosser for decades while we sold him arms and extradited people to be tortured by him. Do these double standards not register with you.


Double standards? In geopolitics and diplomacy? NO WAI WHAT NONSENSE IS DIS? If you think that you can function on this planet without a degree of double standards, then well done, you're being a bigger idealist than a pragmatist. Oh, and Gaddafi constantly put off diplomatic problems on a tantrum. He had oil and business so people needed to neogtiate with him, he also constantly created problems. Malta under Mintoff till his death veered to being close allies to him to maintaining close political ties, yet it was occasionally a begrudging one because the man was insufferable.

So what's your point? You agree with me then?

Also, pretty hypocritical to defend Assad there, even if the man is repulsive.

I've never defended Assad and you know it.

quote:

So you are saying the Saudis have a right to send doctored Korans around the world and the Americans shouldn't give a shit despite them being involved in a war on terror?


No, I'm saying that you can't just piss off and attack a nation that is proving to be the strongest ally in the region. Again, for fuck's sake again, their official position is one that is aiding the West on the war on terror. The closest comparison is Pakistan, it is fighting the terrorist forces in its region, but the army has a very similar ideology to that of the fundamentalists.

They are not an ally, Israel are an ally in the region - the Saudis are puppets. Like Saddam and Mubarak for example were 'allies' for decades, even Gaddafi. The Pakistani army has lost thousands of soldiers fighting terrorism by the way including high ranking Generals - doesn't really fit with your statement about them having a similar ideology with fundamentalists. Comparing the Saudis with Pakistan is plainly wrong apart from their government being puppets of America.

quote:

Lol Assad's socialist secular government is their mortal enemy? Or just a non-compliant Arab country being knocked over like they've been knocked over in a variety of fashions over the past 100 years.


I'm sorry, who the hell started the protests in the first place and who is also aiding them? Which countries does Syria border? Oh I forgot, Assad's Syria was a Land of Serenity, why would anyone protest agaisnt him after the success of the overthrowing of some Arab dictators, he is such a nice man. Speaking of which, did the West overthrow Mubarak and Ben Ali too? And as we all know, Islamists LOVE the Baathists. They don't see them as a Godless philosophy or anything.

The protests are part of the arab spring, arming people within a country and flooding them with foreign fighters is not part of the arab spring, it's an attempt by Western powers to knock off a non-compliant dictatorship. Mubarak was knocked off by the Egyptian people, it's interesting that America offered them no assistance though - that's because Mubarak was their man as was Ben Ali.


quote:

Were they? I thought Bin Laden's concern was fighting the west not killing muslims. Is there evidence of him ever wanting to stoke divisions between muslims? This might be another case of disparate terrorist groups being banded together as one all inclusive 'Al Qaeda' organisation


Tell that to the Muslims who lost their members to terrorist attacks. Tell that to the Muslims who have died because of the Islamic Jihadists. The that to the more moderate Muslims who are killed for not being ultra-conservative. Tell that to the Sufis. A big majority of the victims of Islamic terrorism has been Muslims themselves.

What's that got to do with what I said in the quote above?

quote:

US history shows that they use groups within countries to commit atrocites and start conflicts within their people. It has never been proved who has been conducting bombing campaigns in Iraq - but if we go by past tactics emplyed by the CIA it's clear false-flag terror is something they have used before to weaken nations.


Yes, because the area doesn't have people that have hated each other for thousands of years.

You're clearly an expert on middle eastern history aren't you

quote:

What Al-Zarqawi that US invented uber-terrorist that was apparently behind all the attacks in Iraq? False flag terror at it's finest designed to instigate civil war in Iraq.


What the hell are you talking about?


There's been a ton of speculation about who he was, what he actually did, how much of the bombing campaigns in Iraq were actually down to him or whether he was made up to be this super-terrorist to allow an extension of the occupation in Iraq.




(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4981
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 3:19:53 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
quote:

Read the Wikileaks link I provided to Sharkboy - they are the no.1 financers of Islamic terrorism - they are categorically not being brought to book for this by the Americans.


Yes, that was also shown on The Daily Show and everything and it was big news, but they are also fighting it on other occasions. This is the thing, they stop diplomatic relationships and attack them, they lose an ally there, they don't and they have one. What do you want them to do? The two nations still cooperate and share information about the latest movements involving terrorism and prevent new terrorist movements and attacks. This is why Saudi Arabia is still has close diplomatic ties to the US and has had them till 1933. Do you know what conflicts happened that could have destroyed the relations between those two countries from that time?

quote:

The king invited the Americans there? Do you have any grasp whatsoever of US foreign policy or history in the middle east? They are puppets - they cannot kick the Americans out because then they risk being attacked.


