Stop Bush Rallies

[Ceap]

theres a carnival on weds, going to that, then thursday is big march on westminster, i take my skateboard and /dance to SAMBA!!!!!!

edit: (i gotta reply to brack's edit dammit) nah not too much, too much kiddiespam

 

[shadybrack]

Originally posted by Ceap
theres a carnival on weds, going to that, then thursday is big march on westminster, i take my skateboard and /dance to SAMBA!!!!!!

erm need 2 fix ur typos

theres a carnival on weds, going to that, then thursday is big march on westminster, i take my skateboard and pull all the 13 yr old skater girls

 

[Ceap]

bad brack, yer filters dont work on THIS here forum!!!!!

and i take two pretty girls from work ofc

edit: Peggy Sue got married is on 5 lol

 

[shadybrack]

Originally posted by Ceap
bad brack, yer filters dont work on THIS here forum!!!!!

and i take two pretty girls from work ofc

edit: Peggy Sue got married is on 5 lol

u causing trouble at work again! (these girls 13 and skater chicks or u planning 2 impress the posh girls from ur cinema with ur skater moves? )

 

[loxleyhood]

I have no problem with Bush visiting Britain, but it shouldn't be a state visit because he is a President and not a Monarch.

 

[Ceap]

Originally posted by shadybrack
u causing trouble at work again! (these girls 13 and skater chicks or u planning 2 impress the posh girls from ur cinema with ur skater moves? )

nah they cute girls, all over 21 FYI

btw: The Green Berets is hilarious!

 

[old.Dillinja]

Bush want oil.

Oil in Iraq.

Saddam has Iraq.

Get rid of Saddam.

Take oil.

Bush happy.

 

[Asha]

Originally posted by --Random--
for starters, of course he wants they're oil, who wouldnt, its worth a fucking fortune and we dont want them wasting it.

Yes, can't trust those pesky arabs to not waste it. Better get the Americans in there... cause they don't waste fuel at all!!!

Americans consume more energy per person than anyone in the world, by far. America is the most wasteful country on earth. Give more SUVs!!! It's important, damn.

secondly, it was al-quieda that attacked america, al-quieda is made of crazy anti western muslims, from any country. some probably were from iraq.

No, actually there were none from Iraq. They were mostly Saudi Arabian, but we consider them to be friendly - wonder why? There is no ties between Al-Quada and Iraq. In fact, Iraq under Saddam was very secular compaired to any other Arab nations.

thirdly, he didnt attack them because THEY did it, he attacked them to prevent further attacks against the US and its allies, he couldnt risk saddam supplying terrorists like al-quieda with weapons of mass destruction. if they can cause that much devestation with 2 planes, what could they do with 2 nuclear weapons?

Iraq posed little threat to the USA. He did it cause he's a war-monger and wants to control/shape the world. Also the US economy sucked and he wanted to help it. War helps the US economy. And again, Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Nothing at all.


Why do people hate Bush? Because after stealing an election (he did steal it, no doubt), he pushed through a war on the American people based on dodgy info (that he knew to be false at the time) - he defied the UN and basically said to the world:

I know you don't want this, but I am going to go ahead and do it myself because I know what's best for you.

Now we have a bloody mess. Iraq is a mess.

 

[Asha]

Originally posted by loxleyhood
I have no problem with Bush visiting Britain, but it shouldn't be a state visit because he is a President and not a Monarch.

He's our head of state?

 

[Alkoran]

Originally posted by --Random--
the majority of people only hate him coz thats the 'cool' thing to do, fuck the system and all that. whereas in actual fact, he's doing a good job. he's had to make some feckin nasty decisions. lets look at it this way, after 9/11, if he'd just sat there and done absolutely nothing what would the public of america have done? they'd have been proper pissed off with him, there'd have been riots and everything. its better he looked asthough he was doing something rather than just sitting there waiting for another 9/11. plus, he's in iraq for good reasons. i dont think people quite understand what saddam was like.. and what its like under his regime, also the other fact is that he probably DID have weapons of mass destruction, the only reason they werent found is simply because iraq is such a vast country, it'd be so so easy to hide/destroy them without the americans knowing. i mean, he could have some underground bunker in the middle of the desert with all his weapons in, and there'd be no way for us to find it.

Ok servers down let's take this to pieces.

9/11 that has nothing to do with Iraq (as a side note in the past a large amount of funding for the IRA came from America. Interstingly the government did not jump at the chance to prevent their citizens from supporting terrorism)

It is true the under Saddam the quality of life was poor for many, this is still the case.

"Probably" having weapons of mass destruction is not a crime. You "probably" have illegal software on your computer, but you cannot be imprissoned or fined unless it is found.

If weapons of mass destruction were stored in an underground bunker this would not make them impossible to find. Such weapons would be most likely be guarded and maintainance of the facility and weapons would be needed to ensure the remained effective and safe. Somebody would have to know where they were, Saddam is not going to arm and fire cruise missiles by himself....

I could go on, but there's a game of Mariocart I have to be playing in about 40 seconds.

 

[loxleyhood]

Originally posted by Asha
He's our head of state?

Im not sure whether it still works. I'll ask my politics teacher. Anyways, it still shouldn't be a state visit, its costing too much money and if it wasn't for the efforts of the Mayor it would be an even bigger fuck up for Londoner's lives.

If somebody shoots him Blair is gonna be so embarressed. But, to be honest, being assasinated is probably the only way Bush can keep up the momentum on the 'War on Terror'. Euckk, thats a dirty phrase if there ever was one.

 

[Coim-]

This thread is going to turn out like all the others before it; being closed by a mod.

 

[Tilda]

Originally posted by Ceap
a) a bloody dodgy past, involving insider trading and all sorts of nasty dealings... b) he openily attempted to mislead us regarding Iraq's dangers (Uranium from Niger; Iraq funding Al Qaeda) c) people still remember the elections, and Jeb Bush's attempt / success in preventing black voters registering / voting (they predominaly vote democrat) d) the bribery that took place over resolution 1441 d) his withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Froliferation treaty and the Kyoto Agreeement and e) Guantanamo bay...

I agree but add to that:

His presidential campain was sponsored by Gun manufacturers and Cigarette manufactuerers.

In addition, ok he attacked iraq, I agree with that but he did it for the wrong reasons.
He also retuns the favour to the gun company as supprise supprise befor the war USA's weapons spending shoots up!!!

Tilda

/edit on topic, I wont be going, but i wouldnt be crying if someone blows him up.

 

[loxleyhood]

Ooooooh, I bet that avatar gets you flames Tilda.

 

[ChillyDawg]

Originally posted by --Random--
the majority of people only hate him coz thats the 'cool' thing to do, fuck the system and all that. whereas in actual fact, he's doing a good job. he's had to make some feckin nasty decisions. lets look at it this way, after 9/11, if he'd just sat there and done absolutely nothing what would the public of america have done? they'd have been proper pissed off with him, there'd have been riots and everything. its better he looked asthough he was doing something rather than just sitting there waiting for another 9/11. plus, he's in iraq for good reasons. i dont think people quite understand what saddam was like.. and what its like under his regime, also the other fact is that he probably DID have weapons of mass destruction, the only reason they werent found is simply because iraq is such a vast country, it'd be so so easy to hide/destroy them without the americans knowing. i mean, he could have some underground bunker in the middle of the desert with all his weapons in, and there'd be no way for us to find it.

ACTUALLY hombré Iraq is now so fucked up only military people go there, dubya booche has made the East SO pissed off with everyone else that i persoanlly think he has more right to be shot and lauhged at publicly than Saddam.

but thats just my opninion ofc. happy farming!

 

[Cap'n Sissyfoo]

Ho ho. I really REALLY wish I was back in England. I would really love to go to that march.

I notice that Random is still making a fool out of himself. :/

 

[Ceap]

we gonna chase that crazy baldhead outta fi town!

 

[shadybrack]

Ceap take pictures and go in ur pimp suit with ur cactus!!!

 

[old.TeaSpoon]

Originally posted by old.Dillinja
Bush want oil.

Oil in Iraq.

Saddam has Iraq.

Get rid of Saddam.

Take oil.

Bush happy.

Why does he want it exactly?

 

[Ceap]

to power his S.U.V. (whose petrol consumption regulations he recently relaxed - around the same time as he withdrew from Kyoto Protocol... spot the link?)

edit: cactus is huge now lol, cant uproot it from garden!!

 

[shadybrack]

well u gotta wear ur pimp suit just 2 show bush how gr8 ur!!

 

[Ceap]

nah, normal stuff (old jeans, old sweater) incase of violence / trouble... am going to the unofficial protests on weds etc and dont want teh pimp suit torn by nasty police

 

[--Random--]

Originally posted by Alkoran
Ok servers down let's take this to pieces.

9/11 that has nothing to do with Iraq (as a side note in the past a large amount of funding for the IRA came from America. Interstingly the government did not jump at the chance to prevent their citizens from supporting terrorism)

america went to war with iraq in the fear that iraq were able to supply weapons of mass destruction to terrorist organisations such as al-quieda. therefore, indirectly, 9/11 did have much to do with the war in iraq.

Originally posted by Alkoran


"Probably" having weapons of mass destruction is not a crime. You "probably" have illegal software on your computer, but you cannot be imprissoned or fined unless it is found.

with all respect, creating and using weapons capable of killing thousands of innocent people is a tad higher up the crime list than owning a copied version of microsoft office. they couldnt take the risk that saddam "probably" hasnt got any and not bother attacking, its too big a risk to avoid. imagine they hadnt gone to war, then 2 weeks later london is hit by a nuclear warhead from al-queida? imagine what we'd all be saying right now?

Originally posted by Alkoran


If weapons of mass destruction were stored in an underground bunker this would not make them impossible to find. Such weapons would be most likely be guarded and maintainance of the facility and weapons would be needed to ensure the remained effective and safe. Somebody would have to know where they were, Saddam is not going to arm and fire cruise missiles by himself....

so your saying its not physically possible that the people looking after the weapons are loyal to saddam? surely he'd look to pick only people he fully trusts with his most prized possesions? he aint gonna have them guarded by a bunch of random squaddies is he.

all in all, every one of your points has been proven wrong. next.

 

[--Random--]

Originally posted by Ceap
nah, normal stuff (old jeans, old sweater) incase of violence / trouble... am going to the unofficial protests on weds etc and dont want teh pimp suit torn by nasty police

me and a friend were saying how good it'd be to go down to these protests with a massive american flag with a tanoid speaker and shout how much bush rocks.. then my friend said, but they'd beat u up! i was like... lefties?? pmsl.

just goes to show tho, lefties are all for this bollocky freedom of speech, but when someone else feels like airing they're views they'd be attacked! amazing hipocracy.

 

[Ba6yGirl]

I find it fascinating when a games forum talks about politics - especially when the opinions are based on hear say from politicians and my friend’s friend told me so.

The bottom line is that all countries have terrorists and have/had 'bad' leaders in power.

I am not here to say my opinion as we are all adults and we are all allowed to have our own opinions.

It just bothers me that whether you agree or disagree with the Iraq war, people are dead. We should in this day and age be able to achieve peace without death and destruction.

Perhaps I am naive but the one fact I do know is that politicians cannot and should never be taken at face value - there is always a hidden agenda no matter what they say...

 

[shadybrack]

Originally posted by Ba6yGirl
I find it fascinating when a games forum talks about politics - especially when the opinions are based on hear say from politicians and my friend’s friend told me so.

whereever ceap is there will be politics.

