Thread: Moronic quotes

The title of this thread is quotes from the moron's mouth - well, we know who the morons are don't we? Rove did not out Vaerie Plame after all and the left-wing moonbats owe him & GWB an apology - or what?

Rove, wasn't he the guy that claimed McCain had a black illegitimate child. I don't think anyone needs to lower themself to apologise to this sleazebag.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

The title of this thread is quotes from the moron's mouth - well, we know who the morons are don't we? Rove did not out Vaerie Plame after all and the left-wing moonbats owe him & GWB an apology - or what?

either you are more obtuse than i thought, or just woefully uninformed.

Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret sourcewho, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.

What Rove Told Cooper on Plame Case - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com

Originally Posted by Begbie

Rove, wasn't he the guy that claimed McCain had a black illegitimate child. I don't think anyone needs to lower themself to apologise to this sleazebag.

on the eve of the s. carolina primary, rove had aides call potential republican voters with this (paraphrased) question....

would you still vote for mccain if you found out that he had fathered an illegitimate black child?

needless to say, this doesn't go down well with south carolina republicans.

of course there was no truth at all to any of it. mccain and his wife had adopted a bangladeshi girl.

so what issues are the republicans going to run on?

success in iraq? c'mon.
effectiveness during katrina? please.
fiscal responsibility? that's a good one.

Republicans are planning to spend the vast majority of their sizable financial war chest over the final 60 days of the campaign attacking Democratic House and Senate candidates over personal issues and local controversies, GOP officials said.
The National Republican Congressional Committee, which this year dispatched a half-dozen operatives to comb through tax, court and other records looking for damaging information on Democratic candidates, plans to spend more than 90 percent of its $50 million-plus advertising budget on what officials described as negative ads

washingtonpost.com

raycary wrote: and if you're referring to the miniscule percentage of Muslims who have regrettably felt it necessary to take up arms, well they are hardly threatening everything 'decent'.

we will just take this as, anything or anyone who is not Muslim or does not agree with rays opinions

so tell me ray, if they are attacking only people and things that are NOT DECENT, how would you explain the current Muslim up rising and bombings in Thailand???? would they be doing these things just so they can try and take away land from another RELIGION and make it their own UTOPIA???

I would also ask you to explain the same situation about the current status of the Philippines????

in both instances, the terrorist attacks have openly been contributed to the fact that the organizations "WANT TO MAKE A PLACE FOR MUSLIMS ONLY"

in both instances stated above, the Muslims had not been attacked,oppressed, or invaded

so please explain to me how these actions can be viewed in any other way except---MUSLIMS ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THESE COUNTRIES !!!!!! AND ARE KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE !!!!!

Originally Posted by KID

in both instances, the terrorist attacks have openly been contributed to the fact that the organizations "WANT TO MAKE A PLACE FOR AMERICANS ONLY"

so please explain to me how these actions can be viewed in any other way except---AMERICANS ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THESE COUNTRIES !!!!!! AND ARE KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE !!!!!

Ok fixed

I... I... feel so violated!

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by KID

in both instances, the terrorist attacks have openly been contributed to the fact that the organizations "WANT TO MAKE A PLACE FOR AMERICANS ONLY"

so please explain to me how these actions can be viewed in any other way except---AMERICANS ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THESE COUNTRIES !!!!!! AND ARE KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE !!!!!

Ok fixed

Ahahaha...the truth, it burnses my eyes! Nasty Americanses Hobbits invadings others landses!

"The level of activity that we see today from a military standpoint, I think, will clearly decline. I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."

Dick Cheney, May, 2005.

So, what do you say now, Dick?

noticed ya didn't answer the question's ray, you little bitch buddies are welcome to answer them also

Must be terrible to live in fear.

^ living in fear is reassuring actually. Everything becomes so simple. It's either black or white.

Gawd, it's just hard to believe how delusional and psychotic the administration is:

A Senate report released Friday disclosed for the first time that a CIA assessment in October 2005 said Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or turn a blind eye toward" al-Qaida operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or his associates.

Rice, however, maintained "there were ties between Iraq and al-Qaida. Now, are we learning more now that we have access to people like Saddam Hussein's intelligence services? Of course we're going to learn more."

Ok, so, the Senate says there's no link between Saddam and Al-Qaida, but, NOOOOOO! Rice says there were ties, so, the hell with the Senate and all intelligence assessments.

