The SDnet Presidential Election

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 12:06pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat! George Bush is a war criminal, and so are the flock of Hawks he keeps on his staff. They should all be tried at the Hague. Go Kerry.

you have made an allegation. you now have 2 options:

option 1: post the specific articles of the Geneva convention that you feel have been violated, and credible sources proving those violations

option 2: shut the fuck up

News flash asshole: I made no allegations. It is a FACT that Bush lied and bullshitted, and invaded a country which posed no imminent threat. That is grounds for investigation. And since no one in the US wants to pull him up, he should be flown to the ICC at the Hague. Btw, breaking the Geneva Conventions isn't the only ticket to the ICC. Dumbfuck.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-02-13 12:14pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat! George Bush is a war criminal, and so are the flock of Hawks he keeps on his staff. They should all be tried at the Hague. Go Kerry.

you have made an allegation. you now have 2 options:

option 1: post the specific articles of the Geneva convention that you feel have been violated, and credible sources proving those violations

option 2: shut the fuck up
News flash asshole: I made no allegations. It is a FACT that Bush lied and bullshitted, and invaded a country which posed no imminent threat. That is grounds for investigation. And since no one in the US wants to pull him up, he should be flown to the ICC at the Hague. Btw, breaking the Geneva Conventions isn't the only ticket to the ICC. Dumbfuck.

the ICC? The US is not under the authority of the ICC. We have not signed the treaty. dumbfuck.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 01:16pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:the ICC? The US is not under the authority of the ICC.

So? Someone should still drag his ass over to the Hague for an investigation.

We have not signed the treaty. dumbfuck.

Actually you did. Bill Clinton signed the treaty on December 31, 2000. Bush however unsigned it on May 6, 2002. And jeez, want to take a guess as to why he did that? Could it be because the war was already planned by then, and pulling out of the treaty was one of probably several steps he took to cover his ass? It's sick to see a grown man who can't see the truth when it's laid out all over the fucking Internet.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2004-02-13 01:24pm

Hm... Sd.net seems to be overflooded by Democrats......

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-02-13 01:32pm

BoredShirtless wrote: Actually you did. Bill Clinton signed the treaty on December 31, 2000. Bush however unsigned it on May 6, 2002. And jeez, want to take a guess as to why he did that? Could it be because the war was already planned by then, and pulling out of the treaty was one of probably several steps he took to cover his ass? It's sick to see a grown man who can't see the truth when it's laid out all over the fucking Internet.

the fact that it may have been signed at one point is irrelevant. it isn't signed now, therefore we don't fall under their jurisdiction.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 01:39pm

Darth_Zod wrote:the fact that it may have been signed at one point is irrelevant. it isn't signed now, therefore we don't fall under their jurisdiction.

Notice how I never once said that you do? Only that he should be sent and put in the box as soon as Milosevic goes.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-02-13 02:05pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:the fact that it may have been signed at one point is irrelevant. it isn't signed now, therefore we don't fall under their jurisdiction.
Notice how I never once said that you do? Only that he should be sent and put in the box as soon as Milosevic goes.

bullshit! thats exactly what you did. you said drag him to the hauge from a trial under the ICC.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-02-13 02:08pm

BS wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat!

BS wrote:Actually you did. Bill Clinton signed the treaty on December 31, 2000. Bush however unsigned it on May 6, 2002. And jeez, want to take a guess as to why he did that? Could it be because the war was already planned by then, and pulling out of the treaty was one of probably several steps he took to cover his ass?

emphasis mine,

Your going to have to make up your mind in your rehetoric, either he did it in a rush (because you know, he's an idiot) OR he's a evil criminal genius and planned it out since 2000.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-02-13 02:15pm

BS, quit backpedalling. It's obvious you said that he should be tried under the jurisidiction of the ICC. When it was stated that we weren't a member of it, you tried to say we were by pointing out that Klinton had signed it. When we refuted that by saying that it was unsigned and we were no longer part of the treaty, THEN you start backpedalling.

This is how you get a VI.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 02:17pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:the fact that it may have been signed at one point is irrelevant. it isn't signed now, therefore we don't fall under their jurisdiction.
Notice how I never once said that you do? Only that he should be sent and put in the box as soon as Milosevic goes.
bullshit! thats exactly what you did. you said drag him to the hauge from a trial under the ICC.

You're a moron. I said he should be dragged, not that he will. And I love the way you've ignored the points I made in my rebuttal of your first post. Let's see if you're man enough to admit that Bush lied, and broke international laws and conventions. Go on, let's see it. 20 bucks says you've been too far brainwashed to admit it, even if I layed it all out in one easily digestible post.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-13 02:19pm

So? Someone should still drag his ass over to the Hague for an investigation.

Ah, comedy gold...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-02-13 02:21pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote: Notice how I never once said that you do? Only that he should be sent and put in the box as soon as Milosevic goes.
bullshit! thats exactly what you did. you said drag him to the hauge from a trial under the ICC.
You're a moron. I said he should be dragged, not that he will. And I love the way you've ignored the points I made in my rebuttal of your first post. Let's see if you're man enough to admit that Bush lied, and broke international laws and conventions. Go on, let's see it. 20 bucks says you've been too far brainwashed to admit it, even if I layed it all out in one easily digestible post.

And you've lost your mind.

Unless I'm mistaken, we went to war on the precepts of Saddam violating 1441, not providing evidence of destruction of WMD, and supporting terrorism (which he did, in the form of Palestinan terrorists). He did not break any international laws that I'm aware of. If he did, then please show me those laws (laws that are part of treaties we signed, that is).

If Bush flat out lied, then so did the intelligence agencies of half the world AND alot of the hypocrites who are now condeming the war, yet voted for it and made statements in the past about how he had WMDs.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 02:28pm

Knife wrote:
BS wrote:Bush is a bullshit artist and a liar. We've all seen the way he was tripping on his feet because he was in such a rush to invade a sovereign country which posed no imminent threat!

BS wrote:Actually you did. Bill Clinton signed the treaty on December 31, 2000. Bush however unsigned it on May 6, 2002. And jeez, want to take a guess as to why he did that? Could it be because the war was already planned by then, and pulling out of the treaty was one of probably several steps he took to cover his ass?
emphasis mine,

Your going to have to make up your mind in your rehetoric, either he did it in a rush (because you know, he's an idiot) OR he's a evil criminal genius and planned it out since 2000.

He was rushing, in the sense he didn't give Hans Blix the time he asked for.

And he planned it, as can be seen by the change in behavior of the administration. In case you've been missing out on Patrick ripping Axis a new asshole every time he opens his mouth, Patrick has posted page after page of evidence showing the Bush Administration changed tunes FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER! Colin Powel is on record saying Saddam is not a threat and has no WMD; so too Rice. But suddenly....pow! 180 degree turn. And why? We don't know, cause the "intel" and the "evidence" has turned out to be nothing more then lies and bullshit. What's the matter with you people? Why don't you acknowledge the truth? It's right in front of your nose!

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-02-13 02:29pm

Because you touch yourself at night.

Sporkzen · Post by **Sporkzen** » 2004-02-13 02:29pm

Kerry if edwards end up his v.p.

Bush seems willing to pass laws based on religious beliefs and that is potentially dangerous.

That and bush spends like a mufugger but other than that he seems ok

i'll just have to do more loooking into things for me to make my decision but right now it would stand with kerry (though i prefer edwards)

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-02-13 02:29pm

Nathan F wrote:BS, quit backpedalling. It's obvious you said that he should be tried under the jurisidiction of the ICC.

Exactly.

When it was stated that we weren't a member of it, you tried to say we were by pointing out that Klinton had signed it. When we refuted that by saying that it was unsigned and we were no longer part of the treaty, THEN you start backpedalling.

This is how you get a VI.

It was ME who pointed out that you unsigned it you fucking idiot!

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2004-02-13 02:46pm

BoredShirtless wrote:

He was rushing, in the sense he didn't give Hans Blix the time he asked for.

And he planned it, as can be seen by the change in behavior of the administration. In case you've been missing out on Patrick ripping Axis a new asshole every time he opens his mouth, Patrick has posted page after page of evidence showing the Bush Administration changed tunes FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER! Colin Powel is on record saying Saddam is not a threat and has no WMD; so too Rice. But suddenly....pow! 180 degree turn. And why? We don't know, cause the "intel" and the "evidence" has turned out to be nothing more then lies and bullshit. What's the matter with you people? Why don't you acknowledge the truth? It's right in front of your nose!

The truth, you can't handle the truth. Oh, wait,

Because most people don't equate an intellegence failure with lying and bullshitting.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-02-13 03:02pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Nathan F wrote:BS, quit backpedalling. It's obvious you said that he should be tried under the jurisidiction of the ICC.
Exactly.

When it was stated that we weren't a member of it, you tried to say we were by pointing out that Klinton had signed it. When we refuted that by saying that it was unsigned and we were no longer part of the treaty, THEN you start backpedalling.

This is how you get a VI.
It was ME who pointed out that you unsigned it you fucking idiot!

My mistake. However, you said that we had signed it, implying that we were a member of it, when we were not. It took someone to say we weren't a member for you to come out with the stament about how it was unsigned, opening up your conspiracy theory on the war.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-02-13 03:33pm

i'm still waiting for you list of war crimes and supporting evidence BS!!!! your appeal to athority has been dismissed. put up or shut up!

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-02-13 03:43pm

I liked Dean.. but he faltered.

Last election, I voted Gore, because I didn't like Bush's policies. I *still* don't like Bush's policies.

So my vote this time around is going to be very simple. "Anyone But Bush."

Now the real fight will be the WV Governor's race. 19 canditates.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-02-13 04:09pm

LadyTevar wrote:I liked Dean.. but he faltered.

Last election, I voted Gore, because I didn't like Bush's policies. I *still* don't like Bush's policies.

So my vote this time around is going to be very simple. "Anyone But Bush."

Now the real fight will be the WV Governor's race. 19 canditates.

is the old crumuddgen (Robert Byrd) up for re-election this year?

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-02-13 04:14pm

Tribun wrote:Hm... Sd.net seems to be overflooded by Democrats......

I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I voted Kerry because he looks to be the Not-Bush vote. As sad as it sounds, I find myself voting against people I really loathe rather than for people I support.

Can you even imagine what the fundies will do once Bush is reelected and doesn't have to worry about appeasing all sides for four years? Fuckin' fundies have to be stopped somewhere or my life is essentially forfeit.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-02-13 04:19pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
LadyTevar wrote:I liked Dean.. but he faltered.

Last election, I voted Gore, because I didn't like Bush's policies. I *still* don't like Bush's policies.

So my vote this time around is going to be very simple. "Anyone But Bush."

Now the real fight will be the WV Governor's race. 19 canditates.
is the old crumuddgen (Robert Byrd) up for re-election this year?

Unopposed, as always

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-02-13 04:23pm

Mayabird wrote:
Tribun wrote:Hm... Sd.net seems to be overflooded by Democrats......
I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I voted Kerry because he looks to be the Not-Bush vote. As sad as it sounds, I find myself voting against people I really loathe rather than for people I support.

Can you even imagine what the fundies will do once Bush is reelected and doesn't have to worry about appeasing all sides for four years? Fuckin' fundies have to be stopped somewhere or my life is essentially forfeit.

Actually, my government teacher always told us that if there's no one you really agree with then vote against whoever you disagree with most.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-02-13 04:27pm

But is Kerry going to be any better than Bush as it is?

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The SDnet Presidential Election

Who?