Bush Banger!!

Want to discuss something else? Anything goes here!

Moderator: Bmat

User avatar
lastone
Site Regular
Site Regular
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:57 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Post by lastone »

Now if you want a laugh you need to have a look at this sketch on the daily show.

I cannot link directly to it as the video is streamed but look for this picture

Image
and the title

Indecision 2006: Katherine Harris you will love it.

Go here

http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_ ... ml?start=1
"Goodbye and thanks for the fish"

User avatar
who me
Resident Author
Resident Author
Posts: 5561
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:32 am
Location: Earth mostly

Post by who me »

so does president bush look like the chimp or does the chimp look like president bush?
it is interesting to see that chimps have most of the face expressions that we humans have. I would bet on them sharing most of our feelings.
so,can the chip be elected to office?

User avatar
Darukin
Casual Poster
Casual Poster
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by Darukin »

Lol, funny.

There's also another joke (not real) I'd heard just recently:

So, someone's interviewing the president Bush and tells him that the people are saying that he's the worst American president in history. "So what do you have to say about that, president Bush?" he asks.

Bush replies: "No that's wrong! I'm not the worst at History, I'm the worst at Maths."

:lol:

And by the way. If you guys wanna see something VERY hilarious, watch the George Bush Show at "www.ebolaworld.com". It's about the funniest flash cartoon I'd ever watched and it's in episodes. Hilarious. You better see it if you haven't.

User avatar
Magus
Writer Extraordinaire
Writer Extraordinaire
Posts: 10536
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Post by Magus »

No, Pim. The monkeys were there first.

:wink:

User avatar
FantasyMan
Adept Scribe
Adept Scribe
Posts: 2026
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 11:01 am
Location: Some where I wanna be...

Post by FantasyMan »

My mom and i have come to the conclusion that he looks like a monkey half the time because of how he is always sticking his lips out...
"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself"

-Franklin D. Roosevelt

R.I.P Aldan we know now, that you are in a better place

User avatar
Manji
Site Regular
Site Regular
Posts: 407
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:40 pm
Contact:

Post by Manji »

Merle wrote:
As for the war in Iraq, don't sit there and pretend it has not had any positive consequences. 40 million people have been spared life under a brutal dictator. What's that worth to you? I know you're sitting there all nice and safe and sound, with no responsibilities for your own keep at this point of your life, but how would you feel if it were one of your sisters or your mother in Saddam's rape rooms??? Wells in Africa, or freedom from oppression for Iraq? Go ahead and pick.
What if Richard Cheney came to your wedding, and Pakistan dropped a 500-lb bomb and thirteen cruise missiles into the chapel?

Edit: And I'm tired of hearing about "Terrorists" in Iraq. When the English invaded and burnt Washington, were the guys who grabbed muskets and fought and died in the streets agaisnt the overwhelming odds, armament and discipline the redcoats brought with them terrorists? Or patriots?

User avatar
Magus
Writer Extraordinaire
Writer Extraordinaire
Posts: 10536
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Post by Magus »

Those kind of titles depend entirely on who won the war and who's doing the talking.

User avatar
lastone
Site Regular
Site Regular
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:57 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Here we Go Again

Post by lastone »

With the mid term elections only seven months away, the world still has to deal with a further two years on from that for the conclusion of the Bush administration. It probably a good time for a bit of introspection and crystal ball gazing. When one revues the legacy of the Bush administration the obvious starting point is Iraq.

So let us start off with some facts that in hindsight we can accept as basic truths.

1. Saddam Hussein and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11
Bush: "First-just if I might correct a misperception, I don't think we ever said, at least I know I didn't say that there was a direct connection between September 11th and Saddam Hussein."
There is also dubious grounds to believe that there was any ongoing or meaningful relationship between Al-Qaeda and the Saddam regime. Iraq did support and fund some Palestinian Terrorist groups. Name one Arab nation that didn’t.

2. There was no Weapons of Mass destruction.
3. There was no Nuclear Weapons Program.

So under the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 calling for Iraq to comply with disarmament agreements. They had actually done so. Had the U.N. Weapons inspectors been allowed to finish their tasks, they would have reported compliance.

From this we have to conclude that the U.S. breached its international treaty obligations under the U.N. Charter by invading Iraq. Now I know many will argue about U.N. Resolutions giving the U.S. power to act. You can argue that as much as you like. What is inescapable fact is that the U.N. was in the process of verifying Iraq’s compliance with these resolutions just before the invasion and was forced to stop this process because of the invasion.

Many of the proponents of this war have accepted these facts and fall back on their last line of defence. Well we liberated the Iraqi’s from an insane butcher. Those of you, who did High school English Clear thinking, will recognise this as an “Ends Justifying the means argument.” The ultimate irony is that ends justifying means is the same approach adopted by the terrorist that we are fighting.

Internally we have laws that govern how our communities function. They generally work because no one is above the law. For our international laws to function, we need the same approach. The policy of the Neo Conservatives is one that uses the international laws when convenient and ignores them when they have too. Basically arguing that the U.S. can do what it likes. It is the same mentality that led to the U.S. breaching at least 400 treaties since the declaration of independence.

