Baldy will vote for Kerry [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Baldy will vote for Kerry

Pages : [1] 2

TennisLurker
10-19-2004, 11:50 PM
http://www.tennis-masters-madrid.com/prensa/52.html


P: Entre Kerry y Bush, ¿tiene usted algún favorito?
ANDRE AGASSI: Personalmente votaré a Kerry y ojalá todo el mundo lo hiciera.


more or less..

kerry and Bush, who is your fave?

I will vote for Kerry and I hope every one will vote for him.


Baldy has some redeeming qualities. :D


Pete, T Martin and Chris Evert are republicans I think.

Who do you think Andy and the other american players will vote?

MisterQ
10-19-2004, 11:57 PM
:dance: :woohoo:

This makes up for his being a Michael Bolton fan. ;)

Shy
10-19-2004, 11:59 PM
:bounce:

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:03 AM
Navratilova will vote dems and Lendl republicans I think.

I always have a hard time thinking of Lendl as an american citizen.

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 12:08 AM
Katie Couric: "Let me ask you are you gonna do a lot of politics because I know you're a registered Democrat? This is an election year."
McEnroe: "Well how did you know that? First of all."
Couric: "I did my research, John. Impressive huh?"
McEnroe: "It, it is impressive. It's the first year I've actually registered as a Democrat. I was unregistered cynic for the first 25 years of my life, of my available voting time. But I registered as an independent in 2000 and now I believe change has to come. But we don't want to get political, too political right now. But the answer to you're question is, I would love to have politicians."
Lester Holt: "Has that, has that torpedoed some talk show hosts? Going too political too soon?"
McEnroe: "Would you care to mention some names?" Holt: "Well Rosie, Rosie O'Donnell."
McEnroe: "Well I, I, if you're referring to the fact that she came out and said she was lesbian I think that..."
Holt: "No, gun control and, and..."
Couric: "No I think it was more like the, the gun control thing and Tom Selleck." Holt: "Yeah, yeah."
McEnroe: "'Cause I thought that took a lot of courage, actually, to do that. And I think she was doing quite well and, and she got a little tired of it. I bet you she wishes she had it back now but..."

The Today Show - July 7. 2004
http://www.mediaresearch.org/printer/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040708pf.asp#6

http://www.boycottliberalism.com/biographies/McEnroe.htm

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 12:10 AM
LOL Q!! Poor Michael Bolton (and now I'm thinking of Office Space :haha: )

According to Brad, Andy is republican. How disappointing :o But quite honestly, he doesn't strike me as the caring voting type LMFAO. Mardy strikes me as Republican, too, but I don't know why. I would guess Blake is a Democrat... African-American from the North, well it's a good bet ;) CousinVinny... well those are the types of people we don't want to vote, right? :lol: and yes, Johnny Mac is extremely vocal about supporting Kerry.

myself? I already voted, by mail. I hate them both so I took a stand and wrote someone in :) (Too bad Andre isn't a year older, I could've voted for him!!!)

Shy
10-20-2004, 12:15 AM
LOL Q!! Poor Michael Bolton (and now I'm thinking of Office Space :haha: )

According to Brad, Andy is republican. How disappointing :o But quite honestly, he doesn't strike me as the caring voting type LMFAO. (Too bad Andre isn't a year older, I could've voted for him!!!)
Andy aways strikes me as an democrat then again I never heard him discussing important issue. So, how would I know.

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:15 AM
I wonder who connors will vote.

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 12:17 AM
Andy aways strikes me as an democrat then again I never heard him discussing important issue. So, how would I know.

He strikes me as the apathetic type but I don't know why I say that :shrug: I wouldn't know either except that Brad was on a political talk show here not too long ago and he specifically said that he and Andy both leaned Republican.

TL, Jimbo strikes me as Democrat but again, don't know why I would say that lol

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:21 AM
CousinVinny will vote dems most likely ,because of his strong self-identification with the black community....

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 12:22 AM
Jimmy Connors is Republican, apparently. He was mentioned as a potential Illinois Senate candidate, lol!

http://www.modernvertebrate.com/elections/2004-illinois/speculation.html

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 12:22 AM
:haha: good one, TL! :yeah:

and hmmm interesting. thanks Q!

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:23 AM
(on Jimbo), yeah, I suppose the same.

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:24 AM
whoa, Jimbo is republican.

that surprised me.

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 12:29 AM
Serena Williams is a Democrat.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/9/10/103836.shtml

liptea
10-20-2004, 12:37 AM
Shostakovich rocks, I'm playing him for an assignment in Piano Lit, and he's awesome.

I don't understand how anyone can vote for George W. Bush. In four years, he's destroyed our alliances, lost jobs (first president in 72 years, yo), created an economic downturn, overstepped the Constitutional boundaries on educational policies, and lied to the American people as a basis for going to war against a sovereign nation.

And then tries to attack Kerry for reading Emerson. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." I mean, if I knew that a vote of mine was based on lies and then led to the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans and Iraqis, I'd certainly change my mind.

I wish I were old enough to vote.

That disappoints me about Andy Roddick, but somehow, bashing an innocent (can we say serving iheavily nto the body of a rookie) doesn't seem beyond him. :rolleyes:

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 12:43 AM
Shostakovich rocks, I'm playing him for an assignment in Piano Lit, and he's awesome.

I don't understand how anyone can vote for George W. Bush. In four years, he's destroyed our alliances, lost jobs (first president in 72 years, yo), created an economic downturn, overstepped the Constitutional boundaries on educational policies, and lied to the American people as a basis for going to war against a sovereign nation.

And then tries to attack Kerry for reading Emerson. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." I mean, if I knew that a vote of mine was based on lies and then led to the deaths of thousands of innocent Americans and Iraqis, I'd certainly change my mind.

I wish I were old enough to vote.

That disappoints me about Andy Roddick, but somehow, bashing an innocent (can we say serving iheavily nto the body of a rookie) doesn't seem beyond him. :rolleyes:

:cool: liptea. what shostakovich piece are you playing? (sorry for the tangent...)

liptea
10-20-2004, 12:49 AM
:cool: liptea. what shostakovich piece are you playing? (sorry for the tangent...)

the first movement of the piano sonata no. 2 (op. 61)

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 12:49 AM
That disappoints me about Andy Roddick, but somehow, bashing an innocent (can we say serving iheavily nto the body of a rookie) doesn't seem beyond him. :rolleyes:

Yes..... there's certainly a relationship to Andy hitting a body serve and his political beliefs. :o I should've known this conversation would take a nasty turn. This is MTF after all :) People's political views are private. Brad shouldn't even have talked about them on nationally syndicated radio. So my dad's a Republican and he votes for Bush. I don't hate my dad, I just don't talk politics with him.

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 12:54 AM
the first movement of the piano sonata no. 2 (op. 61)

awesome! :yeah: I just played his Trio No. 2 (op. 67) this summer. Such amazing music.

If you haven't yet read his book of memoirs, Testimony, (collected by Solomon Volkov), I highly recommend it. They are both wryly humorous and devastatingly bleak. That's where my signature quote is from, actually.

well I could talk about Shosty all day. :yeah: But back to politics... :lol:

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 12:55 AM
I just love all the foreign experts on our elections.

Please, anyone wants a reason to vote for W, how about uploading a couple pictures of Kerry campaigning with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, which is like Bush going around with David Duke and Tom Metzger. I don't understand how anyone can see that and still vote for him.

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:55 AM
what about jennifer and lindsay?
are italian american known for voting dems over republicans or vice versa?

tangerine_dream
10-20-2004, 12:56 AM
Who do you think Andy and the other american players will vote?

Who cares? :rolleyes:

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 12:58 AM
I do , that why I asked, and we are on the second page so I guess other people do care too.

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 01:16 AM
Please, anyone wants a reason to vote for W, how about uploading a couple pictures of Kerry campaigning with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, which is like Bush going around with David Duke and Tom Metzger. I don't understand how anyone can see that and still vote for him.

I agree with you 100%. Which is why I didn't vote for either of them :)

TL, I don't know who Italian-Americans are voting for. I don't know if they're the same kind of bloc that Blacks, Hispanics, and Jews are. Since a lot of Catholics, they might tend Democrat but I doubt if there's a big trend there. I would guess Jen is a Democrat, but that's purely from her colored past ;)

I was a polisci major so I am always fascinated trying to figure out who people might vote for - it can be really hard to tell from people's personalities. As long as no one or not players are attacked for their political beliefs since it's something very personal, I think it's just a fun discussion :)

Winston's Human
10-20-2004, 01:35 AM
Lendl is a Republican.

Courier and Agassi have both donated to the Kerry campaign. So I am not surprised they are voting for him.

I would not be surprised if Andy leaned GOP as his family is from Nebraska and his father is a small business owner.

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:35 AM
Delete

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:36 AM
Delete

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:37 AM
Yes, but there is far too much bs put into party lines.

Most of the people I know that call themselves democrats don't believe in 90% of the bs that Kerry says and most of the Republicans I know don't believe in 90% of the bs that Bush says.

For instance, I definently tend towards the right of the political spectrum on a lot of foreign policy decisions, but I am agnostic, I support gay rights, I believe drug use and prostitution are personal choices that should be legal, that we should be able to own any firearm we want, affirmitive action and all forms of government discrimination should be abolished, that we should do a lot more to help the environment, we need to put about 500% more effort into border security and etc, etc, etc and a lot of the people I know from both parties feel the same about all that, but label themselves to one party because they can't stand John Kerry or George Bush.

But I also believe that the last thing we should care about is who people abroad want to be our leader, as I said before, Bush's unpopularity abroad maybe the biggest argument he has for his putting American interests first. For example, how would you French feel about me saying that you should vote against Chirac just because Americans don't like him? That goes for every other damn country out there.

liptea
10-20-2004, 01:37 AM
Yes..... there's certainly a relationship to Andy hitting a body serve and his political beliefs. :o I should've known this conversation would take a nasty turn. This is MTF after all :) People's political views are private. Brad shouldn't even have talked about them on nationally syndicated radio. So my dad's a Republican and he votes for Bush. I don't hate my dad, I just don't talk politics with him.

I do respect Andy's game, although he doesn't have the best sportsmanship on the tour. I also respect what the Republicans stand for, although I'm not a fan of the current administration, if that makes sense.

liptea
10-20-2004, 01:41 AM
awesome! :yeah: I just played his Trio No. 2 (op. 67) this summer. Such amazing music.

If you haven't yet read his book of memoirs, Testimony, (collected by Solomon Volkov), I highly recommend it. They are both wryly humorous and devastatingly bleak. That's where my signature quote is from, actually.

well I could talk about Shosty all day. :yeah: But back to politics... :lol:

I'll look that up. :) , I go a boarding school for the Arts (kinda rare in the US, more rare in South Carolina... ;) ), and I spend almost four hours a day at piano.

As much as I love Dmitri, I love the Chopin I'm learning the most of my entire repertoire, it's the Nocturne in c minor, op. 48, no.1. Amazing, amazing. And you should also find the Rachmaninoff Prelude in D Major, which is absolutely gorgeous.

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 01:50 AM
Coleburg, I have very similar problems to you. I was in favor the Iraq stuff (:bolt: ), but I'm anti-death penalty, pro gay rights, VERY pro choice, pro separation of church and state, and very against affirmative action. So who do I vote for? I hate them both LOL!

I understand, liptea.... I just don't see what Andy's sportsmanship, whether you love it or hate it, has to do with his political beliefs lol. like I said, he doesn't strike me as the type who'd go out of his way to vote anyway. Plus I imagine if he's registered, he's registered in Texas in which case it doesn't really matter lol

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:55 AM
I strongly support the death penalty and abortion, the former not being used nearly enough or quick enough. Almost every state except for a couple in New England have a majority that want the death penalty, I believe it being abolished in so many states with up to 70% supporting it, is a huge testament against our democracy and for the power of these lobbyist lawyer groups.

liptea
10-20-2004, 01:55 AM
Coleburg, I have very similar problems to you. I was in favor the Iraq stuff (:bolt: ), but I'm anti-death penalty, pro gay rights, VERY pro choice, pro separation of church and state, and very against affirmative action. So who do I vote for? I hate them both LOL!

I understand, liptea.... I just don't see what Andy's sportsmanship, whether you love it or hate it, has to do with his political beliefs lol. like I said, he doesn't strike me as the type who'd go out of his way to vote anyway. Plus I imagine if he's registered, he's registered in Texas in which case it doesn't really matter lol

I was just drawing a parallel between bombing the hell out of a nation that was unable to put up a non-guerilla fight and Andy serving the hell into a rookie that was unable to put up a non-reflexive fight.

But...let's agree to disagree, because I'm pretty liberal on everything. And I happen to like John Kerry, as a person, candidate, Democratic party messiah ( :cool: )...or even as a windsurfer.

:boxing: :hug: :smooch:

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:58 AM
liptea, let's broaden that view, by that model you don't believe the world should fight a war on terrorism because they don't have the same weapons capability or resources.

" But...let's agree to disagree, because I'm pretty liberal on everything. And I happen to like John Kerry, as a person, candidate, Democratic party messiah ( )...or even as a windsurfer."

I 100% believe you.

liptea
10-20-2004, 02:06 AM
liptea, let's broaden that view, by that model you don't believe the world should fight a war on terrorism because they don't have the same weapons capability or resources.


Terrorism? You mean, the alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction, the alleged 9/11-al Qaeda-Saddam threat? None of which exist?

Why don't we put United States resources towards a better war, such as one on Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, etc.?

I bet Kerry's funny when he's windsurfing. I have yet to see a man that looks more like a stringbean except the guy off Full House.

Fee
10-20-2004, 02:07 AM
Andre is going to vote for Kerry? Very cool, but not enough to make me look past the multitude of snot rockets he's left on courts all over the globe this year. Doesn't matter anyway, the Republicans have apparently figured out that they can't legitimately win this election so they are doing everything they can to supress the Democratic vote in swing states. Afghanistan will know who their new President is before the US will.

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 02:19 AM
I was just drawing a parallel between bombing the hell out of a nation that was unable to put up a non-guerilla fight and Andy serving the hell into a rookie that was unable to put up a non-reflexive fight.


That's like PETA using images of the Holocaust to further their message about how chickens are treated. oooooookay.


Anyway, I don't like the direction this thread has taken so I'll see you all in a topic about something less inflammatory. :wavey: :hug:

MisterQ
10-20-2004, 02:23 AM
Anyway, I don't like the direction this thread has taken so I'll see you all in a topic about something less inflammatory. :wavey: :hug:

Sorry, Deb. We'll stop talking about Shostakovich. ;)

mitalidas
10-20-2004, 02:43 AM
Yes, but there is far too much bs put into party lines.

Most of the people I know that call themselves democrats don't believe in 90% of the bs that Kerry says and most of the Republicans I know don't believe in 90% of the bs that Bush says.
.

for all of us conflicted souls, just remember: we KNOW what a Bush admin will do. With Kerry, there is a 50% chance he will be no better, but : there is also a 50% chance he will lead us out of this mess (Economic, Political, War, Social, and Isolationist Mess)

back to the topic at hand -sampras is republican, will vote republican. In all these years, until now, I did not dislike anything about him. :sad:

liptea
10-20-2004, 02:50 AM
for all of us conflicted souls, just remember: we KNOW what a Bush admin will do. With Kerry, there is a 50% chance he will be no better, but : there is also a 50% chance he will lead us out of this mess (Economic, Political, War, Social, and Isolationist Mess)

back to the topic at hand -sampras is republican, will vote republican. In all these years, until now, I did not dislike anything about him. :sad:

I think we're the same person with different icons... ;)

Where do we find these things out, aren't votes supposed to be confidential?

Winston's Human
10-20-2004, 02:52 AM
Doesn't matter anyway, the Republicans have apparently figured out that they can't legitimately win this election so they are doing everything they can to supress the Democratic vote in swing states.

As opposed to the massive voter fraud being perpetrated by the Democrats and their hard-left allies.

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:00 AM
I voted yesterday, for Badnarik. you have to ask for a paper ballot to write someone in with these new computer systems.

