If Bush Used Nuclear Weapons On Iran Should He Be Tried As A War Criminal?

by frankiespeakin 119 Replies latest jw friends

brinjen

Good job. Nice to see you are so concerned about the rights of the Iranian government while they are helping destabilize Iraq and providing them weapons while they are still practising beheadings and stonings in the streets. Hey I got an idea. Why don't we ratify that treaty,to say,maybe exclude lawless coutries that want to kill us. Oh no that wouldn't be right eh?
Destabilize Iraq? I think the 'coalition of the willing' have done a nice enough job of that on their own. Iraq was not a threat to the western world until they were invaded. They didn't have WMDs and they had nothing to do with 911, the war was started on a lie.
Tyrone van leyen

Destabilize Iraq? I think the 'coalition of the willing' have done a nice enough job of that on their own. Iraq was not a threat to the western world until they were invaded. They didn't have WMDs and they had nothing to do with 911, the war was started on a lie.
Oh I see, so your answer is to leave a dictator in power that can threaten its neighbours and eventually get the ability to threaten us. It's ok that he gassed 180,000 kurds and started a war with Iran that took a million lives and drained the marshes where the arabs of that area have lived for thousands of years and set oil wells on fire creating pollution that speeds up global warming. Apparently he used to take great pleasure as well in watching videos of the people he hacked to death. He would then take their bodies and put them through shredders. The desserts are full of mass graves that he created.
Not my problem eh! You are a joke talking about human rights and letting that continue. Yes Iraq is destabilized now, they need change. Did you think it would be easy? Did you think if Bush told the truth he could convince people like you what needed to be done? If the west succeeds in getting Iraq on its feet, then what will you say? Wasn't it Al qaeda that took the world trade centre towers down? Do you think they have good intentions? Isn't it Alqeda in Iraq, that they are fighting? Do you think this is an organization that can afford to be ignored? Do you not remember Abu Musab Al Zharqawi? Do you not know how dangerous this group of people are? Do you know what an infidel is? Do you know what they do to people? Do you not think a lawless country like that is not a breeding ground for terrorsits? Do you know what their objective is? Do you really think by capturing Bin ladin that solves the problem? Do you not realize the problem is much bigger than that? Have you not seen the link I sent on this thread with threats. Are you living in dreamland? Do you know how many terrorist organizations there are in the world. There's a few questions for you. If you have any time left in the year, maybe you can answer the 50,000 questions I've asked Frank, and Jourles and Highlander that they are purposly ignoring. I'm tired of answering the same questions over and over again and getting no valid responses to my queries. I have stated fact after fact on these threads and they get ignored and you folks just keep saying the same old shit. One more question havn't you read all my posts? I've answered your questions and I will answer no more . They arn't answers to you, because you read bull crap and don't analyse it. You are satified with what you think you know and it makes you feel good about yourself. Sorry but I'm being brutally honest.This same brutal honesty is the truth that the president knew you couldn't handle.
Who are you?

Who,
OK you got me, hey I'm no history schollar, Hey I like to let you guys get one right and me wrong once in a while, that's how we learn.
Frankie...the Marshall Plan is one of the shining examples of how the US contributed to the rest of the world. It doesn't negate the negatives, however it is important for historical balance.
In 1948, the European Recovery Program (ERP) went into effect and was popularly known as the Marshall Plan. To help restore Europe and halt the spread of Communism, the U.S. Congress approved funds that would eventually rise to over $12 billion for the rebuilding of Western Europe. The Marshall Plan spurred European re-industrialization and brought much needed humanitarian relief to the war-torn countries. It also stimulated the U.S. economy by establishing overseas markets for American goods. In 1953, George C. Marshall became the only former military general ever to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Marshall Plan Speech

