KipWellsFan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_for_food The neocons are only interested in freedom and democracy when it benefits them geopolitcally, everything else is rhetoric. Their alliance with Uzbekistan is an example. tons more at link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbekistan

lol, it was late

I don't have to privilege to have the channel but I have done some reading and watched Control Room. wikipedia is always a wonderful source EDIT: thanks to Michael Moore though documentaries seems to have taken a hit in their reputation. But I'd urge anyone to check it out before they judge it.

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?act=Post&CODE=00&f=1 Nasa is incredible!

You don't have to know much about Al-Jazeera to know they aren't a terrorist network or the enemy. Besides if we don't discuss things where we don't have expertise we'll never be encouraged to learn more about them.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 3, 2005 -> 07:11 PM) Those amenities (heat, electricity) are made available by wealth. That's what is at the heart of it all. Good point

Rhetoric praising the UN? Terrorists hate the erosion of their ultra conservative values. Don't they want to live without amenities such as heat and electricity. I didn't think it had much to do with wealth but I could be wrong. EDIT: of course there are all kinds of different terrorists, with different aims and reasons

I'd agree that insurgents are terrorists but I don't think Kofi is implying that they should be included. He says that the process needs to be all inclusive, but makes a point of mentioning those who aren't interested in contributing. I'm just not sure what you mean EM. EDIT: Also Kofi never even mentions the Liberation, his piece is about progress after liberation.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 3, 2005 -> 04:50 PM) Insurgents = terrorists. You like to play the semantics game when it suits your purposes. And you please tell me just what the UN actually DID to help facilitate the election. Did they supply troops, or security forces to help ensure that the people could freely vote? What did they actually do? If they did something, please tell me. As for your parsing on all the rest, if someone read that piece that didn't know anything prior that happened, they would come away with the impression that the UN played the main, pivitol role in the liberation and elections in Iraq, which is as far from the truth as Kip Wells is from being a good pitcher I do completely agree with your last sentence. I already outlined the UN's involvement in the elections. I guess they didn't facilitate the elections and the coalition troops deserve props for that, but Kofi as I noted wasn't really taking a ton of credit for it anyways. again http://www.unfoundation.org/iraqelections.asp

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 3, 2005 -> 11:09 AM) Kip, can you read? I just farted, and yes I can read. His piece doesn't claim to have created it, they passed in in the UN security council. And please give me where it says the US came up with this timetable. Yah I already refuted this stupid point. If you could read you'd notice he barely gloated at all, and seeing as what they did for the election, they should be able to take some credit If you could read you'd realize he never mentions including terrorists. Here's an idea Evil, thank Kofi for warning that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, no threat to the United States, for trying to stop tens of thousands on innocent civilians from being killed, from 1800+ US soldiers from being killed in a War that really doesn't affect them or their families And just to make sure I have all my bases covered, I said earlier Something which he has yet to really do... that I know of

http://www.unfoundation.org/iraqelections.asp http://www.uniraq.org/

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 3, 2005 -> 02:24 PM) Kip, you don't know s***. You profess to 'be sure' that the UN is doing more than can be seen or proven. Why is that? Maybe because you want to believe it. Show me something they are doing other than creating layers of government and red tape. They didn't want to be there, they didn't want us there, and they sure as hell aren't doing anything to help the situation, except trying to take credit for whatever successes are there. And why wouldn't Kofi lie? He lied about everything else. You seem to ascribe a 'can do no wrong' attitude to those that you agree with (kofi, Kerry, etc.), but a 'can do no right' attitude to those you don't (Rove, Bush, etc.). Get your head out of your ass and wake up. They all lie, they all tellthe truth, they all are in it for themselves, they all f*** up. Lied about everything else? What in gods name are you even talking about? When did they say they didn't want to be there? Aren't doing anything to help, f***, that's clearly bulls***. Talk about being blinded

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_Fund_for_Iraq sounds like they are cutting through some red tape there The UN has been s*** on like crazy with Hans Blix and going over their head to fight this whole f***ed up War. The US has delegitmized themselves with their allies around the World and they've taken the United Nations with them. I'm no expert on how the United Nations is involved in Iraq right now. But I doubt Kofi is just straight out lieing about their involvements. Prove that they are just stalling progress with this "red tape".

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 3, 2005 -> 12:16 PM) Take the words "UN" out and put "US" in and you have it about right on your last paragraph. For once, I really wish we WOULD stay out of everyone's business, including that great country to the north of the United States, and see how long you people last on your own. You're right I should have put US as well, but I think many people probably underestimate the UN's role in Iraq now. And the whole Canada would be screwed without the US point is getting old.

Charles Schumer calls on Rove to deny claims in person, not through lawyer http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopN...-bc-us-leak.xml

here's the resolution 1546 http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issue...8resolution.htm and Allawi and Powell agreeing to it OH my god he's just raving about how the UN successfully held the elections! And he goes into such great detail about how the UN was involved.

That's bulls*** you can slam the UN all you want but I'm sure they've played a played a large part in the rebuilding process and as a spokesman for the UN Kofi is outlining what they have done. He's not lying about anything here. So basically what you're saying is he has lied about basically everything the UN is doing, f***ing bulls***. And he doesn't say anything about including the terrorists, gosh. I'd like to see the f'n mess Iraq is left in if UN just pulls out of that hole and leaves everything up to the Iraqi government.

Well this would be his first movie since Snatch had he not made Swept Away. Starring Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, André Benjamin and Vincent Pastore. I think Ritchie has said this will be less of a comedy and it looks to me like it will be quite the gritty flick. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365686/plotsummary quicktime trailer http://www.greenroom-press.com/clients/Red...ies/trlr_hi.mov

that's you...

while I'm debating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_for_food Why are conservatives mad when their own government, a conservative government, seemed to have done nothing about it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,161084,00.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5062001176.html Oh but it's not a direct criticism... shut up! There are so many of these crazy statements being thrown around these days. If you oppose anything about the War you're just helping the terrorists. Puhleeeeeez! How about how no countries intervened, where was the American and British and Canadian militaries then. That's an asanine statement but it's not surprise seeing as the author is a member of the very mainstream Heritage foundation If you read the article it's obvious Kofi is just outlining where the United Nations is contributing. He is supposed to be positive about the organization he runs afterall. Annan may be a completely hateful, corrupt sob but his article doesn't say much... other than he's quite articulate. I do agree he should give credit to the coalition forces, but that's just not really what this article is about. That or he's just so spiteful to them for going over his head. Oh and maybe I missed it but I don't believe he takes credit for the liberation of Iraq.

O'Donnell video http://movies.crooksandliars.com/McLaughlin_Odonnell.mov

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 2, 2005 -> 10:13 PM) Also, her name and status was revealed by Time in 2003, way before this happened. http://online.wsj.com/public/corrections?page=Corrections Not sure what you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame That was published the day before Novak's I believe.

I'm sorry but that doesn't even seem to make sense This article is basically implying that Joe Wilson went completely crazy, and basically absolutely everything he has said has been lies. Sure... lets compare Wilson and Rove's credibility Wilson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_C._Wilson Rove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove#Ear...cal_experiences Come on, whether you're left or right this guy is scum. Whether he leaked Plame and had any agenda behind it is yet to be seen. EDIT: and those are not all of the scandals he's been involved with

Apparently this isn't the first time Rove's name has come up in discussions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame