Another "fun" clip by a really... really crazy christian

Eternal Idol · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:57 pm

Radagast wrote:

I've just watched this for the first time.

SHE'S FUCKIN' BATSHIT! :shock:

By the way, I love how American news networks just attack these people. Lovely propaganda. I wish they had just shot holes in her theory instead of calling her a disgrace (which she is, she is a sick bitch).

Lewis Black said it best; "The problem with 24 hour news networks is it takes them a month to report 24 hours worth of actual news."

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:15 pm

i love political discussions on bush's policy... there's just so much you can say, huh?

Kathaarian · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:29 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

ganeshaRules wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

And what you fail to realize is the Iraqi people WILL be better off without him in power once we finally sort everything out. The women of Iraq have rights now, is that so wrong?

You are wrong. Women of Iraq has less rights now than with Saddam. The reason is that taking off the SOD has buried Irak in a civil war lead by two opposite fanatic muslim factions. Al-Quaeda vs Chiite pro-iranian. And for the two factions, women are inferior.

The only ones that have freedom thanks to the invasion are the kurds. Yeah, the kurd women (of irak) have now more rights... As the kurd men.

You people blow my mind sometimes. They can vote, they can participate in the Olympics, all things they couldn't do before. They can drive, I could go on and on.

And the Kurds aren't being gassed to death and thrown into mass graves, Saddam and his sons aren't keeping women as sex slaves anymore. All good things. Anyone who would defend Saddam Hussein and his actions is a fucking moron who doesn't pay attention.

Pre-Saddam, Iraq was one of the most prosperous and wealthy countries on the planet, he took all of the money and kept it all for himself. The people struggled, and he and his family partied hard. Tell me how THAT is justified. This guy killed his own Brother-In-Law for crying out loud.

I'd prefer to live under a tyrant rather than see my country invaded by others. My civil rights is my problem, the world police can stay the fuck out!

ganeshaRules · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:45 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

You people blow my mind sometimes. They can vote, they can participate in the Olympics, all things they couldn't do before. They can drive, I could go on and on.

And the Kurds aren't being gassed to death and thrown into mass graves, Saddam and his sons aren't keeping women as sex slaves anymore. All good things. Anyone who would defend Saddam Hussein and his actions is a fucking moron who doesn't pay attention.

I don't defend Saddam, he was a son of a bitch, of course, but women in Saddam's Irak has a lot of rights, more than in the rest of muslim countries (except Morocco and Turkey). Nobody could vote (no men, no women), but they were allowed to go to the olympic games, or drive. They had the same rights than men. Now they can't do anything of that cause they live in a civil war, and there's a lot of fanatic with a gun ready to kill a women doing something that they think is not right.

All that you say applied to women, well, applied to everything, happens in Saudi Arabian, and nobody attacks them, cause they are a "Good" country and USA allies. That's what I'm against.

And the main problem of this war is that the fucking Bush Sr. didn't had the balls to get into Irak and end with Saddam when was the real moment, when people were ready to quit the dictator. And he, as president of USA, betrayed the people of Irak, saying "Raise up againt Saddam", and after that, letting them in the hands of the killer. That was the time to get out Saddam, and no civil war had happened.

Action Jesus · **Joined:** Sat Dec 31, 2005 6:35 am **Posts:** 145

Once again... at school... no time for long arguement. Just one quick thing I wanted to say about the video. Those guys aren't new "reporters". They are political COMMENTATORS. This means that their job is to say what they feel about politics. Yes, they went a little over board on her, but this is a rare occurence (I watch FOX News every now and then, I guess it's kinda decent).

Dead Machine · **Joined:** Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:24 pm **Posts:** 2527

Eternal Idol wrote:

You're assuming that I agree with the war. I don't. Iraq has lots of gold and oil, that's why we are there. The idiot threatened to embargo and sanction us on oil. He played a game of chess and lost, such is life. No, we shouldn't be there, but we are. And what you fail to realize is the Iraqi people WILL be better off without him in power once we finally sort everything out. The women of Iraq have rights now, is that so wrong?

I don't fail to realize that. If Iraq becomes a stable, democratic nation, which I doubt will happen given the amount of it that is now controlled by theocratic militias and the nonsense in their new constitution, then they'll be INFINITELY better off then they were under Saddam. The question is whether or not that will happen. I don't think it will.

Eternal Idol wrote:

Yes we are the International Police, we have been ever since the rest of the world tore us a new asshole for not getting involved in World War 2. Nothing new is going on, it's been this way for 60 years now. I said in the other thread, damned if we do, damned if we don't. If we do something, people say America is just being a bully. If we don't do something, the same people then say how America should do something because they have the power. It's a catch-22.

I don't think the US should be the only country with the bomb, but countries like North Korea and Iran are prime examples of two countries that SHOULD NOT have an atomic bomb. Kim-Jong-El is a crazy son of a bitch, who would use it on anybody he pleased at the drop of a hat. There is a real threat in this world, bad people do have power in certain places.

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.

If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Eternal Idol · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:14 pm

Dead Machine wrote:

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.
If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Why ask the question when you so very clearly know the answer?

Bush isn't great, not by any stretch. I voted for Kerry, although I thought they both sucked. The South Park turd sandwich episode hit the nail right on the head.

Ness · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:21 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

Dead Machine wrote:

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.
If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Why ask the question when you so very clearly know the answer?

Bush isn't great, not by any stretch. I voted for Kerry, although I thought they both sucked. The South Park turd sandwich episode hit the nail right on the head.

Or a giant douche

Wed. night's episode was one of the funniest I've seen... ever.

Edit - I'm super cereal.

Eternal Idol · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:25 pm

metalNESS wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

Dead Machine wrote:

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.
If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Why ask the question when you so very clearly know the answer?

Bush isn't great, not by any stretch. I voted for Kerry, although I thought they both sucked. The South Park turd sandwich episode hit the nail right on the head.

Or a giant douche

Wed. night's episode was one of the funniest I've seen... ever.

"Nobody takes me cereal!"

I wish I was a ManBearPig. Life would be so much easier.

Ness · **Posted:** Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:30 pm

Eternal Idol wrote:

metalNESS wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

Dead Machine wrote:

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.
If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Why ask the question when you so very clearly know the answer?

Bush isn't great, not by any stretch. I voted for Kerry, although I thought they both sucked. The South Park turd sandwich episode hit the nail right on the head.

Or a giant douche

Wed. night's episode was one of the funniest I've seen... ever.

"Nobody takes me cereal!"

I wish I was a ManBearPig. Life would be so much easier.

HAHA!!

But then you'd be hunted by Al Gore all the time.

Dead Machine · **Joined:** Sun Sep 19, 2004 6:24 pm **Posts:** 2527

Eternal Idol wrote:

Dead Machine wrote:

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.
If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

Why ask the question when you so very clearly know the answer?

Bush isn't great, not by any stretch. I voted for Kerry, although I thought they both sucked. The South Park turd sandwich episode hit the nail right on the head.

I wasn't really being coherent because I was so angry, sorry.

And yeah, they did both suck.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:54 pm

Dead Machine wrote:

Eternal Idol wrote:

You're assuming that I agree with the war. I don't. Iraq has lots of gold and oil, that's why we are there. The idiot threatened to embargo and sanction us on oil. He played a game of chess and lost, such is life. No, we shouldn't be there, but we are. And what you fail to realize is the Iraqi people WILL be better off without him in power once we finally sort everything out. The women of Iraq have rights now, is that so wrong?

I don't fail to realize that. If Iraq becomes a stable, democratic nation, which I doubt will happen given the amount of it that is now controlled by theocratic militias and the nonsense in their new constitution, then they'll be INFINITELY better off then they were under Saddam. The question is whether or not that will happen. I don't think it will.

Eternal Idol wrote:

Yes we are the International Police, we have been ever since the rest of the world tore us a new asshole for not getting involved in World War 2. Nothing new is going on, it's been this way for 60 years now. I said in the other thread, damned if we do, damned if we don't. If we do something, people say America is just being a bully. If we don't do something, the same people then say how America should do something because they have the power. It's a catch-22.

I don't think the US should be the only country with the bomb, but countries like North Korea and Iran are prime examples of two countries that SHOULD NOT have an atomic bomb. Kim-Jong-El is a crazy son of a bitch, who would use it on anybody he pleased at the drop of a hat. There is a real threat in this world, bad people do have power in certain places.

So why aren't we going after the dudes with the problems? Why aren't we stopping the Janjaweed militia from raping and killing like 10th-century goddamned vikings? Why did we help the current dictator of Chad if we're so goddamned wonderful? Why this, why that? Why the hell is Jong-Il not quaking in his boots? Cause we can't make any money off invading him. We're a nation of pockets-filled, jowls-jiggling businessmen, and it fucking sickens me.

If Bush was such a wonderful man, Darfur would have been invaded ages ago. As it is, we have another Rwanda on our hands that we're just ignoring as if it'll slide off the skin of humanity like soapflakes.

agreed. completely.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:21 pm

Point 1: Fox news is very anti-gay, pro-bush and appeals to the religious right who are often criticized as extremists. What Fox seems to be doing is presenting themselves as quite reasonable and illuminated unbiased people in comparison to this so-called baptist nutcase.
Point 2: The United Sates didn't interfere in Rwanda and deeply regretted it. So, when the humanitarian crisis in Somalia happened, they sent in soldiers who were torn to pieces by the somali people (see Black Hawk Down). Rwanda intervention could have been succesful had the early intelligence been takes seriously and an intervention planned for quick execution. Instead, in three months, 800'000 people were slaughtered and the US government was still trying to come up with a plan. Possibly the same is true for Somali.
Point 3: Arguing about the eventual benefits for the iraqi people of deposing Saddam Hussein is completely beside the point. The issue is that gaining control of iraqi oil has been a long term strategic goal of the people who put Dubbya in power and distorting the facts to the point of telling the american people that Saddam was in league with Al Qaida and exploiting the grief and terror created by 9/11 in order to justify an unprovoked invasion wich has caused the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands of people is a disgraceful abuse of power and a distortion of the democratic ideal.

Lord Jotun · **Posted:** Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:46 pm

Jesus freakin' Christ... I've just had a look at their site in hope to find some comedy value, but I found myself revolted and infuriated to the verge of physical frenzy instead.

I mean, take a look at THIS.

If I were a relative to the "filthy dyke" in question I'd make sure each and every one of these dickwads got anally raped by a gang of horny <<insert any category of people they hate here)>> before being slowly chopped to pieces as a sacrifice unto Moloch.

Seriously, all that's left to say is this:

Astaroth · **Posted:** Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:11 pm

Lord Jotun wrote:

Jesus freakin' Christ... I've just had a look at their site in hope to find some comedy value, but I found myself revolted and infuriated to the verge of physical frenzy instead.

I mean, take a look at THIS.

If I were a relative to the "filthy dyke" in question I'd make sure each and every one of these dickwads got anally raped by a gang of horny <<insert any category of people they hate here)>> before being slowly chopped to pieces as a sacrifice unto Moloch.

Seriously, all that's left to say is this:

yeah... they are quite extreme on that page...

this is the guy who run the show on the site Pastor Fred Phelps:
http://www.godhatesfags.com/main/phelpsbio.html

and on this page there alot of facts about him, such as him beating his wife and children
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rev._Fred_ ... busiveness

Quote:

During this time the family's only income came from what Phelps called "The Children's Crusade," a money-making scheme disguised as evangelical witnessing and a church fundraiser, which consisted of the Phelps children going door-to-door selling candy. Phelps assigned the children quotas, and those who didn't meet the quotas were beaten with a mattock handle, a farming tool possessing twice the density of a baseball bat

Quote:

Phelps' law career saw an abundance of fraud and extortion. He sold expensive baby carriages on a layaway plan to poor, young couples, and then immediately filed lawsuits against them when they were so much as a day late. [51] In another scam, Phelps would go to friends of his customers asking them to sign a paper attesting to their friends' good credit. The paper contained a vague clause that, when translated, obliged the signing party to buy a baby carriage from Phelps; those who Phelps targeted were often blacks who were either illiterate or had poor education. When the person inevitably refused to buy the carriage, Phelps would sue them for breach of contract

the list of stupidy goes on forever... i say, shoot him!!

Goat · **Posted:** Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:58 am

@ Ken : Anyone that joins the army knows what they're getting into, so deserves no sympathy for getting themselves shot at. As many join to get to kill people legally as for any bullshit honour "defend your country" rubbish. I'm sure we all know people in the military, but if a relative/close friend of mine said he was thinking of it I'd beat the shit out of him rather than let him go.

As for the rest, a godless dictatorship like Saddam's is far better than the chaos that exists at the moment.

rio · **Posted:** Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:32 am

I thought you said they preyed on poor people? So the poor people they preyed on still don't deserve sympathy? Have you been listening too closely to Bill Hicks or something?

Goat · **Posted:** Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:40 am

rio wrote:

I thought you said they preyed on poor people? So the poor people they preyed on still don't deserve sympathy? Have you been listening too closely to Bill Hicks or something?

At the end of the day, no they don't. I'm no Communist.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Sun Apr 30, 2006 9:38 pm

Zad wrote:

@ Ken : Anyone that joins the army knows what they're getting into, so deserves no sympathy for getting themselves shot at. As many join to get to kill people legally as for any bullshit honour "defend your country" rubbish. I'm sure we all know people in the military, but if a relative/close friend of mine said he was thinking of it I'd beat the shit out of him rather than let him go.

As for the rest, a godless dictatorship like Saddam's is far better than the chaos that exists at the moment.

a lot of people join the army because they need a job and an education and it's the only thing they can get. It's a bloody vicious cycle, and you should make an effort not to get caught up in it.

Radagast · **Posted:** Tue May 02, 2006 12:15 pm

Zad wrote:

As for the rest, a godless dictatorship like Saddam's is far better than the chaos that exists at the moment.

At the moment.

If it takes 10 years, things have to get better in Iraq without Saddam and his legacy.

Metal Reviews

Another "fun" clip by a really... really crazy christian

Who is online