a question about Presidents Bush...

2»

Comments

  • ONCE DEVIDED
    ONCE DEVIDED Posts: 1,131
    gue_barium wrote:
    More specific to the Bushes:

    the Carlyle Group
    the Bin laden group
    Halliburton (Cheney, anyway)
    James Bath
    the CIA (Bush Sr. was director back in the day and still gets daily briefings)
    the Saudi's

    making money, lots of money.
    Just rehashing MIKE moore crap does nothing for the debate.
    How about your own thoughts??
    You think youve got it bad. in Australia we have a government who ( as ed said ) is giving your president a head job with our lips.
    yes gwb what ever you want.
    we will alllow an australian to sit in your gulag for 5 years without question
    etc etc
    AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    ONCE DEVIDED wrote:
    Just rehashing MIKE moore crap does nothing for the debate.
    How about your own thoughts??
    You think youve got it bad. in Australia we have a government who ( as ed said ) is giving your president a head job with our lips.
    yes gwb what ever you want.
    we will alllow an australian to sit in your gulag for 5 years without question
    etc etc

    I shall give you leeway, being you have just 87 posts or so. Trust me, I didn't check the other 86.
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • ONCE DEVIDED
    ONCE DEVIDED Posts: 1,131
    gue_barium wrote:
    I shall give you leeway, being you have just 87 posts or so. Trust me, I didn't check the other 86.
    mate, trust me im onyour side but the comment i quoted is staight from farinheight 911
    I have been on other boards and have seen the same comments come from many and the retorts are always deriding MIKE moore as a Bandwagon rider. Its a pity that that movie was so big as the arguments made in it have been HOLLYWOODED and now ignored by the mainstream media and the public.
    All I asked you for were your views. I for instance spoke of human rights violations of citizens of my country
    my 86 to your 619 what does that matter, am I not good enough because I havnt been here longer. At some stage you only had 86 posts, does that mean your views then were not valid
    AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
  • tybird
    tybird Posts: 17,388
    soulsinging wrote:
    vietnam was as much kennedy's fault as lbj. though i think lbj is one of the worst presidents in history. however, vietnam was a snowballing mess from the get-go. we were bailing out the french at first and world opinion was not as cohesive as now. it kinda just spun out of control. that's a bit different from reagan deciding to invade any latin american country he didnt like or bush's jaunt into iraq. honestly, i dont know why you righties always get your backs up anytime someone says reagan wasn't the greatest human being ever to walk this earth. shit, most of you would rate him higher than jesus. i truly expect christianity to have evolved in another 2000 years into worship of reagan.

    i call them like i see them. lbj was reprehensible, but diff. reagan and dubya were idiots. bush sr... ok in my book.
    Who said that I was a "rightie"? Besides JFK did not live long enough for 'Nam to become a weight around his neck like what LBJ endured.

    Reagan was good to okay.......I would have preferred at least one more term for Ford.
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • suns rival
    suns rival Posts: 15,926
    scot88 wrote:
    this is the dumbest fucking thread i've ever read. if you want to know more about the bushes or the republican party, google them or look it up on wikipedia. if i want to know more about a foreign president/ruler/whatever, i'm not going to ask people on an online forum. i'll do some research. i don't know if the original poster is trying to gain acceptance in a mainly liberal forum or what. in every aspect, this is just fucking stupid.

    fuck you! why would you post here if you think this thread is stupid? you're stupid also. dumbass!
    scratching my butt...
    kinakamot ang aking puwit...
    me rascando pompis...
    krap mijn reet...
    boku no ketsuoana o kizu...
    bahrosh teezy...
  • scot88
    scot88 Posts: 217
    suns rival wrote:
    fuck you! why would you post here if you think this thread is stupid? you're stupid also. dumbass!

    really mature.


    i say this thread is stupid (cos let's face it, it is), and you attack me personally. unlike you, i don't get offended when someone who i don't know nor will ever know insults me on an online forum. deal with it.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    JamMastaE wrote:
    your dead wrong,read the book i suggested in my previous post.
    I suggest you start with one of these books. you have alot of catching up to do

    http://www.allaboardtoys.com/sesame_street/books/
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    JamMastaE wrote:
    somethings have to be studied in detail to fully understand them,there is no condensed version,BUT!! this is one of the most important books you will ever read.look on the web,you can find a pdf. version.

    is it as exciting and factual as the da vinci code? i love a good conspiracy novel.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    tybird wrote:
    Who said that I was a "rightie"? Besides JFK did not live long enough for 'Nam to become a weight around his neck like what LBJ endured.

    Reagan was good to okay.......I would have preferred at least one more term for Ford.

    fair enough. just seemed like you were getting your back up about reagan and i find that incredibly annoying. also wanted to point out i give no pass to the many presidents involved in vietnam, but the circumstances there were different. it wasnt an outright offensive invasion. it began as an invited defense of colonialism and snowballed out of control.

Categories