Bush being honored

[Topaz]

Prez Bush is being honored by 8300+ votes in San Franciso, to have the sewage plant named the GW Bush Sewage Plant...just 7100 votes are need to put it on the ballot in Nov. Why? They say Bush has made such a mess of everything. A picture of the plant may be in Bush`s l presidental library. Could impeachment be far behind????

[Oleg Bach]

Prez Bush is being honored by 8300+ votes in San Franciso, to have the sewage plant named the GW Bush Sewage Plant...just 7100 votes are need to put it on the ballot in Nov. Why? They say Bush has made such a mess of everything. A picture of the plant may be in Bush`s l presidental library. Could impeachment be far behind????

How fitting that his lasting legacey will be a pile of poop...and a fine building to house it - a temple of sort to his honourless honour..Did you know that the mythical term Belzebub means lord of the flies or the other translation "Lord of the manure pile" - In ancient times if one tribe wanted to insult another tribe they would yell - Your god or king rules a shit hole....and that is what dear Geroge created in his eight years - a social - economical and spritual shit hole that was once a proud empire...oh my - what's that smell blowing up from the south?

[bush_cheney2004]

....and that is what dear Geroge created in his eight years - a social - economical and spritual shit hole that was once a proud empire...oh my - what's that smell blowing up from the south?

That smell is the same odor of empire that blew in from the north, south, east, and west from kings and queens booted in their Royal Asses long ago.

[Oleg Bach]

That smell is the same odor of empire that blew in from the north, south, east, and west from kings and queens booted in their Royal Asses long ago.

To bad this long lost King of Kings did not arrive and untangle this insidious corporate facism that really stinks - but a stink we are incrimentally getting use to. We need a change and for you information the Kennedy and Bush familys are not royal - or noble - they are merchant class that oppressed anyone intelligence...it's like a conspiring bunch of hardware and butcher shop owners of a bygone era that plot to get rid of the smart and kind noble on the hill - there is no nobity or honour left - I would rather have a good king or queen than a collective of highly orgainzed oil merchants running the place - they are to stupid to have been warrented authority - they are common creeps.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... I would rather have a good king or queen than a collective of highly orgainzed oil merchants running the place - they are to stupid to have been warrented authority - they are common creeps.

Fortunately, what you would rather have died a slow death after royally cocking things up. Amateurs!

[Shady]

How fitting that his lasting legacey will be a pile of poop...

No. His lasting legacy will be a free and democratic Iraq, and possibly Afghanistan. As well as 8 years free of terrorist attacks since 9/11. His short-term legacy associated to him by leftwingers will have little lasting significance.

[g_bambino]

No. His lasting legacy will be a free and democratic Iraq, and possibly Afghanistan. As well as 8 years free of terrorist attacks since 9/11. His short-term legacy associated to him by leftwingers will have little lasting significance.

I think you mean nearly seven years free of any terrorist attacks on the United States. But, so what? There were no terrorist attacks on the US during the term of Martin Van Buren and he isn't remembered for that fact. What did happen during the lifespan of the Bush Administration, though, is a huge increase in terrorist attacks in that "free and democratic" Iraq. As it seems highly unlikely that this particular Middle Eastern country will actually be free and democratic before January 20 of next year, Bush's legacy may well be one of having made a hideous mess that someone else had to clean up. If there ever is success in Afghanistan and Iraq, I doubt the credit will go to hot dog, mission accomplished, "I can press when there needs to be pressed; I can hold hands when there needs to be—hold hands," George W. Bush.

Edited July 1, 2008 by g_bambino

[bush_cheney2004]

I think you mean nearly seven years free of any terrorist attacks on the United States. But, so what? There were no terrorist attacks on the US during the term of Martin Van Buren and he isn't remembered for that fact.

Patently false...see The Caroline Affair:

The Caroline Affair involved Canadian rebels using New York bases to attack the government in Canada. On December 29, 1837, Canadian government forces crossed the frontier into the US and burned the Caroline, which the rebels had been using. One American was killed, and an outburst of anti-British sentiment swept through the U.S. Van Buren sent the army to the frontier and closed the rebel bases. [Wiki]

Bush's legacy may well be one of having made a hideous mess that someone else had to clean up. If there ever is success in Afghanistan and Iraq, I doubt the credit will go to hot dog, mission accomplished, "I can press when there needs to be pressed; I can hold hands when there needs to be—hold hands," George W. Bush.

That was the idea..."make a mess". Equivalent to rushing the net in tennis....President Bush forced the issue and longstanding American policy for Iraq. No balls ...no blue chips.

[g_bambino]

Patently false...see The Caroline Affair:

The Caroline Affair involved Canadian rebels using New York bases to attack the government in Canada. On December 29, 1837, Canadian government forces crossed the frontier into the US and burned the Caroline, which the rebels had been using. One American was killed, and an outburst of anti-British sentiment swept through the U.S. Van Buren sent the army to the frontier and closed the rebel bases. [Wiki]

Not that it's really all that important (I was only being glib), but how was that a terrorist attack on the US?

[bush_cheney2004]

Not that it's really all that important (I was only being glib), but how was that a terrorist attack on the US?

I was not being glib.....continuing the incursion and murder of an American national:

On December 29, Canadian loyalist Colonel Sir Allan MacNab and Captain Andrew Drew of the Royal Navy commanding a party of militia, crossed the international boundary and seized the Caroline, towed her into the current, set her afire, and cast her adrift over Niagara Falls, after killing one American named Amos Durfee in the process. His body was later exhibited in front of a recruiting tavern in Buffalo, New York.

Americans doing the same today are cast as "terrorists".

[g_bambino]

I was not being glib.....continuing the incursion and murder of an American national:

On December 29, Canadian loyalist Colonel Sir Allan MacNab and Captain Andrew Drew of the Royal Navy commanding a party of militia, crossed the international boundary and seized the Caroline, towed her into the current, set her afire, and cast her adrift over Niagara Falls, after killing one American named Amos Durfee in the process. His body was later exhibited in front of a recruiting tavern in Buffalo, New York.

Americans doing the same today are cast as "terrorists".

I know you weren't being glib; hence, I said I was. Anyway, I still don't see the parallels you're trying to draw. Terrorism usually involves a mercenary-type group conducting random attacks on civilians. The situation in 1837 was one wherein the soldiers of a state military sought out criminals who had attempted to take refuge from punishment in another country. Durfee was just an accidental casualty. What happened was not a direct attack on the United States, and certainly not terrorist in nature.

Edited July 3, 2008 by g_bambino

[bush_cheney2004]

.... Durfee was just an accidental casualty. What happened was not a direct attack on the United States, and certainly not terrorist in nature.

Surely you are not serious....if the Americans executed such an operation today, I doubt that Canadians would dismiss the action so readily as "accidental" and "not terrorist in nature".

You should have picked a different president when being "glib".

[g_bambino]

Surely you are not serious....if the Americans executed such an operation today, I doubt that Canadians would dismiss the action so readily as "accidental" and "not terrorist in nature".

Of course I'm being serious; unless you can provide some evidence that the Canadians attacked specifically in order to kill an American, and only used the pursuit of MacKenzie and the quashing of a planned invasion as a ruse in order to do so.

[Topaz]

Surely you are not serious....if the Americans executed such an operation today, I doubt that Canadians would dismiss the action so readily as "accidental" and "not terrorist in nature".

You should have picked a different president when being "glib".

I bet if former CIA agents ever wrote a book about the operations since the WW2, most wouldn't believe it at first, then America would probably be very angry at the government. I think today's world, the world see GW Bush as a terrorist himself under the cover of the elite in the world who want to control the Middle-East and these people of these countries know it and are fighting back to keep their country. Bush has fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and its only a matter of time before he and Israel try to bomb Iran FOR WHAT? They have their reasons that they tell the world but the map of that area says Caspian Sea Basin oil! 3X's u r out!!

[bush_cheney2004]

Of course I'm being serious; unless you can provide some evidence that the Canadians attacked specifically in order to kill an American, and only used the pursuit of MacKenzie and the quashing of a planned invasion as a ruse in order to do so.

First of all....it wasn't just "Canadians"...the incursion, seizure, and murder was led by a member of the Royal Navy.....Canada was just the name of another part of the Empire...the same Empire with which the Americans had experienced much "difficulty" in the past.

Further, the record shows that a complicit Ontario sheriff (Alexander McLeod) was arrested in Lewiston, NY and tried for Durfee's murder (he was acquitted). Obviously his death was not viewed as accidental by the Americans, and McLeod's own defense was that he was acting on British orders. In 1842, with both sides wishing to put the matter to rest, and with a new Tyler administration, the British apologized (Lord Ashburron).

In any event, to glibly choose the Van Buren administration in comparison to Bush with respect to "terrorism" is problematic at best given the circumstances of the Caroline Affair and related tension with the Evil Empire.

[g_bambino]

First of all....it wasn't just "Canadians"...the incursion, seizure, and murder was led by a member of the Royal Navy.....Canada was just the name of another part of the Empire...the same Empire with which the Americans had experienced much "difficulty" in the past.

Further, the record shows that a complicit Ontario sheriff (Alexander McLeod) was arrested in Lewiston, NY and tried for Durfee's murder (he was acquitted). Obviously his death was not viewed as accidental by the Americans, and McLeod's own defense was that he was acting on British orders. In 1842, with both sides wishing to put the matter to rest, and with a new Tyler administration, the British apologized (Lord Ashburron).

In any event, to glibly choose the Van Buren administration in comparison to Bush with respect to "terrorism" is problematic at best given the circumstances of the Caroline Affair and related tension with the Evil Empire.

Well, that it was a problematic choise is, I suppose, your opinion. It is, though, one I don't share. The excursion of the Canadians (they were still called such despite being colonists of the UK) into the United States was not a mission to target American civilians, cause them terror, and undermine the stability of US society and government; the purpose was to capture and bring back for punnishment Canadians who had sought refuge across the border; unless, as I asked earlier, you can provide some information to the contrary. That some Americans decided to get involved with and assist the rebel Canadians probably complicated matters, but it doesn't make the events that took place on Navy Island anything remotely close to what happened in Manhattan six and a half years ago. So, I still contend that Van Buren never dealt with terrorism.

[bush_cheney2004]

....That some Americans decided to get involved with and assist the rebel Canadians probably complicated matters, but it doesn't make the events that took place on Navy Island anything remotely close to what happened in Manhattan six and a half years ago. So, I still contend that Van Buren never dealt with terrorism.

You can do as you please, but to even the most casual observer, your attempt to "glibly" pluck Van Buren out of American history as an example of the most benign experience that has befallen a US president is flawed. I simply wanted to challenge your hasty choice, and always take great pleasure in pointing out the fundamental historical differences between the rebel Americans and much despised Loyalists.

Nobody said the Caroline Affair was comparable to what happened on 9/11/2001. But I am not unreasonable...surely the Americans have at least one administration that would suit your flawed example vis-a-vis seven "attack free" years.

[g_bambino]

You can do as you please, but to even the most casual observer, your attempt to "glibly" pluck Van Buren out of American history as an example of the most benign experience that has befallen a US president is flawed. I simply wanted to challenge your hasty choice, and always take great pleasure in pointing out the fundamental historical differences between the rebel Americans and much despised Loyalists.

Nobody said the Caroline Affair was comparable to what happened on 9/11/2001. But I am not unreasonable...surely the Americans have at least one administration that would suit your flawed example vis-a-vis seven "attack free" years.

Er, I never once said Van Buren's tenure was the most benign experience for a US President; you just did. What did come from me was the point that there were no terrorist attacks during the Van Buren presidency, in response to Shady's claim that the current President will be remembered for nearly seven years without a terrorist assault on his country. In other words, I can separate out different types of attack and see that keeping America terrorist free is not the sole domain of George W. Bush. You appear to be supporting your side of this by erasing the line between terrorism and international policing, thus, in the process, drawing the Caroline Affair and the hijackings of September 11, 2001, together. It seems an odd thing for you to do, though; I thought you, of all people, would have been able to easily recognise one nation invading another in order to apprehend previous and potential attackers, some of whom are even nationals of the invading state!

[bush_cheney2004]

Er, I never once said Van Buren's tenure was the most benign experience for a US President; you just did. What did come from me was the point that there were no terrorist attacks during the Van Buren presidency, in response to Shady's claim that the current President will be remembered for nearly seven years without a terrorist assault on his country.

But there most certainly were....the Second Seminole War comes to mind.

In other words, I can separate out different types of attack and see that keeping America terrorist free is not the sole domain of George W. Bush. You appear to be supporting your side of this by erasing the line between terrorism and international policing, thus, in the process, drawing the Caroline Affair and the hijackings of September 11, 2001, together.

No...you have done this.

It seems an odd thing for you to do, though; I thought you, of all people, would have been able to easily recognise one nation invading another in order to apprehend previous and potential attackers, some of whom are even nationals of the invading state!

Do you understand the "nationals" of Al Qaeda? Checkmate.

[g_bambino]

But there most certainly were....the Second Seminole War comes to mind.

But you brought up the Caroline Affair, not the above. I'm not even sure where terrorism comes into play in the Second Seminole War; do you mean the attacks by Indians on American homesteads?

No...you have done this.

Please don't try and take the words from your mouth and place them in mine; as I already alluded to above, in reaction to a statement I made about terrorism during a certain president's term, you brought up the Caroline Affair. That means you drew the parallel between the 1837 Canadian foray into American territory and terrorist attacks like 9/11, not I.

Do you understand the "nationals" of Al Qaeda? Checkmate.

Irrelevant. There were American Al-Qaeda members; I was comparing them to the Canadian rebels who had fled for refuge in the US republic and were sought out by the Canadian authorities. So, settle down on the bravado; you haven't won anything yet.

[bush_cheney2004]

Irrelevant. There were American Al-Qaeda members; I was comparing them to the Canadian rebels who had fled for refuge in the US republic and were sought out by the Canadian authorities. So, settle down on the bravado; you haven't won anything yet.

Thank you for proving my point...Al Qaeda includes Americans, which can certainly be a source of "terrorism" as well. You said it was I who was doing the comparing....please make up your mind.

Pick another president....."attack free"...of course!

[g_bambino]

Thank you for proving my point...Al Qaeda includes Americans, which can certainly be a source of "terrorism" as well. You said it was I who was doing the comparing....please make up your mind.

Pick another president....."attack free"...of course!

Er, yes... I did say you were making a comparison. And I made one of my own. I'd ask if you need us to limit ourselves to one comparison at a time, but, regardless of how it happened, you actually helped prove my point: the Caroline Affair was more akin to the invasion of Afghanistan than to a terrorist attack on the United States.

[bush_cheney2004]

Er, yes... I did say you were making a comparison. And I made one of my own. I'd ask if you need us to limit ourselves to one comparison at a time, but, regardless of how it happened, you actually helped prove my point: the Caroline Affair was more akin to the invasion of Afghanistan than to a terrorist attack on the United States.

Why yes...I'm sure the Taliban take great comfort in the historical significance. Nevertheless, choosing President Van Buren as the easy-breezy "no-attack" example remains problematic, as there were lots of attacks on the US to deal with in his time.

[g_bambino]

Why yes...I'm sure the Taliban take great comfort in the historical significance. Nevertheless, choosing President Van Buren as the easy-breezy "no-attack" example remains problematic, as there were lots of attacks on the US to deal with in his time.

Could you please direct me to where I said there were no attacks during Van Buren's presidency?

[bush_cheney2004]

Could you please direct me to where I said there were no attacks during Van Buren's presidency?

Sure....you posted:

I think you mean nearly seven years free of any terrorist attacks on the United States. But, so what? There were no terrorist attacks on the US during the term of Martin Van Buren and he isn't remembered for that fact.

This caught my attention as being rather sloppy for both the former and latter assertions and President Van Buren. What we are jousting about concerns the definition of "terrorist" I suppose, but it is easy to retrofit the definition of terrorism before modern usage. Hell, many people consider the modern American military to be a terrorist organization.