quote:Originally posted by Nim: Yes, Bush should have turned Saddam over to the Iraqis instead of shipping him straight into Washington to gloat over him and try and pick his brain. Bad news written all over it.
??? I'm confused as to why you're saying this. Saddam was never shipped to Washington, and he was turned over to the Iraqis not long after his capture.
quote:Originally posted by Tora Ziyal: I saw a broadcast of Tony Blair speaking at a Labour Party thing last week. That was the first time I really heard him speak, and even though I didn't understand half the issues, I was like, man, can we have HIM for president instead?
You are either dangerously insane or dangerously clever.
Tony Blair is disliked by a large amount of the British public now, as we've finally woken up to the fact that he is a snake in, well, snake's clothing. The Labour government has a lot of dodgy dealings going on behind the scenes, just the same as the Republicans. Blair is just a better looking, more eloquent puppet than Dubya.
If you want him because you think he'd make a good President, you are sorely mistaken. If you want him because he does a much better job than Dubya of pulling the wool over the sheep's eyes, then by all means, PLEASE TAKE HIM!
Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Tony Blair has done the unthinkable - made us nostalgic for the Major era. I nearly cried for joy when Rory Bremner did his John Major voice a while back, and also when Private Eye did a one-off resurrection of The Secret Diary of SIR John Major KCMG aged. . ..
I've no illusions though. I know the Conservatives would be just as bad if not worse. But at least they're honest about what they want. They want to be in government to amass as much power, wealth and prestige for themselves and their cronies as they can, and if we're very lucky we'll be thrown the odd scrap.
Meanwhile, Blair and New Labour have gone about amassing as much power, prestige and wealth for themselves and their cronies as they can, all the while making it out like we're in this great partnership together. The Tories want to take us out of Europe - well, at this stage I'm almost in favour of it, it'd be better than this limbo we're stuck in, fartarseing around while Brown applies his five economic tests. Blair's established Britain as the lapdog of a bunch of Chritsian fundamentalist nutjobs whose primary interest in the Middle East is making sure that everything's nice and tidy in the Holy Land when Judgement Day comes (especially all that nasty messy oil that's just lying around the place).
Fucking cocksucker, he'll do a guest voice on The Simpsons but he won't go to pay his respects to British citizens who are dead because of him.
posted
This increase in swearing is really playing havok with my work web filter. Tsk.
Labour still have done good things, overall. Economy and jobswise the country is much better off. The NHS is mildly screwed, but at this stage it always will be. That massive injection of money that it was recently given only helped to repair some of the damage caused by years of Tory neglect. And it's still far better than not having one at all.
I suppose the main difference between Blair and Bush is that Tony actually seems to understand what he's saying, whereas George would be reduced to a gibbering moron (or more so) if his scriptwriters were shot. And while Blair does have some unpleasant right-wing leanings, I really can't see him doing as bad a job of Bush at running America if he had to. For starters, he seems to lack the "let poor black people die in hurricanes" aspect to his personality.
In any event, Lee is only making clearly insane comments about being nostalgic for Major because he's now extremely old, and all old people get right-wing when they realise that everyone younger than them is an uncouth ruffian who doesn't deserve anything and anyway university was a lot harder when I went and we had respect for people damnit.
(And finally, Blair may be disliked by a large proportion of the British public, but the Tories are so incompetent that they've given us 5 leaders to hate in the same amount of time. You think it's worrying that you're nostalgic for Major? I'm getting nostalgic for William fucking Hague.)
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: For starters, he seems to lack the "let poor black people die in hurricanes" aspect to his personality.
This is actually a fantasy- you need to remove the word "black" from that statement for it to be accurate. I've not seen or read anything to suggest Bush is at all racist- certainly Colin Powell does not think so.
The whole "bush does not care about black people" was a one-off line from some black comic trying to boost his name recognition by going down there for a few days "to help" -meaning to provide the networks with familliar faces so we would not have to see real people's opinions on TV- and it sure worked. Then we saw those shitbags Mayor Nagin and his chief of police (since resigned and made a scapegoat) go on Oprah to decree how awful the government response was (point fingers away from their own obvious inepitude) and how babies were being raped, children had their throats cut and there was a freezer full of bodies at the Superdome.
All of which turned out to be not only completely false, but no records of it being reported to police, FEMA or anyone else could be established.
Bush is indeed a shifty fucktard, but there are those willing to stoop far below even his level to attack him.
I wonder how badly relations between Britan and the US would deterorate if either country elected a leader that could be trusted and was not in bed with Christian fundies....
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:??? I'm confused as to why you're saying this. Saddam was never shipped to Washington, and he was turned over to the Iraqis not long after his capture.
posted
It appears to be a Tolkein encyclopedia reference to one Ar-Pharaz�n, who was "twenty-fifth and last King of N�menor. He assailed Mordor and brought Sauron back to N�menor as a hostage, but Sauron seduced him, and persuaded him to sail on Valinor itself. As punishment for this act, the island of N�menor sank beneath the waves of the Great Sea." So, um, yay!
posted
BJ: basically, Ar Pharazon turned into Saurons puppet and was convinced he could take over the world, which destroyed his own society in the process.
Sound like anyone you know?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
Actually, Ar Pharazon was getting old along with the majority of Numenoreans and became preoccupied with ways to extend his already long life span and longed for the eternal life provided in Valinor. Sauron basicly enticed him to do what he already had set his heart on anyway.
Flip Wilson had it right.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Not that I know what possible leverage Saddam could find in order to pour honey in Bush's ear. So would Sauron in this case be Cheney? Or Putin?
Theory: If Guy Fawkes had finished his mission to complete success, ie a new catholic head of state had been installed (instead of catholics being treated even worse after Fawkes), would perhaps the "puritan" future colonizers of America not have been born? I'm just wool-gathering here, I'm not anti-US.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Changing history in such a fashion leads to such a temporal mechanics head-ache that it's not even worth thinking about!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
