cost of nexium how much
side effects of nexium 40 mg
generic brand for nexium
walmart nexium price
nexium without prescriptioin
low cost nexium
nexium prescription
nexium and cost
nexium online no prescription needed
nexium pill
is nexium purchased without a prescription
when will nexium be generic
nexium 40mg cheap online
nexium generic differences dangers
nexium cost for overcounter
nexium purple pill home
reduced prescription pills nexium
nexium 20 mg packets
where to buy nexium using paypal
nexium 40 mg capsule ast
when will nexium become a generic
buy nexium 40 mg cc
nexium prescription discount
generic nexium
generic rx for nexium
nexium purple pill comparison
buying nexium in canada
price of nexium
nexium purple pills
cost difference between nexium and zegerid
buy cheap nexium emedoutlet
prilosec or nexium 40 mg
nexium price at walmart
nexium prescription coupons
generic equivalent for nexium
nexium buy cheap
canada rx nexium
cheap nexium in modesto ca
nexium the purple pill
nexium available in generic
nexium cheap canada
nexium 40 mg success
can you buy nexium in generic
lowest prices on nexium
nexium without a prescription
protonix 40 mg or nexium
discount on nexium
nexium purpil pill home
the generic for nexium
annual sales of nexium
generic prescription for norvascbuying doxycycline over the counter20 mg of norvasc dailygeneric for drug lipitorgeneric drug for nexiumis azithromycin the generic of zithromaxnorvasc onlinepropecia buylegitimate levitra onlinediflucan without a prescription50 mg sildenafil citratewhat color is synthroid 88 mgcost of viagra at walgreensbuy wholesale vardenafil cheapxenical on line uscaremark prevacid 30 mgdistemper in india and doxycyclinecheap tamoxifencost of nexium how muchsafe cheap levitrasynthroid generic side affects
[ Post a Reply to this Message ][ Edit | View ]
test2 -- test2, 22:08:23 02/05/03 Wed
When "Divided We Stand", "United We Ain't"
Seems like there are a number of anti-war protesters out there, and, as usual, they are trying to "represent" that they represent themselves and everyone else. And, if you stand up and try to oppose them, they don't want to listen to you ... in fact, they act like they wish you were dead.
It is absolutely ludicrous that former Attorney General Ramsey Clark would attempt a movement to "impeach" Bush and his team in order to prevent war. Talk about loss of contact with reality. The Congress alone has the power to declare war, not the President, and the Congress has already authorized the President to engage in war if deemed by him to be necessary, although Ted Kennedy, upon sobering up, would like to have another "re-authorization" vote in Congress which he ain't gon'na get. Kind of like a "valley girl" who takes two birth control pills at a time to be "for sure, for sure".
I can almost begin to understand why certain people protested against the war in Vietnam back in the 60's, because North Vietnam was not a physical threat to us back then, although it was an actual threat to humanity. Our involvement in Korea in the early 50s and our involvement in Vietman in the late 60s had the same nobleness of intention - we were there to liberate an oppressed South Korea and South Vietnam. The only major difference was that the US citizens supported our efforts in Korea because we were united in our stand - we had successfully liberated France and England, and freed Germany from itself in WWII, soundly defeating the agressor nations. With respect to Vietnam, the war "appeared" not to be supported because the minority-by-count dope smoking, drug snorting, anti-establishment punks and "flower children" of the late 60s had nothing better to do with their lives than to protest everything "the Establishment" was doing. They probably constituted less than 5% of the population, and the remaining 95% "silent majority" supported our efforts because they believed in America then, and still do. Although it may appear difficult to measure the strength and mass of the silent majority, particularly when the protesting minority is "urinating, defecating and fornicating" in the streets between their unenlightened protests, an iceburg will serve to clearly illustrate my premise - the 10% weaker part tries to push down and suppress the 90% stronger foundation mass, which merely goes on quietly about its daily business supporting the entire entity while taking the minority for a ride wherever the 90% majority mass wants to go.
The United States has been and remains "guilty" of going beyond the call of duty to provide aid to other nations. By freely giving of our wealth and the fruits of our labor to underdeveloped nations, we have undeservedly "earned" their contempt and hatred. Instead of viewing us as a benevolent nation which has had the blessing of good fortune and which is willing to share our wealth and abundance with them, which we have done to a fault, other nations look at us much like it is said that Leona Helmsley's employees look at her - with contempt and hatred; at least her employees are working their butts off for their pawltry wage, and this is more a problem of arrogance met by contempt. Here we are, "giving away the store" to other nations, but it never ceases to fail, when people are receiving a handout, the handout is never enough, and the "hander-outer" is always eventually viewed as the bad guy by the "hand-outees". Who was the genius that said, "No good deed goes unpunished".
World terrorism, as we pretty much know it today, began with isolated, low-yield "political" bombings in public places, predominately in France, England, Ireland and Palestine/Israel. It spread to embassies and public places in third-world nations. We saw it in the US and Japan in the 90's, with the bombing of the WTC and the chemical attack on the commuter train in Japan. Meanwhile, nations other than the US, Britain, France and Russia were developing nuclear capabilities: China, India, Pakistan for sure; and others were and are most certainly somewhere along the road to development: North Korea, Iraq, South Africa (which "voluntarily" gave up their program), Iran, Iraq, Israel, and maybe others.
Having survived the "cold war" with Russia, it may have appeared to a lot of people that the worst was behind us, but let me assure you that "your past is never behind you". Now, we have a new enemy, but, unlike our old enemy which had a geography of known coordinates, a population of known size and demographics, and which was anything but cowardly, our new enemy is a widespread, cowardly network of faceless and nameless "cells" who represent nobody, who stand neither to gain nor lose anything, and who have killed and will continue to kill anyone - men, women and children - of their own or different race and nationality, and for no reason at all. They do not even care if they themselves live or die, and, as we have seen, self-destruction is part of their modus operandi. You tell me why the hell a priviledged character like Osama bin Laden, who could be living in the lap of luxury with his family and peers, wants to hang around in caves with a bunch of smelly thugs. Perhaps he gets a "rush" from being the "leader" of a faceless group of misfits, knowing full well that this may be his only option in life because he does not have the acceptance of his family and nation, and he does not have the wisdom and skill to lead in the conventional sense. At least Saddam Hussein, who has 41 "presidential" palaces, is not so out of touch with reality that he cannot take the time to enjoy the finer things of life.
The world situation is dramatically different today than back in the times of Korea and Vietnam. With technology, we (not just us, but France, Britain, Russia and China) have created a monster which has literally gotten "out of hand" into the "wrong hands".
The attack on the WTC was not just the culmination and end-game of a well-planned and well-executed terrorist plot. It was the beginning of a new era, scale and target of terrorism. It was a giant "wake up call" for America, although evidently some placard-carrying protestors did not hear it. It is no longer a matter of IF there is another terrorist strike in America, it is only a matter of WHEN. With the advent of micro-miniturization of electro-mechanical devices, it is now possible to package small nuclear missiles which have more destructive payload than the nuclear devices used in WWII which had to be deployed using long-range bomber aircraft, and these small missiles can be concealed and carried anywhere and launched from a small truck. The nuclear payload in these missiles could be transported in a suitcase in the trunk of a passenger vehicle and carried anywhere the roads and elevators might lead. Then, there is an abundance of raw and processed nuclear, chemical and biological materials which can be deployed in extremely small "dirty bomb" packages. It is only a matter of time before one or more of these packages are delivered to an unsuspecting ... no ... unprepared doorstep.
Now, pay attention, because here's the crux of the matter: Where will and do the terrorists get their materials for destructive purposes? The answer is, anywhere they can. Who are the likely and willing providers and/or co-conspiritors? The answer is, there are lots of them. There are the unsuspecting, perhaps uninvolved countries which appear to have inadeqaute accountability and control of their dangerous materials and the people who have access to them, notably Russia and some of the former Russian states. There are nations like Pakistan who have fundamental idealogical ties, direct or indirect, to some terrorist groups. And, there are nations like Iran, Iraq and North Korea who most assuredly have the basic materials and who show no love for America. Who really knows what India and China are doing? Finally, who can assure us that our own nation is and always has been in complete control of all of our hazardous materials, and that none of it has gotten into the wrong hands? We have had a few defectors of our own, perhaps more than we realize or want to admit. It's enough to make one stop and ponder what was really going on with China and some of our people in the 1990s.
There is no question that Iraq has had and continues to have raw materials and finished products which constitute WMDs, all in violation of UN resolution 1441 and other resolutions stemming from the 1990s. Anyone who thinks that Iraq, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein, has destroyed all of the banned items is a few fries short of a happy meal. Saddam Hussein as a person is a lot more clever than the UN as an organization, and it takes a veritable idiot not to see what he is up to. It is perhaps true that he and his Iraqi army do not pose a direct, specific threat to the 50 United States and its territories at this time solely because he does not have the means (navy & warplanes & supply infrastructure) to invade our land with his army, and he does not have the rocket technology to launch a WMD directly upon the United States from Iraq. But, he does have the raw materials and finished products which can and will be clandestinely supplied to terrorist cells, who will surreptitiously bring them into our porous-bordered country and activate them in densely-populated urban areas, killing thousands and perhaps millions of innocent men, women and children, and wreaking financial havoc heretofore unknown to our nation. Why use your own army to attack a giant, and get completely wiped out in a single retaliatory measure, when you can hire rogue punks behind the scene to do your dirty work for you, and then sit back and say "Gee, I'm so sorry that happened ... I don't have a clue how it happened ... couldn't be us because the UN said we are clean"? Damned clever!
It's damn easy for cowardly, uninformed protestors to criticize the President and those who lead our nation, those who have the toughest jobs and highest level of responsibility in our land and who have the most to lose in the event of a wrong decision. The limp-wristed, lilly-livered anti-war protesters are in a state of denial. They don't want to take a stand for America because they are afraid to risk their present free, seemingly secure ride which has been afforded them through the diligence and support of the silent majority. They believe that they can just keep their heads in the sand and have continued freedom to smoke their dope, snort their drugs, and urinate, defecate and fornicate in public places, while demonstrating their lack of allegiance to and support for America. They don't have the strength, character and resolve to stand up and fight for what is right, so they attempt to tear down and humiliate everyone who opposes their viewpoint. I guess it's damn difficult for them to demonstrate character if they have none. And, sad to say, it's perhaps hard for them to stand up and fight for a nation they don't really love.
Bottom line, if we don't stop Iraq now, we can count on eventually having to bend over, put our heads between your legs and kiss our sweet, naive butts goodbye, and perhaps sooner than you think.
[ Post a Reply to this Message ][ Edit | View ]
Test -- Test, 22:03:15 02/05/03 Wed
When "Divided We Stand", "United We Ain't"
Seems like there are a number of anti-war protesters out there, and, as usual, they are trying to "represent" that they represent themselves and everyone else. And, if you stand up and try to oppose them, they don't want to listen to you ... in fact, they act like they wish you were dead.
It is absolutely ludicrous that former Attorney General Ramsey Clark would attempt a movement to "impeach" Bush and his team in order to prevent war. Talk about loss of contact with reality. The Congress alone has the power to declare war, not the President, and the Congress has already authorized the President to engage in war if deemed by him to be necessary, although Ted Kennedy, upon sobering up, would like to have another "re-authorization" vote in Congress which he ain't gon'na get. Kind of like a "valley girl" who takes two birth control pills at a time to be "for sure, for sure".
I can almost begin to understand why certain people protested against the war in Vietnam back in the 60's, because North Vietnam was not a physical threat to us back then, although it was an actual threat to humanity. Our involvement in Korea in the early 50s and our involvement in Vietman in the late 60s had the same nobleness of intention - we were there to liberate an oppressed South Korea and South Vietnam. The only major difference was that the US citizens supported our efforts in Korea because we were united in our stand - we had successfully liberated France and England, and freed Germany from itself in WWII, soundly defeating the agressor nations. With respect to Vietnam, the war "appeared" not to be supported because the minority-by-count dope smoking, drug snorting, anti-establishment punks and "flower children" of the late 60s had nothing better to do with their lives than to protest everything "the Establishment" was doing. They probably constituted less than 5% of the population, and the remaining 95% "silent majority" supported our efforts because they believed in America then, and still do. Although it may appear difficult to measure the strength and mass of the silent majority, particularly when the protesting minority is "urinating, defecating and fornicating" in the streets between their unenlightened protests, an iceburg will serve to clearly illustrate my premise - the 10% weaker part tries to push down and suppress the 90% stronger foundation mass, which merely goes on quietly about its daily business supporting the entire entity while taking the minority for a ride wherever the 90% majority mass wants to go.
The United States has been and remains "guilty" of going beyond the call of duty to provide aid to other nations. By freely giving of our wealth and the fruits of our labor to underdeveloped nations, we have undeservedly "earned" their contempt and hatred. Instead of viewing us as a benevolent nation which has had the blessing of good fortune and which is willing to share our wealth and abundance with them, which we have done to a fault, other nations look at us much like it is said that Leona Helmsley's employees look at her - with contempt and hatred; at least her employees are working their butts off for their pawltry wage, and this is more a problem of arrogance met by contempt. Here we are, "giving away the store" to other nations, but it never ceases to fail, when people are receiving a handout, the handout is never enough, and the "hander-outer" is always eventually viewed as the bad guy by the "hand-outees". Who was the genius that said, "No good deed goes unpunished".
World terrorism, as we pretty much know it today, began with isolated, low-yield "political" bombings in public places, predominately in France, England, Ireland and Palestine/Israel. It spread to embassies and public places in third-world nations. We saw it in the US and Japan in the 90's, with the bombing of the WTC and the chemical attack on the commuter train in Japan. Meanwhile, nations other than the US, Britain, France and Russia were developing nuclear capabilities: China, India, Pakistan for sure; and others were and are most certainly somewhere along the road to development: North Korea, Iraq, South Africa (which "voluntarily" gave up their program), Iran, Iraq, Israel, and maybe others.
Having survived the "cold war" with Russia, it may have appeared to a lot of people that the worst was behind us, but let me assure you that "your past is never behind you". Now, we have a new enemy, but, unlike our old enemy which had a geography of known coordinates, a population of known size and demographics, and which was anything but cowardly, our new enemy is a widespread, cowardly network of faceless and nameless "cells" who represent nobody, who stand neither to gain nor lose anything, and who have killed and will continue to kill anyone - men, women and children - of their own or different race and nationality, and for no reason at all. They do not even care if they themselves live or die, and, as we have seen, self-destruction is part of their modus operandi. You tell me why the hell a priviledged character like Osama bin Laden, who could be living in the lap of luxury with his family and peers, wants to hang around in caves with a bunch of smelly thugs. Perhaps he gets a "rush" from being the "leader" of a faceless group of misfits, knowing full well that this may be his only option in life because he does not have the acceptance of his family and nation, and he does not have the wisdom and skill to lead in the conventional sense. At least Saddam Hussein, who has 41 "presidential" palaces, is not so out of touch with reality that he cannot take the time to enjoy the finer things of life.
The world situation is dramatically different today than back in the times of Korea and Vietnam. With technology, we (not just us, but France, Britain, Russia and China) have created a monster which has literally gotten "out of hand" into the "wrong hands".
The attack on the WTC was not just the culmination and end-game of a well-planned and well-executed terrorist plot. It was the beginning of a new era, scale and target of terrorism. It was a giant "wake up call" for America, although evidently some placard-carrying protestors did not hear it. It is no longer a matter of IF there is another terrorist strike in America, it is only a matter of WHEN. With the advent of micro-miniturization of electro-mechanical devices, it is now possible to package small nuclear missiles which have more destructive payload than the nuclear devices used in WWII which had to be deployed using long-range bomber aircraft, and these small missiles can be concealed and carried anywhere and launched from a small truck. The nuclear payload in these missiles could be transported in a suitcase in the trunk of a passenger vehicle and carried anywhere the roads and elevators might lead. Then, there is an abundance of raw and processed nuclear, chemical and biological materials which can be deployed in extremely small "dirty bomb" packages. It is only a matter of time before one or more of these packages are delivered to an unsuspecting ... no ... unprepared doorstep.
Now, pay attention, because here's the crux of the matter: Where will and do the terrorists get their materials for destructive purposes? The answer is, anywhere they can. Who are the likely and willing providers and/or co-conspiritors? The answer is, there are lots of them. There are the unsuspecting, perhaps uninvolved countries which appear to have inadeqaute accountability and control of their dangerous materials and the people who have access to them, notably Russia and some of the former Russian states. There are nations like Pakistan who have fundamental idealogical ties, direct or indirect, to some terrorist groups. And, there are nations like Iran, Iraq and North Korea who most assuredly have the basic materials and who show no love for America. Who really knows what India and China are doing? Finally, who can assure us that our own nation is and always has been in complete control of all of our hazardous materials, and that none of it has gotten into the wrong hands? We have had a few defectors of our own, perhaps more than we realize or want to admit. It's enough to make one stop and ponder what was really going on with China and some of our people in the 1990s.
There is no question that Iraq has had and continues to have raw materials and finished products which constitute WMDs, all in violation of UN resolution 1441 and other resolutions stemming from the 1990s. Anyone who thinks that Iraq, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein, has destroyed all of the banned items is a few fries short of a happy meal. Saddam Hussein as a person is a lot more clever than the UN as an organization, and it takes a veritable idiot not to see what he is up to. It is perhaps true that he and his Iraqi army do not pose a direct, specific threat to the 50 United States and its territories at this time solely because he does not have the means (navy & warplanes & supply infrastructure) to invade our land with his army, and he does not have the rocket technology to launch a WMD directly upon the United States from Iraq. But, he does have the raw materials and finished products which can and will be clandestinely supplied to terrorist cells, who will surreptitiously bring them into our porous-bordered country and activate them in densely-populated urban areas, killing thousands and perhaps millions of innocent men, women and children, and wreaking financial havoc heretofore unknown to our nation. Why use your own army to attack a giant, and get completely wiped out in a single retaliatory measure, when you can hire rogue punks behind the scene to do your dirty work for you, and then sit back and say "Gee, I'm so sorry that happened ... I don't have a clue how it happened ... couldn't be us because the UN said we are clean"? Damned clever!
It's damn easy for cowardly, uninformed protestors to criticize the President and those who lead our nation, those who have the toughest jobs and highest level of responsibility in our land and who have the most to lose in the event of a wrong decision. The limp-wristed, lilly-livered anti-war protesters are in a state of denial. They don't want to take a stand for America because they are afraid to risk their present free, seemingly secure ride which has been afforded them through the diligence and support of the silent majority. They believe that they can just keep their heads in the sand and have continued freedom to smoke their dope, snort their drugs, and urinate, defecate and fornicate in public places, while demonstrating their lack of allegiance to and support for America. They don't have the strength, character and resolve to stand up and fight for what is right, so they attempt to tear down and humiliate everyone who opposes their viewpoint. I guess it's damn difficult for them to demonstrate character if they have none. And, sad to say, it's perhaps hard for them to stand up and fight for a nation they don't really love.
Bottom line, if we don't stop Iraq now, we can count on eventually having to bend over, put our heads between your legs and kiss our sweet, naive butts goodbye, and perhaps sooner than you think.
[ Post a Reply to this Message ][ Edit | View ]
This is the first message here -- Scheeze, 23:35:16 07/06/02 Sat
Whazzup?
[ Post a Reply to this Message ][ Edit | View ]
Feedback: 
exoticparrotsfarm, 00:37:28 07/26/22 Tue 
