1 Go ahead and believe what you want. You guys look so retarded right now that nobody in their right mind would ever listen to you.

2 All we know for sure, is that nobody knows for sure, and that sure is no way to make good policy!              USA, all the way!

3 Johke:

Go ahead and believe what you want. You look so retarded right now that nobody in their right mind would ever listen to you.


Is there a reason you didn't read the Newsweek story and address it? Were the doomsayers wrong then or are they wrong now? Is the Earth cooling or warming? Where's the proof of either claim?


One thing is for sure. The reason given for the alleged anthropogenic warming trend is patently false. It is ridiculously blamed on carbon dioxide.


Carbon dioxide does not cause air to get warmer. Co2 only makes up slightly more than 1% of so called greenhouse gasses--far too little to make a difference one way or the other in the global atmospheric content, much less cause the atmosphere to heat up.


Humanity produced far greater Co2 emmisions in the past than those produced now, yet the past was colder, according to the dommsayers. Industries used to pump it into the air without any restrictions whatsoever.


So called greenhouse conditions are caused by high humidity levels. Humidity is caused by water vapor in the atmosphere--which incidentally makes up 97% of so called greenhous gasses.


Global climate changes are caused by shifting ocean currents, atmospheric water vapor, shifting tectonic plates, solar radiation, and the occasional volcanic eruption. No climatologist will dispute this.


The only point in dispute is whether mankind is causing the climate to grow warmer at a breakneck rate. Well, the doomsayers have been pushing anthropogenic warming for over a decade now, but they still cant prove that the Earth is even 1 degree warmer. This means that if the climate is growing warmer, the growth rate is so slow that it cant even be measured yet. The growth rates for warming that they've predicted year after year have all been wrong. According to their idiotic climate models, the Earth should be over 10 degrees warmer than it is. They are also unable to show how mankind is capable of changing the climate more than infinitesimally.


There are two kinds of climatologists. Honest ones, and unprincipled doomsayers whoring for grant money. The grant whores want to restrain American and Western economic power, which is why the anti-American UN is leading the mob when it comes to lying about the climate. Most of the so called "scientists" quoted by the Establishment Media are neither climatologists nor scientists--although it can be argued that anyone who has boiled water or sniffed his own fart is a scientist.


One thing is painfully clear to all but the terminally stupid: The climate is not warming at a rate that poses any danger to mankind.


I have to wonder if morons like you will still be crying that the sky is falling another10 years from now. How many years worth of a stable climate with infinitesimal change rates will it take for you to abandon your doomsday scenario?


It all depends on how stupid you are. I'm betting that once the global warming scare peters out, idiots like you will glom onto another scare story, like the naturally occurring polar ozone holes, or global oceanic pollution. Hell, you're so stupid I wouldn't be surprised if you switched back to the global cooling scenario.


Remember: None of the predictions made at any of the climate summits have been correct yet. Accepting their incorrect conclusions as environmental-case Gospel is stupidity at its most stolid.

4 Can you please think of something more grown up than making fun of someone's name? Geez, you act like a child.

5 The evidence in support of these predictions [of global cooling] has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hardpressed to keep up with it."

hahahahaha!  Hysteria then no different than hysteria now.

6 WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!
 
No , really.  Every one of us.  Hopefully I'll be shot to death by a jealous husband.  When I'm 83.
 
Isn't it interesting how the "science" of global warming lines up so nicely with the political ideals of the one-world socialists?  Kind of like the way the "science" of eugenics lined up so nicely with National Socialism.  Or the "science" of social darwinism lined up with institutionalized racism. 
 
Fossil records show that the last time atmospheric CO2 was below 400 ppm was at the tail end of the carboniferous period.  That was a long time ago, John.  See, all those plants sucked up the CO2 from the atmosphere.  Then they died and became coal and petroleum, John.  Poor plants. ....
 
Now we dig em up and burn em.  And put that carbon BACK into the atmosphere, from whence it came, John.  Ya see, everything's a cycle, a "Circle of Life", just like in the Lion King. 
 
If you'd like, John, I could go on, and even substitute some of the big words, like "atmosphere", with small, monosyllabic 
easy words, like"air".  Let me know.

