Dear Mods, this long derailed crazy thread needs a lock please :) Thank you

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

attack random country which didnt have anything to do with it = in response to 9-11 ya..

watch this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM bush admits that there were NO weapons what so ever.

;) information my friend , information

this is my point; the government = already proven untrustworthy , unlike wikileaks.

So for now, im on their side.

Half-Way

seriously, are you blindly ignoring my point? il mark it in red for you

this is my point; the government = already proven untrustworthy , unlike wikileaks.

So for now, im on their side.

this is NOT about what wikileaks uncovered at ALL

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Iraq wasn't fought over 9-11. Which is apparently what your link says. That's not a secret dude. WikiLeaks didn't uncover that.

LJS9502_basic

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

[You claim something, then dismiss it , then start talking about stuff that dosent even matter.

If you dont have any valid points for this argument, why even bother responding?

Half-Way

BTW as more time pass I honestly believe Assange is the face of a movement to get this bill passed.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/senator-web-censorship-bill-a-bunker-busting-cluster-bomb.ars

I'm sure support for this is increasing the more assange leaks, no matter how trivial the actual data is. Remember guys, a democrat introduced this bill.

Espada12

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Iraq wasn't fought over 9-11. Which is apparently what your link says. That's not a secret dude. WikiLeaks didn't uncover that.

LJS9502_basic

Any one with any facts should have known that after the gulf war there was a no fly zone and troops plus satellite coverage in place. The odds of Iraq having WMD's was slim to none. Bush lied what else is new.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Iraq wasn't fought over 9-11. Which is apparently what your link says. That's not a secret dude. WikiLeaks didn't uncover that.

LJS9502_basic

seriously, are you blindly ignoring my point? il mark it in red for you

this is my point; the government = already proven untrustworthy , unlike wikileaks.

So for now, im on their side.

this is NOT about what wikileaks uncovered at ALL

okey now seriously, please watch the video OR RESEARCH your information. THEY NEVER had WMD.

And you still dismiss my argument as of why i TRUST WIKILEAKS MORE then the GOVERNMENT.

either A; you do some research and come back later, or B; stop responding with the same stuff that i already PROVED was wrong

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] If we had Wikileaks back then it would have been even more obvious that the whole WMD deal was a lie. We need more Wikileaks to protect us from the real enemies!!kuraimen

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Half-Way"]

seriously, are you blindly ignoring my point? il mark it in red for you

this is my point; the government = already proven untrustworthy , unlike wikileaks.

So for now, im on their side.

this is NOT about what wikileaks uncovered at ALL

Half-Way

okey now seriously, please watch the video OR RESEARCH your information. THEY NEVER had WMD.

And you still dismiss my argument as of why i TRUST WIKILEAKS MORE then the GOVERNMENT.

either A; you do some research and come back later, or B; stop responding with the same stuff that i already PROVED was wrong

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[You claim something, then dismiss it , then start talking about stuff that dosent even matter.

If you dont have any valid points for this argument, why even bother responding?

LJS9502_basic

LOl no i never said that. This discussion was about AS OF WHY i trust wikileaks and not the government (which you obviously trust)

feel free to find the sentence where i claim that wikileaks gave out that information.

I have marked in red all your contradictions in your past posts. since we started this argument.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[You claim something, then dismiss it , then start talking about stuff that dosent even matter.

If you dont have any valid points for this argument, why even bother responding?

Half-Way

LOl no i never said that. This discussion was about AS OF WHY i trust wikileaks and not the government (which you obviously trust)

feels free to find the sentence where i claim that wikileaks gave out that information.

I have marked in red all your contradictions in your past posts. since we started this argument.

FYI....nothing in red is a contradiction.;)

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]WikiLeaks has ZERO to do with this being public knowledge. Did you not pay attention to the news at the time?LJS9502_basic

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

are you serious? I just posted you a video for gods sake-

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks. Why do you think the people supported the war at the time?

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]WikiLeaks has ZERO to do with this being public knowledge. Did you not pay attention to the news at the time?LJS9502_basic

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

Can you please provide a link to the section in bold?

As for the section in red - the government invaded this little isolated country, that hadn't attacked the US or any of its citizens and had done nothing to provoke a war, for "having WMDs" which were proven to never have existed in the first place.

If you can't see how the people were mislead, then there's no point in anybody having a sensible discussion with you.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]WikiLeaks has ZERO to do with this being public knowledge. Did you not pay attention to the news at the time?LJS9502_basic

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

Is this a joke bush said Iraq had WMD's and that it was linked to the 9/11 terror attacks. That is why we went over there to fight the war on terror but everything that was said was a lie. There was a no fly zone with satellite coverage plus troops and inspectors in Iraq. The military knew there was no truth to what was being told but we were told to follow orders and basically shut up. When i spoke to my family I told them that it was all bs and that we were going on a coffe and cake run.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]WikiLeaks has ZERO to do with this being public knowledge. Did you not pay attention to the news at the time?LJS9502_basic

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

Interestingly the ex-Prime Minister of Australia has just suggested that the blame for wikileaks should rest with the US and their poor security measures in an article here (he did just get lambasted in a recent leak however and may just in true form be lashing out like the petulant child he is). He may have a point though I suppose...

And all suggestion of association between wikileaks and attacks on Mastercard is ridiculous. It's easy for the media to use a small minority group of foolish vigilantes to tarnish a broader group, but common sense should tell this obviously is just media mongering.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually what I "claimed" was that WikiLeaks plays fast and lose with the truth. You brought up the Iraq War and the war on terror...not the same thing by the way. I made several valid points.....and that is that we have known for some time that no WMDs were found in Iraq. You keep saying WikiLeaks gave you that truth...but that isn't correct. It was reported at the time by news agencies.

LJS9502_basic

LOl no i never said that. This discussion was about AS OF WHY i trust wikileaks and not the government (which you obviously trust)

feels free to find the sentence where i claim that wikileaks gave out that information.

I have marked in red all your contradictions in your past posts. since we started this argument.

FYI....nothing in red is a contradiction.;) in your past posts.

im starting to think your either a troll, or just an random american trying to defend their country despite not having enough information.

if i could PLEASE ask you to READ what i type, then i would be greatfull.

il give you a few keywords here;

i trust wikileaks more then i trust the government

the government has been proven untrustworthy before. By lying to their people about the true intentions about the war on iraq, claiming it was an answer to the 9/11 attacks.

wikileaks has yet to be proven to be giving out false information, and if the information was false, why would the US government make such a fuzz about it?

the past information i have are a basis of my opinion about this whole case.

And i conclude that im on wikileaks side as of now, when it comes to arguments about this.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

Half-Way

are you serious? I just posted you a video for gods sake-

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks. Why do you think the people supported the war at the time?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]

If Wikileaks found a memo that they were knowingly lying to misled public opinion then history could have changed. That's one of the reasons I support Wikileaks I certainly don't trust the US government to be telling the truth about anything anymore since they have no problem lying to start a war.

raynimrod

Can you please provide a link to the section in bold?

As for the section in red - the government invaded this little isolated country, that hadn't attacked the US or any of its citizens and had done nothing to provoke a war, for "having WMDs" which were proven to never have existed in the first place.

If you can't see how the people were mislead, then there's no point in anybody having a sensible discussion with you.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

LOl no i never said that. This discussion was about AS OF WHY i trust wikileaks and not the government (which you obviously trust)

feels free to find the sentence where i claim that wikileaks gave out that information.

I have marked in red all your contradictions in your past posts. since we started this argument.

Half-Way

FYI....nothing in red is a contradiction.;) in your past posts.

im starting to think your either a troll, or just an random american trying to defend their country despite not having enough information.

if i could PLEASE ask you to READ what i type, then i would be greatfull.

il give you a few keywords here;

i trust wikileaks more then i trust the government

the government has been proven untrustworthy before. By lying to their people about the true intentions about the war on iraq, claiming it was an answer to the 9/11 attacks.

wikileaks has yet to be proven to be giving out false information, and if the information was false, why would the US government make such a fuzz about it?

the past information i have are a basis of my opinion about this whole case.

And i conclude that im on wikileaks side as of now, when it comes to arguments about this.

Interestingly the ex-Prime Minister has just suggested that the blame for wikileaks should rest with the US and their poor security measuresin an article here (he did just get lambasted in a recent leak however and may just in true form be lashing out like the petulant child he is). He may have a point though I suppose...

And all suggestion of association between wikileaks and attacks on Mastercard is ridiculous. It's easy for the media to use a small minority group of foolish vigilantes to tarnish a broader group, but common sense should tell this obviously is just media mongering.

poptart

it has already been proven that those who attacked the websites where groups that support wikileaks, and wikileaks had nothing to do with it them self.

Its obvious that an organization like that would want to do something illegal to be charged with. As it seem now, the US government hasn't found a way to officially charge wikileaks with any form of illegal activities.

If they are going to charge them for releasing top secret material they would also have to charge any newspaper that posted those articles.

That is 100% untrue. The goverment along with the british were acting under intel that Saddam and the bath party possessed WMD"s. This was the reason for the war. coupled with the idea of ousting the Saddam reigme. 9/11 had nothing to do with it and they told us that from the begining.

Tetrarch9

If they are going to charge them for releasing top secret material they would also have to charge any newspaper that posted those articlesHalf-Way

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]That is 100% untrue. The goverment along with the british were acting under intel that Saddam and the bath party possessed WMD"s. This was the reason for the war. coupled with the idea of ousting the Saddam reigme. 9/11 had nothing to do with it and they told us that from the begining.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You support WikiLeaks because they "might" have found a memo? Actually the wouldn't find anything...they pay for illegal activities to steal cIassified info. And for the fourth time....since it was known at the time that the government DIDN'T find these weapons...exactly how did the government mislead you?LJS9502_basic

are you serious? I just posted you a video for gods sake-

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks. Why do you think the people supported the war at the time?

SERIOUSLY

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM AT 01:10 LISTEN

READ WHAT I SAID, WATCH THE VIDEO

SERIOUSLY

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks

READ WHAT I SAID, WATCH THE VIDEO

Half-Way

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Half-Way"]

are you serious? I just posted you a video for gods sake-

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks. Why do you think the people supported the war at the time?

Half-Way

SERIOUSLY

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM AT 01:10 LISTEN

READ WHAT I SAID, WATCH THE VIDEO

Please give up and stop trying to tell americans about their country.

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

im starting to think your either a troll, or just an random american trying to defend their country despite not having enough information.

if i could PLEASE ask you to READ what i type, then i would be greatfull.

il give you a few keywords here;

i trust wikileaks more then i trust the government

the government has been proven untrustworthy before. By lying to their people about the true intentions about the war on iraq, claiming it was an answer to the 9/11 attacks.

wikileaks has yet to be proven to be giving out false information, and if the information was false, why would the US government make such a fuzz about it?

the past information i have are a basis of my opinion about this whole case.

And i conclude that im on wikileaks side as of now, when it comes to arguments about this.

Half-Way

seriously how many ignorant Americans are on this forum?

Everybody knows after 9/11 bush said the Al-Qaeda were based in Iraq and that they ordered the attack and also Sadam had WMD's. He also showed some phoney spy shots of the WMD's and said we must strike now. Osama was never in Iraq or any of the other claims that bush made were ever even remotrly proven to be true and yet the troops are still there.

pimpog

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

im starting to think your either a troll, or just an random american trying to defend their country despite not having enough information.

if i could PLEASE ask you to READ what i type, then i would be greatfull.

il give you a few keywords here;

i trust wikileaks more then i trust the government

the government has been proven untrustworthy before. By lying to their people about the true intentions about the war on iraq, claiming it was an answer to the 9/11 attacks.

wikileaks has yet to be proven to be giving out false information, and if the information was false, why would the US government make such a fuzz about it?

the past information i have are a basis of my opinion about this whole case.

And i conclude that im on wikileaks side as of now, when it comes to arguments about this.

Half-Way

seriously how many ignorant Americans are on this forum?

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]The video says he went into Iraq because at the time he thought they had WMDs. That doesn't mean they misled you if that is what they thought AT THE TIME. Whether that is true or not...the video does not disprove that. So I don't know what you think that video does actually.....Tetrarch9

SERIOUSLY

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM AT 01:10 LISTEN

READ WHAT I SAID, WATCH THE VIDEO

Please give up and stop trying to tell americans about their country.

thats AFTER they went in under the impression the WAR HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH 9/11

IT WAS CALLED THE WAR ON TERROR FOR GODS SAKE

im really worried about america when i see people like this that are so nationalistic that they even forget the governments flaws. Last time that happend we had something called WW2, and hitler did manage to invade some countries. But the people actually noticed something was fishy after poland.

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

SERIOUSLY

The government claimed that the war was in response to the 9/11 attacks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM AT 01:10 LISTEN

READ WHAT I SAID, WATCH THE VIDEO

Half-Way

Please give up and stop trying to tell americans about their country.

thats AFTER they went in under the impression the WAR HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH 9/11

IT WAS CALLED THE WAR ON TERROR FOR GODS SAKE

im really worried about america when i see people like this that are so nationalistic that they even forget the governments flaws. Last time that happend we had something called WW2, and hitler did manage to invade some countries. But the people actually noticed something was fishy after poland.

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"] That is 100% untrue. The goverment along with the british were acting under intel that Saddam and the bath party possessed WMD"s. This was the reason for the war. coupled with the idea of ousting the Saddam reigme. 9/11 had nothing to do with it and they told us that from the begining.

Tetrarch9

seriously how many ignorant Americans are on this forum?

do you believe they have a reason for that? Or is it something else?

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

Everybody knows after 9/11 bush said the Al-Qaeda were based in Iraq and that they ordered the attack and also Sadam had WMD's. He also showed some phoney spy shots of the WMD's and said we must strike now. Osama was never in Iraq or any of the other claims that bush made were ever even remotrly proven to be true and yet the troops are still there.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Half-Way"]

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]You have failed. The first thing he says is the whole reason we went in is WMDs

Please give up and stop trying to tell americans about their country.

LJS9502_basic

thats AFTER they went in under the impression the WAR HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH 9/11

IT WAS CALLED THE WAR ON TERROR FOR GODS SAKE

im really worried about america when i see people like this that are so nationalistic that they even forget the governments flaws. Last time that happend we had something called WW2, and hitler did manage to invade some countries. But the people actually noticed something was fishy after poland.

Maybe this will clear things up please do some reading. (not you LJ) (Im talking to Half Way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You support WikiLeaks because they "might" have found a memo? Actually the wouldn't find anything...they pay for illegal activities to steal cIassified info. And for the fourth time....since it was known at the time that the government DIDN'T find these weapons...exactly how did the government mislead you?LJS9502_basic

Can you please provide a link to the section in bold?

As for the section in red - the government invaded this little isolated country, that hadn't attacked the US or any of its citizens and had done nothing to provoke a war, for "having WMDs" which were proven to never have existed in the first place.

If you can't see how the people were mislead, then there's no point in anybody having a sensible discussion with you.

Could you please actually read what I posted and reply appropriately?

I want a link to your claim in bold that Wikileaks pays for illegal activies to steal clas*ified information.

And you haven't addressed what I said in red, you've just spouted rhetoric based on nothing I said.

Government: "We're invading Iraq because of 9/11 and WMDs, but without sufficient proof to actually declare war"

Eventual fact: It turns out there were never any WMDs and the government admitted that they knew that. There was also no link between Iraq and 9/11.

Surely the misleading part is blatently obvious LJ.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="raynimrod"]

Can you please provide a link to the section in bold?

As for the section in red - the government invaded this little isolated country, that hadn't attacked the US or any of its citizens and had done nothing to provoke a war, for "having WMDs" which were proven to never have existed in the first place.

If you can't see how the people were mislead, then there's no point in anybody having a sensible discussion with you.

pimpog

Everybody knows after 9/11 bush said the Al-Qaeda were based in Iraq and that they ordered the attack and also Sadam had WMD's. He also showed some phoney spy shots of the WMD's and said we must strike now. Osama was never in Iraq or any of the other claims that bush made were ever even remotrly proven to be true and yet the troops are still there.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Half-Way"]

thats AFTER they went in under the impression the WAR HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH 9/11

IT WAS CALLED THE WAR ON TERROR FOR GODS SAKE

im really worried about america when i see people like this that are so nationalistic that they even forget the governments flaws. Last time that happend we had something called WW2, and hitler did manage to invade some countries. But the people actually noticed something was fishy after poland.

Tetrarch9

Maybe this will clear things up please do some reading. (not you LJ) (Im talking to Half Way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism

I think the two wars you meant to contrast is Operation Iraqi Freedom and the War on Afghanistan. Half Way is correct in saying the War on Terror includes the Iraq War. It even says so in the articles you provided. :lol:

War on Terror Wiki: Since then, other operations have commenced, the largest being the War in Iraq, beginning with a 2003 invasion. Originally, it was waged against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]No you are confusing the Iraq War with the war on terror. They are NOT the same...and never were. Maniacc1

Maybe this will clear things up please do some reading. (not you LJ) (Im talking to Half Way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism

I think the two wars you meant to contrast is Operation Iraqi Freedom and the War on Afghanistan. Half Way is correct in saying the War on Terror includes the Iraq War. It even says so in the articles you provided. :lol:

War on Terror Wiki: Since then, other operations have commenced, the largest being the War in Iraq, beginning with a 2003 invasion. Originally, it was waged against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.

And we have a winner :lol:

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

[QUOTE="Tetrarch9"]

Maybe this will clear things up please do some reading. (not you LJ) (Im talking to Half Way)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism

raynimrod

I think the two wars you meant to contrast is Operation Iraqi Freedom and the War on Afghanistan. Half Way is correct in saying the War on Terror includes the Iraq War. It even says so in the articles you provided. :lol:

War on Terror Wiki: Since then, other operations have commenced, the largest being the War in Iraq, beginning with a 2003 invasion. Originally, it was waged against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.

And we have a winner :lol:

[QUOTE="raynimrod"]

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

I think the two wars you meant to contrast is Operation Iraqi Freedom and the War on Afghanistan. Half Way is correct in saying the War on Terror includes the Iraq War. It even says so in the articles you provided. :lol:

War on Terror Wiki: Since then, other operations have commenced, the largest being the War in Iraq, beginning with a 2003 invasion. Originally, it was waged against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with the purpose of eliminating them.

Tetrarch9

And we have a winner :lol:

Which is a shame really. The Middle East shouldn't be synonymous with terrorism. And the wars are far from different - they're both illegal, unjust and for essentially the same reasons.

In fact, neither of them are actually wars. They were the agressive invasions of two sovereign nations that had done absolutely nothing to provoke the United States. We shouldn't have been there to begin with.

The video says he went into Iraq because at the time he thought they had WMDs. That doesn't mean they misled you if that is what they thought AT THE TIME. Whether that is true or not...the video does not disprove that. So I don't know what you think that video does actually.....LJS9502_basic

Basic, its not what they THOUGHT its what they blatantly lied about. They just altered documentation about the transfer of weapons from another country to give false reasoning and justification for invading Iraq.

You need to watch this movie

Aything to make this thread go away gets my vote.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

The video says he went into Iraq because at the time he thought they had WMDs. That doesn't mean they misled you if that is what they thought AT THE TIME. Whether that is true or not...the video does not disprove that. So I don't know what you think that video does actually.....biggest_loser

Basic, its not what they THOUGHT its what they blatantly lied about.

You need to watch this movie

*move poster of Fair game.*

I personally think Green Zone tells the best story of what Happen in Iraq

Aything to make this thread go away gets my vote.

irishscott99

[QUOTE="irishscott99"]

Aything to make this thread go away gets my vote.

Tetrarch9

unlike most people here, i actually support my claims;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTpZYH2x9-k - president

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJiNtpIpD6k&feature=related - vice president

and i would also like to recommend the documentary "why we fight"

;what do i win?

im not a hater, im simply a interpreter ;)

Aything to make this thread go away gets my vote.

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="Tetrarch9"] Ask Testfactor to have it locked.Tetrarch9