Who told? Was it gobear?
He’s a liar! You can’t believe him!
And I was really drunk at the time!
Regards,
Shodan
You say “person” in the singular (btw: the possessive form of “who” is “whose”) like he’s only ever done that in one person’s thread. Most emphatically not the case. Hey, I got nothin’ against Bush-bashing. I’m one of the few folks here who’ll admit to liking Michael Moore’s films. Problem is that some of us, at least, have a few interests outside of Bush, so we’re not interested in having “What’s your favorite color?” turned into pointless screaming. I mean, you think duffer or Reeder’s ever gonna change their mind? Shrill screaming is something that ought to be confined - it’s fine for those who like it, but those of us who don’t should be able to escape it.
Googling for
msm mainstream media
produces 1,770,000 hits.
Googling for
msm men sex
produces 981,000 hits.
Huh. I would’ve guessed men who have sex with men, too.
With that interpretation, a lot of hits for just “msm” become much funnier, if you’re as occasionally-juvenile as I am. Witness “MSM is being touted as a magic bullet for treating arthritis pain”. Heh heh heh…
I thought it stood for monosodium mutamate, the secret ingredient in Wolverine’s lo mein.
Daniel
I suspect “mainstream media” may appear in pages that aren’t actually using MSM as an acronym for that, though. More than “men sex” at least. For instance, someone could be writing about how the mainstream media depict MSMs. Either way, writing in acronyms is RFA. You ain’t twelve, this ain’t AOL, if you’re in a text medium you can suck it up and actually write some fucking text.
Really Fucking Annoying
AFAICT you’d fit right in with AAAA.
TTFN
This is the internet.
Googling for
msm men sex moose
produces 37,500 hits.
Typical, I go to work for eight measily hours and god starts talking smack about me.
Yea I can, can you? The idea that being a member of the UN supersedes the sovereignty of a nation is a popular one amongst the far left, unfortunately for them it’s just not true.
Ohhh, yes, the U.S. never gets criticized in any international forum because it has the biggest guns. :rolleyes: Do they have shock treatments on whatever planet you’re from? I suggest you look into some.
Or they might be just as dead at Sadaam’s hands, he was killing people at a much faster clip that the casualties that have resulted from the war in Iraq. But hey, don’t let facts stand in the way of your indignant frothing, where’s the fun in that?
I would like to point out that it wasn’t long ago that I was bitch-slapped by a Mod for doing pretty much exactly the same thing. Would it have been acceptable if I had used a smiley? In my mind, no. I knew exactly what I was doing, and after all these years I’m pretty sure that rjung knew it as well.
I think that what rjung does is typical of why every discussion seems to lead to Bush around here, but in this case I think he was on the mark. I was soliciting opinions, and one opinion I was looking for was how the Bush “missile shield” would affect the balance of MAD. SO it’s no big deal in this case.
The Bush missile shield will lead to the fall of the outer space treaty and the construction of low earth orbit nuclear platforms by the US, China, and probably Russia. NO missile shield can be built to protect from a short range system that shoots straight down like that. We’ll all be forced to try to maintain MAD by implementing ‘launch on warning’. Someone will fuck up.
I admit to finding Wilson Jermiane Heredia ultra-hot when I saw him in Rent in 1996.
But apart from that… no. 
“Far Left”? If that means slightly right of Ghengis Khan, we’re agreed. Meanwhile, what does your own Constitution say about international treaties?
(my bolding)
But sure, no doubt the US Gov can find lawyers (and sycophants such as yourself) to weasel out of just about anything. Like the illegal war that occupies us here.
I’ll go for the shock treatments just as soon as you pull out all those teeth your knees have impaled into what passes for a brain.
Fact is, short of going to war against the US, there was precious little anyone could do to stop the illegal invasion of Iraq. Lord knows we tried peacefully and legally.
Then again, I’m sure that means nothing to people such as yourself.
::::shrug::::
Blowback’s a bitch. Poll reveals world anger at Bush
Bullfuckingshit. Unadulterated one at that. Put up or shut the fuck up, cumstain. Fact is, Saddam’s worst criminal actions came under the aegis of the US. and nothing he’d done since compairs to the current carnage in Iraq – courtesy, once again, of the US of A.
Try this for a hypothetical – if it’s not too taxing for you: Your company assigns you (along with your inmediate family) to work in Baghdad, which period would you chose to live there assuming security was a priority? 1993-2002 or now?
QED.
Speaking of not letting facts get in the way of our frothing, your claim is bullshit. Hussein had clearly killed far more people–Iranians, Iraqis, and others–than have died in this war, but his large-scale murder programs took place years ago during the Iran-Iraq war, and the suppression of the Kurds and the suppression of the southern Shi’ite insurrection that GHWB promoted and failed to support immediately after the first Gulf War. Even ascribing to him deaths due to infrastructure failure as Hussein manipulated the Oil for Food program, the daily deaths in Iraq in the few years prior to our invasion were far lower than the daily deaths inflicted since we wandered into the country.
A claim that “he was killing” (implying large scale active murders in the late 1990s and early 2000s) is simply false.
You do realize that the Busheviks do not let facts get in their way don’t you?
:rolleyes: Sweetpea, you ain’t so bright, are ya?
However, even on issues about which I hold rather passionate opinions (supported, I hope, by facts), I find it more suitable to express my opinions regarding the issues than to paint broad-brush generalizations about persons who hold contrary opinions. In this way I do not fall into the error of assuming that because persons A and B each hold opinion X, that they must also jointly hold opinion Y (which they may not) or that because person A holds opinion X and happens to be a fool, then person B must be a fool for holding a similar postion–a point which would need to be proven separately.
The number I’ve always heard (apart from those murdered every day for political reasons and/or to create intimidation) was around 2,000 a month, largely due to the Oil For Food program you mention.
Further, the entire population lived in fear of having either loved ones or themselves spirited away in the middle of the night only to return later in the form of small pieces in trash bags…provided of course that they weren’t shoved feet-first into flaming stoves or wood chippers, thereby leaving nothing to put into trash bags.
People died regularly at the hand of Hussein and his sons and his henchmen, and although Hussein clearly didn’t maintain the kill rate that existed at the time he sent hundreds of thousands of his population to die needlessly in the Iran war, or the time he killed tens of thousands in retribution for rising up after GW1, he still murdered thousands of his countrymen at a rapid clip and he could have - and probably would have - murdered many more any time he saw fit. His population was terrorized and Hussein was responsible for over a million Iraqi deaths during his reign.
The fact that the majority of them occured years ago only shows that thanks to sanctions that never would have occurred if not for the U.S., he was not at war. He was every bit as murderous and as uncaring for human life as he ever. Furthermore, his killing (and that of his sons) would have continued for decades.
People are not dying at the same rate now as when the war began, and they will continue to die less and less as time goes by. IMO, at least tens of thousands of Iraqis will be alive ten years from now (at the very least) than would have lived had Hussein and/or his sons maintained power.
I’m afraid I’m gonna have to ask for a cite for your claim that Weirddave’s claim is false (or “bullshit” as you uncharacteristically said at the beginning of your post).
Almost needless to say, I agree with your post. Just wanted to highlight the latest dirt, unintentionally brought up by Sen Norm Coleman, in his haste to implicate any number of prominent members of the anti-war movement in the Oil for Food scandal – culminating in yesterday’s brilliant appearance by British parliamentarian George Galloway in front of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
Some choice quotes from same:
(bolding mine)
And the kicker:
The sheer ineptness that led to this whole clusterfuck would be almost amusing if, in reality, it wasn’t so terribly sad.
Damnit, I knew everyone would find out! That is the last time I trust the two of you. In my defense, the occasional heated exchanges between SolGrundy and gobear are undeniable turn-ons.
Of course, being a conservative and judging from the board’s left-winger view of us I guess I have to go kick my own ass now.
The self-loathing is almost unbearable.