Quake3World

Geebs wrote:

seremtan wrote:

Geebs wrote:Lol, the lefties clutching at straws again. How do you know he didn't just make that stuff up to impress some minor?

because it fits with everything else we know about US/UK involvement in iraq. are you angling for geoff's tinfoil crown now?

Seriously, that article was originally posted in alt.underage.political.groupie.grooming, as an attempt to bore a 13 year old into watching him skullfuck a sheep in a dumpster behind a Long John Silvers'.

Here's the link

sorry, i should have been alerted to the immense comedic content of your post by its total plausibilty as an opinion held by someone on the internet. my bad

Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke

A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

yes but he's joking, in an unfunny way. they are serious, in a funny way

R00k wrote:

Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke

A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.

i don't think he's "conveniently ignoring" that. it just isn't relevant. it's been standing US policy since 1991 to ditch saddam and replace him with someone more compliant, regardless of the administration. clinton tried the covert way, bush went for the overt, in your face approach

this administration, that administration: it makes no difference in washington since the foreign policy goals are the same. the only variation is technical, the exact means

R00k wrote:...

I just pointed out he was a pedo..

Geebs wrote:

R00k wrote:

Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke

A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.

Geebs wrote:

R00k wrote:

Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke

A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.

I know that information to make this administration look bad is far from scarce - hence my "as if." I only said that because you seemed to be implying it, by saying that liberals are desperate.

If you meant that our liberal politicians are desperate, then I completely agree, because they only bungle every opportunity that falls in their lap.

As for the liberal bias in the media... It's a real shame the republicans are at such a disadvantage here. I feel so sorry for those poor guys.

BTW, I know all this happened during the Clinton administration. But the war happened during the Bush administration, and I hold him responsible for it, for 2 reasons.

1) After 9/11, we had a clear public enemy, and Iraq would have never come into the picture - even considering our long-standing foreign policy regarding Iraq - if the Neocons hadn't been whispering in the president's ear about how this is our perfect chance. Regardless of foreign policy, the public has to be made to get behind such an aggressive attack, and it was this administration who told all the lies to get us into it.
2) When something like this happens, the people have to hold the acting officials accountable for it, to let the apparatus know that the war is not supported by the public, regardless of what happened in the past. And all the mistakes that have been made during the war have been made by this administration.

Nightshade wrote:

Geebs wrote:

R00k wrote: A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.

Geebs wrote:

R00k wrote:

Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke

A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.

You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.

There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.

lol @ liberal media bias

Ferchrissakes that was a joke too. Check the cunningly hidden link in the original post if you think I'm going back on anything....

i think you need to leave the trolling to geoff tbh

seremtan wrote:

Nightshade wrote:

Geebs wrote: There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.

There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.

That's right. Dick Cheney and Karl Rove start their day with a plate of toddlers, sunny-side up.

There is plenty of evidence circulating on the internet that they had Christopher Reeve killed to control their supply.