Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 23, 2009 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yet another reason to support Obama: because his detractors sound like this guy.

Posted by MasterChef (anonymous) on June 23, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Right on, Keta! Its WAY too early to let ol' Bushie off the hook. His moronic foreign policies put our country into another Viet Nam situation. We'll probably be spilling innocent blood in the middle east along with massive amounts of money for decades to come. But, at least he got that number 1 terrorist Saddam for us. Oh, wait, bin Laden was the #1 terrorist and he's still at-large.

On the homefront, Bushie's tax cuts for the rich and letting wall street bankers run amok started a run-away train that the next several administrations will have to deal with. Let's not forget Bushie's last minute gift to the bankers. Over half a TRILLION dollars tossed to them as he was heading out the door.

Homer, the extensive use of teleprompters began with the guy the stead-fast republicans swoon over - Ronald Reagan.

Posted by bklibrary (anonymous) on June 23, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Homer you are just like Zell Miller why don't you move to Georgia.

Posted by VoiceofReason (anonymous) on June 23, 2009 at 10:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo

“the WTC was already a terrorist target in '93”.
Bill Clinton was president from 1993 to 2001. What did he do?

George W. Bush took office on January 20, 2001. He was in office less than nine months when the World Trade Center was attacked.

“a briefing titled Bin Laden Determined to Attack on American Soil” From what I have read, there was enough blame to go around. The FBI the CIA and others. Also no one had put together the how, when and where.

“We did not need to go to war with Iraq” If we had not gone to war with Iraq, Saddam would still be in power and we would still be trying to find out if he had biological weapons or was trying to develop them. If you remember, the U.N. was doing nothing about Saddam’s refusals to allow inspections.

We did not need “evidence on weapons of mass destruction on Saddam Hussein”. He had already used chemical weapons on his own people. Do you think he would not have given them to Al Qaeda or biological weapons if he had developed them?

Like every other radical on the left or the right, you are so filled with hate, you can’t see or don’t want to see the facts and make up things to “support” or “justify” your twisted views.

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 24, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So the reason Neo disagrees with you is because he's full of hate and can't see the facts? Follow that to it's logical conclusion: the only people who aren't full of hate and can see the facts are Bush's relatives and friends and the handful of Bush defenders who, unlike the rest of the world, don't see his presidency as disastrous and deadly and expensive into infinity. Worse, you're making stuff up. Ultra-secular Saddam Hussein was no friend to Islamic extremists. Your phrase "if he had developed them" is as close as you can come to making him sound like a well-armed global threat. And we didn't need any evidence to get the Iraq catastrophe rolling? Really? Thank God people who think like you are in the minority.

Posted by VoiceofReason (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo

Reread my post. I did not criticize President Obama at all, let alone criticize “every move Obama makes”. As a matter of fact I did not mention President Obama at all. Seems you made that up to “support” or “justify” your twisted views.

If you want to interpret stating facts as defending Bush, there is nothing I can do about that. Facts are facts.

“the WTC was already a terrorist target in '93”.
Bill Clinton was president from 1993 to 2001. What did he do?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
“He didn't let them be reduced to a pile of rubbish.”

Then what did HE do to prevent it in eight (8) years? DON’T WANT TO SEE THAT?

Keta

“Ultra-secular Saddam Hussein was no friend to Islamic extremists.”

If I remember correctly, he was giving money to the families of suicide bombers that attacked Israel.

“Follow that to it's logical conclusion: the only people who aren't full of hate and can see the facts are Bush's relatives and friends and the handful of Bush defenders”

You need to reread my post especially the last sentence.

I stated “Like every other radical on the LEFT or the RIGHT, you are so filled with hate, you can’t see or don’t want to see the facts and make up things to “support” or “justify” your twisted views.”.

That statement has now been proven.

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 12:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You're misinformed. Saddam Hussein, as I said, couldn't have cared less about the cause of Islamic extremists. He did care about Palestine, which he considered an extension of his own territory. He rewarded some of the families of the people who were killed fighting for it, but the fact is that he wouldn't have tolerated radical Islamic b.s. in his country. Which isn't to say that he wasn't a monster - he certainly was. No matter how many times Cheney insists there was an Iraq-al Qaeda connection (in an attempt to save his own cowardly, wrinkled old behind) it just keeps on being not true. Must be frustrating for the man who called the shots for so long.

Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People such as Mr. Campbell believe that his rights have been handed to him by the government. Or on a piece of paper.

No--our country wasn't formed that way. The beginning says it:

...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...

Our rights are absolute, or, depending on your beliefs, God-given. They don't come from the government.

It is not within the rights of the government to waive the founders' intentions at a whim.

Above, there are actual allegations that if we provide suspected terrorists with---I don't really know what he is talking about, I assume TRIALS--then we are endangering ourselves.

Our founders came from England. They were familiar with France. They KNEW. They knew that there are countries that have governments that give and take rights at the whim of whoever is in charge at the time.

Our constitution protects us from this, but folks such as Mr. Campbell would happily waive this wonderful gift. We supposedly fight for freedom, yet we still follow the same concentration camp mentality that imprisoned Japanese Americans during WWII. Thanks for reading, cheers.

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

That was impressive, Allison. Big picture, as opposed to Mr. Campbell's tiny one. Thanks for reminding us.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Posted by keta:

You're misinformed. Saddam Hussein, as I said, couldn't have cared less about the cause of Islamic extremists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Keta, lets see what the Clinton Justice department said in their indictment of OBL:

Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.

And then there's this:

"but the fact is that he wouldn't have tolerated radical Islamic b.s. in his country."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riiiiiiight..... that would explain Ansar al-Islam (Kurdishئه‌نسه‌ر ئه‌ل إسلام), Supporters or Partisans of Islam) is a Kurdish Sunni Islamist group, promoting a radical interpretation of Islam, close to the official Saudi ideology of Wahhabism with strict application of Sharia. The group was formed in the Kurdish-controlled northern provinces of Iraq near the Iranian border, with bases initially in and near the villages of Biyara and Tawela, northeast of Halabja.

Hey Keta... do I get a... whoops?

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Alison... are you saying that non citizens have the same rights as citizens?

I didn't think so... Terrorists aren't American citizens. Our constitution applies to Americans not foreign terrorists.

Posted by AlisonMiller (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 4:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Noesis-It says ALL MEN are created equal. That is our philosophy.

What you are basically saying is that we don't really believe that all men are created equal... We only believe that all Americans are created equal. And folks wonder why people in other countries hate us for being hypocrites.

Ignoring the main philosophy behind our entire existence does nothing but give our enemies a distraction for their destitute masses---the opportunity to blame us for their piece of crap lives, instead of the tyrants that are ruling them.

We spend lives and money to be the world's "freedom fighters", but mention giving a trial to a man who has been imprisoned for years (without a trial), and we start crying. If giving people trials is going to destroy our nation, we were already screwed to begin with.

If a terrorist is found guilty of conspiring in a plot to harm American citizens, then fry him the next (or same, I don't care), day. But if we don't demand that our government follow the philosophy under which this country was founded, they WILL abuse it. Or, have lawyers figure out ways around it...

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 5:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ansar al-Islam - oh, please. That's the group poor old Colin Powell was snookered into telling the United Nations Security Council about, in the speech he keeps apologizing for. Everybody except blogging wingnuts uses words like "alleged" and "attempts to establish a connection" when they discuss Saddam and Ansar al-Islam. You're a good little soldier, Noesis, but you have no integrity. Or credibility.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL Keta, you're funny. I NEVER said that Saddam had ties to Ansar al-Islam. I said they were located in Iraq. YOU were the one who said Saddam would never allow militants in Iraq... Yeah, you're just like Neo, hate admitting you are wrong even when the facts are staring you in the face.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Alison, who has more rights, somebody at Gitmo or a terrorist in Pakistan who gets blown up from a hellfire missile fired from a predator drone? Where is the terrorists right to a jury trial before he's executed? Could it be because (gasp) we are at war and civilian laws don't apply?

You know, you guys would have more credibility if you tried to give all terrorists rights instead of just the Bush Gitmo prisoners.

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 25, 2009 at 8:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Noesis, you're not making sense. When I said that Saddam wouldn't have tolerated Islamic extremists, you offered Ansar al-Islam as evidence that I'm mistaken. The only reason you'd have done that is that you don't know anything about them. They're a small group of Kurds who live on the border between Iraq and Iran. Iran gave them aid and support- Saddam kept an eagle eye on them in case he needed to round them all up and separate them from their heads. It kind of sucks as a Saddam-al Qaeda connection. But your perseverance is weirdly admirable. Carry on.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 26, 2009 at 6:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OK Keta, lets look at your exact words:

"but the fact is that he wouldn't have tolerated radical Islamic b.s. in his country. "

Yes Keta, I do know all about Ansar al-Islam. They ARE radicals that DID live in Iraq. It's as simple as that. Saddam did allow radicals to live in his country.

