Everyone who voted Bush...hope you're happy

[Just_Insane]

Bush Suppressing Pentagon Report on Global Warming Disaster
Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us


......... by Mark Townsend February 22, 2004
......... and Paul Harris
The Guardian/Observer Printer Friendly Version
EMail Article to a Friend

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of document. It's hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,' he added.



Obviously they suceeded to supress this report and news article to. Or wait, i forgot mens right or not to marry men is what's important damnit, right!? And this is the reason why the whole fucking world should've been able to vote in your election.

[yeat182]

yeah, i'm am pretty happy.


also, i fail to see how a conservative administration is going to keep the liberal media from printing a story...i mean, they didn't stop CBS from airing a different phoney story.

[Just_Insane]

did you even read the story?

[yeat182]

i stopped about half-way down when i reailzed i already saw it when it came out in movie theaters, i think the name was "The Day After Tomorrow".

[UndefinedBoy]

i stopped about half-way down when i reailzed i already saw it when it came out in movie theaters, i think the name was "The Day After Tomorrow".

So you don't believe any of that?

[yeat182]

no where in that entire article do they ever mention HOW this dramatic, apocolyptic climate change is going to occur.

[UndefinedBoy]

no where in that entire article do they ever mention HOW this dramatic, apocolyptic climate change is going to occur.

Do you believe global warming exists?

[yeat182]

Do you believe global warming exists?

yeah, more than likely. but to say that suddenly we will have this giant, cataclysmic climate change is a bit of a leap.

[UndefinedBoy]

yeah, more than likely. but to say that suddenly we will have this giant, cataclysmic climate change is a bit of a leap.

How do you feel about an administration that doesn't believe it exists?

[yeat182]

How do you feel about an administration that doesn't believe it exists?

meh. there theories that prove its true, and theories that prove its false. i still fail to see how this article proves anything.

[Bishop]

yeah, more than likely. but to say that suddenly we will have this giant, cataclysmic climate change is a bit of a leap.

Well even a change in average temperature of 1 degree can cause huge catastrophies.

[Love As Arson]

Where is Dennis Quaid when we need him?

[yeat182]

Well even a change in average temperature of 1 degree can cause huge catastrophies.

it could, although, hasn't the average temperature risen a degree or so in the last 100 years? again, i fail to see what this article is trying to claim.

[Just_Insane]

it could, although, hasn't the average temperature risen a degree or so in the last 100 years? again, i fail to see what this article is trying to claim.

It's right infront of you really, right in the article. And then do some research and you'll find that USA is the country in the world that is at least number one at one thing... : polluting the enviroment. Fuck, you guys haven't even signed the "Kyoto thing". Then take an president who is ignoring what scientists all around the world agree on (AND his own fucking people even now!)....which is that global warming exists and is quite an problem which will lead to shit like it says in the article in an not too distant future anylonger.....2020 it says. How old will you be then? Face the facts! and preferably deal with them to.

[cal1082]

It's right infront of you really, right in the article. And then do some research and you'll find that USA is the country in the world that is at least number one at one thing... : polluting the enviroment. Fuck, you guys haven't even signed the "Kyoto thing". Then take an president who is ignoring what scientists all around the world agree on (AND his own fucking people even now!)....which is that global warming exists and is quite an problem which will lead to shit like it says in the article in an not too distant future anylonger.....2020 it says. How old will you be then? Face the facts! and preferably deal with them to.

lol, the Kyoto thing. Have you seen what they do in China. Many are forced to wear masks around the city because pollution is so bad, and you have a hard time breathing. China for the longest time has used coal for their primary energy source. What you call the "Kyoto thing" should look at every countries pollution the same.

[yeat182]

It's right infront of you really, right in the article. And then do some research and you'll find that USA is the country in the world that is at least number one at one thing... : polluting the enviroment. Fuck, you guys haven't even signed the "Kyoto thing".

i believe china is the number 1 polluter in the world, and if you bothered to do some research you would know that we didn't sign the koyoto protocol, not because we want to pollute more, but becuase it put no restrictions on countries like china and india. it was a one sided agreement.


Then take an president who is ignoring what scientists all around the world agree on (AND his own fucking people even now!)....which is that global warming exists and is quite an problem which will lead to shit like it says in the article in an not too distant future anylonger.....2020 it says. How old will you be then? Face the facts! and preferably deal with them to.


again, i fail to see HOW, in the next 16 years, there is going to be some sort of cataclyzmic climate shift, and the article does nothing to explain it. in fact, it insiuates that it will have something more to do with a nuclear holocaust than with greenhouse gasses.

[Just_Insane]

lol, the Kyoto thing. Have you seen what they do in China. Many are forced to wear masks around the city because pollution is so bad, and you have a hard time breathing. China for the longest time has used coal for their primary energy source. What you call the "Kyoto thing" should look at every countries pollution the same.

Yeah that's the way to solve emergent world problems, fight about who's fault it is....way to go. Blame it on someone else.

And actually that's the exact reason for why you should sign it to, cause the pollution in China does not only fuck up China, infact it fuck up the whole world. It's not like you can lock in the pollution on the ground inside the borders and keep it there.

[yeat182]

Yeah that's the way to solve emergent world problems, fight about who's fault it is....way to go. Blame it on someone else.

And actually that's the exact reason for why you should sign it to, cause the pollution in China does not only fuck up China, infact it fuck up the whole world. It's not like you can lock in the pollution on the ground inside the borders and keep it there.


which is why china should sign the treaty as well.

[UndefinedBoy]

which is why china should sign the treaty as well.

The treaty needed to be re-written...it wasn't...we just walked away from it.

[cal1082]

Yeah that's the way to solve emergent world problems, fight about who's fault it is....way to go. Blame it on someone else.

And actually that's the exact reason for why you should sign it to, cause the pollution in China does not only fuck up China, infact it fuck up the whole world. It's not like you can lock in the pollution on the ground inside the borders and keep it there.

Exactly which is exactly why the protocol should not have exempted other huge pollution producing countries. They targeted the US among others as being at fault, rather than looking at the whole. I'm glad you recognize my point.

[yeat182]

The treaty needed to be re-written...it wasn't...we just walked away from it.

so its our fault it wasn't re-written? we didn't propose the protocol, if someone wants us to sign it, it is their perogative to re-write it so that it is more accomodating to all parties.

[UndefinedBoy]

so its our fault it wasn't re-written? we didn't propose the protocol, if someone wants us to sign it, it is their perogative to re-write it so that it is more accomodating to all parties.

It would've been a big step in the right direction, and I thought this was about bettering the world? Who cares who starts it? With all those countries coming together with this on their mind, we should've jumped at the chance.