7 Ken poop:


Why am I not surprised that you tried to deflect discussion of the facts concerning global warming hysteria with emotional ad hominems?


Stupid leftist. None of your "rules for radicals" work on me.


If you were a man, you'd admit you support the global warming hoax because doing so is a way to retard American performance. Of course, as a leftist you're psychologically incapable of defending your vile positions honestly, and you obviously aren't a real man. You know the vast majority of Americans don't want to see their country humbled by the world's midgets, so you lie your ass off in the name of your ridiculous Marxist agenda. The ends always justify the means for power hungry reprobates like you. The 20th century is littered with the dead and suffering caused by your means. Fucking monster.


Global warming hysteria is just another case of America-last retards trying to retard what they foolishly think is American hegemony and dominance.



Why cant morons like you understand that America does not dominate the rest of the world? It simply outperforms the rest of the world. Instead of trying to retard America, why don't you try to help the world's retards perform better? Because you're blinded by envious hatred and self loathing, that's why.


Tenure sucking parasites like you would be the first to go in your dreary new world order. Your hypocrisy doesn't seem to have any limit, does it? Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and buy land in the Arctic Circle. According to you Chicken Littles, it will be prime real estate faster than you can say BusHitlerBurton. Go sell boats in Florida, dumb-fuck.

8 "rules for radicals"

LOL.  Saul Alinsky.  I still have that very book on my shelf from back in my Lib days!  It used to be required reading for any Liberal arts educated Leftard back in the 70s and 80s.

9 ROFLMAO! Lefties......two lines of insults

Jeff- a essay of facts.



The FACT the lefties can never answer is Kyoto. Even if their version
of global warming was correct Kyoto would do nothing to stop it and
possibly make it worse. In the age of globalization when you omit China
and India from the treaty that means all our remaining polluting
industries would simply go to those countries. Those nations have less
pollution controls so in the end the same number of widgets the market
demands are produced but in a more polluting manner. Kyoto is just the
biggest income redistribution plan the world has ever seen and nothing
about stopping global warming....even if they could.

10
The FACT the lefties can never answer is Kyoto.

They don't have to answer (and they don't), because it's their religion, not science.  They ignore, and instead attack the messenger ("oil companies").

11 My brother just walked in about 5 minutes ag ranting about all the "hard evidence" for global warming he was seeing on Link TV, so I pulled up the Newsweek article from 1975 and showed him all the "massive evidence" for global cooling.  It was funny watching him switch to sputtering about the "oil companies".  LOL.  Leftards make me laugh.

12 I don't know if you all follow this site:

Not By Fire, But By Ice

I can't tell you how his credentials hold up, but his predictions come in pretty close. 

More than anything, I use it as a resource for good stats, but the's been saying NY would get hit hard with snow for quite some time.

13 "Not By Fire, But By Ice" indeed.


The flora and fauna of this planet have never suffered from warmness (draughts aren't caused by heat,) but Ice-ages are a bitch.


Of course, even during the ice-ages life adapted and flourished. Only idiots worry about the climate. Local meteorolical conditions like lightning, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, mudslides and avalanches are what kill people--and they aren't caused by global warming.


The leftards have been crying that the sky is falling for more than 30 years now, but it's still there, it's still blue, and it's still life sustaining.


Reality is immune to leftism.

14 Climate predictions from the same group that said three months ag that we are absolutely winning in Iraq.

15 The Kyoto treaty is an attempt by third world nations to limit growth of the larger countries economies. They cannot compete so they set up rules for the US which they themselves are not bound to. Mexico City has some of the most polluted air in the world. But nobody bitches about their carbon footprint.
 
Now I am going to finish polishing my gas guzzling Dodge truck and yes it does have a Hemi.

16 Do not try to talk facts and logic with a member of the Sacred Liberal Church of Climate Chage.  You might as well walk into a snake-handler ritual in Alabama and try to convince them that maybe playing with poisonous snakes isn't the best idea.  Besides, St. Al. might excommuniate you and cast you into outer darkenss, where there will be weeping and sweating like pigs for a few years, until the Sacred Church of the Chicken Little Libs decides in five-ten years that we're actually facing another ice age, at which point you will be weeping and gnashing your teeth....

17  Isn't it interesting how the "science" of global warming lines up so nicely with the political ideals of the one-world socialists?
 
**************************************************
 
re: 70s hysteria over Nuclear Winter.   Every major publication and newspaper in the 70s decade beat this drum.  The agenda for the left was NO NUKES, we must disarm unilaterally, trust the Soviets they only want Peace like us after-all. 
 
**************************************************
 
The Grant hungry scientific community went along with the "theory" and also added that a natural process was under way that would plunge us into a deep freeze. Just look back at old editions of Science mag or Scientific America and you'll see it yourself.

18 What do facts have to do with Global Warming?

19 John lyin:


As usua, you dodged the facts and threw out a misleading non sequitur. typical islamopithecine and leftist tactic.


Too bad it doesn't work on us, ass-munch.


Your terrorist pals--funded by your mullah monkeys in Iran--have failed to acheive any of their goals. Iraq is still standing, and the Coalition is still there. There's nothing you can do about it, because as a cyber terrorist, you're as big a failure as you are with women.


Global warming is as bogus as you are, you Iranian theocracy troll. Go fuck yourself in the ass. Muhammad did it all the time, and loved it. His epilepsy and insanity were caused by the syphilis he contracted from the goats he fucked. Or maybe it came from the pigs that fucked him, I don't know for sure. All I know is that he was a cowardly, diseased, little weakling who never fought a real man in his pathetic life.


Kind of like you, John lyin. No--exactly like you.


You know where to find me, bitch. If you survive the global warming temperatures that are below zero around here, that is. Fag-ass.

20

I hope you guys heard that there was 3.7 BILLION given to promoters of the global warming 'consensus' only counting one agency of the Canadian government. Lefties will whine all they like about oil money creating bias, but many more billions are payed out to 'consensus' supporters than any oil monies I have seen them reference.

There is a guy who was paid $2500 a day, (I think) when he used to do temp work for coal and oil companies. It would take over FOUR THOUSAND YEARS for him to earn 3.7 billion if he never took a day off.

I hope this sorts out any arguements about 'bias'. Clearly it's profitable to say the world is going to burn up. Being a hack for the 'consensus' is good money!

The next question you SHOULD be asking is, why pay so much for science that is already 'settled' and why incentivize one side of a politically charged topic, if the science speaks for itself?

Why?

USA, all the way!

21

If Halliburton poured every cent of their annual profits into countering the 'consensus' it would take them more than SIX YEARS (at their highest ever annual profit) to get to 3.7 Billion dollars. Yes, six years. If you've ever had a business you know how impractical that would be. It isn't even an option. But when it's not your money (ie, it's tax revenue from a socialist leaning democracy) you can throw into a volcano if you like.

So how about that bias?

USA, all the way!

22 I hope you guys heard that there was 3.7 BILLION given to promoters of the global warming 'consensus'

Do you have a source for that?

23

Yes, but you'll have to hang on.   And I need to correct my math on halliburton. It would be 1 1/2 to 2 years worth of profits spent, so I apologize for the error.

Still .... it is  decent comparison.

USA, all the way!

24

This is pulled from one of the above articles.

Despite such obtuseness Lindzen fights on, defending the science at what is undoubtedly a very considerable personal cost. Those who toe the party line are publicly praised and have grants ladled out to them from a funding pot that overflows with US$1.7-billion per year in the U.S. alone. As Lindzen wrote earlier this year in The Wall Street Journal, "there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."

USA, all the way!

25 Which one?  I needed a source for your allegation that billions in grant money was being funnelled to global warming promoters.

26 Lets say the left is right about carbon dioxide warming the planet... Why are they not suggesting the easiest route to fixing it? Pump gases that cool the Earth into the atmosphere. I know Volcano's produce a sulphate that actually reflect sunlight from the Earth and this process has caused cooling many times before. Im sure there is a way we can produce the same gas to counteract the warming effects of CO2.
Course I am probably thinking out my ass....

27

About the $2500 a day "shill" ...

Professor of Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Member, Annapolis Center Science and Economic Advisory Council. Member, National Academy of Sciences.

Dr. Lindzen was a member of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but takes issue with the general conclusions drawn from the IPCC's report. His prolific writings assert that climate change science is inconclusive, and has testified multiple times before Congress.

Ross Gelbspan reported in 1995 that Lindzen "charges oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels, and a speech he wrote, entitled 'Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,' was underwritten by OPEC." ("The Heat is On: The warming of the world's climate sparks a blaze of denial," Harper's magazine, December 1995.) Lindzen signed the 1995 Leipzig Declaration.

USA, all the way

28 Jesusland ! ! !  I'm looking for it! I'm a very disorganized person.  Just hang on, and I'll try to make this easier. OK 
 
 
 
 
USA, all the way!

29

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/lamb020507.htm

"I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report. Nearly all the changes worked to remove hints of the skepticism with which many scientists regard global warming claims."

A hundred distinguished scientists, meeting in Leipzig, Germany, released a joint statement on July 10, 1966 which said:

"There is still no scientific consensus on the subject of climate change. On the contrary, most scientists now accept the fact that actual observations from earth satellites show no climate warming whatsoever."

From that point forward, any scientist who dared to offer research results that did not affirm the conclusions of the IPCC, has been denied invitations to participate in the IPCC studies, denied funding, and/or denigrated publicly by politically motivated scientists and/or the media. Any scientist who dares express skepticism is at once denounced as a pawn for the oil and coal industry.

The opposite is true: advocates of global warming are pawns of the global warming industry. And, indeed, global warming is an industry. In 1996, at the same U.N. meeting at which the Second Assessment Report was released, Mohamed T. El-Ashry, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Global Environment Facility (GEF), released its quarterly report. He told the delegates that his agency had leveraged $462.3 million into $3.2 billion in climate change projects. And that was just the beginning.

In the last decade, billions and billions of dollars have been spent by governments and foundations on research and mitigation programs related to global warming. To the endless bureaucracies, recipients of grant awards, and non-government organizations, it is imperative that the global warming hysteria continue - to produce the funding that provides their livelihood. Their incessant hype has convinced many people, including legislators, that ridiculous policies should be enacted to prevent carbon dioxide from reaching the atmosphere.

More to follow

USA, all the way!

30

Didn't this article already end up her on a previous thread?!

****

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm
http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/CanadiaFreePress_GlobalWarming020707.htm

"Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets."

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/deweese121406.htm

It’s absolutely incredible to see such panic, considering the global warming mantra is near universal. There are over 12,000 environmental groups in the country controlling over $20 billion in assets, all unified in spreading the climate change gospel. On top of their vast holdings, many of those same groups receive federal grants for “studies” and “reports” on their climate change findings. More grants, in the billions of dollars, are going to scientists willing to join the church and help substantiate the mantra in their “research.”

Added to that substantial fire power is a willing news media which offers magazine cover photos of melting ice caps; and the efforts of the movie and television industry which lets no opportunity get by without some reference to global warming. Al Gore’s own documentary has been in theaters around the nation for months. He is the guest on talk shows nearly every week.

*****

I hope these are closer to what your looking for, and I'll be back as soon as I get more on the Canadian government Agency itself.

USA, all the way!

31

Interesting priorities ...
http://www.montrealmirror.com/ARCHIVES/1998/061198/news5.html

"The CIBE report also states that, out of Environment Canada's total budget, only $16.9 million is spent on compliance and enforcement. "They only conducted five prosecutions last year," Gallon notes. "I suspect they're spending even less than that." He says Environment Canada spends more and more money on information campaigns rather than real enforcement."

USA, all the way!

32 Michael Weaver:


Good job with the research.



Now do you believe me? Global warming is a scam.

33

More ....

http://plato.acadiau.ca/courses/pols/grieve/3883/5climate/CORC_scare.html

ENVIRONMENT Canada spends a good part of its $600-million annual budget cranking out the message that nature is good, man is bad, and global warming is a live threat to life on the planet. The department's Web site is totally dedicated to planting fear of global warming and the looming climate crisis. Elsewhere, the media has been mostly supportive on the climate change issue, their reports filled with the doings of environmental activists, corporate greens and politicians expressing alarm over how fossil fuels are ruining the environment. Global agreements have been signed committing Canada to reductions in fossil fuel consumption of more than 20 per cent over the next dozen years.

Through it all, there must be the equivalent of $1-billion worth of high-power publicity going into the climate change scare every couple of years

USA, all the way!

34

Enviroment Canada budget discussions.

http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/committeepublication.aspx?sourceid=182677

"Mr. Luc Harvey:
    There was talk of a $6.4 billion-total amount paid to the environmental foundations and trusts. Did that turn out to be the correct amount?

 

Ms. Basia Ruta:
    An amount of $6.4 billion?

 

Mr. Hani Mokhtar:
    Not to my knowledge. The amounts we are citing here represent our share, and for most of them, there was another share paid by Natural Resources Canada.

    Hence the figure could be doubled, but I'm not sure that it was $6 billion?"

USA, all the way, and thanks Jeff!

35 Jeff. The 'consensus' is a scam, but we do know there is such a thing as climate change that naturally osccurs whether we are here or not. It may turn cooler on us soon, and we don't know, so these alarmists need to be checked
 
 
 
 
 
USA, al the way!

36

Ok, so Haliburton makes a maximum of about 20% in annual profits of what Wal-Mart makes. Where is this Bush's fault? Wal-Mart is more involved internationally, and makes more money than Halliburton, but somehow only the oil company is truely evil in the eyes of the BDS sufferers. Oh sure, Wal-Mart gets some flack, but nowhere near what they would if they only provided access to a vital economic, and strategic reasource like oil

Those hand made Chinese baskets are so much more important to our national security. Don't you know?

Hey!? Didn't Lament have stock in Wal-Mart? Oh well...

USA, all the way!

37 Well, I have to go now, so don't think I'm ignoring you.  USA, all the way!

38 Parting shot !  "Any scientist who dares express skepticism is at once denounced as a pawn for the oil and coal industry."  but we know it's OK for Al Gore to be with Occidental Oil...              
              
     USA, all the way!

39 And my parting shot, if Kyoto doesn't bind India and China it will cause more pollution, not less.  mkay?  End of story.

40 GLOBAL WARMING IS BECOMING MORE CONTROVERSIAL, NOT LESS

BEYOND THE APOCALYPTIC VISIONS
Look, look, up at the sky! Do you see that? And that? The sky, the sky, it’s on fire! It’s burning, and can you see how it’s spreading?  Look over there – those -- over there, they look like clouds, but if you look closely, they’re not, they’re on fire!  More and more of the sky is changing into fire!  Everyone is looking up, and they see the same thing!  It’s on fire, it’s burning, and it’s going to kill us all!  I can feel the heat, it’s getting hotter and hotter, and we’re all going to die...Ohh, my God, we’re all going to die!

The key problem for global warming theories is that the sea level has not risen much in the last 150 years.  A small rise may have occurred, but this may be attributable to the “tail end” of the last ice age.  If sea level rises much more, we may be able to ascertain what, exactly, is going on.  If sea level declines, then theories of human-caused global warming will probably be relegated to the dust-bin of history.

If a long trend of global warming is occurring, there are two ways it could be related to humans.  First, humans might be causing the warming.  Second, global warming might be causing the humans.  That is, most land mass is in the Northern hemisphere, where warming would increase and improve arable land, growing seasons, crop yields, and available water supplies.  We know that global warming was beneficial to humans when the last ice age began retreating, but we do not know if these benefits have stopped.  World population is increasing, but GDP per capita is also increasing rapidly, which probably causes more energy use per person.  In this way, global warming could CAUSE the CO2 in the atmosphere to rise, instead of CO2 causing global warming.  CO2 is not the most important greenhouse gas– --water vapour is.  CO2 levels may or may not be causing global warming, and global warming may have stopped in 1998.

The entire warming debate is based upon conjecture until any sea level changes can be clearly attributed to human activity. Science has not yet clarified this key issue.

41 Dear #1:

What retarded is, John, is believing that a weatherman who can't get a five day forecast right 50% of the time knows what the climate is going to look like in 50 YEARS. That is retarded.

Leonard Nimoy (Mr. Spock - The most logical being EVAR!) said in the 1970's on "In Search Of..." that we are headed into another ice age. Who the f#@* are you going to believe? Mr. Spock or Mr. Groundhog Day?

I rest my case... Because I drank a case today.