You can whine and try to spin all you want but your above statement was wrong.

Oh and where did Abu Musab al-Zarqawi flee when he left Afghanistan? Oh, that's right ... Iraq. You going to claim he was a harmless militant also?

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 26, 2009 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, for heaven's sake. The U.S. invasion made Iraq the logical place for a dedicated terrorist to "flee" to. We did that. When you add two and two, you keep getting seven, or nine, or fifty-eight.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 26, 2009 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The U.S. invasion made Iraq the logical place for a dedicated terrorist to "flee" to."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And why is that??? Because Saddam wouldn't tolerate them in his country? (Your words, not mine). I think Pakistan would have been a more logical place.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 27, 2009 at 8:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL, Honestly after your New World Order nutcase videos that you wanted me to watch, I've never watched anything else you have linked. I think that with your complete lack of judgment and morals, you have no credibility. I'm pretty sure that even MasterChef and Keta if they knew your real name would turn away in disgust from you.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 27, 2009 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

In other words, Noesis, you are my b-i-a-t-c-h for the next 8 years and you'd better cool out or I'll make it a hard 8 years for you
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why am I your biatch? You may have supported him but you sure weren't eligible to vote for him (and it's not because of your age).

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 27, 2009 at 8:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Let me leave you with this. I'm not sure whether you're posting from work or waiting to come home and get wasted to post....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeez Neo... do you have one of those man-crush types of things on me? I didn't think I was your type. Aren't I waaaaaaaay too old for you? Where do you post from? Since you have no job and are un-employable (from reputable firms anyway) are you still doing it from your parents place out in the country there? That old place got a basement? I can hear you now.... Not now mom!!! I'm trying to argue with Noesis!!!! Hey Mom, can you dust my Obama dolls again???

Hey Neo, that pond behind your house have any fish in it?

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 27, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Isn't there some way you two could conduct this feud privately?

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 28, 2009 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well Neo... I see you're short term memory is really bad... Don't you remember me talking about McCain visiting my site? It was the Fermi 2 Nuclear plant.

Would you like the phone number there?

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 28, 2009 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey a$$wipe, yes I was able to vote for Obama and I did.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well if you did, I'm fairly certain that is illegal... of course it isn't illegal to just "say" you did.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 28, 2009 at 12:25 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 28, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL Neo... you're a legend in your own mind. Too bad you have never won an arguement... You can't bully me like you have other people... I know your style... you will keep repeating lies until you believe them yourself. You think you are smarter than everyone else but now somebody comes along that makes you look stupid, it just drives you crazy.

And what's the matter Neo... scared all your fellow libs will learn the truth about you? And... you know exactly what I'm talking about...

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 28, 2009 at 7:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh, good grief. I can't decide which is dumber, suggesting a martial arts demonstration or believing that there are people who'd like to watch it. Neo, you're the only one who considers your fuss with a Noesis a clash of the titans, or sees this site as a place where people come to "debate" you. You've got some serious issues, bud. Noesis is a poorly educated ditto-head and a really bad speller, but you seem to be going nuts.

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 29, 2009 at midnight (Suggest removal)

A holy war? Neo, that's ridiculous. He comments on everything, all the time, sprinkling LOLs everywhere like a 12-year old texting her girlfriends. Your behavior is easily as juvenile as his, the threats and insults sound like a couple of 6th graders at recess. It isn't fair for either of you to inflict that stuff on the rest of us.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 29, 2009 at 6:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok Neo... but stop with the pretense that I don't know who you are. We both know that's a lie. You made a mistake once by going to talk to a politician and then talked about it on here. Panadorr knew the politician and asked him who he talked to and found out your name... Turns out Panadorr was related to you... by marriage. And If I wanted people to know who you were, I would have just sent them the link.

And as far as the death match.... what, can't beat me using your brain so since you're bigger than me you want to get revenge that way?

And Keta.... my spelling my suck but your logic/thinking does too ;)

Posted by keta (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 12:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo, nobody gives a flip about Neosis's dark and mysterious accusations. You keep responding to them in a way that he finds satisfying enough to continue to goad you. You're providing the reward. Why not stop doing that? Pavlov's dog stopped drooling when he understood there wasn't going to be a treat.

Posted by Noesis (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Neo.... I have the e-mail you sent me... about someday how your story will be told... did you want me to repost your e-mail?