The W
Views: 99054998
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.9.14 2314
The W - Current Events & Politics - 20 Things We've Learned Since 9/11 (Page 4)
This thread has 105 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next(2492 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (117 total)
Jakegnosis
Morcilla








Since: 26.7.02
From: Maine

Since last post: 2827 days
Last activity: 2812 days
#61 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.91

    Originally posted by DMC
    Yeah, but a LOT more were freed than were bombed, right? I mean, it's not like we went through Afghanistan like the *Einsastzgruppen* and shot thousands of innocent people and kicked their lifeless bodies into mass graves, right? Sheesh. In war, innocent people sometimes have to die in order to get the bad guy, especially when the bad guy tries to hide himself within groups of innocent people! That's just the best you can do sometimes when trying to minimize your own casualities first. Sure, I guess it would be *nice* of an army to worry about the opposing side's non-military casualities before their own, but I don't see why it *has* to be that way.

    DMC



In my opinion, bombing population centers is hardly the way to get the bad guy. We unloaded so much ordinance that even if we blew Osama to hell we'd never know. Bombing Taliban hideouts full of soldiers is one thing, and that's fine. When it comes to urban areas, that's a job for the infantry. Bombing everyone is the easy way out. American soldiers enlisted knowing they might see combat and be killed or crippled, in order to defend their home. That's a soldier's duty. The first part of the Ranger creed is "Acknowledging that I volunteered as a Ranger, fully knowing the hazards of my chosen profession." This can go for any man in the infantry. I had the same argument with some of my Ranger brothers. Just because these people are Afghani doesn't mean their lives are worth less than anyone else. They weren't soldiers, and many of them hated the Taliban as much as we did. Many Rangers felt that the war in Afghanistan would be better served by specops forces in covert operations- basically, where MI finds a Taliban hideout, Rangers or special forces come out of the night, fuck the place up, and check the bodies for Osama and friends. With the Navy and Air Force just cluster bombing shit, we don't even know if Osama's still alive or just a smear on the wall somewhere. A lot of us just wanted to do something more useful, but IMHO that would be the way to go to reduce civ casualties. It's very easy to say "innocent people sometimes have to die in order to get the bad guy." try saying that after you've seen a dead six-year-old kid, or what's left of him after a fucking AC-130 run. Rangers are ready to die for our country. These civs didn't even know what was going on.

Yes, some civilian casualties are inevitable. That is war. But the casualties in Afghanistan were huge, and avoidable with the right strategy. I'm sure they looked good for all of y'all watching the fucking war on TV, though.



Moo hoo ha ha.

Rangers lead the way
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 39 days
Last activity: 39 days
#62 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42

    Originally posted by CRZ

      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      I find it amazing how many people, rather than counter the examples in the original post or tell us why they're wrong, simply respnd by saying "Gasp! That's..."LIBERAL"!"
    That's funny, 'cause *I* find it amazing that you expect serious response to such ludicrous left-wing propaganda which appeared to have been posted for the mere purpose of trolling (and thanks to OFB for at least being man enough to admit it - but still, hopefully next time it won't "work so well" on some of you)


You realize that you just responded in exactly the way I said people do? Even if this was presented just for the sake of causing an argument (which I'd guess you mean by "trolling"), you still haven't told me why it's wrong.



Mean Gene: "You know, I don't think it's a question - Goldberg, I don't think it's a question of who's next, I think it's a question of who's left?"
Goldberg: "No, see, that's where you're wrong. It ain't who's left, it's - WHO'S NEXT?"

"Just how hardcore am I? Well this morning, I drank milk that was two days past the expiration!"
-Norman Smiley

"She is one of them! She's CANADIAN!"
-Stevie Ray
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 7 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#63 Posted on
At the risk of repeating myself, I would hope you could have figured by now that I don't consider it worthy of response.

There's a big difference between fostering a debate of ideas and attempting to advance an agenda.

Don't even look at the list. Look at this paragraph following it.

Even after all the above shorthand summaries, no doubt I'm leaving out lots of Bush&Co. dirt, but this list can provide a starting point, and a handy compilation of enough low and high crimes and misdemeanors to warrant their removal from power, either through the ballot box or by resignation or impeachment.

Wow, yeah, this sure looks like they haven't already made their mind up! I sure wouldn't be wasting my time with rational, thoughtful debate! And I'm sure they wrote similar screed about Cliton, about Bush, about Reagan....actually, I'm sure they probably closed one eye and looked the other way when Clinton was in office. I dunno - call it a hunch.

Do you see my side yet? There can be no purpose to engage in discussion when you're presented with material like this, because it can only provoke two responses - either it gets swallowed, or it triggers the gag reflex. I feel that I've somehow failed by the fact that this thread is now in the sixties despite my best efforts to cut it off from the beginning in response number two (heh heh I said "number two").



©CRZ™
Visit [slash] wrestling
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3000 days
Last activity: 214 days
#64 Posted on
If it'll make you feel better, not all liberals (myself included) think that the Clinton years were all fine-and-dandy, either.

(And it's not because of what Clinton did with his prick; as far as I'm concerned, that was none of anyone's business except for his own, Hillary's and Monica's. Gee, a Deep South politician was a pussyhound; THERE'S a shocker! There were a hell of a lot of other things in those years to worry about. It's not as if corporate criminals prospered under Reagan and Bush and then took an eight-year siesta, for instance.)



"No society has managed to invest more time and energy in the perpetuation of the fiction that it is _moral, sane and wholesome_ than our current crop of _Modern Americans_."
-- Frank Zappa
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2954 days
Last activity: 2951 days
#65 Posted on
that's probably because Clinton was not a liberal.



ELECTRIC BLOOD - Get the "F" Out! part 2
THE BEST WRESTLING TAPE EVAR!!

Weekly Visitor
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 300 days
Last activity: 294 days
#66 Posted on

    Originally posted by CRZ
    At the risk of repeating myself, I would hope you could have figured by now that I don't consider it worthy of response.


    Oops.


    There's a big difference between fostering a debate of ideas and attempting to advance an agenda.

    Don't even look at the list. Look at this paragraph following it.

    Even after all the above shorthand summaries, no doubt I'm leaving out lots of Bush&Co. dirt, but this list can provide a starting point, and a handy compilation of enough low and high crimes and misdemeanors to warrant their removal from power, either through the ballot box or by resignation or impeachment.

    Wow, yeah, this sure looks like they haven't already made their mind up! I sure wouldn't be wasting my time with rational, thoughtful debate! And I'm sure they wrote similar screed about Cliton, about Bush, about Reagan....actually, I'm sure they probably closed one eye and looked the other way when Clinton was in office. I dunno - call it a hunch.




If they did write the same about Clinton, it was probably one of Noam Chomsky's zombies, if they didn't it was probably from the same scriptwriters who brought you "Murphy Brown."



George Washington gave his signature
The Government gave its hand
They said for now and ever more that this was Indian Land

"As long as the moon shall rise"
"As long as the rivers flow"
"As long as the sun will shine"
"As long as the grass shall grow"


Stefonics
Bockwurst








Since: 17.3.02
From: Queidersbach

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#67 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.00

    ICEMAN said:
    I thought they did it because we didn't believe in their religion.

Wow. Seriously. That might have been the dumbest thing that I have ever read. I hope to God that you were joking. Really? Is that all they're upset about? Because we don't kneel five times per day toward Mecca? Well if that's ALL their problem is, then we should just nuke them off the map, right?

    BigWhalebony decided to grace us with this brilliant insight:
    If Pat Buchanan didn't get bushwhacked years ago by the LIBERAL media, he may have become President, and we would have killed off all threats to our country years ago. We also probably would have slowed immigration to our country and been more careful in accepting other people to live in our country and be allowed to enjoy life,liberty,and the pursuit of happiness.

