txojumps

1. People who feel the need to make lists *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

Didn't you mean to say........'Never buy a pot pie' *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

I don't know, does the Republic of Ireland want all Americans dead? *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

...but please keep sending us money! The terrorist organization Hamas won an election and governing control of the Palestinian territory. Of ALL the BS I have heard over the last few years this one takes the cake. Of course, the USA and other countries are saying they aren't going to give any money to a terrorist group that has called for the destruction of the United States, Israel and...most other non Muslim countries at one time or another! I CAN NOT even believe what I'm hearing these Hamas leaders saying about foreign aid ...things like...they are "willing" to allow the USA to check in on how they are spending the money. (and various other unbelievable comments) These are the kinds of stories that push me further to the right every day. These people want peace about as much as they want the clap. I hope Israel turns them inside out and then moves right on to Iran. Also, about that strike that missed Al Kareem Abdul Jabar Al Tiny Pecker Second in Command Ali Qeada Camel Jockey two weeks ago... innocent people died. BIG DEAL! As Bush has said 101 times, you harbor terrorists you ARE a terrorist. It's sad when kids die but maybe next time mom and pop mud hut will think twice about who they break bread with. It's these people that are harboring terrorists like Bin Laden. These terrorists are killing innocent people (including kids) all over the world. It's about time we adopt Israel's approach to this! *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

It appears you have no scene control. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

I guess we'd actually need to know who's playing first *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

I like the R6 better. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

Cajun's are in south Louisiana not north... well at least the majority of them. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

I'm not trying to justify anything, I read something intersting and thought I would share it. Just because I live in Texas explains what? You think I'm some oil millionare or is that because Bush lives here? You don't know my politics. Any time people are fighting and dying, it's a war. What do you call the attack on the WTC, a random act of violence? *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

Possibly, I found this on another forum and thought I would share. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

Why are we at war? On a more serious note, whether we like it or not, we. are. at.. war. Clearly no one wants this; however, we are at war. It is not a subject matter any of us wishes to discuss, however, it is very important that we understand the situation and what it means to each and every one of us. The great statesman Patrick Henry once said. "The battle sir, is not to the strong alone, it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave..." Think about those words as I try today to answer the following questions: What kind of war are we in? When did it all begin and what is its history? Who are the enemy? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, what is at stake if we should loose? We call it a war on terrorism Our enemy calls it the Third Jihad, a term I will later explain. In order to fully understand this war on terrorism, I think it is important to understand not only the enemy, but also their motives. It is also good to remember that in any war, awaygames are always preferable to home games. When did this war on terrorism begin? Many will say September 11, 2001 The fact is, the current war on terrorism begin 22 years prior to September 11, 2001 with the taking of hostages and our Embassy in Iran in 1979. Later, there were attacks" - On our embassy in Beirut, Lebanon 1983 - The Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon 1983 - Pan-Am Flight 107 to NY that crashed in Lockerbie Scotland in 1988 - First NY Trade Center attack in 1993 - Khobar Towers Military complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia in 1996 - US Embassy, Nairobi Kenya 1998 - US Embassy, Tanzania 1998 - USS Cole in Yemen 2000 - NY Trade Center 2001 - Pentagon 2001 Why were we attacked? Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. Who were the attackers? In each case of attacks on US, they were Muslim terrorist. It is important to note that 25% of the world population is Muslim. No matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the Muslim terrorist leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing - by their own pronouncements - killing all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die? During a period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks around the world. The attacks happened during administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and our current President Bush. It was not the fault of either Republican or Democrats, as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors. If we go back 25 years, almost every world conflict can be traced to Islamic Jihadists. In each case of attacks on the US, they have been Muslim Jihadists. As I have said, the war against terror did not begin on September 11, 2001, nor will it end with the peaceful transition to civilian authority in Iraq, whenever that may be. In fact, Iraq and Afghanistan are but footnotes in the bigger context of this encounter, but an important one none the less. This war is what the Jihadists themselves are calling the "Third Great Jihad" and is doing so within the framework of a time line which reaches back to the very creation of Islam in the Seventh century and their attempts to recreate the dynamics which gave rise to the religion in the first two hundred years of its existence. No religion in history grew as fast, in its infancy, than did Islam and the reasons for this growth are not hard to explain when you understand what the world was like at the time of Muhammad's death in 632 AD. The Western Roman Empire was in ruins and the Eastern Empire was based in Constantinople and trying desperately to keep the power of its early grandeur while transitioning to Christianity as a de facto state religion. The costs to the average person were unbearable as he was being required to meet the constantly rising taxes levied from the state along with the tithes coerced by the Church. What Islam offered was "the carrot or the sword". If you became a convert, your taxes were immediately eliminated, as was your tithe. If you didn't, you faced death. The choice was not hard for most to make, unless you were a very devoted martyr in the making. At the beginning, even the theology was not too hard for most to swallow, considering that both Judaism and Christianity were given their due by the Prophet. There is but one God-Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet, as was Jesus, and the pre-Christian Jewish prophets of the Torah (Old Testament). Both were called "children of the book", the book being the Koran, which replaced both the Old and New testaments for Christians and Jews. With this practical approach to spreading the "word" Islam grew like wild fire, reaching out from the Saudi Arabian Peninsula in all directions. This early growth is what the Muslims call the "first" great Jihad and it met with little resistance until Charles Martel of France, the father of Charlemagne, stopped them in the battle of Tours in France, after they had firmly established the religion on the Iberian peninsula. This first onslaught against the West continued in various forms and at various times until Islam was finally driven out ofSpain in 1492 at the battle of Granada. The "second great jihad" came with the Ottoman Turks. This empire succeeded in bringing about the downfall of Constantinople as a Christian stronghold and an end to Roman rule in all of its forms. The Ottoman Empire was Islam's most successful expansion of territory even though the religion itself had fractured into warring sects and bitter rivalries with each claiming the ultimate truths in "the ways of the Prophet". By 1683 the Ottomans had suffered a series of defeats on both land and sea and the final and failed attempt to capture Vienna set the stage for the collapse of any further territorial ambitions and Islam shrunk into various sheikhdoms, emir dominated principalities, and roving tribes of nomads. However, by this time a growing anti-western sentiment, blaming its internal failures on anyone but themselves, was taking hold and setting the stage for a new revival know has Wahhabism which came into full bloom under the House of Saud on the Arabian peninsula shortly before the onset of WWI. It is this Wahhabi version of Islam which has infected the religion itself, now finding adherents in almost all branches and sects, especially the Shiites. What this sect calls for is the complete and total rejection of anything and everything which is not based in the original teachings of The Prophet and it finds its most glaring practice in the policies of the Afgani Taliban or the Shiite practices of the late Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Its Ali Pasha (Field Marshall) is now known as Osama bin Laden, the leader of the "third Jihad". The strategy for this "holy war" did not begin with the planning of the destruction of the World Trade Center. It began with the plans for toppling the Shah of Iran back in the early 1970's and culminated with his exile in 1979. With his plans and programs to "westernize" his country, along with his close ties to the U.S. and subdued acceptance of the State of Israel, the Shah was the soft target. Thanks, in large part to the hypocritical and disastrous policies of the State Department during the Carter administration, the revolution was set into motion, the Shah was deposed, his armed forces scattered or murdered and stage one was complete. The Third Jihad now had a base of operations and the oil wealth to support its grand design or what they call the "Great Caliphate." The Great Caliphate Listen to this carefully, what this design calls for is the replacement of all secular leadership in any country with Muslim majorities. This would include, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, all the Emirates, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and finally what they call the "occupied territory" Israel. As a part of this strategy, forces of the jihad will infiltrate governments and the military as a prelude to taking control, once the secular leadership is ousted or assassinated. Such was the case in Lebanon leading to the Syrian occupation and what was attempted in Egypt with the murder of Anwar Sadat, along with the multiple attempts on the lives of Hussein in Jordan, Mubarak of Egypt and Musharraf in Pakistan. Pakistan is a particular prize because of its nuclear weapons. The long-range strategy of the Third Jihad counts on three strategic goals. 1. The U.S. withdrawing from the region, just as it did in Southeast Asia following Vietnam. 2. Taking control of the oil wealth in the Muslim countries, which would be upwards to 75% of known reserves, and 3. Using nuclear weapons or other WMDs to annihilate Israel. A further outcome of successfully achieving these objectives would be to place the United Nations as the sole arbiter in East/West negotiations. Evidence of the Bush Administration awareness of this plan is found in the facts that immediately following the 9/11 attack, their first move was to shore up Pakistan and Egypt, believing that these two would be the next targets for al Qaeda while Americans focused on the disaster in New York. The administration also knew that the most important objective was to send a loud and clear message that the U.S. was in the region to stay, not only to shore up our allies but to send a message to the Jihadists. The attack on Afghanistan was necessary to break-up a secure al Qaeda base of operations and put their leadership on the run or in prison. Why Iraq? The war on Iraq also met a very strategic necessity in that no one knew how much collaboration existed between Saddam Hussein and the master planners of the Third Jihad or his willingness to hand off WMDs to terrorist groups including the PLO in Israel. What was known, were serious indications of on-going collaboration, as Saddam funneled money to families of suicide bombers attacking the Israelis and others in Kuwait. What the U.S. needed to establish was a significant base of operations smack dab in the middle of the Islamic world, in a location which effectively cut it in half. Iraq was the ideal target for this and a host of other strategic reasons. So, who are we at war with? There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting. Most of the suicide bombers in Iraq today are young Saudis. Most of the suicide bombers whose identities have been ascertainable in the past six months were from Saudi Arabia. These are men that are twenty something or teenagers from comfortable middle-class families. They have no experience and they are not trained; they just drive the vehicles. What motivates them? Religion. They are rich, they are educated, and they need nothing, but they see in this fight they will win either victory or heaven. This is their ideology. Either way, they win. So with that background, now to the two major questions: 1. Can we lose this war? 2. What does losing really mean? If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions. We can definitely lose this war, and as ridiculous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not understand the answer to the second question -- 'What does losing mean?'. It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is: We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly to terror attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them. We would of course have no future support from other nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and cannot help them. They will pick off the other non Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do, will be done. Spain is finished. The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already nearing 50% Muslim and fading fast. If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslim terrorist? If we can't stop the Muslim terrorist, how could anyone else? The terrorist fully know what is riding on this war and therefore are completely committed to winning at any cost. We better know it, too, and be likewise committed to winning at any cost. Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win. So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win. Allow me to give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation. President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refused to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently. And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then. Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. So we need to get them out of our heads. Some of us have gone so far out in our criticism of the war and/or the Bush Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause. Remember what I said about their goals. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into all non-Muslims -- not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense. We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't. If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the World will survive if we are defeated. And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in onesingle way that contributes to the good of the World. This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read. If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar? Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"? What surprised the Jihadists following the 9/11 attack was how American sentiment mobilized around the president and a profound sense of patriotism spread across the country They were not expecting this reaction, based on what had happened in the past, nor were they expecting the determined resolve of the President himself. I believe that this is one of the reasons we have not had any further attacks within our borders. They are content to wait, just as one of their tactical mentors, V.I. Lenin admonished."two steps forward, one step back". We are in the battle of our lives which will go on for many years possibly even generations. If we fail to understand what we are facing or falter in the challenge of "knowing our enemy" the results will be catastrophic. Meanwhile, be prepared for media monkey business. No matter how well things go, we'll hear self-righteous gasps over the inevitable U.S. casualties. The first time a rifle ompany consolidates a position long enough to bring up ammunition, we'll hear that the attack has bogged down. If commanders on the ground decide to shift forces from one axis of advance to another, we'll be told that our troops couldn't make progress against "dug-in terrorists." Have faith in our troops and their leaders. I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said earlier. If we are united, there is no way we can lose. General Russell Doughert said it best. "The issue is not war and peace, rather, how best to preserve our freedom." It is my future, the future of my family, your future, the future of your families, and the future of the world we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it. I will. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

If you hate the Republic of Kalifornia so much, you need to move back to Texas! *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

I feel the same way about cats! *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

My suggestion is for you to drink heavily. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one

Cat's the other white meat. *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one