Links. I mean proper links, not some conspiracy theory bullshit, that the King did not invite them there. I mean it. Links. Don't fucking give me examples of what Bahrain, Iraq or Syria, I want proper links dealing exclusively with Saudi Arabia.

Also, you're the guy who didn't know who the Muslim Brotherhood were a year ago when I asked about them a year ago during the Egypt Revolt. Don't come telling anyone about not having a grasp of the Middle East, you're in is much as in fault of this as everyone here.

quote:

I've seen interviews with Shia muslims who preferred it under Saddam! Simply because while Saddam was a brutal dictator the level of killing, horror and lawlessness unleashed on Iraq after 9/11 far outstripped what he did to his people. That's how bad Iraq is now.


And I've seen polls that claim that they are happy, no matter how deep in shit they are, they not being under Saddam. Also, you might not realize since you believe everything better was under Saddam, but the man was also responsible for starting fights between his own people (the Marsh Arabs and Kurds to give an example), made a bloody brutal war agaisnt Iran and also committed various acts of ethnic cleansing. There's a reason the Peshmegerians (sp?) joined forces with the Americans.

Iraq is worse now, you've had Shiite insurgences, from the Arabic side, money being poured into Sunni groups, Turkey coming in due to the Kurdish problem and Islamic extremists taking power, but at least it isn't Hussien and for some, that is consolation. I don't deny he was control and stability in the region, but then that truly becomes keeping a dictator because you think that the people can't govern themselves.

quote:

No.1 financiers of islamic radicalistion on the planet. Damn right they are playing a double game and America know all about it of course because the Saudis are their puppets.


I am not repeating this. Also, if they're merely puppets, they're doing a terrible job at controlling them.

quote:

So what's your point? You agree with me then?


I'm saying you're being a fool if you think that an element of double standards doesn't get poured into this. If you think that being nice and consistent works then you have idea how these diplomatic relations work. You think other countries on Earth are somehow nicer? That we should be nicer and more consistent just for the sake of it? That's silly.

I mean, some of the things America did in South America are disgusting, but then again, you have to when you're a massive power and fighting another massive power. You do have to ally yourself with bastards like Pinochet (who I detest) when you two have a common enemy, even if people like Pinochet can occasionally turn back on your help.

quote:

They are not an ally, Israel are an ally in the region - the Saudis are puppets. Like Saddam and Mubarak for example were 'allies' for decades, even Gaddafi. The Pakistani army has lost thousands of soldiers fighting terrorism by the way including high ranking Generals - doesn't really fit with your statement about them having a similar ideology with fundamentalists. Comparing the Saudis with Pakistan is plainly wrong apart from their government being puppets of America.


Sure they are, they are puppets. Nothing else. Poor Saudis. Let's cry them a river.

Also, you do realize they were the one to train the Taliban right? The ones who feed terrorism into Kashmir or Afghanistan. The ones who hid Osama bin Laden. The ones who have aided terror groups make attacks in India. General Zia-ul-Haq ring a bell? The man who persecuted religious minorities and started imposing Sharia? The Haqqani network? They're religiously conservative as fuck. It's totally bloody similar, only Pakistan has the terrorists right close to its border so the attacks are bigger. Pakistan still has some vicious proxies.

The problem with that both countries is the uneven record. They do fight and offer information, the also support them. Also, Israel is still not the best ally. Everyone in the region, maybe other than Egypt, doesn't like them, so you do need other allies there.

quote:

The protests are part of the arab spring, arming people within a country and flooding them with foreign fighters is not part of the arab spring, it's an attempt by Western powers to knock off a non-compliant dictatorship. Mubarak was knocked off by the Egyptian people, it's interesting that America offered them no assistance though - that's because Mubarak was their man as was Ben Ali.


Again, Gaddafhi, pissed off everyone. From the Libyans, to the Islamic organizations to his neighbours to Europe (do I have to remind that Obama was not keen in entering this war, he only entered due to France and the UK). Also, who is arming them? The terrorist groups? The West? Both did in Libya when Gaddafhi didn't go down and started shooting people. You seem keen to take a dictator's side here. Oh, they're ok when they're non-compliant.

Still, why is Libyan-revolt Western made and not Ben Ali and Mubarak? Especially since they followed each and were born once greater confidence was shown. Actually, why shouldn't the West have intervened in Libya? Because it would be bad and sad that a non-compliant dictator got ousted?

The Western countries still had good ties with Gaddafhi and his bastard of a son till the Civil War started as well.

quote:

What's that got to do with what I said in the quote above?


Everything, since you said bin Laden didn't want to kill Muslims and that's pretty much what he did.

quote:

You're clearly an expert on middle eastern history aren't you


Hey, at least I'm not the one going "Oh it would be ok and fine if the West didn't intervene". It's not as if the Arabs and the Persians don't have a history of detesting each other, even pre-Islam. Or that there are not religious, ethnic groups who don't like each other even within Syria.

quote:

There's been a ton of speculation about who he was, what he actually did, how much of the bombing campaigns in Iraq were actually down to him or whether he was made up to be this super-terrorist to allow an extension of the occupation in Iraq.


Of course he bloody exists. Him being made up is akin to saying Gaddafhi or Elvis Presly are still alive. I bet they made up Mullah Omar too.


< Message edited by Deviation -- 19/9/2012 4:21:34 PM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 4982
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 3:26:25 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
Somewhere Jon Stewart's team is handing him notes from this debate. ^

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4983
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 3:57:09 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
STEPHEN COLBERT OR GTFO

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 4984
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 4:38:40 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
Colbert's team tried to present it to him, typically this was his reaction:




_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4985
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 5:22:59 PM   
Saltire


Posts: 1973
Joined: 5/7/2011
From: Dundee

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker

Historically European nations have been as bad if not worse than the Americans simply down to the brutal racist colonialism bent on exploiting places like Africa, we ourselves extended our influence due to the power of our Empire in India and with the creation of Pakistan and Israel.

More recently however the power has shifted and the Americans have taken up the baton with relish. As it stands no one has actually done more damage to world peace than America over the last 50 years. Despicable sums it up - people call it anti-American 'rhetoric' but the extent of their terrorism (and it is terrorism) is well documented and the cost in lives runs into the millions.

On a more recent note Romneys mumblings are shocking aren't they - what does this actually say about America's democracy exactly when someone like this has a shot as becoming president. I think it's clear - Republican leaders are the puppets of the corporations. You don't need someone with any intellectual capacity, you need a vessel to channel your corruption through.




Yes I was going to reply to Furry's post, but you have highlighted the points in the first two paragraphs I was going to make anyway.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 4986
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 5:37:54 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

Colbert's team tried to present it to him, typically this was his reaction:





I'm so glad. *sniff*

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 4987
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 6:14:26 PM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

quote:

Read the Wikileaks link I provided to Sharkboy - they are the no.1 financers of Islamic terrorism - they are categorically not being brought to book for this by the Americans.


Yes, that was also shown on The Daily Show and everything and it was big news, but they are also fighting it on other occasions. This is the thing, they stop diplomatic relationships and attack them, they lose an ally there, they don't and they have one. What do you want them to do? The two nations still cooperate and share information about the latest movements involving terrorism and prevent new terrorist movements and attacks. This is why Saudi Arabia is still has close diplomatic ties to the US and has had them till 1933. Do you know what conflicts happened that could have destroyed the relations between those two countries from that time?

They are not allies they are puppets!!! Who says anything about attacking them - it's about applying pressure. America have myriad ways to apply pressure to countries without resorting to attacking them. They choose not to why exactly? A regular oil supply?

quote:

The king invited the Americans there? Do you have any grasp whatsoever of US foreign policy or history in the middle east? They are puppets - they cannot kick the Americans out because then they risk being attacked.


Links. I mean proper links, not some conspiracy theory bullshit, that the King did not invite them there. I mean it. Links. Don't fucking give me examples of what Bahrain, Iraq or Syria, I want proper links dealing exclusively with Saudi Arabia.

Links about what? That the king invited them there? After the mass of evidence before you relating to western backed middle eastern dictators and how brutally they are deposed if they step out of line are you honestly so dumb to believe that US/Saudi is a 50-50 relationship between equals. They are puppets you fool!!! They know where they stand, and where their people stand. Arabs don't like Americans because of the way they are treated. To keep them down and to allow them to exploit resources the US back dictators. This is elementary stuff.


Also, you're the guy who didn't know who the Muslim Brotherhood were a year ago when I asked about them a year ago during the Egypt Revolt. Don't come telling anyone about not having a grasp of the Middle East, you're in is much as in fault of this as everyone here.

Why am I at fault? - I just state the truth - YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH. And are the Muslim Brotherhood major players across the entire middle east, that's what we've I've been focusing on all this time not individual parties within countries


quote:

I've seen interviews with Shia muslims who preferred it under Saddam! Simply because while Saddam was a brutal dictator the level of killing, horror and lawlessness unleashed on Iraq after 9/11 far outstripped what he did to his people. That's how bad Iraq is now.


And I've seen polls that claim that they are happy, no matter how deep in shit they are, they not being under Saddam. Also, you might not realize since you believe everything better was under Saddam, but the man was also responsible for starting fights between his own people (the Marsh Arabs and Kurds to give an example), made a bloody brutal war agaisnt Iran and also committed various acts of ethnic cleansing. There's a reason the Peshmegerians (sp?) joined forces with the Americans.