The following is the speech given by Secretary of State George C. Marshall in which he outlined a program of economic assistance to war-torn Europe. It became known as "The Marshall Plan Speech" and was
June 5, 1947, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Mr. President, Dr. Conant, members of the Board of Overseers, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I'm profoundly grateful and touched by the great distinction and honor and great compliment accorded me by the authorities of Harvard this morning. I'm overwhelmed, as a matter of fact, and I'm rather fearful of my inability to maintain such a high rating as you've been generous enough to accord to me. In these historic and lovely surroundings, this perfect day, and this very wonderful assembly, it is a tremendously impressive thing to an individual in my position.
But to speak more seriously, I need not tell you that the world situation is very serious. That must be apparent to all intelligent people. I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. Furthermore, the people of this country are distant from the troubled areas of the earth and it is hard for them to comprehend the plight and consequent reactions of the long-suffering peoples, and the effect of those reactions on their governments in connection with our efforts to promote peace in the world.
In considering the requirements for the rehabilitation of Europe, the physical loss of life, the visible destruction of cities, factories, mines, and railroads was correctly estimated, but it has become obvious during recent months that this visible destruction was probably less serious than the dislocation of the entire fabric of European economy. For the past ten years conditions have been abnormal. The feverish preparation for war and the more feverish maintenance of the war effort engulfed all aspects of national economies. Machinery has fallen into disrepair or is entirely obsolete. Under the arbitrary and destructive Nazi rule, virtually every possible enterprise was geared into the German war machine. Long-standing commercial ties, private institutions, banks, insurance companies, and shipping companies disappeared through loss of capital, absorption through nationalization, or by simple destruction. In many countries, confidence in the local currency has been severely shaken. The breakdown of the business structure of Europe during the war was complete. Recovery has been seriously retarded by the fact that two years after the close of hostilities a peace settlement with Germany and Austria has not been agreed upon. But even given a more prompt solution of these difficult problems, the rehabilitation of the economic structure of Europe quite evidently will require a much longer time and greater effort than has been foreseen.
There is a phase of this matter which is both interesting and serious. The farmer has always produced the foodstuffs to exchange with the city dweller for the other necessities of life. This division of labor is the basis of modern civilization. At the present time it is threatened with breakdown. The town and city industries are not producing adequate goods to exchange with the food-producing farmer. Raw materials and fuel are in short supply. Machinery is lacking or worn out. The farmer or the peasant cannot find the goods for sale which he desires to purchase. So the sale of his farm produce for money which he cannot use seems to him an unprofitable transaction. He, therefore, has withdrawn many fields from crop cultivation and is using them for grazing. He feeds more grain to stock and finds for himself and his family an ample supply of food, however short he may be on clothing and the other ordinary gadgets of civilization. Meanwhile, people in the cities are short of food and fuel, and in some places approaching the starvation levels. So the governments are forced to use their foreign money and credits to procure these necessities abroad. This process exhausts funds which are urgently needed for reconstruction. Thus a very serious situation is rapidly developing which bodes no good for the world. The modern system of the division of labor upon which the exchange of products is based is in danger of breaking down.
The truth of the matter is that Europe's requirements for the next three or four years of foreign food and other essential products - principally from America - are so much greater than her present ability to pay that she must have substantial additional help or face economic, social, and political deterioration of a very grave character.
The remedy lies in breaking the vicious circle and restoring the confidence of the European people in the economic future of their own countries and of Europe as a whole. The manufacturer and the farmer throughout wide areas must be able and willing to exchange their product for currencies, the continuing value of which is not open to question.
Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. Such assistance, I am convinced, must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative. Any government that is willing to assist in the task of recovery will find full cooperation, I am sure, on the part of the United States Government. Any government which maneuvers to block the recovery of other countries cannot expect help from us. Furthermore, governments, political parties, or groups which seek to perpetuate human misery in order to profit therefrom politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States.
It is already evident that, before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government. It would be neither fitting nor efficacious for this Government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a program designed to place Europe on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so. The program should be a joint one, agreed to by a number, if not all, European nations.
An essential part of any successful action on the part of the United States is an understanding on the part of the people of America of the character of the problem and the remedies to be applied. Political passion and prejudice should have no part. With foresight, and a willingness on the part of our people to face up to the vast responsibility which history has clearly placed upon our country the difficulties I have outlined can and will be overcome.
I am sorry that on each occasion I have said something publicly in regard to our international situation, I've been forced by the necessities of the case to enter into rather technical discussions. But to my mind, it is of vast importance that our people reach some general understanding of what the complications really are, rather than react from a passion or a prejudice or an emotion of the moment. As I said more formally a moment ago, we are remote from the scene of these troubles. It is virtually impossible at this distance merely by reading, or listening, or even seeing photographs or motion pictures, to grasp at all the real significance of the situation. And yet the whole world of the future hangs on a proper judgement. It hangs, I think, to a large extent on the realization of the American people, of just what are the various dominant factors. What are the reactions of the people? What are the justifications of those reactions? What are the sufferings? What is needed? What can best be done? What must be done?
Thank you very much.
barry

