I think my opinion on Jane Fonda is obvious...
(yes, that would be her below)
*tests sig*
Um..Mario twins is awesome!
(Slaps his head for giving it a 6 the first time around)
Key discussion topics:
1) Was the Vietnam War justified? Why or why not?
2) Will we ever regret our war with the Taliban?
3) What SHOULD we do with Jane Fonda?
1) We can blame the vietnam war on the French! It was their territory and they couldn't handle it (just like how they couldn't handle Germany invading their asses twice!)But hey, it was a war and I honor those who needlesly fought in it.
2) We will catch that bastard and he'll pay!
3) She needs to be burned at the stake!
hey welcome back tom. i don't think were gonna regret bombing afganistan. Hopefully the outcome of this 'war' (war in quotation marks because you only declare war on countries, not singled out people) because it SHOULD prevent other power hungry leaders from deciding to trying to test the power of democracy. By the way what happend to all the copy and paste links on the bottom of the home page.
WELCOME BACK!!
~dK
I FUCKING HATE YOU TOM FULP! YOU DAMN DUMB ASS SON OF A FUCKING BITCH! YOU SUCK MAJOR FUCKING ASS! YOUR DAMN FUCKING DUMB ASS PIECE OF SHIT NG-SITE WONT LET ME VOTE FOR ANY SHIT! FOR NO OTHER REASON BUT BECAUSE I DONT HAVE FUNKING FLASH! HOW THE FUCK DO I GET EXP. POINTS IF I CAN'T FUCKING VOTE FOR ANYTHING, HUH BITCH?!
~*!YOU FUCKING CAN'T!*~
SO WHY THE FUCK DID YOU MAKE THIS BULL SHIT SITE, HUH?! JUST TO WASTE OTHER PEOPLES FUCKING TIME, HUH?!
YOUR GONNA FUCKING BURN IN HELL FOREVER FOR THIS SHIT!! WHY DON'T YOU JUST DIE ALREADY, HUH BITCH?!
DIEDIEDIEDIE
IEDIEDIEDIED
EDIEDIEDIEDI
DIEDIEDIEDIE
IEDIEDIEDIED
EDIEDIEDIEDI
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOU NEED TO FIX YOUR FUCKING SITTY-ASS SITE! OR IT MIGHT NOT BE THERE IN THE MORNING!
Freak613....I think this guy has what you might call a personality problem...
where do you get FUNKING FLASH at anyway?
I have NO idea what you are on, but ya need to lay off it.
There is a fraekin' flash link, hell I got Flash 5 from this site, look around before you post BS on the board.
Throughout this post, i may mistakenly use the term 'we' when i really mean 'our politicians' frankly, two letters are easier to type than 14, and i just want to clear this up ahead of time, bill. I'm an american. im proud to be an american. i think 9/11 has brought out the best in my people. The donors nationwide that gave money and blood, the locals that are giving their time clearing rubble, and the police officers and firefighters that gave their lives. However, i think some of our more contemporary leaders have been for shit. and 9/11 has brought out the worst in them. for example Anybody hear of john ashcrotch? on 9/11, freedom was attacked... and some buildings were knocked down.
1) Was the Vietnam War justified? Why or why not?
'Nam was a classic example of the ass-backwards cold war policies that got us into this mess.
I dont give a shit what the vietncong did to dissenters after the war. Our helping the south vietnamese kill some of their tormentors' family members and burn down some of their tormentors' homes and agent orange their tormentors' jungles only made it worse for them when we left them in their own shit. Also consider the dictators we supported, like Diem, were just as bad. Is it better when a dictator kills a communist than when a communist kills a capitalist? Consider that dictators tend to kill supporters of democracy and communism with equal glee.
2) Will we ever regret our war with the Taliban?
