Botellines

LMAO, that is taking the old line "Don´t tell me what to do" to the next level

Not hard to guess, but i am quite an Invertebrate. Did you ever played with that computer game called "Lemmings"? they even had a version called "Lemmings 3D" Do you have green hair?

In this post PhillyKev and Ron can bash at each other at will. Tom suggested them to keep the fighting to only one thread, and not to all of them, so guys, keep the sense of humor up. We can even throw a little poll to see what kind of little animal we are.

I assume, peacefuljefrey, that you can, at least, speak as many languages as i do to take the piss about my spelling skills. Of course English is not my native language, As you can see in my profile I am spanish. Although i don´t need to excuse myself, nor i feel particularly compelled to do so, i want to explain why i had the confussion with how i spell my career. Psychologist is "Psicólogo" in spanish, so we could say i wrote my career in Spanglish. But you knew that, right, Peaceful Jeffrey? By the way PeacefulJeffrey, what do you do for living?, no, wait, tell me in Spanish and Cantonese. Do you know what the maturity level for a psychologist should be? if so, please, let us know. I don´t think i will be a succesful psychologist until i meet your standards. Just so you know, Irony, sarcasm, and a fine sense of humor, directly correlates with a high level of mental maturity and more often than not with a high IQ. If you didn´t get my words as, at least humorous, probably means that your maturity level was even lower than mine. Sorry, you cannot be a "psicologist" either. As a matter of fact, i don´t think you should be allowed to own guns with your maturity level

Yeah, I agree that paedophilia is paedophilia, no matter the gender. Maybe we should draw the line in wether the sex is consented or not. We get diferent reactions depending on the gender because usually if it is an old guy with a young girl is not consented and the other way around it usually is (still paedophilia though) Clearly he wanted to get laid, i am sure that 2 14 years olg guy can stop a 23 years old woman. Also, at that age a guy clearly know what sex is all about. I would call this rather than pedophilia, estatutory rape. By the way, do you have a law making a distintion beetwen statutory rape and paedophilia? here in spain i think that the line is drawn at 14. I mean, if i have consented sex with a 14 years old girl, most of the trouble will come from her parents and society in generalk (it is morally wrong), but if i have consented sex with a 13 years old girl then i am in big shit with the law as well. same as if it was no consented sex.

I wrote the past post without reading the whole story. After reading it, i am glad she agrees with me that doing forbidden things are fun.

I am not a psicologist, just studying to became one. (although that disqualifies me to write about psichology as someone stated in these boards), so take what i say with a grain of salt. It could be atraction to the forbidden, we all know how much more fun is to do things that are not "right". I don´t think it would have been phisical for a 14 years old kid is not fully formed yet (contrary to a 14 years old girl who already looks a lot like the woman she will eventually be) Another posibility would be that she needs to be in control of the situation, and that is much easier with a young boy. For once, he most likely will be not be as pushy about sex as, lets say, an 18 years old guy, and she will dominate the situation in all aspects. Of course he wouldn´t have to be so young but it is what she would have more access to for being a teacher. Some girls who have had some bad experiences could feel atracted to people she can dominate easily. Any psichologist agrees with me? Anyway, do you really think he is lucky? Honestly, he has tasted delights forbidden to many of us, he has reached heaven at 14. All his female classmates will look ugly now in comparison. he will eventually realize that what happened happens only once in a lifetime.

I guess the problem is not the lie per se, but the consequences. Question: Honey, does my butt look fat in this jumpsuit. Lie: Of course not, why would it make it look fat, you have a gorgeous body. (She weights 100Kg) Consequences: you get lied while making her happy. another example. Question: Mr President, Mr President, Why do we have to invade Irak. Lie: Because they have WMD, they will welcome us and and they have links to AlQuaeda. (They don´t) Consequences: among many others a lot of people die. I think it is quite obvius the diference. Isn´t the first one called white lie anyway? If so, the second should be called bloody lie.

They have a goal and will not hesitate to use whatever means will help them get that goal. Same thing that the US. The whole problem is that their goal are now diferent than US´s goal. Before, when the US had the same goal than OBL (screwing the soviets) OBL (and al-quaeda) were such a nice bunch of people. It just bugs me that this is a war or not depending on war supporters agenda. Why isn´t it as bad when an inocent iraki dies tortured in abu-grahib as the beheading of an american guy?

What the hell did you expect? is this a war or is it not? could Paul Jhonson be consider a POW (even without wearing an uniform) or be all his rights denied as geneva convention and another thread sais? If the US is sending Iraquis found in Iraq to be tortured or/and killed in abu-grahib what wouldn´t you do with a bomb technician found in the UK or the US. I don´t aprove terrorism, I don´t aprove this war but if you get rid of the double standard, you will admit this behading was foreseeable. Come on, he was an Engineer working on the very same Helicopters that kill hundreds of palestinians. And he was in a very muslim country. You think that muslim extremists want all the westerns to en up like paul jonhson. Please, no double standards now, okay? why cannot they think that we, chistians, want to end with the Islam (as the bible command)? the thing is that without (apparently) wanting that, we are being quite more successful than them. Again, and just for the record. I am as against terrorism as the most radical of you can be. What i don´t share with many of you is the definition of terrorism.

agreed. Had it not happened this invasion. Probably SH would have continued with his former goverment and politics. I doubt he would have attempted to invade another country, and for sure he couldn´t have done much against the US or Europe. Many Iraquis would have died for being against SH, although i don´t think that would have been as many as all the collateral damage the US and UK managed to inflict. Regarding terrorist attacks, there would have been a lot of terrorist attacks beetwen tribal groups as always. At the moment all the islamic groups seem to have put on hold their diferences and concentrate on attacking their common enemy. It is hard to tell if there is now more terrorist attacks than if there wasn´t a war (personally i think that yes) but in any case, now the attacks are directed against you, not against eachother. And i hope that no right wing, war supporter sais now that they value iraqui´s lives

My crystal ball told me that if Bush now does what he pleases thinking that it is god´s wishes, being reelacted will only reinforce him in his believes.

I´d say at least 12000 feet.

I think Kerry will win, although not for much. Bush has screwed up way too many times. Besides, citizens will probably consider the trayectory of the candidates. I mean, if bush gets reelected he will get cocky and will think it is god´s will, making him more extremist in his political views. And on top of that he will have nothing to loose. He cannot be reelected again, so he only have to make sure he doesn´t get inpeached (i don´t know what else he would have to do to get that). In the other hand, if Kerry gets elected, he will have to do a good job if he want any chance to be reelected within 4 years. So i think it is safer to vote kerry and probably many people will think likewise, even moderate republicans.

I don´t get why Kerry has incurred in treason or how he has helped the enemy. Can you explain it to me? Do you think GWB is doing a good job at protecting your country?

[reply At the end of the day, its only politics Deuce, falling out with people over politics is like falling out with them over their choice of beer.

The truth is that US people seldom try to learn spanish when they come here to live either (I have checked this mysel in St Louis University in Madrid). Inmigrants going to the US seldom do their best to learn the local language. I guess that this may be because: a) They have low paid jobs, so they have to work long shifts leaving them few time to go to class b) since they don´t speak english initially they prefer to hang around with people who can communicate with, efectively reducing the need to communicate in English. Case B also affects US exchange students. So seldom people try to learn another language regarding of the status, and that is a pity. But i don´t think the solution would be not putting any sign in foreign languages. What would the tourist do? (voting and such do not apply here) Edited for clarity

Are you having problems vocalizing? Try this one. Dame una hamburguesa ahora maldito bufon. You may have better luck.

Every Morning, i wake up and realize how much i hate the US, specially you, Pajarito. Then i have breakfast while i mumble about how much i dislike Cocacola for being American. At work i refuse to have McDonalds or Pizzahut at lunch for being american, as i chucle to myself thinking about all those fat asses and ugly people. But in the afternoon, I envy you all for how much cholesteral and grease you have consumed before 1:00 pm. And then think a bit more about how much i hate you pajarito... God, i cannot even take a siesta out of envy and anger at the US. I spend the rest of the evening hating you some more before i got to bed to dream how all the evil things i would do to you. Now seriously. I think as much about Americans as French, or ethiopans. You must be a bit egocentric to think that we have so much strong feelings about you all. Usually in Europe, we care about things that affect us directly. And you as an american do not affect me in the slightest. Your government does, and that is why we are discussing GWB virtues everyday. The standard american, is just a person who is welcome or not based on their personal character, not the whole country´s. Besides, we all know that no one voted GWB I wouldn´t move to your country, my egotistic friend. You don´t have tapas, siesta and a gun control law.

You are right. But if you want any chance to reconstruct Irak and stop terrorist attacks there, it is extremely important that you get the simpathy of all the non-terrorist Irakis (which by the way are 99%) And by doing that The US is getting the opposite. It is unrealistic to expect that things like that will not happen., but if the Us army were more strict with the thiefs among their files, Iraquis perception of the Us army would change for the better a lot.

By Luke Baker BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Besides the prisoner-abuse scandal, there is another, more pervasive problem Iraqis say they suffer daily at the hands of U.S. troops -- theft of money and other property during aggressive American raids. Over the past 14 months of occupation, U.S. forces have carried out literally thousands of raids on homes across the country, routinely seizing money, jewelry and other property from Iraqis suspected of "anti-coalition activities." Items are generally confiscated on suspicion they could be used to finance attacks against U.S.-led forces, and the U.S. military says it has had some success in cutting off funding for insurgents via the policy. But Iraqis say the raids often target the wrong people, are carried out in an aggressive, even destructive manner and complain that lifetime savings, precious jewelry and family heirlooms are regularly stolen in the process. Adel Alami, a lawyer with Iraq's Human Rights Organization, says the majority of the cases his group deals with involve Iraqis seeking compensation for lost property and cash. "It's a huge problem, almost everyone has something to say about gold, money and other valuables going missing and they don't believe they'll ever get them back," he told Reuters. Last year, Wajiha Daoud, an 80-year-old widow, had her house in a middle-class neighborhood of old Baghdad raided by U.S. troops who said they had "high-level intelligence" that the home was a safe house for Saddam Hussein loyalists. During the raid, which lasted around 30 minutes, the woman and her family, who live across the street, were kept outside. "When we went back in, the house was half-destroyed," said her son Musadaq Younis, an English-speaking computer technician. "All the furniture was slashed with knives, tables and chairs were broken and the windows smashed. They didn't need to break down the front door -- I told them I had the key." But that was not the worst. When Younis' sister arrived she immediately rushed upstairs to a small cabinet and found it empty -- $5,000 in cash, gold and other jewelry, including her wedding ring, were missing. "She went white," said Younis. The family filed a claim against the U.S. military -- a complex process that took nearly three months to get a reply. In response, the military said the raid was justified and no compensation was owed. The officer who commanded the raid told Younis: "My soldiers aren't thieves." Being comfortably well-off and employed, the impact of the loss on the family was not too great, but for hundreds, if not thousands of other Iraqi families, raids on their homes can prove devastating, socially and financially. "Confiscation and theft during raids is rampant," said Stewart Vriesinga, a coordinator for Christian Peacemaker Teams, a non-profit group that documents abuses in Iraq. "Soldiers don't seem to understand the Iraqi custom of not using banks -- a lot of people keep fairly substantial sums of money at home. A soldier from Kentucky or wherever sees that and thinks the person must be up to no good, so he takes it. "We sure don't know how much money has been taken from (Iraqis)...but it's enough to have serious socio-economic consequences," he told Reuters. A spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition said he was aware of Iraqi complaints of theft during raids and said some U.S. soldiers had been disciplined for "inappropriate conduct." But he said the problem was "very rare, extremely rare." "We're aware of it... But there's also the possibility of Iraqis making malicious claims," said Captain Mark Doggett. Doggett said when are items are confiscated, a receipt is always given. If the owner is eventually found to be innocent, items can be recovered, he said. But many people who have had property confiscated say no receipts were written. Vriesinga estimates that in nine out of 10 raids, the home owners raided are innocent, but suffer huge consequences. "If the husband is hauled off as a suspect, the family has lost its breadwinner and often lost its savings and cash as well," he said, citing a recent Red Cross report which referred to up to 90 percent of Iraqi detainees being innocent. If Iraqis file complaints, it comes down to a case of the Iraqi suspect's word against the American soldier's, he said. "If there's any doubt, then it's assumed the Iraqi is lying -- the Americans are creating enemies by the score." http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5250466§ion=news

Exactly, the problem is that it makes no sense. It is true that that amount is not much, but i thought that it was that payment a year. Somebody correct me if i am wrong. If it is so, then we are looking at a more decent amount, and it would look a bit more legal since it wouldn´ñt be hidden. If someone finds out, let´s call it deferred payment. Regarding the stock options... Usually a bussiness will put heavy constraints about when you can sell your stock options so the price in the market will not fluctuate too much. so i guess it is a possibility that they let them sell ALL his stock options before taking part in politics, but somehow i doubt it. If he didn´t sell it, he would have had to give them away. Let´s say that the stock option is worth 20$ (i think it is beetwen 23 and 54) then he would have given away 480000 X 20 = 9600000 $. If so, he is not corrupt, he is a fool. Maybe there is a much simpler explanation to that but if so, why isn´t it common knowledge? As you said, it doesn´t make sense.

Does it mean that he gave away or donate ALL of his Stock options before taking office? I may have misunderstood the information but i thought that he still had something like 480000 stock options AND was getting a fixed amount EACH year in deferred payment. The latest looks dodgy to me. If he nneds to severe all his ties with Halliburton due to political implications why don´t they give him the money all at the same time. I am sure that Haliburton can afford that amount.

Am i the only one here who sees a conflict of interest? Dick Chenney had some word on deciding wether going to war or not AND stock options in a company who may (and did lawfully or unlawfully) economicly benefit from the war. That is just not right, even if it was true that the contract was awarded lawfully to Halliburton (which personally i think not). In the meantime more people dying... Don´t you conservatives want to know, just in case, if you all have been scammed by the government? I mean, it wouldn´t be the first time a government in the planet does that. It has happened in Spain, in Argentina, Peru, Germany, etc, etc. Why do you think that will not happen to you? After all, being a bit skeptical and doing a full enquiry will not do any harm, if everything was legal you just apology, if not at least you got the truth and can act accordingly.

you mean "whackos" as people who hold their religious beliefs at heart? Or "whackos" as citizens of a soverign country that don´t want other countries to plot against them or even invade them? Maybe "whackos" as people who think that their religion is the right one and the rest are either wrong or not enlightened by God. Man, those are "whackos" let me tell you. Those self righteous religious people who believe in divine justice for those who do not accept their sets of believes. As PhillyKev said: Ironic.