Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
North Korea to test a nuke.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapc...ear/index.html


Someone explain to me why Bush went after the one member of his "Axis of Evil" that wasn't anywhere close to developing nukes?

Oh, wait -- I forgot. Ties to al Qaeda. Plus all the flowers and sweets.

The same reason why we didn't go after the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The costs would be too high. Do the lives of the people in Seoul really mean so little to you?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Spanky
Why do you think this guy was a perderast? Was Gary Studds a pederast?

Yes. Emailing boys about sex, and about meeting them to do things, sounds like a pederast to me.

Are you denying Foley is a pederast? Are you actually trying to say this guy is not bad news, or that because someone else is bad news it's not such a bad thing? Come on.

(And, yes, Studd's boy may have been a year older than Foley's, but I wouldn't let my kids hang around him. Do you have anything more recent than 23 years ago to distract attention? Something like, say, DeLay or Abramhoff? Condi or Rumsfeld?)

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Elections are better in parliamentary systems, though.

They work better in any system where the seats aren't totally Gerrymandered. In california (which holds the most seats) you can thank the Unions (and the CDP and CRP) for the current messed up situation.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Congratulations! Your boy has now delivered, in the more than five and one-half years he has been in office, a total return of almost 11%! That is almost 2% per year! Better than some NOW accounts!

My retirement is secure.

God you are dumb.

What area of law are you in. clearly nothing to do with finance- too dense for anything with technology, you're not a good people person like Sidd, so not in litigation. I'm stumped. hint?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Did you feel this way about Monica? Why is it different or worse, such that a resignation here is less excusable than a refusal to resign, along with false denials?

Minors are involved. Minors he had authority over.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
What did she say that was a lie?

From Greg Mitchell:

• My check of her testimony before the 9/11 Commission in 2004 reveals that not only did Rice not disclose this meeting with the two men -- she also gave misleading information about the level of threats to the homeland that she learned about that summer.
  
  How do we square Black’s account (in the Woodward book) of that July 10, 2001, meeting -- "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head"—and Rice’s statement to the 9/11 Commission, “There was no threat reporting of any substance about an attack coming in the United States”?
  
  The Woodward book describes how, on that July day, Tenet met with Black at CIA headquarters. Black laid out the case, consisting of intercepts and other top-secret intelligence showing the increasing likelihood that al-Qaeda would soon attack the United States: “The mass of fragments made a compelling case, so compelling to Tenet that he decided he and Black should go to the White House immediately."
  
  Tenet urgently called Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser. "Tenet and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action,” Woodward writes. “Tenet had been losing sleep over the recent intelligence. There was no conclusive, smoking-gun intelligence, but there was such a huge volume of data that an intelligence officer's instinct strongly suggested that something was coming.”
  
  Woodward describes the meeting, and the two officials' plea that the U.S. "needed to take action that moment -- covert, military, whatever -- to thwart bin Laden." The result? "Tenet and Black felt they were not getting through to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off….Tenet left the meeting feeling frustrated. Though Rice had given them a fair hearing, no immediate action meant great risk. Black felt the decision to just keep planning was a sustained policy failure. Rice and the Bush team had been in hibernation too long....
  
  "Afterward, Tenet looked back on the meeting with Rice as a lost opportunity to prevent or disrupt the attacks. Rice could have gotten through to Bush on the threat, Tenet thought, but she just didn't get it in time. Black later said, 'The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.'"

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1003189623

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
My check of her testimony before the 9/11 Commission in 2004 reveals that not only did Rice not disclose this meeting with the two men --

you've got to be kidding. you need to cite a, you know, an answer to a question that was untrue. got one?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Yes. Emailing boys about sex, and about meeting them to do things, sounds like a pederast to me.

Are you denying Foley is a pederast? Are you actually trying to say this guy is not bad news, or that because someone else is bad news it's not such a bad thing? Come on.

(And, yes, Studd's boy may have been a year older than Foley's, but I wouldn't let my kids hang around him. Do you have anything more recent than 23 years ago to distract attention? Something like, say, DeLay or Abramhoff? Condi or Rumsfeld?)

Emailing a sixteen year old about sex is a pederast? Sex with a sixteen year old is not paedophila, but emailing a sixteen year old about sex is paedophilia? Give this up - you are being an idiot. In many states having sex with a sixteen year old is not a crime. In the rest sex with a sixteen year is statutory rape, not a child molesting crime. Are you telling me you have never found a sixteen year old attractive? I am not defending Foley, I am just stating calling him a pederast is political grandstanding B.S. and feeds right into the Far Right Christian propaganda that all Homosexuals are Paedophiles.

There is a big difference between being attracted to a post pubescent and a prebubescent. There is a reason that child molesting is considered a much more heinous crime than statutory rape. Not that statutory rape isn't bad, just child molesting is a lot worse.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Spanky
They work better in any system where the seats aren't totally Gerrymandered. In california (which holds the most seats) you can thank the Unions (and the CDP and CRP) for the current messed up situation.

Who are you going to blame Texas on?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Did you feel this way about Monica? Why is it different or worse, such that a resignation here is less excusable than a refusal to resign, along with false denials?

Well, for one, Monica was an adult. 16 is different from 12, sure, but it ain't 18. And I wouldn't want my 16 year old engaging in cybersex with a 40-plus year old (bonus points -- he did it while in the middle of a House vote! http://www.wonkette.com/politics/mar...lly-204965.php ).

And I don't blame Foley for lying about it. People lying about sex is understandable (especially if you are a closeted gay member of an anti-gay party). If reports that Hastert et al knew or should have known what Foley was doing are true, then I blame *them.*

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Are you saying she didn't commit perjury? If not, why aren't you clamoring to have her removed from office?

Did she lie under oath?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you've got to be kidding. you need to cite a, you know, an answer to a question that was untrue. got one?

It's on Foley's IMs.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
Are you kidding me? What I said above your brother said was B.S.? I have spent a lot of time around homosexuals and any gay man that says youth is not prized in the homosexual community is either in denial or is lying. Here in San Francisco, there are constant statements made by gay activist men to the gay community stating that the gay communities obsession with youth is not healthy. Just like social commentators often say that the society as a whole's obsession with youth is not healthy.

I was not demonizing anyone, I was just stating the facts. Any gay man that says that only paedophiles and not homosexual men are attracted to (good looking) sixteen year olds is in denial or is lying.

Heterosexual men are also into youth. We like young women. If a Heterosexual male is attracted to a sixteen year old women, that does not make him a paedophile. Tracy lords was sixteen when she was the top porn star in America. Was every male that found her attractive a paedophile? Is every highschool teacher that has an affair with a sixteen year old student a paedophile? Absolutley not. Why are all models and playboy playmates so young?

The fact that the Republican congressmen in question was attracted to a sixteen year old makes him a regular homosexual. Not a paedophile. The same would be true of a male congressmen that was attracted to a sixteen year old female page. Sixteen year olds are allowed to get married. Is everyone married to a sixteen year old a paedophile? Give me a break.

Gary Studds had an affair with a sixteen year male page. That clearly makes him a homosexual not a paedophile.

Any statement to the contrary is pure P.C. B.S.

I'd be happy to compare fag hag status any time you want.

There is a major difference between looking young and being young. Gay obsession is with the appearance of youth and beauty. It is illegal to go after 16 year olds, even in San Francisco. Jail bait, they may be, but they're not ok to pursue.

They may not be paedophiles, but they sure as hell are pederasts, and to suggest that the entire gay community condones the behavior is painting with waaaaaaay too broad a brush.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Spanky
Did she lie under oath?

no. some blogger read her testimony and felt she should have mentioned some things, i suppose in undisclosed answers.

Spanky, how can you keep this up? don't you get sick of arguing with these guys? I am on my last nerve.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Who are you going to blame Texas on?

Tom Delay and the Texas Republican Party. But before him the Democrats had done the same thing. As far as I know there is no proposition system in Texas, so only the two state partys are to blame. As I said the guilty partys in California are the two state partys and the Unions.