Not as long as those who control the media continue to do so. The massive civilian casualties in Iraq, and continuing totalarianism and sexism in kuwait are grossly glossed over by the media prostitutes. After Allied Force, the violence did NOT stop, it only reversed, and most of the serbs were either chased out of Kosovo or killed. But the media once again wrote 'and they lived happily ever after. The End.' and moved on. And when Clinton touted that he stopped the violence in Kosovo, the audience applauded as if it were true. After the embassy strikes, the media prostitutes totally looked the other way on the wrongful bombing of the sudanese pharmaceutical plant and the thousands that might still be alive if they still had a source of medicine.
It would be wrong for me to criticize the bombing so early in the game, considering Dubya might become possesed with the ghost of Harry Truman, follow up with ground troops, clean out the taliban, and build afganistan from the ground up, dragging the afghan people, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century. But what i fear is that he might rely on the same chickenshit tactics that they've used ever since the beginning of the cold war. Bomb them to shit from a safe distance, and let the Northern alliance do the dirty work of overthrowing them. That same cowardice is what got us into this mess, backing the taliban terroists when they were fighting the ruskies, but not actually putting our own asses on the line. What worries me is if the former Shah, or whatever he's called, is just as bad when he comes to power and when we're not there, looking over his shoulder, making sure some sort of new constitution is being signed that guarantees democracy. what worries me even more is that with the unprecedented media blackouts, i might never know about it. Its hard enough to hear about how we got chased out of somolia with our tails between our legs, and more about the iran-contra scandal and which people who are still in public office were in on it, and the School of the Americans and what their alumni do. Imagine if this information was illegal to have, being 'a threat to national security.'
Bush said during his address that the terrorists hate even us civilians cause they see us living in a democracy. ironically, this may be true. Other people may suffer at the hands of american forces, and see it as the will of the American people, as we supposedly control our own government. and themselves not owning a Television, they may not understand th powerful influence television has by what they sa, and what they actively dont.
3) What SHOULD we do with Jane Fonda?
Let the ugly bitch spend her autumn years in obscurity. Let the families of those american soldiers sue her ass so she spends 'em broke too. If the vietcong instead captured some of our guys on top, the polititians and upper brass, and removed THEIR fingers, id give her a medal. but no, she helped perpetuate acts of cruelty against poor working draftees who would have had to work for a living.
I dont know how you could compare the Vietnam War with the current action being taken against the Taliban. We are not fighting to save a democratic country from being taken over by a hostile communist country. There is no domino effect here. We are simply making an endeavor to stop a group of people who have delibrately set out to attack the U.S. itself. Vietnam was not pointless. We were trying to help a people who didn't want to have their democracy taken away from them. I think the Vietnam War was justified clearly by the fact that we TRIED to stop this from happening. You never know, maybe if we didn't try the "domino effect" would have happened and communism would have had the upper hand.
1) The Vietnam War was not justified. If the North Koreans wanted to be Communist they should have been allowed to be that. I think this "war" on terrorism is sickening, any war IS TERRORISM. The Americans are being just as bad as El-Quida and it makes me sick. What "American Freedom" stands for is so naive. What if everyone across the world does'nt want to live in a capitalist democracy ? What if people don't want to have their country guided by a minority of mindless infidels (Bush, Blair, Sharon etc), and put the power back where it belongs, into public hands ? I really don't think the U.S. citizens understand that BUSH HAS NOTHING ON OSAMA BIN LADEN. THEY HAVE NO PROOF HE WAS CONNECTED WITH THE ATTACK. This slaughter of Afghan citizens is only a short-term retaliation to keep Bush's image strong with the Billy-Joes and John-Boy hillbillys.
2) Any ground war on the taliban will be just fighting the vietcong. There are a potential 50 Million taliban sympathisers across Afghanistan and Pakistan. There will be mass slaughter of troops on both sides.
3) String her up.
Overall, I'd like to sum up these things:
1) Would there have been such a melodramatic response to the events if a building was destroyed with 6000 people inside who had anti-capitalist views ?
