EvilMonkey

QUOTE(Pale Hose Jon @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 10:20 PM) So we are going to blame an entire population for the actions of a few. It is not as if the ruling party of Hamas has declared that they comitted that kidnapping and that in some sort of outlandish resolution the entire population stated that they supported the kidnapping. It would be similar to me blaming all americans and myself for the rape and murder of that iraqi women by US soldiers. Please dont blam the whole for the actions of the few Ah, but the Muslim extremists DO blame you for the rape and murder of the Iraqui woman. Just by virtue of being an American, you are marked for death, it is all your fault, and you are their gateway to the 72 virgins. INFIDEL! For a real trip, check out Aljazeera's webpage. They have a story on it about the woman that was raped, with comments. They cerainly paint all Americans with the same brush. Some sample quotes: • The US has a long history of sending their rapist soldiers back home and denying the aggrieved country justice. If Saddam is being tried for murdering Iraqi's why aren't the US Soldiers tried by the Iraqi's for the rape, murder and mutilation of civilians. The outcome of this trial will surely show the world America's view of itself relative to the rest of the world. If these soldiers don't get the death penalty in the US for this atrocious, barbaric act, It scares me to think what kind of act is worth getting the death penalty. • This soldier is a typical American soldier, this incident is one of thousands in Iraq, This is the real face of America ... Now and then there will be thousands of Bin Laden who will make another 11 of Sep. America is an EVIL nation • They are child rypest, who then burns the young girl and kils the family to hide thier crimes. That was nt the only rype and mruders bushblair regine have done to civilians, it is just the few we knows of. Then the world wonders, y are the Iraqis angry and kil the occupiers. There is just so many atrocities going on in Iraq, we have no idea about. This is the resons for the press buildings bombings and all the journalist who was mrudered, so the info about what are happening to the civilians won't reach the world. We cannot solve today's problems using the mindset that created them, Albert Einstein. If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life, Henry David Thoreau. If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Law never made men a whit more just, Henry David Thoreau.. Peace to the world. • i strongly believe that, what we are watching here is just a tip of an iceberg, it is very easy for american army to rape the girls, kill the men then call for f 16 planes to drop some 500 lbs bombs on victim's house to vaporize all evidence. Thihs is some funny stuff. And I thought wacko fringe-left liberals were crazy! You guys have NOTHING on the people posting here. They even make Iggy seem sane. EDIT: Here is the link. http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11692

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 09:21 PM) How many people have you heard about who enlisted in our army after 9/11? (With Israel, it's a bit of a different story, since military service is mandatory there IIRC) Read what I wrote. How many MUSLIMS have decided to take arms against TERRORISTS after TERRORIST bombs kill INNOCENT MUSLIMS? I am not talking about the increased military enrollment here after 9/11. If Muslims are so quick to want to become terrorists after an Israeli bomb kills innocent people, how come not the reverse when a Muslim bomb kills Muslims?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 05:17 PM) When an Israeli bomb kills a bunch of people, some of them children, all it does is create even more people willing to fight against Israel. Which is exactly what an organization determined to fight Israel would want. So how come when a Muslim bomb blows up innocent Muslims, it doens't spawn more people willing to fight against the terrorists? Hmmm.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 9, 2006 -> 06:27 PM) There is nothing that justifies cutting off 600,000 civilians from power and water. The power station was one of the biggest parts of the private Gazan economy. There are many gazans who have nothing to do with Hamas. Who have nothing to do with terrorism. They just want to make a living, and can't. And they also do nothing to help stop Hamas. Kinda like people closing thier windows when they hear a rape or an assault going out right outside.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 9, 2006 -> 06:05 PM) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5163072.stm So I understand the need to protect yourself from attack. I understand the need to protect your own, even if they are in harms way. Like the kidnapped soldier. Here's what I don't understand. Rocket attacks from Hamas that literally explode in unpopulated areas. Destroying the only source of power for literally half of the 1.3 million people who live in affected areas. This pretty much also takes away their source of clean drinking water too. Destroying bridges, and houses in the name of security or finding one person. I don't think any side here is right, but the size of destruction that we're seeing over just one person... is both stunning and depressing. C'mon, Rex, you can't be that blind to the situation. Kick a dog enough times and eventually he will bite, and bite hard. If your neighbor starts lobbing hand grenades into your backyard, how long are you going to stand for it, even if the only thing hurt were your flower garden?Israel pulled out of the strip and gave them complete autonomy there, and what do they do? Use it as a base to further attack Israel. Not to get into the whole who's right/who's wrong debate, but with all the cease fires that the Palis have violated, I wish Irsrael would just turn the whole f***ing place into a parking lot and be done with it. The Palis and their perpetual cries of victimhood make whiny liberals look like conservatives. How about just shutting up, and do something to help your situation other than attacking Israel? Make something, sell something, DO something.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Jul 9, 2006 -> 05:55 PM) isnt it a state rule, not a federal rule. what's legal in NJ isnt legal in TX. lets be fair in the Wellstone case, he died. Not under Federal Investigation for Bribery. That's just it, it WASN'T legal in NJ, but somehow they got away with it. According to New Jersey law, a political party may replace a candidate for statewide office on the ballot at least 48 days before Election Day. The only exceptions would be the death of the candidate, in which case the party would be allowed to name a replacement to appear on the election ballot; or if a candidate (Torricelli) resigns from the U.S. Senate, in which case the governor would name his immediate replacement. Neither one happened, yet he was replaced. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled unanimously that election laws should be "liberally construed" to provide a "full and fair ballot choice for the voters of New Jersey." I guess the people of Texas shouldn't be provided a "full and fair ballot choice". Maybe they aren't as good as the voters in NJ? I think Tex might disagree with that one.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 9, 2006 -> 03:09 PM) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...1211541,00.html Kinda ironic that they wouldn't let Delay off the ballot, when the Democrats successfully replaced Robert Torricelli, similarly affected with concerns about his character, with Frank Lautenberg less than a month before the 2002 election and in rather flagrant violation of state law requiring such a change be made at least 48 days in place of an election. And wasn't Wellsotne replaced onthe ballot about 10 days or so before that election? I guess only Dems can be replaced on ballots.

Damn, playing for change tonight (quarter,nickle, dime) and I STILL lost $21. I couldn't buy a pair if Vanna White was in the house! Two weeks in a row I suck! Hope I got the bad mojo put before the money tourney.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jul 8, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) As far as the attacks on Hugo Chavez, I can't for the life of me figure out why people despise him so much. You mean, he nationalized his economy, and says things in support of his country? I don't have a problem with democratically elected men criticizing democratic governments, even if it is harsh, and I have no problem with Chavez talking to Castro. It's not as if we don't talk to Dictators much worse than Fidel Castro. So you think it is ok that he is taking private businesses and turning them into state businesses? His country wouldn't even be where it is now if it wasn't for private industry investing there, and then he goes and screws them all by taking it. How is that going to help future investments? Plus, the guy is a loony! He is like Iggy, seeing black helicopters around every hill. The US may not be able to find Osama, but with him in public as much as he is, if we wanted to assassinate him, he would be gone already. All his support talk sounds alot like the 'jingoism' that I keep hearing the US is guilty of.

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 03:51 AM) I should have clarified: I meant online. I'd love to get a decent cash game going again, but we lost a lot of our key guys. Oh, I figured that was what you meant, just thought I would throw a plug to the event.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jul 4, 2006 -> 06:53 PM) You really don't know much about Mexican elections. Geeze, forget to put something in green ONE TIME and you go all crazy on me! OK, I will remember this time. You know, if they recount those ballots down there enough times, I bet Al Gore wins!

QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Jul 6, 2006 -> 03:04 AM) I used to play on poker room, but it got way too slow, and I had connection problems. I use Ultimate Bet now. I just can't see myself playing for real money though. How about if it was to benefit a charity? http://www.plainfieldhumane.com/ I've done this twice so far, placed 5th last time. It is alot more exciting than online.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 6, 2006 -> 03:25 AM) Hillary Clinton is on record as supporting whoever wins the primary. I didn't say all................

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 3, 2006 -> 09:29 PM) The party's wishes would be reflected in the primary election. Looks like alot of the Party bigwigs are on Joe's side. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060705/ap_on_...crats_lieberman

