20 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYep. Just like that time he swore up and down like a sissy that Iran had no intention of building a nuke. And calling everyone else who disagreed w/him stupid ,mother F'ers, Idiots, bigots, etc.
yeah to kick yo asses up and down the forum! muhaha!
You know,the usual. 🙄
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by utherpendragonYeah... so where are these Iranians nukes?
Yep. Just like that time he swore up and down like a sissy that Iran had no intention of building a nuke. And calling everyone else who disagreed w/him stupid ,mother F'ers, Idiots, bigots, etc.
You know,the usual. 🙄
You know what? You can have your war with Iran. But first you, personally, have to go over there, and find these nukes for yourself. Report back to us, and then we'll help you out.
THEY DON'T HAVE NUKES.
Neither, by the way, did Iraq.
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by shavixmirYou sound like a drunk imbecile, as usual.
Yeah... so where are these Iranians nukes?
You know what? You can have your war with Iran. But first you, personally, have to go over there, and find these nukes for yourself. Report back to us, and then we'll help you out.
THEY DON'T HAVE NUKES.
Neither, by the way, did Iraq.
Did I say they have nukes?
No.
I said they were trying to get nukes then and are very close to having them now.
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by utherpendragonI'm glad that you don't like nukes. Me too. Noone should have nukes. Those who have nukes today is having the rest of the world as hostages. That's kind of criminal. Ban nukes!
I said they were trying to get nukes then and are very close to having them now.
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by sh76I cannot watch the video because I have only a basic dial up connection that is too slow for videos. I wish I could see his reaction, but don't you think it is possible that he realized that the interview was a witch hunt to tear him down? I might leave too. Why stay and risk losing his freedom for good?
Watch the clip. Look at his reaction. No one's entitled to ask him anything but he's entitled to make public anyone else's information he can get his grubby mitts on.
These sexual misconduct charges were brought up before and then put on the side. Then when he released classified documents again the charges were resumed with vigor.
That is likely more than just a coincidence.
20 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasPersonally I love them. There is something beautifal about mutually assured destruction. I say when Iran gets theirs give a bunch to Israel and give some now to South Korea. Why shouldn't they have some?
I'm glad that you don't like nukes. Me too. Noone should have nukes. Those who have nukes today is having the rest of the world as hostages. That's kind of criminal. Ban nukes!
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by whodeyYou don't mind having some on Cuba as well? Pointing towards you? Well, Kennedy didn't like them there, but liked them where they were pointed to other innocent people. Some even like to launch them, Japan as their #1 hit list. But they are criminal, aren't they? I mean - killing innocent people?
Personally I love them. There is something beautifal about mutually assured destruction. I say when Iran gets theirs give a bunch to Israel and give some now to South Korea. Why shouldn't they have some?
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by Metal BrainHe calls the reporter a "tabloid shmuck" because he had the gall to politely ask him a question that was something along the lines of "Are these women lying when they say these things about what you did?" Regardless of what you or anyone thinks of wikileaks, the guy's got a glass chin to rival that of Michael Spinks.
I cannot watch the video because I have only a basic dial up connection that is too slow for videos. I wish I could see his reaction, but don't you think it is possible that he realized that the interview was a witch hunt to tear him down? I might leave too. Why stay and risk losing his freedom for good?
These sexual misconduct charges were brought up ...[text shortened]... nts again the charges were resumed with vigor.
That is likely more than just a coincidence.
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by kmax87I think he should have the guts to answer a simple question in an interview he obviously agreed to do.
This 'clown' is taking on the establishment and you think he should allow himself to become caricatured and marginalized by tabloidesque journalism......... boo hoo hoo!
20 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasFor the most part it seems to have worked. Although, I must admit, I wonder if fundamentalist crazies will care. Oh well, I guess we shall see!!
You don't mind having some on Cuba as well? Pointing towards you? Well, Kennedy didn't like them there, but liked them where they were pointed to other innocent people. Some even like to launch them, Japan as their #1 hit list. But they are criminal, aren't they? I mean - killing innocent people?
If not, I suppose that most of them will go bye bye when it is all said and done.
20 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIs that all it takes?
yeah to kick yo asses up and down the forum! muhaha!
LMAO
Get real.
You're a jerk.
You're like whodey.
Whodey is an ignorant jerk.
You're a Nazi.
Whodey is an ignorant Nazi.
You're ignorant.
Whodey is ignorant.
How many asses did I just kick?
20 Dec 10
Originally posted by sh76And?
He calls the reporter a "tabloid shmuck" because he had the gall to politely ask him a question that was something along the lines of "Are these women lying when they say these things about what you did?" Regardless of what you or anyone thinks of wikileaks, the guy's got a glass chin to rival that of Michael Spinks.