2) The capitalist system kills 5000 people each day anyway, due to third world debt (which the "freedom" of the u.s.a. will not cancel), currency speculation (which is only 5% accurate and causes the destabilization of economies leading to poverty and famine), and civil wars (which are funded by the u.s. arms manufacturers).....but there is'nt a 3 minutes silence for those people, is there ?
3) Did the Americans get any retribution for killing 250,000 people when they tested their nuclear weapons on civilian cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 ?
4) How can the U.S.A. say that it is the symbol of Democracy when it's own president was elected through a dodgy electorial college of which his own brother was the state congressman ? And when 3 memebers of the republican party are former members of the Ku Klux Klan ? How can the New York Mayor, Rudi Guiliani, be branded a "hero", when he backs initiatives on black citizens in New York such as "no holds barred" and "zero tolerance". Was'nt it Guiliani who pardoned the policemen who shot a black man 47 times for reaching into his pocket for his wallet ? IS THAT YOUR DEMOCRACY ????
This "war on terrorism" will be yet another stain on history in the future.
What the minority think now, the few UNBIASED, UNHYPEROVERREACTIONALEMOTIONAL, UNBRAINWASHED people realize now will become mainstream thinking in the future.
While the media distracts people with this nonsensical bombing, where absolutely nothing is being accomplished besides the loss of more life - OUR COUNTRY IS TAKING AWAY ALL OF OUR FREEDOMS. Unfortunately, this obvious news has not reached the front page yet.
In the years following this, books and conspiracy theories will start to be released - providing evidence that our own government could have been behind the whole thing, etc. etc. etc. The generation that did not actually experience the bombing will be more levelheaded and less idiotic about it and see how practically a whole country can be so easily brainwashed. And Afghanistan will be in even worse of a shape than it already is in.
Hear, hear, Spook! I'm glad someone sees things for the way they are.
By the way, what is all this nonsense about the "domino effect?" Why do some of you people think that because one country goes socialist that all countries will? And if the entire WORLD was one type of government, ESPECIALLY one that emphasizes unity -- why would that be bad, exactly? Just because it was labeled as "communism?" Can someone tell me why Communism is bad? I mean, I've heard that said many times -- but I want reasons now.
...this ought to be good.
Key discussion topics:
1) Was the Vietnam War justified? Why or why not?
2) Will we ever regret our war with the Taliban?
To begin, i don't like war. No one really does that's for damn sure, but still I don't like it. But a lot of stuff is necessary, even war. I feel the war at Vietnam had a just cause, but we had no reason to be there. It's too late now to say why cause there is no reason to, we lost they won: shows over. Thru the whole thing we only delayed the inevitable: but the problem was that we wasted lives there which isn't the best thing. Well, things worked out for us in the end didn't it. They don't hold too many gruges and i think we started trading with them (i'm not a well informed person). So it could have been like that if we didn't go over there but we were just paranoid on the spread of Communism. Oh well i wasn't born yet, so it didn't really affect me too much although i still say it was useless. Well moving on about 40 years, we have a new enemy at our hands: The Taliban. They are using some great taticts, seriously. Crashing a plane at the Pentagon, disabliling us for a few weeks. I am not condoning their actions, hell no. The Taliban will get theirs in this life or the next. I'm just looking at it at a stragitic point of view. The question is, will we regret it. I can't actually tell wheter we will or not. That is too soon to tell. But i can tell you that we needed something like this to happen. Before, most people hated our government, (i still do just to let you know, i just can't say to anyone or else i will get a ass beating i may be 6'6" 230 lbs. but there are limits) and now i have seen those people waving their American flags in their cars and their yards. This is the largest amount of patrioism i have seen in a long time. And boy was i wrong about ol' W. He sure proved that he could handle it. AND HE STILL GOES OUT INTO THE PUBLIC. Wow i tip my hat to him man, Even though he is a easy target and may actually get killed. Well to wrap things up i can't wait to see who will win this battle. I sure as hell hope it is us, mainly cause even though it is violated on a daily basis, i like my freedoms. Well i am done now, go back to CNN for the up to the minute bombings while i go wait here to get the first attack from the Taliban to begin, since I am in a city that would be a major target to hit for the Taliban.