[yeat182]

It would've been a big step in the right direction, and I thought this was about bettering the world? Who cares who starts it? With all those countries coming together with this on their mind, we should've jumped at the chance.

because signing the protocol doesn't better the world. everyone seems to think that because we didn't sign this that means we are going to start polluting more than before. that isnt' true. in fact, the individual states, especially california, have stricter regulations than the koyoto protocol asks for.

[UndefinedBoy]

because signing the protocol doesn't better the world. everyone seems to think that because we didn't sign this that means we are going to start polluting more than before. that isnt' true. in fact, the individual states, especially california, have stricter regulations than the koyoto protocol asks for.

This only would've kept us regulated and we could've gotten the rest of the world to do the same...why is so difficult to convince you that we should've at least made an effort? If we're going to lead the world in wars why not lead in other areas as well?

[Just_Insane]

however what this is about is the global threat of global warming...something that Mr. Bush doesn't even admit exists, that's not the way to solve a problem or anything at all. And still the U.S. is one of the countries who pollute this earth the most, fuck China...can't do anything about China. What you can do is be a good role-model and do what you can, which is to fix the problem in your own country. Saying "no we won't cause china don't why should we" sounds like something a little small fucking kid would say in the playground...except he probably wouldn't say China. And if everyone would do that we'd get nowhere and most countries have signed, even countries who pollute far less then the U.S. and are much smaller, what if everyone would say "no fuck you we won't the U.S. haven't"(fuck this discussion sounds like something i could have with someone at kindergarten) .What's up with the U.S. always blaming everything on someone else. Iraq was the fucked up country with a fucked up president and system...Fix your own fucking problems first damnit!

[yeat182]

What's up with the U.S. always blaming everything on someone else. Iraq was the fucked up country with a fucked up president and system...Fix your own fucking problems first damnit!

are you kidding? you are the one blaming the US!

[_astheruinfalls]

so its our fault it wasn't re-written? we didn't propose the protocol, if someone wants us to sign it, it is their perogative to re-write it so that it is more accomodating to all parties.
We should be doing more things to keep the air clean, anyways. We don't need a fucking protocol.

And plus, since when does it matter who fucking proposed it? It's going to affect MANY PLACES, so I think we should do more than just put a damn signature on it.

You want to be the world police. You want to save everyone...but only if it's on your time.

[cal1082]

It would've been a big step in the right direction, and I thought this was about bettering the world? Who cares who starts it? With all those countries coming together with this on their mind, we should've jumped at the chance.

the Kyoto Protocol did not better the world. Rather it was trying to regulate the power of developed countries, while trying to give more power to developing and third world countries.

[Just_Insane]

again, i fail to see HOW, in the next 16 years, there is going to be some sort of cataclyzmic climate shift, and the article does nothing to explain it. in fact, it insiuates that it will have something more to do with a nuclear holocaust than with greenhouse gasses.


Umm sorry dude...but, CAN'T YOU READ!? Or do i have to explain it to you, fuck don't you kids learn about this in your schools!? We learn about this in like 4'th grade, and then even more even further. Somethings not right here. But ok i happened to study social science here and there we learn a lot about this and actually right now i'm doing an project about it. Global warming means the temperature of the earth rises thanks to pollution from e.t.c. oil(cars e.t.c.) and thanks to that gas the warm shine that comes from the sun you know, never leaves the planet earth(the one you live on) like they should and this means the earth gets warmer and warmer cause the warmth that comes in does never go out thanks to the pollution(like it doesn't in a greenhouse). And this e.t.c. makes the huge ices melt which means the water hight rises which means natural catastrofhes such as well who know maybe New York and some other U.S. cities will drown under the water. And when there's not a ballance shit starts to happened. Fuck do some reading, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm strange how you don't learn about this in your schools............................ .

[_astheruinfalls]

the Kyoto Protocol did not better the world. Rather it was trying to regulate the power of developed countries, while trying to give more power to developing and third world countries.
And you don't think that has any good in it? Just because they lag behind doesn't mean they should stay there. Sure, this probably isn't the best way to handle that problem, but still.

[cal1082]

This only would've kept us regulated and we could've gotten the rest of the world to do the same...why is so difficult to convince you that we should've at least made an effort? If we're going to lead the world in wars why not lead in other areas as well?

We do. If I'm not mistaken the US is the biggest supplier of foreign aid, and the largest contributor to the UN (could be wrong on the last one though.)

[yeat182]

We should be doing more things to keep the air clean, anyways. We don't need a fucking protocol.

And plus, since when does it matter who fucking proposed it? It's going to affect MANY PLACES, so I think we should do more than just put a damn signature on it.

You want to be the world police. You want to save everyone...but only if it's on your time.

for the thousandth time, just because we didnt' sign it doesn't mean we won't and haven't improved our pollution problems. all it means is we don't support the fact that other countries with larger populations and bigger problems, don't have to improve their own pollution.

[yeat182]

We do. If I'm not mistaken the US is the biggest supplier of foreign aid, and the largest contributor to the UN (could be wrong on the last one though.)

biggest donator to AIDS research and awareness...

[cal1082]

And you don't think that has any good in it? Just because they lag behind doesn't mean they should stay there. Sure, this probably isn't the best way to handle that problem, but still.

and just because they lag behind doesnt mean we should be forced to cut back while they can produce the same or more. If you really thought this was about bettering the world you would agree.

[_astheruinfalls]

for the thousandth time, just because we didnt' sign it doesn't mean we won't and haven't improved our pollution problems. all it means is we don't support the fact that other countries with larger populations and bigger problems, don't have to improve their own pollution.
Oh come on. You really think pollution is under control in the US? Bullshit. Bull-fucking-shit. Pollution is horrible here.

And why don't we HELP THOSE COUNTRIES by HELPING TO RE-WRITE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL?

Oh, right...it wouldn't be helping us. My bad.

[cal1082]

i know many of you are in the "blame the US first" category but saying the US should do more on the world scale rather than just start wars is an absurd, ignorant statement.

[_astheruinfalls]

and just because they lag behind doesnt mean we should be forced to cut back while they can produce the same or more. If you really thought this was about bettering the world you would agree.
I thought we were supposed to be helping our fellow man? I guess not. I guess we should try and go as far ahead as possible and let everyone else sit and whither and die.

I want to better the world. That is why we shouldn't try and get a gain from every-fucking-thing. Life isn't all about the US, I'm sorry.

[yeat182]

Oh come on. You really think pollution is under control in the US? Bullshit. Bull-fucking-shit. Pollution is horrible here.

horrible? try living in china.

And why don't we HELP THOSE COUNTRIES by HELPING TO RE-WRITE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL?

Oh, right...it wouldn't be helping us. My bad.

no, because they won't sign it, which is why the are exempt from it in the first place.

[_astheruinfalls]

i know many of you are in the "blame the US first" category but saying the US should do more on the world scale rather than just start wars is an absurd, ignorant statement.
You want to be the world police.

[cal1082]

Oh come on. You really think pollution is under control in the US? Bullshit. Bull-fucking-shit. Pollution is horrible here.

And why don't we HELP THOSE COUNTRIES by HELPING TO RE-WRITE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL?

Oh, right...it wouldn't be helping us. My bad.

Also if i'm not mistaken pollution has gone down consistantly over the last decade.

[_astheruinfalls]

horrible? try living in china.



no, because they won't sign it, which is why the are exempt from it in the first place.
So just because there's someone worse means we can't have bad pollution? Nice logic.

That's why we need to RE-WRITE IT. Read what I say.

[cal1082]

I thought we were supposed to be helping our fellow man? I guess not. I guess we should try and go as far ahead as possible and let everyone else sit and whither and die.

I want to better the world. That is why we shouldn't try and get a gain from every-fucking-thing. Life isn't all about the US, I'm sorry.

you dont think the rest of the world is trying to get a gain from every-fucking-thing? Your lost if you don't. Again what do you think the point in the protocol is..........so they can gain.

[_astheruinfalls]

Also if i'm not mistaken pollution has gone down consistantly over the last decade.
And that's why air conditions in so many cities are still not up to quality?

I know Atlanta has not met the air quality since 1981. Yay for pollution!

[cal1082]

You want to be the world police.

Originally Posted by cal1082
i know many of you are in the "blame the US first" category but saying the US should do more on the world scale rather than just start wars is an absurd, ignorant statement.

nothing you said had anythign to do with what i said.

[_astheruinfalls]

you dont think the rest of the world is trying to get a gain from every-fucking-thing? Your lost if you don't. Again what do you think the point in the protocol is..........so they can gain.
Of course they are all trying to gain; BECAUSE THEY ARE WAY BEHIND US. Look outside of your little bubble, everywhere isn't like this. You should know that. We have everything handed to us. Life is easy here for most. And since we are so far ahead, we should be able to take some time out of making money to help others.

Again...THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO RE-WRITE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL...for the millionth fucking time.

[cal1082]

And that's why air conditions in so many cities are still not up to quality?

I know Atlanta has not met the air quality since 1981. Yay for pollution!

again if i'm not mistaken pollution has gone down every year over the past decade.

[_astheruinfalls]

Originally Posted by cal1082
i know many of you are in the "blame the US first" category but saying the US should do more on the world scale rather than just start wars is an absurd, ignorant statement.

nothing you said had anythign to do with what i said.
If you are going to be the world police, you are going to have to take other roles. One would involve helping other countries further.

[_astheruinfalls]

again if i'm not mistaken pollution has gone down every year over the past decade.
Again, that's why many MANY states across the US still are not meeting air quality.

[Just_Insane]

i know many of you are in the "blame the US first" category but saying the US should do more on the world scale rather than just start wars is an absurd, ignorant statement.

It's not about who's fault it is. That's what it's about for my 8 year old bro...although he's growing out of it now. And who's ignorant. You're the one totally ignoring a fact and a huge fucking problem cause you don't like what is said. And honestly a president who don't even think this problem exists, you think he'll do anything to solve it!?

[cal1082]

Of course they are all trying to gain; BECAUSE THEY ARE WAY BEHIND US. Look outside of your little bubble, everywhere isn't like this. You should know that. We have everything handed to us. Life is easy here for most. And since we are so far ahead, we should be able to take some time out of making money to help others.

Again...THAT IS WHY WE NEED TO RE-WRITE THE KYOTO PROTOCOL...for the millionth fucking time.

Stupid.........everybody can read what you wrote. I didnt say anything about re-writting the protocol. That's fine if you feel that way and I wouldnt have a problem with the US re-writting the protocol either to make it more fair. Fact of the matter is, and the only point I've been arguing, is that the Kyoto Protocol as written was not meant to better the world because if it was it would have cut down on pollution rather than just extending it to third world and developing countries.

[cal1082]

If you are going to be the world police, you are going to have to take other roles. One would involve helping other countries further.

Do you not read posts?

The US is the largest contributor in forgein aid to countries.

[Just_Insane]

again if i'm not mistaken pollution has gone down every year over the past decade.

That doesn't mean anything....pollution from 50 years back still is up in the atmosphere helping heating the world even more. And Bush still ignores it. Maybe cause he's making millions on fucking up the enviroment....

[_astheruinfalls]

Stupid.........everybody can read what you wrote. I didnt say anything about re-writting the protocol. That's fine if you feel that way and I wouldnt have a problem with the US re-writting the protocol either to make it more fair. Fact of the matter is, and the only point I've been arguing, is that the Kyoto Protocol as written was not meant to better the world because if it was it would have cut down on pollution rather than just extending it to third world and developing countries.
I know that. That is why I have been saying we need to re-write it. And if you think we should, why are you arguing against me?

[_astheruinfalls]

Do you not read posts?

The US is the largest contributor in forgein aid to countries.
But there is more we could do. As well with a lot of other countries. I'm not holding the US responsible for all this. If I came off like I believe that, then my bad. I don't. Europe could be helping a lot. Hopefully when they sign the constitution they can start helping the world out as a super power.

[Just_Insane]

But there is more we could do. As well with a lot of other countries. I'm not holding the US responsible for all this. If I came off like I believe that, then my bad. I don't. Europe could be helping a lot. Hopefully when they sign the constitution they can start helping the world out as a super power.

Fuck no! No more capitalist superpowers.

[_astheruinfalls]

Fuck no! No more capitalist superpowers.
Europe is definately more socialist than capitalist. I don't know where you're getting your information. You fucking live there.

[_astheruinfalls]

And anyways, socialism and capitalism are really imperfect and are both going to result in problems and strife.

[yeat182]

It's not about who's fault it is. That's what it's about for my 8 year old bro...although he's growing out of it now. And who's ignorant. You're the one totally ignoring a fact and a huge fucking problem cause you don't like what is said. And honestly a president who don't even think this problem exists, you think he'll do anything to solve it!?

we aren't ignoring pollution because we didn't sign the koyoto protocol!!!!!!!!

[yeat182]

So just because there's someone worse means we can't have bad pollution? Nice logic.

no i mean the US hardly horrible when compared to china.

That's why we need to RE-WRITE IT. Read what I say.

alright, you want to re-write it, what do you propose we amend?

[_astheruinfalls]

no i mean the US hardly horrible when compared to china.



alright, you want to re-write it, what do you propose we amend?
But we are still bad, and that's all that matters.

Haha, in all seriousness, I haven't looked at the protocol. I'm basically just taking people's words on how bad it is, and from that, I'm suggesting we re-write it to fit what needs to be done here and better fit other countries and more strictly enforce the laws.

[_astheruinfalls]

Is it just me, or is this Just Insane kid kind of annoying?

And I'm sorry, I just Justin, but anyone who has a name after them needs to be shot. A lot.

[yeat182]

But we are still bad, and that's all that matters.

Haha, in all seriousness, I haven't looked at the protocol. I'm basically just taking people's words on how bad it is, and from that, I'm suggesting we re-write it to fit what needs to be done here and better fit other countries and more strictly enforce the laws.


well, there are 2 problems with re-writing it. first of all and most obvioiusly, if the US attempts to re-write it, the world will be in an uproar, again talking about how evil we are for attempting to change the document. (you can see they hypocrisy, if we don't sign it we are wrong, if we fix it, we are wrong). Secondly, the only way to make it fair is to make it apply to ALL nations, and as i have already stated, the reason why China and India are exempt is because they don't want to sign the protocol. if we require them to sign it, they won't and there will be no difference to the situation we have now.

[cal1082]

I know that. That is why I have been saying we need to re-write it. And if you think we should, why are you arguing against me?

again do you read my posts?

" I didnt say anything about re-writting the protocol. That's fine if you feel that way and I wouldnt have a problem with the US re-writting the protocol either to make it more fair. Fact of the matter is, and the only point I've been arguing, is that the Kyoto Protocol as written was not meant to better the world because if it was it would have cut down on pollution rather than just extending it to third world and developing countries."

[yeat182]

also, can someone please tell me where in the article it say HOW the world is going to end in 2020? as far as i'm concerned this article is pointless and irrelevant.

[cal1082]

But there is more we could do. As well with a lot of other countries. I'm not holding the US responsible for all this. If I came off like I believe that, then my bad. I don't. Europe could be helping a lot. Hopefully when they sign the constitution they can start helping the world out as a super power.

helping is fine, and again, my point the whole time is the kyoto was not helping the world

[Just_Insane]

Europe is definately more socialist than capitalist. I don't know where you're getting your information. You fucking live there.

Yeah but the goal with the european union(which i assume you were talking about) is to create a capitalist Europe militair super power. And about Europe being more socialist then capitalist...well that depends on how you define socialism i guess. It's a mix right now i'd say and with the european union it's going towards capitalism more and more, and a country like the UK is fucking capitalistic e.t.c. And yes both both capitalism and the kind of socialism which i think you mean are imperfect. But however capitalism is way worse.

[_astheruinfalls]

I know. I never said it would. That's why we need to re-write it.

And yeat...I'm not sure. The only way around that I can think of is to build it up. Start with a small amount of countries, and just bring more in. Maybe there would be benefits for the countries in the Kyoto Protocol...I don't know. Be no matter what, we need to deal with this problem.

As for the world ending in 2020, that sounds a little far fetched. So yeah.

[_astheruinfalls]

Yeah but the goal with the european union(which i assume you were talking about) is to create a capitalist Europe militair super power. And about Europe being more socialist then capitalist...well that depends on how you define socialism i guess. It's a mix right now i'd say and with the european union it's going towards capitalism more and more, and a country like the UK is fucking capitalistic e.t.c. And yes both both capitalism and the kind of socialism which i think you mean are imperfect. But however capitalism is way worse.
But no matter what, you're going to be screwed.

[Just_Insane]

Also funny how you talk about your own interests all the time and money, how YOU benefit from it. And why'd the worlds richest and biggest country do something like helping others when they don't even get bigger of it!? Duh. All about your interests. Capitalism. However what you still to ignore is that Bush still ignores Global warming exists.

[Just_Insane]

Is it just me, or is this Just Insane kid kind of annoying?

And I'm sorry, I just Justin, but anyone who has a name after them needs to be shot. A lot.

that's relevant.

[_astheruinfalls]

How much of your own money do you donate? How much time do you take out of your life to helping the poor?

[yeat182]

I know. I never said it would. That's why we need to re-write it.

And yeat...I'm not sure. The only way around that I can think of is to build it up. Start with a small amount of countries, and just bring more in. Maybe there would be benefits for the countries in the Kyoto Protocol...I don't know. Be no matter what, we need to deal with this problem.

As for the world ending in 2020, that sounds a little far fetched. So yeah.


yes, but simply because we haven't signed the protocol doesn't mean we aren't dealing with it. again, look at a state like california, which has stricter pollution regulations than most countries do. as for benefits, that is one thing, but right now there are no benefits, only penealties. the only benifit is that we don't have to sign it.

[Just_Insane]

How much of your own money do you donate? How much time do you take out of your life to helping the poor?

Well i believe you do that by discussion and education, so let's see today i've been in school from 8-4...then i studied and started this thread til 6...from 6-9 i jammed with my punk band (which means politics for all of you emo kids :wink3: ) And i do what i can to fight and not support capitalism(which is the cause of poverty) including obviously wasting my time on you people.

[yeat182]

Also funny how you talk about your own interests all the time and money, how YOU benefit from it. And why'd the worlds richest and biggest country do something like helping others when they don't even get bigger of it!? Duh. All about your interests. Capitalism. However what you still to ignore is that Bush still ignores Global warming exists.


did you not read the posts about how we donate the most foreign aid and donate the most money to AIDS research, etc. etc.

[_astheruinfalls]

Well i believe you do that by discussion and education, so let's see today i've been in school from 8-4...then i studied and started this thread til 6...from 6-9 i jammed with my punk band (which means politics for all of you emo kids :wink3: ) And i do what i can to fight and not support capitalism(which is the cause of poverty) including obviously wasting my time on you people.
So by sitting in school and jamming with your "punk band," you're helping the poor?

I wish more people would see it your way.

[Just_Insane]

So by sitting in school and jamming with your "punk band," you're helping the poor?

I wish more people would see it your way.

Yup, i'm doing my best. The best and only way to really help the poor is to fight the system that creates them and exists because of them.

[_astheruinfalls]

Yup, i'm doing my best. The best and only way to really help the poor is to fight the system that creates them and exists because of them.
Alright, let's say you defeat capitalism, then what? They aren't trained to do jobs. They don't have money to buy a house. They don't have money to buy food. Then what?

[yeat182]

Yup, i'm doing my best. The best and only way to really help the poor is to fight the system that creates them and exists because of them.

good luck with that.

[_astheruinfalls]

And yeat- I don't know. This problem is defiantely out of my little thinking box.

[yeat182]

And yeat- I don't know. This problem is defiantely out of my little thinking box.

i think the best solution is better regulations here at home. let the rest of the world sign the koyto protocol if they wish, that is there choice, but we can certainly do the same job on our own without tying our hands at the expense of other nations. it has already started in individual states (california) and i think a better domestic policy would be far more effective than this protocol.

[_astheruinfalls]

i think the best solution is better regulations here at home. let the rest of the world sign the koyto protocol if they wish, that is there choice, but we can certainly do the same job on our own without tying our hands at the expense of other nations. it has already started in individual states (california) and i think a better domestic policy would be far more effective than this protocol.
A domestic policy would be better, but again, I still believe we need to be helping other countries, and other industrialized countries need to be doing the same. I think we need to start focusing where we help more, and not just helping in a broad scope.

[Bishop]

I haven't read all the pages on this and this may have been mentioned but here I go.

Although global warming can be a very real problem, Earth has some mechanisms in place. For one you have volcano's and cars and such that are reaching carbon dioxide into the air. Now contrary to how much you may hate this, these gases and others also help to keep our atmosphere in place so that we can be protected from different things flying around out there in space. Now when these gases become to much and they start heating things then the polar ice caps start melting thereby increasing the size of the oceans and the oceans waters help to turn the carbon dioxide in our air back into sediments i.e. limestone and the like. And then plant life started which provides for most of the life on earth.

Now that's not taking into account animals, human life and such.. not to mention any chemicals(although I'm pretty sure microbes will evolve and start munching down on all that at some point.) Plus there would be plenty of land covered, even if the oceans went up by 8 kilometers that would put Washington D.C., Florida and most coastal areas underwater. Catastrophic, yeah, but that's life baby.

[Bikeage]

Do you not read posts?

The US is the largest contributor in forgein aid to countries.

if you take how much we give in foreign aid in a percentage and compare it to other countires, we are one of the lowest... not only that, but this presidency is one of the worst (environmentaly) in a long time.

i can't believe some of you morons are arguing against the kyoto treaty & side-stepping everything

[yeat182]

if you take how much we give in foreign aid in a percentage and compare it to other countires, we are one of the lowest...

that isn't true.



i can't believe some of you morons are arguing against the kyoto treaty & side-stepping everything

i can't believe people that are strong environmentalists would support the protocol.

[Just_Insane]

Alright, let's say you defeat capitalism, then what? They aren't trained to do jobs. They don't have money to buy a house. They don't have money to buy food. Then what?

Ummm WHAT!?The poor!? that must be one of the most ignorant things ever said here. In a capitalist system the POOR are the ones working for the rich's benefit keeping the poor poor making the rich richer.

[Just_Insane]

i can't believe some of you morons are arguing against the kyoto treaty & side-stepping everything[/QUOTE]


Neither can i.

[richter915]

i can't believe people that are strong environmentalists would support the protocol.
because focussing research on alternative sources of fuel is just ungodly? because losing the reliance on Iraqi Oil might kill us all one day? Because lowering CO2 emissions which are destroying the atmosphere, increasing global warming, killing off tons of innocent animals, and ruining entire biomes is just too harmful?

I'd rather my parent's (and my future) tax dollars go into supporting research like that and not fucking space exploration and research on bioterrorism (that we use on others or sell to Iraq)

[_astheruinfalls]

because focussing research on alternative sources of fuel is just ungodly? because losing the reliance on Iraqi Oil might kill us all one day? Because lowering CO2 emissions which are destroying the atmosphere, increasing global warming, killing off tons of innocent animals, and ruining entire biomes is just too harmful?

I'd rather my parent's (and my future) tax dollars go into supporting research like that and not fucking space exploration and research on bioterrorism (that we use on others or sell to Iraq)
I can see where they are coming from, though.

Why should we sign something that on restricts us and other nations still signed it and there are others out there worse. We need to work as a world against this problem, not just one nation.

[_astheruinfalls]

Ummm WHAT!?The poor!? that must be one of the most ignorant things ever said here. In a capitalist system the POOR are the ones working for the rich's benefit keeping the poor poor making the rich richer.
That's why you see people on the street with no jobs.

The fact is many people don't have the education to sustain certain jobs. Hence why a lot of people work at fast food. They would first need to gain that education. So instead of fighting firstly against capitalism, fight more for the rights of the people then against capitalism.

If I build a house and there's no one to live in it, then I kind of wasted my time, didn't I?

[Just_Insane]

That's why you see people on the street with no jobs.

The fact is many people don't have the education to sustain certain jobs. Hence why a lot of people work at fast food. They would first need to gain that education. So instead of fighting firstly against capitalism, fight more for the rights of the people then against capitalism.

If I build a house and there's no one to live in it, then I kind of wasted my time, didn't I?

Yeah but you assumed that everyone poor was homeless. The fact is in a capitalist system people without money don't get no education. They don't get the same possibilities as the rest, that's why there poor. Also a capitalist system can not exist without poverty. That's why we need to fight that system and fighting that system is fighting for humanity and humans rights.

And yup you did. smart...But there's millions of homeless people all around the globe so there is someone to live in it, like a billion.

[_astheruinfalls]

Yeah but you assumed that everyone poor was homeless. The fact is in a capitalist system people without money don't get no education. They don't get the same possibilities as the rest, that's why there poor. Also a capitalist system can not exist without poverty. That's why we need to fight that system and fighting that system is fighting for humanity and humans rights.

And yup you did. smart...But there's millions of homeless people all around the globe so there is someone to live in it, like a billion.
I like how you said no education. Good job.

But anyways, I know everyone who is poor isn't homeless. I'm poor but I'm not homeless. But the fact is that when you abolish capitalism, drastic changes are going to happen. It would be a very rough time. Some people won't be prepared. So you have to prepare them. Get people working.

And I know everything your saying. I've been into the whole anti-capitalism movement for a while now.

[Just_Insane]

And the point your missing is that if we succeed to tear down the capitalist system which is now. We won't build a system that is the exact same to replace it. duh. Really you need to educate yourself on this really. Go here first to find out what i'm talking about cause i could go on for a month explaining all the details but really don't feel like it, cause that'd just be a waste of my time. When you instead could go here expandning your mind finding it out for yourself:

www.infoshop.org

[_astheruinfalls]

I know what I'm talking about.

Your first sentence doesn't make any sense.

[yeat182]

because focussing research on alternative sources of fuel is just ungodly? because losing the reliance on Iraqi Oil might kill us all one day? Because lowering CO2 emissions which are destroying the atmosphere, increasing global warming, killing off tons of innocent animals, and ruining entire biomes is just too harmful?

no, because the countries that pollute the most, will continue to do so...

I'd rather my parent's (and my future) tax dollars go into supporting research like that and not fucking space exploration and research on bioterrorism (that we use on others or sell to Iraq)

you do realize that space exploration is directly related to the study of the environment, right? as well as alternative fuel sources? also, when have we used bioterror on anyone? (and we never sold it to Iraq, get your facts straight.)

[ohlookitspaul]

(and we never sold it to Iraq, get your facts straight.)
i dont feel like reading all the replies in this thread so excuse me if maybe you're talking about something different but...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm

?

[9mmREGRET]

im happy..

[yeat182]

i dont feel like reading all the replies in this thread so excuse me if maybe you're talking about something different but...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm

?

they sold small samples for medical use, which would allow the iraqis to develop their own vaccines. also, that is from common dreams, so its authenticity is highly suspect.

[ohlookitspaul]

well, if you read the top, it's not directly from common dreams. generally, common dreams takes articles from other papers and organizes the ones it like on its site, as it did with this one.

and what about this little line:

"The Senate report also makes clear that: 'The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs.' "

[yeat182]

well, if you read the top, it's not directly from common dreams. generally, common dreams takes articles from other papers and organizes the ones it like on its site, as it did with this one.

and what about this little line:

"The Senate report also makes clear that: 'The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs.' "


i'd like to see that actual report actually, its public domain i'm sure. would probably be pretty interesting.

[Just_Insane]

i'd like to see that actual report actually, its public domain i'm sure. would probably be pretty interesting.

Haha you're fucking ridicolous. Obviously you trust whatever CNN or a multimillionaire says and everyone who says anything different that you don't like you wanna see "the actual report" on.

[yeat182]

Haha you're fucking ridicolous. Obviously you trust whatever CNN or a multimillionaire says and everyone who says anything different that you don't like you wanna see "the actual report" on.

obviously.

[Just_Insane]

I could like tell you Bush is a multimillionaire and you'd be like "i'd like to see the actual report on that". But if i tell you the american democracy(which it isn't for your information, look at the "Bush and Saddam the one and the same thread") is the best in the world you'd be like "yey! fuck yeah!". What's the point in even trying.

[yeat182]

I could like tell you Bush is a multimillionaire and you'd be like "i'd like to see the actual report on that". But if i tell you the american democracy(which it isn't for your information, look at the "Bush and Saddam the one and the same thread") is the best in the world you'd be like "yey! fuck yeah!". What's the point in even trying.

i said i want to see the actual report because i think it would be an interesting read. and america isn't a democracy, it is a republic.

[ohlookitspaul]

i'd like to see that actual report actually, its public domain i'm sure. would probably be pretty interesting.
http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/medsearch/FocusAreas/riegle_report/report/report_toc.htm

there you go.

on this page, http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/medsearch/FocusAreas/riegle_report/report/report_s00.htm#INTRODUCTION, is where it says what i was talking about. go to the middle of the page, where there is an outline headlined "Findings" and it's the 3rd bulleted item.

"3. The United States provided the Government of Iraq with "dual use" licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological, and missile-system programs, including:[8]

chemical warfare agent precursors;
chemical warfare agent production facility plans and technical
drawings (provided as pesticide production facility plans);
chemical warhead filling equipment;
biological warfare related materials;
missile fabrication equipment; and,
missile-system guidance equipment "

[PunkDrums182]

Where is Dennis Quaid when we need him?
hahaha

[mondeoman]

Personally this sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me. That scenario is way too far off and I just don't believe it.
For the record, I'm a meterology major and a registered Democrat who voted Kerry.

[ohlookitspaul]

no response, yeat? :)

[yeat182]

no response, yeat? :)

sorry, i haven't had time to read the report, but i'll get to it.

[ohlookitspaul]

sorry, i haven't had time to read the report, but i'll get to it.
haha ok...i'll be waiting.

[yeat182]

haha ok...i'll be waiting.

i read through the relevant parts, and it certainly mentions the US sending materials to Iraq, but since the focus of this report is gulf war syndrome, its a little lacking in the investigation to what was sent to Iraq and why. also, does anyone else find it strange that this report lays out all the weapons Iraq had following the gulf war, yet people say the president lied about it since we haven't found anything? i don't think you can have it both ways, but thats just me.

[No Control]

Here is a really interesting article I think everyone would be into reading.
It's pretty interesting.

You can just check out the article here. (http://www.irr.org.uk/2001/october/ak000004.html)

[ohlookitspaul]

i read through the relevant parts, and it certainly mentions the US sending materials to Iraq, but since the focus of this report is gulf war syndrome, its a little lacking in the investigation to what was sent to Iraq and why. also, does anyone else find it strange that this report lays out all the weapons Iraq had following the gulf war, yet people say the president lied about it since we haven't found anything? i don't think you can have it both ways, but thats just me.
well, the reason i put the link up was to contradict you. "when have we used bioterror on anyone? (and we never sold it to Iraq, get your facts straight.)" as long as you admit you were wrong. :)

and yes, Iraq had a lot of weapons still, but that's why there were weapons inspectors and such there for years and years afterwards. even scott ritter, weapons inspector, said:

"It was possible as early as 1997 to determine that, from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq had been disarmed. Iraq no longer possessed any meaningful quantities of chemical or biological agent, if it possessed any at all, and the industrial means to produce these agents had either been eliminated or were subject to stringent monitoring. The same was true of Iraq's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. As long as monitoring inspections remained in place, Iraq presented a WMD-based threat to no one."

[yeat182]

well, the reason i put the link up was to contradict you. "when have we used bioterror on anyone? (and we never sold it to Iraq, get your facts straight.)" as long as you admit you were wrong. :)

i admit it would seem i was wrong. but i've read several articles that contend that. i'll conceed at this point though.

and yes, Iraq had a lot of weapons still, but that's why there were weapons inspectors and such there for years and years afterwards. even scott ritter, weapons inspector, said:

"It was possible as early as 1997 to determine that, from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq had been disarmed. Iraq no longer possessed any meaningful quantities of chemical or biological agent, if it possessed any at all, and the industrial means to produce these agents had either been eliminated or were subject to stringent monitoring. The same was true of Iraq's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. As long as monitoring inspections remained in place, Iraq presented a WMD-based threat to no one."


yeah, but alot of people have since said that there were never any weapons there because we haven't found them yet, which is ridiculous, as this report proves. my question is though, where did they go if they aren't in Iraq?

[ohlookitspaul]

yeah, but alot of people have since said that there were never any weapons there because we haven't found them yet, which is ridiculous, as this report proves. my question is though, where did they go if they aren't in Iraq?

well i don't know what the other people say or whatever, but for me...I believe that iraq had weapons after the gulf war, but they were gone by the time bush's iraq war came around. and well, i'm not an expert on weapons inspections and the processes they take by far, but i thought that perhaps the UN and UNSCOM or what not destroyed the weapons or whatever it is that they are officially supposed to do when they find such weapons.

[sunrisehighway]

No point in this thread at all, anyone who voted for Bush is incapable of generating intelligent thought and anyone who didn't already saw these type of things coming. Good job to all the hicks, homophobes, hardcore catholics, etc for putting this man back in power. Your country is now the laughing stock of the world. Actually there's not even anything to laugh about its more like a "wow they are pathetic" feeling and a growing hatred. Anti-American sentiment will grow even more than it did in the last 4 years and that is what's unfair to the approx. 48% of people who aren't idiots.

Go ahead rip into me it doesn't mean anything to me because I am already smarter than you simply for the fact that I didn't vote for George W. Bush (not that I had the oppurtunity too, thank god I live in Canada).

[Justin_stacy]

No point in this thread at all, anyone who voted for Bush is incapable of generating intelligent thought and anyone who didn't already saw these type of things coming. Good job to all the hicks, homophobes, hardcore catholics, etc for putting this man back in power. Your country is now the laughing stock of the world. Actually there's not even anything to laugh about its more like a "wow they are pathetic" feeling and a growing hatred. Anti-American sentiment will grow even more than it did in the last 4 years and that is what's unfair to the approx. 48% of people who aren't idiots.

Go ahead rip into me it doesn't mean anything to me because I am already smarter than you simply for the fact that I didn't vote for George W. Bush (not that I had the oppurtunity too, thank god I live in Canada).
http://www.helpthemleave.com/
Here this might help you, I mean, I can see your "intelligence,” or lack of, is just being wasted here in America....

[sunrisehighway]

http://www.helpthemleave.com/
Here this might help you, I mean, I can see your "intelligence,” or lack of, is just being wasted here in America....

That's a good example of intelligence right there. Way to read my post since I clearly said I live in Canada. That site also looks like it was designed by an intelligent person. I bet you desperately want to ship out all the people who voted for Kerry, then you can marry your cousins, burn gays, reintroduce slavery, force woman to have their babies, and get caught up on your banjo practice.

You could put all the Liberal people in the NORTH, and you guys could live in the SOUTH... hmmm what does that sound like??

[yeat182]

No point in this thread at all, anyone who voted for Bush is incapable of generating intelligent thought and anyone who didn't already saw these type of things coming. Good job to all the hicks, homophobes, hardcore catholics, etc for putting this man back in power. Your country is now the laughing stock of the world. Actually there's not even anything to laugh about its more like a "wow they are pathetic" feeling and a growing hatred. Anti-American sentiment will grow even more than it did in the last 4 years and that is what's unfair to the approx. 48% of people who aren't idiots.

Go ahead rip into me it doesn't mean anything to me because I am already smarter than you simply for the fact that I didn't vote for George W. Bush (not that I had the oppurtunity too, thank god I live in Canada).

you are more intellegent because you live in canada? how intellegent can you be if you stereotype everyone that voted for bush as "hicks, homophobes, hardcore catholics, etc." ?

also, not being allowed to vote for the president doesn't make you smarter than anyone.

[yeat182]

That's a good example of intelligence right there. Way to read my post since I clearly said I live in Canada. That site also looks like it was designed by an intelligent person. I bet you desperately want to ship out all the people who voted for Kerry, then you can marry your cousins, burn gays, reintroduce slavery, force woman to have their babies, and get caught up on your banjo practice.

You could put all the Liberal people in the NORTH, and you guys could live in the SOUTH... hmmm what does that sound like??


you do realize that it was the republicans that ended slavery, right? also, because you can throw out the most insults per post, doesn't make you more intellegent than anyone, in fact, quite the opposite.

[sunrisehighway]

you are more intellegent because you live in canada? how intellegent can you be if you stereotype everyone that voted for bush as "hicks, homophobes, hardcore catholics, etc." ?

also, not being allowed to vote for the president doesn't make you smarter than anyone.


No, im smarter than anyone who votes for Bush, it has nothing to do with what country I live in. If I was in the US, I still would not vote for Bush... and yes... I would still be smart.

And oops im sorry, add IDIOTS to the end of my list of hicks, homophodes, hardcore catholics because if your not one of these and you STILL voted for Bush then your just plain stupid... thinking Bush will actually do your country good is delusional. Either way "idiot" pretty much sums it up because hicks, homophobes and hardcore catholics ARE idiots.

[yeat182]

No, im smarter than anyone who votes for Bush, it has nothing to do with what country I live in. If I was in the US, I still would not vote for Bush... and yes... I would still be smart.

And oops im sorry, add IDIOTS to the end of my list of hicks, homophodes, hardcore catholics because if your not one of these and you STILL voted for Bush then your just plain stupid... thinking Bush will actually do your country good is delusional. Either way "idiot" pretty much sums it up because hicks, homophobes and hardcore catholics ARE idiots.

so, people that don't agree with you are idiots? spoken like a true liberal.

[sunrisehighway]

so, people that don't agree with you are idiots? spoken like a true liberal.

Do you even know what a Liberal view is? For the most part (although in the US neither party really makes any progress with anything) a Liberal view on politics is OPEN to new and other ideas. Yes I am closed-minded about CLOSE-MINDED people but that just comes with the position. I'm open to new ideas, accepting new types of people etc. I'm sorry but I'm not all about the old-fashioned bible-thumping bullshit...

Conservatives are ignorant.. scared of new things, scared of "God" ... scared of losing what they have in their sick minds as normal.

[BrandNew20]

Don't go thinking all conservatives are obsessed with God, I personally have never seen Yeat go to God as his basis for his views.

[yeat182]

Do you even know what a Liberal view is? For the most part (although in the US neither party really makes any progress with anything) a Liberal view on politics is OPEN to new and other ideas. Yes I am closed-minded about CLOSE-MINDED people but that just comes with the position. I'm open to new ideas, accepting new types of people etc. I'm sorry but I'm not all about the old-fashioned bible-thumping bullshit...

Conservatives are ignorant.. scared of new things, scared of "God" ... scared of losing what they have in their sick minds as normal.

you contradict yourself. you can't even accept someone that doesn't hold the same political ideals as you, and you expect us to believe you are some enlightend, accepting, individual? good luck with that.

[yeat182]

Don't go thinking all conservatives are obsessed with God, I personally have never seen Yeat go to God as his basis for his views.

in fact, i don't even believe in god. and i'm pro-choice. and against guns.

[Brit_Ben]

Don't go thinking all conservatives are obsessed with God, I personally have never seen Yeat go to God as his basis for his views.

this is because in times of war in particular God and religion can easily be used to justify situations by saying things like 'it is God's will' etc.

Using religion as a tool for social control is blasphemous and contradicts itself. Also what about non-christian soldiers fighting? are they just forgotton?

[yeat182]

this is because in times of war in particular God and religion can easily be used to justify situations by saying things like 'it is God's will' etc.

Using religion as a tool for social control is blasphemous and contradicts itself. Also what about non-christian soldiers fighting? are they just forgotton?

this doesn't relate at all to anything anyone has said, least of all the post you are quoting.

[UndefinedBoy]

this is because in times of war in particular God and religion can easily be used to justify situations by saying things like 'it is God's will' etc.

Using religion as a tool for social control is blasphemous and contradicts itself. Also what about non-christian soldiers fighting? are they just forgotton?

What are you talking about?

[sunrisehighway]

in fact, i don't even believe in god. and i'm pro-choice. and against guns.

Honestly good for you that you choose going these ways. You voted for the wrong guy though that's all I can say.

[_astheruinfalls]

in fact, i don't even believe in god. and i'm pro-choice. and against guns.
Woah, are you serious?

[yeat182]

Honestly good for you that you choose going these ways. You voted for the wrong guy though that's all I can say.

thats your opinion.

[yeat182]

Woah, are you serious?

yep.

[chriscac28]

i'm copying and pasting this from my livejournal, it's an essay i wrote about a few days after the election. it's not entirely non-partisan (my views are expressed, because yes i will admit i am biased) but it shouldn't really offend anyone:

"Abortions for Some, Miniature American Flags for Others"
An Open Letter to the Citizens of These United States of America

Those of you who know me well (and possibly even those who don't) recognize the fact that I am a fairly laidback individual. I don't get worked up about much and it takes quite a bit of genuine concern for me to become impassioned about a specific event or situation. Lucky for you, this is just such a situation and these are its consequences. Yet I digress...

I awoke that morning to a deceptively sunny day. There was an excitement in the air: a strange yet welcome feeling after the uncertainty of the preceding evening. The sounds emanating from the television in the living room echoed these sentiments and though the uncertainty still loomed, it was masked by a confident optimism. The weather early that day mirrored this almost too perfectly: there was a chill in the air, though the sun shone bright enough that this was only disclosed through the fleeting passing of the wind.

As I made my way along the streets that morning I could notice the sunlight slowly fading and the coldness in the air becoming more evident. As I entered work, the warmth, however, was almost unbearable. In combination with the new sounds emanating from throughout the place, the reality of the situation became readily apparent: in its final throes the confidence of the morning had turned to a foolish optimism. This was it: it was true, it was over, and there was nothing we could do. In a sense...

It should be clear from the paragraphs above that I was not happy with the outcome of the presidential election last week. However, I don't intend this essay to be a rant on how Kerry should have won, or how I'm going to move to Canada, or anything that will further separate our already clearly divided country. Rather, I wish to turn some of that leftover foolish optimism into something more useful - keep it as something positive - because no matter what the outcome of the election, we are still at a substantially pivotal point in our nation's history.

The evidence for this is abundant: there was an amazingly high voter turnout during this election, the totals for the two candidates in both the popular and electoral votes were exceptionally close, states were won by mere thousands, etc. This is not a time for partisan bickering and further division. It is a time to embrace that middle ground that most of the country stands on, a time for understanding, compromise and unification.

It is evident now, more than ever, that the voice of the American public (and consequently every individual therein) is heard and does make a difference in the direction this country is headed. "We're wide awake and we're thinking. My darling, believe your voice can mean something."

I was truly amazed to see how many people became involved in this election. Friends of mine who I was almost sure would be utterly apathetic about the situation became embattled on both sides of the fence. So many people, young people especially, spoke out regarding their feelings and opinions on this country and the way it was being run, and this made me proud to be a citizen of this country and a member of this generation. However, it is also the case that many of these same people have been all but silent since the outcome of the election became known and it is this issue specifically that I would like to address.

There is an all-too-common frame of mind/viewpoint that elections are the only times when we as Americans get to voice our opinions on the way the country is being run. While it is true that we live in a Republic - where we elect officials to represent us in government - rather than a true democracy - where all policy would be decided by a majority vote of the people - it is also true that this system has its foundations in the democratic process and the democratic process NEVER ends.

Those of us out there who wanted the election to end differently than it did still have the chance to fight for the changes we want made. I'm sure that even those who voted for Bush this time out do not agree 100% with all of the policy enacted by his administration in the past four years. We elect these officials to represent us and our viewpoints and now we must make sure that our viewpoints are known to these same officials.

This is all I'm asking of the people of this country: instead of sitting around, bitching about how the election should have turned out differently, or joking about moving to Canada, or simply saying "Oh well, maybe next time" (trust me, this one doesn't work, I've been seeing Cubs fans do it my whole life) we need to get out there and make something happen. Pick one issue that is important to you and fight for it. Write letters to your Senators, Congressmen and other elected officials. Donate your time and/or money to those organizations who have already taken on this battle. Most importantly, do SOMETHING. Stay educated on what is going on in our country and if you have something to say about it, say it. Write it in your LiveJournal, send it to your local newspaper's "Opinion" section, shout if from the rooftops if you have to.

In a country so evenly divided from state to state and within the states themselves, every little bit can count. This country is made up of its people, run by those people and exists for the benefit of the same. We all have the power to enact change, and even moreso we have the responsibility to do so when we feel things aren't being run the way they should. So do yourself, your country and the world at large a favor: become educated, take a stand and fight for what you believe in.

Just be heard.

[_astheruinfalls]

yep.
I never knew that.

[yeat182]

i'm copying and pasting this from my livejournal, it's an essay i wrote about a few days after the election. it's not entirely non-partisan (my views are expressed, because yes i will admit i am biased) but it shouldn't really offend anyone:

"Abortions for Some, Miniature American Flags for Others"


best title ever. don't blame me, i voted for Kodos!

[BrandNew20]

best title ever. don't blame me, i voted for Kodos!

that episode is such a great satire.