This one cracked me up though:

"It is unimaginable that you could do something about the Middle East with Saddam Hussein sitting in the center of it, threatening his neighbors, threatening our allies, tying down American forces in Saudi Arabia," Rice.

So, yeah, it's better now. Quagmire in both Afghanistan and Iraq, more reasons for terrorists to take up arms, but, HELLS YEAH WE'RE NOT TIED DOWN IN TEH SAUDI ANY MORE

Rice: Do not relent in fighting Iraq war - Yahoo! News

So Saddam became a threat to America??

Okay lets say he was a threat to America, why did the Americans supply weapons to him??

Stupid, isn't it? We supply weapons to help Saddam fight Iran, then, we invade Iraq.

We supply weapons to Ho Chi Minh, then, we invade Vietnam.

We supply weapons to the Afghan rebels under bin Laden's leadership, then, we invade Afghanistan.

Are we just f'ing stupid?

No surasak, I think it's like this. It's okay with America if Iranians were being killed with Mustard gas and Chemical weapons.

Why should Iran love america??

America's complex.

Originally Posted by KID

noticed ya didn't answer the question's ray, you little bitch buddies are welcome to answer them also

I know its hard for you to keep it civil but still give it a try please.

Originally Posted by surasak

Stupid, isn't it? We supply weapons to help Saddam fight Iran, then, we invade Iraq.

We supply weapons to Ho Chi Minh, then, we invade Vietnam.

We supply weapons to the Afghan rebels under bin Laden's leadership, then, we invade Afghanistan.

Are we just f'ing stupid?

On that basis, why don't we just invade whenever an arms order comes through?

keda

well it also depends where the oil is

And narcotics.

Let's see. Vietnam. Oil. Check.
Afghanistan. Narcotics. Check.
Iraq. Oil. Check.

Iran. Oil. To be checked soon!

More bollocks from the world's #1 terrorist organisation.

US waging 'ideological struggle'

US President George W Bush addresses the nation from the Oval Office

US President George W Bush has said the fight against terror is a "struggle for civilisation", in a speech marking five years since the 11 September attacks.

Addressing the nation from the Oval Office, Mr Bush called for a unified country to "meet the test of history".

Earlier, Mr Bush attended solemn ceremonies in New York, Washington and Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Mr Bush has only made five such addresses to the American people - the first was on the day of the attacks.

Mr Bush said the so-called war on terror was much more than a military conflict.

'New threat'

"It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the calling of our generation," he said during the speech, broadcast during primetime on US networks.

"It is a struggle for civilisation. We are fighting to maintain a way of life enjoyed by free nations."

He told viewers that America did not ask for this war.

"But the war is not over and it will not be over until either we or the extremists emerge victorious," he said.

Mr Bush warned that failing to face the enemy now would create a new threat in the future.

"We will leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons," he said.

The BBC's James Westhead, in Washington, says the speech will inevitably have political significance for the US, deeply divided both on Iraq and the administration's tactics in fighting the "war on terror".

Mr Bush said the US must remain committed to Iraq.

"Whatever mistakes have been made in Iraq, the worst mistake would be to think that if we pulled out, the terrorists would leave us alone," he said.

"They will not leave us alone. They will follow us."

He said the safety of the US depended on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad.

As the nation marked the anniversary, broadcasters aired an apparently new video from al-Qaeda deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, who urged Muslims to increase resistance against the US.

In the footage, he referred to the recent Israeli bombardment of Lebanon, saying al-Qaeda had been given "every legitimacy" to keep fighting the US and its allies.

'Together as one'

Earlier, flags flew at half-mast at Ground Zero, the footprint of New York's World Trade Center, as those present remembered the moments when the hijacked planes hit the two towers.

Tearful families of the victims, some clutching photos of loved ones, floated flowers in a reflecting pool in remembrance of those who had died at the site.

Mr Bush, accompanied by First Lady Laura Bush, observed the memorial silences at a fire station among colleagues of the hundreds of fire-fighters who died during the rescue operation.

He later attended a ceremony at a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where United Airlines Flight 93 crashed to the ground after passengers tried to retake the aircraft.

A memorial ceremony was also held at the Pentagon, where 184 people died when a third hijacked plane ploughed into the building.

Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's voice cracked with emotion as he paid tribute to Pentagon colleagues and servicemen who had been on the front line of US "war on terror" in the five years since the attacks.

After laying a wreath there later, Mr Bush struggled to hold back his tears as he met relatives of the dead.