NO
brinjen

Did you think it would be easy?
No, your confusing me with Bush.
Did you think if Bush told the truth he could convince people like you what needed to be done?
Bush has never told the truth. If he did he would mention his own family's involvement with Al Quaeda, and the taliban and the Bin Ladens. It's easy to say now everyone knows there are no WMDs to change your story.
If the west succeeds in getting Iraq on its feet, then what will you say?
If?
Wasn't it Al qaeda that took the world trade centre towers down?
Yes, and wasn't it Bush that was given the chance to stop them only he ignored the warnings and simply went fishing instead?
Do you think they have good intentions?
I never said that. Of course Al Quaeda dosen't have good intentions. But neither does Bush.
Isn't it Alqeda in Iraq, that they are fighting?
Ask yourself, if you were a terrorist organisation looking to recruit where would you go? How about a country your enemy just invaded!
Do you think this is an organization that can afford to be ignored?
So killing innocent people is going to teach them?
Do you not remember Abu Musab Al Zharqawi?
Yes, and your point?
Do you not know how dangerous this group of people are?
I'm sorry who are we talking about here? Al Quaeda or Bush? They're both dangerous.
Do you know what an infidel is?
Someone who denies the existence of god.
Do you know what they do to people?
Again, who are we talking about here?
Do you not think a lawless country like that is not a breeding ground for terrorsits?
Once again, does killing innocent people stop this? Or just make it easier for the recruiters...
Do you know what their objective is?
What's Bush's real motives?
Do you really think by capturing Bin ladin that solves the problem?
It's a start. Did you know some of his relatives were in the US the morning of 911? They were flown out of the country 2 days later. No FBI were allowed to talk to them. All the while they're detaining anyone of middle eastern appearance as they enter the country and interogating them. Ask yourself, if I were to go into say a restaurant with a gun, shoot some people before fleeing who would you want to talk to to find out where I was hiding? People from my country? People of my religion? Or my family?
Do you not realize the problem is much bigger than that?
Yes I do, and we're gonna change the world by declaring war on.....(quick someone pick a country)
Have you not seen the link I sent on this thread with threats.
Yes I have.
Are you living in dreamland?
No. Wide awake looking at the big picture.
Do you know how many terrorist organizations there are in the world.
Do you honestly think Bush is going to rid the world of terrorism?
One more question havn't you read all my posts?
Yes I have. You read mine?
Now, I have a few questions....
Do you trust a man whose grandfather helped fund the Nazis? Do you trust the same man who has been business partners with terrorist organisations? Do you believe everything Bush (and Cheney) tell you? Did you know the Bin Ladens used to be a shareholder in Halliburton? Did you know Dick Cheney has shares in Halliburton and has personally made 8 million dollars out of this war on terror? Why didn't Bush stop the 911 attacks when he had the chance? Did you know just months before 911 Bush invited members of Al Quaeda to the states to help improve their image? Have you checked this site? http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/ Do you think any war has to have a good side and bad side? Has the thought occured to you they might both be bad? Has the thought occured to you they might both be gaining from this war?
I never said Al Quaeda was a harmless pretty little organisation. I'm saying the war is a lie, started by a couple of greedy men who have made a lot of money at the expense of a lot of lives. Neither care about them, as long as they get what they want.
Sorry but I'm being brutally honest.This same brutal honesty is the truth that the president knew you couldn't handle.
"The truth? You can't handle the truth..." oh wait, that was a movie. Look at the big picture. Don't believe everything Bush tells you, he wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit him....
brinjen

Sorry! My bad was intending to post on another topic clicked on the wrong tab instead. Couldn't delete so edited instead.
frankiespeakin

Ty,
I don't think all Iranians are evil, nor do they deserve to die. I don't want war like anyone else but I am not convinced that radical islamist hold the same values as ourselves and we must protect ourselves and try to help them at the same time. Only when push comes to shove, Frank, wer'e not the bad guys and must protect the world from greater evil if the lesser evil is necesary, the same way you would protect your kid.
I think the old indian saying is true;"White man speak with fork tongue". So you don't want war but war is ok.

Tyrone van leyen

Did you think it would be easy?

No, your confusing me with Bush.

The threat is real. Everyone underestimated Al Qaeda, including Bush. The fact that this occcupation has lasted this long is proof of that. It's a good thing he took action when he did, or you would have been getting more unprovoked attacks on your infrastructure. Now Al Qaeda's hands are tied and they are on the run.

Did you think if Bush told the truth he could convince people like you what needed to be done?

Bush has never told the truth. If he did he would mention his own family's involvement with Al Quaeda, and the taliban and the Bin Ladens. It's easy to say now everyone knows there are no WMDs to change your story.

Do you think it would be wise to let a country such as Iraq have the benefit of the doubt with there track record? Thank God someone made sure they don't have them. If Bushes family were involved with Al qaeda it was before they became militant towards the States. Many countries including my own did not even list Hezbollah as a terrorist organization until 2 years ago and were still sending them money. Even our prime minister was supporting Hamas. That was then. This is now. Everyone was gulity of that!

If the west succeeds in getting Iraq on its feet, then what will you say?

If? Ya, why is that such a hard question?

Wasn't it Al qaeda that took the world trade centre towers down?

Yes, and wasn't it Bush that was given the chance to stop them only he ignored the warnings and simply went fishing instead?

It is easy to blame a new president for not seeing the danger. That is why Al Qaeda struck when it did. To test his steel. Sure he knew they were up to things but he didn't know anymore than we about what was going to happen anymore than anyone knew about the planned attacks on Fort Dix. Do you think he has a crystal ball? It even makes more sense that they struck while he was fishing. To make him look incompetant. They knew exactly what they were doing.

Do you think they have good intentions?

I never said that. Of course Al Quaeda dosen't have good intentions. But neither does Bush.

Don't be ridiculous. If they'll dam near impeach Clinton for a blow job, do you not think Bush would have been sent packing a long time ago? He has not let his guard down since his wake up call with the fishing trip, and is keeping the enemy on the run, despite all your criticisms. I think you hurt his feelings.

Isn't it Alqeda in Iraq, that they are fighting?

Ask yourself, if you were a terrorist organisation looking to recruit where would you go? How about a country your enemy just invaded!

Are you not aware that Saddam Husein was a huge sponsor of terrorism? He could have kept them going finacially for eternity. You must strike the source. Bin ladin is nothing more than a figurehead.They are still finding funding but at least they're being kept busy and hurting like hell.

Do you think this is an organization that can afford to be ignored?

So killing innocent people is going to teach them?

I know, I know! Islamic Radical terrorists are innocent and we are evil. Sorry we don't have computer guided bullets. Get real. The States is doing the best they can, but you don't like to read those articles that I mentioned like the rescue two days ago of 42 people in Iraq who were held captive in an Al Qaeda training camp. They had signs of torture and broken bones. Last time I checked It was the Sunnis and shias Mahdi army that were doing all the killing. The states is trying to stop it. You are so ridiculous. They are blowing themselves up, Women and children at wedddings, funerals and mosques. and if the States accidently kills a civilian, or one nut case who isn't stable to begin with, does something bad, your entire media focus's on that. You say you see the big picture and you are focusing on small occurences that are not intentional while the enemy is guilty of bloody genocide. Like I said before, unfortunately in the heat of battle war with the enemy at times lacks clinical percision, but by not being there they would wipe each other out complety. Is that not a greater evil of killing innocents. Again you do not see the big picture.

Do you not remember Abu Musab Al Zharqawi?

Yes, and your point?

