SkyDekker

ouch, heal quick!!!

Those are some amazing pictures.

you know what Anvil, you say some interesting things but then you throw in stuff like: and and and you lose all credibility you built up before then. BTW, like I said in another thread, if I really hated some one I would come out and say it. I certainly support Bush in certain matters, but I have some serious doubts about others. I guess in your world, if people do not agree with you they are stupid. Too bad you cannot have a discussion without that sentiment.

1I called you once, maybe you remember

And in your "explanantion" of the current economic condition, Bush has no fault whatsoever, it is all some one else's fault. And a lot of the economic woe's is blamed on a strike in your "story". Prove it! Prove that without that strike the US economy would have been in a better situation.

Why is that? Because I am not smart enough, or because I do not agree with you? Mr. Anvil, I am not quite sure where you are getting the idea that I hate Mr. Bush or America. Personally I really do not hate many things, I find it to be an exceptionally strong feeling, one restricted to only a very few people or things. I do read it, I keep quoting it, then I ask you a question. You have yet to answer that question. Makes me wonder who needs to READ. Really, well I am happy you read a couple of resolutions and now think you can make that statement. Have you read that part about member nations going to war and the procedures in place for that? Before you start telling people to do research, maybe you should try and do some of it, or at least that pertaining to the erroneous statements you are making. Furthermore, it is ceertainly no fact in International Law that the resolutions alone would have been enough to go to war. The US basically said piss on you UN, we don't like what you are doing, we don't care what you think, you are useless, but we'll use your resolution to try and justify a war. I can't really agree with that sentiment. Non-negotiable fact of life, as I stated before. But don't think for a second that I'm going to let you bash the US for breaking with the UN mandates when it DID NO SUCH THING. You then went on about President Bush misleading the American people, i.e. lying. If you wish to prove that, you have to establish that President Bush KNEW FOR A FACT THAT NO WMD EXISTED in Iraq. In other words, you have to show that he knew he was being deceived by all of the intelligence agencies. Until you have done so, you have absolutely no basis whatsoever in proving that he was lying on the issue. None. Nada. Zilch. Chill dude. Let go of your hate. I prefer home grown Niagara Peninsula wines.

If you wear a nacklace, that may be the place to put it. Now when skydiving, but certainly a possibility for most otehr times you may want to take it off.

Nice, I hope you bought a couple of thousands worth

and.... So which one is it Anvil???? Or are we back to option 3: We only like to UN when it fits into our argument? To the rest of your email: It started with me asking you a question, I did not claim anything different. All I claimed was keeping an open mind, keeping an open mind to different possibilities. Maybe when you invade a country the burden of proof is a little different. I like the idea of having proof before you invade another country. You know, the old innocent until proven guilty. But I guess you adhere to shoot, kill first and then ask questions.

Maybe Perris would go for an arrangement where they would allow you to jump the $50 if he declines?

Just talked to the Sunny One. She is feeling a bit better and may be sent home later today. Then we had to get off the phone cause she had to pee

yeah call the other 30 million canadians waiting for that as well

Even if this was true, it would only be a matter of the pot calling the kettle black. Unless he knew that the information was wrong all along. I guess you assume that the President can do no wrong. I assume that the President misleading the US citizens is a possibility. Heck, it's been done many times before. It amazes me how folks who did NOT want to give the UN inspection teams more time, because there was an imminent danger, are not outraged that they are so far unable to find anything. If they are so well hidden, how can it be such an imminent danger? Bush had alterior motive to invade Iraq, be it oil or be it finishing what his daddy could not, and used WMD as an excuse. WMD are never found, to me that would be a LIE. Now would those UN resolutions be from the same United Nations as the one that the US broke from when it went to war against Iraq? So, do you agree with the UN, or do you not agree with the UN? Or option three: you only agree with the UN when it fits in your plan?

I agree that that would be a great reason to change something, but it was NOT the reason given prior to the war. Right, so when a guy you like lies it is some one else's fault. But if it is some one you don't like he is a lying coward. Shame you do not apply your standards to all people alike.

Can't say I blame you, you lucky dog

So, if they do not find any WMD sometime soon, will you call your current president a lying coward?

1. 3 weeks paid time off 2. no weekends 3. pretty much my own boss 4. large expense account ($3,000 last month without any air travel) 5. paid cell phone 6. paid benefits 7. can leave when I want

Just charge it one jump at a time and you got yourself free jumps!!!

that last one looks like an engagement picture

nice shots Viking, really nice shots

2.....1......poof

mmm, not quite sure where that is

I knew there was a problem with me not reading all the posts on here All I have to do is convince my boss Guess, I'll have to hook up with skyone at Rantoul and try and become the first canuck that way

hey, I want a name as well, so I can around!!!!!! I want to be the first Canuck!!!!!!! what do you say lip?

A sentence like that certainly makes you think, doesn't it.