Fuck you Osama Garbagebin laden and fuckin Sadam sick cunt.
FUCK U MOTHERFUCKER'S
1) Was the Vietnam War justified? Why or why not?
2) Will we ever regret our war with the Taliban?
3) What SHOULD we do with Jane Fonda?
1: Yes, i was justified at the time. The mistake was in our tactics. First of all we had never fought a gurilla type war since the reveloutin. We went into that war thinking we could "bomb them into the stione age" but like the afghan's they were already there.
2: We will not regret our war on the Taliban, we will regret it if we don't finish the job.
3:Hmmm, we should probably tie her up and cut her with razor blades.
First, a couple of general observations about this discussion:
There are some seriously misinformed, uneducated, and surface thinkers who have posted on this issue.
For anybody to equate Viet Nam with the current action against global terrorism, to say the Viet Nam was an American attempt to "strongarm" the rest of the world, to assert that Viet Nam draftees were "under the poverty line or minorities", to suggest that the US is considering the use of nuclear weapons in Afdghanistan, or that the "Ashcroft" bill threatens common citizens... well, these (among a LOT of others) are simply looney tune ideas completely unsubstantiated by a shread of fact.
1) Was the Vietnam War justified? Why or why not?
Informed people may argue about whether or not the Gulf of Tonkin incident was accurately reported, but nobody can argue that both unconventional and regular military forces from the North did not invade the South with the intent to destabilize the government in the South. As signatories to the South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) agreement, the US was legally bound to respond to the invasion with military force, even if we were not concerned about stopping the spread of Communism in SE Asia.
Don't forget, the spread of Communism had gobbled up formerly democratic countries in Eastern Europe, South America, and 90 miles off our southern coast in Cuba. Russia even attempted to place nuclear-tipped ICBMs in Cuba. The threat was real. I would also point out to those who debunked the "Domino Theory" in SA Asia, after Viet Nam there were ZERO additional efforts in that region by Communist powers to gain a foothold. I'd call that a lesson learned.
2) Will we ever regret our war with the Taliban?
Only if we found the horrific events of 9/11 completely acceptable, and are willing to suffer many more (and larger) such outrages.
3) What SHOULD we do with Jane Fonda?
Send her a letter telling her what you think of her traitorous actions during wartime. Otherwise, shut up about it. She has as much right to make dumb-ass, self-serving decisions as you or I. That's just ONE of the many freedoms we enjoy as Americans... freedom to be stupid.
hey, is there any site on the internet where i can buy paintings by that vietnamese dude?
At 10/12/01 11:44 AM, Cav_Man wrote: 3) What SHOULD we do with Jane Fonda?
Send her a letter telling her what you think of her traitorous actions during wartime. Otherwise, shut up about it. She has as much right to make dumb-ass, self-serving decisions as you or I. That's just ONE of the many freedoms we enjoy as Americans... freedom to be stupid.
Well said.
Also, that story about Jane Fonda receiving notes from American POWs while supposedly visitng a Vietnamese and then handing them over to the guards is untrue. For the real story without all the bullshit, read this...
At 10/12/01 02:31 PM, FTC wrote: Also, that story about Jane Fonda receiving notes from American POWs while supposedly visitng a Vietnamese and then handing them over to the guards is untrue.
Meant to say Vietnamese "prison camp" there. Whoops.
The war with Vietnam was not justified. The idea was to fight the commies or become commies. Well the Viet Cong won and we still aren't communists. Therefore the goal of the war was bogus and irrational. This war with the taliban is a true response seen by all, and not some ambigious attack upon some destroyer that is in the wrong part of a hostile nation (North Vietnam). I don't think we will regret putting pressure upon these terrorists, and neither will the majority of the rest of the world.
I think that is a very important fact Tom. The Vietcong did not come after us. We came after them. The taliban crashed planes into the world trade centers. They came after us.
This is a quote from a much larger article. Many of the morons here should read all of it. Maybe they might actually begin to be informed:
But never before has the concentration of media ownership been so vividly displayed. Dozens of channels, but just five companies -- interviewing mostly the same experts.
A lot whom, frankly, didn't know squat.
Since when is Newt Gingrich suddenly an expert on Mideast affairs? You'd think an expert would at least be able to pronounce the words right -- apparently, the U.S. is menaced by the "Afghani" "Islama Bin Layden" -- before demanding that bombs start falling on cities.
For a lot of talking heads -- as opposed to, say, actual experts -- regard for human life has truly fallen to the level of those we would destroy. I even stumbled across (while flipping channels) at least one Fox News guest seriously suggesting the use of tactical nuclear warheads.
Bill O'Reilly, America's bug-eyed lunatic du jour, has advocated bombing "the Afghan infrastructure to rubble... the power plants, their water facilities... if they don't rise up... they starve, period."
In other words, vengeful genocide. Also, terrorism, by the U.S. government's own widely-accepted definition (see below). Nice call, Bill. Great "no-spin zone" you got there.
Next war, let's have a special all-volunteer Pundit Brigade, so these combover commandos can hurl themselves straight into battle, as they so obviously wish they could.
Incidentally, a bunch of these very same "patriots" spent much of the last several years shouting about Bill Clinton's penis. Last we heard, he still had one.
So during all the years that Osama Bin Laden was building his network, arming himself to the teeth, and planning his assault on the U.S., "patriots" in Congress and on talk radio had the FBI wasting tens of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of man-hours on Monica Lewinsky instead of working to fight... I dunno, maybe... terrorists?
Which would you rather the FBI to have investigated fully all these years?
Until Bill Clinton's penis can knock down the Sears Tower, me, I'm choosing Osama.
Think about it. Whose big idea was it to misallocate those resources so pointlessly, particularly given that the intelligence agencies were quite clear on the point that Al-Qaeda was on its way?
In a just society, resignations and remorse would be flowing freely.
Things I haven't seen on TV much yet:
Thousands of anti-war demonstrators holding vigils and marching in the streets of Berlin, London, Budapest, and elsewhere across Europe.
Likewise, more thousands of demonstrators turning out in New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Boston, and here in Los Angeles.
TV anchors admitting that part of the reason they (and in large part, we) feel so ambushed and know so little about the region is that networks have been downsizing foreign desks for years, finding it (like us, their viewers) more profitable to wallow in Jon-Benet Condit crap, even though Osama Bin Laden openly announced his intentions over five years ago.
Or mentioning that these cutbacks are a logical result of corporate cost-cutting.
Or mentioning that more cutbacks are planned, and that the parent companies are all deeply reluctant to criticize the White House, wishing to curry favor with Colin Powell's kid at the FCC for the next round of deregulation.
____________________
News producers' compulsion to pre-package reality into unchallenging tidbits reaches its zenith in the ongoing titles slathered all over their screens:
"America's New War"
"America Strikes Back."
"America Tries To Get A Nap But Can't Because The Footage Is Really Creepy."
And judging from the enormous font Fox prefers,
"America Is Blind As A Bat."
I'm sorry, but war and death are not fancy products or new fall miniseries, no matter how often MSNBC titles them as such. How dare these producers package our pride and our pain and sell it back to us as a slogan?
Worse, "America Unites" (the typical Fox title) also carries the McCarthyish implication that anyone who doesn't agree with the majority opinion isn't American.
This, of course, is precisely the sort of totalitarian mindset that America actually should unite -- against.
On "Late Night," Dan Rather said the following to David Letterman:
"George Bush is the President, he makes the decisions and, you know, as just one American, he wants me to line up, just tell me where."
This is understandable. It's also a complete abandonment of good journalism.
It is not the patriotic duty of the news media to now become instant, permanent propagandists for the State. Quite the opposite.
Obviously, some information needs to be classified, and in a war, there are even more legitimate security concerns. But certainly in day-to-day reportage, it is the patriotic duty of the news media to tell the truth. That's it. All done.
If that's perceived as inherently adversarial to the government's interests, that's a measure of how much we have accepted that governance is now based on lies.
In fact, had the news media done a better job all along, there's a damned good chance the free people of this free country wouldn't find themselves in this mess in the first place.
____________________
Suppose for a second that you've never heard of Gary Condit, that the arrest of a famous football player for murder had received only passing interest, and that the paramour of President Clinton was only vaguely more memorable than the extramarital love of New York mayor Rudy Giuliani.
(Fascinating, how Giuliani's personal life is never considered part of his fitness for holding office. Why do you suppose that is?)
Suppose the news media had behaved responsibly in the last ten or twenty years, sticking to real stories, keeping international desks open, and maintaining budgets for investigative journalism?
Would a truly well-informed American public have supported shipping $3 billion in weapons and support to avowedly anti-American organizations aligned with opium producers and smugglers, simply because they were also anti-Soviet?
Probably not.
Would a truly well-informed American public have allowed the U.S. to knowingly provide massive aid to a corrupt Saudi regime supporting Osama Bin Laden, even after his declaration of war against the U.S. five years ago?
I cannot believe this of my fellow citizens.
Would a truly well-informed American public have allowed the US. to enforce sanctions against Iraq which have killed over a million civilians -- including over 500,000 innocent children, realizing fully, all along, that the policy makes a) Saddam Hussein more powerful, not less, and b) America the object of passionate hate in much of the Arab world?
This episode arguably reaches the shamefulness of slavery or "Indian removal" from previous centuries -- and it's still happening, right this minute, causing more deaths and hatred with each passing day. I do not believe -- perhaps I simply cannot -- that this, either, would be supported by my fellow Americans, if they knew what was actually happening.
(Incidentally, you can remind anyone rationalizing the deaths of enormous numbers of innocents as a necessary response to the objectionable behavior of their government -- that's precisely the terrifying mindset of the hijackers and terrorists that we're trying to overcome.)
Had Tom Brokaw said the words "Iraqi civilians" one-tenth as often as he did "Jon-Benet Ramsey," he might not need to grandstand his new all-terrorism format right now.
Sadly, we'll never know.
But surely, the answer to our predicament is not to compel the press to retreat even further, guaranteeing years and generations more of an uninformed populace.
So what muzzled the media? A whole bunch of factors, most of which simply boil down to corporate fealty to the bottom line.
You're already familiar with how the airlines gradually cut corner after corner on security regulations and recommendations until what remained was little more than a token symbol, a mere form and ritual pretending to be security...?
Same thing with news, pretty much.
TV networks and newspaper publishers are in business. They exist to make money. They have an obligation to their shareholders to do so. That's how capitalism is set up. No avoiding it, really.
One of the best ways to make money in news is by appealing to the least common denominator. An even better way is by simply buying up other media outlets and sharing costs across operations.
In order to acquire other media companies, federal restrictions on broadcast ownership, created specifically to safeguard the openness and diversity of public debate, must be loosened and eliminated.
You do that by hiring lobbyists and contributing to political campaigns and not giving airtime to anti-monopolization advocates.
In a nation where political campaigns are largely bought and sold like any other commodity, it wasn't long before "deregulation" occurred, leading to the MSNBCGEs and AOL/Time-Warner/Turners of the world.