That one has got you scratching your heads. Look to the Indian Nations


For the future I can see more of the same. For some time after the mid term elections I expect the Bush Administration to go after Iran. The same approach is being used. Frighten the population about weapons and conduct a unilateral pre-emptive strike.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/a ... 417fa_fact



THE IRAN PLANS
Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH
Issue of 2006-04-17
Posted 2006-04-10
One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’
Anyone recognise the similarities yet. “Welcomed as liberators”.

Let us look at Iran and the actual threats that it poses. Since the fall of the Shah it has been involved in one war with Iraq. From all indication that was as a result of the Regan policy of getting Iran and Iraq to fight. Anyway who would argue if I stated Saddem Hussein started it. That’s all there is. Okay the current leader has denied the holocaust and stated that Israel should be wiped off the map.

Iran has opposed the state of Israel for nearly 30 years and apart from the obligatory financial aid to various Palestinian groups has done nothing to further those aims. The proclamations of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should be seen in the same light as Regan proclaiming the Soviet Union as the Empire of Evil.

We of course come to weapons of mass destruction, with Bush and other European powers questioning Iran’s Nuclear weapons program. The strange thing is No one has yet established that Iran has a Nuclear weapons program.


IAEA finds no evidence of Iranian nuclear-weapons plan

On March 2, an Associated Press report made it clear that the IAEA's multi-year investigation has not shown "any diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices." This verdict sharply contradicts the February 4th resolution of the Board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which reports Iran to the UN Security Council, and strongly challenges the US deceptive propaganda war on Iran.
The February resolution was the result of some three years of massive political and economic pressure by the US administration on the EU-3 (France, Germany and the UK) and other Board members of the IAEA, particularly China, India and Russia.
The resolution has no legal basis: it preempts the final report of the IAEA investigation due on March 6th and thus tries to influence and frame the final decision improperly.
It has no formal technical validity either: it contains no reference to the report of the inspectors dated January 31, 2006, whose summary states that Iran has continued to cooperate with the IAEA to provide requisite declarations and access to locations in a timely manner as if the voluntary Additional Protocol is in force. Instead it takes the opposite stance by stressing breaches of Iran's obligations.
The resolution fails to recognize the crucial point that the IAEA has not found Iran in violation of its Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations, only in minor breaches of NPT Safeguard Agreement. The former is applicable in cases of weaponization; the latter comes into play when certain things are supposed to be reported, such as a lab experiment, purchase of equipment, etc., and are not. There is a fundamental difference between the two: the former sends a country to the UN Security Council; the latter is only discussed by the IAEA Governing Board and the violator may be censured.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... cleId=2171




In the words of Ron Paul, Congressman (R-TX):
"Those reading this bill may find themselves feeling a sense of deja vu. In many cases one can just substitute 'Iraq' for 'Iran' in this bill and we could be back in the pre-2003 run- up to war with Iraq. And the logic of this current push for war is much the same as was the logic used in the argument for war on Iraq. As earlier with Iraq, this resolution demands that Iran perform the impossible task of proving a negative ? in this case that Iran does not have plans to build a nuclear weapon."
http://mediachannel.org/blog/node/3677
Spinning Us to War in Iran
Submitted by editor4 on March 14, 2006 - 4:15pm.

By Antony Loewenstein
Perhaps the biggest bomb-shell - as yet unreported in the mainstream media - lies in the case of Valerie Plame, a former CIA agent outed by the Bush administration after her husband, Joe Wilson, challenged White House allegations about Iraq allegedly obtaining uranium from Niger. The Raw Story website discovered in mid-February that one of the main reasons Plame may have been outed was because she was working on discovering Iran’s nuclear capabilities, if any, and represented a direct threat to the neo-con agenda. In other words, by removing Plame from the scene, the US intelligence community was virtually blind in determining Iran’s nuclear progress - the neo-con’s ideal situation.


Further evidence of the propaganda initiative by the Bush administration to prepare us all for military action can be seen in resent press conferences held by the president. Where he accuses Iran of supplying the insurgence with IED’s.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TDS-Bush-Iran-IED.wmv

ABC And The IED's From Iran That Were Made In The UK
Today, ABC News' Chief Investigative Correspondent, Brian Ross, presented an "exclusive" report telling us that:
U.S. military and intelligence officials tell ABC News that they have caught shipments of deadly new bombs at the Iran-Iraq border.

They are a very nasty piece of business, capable of penetrating U.S. troops' strongest armor.

What the United States says links them to Iran are tell-tale manufacturing signatures — certain types of machine-shop welds and material indicating they are built by the same bomb factory.

"The signature is the same because they are exactly the same in production," says explosives expert Kevin Barry. "So it's the same make and model."

...The U.S. Army has embarked on a crash effort to find ways to stop the bombs, according to an unclassified report issued last month. The devices are easily hidden and detonated by motion detectors — like those used in garden security lights — that cannot be jammed.

When exploded, the copper disc becomes a molten liquid bullet that can penetrate the thickest armor the United States has.
Not once in the entire piece are we presented with any evidence that the bombs are being made with Iranian government materials or even knowledge, yet the very fact that these advanced IED's have come over the border from Iran, where there is an extremely active Al Qaida movement fighting the current Iranian regime, is enough for ABC's pet "expert" to tell us that:
"I think the evidence is strong that the Iranian government is making these IEDs, and the Iranian government is sending them across the border and they are killing U.S. troops once they get there,"..."I think it's very hard to escape the conclusion that, in all probability, the Iranian government is knowingly killing U.S. troops."
Now I admit there is a possibility that the Iranian government is indeed involved and the details of the evidence haven't been released - but if so, then the "chief investigative reporter" is surely remiss in not asking for it or noting it's absence.

Another way Brian Ross is failing to be in any manner "investigative" is in failing to find out or inform the public that this isn't any kind of exclusive - it is actually old news from way back in October last year.

Back then, the British media were full of the accusations that improved IED's using motion detectors as triggers were being sent to Iraq from Iran. They were being sent, according to British claims, to the Sadr militia - an organisation that the US has gone out of it's way to placate - but that too isn't mentioned by Ross. Just as now, absolutely no evidence was brought forward to show that the Iranian government were at all involved... and then the kerfuffle suddenly stopped. Why?
Well as I wrote at the time, it was discovered that the new, deadly IED's were using a British design that had been stupidly given to the IRA by British intelligence and then passed around various terror groups the IRA were allied with. Major egg on faces - story dropped. As the Independent on Sunday reported:
Eight British soldiers killed during ambushes in Iraq were the victims of a highly sophisticated bomb first used by the IRA, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

The soldiers, who were targeted by insurgents as they travelled through the country, died after being attacked with bombs triggered by infra-red beams. The bombs were developed by the IRA using technology passed on by the security services in a botched "sting" operation more than a decade ago.

This contradicts the British government's claims that Iran's Revolutionary Guard is helping Shia insurgents to make the devices.

The Independent on Sunday can also reveal that the bombs and the firing devices used to kill the soldiers, as well as two private security guards, were initially created by the UK security services as part of a counter-terrorism strategy at the height of the troubles in the early 1990s.
It wouldn't have taken much investigating to find this out, but ABC's chief investigative reporter seems not to have done any investigating at all for his exclusive report.

Here's what seems to have really happened: having tried this half-assed story in the UK and had it fall flat, the Pentagon waited a few months then gave it to Ross as a briefing from the usual "anonymous sources" and Ross duly regurgitated it whole without doing a single fact-check or further research.

"Chief Mouthpiece" would be a better description of his actual work.

http://cernigsnewshog.blogspot.com/2006 ... -made.html


Now I know that many fear Iran. I would suggest that there is far more to fear from fellow Americans that you do from Iran. Take for example Katherine Harris a “wanna be” candidate for the Republican Party, who at a resent “Reclaim America for Christ” conference at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, recalled how studying under Francis Schaeffer in Switzerland was a defining period in her life.

Harris is due to answer some tough questions
BY FRED GRIMM
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/14273640.htm
Schaeffer was plenty familiar to a gathering dedicated to retrofitting America into a ''Christian'' nation. He was among the founding theologians behind the Christian reconstruction movement, the dominionists, who preach that it is their paramount Christian duty to bring biblical law and ''Christian dominion'' to North America and the world beyond.
Of course, the reconstructionists embrace a wide spectrum of beliefs, but at the extreme end, they would tamper with the long decided legal precedents and extend the death penalty to adultery, homosexuality, blasphemy, heresy and other capital offenses enumerated in the Old Testament.

The Republicans should deal with their own Taliban wing before they go seeking adventure in other nations.


Many might think that the mid term elections will come to your rescue. Many in the world live in the hope that the Democrats will win the congress. Even that has the possibility to be ineffective in stopping Bush if he wants to proceed to war. The same legal reasoning that Bush uses to pursue domestic wiretapping can be used to say that he has the power to side step congress. Now there’s a happy thought. One that I will leave you pondering with for now.
"Goodbye and thanks for the fish"

User avatar
Magus
Writer Extraordinaire
Writer Extraordinaire
Posts: 10536
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 5:34 pm
Location: Illinois
Contact:

Post by Magus »

Yet more reasons why I dislike the Bush regime... I mean administration.

:wink:

I didn't know that about the candidate, and quite frankly that does scare me. I doubt they even realize how close they are to becoming their own enemies.

User avatar
FantasyMan
Adept Scribe
Adept Scribe
Posts: 2026
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 11:01 am
Location: Some where I wanna be...

Post by FantasyMan »

my freidns are doing a school thing on bush and found a whole list of EXCUSES about why nothing was done to prevent 9/11 and stuff....cant recall website though
"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself"

-Franklin D. Roosevelt

R.I.P Aldan we know now, that you are in a better place

User avatar
Dragonfleet
Casual Poster
Casual Poster
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Canberra, ACT, Australia
Contact:

Post by Dragonfleet »

An interesting analysis there lastone.

We certainly live in a dangerous world. =/ Our government seems unable to make their own arguments and just tags along with the US due to our western similarities. It's a shame really because no matter how much corruption we find in the government they'll always be elected again because the opposition is too weak to take the lead. :(

Post Reply