OT Tried to listen to Al Fanken on Air America...

[url]http://www.airamerica.com/alfrankenshow/[/url]
--


Scott in Florida

In article <598Bh.5686$TG6.4547@trnddc06>,
"Truckdude" <shrub@thedeecider.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
> news:rl2at2p53s7up4fj5kefsh8akcdc6vhjj7@4ax.com...[color=green]
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:35:16 GMT, "Truckdude" <shrub@thedeecider.com>
> > wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >>Based on the midterms, citizens/voters everywhere have figured out
> >>something
> >>alright.
> >>[/color]
> >
> > What did the mid terms show?
> >
> > What are the Dims doing with their power?
> >
> > Voting against the troops?
> >
> > That won't win much in 08......
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Scott in Florida
> >
> >[/color]
>
> No one is voting against the troops, they are voting against the president
> and the mission.[/color]

that's what they'd like you to believe.
--

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:cvvbt2d8tfop8l1r2bpb8qr48ovpcphct9@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> dbu* wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I want our troops over there fighting the terrorists.[/color]
>
> But they are not fighting "terrorists", which has already been
> explained to you, you freaking retard. We're in a middle of a civil
> war, with a lot of them wanting us OUT OF THERE.
>
> They would be leaving us alone if we were not occupying their country!
> Sheesh!
>[color=green]
>>I don't want to
>>have another 9/11 over here. Next time it might be a whole city.[/color]
>
> How does being in Iraq, prevent "another 9/11", idiot.
>[color=green]
>>People are complacent when they have wealth and security. We don't get
>>the security by sitting back on our asses whining. If something diire
>>happened in your school or your little town you'd be screeming, WHY US,
>>DO SOMETHING!!!![/color]
>
> Friggin moron. It does not help us to do things THAT MAKE THINGS
> WORSE. Like IRAQ.[/color]

You stupid fucking cocksucking ***got. Saddam and his Baathist party
followers BROKE the terms of the cease fire after the first Gulf conflict.
The PENALTY for that was the arrival of the COALITION forces. The Coalition
has EVERY right to REMAIN IN FUCKING IRAQ until ALL the terms of the cease
fire are honoured BY ALL PARTIES. SO shut the FUCK up, you clueless cretin.



[color=blue]
>[/color]

"Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message
news:oPudnZk04vBHhUvYnZ2dnUVZ_o-knZ2d@giganews.com...[color=blue]
>
> "dbu," <nspam@nojoke.com> wrote in message
> news:nspam-8A118B.13290016022007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...[color=green]
>> In article <cvvbt2d8tfop8l1r2bpb8qr48ovpcphct9@4ax.com>,
>> dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> dbu* wrote:
>>>
>>> >I want our troops over there fighting the terrorists.
>>>
>>> But they are not fighting "terrorists", which has already been
>>> explained to you, you freaking retard. We're in a middle of a civil
>>> war, with a lot of them wanting us OUT OF THERE.[/color]
>>
>> What then are our troops fighting? Just to be clear, I know. I want
>> you to tell me what it is you think they are fighting.
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> They would be leaving us alone if we were not occupying their country!
>>> Sheesh!
>>>
>>> >I don't want to
>>> >have another 9/11 over here. Next time it might be a whole city.
>>>
>>> How does being in Iraq, prevent "another 9/11", idiot.[/color]
>>
>> We fight them there,[/color]
>
> "There" = Iraq, right?
>[color=green]
>> keep them on the defense,[/color]
>
> Define "them", because...
>[color=green]
>> they won't be able to launch another attack here and kill our innocent
>> citizens.[/color]
>
> Iraq was not responsible for 9/11.[/color]

Has estrogen fried your brains? The COALITION is in Iraq because Saddam and
his Baathist party followers BROKE the terms of the cease fire. PERIOD.

[color=blue]
>
> So... why exactly *are* we there, & why did we start the war in the first
> place? If not in response to 9/11, then to take out Saddam Hussein? Did
> that, but are now mired in a super-mess, in the middle of a
> political/religious Iraqi civil war.
>
> Cathy
>
>
>
>
> Why would[color=green]
>> you not be for that?[/color]
>
>[color=green]
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> >People are complacent when they have wealth and security. We don't get
>>> >the security by sitting back on our asses whining. If something diire
>>> >happened in your school or your little town you'd be screeming, WHY US,
>>> >DO SOMETHING!!!!
>>>
>>> Friggin moron. It does not help us to do things THAT MAKE THINGS
>>> WORSE. Like IRAQ.[/color]
>>
>> Remember, we did not start it, they did.
>>
>> I really don't understand why you don't grasp this concept of fighting
>> them in another land and not our own soil. Why does it have to be
>> continually repeated and explained to you over and over again. Are you
>> a little dense or something?
>> --
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

In article <1171690249.581460.204540@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>,
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> dbu, wrote:
>[color=green]
> > In article <1171675620.100498.282660@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> > "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:[/color]
>
> Dizzy wrote:
>[color=green]
> > I want our troops over there fighting the terrorists.[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Then you know that in Iraq at least 90% of the attacks against are
> > > troops are from Sunni Saddam loyalists, about half of the remaining
> > > 10% are from Shiite militias, and the rest from terrorists. I'd
> > > rather have our troops fight mainly the terrorists, as they've been
> > > doing in Afghanistan, but not as well as before 2003 because GW Bush
> > > pulled out so many of them and shipped them to Iraq.[/color]
> >
> > No, wrong, they are ALL terrorists.[/color]
>
> People who defend their country against foreign attack are not
> terrorists, and the vast majority of the insurgency consists of former
> Baathists and members of the Iraqi military trying to fend off
> foreigners and other Iraqi ethnic groups. The only terrorists in Iraq
> are foreign Sunnis, but they commit only a small percentage of the
> attacks against the US and UK militaries.[/color]


terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic;
revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom
fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.
--

In article <1171688758.861714.41260@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> dbu, wrote:
>[color=green]
> > In article <a9-dnTsHfIn41kvYnZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Please tell me: what does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?!?[/color]
> >
> > It originally had to do with Sadam and WMD, a nuclear program, that was
> > a very high priority. So far we have not found any WMD of great
> > significance,[/color]
>
> IOW the neocons were wrong about that.
>[color=green]
> > we have found some chemical,[/color]
>
> How much of it useable for terrorist attacks?
>[color=green]
> > but not any nuclear thank heaven for that, I'm sure you'll agree.[/color]
>
> IOW the neocons were wrong about that, too.
>[color=green]
> > We have found a haven of terrorist activity.[/color]
>
> How much terrorist activity was there in Iraq under Saddam before we
> invaded?
>[color=green]
> > Had we not invaded, in my opinion Iraq would have become
> > another Afghanistan, yet another training base which they were
> > denied in Afghanistan.[/color]
>
> But thanks to our invasion, it's just the opposite of that, right?
>[color=green]
> > Saddam was a terrorist himself, used WMD, chemical WMD
> > against his own people and was preparing WMD in various
> > forms to use against others.[/color]
>
> That happened before Gulf War I and was settled by our victory in that
> war.
>[color=green]
> > He also sponsored terrorism to Israel.[/color]
>
> Not before GW Bush threatened invasion of Iraq.[/color]

terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic;
revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom
fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.
--

In article <1171691953.819366.164710@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:08:24 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > >They would be leaving us alone if we were not occupying their country!
> > >Sheesh![/color]
> >
> > that is just so much bull shit.
> >
> > We WERE not bothering anybody before 9/11[/color]
>
> Bin Laden didn't think so, and his primary, maybe even sole, reason
> for attacking the US on 9/11 was our continued military presense in
> Saudi Arabia after Gulf War I.[/color]

terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic;
revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom
fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.
--

In article <1171693467.087754.209120@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Scott in Florida wrote:
>[color=green]
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 05:11:46 GMT, "Truckdude" <shrub@thedeecider.com>
> > wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > >were in the friggin' Navy??[/color]
> >
> > ROFLMAO
> >
> > has to be some ground pounder....
> >
> > Never saw a ground pounder beat a Navy man in a bar fight....[/color]
>
> How about in a war? Oh wait, you wouldn't know because, like me,
> you've never been in a war.[/color]

terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic;
revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom
fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.
--

sharx35 wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote in message
> news:oPudnZk04vBHhUvYnZ2dnUVZ_o-knZ2d@giganews.com...[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Iraq was not responsible for 9/11.[/color]
>
> Has estrogen fried your brains? The COALITION is in Iraq because Saddam and
> his Baathist party followers BROKE the terms of the cease fire. PERIOD.[/color]

The problem with that reasoning is that Saddam was under control, had
no WMDs (as an extensive $600M search and the lack of any insurgents
using them prove this) or effective delivery systems for them, and had
pretty much let UN weapons inspectors into his country. But for the
sake of the ignorant, let's say that he did have chemical and
biological WMDs. Was that enough of a reason to invade Iraq badly?

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:5e7at25ts5baq0omaudjb6egd6k18ogv45@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 21:32:55 -0500, "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net>
> wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> Sorry Chatty Cathy, but you can't support the troops without supporting
>>> the mission.[/color]
>>
>>Maybe *you* can't, but others can.
>>
>>Cathy[/color]
>
> Real my lips......
>
> You CAN'T support the troops and not support the mission.
>
> We are at WAR.
>
> Our troops are fighting that war.
>
> Either there or here.
>
> Your choice.
>
> I notice they are starting to attack us here. You are NOT safe going
> shopping, now.
>
> --
>
>
> Scott in Florida
>
>[/color]

As a matter of fact, a car blew up in our parking lot Thursday night and
someone was killed. Supposedly I was in the apartment at the time, so it
must have been in the far lot.

Charles of Schaumburg.

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:qocct21pulld7o8otebehrhpp94agi9qg7@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:08:24 GMT, dizzy <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>How does being in Iraq, prevent "another 9/11", idiot.[/color]
>
> With the coward liberal Dims that pulled that treasonous stunt in the
> US House of Representatives today....I guess we can stand by for
> another 9/11.
>
> I only wish the terrorists would attack every home town of every
> asshole politician (Republican or Dim) that voted for that
> resolution...[/color]

This is the sort of response that makes me think you have absolutely no
brains re: posts worth reading, & absolutely no compassion.

Cathy
[color=blue]
> --
>
>
> Scott in Florida
>
>[/color]

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:engat2ton18tqi7un9q67gq6gn9uhgfre9@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 05:11:46 GMT, "Truckdude" <shrub@thedeecider.com>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>were in the friggin' Navy??[/color]
>
> ROFLMAO
>
> has to be some ground pounder....
>
> Never saw a ground pounder beat a Navy man in a bar fight....
>
> --
>
>
> Scott in Florida
>
>[/color]

There is a reason why.....no squid has the balls to frequent a ground
pounder bar.

dbu, wrote:
[color=blue]
> In article <1171688758.861714.41260@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote:[/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > In article <a9-dnTsHfIn41kvYnZ2dnUVZ_ualnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > > "Cathy F." <clfr@adelphiadot.net> wrote:[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > Please tell me: what does 9/11 have to do with Iraq?!?[/color][/color]
>
> It originally had to do with Sadam and WMD, a nuclear program, that was
> a very high priority. So far we have not found any WMD of great significance,
>[color=green]
> > IOW the neocons were wrong about that.[/color]
>
> we have found some chemical,
>[color=green]
> > How much of it useable for terrorist attacks?[/color]
>
> but not any nuclear thank heaven for that, I'm sure you'll agree.[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > IOW the neocons were wrong about that, too.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > We have found a haven of terrorist activity.[/color]
>[color=green]
> > How much terrorist activity was there in Iraq under Saddam before we
> > invaded?[/color]
>
> Had we not invaded, in my opinion Iraq would have become
> another Afghanistan, yet another training base which they were
> denied in Afghanistan.
>[color=green]
> > But thanks to our invasion, it's just the opposite of that, right?[/color]
>
> Saddam was a terrorist himself, used WMD, chemical WMD
> against his own people and was preparing WMD in various
> forms to use against others.
>
> That happened before Gulf War I and was settled by our victory in that war.
>[color=green]
> > He also sponsored terrorism to Israel.[/color]
>[color=green]
> > Not before GW Bush threatened invasion of Iraq.[/color]
>
> terrorist
> noun
> the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic;
> revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom
> fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.[/color]

You keep repeating that, but it doesn't answer anything.