Musharraf rules out stepping down.

[CDNBear]

The thought did not occur to me that it was you who made any such demands for a Bush invasion. But in your continued paranoia you ascribe something to me that I never intended. Take your meds and see your shrink because, once again, you are imagining things.

Again with the passive aggressive argumentum ad hominem? But I will address your delusions none the less.

First off, you've called me a 'right winger' , 'reich winger' and a 'neoKKKon', so when you make these cowardly blind generalizations...

by right wing pundits on this forum

... it isn't a leap of the imagination to assume you are referring to me, as well as the rest of the Members of this form that disagree with your extremist views.

Besides that gopher, I thought you would have grown out of this stage by now. My error. Carry on as you were.

`` Chavez ... socialist duechebag [sic]``


Republican hero Nixon was a self admitted ''Keynesian'' socialist. Reagan and the two Bush's followed his example through deficit spending and corporate welfare.

Great, can you point to the one that wasn't a duechebag gopher? I know I can't/won't.

Now do you see the grounds for my address. You just insinuated that I would have supported anyone of these assholes, I wouldn't. Not one of them was any less as crooked as a dogs hind leg. Although not one of the scumbags you highlighted has ever tried to make himself dictator for life.

At any rate gopher, my opinion of Musharaff is that he's back stabbing, two face American puppet, with all the saving graces of a sack of soggy shyte.

Now if you'll stop pigeon holing everyone that disagrees with you at some point or another as 'right wingers' et all, I'll stop making you look foolish.

 

[Zzarchov]

Am I missing something here?


He is president yes?

This was a parlimentary election.

Why would he step down because the opposition won the Parliment?


Its pretty common to have a president from one party and a congress/parliment controlled by another party.

The US is like that now and it was like that under Clinton.



What is this Dictatorship I'm missing?

 

[Praxius]

``I don't remember reading anything in regards to Chavez bashing in these forums laitly.``


There were considerable agitation by right wing pundits on this forum in December when constitutional reform had been voted upon. All of these pundits said Chavez would rig the votes and were calling for Bush to do something about it.

As you know or should know, Chavez did NOT rig the vote and he lost by a small margin.

Oh yes that, I remember. I also remember I gave him cudos for bowing to public wishes and not going apesh*t.

If these pundits were consistent and had any real principle, they would have called for action on Bush's part for Musharraf's unlawful arrests of dissenters and his attempts to rig the votes as shown in BBC News. But consistency in the application of principles calls for character and integrity. This is something that the right wing pundits do not have and that is why they are always so inconsistent in their ravings.

They'll learn.

 

[gopher]

it isn't a leap of the imagination to assume you are referring to me

HAHAHAHA!!!!!!

What f*cking paranoia and infantilism!!

The biggest name caller on this forum is so paranoid that he is imagining that my comments were directed at him when they were not.

Somebody call the psycho ward!

 

[gopher]

``They'll learn.``

A reasoned and restrained reply. And to their credit they have finally come to the realization that right wing extremism is the cause, not the solution, to the problems we are facing in this troubled world.

Case in point: Reagan's financial and tactical support of the Mujahideen which ultimately created al-Qaeda.

Simply put - if the right wingers had never caused this problem in the first place, there would be no terrorism in the world today.

Kudos to you for a smart reply.

 

[CDNBear]

it isn't a leap of the imagination to assume you are referring to me

Is this how you convince yourself of all your extremist views, take half sentences out of context? :roll:

Open wide gopher, and say 'ahhhhhhh' "it isn't a leap of the imagination to assume you are referring to me, as well as the rest of the Members of this form that disagree with your extremist views.'

What f*cking paranoia and infantilism!!

What an absolutely true statement, best fitting yourself gopher.

The biggest name caller on this forum is so paranoid that he is imagining that my comments were directed at him when they were not.

Again gopher, try to stick to the truth. I know you have no idea what that is, but for once it would be nice.

Somebody call the psycho ward!

What were you saying about 'infantilism'?:roll:

Grow up gopher.

 

[CDNBear]

``They'll learn.``

A reasoned and restrained reply. And to their credit they have finally come to the realization that right wing extremism is the cause, not the solution, to the problems we are facing in this troubled world.

Case in point: Reagan's financial and tactical support of the Mujahideen which ultimately created al-Qaeda.

What crap!

Though the contemporary Al Qaeda may have Members from and doctrine taken from the Mujahideen. It's position in contrary to the US is not about its creation or who helped create it. It is based on the fact that Bush Sr. put military personnel on, and left them there, on the Holy Land.

Simply put - if the right wingers had never caused this problem in the first place, there would be no terrorism in the world today.

Actually, if we use your logic, we could pin the bulk of the blame on Russia. Had they not invaded Afghanistan, the Mujahideen, never would have been seen as a necessity, worthy US support.

Kudos to you for a smart reply.

:lol:
It's only 'smart' to you, cuz someone rubbed your fragile ego.

 

[gopher]

Crybaby Bear's new icon:

As for the Soviet's invasion of Afghanistan, most assuredly by now you have looked up my previous links on the ARA and Republican Hoover's support and entrenchment of the Soviets into power in 1922. Without it there would never have been a cold war. But you know that already. And so does everyone else.


:lol:

 

[CDNBear]

Crybaby Bear's new icon:

This is what you bring to the argument?

Dear God child, grow up.

As for the Soviet's invasion of Afghanistan, most assuredly by now you have looked up my previous links on the ARA and Republican Hoover's support and entrenchment of the Soviets into power in 1922. Without it there would never have been a cold war. But you know that already. And so does everyone else.


:lol:

You missed the sarcasm in my post gopher, but none the less proved my point succinctly. Thanx.

 

[gopher]

Bear,

Because of your exceedingly low self esteem, and in your pathetic state of loneliness, if you are comforted by the incongruous notion that anyone would hold you in such regard that they would fancy your self-loathing ideas as worthy of any such attention as you have erroneously ascribed to me, that's perfectly OK. Better that you derive such ill gotten comfort than having you languish with thoughts of such self imposed isolation in such an acute state of despondency which, as most of us know, can often lead to succumbing to high states of despair and ultimately to self imolation.

:smile:

 

[CDNBear]

Bear,

Because of your exceedingly low self esteem, and in your pathetic state of loneliness, if you are comforted by the incongruous notion that anyone would hold you in such regard that they would fancy your self-loathing ideas as worthy of any such attention as you have erroneously ascribed to me, that's perfectly OK. Better that you derive such ill gotten comfort than having you languish with thoughts of such self imposed isolation in such an acute state of despondency which, as most of us know, can often lead to succumbing to high states of despair and ultimately to self imolation.

:smile:

That load of shyte, followed up with this commentary in my 'Rep'...

Totally inance commentary - but no surprise coming from one with such low self esteem. Pwned again! Who's your Daddy? Yup, it's Gopher!

I think you need to look up 'pwned' and 'inane'. If anyone is being pwned, it would be you, by yourself...and if you think your present course of commentary is appropriate, mature, intelligent or anything other then inane, youmay want to look that up to. Look at what you call debate. Grow up.

Sadly typical gopher...when you run out of BS to try and spread your extremism with, you succumb to such puerile ventures. Not to mention, getting a psychiatric analysis from someone that can generate a tune in a cross wind, blames everything on the US and sees Zionist conspiracies in the corner store seems highly hypocritical.

Glad to see you haven't changed gopher...now back on topic, not that you have any idea what that is...

Your tenth degree of separation trying ever so valiantly to pin all the blame and all the woes of the world on one entity, is pathetic. Like the beave, you use opinion and conjecture as your basis of argument, along with an unhealthy helping of tenuous strings to make it fit just right to support your ideology.

Great the US helped create Russia, guess what gopher...that doesn't make Russia the US's responsibility. Russia was instrumental in creating the cold war when it turned on the allies in the last days of WWII. Does that mean they bear some responsibility for what the US eventually beacame?

 

[Zzarchov]

Remember only the USA can be evil.

Im not sure why, there isn't anything particularily unique about it, but for some reason, it and it alone is the only entity capable of misdeeds and imperial behaviour.

 

[Praxius]

Remember only the USA can be evil.

Im not sure why, there isn't anything particularily unique about it, but for some reason, it and it alone is the only entity capable of misdeeds and imperial behaviour.

No no.... see Russia, China, Iran, N.Korea and all the other countries in the world are very well capable of performing very evil acts...... the US is just plain crappy at covering their deeds up and their explinations are lame.... so of course they get the worst side of the attention.

Nothing more, nothing less.... if they put some effort and some brains in that administration that can make some plausable explinations or cover ups, then most wouldn't be focused on them so much because then they'd have the benifit of the doubt. Then they could continue doing all the things they want.

But the Administration's explinations and reasons for actions are either so far fetched, or so slack in actual facts and information, it's kinda hard not to pay attention to them and point them out.

If the Bush Administration didn't treat everybody like absolute morons, then this wouldn't be occuring.

 

[CDNBear]

I'm wondering what gophers feelings are on say France and it's involvement in creating the Russian/Afghan conflict, the present Afghan/NATO conflict, and Musharraf...

Hmmm, I wonder just where he stands on France.

 

[gopher]

``I think you need to look up 'pwned' and 'inane'. If anyone is being pwned, it would be you, by yourself...and if you think your present course of commentary is appropriate, mature, intelligent or anything other then inane, youmay want to look that up to. Look at what you call debate. Grow up.``


Hey Bear,

Did you forget forum rules which forbid using PM messages on the board?

I was told previously that you can be disqualified from the forum for doing so.

Let's see if the same standard that is applied to all else is applied to you.

 

[gopher]

BTW, somebody ignored the fact that you again started with the hostilities and gave me anonymous bad rep points.

So who is the anonymous coward??

 

[gopher]

``I wonder just where he stands on France.``

France? It elected pro war right winger Sarkrazy who is a serial adulterer. His family fled Hungary rather than stand up and fight against foreign invaders. And he has no military record in so far as I know.

In another thread, I reminded the right wingers on this forum that when there were racial riots in France a few year ago, they blamed Chirac whose liberalism was said to be the cause of it all. Then, when there were more recent racial riots those right wingers failed to blame Sarkrazy.

BTW, in France he was blamed for both sets of riots --- a point I was driving at in contrast to the inconsistency of the right wingers.

While this is not relevant to the issue of Musharraf, I answered it to at least show that I am consistent in my views.

 

[CDNBear]

Hey Bear,

Did you forget forum rules which forbid using PM messages on the board?

I was told previously that you can be disqualified from the forum for doing so.

Let's see if the same standard that is applied to all else is applied to you.

Ummm, gopher, that wasn't in a PM. Up the meds.

BTW, somebody ignored the fact that you again started with the hostilities and gave me anonymous bad rep points.

Please show me where I stooped the level of immaturity you have here?

I asked you a question, pointed out your name calling and here we are.

So who is the anonymous coward??

gopher, I sign all my 'Rep' comments. If someone gave you bad 'Rep'. It may have something to do with your juvenile behavior.

While this is not relevant to the issue of Musharraf, I answered it to at least show that I am consistent in my views.

No you aren't, but that's another topic...

If one applies your logic to the process here, as you have highlighted and exampled continuously. France is at the very center of fault.

You have said...Musharaff=US's fault, Mujahideen=US's fault, Russia=US's fault. Well then, by your logic, this is all the fault of France. Seeing as they supplied the weapons and officers that enabled the US to become a Republic. They bear the same weight you put on the US for all the deeds of those they have assisted.

It was nice playing with you again gopher. You're easier to set up and knock down, then bowling pins in an alley with no gutters.

I'll happily await your next round of personal attacks and juvenile banter.

 

[gopher]

No I didn't. I said, 'Isn't this how the Nazi's started'. But never demanded Bush intervene. Get you name calling correct, or your facts.
That says volumes. But he's still a socialist duechebag.
Ravings, well I guess you'ld be the expert on those, but did you ever think that maybe some people didn't know we had to post our discourse with his actions to accommodate your insatiable need to be attended?

The reader can see for him/herself as to who is the one who started with the paranoid innuendo.:lol:

 

[dancing-loon]

I found a good quote from Musharraf in the recent TIME magzine I would like to share with you for comments:

"You have taken centuries in reaching wherever you have come. Allow us time for going for the values that you have established for yourself."
Pervez Musharraf, President of Pakistan, on accusations that he has rolled back democracy in order to maintain his power.

What do you think? Is he right?
I think he has a valid point. Why knock him?