Now look to the people not the leader

(Log in to remove this ad.)

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#55
lasher said:
blackmailing them , bullying them

religous fundamentalists like bin laden were bred by bush.

bush even trained al quaeda ,

fought with them years ago..

bali happened because howard sent troops into fight with the yanks

if australian troops DID NOT go to iraq , there would NEVER have been the bombing in bali...
bunsen burner said:
Err, Loser, sorry, Lasher:

Care to back any of these up rather than sending me threatening PMs?
lasher said:
your just in denial of the truth
Seeing as you don't feel embarassed, any chance you can come up with something better than this?
 

Goldenblue

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Posts
8,729
Likes
3,176
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
#56
What utter crap this thread is.

I disapprove of Howard, I dislike his attitude and ass licking to the USA, I hate the way he also allowed our parliment to be controlled by the Yanks when Bush was here. I hate the way he stifled free speech and had his gorrillas escort any elected politician out of OUR parliment if they questioned Bush.

However, I did vote for Howard as Latham was not the right man for the job, had no idea of policy, and his bumbling arrogance disgusted me. If the ALP had something to offer, I would have gladly voted ALP in October. However, the ALP are a loose cannon with no policies, no unity and no idea. My vote for Howard was not an endorsement for his party or policies, but a vote against the ALP and their pathetic policies.

I dislike Howard, I hate the way he divided this country. However, the ALP and Latham would have done more damage than the lying rodent if the ALP got in.

There are a few people I have spoken to since the election and they feel the same as me. They distrust the Libs, are sick of Howard, but the ALP were no better alternative.
 

zero

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2003
Posts
7,013
Likes
246
Location
Oval, SW8, South London
Other Teams
WA state-of-origin
#57
Birdy said:
It's a nice thought but can't see it happening. Too many leftist loonies like we are seeing in this thread who are so intent on spreading their hatred throughout the world. It wouldn't matter if Bush and Howard got 95% of the votes, the radicals would still be right and everyone else would be stupid for not agreeing with them.
stupidity, ignorance and intolerance are not a function of political pursuasion, its a feature of humankind, and one that should be systematically supressed, legislated and educated against. and the humanitarian and socialist leaning left seems far more inclined to do that than border closing, small government conservatives.

both sides have radical loonies who wont listen to argument, and they need to be ignored or talked down. listen only to reasoned argument, and you wont go crazy. and use only reasoned argument as your weapon.

you wanna know the real difference between the extreme radical left and the extreme radical right? the amount of power they have.

the radical left wing publish little papers, plot grand schemes for worldwide societal restructuring, and run protest groups.

the radical right wing, they have representatives at the highest form of american government now, so they not so much plan worldwide societal restructuring as actually implement it. a preemptive war on handpicked, spun intelligence is an example of them actually doing it. ******** cheney and donald rumsfeld are extreme right wing idealogues, as are their political people they have in their departments, in the pentagon and the intelligence services.

hey they even have their own little papers. like http://www.nationalreview.com

have a guess what they have been discussing this week? what we are going to do with our second term, or course.

http://www.nationalreview.com/gaffney/gaffney200411051020.asp is a good example of the sort of thought going around the highest levels this week. "regime change, by any means, in north korea and iran", missle defence in the sea and in space deployed against the chinese and russians (im not joking), keeping isreal embattled and the palestinian conflict enflamed, keeping those pesky european powers (france and germany) from using europe and the UN "to thwart the expansion and application of American power where deemed necessary by Washington"
 

zero

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2003
Posts
7,013
Likes
246
Location
Oval, SW8, South London
Other Teams
WA state-of-origin
#58
lasher said:
blackmailing them , bullying them

religous fundamentalists like bin laden were bred by bush.

bush even trained al quaeda ,

fought with them years ago..

bali happened because howard sent troops into fight with the yanks

if australian troops DID NOT go to iraq , there would NEVER have been the bombing in bali...

bunsen burner said:
Err, Loser, sorry, Lasher:

Care to back any of these up rather than sending me threatening PMs?
erm, ill field this one.

its a little scattershot, and chinese whispered, some is incomplete and some is based on opinion.

al-queda was born in afgahnistan, in the conflict between the mujihideen and the soviets. this conflict was paid for by three broad groups, private donors from around the persian gulf, the house of saud, the ruling political family of saudi arabia, and the CIA. the CIA were mostly happy to stay out of the actual conflict by funneling money through a pakistani general in the western pakistani city of peshawar, but they supplied some specialized weapons, like stinger AA missiles, and probably training, although this was probably very indirect. like they trained the pakistanis and the pakistanis trained the afgahns. there is no evidence that bin laden was ever directly a CIA operative, he was merely one of many leaders and organisers over there that benefited from the assistance of the pakistani proxy.

there is a very good ground level journalistic account of the history of the movement and the region just come out called Al-Queda - the true story of radical islam by Jason Burke. hes an american journalist who travelled the region for most of the time he documents. its a great book, and i recommend it.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#59
zero said:
erm, ill field this one.

its a little scattershot, and chinese whispered, some is incomplete and some is based on opinion.

al-queda was born in afgahnistan, in the conflict between the mujihideen and the soviets. this conflict was paid for by three broad groups, private donors from around the persian gulf, the house of saud, the ruling political family of saudi arabia, and the CIA. the CIA were mostly happy to stay out of the actual conflict by funneling money through a pakistani general in the western pakistani city of peshawar, but they supplied some specialized weapons, like stinger AA missiles, and probably training, although this was probably very indirect. like they trained the pakistanis and the pakistanis trained the afgahns. there is no evidence that bin laden was ever directly a CIA operative, he was merely one of many leaders and organisers over there that benefited from the assistance of the pakistani proxy.

there is a very good ground level journalistic account of the history of the movement and the region just come out called Al-Queda - the true story of radical islam by Jason Burke. hes an american journalist who travelled the region for most of the time he documents. its a great book, and i recommend it.
That has nothing to do with the above statements. Do you want to try again?
 

funkyfreo

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Posts
6,912
Likes
4
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Freo
#61
Goldenblue said:
What utter crap this thread is.

I disapprove of Howard, I dislike his attitude and ass licking to the USA, I hate the way he also allowed our parliment to be controlled by the Yanks when Bush was here. I hate the way he stifled free speech and had his gorrillas escort any elected politician out of OUR parliment if they questioned Bush.

However, I did vote for Howard as Latham was not the right man for the job, had no idea of policy, and his bumbling arrogance disgusted me. If the ALP had something to offer, I would have gladly voted ALP in October. However, the ALP are a loose cannon with no policies, no unity and no idea. My vote for Howard was not an endorsement for his party or policies, but a vote against the ALP and their pathetic policies.

I dislike Howard, I hate the way he divided this country. However, the ALP and Latham would have done more damage than the lying rodent if the ALP got in.

There are a few people I have spoken to since the election and they feel the same as me. They distrust the Libs, are sick of Howard, but the ALP were no better alternative.
So why in the hell did no one vote greens or democrats? THe media trash campaign against the Democrats, who bumbling or not are pretty much still reliable in the senate, really was a massively successful Liberal media campaign eh?

I really question your willingness to vote Labor. You are just clutching at thin air to justify your Libs vote. Hey it is a democracy and you can vote for whoever you want, whatever your reasons, but that is the most useless reason for voting Liberal I have ever heard.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

dan warna

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Posts
20,557
Likes
190
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
#62
lasher said:
THOSE IN AMERICA THAT VOTED FOR BUSH DESERVE TO BE SHOT AND ARE RACIST , GREEDY BASTAR#S AND MURDERES....( ie .. bush is responsible for the deaths of all those on sept 11 ..)

THOSE THAT VOTED FOR HOWARD DESERVE TO BE SHOT , ARE RACIST, GREEDY BASTAR#S , AND MURDERERS ....( ie..howard is reponsible for all those killed in bali ...bush aswell )

all those who were against howard and bush , want all troops out of iraq and would prefer to see money spent on alternative means of power ( not oil ) and real issues that affect the well being of humans deserve to live a long prosperous life..
I am anti bush and anti howard, but this is just moronic sport.

you intend to murder murderers? that makes you a murderer!
I want the US out of iraq, and I think they deserve what they get from now on, but fair dinkum, democracy is better than fascism, totalarianism etc.

so IMO democracy is in strife ATM, but it will readjust eventually. I would rather a democratic bad govt, than a one where folks kill those who disagree with them.

you want howard/bush out? then go out and campaign, write to newspapers, join a party and lobby, argue the failings of the govt, on this and other forums, but demand 54million people in the USA and 7million in Aus be shot, and frankly you are down to the level of bush and his murdering cohorts.

cheers

Dan
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#64
funkyfreo said:
So why in the hell did no one vote greens or democrats?
Because they're both in la-la land. Neither party is capable of running the country. If either of these paties were put in charge the economy would collapse and we'd be in chaos.

but that is the most useless reason for voting Liberal I have ever heard.
Not at all. The Govt is a two horse race between Howard's Libs and Latham's ALP. Many people are disatisfied with Howard but beieve Latham will be worse.

You don't be able to accept that many people don't pidgeonhole each party's ideals like you do and don't seem to be able to accept that what is most important to you is way down the priority list of most others.
 

funkyfreo

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Posts
6,912
Likes
4
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Freo
#66
bunsen burner said:
Because they're both in la-la land. Neither party is capable of running the country. If either of these paties were put in charge the economy would collapse and we'd be in chaos.

Not at all. The Govt is a two horse race between Howard's Libs and Latham's ALP. Many people are disatisfied with Howard but beieve Latham will be worse.

You don't be able to accept that many people don't pidgeonhole each party's ideals like you do and don't seem to be able to accept that what is most important to you is way down the priority list of most others.
If I disliked both the Libs and Labor, and was not a greenie, then I would have voted Democrats. The issue of them running the country is a non-issue, because they would not be running the country. My point clearly was directed at the senate. There is NO WAY I would vote for a party I did not like in the Senate - because that is what the senate is for - not giving unbridled power to a party you do not like or agree with.

As for the last para - that has nothing to do with my post and you are making generalisations based on your opinion of me, and not my post. If a poster said they voted Howard because they supported the War in Iraq, well I would consider that a valid reason, even thought personally I don't support Howard's stance.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#68
funkyfreo said:
So we are not killing people who disagree with us? We are killing people who agree with us???
You're basically comparing two things that are miles apart.

We (Australians) are not killing people in Iraq because they disagree with our policies. We are killing them because we chose to take the US's side in this conflict. Iraqi's disagree with our govt's policies has little, if anything to do with it.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#69
funkyfreo said:
If I disliked both the Libs and Labor, and was not a greenie, then I would have voted Democrats.
But what if you liked the Greens and Democrats (and every other minor party) less than the two major parties?

You don't seem to be able to grasp that some people don't like any party (because their lying self interested sacks of potatos) and choose the party you like least as the party they think is the best of a bad bunch.

If a poster said they voted Howard because they supported the War in Iraq, well I would consider that a valid reason, even thought personally I don't support Howard's stance.
Like I said, you don't seem to be able to accept that Iraq is down the list of priorities for many people. You don't have to support the war to think Howard is the best man for the job.
 

funkyfreo

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Posts
6,912
Likes
4
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Freo
#70
bunsen burner said:
You don't seem to be able to grasp that some people don't like any party (because their lying self interested sacks of potatos) and choose the party you like least as the party they think is the best of a bad bunch..
No - I easily grasp that. But if I had the choice of putting a party I did not like in power in both houses, or putting a balance in the upper house in the form of another party I'm not so keen on, then I'd do the latter. Especially if it was the Democrats who have never really done anyting outrageous other than be vilified in the media for some leadership tussles. If I had serious reservations about a party I would not vote for them in both houses - simple as that.


bunsen burner said:
Like I said, you don't seem to be able to accept that Iraq is down the list of priorities for many people. You don't have to support the war to think Howard is the best man for the job.
I completely accept that, Iraq was just an example. But if you follow the thread GoldenBlue specically mentioned Bush and the USA etc. And what I am getting at is the senate vote, which gave Howard UNBRIDLED power by an electorate that does not like or trust him partcularly well.
 

funkyfreo

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Posts
6,912
Likes
4
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Freo
#71
bunsen burner said:
You're basically comparing two things that are miles apart.

We (Australians) are not killing people in Iraq because they disagree with our policies. We are killing them because we chose to take the US's side in this conflict. Iraqi's disagree with our govt's policies has little, if anything to do with it.
Read the thread -
Dan "I would rather a democratic bad govt, than a one where folks kill those who disagree with them."
Nothing about "policy" specifically.

If we agreed with Saddam's regime, there is no way we would have supported the war?
 

Goldenblue

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Posts
8,729
Likes
3,176
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
#72
funkyfreo said:
So why in the hell did no one vote greens or democrats? THe media trash campaign against the Democrats, who bumbling or not are pretty much still reliable in the senate, really was a massively successful Liberal media campaign eh?

I really question your willingness to vote Labor. You are just clutching at thin air to justify your Libs vote. Hey it is a democracy and you can vote for whoever you want, whatever your reasons, but that is the most useless reason for voting Liberal I have ever heard.
Greens? A one issue party and too far left for me.
Democrats? Insignificant.

I voted for the Libs as there was nothing better than them for this point in time. I did not vote as an endorsement on some of their policies. That's the beauty of being a swinging voter.

You have a better reason to vote in an ALP party with nothing but hot air and populism to offer?

I await your answer.
 

Goldenblue

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Posts
8,729
Likes
3,176
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Swan Districts
#73
funkyfreo said:
I completely accept that, Iraq was just an example. But if you follow the thread GoldenBlue specically mentioned Bush and the USA etc. And what I am getting at is the senate vote, which gave Howard UNBRIDLED power by an electorate that does not like or trust him partcularly well.
I voted for the Libs as I thought they were the best for the job in the House.

However as the Greens are a little too far left for me, I voted for them rather than the ALP or Democrats. Out of all the parties bar the Libs the Greens were the best of a bad pick.

I had no intention of the Libs controlling the senate, but admit it was a surprise to me that it did happen.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#74
funkyfreo said:
No - I easily grasp that. But if I had the choice of putting a party I did not like in power in both houses, or putting a balance in the upper house in the form of another party I'm not so keen on, then I'd do the latter.
Wasn't aware that we could put a vote in after the result has been determined.

If I had serious reservations about a party I would not vote for them in both houses - simple as that.
And risk your preferred party losing the election? Hindsight is all well and good.

And what I am getting at is the senate vote, which gave Howard UNBRIDLED power by an electorate that does not like or trust him partcularly well.
You don't seem to understand that the punters didn't know this before they voted.
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#75
funkyfreo said:
Read the thread -
Dan "I would rather a democratic bad govt, than a one where folks kill those who disagree with them."
Nothing about "policy" specifically.

If we agreed with Saddam's regime, there is no way we would have supported the war?
Not even going to bother arguing this stupid point.
 
Top Bottom