42 I support global warming. It's been below zero every day for two weeks now. But it was much colder here, and with more snow, twenty years ago.
I don't much care why global warming exists, I just want more of it.
There appears to be more evidence of global warming than of christian miracles and,  because I believe in miracles, I choose to believe in global warming.
 

43 I see you guys are still trying to convince the Pope not to be a Catholic.  You're wasting your breath.  Facts and logic are irrelevant to these climate Marxists, and the ends always justify the means. 

44 Ice ages are broken into "glacial periods" and "interglacial periods".

The glacial periods last about 100,000 years and the interglacials last 10,000 to 15,000 years, PYE (pick your expert) because glaciers tend to destroy evidence.

We are probably in an interglacial period, and it began 10K to 15Kyrs ago, again PYE.

The 1975 article is probably closer to correct, by accident. We will probably enter a glacial period some time in the next few thousand years, if we cannot find a way to warm the planet. The glaciers will take hundreds of years to develop, so the main problems will be low temperatures, crop losses, and lack of fuel.

Check the map at the bottom of this page for the vegetation distribution during the last glacial maximum, and remember that the white part is simply the glaciers big enough to leave enough evidence to survive this long. We don't see areas with wide ranging temperature extremes, or the snow and ice fields that do not move, so do not scratch the rocks.

://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/disp.html

45 Phillep : Good site. I wish we used such material more often in these discussions. The alternative to global warming is this - and if we are reactionary climate alarmists, will we bring the ice back sooner? Suppose the 'cooling' science is accurate enough to have an impact! Is that a good thing if it hastens a return to full blown ice age? Probably not if people use the warm land to live on, and grow food.                 USA, all the way!

46 Mike:


When I wrote that global warming is a scam, I was refering to the doomsday scenario--which is essentially what the global warming religion is. Climate change is not anthropogenic, and the Earth is not going to bake like a potato at the end times.

47 it will anyway, once the sun blows up...

48 Jeff, Yes I'm sorry about lecturing, It gets a bit reflexive.   USA, all the way!

49 I could use some warming. In all seriousness the north wind is howling under the door, and I'm pretty chilly. Plus, I have to go unbury some firewood tommorrow. I,m thinking about putting Co2 into the air big time the next few days. As in huge roaring fire! Valentines day, and My wife's birthday are both this week, so you may not hear much from me for a few days. I need to play tag with Osamabinwarming, some more, and I hope he see's this thread.   
                                   USA, all the way!

50 Pardon me if my memory is a little rusty here, but does anyone else remember that passage in 1984 where Hate Week celebrations were in full swing, and the people were venting their rage at Eastasia, when suddenly the Kommisar who was haranguing the crowd was handed a note and forthwith announced that the enemy was, and had always been, Eurasia, and the crowd went wild with hate for the new enemy? Well, it seems to me this who global warming/cooling thing is like that; the sheeple are herded from panic to panic, with each increasingly more frightening, when really it's nothing more than people hiding in the bushes, shouting words of fear. Of course, most sheeple are far too stupid to realise this.

51 I believe your correct.           USA, all the way!

52 THE SKY IS FALLING !!!
THE SKY IS FALLING !!!

53 "the sheeple are herded from panic to panic, with each
increasingly more frightening, when really it's nothing more than
people hiding in the bushes, shouting words of fear. Of course, most
sheeple are far too stupid to realise this."

that is the weirdest quote for someone who supports the iraq war to give....

54 Jakeass:


The sheeple say George Bush is more of a threat than the terrorists, and that the spanking of saddam has made America less safe. Their idiotic opinions have been overridden by the sane majority--much to the chagrin of islamopithecines like you.

55 Jeff, you make me laugh.

56 He's funny.  You, on the other hand, are merely stupid.

57 He's funny.  You, on the other hand, are merely stupid.

that wasn't very witty...

58 Jake/Jorge:


Neither is using two aliases to make your point, you islamopithecine moron.

59 i think i mentioned the mistake in another thread...

60 which, come to think of it is the only reason you would assume that jorge would be jake, so you're fully aware of the issue and yet you refuse to take it as it is...

61 Fake/Jorge/DJM/Ilya Krackovitch:


Yeah, you really fooled me.


Imbecile.

62 woah what?

63 Whoah, how many aliases can you use on one thread, you butt guzzling felch-faggot?