LOL: BUSH says: They don't appreciate women

[directfiesta]

This guy is really dumb...

"He is saying, 'leave'. As I have told the American people, people like Zawahiri have an ideology that is dark, dim, backwards," said the president. "They don't appreciate women, if you don't agree with their narrow view of a religion, you will be whipped in the public square. That's their view. And they have tactics to help spread that view."
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-08-04-voa54.cfm

And if you don't " agree to the narrow view of the US ????

video of idiotic childish speech



portrait of intelligence

[Hollywood Horwitz]

damn,this guy never ceases to amaze me,the rest of the world is laughing at the US and Bush keeps the jokes coming..

[tony286]

its amazing the sheep defend this man

[WarChild]

Of the big colonial powers (England, France, Spain) how come the French ended up getting creamed so badly in the end?

Is it inferior genes or just general cowardice? I've always wondered this.

[Antonio]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Of the big colonial powers (England, France, Spain) how come the French ended up getting creamed so badly in the end?

Is it inferior genes or just general cowardice? I've always wondered this.

what are you talking about?

[xxxdesign-net]

Originally Posted by Antonio

what are you talking about?

probably a pot head..

[tristan_D]

that freak is the world's biggest joke, and I think he knows and is enjoying it.

[Mr Dickovitch]

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Mr Dickovitch

Idiot ... Iraq was the most open society to women ...
Now it became like that, thanks to you.

PS: when did women obtain the right to vote in the USA ????

[Mr Dickovitch]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

Idiot ... Iraq was the most open society to women ...
Now it became like that, thanks to you.

PS: when did women obtain the right to vote in the USA ????

In Iraq under Saddam, if you are a woman, you could face:

Beheading. Under the pretext of fighting prostitution, units of "Fedayeen Saddam," the paramilitary organization led by Uday Hussein, Saddam's eldest son, have beheaded in public more than 200 women throughout the country, dumping their severed heads at their families' doorsteps. Many families have been required to display the victim's head on their outside fences for several days. These barbaric acts were carried out in the total absence of any proper judicial procedures and many of the victims were not engaged in prostitution, but were targeted for political reasons. For example, Najat Mohammad Haydar, an obstetrician in Baghdad, was beheaded after criticizing the corruption within health services. (Amnesty International Report, Iraq: Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, August 2001; Iraqi Women's League in Damascus, Syria)

Rape. The Iraqi Government uses rape and sexual assault of women to achieve the following goals: to extract information and forced confessions from detained family members; to intimidate Iraqi oppositionists by sending videotapes showing the rape of female family members; and to blackmail Iraqi men into future cooperation with the regime. Some Iraqi authorities even carry personnel cards identifying their official "activity" as the "violation of women's honor." (U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2001, March 2002; Iraq Research and Documentation Project, Harvard University)


Torture. The Iraqi Government routinely tortures and kills female dissidents and the female relatives of Iraqi oppositionists and defectors. Victims include Safiyah Hassan, the mother of two Iraqi defectors, who was killed after publicly criticizing the Iraqi Government for killing her sons after their return to Iraq. Women in Saddam's jails are subjected to the following forms of torture: brutal beatings, systematic rape, electrical shocks, and branding. (U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2001, March 2002; U.S. Department of State, Iraq: A Population Silenced, December 2002)



Murder. In 1990, Saddam Hussein introduced Article 111 into the Iraqi Penal Code in a calculated effort to strengthen tribal support for his regime. This law exempts men who kill their female relatives in defense of their family's honor from prosecution and punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women reported that more than 4,000 women have been victims of so-called "honor killings" since Article 111 went into effect. (UN Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, January 2002)

[The Sultan Of Smut]

Originally Posted by Mr Dickovitch

In Iraq under Saddam, if you are a woman, you could face:

You totally took the piss out of a good Bush bashing

[Mr Dickovitch]

Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut

You totally took the piss out of a good Bush bashing

:food-smil

[Triple 6]

say hi to august 6th

[reed_4]

Bush is an amazing idiot, the world is laughing at him.

[sniperwolf]

Originally Posted by Mr Dickovitch

In Iraq under Saddam, if you are a woman, you could face:

Beheading. Under the pretext of fighting prostitution, units of "Fedayeen Saddam," the paramilitary organization led by Uday Hussein, Saddam's eldest son, have beheaded in public more than 200 women throughout the country, dumping their severed heads at their families' doorsteps. Many families have been required to display the victim's head on their outside fences for several days. These barbaric acts were carried out in the total absence of any proper judicial procedures and many of the victims were not engaged in prostitution, but were targeted for political reasons. For example, Najat Mohammad Haydar, an obstetrician in Baghdad, was beheaded after criticizing the corruption within health services. (Amnesty International Report, Iraq: Systematic Torture of Political Prisoners, August 2001; Iraqi Women's League in Damascus, Syria)

Rape. The Iraqi Government uses rape and sexual assault of women to achieve the following goals: to extract information and forced confessions from detained family members; to intimidate Iraqi oppositionists by sending videotapes showing the rape of female family members; and to blackmail Iraqi men into future cooperation with the regime. Some Iraqi authorities even carry personnel cards identifying their official "activity" as the "violation of women's honor." (U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2001, March 2002; Iraq Research and Documentation Project, Harvard University)


Torture. The Iraqi Government routinely tortures and kills female dissidents and the female relatives of Iraqi oppositionists and defectors. Victims include Safiyah Hassan, the mother of two Iraqi defectors, who was killed after publicly criticizing the Iraqi Government for killing her sons after their return to Iraq. Women in Saddam's jails are subjected to the following forms of torture: brutal beatings, systematic rape, electrical shocks, and branding. (U.S. Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices-2001, March 2002; U.S. Department of State, Iraq: A Population Silenced, December 2002)



Murder. In 1990, Saddam Hussein introduced Article 111 into the Iraqi Penal Code in a calculated effort to strengthen tribal support for his regime. This law exempts men who kill their female relatives in defense of their family's honor from prosecution and punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women reported that more than 4,000 women have been victims of so-called "honor killings" since Article 111 went into effect. (UN Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, January 2002)

sadly that's pretty damn true...

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by sniperwolf

sadly that's pretty damn true...

August 2nd:

Iraqi women turn to US envoy over charter rights
02 Aug 2005 15:18:52 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Andrew Hammond

BAGHDAD, Aug 2 (Reuters) - Iraqi women leaders met the U.S. ambassador on Tuesday in an effort to pressure politicians framing Iraq's new constitution not to restrict women's rights.

The position of women in Iraqi politics and society is one of the most contentious issues facing the panel drafting the constitution, which must be completed by an Aug. 15 deadline.

Many Iraqi women's groups fear Islamic law, which is likely to be enshrined as a main source of legislation, will be used to limit their rights. The United States shares their concern.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/KHA241371.htm

probably a lie ... didn't hear that on FUCKS NEWS

Despite the autocracy and rights abuse Iraqis suffered under two decades of rule by Saddam, his Baath party's secular Arab nationalist ideology generally promoted equal rights.

[abetech]

Originally Posted by Mr Dickovitch

In Iraq under Saddam, if you are a woman, you could face:

Males faced the same. Saddam was a mother fucker, but he was an equal opportunity mother fucker.

Women were abused far more systematically under the Taliban.

[tungsten]

another instance of bush being an idiot

[12clicks]

the truly amazing thing is watching internet trolls posting from their mom's house about what a failure Bush is.

[BellaSeaira]

Originally Posted by tony404

its amazing the sheep defend this man

Maybe it's because he is small so it doesn't hurt as bad

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Of the big colonial powers (England, France, Spain) how come the French ended up getting creamed so badly in the end?

Is it inferior genes or just general cowardice? I've always wondered this.

Errr... try geography.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

Errr... try geography.

So the Treaty of Paris, for instance, was signed because of geography?

Because I'm positive you don't know what the Treaty of Paris is, I'll tell you.

The Treaty of Paris marks the end of the French-Indian war in 1763. The treaty gave Britain almost all French land in Canada and, to the south, all of France's holdings east of the Mississippi River except New Orleans. Britain also received the territory of Florida from Spain.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

So the Treaty of Paris, for instance, was signed because of geography?

Because I'm positive you don't know what the Treaty of Paris is, I'll tell you.

The Treaty of Paris marks the end of the French-Indian war in 1763. The treaty gave Britain almost all French land in Canada and, to the south, all of France's holdings east of the Mississippi River except New Orleans. Britain also received the territory of Florida from Spain.

1763?

Are you on crack?

Hell, why not go back to 3000 BC and make alist of who got creamed by whom. Be a long fucking list.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

1763?

Are you on crack?

Hell, why not go back to 3000 BC and make alist of who got creamed by whom. Be a long fucking list.

Aside from the fact that it is way off topic ...

Warchild, listen to the idiot in the clip ... then come tell me how smart he sounds ... Looks like he is talking to kindergarden kids... the only thing is that lives are at stake ...

[The Sultan Of Smut]

Originally Posted by 12clicks

the truly amazing thing is watching internet trolls posting from their mom's house about what a failure Bush is.

Bush didn't fail, he and his administration acheived everything they set out to do. The added benefit I've found is that I get a lot of entertainment watching the leader of another country spin the biggest load of bullshit I've ever seen! That's actually saying something since my government is pretty crooked as well but at least the media up here does it's job every so often and represents the public's interest.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

1763?

Are you on crack?

Hell, why not go back to 3000 BC and make alist of who got creamed by whom. Be a long fucking list.

I would have thought the world "Colonial" in my original post would have given you a time frame of reference. It's okay if you can't follow along, I can go slower.

The great thing about picking on the French is you can pick almost anytime through history and the French got creamed in it.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut

well but at least the media up here does it's job every so often and represents the public's interest.

It would have to be the Media because all of our concerned and educated liberal rabble up here in Canada is too busy worrying over what's going on s to the South of them.

Rich and Directfiesta are great examples. You ever hear either of these two bring up a problem in Canada? If they're such great political activists, where's the outrage over their own political system's faults? You'd expect that at least once in a blue moon one of these two would be outraged by the actions of some nation other than America.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

I would have thought the world "Colonial" in my original post would have given you a time frame of reference. It's okay if you can't follow along, I can go slower.

The great thing about picking on the French is you can pick almost anytime through history and the French got creamed in it.

...and you say the French got creamed worse than England or Spain? How about you learn some history.

But if you're talking 20th century, it's geography. If Canda was parked next to Germany, it would have been creamed too.... as would have any country.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Rich and Directfiesta are great examples. You ever hear either of these two bring up a problem in Canada?

Talking with most Americans about affairs outside their own nation is like having a conversation with a retard about quantum physics.

What's the point?

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

...and you say the French got creamed worse than England or Spain? How about you learn some history.

But if you're talking 20th century, it's geography. If Canda was parked next to Germany, it would have been creamed too.... as would have any country.

Bold statement. You make it sound as if a superior, better equiped German army rolled over the little old French. You do realize that's now how that all went down, don't you?

[pornguy]

Then we will fucking bomb you and destroy you.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Bold statement. You make it sound as if a superior, better equiped German army rolled over the little old French. You do realize that's now how that all went down, don't you?

Amuse me... tell me how it all went down.

This should be fun.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

Amuse me... tell me how it all went down.

This should be fun.

It's not my job to educate you about the beginings of World War II. Suffice it to say the Germans were not a larger, better equipped force that steam rolled the little old French. The French were at least as strong as the Germans.

You can begin your eduction in to French millitary triumphs by reading about the Maginot Line.

[aico]

Originally Posted by tony404

its amazing the sheep defend this man

it's what their paid to do... I am sure everyone, including Republicans, will let out a sigh of relief once he's out of office.

[baddog]

It is amazing the number of people in this thread that are on ignore.

I guess it is true that birds of a feather, and all that.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by baddog

It is amazing the number of people in this thread that are on ignore.

I guess it is true that birds of a feather, and all that.

[The Sultan Of Smut]

Originally Posted by WarChild

You ever hear either of these two bring up a problem in Canada?

Nope, not once. Though I really don't spend much time on this board each day so I really can't comment on this. I also don't use the search function to look for political debate on GFY, I've got better things to do with my time but if I see a political thread on the first page I sometimes chime in.

Originally Posted by WarChild

It would have to be the Media because all of our concerned and educated liberal rabble up here in Canada

Oh oh, looks like you're becoming as politically polarized as our southern neighbours. I don't see the point of labeling everyone as either 'liberal' or 'conservative'. The rabble (of which we're both members - yes, both of us) should be able to voice their opinions without the threat of recrimination. I figure that's a sign of a free and open country.

[smack]

you know what bush doesn't appreciate? irony.

[The Sultan Of Smut]

Originally Posted by baddog

It is amazing the number of people in this thread that are on ignore.

I guess it is true that birds of a feather, and all that.

I hope no one has me on ignore...

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by smack

you know what bush doesn't appreciate? irony.

Directfiesta is probably one of my favorite little subjects to play with. This guy thinks that in his lifetime Quebec will seperate from Canada, and be better off for it. In the same breath he's calling a man who was elected President of the United States stupid. There has to be some irony in there somewhere.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by WarChild

not you

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

It's not my job to educate you about the beginings of World War II. Suffice it to say the Germans were not a larger, better equipped force that steam rolled the little old French. The French were at least as strong as the Germans.

Facts:

1. As of May 1940, 136 German divisions were in the west, as opposed to 94 French divisions in northeastern and northern France.
2. Tank forces essentially equal.
3. In aircraft the Germans enjoyed advantage in over-all numbers, with about 3,200 planes to 1,200 French. The French were particularly inferior in anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons.

So yes, the French were outnumbered but all the above is essentially meaningless anyway because you missed my point in the first place. France, like Belgium and Poland being neighbours (i.e sharing a land border) with Germany bore the initial brunt of the fresh German war machine.

So geography played a large part in their defeat. That was my point but you were so blinded by your hatred of all things French you were incapable of seeing it.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

Facts:

1. As of May 1940, 136 German divisions were in the west, as opposed to 94 French divisions in northeastern and northern France.
2. Tank forces essentially equal.
3. In aircraft the Germans enjoyed advantage in over-all numbers, with about 3,200 planes to 1,200 French. The French were particularly inferior in anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons.

So yes, the French were outnumbered but all the above is essentially meaningless anyway because you missed my point in the first place. France, like Belgium and Poland being neighbours (i.e sharing a land border) with Germany bore the initial brunt of the fresh German war machine.

So geography played a large part in their defeat. That was my point but you were so blinded by your hated of all things French you were incapable of seeing it.

I don't hate the French, I just think it's funny that they're the World's bitches.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

I don't hate the French, I just think it's funny that they're the World's bitches.

In your opinion. Whatever makes you feel better.

Hell, the USA got owned by Vietnam... and that was a third world country.

Edit: Gee, maybe I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and call them 'developing'.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

In your opinion. Whatever makes you feel better.

Hell, the USA got owned by Vietnam... and that was a third world country.

I'm not American, why would I care?

Last I checked far more Vietnamese died in that war than Americans. Was there ever a single battle in America? Sure, America had to run off from that "police action" but you seriously think the Vietnamese "owned" them? Wow.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

I'm not American, why would I care?

Just goes to show you that ownage does have a lot to do with geography.

The only reason Canada hasn't gotten owned yet is geography.

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

Just goes to show you that ownage does have a lot to do with geography.

The only reason Canada hasn't gotten owned yet is geography.

Canada's never lost a war, police action or otherwise. Never surrendered either.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Canada's never lost a war, police action or otherwise. Never surrendered either.

That's because you've never been invaded, dummy

Just don't get it, do you?

[WarChild]

Originally Posted by Joe Citizen

That's because you've never been invaded, dummy

Just don't get it, do you?

Wait a second. You have to be invaded to lose now? So America won in Vietnam after all? I can't keep track of your position on this.

[Joe Citizen]

Originally Posted by WarChild

Wait a second. You have to be invaded to lose now? So America won in Vietnam after all? I can't keep track of your position on this.

Boy are you dumb.

I'm saying the reason you haven't lost is you haven't been invaded. Hell, Australia could probably invade Canada and win.