What the Iraqis have gained is freedom at a price that none of them would have been willing to pay. The violent and bloody deaths of their friends and loved ones. A people left to grieve in freedom. Do you remember the bomb attacks that hit us on 7/7 and the devastating way it affected the nation. Iraq has seen attacks of that nature EVERY WEEK FOR A DECADE. Damn right it's worse off now than it was under Saddam.


Iraq is worse now, you've had Shiite insurgences, from the Arabic side, money being poured into Sunni groups, Turkey coming in due to the Kurdish problem and Islamic extremists taking power, but at least it isn't Hussien and for some, that is consolation. I don't deny he was control and stability in the region, but then that truly becomes keeping a dictator because you think that the people can't govern themselves.

So you agree with me? It's the response of the pro-Iraq war western commentator who defends the horrific outcome of Iraq that they are better off. Safe in the knowledge that their families haven't been blown to smithereens, kidnapped, shot dead, died due to lack to medical care - free to pat themselves on the back at a job well done as the cross hairs move elsewhere.

quote:

No.1 financiers of islamic radicalistion on the planet. Damn right they are playing a double game and America know all about it of course because the Saudis are their puppets.


I am not repeating this. Also, if they're merely puppets, they're doing a terrible job at controlling them.

That's what this whole argument has been about - the fact that the Americans fighting this whole civilisation saving war on terror choose not to move against one of the primary causes of radicalisation. Why do you think this is?


I'm saying you're being a fool if you think that an element of double standards doesn't get poured into this. If you think that being nice and consistent works then you have idea how these diplomatic relations work. You think other countries on Earth are somehow nicer? That we should be nicer and more consistent just for the sake of it? That's silly.

What because double standards and hypocrisy are a part of international affairs we should just accept it? What kind of argument is that?

I mean, some of the things America did in South America are disgusting, but then again, you have to when you're a massive power and fighting another massive power. You do have to ally yourself with bastards like Pinochet (who I detest) when you two have a common enemy, even if people like Pinochet can occasionally turn back on your help.

So basically you agree with backing brutal dictatorships. That says it all really.

quote:

They are not an ally, Israel are an ally in the region - the Saudis are puppets. Like Saddam and Mubarak for example were 'allies' for decades, even Gaddafi. The Pakistani army has lost thousands of soldiers fighting terrorism by the way including high ranking Generals - doesn't really fit with your statement about them having a similar ideology with fundamentalists. Comparing the Saudis with Pakistan is plainly wrong apart from their government being puppets of America.


Sure they are, they are puppets. Nothing else. Poor Saudis. Let's cry them a river.

You don't even know what your arguing about here

Also, you do realize they were the one to train the Taliban right? The ones who feed terrorism into Kashmir or Afghanistan. The ones who hid Osama bin Laden. The ones who have aided terror groups make attacks in India. General Zia-ul-Haq ring a bell? The man who persecuted religious minorities and started imposing Sharia? The Haqqani network? They're religiously conservative as fuck. It's totally bloody similar, only Pakistan has the terrorists right close to its border so the attacks are bigger. Pakistan still has some vicious proxies.

What Pakistan are printing doctored Korans and pumping cash into global terror like the Saudis? Zia Ul Haq was backed by the west by the way - that's a suprise. And Pakistan has not only seen thousands of soldiers killed but tens of thousands of civilians by terrorism. There's definately very dodgy elements there but they are catergorically not in the same leage as Saudi Arabia in terms of supplying cash. And the ISI have been connected to the CIA since the Afghan war lest we forget.

The problem with that both countries is the uneven record. They do fight and offer information, the also support them. Also, Israel is still not the best ally. Everyone in the region, maybe other than Egypt, doesn't like them, so you do need other allies there.

Israel are America's main ally in the middle east that's plainly obvious, what the hell are you talking about?


quote:

The protests are part of the arab spring, arming people within a country and flooding them with foreign fighters is not part of the arab spring, it's an attempt by Western powers to knock off a non-compliant dictatorship. Mubarak was knocked off by the Egyptian people, it's interesting that America offered them no assistance though - that's because Mubarak was their man as was Ben Ali.


Again, Gaddafhi, pissed off everyone. From the Libyans, to the Islamic organizations to his neighbours to Europe (do I have to remind that Obama was not keen in entering this war, he only entered due to France and the UK). Also, who is arming them? The terrorist groups? The West? Both did in Libya when Gaddafhi didn't go down and started shooting people. You seem keen to take a dictator's side here. Oh, they're ok when they're non-compliant.

What I've always attempted to highlight is the way the US and other western nations back dictators when it's necessary, knock them off when they are no longer useful/ compliant. It's disgusting because it kills a lot of people - that's not the same as supporting dictatorships.


Still, why is Libyan-revolt Western made and not Ben Ali and Mubarak? Especially since they followed each and were born once greater confidence was shown. Actually, why shouldn't the West have intervened in Libya? Because it would be bad and sad that a non-compliant dictator got ousted?

