Get ready for the next big heart-tug

jackiebaron

The propaganda machine is whirring as we speak.

The heart-tug for Iraq was "helping these people" even though over a million of them have been whacked.

The heart-tug for Afghanistan was "girls can't go to school. Women have to wear a burkha".

The heart-tug for Libya was/is that a brutal dictator is offing his own people (even though intervention has capped just as many).

NOW


The heart-tug for the Ivory Coast is child slavery.....just effing saw it on the telly. "We must move into Cote d'Ivoire to save the kids who are picking cocoa beans, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

jill_valentine

There's no comparison between Libya and the other two.

Saila

wont someone PLEASE think of the children.

and there is no oil there

Quiet you

So everything any western power does is evil and driven by oil in your mind then?

Iraq was an illegal war fought for what most people can only assume was oil. I don't think anyone will argue that point with you.

Afghanistan was legal and sanctioned due to the Taliban harbouring and providing resources to Al-Quieda elements although I have a weird feeling you simply won't accept that.

Libya seems to be one of those win, win situations for us. We get to keep recieving oil and help a popular uprising that are looking for nothing more then the right to have a say in how their country is run. As for the numbers of civilians killed, nobody knows exactly because Lybian state television keeps faking casualties. The evil western media considers the vast majority of the evidence shown to them of civilian deaths a joke.

There is nothing of worth in the Ivory Coast yet the French and U.N. forces are supporting Ouattara's forces becuase Gbagbo has refused to cede power after losing a democratic election.

Leaving Iraq out of it there's nothing evil being carried out by the west. Some self-serving intervention yes but ultimately it's the right thing to do. It's just a shame they don't keep up the good work and go after other, just as deserving, dictators.


Edit -- I had a quick look through other posts you've made. Well done. You trolled me good.

Saila

Quiet you wrote: »

So everything any western power does is evil and driven by oil in your mind then?

no just resources, there are no permanent friends and enemies in world affairs just temporary interests

Quiet you

Saila wrote: »

no just resources, there are no permanent friends and enemies in world affairs just temporary interests

No argument here but to just randomly come out and belittle what's happening in other countries just to make some anti-military, anti-west point is kind of shi**y as far as I'm concerned.

If he had made a logical and realistic point like yours I wouldn't have felt the urge to make a comment.

Chaotic_Forces

Do you ever stop bitching about militaries?

Quiet you

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Do you ever stop bitching about militaries?

Hah, I had the same thought. I knew I recognised the insane, conspiratorial ramblings and had a look.

He kept hurling unsubstantiated "facts" at me and others before (possibly you) while he tried to back up his argument as to why everything America does is a war crime.

Chaotic_Forces

Quiet you wrote: »

Hah, I had the same thought. I knew I recognised the insane, conspiratorial ramblings and had a look.

He kept hurling unsubstantiated "facts" at me and others before (possibly you) while he tried to back up his argument as to why everything America does is a war crime.

I know him/her, they tend to post something against America/armies, get proven wrong with well thought out, constructive, logical arguments and then vanish and join in when there's a slight mistake they can capitalize on.

Quiet you

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

I know him/her, they tend to post something against America/armies, get proven wrong with well thought out, constructive, logical arguments and then vanish and join in when there's a slight mistake they can capitalize on.

Don't forget the old, dragging up quotes from pages ago only to misrepresent what you actually said and make you look like a baby killer trick.

jackiebaron

Quiet you wrote: »

No argument here but to just randomly come out and belittle what's happening in other countries just to make some anti-military, anti-west point is kind of shi**y as far as I'm concerned.

If he had made a logical and realistic point like yours I wouldn't have felt the urge to make a comment.

Oh, there's a point alright Qy. Now if you think I'm shït-stirring then so be it.
On TV tonight I saw a pathetic report about child slavery in no place other than the Ivory Coast. Now, tell me this, why didn't this report come out a year ago and why aren't these reports coming out DAILY regarding child soldiers in Burma, or blubbery American and German men crawling all over Thai and Bangladeshi 13 year-olds or baby soldiers in Guinea Bissau or Fillipina fisher girls being thrown overboard if they lose their strength.

All of a sudden, child slavery in Cote d'Ivoire is a mandate and a priority. What about the girls next door in Liberia and north in Mauratania who have their womanhood slashed when they reach 12 or 13?