Who, in turn, increased their bottom lines further by cutting overseas reporting and relying increasingly on sex and scandal in place of actual news -- so systemically that an entire generation now exists with little understanding of what a responsible alternative -- where news is more than just the saline carrying sales pitches into our bloodstreams -- might actually look like, or that the rest of the world doesn't actually regard itself as just a junior partner of the Great American Dream.
George W. Bush has proclaimed that "America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world."
If that was indeed the reason, then why haven't terrorists targeted Canada, Sweden, Norway or the two dozen other countries with elections even more free and fair than our own?
Bush's statement may be wonderfully reassuring. But it's also simple-minded and deceptive on its face, more so once you understand the history of the situation.
Governments do not gain trust by telling unnecessary lies, any more than individuals do. Letting crap like this slide -- as most reporters did -- is not good journalism. It's willful propaganda. It feels good. But it's not doing the job.
White House senior counselor Karen Hughes to Barbara Walters, regarding the reason for the attack:
"They hate the fact that we elect our leaders... unlike the terrorists, our leaders are elected, not appointed."
Um, Karen...? Are you really sure you want to play that whole election card right this minute?
By the way, remember that big, final recount of Florida ballots being done by the big, final consortium including CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times?
The final recount was supposed to be released in mid-September. Thanks to the current crisis, it's now on hold indefinitely.
Gee. If the recount showed that Bush was the real winner, wouldn't these guys be rushing the results into print, finally confirming Junior's legitimacy, hoping that might unite the nation and stuff?
Maybe. Maybe not. I guess we'll just have to wait even longer to find out who we the people actually voted for. In the meantime, it's not news, and we apparently have no right to know.
Let's repeat: whoever actually won, the American people currently have no right even to know who they legitimately voted for in the last democratic election.
Nice democracy we're fighting to save here.White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the other day that Americans -- quote -- "need to watch what they say, watch what they do" -- a creepily doubleplusunfree comment from our nation's Minister of Truth. Worse, the complete comment was then edited, Winston Smith-like, out of the White House's transcript.
Yikes.
Fleischer has also been caught dissembling over the whole Bush-in-Nebraska claim that Air Force One was targeted by terrorists. It wasn't.
Oy. Why the lying? We really don't need that right now.
Then again, Fleischer also peddled the disproven smear that departing Clintonites damaged the White House. So we all know that his office is perfectly willing to shade the truth.
Just like every White House spokesman in living memory.
And now it's suddenly "patriotic" to forget all that, lie to ourselves, and pretend that our leaders are impeccably honest and infallible?
Excuse me, but that kind of "patriotism" is -- by its own definition -- a lie.
Is it possible that merely having a memory makes one unpatriotic?
I never thought I'd agree with you on anything, I love you aaron! Glad to see someone here doesn't have their head up their falsely patriotic ass.
Well at the moment, I could try to display my opinion and argument The Vietnam War, but there could be so much about every intricite detail of that war that I might BLOW MY BRAINS OUT simply just by trying to sort them out.
So I decided to talk about the Jane Fonda case, personally I don't seem to care much for her actions in 'Nam cause I really don't know the full story. But if you want to know what we should do to her, I think you guys forgot that this is WWW.NEWGROUNDS.COM!!!! Those of you who hate her so much, why don't you do a collection of anti-Jane Fonda Flash movies and games? It's quite obvious isn't it? After all, Newgrounds is kind of like Mad Magazine online. So tell me what you think about "that" idea.
Only I can make blue whales cry.
At 10/12/01 07:25 PM, WhiteRabbit wrote: I never thought I'd agree with you on anything, I love you aaron! Glad to see someone here doesn't have their head up their falsely patriotic ass.
I see you finally figured out how to post pics. When are you going to get naked for me?
At 10/11/01 12:14 AM, TomFulp wrote: Don't forget to check out the cool artwork that I bought while I was in Vietnam. Isn't it great? I took a picture of me and the artist, so assuming it didn't get fried by airport x-rays, I will be posting it soon! Like you care!
Those pictures are so cool I wish i had some like that in my room.
