Montgomery Burns

The Dems were hoping for indictments against Rove, Cheney and Bush for "outing" Valerie Wilson. Instead they got an indictment against someone no one has heard of (Scooter Libby) - for allegedly telling a different story than a reporter. Whoop-de-doo. Curses! The left is foiled again.

Folks, don't feed this troll's ignorant assumptions. Just ignore it and it will hopefully go away to "debate" someone at rabble.ca.

Black Dog: You trolling fool. If you weren't such a close-minded ideologue, you'd have read the article and noted that the photographer pointed out that he did not tell anyone to pose and smile. The mask is off. Everyone knows that the far left hates the USA and its militarymen and women who protect them. I think you're just upset that you missed the 2000 American Deaths in Iraq Party.

Oops. Forgot that. Thanks for pointing that out. Nice to hear from someone other than the trolls.

Thanks for all the links to radical leftwing sites.

Black Dog: With the exception of India, this statement of yours shows what a morally bankrupt person you really are.

The facts are the facts, and the fact is you're outa ammo. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Has he ever had any ammo...besides those troll weapons he fires on this board on a near daily basis?

You sound like ChIraq, Schroeder, Putin, Chretien or PMPM. Money is the most important thing--those brown-skinned Iraqis be damned. If only Canada had "many, many, MANY major corporations...." Congratulations on being able to come up with a glib reply. Two, actually. Unfortunately in so doing you've revealed that you're more concerned with being glib than with being consistent. The USA does it, it's okay, but if Canada trades with China, then we're bad, bad people. Just as I am constantly amazed at the smugness and arrogance of many Canadians who seem to feel that the big, bad USA can do no wrong, even when it is doing exactly the same thing that you rail against Canada POSSIBLY doing in the future. Those darn Amuricans better watch out or we'll burn down their White House again! Well, maybe the Brits will do it, so we can again take credit for it. Obfuscation not worthy of a reply. More of the same. No one is forcing any Canadian-owned corporation to trade with China, or anyone else, for that matter. I suppose they are free to trade with whom they choose. A Canadian is sneering at America's freedom? A Canadian? Someone from the country that yadda yadda yadda.....blather rant rave. Actually, I was chuckling, yes. But not "sneering" at America's freedom, rather laughing at a Canadian who acts like a wanna-be American, while sneering at virtually everything done by his own nation. In your eyes, it seems that the USA can do no wrong, and Canada can do no right. If you REALLY love the USA so much......nah, it's been said before, and you sneered at that, too. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Folks, don't feed the troll. It never has anything of interest to say.

It also shows Canada having nearly (per capita) 2.5 more rapes than the US, and 50% more robbery victims than the USA (per capita). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In all honesty, I didn't notice because that was not relevant to the conversation and had not been brought into question in the thread. In fact, I still haven't bothered to go back and look. But I can say that I'm sure most people would far rather be murdered than simply robbed, or even raped <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That has to be one of the lamest replies I've seen from you yet. Don't bring up Canada's horrid rape and robbery epidemic!! It's "not relevant" to the conversation!! (Translation: Don't you dare bring up something that makes Canada look worse than the USA; a true Canadian hates the USA with every fibre of their being).

tml12: What? Bush was responsible for 9-11. America, and especially Bush, are to blame for everything wrong in this world. Didn't you get the memo? Just yesterday, I cursed out Bush as a car drove by and kicked up a stone--chipping the windshield of my truck. If only Bush hadn't given those taxcuts to only the rich... Damn you Bush! :angry:

Looking at the Top 11 from the BBC, it is easy to see that they has a radical audience. Just compare their Top 11 to Rightwingnews'. No contest.

Times Online: Blair hints at military action against Iran Tony, what kind of a leftist are you? Don't you know that Iran is morally equivalent to every other country in the world?

Not going to happen. And what do you mean, "Iran next noises"? I think you're remembering things that were never said. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I hope you're right, about it not going to happen. As for the "noises", do a Google search using "Bush preparing for Iran". Here's the first pair of entries I got, hence the reference to the "noise". And my apologies, it seems it was only members of Bush's admin malking the noise, not Bush himself. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_112004Y.shtml http://salon.com/news/feature/2005/01/18/iran/print.html Well, it seems like everyone else has 'em. Seriously, hard to say. It seems like the handful of countries that presently have nukes want to remain as part of some exclusive club, and don't want any new members. Hell, if Canada decided to start up a nuclear missile program, would the USA, France, Britain, et al decide to come down on us too??? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> TruthOut.org and Salon? And you insist that you are not a leftie.