Why shouldn't the west have intefered in the whole of the middle east is what you should really be asking because that's what it all ultimately boils down to. Dictators, wars, violence, dead people. But you think it's ok to back dictatorships don't you?

The Western countries still had good ties with Gaddafhi and his bastard of a son till the Civil War started as well.

quote:

What's that got to do with what I said in the quote above?


Everything, since you said bin Laden didn't want to kill Muslims and that's pretty much what he did.

No I said I didn't believe Al Qaeda existed in the sense people would like to have us believe. Bin Laden was fighting a war against the west, some terrorists interpreted it as killing infidels which could include muslims of other sects = no real controlling hierachy whatsoever, disparate terrorist groups loosely connected doing what the hell they want.


quote:

You're clearly an expert on middle eastern history aren't you


Hey, at least I'm not the one going "Oh it would be ok and fine if the West didn't intervene". It's not as if the Arabs and the Persians don't have a history of detesting each other, even pre-Islam. Or that there are not religious, ethnic groups who don't like each other even within Syria.

It's weird these ethnic groups weren't massacring each other until the west started arming the rebels and kicked off a civil war.


quote:

There's been a ton of speculation about who he was, what he actually did, how much of the bombing campaigns in Iraq were actually down to him or whether he was made up to be this super-terrorist to allow an extension of the occupation in Iraq.


Of course he bloody exists. Him being made up is akin to saying Gaddafhi or Elvis Presly are still alive. I bet they made up Mullah Omar too.



Al Zarqawi was a useful bogeyman to provide cover for the US destabilisation of Iraq.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4988
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 6:30:42 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
Who needs the The Daily Show? Your turn Dev, don't let us Republicans down.





*vad3r cries for blood*

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 4989
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 7:41:55 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
This is becoming tiring.

quote:

They are not allies they are puppets!!! Who says anything about attacking them - it's about applying pressure. America have myriad ways to apply pressure to countries without resorting to attacking them. They choose not to why exactly? A regular oil supply?


They are not puppets and the US have been applying pressure, even if not properly. And yes oil is a deal and what is being targeted by the terrorists in Saudi Arabia is the oil and Westerners doing supply there. Is the funding coming just from the Monarchy? No, it's coming from Saudi institutions and companies, not directly from the King. Fuck, even if for a different situation, wikileaks even showed that the Obama administration has been quietly putting pressure on the Saudi's government's stance of women's rights.

quote:

Links about what? That the king invited them there? After the mass of evidence before you relating to western backed middle eastern dictators and how brutally they are deposed if they step out of line are you honestly so dumb to believe that US/Saudi is a 50-50 relationship between equals. They are puppets you fool!!! They know where they stand, and where their people stand. Arabs don't like Americans because of the way they are treated. To keep them down and to allow them to exploit resources the US back dictators. This is elementary stuff.


Well done. You've failed to provide links on what is the West's very unique relationship to an Arab country. Bravo. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing.

quote:

Why am I at fault? - I just state the truth - YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH. And are the Muslim Brotherhood major players across the entire middle east, that's what we've I've been focusing on all this time not individual parties within countries


Yes they fucking are, even provided one of bin Laden's biggest influences, al-Qutb and Egypt's latest president Morsi. Even the opposition in Libya's government is linked to them.

quote:

What the Iraqis have gained is freedom at a price that none of them would have been willing to pay. The violent and bloody deaths of their friends and loved ones. A people left to grieve in freedom. Do you remember the bomb attacks that hit us on 7/7 and the devastating way it affected the nation. Iraq has seen attacks of that nature EVERY WEEK FOR A DECADE. Damn right it's worse off now than it was under Saddam.


And yet, the polls show at least it's not under Hussien. Stop talking on behalf of the Iraqis, you are not one of them and neither am I, they're a diverse group with different opinions.

Also, do you know brutal the Iran-Iraq War was? It was bloody traumatic.

quote:

That's what this whole argument has been about - the fact that the Americans fighting this whole civilisation saving war on terror choose not to move against one of the primary causes of radicalisation. Why do you think this is?


No it hasn't, it has been about "America is BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD" and you constantly saying they are puppets. And again, what sort of pressure do you want them to apply? There's many ways to do that.

quote:

What because double standards and hypocrisy are a part of international affairs we should just accept it? What kind of argument is that?


Sadly yes, it's how it operates everywhere and if you don't for some moral cause, you'll end up being the loser. Can you give me an example of one country in a position of exerting big influence or power, one, that hasn't used a rather vicious country because of mutual benefit? It sure as hell hasn't been Russia or China.

quote:

So basically you agree with backing brutal dictatorships. That says it all really.


