More Us Election Fraud To Come...

[Butterfly]

Found this little gem: more evidence of the 2000 presidential election fraud (not that we didn't know that already)

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0310/S00211.htm

Who needs election when you have Bush as a Liberator ?

Another 4 years of disastrous economic and foreigner policies to come. Time to buy more Euros (the currrency, not the people )

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Butterfly do you really believe that Dubya ( or is it Dudya ) could get up again ? Won't the body bag syndrome knock him about with the electors ?

[Rolling Stone]

"Another 4 years of disastrous economic policies, time to buy more Euros"

You have to be kidding? First the economic policy was the right route and is in any situation similar to what the US faced starting in 2000. Buying euros was a good idea 2 years ago but now its a dangerous move.

The dollar is being held where it is by the fed for good reason but that alone has little to do with the Euro's future. The Euro is facing far many more problems as is the EU in the coming year that have nothing to do with the US or the dollar. Don't want to buy dollars don't, but to say buy Euros is not to smart but if you or anyone else feels the need buy and help make me money this year. I short the Euro anytime it touches 1.18 and rebuy on any signs of sustained strength. In 9 months I plan on shorting and going along on the ride to $1.05. Its overhyped and blown far out of proportion with its actual value considering the huge hurdles its facing this coming year.

Its a foregone conclusion for to many reasons to list here. The US economy was rocked by an overblown and over hyped market plain and simple not politics and anyone who believes different is living in a fantasy world or understand very little about economics.

I love ideologues in the financial arena they make me $$$ whether conservative or liberal they invest with their heart and not their brains and I along with thousands of other investors try and take advantage of it. If people could get their heart and politics out of the market they can make money but most unfortunately/fortunately cannot. Everyone who had a clue made far more in the fall than in the rise of the US stock market. IMHO politics should not be forgotten when investing but a tremendous amount of weight should not be put in it either. I voted for Clinton the second time and for Gore and my reasoning was they left the economy alone and let it go. Bush winning actually cost me money as I made the wrong choices when it looked as though Gore would win. That was Clinton's greatest achievement in my opinion, he understood that he knew jack about economics and left it alone to those who knew best. But he did let it run wild for far to long and the corporate scandals prove as much. before you say it I could care less about thoughts in political terms only financial.

I am an investor and understand how to read the paper and read financial statements I don't need some political hack on TV to tell me what happened. And thinking as an investor understand that although everyone got busted in 2000 and 2001 the dirty deeds started far before in the 90's. Everyone with a clue saw the writing on the wall thats the way it is and always will be, crazy markets will produce the greatest opportunities but will also create the greatest scams.

The Jimmy carter types are those to look out for as they know almost zero about economics but are the ones that want to play with economic policy to fill some political agenda.

Keep it real!

[SoCal]

Oh Bitterfly,

+7% growth in the largest economy in the world. Disasterous for you maybe, but I am loving it. Every day we get better and stronger, and you the more bitter.

You must not live in Thailand, as you prefer to America bash, than just sitting back, being happy, and loving life.

So much resentment for Bush, and five more years to go. Poor bitter, can't get any bush, so has to go attack Bush.

Poor Bitterfly, can feel nothing but sorrow for you.

[Butterfly]

Butterfly do you really believe that Dubya ( or is it Dudya ) could get up again ? Won't the body bag syndrome knock him about with the electors ?

I think the next election will be another fraud. They got away with it once, they will do it again if given the opportunities. These are people who believe in the "elite" power to rule the "mass" for more "corporate" profits. They are the "Mr Smith" of the Matrix if you catch my drift. They don't know shit about economics and despite their "speech" about freedom and "free markets", all they can deliver is "corporate welfare". A total fraud. But again what would you expect from liars and snakes.

yeah 7%, an annualized number based on a 1 quarter growth. Does not mean shit. It's just a "marketing" tool for the "poor fools" so they can have "hope" that things will get better when it won't. With all the jobs going overseas, soon enough those "fools" will find out the hard way. Btw, there is draft in plan for next year, after the election. And guess where those "fools" will go after they voted faithfully for "Mr Liberator" ? I am sure they will become very useful as target practice.

[Butterfly]

Oh Bitterfly,

+7% growth in the largest economy in the world. Disasterous for you maybe, but I am loving it. Every day we get better and stronger, and you the more bitter.

You must not live in Thailand, as you prefer to America bash, than just sitting back, being happy, and loving life.

So much resentment for Bush, and five more years to go. Poor bitter, can't get any bush, so has to go attack Bush.

Poor Bitterfly, can feel nothing but sorrow for you.

hahaha !!! you are one of the "fool". I am not really surprised by your comments.

So how do you feel about going to Iraq next year ? sure enough all those "patriotic" speech you had will be useful over there to fight the "evil" muslims. Don't forget your target patch. You will need it.

[Butterfly]

"Another 4 years of disastrous economic policies, time to buy more Euros"

You have to be kidding?  First the economic policy was the right route and is in any situation similar to what the US faced starting in 2000.  Buying euros was a good idea 2 years ago but now its a dangerous move. 

The dollar is being held where it is by the fed for good reason but that alone has little to do with the Euro's future.  The Euro is facing far many more problems as is the EU in the coming year that have nothing to do with the US or the dollar.  Don't want to buy dollars don't, but to say buy Euros is not to smart but if you or anyone else feels the need buy and help make me money this year.  I short the Euro anytime it touches 1.18 and rebuy on any signs of sustained strength.  In 9 months I plan on shorting and going along on the ride to  $1.05.  Its overhyped and blown far out of proportion with its actual value considering the huge hurdles its facing this coming year.

Its a foregone conclusion for to many reasons to list here.  The US economy was rocked by an overblown and over hyped market plain and simple not politics and anyone who believes different is living in a fantasy world or understand very little about economics. 

I love ideologues in the financial arena they make me $$$ whether conservative or liberal they invest with their heart and not their brains and I along with thousands of other investors try and take advantage of it.  If people could get their heart and politics out of the market they can make money but most unfortunately/fortunately cannot.  Everyone who had a clue made far more in the fall than in the rise of the US stock market.  IMHO politics should not be forgotten when investing but a tremendous amount of weight should not be put in it either.  I voted for Clinton the second time and for Gore and my reasoning was they left the economy alone and let it go.  Bush winning actually cost me money as I made the wrong choices when it looked as though Gore would win.    That was Clinton's greatest achievement in my opinion, he understood that he knew jack about economics and left it alone to those who knew best.  But he did let it run wild for far to long and the corporate scandals prove as much.  before you say it I could care less about thoughts in political terms only financial. 

I am an investor and understand how to read the paper and read financial statements I don't need some political hack on TV to tell me what happened.  And thinking as an investor understand that although everyone got busted in 2000 and 2001 the dirty deeds started far before in the 90's.  Everyone with a clue saw the writing on the wall thats the way it is and always will be, crazy markets will produce the greatest opportunities but will also create the greatest scams.

The Jimmy carter types are those to look out for as they know almost zero about economics but are the ones that want to play with economic policy to fill some political agenda.

Keep it real!

You are not making any sense. You support a "laissez faire" approach with a conservative fiscal policy (that was Clinton) and still you think the current economy is on the right track ? I am the one asking you if you are joking, right ?

I agree with you on the Clinton part, but Bush is using public money for "Corporate Welfare" and going into "monetizing the debt" to finance the war. If those are not signs of total disastrous economic policies with "real" impact on the economy, then I think you missed a few classes in your "Finance and Banking" courses.

Not to mention that the dollar has been "artificially" supported through all those years, thanks to the oil business, which gave the US a worldwide reserve of funds to finance its massive debt. How do you think this country was able to sustain such a huge debt without consequences for so long ? a similar country without the dollar as its currency would be under IMF supervision already. The US got away with its "bad" economy for so long thanks to the oil, that the introduction of the Euros has become a serious threat to the US economic supremacy. Not that it will happen overnight, but it will happen in a decade. The facts that most ME are starting to switch to the Euros for trading oil, the fact that Iraq was using Euros only to sell its oil to the UN before the war, the fact that Russia is seriously thinking about switching to Euros only for its oil export, and that major exchanges have been talking about using Euros to quote oil on their board, bring me to believe that the dollar is still "overpriced" despite what you think.