Gigan
10-20-2004, 03:01 AM
i have couple of questions guys, please tell:

1. what means word foreigner currently in your country?
(i think person without u.s. passport, may be i'm wrong?)

2. shall Pete or Andre go later for president (status)?
i heard father of Andre is in great worry about his son...?

____________________________________
:wavey: Andre Agassi forever :wavey:

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 03:02 AM
Andre, if you want to play at TMC Houston Texas, yo shouldn't support Kerry that much :tape:

Even Monicaselesfan2 would be better than Dubya :ras:

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:02 AM
btw, that is so fucking childish to not like someone because they have a different political ideology

Gigan
10-20-2004, 03:02 AM
I voted yesterday, for Badnarik. you have to ask for a paper ballot to write someone in with these new computer systems.

bad dream...



______________________________
:wavey: Andre Agassi forever :wavey:

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:04 AM
That disappoints me about Andy Roddick, but somehow, bashing an innocent (can we say serving iheavily nto the body of a rookie) doesn't seem beyond him. :rolleyes:


http://www.efflixi.com/images/discotardnew.gif

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:08 AM
Doesn't matter anyway, the Republicans have apparently figured out that they can't legitimately win this election so they are doing everything they can to supress the Democratic vote in swing states. Afghanistan will know who their new President is before the US will.

http://www.efflixi.com/images/discotardnew.gif

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:12 AM
Terrorism? You mean, the alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction, the alleged 9/11-al Qaeda-Saddam threat? None of which exist?

Why don't we put United States resources towards a better war, such as one on Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, etc.?

I bet Kerry's funny when he's windsurfing. I have yet to see a man that looks more like a stringbean except the guy off Full House.


That is the dumbest thing I have ever seen posted on MTF. go drown yourself in your ignorance.

http://www.efflixi.com/images/discotardnew.gif*100

darnyelb
10-20-2004, 03:14 AM
Happy to this hear this about Courier, Agassi, Serena.

Andy Roddick strikes me as apathetic, but he'd vote Republican.

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 03:14 AM
Happy to this hear this about Courier, Agassi, Serena.

Andy Roddick strikes me as apathetic, but he'd vote Republican.

http://www.efflixi.com/images/discotardnew.gif

Gigan
10-20-2004, 03:16 AM
Andre always looking forward,
for something better...

-----> (pic)

____________________________________
:wavey: Andre Agassi forever :wavey:

Havok
10-20-2004, 03:43 AM
This thread is very weird.:scared:

Deboogle!.
10-20-2004, 04:20 AM
Sorry, Deb. We'll stop talking about Shostakovich. ;)

I <3 you so much, Q!

Marine
10-20-2004, 07:43 AM
back to the topic at hand -sampras is republican, will vote republican. In all these years, until now, I did not dislike anything about him. :sad:

Ohh yess, totally agree with you, it's so disapointing.... :sad:

Sjengster
10-20-2004, 08:46 AM
No surprise though, Sampras comes from a rather conservative background and said recently in an interview something about how he would encourage his son to take up sport if it prevented him from falling in with the wrong crowd (partying and drugs, etc.).

This thread only took a turn for the worse when gbpgbp02 started posting oh-so erudite repudiations of other people's statements by using the same "retarded" smilie over and over again. Talk about a poverty of ideas.

Space Cowgirl
10-20-2004, 09:23 AM
I just love all the foreign experts on our elections.

Well when the person you lot vote for President has an effect all around the world, are we non-Americans not entitled to air our opinions? Or is that something else banned under the Patriot Act? :rolleyes:
Sorry, I won't post again on this topic as I get too angry. Why on earth people think that Bush is a good president is something that will forever be a mystery to me

Purple Rainbow
10-20-2004, 10:27 AM
Even Monicaselesfan2 would be better than Dubya :ras:

:lol: That would be an hilarious sight!

Condi Rize: Mrs. President, we have satellite images which show the hiding place of Osama bin Laden!

MSfan2: Any more pics?

Condi Rize: Well, what about this recent photographs showing WMD depots in Iraq?

MSfan2: Any more pics?

etc, etc....

mitalidas
10-20-2004, 11:56 AM
I think we're the same person with different icons... ;)

Where do we find these things out, aren't votes supposed to be confidential?

our identities are confidential :)
so revealing that we're pro-B or pro-K on this forum is as good as secrecy

Maybe CNN will report us and say that "It appears that the adult tennis loving population is biased against the sitting president"

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 01:04 PM
I just love all the foreign experts on our elections.


We are just curious ;) . That Florida ballots mess, LMFAO :haha:

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 01:51 PM
A Colombian talking about political messes in other countries?

Talk about irony. :eek:

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 01:59 PM
anymore pics ? :p

Gigan
10-20-2004, 02:14 PM
A Colombian talking about political messes in other countries?

Talk about irony. :eek:
are you sure on colombian?
colombian some times can be mongolian... ;)

________________________________________
:wavey: Andre Agassi forever :wavey:

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 02:36 PM
:awww: ok, i got it. Don't mess around with politics ;)

JennyS
10-20-2004, 02:36 PM
I have no idea who Jen is voting for, but she did take part in Jocks to GI's on the ESPN website and said she supported what the troops were doing 100%

I'm not huge on talking politics, but I will say this. There was a very interesting special on Fox News about Saddam, the UN and the Oil for Food program and it was very imformative and interesting. Saddam was using the program to obtain weapons and he was indeed a major threat.

tangerine_dream
10-20-2004, 03:44 PM
I do , that why I asked, and we are on the second page so I guess other people do care too.

Why are non-Americans who don't like the American players suddenly so interested in their political beliefs? :o

TennisLurker
10-20-2004, 03:48 PM
I like capriati a lot actually.

Fee
10-20-2004, 04:21 PM
are you sure on colombian?
colombian some times can be mongolian... ;)

WTF?

Jenny, please don't take ANYTHING you see on Fox News at face value. That news piece may or may not have been true. Fair and balanced my eye.

Alfonso, you say whatever you like about American politics, including the mess in Florida. In fact, I hear they are looking for international observers to go there and make sure the voting is legitimate. Any volunteers?

And yes, ballots are confidential, but if someone wants to publicly state their support for a candidate or announce their intention to vote for a particular candidate, there is no law against it. That's how we know that Pete is a Republican and Andre plans to vote for Kerry (but Pete is still the greatest player of all time and he lives in California, so his vote won't do any harm).

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 04:30 PM
WTF?


Alfonso, you say whatever you like about American politics, including the mess in Florida. In fact, I hear they are looking for international observers to go there and make sure the voting is legitimate. Any volunteers?


Sorry, Fee :hug: I shouldn't say that. But If JMG and Kiwi can come with us, i'll be there :cool:

Jimena
10-20-2004, 04:50 PM
I'm not huge on talking politics, but I will say this. There was a very interesting special on Fox News about Saddam, the UN and the Oil for Food program and it was very imformative and interesting. Saddam was using the program to obtain weapons and he was indeed a major threat.

He might have been trying, but a heck of a lot of countries are trying to get weapons and the US didn't invade them. The scandal has a heck of a lot more to do with who profitted from the program (business people from Europe and the US). Saddam was essentially contained by the sanctions. And he was using the oil for food program to try to get people to lift the sanctions. He was a bad guy, yes, a brutal dictator. But that is a flimsy reason for invading, specially since he was brutal back when developed nations helped him stay in power and wage war against Iran and his own people. He was not a major threat.

Go rent Outfoxed. And take everything EVERY single media outlet in the US says with a humongous grain of salt.

Personally, I'm dying, dying yo, for this freaking election to be over. Blah.

And I don't care much about the politics of tennis players. I know where Sampras is coming from, but I don't agree with him. I still love him as a player, though.

And for whomever said that he/she didn't understand why people would vote for Kerry after seeing him standing next to Jackson and Sharpton, I say: how can anyone vote for Bush after he said that Scalia and Thomas are his favorite Supreme Court Justices, and spoke at Bob Jones University? Hey, if you're going to say it about one candidate, there a plenty of reasons to say it about the other one.

Fee
10-20-2004, 04:58 PM
Sorry, Fee :hug: I shouldn't say that. But If JMG and Kiwi can come with us, i'll be there :cool:

Alf, do you know how privileged and pleased I would be to go anywhere with you, JMG, and Nic all together? As long as you can put up with all of the attention they give me (NOT! :lol: ). I would have to spend all of my time slapping your hands away from their cute rear ends :tape:.

(and don't apologize for your comment, it wasn't that far off the mark).

RebelNYC
10-20-2004, 05:04 PM
Andre once again proving his brilliance, and not just on a tennis court!

jmp
10-20-2004, 05:14 PM
I'm surprised to see this discussion on GM. I wasn't so interested in the American players' vote/party affiliation as I was in the MTFers here - US and non-US. The television media will show you all kinds of stuff. But, it's different when you hear real people say what they feel. I've been reading a lot of blogs and watching focus groups on c-span. I'm curious as to what is motivating the American public. So far, MTF seems like everything else I've been reading/seeing. People are all over the place. But, I think the most encouraging sign is that the American public seems really engaged this election and not apathetic. Here's what I think this election comes down to:

9/11 scared the stuffing out of every American. From there it's a toss up on how people reacted to that fear. I think that a lot of people are so frightened that they can't do anything but stay with Bush. While almost as many people think Bush is wrong. So, between the strong pro-Bush crowd and the too-scared crowd, Bush wins this election.

I'm personally miffed when I hear people say that they thought Bush was right, but, now that the war isn't going well they think he's wrong. It smacks of short sightedness and that "fair weather friend" mentality. But, it's their right to change their minds.

Some presidential elections just don't matter that much. But, I think this one is BIG.

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 05:25 PM
Alf, do you know how privileged and pleased I would be to go anywhere with you, JMG, and Nic all together? As long as you can put up with all of the attention they give me (NOT! :lol: ). I would have to spend all of my time slapping your hands away from their cute rear ends :tape:.

(and don't apologize for your comment, it wasn't that far off the mark).

Fee :kiss: no problem with the apologies. I had to. I just reacted and didn't think. Politics and religion are very personal issues and i don't have hard feelings about any specific country. About Dubya, well, that's another story :rolleyes:

Fee
10-20-2004, 05:45 PM
I'm surprised to see this discussion on GM. I wasn't so interested in the American players' vote/party affiliation as I was in the MTFers here - US and non-US. The television media will show you all kinds of stuff. But, it's different when you hear real people say what they feel. I've been reading a lot of blogs and watching focus groups on c-span. I'm curious as to what is motivating the American public. So far, MTF seems like everything else I've been reading/seeing. People are all over the place. But, I think the most encouraging sign is that the American public seems really engaged this election and not apathetic. Here's what I think this election comes down to:

9/11 scared the stuffing out of every American. From there it's a toss up on how people reacted to that fear. I think that a lot of people are so frightened that they can't do anything but stay with Bush. While almost as many people think Bush is wrong. So, between the strong pro-Bush crowd and the too-scared crowd, Bush wins this election.

I'm personally miffed when I hear people say that they thought Bush was right, but, now that the war isn't going well they think he's wrong. It smacks of short sightedness and that "fair weather friend" mentality. But, it's their right to change their minds.

Some presidential elections just don't matter that much. But, I think this one is BIG.

This is an excellent post. I think your observations are right on. On 9/11 I woke up to the news at the top of the hour on NPR and immediately turned on my TV. After watching both towers collapse, I had to go to work in the California State capitol building. By the time I got there, the building had been closed for safety. In one day I went to working in a place that most people ignored, or knew little about, to a place that became a 'visible target.' As an American of English/Irish heritage married to an American of German heritage, I was incredibly touched by the support we received from just about every corner of the globe. Unfortunately, Bush squandered and lost all of that international support with his ignorant, chest-thumping, 'God is on my side' bravado, leaving Afghanistan before the job was done and diverting resources to Iraq. By the way, the real reason Bush went after Saddam Hussein? 'Because he tried to kill my dad.'

Anyway, I should probably stop spouting about this and get back to tennis, and my half-witty exchanges with Alfonso.

Winston's Human
10-20-2004, 05:57 PM
Jenny, please don't take ANYTHING you see on Fox News at face value. That news piece may or may not have been true. Fair and balanced my eye.

As opposed to CBS with its forged memos or ABC where Peter Jennings said that reporters do not have to be objective.

Jenny, if you are going to see "Outfoxed", you should also read "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg on media distortion.

maratski
10-20-2004, 06:00 PM
I'm surprised to see this discussion on GM. I wasn't so interested in the American players' vote/party affiliation as I was in the MTFers here - US and non-US. The television media will show you all kinds of stuff. But, it's different when you hear real people say what they feel. I've been reading a lot of blogs and watching focus groups on c-span. I'm curious as to what is motivating the American public. So far, MTF seems like everything else I've been reading/seeing. People are all over the place. But, I think the most encouraging sign is that the American public seems really engaged this election and not apathetic. Here's what I think this election comes down to:

9/11 scared the stuffing out of every American. From there it's a toss up on how people reacted to that fear. I think that a lot of people are so frightened that they can't do anything but stay with Bush. While almost as many people think Bush is wrong. So, between the strong pro-Bush crowd and the too-scared crowd, Bush wins this election.

I'm personally miffed when I hear people say that they thought Bush was right, but, now that the war isn't going well they think he's wrong. It smacks of short sightedness and that "fair weather friend" mentality. But, it's their right to change their minds.

Some presidential elections just don't matter that much. But, I think this one is BIG.

I don't pay any attention to the elections at all and won't get into them, but wonder one thing. You say that you think a lot of people stay with Bush after 9/11, but that horrible day isn't an issue anymore. The war in Iraq is what divides the Americans lately and that is not linked to 9/11. FBI, CIA or whoever is doing things for the government has already stated that Bin Laden and Saddam had no links whatsoever so why do people let such things count while deciding who to vote for?

I said I don't pay attention to the elections, but do have to say that I hope Bush will be gone soon. IMHO, I think he just screws up more then he does good things. He made such a mess in this world before doing ONE good thing, which is capturing Saddam.

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 06:21 PM
I don't pay any attention to the elections at all and won't get into them, but wonder one thing. You say that you think a lot of people stay with Bush after 9/11, but that horrible day isn't an issue anymore. The war in Iraq is what divides the Americans lately and that is not linked to 9/11. FBI, CIA or whoever is doing things for the government has already stated that Bin Laden and Saddam had no links whatsoever so why do people let such things count while deciding who to vote for?

I said I don't pay attention to the elections, but do have to say that I hope Bush will be gone soon. IMHO, I think he just screws up more then he does good things. He made such a mess in this world before doing ONE good thing, which is capturing Saddam.

your ignorance is showing :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

alfonsojose
10-20-2004, 06:32 PM
:lol: That would be an hilarious sight!

Condi Rize: Mrs. President, we have satellite images which show the hiding place of Osama bin Laden!

MSfan2: Any more pics?

Condi Rize: Well, what about this recent photographs showing WMD depots in Iraq?

MSfan2: Any more pics?

etc, etc....

:haha: :haha:

BTW. monicaselesfan2 has posted "thank U" sometimes. It's better than we thought ;)

Space Cowgirl
10-20-2004, 06:34 PM
your ignorance is showing :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

care to point out why Maratski is ignorant?? Or do you believe Bush's bullshit as well? :rolleyes:

maratski
10-20-2004, 06:45 PM
your ignorance is showing :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Will you be so kind enough to tell me who investigates such things in all the other countries in the world? If I'm so ignorant, which you're not (judging from your comment), then I'm sure this question is a piece of cake for you.

Space Cowgirl
10-20-2004, 06:57 PM
Will you be so kind enough to tell me who investigates such things in all the other countries in the world? If I'm so ignorant, which you're not (judging from your comment), then I'm sure this question is a piece of cake for you.


I wouldn't pay too much attention to gobbledegook's rationale. I got bad-repped for my comment to him/her (oh the joy, my first!), no comment apart from the "hilarious" :retard: smilie was made, though.
So I guess that is about as high as he/she/it is willing to raise the standard of debate ;)

Fee, I agree 100% with your comment that you made when repping me. I hope more people feel the same :)

jmp
10-20-2004, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by maratski
I don't pay any attention to the elections at all and won't get into them, but wonder one thing. You say that you think a lot of people stay with Bush after 9/11, but that horrible day isn't an issue anymore. The war in Iraq is what divides the Americans lately and that is not linked to 9/11. FBI, CIA or whoever is doing things for the government has already stated that Bin Laden and Saddam had no links whatsoever so why do people let such things count while deciding who to vote for?

Exactly, maratski! This is my point. I listened and read what potential voters are saying and they either believe there is a link or they can't take the risk that there is not. This is how they can let 9/11 influence their vote.

There is also the other point of view that 9/11 signals a change in how we handle threats to our national security, i.e. the US can't possibly blast every country who harbors terrorists.

Then there are those who say all the focus on 9/11 means that domestic issues and constitutional rights are being robbed.

Fedex
10-20-2004, 07:30 PM
Serena Williams is a Democrat.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/9/10/103836.shtml
That doesnt suprise me, that she is.
Good Job for Andre on making the right choice. :yeah: :)

Ballbuster
10-20-2004, 07:31 PM
care to point out why Maratski is ignorant??

:rolleyes:

Maybe it was the part in size 5 text? There's no evidence the Saddam was behind 9/11, but there were ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda :rolleyes:

Or do you believe Bush's bullshit as well?
Did you read the thread, because I already mentioned who i voted for and it wasn't Bush.

Fedex
10-20-2004, 07:37 PM
I just love all the foreign experts on our elections.

Please, anyone wants a reason to vote for W, how about uploading a couple pictures of Kerry campaigning with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, which is like Bush going around with David Duke and Tom Metzger. I don't understand how anyone can see that and still vote for him.
What does this have to do with anything? Should I really waste my time, trying to educate you in politics?? Bush has completly detroyed our economy, we have virtually no homeland security, a defecit as fas as the eye can see, do I need to go on? I could go on forever, all the things this administration has done wrong. That's what matters, not who you campain with. :rolleyes:

maratski
10-20-2004, 07:41 PM
Maybe it was the part in size 5 text? There's no evidence the Saddam was behind 9/11, but there were ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda :rolleyes:

We must have been watching different news channels then.

Jennay
10-20-2004, 07:45 PM
I would guess Jen is a Democrat, but that's purely from her colored past ;)
LOL!!! :haha: :haha: :haha:

Jimena
10-20-2004, 07:46 PM
Exactly, maratski! This is my point. I listened and read what potential voters are saying and they either believe there is a link or they can't take the risk that there is not. This is how they can let 9/11 influence their vote.

Well, 9/11 has been used as a political tool during this election cycle to scare people into voting one way or another. I mean, Cheney saying that the country will be less safe if Kerry wins? Fearmongering of the worst kind. (Of course, the Republicans are not the only ones resorting to fear as a campaign tactic. The Kerry and the draft thing is a good example.) The Republicans also exploited 9/11 during their convention. It all has to do with Bush's ratings going up every time the "War on Terror" (a bad name, if you ask me) comes up. A lot of people feel like he would be better at keeping the US safe.

In terms of the non-existent link between Iraq and 9/11, it doesn't help that Cheney (again) has been repeatedly stating that there is a link, even when he denied he ever said that during the VP debate. A pretty big percentage of the people that watch Fox News believes that there is a link. It is incredibly useful for the Bush administration to keep linking Iraq and Al-Qaeda. It frames their biggest problem (Iraq) in the context of their biggest campaign asset. Brilliant strategy, but a lie nonetheless.

I don't even know why I'm paying that much attention to these elections. I can't even vote this year.

maratski
10-20-2004, 07:58 PM
Nobody found any weapons of mas destruction in Iraq so the war missed it's goal. I wonder why people still believe the government after this stunt.

It's such a shame that there's so many people in the world who don't want to use their brain. :(

Shy
10-20-2004, 08:04 PM
Nobody found any weapons of mas destruction in Iraq so the war missed it's goal. I wonder why people still believe the government after this stunt.

It's such a shame that there's so many people in the world who don't want to use their brain. :(
People only believe in what they want too.

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 08:07 PM
The Iraq 9/11 connection that people are saying the Bush Admin tried to advance is complete and utter nonsense. They have made enough mistakes, there is no need to make up things. They never said that Saddam was behind 9/11, there was one poll taken among the American people in 2002 that asked if Iraq was maybe somehow involved in it in some way shape or form, like money being obtained there, which isn't out of the question seeing that Saddam openly funded Hamas and Islamic Jihad among others that Al Queda got some of its recruits and funding from, but it was displayed as "Americans think Saddam behind 9/11" which was nothing more than pure propaganda.

I also love how no one ever mentions Iraq daily shooting at American and British pilots in the No Fly Zones that they agreed to in the treaties and the 1000 ways they violated the treaty they signed in '91, such as expelling the inspectors numerous times among all the other "minor" weapons violations like all the Scud's that they said they destroyed and have been uncovered post-war, that NO ONE talks about.

I also love all the attacks on Fox News, please. The conservatives on Fox are well-known and don't pretend to be objective. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and Jon Stewart and the Daily Show have all come out against Bush, New York Times and the Globe among the other major papers have all endorsed Kerry. Yet I never hear about the bias on these programs on message boards, it's always Fox News and some far-left film maker or website as the source of all the information.

I also love to hear about all the good will around the world that we have squandered. Yeah, that did the Czechs a lot of good. We really need a bunch of Europeans going "oh look at the Americans not responding to these attacks, how mature, look another plane going down and they are not going anything but asking what they did wrong to make this happen and how they can appease the terrorists and prevent it from happening again, don't you just have so much support and empathy for them?" You can keep it.

Chloe le Bopper
10-20-2004, 08:16 PM
Why are non-Americans who don't like the American players suddenly so interested in their political beliefs? :o
Man, speak of what you know. Lurker would clearly not be among those things.

Marine
10-20-2004, 08:16 PM
LOL!!! :haha: :haha: :haha:

I'd say she's republican, only republicans choose the song "bomb over Bagdad' to enter on the court ... :rolleyes:

jmp
10-20-2004, 08:33 PM
Coleburg83, could you go into a little more depth about whether or not you think there is a link between 9/11 and Iraq? I wasn't clear from your post if you were saying that there was a link, or that the media was lying when they said that the Bush Administration made the link, or that it doesn't matter if there is a link or not.

I'm going to be out of the loop for a while. But, I'll try to get back to the board later.

I'm interested in what you meant because it seems to be different from the other opinions I've heard up until now.

maratski
10-20-2004, 08:40 PM
From the various sources of news that I check, I can conclude that there wasn't a link between the two.

Jimena
10-20-2004, 08:49 PM
The Iraq 9/11 connection that people are saying the Bush Admin tried to advance is complete and utter nonsense.

I respectfully disagree. When the VP makes these assertions, it is not nonsense. It is a concerted effort by one campaign to turn an issue to their advantage.

I also love how no one ever mentions Iraq daily shooting at American and British pilots in the No Fly Zones that they agreed to in the treaties and the 1000 ways they violated the treaty they signed in '91, such as expelling the inspectors numerous times among all the other "minor" weapons violations like all the Scud's that they said they destroyed and have been uncovered post-war, that NO ONE talks about.

Because they weren't the reason for the war. The rationale behind the war has been ripped to shreds and all that is left is the politicizing of the issue by both sides.

I also love all the attacks on Fox News, please. The conservatives on Fox are well-known and don't pretend to be objective. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and Jon Stewart and the Daily Show have all come out against Bush, New York Times and the Globe among the other major papers have all endorsed Kerry. Yet I never hear about the bias on these programs on message boards, it's always Fox News and some far-left film maker or website as the source of all the information.

It is possible to support Kerry and not be part of the so-called liberal media. Heck, even Dubya's hometown paper endorsed Kerry (and they have lost subscriptions, obviously). It is also possible to endorse Bush and not be a conservative warmonger or a Christian fundamentalist.

And about Fox News not pretending to be objective: what about the whole "fair and balanced" thing?

Frankly, the bias of the right-wing media is based on things that I question. I find a lot of faulty premises in their arguments. But that's MY bias. I'm in a US colony, though I consider we are part of Latin America. I was invaded into a US citizenship, if you will. It has made my life easier, of course. But I've never considered myself an American, though I lived there for 12 years. My perspective on the US is informed by the history of US policy in our region and it does not let me see the world the way the conservative media presents it.

I also love to hear about all the good will around the world that we have squandered. Yeah, that did the Czechs a lot of good. We really need a bunch of Europeans going "oh look at the Americans not responding to these attacks, how mature, look another plane going down and they are not going anything but asking what they did wrong to make this happen and how they can appease the terrorists and prevent it from happening again, don't you just have so much support and empathy for them?" You can keep it.

But here you are linking the 9/11 attacks to what has incensed the rest of the world, which is the war in Iraq. The majority of the world supported the US in the effort against the Taliban regime. They clearly saw that and the war in Iraq as two different animals.

I think that the war in Iraq and the war on terror are not related. You think differently, apparently. Can we be civil and agree to disagree?

tennischick
10-20-2004, 09:01 PM
tennis anyone? :p

Jorge
10-20-2004, 09:03 PM
It's such a shame that there's so many people in the world who don't want to use their brain. :(

Amen to that :yeah:

Agassi voting democrats and Pete republicans? another reason to like baldie and to dislike the ol' Pete :devil:

BTW I guess Andy is republican but I might be wrong, it's hard (if not impossible) to know it just based on his public behaviour, birthplace, general background, etc.

PS Any person has the right to express their opinions about the inner politics of any foreign country, (which is different than to interfere directly "a la Bush") :cuckoo: specially if what happens in that country will affect directly the whole world.

JennyS
10-20-2004, 09:20 PM
I believe there are weapons of mass destruction, many of which were taken out of the country and hidden. I also think there could be weapons in Iraq that haven't been found yet.

The reason I feel this way is that I find it hard to imagine that Saddam would NOT want to try to harm Americans. He and his sons were disgusting savages and the world is a better place without them killing people.

I'm voting for Bush because I don't trust Kerry at all. He won't release his military records so there must be something fishy. I think he's a smooth talker, changes his stories a hundred times and looks like Guy Smiley the muppet.

Okay I'm done talking politcs. I hate these debates.

maratski
10-20-2004, 09:31 PM
Who on earth would hide weapons for Iraq?

How come the weapons that you think can be found in Iraq aren't found yet, now Saddam and his sons are out of the way?

Why would Saddam harm Americans?

Do you also think the world is a better place when Bush stops killing people?

I know you're done talking politics, but these are questions that came up to me when reading your post. To me you come across as one of those people who don't use their own brain.

JennyS
10-20-2004, 09:38 PM
Who on earth would hide weapons for Iraq?

How come the weapons that you think can be found in Iraq aren't found yet, now Saddam and his sons are out of the way?

Why would Saddam harm Americans?

Do you also think the world is a better place when Bush stops killing people?

I know you're done talking politics, but these are questions that came up to me when reading your post. To me you come across as one of those people who don't use their own brain.

I have a little more time to talk politics.

Wow, that was mature. I can't believe I graduated from college without a brain! I guess I'm like the scarecrow.

And this info came straight from my father: The WMD's are in SYRIA.

Jorge
10-20-2004, 09:43 PM
And this info came straight from my father: The WMD's are in SYRIA.


:haha: :haha: yu made my day!!! :haha:

I'll tell you where you can find WMD: USA, Israel, Great Britain, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, China, presumably North Korea. there u can find WMD not in Iraq, even Colin Powell and Rumsfeld have accepted it :rolleyes:

Socket
10-20-2004, 10:06 PM
Google WMD and Syria and see what you find. Here's one fairly recent article:

http://us.rediff.com/news/2004/aug/16iraq.htm

Is it certain that Saddam moved the WMDs there? No. Is it conceivable that Syria would cooperate with Saddam to receive WMDs to avoid UN weapons inspectors? Yes.

Fee
10-20-2004, 10:29 PM
I believe there are weapons of mass destruction, many of which were taken out of the country and hidden. I also think there could be weapons in Iraq that haven't been found yet.
The reason I feel this way is that I find it hard to imagine that Saddam would NOT want to try to harm Americans. He and his sons were disgusting savages and the world is a better place without them killing people.
I'm voting for Bush because I don't trust Kerry at all. He won't release his military records so there must be something fishy. I think he's a smooth talker, changes his stories a hundred times and looks like Guy Smiley the muppet.

Oh Jenny... poor, poor Jenny...

High level Iraqui officials that have been captured and questioned (forgive me, I cannot remember their names) have admitted that there were no WMD's, that Saddam was blowing smoke becuase he knew he had been reduced to basically the 'Mayor of Baghdad' by the no-fly zones and the sanctions, but he still wanted to appear to be a 'player' (so to speak) in the Arab world. Saddam never came after the US, never had any intention of coming after the US. Why? because he knew if he ever did he would get his ass kicked, captured and possibly killed. (which eventually happened anyway, but for all the wrong reasons). The biggest problem he presented to the US was sticking his fingers in the Israel-Palestine conflict by giving money to the families of suicide bombers after the fact.

As for John Kerry, he has released ALL of his military records. Every single last one of them. Go to his website, do a Google search and stop listening to the BS that Limbaugh and Colter spout. Those two are LYING when they repeatedly accuse Kerry of not releasing his records. Its been done, everyone has seen them, and its George Bush who is hiding his military records. Bush is the flip-flopper, not Kerry.

What's wrong with a man who speaks as if he was educated well by competent people? Our President is supposed to be more qualified, smarter, better and brighter than the rest of us. And if you disagree with that, then please start sending me checks so that I can run in 2008.

Jorge
10-20-2004, 10:30 PM
Is it certain that Saddam moved the WMDs there? No. Is it conceivable that Syria would cooperate with Saddam to receive WMDs to avoid UN weapons inspectors? Yes.
is conceivable that Saddam did not have WMD? ONE BIG YES
is conceivable that Bush was lying on this issue? MORE THAN LIKELY

you can't defend indefensible arguments when even Paul Brener and Tony Blair (not even mentioning Rumsfeld, Powell, etc) have accepted that there aren't(weren't) WMD and that the "intelligence info" they had was wrong :rolleyes:

Coleburg83
10-20-2004, 10:32 PM
No, it does matter. Very much. It was a huge intelligence failure of epic proportions. Do I think it's "keyword" possible some of the funding that these terrorists got came from Iraq, maybe, I doubt it, but it's not out of the question, which is all that poll was asking.

And for people that think that Iraq and Al Queda were not connected. Ansar-al-Islam and Abu Mussab al Zarqawi are fictional characters right?

I don't believe for a minute that Bush lied about it, you have to be a complete tool to think that the admin knew there was no weapons and then made the case for war, not entirely, but largely on that reason. They would have had the support to go just for regime change if that were the case, but they relied too heavily on Iraqi defectors and opposition. You know that the Atomic bomb was developed because the intelligence agencies told Roosevelt that the Germans were close to developing nuclear weapons and he put all that money that could have been used elsewhere in the war into the Manhattan project simply because the intelligence said the Germans were close, only to find out that they were not even remotely close at the end of the war, do you believe that Roosevelt misled and lied and squandered those resources? You can only go on what your intelligence tells you. Everyone thought that Saddam had WMD, including him, his scientists lied to him and our informers in Iraq lied to us, British intelligence, French intelligence, Russian intelligence, Chinese intelligence and so on.

It's easy to cherry pick, I remember all the demonstrations abroad and here against our intervention in Afghanistan that the world somehow seems to support now that it's gone fairly well. We'll see how things turn out in Iraq, but when people look back on Bush in years to come rather he gets reelected or not, taking out Saddam's regime and the Taliban is not going to look like such a horrible thing IMHO to future generations.

Jimena
10-20-2004, 10:35 PM
I'm voting for Bush because I don't trust Kerry at all. He won't release his military records so there must be something fishy.

Aren't there parts of Bush's military records that are missing? I mean, if we want to talk about incomplete information we can mention lots of instances on both sides of the equation (the current administration won't release information from the Energy Task Force. Isn't there something fishy, too? And that's just one example...). Anyway, I think military records are irrelevant in this case. The Vietnam war was 30 years ago. I think both candidates would be better off leaving this issue alone. There are a lot of issues that are more relevant in this election.