Not really, it's just how it can function. Also, speaks the guy crying over Hussien and Gaddafi and is also defending Assad.

quote:

You don't even know what your arguing about here


The ironing is delicious.

quote:

What Pakistan are printing doctored Korans and pumping cash into global terror like the Saudis? Zia Ul Haq was backed by the west by the way - that's a suprise. And Pakistan has not only seen thousands of soldiers killed but tens of thousands of civilians by terrorism. There's definately very dodgy elements there but they are catergorically not in the same leage as Saudi Arabia in terms of supplying cash. And the ISI have been connected to the CIA since the Afghan war lest we forget.


Of course, some 35,000 civilians to be close to the number. That doesn't make it any less of a duplicitious country. Oh and guess why they supported him, because they had a common interest which was keeping the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Also, keeping bin Laden in Abbatobad, one of the US main enemies, is akin to funding a hell load of groups.

quote:

What I've always attempted to highlight is the way the US and other western nations back dictators when it's necessary, knock them off when they are no longer useful/ compliant. It's disgusting because it kills a lot of people - that's not the same as supporting dictatorships.


Only that Gaddafi was being compliant till the Civil War. HE WAS COMPLIANT. The bullshit started when he started making threats to the West after the revolts and gave extra reasons to invade when he started killing the protestors. You're ignoring this just to keep to your viewpoint. What did Assad o to earn him the West to attacking him?

quote:

No I said I didn't believe Al Qaeda existed in the sense people would like to have us believe. Bin Laden was fighting a war against the west, some terrorists interpreted it as killing infidels which could include muslims of other sects = no real controlling hierachy whatsoever, disparate terrorist groups loosely connected doing what the hell they want.


bin Laden was a Qutbist. This meant that any Muslim to follow his ideology was an enemy. Not just the West, but those within the religion itself.

quote:

It's weird these ethnic groups weren't massacring each other until the west started arming the rebels and kicked off a civil war.


Relations between groups can calm down depending on who is controlling the region. That a war suddenly happens and these are released are nothing special.

quote:

Al Zarqawi was a useful bogeyman to provide cover for the US destabilisation of Iraq.


Sure, and Tony Blair was one of those lizard people.

quote:

Who needs the The Daily Show? Your turn Dev, don't let us Republicans down.


Pffffft, this is a battle between a Democrat and a guy whose been reading way too much Chomsky.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 19/9/2012 7:42:47 PM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 4990
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 7:55:11 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
Silence in the audience please...Mr. Skywalker, your response when you're ready.




_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4991
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 7:57:42 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5061
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North
If only a certain banned user was still here. He could've resolved this argument with a picture of Bart Simpson yawning or a cow wearing sunglasses.

_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 4992
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:02:15 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
Also, geopolitically, Israel is more European than Middle Eastern. It's a great ally to have in the region, but a useless one if you want something close to Arabic states.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4993
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:06:33 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
This debate won't end until the other man dies of natural causes. Two proud senators have their livelihoods and pride at stake here. Soon the internet will begin to crumble and this peaceful forum society we once knew will be no more than a distant memory.



< Message edited by vad3r -- 19/9/2012 9:42:52 PM >


_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 4994
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:16:40 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
First page of this thread is most amusing.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 4995
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:23:52 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

First page of this thread is most amusing.


And well before my time, sadly.

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 4996
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:26:20 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14550
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Barack Obama will not get the nomination. Americans will not vote a man named Barack Obama into the White House. He should change his name to John Smith if he wants to stand a chance.



_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 4997
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 8:48:38 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b


quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Barack Obama will not get the nomination. Americans will not vote a man named Barack Obama into the White House. He should change his name to John Smith if he wants to stand a chance.






_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 4998
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 9:35:19 PM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

This is becoming tiring.

quote:

They are not allies they are puppets!!! Who says anything about attacking them - it's about applying pressure. America have myriad ways to apply pressure to countries without resorting to attacking them. They choose not to why exactly? A regular oil supply?


They are not puppets and the US have been applying pressure, even if not properly. And yes oil is a deal and what is being targeted by the terrorists in Saudi Arabia is the oil and Westerners doing supply there. Is the funding coming just from the Monarchy? No, it's coming from Saudi institutions and companies, not directly from the King. Fuck, even if for a different situation, wikileaks even showed that the Obama administration has been quietly putting pressure on the Saudi's government's stance of women's rights.

They are a dictatorship - backed and armed by the Americans. They are not a democracy, they repress their own people and yet you defend them - they are puppets. It's incredible you think otherwise.

quote:

Links about what? That the king invited them there? After the mass of evidence before you relating to western backed middle eastern dictators and how brutally they are deposed if they step out of line are you honestly so dumb to believe that US/Saudi is a 50-50 relationship between equals. They are puppets you fool!!! They know where they stand, and where their people stand. Arabs don't like Americans because of the way they are treated. To keep them down and to allow them to exploit resources the US back dictators. This is elementary stuff.


Well done. You've failed to provide links on what is the West's very unique relationship to an Arab country. Bravo. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing.

What link do you require here, links to prove that the Saudis are a puppet of the West? A repressive dictatorship armed by America - is that unique in your book


quote:

Why am I at fault? - I just state the truth - YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH. And are the Muslim Brotherhood major players across the entire middle east, that's what we've I've been focusing on all this time not individual parties within countries


Yes they fucking are, even provided one of bin Laden's biggest influences, al-Qutb and Egypt's latest president Morsi. Even the opposition in Libya's government is linked to them.

That's Egypt and apparently the Libyan opposition is 'linked' to them. Not exactly across the entire middle east.


quote:

What the Iraqis have gained is freedom at a price that none of them would have been willing to pay. The violent and bloody deaths of their friends and loved ones. A people left to grieve in freedom. Do you remember the bomb attacks that hit us on 7/7 and the devastating way it affected the nation. Iraq has seen attacks of that nature EVERY WEEK FOR A DECADE. Damn right it's worse off now than it was under Saddam.


And yet, the polls show at least it's not under Hussien. Stop talking on behalf of the Iraqis, you are not one of them and neither am I, they're a diverse group with different opinions.

I can talk on behalf of the hundreds of thousands killed and maimed and millions displaced by the war on Iraq. You admitted yourself in your previous post Iraq is worse off - why are we arguing about this.

Also, do you know brutal the Iran-Iraq War was? It was bloody traumatic.

Did you know the US backed Iraq during that war?

quote:

That's what this whole argument has been about - the fact that the Americans fighting this whole civilisation saving war on terror choose not to move against one of the primary causes of radicalisation. Why do you think this is?


No it hasn't, it has been about "America is BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD" and you constantly saying they are puppets. And again, what sort of pressure do you want them to apply? There's many ways to do that.

You yourself have admitted America have done "BAAAAAAAAAAD" things in the past - but you continue to defend them. Why is this - are you a puppet?


quote:

What because double standards and hypocrisy are a part of international affairs we should just accept it? What kind of argument is that?


Sadly yes, it's how it operates everywhere and if you don't for some moral cause, you'll end up being the loser. Can you give me an example of one country in a position of exerting big influence or power, one, that hasn't used a rather vicious country because of mutual benefit? It sure as hell hasn't been Russia or China.

It's obvious it operates everywhere but do you think it's a good thing or a bad thing?


quote:

So basically you agree with backing brutal dictatorships. That says it all really.


Not really, it's just how it can function. Also, speaks the guy crying over Hussien and Gaddafi and is also defending Assad.

As your arguments break down you begin to lie. You will of course quote where I've defended any dictator in your next post.... or will you? And people can read back and see where you've defended the use of dictatorships in your previous posts.



quote:

You don't even know what your arguing about here


The ironing is delicious.

AHAHAHA - The IRONING is delicious!!!! Sorry that was a cheap shot

quote:

What Pakistan are printing doctored Korans and pumping cash into global terror like the Saudis? Zia Ul Haq was backed by the west by the way - that's a suprise. And Pakistan has not only seen thousands of soldiers killed but tens of thousands of civilians by terrorism. There's definately very dodgy elements there but they are catergorically not in the same leage as Saudi Arabia in terms of supplying cash. And the ISI have been connected to the CIA since the Afghan war lest we forget.


Of course, some 35,000 civilians to be close to the number. That doesn't make it any less of a duplicitious country. Oh and guess why they supported him, because they had a common interest which was keeping the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Also, keeping bin Laden in Abbatobad, one of the US main enemies, is akin to funding a hell load of groups.

Yeah someone in Pakistan must have known about Bin Laden I'll admit, but it's country run by corrupt money hungry politicians not terrorists. At the end of the day they've lost thousands of soldiers to terrorism - they are clearly doing more to combat it than your beloved Saudi Arabia.

quote:

What I've always attempted to highlight is the way the US and other western nations back dictators when it's necessary, knock them off when they are no longer useful/ compliant. It's disgusting because it kills a lot of people - that's not the same as supporting dictatorships.


Only that Gaddafi was being compliant till the Civil War. HE WAS COMPLIANT. The bullshit started when he started making threats to the West after the revolts and gave extra reasons to invade when he started killing the protestors. You're ignoring this just to keep to your viewpoint. What did Assad o to earn him the West to attacking him?

The whole move against the 'axis of evil' as Bush put it is part of a strategy to knock off a succession of dictators who we don't 100% control. It's been most recently tied in with the arab spring which is a genuine movement to throw the shackles off dictatorships but the involvement of the west had clouded matters. Egypt for example looks like arabs taking down a western backed dictator - not ideal for America as they pumped billions into Mubarak over the years to keep him in charge.Gaddafi wasn't perfectly compliant even though he had to extent been brought in from the cold by Blair so he got knocked off, Saddam got taken down beforehand but at great cost so direct invasions were off the cards. Assad is next and then finally Iran - as I've said before no arab spring or calls for democracy in places like Saudi Arabia and Bahrain because we of course control these dictatorships.

quote:

No I said I didn't believe Al Qaeda existed in the sense people would like to have us believe. Bin Laden was fighting a war against the west, some terrorists interpreted it as killing infidels which could include muslims of other sects = no real controlling hierachy whatsoever, disparate terrorist groups loosely connected doing what the hell they want.


bin Laden was a Qutbist. This meant that any Muslim to follow his ideology was an enemy. Not just the West, but those within the religion itself.

quote:

It's weird these ethnic groups weren't massacring each other until the west started arming the rebels and kicked off a civil war.


Relations between groups can calm down depending on who is controlling the region. That a war suddenly happens and these are released are nothing special.

Groups killing each other within a country also reflects a US tactic used numerous times before. Weaken a nation by pitting people against each other. The west arming groups has forced Assad into a civil war where he has shown his own hand in terms of brutality. They should have let the Syrian people attempt it peacefully first at the very least as in Egypt. The problem is with Egypt they no longer have control and they don't want a repeat in Syria. America don't want real democracy in the middle east, they never have.

quote:

Al Zarqawi was a useful bogeyman to provide cover for the US destabilisation of Iraq.


Sure, and Tony Blair was one of those lizard people.

Al Zaqawi came out of nowhere and was suddenly linked to all sorts of terrorist acts not only in Iraq but actually round the world. In fact there was no evidence of any of this. He was the face of America's attempt to destabilise Iraq, a super-terrorist, on one hand a lone-wolf, on another attempting to topple Bin Laden himself. Al Zaqarwi was actually used by Colin Powell to try and link Al Qaeda to Iraq to give the Americans a valid reason to invade. He told the UN Al Zaqarwi was cooking up ricin in Northern Iraq - an Observer journalist visited the facility pinpointed by Powell and found nothing.

quote:

Who needs the The Daily Show? Your turn Dev, don't let us Republicans down.


Pffffft, this is a battle between a Democrat and a guy whose been reading way too much Chomsky.


No you're a Neocon and you don't know it, you back Saudi Arabia even though you know for a fact they finance terrorism and you back the use of dictators to meet foreign policy goals.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 4999
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 9:41:33 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
YE$$$$$$$$$! Your turn Dev, no pressure. I can safely say you're the most famous Maltese man ever now.



_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 5000
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 9:59:15 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54579
Joined: 1/10/2005
I'm sensing something of a humour failure - I rather think the ironing crack was deliberate 

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 5001
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:05:39 PM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

YE$$$$$$$$$! Your turn Dev, no pressure. I can safely say you're the most famous Maltese man ever now.




Why is this fucking shit stirrer hanging about in this thread?

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

I'm sensing something of a humour failure - I rather think the ironing crack was deliberate


Bollocks

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 5002
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:06:11 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5061
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

I'm sensing something of a humour failure - I rather think the ironing crack was deliberate 


I thought that too. But then again I find ironing hilarious.

_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 5003
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:08:57 PM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 5004
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:12:23 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5061
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker




Delicious.

_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 5005
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:15:59 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54579
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

YE$$$$$$$$$! Your turn Dev, no pressure. I can safely say you're the most famous Maltese man ever now.




Why is this fucking shit stirrer hanging about in this thread?

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

I'm sensing something of a humour failure - I rather think the ironing crack was deliberate


Bollocks


I'm assuming that's 'bollocks I made a booboo' - Dev didn't make up the ironing crack, it's not new. 'course he may have accidentally hit on an existing joke but in context I didn't think so 


_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 5006
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:19:48 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

I'm sensing something of a humour failure - I rather think the ironing crack was deliberate 


Yup. It's a well-used paraphrase round these parts.


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 5007
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:22:55 PM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12151
Joined: 30/9/2005
Is an ironing crack anything like a builder's crack?

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 5008
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:26:01 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker


quote:

ORIGINAL: vad3r

YE$$$$$$$$$! Your turn Dev, no pressure. I can safely say you're the most famous Maltese man ever now.




Why is this fucking shit stirrer hanging about in this thread?


To see Dev woop that ass. Which he's doing a mighty fine job of so far I must say. You're making it too easy, every time you type something, he wins a little more.

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 5009
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 19/9/2012 10:30:37 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

Is an ironing crack anything like a builder's crack?



Sort of but it smells better.

(ugh....)

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 5010
Page:   <<   < prev  165 166 [167] 168 169   next >   >>
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> News and Hot Topics >> RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election Page: <<   < prev  165 166 [167] 168 169   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.187