No tanks or bombers or troops to halt that.
Child slavery, protection?......don't make me laugh!

jill_valentine

....

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

I know him/her, they tend to post something against America/armies, get proven wrong with well thought out, constructive, logical arguments and then vanish and join in when there's a slight mistake they can capitalize on.

Adyx

jackiebaron wrote: »

Oh, there's a point alright Qy. Now if you think I'm shït-stirring then so be it.
On TV tonight I saw a pathetic report about child slavery in no place other than the Ivory Coast. Now, tell me this, why didn't this report come out a year ago and why aren't these reports coming out DAILY regarding child soldiers in Burma, or blubbery American and German men crawling all over Thai and Bangladeshi 13 year-olds or baby soldiers in Guinea Bissau or Fillipina fisher girls being thrown overboard if they lose their strength.

All of a sudden, child slavery in Cote d'Ivoire is a mandate and a priority. What about the girls next door in Liberia and north in Mauratania who have their womanhood slashed when they reach 12 or 13?

No tanks or bombers or troops to halt that.
Child slavery, protection?......don't make me laugh!

So tell us then, what is the real reason?

jackiebaron

I just heard a "dildo" squeaking about how Ghadaffi should be brought before to ICC.

...that's the International Criminal Court.

The "dildo" was American.

America doesn't recognise the ICC.


< fücking speechless ...through pure flabbergastedness >

WoollyRedHat

Quiet you wrote: »

So everything any western power does is evil and driven by oil in your mind then?

Iraq was an illegal war fought for what most people can only assume was oil. I don't think anyone will argue that point with you.

Afghanistan was legal and sanctioned due to the Taliban harbouring and providing resources to Al-Quieda elements although I have a weird feeling you simply won't accept that.

Libya seems to be one of those win, win situations for us. We get to keep recieving oil and help a popular uprising that are looking for nothing more then the right to have a say in how their country is run. As for the numbers of civilians killed, nobody knows exactly because Lybian state television keeps faking casualties. The evil western media considers the vast majority of the evidence shown to them of civilian deaths a joke.

There is nothing of worth in the Ivory Coast yet the French and U.N. forces are supporting Ouattara's forces becuase Gbagbo has refused to cede power after losing a democratic election.

Leaving Iraq out of it there's nothing evil being carried out by the west. Some self-serving intervention yes but ultimately it's the right thing to do. It's just a shame they don't keep up the good work and go after other, just as deserving, dictators.


Edit -- I had a quick look through other posts you've made. Well done. You trolled me good.

Afghanistan has been an out an out mess, as has been Iraq. Beyond the invasion of countries that have been carried out without careful planning, the use of force in such countries in the past has been questionable, to use the term lightly, with some of the reports in Iraq for example really questioning the countries of such invasions right or authority to intervene. Reported use of phoshorus for example is abhorrent and has no place in this world and is sickeing to it's core. These weapons harm and destruct the very lives they so purport to protect. And it's cynical to use economical factors as any justification for invasion, it shouldn't come into it ever, either primary or secondary reasons for an intervention.

jackiebaron

This woman who was allegedly gang raped.

Why is so much attention being hovered on this story....even if it is true?

When.....I mean, during the attacks upon Iraq and Afghanistan have there been reports of Iraqi or Afghan men gang raping a woman?

If a woman is raped.....and I mean REALLY raped, the last thing she wants to do is to become a public figure. She wants comfort, protection and safety. She wants to retreat back into the bosom of her mother and family.
THAT'S why that young girl, Jessica Lynch, avoided the limelight. They tried to spin up a bullshït story of her "firing her weapon, till it clicked empty". She came out and said that it was a hoax and that she fell unconscious and woke up in an Iraqi hospital after a fücking crash.

The whole thing was staged, she didn't like it and now nobody even remembers her.....even though they all had fridge stickers of her not long ago.

If this woman has been raped, then it's a disgrace. But rape is a criminal offence, not an act that warrants military intervention. A rape occurs in the United States every 13 minutes. Where are the tanks and bombers there?

Don't try to tug on our heart strings with shït that you ignore elsewhere. A woman is raped? We must help!!! Women in Saudi Arabia aren't even allowed to leave the house or drive a car to buy eggs....but that's fine, right?

F.O.

Chaotic_Forces

jackiebaron wrote: »

This woman who was allegedly gang raped.

Why is so much attention being hovered on this story....even if it is true?

When.....I mean, during the attacks upon Iraq and Afghanistan have there been reports of Iraqi or Afghan men gang raping a woman?

If a woman is raped.....and I mean REALLY raped, the last thing she wants to do is to become a public figure. She wants comfort, protection and safety. She wants to retreat back into the bosom of her mother and family.
THAT'S why that young girl, Jessica Lynch, avoided the limelight. They tried to spin up a bullshït story of her "firing her weapon, till it clicked empty". She came out and said that it was a hoax and that she fell unconscious and woke up in an Iraqi hospital after a fücking crash.

The whole thing was staged, she didn't like it and now nobody even remembers her.....even though they all had fridge stickers of her not long ago.

If this woman has been raped, then it's a disgrace. But rape is a criminal offence, not an act that warrants military intervention. A rape occurs in the United States every 13 minutes. Where are the tanks and bombers there?

Don't try to tug on our heart strings with shït that you ignore elsewhere. A woman is raped? We must help!!! Women in Saudi Arabia aren't even allowed to leave the house or drive a car to buy eggs....but that's fine, right?

F.O.

So why don't you physically go to these places and change them for the better?

jackiebaron

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

So why don't you physically go to these places and change them for the better?

That was good.

Chaotic_Forces

jackiebaron wrote: »

That was good.

If it was a good suggestion, why not do it? Or do you just sit on your backside and bitch about things instead of being a decent person and trying to change the world for the better? :rolleyes:

Canis Lupus

jackiebaron wrote: »

If a woman is raped.....and I mean REALLY raped

Ah, I've been giggling at that line for a minute now.

MagicSean

I see what you're saying but I don't think NATO has the resources to invade all these places Jackie, no matter how much you'd like them to.

humanji

jackiebaron wrote: »

I just heard a "dildo" squeaking about how Ghadaffi should be brought before to ICC.

...that's the International Criminal Court.

The "dildo" was American.

America doesn't recognise the ICC.


< fücking speechless ...through pure flabbergastedness >

Did the American represent the US government? And why is aid being offered to the Ivory Coast?

The reason there was a program about child slave labour is because the country is in the news. Most people only know of the Ivory Coast because the fact that their flag is similar to ours is a regular pub quiz question. Other than that, people generally know f*ck all about countries in Africa. When there is a war that's featured in the news, then it's hardly surprising that tv channels show programs about it. It's not the tv channels' fault, they're simply catering for the wants of their audience. So using this as an Anti-US rant is a bit bizarre.

Dave!

Oh jackie... same old conspiracy crap coming out of you...


Don't ever change

Chairman Meow

jackiebaron wrote: »

The propaganda machine is whirring as we speak.

The heart-tug for Iraq was "helping these people" even though over a million of them have been whacked.

The heart-tug for Afghanistan was "girls can't go to school. Women have to wear a burkha".

The heart-tug for Libya was/is that a brutal dictator is offing his own people (even though intervention has capped just as many).

NOW


The heart-tug for the Ivory Coast is child slavery.....just effing saw it on the telly. "We must move into Cote d'Ivoire to save the kids who are picking cocoa beans, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

What the **** is wrong with you?

MagicSean

Chairman Meow wrote: »

What the **** is wrong with you?

I think he may have had his army application rejected at some stage.

orourkeda

Quiet you wrote: »

So everything any western power does is evil and driven by oil in your mind then?

Iraq was an illegal war fought for what most people can only assume was oil. I don't think anyone will argue that point with you.

Afghanistan was legal and sanctioned due to the Taliban harbouring and providing resources to Al-Quieda elements although I have a weird feeling you simply won't accept that.

Libya seems to be one of those win, win situations for us. We get to keep recieving oil and help a popular uprising that are looking for nothing more then the right to have a say in how their country is run. As for the numbers of civilians killed, nobody knows exactly because Lybian state television keeps faking casualties. The evil western media considers the vast majority of the evidence shown to them of civilian deaths a joke.

There is nothing of worth in the Ivory Coast yet the French and U.N. forces are supporting Ouattara's forces becuase Gbagbo has refused to cede power after losing a democratic election.

Leaving Iraq out of it there's nothing evil being carried out by the west. Some self-serving intervention yes but ultimately it's the right thing to do. It's just a shame they don't keep up the good work and go after other, just as deserving, dictators.


Edit -- I had a quick look through other posts you've made. Well done. You trolled me good.

Is Afghanistan the only nation on earth that helps to resource Al-Qaeda

Dudess

Cynicism for the sake of it ftw - makes ya look kinda edgy.

Chaotic_Forces

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Ah, I've been giggling at that line for a minute now.

That could work if you're ever charged: Your Honour, I admit I raped her but come on, it wasn't as if she got really raped.

Quiet you

orourkeda wrote: »

Is Afghanistan the only nation on earth that helps to resource Al-Qaeda

Nope but they were the only country to openly harbour them and have a high ranking member as minister for defence.

Quiet you

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

Afghanistan has been an out an out mess, as has been Iraq. Beyond the invasion of countries that have been carried out without careful planning, the use of force in such countries in the past has been questionable, to use the term lightly, with some of the reports in Iraq for example really questioning the countries of such invasions right or authority to intervene. Reported use of phoshorus for example is abhorrent and has no place in this world and is sickeing to it's core. These weapons harm and destruct the very lives they so purport to protect. And it's cynical to use economical factors as any justification for invasion, it shouldn't come into it ever, either primary or secondary reasons for an intervention.

Yip, both could have been managed in a far better way but that doesn't take away from the fact that the invasion of Afghanistan was sanctioned.

As for weapons used and motives for invasion, I agree. They've done some pretty terrible things for some pretty greedy reasons but when talking about the likes of Libya and the Ivory Coast I don't really think you can fault their actions.

Whatever our crazy pal Jackie wants to think you can't deny that protecting innocents from massacre and letting those that want a say have their say is a bad thing.

RichieC

Funny, since the teabaggers in America right now are targeting Child labour laws for repeal!

Quiet you

jackiebaron wrote: »

This woman who was allegedly gang raped.

Why is so much attention being hovered on this story....even if it is true?

When.....I mean, during the attacks upon Iraq and Afghanistan have there been reports of Iraqi or Afghan men gang raping a woman?

If a woman is raped.....and I mean REALLY raped, the last thing she wants to do is to become a public figure. She wants comfort, protection and safety. She wants to retreat back into the bosom of her mother and family.
THAT'S why that young girl, Jessica Lynch, avoided the limelight. They tried to spin up a bullshït story of her "firing her weapon, till it clicked empty". She came out and said that it was a hoax and that she fell unconscious and woke up in an Iraqi hospital after a fücking crash.

The whole thing was staged, she didn't like it and now nobody even remembers her.....even though they all had fridge stickers of her not long ago.

If this woman has been raped, then it's a disgrace. But rape is a criminal offence, not an act that warrants military intervention. A rape occurs in the United States every 13 minutes. Where are the tanks and bombers there?

Don't try to tug on our heart strings with shït that you ignore elsewhere. A woman is raped? We must help!!! Women in Saudi Arabia aren't even allowed to leave the house or drive a car to buy eggs....but that's fine, right?

F.O.

More of the jackiebaron brand of facts ehy? Any proof a rape claim was faked? Any incidents spring to mind of a war waged over a rape claim?

Also, what does Jessica Lynch have to do with anything? What exactly is your point? Do you even have one or is it just time for a rant?

gargleblaster

Quiet you wrote: »

Yip, both could have been managed in a far better way but that doesn't take away from the fact that the invasion of Afghanistan was sanctioned.

As for weapons used and motives for invasion, I agree. They've done some pretty terrible things for some pretty greedy reasons but when talking about the likes of Libya and the Ivory Coast I don't really think you can fault their actions.

Whatever our crazy pal Jackie wants to think you can't deny that protecting innocents from massacre and letting those that want a say have their say is a bad thing.

The invasion of Afghanistan was sanctioned before it happened? By whom (other than the feckless US congress)?




As much as I hate to side with someone who would say something like "really raped" :mad::mad::mad::mad: I feel like I have to.

Most of the time, military intervention is motivated more by economic interests rather than some quest for justice. The US military in particular was outed for this by one of its greatest heroes, General Smedley Butler.

RichieC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjloBXr9tVw

Quiet you

gargleblaster wrote: »

The invasion of Afghanistan was sanctioned before it happened? By whom (other than the feckless US congress)?




As much as I hate to side with someone who would say something like "really raped" :mad::mad::mad::mad: I feel like I have to.

Most of the time, military intervention is motivated more by economic interests rather than some quest for justice. The US military in particular was outed for this by one of its greatest heroes, General Smedley Butler.

They used the right to self defence as a reason so I'll admit that sanctioned was not the right word to use although they didn't break any international laws as far as I can seee.

He is saying that the military actions against Libya are all down to a couple crimes which we all know is not the case. It's as if he thinks the media are an unarmed wing of western militaries.

You're right, most of the time it is about money. In the Ivory coast its about justice. In Lybia it's about money and works out well because justice can be served in the process.

LondonIrish90

gargleblaster wrote: »

The invasion of Afghanistan was sanctioned before it happened? By whom (other than the feckless US congress)?




As much as I hate to side with someone who would say something like "really raped" :mad::mad::mad::mad: I feel like I have to.

Most of the time, military intervention is motivated more by economic interests rather than some quest for justice. The US military in particular was outed for this by one of its greatest heroes, General Smedley Butler.

The United Nations.

They good enough for you?

Irish soldiers (therefore the Irish state) have been a part of ISAF also.

gargleblaster

Quiet you wrote: »

They used the right to self defence as a reason so I'll admit that sanctioned was not the right word to use although they didn't break any international laws as far as I can seee.

He is saying that the military actions against Libya are all down to a couple crimes which we all know is not the case. It's as if he thinks the media are an unarmed wing of western militaries.

You're right, most of the time it is about money. In the Ivory coast its about justice. In Lybia it's about money and works out well because justice can be served in the process.

Whether they broke any international laws is up for debate.

Agreed re: Libya. It's nice when it's not just about money. And in Afghanistan it wasn't just about money either. I was simply making the point that war is usually about money.


LondonIrish, citation please? (re UN resolution sanctioning the invastion of Afghanistan)

Overheal

jackiebaron wrote: »

The heart-tug for the Ivory Coast is child slavery.....just effing saw it on the telly. "We must move into Cote d'Ivoire to save the kids who are picking cocoa beans, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Ah, so you think it's laughable that they've intervened in the Ivory Coast for humanitarian reasons?

I find that odd, since earlier this week you conversely remarked that they of course would never do anything for humanitarian reasons, they would only say they were as propoaganda:

jackiebaron wrote: »

[Re:Will the Us/Uk/ french protect the Ivory Coast civilians?]Of course not. They're not in the business of providing humanitarian assistance. They just say they are when it suits them.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=71501974&postcount=51

How then do you explain that?

Overheal

RichieC wrote: »

Funny, since the teabaggers in America right now are targeting Child labour laws for repeal!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056204508

join the debate

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

jackiebaron wrote: »

The propaganda machine is whirring as we speak.

The heart-tug for Iraq was "helping these people" even though over a million of them have been whacked.

The heart-tug for Afghanistan was "girls can't go to school. Women have to wear a burkha".

The heart-tug for Libya was/is that a brutal dictator is offing his own people (even though intervention has capped just as many).

NOW


The heart-tug for the Ivory Coast is child slavery.....just effing saw it on the telly. "We must move into Cote d'Ivoire to save the kids who are picking cocoa beans, hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Part in bold, got a link???

jackiebaron wrote: »

This woman who was allegedly gang raped.

Why is so much attention being hovered on this story....even if it is true?

When.....I mean, during the attacks upon Iraq and Afghanistan have there been reports of Iraqi or Afghan men gang raping a woman?

If a woman is raped.....and I mean REALLY raped, the last thing she wants to do is to become a public figure. She wants comfort, protection and safety. She wants to retreat back into the bosom of her mother and family.
THAT'S why that young girl, Jessica Lynch, avoided the limelight. They tried to spin up a bullshït story of her "firing her weapon, till it clicked empty". She came out and said that it was a hoax and that she fell unconscious and woke up in an Iraqi hospital after a fücking crash.

The whole thing was staged, she didn't like it and now nobody even remembers her.....even though they all had fridge stickers of her not long ago.

If this woman has been raped, then it's a disgrace. But rape is a criminal offence, not an act that warrants military intervention. A rape occurs in the United States every 13 minutes. Where are the tanks and bombers there?

Don't try to tug on our heart strings with shït that you ignore elsewhere. A woman is raped? We must help!!! Women in Saudi Arabia aren't even allowed to leave the house or drive a car to buy eggs....but that's fine, right?

F.O.

You talk way too much crap... seriously...

gargleblaster

Regarding the media being an unarmed wing of the military, I wouldn't go nearly that far. However there have been some instances which have made me think twice about putting much credence at all in 'official' media reports.

Case in point: the situation in Venezuela. If an Irish film crew hadn't been there the day that the attempt at ousting Hugo Chavez was made, we would have nothing but the official reports, which all relayed that he stepped down.

I'm not saying that all the media is corrupt and it's a giant conspiracy, just that if a major media organization doesn't think to question the information it is given by whichever official government organization shares it with them, then obviously that has led to some rather large howlers being passed on to the public as fact. This was also the case in the lead up to the first US invasion of Iraq (babies being thrown out of incubators) and also the most recent one (all the cooked up evidence presented to the UN was first presented to the US public via major news organizations).

Overheal

Jamal Ambitious Loiterer wrote: »

Part in bold, got a link???

You already know he doesn't. Jackiebaron I'm afraid you've lost any sense of belief here, as in the last 2-3 weeks you've made dozens of wild claims and provided virtually no citation for any of it.

RichieC

Overheal wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056204508

join the debate

Debating Americans about politics isn't good for my health.

Quiet you

gargleblaster wrote: »

Regarding the media being an unarmed wing of the military, I wouldn't go nearly that far. However there have been some instances which have made me think twice about putting much credence at all in 'official' media reports.

Case in point: the situation in Venezuela. If an Irish film crew hadn't been there the day that the attempt at ousting Hugo Chavez was made, we would have nothing but the official reports, which all relayed that he stepped down.

I'm not saying that all the media is corrupt and it's a giant conspiracy, just that if a major media organization doesn't think to question the information it is given by whichever official government organization shares it with them, then obviously that has led to some rather large howlers being passed on to the public as fact. This was also the case in the lead up to the first US invasion of Iraq (babies being thrown out of incubators) and also the most recent one (all the cooked up evidence presented to the UN was first presented to the US public via major news organizations).

I totally agree with you. I wouldn't even watch the headlines on most news channels but I think what you're missing here is jackiebaron is a conspiracy nut and not a very consistent one at that. Thats why I said he thinks the news is another branch of the military.

I'd be very slow to take any news organisations word unless it's Reuters or AlJazira without a decent bit of research first, jackie however just likes to make sh*t up and shout "fact" a lot.


As for the Chavez thing. What a documentary. Pitty they let the CIA plane get the plotters out of the country. Those would have been some interesting headlines.

Overheal

RichieC wrote: »

Debating Americans about politics isn't good for my health.

Worried that we might know what we're talking about?

Quiet you

RichieC wrote: »

Debating Americans about politics isn't good for my health.

Is Overheal not a yank? He seems pretty rational and on the ball to me.

RichieC

Overheal wrote: »

Worried that we might know what we're talking about?

That's not been my experience, been a member of democratic underground and Free Republic since 2004... in both cases they're just ideologically driven and react knee jerk style to every story.

Overheal

I havent been to either site, but maybe I should, just for giggles.

US Politics forum probably isn't what you're used to. It's still moderated my Politics root. Several regular Irish posters in there; both conservative and liberal. If you haven't been in there for reals, I don't think it's really fair to judge it.

RichieC

Quiet you wrote: »

Is Overheal not a yank? He seems pretty rational and on the ball to me.

I wasn't specifically talking about Overheal who you correctly noted does seem to be on the balls.

In saying that though he is over there defending the teabagger assault on child labour laws.

Quiet you

RichieC wrote: »

I wasn't specifically talking about Overheal who you correctly noted does seem to be on the balls.

In saying that though he is over there defending the teabagger assault on child labour laws.

Meh, as long as people aren't being murdered or otherwise persecuted I don't think I can comment on what other countries decided about what's best for them. It's kinda their decision to make.

I wouldn't be too happy if some Americans decided that we needed our laws changed and began commenting on it.

RichieC

Quiet you wrote: »

Meh, as long as people aren't being murdered or otherwise persecuted I don't think I can comment on what other countries decided about what's best for them. It's kinda their decision to make.

I wouldn't be too happy if some Americans decided that we needed our laws changed and began commenting on it.

They're only internet opinions.