Shocking really - Page 3

Nova · 11-05-2004, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by northstar
According to Greenspan, it was Enron and the energy crisis. So basically, it was a massive evil right wing plot.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl....DTL&type=news

Remind me, how much money has Enron donated to the Bush campaign in total? $600k+?

Harley · 11-05-2004, 09:19 PM

It's pretty simple Republicans have more money and money can buy anything in this country, even presidential election

[color=#111111][size=5][font=Lucida Blackletter])-(@

Mishra · 11-05-2004, 09:21 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Harley
[b]It's pretty simple Republicans have more money and money can buy anything in this country

[color=#111111][size=5][font=Lucida Blackletter])-(@

azimaith · 11-05-2004, 09:21 PM

Enron and the energy crisis was the straw that broke the camels back, not the source. The source was overspending by the government. They had no windfall and therefore when it hit they crumbled like a house of cards.

Nova, like I mentioned before, it really does go both ways. There are smart and dumb people on both sides and I don't see the point of:
1: Calling people dumb for having a different opinion.
2: Painting one party as all idiots.

Nova, Soros also gave 1mill to the democratic party for *anyone* who could oust bush, so Enron donating money is no more dubious than any other group.

As for buying anything, both sides of the presidential election are *loaded* not just democrats, not just republicans. Bush has tons of money, so does kerry. Both sides have so much funding its ridiculous so saying Republicans have all the money is false.

northstar · 11-05-2004, 09:22 PM

And how quickly they eat their own...

Where is Kenneth Lay at the moment?

Nova · 11-05-2004, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by azimaith
Nova, like I mentioned before, it really does go both ways. There are smart and dumb people on both sides and I don't see the point of:
1: Calling people dumb for having a different opinion.
2: Painting one party as all idiots.

No point debating with me, I dont agree with what Rove said. But he did say it. Perhaps Rove meant 'in general.'

azimaith · 11-05-2004, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nova Cat
No point debating with me, I dont agree with what Rove said. But he did say it. Perhaps Rove meant 'in general.'

Another entertaining quote was by Winston Churchil.

"If your young and republican you have no heart, if your old and liberal your an idiot."

People do seem to get more conservative as they get older.

Nova · 11-05-2004, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by azimaith
Another entertaining quote was by Winston Churchil.

"If your young and republican you have no heart, if your old and liberal your an idiot."

People do seem to get more conservative as they get older.

Yes they do.

[Alpha]InfamousAn · 11-05-2004, 11:13 PM

You do realize that even states that were a majority for Kerry ALSO had votes for Bush. Same with Bush states. Infact, many of them had less than a 10% difference. What does that tell you? It tells me that you can't make any broad generalization about any of the voters or areas that went to either president. It tells me that most areas of the country are very similar in their wants and needs. It tells me that Bush was just a little more in touch with what the American people wanted. Liberals are not so different from conservatives. More importantly, there are probably more MODERATES that swung the vote in Bush's favor. Most of use share views from BOTH sides, and we voted for our chosen canidate due by ranking the importance of various issues. I didn't agree with the gay marriage ban, but it wasn't going to impact my vote. I found our military plan to be 10000x more important than any kind of economic or social reform.

Kobayashi · 11-06-2004, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by azimaith
I'm not claiming that everyone in these areas is dumb or that everyone in the south and midwest are dumb, what i'm saying is that you can't geographically set apart people then say that they are all dumb because they pick one side of the party. Remember that most of these states were around 51-49 or 53-47 meaning that its impossible to claim that people of a party are dumb because the numbers were too close.

Still.

With a STATE AVERAGE IQ of 85, I as an American would be pretty damned worried about where my country was headin'.

Hells Fury: I wub you too

I too don't believe sep 11th to be such a huge, and tragic event.

I feel more for the innocents that have lost their lives to Burn Motherfucker, BURN playing inside an American Tank.

Nova · 11-06-2004, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kobayashi
I feel more for the innocents that have lost their lives to Burn Motherfucker, BURN playing inside an American Tank.

The deformities caused by those uranium shells....disturbing to say the least.

Kobayashi · 11-06-2004, 06:00 AM

Hehehehe, good one.

BorderCollie-san · 11-06-2004, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by azimaith
What your basically saying is that people who are conservative are all idiots.

Academics are overwhelmingly liberal...

[Alpha]InfamousAn · 11-06-2004, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nova Cat
The deformities caused by those uranium shells....disturbing to say the least.

Please provide conclusive proof that Uranium shells cause deformities (outside of limbs being shot off). You forget, it is fully depleted uranium... that means that it is no longer radioactive. Kob, how would you feel if london was completely wiped out via a terrorist nuke? How many innocent people do they have to slaughter before you realize that they will continue to kill innocents until someone stops them? Our war has always been directed towards those that fight, and we have taken every opportunity to spare those that don't want to fight. Is there any other war where a country would rather sacrifice their own soldiers to give all their opponents a chance to surrender?

BorderCollie-san · 11-06-2004, 11:21 AM

I'm pretty sure it's a well established scientific fact that DU shells cause radiation sickness, not to mention that it's just plain chemically toxic. Just because the US government isn't crazy about admitting it and having to pay compensation to all the Gulf War veterans doesn't mean it's a lot of bullshit.

And it's most certainly not fully depleted.

Kobayashi · 11-06-2004, 11:34 AM

Uranium takes what.. 400 gazillion years to deplet completely?

Infamousandy: Well, seeing as Britain has allied itself closely with America, and is now a part of the "coalition" I don't see why they should be sacred to retaliation attacks.

Oberjaeger · 11-06-2004, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by [Alpha]InfamousAndy
Please provide conclusive proof that Uranium shells cause deformities (outside of limbs being shot off). You forget, it is fully depleted uranium... that means that it is no longer radioactive.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Depleted uranium or uranium-238 remains radioactive for around 4.5 billion years. It's commonly referred to as depleted as it's the by-product you get when enriching uranium ore to get purer uranium-235.

DU shells, upon impacting upon a target leave behind large amounts of dust containing U-238. I'm sure that even you can imagine what happens when you inhale and ingest radioactive dust.

[Alpha]InfamousAn · 11-06-2004, 06:56 PM

Information on the health risks of depleted uranium

http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q746.html

The chemical toxicity is more dangerous than the radiation. Even then, it requires massive inhalation and its effects are reversible. We use DU because it is good at penetrating heavy armor (such as troop carriers or tanks).

Nova · 11-06-2004, 08:32 PM

Toxicity, radiation......whatever the case, its quite well documented that uranium shells cause these deformities. A very large majority of the men who have had children and were exposed to this uranium have children with deformities. If I could dig up the video about it I would.

http://www.alkhilafah.info/massacres...atastrophe.htm

Theres a link for you. Just as a warning.....these pictures aint pretty.

Wile E · 11-08-2004, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by azimaith
I live in Hawaii

Cool, I grew up in Hawaii.

[Alpha]InfamousAn · 11-08-2004, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nova Cat
Toxicity, radiation......whatever the case, its quite well documented that uranium shells cause these deformities. A very large majority of the men who have had children and were exposed to this uranium have children with deformities. If I could dig up the video about it I would.

http://www.alkhilafah.info/massacres...atastrophe.htm

Theres a link for you. Just as a warning.....these pictures aint pretty.

The problem with that is that scientific study has proven that it is NOT the DU shells. They still do not know the cause of Gulf War Syndrom is. You do realize the toxicity is similar to lead. You have to inhale large quantities for it to effect you.

11-05-2004, 11:13 PM	#69
[Alpha]InfamousAn Registered User Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Alabama Posts: 1,262	You do realize that even states that were a majority for Kerry ALSO had votes for Bush. Same with Bush states. Infact, many of them had less than a 10% difference. What does that tell you? It tells me that you can't make any broad generalization about any of the voters or areas that went to either president. It tells me that most areas of the country are very similar in their wants and needs. It tells me that Bush was just a little more in touch with what the American people wanted. Liberals are not so different from conservatives. More importantly, there are probably more MODERATES that swung the vote in Bush's favor. Most of use share views from BOTH sides, and we voted for our chosen canidate due by ranking the importance of various issues. I didn't agree with the gay marriage ban, but it wasn't going to impact my vote. I found our military plan to be 10000x more important than any kind of economic or social reform.
	My computer rig AMD Athlon X2 4400+ 2 GB DDR800 RAM Radeon X1900XT

11-06-2004, 11:34 AM	#76
Kobayashi BANNED Epic Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 17,010	Uranium takes what.. 400 gazillion years to deplet completely? Infamousandy: Well, seeing as Britain has allied itself closely with America, and is now a part of the "coalition" I don't see why they should be sacred to retaliation attacks.
	Last edited by Kobayashi; 11-06-2004 at 06:37 PM..

11-05-2004, 09:19 PM	#62
Harley Motorhead Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: In Deep Shit where oral sex is illegal Posts: 4,017	It's pretty simple Republicans have more money and money can buy anything in this country, even presidential election [color=#111111][size=5][font=Lucida Blackletter])-(@

11-05-2004, 09:21 PM	#63
Mishra ♥♥♥♥♥♥ Elite Poster Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: denver Posts: 14,334	[quote]Originally posted by Harley [b]It's pretty simple Republicans have more money and money can buy anything in this country [color=#111111][size=5][font=Lucida Blackletter])-(@

11-05-2004, 09:21 PM	#64
azimaith Miller: The Ultimate Badass. Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hawaii Posts: 3,664	Enron and the energy crisis was the straw that broke the camels back, not the source. The source was overspending by the government. They had no windfall and therefore when it hit they crumbled like a house of cards. Nova, like I mentioned before, it really does go both ways. There are smart and dumb people on both sides and I don't see the point of: 1: Calling people dumb for having a different opinion. 2: Painting one party as all idiots. Nova, Soros also gave 1mill to the democratic party for anyone who could oust bush, so Enron donating money is no more dubious than any other group. As for buying anything, both sides of the presidential election are loaded not just democrats, not just republicans. Bush has tons of money, so does kerry. Both sides have so much funding its ridiculous so saying Republicans have all the money is false.

11-05-2004, 09:22 PM	#65
northstar Registered User Grizzled Veteran Join Date: May 2002 Location: Northern California Posts: 3,142	And how quickly they eat their own... Where is Kenneth Lay at the moment?

11-06-2004, 06:00 AM	#72
Kobayashi BANNED Epic Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 17,010	Hehehehe, good one.

11-06-2004, 11:21 AM	#75
BorderCollie-san Registered User Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Feb 2000 Posts: 4,051	I'm pretty sure it's a well established scientific fact that DU shells cause radiation sickness, not to mention that it's just plain chemically toxic. Just because the US government isn't crazy about admitting it and having to pay compensation to all the Gulf War veterans doesn't mean it's a lot of bullshit. And it's most certainly not fully depleted.

11-06-2004, 06:56 PM	#78
[Alpha]InfamousAn Registered User Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Alabama Posts: 1,262	Information on the health risks of depleted uranium http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q746.html The chemical toxicity is more dangerous than the radiation. Even then, it requires massive inhalation and its effects are reversible. We use DU because it is good at penetrating heavy armor (such as troop carriers or tanks).

11-06-2004, 08:32 PM	#79
Nova 0-2 and counting Elite Poster Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: California Posts: 14,238	Toxicity, radiation......whatever the case, its quite well documented that uranium shells cause these deformities. A very large majority of the men who have had children and were exposed to this uranium have children with deformities. If I could dig up the video about it I would. http://www.alkhilafah.info/massacres...atastrophe.htm Theres a link for you. Just as a warning.....these pictures aint pretty.