Booing the Anthem

This is not an indictment of Canada for not agreeing with the U.S. lead war against Iraq. As a U.S. citizen who believes in the freedom of speech, I believe citizens and fans have the right to express their opinion. I also believe that the heavy French population in Montreal and Quebec has vastly different opinions from those in Ottawa, Toronto, and Vancouver as shown by the attempts to become a separate country. However there is a time and place for everything and a hockey game is not the forum to express those opinions.

What happened at the Montreal-Islanders game Thursday night was a disgrace. Americans are putting their lives on the line trying to oust a dictator who has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people as well as neighboring countries (Iran, Kuwait). The U.S. has tried through the U.N. for over a decade to follow “diplomacy” as the French put it to get Hussein to comply. He has not mainly because countries like France and Russia have economic interests in Iraq and know France will stand up for him to protect those interests. The BS being thrown around about “blood for oil” is ridiculous. We import 50% of our oil from that region and the majority of it is from Saudi Arabia. If France were to lose hundreds of millions in trading, it would hurt their struggling economy.

The Islanders are mainly made up of non-Americans. Most notably, players like Peca, Scatchard, Wiemer, and Asham are Canadian, yet they felt embarrassed after the French Canadians booed the U.S. anthem. The Isles used that as motivation to flat out bury the Canadiens and their playoff hopes.

Canada might be free, but relies heavily on the U.S. military might of the South. The U.S. freed occupied France in WW II and helped French soldiers in Vietnam. The U.S. recognizes the Canadian help provided in other conflicts and respects Canada.

That’s not to say the U.S. doesn’t do stupid things. Islander fans booed the Canadian anthem last year, but that had more to do with the thuggery of the Maple Leafs against Peca and Jonsson than a disrespecting of Canada. Toronto fans have repaid the favor since.

However freedom is something that you have fight for sometimes. Unfortunately it seems that the French want freedom on the backs of others. It is not a coincidence that France stated it would back the U.S. if chemical weapons were used in this war. They would enjoy the spoils of freedom while not putting their own soldiers in the line of fire. France would not want to lose face, so it would go from the peace bandwagon to the winning bandwagon.

Last night was just a hockey game. It was a benefit of freedom. However to boo a U.S. based team, it’s fans and citizens is a sign of disrespect. I just hope Canada doesn’t face the terrorism we have. If you do, I hope the U.S. lets France intercede.


390 Responses to Booing the Anthem

  1. NYIchooch75 says:

    Well said.

  2. adamgr says:

    “France…was selling em’ shit as late as this January! “

    You’ve watched way too much FOX. This is just another lie intended to cover up the real fact. By the way who sold Sadam biological weapons back in 1984? – America!

    “And the world isn’t against this war”

    Dude, America is NOT the world. People all over the world are against this war. Even the majority of the British and Australian people are against this war!

  3. NYIchooch75 says:

    YEAH! FUCK THESE MOTHERFUCKERS! USA! USA! USA!

  4. BosBrn says:

    I notice that you compliment a lot of people. Is this because you can’t make a half decent comment yourself? I thought so!

  5. adamgr says:

    “Hey this Ben Ladin might be a pretty bad guy too. Personally I’m bettin Bin Ladin is worse.”

    hey, you’ve already called Saddam Sadam. So who cares?

  6. NYIchooch75 says:

    It amazes me how much people really need to have some cause. I wonder what all these protesters are going to say if towards the end of the war, the Iraqi military starts tossing chemical weapons left and right as a last ditch effort to fight back. What the hell will anyone say then?

    These protesters are people who are so far removed from September 11th. You know how you watch the terrible aftermath of an earthquake in, say Japan, and you say to yourself, “My God, that is so terrible!”, yet change the channel and resume watching South Park, like nothing ever happened. That is what these people are doing. They have no idea of the effects of that because they are so removed from it. I wonder if they donated to the Red Cross, or gave blood after September 11th. I wonder if they will donate to the Red Cross after the war is over, to help the Iraqi people? I doubt it. That would be taking away from their double-espresso’s at fucking Starbucks.

  7. flyersruleclarkstillsucks says:

    Na, he was a good guy, was a picker thou, so we didn’t shake he’s hand or want him to touch us, and we thought he was guy, so his nick name was ben over, but as high school went on the name grew, so by 12th grade, his nick name was ben over and take it in the ass ladin, and that name stayed with him untill we found out, he just had a bad lisp, so we felt bad, and now we just call him ben over! just don’t shake his hand!

  8. BosBrn says:

    Could that be because the Canadian government is too chicken-shit to do or say anything? Could that be because they have no military that could stop or help in a war….. they couldn’t do anything against a single terrorist. So what they do is just sit there with their thumbs up their asses and don’t say a word because they now they would get their asses kicked and would be screaming for help if they criticized any other nation.

    I would like to add, that I would hit anyone who booed ANY National Anthem. Whether it was the Canadian, U.S. or even the Iraqi anthem. That is just common respect.

  9. BosBrn says:

    So what you are saying is, there is no chance he served in the Gulf War? No chance he was in Granada? Be real, pal! Unless you know him personally, which obviously, you don’t…. Just shut up!

  10. NYRrule says:

    What a retard you are man. North Korea is a way more delicate situation because they have an A-bomb already. If we were to go in and attack them, they would use it. Plus, South Korea is an ally and we don’t want to put them in danger. We’re try to PREVENT Saddam from one day getting an A-bomb. Think man!

  11. adamgr says:

    “If I were american I’d be ASHAMED for what Bush i doing “

    belive me there’re americans that feel ashamed. Unfortunately we’re not a really smart nation. If Bush attacked Canada we would think that’s fine…

    After all we haven’t forget 9/11!

  12. Tony says:

    I thought they were doing that so the smoke will make it harder for the Americans to aim their bombs but I could be wrong.

  13. titans says:

    He probably killed himself long ago.

  14. KnownStrangers says:

    Just to clarify things :

    my comment on the 9/11 events are not facts, they are interpretations, yes exactly, and i am not misinformed…

    it just show one thing, you live that from the inside, so you have the tendency to see it as an attack against Freedom, etc, but other people, the non americans, they dont see it (perception) as an attack against Freedom, etc.

    OH ! and by the way, when i use the word people, i mean citizens, not politicians.

    Yes again you’re right, you (assuming you’re american) are the super power, but hey, do you really believe that if the U.S. was’nt this super power there would’nt be another Country to replace them. As if it would be better or worst, who knows ?

    De Gaulle said “Vive le Québec libre (free)” and it clearly imply the separation from the rest of the Canada and all, and at that time, when he said so, the separatist movement was as its debut, and it was the first time a “Stranger” expressed his opinion on the subject in such a matter.

    About the economic aspects, again you’re right, U.S have economicals interests, so the Frenchs, Russians, Germans and the others : but hey, why is it worst that the Frenchs based their decision on economics… really, i dont see why…

    __________________

    In all your comments you talk about facts instead of perceptions, all theses facts are true (well, most of them) the only problem is that you’re assuming that decisions are based on facts… “meep meep” wrong awnser…

    an example of that : people who died from “non american” intervention, true, there is a lot… but how about those who died from an american bullet ?

    if we start counting down, we might realise at the end that it’s probably even… and we may even realise that life stayed the same in the country you sended troop to… most of them are still under Dictatorship, or will (again) be as soon as american troops leave…

    ____________________

    Finally, even though you expressed a different point of view than mine, you haven’t use word like [fill blank here] in your post. Big Thanks for that =)

  15. Just-Checking-In says:

    “-mistaking Montreal hockey fans’ expressing

    disapproval of American policies for an insult.”

    Oh if that is the case then.

    Fuck Canada.

    I am afterall not insulting any Canadians, I am simply expressing my disapproval for Canadian policies.

  16. KnownStrangers says:

    Komisarek is American AND playing for the habs… wise move from him not to talk

    1- he say it was stupid to boo : guess what, he’s talking about fans he will play in front of for years to come. he see Brisebois being boo’d all the time. don’t think he want to live that… better be safe than sorry =)

    2- he’s american, what his friends/family members/etc will feel if they hear it say that he approved the booing…

  17. Obcd says:

    well i’m not from your country, in my country we didn’t have to fight for our freedom they gave it to us.

  18. RatSale says:

    a bit of both

  19. Obcd says:

    and what are you trying to do by saying that? make me cry?

  20. Obcd says:

    Listen you don’t understand this guy is saying that everybody against war is stupid! Freedom of speech is a right but this guy doesn’t think it should be. And that’s why I don’t think he is old enough to be there. You can be for or against, I don’t care! But at least let other people say their opinion without saying they are idiots. If I insult anybody, it is only an answer to another insult.

  21. RatSale says:

    common respect or uncommon disrespect of freedom of speech ………….

  22. RatSale says:

    ” The 9/11 attacks were part of a religious condemnation of a western lifestyle”

    Nuance, condamnation of western interventionism

    “We are the worlds Super Power and there is no denying that fact. “

    Ego, patriotism and testosterone just like thousand’s oy years ago, if you could see beyond your borders for a second you might realize that today’s reality doesn’t give a shit about all that.

    Anyways it all depends how you define power……

    It’s Vive le Québec libre but it really has nothing to do with this situation.

    “Finally, sure there is an economic aspect to war. However, the real joke in the situation would be people believing that French and Russian opposition to the war is not also driven by economics? “

    I totaly agree, but based on that, war is definitely the worst and weakest way to protect economic interests.

  23. DaAvs says:

    I’m still trying to see where your point is…WHO in this world believes Saddam should remain in the power? Just because you feel things might work out doesn’t mean action shouldn’t be taken, you want to wait and see what happens, I gurantee your crystal ball won’t like what it sees. Address the real issue, should Saddam be in power? Once you address that, I’ll give your just due…but until it’s just saying “Not our part of the world and not our problem”. Or “It’s really just for oil” He is a menance, a killer, and a threat. Bush is acting, because he’d rather not see chemical weapons used on us later. I hate war…but their is cause for it.

  24. MantaRay says:

    In May 1952, the playwright Lillian Hellman wrote in a letter to the House Un-American Activities Committee: “I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year’s fashions.”

    In 2003, this year’s media fashions are increasingly adorning the conformist models of pseudo-patriotism. For many Americans, the gap between what they believe and what’s on their TV sets is the distance between their truer selves and their fearful passivity.

    In the domestic media siege being maintained by top-notch spinners and shrewd political advisers at the White House, conscience is in the cross hairs. They aim to intimidate, stampede and suppress the many millions of Americans who recognize the deranged and murderous character of the war makers in Washington.

    Half a century ago, Albert Einstein urged: “Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it.” Today, one way or another, the mass media are going along with the Bush administration’s demands that we not challenge the U.S. military actions now taking uncounted lives in Iraq.

    Conscience is not on the military’s radar screen, and it’s not on our TV screen. But media messages do not define the limits and possibilities of conscience. We do

  25. Just-Checking-In says:

    Then let me clarify:

    First, instead let me say thank you for intelligent discussion. Looking back, I was perhaps a bit harsh in the way I wrote some things and I will try to refrain from that in the future.

    Now as I was saying before, or rather I really did not say that the September 11 attacks were an attack on freedom. Rather they were a religious attack on the United States. Were the attacks in Jakarta (? Spelling and place) an attack on that country or an attack on western civilizations? Those people were attacked because this is a religious war with the fanatics.

    If those in Europe or other places do not see them as such and instead people simply upset with the policies of the United States then they are mistaken. The targets chosen were a combination of civilian and military. IN this case, I believe that you are very wrong.

    With regards to the use of the word people, I really have no comment, I am sure that I understood it that way, however I can not comment specifically, since I really am not sure what you mean.

    Yes, I am an American; however, I can claim a Canada heritage from my mother who is a Canadian and from the fact that I am also married to a Canadian. So yes, you are correct that if the United States were not the super power that it is, that someone else would fill the vacuum. However, show us another super world power that has used its power more beneficially than the United States.

    As for the economic aspects, the reason that I said that is many times; I hear the anti-war protesters talking about blood for oil and use the excuse that this war is simply economically driven. Like that means something wrong or horrible. I was simply saying that France and Russian’s opposition are not just based on humanitarian reasons; they have an economic ramification as well. If you are going to call out the United States, call everyone out.

    As for my quote of De Gaulle, merci pour me corriger.

    As for your second thread, I would tend to argue otherwise. Yes, we have killed many innocent people with bombs, bullets and grenades. However, the end justification for our actions was just. No one said that war was a great thing. In the last forty years, or rather since World War II, the nature of conflicts has changed. Very rarely do you see the large troop movements on a battlefield. Rather you see the urban guerilla fighting. The kind where people use the environment, and by environment I mean the local population, as a cover for their actions.

    The result may have been that innocent people were caught in the action, however it was usually the result of the other people putting them in harms way.

    I look forward to more of your responses.

  26. DaAvs says:

    Term Anarchist mean anything to you? It’s ideal NOT to have situations of war or intervention. But this is far from an ideal world.

    Saddam is a sick puppy, do you want to give him more time to build?

    I admint that things aren’t going to work out ideally, and resentment will come. But be realistic, Saddam builds these weapons and forges alliances. What happens then? A stranglehold works if you keep the preassure on, but the UN was proving that it was loosening it’s grip. I’m not naive to how this will impact Iraq, but no action will impact the world.

    Lesser of the two evils has to come about. The aftermath the US always gives some support.

    I’ve personally wanted action for quite awhile, and am glad to see us moving. Because Saddam is obviously against America, and if this came at a later time when has more weapons and even allies. I’d fear the outcome.

  27. DaAvs says:

    Sorry, I see no comparison. Germany was building up for an assault. If anything the US is building down. As well no way could a religion or race be allowed within this infrastructure and media coverage to be able to do the harm to a race. If you want to say we’re committing genocide, you are deluded and twisted.

  28. Just-Checking-In says:

    Intervention is intrepreted in many different ways.

    “Ego, patriotism and testosterone just like thousand’s oy years ago, if you could see beyond your borders for a second you might realize that today’s reality doesn’t give a shit about all that.”

    Just like jealously, envy and inferiority should not be a basis for condemnation of American actions. I have yet to see good arguments against the United States actions based on what someone else would have/should have done.

    I would also argue that my use of those words did indeed have a lot to do with the situation.

    Someone was mentioning the ignorance of some people in the United States comparing France to Quebec. I was simply pointing out the fact that they were wrong in to make that analogy, however I also wanted to point out that many Americans see thoughts of Quebec independence as being fueled over the years by France.

    “…war is definitely the worst and weakest way to protect economic interests.”

    I will accept that if you will accept that threating to veto UN security council resolutions are also one of the weakest and worst ways to protect economic interests.

  29. DaAvs says:

    No it’s bigotry. But so is putting something-someone down for your own personal opinion. That’s what the fans did by booing, commit bigotry. And thus caused a chain reaction. Generalization will always be made as long as a single person can define a view. And unfortunatly some french-canadians made a bad impression to some people. Resentment is always gonna be there.

  30. Gali says:

    It may shock you to hear it, but your pro-war speeches sound a bit nazi. You may have been brainwashed.

  31. DaAvs says:

    Was it media speculation that made us think Saddam was a bad person? Or was it morales that did that? Personally I believe action defines a person and their character. I don’t denounce secondary objectives and what ‘could’ be the US agenda. I just believe the unjust should not sit unpunished for crimes just because of their postion and power. Bush if he ordered the murder of many peoples without juse cause, would be responsible for his actions (the war against terrorism is just, so don’t be naive in saying that action in afghanstain is murder as you fight for a cause. And the US’s cause is to prevent massacre of the innocents in an attempt to make a point). My conscience is defined by history. Ever heard of a imperialistic man, who’s ability to build in the shadows led to war? Well this can be many men, but were any of them not worth fighting. The US errored in becoming imperialistic, but I don’t believe at this moment that is our ‘hidden agenda’. Oil maybe a reason, but justice and fear fuel this fight. So don’t be condcending to those who believe a wrong from 10+ years ago needs to be undone. Long has he played games and built weapons to harm. How long until action should be taken?

  32. Gali says:

    Sounds familiar.

    Anyways, the winner’s always the one with the biggest phallic symbol : )

  33. DaAvs says:

    Maybe I’m not deluded into thinking that somehow a DIPLOMATIC resolution can come. I understand the termanology war-mongoring, but a rational solution can’t be reached. Has 12 years of ‘talking’ resolved anything thus far? No he builds weapons against the regulations and harms others still. But let him because he leads a country, and is not ‘currently’ a threat.

  34. adamgr says:

    A few reasons why you should be against this war:

    1) The claimed reason for the war continually changes (remove WMD, liberate Iraqi people, over throw Saddam etc. etc. etc.)

    2) The evidence against Iraq has been proven to be fabricated

    3) You can’t liberate the Iraqi people by killing them (death does not bring human rights).

    4) George W’s entry to the presidency was achieved through lies and deceit. He is now waging war using the same tactics.

    5) War is not a sporting event. US forces are not going to “kick Iraqi ass”, they are going to kill, burn, maim and mutilate Iraqi citizens.

  35. adamgr says:

    George W. Bush is grasping at straws, looking for reasons that DO NOT EXIST to justify war. This military campaign is about vengeance, violence and death, and has nothing to do with protecting U.S. citizens or liberating the Iraqi people. It will bring nothing but more ill will towards the United States.

  36. adamgr says:

    George W. Bush is grasping at straws, looking for reasons that DO NOT EXIST to justify war. This military campaign is about vengeance, violence and death, and has nothing to do with protecting U.S. citizens or liberating the Iraqi people. It will bring nothing but more ill will towards the United States.

  37. Just-Checking-In says:

    I am really at a loss for quoting Lillian Hellman. Although Hellman was never arrested for any crimes, she was a communist.

    She openly supported the Loyalists fight in Spain and often gave support for the Abraham Lincoln Brigade.

    Now I am not defending the fascists, far from it. However, her actions showed that she was not above seeing armed conflict.

    Also being a communist is not meant to be a label to attack someone. However, the years of oppression and human rights abuses are not something that I would look to as a model society.

    As for the spin-doctors and such. Yes, it must indeed be working since most polls show that between 70 to 76 percent of the population supports that action in Iraq. While around 20, percent disapprove.

    Maybe if the opposition had more to say than “no blood for oil” or something else as insightful as that. Maybe offering suggestions to the situation other than giving the 12 years of economic sanctions more time.

    As for Einstein, Does this mean that he was all for the use of Atomic weapons that he helped create?

    As for the lives of those in Iraq.

    There was a piece by Walter Russell Mead of the policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations who wrote in the Washington Post recently.

    The 1991 Gulf War killed between 21,000 and 35,000 Iraqis. Between 1,000 and 5,000 were civilians. However, the United Nations estimates that the former U.N. policy of trying to contain Saddam with economic sanctions kills 5,000 Iraqi children under 5 years old — every month. Sixty thousand a year.

    Mead states that, “any reasonable estimate containment kills about as many people every year as the Gulf War — and almost all the victims of containment are civilians, and two-thirds are children under five.”

    Showing support and taking part in patriotic actions that support the President is no less important, than those of the anti-war demonstrators. Why is it that those that support the President and his actions are being manipulated and those that oppose the war have the correct view? Why is it that if someone disagrees with the anti-war view and publicly shows that support they are aiming to intimidate, stampede and suppress, while those that are protesting are simply exercising their rights?

  38. adamgr says:

    If the Iraq economy depended on soy beans, how active would our government pursue removing Saddam Hussein?, a dictator our CIA helped put into power and our government provided weapons. If the world`s most voracious oil-glutten occupies Iraq, we will become the most powerful presence among the oil-richest nations. Neither the “free” press, the US Government, or the United Nations are presenting this as an active motive for war. But the primary motive is GREED secured by CONTROL. For this we are asked to sacrifice the Iraq people and our soldiers while bankrupting our country economically and morally.

  39. Gali says:

    Bravo!

    You’re catching up. If only you could lose the “fuck” thing, you might actually sound intelligent.

  40. Just-Checking-In says:

    “If the Iraq economy depended on soy beans, how active would our government pursue removing Saddam Hussein?”

    Would have-could have-should have. Since that is not the case your mental masterbation will never really get anyone anywhere.

    “a dictator our CIA helped put into power and our government provided weapons”

    Blah-blah-blah. Let’s review the history books here.

    Again you have to turn back the clock and look at what was happening. The Iranians had taken our embassy staff hostage and from the Shiite revoultionaries were exporting terrorism abroad. These included attacks on the US Marines in Beruit as well as kidnapping Americans world wide.

    At the time, the Iranians were fighting the Iraqis. Giving support to the Iraqis was an attempt to curb that fundamental expansion. Again this happened in the late 70’s and early 80’s.

    Also you are over-estimiating that support. Do you see the Iraqis using American made tanks on television? Flying American made jets? Shooting off American made missiles? Using American made rifles? NO but you do see them using Soviet and French made items. Also considering the French and Soviets also sold the Iraqis the ability to begin creating Nuclear weapons. We are lucky that the Gulf war happened when it did.

    Also as has been pointed out, the effects of UN Sanctions kill as many people every year that the first Gulf War did.

  41. adamgr says:

    “They just want to be the anti-America. You;r enot European, you don;’t know what goes on over there. I DO, i watch the European news every day. “

    Well you should know better then.

    “France is only interested in oil, they don’t want anything of theirs damaged. “

    If they were only interested in oil they would fight against Iraq because if they would fight against Iraq theq would get oil fields as well.

    “Schroeder has a history of anti americanism, so he is simply just against anything that the US does, because he is a socialist clown.”

    C’mon he’s just against this war. He has supported the USA in many ways. He helped us for instance in Afhganistan.

    “NKorea is still behind and China could wpe them out easily, they don’t like each other.”

    Yeah maybe according to Fox New but it in reality they come pretty good along with each other. China would never fight against Nkorea? Would we fight against Canada?

    You better stop watching FOXNews!

  42. dickfitzwell says:

    what about iraq claiming they had no more scud missles?what did iraq fire at kuwait the other day, a scud missle that they did noy have

  43. titans says:

    Do you people wanna see another 9/11?? Do you? Do you know what that’d do to our country? Can you imagine? If we get hit like that again, forget it! This country, and alot of the world for that matter will go right down the shitter! Thats why were in Iraq, so we can prevent this maniac Hussein from supplying terrorists with the tools to wipe us out! God people get your heads out of your asses! I commend Bush for his agressivness in dealing with those that could possibly threaten us!

  44. adamgr says:

    “I heard on CNN last week that France is one of Iraq’s biggest buyers of their oil.”

    We’re one of the Saudi Arabia’s biggest buyers of their oil. THEY SUPPORT TERRORISM!!!

    Have you already forgotten 9/11? Most of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia! So what is worse???

  45. adamgr says:

    “Do you people wanna see another 9/11?”

    Nope. But how about you? You know that a second 9/11 is more likely because of this war, don’t you?

    C’mon there’re no good reasons for this war.

    There’s NO evidence Iraq about to attack US.

    ‘Weapons of mass destruction’ argument phony. and completely hypocritical: several countries – have WMD. Only US has used nuclearweapons, against defenseless Japanese civilians.

    Iraq has second largest oil reserves in world. Since global economy runs on oil, whoever controls oil, controls world. Bush now sees opportunity to achieve this.

  46. KnownStrangers says:

    Quote :

    Were the attacks in Jakarta (? Spelling and place) an attack on that country or an attack on western civilizations? Those people were attacked because this is a religious war with the fanatics.

    i thought too, until i had the chance to talk about it with a few “arabics” at work.

    We should all know by now that Religion is important in that part of the world, but (yeah, there’s always a but) what we have to know is that most of the conflicts in this region are not based on it… sure, in one country you have Muslims, and the other one you have Jewishs (for example) but in most cases the conflict exists for centuries, if not milleniums, sure, the guy on the east side of the country (a Muslim for example) want to bash the guy on the west side of the same country (a Christian for example) but in most cases it would be because he wants to get the east side back.

    Well, imagine this scenario, you’re the Leader of the east side, don’t you agree that Religion yould be the perfect reason (exactly, an excuse) for your troops to “dive in” without questionning you ? =)

    _____

    Quote :

    show us another super world power that has used its power more beneficially than the United States.

    benefits ? we can talk about those benefits for hours, if we take Africa for example, sure a few Dictators were “thrown out”, but hey, there’s no real democracy yet in most of theses countries, no sign that they’re doing better economicly, and they are still ‘controlled” by war lords… i mean, they’re still starving, arent they…

    _______

    Quote :

    I hear the anti-war protesters talking about blood for oil and use the excuse that this war is simply economically driven.

    True, most anti-war believe so, even though its not totally true, there is truth in it… and, don’t forget, no one here (including the anti-war) is saying that Saddam is a good guy.

    Every one is talking about the war for oil thing for a simple reason, Bush decided to act without the U.N. consent, hey ! he even talked and acted like he just don’t give a damn about the U.N… that’s where he gave weight to that opinion. (Democracy hu?)

    ______

    well, that’s it… for now =)

  47. adamgr says:

    “Adam you are dumb fucking fag.”

    Pretty bad argument.

    “Most of the countries that made up the old Soviet Union are for this war.”

    It’s pretty pathetic to make up this stuff. The eastern european people don’t support this war!!!

    Sure Poland’s administration, for instance, supports our war but not Poland’s people. The majority of them is againt the war!

  48. adamgr says:

    “Even if i was a full blown liberal and democrat, i’d be for this war since facts are facts and Saddam has to be removed, period. “

    Give me a break! What this war claims to accomplish could have been acheived better through peaceful means. This war and the rise of an ugly breed of pseudo-patriotism that attends it create an atmosphere of fear and suspicion – heartbreaking in a country whose people have prided themselves on a reputation for generosity and love of freedom.

  49. adamgr says:

    “I notice that you compliment a lot of people. Is this because you can’t make a half decent comment yourself? I thought so!”

    *lol* you can count my comments on this topic if you want to but it could take a while! Have fun!

  50. JohnFlan22 says:

    To all you pinco-fags out there. 9/11 happend because we were percieved as a weak nation with it’s guard down. Since then we have been on a mission to kick-all-ass associated with Terrorism and guess what, we havent had an attack on the US soil since. You idiots think that in that time these scum bags stopped hating us or something? NO they still hate us but now they know we’re gonna hunt their asses down BEFORE they try anything and there on the f*cking run. So NO the likelyhood of more terrorism is not any higher then it has been since 9/11 by us going into iraq And YES Saddam funds terrorism, it’s a fact. He gives 10’s of thoasands of dollars to the families of suicide bombers that bomb israelis. He’s a messed up bastard and deserves a far worse death then he might have gotten from our bombs. Fuck the French, why would anyone EVER listen to these bastards anyway? The only time they want the US to got to war is when Nazi’s are drinking coffee in Paris. They have no morales, they beleive in moral reletavism as the basis of their FRENCH thinking which basically states that “Who are we to say what is right and wrong, their is no right and wrong only greyyyy.” Well guess what gassing kurds is wrong, rape rooms are immoral, ruling by fear and terror is disgraceful, genocide against a singular ethnic group is evil. There is such a thing as TRUTH. The french are just too caught up in there FRENCH THINKING to see it. Go USA, may GOD BLESS AMERICA! And I pray for the souls of the morally decrepit.

Leave a Reply