And about WMD. Ok, so Iraq may have had at some point or another WMDs. However, that was not the rationale for the war, that was not the way it was presented to the American public, and that was certainly not the way it was presented to the international community. They took iffy intelligence, built up a case on that intelligence and presented it as irrefutable truth. Some people say they did this knowingly, and have the aluminum tubes story to back it up. I think that's scary.

In terms of not trusting Kerry, I can find plenty of reasons not to trust Bush, either. It's just that Bush has been more successful in presenting an image of himself as steady and resolute, and of Kerry as a flip-flopper (but no, he's now a liberal! A Liberal I tell you! He's a flip-flopping liberal! Please. Talk about an oxymoron...).

It's easy to cherry pick, I remember all the demonstrations abroad and here against our intervention in Afghanistan that the world somehow seems to support now that it's gone fairly well. We'll see how things turn out in Iraq, but when people look back on Bush in years to come rather he gets reelected or not, taking out Saddam's regime and the Taliban is not going to look like such a horrible thing IMHO to future generations.

What I meant was that there was support from the governments. Many governments from many countries are involved in Afghanistan. I'm not talking about the people. I went to Spain in the summer of 2001 and Bush was going there for a visit and people were not happy, let me tell you. They were not going to like his actions anyway. But I was not talking about that.

And yes, maybe in the years to come, people will look at taking out Saddam as a good thing. But maybe not. We don't know. We know about right now, and how it was handled and how it's being dealt with. And I think it was a failure. Maybe it won't be in the end. But the run up to it was apalling.

jmp
10-21-2004, 12:34 AM
Thanks, Coleburg83. I think I understand your post to say there is no link between 9/11 and Iraq. But, there is a link between Iraq and Al Queda because Ansar-al-Islam and Abu Mussab al Zarqawi are in Iraq. Since Al Queda was connected to 9/11, the US needed to invade Iraq because that's where Ansar-al-Islam and Abu Mussab al Zarqawi are.

This is different from what I've read and heard from individual voters on television and the Internet.

Winston's Human
10-21-2004, 02:21 AM
It is possible to support Kerry and not be part of the so-called liberal media. Heck, even Dubya's hometown paper endorsed Kerry (and they have lost subscriptions, obviously). It is also possible to endorse Bush and not be a conservative warmonger or a Christian fundamentalist.

President Bush's so-called hometown paper is a weekly alternative newspaper with a subscription circulation of less than 500. By contrast, at least three major Texas papers (San Antonio Express, Dallas Morning News, and Fort Worth Star-Telegram) all endorsed President Bush.

Plus, the Boston Herald (a major newspaper in Senator Kerry's hometown) endorsed President Bush.

mitalidas
10-21-2004, 02:48 AM
Well, this is worse for Bush than the second-tier newspaper of Boston not endorsing Kerry

Republican newspaper refuses to back Bush
Tampa, Florida
October 19, 2004

In a break with tradition, The Tampa Tribune, a Republican standard-bearer for decades, has refused to endorse a candidate for US president for the first time since 1964The newspaper has solidly supported every Republican presidential nominee since 1952, except for Barry Goldwater, but withheld its endorsement this year, calling the decision "achingly difficult" and blaming shortcomings of both candidates.

Editors instead published an unusual full-page editorial with harsh criticism of the war in Iraq and President George Bush's economic policies.




Mr. Bush must be doing something radically wrong if even the conservative papers do a volte face on him (only one since the McCarthy-era Goldwater? Fine company!)

Smankyou
10-21-2004, 03:01 AM
President Bush's so-called hometown paper is a weekly alternative newspaper with a subscription circulation of less than 500. By contrast, at least three major Texas papers (San Antonio Express, Dallas Morning News, and Fort Worth Star-Telegram) all endorsed President Bush.

Plus, the Boston Herald (a major newspaper in Senator Kerry's hometown) endorsed President Bush.

Yes well, the Rupert Murdoch's of the world will do that for you.

Coleburg83
10-21-2004, 05:55 AM
I don't understand how newspapers can endorse any candidate.

How can you trust accurate reporting from example the New York Times (the so-called #1 in the country) when it's clearly been rabidly anti-Bush from his acceptance speech to it's endorsement of John Kerry now, which only confirms what people already know about the paper slanting the news to reflect the politics of it's editorial staff and vice-versa for the papers endorsing Bush or anyone else.

It's ridiculous.

maratski
10-21-2004, 09:01 AM
I have a little more time to talk politics.

Wow, that was mature. I can't believe I graduated from college without a brain! I guess I'm like the scarecrow.

And this info came straight from my father: The WMD's are in SYRIA.

If the WMD's are in Syria, why isn't the place bombed yet or taken over by the Americans? Perhaps cause they're scared to fail AGAIN?

Since you just took this info from your father, I think my comment on your brain still stands.

maratski
10-21-2004, 09:06 AM
I don't believe for a minute that Bush lied about it, you have to be a complete tool to think that the admin knew there was no weapons and then made the case for war

I'm a complete tool then :)

It's easy to cherry pick, I remember all the demonstrations abroad and here against our intervention in Afghanistan that the world somehow seems to support now that it's gone fairly well. We'll see how things turn out in Iraq, but when people look back on Bush in years to come rather he gets reelected or not, taking out Saddam's regime and the Taliban is not going to look like such a horrible thing IMHO to future generations.

So killing tons of innocent people to catch the few people who are on your terrorist lists will be considered a good thing by the future generations? Wow! I sure hope that once I get married, my children won't think like that.

Action Jackson
10-21-2004, 09:17 AM
Syria are a rogue state I keep forgetting, then again countries like North Korea, China and Zimbabwe aren't in need of regime change either.

Back to the subject, it's not surprising that many of the tennis players from the US are Republicans, using the class distinctions in this case, the game of tennis hasn't always been accessible to people of all socio-economic backgrounds, and that still remains the case today, though on a lesser scale.

Yes, sure there are some public courts, but when it gets to the vital teenage years, when they need specialist coaching, then all the costs are going to add up very quickly, and the ones that are in a better position to afford it are people of a higher socio-economic background, and these people are more likely to vote Republican and people like Martin, Sampras, Evert, Shriver, Gilbert are just a reflection of that.

A question to all. How many working-class heroes are there, who are top tennis pros?

Space Cowgirl
10-21-2004, 09:27 AM
It's easy to cherry pick, I remember all the demonstrations abroad and here against our intervention in Afghanistan that the world somehow seems to support now that it's gone fairly well.


Uh, what demonstrations?? The demos were against the invasion of Iraq, not Afghanistan. And in case you've forgotten, there are several countries who are against what is happening in Iraq (eg: Germany) supplying troops to help restructure Afghanistan. Please do not try to fudge the issue.
Anyway, how can you class the intervention in Afghanistan as having gone "fairly well"? Still no sign of Bin Laden, record poppy harvests resulting in a flood of heroin on the streets, warlords running the country outside of Kabul, etc. Hardly a success, but be sure that the world is in agreement with the US that its intervention was correct.
Iraq is a completely different story.

jtipson
10-21-2004, 09:27 AM
Any chance of moving this to non-tennis? GM doesn't seem to be an appropriate place to discuss politics.

Action Jackson
10-21-2004, 09:31 AM
Any chance of moving this to non-tennis? GM doesn't seem to be an appropriate place to discuss politics.

Fair point, then again it wouldn't surprise you that Edberg was a Tory would it?

jtipson
10-21-2004, 10:20 AM
Fair point, then again it wouldn't surprise you that Edberg was a Tory would it?


No, but nothing would surprise me in politics, I guess. I wasn't complaining about your post by the way (which I would agree with), it was just a general comment about the thread.

Jimena
10-21-2004, 02:12 PM
And for people that think that Iraq and Al Queda were not connected. Ansar-al-Islam and Abu Mussab al Zarqawi are fictional characters right?

al Zarqawi, as per the latest CIA report, moved to Iraq after the bombing of Afghanistan. And they're saying that he didn't have a connection to Al Qaeda. He has been able to do what he has done in the past year and a half, precisely because of the invasion. There are some people in Europe, mostly, that say that he is a rival to bin Laden, competing with Al Qaeda for recruits, and that his importance was greatly exaggerated in the run up to the Iraq invasion. He was basically introduced to the world as a "danger" when Colin Powell gave his now infamous speech at the UN. And some people believe that he has stronger ties to Iran and Syria than he ever had to Iraq.

Ansar al-Islam is an insurgent group of fundamentalist Kurds. Their aim was to overthrow, not cooperate with, Saddam.

How al Zarqawi could cooperate with a rebel group and at the same time be strongly tied with Hussein, is a contradiction that hasn't been explained.

These two do not justify the invasion, IMO. And they do not provide a clear link between Iraq and global terrorism prior to the Iraq invasion.

Experimentee
10-21-2004, 03:07 PM
Andre and Serena :woohoo:
My faves never disappoint me ;)

Experimentee
10-21-2004, 03:19 PM
I have a little more time to talk politics.

Wow, that was mature. I can't believe I graduated from college without a brain! I guess I'm like the scarecrow.

And this info came straight from my father: The WMD's are in SYRIA.

:haha::haha::haha:
Well if your father said it :eek:
Quick we should send him to tell Bush straight away so we can set about bombing Syria too!

tennischick
10-21-2004, 05:27 PM
here's my sole contribution to this political debate. the video is a tad longish but definitely worth seeing. decide for yourselves what you think but only a seriously biased person would not agree that it raises interesting questions. not to mention the implications of these questions. :awww: :rain:

http://www.freedom84.org/pentagonlies.htm#Main

Winston's Human
10-21-2004, 05:51 PM
Yes well, the Rupert Murdoch's of the world will do that for you.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is owned by Knight-Ridder, the Dallas Morning News is owned by Belo, and the Boston Herald is owned by Herald Media. They are not Murdoch papers.

MisterQ
10-21-2004, 06:26 PM
I have a little more time to talk politics.

Wow, that was mature. I can't believe I graduated from college without a brain! I guess I'm like the scarecrow.

And this info came straight from my father: The WMD's are in SYRIA.


You cannot be syria!

alfonsojose
10-21-2004, 06:33 PM
Before thinking about invade countries, there are a lot of issues to fix in U.S. Elections :eek:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20041021/wl_oneworld/4536964871098364010&e=3

Socket
10-21-2004, 07:00 PM
Before thinking about invade countries, there are a lot of issues to fix in U.S. Elections :eek:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20041021/wl_oneworld/4536964871098364010&e=3

I actually thought there might be some legitimacy to these "concerns" until I went to Global Exchange's website and found out that they're just the far left, anti-IMF/World Bank crowd. I'll get worried when a legitimate non-partisan group raises concerns.

Action Jackson
10-22-2004, 02:53 AM
I didn't write this unfortunately.

George, God here ...

George, God here ...

President Bush has words with the Almighty

Terry Jones
Friday October 22, 2004

"George?"
"Yes?"
"This is God here ..."
"Hi, God. What can I do for you?"
"I want you to stop this Iraq thing, George."
"But you told me to do it, God!"
"No I didn't, George ..."
"But you did! You spoke to me through Karl, Rumsey and Dick and all those other really clever guys!"
"How did you know it was me talking, George?"
"Instinct, God. I just knew it!"
"Do you really think I'd want you to unleash all this horror and bloodshed on another lot of human beings?"
"But they're Muslims! They don't believe in You, God!"
"But, George, they do believe in me. Jews, Christians and Moslems all worship the same Me! Didn't you do comparative theology at school, George?"
"No, of course not! You think I'm some sort of peace-waving dope-headed liberal faggot-lover, God?"
"No, of course not, George, but I expect you to know something about the people you're bombing."
"Oh, come on! I know it's right to bomb those oily rag-heads until there's not one left to wipe a wrench on!"
"How do you know that, George?"
"Cause You tell me that's what I should do, God."
"George, I do not tell you to do that!"
"But I hear You, God! You speak to me! You tell me what to do! You tell me what is Right and what is Wrong! That's why I don't need to listen to any soft-baked, mealy-mouthed liberal Kerry-pickers!"
"George, you're deluding yourself."
"God! How can you say that? I got some of the most powerful people on this planet down on their knees every day in the White House just a-praying to You! Now are you gonna tell me You ain't listening? Because if You ain't listening, God, that's Your problem - not mine!"
"George, of course I'm listening - it's you who is not listening to Me!"
"And I'll tell you why! 'Cause You ain't addressing me right."
"What d'you mean, you jumped-up little Ivy League draft-dodger?"
"If you're so 'omniscient', God, you oughta know that you gotta go through Karl Rove, John Ashcroft, Rumsey and Dick ... those fellas know what they're talking about! I can't listen to just any deity who can pick up the phone!"
"But, I'm God, George!"
"Does Karl say you are?"
"But why do you believe Karl?"
"Because my gut tells me he's right!"
"Listen, you ignorant little pinch-eyed Billy Graham convert! Can't you get it into your head that I'm God and I'm telling you to stop all this 'pre-emptive strike' nonsense! Stop destroying Iraq! Stop supporting that monster Sharon! Stop picking a fight with the only other human beings on the planet that believe in Me! You're leading the world into unbelievable chaos and horror!"
"That's enough, God! That's just the sort of defeatist crap that I won't allow in the White House! Get out of here!"
"I cannot believe I'm hearing this, George."
"Well you better start believing, God, because this is the new reality. Don'tcha know that a recent Gallup poll shows that 42% of Americans identify themselves as 'born again'? That cuts across Republicans and Democrats, rich and poor, white and black! This is a real political power base, God, and you'd better believe it!"
"Look, all I'm asking is for you to show a little compassion to your fellow human beings!"
"I'm not going to debate this with you, God! You're beginning to sound like you belong to the reality-based community!"
"What the hell does that mean?"
"Well by the 'reality-based community', we mean people who believe that solutions emerge from their judicious study of discernible reality." "Sounds fair enough..."
"But, as one of my advisors told Ron Suskind of the Wall Street Journal: 'The reality-based community is not the way the world really works any more. We're an empire now and, when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do'."
"You mean...you don't give a damn, George?"
"I mean You speak through me, God, not the other way round! Is that clear?"
"Yes, Mr President."

undomiele
10-22-2004, 02:04 PM
So Baldy is voting for Kerry despite being friends with Bush Sr.? :haha: He's alienating his fan base!


Good one George :lol: :lol: :yeah:

mitalidas
10-22-2004, 02:14 PM
So Baldy is voting for Kerry despite being friends with Bush Sr.? :haha: He's alienating his fan base!


Good one George :lol: :lol: :yeah:
Just goes to show how MUCH he must dislike Bush Jr's policies

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 04:23 AM
We must have been watching different news channels then.


Please give me a link to a source claiming that the FBI and CIA have said there was no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq?

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-24-2004, 04:31 AM
One reason I am sceptical about any links between Al Qaeda and Iraq while Saddam was in charge is a very simple one. For all the things Saddam Hussein did, he was a secularist religiously, so that being the case to Al-Qaeda even though he is an Arab, he was just as bad as the others who according the ideology of Al-Qaeda are infidels.

Chloe le Bopper
10-24-2004, 04:34 AM
I believe there are weapons of mass destruction, many of which were taken out of the country and hidden. I also think there could be weapons in Iraq that haven't been found yet.

The reason I feel this way is that I find it hard to imagine that Saddam would NOT want to try to harm Americans. He and his sons were disgusting savages and the world is a better place without them killing people.

I'm voting for Bush because I don't trust Kerry at all. He won't release his military records so there must be something fishy. I think he's a smooth talker, changes his stories a hundred times and looks like Guy Smiley the muppet.

Okay I'm done talking politcs. I hate these debates.
You also don't offer anything worthwhile to them, so it's best for everybody if you don't participate in them :wavey:

Mthammer©
10-24-2004, 04:42 AM
I didn't know Andre was either. I don't know much about what tennis players know about politics. They are probably like other celebrities that don't know what the hell they are talking about just so they can get Bush out of office :mad:.

But my Dubya will win this one, folks :cool:

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 04:52 AM
hmmm, are you trying to test how liberal are admins are with that avatar?

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 04:54 AM
I didn't know Andre was either. I don't know much about what tennis players know about politics. They are probably like other celebrities that don't know what the hell they are talking about just so they can get Bush out of office :mad:.