 

[--Random--]

Originally posted by Ba6yGirl


Perhaps I am naive

hit the nail on the head. dont worry its not just you, all lefties are. they live in a dream world. as nice as it would be to resolve our differences with no violance and restore peace to the entire planet.. it wont happen, ever.

people blaim us, but look at people like al-queida, a bunch of religous people that actually think people should die if they dont belong to they're religion, i mean people call hitler a nasty bloke, look at these!!! you dont seem to understand, these people will not stop terrorising us until the entire planet is muslim, which wont ever happen because luckily the majority of people on the planet are intelligent enough to know religion is an out dated pile of bollocks.

you should be saying, in this day and age surely certain people can realise they're religion is talking shite, always has been, and stop terrorising people because they dont beleive what they beleive.

 

[Ceap]

Originally posted by --Random--
america went to war with iraq in the fear that iraq were able to supply weapons of mass destruction to terrorist organisations such as al-quieda. therefore, indirectly, 9/11 did have much to do with the war in iraq.

America went to war with no evidence of an immediate threat. They claimed at the time they knew where the weapons were. The evidence they claimed proved their point (Uranium fron Niger, Al - Samoud missiles, etc) was either sexed-up, misleading or falsified. If it was only the weapons, why wasn't Hans Blix given more time? As he said, "this is not the destruction of toothpicks we are witnessing"

Originally posted by --Random--
with all respect, creating and using weapons capable of killing thousands of innocent people is a tad higher up the crime list than owning a copied version of microsoft office. they couldnt take the risk that saddam "probably" hasnt got any and not bother attacking, its too big a risk to avoid. imagine they hadnt gone to war, then 2 weeks later london is hit by a nuclear warhead from al-queida? imagine what we'd all be saying right now?

He was refering to the lack of evidence, citing software piracy as an example. As yet NO weapons have been found.

Likewise to play 'what-ifs'... what if America invaded and they found no missiles... imagine what we'd all be saying right now?

Originally posted by --Random--
so your saying its not physically possible that the people looking after the weapons are loyal to saddam? surely he'd look to pick only people he fully trusts with his most prized possesions? he aint gonna have them guarded by a bunch of random squaddies is he.

America claimed it knew where the weapons were. Colin Powell gave a big speech where he pointed out where the weapons were. Only problem, they weren't there. If you go research the history, and read what the other UN weapons inspectors say, only the US and UK governments believed Saddam posed a real threat.

Not to say he wasnt a threat to his own people. But that isn't what the US and UK claimed. Their arguement was based on WMDs.

Originally posted by --Random--
all in all, every one of your points has been proven wrong. next.

all in all, everyone of YOUR points has been proved wrong. must try harder.

 

[Ceap]

Originally posted by --Random--
al-queida

it's spelt Al Qaeda

 

[--Random--]

Originally posted by Ceap
America went to war with no evidence of an immediate threat. They claimed at the time they knew where the weapons were. The evidence they claimed proved their point (Uranium fron Niger, Al - Samoud missiles, etc) was either sexed-up, misleading or falsified. If it was only the weapons, why wasn't Hans Blix given more time? As he said, "this is not the destruction of toothpicks we are witnessing"



He was refering to the lack of evidence, citing software piracy as an example. As yet NO weapons have been found.

Likewise to play 'what-ifs'... what if America invaded and they found no missiles... imagine what we'd all be saying right now?



America claimed it knew where the weapons were. Colin Powell gave a big speech where he pointed out where the weapons were. Only problem, they weren't there. If you go research the history, and read what the other UN weapons inspectors say, only the US and UK governments believed Saddam posed a real threat.

Not to say he wasnt a threat to his own people. But that isn't what the US and UK claimed. Their arguement was based on WMDs.



all in all, everyone of YOUR points has been proved wrong. must try harder.

if colin powell went on tv, showed everyone where he thought the weapons were, is it truley a surprise that these weapons vanished from said location? is it not possible the iraqies can actually understand english and actually watch tv and actually hide things?

there were alot of strong facts and figures that unfortunatly i cant remember, many published in newspapers (not the sun), there was one that astonished me, some crazy amount of anthrax, went totally missing from the time of the last weapons check to the time of this, they asked the raqies where it was, and they said they had no idea what we were talking about. its little things like that that make us rightly suspicious. there were so many chemicals that could not be accounted for that just mysteriously went missing, that the iraqies simply could not explain.