Hitler never attacked or invaded the US (ditto for Canada) when they declared war on Germany. For that matter neither did Japan. The Japanese Airforce - and no other part of their military - attacked a US military base located on a US possession taken from the indigenous island population. Japan was a "liberating" army; liberating Hawaii from the American "occupation". The US had no right to join in the war in Europe nor the war in the Pacific. Saddam should be back in power. The people who brought down the buildings in NYC all died in the attempt so no retribution is necessary there either. Unless or until a WMD is used, their existence is not to be believed. Besides how can it be possible to hide a "suitcase nuke" or a few gallons of Anthrax by burying it somewhere in a area the size of Iraq? It's just NOT possible. There are NO WMD in Iraq or any of the Arab States. The bottom line: The US military should not only be withdrawn from Iraq but every place they are deployed, and then disbanded. Reagan "won" the war against the USSR, there is nobody looking to hurt them. China? No - they're just a hard working people and a good source for cheap goods to be sold at Wal-Mart. Korea? No, those people dying in the camps are no more important then the people who died in Iraq. It's the perfect argument! If Korea had oil, Bush would invade and attack. The US would care and should want to get involved. They don't have oil - so let the citizens die. The new US philosophy for foreign involvement should be that if Koreans kill Koreans, Sudanese kill Sudanese, Rwandans are just killing Rwandans - don't look to the US or it's citizens to care. It's just not their job. If the US only left everyone else alone, disarmed; the world would be Eden-like. Bush should be brought up on war crimes, impeached, and jailed. He wasn't smart enough to analyze the information provided and decided to believe something that was, to date, not proven. He compounded his failure by passing on the information and acting upon it! So, just to recap: Saddam should be back in power. He should be allowed to sue for false imprisonment - I think a $3 billion dollar settlement appropriate (paid for by the wealthy; the only ones who received a taxcut from Bush); the lawyer-laden Democrat Party would have no problem representing him. All the 1.5 million Iraqis who were killed or mangled by Saddam, were just not thinking politically correct for the greater good of Iraq. That $3 billion will go a long way to the rebuilding of the palaces as well as the prisons and torture dungeons - the far left can never have enough of them. Bush arrested. Military disbanded. Then all would be right in the world. The US would be a "nice" country and would not be hated (it's NOT jealousy!! :angry:) by the rest of the world, the rest of the world that hates the US so much that they devour American culture like Michael Moore devours food at an all-you-can-eat buffet. A country so hated that people never ever try to drift 90 miles on a raft through shark-infested waters to reach America.

And the US economy continues to rock and roll. From the BBC: But but but...everyone does not make the same income, not everyone has the "right" to free unlimited healthcare, and many are two-income families--ergo this economic report is a disaster...i.e., if you're a leftie. Why can't Canada and the EUtopia make life better for their citizens, instead of the grinding destitution that is so common here and across the pond?

As usual, I state facts, data and reason. But Eureka tore apart my arguement so brilliantly and effortlessly: They are lies!! (but I'm not going to prove that they are lies) I find the far left so amusing.

Well, if Canada's taxpayer-funded, state-run, North Korea-style CBC says so, then it must be true.

PocketRocket: You sound like ChIraq, Schroeder, Putin, Chretien or PMPM. Money is the most important thing--those brown-skinned Iraqis be damned. If only Canada had "many, many, MANY major corporations...." Those darn Amuricans better watch out or we'll burn down their White House again! Well, maybe the Brits will do it, so we can again take credit for it. Who in the hell is going to stop Alberta from selling its oil to whom it wants? Besides, I saw this from the Glove and Mail today: TD boss Ed Clark says he has no interest in chasing the Chinese dragon, and is instead focusing his external growth ambitions on the U.S. market. Through its TD Waterhouse brokerage, TD once had a small presence in Hong Kong, but that has since been shuttered. The bank has no beachheads on the mainland. Thank goodness there are some Canadians who don't put their knee-jerk anti-Americanism ahead of economic interests. A Canadian is sneering at America's freedom? A Canadian? Someone from the country that fines people $1500 for whispering (going out of his way to make sure this wasn't heard) to another person that someone in a car dealership was gay? Someone from the country who suspends teachers for writing a letter to the editor (while off-duty from work) supporting the traditional definition of marriage? Someone from a country that drags a Bishop into a human rights commission for daring to say that homosexuality undermines the foundation of family. Someone from a country that does not have hearings on Supreme Court judges (like the US), but instead the PM merely picks whoever he wants? Someone from a country that drags a politician in front of a human rights commission for daring to say that Native Indians are involved in a disproportionate amount of crime? Someone from a country that has a province where it is ILLEGAL to make billboards, product packaging, road signs and advertisements in English unless French is given greater predominance? The Language Police will impose fines of up to $7000 PER OFFENSE for noncompliance measure the lettering of English on business signs. While it's illegal to use English in Quebec for these things, by contrast, in the US it is illegal to discriminate against anyone for using whatever language they wish. I'm no fan of the ACLU, but if Canada ever tried to pull this type of cultural discrimination in the US, the ACLU would be on the warpath. I'm constantly amazed at the smugness and arrogance of many Canadians when it comes to the US. Much like Canada. Like Canada and the WTO ruling.