But my Dubya will win this one, folks :cool:

before anyone gets upset and starts insulting him. I'm pretty sure this is a troll who doesn't like Bush at all (from WTAW, comeon how many williams fans are bush supporters?) and he just likes to stir up trouble and be a homophobic prick

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-24-2004, 04:58 AM
Thanks for the warning gb.

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 05:05 AM
Marc are you up late or up early in Austria?

Mthammer©
10-24-2004, 05:05 AM
who are you at WTAWorld, gb? what is your username.

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 05:06 AM
who are you at WTAWorld, gb? what is your username.

I prefer not to say, but change your avatar or else you will be banned. kay?

Mthammer©
10-24-2004, 05:10 AM
let me guess. YAGIM or Frank is your name at WTAWorld?

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-24-2004, 05:11 AM
Marc are you up late or up early in Austria?

Had a big night on the drink so it's up late for me. I will be awake for the final and that's all that counts on a lazy Sunday.

Mthammer©
10-24-2004, 05:14 AM
and by the way. I LOVE George W. Bush. Just because I don't agree with Serena and Venus' views on politics, doen't mean I hate them. That is the great thing about America :yeah:

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 05:14 AM
let me guess. YAGIM or Frank is your name at WTAWorld?

actually I only post in JustineTime but I lurk in the non-tennis debates(if thats what they can be called).

Mthammer©
10-24-2004, 05:16 AM
if you go to non-tennis, you will see my debates with Bacardi and Jigglypuff, then you will see if I love or hate Bush.

Ballbuster
10-24-2004, 05:16 AM
You also don't offer anything worthwhile to them, so it's best for everybody if you don't participate in them :wavey:

Becca their were some from the opposite spectrum making ridiculous statements in this thread but yet only insult hers??

Roger-No.1
10-24-2004, 10:52 PM
So Baldy is voting for Kerry despite being friends with Bush Sr.? :haha: He's alienating his fan base!


Good one George :lol: :lol: :yeah:

Yeah, many Republicans are not voting for Bush this time.

ae wowww
10-24-2004, 11:20 PM
Isn't Agassi like bum chums with Bush though?! He came to Masters Cup just for Andrew in 03... theyre on the dvd meeting up...

ae wowww
10-24-2004, 11:21 PM
e.g old bush not current... but still.

vote kerry!

Roger-No.1
10-24-2004, 11:34 PM
Isn't Agassi like bum chums with Bush though?! He came to Masters Cup just for Andrew in 03... theyre on the dvd meeting up...
Yeah, Imagine that. Baldy is a Democrat, right? No surprise other Republicans are voting for Kerry.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:00 AM
I didn't know Andre was either. I don't know much about what tennis players know about politics. They are probably like other celebrities that don't know what the hell they are talking about just so they can get Bush out of office :mad:.



It always amuses me when "normal" people assume that they clearly know more than celebrities, when in fact, you more than likely don't. I'm not saying that they know more... merely that they are just like "normal" people who happen to be in a particular situation that requires speaking into a camera more often than the rest of us. Why people take that and assume that most don't know what they are talking about... is nonsensical. Quite stupid, really.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:01 AM
before anyone gets upset and starts insulting him. I'm pretty sure this is a troll who doesn't like Bush at all (from WTAW, comeon how many williams fans are bush supporters?) and he just likes to stir up trouble and be a homophobic prick

Eh, too late.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:02 AM
and by the way. I LOVE George W. Bush. Just because I don't agree with Serena and Venus' views on politics, doen't mean I hate them. That is the great thing about America :yeah:

If that's all that makes America great, it's not nearly as great as I thought.

Troll or not, I'm enjoying replying to the bub. :cool:

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:03 AM
Becca their were some from the opposite spectrum making ridiculous statements in this thread but yet only insult hers??

I didn't read the whole thread. My attention was directed to her comment. I assure you that if the opposition screams "MY DAD SAID SO" I will piss all over them with laughter too.

Try harder.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:05 AM
Frankly, gbpgbp02, I can't stand intollerant fucktards on either side of the political spectrum. I don't lean significantly left or right. I'm impatient with people who think that their political view is the "right" one and the "only one". While a view might be "right" for one person, it may not be right for me, and vice versa. This is why I rarely talk politics with people. Most people are, as I said, intollerant fucktards about it. They lack an appreciation to see what both sides offer. Instead they just flicker insults about how Kerry is this, and Bush is that. And yeah, so far as I can tell, you're one of them. You and a lot of other people in this thread.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:07 AM
Just to extend that thought a little further, I don't appreciate people who assume that all Republicans are selfish, immoral, backwards, bible thumping idiots anymore than I like hearing people make generalizations about all Demoncrats being bleeding hearts liberals. There is a LOT of ignorance on both sides and it's completely sickening. A lot of people should be really ashamed of themselves, but they never are. They just keep on spewing crap. Oh, well.

Ballbuster
10-25-2004, 12:29 AM
Frankly, gbpgbp02, I can't stand intollerant fucktards on either side of the political spectrum. I don't lean significantly left or right. I'm impatient with people who think that their political view is the "right" one and the "only one". While a view might be "right" for one person, it may not be right for me, and vice versa. This is why I rarely talk politics with people. Most people are, as I said, intollerant fucktards about it. They lack an appreciation to see what both sides offer. Instead they just flicker insults about how Kerry is this, and Bush is that. And yeah, so far as I can tell, you're one of them. You and a lot of other people in this thread.

could you quote something I said in this thread "about how Kerry is this, and Bush is that"? because as far as I can see I didn't mention either one of them in this thread.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 12:41 AM
could you quote something I said in this thread "about how Kerry is this, and Bush is that"? because as far as I can see I didn't mention either one of them in this thread.
Well, I was only skimming. But it did seem that you quoted and rolled your eyes at as many liberal views as possible (was that this thread or another one? It doesn't matter much). Perhaps the views were ridiculous? Or were they just ridiculous from your, individual perspective? However, if you were to take into consideration another perspective, perhaps they made sense?

Again... skimming...

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 02:42 AM
I didn't write this unfortunately.

George, God here ...

George, God here ...

President Bush has words with the Almighty

Terry Jones
Friday October 22, 2004

"George?"
"Yes?"
"This is God here ..."
"Hi, God. What can I do for you?"
"I want you to stop this Iraq thing, George."
"But you told me to do it, God!"
"No I didn't, George ..."
"But you did! You spoke to me through Karl, Rumsey and Dick and all those other really clever guys!"
"How did you know it was me talking, George?"
"Instinct, God. I just knew it!"
"Do you really think I'd want you to unleash all this horror and bloodshed on another lot of human beings?"
"But they're Muslims! They don't believe in You, God!"
"But, George, they do believe in me. Jews, Christians and Moslems all worship the same Me! Didn't you do comparative theology at school, George?"


God and Bush talk to each other... who knew? :eek:

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 03:02 AM
Actually, God talks through Bush, as the story goes.

coriafan01
10-25-2004, 04:15 AM
As opposed to the massive voter fraud being perpetrated by the Democrats and their hard-left allies.

That is such a Bush Administration statement. That is the Bush doctrine being sold to the lambs.

"He knows that we are waging this war for a better peace, that we are fighting for the happiness of people who have so often been oppressed by their governments."

"No power in the world will make us deny our duty, or forget even for a moment our historical task of maintaining the freedom of our people."

--- Joseph Goebbels, chief Nazi propagandist

Ballbuster
10-25-2004, 04:21 AM
their's voter fraud going on both sides. anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is a partisan :retard:

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-25-2004, 04:23 AM
It can't be that difficult to get voter registration right, and maybe they should send in the U.N election observers to monitor the US election.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 04:28 AM
It can't be that difficult to get voter registration right, and maybe they should send in the U.N election observers to monitor the US election.
Somebody on wtaworld suggested something similar, although they were talking about somebody from the European Union going and doing that. I laughed the idea at the time, thinking that it was too ridiculous to actually take place... but erm, apparently it did :confused:

*Wtaworld - not always the best source of information*

undomiele
10-25-2004, 02:09 PM
Please give me a link to a source claiming that the FBI and CIA have said there was no link between Al Qaeda and Iraq?

Hussein's alleged support for Al Qaeda was thoroughly debunked by the final report of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission earlier this summer -- not by any report published by the CIA or FBI. (Don't you read newspapers?)

In fact, the FBI can have nothing to do with Iraq since they are the Federal Bureau of Investigation, ie: they only deal with domestics, the CIA, did however, release the "Duelfer Report" a couple of weeks ago --a billion dollar, 15 month investigation that stated, conclusively, that Hussein had dismantled all of his WMD programs shortly after the 1991 Gulf War and had never tried to reconstitute them.

Bush can run but he can't hide.... :lol:

Winston's Human
10-25-2004, 02:43 PM
That is such a Bush Administration statement. That is the Bush doctrine being sold to the lambs.

Clearly, you have not been following to ongoing voter registration scandals involving ACORN and ACT - two left-wing organizations. I doubt the international press is interested in such news that contrasts their story-line.

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 03:02 PM
That is such a Bush Administration statement. That is the Bush doctrine being sold to the lambs.

"He knows that we are waging this war for a better peace, that we are fighting for the happiness of people who have so often been oppressed by their governments."

"No power in the world will make us deny our duty, or forget even for a moment our historical task of maintaining the freedom of our people."

--- Joseph Goebbels, chief Nazi propagandist

Hussein's alleged support for Al Qaeda was thoroughly debunked by the final report of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission earlier this summer -- not by any report published by the CIA or FBI. (Don't you read newspapers?)

In fact, the FBI can have nothing to do with Iraq since they are the Federal Bureau of Investigation, ie: they only deal with domestics, the CIA, did however, release the "Duelfer Report" a couple of weeks ago --a billion dollar, 15 month investigation that stated, conclusively, that Hussein had dismantled all of his WMD programs shortly after the 1991 Gulf War and had never tried to reconstitute them.

Bush can run but he can't hide.... [/B]

Bush will negligently/intentionally kill 275 million Americans when it benefits his business connections, oil profits, etc. He doesn't need to kill as many people as he'd like because he wants 50% of the population to vote for him so he can get elected. But he doesn't realize citizens don't like a president that would leave them to die...

Unfortunatley, he's so isolated, he can't hide his lack of accountability. He keeps isolating himself from others. And the ultimate isolation? He's the only good human being out of 6 billion people.

Economic loss can arise in numerous ways: an employee deprived of rights/obligations by an employeer; a child deprived of the financial support of its father; negligent advice given by A to B and relied upon by C; a defective will that deprives someone of a legacy; or road works that damage A's electricity cable, depriving many nearby factories of electrical power.

Human loss goes beyond. And History will write its books.

Eve83
10-25-2004, 04:39 PM
Wow...lots of posts here. Well, Andy was actually asked in the most famous german newsmagazine about his opinion about Bush. He didn´t give a clear answer, he said that there are things which are going seriously wrong but however as an American he had to support his president. Furthermore he was really looking forward to Fahrenheit 9/11 and he´s friends with the Bush Senior for whatever reasons...

I know that as an foreigner I don´t have any rights to say it, but please vote for Kerry!!! I´d love to see the US cooperating with Germany and other countries again...let´s all be friends;), lol.

Chloe le Bopper
10-25-2004, 04:40 PM
as an American he had to support his president.

I'm Canadian, not American. This? I've never understood. If my prime minister does something that I disagree with, I feel absolutely no reason to support him whatsoever. Boggles the mind, that.

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 05:56 PM
If my prime minister does something that I disagree with, I feel absolutely no reason to support him whatsoever. Boggles the mind, that.

That's true. I think Roddick was just trying to avoid the question. He may let him stay in power 4 years, but he may not agree with him or respect his ideas, even as a Republican. Sometimes Bush is not even recognized as president.

The 2000 disaster was something that made democracy in America look bad because it didn't give a clear result for all.

The way it happened, Americans felt they were in a 3rd world country.

Now many international observers will be in each state, something US observers used to do in other non-democratic countries,

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 06:00 PM
Afghanistan will know who their new President is before the US will.

That may be true..... unfortunately

User ID 4783
10-25-2004, 06:17 PM
I'm Canadian, not American. This? I've never understood. If my prime minister does something that I disagree with, I feel absolutely no reason to support him whatsoever. Boggles the mind, that.
absolutely agree with you

Andy was actually asked in the most famous german newsmagazine
Wo stand das?

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 06:22 PM
I´d love to see the US cooperating with Germany and other countries again...

Now that would be interesting

undomiele
10-25-2004, 10:53 PM
Im 100% convinced that the reason George Bush is where he is today (tied as opposed to -50%) is because a lot of Americans cannot believe that their president would actually lie to them about war. As opposed to people in other countries, they fundamentally believe their president is a good man and could never ask the country to sacrifice the lives of their military for selfish reasons. Theyre emphatically uncynical about their president in that sense. And that can be very dangerous as we see now.

Ballbuster
10-25-2004, 11:09 PM
hmmm, nine hours after undomiele posted this no one has responded to it.
hmmmm, I wonder why that is.

Hussein's alleged support for Al Qaeda was thoroughly debunked by the final report of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission earlier this summer -- not by any report published by the CIA or FBI. (Don't you read newspapers?)

In fact, the FBI can have nothing to do with Iraq since they are the Federal Bureau of Investigation, ie: they only deal with domestics, the CIA, did however, release the "Duelfer Report" a couple of weeks ago --a billion dollar, 15 month investigation that stated, conclusively, that Hussein had dismantled all of his WMD programs shortly after the 1991 Gulf War and had never tried to reconstitute them.

Bush can run but he can't hide.... :lol:

A. yes I knew it wasn't the CIA or the FBI, I was referring to maratski's quote.
B. Do I read the newspapers? not that often but speaking of reading, you obviously haven't read the 9/11 commission's report.

What the 9/11 report really said was that they had found no operational connection between Saddam Hussien and 9/11. Whereas they found over 50 direct connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

http://qando.net/archives/003626.htm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/In...tions/wm583.cfm

thanx for playing :wavey:

Ballbuster
10-25-2004, 11:12 PM
That is such a Bush Administration statement. That is the Bush doctrine being sold to the lambs.

"He knows that we are waging this war for a better peace, that we are fighting for the happiness of people who have so often been oppressed by their governments."

"No power in the world will make us deny our duty, or forget even for a moment our historical task of maintaining the freedom of our people."

--- Joseph Goebbels, chief Nazi propagandist

1. your post had nothing to do with the one you quoted.
2. I think you're the lamb since your post is evident you've been swallowing propaganda.
3. If you're going to believe these moonbat theories, you might as well be non-partisan and use the "Bush and Kerry were both in Skull and Bones. There's a coup, better vote for a third party."

Paulatina
10-25-2004, 11:21 PM
Everyone should read this article - don't be put off by the beginning, just read it -


http://www.europundits.blogspot.com/2004_10_01_europundits_archive.html#10982631004973 9077

Roger-No.1
10-25-2004, 11:41 PM
Is Bush even good for America?

Fee
10-26-2004, 12:36 AM
That wasn't an article, it was just an opinion, no different than most of the ones posted here, although it was slightly better written.

undomiele
10-26-2004, 12:48 AM
A. yes I knew it wasn't the CIA or the FBI, I was referring to maratski's quote.
B. Do I read the newspapers? not that often but speaking of reading, you obviously haven't read the 9/11 commission's report.

What the 9/11 report really said was that they had found no operational connection between Saddam Hussien and 9/11. Whereas they found over 50 direct connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

http://qando.net/archives/003626.htm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/In...tions/wm583.cfm

thanx for playing :wavey:

OMG are you actually trying to pass off the Heritage Foundation website as a credible source of information on the 9/11 report?????!?!?! :lol: :haha: :rolls: All i can say is no friggin wonder your arguments are moronic :retard: . Thats like referring fat people to McDonalds for the latest on tips on heart disease prevention, I mean COME ON!! .


Let me welcome you to the real world gbpgbp02 and deliver you unto the REAL US government's website for the 9/11 commission's report
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm THAT I HAVE, INDEED, READ

and cut and paste every single paragraph that mentions Saddam Hussein (and Im talking about EVERY SINGLE PARAGRAPH) and see how you could possibly justify your belief of these so called "connections" that link Saddam to Al Qaeda.



