Her vagina was blue.
Her vagina was pink.
Her vagina could sop up a stopped up sink.

There was no time to ponder equality,
with so many ways to color her wallaby.

>> ^transporter:

Looks like something out of Dr. Seuss. "The 500 Vagina-wigs of Bartholomew Cubbins"

Her vagina was blue,
Her vagina was pink,
Her vagina could sop up a stopped up sink.

(Wrong button, oops)

In reply to this comment by transporter:
Looks like something out of Dr. Seuss. "The 500 Vagina-wigs of Bartholomew Cubbins"

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

Oh yeah! The evening shift did that tho >> ^zombieater:

>> ^lampishthing:
You forget that you would have probably had to pay for the wasted product >> ^zombieater:
This makes me wish I had been more creative during my days in the food service industry.


Nah. This dude is merely flushing the fountain drink station - it's SOP to clean it out.

>> ^lampishthing:

You forget that you would have probably had to pay for the wasted product >> ^zombieater:
This makes me wish I had been more creative during my days in the food service industry.



Nah. This dude is merely flushing the fountain drink station - it's SOP to clean it out.

SOP for the Republicans. And why shouldn't it be? It's not like it's ever hurt them...their supporters don't appear to have memories, or to be capable of watching recorded interviews.

Believe me I'm not arguing that Saddam nor Gaddafi were nice guys. I making the distinction between a country being run by a corrupt leader, and destroying a country because of their corrupt leader. In my opinion Gaddafi didn't suddenly become more of a threat after his speech. In fact, he did what almost EVERY country on the face of the planet would do when faced with an armed uprising (this includes the US and the UK). There are other issues at play here also, such as why Burmese, Rwandan, Ivory Coast, Kenyan, North Korean, Saudi, Bahraini leaders deserve more respect than Iraqi and Libyan (oil rich) leaders.

By UN estimates the US killed 100,000 Iraqis (civilians and soldiers)in the first Gulf War. Other estimates show countless thousands died due to the sanctions in the 90s, and god knows how many in the last Iraq War disaster. The entire infrastructure of the Iraqi state has been in shambles for 20 years. In fact, they went from the most modern, secular, arab state to a destroyed wreck of a country. I strongly feel that a 70 year old Saddam Hussein was less of a threat to the Iraqi people than the US war was. In my opinion time would have been a much kinder ally to the Iraqis than the US was. Though I understand your point about the Kurds, realistically anything said about Iraq could easily be said about Turkey, one of our biggest allies.

"As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?" I guess my answer to you is yes. Foreign policy consistency across the board would go a long way towards stopping dictators from betting that they will get away with human-rights crimes. Inconsistency is not going to help anyone.

Thanks for you civil and informed answer. Just so you know, I probably won't have the time to respond again any time soon.
>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^vaporlock:
Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).
Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).
I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.


like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context
Slow down before you dismiss Gaddafi's statements on genocide because they resemble Saddam's speechs. Nobody, and I mean nobody(Arab,Palestinian,Iraqi) denies Saddam's record on mass killings.
In his Anfal campaign against the Kurds there estimates higher than 200k murdered by Saddam. Half of the dead are from military operations against civilians including the use of chemical weapons, while the other half are mass executions complete with bulldozers to dig large enough graves on site.
The estimates of his crushing of the Shia uprisings at the end of the first gulf war exceed 100k dead as well, with gunships and tanks being used to lower the number of 'unruly' civilians to something more 'manageable'.
You are right about the similarities between Gaddafi and Saddam. It's a reason to take his threats regarding genocide of those opposing him as deadly serious.
Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
It wasn't just a "speech". He followed the speech up by mobilizing his army and marching across the country killing anyone even suspected of being with the opposition. He was within a single city of having taken back full control of the country and being able to "secure" his gains. I hate having to point that "secure" in this case means systematically hunting down killing as many supporters of the opposition as it takes to be certain no-one will ever consider doing it again. Whether that can be done with 100 or 100 thousand doesn't matter to a dictator, it's just a means to an end.
As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?

>> ^vaporlock:

Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).
Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).
I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.



like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context

Slow down before you dismiss Gaddafi's statements on genocide because they resemble Saddam's speechs. Nobody, and I mean nobody(Arab,Palestinian,Iraqi) denies Saddam's record on mass killings.

In his Anfal campaign against the Kurds there estimates higher than 200k murdered by Saddam. Half of the dead are from military operations against civilians including the use of chemical weapons, while the other half are mass executions complete with bulldozers to dig large enough graves on site.

The estimates of his crushing of the Shia uprisings at the end of the first gulf war exceed 100k dead as well, with gunships and tanks being used to lower the number of 'unruly' civilians to something more 'manageable'.

You are right about the similarities between Gaddafi and Saddam. It's a reason to take his threats regarding genocide of those opposing him as deadly serious.

Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.

It wasn't just a "speech". He followed the speech up by mobilizing his army and marching across the country killing anyone even suspected of being with the opposition. He was within a single city of having taken back full control of the country and being able to "secure" his gains. I hate having to point that "secure" in this case means systematically hunting down killing as many supporters of the opposition as it takes to be certain no-one will ever consider doing it again. Whether that can be done with 100 or 100 thousand doesn't matter to a dictator, it's just a means to an end.

As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?

Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).

Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).

I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by vaporlock.

Compare BP's number of safety violations to other comparable oil companies and you'll find that it was sop that lead to this disaster.

After a 2 sec Google search:
http://www.businessinsider.com/bp-has-been-fined-by-osha-760-times-has-an-awful-track-record-for-safety-2010-6

Thy connection with the universe, all beings, all matter, all non-matter is a fact. Everything is part of one thing-The whole-As all addicted to science should become more fully aware of as the next 20-50 years begin to re-write the history of a symbol-addicted world of infants. GOD, as most twits still fumble about with the concept, is a symbol for this mystery that only now, quantum physics is beginning to unravel. Two things to log into the data base forfuture reference are
A. The technology to construct much of what we have not seen as civilians (the applications being highly classified), is a mixed bag that may or may not be of our own design.
B. The dark aspects of our government would like nothing more than for people to be as predictableas insects,and pooh-pooh the facts before them, as bullshit.

According to some on the inside (and like enoch says correctly,many many people from the intelligence community, high ranking military officials,civilians employed with security clearances in the N2K/above top realm, and others of note and with a background that can't be denied), the sightings many have seen have been terrestrial applications whose technology came from off-planet.

We have free-energy, it has been witheld from humanity. Period. The political and corporate structure of the prison the pouppeteers have create3d for humanity is apalling. Sickens me to the core that still, with the data available to so many, that so-called and self-labled, intelligent people continue to play the game created by a pathetic,dying few. The pardigm is in retrograde and the next will scare the shit outof those sop ill-prepared to face the truth. Weaklings,mental, spiritual,self deluded weaklings.

Future generations will look back on the 20th-21st century with anger nad joy. The fact that most of the people on tis site have their heads so firmly planted in their asses regrding the true nature of the world around them is testimony to such a future sentiment and to our current dilemma-

I suggest you catch up with the world around you,and get your heads out of the televison,and out of the box-Here's a good start

Appreciate the reasoned arguments in this thread. I've been posting a lot lately on first gut reactions of these kinds of videos - the Gitmo one, and the Fox nuclear coverage - and it's probably good to take a step back and breathe. @NetRunner, you're absolutely right about everything here being terrible, but SOP. This defense posed on Reddit was interesting to read, not that it makes it any less sad:

http://i.imgur.com/twrSH.jpg

We're missing a golden opportunity here, people.

SCOTUS says corporations are people too, right? Well, the DSM-IV says that if a person acted in a manner similar to SOP at the average corporation, they would be labeled sociopathic. If they then engaged in behavior that proved to be a threat to themselves or others, they could be involuntarily committed, until such a time that they can 'prove' that they're sane.

And... well... I'd like to see them try.

And this is why they will survive the coming Zombie Apocalypse.

Well, that and the fact that they're used to people coming back from the dead.

Holy Smokes, I'm simultaneously impressed and NOT impressed. The fact is, if any country can be said to be ready for anything, it's Israel. They're survivors. The desert has made them a hard, yet generous people. What they do to the Palestinians is inexcusable, but the Palestinians are also getting a ton of BAD ADVICE from people who don't mean them well. Everyone loves a proxy, especially a proxy willing to die for your cause, so you don't have to, and perhaps one day the Palestinians will awaken and realize what Israel did, which is that no one, NO ONE is on your side more than you are. The only people you have to be accountable to are yourself, and your children. Be there for them, and they will grow up right.

It's funny--the usual SOP is for the world to hold Israel accountable for its actions, usually using lots and lots of words. Here, the Israelis are holding the world accountable, especially Haiti's large-ish neighbor to the north, by SHOWING them how it's done. They live every day as if tomorrow will be another September 11, 2001. We don't.