Wetlook World Forum

Message # 16831.3.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1

Subject: Re: Re: Re: terrorists money

Date: Thu 30/06/05 14:15:29 GMT

Name: Matz

Email: slapstickclown@gmx.netz

Website:

By Anonymous - Wed 29/06/05 19:26:23 GMT

Website:

By waterjoe - Wed 29/06/05 17:23:59 GMT

Website:

Who has made big the South American gangsters (not only drug dealers, also politicals and dictators like Noriega, the Contras, Pinochet and so on)? Who has feeded the Taliban with money and weapons? It was not Switzerland or Swiss money.

By Desert Hawk - Wed 29/06/05 16:11:51 GMT

Website:

By Anonymous - Wed 29/06/05 16:00:42 GMT

Website:

While I disagree with you on some points there, I certainly do thank you for mostly presenting your agrument respectfully and intelligently and I hope I can return the favor here.  Although I do take exception to the name-calling when describing your impression of the Democratic party, not because I'm a strict "party man," but because name-calling always detracts from an agrument, rather than enhances.

The 2000 election had so many facets to it that we could go back and forth for a good long time and in the end, we'd probably have to agree to disagree, so I'm perfectly willing to leave that alone if you are.  

However, I'm not an environmentalist and I can't stand my 4-cylinder car either.  Better engineering could make them a little more powerful, but I think that's just rearranging deck chairs, so to speak.  What I was referring to was actual alternative fuels, like hydrogen.  The Republicans flat out opposed the version of the bill that would have allocated for more research and development of hydrogen as a replacement for gasoline in automobiles.  The greatest, but not singular, knock against hydrogen is that there's no infrastructure to support it's distribution to the public.  But after seeing the remarkable things accomplished through the Depression-era public works projects, you can't tell me that our country isn't capable of developing such an infrastructure and increasing the quality of hydrogen technology if we committed ourselves to it.  Most of the other problems with hydrogen are engineering issues and would most likely be worked out by the time a distribution infrastructure was ready for use anyway.  Our country could be the model for the replacement of oil as our primary automotive fuel.  Imagine how huge that could be!  That's the sort of innovation, leadership and know-how that put us on the map to begin with & we're letting this incredible opportunity slip through our fingers.  Imagine the political and economic leverage that could bring us if we no longer depended on the nations of OPEC, or if we moved on to something better and a country, like say China, was still stuck with a huge and growing need for an ever shrinking amount of oil.  

Yes, I did think force was necessary, in the short run, to combat terrorism.  But if we really want to defeat it, the best way to do it is to take away their source of capital.  To take away their source of capital, we need to stop buying oil.  To stop buying oil, we need to replace it with something.  We have that something and we're doing nothing with it.  

By Desert Hawk - Wed 29/06/05 12:02:04 GMT

Website:

2. Many of us, including myself, do not want crappy four cylinder cars! The only way to drastically improve so-called 'corporate average fuel economy" would be for everybody to get 4 cylinder crap. I just junked a 4 cylinder plymouth Sundance with only 127000 miles. I don't think I posted it ehre, but I posted about it on most message boards I use.  I had the POS for 6 years(87000 miles when I got it) and in that time it blew 1 engine and 2 heads, and was not worth another massive repair bill. Pieces of crap like this are what liberals want us to drive. Never again for me. CAFE standards be damned!

3. Enviornmental crap laws drive up the price of gas, and do little or nothing to really reduce pollution.  high gas prices are not the result of bush's energy policy. The high cost of enviornemntal laws also stops construction of new refineries.

4. I wholeheartedly agree with everything GOP said. Bush has been the best president in my lifetime (I am 35).  I used to be a Democrat, and swithced in 1998 because the Democrats are no longer the workingman's party; they are now the party of enviornmentalist wackos, tax and spenders, special interests, and perverts. For more of my political insight, go to yahoo finance message boards for DUK and BAC and NYT, especially DUK. You liberals will love tfberry11!  By the way, I do now own New York Times stock. I go there to bash that liberal company. I do own Duke Energy and Bank of America. Politics and the stock market, 2 of my other great passions in life!  Along with wetlook, amusement rides, video games, numismatics, and food!

By Anonymous - Tue 28/06/05 18:09:40 GMT

Website:

I must say though, his Social Security plan does intrigue me.  I've always wished that I could keep my SS tax and put it to work myself.  Maybe we'll get to see how that works out.

As far as bringing up free speech, I amazed you would even broach the subject given that no elected official has supported the erosion of free speech and other civil liberties to such an extent since McCarthyism.  But that shouldn't come as a surprise since the free thinkers in his administration always seem to get "weeded out" and replaced with people who share his delusions.  I am genuinely frightened that he has an entire 3 years left.  And this is coming from someone who LIKED REAGAN AND H.W. BUSH!    

By G.O.P. - Tue 28/06/05 12:07:39 GMT

Website:

By Anonymous - Tue 28/06/05 03:53:42 GMT

Website:

By Anonymous - Tue 28/06/05 03:49:15 GMT

Website:

By MaK - Tue 28/06/05 00:26:36 GMT

Website:

http://www.asianology.com/daily/