Why do you think Euro went up so quickly ? not because the EU economic situation was better (because it was not), but only because major currency players started to realize that the dollar was not "worth" it and that the Euro was becoming a serious challenger since its introduction into a real currency in 2001.

[Butterfly]

I hope those "patriotic" speech will go beyond than just talk

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/11/...t/index_np.html

Oiling up the draft machine?

The Pentagon is quietly moving to fill draft board vacancies nationwide. While officials say there's no cause to worry, some experts aren't so sure.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

By Dave Lindorff

Nov. 3, 2003 | The community draft boards that became notorious for sending reluctant young men off to Vietnam have languished since the early 1970s, their membership ebbing and their purpose all but lost when the draft was ended. But a few weeks ago, on an obscure federal Web site devoted to the war on terrorism, the Bush administration quietly began a public campaign to bring the draft boards back to life.

"Serve Your Community and the Nation," the announcement urges. "If a military draft becomes necessary, approximately 2,000 Local and Appeal Boards throughout America would decide which young men ... receive deferments, postponements or exemptions from military service."

Local draft board volunteers, meanwhile, report that at training sessions last summer, they were unexpectedly asked to recommend people to fill some of the estimated 16 percent of board seats that are vacant nationwide.

Especially for those who were of age to fight in the Vietnam War, it is an ominous flashback of a message. Divisive military actions are ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. News accounts daily detail how the U.S. is stretched too thin there to be effective. And tensions are high with Syria and Iran and on the Korean Peninsula, with some in or close to the Bush White House suggesting that military action may someday be necessary in those spots, too.

Not since the early days of the Reagan administration in 1981 has the Defense Department made a push to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots. Recognizing that even the mention of a draft in the months before an election might be politically explosive, the Pentagon last week was adamant that the drive to staff up the draft boards is not a portent of things to come. There is "no contingency plan" to ask Congress to reinstate the draft, John Winkler, the Pentagon's deputy assistant secretary for reserve affairs, told Salon last week.

Increasingly, however, military experts and even some influential members of Congress are suggesting that if Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to consider a draft to fully staff the nation's military in a time of global instability.

"The experts are all saying we're going to have to beef up our presence in Iraq," says U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, the New York Democrat. "We've failed to convince our allies to send troops, we've extended deployments so morale is sinking, and the president is saying we can't cut and run. So what's left? The draft is a very sensitive subject, but at some point, we're going to need more troops, and at that point the only way to get them will be a return to the draft."

Rangel has provoked controversy in the past by insisting that a draft is the only way to fill the nation's military needs without exploiting young men and women from lower-income families. And, some suggest, by proposing military service from middle- and upper-class men and women, Rangel may be trying to diminish the odds of actually using them in combat. But Rangel is hardly alone in suggesting that the draft might be needed.

The draft, ended by Congress in 1973 as the Indochina War was winding down, was long a target of antiwar activists, and remains highly controversial both in and out of the military. Most military officers understandably prefer an army of volunteers and career soldiers over an army of grudging conscripts; Rumsfeld, too, has long been a staunch advocate of an all-volunteer force.

According to some experts, basic math might compel the Pentagon to reconsider the draft: Of a total U.S. military force of 1.4 million people around the globe (many of them in non-combat support positions and in services like the Air Force and Navy), there are currently about 140,000 active-duty, reserve and National Guard soldiers currently deployed in Iraq -- and though Rumsfeld has been an advocate of a lean, nimble military apparatus, history suggests he needs more muscle.

"The closest parallel to the Iraq situation is the British in Northern Ireland, where you also had some people supporting the occupying army and some opposing them, and where the opponents were willing to resort to terror tactics," says Charles Peña, director of defense studies at the libertarian Cato Institute. "There the British needed a ratio of 10 soldiers per 1,000 population to restore order, and at their height, it was 20 soldiers per 1,000 population. If you transfer that to Iraq, it would mean you'd need at least 240,000 troops and maybe as many as 480,000.

