Your anti-war posterchild...

Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream has now stepped up to the plate claiming HE KNOWS IRAQ IS CLEAN.

He's sponsored an ad running on TV in NY and Washington DC "educating" everyone about the truth regarding Iraq.

Yes, it's now official....an ice cream expert is now an expert of WMD, Iraq and foreign affairs.

Someone should really study what is put in that Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream now...

HAHAHAHA, you got a link to this fruitcake MT69.

I saw him on Hannity and Colmes tonight, it should air again later on Fox-News.

Shawn Hannity asked if it was ok to fight the Nazis in WWII after the Ice Cream clown claimed WAR is no good....the clown just danced around the question.

These hollywood "elites" act like they know TOP SECRET stuff from their Beverley Hills mansions. "They" can see Saddam is no threat behind their baracaded homes, the rest of America are uneducated buffoons according to them.

[Edited on 30-1-2003 by MT69]

you really are a twat aren't you.

Originally posted by MT69
Yes, it's now official....an ice cream expert is now an expert of WMD, Iraq and foreign affairs.

...wasn't GWB a cheerleader???


Peace,
ALIEN

Originally posted by Lupe_101
you really are a twat aren't you.

Lupe - Keep talking moron. You cannot counter the fat Ice Cream dork being on your side, so you call the other side names.

Maybe Ronald McDonald will come out for you idiots next week...

yeah and maybe Bush with "chokeify" on another pretzel.
crawl back into your bunker with your guns n' ammo rags doodle.

Rags doodle??? (rolling on the ground)

You Brits have some stupid sayings...

rags = a slang term for crappy magazines; we used that here in the US as well

doodle = a more polite form of wanker, which means chronic masturbator ( UK folks help out....we just call folks 'jer-offs' here in the states! )

Bout Time - I figured you were typing from Europe with your misinformed posts about the US.

And by the way........
In a Republic, folks like Ice Cream man can say what they please; contrary to fascist beliefs, it's written into our constitution!!!

What? Don't like Ice Cream Man? How about Gen. Zinni?
Gen. Schafer? Gen. McPharland?
Now I know you'll like Stormin Norman himself, General Norman Schwarzkopf!!!!
quote:
That dismissive posture bothers Schwarzkopf because he thinks Rumsfeld and the people around him lack the background to make sound military judgments by themselves. He prefers the way Cheney operated during the Gulf War. "He didn't put himself in the position of being the decision-maker as far as tactics were concerned, as far as troop deployments, as far as missions were concerned."
Rumsfeld, by contrast, worries him. "It's scary, okay?" he says. "Let's face it: There are guys at the Pentagon who have been involved in operational planning for their entire lives, okay? . . . And for this wisdom, acquired during many operations, wars, schools, for that just to be ignored, and in its place have somebody who doesn't have any of that training, is of concern."

www.washingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by MT69
Bout Time - I figured you were typing from Europe with your misinformed posts about the US.

Nope, just hate fascists!

-New Yorker
-Business Owner
-Voted Republican in everything except the national contests
-Would have vote for John McCain if the Bush Crime Family didn't kill his campaign
-Military vet
-Old enough to have had Reagan as my first vote; have smartented up considerably since my teens.

Ok, General Powell and Mr. Cheney....General S's bosses during the Gulf War say he's wrong. You want to play games???

By the way General S is out of the loop the last time I checked and ditto with those other Generals you quoted. They lost their security access as soon as they hung up the uniform since the majority of them went for civilian jobs and didn't stick around in civil service jobs. Of course, you want to believe some retired Generals who have as much info as you do...and less than me.

Nope, just hate fascists!

-New Yorker
-Business Owner
-Voted Republican in everything except the national contests
-Would have vote for John McCain if the Bush Crime Family didn't kill his campaign
-Military vet
-Old enough to have had Reagan as my first vote; have smartented up considerably since my teens.

I liked McCain but support Bush.

Military vet....you mean 4 years for the GI Bill???

Quit trying to call yourself a Republican, you're a Democrat talking trash about Republican leaders.

Focus junior, focus!!
You started the topic of the source of dissent being more important than the message. Fair enough. I gave you examples of folks who 'earned' their right to critique.

What don't you understand?

It wasn't for me career wise, but my family is deep with retired officers ( you should see the mansion with maid my grand uncle has down in the DR on retired Full Bird pay!)

Don't you even insult me by calling me a Republican again. I hate the two party system; research some of my posts, I've laid that out in depth. In short, voting party removes the proper question "Who is best for my country?" and replaces it with " how can my party win?"
That's why we end up having people like Dick Gephart, Joe Lieberman, Tom Delay and George Bush hold offices they shouldn't be allowed near.

It's obvious that you couldn't hack the military because it's an organization mostly pro-Republican. The Democrats I've come across in the military are only in it for themselves ie the GI Bill benefits before they punch out early...like you.

Keep telling yourself that, son, maybe you'll believe that some day! The only political affiliation is to the CINC, whomever he may be at the time.
From some of the threads I've read, you still haven't proved you're not a 16 yr old in mama's basement who is a military brat with a little bit of surface knowledge.

Bout Time - Yeah, believe what you like to put the pieces of the puzzle in your head together. I feel sorry for you since you have to live with yourself 24/7, so you go around making up stuff about others to feel better.

I can read you like a book....you enlisted in the military for 4 years because "relatives" did it. You couldn't hack it as a liberal and now try to pass off your short military stint as some badge of honor and expertise on military affairs.

Oh, do you think this war is all about OIL???

[Edited on 30-1-2003 by MT69]

I make my bones & then some, but thanks for caring!
You can read books!?! And here I thought you just listened to Sean Hannity tapes & shows....good for you!

Tell me you think that out of the 15 points on the planet where US military forces are involved, and the 28 other Countries who have WMD's that are hostile to the US, oil industry tycoons Cheney/Bush DIDN'T pick Iraq for the oil!?! Please, I'm dying for a good laugh about Junior's compassion for the suffering Iraqis he's so concernered about.

Please 69, read more, the debate will be more fun.... promise!

"Facing its most chronic shortage in oil stocks for 27 years, the US has this month turned to an unlikely source of help - Iraq.
Weeks before a prospective invasion of Iraq, the oil-rich state has doubled its exports of oil to America, helping US refineries cope with a debilitating strike in Venezuela.
After the loss of 1.5 million barrels per day of Venezuelan production in December the oil price rocketed, and the scarcity of reserves threatened to do permanent damage to the US oil refinery and transport infrastructure. To keep the pipelines flowing, President Bush stopped adding to the 700m barrel strategic reserve.
But ultimately oil giants such as Chevron, Exxon, BP and Shell saved the day by doubling imports from Iraq from 0.5m barrels in November to over 1m barrels per day to solve the problem. Essentially, US importers diverted 0.5m barrels of Iraqi oil per day heading for Europe and Asia to save the American oil infrastructure.
The trade, though bizarre given current Pentagon plans to launch around 300 cruise missiles a day on Iraq, is legal under the terms of UN's oil for food programme.
But for opponents of war, it shows the unspoken aim of military action in Iraq, which has the world's second largest proven reserves - some 112 billion barrels, and at least another 100bn of unproven reserves, according to the US Department of Energy. Iraqi oil is comparatively simple to extract - less than $1 per barrel, compared with $6 a barrel in Russia. Soon, US and British forces could be securing the source of that oil as a priority in the war strategy. The Iraqi fields south of Basra produce prized 'sweet crudes' that are simpler to refine.
On Friday, Pentagon sources said US military planners 'have crafted strategies that will allow us to secure and protect those fields as rapidly as possible in order to then preserve those prior to destruction'.
The US military says this is a security issue rather than a grab for oil, after a 'variety of intelligence sources' indicated that Saddam planned to damage or destroy his oil fields - which would inflict up to $30bn damage on the US economy and cause irreparable environmental damage.
But the prospect of British and US commandos claiming key oil installations around Basra by force has pushed global oil diplomacy into overdrive. International oil companies have been jockeying position to secure concessions before 'regime change'.
Last weekend a Russian delegation flew to Baghdad to patch up relations after Iraq's cancellation of its five-year-old contract to develop the huge West Qurna oil field - worth up to $600bn at today's oil price. Lukoil was punished by Baghdad for negotiating with the US and Iraqi exiles on keeping its concession in a post-Saddam Iraq.
The delegation of Ministers and oil executives returned to Moscow with three signed contracts. Oil is the state budget's lifeblood, and Russia requires an oil price of at least $18. Russians fear a US grip on a large reserve of cheap oil could send prices tumbling.
But Saddam has offered lucrative contracts to companies from France, China, India and Indonesia as well as Russia.
It is only the oil majors based in Britain and America - now the leading military hawks - that don't have current access to Iraqi contracts."

www.observer.co.uk...

Here's a great article on how US papers are shaping the debate

www.editorandpublisher.com...


[Edited on 30-1-2003 by Bout Time]