[I] Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq, even though Iraq's dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist agenda-save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against "Crusaders" during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army.

To protect his own ties with Iraq, Turabi reportedly brokered an agreement that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to aid a group of Islamist extremists operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside of Baghdad's control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin's help they re-formed into an organization called Ansar al Islam. There are indications that by then the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy...

There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported to have received a significant response. According to one report, Saddam Hussein's efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.
[Chapter 2: THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM --Section 2.1 A DECLARATION OF WAR]

...In addition, the Clinton administration was facing the possibility of major combat operations against Iraq. Since 1996, the UN inspections regime had been increasingly obstructed by Saddam Hussein. The United States was threatening to attack unless unfettered inspections could resume. The Clinton administration eventually launched a large-scale set of air strikes against Iraq, Operation Desert Fox, in December 1998. These military commitments became the context in which the Clinton administration had to consider opening another front of military engagement against a new terrorist threat based in Afghanistan.

With UN sanctions set to come into effect in November, Clarke wrote Berger that "the Taliban appear to be up to something."89 Mullah Omar had shuffled his "cabinet" and hinted at Bin Ladin's possible departure. Clarke's staff thought his most likely destination would be Somalia; Chechnya seemed less appealing with Russia on the offensive. Clarke commented that Iraq and Libya had previously discussed hosting Bin Ladin, though he and his staff had their doubts that Bin Ladin would trust secular Arab dictators such as Saddam Hussein or Muammar Qadhafi. Clarke also raised the "remote possibility" of Yemen, which offered vast uncontrolled spaces. In November, the CSG discussed whether the sanctions had rattled the Taliban, who seemed "to be looking for a face-saving way out of the Bin Ladin issue."90

In February 1999, Allen proposed flying a U-2 mission over Afghanistan to build a baseline of intelligence outside the areas where the tribals had coverage. Clarke was nervous about such a mission because he continued to fear that Bin Ladin might leave for someplace less accessible. He wrote Deputy National Security Advisor Donald Kerrick that one reliable source reported Bin Ladin's having met with Iraqi officials, who "may have offered him asylum." Other intelligence sources said that some Taliban leaders, though not Mullah Omar, had urged Bin Ladin to go to Iraq. If Bin Ladin actually moved to Iraq, wrote Clarke, his network would be at Saddam Hussein's service, and it would be "virtually impossible" to find him. Better to get Bin Ladin in Afghanistan, Clarke declared.134 Berger suggested sending one U-2 flight, but Clarke opposed even this. It would require Pakistani approval, he wrote; and "Pak intel[ligence service] is in bed with" Bin Ladin and would warn him that the United States was getting ready for a bombing campaign: "Armed with that knowledge, old wily Usama will likely boogie to Baghdad."135 Though told also by Bruce Riedel of the NSC staff that Saddam Hussein wanted Bin Ladin in Baghdad, Berger conditionally authorized a single U-2 flight. Allen meanwhile had found other ways of getting the information he wanted. So the U-2 flight never occurred.136
[Chapter 4: RESPONSES TO AL QAEDA'S INITIAL ASSAULTS]

And finally, the section that completely debunks anything you may have to say in your defense on the matter:

10.3 "PHASE TWO" AND THE QUESTION OF IRAQ
President Bush had wondered immediately after the attack whether Saddam Hussein's regime might have had a hand in it. Iraq had been an enemy of the United States for 11 years, and was the only place in the world where the United States was engaged in ongoing combat operations. As a former pilot, the President was struck by the apparent sophistication of the operation and some of the piloting, especially Hanjour's high-speed dive into the Pentagon. He told us he recalled Iraqi support for Palestinian suicide terrorists as well. Speculating about other possible states that could be involved, the President told us he also thought about Iran.59

Clarke has written that on the evening of September 12, President Bush told him and some of his staff to explore possible Iraqi links to 9/11. "See if Sad-dam did this," Clarke recalls the President telling them. "See if he's linked in any way."60 While he believed the details of Clarke's account to be incorrect, President Bush acknowledged that he might well have spoken to Clarke at some point, asking him about Iraq.61

Responding to a presidential tasking, Clarke's office sent a memo to Rice on September 18, titled "Survey of Intelligence Information on Any Iraq Involvement in the September 11 Attacks." Rice's chief staffer on Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, concurred in its conclusion that only some anecdotal evidence linked Iraq to al Qaeda. The memo found no "compelling case" that Iraq had either planned or perpetrated the attacks. It passed along a few foreign intelligence reports, including the Czech report alleging an April 2001 Prague meeting between Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer (discussed in chapter 7) and a Polish report that personnel at the headquarters of Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad were told before September 11 to go on the streets to gauge crowd reaction to an unspecified event. Arguing that the case for links between Iraq and al Qaeda was weak, the memo pointed out that Bin Ladin resented the secularism of Saddam Hussein's regime. Finally, the memo said, there was no confirmed reporting on Saddam cooperating with Bin Ladin on unconventional weapons.62

On the afternoon of 9/11, according to contemporaneous notes, Secretary Rumsfeld instructed General Myers to obtain quickly as much information as possible. The notes indicate that he also told Myers that he was not simply interested in striking empty training sites. He thought the U.S. response should consider a wide range of options and possibilities. The secretary said his instinct was to hit Saddam Hussein at the same time-not only Bin Ladin. Secretary Rumsfeld later explained that at the time, he had been considering either one of them, or perhaps someone else, as the responsible party.63

According to Rice, the issue of what, if anything, to do about Iraq was really engaged at Camp David. Briefing papers on Iraq, along with many others, were in briefing materials for the participants. Rice told us the administration was concerned that Iraq would take advantage of the 9/11 attacks. She recalled that in the first Camp David session chaired by the President, Rumsfeld asked what the administration should do about Iraq. Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz made the case for striking Iraq during "this round" of the war on terrorism.64

A Defense Department paper for the Camp David briefing book on the strategic concept for the war on terrorism specified three priority targets for initial action: al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Iraq. It argued that of the three, al Qaeda and Iraq posed a strategic threat to the United States. Iraq's long-standing involvement in terrorism was cited, along with its interest in weapons of mass destruction.65

Secretary Powell recalled that Wolfowitz-not Rumsfeld-argued that Iraq was ultimately the source of the terrorist problem and should therefore be attacked.66 Powell said that Wolfowitz was not able to justify his belief that Iraq was behind 9/11. "Paul was always of the view that Iraq was a problem that had to be dealt with," Powell told us. "And he saw this as one way of using this event as a way to deal with the Iraq problem." Powell said that President Bush did not give Wolfowitz's argument "much weight."67 Though continuing to worry about Iraq in the following week, Powell said, President Bush saw Afghanistan as the priority.68

President Bush told Bob Woodward that the decision not to invade Iraq was made at the morning session on September 15. Iraq was not even on the table during the September 15 afternoon session, which dealt solely with Afghanistan.69 Rice said that when President Bush called her on Sunday, September 16, he said the focus would be on Afghanistan, although he still wanted plans for Iraq should the country take some action or the administration eventually determine that it had been involved in the 9/11 attacks.70

At the September 17 NSC meeting, there was some further discussion of "phase two" of the war on terrorism.71 President Bush ordered the Defense Department to be ready to deal with Iraq if Baghdad acted against U.S. interests, with plans to include possibly occupying Iraqi oil fields.72

Within the Pentagon, Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz continued to press the case for dealing with Iraq. Writing to Rumsfeld on September 17 in a memo headlined "Preventing More Events," he argued that if there was even a 10 percent chance that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attack, maximum priority should be placed on eliminating that threat. Wolfowitz contended that the odds were "far more" than 1 in 10, citing Saddam's praise for the attack, his long record of involvement in terrorism, and theories that Ramzi Yousef was an Iraqi agent and Iraq was behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.73 The next day, Wolfowitz renewed the argument, writing to Rumsfeld about the interest of Yousef's co-conspirator in the 1995 Manila air plot in crashing an explosives-laden plane into CIA headquarters, and about information from a foreign government regarding Iraqis' involvement in the attempted hijacking of a Gulf Air flight. Given this background, he wondered why so little thought had been devoted to the danger of suicide pilots, seeing a "failure of imagination" and a mind-set that dismissed possibilities.74

On September 19, Rumsfeld offered several thoughts for his commanders as they worked on their contingency plans. Though he emphasized the worldwide nature of the conflict, the references to specific enemies or regions named only the Taliban, al Qaeda, and Afghanistan.75 Shelton told us the administration reviewed all the Pentagon's war plans and challenged certain assumptions underlying them, as any prudent organization or leader should do.76

General Tommy Franks, the commanding general of Central Command, recalled receiving Rumsfeld's guidance that each regional commander should assess what these plans meant for his area of responsibility. He knew he would soon be striking the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. But, he told us, he now wondered how that action was connected to what might need to be done in Somalia, Yemen, or Iraq.77

On September 20, President Bush met with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the two leaders discussed the global conflict ahead. When Blair asked about Iraq, the President replied that Iraq was not the immediate problem. Some members of his administration, he commented, had expressed a different view, but he was the one responsible for making the decisions.78

Franks told us that he was pushing independently to do more robust planning on military responses in Iraq during the summer before 9/11-a request President Bush denied, arguing that the time was not right. (CENTCOM also began dusting off plans for a full invasion of Iraq during this period, Franks said.) The CENTCOM commander told us he renewed his appeal for further military planning to respond to Iraqi moves shortly after 9/11, both because he personally felt that Iraq and al Qaeda might be engaged in some form of collusion and because he worried that Saddam might take advantage of the attacks to move against his internal enemies in the northern or southern parts of Iraq, where the United States was flying regular missions to enforce Iraqi no-fly zones. Franks said that President Bush again turned down the request.79


Now having read the entire report I want YOU to show me EXACTLY where in the 9/11 report does it indicate that that they found over 50 direct connections between SADDAM HUSSEIN and Al Qaeda.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 12:50 AM
Is someone here Jewish? Arab? Do you think US involvement in the Israel-Arab War makes Americans unsafe?

Chloe le Bopper
10-26-2004, 12:52 AM
hmmm, nine hours after undomiele posted this no one has responded to it.
hmmmm, I wonder why that is.



I sincerely apologize for actually going to class and fulfilling my volunteer obligation today. I promise to sit at home all tomorrow, skip my 3 hours of lectures and 5 hour work shift, just so that I can respond to stuff that I know nothing about. Clearly that is more important than helping provide a legal information service and attempting to, you know, PASS. Stuff that I know nothing about would have been contained within her post, by the way. I try to make a point of not forming an opinion on such things.

So you can take your hmmmms and stuff them the fuck up yer ass, bud.

Chloe le Bopper
10-26-2004, 12:56 AM
Is Bush even good for America?
Well, by virtue of being a republican, I imagine that yes, he would appeal to (and be good for) a good number of Americans.... namely republicans.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:02 AM
Well, by virtue of being a republican, I imagine that yes, he would appeal to (and be good for) a good number of Americans.... namely republicans.

And the quality of life? Health indicators? Freedom? Where is it going? A group of Republicans may vote for him, but is he good for America? Are we getting there, if this is the No, 1 country/economy in the world, where are the greater benefits? Where are they?

Why do international observers come to America to see if the election is fair?
When did we become that kind of democracy?

Chloe le Bopper
10-26-2004, 01:03 AM
And the quality of life? Health indicators? Freedom? Where is it going? So a group of Republicans may vote for him, but is he good for America?
I would imagine that in their view he's good for their idea of America, or they wouldn't vote for him.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:11 AM
I would imagine that in their view he's good for their idea of America, or they wouldn't vote for him.

The Republicans who are not voting for Bush, they don't believe in him.

And the Republican who trusts his words and would vote for him....

Is it like a hospital patient who just got out of surgery? Instead of resting and getting some energy back, are they walking into danger becuse they think they'll feel better if they keep walknig.... except they feel worse.... and they keep walking to feel better... and they feel worse... like a vicious circle?

coriafan01
10-26-2004, 04:37 AM
http://www.needlenose.com/win04/vote2.htm

maratski
10-26-2004, 09:34 AM
Is someone here Jewish? Arab? Do you think US involvement in the Israel-Arab War makes Americans unsafe?

I'm Arab and I think it does make Americans unsafe. Like I said before, I watch the news on many channels, dutch news, Euronews, CNN, Al Jazeera, ANN, Al Arabia,....I get to see both sides of the story. A lot of Muslim people see America as a country that isn't neutral in the peace process in the Middle East. America clearly helps Israel more then the Palestinians. They see this as an attack to Islam and not just the Palestinians. IMHO it's one of the reasons why 9/11 happened and why we hear so much about terrorists everywhere. I can tell you that there are plenty of anti-American people in the arab world and as long as Bush keeps doing these things, then I honestly can't tell you when the Americans can feel safe again, cause one day or another these people will lose control and do something bad. I've heard several times that Moroccans have been arrested in the city I'm from. There seem to have been several shoot outs and the police found many weapons, explosives, etc. Bin Laden has a lot of followers in Morocco from what I've seen. I'm 23 years old and have a feeling that I'll never see the end of the war on terorism.

Action Jackson
10-26-2004, 09:40 AM
It doesn't help when the US keeps using its veto to stop any action from being taken against Israel in the UN. That in itself shows that they are not unilateral and have a clear bias and aren't doing everything to help find a solution. The Palestinians are prepared to take the 1967 green line as a border.

What Mr. Bush has done with his policies, has managed to create even more anti-American sentiment globally and not just in the Middle East either.

Paulatina
10-26-2004, 12:40 PM
Why would the US want to take action against Israel? Israel doesn't deliberately target Palestinean civilians (see - http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=439) and I don't know why anyone would want to help people who do this to their children
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/?PHPSESSID=2a484bfb1647b1c35d1b587e6a850522
I do feel terribly sorry for all the innocent Palestineans who have been caught up in this mess, but they suffer because of their wretched leaders and not because of Israel or America. Israel has said many times it will negotiate with Arafat and he just refuses, saying he has to continue with his sick suicide bombings and he won't stop until Israel is destroyed. Well, all or nothing undermines the basic concept of negotiation, doesn't it? Even King Abdullah of Jordan said that Arafat has gone mad.

maratski
10-26-2004, 12:45 PM
It's not just about the Palestinians. It's also about Iraq, Afghanistan and lord knows what the next country will be that Bush wants to attack. He goes from country to country in case you haven't noticed.

undomiele
10-26-2004, 12:58 PM
This goes way before Arafat Paulatina. Its not logical to hide behind the veil of recent events as an excuse for not giving the Palestinians their own state. Its just the right thing to do. The US and Israel have to learn the concept of even-handedness and learn that as long as the Palestinians suffer destruction, death, and what have amounted to severe acts of humiliation (anathema to arab pride) they will continue to embrace Arafat. Responding to suicide bombings with bombs and more casualties is not the answer --its a vicious circle. I think Israel could do a lot more to use more peaceful means of resolving the problem as bombing Palestinian civilians and building walls only foster the problem instead of solving it.

Space Cowgirl
10-26-2004, 01:09 PM
Israel doesn't deliberately target Palestinean civilians

Sorry but this is plain wrong. For every Israeli killed, the Israeli Army kills 2-3 Palestinian in revenge. Civilian or Hamas member, it seems that anyone is a target if they are in the wrong place at the wrong time, even children (this goes for both sides btw).


Israel has said many times it will negotiate with Arafat and he just refuses, saying he has to continue with his sick suicide bombings and he won't stop until Israel is destroyed.

Uh, do you not remember the Camp David Accord signed when Bill Clinton was President? In it, Arafat agreed that the PLO would remove its "destroy Israel" motto from its constitution. Also, he is not responsible for the suicide bombings, that is Hamas, which is not exactly his ally. It is Ariel Sharon who refuses to negotiate a peace deal, he is a warmonger through and through. Remember how the current intifadeh started? It was because Sharon decided to parade on the Temple Mount, one of Islam's holiest sites, in 2001(?), He did this specifically to wind up the Palestinians. I would love to see how Israel would react if Arafat had done something similar at the Wailing Wall. But of course he can't since he's now under virtual house arrest and has been named as a legitimate target for assassination by Sharon, so he can't go out in public.

IMO neither Arafat (because he's corrupt) nor Sharon (also corrupt and a warmonger) are interested in sorting things out. The current situation suits them. The US should withdraw all aid to Israel (the only middle-east country with nukes as well, how about that for WMD), that's the only way it could be seen by both Arabs and Israelis as a genuine peace broker. As it is, the US has a vested interest in backing Israel, so will never be fully trusted by the Palestinians.
Also, in many ways, the fundamentalist Christians are as much a destabilising influence in the Middle East as the Jews and Moslems because they believe that for the second coming of Christ Israel has to be Jewish, "'cos it says so in the Bible". Guess who the most powerful Bible-bashers in the US are?
Go figure :confused:

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 01:11 PM
The Arab leaders have to understand that wiping out the nation of Israel is not an option, and the state is going to exist as I said the Palestinians are willing to accept the Green Line of 1967 as a border between the two and this is not just an Arafat thing, try about 1948 and the Palestinians were a bit silly as well not accepting the initial terms, but that

A separation wall will only increase the antagonism between the groups, and drive the people further apart than already now and even with the wall if they stuck to the 1967 line, then there would be less outrage than there is now.

It's not just one foreign policy issue, it's others as well. I love it when they tried to influence that Venezuelans should get rid of Chavez, because he is a leftist and then the result of the referendum was overwhelmingly in Chavez's favour.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:26 PM
Israel and Palestine are old enough to handle their own disputes. Israel hates Arabs and viceversa. A different kind of process shall come.

If US involvement in this war is what brought terrorist attacks to this country, then a change in foreign policy is needed.

maratski
10-26-2004, 01:30 PM
Israel and Palestine are old enough to handle their own disputes. Israel hates Arabs and viceversa. A different kind of process shall come.

If US involvement in this war is what brought terrorist attacks to this country, then a change in foreign policy is needed.

And do you really think that will happen? Do you think it's possible the US of A can actually mind it's own business? :eek: :eek: :eek:

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 01:35 PM
And do you really think that will happen? Do you think it's possible the US of A can actually mind it's own business? :eek: :eek: :eek:

They have had 50 hits and still going.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:39 PM
For every Israeli killed, the Israeli Army kills 2-3 Palestinian in revenge.
Terrible.


Uh, do you not remember the Camp David Accord signed when Bill Clinton was President? In it, Arafat agreed that the PLO would remove its "destroy Israel" motto from its constitution. Also, he is not responsible for the suicide bombings, that is Hamas, which is not exactly his ally. It is Ariel Sharon who refuses to negotiate a peace deal, he is a warmonger through and through.
Israel hates Arabs. Or is it just the government of Israel?

The US should withdraw all aid to Israel (the only middle-east country with nukes as well, how about that for WMD), that's the only way it could be seen by both Arabs and Israelis as a genuine peace broker. As it is, the US has a vested interest in backing Israel, so will never be fully trusted
I don't understand. Why is the US helping Israel in the first place?

maratski
10-26-2004, 01:42 PM
Israel hates Arabs. Or is it just the government of Israel?

I think that every time you see the name of a country, then you can assume the gouvernment is meant by it. At least in my posts.
I've seen interviews with orthodox Jews on tv and they aren't supporting Sharon. They talked about how they used to live in peace with the Palestinians.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:44 PM
And do you really think that will happen? Do you think it's possible the US of A can actually mind it's own business? :eek: :eek: :eek:
This is what I just realized. Why is the US helping one of the countries involved in the war? In this case it's Israel, but it could've been Palestine? I think it's controversial.

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 01:45 PM
I don't understand. Why is the US helping Israel in the first place?

There is a very influential Jewish-American lobby group with a very high proportion of economic power and interests that would be of more benefit to retain the status quo.

Actually Jews, Arabs and Christians have lived and existed quite peacefully for quite a while, the settlers tend to be more hardline and uncompromising in their beliefs and Humpty Dumpty Sharon doesn't help either and he is as bad as Arafat, but in different ways.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 01:51 PM
There is a very influential Jewish-American lobby group with a very high proportion of economic power and interests that would be of more benefit to retain the status quo.

That explains the support for Israel and not Palestine.

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 01:54 PM
That explains the support for Israel and not Palestine.

I just hope that I don't get called a racist for that post.

Why else do you think there is still an embargo in Cuba and no it's not a Jewish conspiracy. In Latin America there is still plenty of interference, not many people remember the other Sept 11 do they?

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 01:55 PM
FryslanBoppe: Chavez is a puppet of Castro. Do you really believe the results of the referendum were accurate?

RonE
10-26-2004, 01:55 PM
Israel hates Arabs. Or is it just the government of Israel?



That is a very ignorant thing to say. On the most part people (anywhere in the world) would just want to get on with their lives and be left alone.

It is only a minority of fanatics on both sides that are keeping the dispute going. The majority of people would want to see a peace deal reached ASAP.

But the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue is just a microcosm of the big picture. 9/11 didn't happen because of this particular conflict as opposed to what many believe. It is basically a case of the haves vs. the have-nots. America is seen as a big fat greedy country trying to live on the backs of poor people by many in the third world. It was a culmination of inferiority syndrome on the part of the terrorist organizations as well as religious fundamentalism that caused the attacks.

It is not only America that is being targeted but many European countries are also getting many threats including France, Germany and U.K among others. It is a worldwide epidemic fueled by a select few radical extremists that have a stranglehold on a silent majority.

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 01:58 PM
FryslanBoppe: Chavez is a puppet of Castro. Do you really believe the results of the referendum were accurate?

And Karzai isn't a puppet in Afghanistan? What's your point.

If they were worried about the result then they could have observers there and actually in Venezuela they did have UN observers, just like they are going to have observers in the US election.

That explains the support for Israel and not Palestine.

I just hope that I don't get called a racist for that post.

Why else do you think there is still an embargo in Cuba and no it's not a Jewish conspiracy. In Latin America there is still plenty of interference, not many people remember the other Sept 11 do they?

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 02:02 PM
My point is that I lived in Cuba for 10 years until 2003. Cuba is proud of its record on infant mortality - lowest in America they say. Well, babies that die after delivery are thrown in the trash and not recorded. The parents that want the corpse to bury are turned away, there was no baby. It goes on and on. Communism only exists by lying. Therefore I can not believe anything that ignorant peasant Chavez says.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 02:04 PM
America is seen as a big fat greedy country trying to live on the backs of poor people by many in the third world.

Thanks RonE

maratski
10-26-2004, 02:04 PM
I think I recall Bin Laden saying he didn't like the fact that the USA wasn't neutral in the peace process in the Middle East.

The countries that support the USA in Iraq are being targeted cause they are seen as allies (sp?) of the USA. I mean the terrorists have an easy logic, hate America, that tries to ban Islam, and the countries that help.

FryslanBoppe
10-26-2004, 02:08 PM
My point is that I lived in Cuba for 10 years until 2003. Cuba is proud of its record on infant mortality - lowest in America they say. Well, babies that die after delivery are thrown in the trash and not recorded. The parents that want the corpse to bury are turned away, there was no baby. It goes on and on. Communism only exists by lying. Therefore I can not believe anything that ignorant peasant Chavez says.

Yes, the Miami propagandists are any better than the people from the Communist party?

As I said they had observers to see the referendum wasn't rigged and must gall that the world's greatest democracy needs to have outside observers to monitor a democratic election.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 02:26 PM
I think I recall Bin Laden saying he didn't like the fact that the USA wasn't neutral in the peace process in the Middle East.

The countries that support the USA in Iraq are being targeted cause they are seen as allies (sp?) of the USA. I mean the terrorists have an easy logic, hate America, that tries to ban Islam, and the countries that help.

Israel hates Palestine. Palestine will hate Israel. Israel gets help from USA. USA gets help from Spain. Palestine will hate USA and Israel.

It's like domino. Someone remembers a similar war?

And when it becomes "Israel hates Palestine" and viceversa.... it becomes a war of countries.... and Jewish and Arab people stop coexisting peacefully.

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 02:48 PM
Fryslanboppe: The real Cubans detest the Miami Cubans just as much as Castro. Castro only survives the poverty and opression that is Cuba by blaming the embargo. I do not know why the US keeps the embargo and thus keeps Castro in power. Remember when Castro shot down two planes, just when Clinton was talking of better ties with Cuba. Castro did this to ensure the embargo stays in place and as a result he stays in place.
The Miami Cubans want a violent end to the Castro regime so that they can return and buy up the island, leaving the Cubans who stayed with nothing. So for the real Cubans it is a toss up whether Castro or the Miami Cubans would be most despised

Space Cowgirl
10-26-2004, 02:49 PM
I don't understand. Why is the US helping Israel in the first place?


The USA gives Israel billions of dollars in development aid every year, that is what I meant.
Also, as someone said, the US Jewish community has a very strong political influence in Washington. That said, the Christian fundamentalists are also strong (see the current US administration)

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-26-2004, 02:58 PM
Why else do you think there is still an embargo in Cuba and no it's not a Jewish conspiracy. In Latin America there is still plenty of interference, not many people remember the other Sept 11 do they?

Yes, that other Sept 11 tends to be forgotten about doesn't it.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 03:06 PM
Yes, that other Sept 11 tends to be forgotten about doesn't it.

Another sept 11? Where? When?

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-26-2004, 03:08 PM
Fryslanboppe: The real Cubans detest the Miami Cubans just as much as Castro. Castro only survives the poverty and opression that is Cuba by blaming the embargo. I do not know why the US keeps the embargo and thus keeps Castro in power. Remember when Castro shot down two planes, just when Clinton was talking of better ties with Cuba. Castro did this to ensure the embargo stays in place and as a result he stays in place.
The Miami Cubans want a violent end to the Castro regime so that they can return and buy up the island, leaving the Cubans who stayed with nothing. So for the real Cubans it is a toss up whether Castro or the Miami Cubans would be most despised

It wasn't just the embargo for all the years from 62-90 when the former USSR helped subsidise the Cuban economy. It has an effect, but it's far from the main reason.

Considering they have the highest literacy rate in Latin America, the average black Cuban is definitely better off than when it was a mafia gambling island.
This doesn't mean that everything that Fidel has done and what is happening now is great, but look at pre-1959 and now, there has been an overall improvement.

Anyway, their massive interference in Latin America has been a constant, and not just talking about Venezuela, Nicaragua. They must hate the fact that Lula is in charge of Brazil.

The Americans are in a tough position in many ways, they are admired in many places around the world and there was a time when they had a good reputation globally, but this was a while ago, and many of the foreign policy decisions they have undertaken have put Americans at a greater risk than before, and they have a guy in charge who isn't very responsible and they need election monitors, that is not a good ad for the nation that claims to lead the free world.

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-26-2004, 03:09 PM
Another sept 11? Where? When?

Try doing a Google search on Sept 11 1973 and see what you come up with.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 03:11 PM
Try doing a Google search on Sept 11 1973 and see what you come up with.

You're right... I had forgotten about that! Didn't know it was on Sept 11.

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-26-2004, 03:14 PM
You're right... I had forgotten about that! Didn't know it was on Sept 11.

The short version is that the CIA-backed and trained Pinochet who took over from a democratically elected government in Chile and he was the military strongman in charge of Chile for a lot of years, and many people fled the country because of this conflict.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 03:20 PM
As I said they had observers to see the referendum wasn't rigged and must gall that the world's greatest democracy needs to have outside observers to monitor a democratic election.

Tha'ts a bit embarrassing. US democracy needs international observers. Not exactly the best for a country who pretends to be leader of the world. Business management requires credibility in a leader.... and we're losing that. Something was definitely lost in 2000.

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 03:21 PM
Marc Rosset: I am not so sure the average black Cuban is better off now. Racism is rife in Cuba. As I said before, Cuba is a big lie.

Jimena
10-26-2004, 03:24 PM
You're right... I had forgotten about that! Didn't know it was on Sept 11.

Yep. And on Sept. 11, 2001, a group of Chileans filed a civil suit in Washington, DC against Henry Kissinger for his role in the coup that put Pinochet in power. Of course, no one ever heard about this because of what happened that day.

FryslanBoppe: Chavez is a puppet of Castro. Do you really believe the results of the referendum were accurate?

No he isn't. He uses Castro to his advantage, and uses similar rhetoric and imagery. IMO, both the right wing and the left wing in Venezuela deserve each other. Talk about propaganda. And in the right wing's case, complete disregard for democratic institutions.

And in terms of the recall elections, international observers confirmed the result.

And in terms of Cuba's public health system, it is indeed the best in the Americas with Costa Rica coming in second place, stories such as
throwing dead babies in the trash notwithstanding.

Marc Rosset is Tall
10-26-2004, 03:25 PM
Marc Rosset: I am not so sure the average black Cuban is better off now. Racism is rife in Cuba. As I said before, Cuba is a big lie.

Ok, which society has a perfect balance of race relations?

Answer : Utopia, does it exist? No.

Actually come to think of it they would be. I mean they are going to be dominant in the party are they? They are not the majority population and if you look at the Miami Cuban population the vast majority of these are white at least they would make up 90%. It's ok they do have access to boats as well to make the crossing to Florida.

Jimena
10-26-2004, 03:30 PM
Marc Rosset: I am not so sure the average black Cuban is better off now. Racism is rife in Cuba.

Yes, it is. But I think it was the NY Times that did a story on race in the US, using the Florida Cubans as an example. Two new arrivals from Cuba, one white, one black. The article followed their stories, and their different perspectives on race in the US and Cuba. The white Cuban ended up in Miami wishing for the freedom of his country, while the black one ended up identified with US hip-hop culture because the Miami Cubans would not accept him.

It was a very interesting article.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 03:34 PM
Yes, it is. But I think it was the NY Times that did a story on race in the US, using the Florida Cubans as an example. Two new arrivals from Cuba, one white, one black. The article followed their stories, and their different perspectives on race in the US and Cuba. The white Cuban ended up in Miami wishing for the freedom of his country, while the black one ended up identified with US hip-hop culture because the Miami Cubans would not accept him.

It was a very interesting article.


What else is new? Racism exists in America too. :yeah:

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 04:48 PM
Yes that is a fact. When black Cubans get to Miami they are no longer accepted in the Cuban community and are considered as blacks first and Cubans second. I have a Cuban ''friend'' in Miami who,after 6 months in the US, proudly told me he really feels at home in the Cuban community in Miami because they have no blacks living in their neighbourhood.
You would think oppressed people would be tolerant, once they got their freedom, but it does not seem so. Look what happened in the Balkans once the oppression of Communism disappeared. Ethnic cleansing. The only good thing about Communism is that it makes people too miserable to bother hating their neighbour.

Action Jackson
10-26-2004, 05:01 PM
Brazil has had a lot of mixing of races, and outwardly has harmonious relations, but the society is institutionally racist and highly stratified along racial lines, and that has never suffered communism, which would be similar to Cuba in a racial context.

It depends on the country and not every single country that was a former communist state practiced ethnic cleansing once communism wasn't the government, it's a very simplistic statement. For every former Yugoslavia there was the old Czechoslovakia that was the opposite to this.

So do you know why certain countries had more problems than others?

Tennis Fool
10-26-2004, 05:21 PM
Fryslanboppe: The real Cubans detest the Miami Cubans just as much as Castro. Castro only survives the poverty and opression that is Cuba by blaming the embargo. I do not know why the US keeps the embargo and thus keeps Castro in power. Remember when Castro shot down two planes, just when Clinton was talking of better ties with Cuba. Castro did this to ensure the embargo stays in place and as a result he stays in place.
The Miami Cubans want a violent end to the Castro regime so that they can return and buy up the island, leaving the Cubans who stayed with nothing. So for the real Cubans it is a toss up whether Castro or the Miami Cubans would be most despised

Question I always wanted to ask someone: Did the Castro coup affect primarily white, rich Cubans who was prospering and then became refugees? What of the black, poor Cubans? Did they want Castro?

I always think of the Cuban-Americans who are against Castro, like Gloria Estefan and Andy Garcia, who tend to be white. (Not sure of their political affiliation though).

But then you have black Cuban-Americans, like that gymnast (forget her name) and Celia Cruz. They also left, for economic reasons.

Tennis Fool
10-26-2004, 05:25 PM
I haven't read the entire thread, so not sure if this has to do with the Sunday Times article on the Census and how Latino-Americans don't want to register themselves as "black" or "white". The majority in the last census registered themselves as "other", because of their mixed heritage.

The Census is looking to abolish the "other" category for 2010, because it is unhelpful. Three Dominican women were profiled. One said that she placed "other" because in the DR, a dark-skinned woman like herself is considered something close to "mulatto". Another woman, who was light-skinned, but whose mother is dark-skinned, said that she would put "white" if given only two options next time.

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 05:40 PM
George: I think maybe the amount of hate depends on the amount of threat from the minority group. In NI there is no racial hate, just religous. I am not sure about the differences between the Czechs and the yugoslavians. Maybe there were less religous and racial differences among the Czechs.

Tennis Fool: I think the Castro Revolution affected everybody, but the blacks maybe had not as far to fall. Also the whites had more means to escape, thus the preponderance of white Cubans in Miami. I am not really sure how bad it was for blacks under Bautista. What I do know is that the countryside is practically deserted now because Castro only allowed sugar to be grown and the sugar industry is now dead. Thus the rural blacks have all moved to the city. You might as well live in the city and get paid nothing as live in a deserted countryside and get paid nothing!!!! And it is hard for me to believe that the squalor I saw in Havana is a big improvement over pre-Castro days. The blacks have less relatives in Miami and since all the shops in Cuba only accept $US, the blacks can only look in the windows. Without a dollar income from abroad, only the party privileged can manage to live a bearable life.

Action Jackson
10-26-2004, 05:45 PM
Question I always wanted to ask someone: Did the Castro coup affect primarily white, rich Cubans who was prospering and then became refugees? What of the black, poor Cubans? Did they want Castro?


Definitely it had more of an impact on the richer white Cubans as they had the most to lose economically and when Castro decided to nationalise certain industries, a lot of the wealth was moved offshore and then they went across the strait to Florida. Look at the ethnic make up of the exiles in Miami and you will see there isn't a huge amount of black Cubans amongst them.

Don't forget Cuba was a tacky place full of mob money in casinos and Cubans were just like servants in their own land and Batista was an American stooge.

The poorer black Cubans on the whole have benefitted from Castro. The majority were illiterate and now they have the highest literacy rate and they have a low infant mortalty rate and that is not just because of dumping some babies in the trash.

They can join the military and other institutions and are not just farm labourers, though they do have the barrier of institutional racism which is not only a Cuban problem. Sure they will get stopped more for I.D checks, if they drive a nice car, then it will be scrutinised closely, and none of this happens to a black person in the US or the UK.

I always think of the Cuban-Americans who are against Castro, like Gloria Estefan and Andy Garcia, who tend to be white. (Not sure of their political affiliation though).

Usually Republican, but whoever will get them the best deal.

But then you have black Cuban-Americans, like that gymnast (forget her name) and Celia Cruz. They also left, for economic reasons.

For every few that go, many more have stayed in Cuba. There have been quite a few black Cuban boxers that the Americans would have loved to have seen turn pro, but the very best of them refused e.g Teofilo Stevenson and Felix Savon. These guys could have made much more money outside of Cuba, but chose not to go for the lucre.

Tennis Fool
10-26-2004, 05:51 PM
I always remember this ad, "What happens after Castro?" And a billboard went up with the pink pucker lips of some model bimbo (sorry Rebecca).

Interesting discussion. Guess I should read this thread...

Still think that GW will squeeze out a win. Glad to see AA as politically active (never thought of him as a particularly smart guy). But great :yeah:

Mary Carillo always mentions how most tennis players have no clue about what's going on in the world around them. She even got on Fed about this.

Action Jackson
10-26-2004, 05:53 PM
George: I think maybe the amount of hate depends on the amount of threat from the minority group. In NI there is no racial hate, just religous. I am not sure about the differences between the Czechs and the yugoslavians. Maybe there were less religous and racial differences among the Czechs.

NI wasn't or isn't a communist state. It's not just about religion there, it was economic control of one group over another that had a religious aspect to it, to cloud what was really denial of the same economic opportunities.

Ok, former Yugoslavia was made up of more diverse groups of people than what the old Czechoslovakia was. Ethnically there is virtually no difference between a Croat, Bosnian and Serb, but religiously there are differences, in spite of what some of my more militant friends say there is hardly a difference between the languages, except a few words and they are written in a different alphabet.

Because of the fault line between the Hapsburgs and the Ottoman Empire that's why fmr Yugos it developed differently to the old CZ and why there was always more violence in that region, and a Bosnian Serb started WW1 when they broke up there was always going to be more trouble there than in CZ, and they went about it in different ways as well.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 06:23 PM
Yes that is a fact. When black Cubans get to Miami they are no longer accepted in the Cuban community and are considered as blacks first and Cubans second. I have a Cuban ''friend'' in Miami who,after 6 months in the US, proudly told me he really feels at home in the Cuban community in Miami because they have no blacks living in their neighbourhood.
You would think oppressed people would be tolerant, once they got their freedom, but it does not seem so. Look what happened in the Balkans once the oppression of Communism disappeared. Ethnic cleansing. The only good thing about Communism is that it makes people too miserable to bother hating their neighbour.

I agree with you buddy. People don't learn about intolerance. But it's always easier to complain about my rights than other people's rights. Capitalism makes people miserable too. A sad awakening for some of the people who come to America expecting financial success.

Jimena
10-26-2004, 06:58 PM
I haven't read the entire thread, so not sure if this has to do with the Sunday Times article on the Census and how Latino-Americans don't want to register themselves as "black" or "white". The majority in the last census registered themselves as "other", because of their mixed heritage.

The Census is looking to abolish the "other" category for 2010, because it is unhelpful. Three Dominican women were profiled. One said that she placed "other" because in the DR, a dark-skinned woman like herself is considered something close to "mulatto". Another woman, who was light-skinned, but whose mother is dark-skinned, said that she would put "white" if given only two options next time.

I'm Latina, from Puerto Rico and I lived in the US for 12 years, including my years in college. I'm very pale, though I have dark hair, and people usually thought I was Greek, Italian, Jewish, Arab... anything but Latina. While living in the States I found that the higher I went up in the payscale, the more Latinos at my economic level started to look like me, i. e. white. I never encountered prejudice because I am Latina, quite the opposite. That cannot be said for my other Latino friends who also had a great education, but looked like Latinos "are supposed to look".

Nevertheless, I would never consider myself white. In PR we use the same census used in the US, and people don't know what to make of the race question. Although race plays a part, of course, in the way the society is structured (there's a reason why calling someone a "blanquito"- from blanco or white- is usually charged with political and class connotations, meaning someone with money, power, and little social awareness), there is less consciousness of it, which IMO is not a good thing. But we are really mixed, whether we like it or not- 85% of the people in PR called themselves white in the 2000 census, leading to a lot of self ridicule, but sadly little examination of what race means on the island. And people that are considered black in the US, would not be considered black in PR. They would be considered "indios", or "mulatos, or "trigueños". We cannot be classified in the same way that the US does its classification. And the whole one drop of blood thing doesn't make sense to us.

Sorry for the dissertation. :o Race is a very interesting issue to me.

Roger-No.1
10-26-2004, 07:06 PM
I'm Latina, from Puerto Rico and I lived in the US for 12 years, including my years in college. I'm very pale, though I have dark hair, and people usually thought I was Greek, Italian, Jewish, Arab... anything but Latina. While living in the States I found that the higher I went up in the payscale, the more Latinos at my economic level started to look like me, i. e. white. I never encountered prejudice because I am Latina, quite the opposite. That cannot be said for my other Latino friends who also had a great education, but looked like Latinos "are supposed to look".

Nevertheless, I would never consider myself white. In PR we use the same census used in the US, and people don't know what to make of the race question. Although race plays a part, of course, in the way the society is structured (there's a reason why calling someone a "blanquito"- from blanco or white- is usually charged with political and class connotations, meaning someone with money, power, and little social awareness), there is less consciousness of it, which IMO is not a good thing. But we are really mixed, whether we like it or not- 85% of the people in PR called themselves white in the 2000 census, leading to a lot of self ridicule, but sadly little examination of what race means on the island. And people that are considered black in the US, would not be considered black in PR. They would be considered "indios", or "mulatos, or "trigueños". We cannot be classified in the same way that the US does its classification. And the whole one drop of blood thing doesn't make sense to us.

.

It's a very good dissertation, Jimena. :yeah:

mitalidas
10-26-2004, 09:54 PM
Guess which two cousins hate each other?
Scroll down:

http://msn.ancestry.com/landing/strange/bush4/tree.htm

jmp
10-26-2004, 10:01 PM
This is a very interesting thread. I really enjoy reading international viewpoints. Thanks all. :)

RonE
10-26-2004, 10:04 PM
Guess which two cousins hate each other?
Scroll down:

http://msn.ancestry.com/landing/strange/bush4/tree.htm


OMG!!! :haha: :haha: :haha:

If Elizabeth Cooke were alive I can just imagine the following conversation right before the last presidential debate:

Elizabeth: "You boys make sure you be back home for dinner"

John&George: "Yes Grandma"

Elizabeth: "Now John, you be nice to your cousin and let him win this one. You already have the first two"

John: "But Grandma, thats not fair! It's not my problem he sucks"

George: "Suck this!" (throws pie in John's face)

John: "Why you....." (spills milk on George's head)

Elizabeth: "All right boys, thats it!!! I won't have any more of this behaviour! You're both grounded!!!!!!!!! No presidential debate!!!"

John&George: "But Grandmaaaa!!!"

Elizabeth: "GO TO YOUR ROOMS NOW!!!!!"

John&George: "Yes ma'am!"

buddyholly
10-26-2004, 11:10 PM
George, if you are still reading. I am from Northern Ireland and it really was (and still is)religious at the core. The economic differences came about because the Catholics still run their own non-governmental schools so that they can teach religion during school hours. In that curriculum the kids do not get much science and Catholics are not well represented in the engineering and science fields. Of course, flat out discrimination also exists and a Catholic engineer would be passed over for a Prod one. Hopefully that has changed. Anyway the Irish Republic has made great progress in the European Union and is now a technology centre. The standard of living has surpassed Britain, so the Catholics have the last laugh, maybe.

Roger-No.1
10-27-2004, 01:05 AM
Talking about cousins.....

Bush cousins say "Kerry is their man"
Web site says 'blood is thinner than oil,'
Bush policies spell disaster

Tracy (S. Chatham, MA): "I am voting for John Kerry this year as much out of need as desire. I have always liked him as a politician as well as a human being and I have never doubted his ability to run this country. I feel we need him now more than ever. The very thing that our president, my cousin, criticizes him for is exactly what makes [Kerry] a natural leader, the ability to see when an error has been made and to be willing to do whatever it takes to fix it.

The difference is, whatever needs fixing (the war in Iraq, joblessness, health insurance, social security, etc, etc) will be approached with a level head and the ability to see all sides of a problem".


Hilary (Seattle, WA): "I'm voting for John Kerry because he'll make a better President. He'll fight for families, for children and for women. He'll help America restore its shattered reputation in the world, and he'll move the world to a more peaceful place. George W. Bush's grandfather and my grandmother were brother and sister. As much as I'd like to vote for a relative running for President, I just can't. economic policies have destroyed lives, and his military policies continue to result in death on a daily basis. Enough is enough! After September 11th, Americans understandably became scared. President Bush has exploited that fear and used that horrible tragedy to convince people to accept the mistakes he has made. John Kerry will lead us in the right direction. [John Kerry will] combat terrorism while at the same time moving America towards a more just, productive and respectable place in the world.

[B]John Kerry is better for business, he's better for families, and he's better for America."

undomiele
10-27-2004, 01:43 AM
FryslanBoppe: Chavez is a puppet of Castro. Do you really believe the results of the referendum were accurate?

Chavez isnt a "puppet" of Castro --thats what the Miami Cubans and the US would want you believe. He's friends with the guy but he's definitely his own man. He's done some wonderful things with his social programs in Venezuela --spending close to $2 billion dollars in literacy programs, healthcare in the ghetto areas, and food distribution-- and is doing a lot to include the 80% of the population thats poor in representational politics where they had been excluded before. The man is a hero to a majority of Venezuelans (he won the referendum by 60%) and the OAS and the Carter Center will agree as they were there to certify the referendum results.

The opposition are a bunch of pathetic whiners and need to realize that Venezuela is not ever going to go back to where it was before -- a country where only the rich benefitted from Venezuela's lucrative oil profits.

tennischick
10-27-2004, 04:01 AM
OK y'all ignored my last contribution to this thread. so here goes another.

go to www.google.com

type in "weapons of mass destruction"

hit "i'm feeling lucky" (don't do the "search")

:lol: at the response :lol:

Action Jackson
10-27-2004, 04:37 AM
OK y'all ignored my last contribution to this thread. so here goes another.

go to www.google.com

type in "weapons of mass destruction"

hit "i'm feeling lucky" (don't do the "search")

:lol: at the response :lol:

Very old, but still funny nevertheless.

Action Jackson
10-27-2004, 04:59 AM
George, if you are still reading. I am from Northern Ireland and it really was (and still is)religious at the core. The economic differences came about because the Catholics still run their own non-governmental schools so that they can teach religion during school hours. In that curriculum the kids do not get much science and Catholics are not well represented in the engineering and science fields. Of course, flat out discrimination also exists and a Catholic engineer would be passed over for a Prod one. Hopefully that has changed. Anyway the Irish Republic has made great progress in the European Union and is now a technology centre. The standard of living has surpassed Britain, so the Catholics have the last laugh, maybe.

Obviously you must have studied or learnt how Northern Ireland came into existence. Yes, the reasons that the Prods who originally came from Scotland, Wales and England into the 6 counties where they were the majority rejected joining the Irish Free State as they were worried about being a minority in a Catholic state.

As Northern Ireland was prosperous because of the heavy industry ie shipbuilding who was it that saw the benefits of this prosperity it wasn't the Catholics. Why because the 6 counties wanted to remain with the UK, and they were looked after from London for their loyalty.

When the RUC was formed, it was meant to have at least 25% Catholic representation, but because of intimidation from their own Cathlic community, the police links with the Orange Order group, that has never risen about 10 % and how is that a fair representation of the respective society?

Gerrymandering of the votes in local council elections to keep the Prods in power when one Catholic household got one vote, but a Protestant business owner would get 4 votes, as they were a property holder, homeowner, rate payer and that helped keep the status quo.

Internment without trial, the SPA act, all in all was a basic denial of civil rights to one community, at the expense of another under the guise of religion, but the lack of civil rights initially was more of a bigger problem than religion. Then after seeing what had happened with the blacks of the USA in the 60s, then with that same spirit these people who were oppressed decided to take a stand.

Actually my friends from Northern Ireland know exactly how to tell someone's religious background and it's not through their name, they do it through occupation.

There has been progress, then again from what it was, that wouldn't be hard, but all the hypocrises still continue, one side has to give up arms and the other doesn't for example.

As for what will happen who knows.

buddyholly
10-27-2004, 01:40 PM
Undomiele: I suppose you also think that Che did some wonderful things in Cuba. What is wonderful about sitting in El Morro deciding who you will have executed today?
One good thing that Fidel did was send Che off to the African jungle to get killed and when that didn't work he persisted and sent him off to South America. Fidel knew very well that there was no room for two totalitarian monsters on the same island.

Action Jackson
10-27-2004, 02:16 PM
They got rid of Batista and improved the overall literacy rates, lowered infant mortality, then again I suppose that is not progress to some individuals.

undomiele
10-27-2004, 02:26 PM
Whatever Buddy Holly :rolleyes: I was talking about *Chavez* and how he has done a lot of great things for his people. Its clear to me you're too willing to pigeon hole Chavez as a Castro imitator when you really don't know that much about him.

And yes I do think Communism in Cuba has done some great things compared to what it had been under Batista. As for Cubans suffering, you have to largely thank US sanctions for that.