"The only reason you aren't hearing these kinds of numbers discussed by the White House and the Defense Department right now," Peña adds, "is that you couldn't come up with them without a return to the draft, and they don't want to talk about that."

The Pentagon has already had to double the deployment periods of some units, call up more reserves and extend tours of duty by a year -- all highly unpopular moves. Meanwhile, the recent spate of deadly bombings in Baghdad, Falluja and other cities, and increasing attacks on U.S. forces throughout Iraq have forced the U.S. to reconsider its plans to reduce troop deployments.

Those factors -- combined with the stress and grind of war itself -- clearly have diminished troop morale. And many in the National Guard and reserves never anticipated having to serve in an active war zone, far from their families and jobs, for six months or longer. Stars and Stripes, the Army's official paper, reports that a poll it conducted found that half the soldiers in Iraq say they are "not likely" or are "very unlikely" to reenlist -- a very high figure.

Consider that the total enlistment goal for active Army and Army reserves in the fiscal year ended Oct. 1 was 100,000. If half of the 140,000 troops currently in Iraq were to go home and stay, two-thirds of this year's recruits would be needed to replace them. And that does not take into consideration military needs at home and around the globe.

"My sense is that there is a lot of nervousness about the enlistment numbers as Iraq drags on," says Doug Bandow, another military manpower expert at Cato. "We're still early enough into it that the full impact on recruiting/retention hasn't been felt."

The Pentagon, perhaps predictably, sees a more hopeful picture.

Curtis Gilroy, director of accession policy at the Department of Defense, concedes that troop morale is hurting. "There are certainly concerns about future reenlistments. Iraq is not a happy place to be," Gilroy says. "[but] I think a certain amount of that is just grumbling. What we're interested in is not what people are saying, but what they do." So far, he reports, reenlistments and new enlistments remain on target.

Beth Asch, a military manpower expert at the Rand Corp. think tank, agrees that current retention and new enlistment figures are holding up. But she cautions that it may be too soon to know the impact of the tough and open-ended occupation in Iraq. "Short deployments actually boost enlistments and reenlistments," Asch says. "But studies show longer deployments can definitely have a negative impact."

While she thinks it is unlikely that the military will have to resort to a draft to meet its needs, Ned Lebow, a military manpower expert and professor of government at Dartmouth College, is less confident.

"The government is in a bit of a box," Lebow says. "They can hold reservists on active duty longer, and risk antagonizing that whole section of America that has family members who join the Reserves. They can try to pay soldiers more, but it's not clear that works -- and besides, there's already an enormous budget deficit. They can try to bribe other countries to contribute more troops, which they're trying to do now, but not with much success. Or they can try Iraqization of the war -- though we saw what happened to Vietnamization, and Afghanization of the war in Afghanistan isn't working, so Iraqization doesn't seem likely to work either.

"So," Lebow concludes, "that leaves the draft."

Purely in mechanical terms, a draft is a complicated and difficult thing to get off the ground. It would require an act of Congress, first, and then the signature of the president. Young men are already required to register with the Selective Service system, but if the bill were signed into law, it would still take half a year or more to get the new troops into the system. Federal law would require the Selective Service to immediately set up a lottery and start sending out induction notices. Local draft boards would have to evaluate them for medical problems, moral objections and other issues like family crises, and hear the appeals of those who are resisting the draft.

Under law, the first batch of new conscripts must be processed and ready for boot camp in 193 days or less after the start of the draft.

But if the mechanics of the draft are difficult, the politics could be lethal for Bush or any other top official who proposed it.

Already, the American public is almost as split today over the war in Iraq as it was about the war in Indochina nearly four decades ago, though not yet as passionately. But a new draft would likely incite even deeper resentment than it did then. In the last war fought by a conscript army, draft deferments for students meant that nobody who was in college had to worry about being called up until after graduation, and until late in that war, it was even possible, by going to grad school (like Vice President Dick Cheney), to avoid getting drafted altogether. In the Vietnam War era, college boys could also duck combat, as George W. Bush did, by joining the National Guard.