Well, you said earlier what are we doing attacking a country that has nothing to do with 911. He was the instigator and leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Although, he hails from Jordan, he is a cold blooded killer that was trying to create Mayhem and was kept busy in Iraq until they dropped two 500 pound bombs on his head. He has been replaced of course by Al masri I beleive but they are kept on the run. If not they would be organizing themselves on your soil.

Do you not know how dangerous this group of people are?

I'm sorry who are we talking about here? Al Quaeda or Bush? They're both dangerous.

I'm sorry but the rules of the game always change when a war is taking place. If there has been infringements on peoples rights it is in the interest of national security. If you would rather take your chances with Al qaeda because they seem more virtuous to you that is your choice. There are only two choices here. Pick one! The greater evil or the lesser evil. If you choose neither, then you are siding with the enemy, and that is what they want. What is your movement about anyways. Whats the other choice I'm missing here?

Do you know what an infidel is?

Someone who denies the existence of god.

Lets expand upon that defintion a little. It is anyone who is not a part of radical Islam in the enemies mind. There objective is to convert the entire world to Islam through force. I'm sure you can find a way to play with that defintion to suit your reality though.

Do you know what they do to people?

Again, who are we talking about here?

I am talking about the little smurfs in your dream world.

Do you not think a lawless country like that is not a breeding ground for terrorsits?

Once again, does killing innocent people stop this? Or just make it easier for the recruiters...

Well, we settled the innocent people issue, and we have clearly defined who the enemy is, so lets rephrase the question for your new enlightenment. Does killing terrorists, help stop terrorism? I tend to think valentines cards, are a little ineffective. So I'll venture to say yes.

Do you know what their objective is?

What's Bush's real motives?

Bush is a greedy little grinch, who is conspiring against the whole world to make profits from warfare, despite the fact that he is already rich. When he is not with his family enjoying a needed break from criticizers as he has the right to, he likes to disect babies and drink there blood. Get real.

Of course you know I'm talking about radical islamic terrorists and of course you know what they do!

Do you really think by capturing Bin ladin that solves the problem?

It's a start. Did you know some of his relatives were in the US the morning of 911? They were flown out of the country 2 days later. No FBI were allowed to talk to them. All the while they're detaining anyone of middle eastern appearance as they enter the country and interogating them. Ask yourself, if I were to go into say a restaurant with a gun, shoot some people before fleeing who would you want to talk to to find out where I was hiding? People from my country? People of my religion? Or my family?

The Bin Ladin family was well known and have been since the 30's when there father started his construction empire. Osama was a black sheep and always has been. He is even a black sheep in Saudi Arabia. There was no reason to suspect his family. They were appaled at what he did. Getting them out of the country was probably a good idea for there safety. They have no idea where he went as they were not involved in fighting in Afghanistan during the 80's and had better things to do than sleeping in caves. In the interest of national security it might have been aan overreaction but its better to be safe than sorry. Many links to Alqeda have been discovered by these interogations.

Do you not realize the problem is much bigger than that?

Yes I do, and we're gonna change the world by declaring war on.....(quick someone pick a country)

It is not a war, it is an occupation. My fingers are getting tired from repeating myself. The war is against Al qaeda who happens to be there and stabiltiy must be established so no furhter funding goes to terrorsit groups and so that they will not attack us. If the Us succeeds, this will be a model for the rest of the middle east. If it was a war against Iraq they could easily have wiped out every man woman and child 5 years ago.

Have you not seen the link I sent on this thread with threats.

Yes I have. Good cuz I'm gonna send another clip when I'm done mopping up

Are you living in dreamland?

No. Wide awake looking at the big picture.

Ya Michael Morons Disneyland

Do you know how many terrorist organizations there are in the world.

Do you honestly think Bush is going to rid the world of terrorism?

Well I sure hope he gives it a dam good try. There is no room for evil in a global world or the spread of evil for the greater good of mankind, it must be fought. And not with Valentine cards.

One more question havn't you read all my posts?

Yes I have. You read mine?

Of course and I disagree

Now, I have a few questions....

Do you trust a man whose grandfather helped fund the Nazis?

Irrelevant. Do you judge people by there relatives actions? The royal familys' son Edward ,was a Nazi supporter and they shipped him off to Bermuda cause he was an embarrasment.

Do you trust the same man who has been business partners with terrorist organisations?

Sure. That was then this is now. Even Jacque Chirac always loved a good dictator in times of peace, but he warned them if they tried anything on him they would get nuked. I think they beleive him too.

Do you believe everything Bush (and Cheney) tell you?

Of course not! This is a war against terrorism. You can't be an open book with your intentions because it takes away the element of suprize. I don't trust the media either. You have to read between the lines and think about whats really happeneing. Thats what all the wire tapping is about. Why don't we just send them a memo about our plans. That sounds fair eh.

Did you know the Bin Ladens used to be a shareholder in Halliburton?

Who the hell cares? Its the stock market. It's there whether you like it or not, If there's money to be made. Even the Watchtower corp. has shares in Rand tech.but they're not going around killing people. They only do that with there boring talks. This is an issue of money that supports killing. Well Cigarette stock kills people too. If we lived in a world where there was no war then I would say this is wrong, but If there was no war machine, how in the hell would you defend yourself? Someone has to buy the stock and someone will get rich. If I were rich my conscience would not allow me, but some only see it as profit and nothing else. Welcome to the world.

Did you know Dick Cheney has shares in Halliburton and has personally made 8 million dollars out of this war on terror?

Well at least the weapons shares he buys are being used in the fight against terrorism. Would you rather everyone bought stock in bubble gum and pee shooters. We can send over an army of smurfs maybe. The terrorists would die of laughter. This is the real world. It's ugly but there it is.

Why didn't Bush stop the 911 attacks when he had the chance?

Cuz he doesn't have crystal balls and his superman cape was getting ironed at the cleaners . He couldn't leap the towers to redirect the planes. Imagine the president doing this in his underware.

Did you know just months before 911 Bush invited members of Al Quaeda to the states to help improve their image?

Shit, he should have invited you over to help him. You're doing a much better job than he could ever do. We have all learned alot about the inner workings of terrorists since 911. If you are talking about the Taliban, perhaps he was trying the same gentle approach of freindliness and integration as you are now doing. It doesn't work. Lesson learned

Have you checked this site? http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/ Do you think any war has to have a good side and bad side? Has the thought occured to you they might both be bad? Has the thought occured to you they might both be gaining from this war?

Of course they're both bad. War is ugly, but it is a question of the lesser evil for the greater good of humanity. Pick which one you like or trust more. Again I ask. What is your movement? If it is no movement, then you have no defense. Why don't we all just go to Iraq ,hold hands and sing, " We shall overcome" What is your statedgy? Its easy to criticize, but its not very effective when people are shooting at you.

I never said Al Quaeda was a harmless pretty little organisation. I'm saying the war is a lie, started by a couple of greedy men who have made a lot of money at the expense of a lot of lives. Neither care about them, as long as they get what they want.

Its not a lie my dear. Its very real and people are dieing so that we can enjoy freedom. Like I said, sure of course people will make money, but how will you defend your country without a war machine? I think Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld care very much. That is why they spend so much money to make sure the soldeirs have the best of everything including special armour plating. I wouldn't want to be these guys when it comes to telling the families they have lost a loved one. I bet Bush wishes everything in the world for this to end. Don't you think he knows how people feel about him. It must be awful, but he is staying the course. This is an enemy unlike any other the world has ever fought against and it must be won.

Sorry but I'm being brutally honest.This same brutal honesty is the truth that the president knew you couldn't handle.

"The truth? You can't handle the truth..." oh wait, that was a movie. Look at the big picture. Don't believe everything Bush tells you, he wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit him....

Tyrone van leyen

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20060430.aspx Here is a link to help you see the error of your smurflike ways and as for Frank well if I got a forked tongue, the way you play with words and reality, youv'e got a multi pronged pitchfork for a tongue. Even the Indians fought and killed, they had no choice either.
TopHat

Let's not try a man before he has done the dirty deed....

If Bush Used Nuclear Weapons On Iran Should He Be Tried As A War Criminal?

The Marshall Plan Speech

Share this