Dude, next you're gonna tell us that the eeeeeeeevil fascist Bus***ler sent a CIA death squad to silence Kenny Boy, lest he implicate Chimpy McFlightsuit in more of his nefarious evildoings.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 3, 2006 -> 09:37 PM) The IFE lead is nearly 400,000 votes at this point and there will be a recount at the request of the PRI candidate, although little is expected to change. Maybe the Dems can lend them some of their ballot counters to help with all the hanging chads and such. I am sure they can come up with a few hundred thousand votes if they try hard enough.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 3, 2006 -> 11:18 PM) He didn't do that in the middle of an election did he? And that's a fundamentally different thing. He left his party. He didn't waiver about it and say "I'm gonna leave unless you elect me." He just left. There's a big difference there. Yes, he did just leave, AFTER he was elected as a Republican by the people. They didn't elect him as an independant, or a Democrat. So, following your Lieberman logic, respecting the will of the people, he should have resigned.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 3, 2006 -> 09:29 PM) The party's wishes would be reflected in the primary election. If his operation with 18 years experience in Connecticut can't get him enough votes to get the Primary Victory (after securing the party endorsement in the state's spring convention), he ought to step aside. If he wants to hedge his bets, then hedge his bets now and leave the party. But don't run as a "petitioning" Democrat because you weren't able to win the regular nomination. I've never been a fan of Lieberman, but this is ridiculous. s*** or get off the pot. Be a Democrat or don't. Just don't play it both ways. Sorta like Jim jeffords, after being elected as a Republican, should have just resigned instead of turning himself into an Independent Democrat? After all, the Party elected him, if he didn't want to be a Republican anymore, he should have just resigned.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 3, 2006 -> 07:32 PM) Not respecting the wishes of your own party makes you an assbag. If you don't want to be a Democrat anymore, just leave the party already - but playing it both ways and not being respectful of the wishes of the people who put you there in the first place... makes you an assbag. Didn't the voters put him there, not the 'party'? Is the Senator from NO an assbag for not respecting the party wishes and resigning? Do you want sheep or people in your elections?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 30, 2006 -> 07:21 PM) The biggest harm, imo, is that they disclosed who all is in on the program, and that's where they should have stopped. YES! Because now all the people who cooperated with us on this will think twice about doing so again because they were 'outed'. The finance guy in Canada is getting a ton of heat from all the moonbat liberals up there for not saying anything about a LEGAL program. The SWIFT people now fear that they could be a terrorist target since their existence was made common knowledge. The government there is also demanding investigation. When topics like this come up, you have the liberals generally saying that if we 'go after the informants' that it would create a climate where confidential sources wouldn't want to come forward. I think I heard the phrase 'it would have a chilling effect on our free speech rights'. You get the same effect by blabbign to the world about who helps us. If they help us, they are a target. How many people knoew of the SWIFt thing before this broke? Not many. How many knew that Canada was helping us get this info? Probably only a few. But next time we need help, I bet the governments 'confidential sources' will think twice about their safety before talking.

QUOTE(BDavisFutureHOF @ Jun 29, 2006 -> 01:04 PM) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13602099/from/ET/?GT1=8211 I hate the fact that I am saying this -- but she really looks beautiful here. That's what a good art guy with an air bursh can do! But you're right, not bad.

Not to start something again, but with the Crosstown series coming up, I thught it kinda funny that I saw this tonight. While watching sports highlights, they showed the Cubs game. Pierre comes barreling home, and the throw is dropped by the catcher. Pierre, not sure if he touched the plate, dives pack and slaps the plate. Then, seeing that the ump called him safe, he slapped the plate 4 more times. I wonder if Barrett would have thought it ok for the opposing catcher to sucker punch him while he lay on the ground slapping home plate? Hmmm.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 01:05 AM) Wow, I don't think I've ever been this offended at a Soxtalk post. Congratulations, your inane comment and complete ignorance of the grant reviewal and application process wins you a big prize. Soxy, are you, or a close relative, a scientist? My statement was not intended to personally insult you, or to insinuate that ALL scientists will lie, just as all politicians don't lie (if you look hard, you may find a few who don't, they ARE out there, somewhere). But why this manufactured outrage over that statement? Global warming, second ice age, then global warming, then the next ice age, then global warming, whatever the current funding will support, they (in general) will do. In regards to global warming, once a particular notion becomes conventional wisdom, evidence and stories confirming that conventional wisdom are easily accepted and published—and reported in the media. Thosestudies that contradict the prevailing views have a much harder time getting a hearing. With the loud voice and center stage that global warming gets, studies that would contradict that would be met with extreme scepticism and dismissed as bad science. http://www.sitewave.net/PPROJECT/ That links to a petition signed by over 17,000 scientists that disagreed with Kyoto and some of the global warming alarmists. When Kyoto was turned down (by Clinton), all you heard about was the concensus in the scientific community about global warming. This doesn't look like concensus. Oh, here is a review of Gore's flick, although if may be a bit biased. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2.../4/173940.shtml

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jun 27, 2006 -> 10:06 PM) Keep in mind that many of these "100 top climate researchers" are vying for federal grants to keep their research programs alive. They obviously have a vested interest in legitimizing his movie. I cannot agree with that statement more. And if people think a scientist won't lie to protect his grant, they have their heads up their asses. They are as bad as politicians and earmarks. maybe worse.

Just what was Jay refering to when he constantly called Frank the Big Skirt? Wasn't he making a gay reference? I guess it is ok for him to do, but not others.