But that's all been changed. In a new draft, college students whose lottery number was selected would only be permitted to finish their current semester; seniors could finish their final year. After that, they'd have to answer the call. Meanwhile, National Guardsmen, as we've seen in the current war, are now likely to face overseas combat duty, too.

"If Congress and Bush reinstitute the draft, it would be the '60s all over again," predicts Lebow. "It's hard to imagine Congress passing such a bill, but then, look how many members of Congress just rolled over and played dead on the bill for $87 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan."

New York Rep. Rangel and Sen. Fritz Hollings, D-S.C., introduced companion bills in the two houses of Congress to reactivate the draft last January, at a time when Bush was clearly moving toward an invasion. While both bills remain in the legislative hopper, neither has gone anywhere.

Even among those who think the public might support a draft, like Bandow at the Cato Institute, few believe Bush would dare to propose it before the November 2004 election. "No one would want that fight," he explains. "It would highlight the cost of an imperial foreign policy, add an incendiary issue to the already emotional protests, and further split the limited-government conservatives." But despite the Pentagon's denials, planners there are almost certainly weighing the numbers just as independent military experts are. And that could explain the willingness to tune up the draft machinery.

John Corcoran, an attorney who serves on a draft board in Philadelphia, says he joined the Reserves to avoid the draft during the Vietnam War. Today, he says, the Bush administration "is in deep trouble" in Iraq "because they didn't plan for the occupation." That doesn't mean Bush would take the election-year risk of restarting the draft, Corcoran says. "To tell the truth, I don't think Bush has the balls to call for a draft.

"They give us a training session each year to keep the machinery in place and oiled up in case, God forbid, they ever do reinstitute it," he explains.

"They don't want us to have to do it," agrees Dan Amon, a spokesman for the Selective Service. "But they want us to be ready to do it at the click of a finger."

- - - - - - - - - - - -

About the writer

Philadelphia-based journalist Dave Lindorff writes regularly for Salon.

[Butterfly]

At least US Tax payers are supporting the dollar

Must be a new "free market" thing

http://msnbc.com/news/989803.asp?0cv=CA01

“Halliburton has been given a blank check.” But, there’s a big problem, according to Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman. He says the price Halliburton is paying Kuwait for gas is “grossly excessive.”

According to the Army Corps of Engineers Halliburton is paying Kuwait $2.65 a gallon while an Iraqi oil agency is paying only about a dollar a gallon.

“They don’t care about cost containment or holding down expenses because they know the U.S. taxpayers will pick up the cost,” said Waxman.

And, at Baghdad gas stations the price is just 15 cents a gallon or less. Mohammed al-Jibouri, an Iraqi oil official, says he can get a lower price, in part, because of experience. “We know the people and we know the companies so we can get a better deal.” Whatever the reason, Waxman claims Halliburton has wasted at least a $100 million of U.S. taxpayer money.

[tomy]

OH! my din-ga-ling GOSH, why don't you just reply for all of us while you at it Butterfly, damm don't have to hog it all.

[Rolling Stone]

You are not making any sense. You support a "laissez faire" approach with a conservative fiscal policy

(that was Clinton) and still you think the current economy is on the right track ? I am the one asking

you if you are joking, right ?"

No I am a serious as can be and I totally understand what I am saying. I like all politicians that are like Clinton that see a good thing and figure why _uck it up. But I also agree with politicians like Bush that see a problem and use the right policy to have the most rapid and successful effect. I am totally unpolitical in my thoughts on the matter as long as what is in place at the time is the right decision. Economic policy has to change and as long as it gets whatever it needs, or is left alone when it is right to do so, I am in.

I totally disagree with your thoughts on the US dollar and the reasons you state that the "world" is changing to Euros. First and foremost you know why Iraq only sold the oil to the UN in Euros? Because the bank where the UN oil for food money was and "still" is kept is in France. And people switching over to the Euro I agree had some to do with many people feeling just like you, but don't forget the 1000's like me that sold the dollar and bought Euros for a year and a half was because of totally financial reasons. It was just the way to go at the time but was not a forever thought or feeling that the Euro was the future its all about the $$$ for me.

You can have 2 sets of economists or 4 for that matter and all will believe something different as the best route forward and which is the most disastrous. 2 things to think about with the Euro, first those eastern block countries coming in for multiple reasons (corruption, flawed banking systems, weak corporate market), second the economies of France and Germany and their own unemployment (near double US rate) and deficit spending. And thats just the tip of the iceberg.

And I along with so many (including Europeans) feel the EU is ultimately going to fail. I think this for historical and economic reasons which is my opinion and only that. I am patiently awaiting all the fighting that is going to go on and how long it will take for the whole thing to blow up. I do think that if the EU slowed down a bit (drastically) with their growth strategy it may have a better chance. They are trying to get everyone together to quickly especially the East. block countries. My opinion is that the same problems that hit Germany after they absorbed east Germany only on a grander scale.

The current policy of cutting taxes in the US is the right policy as history has proven many times. Kennedy and Reagan both showed that when you cut taxes for those that produce the wealth taxes collected by the IRS actually increased and are again. I point to the lowered number by the CBO for projected deficit this year and in my opinion it will fall lower. But thats just my opinion.

9 months or less will be the time to buy a ticket on the Euro southward train and I am gonna ride it all the way to $1.05. Looking for it to drop to $1.12 now but may not get that extra .02 but we chall see.

Keep it real!

[SoCal]

Oh Bitterfly,

Such hate in you. Your life must be truly pathetic.

Today anounced 126,000 new jobs created, as unemployment dips to 6%. Somehow my life keeps getting better and better, and you all the angrier.

So much sorrow for you.

[Butterfly]

Oh Bitterfly,

Such hate in you. Your life must be truly pathetic.

Today anounced 126,000 new jobs created, as unemployment dips to 6%. Somehow my life keeps getting better and better, and you all the angrier.

So much sorrow for you.

I don't know, I got a perfect short time tonight with a beauty from Nana. How was yours ?

[Butterfly]

Oh Bitterfly,

Such hate in you.

Where do you see the "hate" here ? these are facts and news link !!!!

me think you can't take it and are too pussy to debate anything substancial. People like you should be on the "front line" in Iraq.

So when are you joining with the "love" of your country ?

[SoCal]

Oh Bitterfly, don't you know you can't believe everything you read on the web. Seems to me that I just read somewhere that you had sex.

Of course, it did say that you had to pay for it, and it was a short time, so it all makes sense given your personality.

Hey, I think Iraq was a dumb move, but that doesn't make me hate America or Bush. There are two facts undeniable: 1) We dug this hole, and now have to see it through. Yes, it will be a lot of sacrifice, but it is our sacrifice, so why exactly do you care? America has sacrificed for the last 100 years for the betterment of the world, but you conveniently forget this. 2) The majority of Iraqi people say their life is better today, than it was under Sadam. Not that I think this explains the whole war issue, but it does bring some solice.

Wow, even more sorrow for you now. You actually live in Thailand, and you are pre-occupied with your own personal war. How sad. Boderline pathetic actually.

Oh, last thing. If you want to call me a pussy, I will be in BKK next month. No need to hide behind your computer. Why don't you meet with me. I could without a doubt kick your a**, but better yet, maybe I buy you a beer and show you that we are not all that bad. Up to you.

[Axel]

...but better yet, maybe I buy you a beer and show you that we are not all that bad. Up to you.

So much pro and con and nobody gives in. So the quote is the best I saw in this discussion.

For me both sides interesting to read and coming closer to my own saying. I am absolutely against Bush. This has nothing to do with America-bashing or -hating.

I am against violence which is never necessary, if both sides can listen.

(Oh yeah once in this board I said "take Bush out". Seems my English needs improvement, I meant take him, if you want kick him, out of office.)

Iraq: Sad news every day. Helicopters shot down here, there, with needless loss of lifes. This will lead to an escalation of fightings, The US will ask for more troops, the other side will want more retaliation. Neither side understands the other which anyway is a difficult thing.

So the quote is the best, only GWB does not drink (?) anymore. Well can be done with tea or coke.

[Butterfly]

Oh, last thing. If you want to call me a pussy, I will be in BKK next month. No need to hide behind your computer. Why don't you meet with me. I could without a doubt kick your a**, but better yet, maybe I buy you a beer and show you that we are not all that bad. Up to you.

SoCold, again, I am not Anti-American but I am Anti-Bush. I think he is POS who need to be put into sleep for security reasons. He is a far greater danger to the US than most "american sheeps" realize. But again they have "Faux" and "Ophra" to keep them busy. Wonder sometimes if the movie "Matrix" is not real when you see all those "brain dead" people repeating the "party line" like little bots. Someone need to unplug them or give them the blue pill.

Also you should know that my best friend in Bangkok is American and he is a total nut job. See, he is a NeoCon and wants the US to "invade" every shithole country in the universe so they will all "evolve" into prosperity. He voted for Bush and was all pro-war. However, he has always been honnest about the whole thing, knowing perfectly that the war was justified in his book to get the "oil" as Americans are the "chosen" people to rule the world. He also think that the US should invade all the other "shitholes" in the ME for the "oil" and "security". He also realize that the election in 2000 was a fraud and he is fine with it. He doesn't believe in democracy and think the election process is a waste of time when a "perfectly fit elite" is already there to rule the "inferior american masses". I actually "love" the guy because he is a lot of fun and my best drinking buddy. But I know I can't talk politics with him because he has no "brain". Does this mean he is bad guy ? no. He just does not know what he is saying, that's all.

I can't say the same thing with a "stranger", above all on the Internet, on a message board. You might be a lot of fun too, and I am sure you are not "evil" but since we can "debate" here anonymously, I will take my chance with you on the "debate" level. If you also want to take a drink, I am game. I don't believe in fighting above all after my Thai Boxing training for 12 months in Pattaya

I also happen to stay near that parking lot

[SoCal]

Thai Boxing training for 12 months in Pattaya

------------------------------

Bitterfly, last guy I fought was last New Years in a Solana Beach biker bar. I used to hang with some of the 81 Dagos. He was a 6'4" 250lb skin head. We were sitting at the bar when I asked him his name, he said Blair. I asked him if that wasn't a girl's name, then for some reason unbeknownst to me the sh*t hit the fan.

Needless to say, I don't believe in picking on the little guy, or someone who can't provide a little sport. FYI, I am 34 yrs old, 6'3", and 270lbs (could lose 25, but built like a house), and always look for the meaniest, ugliest, craziest mfer when I am in the mood.

Back to the original subject. Anti-American, or Anti-Bush, I just don't get it. You live in one of the most congenial places in the world, you are on a Thai web site, and you use it as your personal forum of hate. Just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I know for you 9/11 was a footnote in history, but for a lot of us it changed a lot of things. You don't need to respect that, but if you say the things you do to the wrong person, don't be surprized at the reprecussions.

Want to meet for a drink at Nana? I think that is great. Just like your neo-con friend we can avoid politics.

Love and Kisses, SoCold

[Butterfly]

I know for you 9/11 was a footnote in history, but for a lot of us it changed a lot of things. You don't need to respect that, but if you say the things you do to the wrong person, don't be surprized at the reprecussions.

yes 9/11 is a footnote in history, and americans with their "short memory span" will forget all about it in a few decades. If you think you are the only ones to have suffered a major "terrorist attack", think again. Maybe you should take your head out of your ass and see that there is a "world" outside the US. Again, Americans are not the "chosen" people or are NOT above other "races" or "nations" despite the US "economic" success. How many innocent people do you think were killed in Afghanistan and Iraq ? don't you think that they shouldn't have their little "revenge" on Americans for what they did ? I know they were just collateral damages. Guess what ? the 3000 people in the WTC on 9/11 were also collateral damages.

[Butterfly]

Back to the original subject. Anti-American, or Anti-Bush, I just don't get it. You live in one of the most congenial places in the world, you are on a Thai web site, and you use it as your personal forum of hate. Just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

What ? can't I post to my favorite forum in between short times ?

You are not making any sense for a "freedom" supporter.