|
|
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html
I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, R ....maybe they just figured Lindsay Lohan would get all drunk and stupid at the presentation and, like, embarrass them or something... |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
This will end up doing a ton of harm to this country...and his
administration. With not even a year in office and things being worse than ever...not only amongst Americans...but the U.S. relations with tyrants like Ahmaddinejab,who is more than ever now going to taunt obama and have him for a chew toy,this will not sit well with the majority. Before considering him...they should have at least waited until he got out of office...and examined the record in totality.His getting this now...with things much worse than a year ago...will only fuel anomosity. Bad decision. This would have been like officially giving the Titanic an award for smoothest Atlantic crossing an hour after it left England....... |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-09 07:58:58 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. He was in office less than two weeks before he was nominated. He did nothing to earn it. OTT, it is a wet day here in the Georgia mountains. Doing some real estate looking this a.m., and hope to wet a line later this afternoon. Dave |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1,
just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... Jon. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
" Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP "
it's true....love is blind........ |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:58 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). HTH, R |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Jon wrote:
As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... He's the American president and he's not George W. Bush. That should be enough right there. And just because nominations close on February 1st doesn't mean the selection committee has to sequester themselves in isolation chambers between February 1st and the selection voting. -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
David LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry said: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:15:50 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:58 -0500, Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). HTH, R Jeez richard. Sour grapes make lousy whine. Alfred Nobel created the prize to be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Hopey has been going around the world for the last 9 months trying to do those very things. And, as should be obvious, while the nominations were in February the voting by the committee was just a short while ago. All it takes to be nominated is to have one qualified person, like a history professor, forward said nomination to Oslo. Limbugh has been nominated, as was W. hth Geo. C. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). Would you like some cheese with that whine ? Obama was awarded The Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". Sounds perfectly reasonable to me and even though it was surprising to even hint at some sort of skulduggery is just petulant whining. The Nobel Peace Prize committee has never claimed to be an agenda free selection committee and I think they're flippin' the bird to Shrub as much as they're honoring Obama. To which I can only say, BRAVO, well done. -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 5:40*am, wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, R ...maybe they just figured Lindsay Lohan would get all drunk and stupid at the presentation and, like, embarrass them or something... Nitwit It was an award to the American people for getting rid of Bush and his gang of theives, liars and cowards. It's going to help world peace. They could have awarded it randomly to 5 or 10 people in the US but they might have picked some moron like yourself. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-09 10:40:52 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? Real simple; I told them you were an asshole. d;op |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-09 09:42:58 -0400, Jon said:
As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... Jon. Ta Da! |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 8:37*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
This will end up doing a ton of harm to this country...and his administration. With not even a year in office and things being worse than ever...not only amongst Americans...but the U.S. relations with tyrants like Ahmaddinejab,who is more than ever now going to taunt obama and have him for a chew toy,this will not sit well with the majority. Before considering him...they should have at least waited until he got out of office...and examined the record in totality.His getting this now...with things much worse than a year ago...will only fuel anomosity. Bad decision. This would have been like officially giving the Titanic an award for smoothest Atlantic crossing an hour after it left England....... Hm..... Sanity, or a close enough approximation, anyway. Who are you what did you do with whatever the hell the moron's name is? g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 1:52*pm, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2009-10-09 09:42:58 -0400, Jon said: As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... Jon. Ta Da! There is a disconnect in the thinking of those who state that Obama lacks respect in he world community and then make clear they are disappointed he won this prize. There may be question as to whether he has accomplished enough to deserve the prize but to ridicule him and the committee for accepting and awarding the prize respectively is disingenuous. If you simply despise the man and wish him failure and lack of respect, without a reason you'd care to bring to light, simply state this and cut with the twisted logic. I believe for some there is nothing for which he will be granted credit. Paul |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 8:41*am, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2009-10-09 07:58:58 -0400, Ken Fortenberry said: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. Someone should inform the committee. Boy are THEY gonna be red it the face or what, huh? Idiot. He was in office less than two weeks before he was nominated. *He did nothing to earn it. Well, that much at least, appears to be true. Nevertheless, pig.....liar. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 8:43*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
" Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP " it's true....love is blind........ Well, if you take it from behind, as you so much enjoyed for eight years, visual acuity is moot. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 8:42*am, Jon wrote:
As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... I suspect that people with half a brain would be lucky to articulate "Huh?" (or anything else, for that matter) on their best days, and it isn't likely that they can support themselves in an upright position (or anything else, for that matter). Aside from that, cogent (if somewhat belated) observation. Gosh, this thread has already driven several people well beyond their capabilities. Maybe the Swedes ain't as dumb as they look. giles |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 9:38*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: Jon wrote: As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... He's the American president and he's not George W. Bush. Low potential breeds low expectations. That should be enough right there. Enough for what? I can put words on paper.....and I'm not Ernest Hemingway.....where's my million dollars? And just because nominations close on February 1st doesn't mean the selection committee has to sequester themselves in isolation chambers between February 1st and the selection voting. Can't speak with any authority about whether the selection committee is or is not sequestered bewteen February 1st and the selection voting, but the closure of nominations of February 1st suggests rather strongly that Obama was nominated on or before that date. Sorta makes the question of sequestration slobberingly meaningless in the present context, ainna? Moron. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 1:52*pm, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2009-10-09 09:42:58 -0400, Jon said: As one article mentioned, nominations for the prize close on Feb 1, just 12 days after the President took office. Perhaps someday he will have a record deserving of the prize, but right now anyone with at least half a brain, supporter or not, must be thinking "Huh?"... Jon. Ta Da! Ah.....yes.....nice gloss. Imbecile. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 9:15*am, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:58 -0500, Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. *My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). * So.....um.....they missed you again, huh? Tsk, tsk. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 10:18*am, georgecleveland wrote:
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:15:50 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:58 -0500, Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. *My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). * HTH, R Jeez richard. Sour grapes make lousy whine. Yeah, but if it's all ya got to work with..... :) Alfred Nobel created the prize to be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Hopey has been going around the world for the last 9 months trying to do those very things. And, as should be obvious, while the nominations were in February the voting by the committee was just a short while ago. All it takes to be nominated is to have one qualified person, like a history professor, forward said nomination to Oslo. Undoubtedly, there have been worse candidates. Limbugh has been nominated, as was W. There! See what I mean? Nevertheless, even for a famously opaque and inscrutable organization, the Nobel committee seems to have outdone itself this time around. Surely there is SOMEONE in the world who has actually accomplishment something or other of significance in bringing about, or at least encouraging, peace in this world in the last year or so. Or maybe not. Maybe, every once in a while, they should just hold on to one or another of the prizes for a year or two.....just until a credible winner, or at least candidate, shows up. hth A reasonable voice always does. giles |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 10:39*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. *My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). * Would you like some cheese with that whine ? Ooh! Piquant! Obama was awarded The Nobel Peace Prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". Which, if you read it closely (or just glance at it), seems eerily close to meaning something or other, doesn't it? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me surprise. and even though it was surprising to even hint at some sort of skulduggery is just petulant whining. Skullduggery? Intrigue? Questionable motives? Obscure intentions? Impenetrable logic? The Nobel committee? No.....say it ain't so. The Nobel Peace Prize committee has never claimed to be an agenda free selection committee Which, perforce, makes all of their decisions unassailable.....right? and I think they're flippin' the bird to Shrub as much as they're honoring Obama. Wouldn't it have been much easier (not to say much more decorous and much less wasteful) to simply tell the world that Bush was a pig and an idiot, and then give the prize to someone who had actually accomplished something or other to bring about, or at least promote, peace in this world? To which I can only say, BRAVO, well done. Well, yeah, we believe that. Dumbass. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 11:44*am, BJ Conner wrote:
On Oct 9, 5:40*am, wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, R ...maybe they just figured Lindsay Lohan would get all drunk and stupid at the presentation and, like, embarrass them or something... Nitwit Hear! Hear! It was *an award to the American people for getting rid of Bush and his gang of theives, liars and cowards. And it only took us eight years! Not a record, perhaps, but we should certainly be proud of our accomplishment, nevertheless. It's going to help world peace. Yep, any day now. They could have awarded it randomly to 5 or 10 people in the US Well, yeah, they have. but they might have picked some moron like yourself. Well, yeah, they have. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
David LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? Real simple; I told them you were an asshole. You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html The statement is worth reproducing he The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population. For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." Oslo, October 9, 2009 |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 3:26*pm, Family-Outdoors wrote:
There is a disconnect in the thinking of those who state that Obama lacks respect in he world community and then make clear they are disappointed he won this prize. Where's the disconnect? Seems perfectly consistent to me. There may be question as to whether he has accomplished enough to deserve the prize but to ridicule him and the committee for accepting and awarding the prize respectively is disingenuous. Once again, I fail to see any inconsistency. How is ridiculing the committee and the candidate for awarding and accepting, respectively, what is perceived as an undeserved prize disingenuous? If you simply despise the man and wish him failure and lack of respect, without a reason you'd care to bring to light, simply state this and cut with the twisted logic. "Twisted logic" will do as well as any other description in what passes for "discussion" (here as well as in so many other places and venues in the world), I suppose. But it cuts both ways. I believe for some there is nothing for which he will be granted credit. You're absolutely right. On the other hand, there are some for whom nothing that he does well ever be wrong. And between them, these two groups comprise the vast majority. Almost makes a boy wish that the the stupid buzz word (or, "term" to be more precise, I suppose) of a couple of decades ago had some validity.....that they were, in fact, silent. giles. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 4:24*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? Real simple; *I told them you were an asshole. You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html The statement is worth reproducing he The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population. For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." Oslo, October 9, 2009 Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-09 17:24:43 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? Real simple; I told them you were an asshole. You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html The statement is worth reproducing he The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population. For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." Oslo, October 9, 2009 Well, thank you for that, young fella. I read the exact same words several hours ago. Still doesn't answer the question: "How could they nominate him (and who did nominate him, btw) with only two weeks in office?" I don't care what my-dick-is-longer-than-yours contest he wins, but let it be legitimate. This one isn't. Two weeks in office and he's nominated? Riiiiiiight. Could it be just another sign of Obama's failure, a sign given by the ultra-leftist Nobel group, simply as a political maneuver designed to help a fellow traveler in need? d;o) |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 4:51*pm, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2009-10-09 17:24:43 -0400, Ken Fortenberry said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken, he wasn't eligible for the NPP. ... When did the Nobel people put you on their rules committee ? Congrats, what did you do to earn that ? Real simple; *I told them you were an asshole. You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html The statement is worth reproducing he The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons. Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population. For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." Oslo, October 9, 2009 Well, thank you for that, young fella. *I read the exact same words several hours ago. Um.....I raise the "skeptical" flag. Still doesn't answer the question: *"How could they nominate him Well, the short version is someone says....or writes.....I hereby nominate, blah, blah, or words to that effect. (and who did nominate him, btw) "Them." Yes, it was definitely "them".....um.....or "him".....or "her." with only two weeks in office?" Oh....that. See, they'd been dithering over George III for ever so long when all of a sudden someone told them that he was no longer in office (though still an unmitigated idiot) so they said "who's next?" or something like that and somebody said, "um.......you know.....uh......the tan guy" or something like that, and next thing you know, VIOLA!, it's George Hamilton! I don't care what my-dick-is-longer-than-yours contest he wins, but let it be legitimate. You're a liar. This one isn't. You measured George Hamilton's dick? :( Two weeks in office and he's nominated? I've spent two weeks in an office. Anybody who has should get a prize of some sort or other. Riiiiiiight. Or leeeeeeeft. And the difference is.....? Could it be just another sign of Obama's failure, Well, yeah, o.k., you got us there......that's what prizes USUALLY mean. a sign given by the ultra-leftist Nobel group, Uh.....o.k., ya got us there too. Every right thinking person knows that the road to peace is paved with more guns, bullets, bombs, missiles, rockets, mortars, cannons, tanks, MIRVs, ICBMs, nukes, HUMVEES, IREs, handgrenades, bayonettes, barded wire, gas-chambers, waterboards, garrots, bows, arrows, slings, stones, spears, howitzers, mustard gas, bouncing betties, punjie sticks, rocks, crematoria, saps, lead pipes, guillotines, nooses, trip wires, lasers, heros.....um.......oh yeah, and dynamite. simply as a political maneuver designed to help a fellow traveler in need? Fukkers ought'a be gut-shot and left on the curb as a warning, to others, ainna? Imbecile. Pig. g. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
David LaCourse wrote:
Ken Fortenberry said: You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html snip Well, thank you for that, young fella. I read the exact same words several hours ago. Still doesn't answer the question: "How could they nominate him (and who did nominate him, btw) with only two weeks in office?" Anyone can be nominated if someone wants to take the time and effort to do so. Hell, someone once nominated Rush Limbaugh. Was that you, Louie ? I don't care what my-dick-is-longer-than-yours contest he wins, but let it be legitimate. This one isn't. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize is a penis contest ? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound ? Two weeks in office and he's nominated? Riiiiiiight. Could it be just another sign of Obama's failure, a sign given by the ultra-leftist Nobel group, simply as a political maneuver designed to help a fellow traveler in need? d;o) Well, it's certainly an indication of how low the right-wing American whackjobs will go to denigrate their president. Why do you hate America so much ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Tim J. wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote: snip Well, it's certainly an indication of how low the right-wing American whackjobs will go to denigrate their president. Ooooooo, another nomination. Thank you, but if you really want to nominate me the Norwegian Nobel Committee has some paperwork hurdles you'll need to satisfy. This one is for the most ironic post of the century. Do they give an award for that ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-09 18:39:08 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html snip Well, thank you for that, young fella. I read the exact same words several hours ago. Still doesn't answer the question: "How could they nominate him (and who did nominate him, btw) with only two weeks in office?" Anyone can be nominated if someone wants to take the time and effort to do so. Hell, someone once nominated Rush Limbaugh. Was that you, Louie ? Uh, yeah, and also Oprah. Hell, she's done more for peace than Obama. The other people who were nominated ALSO have done more than Obama. He hasn't done squat, Ken. We're still in Iraq and when he accepts the award, he will be ordering more troops into Afghanistan. Does that sound like peace to you. The man is a do nothing liar. I don't care what my-dick-is-longer-than-yours contest he wins, but let it be legitimate. This one isn't. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize is a penis contest ? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound ? And you don't? This guy could kill his wife and you'd say she deserved it. He can do NOTHING wrong in your eyes. He's your Socialist Savior. Two weeks in office and he's nominated? Riiiiiiight. Could it be just another sign of Obama's failure, a sign given by the ultra-leftist Nobel group, simply as a political maneuver designed to help a fellow traveler in need? d;o) Well, it's certainly an indication of how low the right-wing American whackjobs will go to denigrate their president. Why do you hate America so much ? I should ask you, seriously, the same question. I served my country and continue to do so. You, sir, have done and continue to do nothing. A do-nothing-in-his-life president being lauded and celebrated by a do-nothing-in-his-life fawning parasite. Davey |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 5:39*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: David LaCourse wrote: Ken Fortenberry said: You should read the actual words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html snip Well, thank you for that, young fella. *I read the exact same words several hours ago. *Still doesn't answer the question: *"How could they nominate him (and who did nominate him, btw) with only two weeks in office?" Anyone can be nominated if someone wants to take the time and effort to do so. Hell, someone once nominated Rush Limbaugh. Was that you, Louie ? I don't care what my-dick-is-longer-than-yours contest he wins, but let it be legitimate. *This one isn't. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize is a penis contest ? Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound ? Two weeks in office and he's nominated? * Riiiiiiight. * Could it be just another sign of Obama's failure, a sign given by the ultra-leftist Nobel group, simply as a political maneuver designed to help a fellow traveler in need? * d;o) Well, it's certainly an indication of how low the right-wing American whackjobs will go to denigrate their president. Why do you hate America so much ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 9, 6:39*pm, "Tim J." wrote:
Ooooooo, another nomination. This one is for the most ironic post of the century. Not a bad nomination, but it's a little early on in the process, no? :-) Jon. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Jon wrote:
"Tim J." wrote: Ooooooo, another nomination. This one is for the most ironic post of the century. Not a bad nomination, but it's a little early on in the process, no? :-) Okay, somebody explain the "irony" because I don't get it. If you're trying to point out that some folks on the left thought Shrub could do nothing right so it's now "ironic" to hear those folks complain about the same behavior from the right, you're being simple-minded, shallow and stupid. But that can't be what you guys mean, right ? I mean you guys wouldn't be so clueless as to compare being upset with a president who lies to the country so as to lead it into unnecessary war with being upset with a president who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Would you ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 10, 6:19*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: Jon wrote: "Tim J." wrote: Ooooooo, another nomination. This one is for the most ironic post of the century. Not a bad nomination, but it's a little early on in the process, no? *:-) Okay, somebody explain the "irony" because I don't get it. If you're trying to point out that some folks on the left thought Shrub could do nothing right so it's now "ironic" to hear those folks complain about the same behavior from the right, you're being simple-minded, shallow and stupid. But that can't be what you guys mean, right ? I mean you guys wouldn't be so clueless as to compare being upset with a president who lies to the country so as to lead it into unnecessary war with being upset with a president who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Would you ? -- Ken Fortenberry There is a method of operation that permeates the efforts of the whacko right. They denigrate ideas of those who are not in their club. It is in my opinion, vital to understand that they are not exclusively taking shots at ideas or positions, but people. I do not believe all who oppose Obama do so because of his color, but I believe it does affect many who do not even know that it does. The habituated method of operation of the right as taught by Rove and others is to viciously oppose people that are not in the club. (BTW how damn ridiculous is it to trot out one of the few black conservative columnists or commentators whenever it is convenient to do so? Obama's election has certainly benefited them.) Proof that Obama's ideas are not the target are revealed in areas like the "death panels." The idea of end of life counseling being covered by medicare was originally floated by conservatives. When it became part of healthcare reform, Palin and others wrapped it in a different package and pounced. Many of Obama's positions are consistent with portions of what the right desires. But he isn't in the club. Sounds a little childish. Winning the Nobel Prize is like throwing meat to the lions. When you hear them say, "We just can't figure out what he won it for," what it really means to many of them is that they just need a little time to formulate a smear campaign based on this new dynamic. What it means to the rest, is they are SO small minded, they honestly are incapable of realizing... a)how much damage Bush did to our country domestically and abroad, destroying a large portion of the respected status we had. He also failed miserably to capitalize on the genuine sympathy availed to us after 9-11...b) Why an international organization would send a message (as it clearly is) saying congratulations on replacing an abject foreign policy failure with a man who at the very least is communicating the ideas that will promote peace. I will remain a sidelined conservative until the leaders of conservatism turn from these tactics and the morons of the conservative media are taken down. Paul |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:18:57 -0500, georgecleveland
wrote: On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:15:50 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:58:58 -0500, Ken Fortenberry wrote: wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe...ize/index.html I guess they figured if Kofi Annan and Al Gore didn't convince folks this thing is a cheap joke, this ought to do it... Sheesh, Spoken like someone with the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old. Obama is the president, get over it already. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html Unless he was nominated in for 2008 too late (even more ridiculous), and as others have correctly pointed out, he had to have been nominated no later than a coupla weeks into office as POTUS. My guess is that there will be some, er, "discussion" from at least some perfectly reasonable eligible nominators to release more details of this nomination long before the 50-year mark. And for the record, unless he or his people had something untoward to do with this (and that would include, um, "encouraging" one or more nominators to nominate him), this doesn't reflect on Obama one bit, it reflects upon the Committee (which has shown itself to be goofy in the past, ala Annan, Gore, etc.). HTH, R Jeez richard. Sour grapes make lousy whine. Alfred Nobel created the prize to be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." And you feel that he had done that by Feb 1, 2009? Hopey has been going around the world for the last 9 months trying to do those very things. He has? Lessee - on the recent trip to Copenhagen (not to campaign for the Olympics) the White House touted his meeting with McChrystal (the military commander he personally picked to help win a war) about troop build-ups. And the NYT compares him to such "lofty company" (maybe they should have said "transformative figures"...) as Lech Walesa and Teddy Roosevelt. Lech Walesa's thoughts? "What? So fast? Well, there hasn't been any contribution to peace yet. He's proposing things, he's initiating things, but he is yet to deliver." Teddy didn't give any thoughts on the matter. The 1976 joint winner, Mairead Corrigan: "President Obama has yet to prove that he will move seriously on the Middle East, that he will end the war in Afghanistan and many other issues" And the Middle East peace he is supposedly inspiring? Let's see... Hamas - ""Obama does not deserve this prize." Iran: (Government Spokesman) "The decision in this area was hasty, and conferring this prize was premature." Iran: (Ahmedinejad) "I hope that by receiving this prize, he will start taking practical steps to remove injustices in the world." Fred Armisen: "Out of Iraq? Nope, not even close..." "Close Guantanamo Bay? Not Done..." "Improve Afghanistan? Actually, I think it's worse..." And guess who said this: "To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize." In your opinion, was the speaker being honest, falsely modesty, disingenuous, or ??? And yes, I realize there are numerous quotes out there that either show outright support (or at least don't directly question it) for his win. And, as should be obvious, while the nominations were in February the voting by the committee was just a short while ago. Well, it might not be as "obvious" as you think. The nominations were reviewed and a "short list" was compiled by, IIRC, March 15, 2009. Do you feel that he had accomplished the above by then? If so, why? The voting was in August. IAC, can you objectively show how and why you feel he is "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses," even as of yesterday? All it takes to be nominated is to have one qualified person, like a history professor, forward said nomination to Oslo. Limbugh has been nominated, as was W. And what your reaction be if "Limbugh" (I'm guessing you mean Rush Limbaugh) had won (or even found out he was under serious consideration)? Bush is another matter - while IMO he wouldn't be an appropriate choice (or deserving choice overall), his selection would at least have had a marginally-defensible claim for actual accomplishments and attempts in Africa. Finally, again, barring anything untoward from Obama's camp, this doesn't really reflect upon him, but rather, greatly diminishes an already-diminished Peace Prize. Should a undergrad that shows great promise be given a degree based on that promise? Should a med student who shows great promise be allowed to skip further training because of that promise? Would you loan your life savings to your broke-ass deadbeat brother-in-law because he promised - greatly - to pay you back...? TC, R hth Geo. C. |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On 2009-10-10 09:11:07 -0400, Family-Outdoors said:
On Oct 10, 6:19*am, Ken Fortenberry wrote: Jon wrote: "Tim J." wrote: Ooooooo, another nomination. This one is for the most ironic post of t he century. Not a bad nomination, but it's a little early on in the process, no? *:-) Okay, somebody explain the "irony" because I don't get it. If you're trying to point out that some folks on the left thought Shrub could do nothing right so it's now "ironic" to hear those folks complain about the same behavior from the right, you're being simple-minded, shallow and stupid. But that can't be what you guys mean, right ? I mean you guys wouldn't be so clueless as to compare being upset with a president who lies to the country so as to lead it into unnecessary war with being upset with a president who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Would you ? -- Ken Fortenberry There is a method of operation that permeates the efforts of the whacko right. They denigrate ideas of those who are not in their club. It is in my opinion, vital to understand that they are not exclusively taking shots at ideas or positions, but people. Duh. Change whacko right to whacko left and you might get a clue. Why do you think Tim used the word "irony?" He should have used the word hypocricy. I do not believe all who oppose Obama do so because of his color, but I believe it does affect many who do not even know that it does. Zzzzzzzzzz The habituated method of operation of the right as taught by Rove and others is to viciously oppose people that are not in the club. Change Rove to Pelosi or Reid or Kennedy or Murther or et al. (BTW how damn ridiculous is it to trot out one of the few black conservative columnists or commentators whenever it is convenient to do so? Obama's election has certainly benefited them.) Obama's election has benefited NO ONE yet. He hasn't done anything. He's still campaigning. Proof that Obama's ideas are not the target are revealed in areas like the "death panels." The idea of end of life counseling being covered by medicare was originally floated by conservatives. When it became part of healthcare reform, Palin and others wrapped it in a different package and pounced. Many of Obama's positions are consistent with portions of what the right desires. But he isn't in the club. Sounds a little childish. Yes, you do. Winning the Nobel Prize is like throwing meat to the lions. When you hear them say, "We just can't figure out what he won it for," what it really means to many of them is that they just need a little time to formulate a smear campaign based on this new dynamic. What it means to the rest, is they are SO small minded, they honestly are incapable of realizing... a)how much damage Bush did to our country domestically and abroad, destroying a large portion of the respected status we had. He also failed miserably to capitalize on the genuine sympathy availed to us after 9-11...b) Why an international organization would send a message (as it clearly is) saying congratulations on replacing an abject foreign policy failure with a man who at the very least is communicating the ideas that will promote peace. In other words, the Nobel folks have an anti-conservative agenda. Correct. I will remain a sidelined conservative until the leaders of conservatism turn from these tactics and the morons of the conservative media are taken down. And what of the morons of the liberal media, too numerous to even consider listing on this page? Dave |
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
On Oct 10, 9:17*am, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2009-10-10 09:11:07 -0400, Family-Outdoors said: On Oct 10, 6:19*am, Ken Fortenberry wrote: Jon wrote: "Tim J." wrote: Ooooooo, another nomination. This one is for the most ironic post of t he century. Not a bad nomination, but it's a little early on in the process, no? *:-) Okay, somebody explain the "irony" because I don't get it. If you're trying to point out that some folks on the left thought Shrub could do nothing right so it's now "ironic" to hear those folks complain about the same behavior from the right, you're being simple-minded, shallow and stupid. But that can't be what you guys mean, right ? I mean you guys wouldn't be so clueless as to compare being upset with a president who lies to the country so as to lead it into unnecessary war with being upset with a president who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Would you ? -- Ken Fortenberry There is a method of operation that permeates the efforts of the whacko right. They denigrate ideas of those who are not in their club. *It is in my opinion, vital to understand that they are not exclusively taking shots at ideas or positions, but people. Duh. *Change whacko right to whacko left and you might get a clue. *Why do you think Tim used the word "irony?" *He should have used the word hypocricy. *I do not believe all who oppose Obama do so because of his color, but I believe it does affect many who do not even know that it does. Zzzzzzzzzz The habituated method of operation of the right as taught by Rove and others is to viciously oppose people that are not in the club. Change Rove to Pelosi or Reid or Kennedy or Murther or et al. *(BTW how damn ridiculous is it to trot out one of the few black conservative columnists or commentators whenever it is convenient to do so? Obama's election has certainly benefited them.) Obama's election has benefited NO ONE yet. *He hasn't done anything. * He's still campaigning. Proof that Obama's ideas are not the target are revealed in areas like the "death panels." *The idea of end of life counseling being covered by medicare was originally floated by conservatives. *When it became part of healthcare reform, Palin and others wrapped it in a different package and pounced. *Many of Obama's positions are consistent with portions of what the right desires. *But he isn't in the club. *Sounds a little childish. Yes, you do. Winning the Nobel Prize is like throwing meat to the lions. *When you hear them say, "We just can't figure out what he won it for," *what it really means to many of them is that they just need a little time to formulate a smear campaign based on this new dynamic. *What it means to the rest, is they are SO small minded, they honestly are incapable of realizing... a)how much damage Bush did to our country domestically and abroad, destroying a large portion of the respected status we had. *He also failed miserably to capitalize on the genuine sympathy availed to us after 9-11...b) Why an international organization would send a message (as it clearly is) saying congratulations on replacing an abject foreign policy failure with a man who at the very least is communicating the ideas that will promote peace. In other words, the Nobel folks have an anti-conservative agenda. *Correct. I will remain a sidelined conservative until the leaders of conservatism turn from these tactics and the morons of the conservative media are taken down. And what of the morons of the liberal media, too numerous to even consider listing on this page? Dave Wrong on all counts. Pelosi, Reid, et al are highly ineffectual and rather lacking in any form of intelligence. What they also lack is a truly well thought out plan to destroy their opponents. This may in fact be largely due to their not being smart enough to do so, as opposed to being above doing so. The bottom line is they do not employ tactics like Rove did vs. McCain in S. Carolina when he was running vs. Bush. What I am saying is I am sick and tired of this strategy that the right wing talkers have taken up as it seems that it is all conservatives know how to do now. There are a few conservatives, mostly in the Senate, who understand that in the long run the methodology being employed will never be a winner. Their voices are muted and they truthfully are afraid to make too strong a stand. They may appear and speak at a Kennedy memorial or state at a Town Hall that it is wrong to question Obama's patriotism or belief in the Constitution, but they know well that to be too vociferous in their protest gets them a RINO label and puts a target on their chest. If the Nobel organization is liberal in its leanings, and I don't know enough to dispute this, wouldn't the proper protest be to say that Obama deserves the prize because he is a liberal (of course he is)? Wouldn't it be ridiculous then for Rush and Hannity to protest that Obama should not have won it if Reagan didn't even win it? Would it not serve your purpose better to assert it is the very policies he promotes, yet perhaps has not yet achieved, that earned him the prize? Then it comes down to a debate over whether we would want a President to promote policies that would get him on the "right" side of a liberal organization. Perhaps I am overusing the term ironic, but I do find it ironic that you use the retort "Yes, you do" to answer my charge of childish behavior by the right. Seriously? If you have a coherent response, I'd like to know what it might be. That certainly does not qualify. Finally, liberal bias in the media is a passe charge. When Fox News kicks the crap out of every cable news outlet in the US and nobody watches network news and Limbaugh makes more money than Bill Gates, how can anyone with an ounce of sense think people don't have access to the message of the right? Respectfully (for now), Paul |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter