GG Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 no, the US is responsible because they put saddam in power and supported his mafia tactics. who said anything about a photo op? i dont understand what you are saying after that. iran had a revolution in 79, to overthrow our dictator the shah. we then told saddam to invade iran, Madeleine Albright admitted it. these are established facts, not opinion. the reason his predecessor was killed is because he too, sadat, was a supporter of US foreign policy( the treaty with israel), which was murdering millions for oil and murdering palestinians.... That's quite the linear thinking world you occupy. I suppose you have a ready explanation why more people die after US decides to exit an ugly situation or decides not to intervene? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 no, the US is responsible because they put saddam in power and supported his mafia tactics. who said anything about a photo op? i dont understand what you are saying after that. iran had a revolution in 79, to overthrow our dictator the shah. we then told saddam to invade iran, Madeleine Albright admitted it. these are established facts, not opinion. the reason his predecessor was killed is because he too, sadat, was a supporter of US foreign policy( the treaty with israel), which was murdering millions for oil and murdering palestinians.... Are you the secret arm of "No Justice's" avengers? Sorry, NJ, this guy is a moron, and I used you to make fun of him. I might not agree, but I have some respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Are you the secret arm of "No Justice's" avengers? Sorry, NJ, this guy is a moron, and I used you to make fun of him. I might not agree, but I have some respect. again insult... please make an argument... That's quite the linear thinking world you occupy. I suppose you have a ready explanation why more people die after US decides to exit an ugly situation or decides not to intervene? what conflict are you referring to? iraq, iran? cuba? lets make this simple............. if saddam installed a dictatorship in canada to get better prices on resources, would you support it? do you think that is moral? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 no, the US is responsible because they put saddam in power and supported his mafia tactics. who said anything about a photo op? i dont understand what you are saying after that. iran had a revolution in 79, to overthrow our dictator the shah. we then told saddam to invade iran, Madeleine Albright admitted it. these are established facts, not opinion. the reason his predecessor was killed is because he too, sadat, was a supporter of US foreign policy( the treaty with israel), which was murdering millions for oil and murdering palestinians.... And what position inside the US gov in 79 did Albright hold that she could "admit" this? You are mouthpieceing Madeleine Albright for your facts? No wonder you can't even get you're continents straight. We caused apartheid? Oh I long for the day's of the American colonies in Africa! Israel[or US, same to you] was murdering millions for oil? You really are a off the wall nut man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 OK, I wasn't around when this guy was posting under his other name. Realistically, is there any reason for anyone to respond to his schit? I won't put him on "ignore" for at least a while. It could be fun to see what pBill's secret partner has to say. HAHAHAHA........................................ Isn't this the guy who came on the board (I figured he was a middle schooler) when we were supposedly in negotiations with Cowher and post a million times Cowher to the Bills by Tuesday - like he had some inside info.........And, then was never heard from again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 lets make this simple............. if saddam installed a dictatorship in canada to get better prices on resources, would you support it? do you think that is moral? May I mambo dogface to the banana patch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 And what position inside the US gov in 79 did Albright hold that she could "admit" this? You are mouthpieceing Madeleine Albright for your facts? No wonder you can't even get you're continents straight. We caused apartheid? Oh I long for the day's of the American colonies in Africa! Israel[or US, same to you] was murdering millions for oil? You really are a off the wall nut man. it is established fact the cia put the shah in power. so i dont know what to say here. i didnt say we started the apartheid, i said we supported it... i guess installing autocratic regimes which murder and torture doesnt mean we murder and torture... even though the cia was directly involved. really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 so i dont know I’ve been reading this board for over 10 years and I don’t think I’ve ever read a more delirious poster than you. You’re !@#$ing nuts, dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Projecting much? Go to the Trayvon thread. There's ample evidence that Martin initiated the physical contact. Both miscalculated, and Martin lost a bigger bet. How about offering a coherent response instead of a random ramble that doesn't address the topics? But I'm sure you know that the only reason the guy in Egypt ruled for 30 years is because Al Qeda founders killed his predecessor and he was justified in promoting the dictatorship. It's overly convenient to blame the USA for radicalization of Mid East, while in reality they needed nobody's help to do it. The radicals were violent well before US invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq. Yet, we're supposed to accept a theory that not only is the US the root cause of world evil, but that a US military and business pullback from overseas will usher an age of peace and prosperity in the world. Idiot may be too soft of a word. Give your critisim of Obama, I'm sure you have no hidden biases at all. Change is a bad thing for you right? A world where 28 yo men follow 17 yos is awesome. Also, would you be so quick to defend Martin if he "stood his ground" and shot and killed Zimmerman because he felt threaten? Me thinks not. Nice, but you're wasting your time. The sea biscuits and and MDP's of the world will alway's blame the CIA for the lose of the garden of Eden, because we give them fabulous amounts of money for oil they never realized had any value. That put US puppets in power, and ended the Utopia that was the pre Western middle east. I'm sure living in Alaska you have a worldly and diverse POV. Note: not everyone who is colored is evil despite what this board tells you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Give your critisim of Obama, I'm sure you have no hidden biases at all. Change is a bad thing for you right? A world where 28 yo men follow 17 yos is awesome. Also, would you be so quick to defend Martin if he "stood his ground" and shot and killed Zimmerman because he felt threaten? Me thinks not. I'm sure living in Alaska you have a worldly and diverse POV. Note: not everyone who is colored is evil despite what this board tells you. You are a complete ass. Criticism of Obama means bias? No knowledge of the Martin/Zimmerman case other than Al Sharpton's version? Biscuit? More like Muffy, short for Muffin. Go play somewhere else. You can't compete here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 You are a complete ass. Criticism of Obama means bias? No knowledge of the Martin/Zimmerman case other than Al Sharpton's version? Biscuit? More like Muffy, short for Muffin. Go play somewhere else. You can't compete here. Not bias. Read it again. He's calling us all racists. Criticizing Obama is a clear indicator of racial prejudice. Exiting the vehicle with intent to follow is a hate crime, didn't you hear? When a black guy gets shot by a non-black its also a hate crime. When a 28 year old follows a 17 year old its a hate crime. Those white-hispanics are just so full of hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Not bias. Read it again. He's calling us all racists. Criticizing Obama is a clear indicator of racial prejudice. Exiting the vehicle with intent to follow is a hate crime, didn't you hear? When a black guy gets shot by a non-black its also a hate crime. When a 28 year old follows a 17 year old its a hate crime. Those white-hispanics are just so full of hate. He's a complete POS and not worthy of even this much attention. I'd rather debate Conner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I’ve been reading this board for over 10 years and I don’t think I’ve ever read a more delirious poster than you. You’re !@#$ing nuts, dude. so what is your argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 so what is your argument? Sorry, I dont argue with idiots. Good luck, cause you're gonna need it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Give your critisim of Obama, I'm sure you have no hidden biases at all. Change is a bad thing for you right? A world where 28 yo men follow 17 yos is awesome. Also, would you be so quick to defend Martin if he "stood his ground" and shot and killed Zimmerman because he felt threaten? Me thinks not. Yes, I have a bias against incompetent leaders, especially the ones with the only thing on a resume being a slogan. Your point? And, yes, I would defend Martin's right to self defense under Florida's laws. Where's your feigned outrage at the thousands of Trayvon Martins who are killed every year? Would you think differently if Martin was shot under similar circumstances in a black neighborhood, when he decided it was wise to confront a guy who was trailing him, instead of continuing his walk home? Look at the details of the case, look at the map of the development, look at the timeline, and then draw the conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Yes, I have a bias against incompetent leaders, especially the ones with the only thing on a resume being a slogan. Your point? And, yes, I would defend Martin's right to self defense under Florida's laws. Where's your feigned outrage at the thousands of Trayvon Martins who are killed every year? Would you think differently if Martin was shot under similar circumstances in a black neighborhood, when he decided it was wise to confront a guy who was trailing him, instead of continuing his walk home? Look at the details of the case, look at the map of the development, look at the timeline, and then draw the conclusion. Wow. So it is Martin's fault because he decided to confront some weirdo who was following him? You better believe if someone is following me, I'm sure as hell going to confront them. but I guess it's Martin fault for getting shot because he didn't just run home? I know it's hard for some you cranky guys (let me guess, you're over 40) to understand this, but I really could care less about the race involved. White teenager and black man, I'd have the same exact reaction. If the man was told by 911 to leave the "suspect with skittles" alone, he is 100% at fault for everything that happened after. If he doesn't confront against 911's wishes, there is no situation. and to top it off, he's a giant kitty cat for getting beat up by a kid more than 10 years younger than him and who weighed 100 less lbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Me thinks Me doubts that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 You are a complete ass. Criticism of Obama means bias? No knowledge of the Martin/Zimmerman case other than Al Sharpton's version? Biscuit? More like Muffy, short for Muffin. Go play somewhere else. You can't compete here. You right. I can't compete about your crying about politics on a message board. You're changing the world. Let me guess: over 40 years old? Seriously, if you ever really wanna compare resumes, PM. Because you couldn't compete with my real life. See people like you like to lump people together. It's easier for you. If you think Zimmerman is a scumbag who created a situation that shouldn't have existed in the first place, you must love Sharpton. I think Sharpton is an idiot. You are the type of person that is killing this country. Complain and B word. change is bad. My way of thinking is the only way. It is easier to criticize than listen. But you're right. I don't belong here. I'm a free thinker and not one to follow in group think. Enjoy your circle jerk. You're a great man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 (edited) Wow. So it is Martin's fault because he decided to confront some weirdo who was following him? You better believe if someone is following me, I'm sure as hell going to confront them. but I guess it's Martin fault for getting shot because he didn't just run home? I know it's hard for some you cranky guys (let me guess, you're over 40) to understand this, but I really could care less about the race involved. White teenager and black man, I'd have the same exact reaction. If the man was told by 911 to leave the "suspect with skittles" alone, he is 100% at fault for everything that happened after. If he doesn't confront against 911's wishes, there is no situation. and to top it off, he's a giant kitty cat for getting beat up by a kid more than 10 years younger than him and who weighed 100 less lbs. Sure you don't. You just insinuated that 3rd and GG would be more inclined to care about the Trayvon case if the deceased teen were white and the shooter black for kicks, and called them racists in jest. Sure. Why are you putting suspect with skittles in quotes? Edited May 11, 2012 by Jauronimo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 You right. I can't compete about your crying about politics on a message board. You're changing the world. Let me guess: over 40 years old? Seriously, if you ever really wanna compare resumes, PM. Because you couldn't compete with my real life. You drive a BMW, don't you. Tell us, what is it about people over 40 that makes it such an important benchmark for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts