GQ_jumper

I was pushing for a sentence to my house as my sex slave for 6 mothsQuote Sorry but the constitution protects here against cruel and unusual punishment Besides, who would want to touch that nasty skank? History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

exploiting any weakness they may have. Quote Chuck's coach commented on this though, they both agree that Jackson isn't a guy where you can really watch one of his fights and say, "there's his weakness". Chuck definitely has his work cut out for, he can pull it off though, it's Chuck History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Having never seen Rampage fight, I can't really comment on his abilities. My vote is for the Iceman. Quote Good call Rampage has his great moments that's for sure, but lately they've been less than impressive, I haev no doubt that Chuck would roll over Eastman in less than half a round. Didn't it take Quinton two? And Quinton is just recovering from a losing streak, Wanderlei knocked his ass out of the ring their second fight, and like Tito said in his post fightinterview, "Chuck is in a different place right now". History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

It's three weeks out so why not kick off the poll now. In one corner, Chuck Liddell the current light heavyweight champ, IIRC his wnning streak is up to seven right now. He has won all of his fights since he won the title by knockout, very few have made it past the first round. He even bested the current heavyweight champ Randy twice in a row, and has two seperate wins against Tito. He's proven that big wrestlers and takedown artists are no threat to him. In the other corner, Quinton Jackson, new to the UFC and one of only three people to ever beat Chuck. He is the last one of those three that Chuck has yet to have a rematch with and the only one that Chuck hasn't avenged his loss against. Rampage is best known for big slams, sometimes even knocking out opponents with the takedown. A lot of people are looking at the string of upsets in the last three UFC's, Cro-cop, Sylvia, and GSP and relating it to this fight. Chuck says that means nothing and this fight is buisness as usual for him. My personal opinion, Chuck is going to knock Quinton's fukcing jaw off. I was personally cheering for Tito in the last fight, cause well....I'm a tito fan, but next to Tito chuck is one of my favorites. Watch his interviews(with the exception of that Good Morning America one!), he's friendly, polite, well-spoken, respects his opponents, and I've seen his training regemine, BRUTAL!! Quinton, well, once again look at his interviews, he butchers the english language, talks like a thug, and talks a lot of trash, I'm sure he trainis hard as well but I haven't seen too much on it so I can't comment there. Considering he got his ass handed to him in his last couple of Pride fights, I'm not impressed. And his win against Eastman, yeah Eastman is a tough dude, but he isn't a full time fighter, he trains in his spare time, that doesn't put him in the same class of fighters as Chuck. the biggest thing was in the last fight between these two chuck had a serious knee injury that held him back. I went back and watched the fight, and it wasn't the same Chuck we are all used to. He looked like something was dragging him down. I hope Chuck knocks that fuckin blinged out mouth piece along with a couple teeth and snaps his spine in the process, I absolutely despise Jackson, ever since he showed that he didn't even have the respect and professionalism to hang up his god damn cell phone while the national anthem was being played before his fight with Silva. He did the same to the brazilian anthem too, it may not be his country but show a little respect and courtesy, the mere mention of his name around me throws me into a turrets(sp) outburst that could most likely end my career if an officer ever heard it(yeah it's pretty nasty). So on that note, who's it gonna be? And if you vote against Chuck I want you to go hang your head in shame afterwards History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

May 4, 2007: On April 19th, the U.S. Army pissed off its most articulate troops, and many overworked junior officers, by issuing new regulations that require troops to get an officers permission before they write anything that might violate OPSEC (Operations Security) in a blog, email, BBS posting, and so on. This means thousands of junior officers have yet another job, that of censoring subordinates Internet activity. Troops who post information without first getting it cleared by their OPSEC officer, can be punished. Exactly how much, is unclear, but apparently it could be as bad as a court-martial, depending on whose feathers you ruffle. The reality is that troops will continue doing what they have long been doing, posting under an alias, and not identifying themselves. They will just do it more frequently. Back in the 1990s, when word got around that the army was filtering all email sent by .mil accounts, troops began to get civilian email accounts, just to be on the safe side. That trend will continue, and much of the same information will get out there, but very little of it from someone who openly admits they are in the army. The bad guys will have the same access to what the troops are saying on the Internet. The army will be able to hunt down and identify some troops posting stuff via civilian email accounts. Attempts to punish these troops will cause a major "free speech" furor. Everyone, except the journalists and advertising sales people, will be unhappy. Questions will be raised about who came up with this idea, and the answers will prove noteworthy. Maybe even interesting. There might even be tears. Quote Once again the article is blowing this whole thing out of proportion. In the very beginning of the article it says troops have to consult their COC when they are going to post anything that could violate OPSEC. All that means is if you mention upcoming operations you have to consult higher. And no one should be mentioning upcoming ops anyways. It could also pertain to posting about TTP's and SOP's but once again, o one has any buisness posting about either of those and if they do then they should get the book thrown at them. I don't even know why this is an issue. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Its circular and is only three pieces so there is only one seam on the viewing side. Quote Gotcha, that's what i wanted to hear, i like that round chamber in eloy. thanks History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Instead of forbidding it, why not lay out the rules and punish those who post/send inappropriate content? Quote There actually is no new rule out, I have no idea what this article is talking about, we were given nothing more than our usual guidance about not posting things that would violate OPSEC on the net. My COC knows damn well that I am on here every day in my free time chattin with you crazy knuckleheads, and they don't care. And to everyone commenting on my beer supply, HAHA SUCKAS!!!!! But despite the fact that supplies like that are available doesn't mean that I don't work Work hard play harder History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

I agree, OPSEC training/info was hammered into us before we left last time. Considering everything going on, I'm not surprised, now, stop blogging and go find my leg will ya??!! I'll go check the fridge, maybe its behind all the beer in there History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

I went out the back door of the mountain cabin tonite for a smoke . Foggy as hell. Came face to face w/ the bigget fuckin racoon I ever met. Should I have shot him or cut his throat w/ the Kabar? My dick got real small in a NYC. What do racoons taste like anyway? Damn critters. I let him back me in into the cabin the nice guy I am. Quote I'm still waiting to find out how big the OP's weiner is, that's what'sreally important in this whole debate. Til I find out I'm going to go have a hamburger, or maybe a pork chop, we had a wild bore brought in from Kurdistan last night and we're grillin it up tonight. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Sheesh. If he's suing for 67 million for pants wadda think he'll sue for if is whole suit gets fucked up in one of those senarios? Wonder what his Gucci loafers are worth?Quote If you look at the 4th page of the article it shows his justification for the amount of money, pure BS. A cheap way to twist the law and hurt a family that made every effort to appease him after losing the pants. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

wish google earth kept more up to date.Quote Not sure if that would be a good thing, I'm known to tan naked on the roof of the team house every once in a while History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

what a cock bag, I hope that guy filing the suit gets trampled by an elephant escaping from the zoo, or hit by a runaway stroller, or runover by a drunken unicycler. As long as it's humiliating I'm for it. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Personally, I'm a fan of politicians trying to push the platform on which they were elected. If the Dems weren't trying to do this, the right would be screaming that they were two-faced and just saying what they needed to get elected. Bush hasn't shown that his plan is particularly effective, so it's about time Congress got involved and started controlling his reckless spending of our dollars and the lives of our servicemen. Quote You're right that they need to back up what they said, but at the same time they aren't exactly going about it the right way. Funding for the troops is needed regardless of a timeline or not, you can't fight a war without money and the dems know this, so trying to hold the money over the Pres' head while attaching a timeline is pretty underhanded. there is a middle ground to be reached here, both sides just need to pull their heads out of their fourth point of contact(that would be their ass for you non-airborne types). History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

However, I never really understood why soldiers in the field were allowed to do it in the first place, or how they found the time. I'm just a really fast typer that's how Funny, I haven't heard shit about this reg, and I'm downrange at the moment. And my NCOIC knows very well that I post regularly on here and have a myspace blog. I don't know how much truth there is to that story. I can understand tightening up on OPSEC, but you don't do that by restricting all communication, you do it by ensuring your soldiers know what is and isn't an OPSEC violation. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

I make it a POINT to walk fast at all times. To work, upstairs, any time I can get my heart rate a little faster during the day...then this? Quote Ditto, I make it a point to walk everywhere with a purpose, not to mention I intentionally park at the far end of the parking lot when i go anywhere(except on dates). And when I go up stairs I usually run. In a world that's getting fatter by the day why would this be a bad thing? History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Can any "fun" hunters explain why you think killing a defenceless animal is something to be proud of??? i'm at a loss to think of anything positive to say about the subject apart from SMALL PENIS Quote I like to play duck hunt on the nintendo, it's fun Besides the first time I went hunting I was too young to realize that I was going to grow up and have a small penis, so there. How big is your weiner, BTW? History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Pssst (a lot more than you think ..... but that's not the point of SC Quote *GQ looks around and whispers*Well I won't tell anyone we gree if you won't, but so no one thinks we're chatting you scream "warmonger" really loud and I'll punch you in the head and say "treehugger". Ready.........GO History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

I don't disagree with that point at all, but it was clearly stated that I have no right to take action to protect myself, that's what I was arguing. What other choice is there after taking a dictator out of power, you can't just roll off into the night and let things sort themselves out. We had no other choice apart from staying here to try and maintain security until a government formed that could do that for itself More often than not you're absolutely correct, but there are a few people that insist on calling soldiers evildoers simply because we wear Old Glory on our shoulders. Now see this is where you really confused me, if I came home safe and sound how would you get any ladies?!?! They'd be too busy following me around to caht with you take care brotha History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

yum yum spuds.Quote I knew there was something we could agree on History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

That is why even being outraged i wasn´t going to initially respond to this post, because it is not my problem how other people raises their kids. However teenagers are not considered responsible enough to do a whole lot of things, like driving, drinking, having consensual sex, signing contracts, etc. I don´t see handling guns as something less serious than the other things they are not allowed to do. Quote You make a valid point there but i think I have to agree with Bill that the individual parents are best suited to decide when their children are ready. I was put behind a rifle for the first time at the age of 6 and was alwaystaken out shooting with my dad(never alone). Now I'm incredibly comfortable around weapons, the people I see having issues are the ones who didn't experience them early on and developed a fear of them. Being uncomfortable with a weapon is more dangerous than being well-trained with one IMO. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

In a political system where 1 person holds supreme executive power .... now what would we call that person ... ummmm.. Oh yes ....... a Dictator Quote I like tator tots, they taste good Seriously though, both sides are slowly moving towards the middle ground it's just that both sides want an upper hand no matter how slight so they are testing the waters to see how far they can push it. And honestly both sides can be accused of undermining the troops right now, the Dems for continuously attaching a timeline to the money we need to survive over here knowing damn well it would be vetoed, and the righties for are not making more of an effort to come up with a compromise on a withdrawl plan. There needs to be one but at the same time you can't sit there and say "the war will be over tuesday, and then we can all go home". Set milestones that need to be reached with a clause that states if the Iraqi government doesn't continue to push forward at a certain pace then we move on to the next stage of withdrawl, and they can play catch up. Put their feet to the fire to pick up more responsibility by making sure they understand we aren't going to do all the work anymore. And in the meantime those of us on the ground are left feeling like a little kid watching mommy and daddy go through a divorce not caring about the best interest of the child, merely fighting for custody to punish the other one for sleeping with the secretary/pool boy. Ya like that analogy, i just came up with it myself History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Lately it's used more often as a slam. "You DON'T support the troops because you don't support Bush/the war/our foreign policy." But that's just an attempt to take away someone _else's_ gold stars. Quote Hey if we weren't all slamming each other than nothing would get done around here History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Hey Kirk what shape is the flight chamber going to be, the pics look like it's an octagon but I may not be looking at the right level. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

It's meaningless. It's like saying "I am against raping teenagers." Everyone is. Quote It's a simple catch phrase that gets politicians a few extra gold stars in the happy column to make up for something else they are doing. History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower

Hopefully this time it's for real.Quote I mentioned it early today in another post, this is becoming common. The locals are getting sick of the BS and are beginning to push the insurgents out themselves. It's going to be a long road before they get them all out, but at least its a start. On the downside it's going to be pretty damn hard to tell who's friendly and who's not if it's a bunch of civilians running out with weapons to help!! I miss the old GI Joe days where all the bad guys had red lasers and all the good guys had blue ones History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower