:: NEWS
09/03/2010
09/02/2010
09/01/2010
08/31/2010
|| 09/27/2004 ||
election

American Stupidity Surrounds You

Maybe you haven't noticed this, then again, if you have, you wouldn't be reading this post. Almost half the people in America (and anywhere I guess) are below average intelligence. To put this in context, look at the people around you, half of them are stupid. Well, maybe not, but that's the way I've been looking at things lately. I look at the national take on subjects and polling statistics, and I have to think to myself, "Well, almost half of them can't decide what to have for breakfast, so why does that poll make a difference?"

Then I realized that most of the people that answer polls are also the people that vote, that tends to scare me a bit. I used to look at polls on the front page of USA Today (a throw-away rag if you ask me) and those polls on the front page of CNN.com. Things like "Should People Be Smarter?" and about 39% would answer NO. Some people just like answering questions, it makes them feel a bit more worthy. They may not understand the question, but DAMN! they really have a good answer for you!

Instead of a push for getting more people to vote, maybe there should be a push to make sure the people voting have some idea "why"  they are voting. I have talked to too many people that have seriously told me "I like Bush, he is a nice person." How would you know? Have you met him? If not, is that what the news told you? Did you ignore the fact that he led us into a war based on a lie and led thousands of Americans to their deaths? Do you still support him? Is this a rhetorical question?  Do you get all your information from television? Do you believe all you have been told or do you at least make some attempt to find the truth? Even if he IS a nice person, I'm sure Hitler was nice to the children around him. And, before all you Neo-cons get up in arms, that was just a comparison made to explain the stupidity of that "he is nice" thought, not a direct comparison!

Look, if you don't know what you are voting for, or are just basing your vote on the  belief that one candidate is "nicer" than the other, I would like you to stay at home on the election night. You may be one of the stupider people. I don't know how else to put this, but you may not be smart enough to vote.

Yes, there should be a "catch" for stupid voting, but it shouldn't be the Electoral College.

 


Leave a Comment


John Wrote the following on 09/27/2004 11:28 PM :
Wolfie - Why do you believe the president "led us into a war based on a lie and led thousands of Americans to their deaths"? Is it because we have never found weapons of mass destruction? Do you not believe the CIA, the FBI, MI6, Vladimir Putin and the Bill Clinton adminstration? They all admit to telling Mr. Bush that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction! You clearly have never made a decision based on bad information have you? Your dog must have a tough time living with you as perfect as you are...... - No harm holding the president to an unattainable standard, if you yourself can acheive this - otherwise explain again how you lost your job?.....it must've been hard for them to fire someone as perfect as yourself.


codewolf Wrote the following on 09/27/2004 11:42 PM :

HA HA - I think the only standards my Dog(tm) holds me to is based on the amount of treats he gets in a day, hardly worth measuring anything of significance against. I'm not the president John. I don't have the informational resources he has had at his disposal. The information that he had STATED HE HAD, WHEN HE INVADED was that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. In fact, the information he had showed that Iraq was not a threat at all. It has been shown that he had made the decision to invade Iraq well before 9/11. I'll be happy to post the sources. John, comments like "otherwise explain again how you lost your job?" are typical of someone stretching for something to argue with. I never "lost" my job. I'm a consultant, after a few years at my last assignment, and refusing a permanent position, I was without a job. I'd be VERY happy to post more stories on how hard it is for someone "as perfect as me" (almost your own words) to be without a job in this struggling economy. Although your personal attacks are not on the topic of this post, yeah, I am a fucking good programmer, probably one of the best in the North East. So take your personal attacks elsewhere!


John Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 00:23 AM :
Easy cowboy! I'm sure you're a great programmer. But how would I know? I'm just some poe-dunk, Jesus freak who defends the truth on your website. Do you think I know something about your programming skills - you don't? My comment about you not being perfect was not intended as much of a "personal attack" as an attempt to make a point. I guess I overstated it, but simply put - no one is perfect - including the president (current or past). It seems that you are holding the president to this standard when you call him a liar for a decision based on inaccurate information. I hate to burst your bubble, but even with all of the information the president may have at his disposal - he is not omnipresent. See, that's the funny thing about evil people. They're not going to post an article in the newspapers about how we can co-exist on this planet before they try to blow us up. They want you and I dead simply because we are Americans. Did they give us (17) resolutions before they flew planes into the WTC? That's why it's even more important for our president to make risk management decisions based on the best available information. If he waits for "perfect" information - it will be too late. And in a nuclear world, waiting for uncontested kernels of truth is clearly irresponsible. Security intelligence is fuzzy. It's not an exact science as you may want it to be. It's unfortunate Mr. Clinton did not act on more of the intelligence that was available to him. We may have been able to avoid the massive lose of life that happened on 9/11.....but this is purely speculation. Feel free to post your liberal bomb throwing resources. As you've stated before - "this is your website" and you have proven that you'll post what you want regardless of the accuracy or fairness of the piece. If you have evidence collected by fair, honest and independant sources that prove the president "decided" to invade Iraq before 9/11, I would love to review them. Otherwise I think you should be intellectually honest enough to admit your position is merely that - a speculative position based on heresay....but I won't hold my breath.



codewolf Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 00:31 AM :
Look - I HAVE asked you more than once, please send me something with your opinion to post! Not once have you responded. Otherwise, (without opposing viewpoints) this site is all my postings. You seem to be somewhat well spoken, you seem to be able to post a decent comment attacking opposing viewpoints. So send me a decent post supporting Bush, and as I have said, I'll be happy to post it! That simple. codewolf@codewolf.com , keep the subject simple to get through the spam filters.


codewolf Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 00:36 AM :
Although I do own the site and post all I want, I always welcome outside opinion. If I was that pig headed or arrogant about my own opinion I'd be deleting your posts. That's not what codewolf.com is about. I love posting anti-bush stories because it encourages discussion about the articles. Your comments are just the things I want here (outside of personal attacks).


spoch Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 08:02 AM :
I agree with your statement about alot of people stating that they are voting for a candidate without any reasons. However it is both sides not just the Bush side. I have heard people say I am voting because I can't stand (insert name) or I am voting for (insert name) because he sounds better or even is better looking. I agree people should know the issues to vote. However it is not a one-sided group.



Sigh Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 10:18 AM :
John, you are so woefully misinformed. If you'd been following the problem in the Middle East as long and as closely as some of us (and all our major allies), you'd know that, yes, Bush lied about why we were going to war in Iraq. I find it interesting that everyone is biting Bush's excuse that the US intel machine failed us. They did nothing of the sort. They warned us about 911, they told us there could be no significant WMD program in Iraq, they told us there was no credible link between Hussein and Bin Laden, they told us everything we needed to know. Their intel was either ignored or twisted. In the case for war, it was entirely fabricated in the West Wing. As for the stupidity factor, well that's been with us for a long time now codewolf. Remember, women voted for JKF because he was "cute." I have a European friend who wonce said that Americans are too stupid to have a true democracy. He's right. Most Americans know nothing about our constitution or how our government is supposed to operate. They have little more than the "Happy Meal" version of American history and are far more interested in who's being voted off the island on Survivor than what's going on in Washington. They are fodder for the sound byte marketers and spin doctors.


John Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 11:56 AM :
I've been woefully misinformed before so it wouldn't be the first time. However - it's not just the US intel that advised the President. Mr. Putin from Russia, MI6 in Great Britian and even the Pakistan government advised the Bush Administration regarding Iraq. I agree that most Americans do not care about what's going on in Washington. However, I think you've been bitten by the happy meal mentality yourself if you think that US intel "tells us everything we need to know". US intel has and will admit that they do not know everything all the time. Your opinion that the blame should only fall on (1) pair of shoulders is unfair and disregards the interdependant reality of the situation. The decision to invade Iraq is simply that - a decision. It takes a person to make that decision who happens to be our president. Decisions are based on intelligence information, which was provided by US and foreign intel. Now you can choose to not believe these agencys or believe they are lying but the facts remain the same - they told the president this information. You are not stating the facts correctly when you say US intel did not tell the president there were WMDs in Iraq. The underlying premise I am perceiving in your comments is that the president wanted to go to war in Iraq for reasons that you do not state. You say he twisted or ignored intel. Do you think Mr. Bush's motivation for going to was is A. The war in Iraq would make him more popular with the American people? B. Make a name for himself in History? C. Finish Bush senior's job? D. Help line his pockets with oil money because somehow there is a connection with the Saudi's and the Bushes? These are all common objections. Which one(s) do you subscribe to and what is your evidence?


John Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 3:58 PM :
Dear Sigh, Since you've been following the problem in the Middle East for so long, what is your solution? If President Sigh was in charge of our country for (1) day what would you do?



Sigh Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 4:45 PM :
It could not be accomplished in one day. The first thing I'd do, though, since you ask, would be to call the ambassadors from all our allies and *aplogize* to them. We treated them badly in our effort to justify invading Iraq. They came to our aid and offered us their prayers after 911. But when they wouldn't bite on what they knew to be a flawed and untimately self-defeating policy in Iraq, we reviled and ridiculed them and attempted to force our will on them. I'd then tell Israel that the party's over. While we support their right to a free Jewish state and remain committed to helping them, they must sit down and negotiate with the Palestinians in good faith. The Palastinians have a right to live peacefully, too. I'd put a negotiate with the UN to put a true multinational peacekeeping force and rebuilding team in Iraq. Kofi Annan has already offed Bush this, but with the stipulation that the paricipating countries must be given equal responsibility and control of rebuilding the nation. Bush refused. I would consider that Iraq is an artificial nation that neither the Suni's, the Shi'its or the Kurds have ever really wanted. Saddam may have been a brutal bastard, but at least he understood that the only way to keep Iraq from descending into civil war was to rule by brute force. Understanding this, I would explore the possibility of dividing Iraq into three separate autonomous states. It might not be possible, but I'd put my best diplomatic minds on the problem. I would not insist that they immediately adopt an American-style democracy. They don't have the experience for this yet, and a parliamentary system would probably be better for them anyway. I would also actually try to open some diplomatic channels to what we refer to as terrorist organizations. We call them terrorisf; they call themselves warrirs who must fight against the most powerful nations on the earth the only way they can. Sure most of them are fanatics, but not all of them. No doubt they have demands that should be heard. This is the essence of diplomacy. One thing is certain: we will never defeat them with military might and we must never forget that Gandhi (anyone remember him) taught us that "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." I'd end this silly and outdated posture that nations like Cuba and N. Korea are our enemies. Rather than rattling our sword at them and insisting that they abandon communism, I'd attempt to show them that the US respects their right to self-determination and offer assistance in their making reforms that would bring them back into the world community. Maybe it would work, maybe not, but we've done it before. I'd keep the big stick in the closet, pulling it out only when it was absolutley necessary. I'd show both our enemies and our allies alike that the US is committed to world peace. I'd show them that our idea about true globalism isn't just our multinational corporations exploiting their people as a source of cheap labor. I would go on, John, but I think you get the point. My way is a way of peace. My presidency should be about showing the world by example that the only superpower left on the planet restrains itself because it is the right thing to do. I absolutely guarantee that the world would begin to respect us again. I don't want the other peoples of the world to fear us. I want that when one of our citizens is abroad, he won't have to fear reprisals for my short-shighted, bullying policies. America takes a lot of pride in that we are a nation built on Christian principals. It's way past time that we started actual walking that walk. So far all we've done is talked the talk. The Muslims hate us. That hate may be irrational; it may not be justified, but it is there. Someone must break the cycle of hatred. President Sigh may not succeed in the effort, but he would give it everything he had. I choose peace.


John Wrote the following on 09/28/2004 6:28 PM :
Interesting. Thank you for your viewpoint. Well put and clear. Your presidency (which I agree a day is not long enough) seems to stress peace. Peace is what we all ultimately want. However, I have a few questions for you: 1 - Do you believe peace is free? 2. How far do you pursue "restraint" until you use military force? Is military force ever justified? (in otherwords do you believe in "just war".) 3. Do you believe you can negotiate with terrorists? (terrorist being defined as a group that murders and commits crimes against humanity as defined by the geneva convention and the United Nations as "terrorist acts"). 4. Please reference one or two Bible verses that support your viewpoint regarding Christ's position on military non-aggression. These four simple, yet important questions all have to do with the main themes of your comments - 1. Morality (and peace) based on Biblical principles. 2. American Sovereignty and it's position as a world leader.


Sigh Answers Wrote the following on 09/29/2004 1:01 PM :
1. No peace is not free. It requires that we all give up some things we think we can't live without. Once we have done so, we find that we can live quite well without them. Peace often requires that we pay a very dear and always personal price. 2. Military force is sometimes the only option. But it is the option of last resort. It must only be deployed when *all* other options have failed. When it is used, we must be honest withourselves and others about the horrors of war. For example, you don't sugar-coat civilian casualties by calling them "colateral damage." We give the press full access to the battlefields so that the people back home will know what killing looks like. When a military strategy isn't working, you don't lie to the people about it, but adopt and adapt. You do what a president is supposed to do: take responsibility for your actions. You never blame others for your bad choices. Finally you never send soldiers to die on a foreign battlefield without a complete operational plan and a clear, concise, realistic and obtainable political objective. That objective must be the product of statesmen, never soldiers. 3. Mohandas K. Gandhi did. He taught people that hated one another that their hatred would comsume them all and would never acheive the ends they desired. Gandhi said that he learned about passive resistance by reading the teachings of Jesus. Which brings me to... 5. I will not play the Bible passage quoting game that so many "Christians" play. In this case it is unnecessary, since the all teachings of Jesus are all about love and seeking peace. Jesus was undeniably a pacifist. My comments were not based in on biblical principles, though they are echoed there. Christianity doesn't coner the market on morality and ethics. But peace and love are the cornerstones of the Christian faith. Americans make a big noise about their Christianity, but then put it aside when it becomes inconvenient. Jesus never said that following him would be easy (indeed, he showed us by example just how hard it could be), but he did teach us that ulimately the reward would be worth the hardships.



John Wrote the following on 09/29/2004 4:51 PM :
Do you believe that we should've given Saddam 1 more resolution? Do you believe he would've backed down if the UN gave him 18 resolutions instead of 17? How many is reasonable? Did you develop respect for your parents (or anyone) by being told consequences for actions and then consequences never being carried forth? I believe America has exercised incredible restraint. After 9/11 we could've turned Afghanistan into a crater. We did not. We also gave Saddam every oppurtunity to prove he did not have WMD's but he refused to cooperate with the UN inspectors. The only time any country in the middle east respects America is when we have an army at their borders. I am not interested in playing the bible passage game either. However I disagree with your interpretation of what the Bible teaches with regards to peace. The Bible is clear that wars will continue unitil end times and Governments are justified in their use of capital force to defend peace loving civilians. I believe the passage you are basing your comments on about peace is Jesus' teaching of at the sermon on the mount where he states if someone strikes you on the face, you should turn the other cheek. You can take this quite literally if you like, but the rest of the sermon is in the context of relations to other persons, not on the level of nations to other nations. The grim reality is this: radical Islamic ideaology will never accomodate our country and our freedoms. Either we surrender them to them, or we fight them. They want to kill us simply because we do not believe what they believe. They want to kill us simply because of who we are - Americans.


Sigh Wrote the following on 09/30/2004 09:59 AM :
Once again John you are proving that you really know nothing about this conflict or the history of how it came to pass. Prior ot the illegal US invasion of Iraq, Saddam - a brutal dictator who rose to power because the US wanted him in power - was CONTAINED. His government was under constant scrutiny, he was embargoed, and he had US combat aircraft patrolling both the northern and southern regions of his country. Any Iraqi military aricraft entering these no-fly zones would be shot down. But he couldn't have done it anyway, since he didn't have the parts needed to keep his impotent air force in the air anyway. The Iraqi army was not threat; we know from GW1 and the current conflict was a joke. Not even the much vaunted Republican Guard was a match for our forces. They were no threat to anyone, much less American security. Saddam may have thumbed his nose at US sanctions, but it was like a petulent child defing it's parents. Of course Saddam didn't cooperate with the UN inspectors; no one ever expected him to. But we were told time and time ane time again that Iraq had WMD programs and that they intended to use these weapons against all comers. Before GW1, they most assuredly did have WMD programs and no one will ever forget that Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds. It is possible that they had some small efforts to develop WMDs after GW1, but the UN inspectors couldn't even find evidence that they were any such programs. They certainly didn't find any labs or factories or weapons caches. The UN was not convinced that there were no WMD programs in Iraq and asked for more time and personnel to complete their inspections. Bush decided to go to war and remove Saddam. It had nothing to do with his war on terrorism; it had nothing to do with Saddam; it had nothing to do with WMDs. His "intellignece" was manufactured. Tony Blair just admitted this and apologized to the British people. Against the advice of ALL of his military and security advisors, he invaded Iraq with no clear objective, with criminally inadequate military planning, with far too few ground forces, and against the will of our allies. He failed to secure the Iraqi borders and strategically important parts of the country. He disbanded the Iraqi military. He left Iraqi weapons caches and armories unguarded. Al Qaeda was lurking, waiting for Bush to do something this stupid. They were banking on it. Bush gave them their opening and they started pouring sympathetic groups into Iraq as insurgencies. They set things up to where we use our massive military superiority to take them out, but do so only with massive civilian casualties. The backlash from such an action would erupt the entire region into a firestorm. Now, our one theater commanders are saying that contrary to what Bush is saying in front of the cameras, we are loosing control over Iraq. In thruth, only about half of the country is under coalition control and we are loosing ground daily. If we "stay the course" in Iraq, we will eventually have to do just what we had to do in Vietnam: pull out of Iraq in defeat and disgrace and watch impotently as the country to descends into civil war. You speak of Afghanistan and the restraint we exercised there. Oh, please. The whole Afghan campaign was a front. Most of the money Congress appropriated for Afghanistan operations was diverted to the preparations for the invasion of Iraq. We may have removed the Taliban from power temporarily, but we didn't control them. Now the Taliban warlords are re-exerting their contol, taking over the country slowly but surely and we are doing nothing to stop it. John, you spout the Bush line on what's going on in the Gulf. You talk about how the Islamic world hates us for what we believe. You are so wrong. They hate us for our incredible hypocricy. They hate us for using other, weaker nations as pawns in our policial machinations. They hate us because we think we have some right to dictate to the rest of the world how to think. They hate us because we have persecuted them either covertly or overtly for over 1000 years. You don't seem to have any understanding of Islam. I know many Muslims. They are peaceful and deeply spiritual people. The brand of radical "Islam" that has come to power in the world today is abominable to most Muslims. They understand that their religion has been politicized by radicals. The radical right in the US is trying to do the same thing to Christianity. Again, you wish to play quote that scripture. The passage to which you refer is actually "If your enemy strikes your cheek, offer him the other." The message is is unmistakable: meet violence with peace. Jesus also said "he who lives by the sword, so also shall he die by the sword." Again, his meaning is unmistakable: violence begets violence and in the end all who embrace it will be consumed by it. You forget that during Jesus' life all of Judea was in chaos. Various factions were fighting against one another. Jesus made it quite clear that war is not the answer. It amazes me how so many Christians pick and choose this passage or that to support their misguided points of view, while completely ignoring context. You claim to love Jesus, but you really don't even know him or what he stood for. You cannot call yourself a good Christian and support George W. Bush's immoral war in Iraq; it is the antithesis of Christian values and no amount of clever Bible quoting will ever change that. You cannot call yourself a good Christian and spout hatred. You cannot simply "accept Jesus Christ as you personal Lord and Savior," then ignore his teachings and expect to find salvation. You *must* live (or at least try) a Christ-like life.


John Wrote the following on 09/30/2004 4:42 PM :
Clearly we have different interpretations of the Bible, Islam and politics. This is a good thing! I appreciate your detailed view of the middle east and your articulate objections to my view with regards to the Bible and Islam. Again, I disagree with your view of Jesus' teaching with regards to war and peace and base my interpretation of His teaching on the whole Bible and not just the bits and pieces I choose. I would be happy to debate them further with you, however, the underlying message of your comment is clear - you have the only possible viewpoint and no other view is necessary. Clearly arrogance is not part of Christ's teaching. Like all of us (or at least most of us) learning and interpreting the Bible is a live long process that should never stop. Might I suggest you consider the viewpoint I raise? Is it possible that Jesus wants good to triumph over evil? Isn't this what happens in the last chapter?



Bob Wrote the following on 09/30/2004 7:49 PM :
Sigh - You are a pussy. The very fact that you use a screen name other than your own only proves this. Your ideological interpretation of Christianity, if followed, is a cancer that destroys innocent lives. People from the middle east, professing to be Muslims, have been attacking and killing Americans and our Allies for more than 20 years now. Most Americans may not fully understand their grievances and hate, but I know that nothing can justify the inhumanity of their attacks. On 9/11, nineteen ARAB-MUSLIMS hijacked four jetliners. They cut the throats of women in front of children and brutally stabbed others to death. They took control of those planes and crashed them into buildings, killing thousands of proud innocent fathers, loving sons, wise grandparents, elegant daughters, best friends, favorite coaches, fearless public servants, and children's mothers. Do these Muslims pledge allegiance to our flag? Do they proudly display it in front of their house and on their car? Do they pray in their many daily prayers that Allah will bless this nation; that He will protect and prosper it? Or do they pray that Allah will destroy it in one of those "Jihads"? Are they thankful for the freedom that only this nation affords? A freedom that was paid for by the blood of hundreds of thousands of patriots who gave their lives for this country? Muslim leaders in this nation should be flooding the media at this time with hard facts on their faith, and what hard actions they are taking as a community and as a religion to protect the United States of America. Buy they aren't. If the true teachings of Islam proclaim tolerance and peace and love for all people, then where are the chapters and verses from the Koran and statements from popular Muslim leaders to backing it up? What good is it if the teachings of the Koran are good and pure and true when the "leaders" are teaching fanatical interpretations, terrorism, and intolerance? It matters little how good Islam SHOULD be if large numbers of the world's Muslims interpret the teachings of Mohammed incorrectly and adhere to a degenerative form of the religion. If you're not helping to protect innocent lives, by propogating a stance of "peaceful" non-aggression to these brutal thugs, than you are clearly one of them, hiding behind "Christianity". Sigh - you are either the Enemy or you are a pussy. There are no other alternatives.


John Wrote the following on 10/04/2004 3:07 PM :
Sigh, Sigh - you there? Must be hard to think up an arguement against the truth. Good comments Bob.


ArtsAndAttitudes Wrote the following on 02/26/2006 02:48 AM :
Very unique view,...

Funny too!



nirx tmvhq Wrote the following on 04/20/2007 05:10 AM :
snmqawo argfdhx gyxoczevh wdmv qsebuodfc pojavyhm ipcgys


kyhjci xucbisg Wrote the following on 04/20/2007 05:11 AM :
pbcmajlo aewvi mwtolzp qgflu bzuq sdkg tuvzpik [URL=http://www.sumw.twolpsxbh.com]ixktrl mkfbh[/URL]


kyhjci xucbisg Wrote the following on 04/20/2007 05:13 AM :
pbcmajlo aewvi mwtolzp qgflu bzuq sdkg tuvzpik [URL=http://www.sumw.twolpsxbh.com]ixktrl mkfbh[/URL]



Woodrow Emerson Wrote the following on 01/09/2009 9:27 PM :
hi

3s4jgy20tysw6ls7

good luck


Arlen Lawrence Wrote the following on 01/11/2009 10:06 AM :
hi

3s4jgy20tysw6ls7

good luck


NOT_ClassicNancyhere Wrote the following on 01/29/2009 2:57 PM :
Hey Friends,

I was recently looking for an Antioxidant , to detox my body.

I was suprised to find this site

FREE AntiOxidant Bottle

They are giving away this excellent Grape Seed Antioxidant for free.

Try to grab one till this offer is on

Love

Nancy



OwnentyOpponi Wrote the following on 02/19/2009 5:39 PM :
Gamblers Fool Proof Money Making System

Hi, I just became a part of this forum here and I thought I'd do some contributing of my own and pimp a site that I use regularly for almost every successful bet I place.

The-Winners-Way.com[/b] is a site that shows you how to win 97% of your bets. Regular Gamblers through there are making around [b]$5000.00 to $12,000.00 a week.

Seriously, unbelievable returns! www.The-Winners-Way.com

Anyway, I will be hangling out here more often so keep me posted on your earnings...


MymnFoozy Wrote the following on 03/01/2009 6:39 PM :
aggiornamwnto automatico pagina web?ki mi pu?? dire da dove posso scaricare film?

nn ditemi emule....

Chat Sicilia

____________

buon anno nuovo


Joultytut Wrote the following on 09/24/2009 10:16 PM :
מה קורה אנשים?

לאחרונה התחלתי לקחת מזון אורגני לבעיות עיכול ואני חייב לציין שאני מתחיל להרגיש שינוי

בחיים לא חשבתי שויטמינים יעזרו לי עם הבעיה הזאת אני אישית מאוד ממליץ לכם להתחיל לנסות

בכל מקרה, תשמרו על עצמכם ועל ה תזונה

תהנו



Lymnneftfer Wrote the following on 10/16/2009 2:42 PM :

Nathan L. aus Wartburg (USA-TN) sagt, dass sein ACE 250 den Ring regelrecht aus der Erde in seiner Umgebung "ausgekratzt" habe. Der goldene Ring mit dem Diamanten "hat im Einzelhandel einen Wert von 1,200 $", gemהss Nathan. goldsuche ace250 schatzsuche


LarIsmooragem Wrote the following on 11/23/2009 03:40 AM :
Do you have any funny or clever riddles? Post them :)

What gets wetter and wetter the more it dries?

You throw away the outside and cook the inside. Then you eat the outside and throw away the inside. What did you eat?

What goes up and down the stairs without moving

>

Bootleg Movies Online


Moowsslum Wrote the following on 11/29/2009 08:20 AM :
I need tires for the winter i don't know if i should buy the tires from discount tire or tires.com or another site. I'm looking for relatively cheap price

do you guys have any reccomendations?

>

<p>

tire discount coupon

tire discount coupon



LarIsmooragem Wrote the following on 12/02/2009 07:10 AM :
Do you have any funny or clever riddles? Post them :)

What gets wetter and wetter the more it dries?

You throw away the outside and cook the inside. Then you eat the outside and throw away the inside. What did you eat?

What goes up and down the stairs without moving

>

Bootleg Movies Online


Add a Comment !
Your Name:
[NOT LOGGED IN]
Comments :

Some BB code is now supported:

Underline Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of an [u]underlined[/u] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of an underlined comment.

 

Italic Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of a [i]italic[/i] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of a italic comment.

 

Bold Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of a [b]bold[/b] comment.

Will produce:

This is an example of a bold comment.

 

URL Hyperlink Example:

The following comment:

This is an example of [url=http://www.codewolf.com]a very cool site[/url]

Will produce:

This is an example of a very cool site

 

Also: Line breaks will be treated as a new paragraph