Pocket Rocket: It also shows Canada having nearly (per capita) 2.5 more rapes than the US, and 50% more robbery victims than the USA (per capita).

The same Larry Campbell who called conservatives "barbarians" during the last federal election? I'm glad I don't watch it.

theloniusfleabag: Please don't use childish terms to refer to people. It is against the rules of this forum. Attack the point; don't call them names.

Black Dog: Fascinating stuff here. Indeed, his oped in the LA Times is fascinating: A shadowy hidden secretive little-known cabal of senior officeholders like the VP of the USA and the Secretary of Defense were making administration policy. I'm shocked to hear this! I also found his speech (from your other link) to be fascinating stuff: Bush lied, Uday and Kusay died! But but but....what about the "neocon cabal"? Obviously Wilkerson hasn't been listening to the MSM media and the far left. It's a disaster over there. It is a QUAGMIRE! Thanks for posting this topic, BD.

I'd like to congratulate the Republicans for fighting Bush on the Miers affair. One doesn't like too much infighting, but sometimes you have to, and it’s one thing that I've always admired by the right. No lockstepping, no unconditional worship of Great Leader (eg, Clinton). Instead, you have a bunch of outspoken individualists unafraid to speak up on matters of principle, even when it means beating up on "their own." When the Democrats don't have much problem with Miers, then you know she was a poor candidate. Judge Alito is a far better nomination. The ACLU, MoveOn, NOW, and Howard Dean have already issued statements complaining about Alito. Any guy that make the "progressives" of the far left seethe with rage, is A-OK in my book.

PocketRocket: Resolution 1441 (the 17th one) warned of serious consequences. What in the world do you think that meant--another (18th) UN Resolution against Iraq--perhaps a sternly written letter? Even the pacifist Hans Blix admitted - in his book - that that was diplospeak for war. What UN Resolution was passed that vioded the previous 17? It is clear that the only reason why Russia, France, China, Germany, and Canada wanted to keep Saddam in power because of their oil and arms deals with him. You changed the subject, but were you complaining when Halliburton got bid-free contracts for Bosnia during the Clinton administration? The fact is that Halliburton is the best at what they do, and have the best capibilities when it comes to responding to emergencies. Besides, they've made a paltry profit out of Iraq. Congratulations on winning the Understatement Of The Day™ award. Militarily? No. But things have changed in the post 9-11 world. I wish you could understand that. Oh but there was. Saddam ran a terrorist haven, he was linked with Al Qaeda, he sponsored international terrorism, and he might have been involved in 9-11 (he allowed Al Qaeda to use a passenger jet for training purposes at the Salman Pak terrorist training camp). Clinton-appointed federal judge Harold Bear apparently thought so, as he awarded two 9-11 families a $109 million judgement against the state of Iraq for their complicity in the terrorist attack that killed 3000 Americans. You might not have known about Baer's ruling because the liberal media - typically - has put a blackout on the story. What "world"? The part ruled by dictators/kings who offer only state-run propaganda for their serfs? European and Canadian sheep who are, for the most part, brainwashed by hard-left news from the likes of the BBC and CBC? Or the part of the world where the people know these two best: i.e., the US and the UK. Seems to me that both Bush and Blair were re-elected. Ditto for John Howard. Does that tell you anything? Here's the Reuters link for you to read before you state whether the comparison of Bush and Blair to Adolph Hitler - is "justifiable". Good grief. You think that Robert Mugabe, Kim Jong Il, Saddam Hussein, Mohammar Khaddafi, Syria's Assad, Yassir Arafat (from the fictious nation called "Palestine"), etal, should be given a platform at world events?! That int'l body has helped move towards peace by doing nothing in Sudan, Rwanda, North Korea, etc. That int'l body allows states like Libya, Syria, China, Cuba to sit, and even chair that int'l body's Human Rights Commission. That int'l body passed 12 years of resolutions against Iraq was virtually toothless when it came to enforcing its own resolutions. There was one reason for this. The billions of dollars that the UN illegally made in the Oil For Food Program. Like Russia, China, France, Germany, Canada, etc, it was all about their insatiable greed for money. Typical socialists--leeching off the blood of the Iraqi people.

All last week, the left was eagerly anticipating "Fitzmas," their name for that happy day when federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald would hand down indictments against Scooter Libby, and Rove, maybe even Cheney, and maybe, just maybe--if we're really really lucky--Bushitler himself. What they got instead, was an indictment against someone no one has never heard of before (shades of Jeff Gannon), who is not charged with "outing" Plame. Another liberal wet dream dead. Rove, Cheney and Bush win again. It's basically a nonstory--just like the left said about Clinton's perjury--right? Besides, I believe that Libby will be acquitted. Why? Because I saw this from the New York Times: