Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

yellow ribbonFollow

#1 Sep 04 2004 at 8:16 PM Rating: Default
http://www.clermontyellowribbon.com/untilthenflash.htm
#2 Sep 05 2004 at 12:49 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,311 posts
Are you going after the title, "Queen of Pablum"?
#3 Sep 05 2004 at 12:55 AM Rating: Good
Another masterpiece from the seagull of the aslyum.
#4 Sep 05 2004 at 1:27 AM Rating: Good
**
450 posts
Great photo essay. The music and the text gotta go, though.

edit: spelling

Edited, Sun Sep 5 02:27:41 2004 by Jindo
#5 Sep 05 2004 at 1:33 AM Rating: Decent
Lubriderm wrote:
Another masterpiece from the seagull of the aslyum.


s/seagull/albatross

Get your seabirds right, damnit. :-)
#6 Sep 05 2004 at 1:35 AM Rating: Good
#7 Sep 05 2004 at 1:38 AM Rating: Good
MDenham the Shady wrote:
Lubriderm wrote:
Another masterpiece from the seagull of the aslyum.


s/seagull/albatross

Get your seabirds right, damnit. :-)


Hehe, albatros works too.

By seagull I mean the she flys in, sh[b][/b]its all over the forum, then flys out.
#8 Sep 05 2004 at 1:40 AM Rating: Good
**
450 posts
I'm not so sure about the flying out part.
#9 Sep 05 2004 at 1:42 AM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
Quote:
Hehe, albatros works too.

By seagull I mean the she flys in, ***** all over the forum, then flys out.


Funny, I see more **** from you then her
#10 Sep 05 2004 at 1:55 AM Rating: Good
Ok ok, how about this one Git?

Quote:
Some people call me brutaly honest and some people just call me an ***-hole, everybody else calls me a beaner.
#11 Sep 05 2004 at 1:56 AM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
yer just pissed I like Flea
#12 Sep 05 2004 at 2:02 AM Rating: Good
Lol, if I took the time to get mad at everybody that liked Flea I'd be one cranky ****.

The real reason is Yu tuk ma jerb!
#13 Sep 05 2004 at 2:10 AM Rating: Good
****
6,730 posts
How can one beaner take the job of another beaner? I am confused
#14 Sep 05 2004 at 5:47 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,372 posts
Didn't see any of these in the deck.
#15 Sep 05 2004 at 5:54 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
That never happened Pat, Fox News told me so.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#16 Sep 05 2004 at 11:06 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
Didn't see any of these in the deck.


Didn't see any of these in the deck either

One of the reasons our Men and Women are over there.

The Abu Ghraib abuse is a small stain (though a very bad tragedy) on the efforts of the American and British soldiers that have and continue to serve over there.

To denounce the efforts of the soldiers over there now and in the past, the way you and others are doing so here in this forum is just as bad as those that have never served their country questioning the validity of John Kerry's Service record and how he received his medals.

Edited, Sun Sep 5 12:06:51 2004 by Stok
#17 Sep 05 2004 at 11:33 AM Rating: Good
Stok wrote:
Quote:
Didn't see any of these in the deck.


Didn't see any of these in the deck either

One of the reasons our Men and Women are over there.

The Abu Ghraib abuse is a small stain (though a very bad tragedy) on the efforts of the American and British soldiers that have and continue to serve over there.

To denounce the efforts of the soldiers over there now and in the past, the way you and others are doing so here in this forum is just as bad as those that have never served their country questioning the validity of John Kerry's Service record and how he received his medals.

Edited, Sun Sep 5 12:06:51 2004 by Stok


Phew, thank god. I thought we were over there because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was a threat to the US (as stated by our president).
#18 Sep 05 2004 at 11:41 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Quote:
Phew, thank god. I thought we were over there because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was a threat to the US (as stated by our president).
Same here, until I realised the timing of the election
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#19 Sep 05 2004 at 12:11 PM Rating: Excellent
#20 Sep 05 2004 at 1:35 PM Rating: Good
Dumb asses WMD and a threat to our nation where SOME of the reasons. Bah we've argued this to as fine a point as anyone can get. So GFY. :)
#21 Sep 05 2004 at 1:49 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Quote:
Dumb asses WMD and a threat to our nation where SOME of the reasons.
No. WMD was the reason Bush stated for going into Iraq.

Yes, there were other reasons he could have used, some of which I could agree with, but that was the One reason that he used to persuade people to support him.

Since then he's flip-flopped about Iraq + Al-Qaeda, and the murder of the Kurds, Marsh Arabs and Sunni Muslims.

I'm afraid you're guilty (as many of us are) of looking through your Retrospectoscope*.

As I've said here before, I think it was the right war for the wrong reason. If it had been declared to protect the Iraqi People from Saddam it would have been prosecuted in a very different way. There would have been a plan for what to do the day after surrender.


*Retrospectoscope = Medical term for seeing with hindsight.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#22 Sep 05 2004 at 1:53 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Stok that is flawed report. Blair already took back the statement about the 400k bodies in mass graves. It wasnt true and he got called on it, couldnt back it up and retracted the statement.

According to US state department reports the Saddam regime since the early 80's has killed between 350-400,000 people. An atrocity to say the least but if you look up and do math on state department website and some other sources Between 1991 and 2004 the United states has killed around 200,000 Iraqis.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#23 Sep 05 2004 at 1:59 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Bhod wrote:
According to US state department reports the Saddam regime since the early 80's has killed between 350-400,000 people. An atrocity to say the least but if you look up and do math on state department website and some other sources Between 1991 and 2004 the United states has killed around 200,000 Iraqis.
I understand Stok's frustration.

The Ba'athist genocide would have been a legitimate reason for invasion/liberation, but Bush's problem is that Saddam probably ain't even in the top 10 of international despots. He'd have to take out China 1st and, erm, well, (/braces himself for a flaming) China is the world's Super-Power.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#24 Sep 05 2004 at 2:52 PM Rating: Decent
****
5,372 posts
Quote:
The Abu Ghraib abuse is a small stain


Small stain? It was an utter catastophe.
#25 Sep 05 2004 at 6:45 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Quote:
The Abu Ghraib abuse is a small stain (though a very bad tragedy)
Funny. My quote says exactly what your entire post says. It's all about context.

Twiztid
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#26 Sep 05 2004 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
18,463 posts
This post was like one of those bad email forwards. I bet we're all doomed unless we immediately show this to 10 people.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 312 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (312)