And there certainly wouldn't have been any of them "niggers", "spics", or "slants" around to poison your Aryan blood, right? Jesus Christ, if you think that the "LIBERAL" media "bushwhacked" good 'ol Pat YEARS AGO, you have MUCH bigger problems than picking a president to vote for.

    Then he ended with this wisdom:
    Nader and Buchanan had an equal chance of attaining the Presidency...No Chance In Hell(which is too bad......in Buchanan's case).

Sure. Nothing like a minority hating leader. But maybe you're right. If he were to have been elected president all those years ago, we wouldn't have had a terrorist problem because there is a pretty damn good possibility that the only people left on the planet would have been good, pure white folk. Yeah, there's a dream come true. Do you go in public with your hood?









Is Brooklyn in the house? Yes, yes I think it is.
Jubuki
Kolbasz








Since: 16.7.02

Since last post: 4359 days
Last activity: 4342 days
#68 Posted on
Wow. This has taken on the shape of a Salvador Dali clock. There's got to be a few college-goers here -- dig out some of the Congressional Quarterlys from your library and take a closer look at what's really going on. The bills and items that make their way through Congress, successful or not, get published in magazines such as this and are accessible to a large number of people, if anyone really had the desire to go out there and look for it. It's easy to stay current and be educated on these matters, and it's easy to be a watchdog over one's own elected officials, if that's what one wants to do. But motivation is one thing I'd question after perusing this thread.



Chris
The AIR RAID CRASH
Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2833 days
Last activity: 2833 days
#69 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
CRZ sez:

    Wow, yeah, this sure looks like they haven't already made their mind up! I sure wouldn't be wasting my time with rational, thoughtful debate!

I'm sorry, but that response is bullshit. Why should the author not have their minds made up before they write the article? Why should they present a balanced account in what is obviously an opinion piece? What is irrational and unthoughtful about this list? Well, okay half of it is a little conspiracy theory heavy, but on the whole it's presented in a thoughtful, rational manner.

Your old recaps of Nitro were BIASED ... but that didn't make your criticisms of WCW unthoughtful or irrational.

What I find amazing is that there is NO thoughtful or rational responses being offered to the specific claims of the article. It's all mudslinging. Come on ... let's look at some specific claims:

The oil pipeline? Click Here to read the BBC news report on it. It's an established fact that the pipeline was in planning for years, and now with a pro-US government in power it's full steam ahead.

The Homeland Security Act? Click Here to read about how the government is now getting information on YOU right now. I'm pretty libertarian in bent ... I can't believe there isn't more of a outcry about this.

Due process being shredded? We've already seen one American citizen being denied the right to an attorney, because he is obviously guilty and may pass sinister messages through his lawyer to his compatriots.

Bush and Cheney up to their ears in corporate misconduct? $7 trillion dollars has been erased from the stock market in the last year, in large part because of the actions of CEOs and managers at firms. If Bush and Cheney were part of the problem in the late '90s, why should Americans trust them to be part of the solution in the '00s?

No peace in Israel? The US supports Sharon, who just approved a bombing that killed a Hamas leader, along with 8 children in their beds, as well as wounding hundreds of others. That just strengthens Palestinian extremism, and the cycle of violence continues. Sharon knows this. Hamas knows this. But because they are extremists they don't want peace, they want victory and glory and bloodshed.

Please everyone ... read Kafka. Read Orwell.. Read Chomsky. Read Hitchens. Don't focus on BIAS. Focus on facts.

Unless the Thoughtpolice have already taken over, and it's now a thoughtcrime to criticize those in power or doubt their integrity.






Let me put you in the picture, let me show you what I mean;
The Messiah is my sister, ain't no king man, she's my queen.
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2954 days
Last activity: 2951 days
#70 Posted on

OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#71 Posted on
It would seem that George W. Bush changed his name to "America" some time in the last few months, wouldn't it?



"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree."
---George Carlin

"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music."
---Anon.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2796 days
Last activity: 2639 days
AIM:  
#72 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44
Said Gavintzu: "Please, everyone. Don't focus on BIAS. Focus on facts. Read all these unbiased columns from raging lefitsts!"

Christopher Hitchens is on record in Martin Amis's novel on V.I. Lenin as saying Lenin was a great man.

Notice how you didn't offer anything rational yourself, but instead referred us to the men who do your thinking for you, i.e. Chomsky and Hitchens?

And here's some Chomsky: "The U.S. and Britain have simply announced, very clearly and loudly, that they are violent criminal states that are intent on destroying totally the fabric of international law, a fabric that has been built up laboriously over many years. They have announced that they will do as they please and will use violence as they please, independently of what anyone else thinks. In my view, that is the sole significance of the bombing and is probably the reason for it. "

I gather from this that Chomsky doesn't believe that the US should make its own decisions. Oh, no, that's only for those poor, oppressed dictators. What makes this even better is this comment:

This action is in fact a call for a lawless world in which the powerful will rule. The powerful happen to be the United States and Britain, which is by now a pathetic puppy dog that has abandoned any pretence of being an independent state.

So... He faults the US for not letting the international community dictate its policy, and then faults Britain for listening to the US? So, Noam, it's OK to let the UN tell you what to do, but it's not OK to ally yourself with the US? God knows we're just so damned evil. We ought to listen to the UN, because they have such wise countries involved like France, and Saudi Arabia. And Lord knows that the French know how to run a successful country without the US bailing them out.

On to your rational, well-thought out article.

1. We've learned that Bush&Co.'s "war on terrorism" has morphed from finding and destroying those responsible for the 9/11 mass-murders to a worldwide campaign to install a Pax Americana, by force if necessary. In other words, neo-imperialism, reminiscent in many ways of the old Roman Empire or, closer to our own time, the British Empire.

You have a problem with peace, or the eradication of terror? What was WWII, other than those nasty Imperialist Americans evilly stealing the German people's sovereignty? You have an awful lot of sympathy for these Arab regimes, but something tells me you'd never like to live in one. Quick: Name me an Arab democracy.

2. We've learned that Bush&Co. has no desire to rethink any of its policies abroad, the same policies that isolate it and that generate hatred, suspicion and terrorism in so many regions of the globe. Rather than reconsider its policies, or try to accomplish its ends through diplomacy and alliances and cultural/economic initiatives, in its arrogance it continues to bully and threaten others, insult its European and other allies, disregard international treaties and courts, engage in unilateral actions without regard to the national interests of others, and, in general, simply throw its massive weight around. The prevailing attitude seems to be: we are the one Superpower, get used to bending to our will.

Where are the supporting facts here? There are none, of course. Only more unfounded opinion. THIS is why Zed finds this article unworthy of response, (I think). Stop and think about how much foreign aid money the US hands out, and doesn't have to. Is it our responsibility to bail out the IMF? No, but we do. It's a sure fact that the rest of the world needs us more than we need them. Why not check it out?

8. We've learned that Ashcroft/Bush are shredding Constitutional due-process guarantees in their move toward total control:

I'm sure phase two will involve a giant mind-control ray, and maybe an army of the undead. Note that I am NOT suggesting no one should criticize Bush. But this is, quite simply, ridiculous. As much as Sharon's bombing of the Hamas leader was excessive, where is your righteous outrage when Israeli schoolchildren die? Because there are a hell of a lot of them dying every day. More, I dare say, than Palestinians.

(edited by PalpatineW on 4.8.02 2106)

Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 39 days
Last activity: 39 days
#73 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
Actually, Gavintzu was linking not "to people who do his thinking for him," but to news stories which present facts that he uses to reach his own judgment.

Your example of WW2 Germany is completely different. Germany was trying to take over Europe. The people who attacked us last september were trying to avenge what they see as a violation of their rights.



Mean Gene: "You know, I don't think it's a question - Goldberg, I don't think it's a question of who's next, I think it's a question of who's left?"
Goldberg: "No, see, that's where you're wrong. It ain't who's left, it's - WHO'S NEXT?"

"Just how hardcore am I? Well this morning, I drank milk that was two days past the expiration!"
-Norman Smiley

"She is one of them! She's CANADIAN!"
-Stevie Ray
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2796 days
Last activity: 2639 days
AIM:  
#74 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44

    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    The people who attacked us last september were trying to avenge what they see as a violation of their rights.


How'd you know that? You read it in the Nation?



Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 39 days
Last activity: 39 days
#75 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
The people our government claims we are fighting chose to attack this country because they see America as the big dog in a yard full of puppies. The see America as a big evil body looking to hold down the rest of the world. You may think these are stupid claims, but they don't care what you think any more than you care what they think.

Regardless of whether they have been violated or not, my point still stands. Your Germany comparison doesn't fit because these people are not trying to take over our land.



Mean Gene: "You know, I don't think it's a question - Goldberg, I don't think it's a question of who's next, I think it's a question of who's left?"
Goldberg: "No, see, that's where you're wrong. It ain't who's left, it's - WHO'S NEXT?"

"Just how hardcore am I? Well this morning, I drank milk that was two days past the expiration!"
-Norman Smiley

"She is one of them! She's CANADIAN!"
-Stevie Ray
Gavintzu
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada

Since last post: 2833 days
Last activity: 2833 days
#76 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Palpatine sez:

    Notice how you didn't offer anything rational yourself, but instead referred us to the men who do your thinking for you, i.e. Chomsky and Hitchens?

Beep ... Unit 4582 processing thought of Noam Chomsky ... beep ... accepting all that is read as truth ... beep. The bit at the end was intended as an educational supplement to widen some horizens. The body of my post (which you seemed to have missed) was full of facts and tidbits.

Hitchens thought Lenin was a great man? Depends on the context I guess. Was Churchill a great man? He had a lot of blood on his hands, he was on record as a racist, and was probably the best democratic leader the West has seen in 300 years. Churchill wasn't a saint, but he was a great man. An argument along the same lines could be made for Lenin, I guess. Are you sure you aren't confusing the crimes of Lenin with the crimes of Stalin? Or do you feel sainthood is a prerequisite for greatness?


    here's some Chomsky: "The U.S. and Britain have simply announced, very clearly and loudly, that they are violent criminal states that are intent on destroying totally the fabric of international law, a fabric that has been built up laboriously over many years.


Most Americans read that and shake their heads. Many Europeans read that and maybe rub their chins. Many Third World inhabitants read that and nod enthusiastically. To what degree that statement is correct seems to be the crux of our little disagreement.


    This action is in fact a call for a lawless world in which the powerful will rule.

If you look at the US behaviour in the Third World for the past 50 years, and its inconsistent application of international law, this statement is not on the face of it wrong. It was criminal for the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan (to protect its border against Muslem extremists) but it's okay for the US to attack Iraq (to protect its interests against Saddam and his evilness). Sounds pretty Wild West to me.


    You have an awful lot of sympathy for these Arab regimes, but something tells me you'd never like to live in one. Quick: Name me an Arab democracy.

I have no sympathy for those Arab dictatorships. The problem is that most of them (Iran 1950-1979, Iraq 1950-1990, Saudi Arabia 1945-present, Pakistan 2001-) are supported militarily and economically by the US. By supporting US foreign policy you are the one defending most Arab dictatorships.

Oh, Pakistan was a democracy for about a decade. But then there was a US-supported military coup. Its security services armed and supported Al Qaeda up until September 11, for the purposes of terrorizing Indians in their border dispute with Pakistan. That is what is called "blowback" in policy terms. Here's some Hitchens talking about that:

"... while the cruise missiles fired at Afghanistan (in 1998) managed to kill some Pakistani intelligence officers who were training Al Qaeda forces to infiltrate Kashmir. In that moment, a whole nexus between Islamabad, the Taliban and bin Laden was accidentally exposed. And the political establishment in this country decided to look away." The US directly supported Islamabad (Pakistan), and knowingly indirectly supported the Taleban and al Qaeda, up until the blowback of September 11.

The US is generous in foreign aid. But I'm sure the people directly involved would much prefer the US stop arming and supporting dictatorships rather than getting a small handout. As well as stop carpet bombing civilian areas when they do go to war. That would be a good start. The Iraqi people thank you in advance.


    where is your righteous outrage when Israeli schoolchildren die? Because there are a hell of a lot of them dying every day. More, I dare say, than Palestinians.

Click on the link I had under "cycle of violence". Imagine me shaking my fist at the bastards who commit outrages against civilians. Hamas are lunatics. Arafat is a criminal and a thug. Why do you imagine that when I attack Israeli actions that I must support Palestinian terrorism? Why do you imagine that when I attack US foreign policy that I must support Saddam?

The world is not black and white ... it is complex. Just getting your information about the world from CNN, the nightly news, and the Associated Press is not enough.



Let me put you in the picture, let me show you what I mean;
The Messiah is my sister, ain't no king man, she's my queen.
DMC
Liverwurst








Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 3442 days
Last activity: 3436 days
#77 Posted on
Chomsky...if there are any academics that are more arrogant than linguists, I would like to know. Talk about people who think they know everything about everything because they have a college degree in something.

DMC



"Tonight our bed is cold, lost in the darkness of our love.
God have mercy on a man, who doubts what he's sure of."
-Bruce Springsteen
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 300 days
Last activity: 294 days
#78 Posted on
Speaking as part of the "liberal" (as per the far right) and/or "conservative political pawn" (as per the far left) media, I think I can safely say that Noam Chomsky is an assmunch.

Thank you.



George Washington gave his signature
The Government gave its hand
They said for now and ever more that this was Indian Land

"As long as the moon shall rise"
"As long as the rivers flow"
"As long as the sun will shine"
"As long as the grass shall grow"


deadbeater
Morcilla








Since: 12.2.02
From: Parts unknown

Since last post: 4337 days
Last activity: 4337 days
#79 Posted on
Point 15--the corporate one, can be said by Judicial Watch, for they are the ones spearheading the investigations inro Enron, Haiburton, etc. I like to know that a think tank for once doesn't play favorites.



"Business has just picked up" says JR. Then right on cue, Molly enters the arena! Never was JR any better in introducing someone. --Raw 7/15
Scott Summets
Sujuk








Since: 27.6.02

Since last post: 3872 days
Last activity: 3840 days
#80 Posted on

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    9. We've learned much about the dangers of religious fundamentalism in Islam, but we've also learned about dangers posed by our own religious fundamentalists - eager for a Christian theocratic society, symbolized most recently by a Secret Service agent scrawling on a Muslim suspect's refrigerator "Islam Is Evil, Christ Is King" -



This point makes no sense at all -- because of one agent's writing on a prayer sheet (bigoted as it was), the whole government is anti-Islamic and evil? Just for everyone to know, the agent that wrote the anti-Muslim comments was taken off the force and most likely will be fired.



Cause' here me and KG come naked, out of the side hatch, with the oils and perfumes, and incense!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextThread ahead: Caveat Emptor
Next thread: Georgie's vacation
Previous thread: New mutual fund
(2492 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Older W's may remember this: (July 1972--Jane Fonda strides a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun--AP) Now Hanoi Jane's at it again. Ms. Fonda announced (at an appearance promoting her book) that she's starting up a bus tour to oppose the Iraq war.
The W - Current Events & Politics - 20 Things We've Learned Since 9/11 (Page 4)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.155 seconds.