Brian Gillingham

Hey guys, what's the best way to get more traffic at my new software forums? They are pretty empty as they have just been added (Aug 17th, 2006) to my already established software download site. The idea is that the software forums can be where you discuss the programs that you download... Each program in the download site has a link to its category in the forums. Since empty forums are hidden, it can be a bit confusing, but everything is integrated with the actual software we have listed. Once there are a few thousand posts in our forums, we have plans for displaying relevant forum posts on program pages. I am actively learning how to have my pages indexed at a higher rate at Google and the other SE's. Most of my traffic seems to come from Google. A lot of my traffic is from the actual software developer wanting to post his PAD (Portable Application Description) file for their software. We have all kinds of useful RSS feeds - I think that this is an often overlooked method for generating traffic. One option would be to pay for google ads, but the forums are a free service that I don't get any money (worth mentioning) from. I can post a link to it here in forums like these - asking for help. Some will obviously find this article when searching for something else, and become traffic at my site, eh. Here's my forums: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ Here's the main site: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

I use a couple blocks of code now - so I have multiple google Adsense promotions handled in that code block. It randomly decides which promo to display. PM me if interested in a new sample of my code.

I actually consider those who NEED religion as week. I haven't had a need for any of what you say people need religion for in over 10 years. Sure, now - I do feel that practicing religion helps people to magically deal with life's stresses. All religion have to have some good lessons or morales as a matter of maintainablility (they'd get fewer members if they were proclaiming that somebody like D.H.Lawrence was speaking the words of god). The beliefs that the lessons are based on is what I have problems with - usually intrepreted stories. Religion is not good if you ask me. It is the cause of most wars - and that's a fact. Whenever there are two large groups who believe in slightly different things they grow this thing called hatred (look at Israel and Lebanon or Syria). What people should really deal with is reality. I hope that they discover life on Mars - soon. But, then they will claim that the Bible stated that God created the universe - and therefore, life on Mars... but it does say "... all the creatures of this land...." Those books written 2000 years ago can NOT be relevant today. Religions should not be distinctly taught to our children - we should either teach them ALL religions or NO religions. If everybody understood each other, there'd be no reason for border-wars. I can't see getting offended or so worked up over a BELIEF! Why do people become fanatics of their religion - I am not just talking about islamic fanatics (like Bush recently titles them "Islamo Fascists")? The promise of things that can't possibly be true drives people to amazing ends -- for example: "eternal life", or "72 virgins".... hmmmm - who wouldn't want 72 virgins when they die? Of course it is complete BS! Nobody could ever prove any of these descriptions of the after-life! Now, to say that there will be complete chaos without religion is to assume too much. Without religion, we could devote more of out time talking to our neighbors (who were previously going to some other religious meetings). Without religion, we wouldn't have any more need for border wars - right? If there really is no after-life, we better make this life good and peaceful, right? Would greed take over? I am sure that some would stop caring about the immoralities of their crimes and - for some, it would be more chaotic.... but I don't believe for a second that the whole world would drop into chaos. My friends are mostly athiests as well - and we are so peaceful, you would think that we were each regular members at our sunday church.

EXACTLY! Well said... Last night I was watching a Daily Show with Jon Stewart on TiVo - he was showing the two sides of a single argument - should we sacrifice life in order to make other life better? The clips were from the stem cell veto as well as an answer that Bush gave as to how many Iraqi's have probably been killed since we started the conflict... "I'd say that about 30,000...." You can't have it both ways. The sacrifice of Iraqi lives now is against the rule "we shouldn't sacrifice life in order to make other lives better." What Bush really needs to do is eat nothing but pretzels -- sooner or later, one of 'em will do the job.

I was wondering about the maximum size of file that you should put in a signature. I don't think that you should ever exceed 10kb for your signature, but that's just me. It's not like I am using dial-up, but some people still do. The total bandwidth wasted on images that are completely ignored has got to be a staggering number. When the images are larger than they need to be, it is even worse.I also don't think that a signature graphic needs to be that large in dimension either. I am just going with the standard 88x31 micro button size. I know that animated microbuttons are supposed to draw more clicks than static images. When animating rendered images, keeping the size down is a real challenge.I don't use this image anywhere because of the file size. Here is a 47.28 kb of a microbutton I am considering using for my site:The one that I use is only 1.23 kb:Now, I think that I should try to make something animated, but less than 10 kb (to stay within my limits). Opinions??

I forgot to mention the fact that she is also working toward completing a degree from home via an online university.My college degree was in Civil Engineering - a field in which I never worked. I just thought that it would be better to get the degree than to drop out. My employment has centered around computer programming.You are reminding me of the recent talk about the "illegal immigrants". The pundits would say things like "they do jobs that we don't want to". Couldn't it be a heirachy of workers - with the women just above the immigrants? I guess that the separate tiers exist, but not intentionally.I am not suggesting a socialist system, just something a bit more fair.The sad truth is (see if this pops an image of your old boss - or your current manager): many times those who get paid the six-digit salaries are less competent and more lazy than the people who do the real labor for that business.

I don't think that it is fair that I could earn a yearly wage of roughly four times the amount that my wife can. Granted, I have a college degree and have been working in that field for a few years, but I could work my way up to that same wage in a different field in a matter of years. She is now considering working two jobs while my self-employment is still brining in less than what we need. I currently have two "businesses" from home - and they are just now starting to make me the kind of money that I was earning before (for the evil corporations). What would be nice is if she could earn more money for doing the same work. Her job isn't brain surgery, but it also isn't the type of thing you could employ a robot to do.I wonder sometimes what would happen if all women just stopped taking jobs that pay lower. Would men start taking these positions - and would they get paid more? The one exception to this rule that I can think of would be porn actors - where the men usually get paid much less than the women stars. No - I don't want for my wife to apply for a job in porno...Just a couple thoughts for a weekday morning...

Joshua, By the way, you are the first to mention hate. I am just pointing out that these are groups that tend to be brainwashed - that's all. I am not at odds with the whole of the population like some Grizzly Adams. I believe that I have been proving the point as well ... by that, I mean - none of the "defenders" of any of these groups has offered any facts or statistics to indicate that they aren't in some sort of disbelief or brainwashedness. The truth is that the majority of the world's population still does not eat that much meat most of the time. You don't really consider the billion or so hindu and buddhist - most of them are 100% vegetarian or vegan. The fact about protein is that you simply don't need anywhere near the amount of protein that you have been led to believe. Do some serious research on the topic -- get back to this thread and we'll talk about it more then. Not so harsh now! ... I have to admit that I don't really feel that any/all religions are cult oriented, but most are a bit too convinced of some fundamental things that just don't jive.

I don't agree completely, because I feel that he must still have followers - no? All of this on a day when North Korea launches multiple missles - capable of carrying WMD to the USA. Hmmmm.... and we focused on Iraq? Here's Cheney again "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." - 26 Aug 2002

Who hires / fires those members of Senate and the House members on a periodic basis? If you answered, the people decide who represents them in the House or Senate, you're correct. This is the reason that the elections in 2006 are so important - if we elect enough who support impeaching the power-monger Bush and hold his administration to scrutiny as well, the PEOPLE decide who gets impeached. This is especially true if the people make their voices heard. You have a direct channel to your senator - whose job it is to listen to you (to some degree). So, there you have it - how the people can impeach the president. That's not even the topic here, but I felt compelled to include it in the thread rather than a potentially rude PM. The sad truth about house / senate elections is the rate of incumbancy. Little interest is privately invested in the whole process, most wind up voting for the current guy - regardless. Donations are even hard to come by for challengers to incumbants. The usual exception of the money issue is when a seat is completely up for grabs - that's usually a well funded race because the people usually have no preconceptions of either candidate.

How wrong you are. The election in 2006 may be more important historically than the 2000 and 2004. If the house (of cards) collapses, Bush is gonzo - and you probably know that. I think that this year it is especially important to vote - and it would be nice if we could put Impeachment on the ballots (how to) - instead of gay marriage. You speak in absolutes. There is no such thing as 100% in many claims such as "Republicans will always support republicans". This is simply not true. You'd really like it if everybody stopped complaining about the Republicans in general, eh? They stopped looking for Bin Laden? Isn't he really the terrorist?

Did you hear what the CIA just released? The fact that they stopped looking for Bin Laden late last year. Pick your source of news article from this google news search. They stopped looking for Bin Laden? Isn't he really the terrorist? I want for my tax dollars to get that guy and make him pay. I don't want my tax dollars to keep pouring into this hopeless Iraqi conflict - it is a stupid conflict that has nothing to do with the initial terrorist attacks - and nobody ever proved that Iraq was going to attack America in any way. I really feel that the direction is bad (must have been Cheney doing the aiming). Americans are getting sick of these amazing revelations - like the CIA unit giving up hunting down Bin Laden.... it is just pathetic. I already think that I know what is going to happen before the 2006 elections in the US... We will begin to withdraw troops from Iraq. Democrats will be happy, Republicans will be weary of the plan. Time will pass - more withdrawals. At some time before the elections, (or this may be reserved for the 2008 elections... President may be more important that the house seats that are in 2006) either some terrorist attack will (be allowed) to take place on American soil or in Iraq - killing many (enough to make the people completely support the "fight back" direction)... the parties guilty of the act will be quickly traced back to Iraq... Many will argue that haste in this matter is potentially dangerous - pointing to the lead up to the Iraq war. Some democrats will start to support republican candidates. Election day, victory for Republicans! - rinse and repeat - rinse and repeat - ....

It is blind patriotism just like this that is the result of endless propaganda - since even before 9-11, that keeps us at the end of terrorists' sights. IF we were a more peaceful country (that means - minding our own business), THEN these things wouldn't happen. As long as we are making things worse in Iraq (I remind you about the degradation in infrastructure that is our fault, and the recent news about criminal behavior of American troops in Iraq), more Arabs would like to see our buildings being hit by planes. How is it that this bit of logic always seems to escape the minds of people like you. What really saddens me is that we are basically gutting a country for what - WMD? What I am saying is that the declared mission is over - so leave! I frankly don't care that the state we'd leave Iraq in would be worse than it was when we got there - it will continue to get worse as times passes. That's the trend that you just ignore.... is it really getting better? The soldiers that are completely on Bush's side - as you say, many of them are not educated as I have been. They are being paid large sums of money (my taxes, mind you) to kill arabs (oops... protect america). Many of them are very young and impressionable - that's all I should have to say. The mission that they are on is one that they don't fully understand. Get real. How is it that somebody over there could be objective about this mission -- of course they want to shoot the arabs! The probably have seen fellow Americans die at the hands of these "resistance fighters", even I may want to get revenge if I saw that. My point is that you can't objectively use their opinions at all -- you need wise intrepretation of all of the events, not just what Pvt. Joe Scmoe thinks. When any educated person analyzes the whole of the situation, they come to the same conclusion - and that conclusion is not that the Iraq war is a good thing for the world... The war is wrong. That brings me to another point I have been wanting to interject. This is not a WAR. This is more like a crack-down. Think about it - you only have wars between two countries.... here, it's the USA vs. Terrorism. Terrorism is simply a tactic or one way to fight. The "terrorists" are not from any single country - they are from all over the world. Now, even though you may be able to say that 95% of these trouble makers may be from the middle-east countries, you can not justify a war on that soil. So what if the leadership of that country did not do everything in their power to prevent these underground groups from banding together. When could a war like this be over? Seriously ponder this question and let me know if there is an answer that doesn't involve killing all who may be sympathetic to the cause (don't get any ideas, I am not sympathetic to their cause as much as I am opposed to our course). I hate the Republican squelch box - "the democrats want to cut and run". Well, our last "next president" John Kerry said it best - that Bush's plan to stay the course is a "Lie and die" plan. They lied (that's a fact - and you know it, why are you not outraged? is it comforting to know that we are killing under false pretenses?) and now they're (young Americans, Iraqis, including some genuine terrorists, etc.) dying. As Kwai Chang Caine said best, "There is always another way". I was done with my post - when I caught the last line again... religious blessings on killers? My freaking god! How hypocritical to bless killers in this manner. Aha! This is really a holy war? Beth implies this with her salutation.... That is why this athiest doesn't care. You sheep really are great! Our book states that God said ...... while they have this other book that states that God said .... Get real.... God is laughing his **bottom** off at you. You think that God would want to bless OUR soldiers???? The soldiers from the most-gluttenous country since the great Roman empire fell? God probably really doesn't want America to win if you think about it... Bring freedom!? Ha! Ha hahaha... hahahaha.... that is the single dumbest thing that I have heard. We are not taking freedom anywhere - except for the freedom that they are taking from American citizens --- I have no idea where that freedom goes, but you could say that it was taken from us - brought to Iraq? I don't think so. We have temporarily imprisoned major percentages of the male population in Iraq at one time or another - because they are FREE? I am truly sorry about pissing on your cheerios.

Douchebag? How objective. Name calling is really mature. I know - I know - I called Bush a real nimrod, but he did say to the Iraqi resistance "bring it on!" and that certainly qualifies as a nimrod statement if there ever was one. Kioku, fellow human, I really have to disagree with you - and say that I believe that you have a very closed-mind. First of all, liberal is not a bad word. The fact that we're in Iraq has nothing to do with getting running water or electricity to the citizens (which we're doing a pretty poor job - from what I have read - Baghdad has less water and electricity now than they did under Saddam). The mission was for WMD. They aren't there - we've declared "Mission Accomplished" - so leave! No WMD (well, there were some chemical shells leftover from who knows how long ago), so leave. The problem is that now we've got to repair the literally broken the infrastructure in Iraq as well as keep fighting the butt-load of terrorist types (anti-american freedom fighters) that we attracted to the area. I haven't ignored the fact that innocent Iraqis have been murdered. Today's news - 5 US soldiers are being tried for having raped and then burned an Iraqi woman to get rid of any evidence - that's only one murder... let's see -- how about the SANCTIONS that killed 500,000-800,000 innocent Iraqis?. And you call that not caring? You don't care that we'd actually do something that heartless, don't you - or you simply believe that it was all Saddam's fault - if he accepted our impossible terms, he could have saved his people. Do some research on this one and you will not want to reply on this point -- we are some ruthless sons of *BLEEP*es and I don't think that it is the right path, that's all. Also, that release of information by the newspapers - does little to make it tougher for terrorists to operate. Many eyes are on the administration for its repeated abuses of power. This is yet another example where they decided to let the people make the decision. There is no WAR right now... we are fighting a tactic - and that will never end. Get wise... take a step back, and a deep breath and think about it.... how can we fight a tactic without killing all of the people who are sympathetic to their belief? I am afraid that it is the only way that we'd ever really win this "War". BTW, I listened to a bit of Sean Hannity's show on Fox radio... I never heard him hang up on so many people that disagreed with him (it was all related to the recent Supreme Court ruling that Guantanamo prisoners deserve rights. Facts are facts, we captured some dangerous goat farmers - and we don't want them to have any rights). What a douchebag - just like Mr. Kioku - wave that flag of hate!

I don't think she said anything about anybody being retarded. She is half-republican anyway. I wouldn't vote for her - and I am 100% liberal. Who is whining? I am outraged - and it is called frustration, not whining. I am outraged by the useless killing. Get out of Iraq! Stop the war on error! As for the side-effects of us leaving... I believe that adriantc is missing the big picture. I think that it is much worse for us to look like Nazis than for us to look weak. Who really cares if we look a little bit weak. Anybody else see it this way? We are taking plays directly out of Goebel's playbook from the 1938 run up to WWII. "This is a war that was forced upon us", "This is brought on by the actions of the jews in Poland". Basically, if a leader calls a potential enemy enough names and makes up enough *BLEEP*, then the people will follow - especially if they believe that their life was threatened by this enemy.... (that is what the terror alert level chart was for). Pros for withdrawing We can't afford this ongoing war. Remember what happened to Russia - fighting Afghanistan? The war nearly bankrupted the entire country. Peace - sooner than later. The extremist islamists would have a very hard time recruiting new fighters against a benevolent America. That is a lesson that you never would hear from the administration, but it is true.... they'd literally put down their weapons against us if we stopped our conquest and our gluttonous ways. Terrorist that continue to attack us would have less support in the future if the attacked us (since we would be leaving them alone - which is really all that they want) We would be viewed as wiser, not weaker - respected more not less around the world UN would be able to get some real work done - like the Kyoto CO2 protocol, the stuff in Africa and middle-east) Arabs of the future would view the new America as a benevolent one (if we could actually follow through) Cons for withdrawing USA looks a bit weaker than it is (another way of saying that we don't look like an international bully anymore) USA would have very little control over the world's oil (I actually consider this a Pro, but I list it here because the administration would certainly view this as a Con) I think that we are a very bad country. We are a pathetic country that is strong. If we were a cartoon character maybe we'd be Strong-Stupid (is that one of the UhGi Oh's?). Based on another recent incident in the news, our leaders want to control the newspapers - kind of like the Soviet Union, eh? Take this freedom away and I think that we'd have a revolution - not only from the locals here in USA, but the whole world would begin to treat us like the country that we ARE. Bad intelligence. That is what I am going to call Bush for the rest of my life -- George "Bad Intelligence" Bush.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..... 49, right? The last time that you were there must have been a few weeks after the start of the conflict. The current figure is more like 28. So, do you still feel like the WHOLE WORLD is on your side? We will stand alone sometime - all empires before have crumbled. Read some history... we are just the next great thing, eh? Do you also believe that all of these countries really want to be there? Cut and run! Cut and run! I just love to say that! We should all just cut and run! Somebody needs to write a catchy song to go with it...

So, that is a really impressive list there. Most of their commitments are to keep innocent people alive - like emergency care and food. As to the countries included in your generous list, there are some that have already "CUT AND RUN" as the randy right likes to say. As you can see some of this has already happened. You can probably find better info out there on the remaining coalition countries, but it certainly isn't 49!! I wonder sometimes what Iraq would be like if we never helped placed the cruel sanctions on their country - over 12 years and some estimate over 1,000,000 children dead. Just wonderful - great work Bush. Bush has cried "Wolf!" too many times. Tell your senators that you are sick and tired of "terror alerts" in Miami when Bush's ratings go too low. Tell your senators that you don't appreciate being manipulated with a terror chart.... When is the last time that you saw this? If you answered - "just before the 2004 elections", you should win a wish - a new administration would be what I would wish for. A pacificist would deal with terror much more effectively than Bush. Don't be a macho idiot. Dealing with people who already believe that we are a zionist gluttonous country will only be further convinced by Bush's approach - he is completely playing the American people and the terrorists are working for the FBI or CIA. Read about where the US planned terror attacks on our OWN citizens in the past - Operation Northwoods. The Freedom of Information Act has given us so much to be happy about. One of our sole remaining good freedoms. I wonder when they are going to try to take that freedom away.

Remember that they initially lied about the banner - saying that the banner was put up by the Navy and that "it was an idea that was suggested by those on the ship as a way to honor the sailors and crew on board the USS Lincoln for accomplishing their mission." Later Bush added "The Navy asked us to take care of the production of the banner". Which was a lie - later Daschle said "...[white house] said that the Navy called for it, and that was a fabrication because they then later acknowledged that it was the White House who created the banner." Accept reality; living in the true world is so much better than a fantasy land that is full of lies. When you tell lies, you will eventually be hurt by them. There was a higher rate of deaths (on all sides) after declaring "Mission Accomplished" than before.

If you don't recall, Bush stood on the deck of the USS Lincoln or Kennedy - with a big HUGE banner that read "Mission Accomplished!" It would be different if it was explained to the American people why we needed to go into Iraq... but I can't support anything to do with this war since we were lied to about the need for war. This is so different from WWII - how dare you try to justify this war by somehow affilating it with WWII - this war is based on a stinking pile of bad information, forged documents about WMD in Iraq, lies and cover-ups. End the war on Error! (notice, I didn't mean to type "Terror", but "Error!") I am sorry to take the thunder from your statement, but the U.S. Armed Forces only considers a nuclear weapon a weapon of mass destruction - not poison gasses. Iraq has neither nuclear weapons nor chemical or biological weapons. Furthermore, the chemical weapons that Saddam used against Iran in the 1980's was supplied indirectly by the USA. Aren't we great!? Sure, he gassed Kurds some time after that - he is being tried for that now. We have never been tried for the past war crimes because we came out on the winning side of things (think about that - only the loser pays, and that is the fundamental reason that War is wrong. Just because I could beat your *bottom*, doesn't mean that I was right. Think about it.) Here's another fantastic thing about the story of Saddam gassing the Kurds... the Kurds were fighting along side with Iranians against the Iraqi leadership. The other thing that you never hear is that BOTH SIDES WERE USING GAS - the incident makes Saddam fameous for gassing Kurds because that is the half-story that we're always told. Consider how we may sympathize with his position if Bush said "Fifteen years ago, as Kurds were fighting along side of Iranians, Saddam's regime ordered a chemical attack... At the time, the Iranians were also using mustard agents." Why do you think the deficit is a problem (the answer is WAR). Bush never lowered my costs - or increased my income. The same can't be said of what he did for the richest 2% of Americans - rich are getting richer because of all of the breaks they are getting at our expense. Sure, it is pathetic that we are a supposed advanced nation and we basically make it nearly impossible for over 40 million Americans to have basic health insurance. That's just pathetic and unbelievable. Here's another little tidbit for you to chew on - in one period of eight and a half weeks in Afghanistan, we are linked to 3,767 civilian deaths. I'll say it so you don't have to - just because I decry these civilian deaths, I am aiding propaganda efforts of the terrorists, right? I can hear Rumsfeld say something like "Collateral damage is inevitable in war. It is highly likely that some of the deaths were due to their own Anti-Aircraft fire..."

I finally deciphered the font.... it says "Ashmaster"! That's my way of saying that the font is either too small (for me) or too artistic (again - for my quick reading eyes at least). I've seen the other images like this around the forums, since I couldn't really read what it said, I had to give it 3/5. The thing that I don't understand is what signifigance these signature pictures are. Why do people spend as much time - as you indiciated. Don't get me wrong, it is a beautiful chrome-like image, I just miss the point a bit.

You may have heard about the Al Gore movie by now.... perhaps you've even heard about the ads that were put together to battle the movie. Remember, there is no other reason for the ads at this point in time other than the release and popularity of the "Inconvenient Truth" movie. The one commercial states "...CO2, they call it pollution, we call it life". Now, do you want to know who paid for the ads to be created? Competitive Enterprise Institute created them. Who is the Competitive Enterprise Institute??? It is a junk-science group that is funded by Exxon along with other big oil companies. Why would these companies have to create an ad like that - especially if what they are claiming was TRUE? Come on now, these idiots at CEI are claiming that the earth is flat! <sarcasm>Well, Jeb, they convinced me! CO2 is coming out of my mouth and my car --- I am going to keep my SUV that gets 15 mpg and keep buying lots of gas for its tank</sarcasm>. Toxic effects can come from CO2, but that is not the argument behind global warming; the problem with CO2 has everything to do with climate change - not toxic effects on humans. FACT: if you close yourself in a room that is sealed, you will die from your own CO2, remember the number of kids that died in car trunks last summer? CO2 is a poisonous gas - any good scientist will tell you that the dosage is what matters... much more is simply worse than what we have or even a bit less.

Somebody needs to get you some english lessons... unless you are an illegal immigrant. Spelling errors and grammar mistakes abound. It is fairly obvious that you spent little time working on the tools of communication. It is not our job to fight wars. I don't pay my tax dollars so that 20? of every dollar is used to find better ways to survive mortal combat. I wish that my taxes were used for more benevolent reasons - than buying billion dollar weapons systems.... That's crazy. Where does it say that it is our job to fight? Isn't it our job to be the good guy? The only way that the military approach would bring peace is by killing everything that it can't communicate with. As long as you leave survivors, they will grow back and hate us more. Our country's behavior really reminds me parental abuse. There is a cause and effect that you are completely missing - if we continue to act this way, we will pay for it in the future. Here's a fact that Absolute hates: America is the only country guilty of killing innocent people with nuclear bombs (we did it twice in one year!) It is so completely unjust that we are somehow allowed to declare which other countries get nukes?? Is that fair? Who gives us that right? I don't really care - it isn't something that the USA should decide - with blood already on our hands. The torture continued under new management when we got there. It really doesn't look good for you - when you try to use the "we're better than them" arguement... how possible killing of 11 innocent civilians in the Iraqi city of Ishaki by US, or Abu Graib or Haditha Massacre: America?s Latest Disgrace. But, you would say something like they are trained to lie about being tortured or those were bad apples. What is the current Terror Alert Level??? I am tired of hearing your closed-minded babblehackey. You are blind to everything BAD that Bush has done for some reason.... in fact, you prop up both Bushes (I thought that you were talking about God / Jesus due to the triple "!!!" - usually reserved for empty promise messages like "You need our product!!!"). I really don't know where you get your facts, but they seem more like supposition. Morale is down, enlistment is steady (but down when compared to previous target numbers), psychological releases are more common, suicides are up, AWOL and defections are up. I don't know, do you want some links to these facts? Oh, and the biggest reason that enlistment in either Iraqi police or our Army is able to sustain itself -- POVERTY. It is a real shame that Iraqis have VERY little employment opportunity in a city that is so decimated -- but the Baghdad Police are hiring! The fact is that Bush and Bush can be looked at as responsible for giving the orders that killed more than 500,000 some estimate over 1,000,000 mostly-innocent Iraqi's over the past 15 years. If you don't believe me, you can read a very well written article here: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ Here's another great multi-part article written by Manuel Valenzuela of Dissident Voice (I recommend reading this): http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Valenzuela_Iraq1.htm and http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles9/Valenzuela_Iraq2.htm

Why are we still there? What is the reason now? There just isn't a good reason anymore! Bring our armed forces back home. Impeach the bumbling idiot cheerleader Bush! Anybody from this administration talks anymore and all I hear is "We know where the WMD are ... blah blah blah ... 9/11 ... blah blah ... You're Safer ... blah ... Gay Marriage ... Saddam Al Qaeda ... Illegal Immigrants ... amen! (get this "God" crap out of our government! - If there is a God, why in the world did he put OUR oil under the Arab's soil???) You don't know that I was roommates with an ex-Iraqi citizen in college. Hmmph. Anyway, the bad FAR outweighs any good that you can possibly get out of this. This is President Nimrod's (a.k.a. Bush's) war. My point is that he didn't have a reason for going to war (we know this now, are you still beating the "9/11" drum??? Iraq didn't have ANYTHING to do with the 9/11 attacks - as was determined by many investigations primarly the "9/11 Commission". You, my friend - are in the wrong. This is NOT how you spread peace and democracy - that's a fact jack. Yep, there's the "9/11" drum again. Don't you call me insane, I am the rational one who looks at FACTS, not trying to justify decisions based on BAD INTELLIGENCE. I have been studying international history as a hobby for decades... yet you say "get some knowledge about a subject before speaking on it"; I think that you don't want to hear opposition because your case just looks worse as people like me start to speak out. You are like the administration in that sense, you only want ONE SIDE OF THE STORY. Look at facts dude, there is no connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq before we created it. Is the country in a safe enough state for us to just up and leave?! The place is only a mess today because we stirred things up, like a stupid hick with a stick poking a hive full of jive! I believe that if we left, things will be better far before they could if we stayed... If we stay, more Al-Zarqawi will be created (or, so they would have us believe)... I am going out on a limb here -- Bush will be impeached more severely than anybody in history (Coulter's - head will spin, it will be that bad for the administration). I have been brave enough to go out on a limb before 2004 and buy a hybrid car because I knew that gas prices would be tripling in the next 5 years.... I was right back then, and I feel that I am right now.

So, we killed Al-Zarqawi in an air-strike late last night. He was the leader of what we called "Al-Qaeda" in Iraq. This was the dude that beheaded Nick Berg a couple years ago... he was a man of terror.Bush said "this violent man will never murder again". I really hope that he was talking about himself. Aren't we done killing arab people? Bush also said "the fighting and killing will continue" (paraphrased), meaning that we're not done in Iraq.Did we find the WMD yet?Did we get rid of Saddam?Did we spread democracy?Did we get Saddam's sons?...what other fake reasons did we have?I think that we're done! Yay! We can start bring our troops back home!Bush, I am writing this paragraph directly to you and / or your administration: Please don't up with another "Al Qaeda - leader" or another reason to keep killing. Isn't this it? Isn't the mission accomplished yet?! You will be impeached - the only way you could avoid this now would be to declare martial law in our country. Ha! "Shock and Awe" is TERRORISM; do you think that nobody was terrified in Iraq that day?.BTW, get the USA Today issue for today (June 8th, 2006) - look on page 2 for the Impeach Bush ad.

Review me: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ Some of you may have seen my posts about my site in the "Showcase" forum here, but I have made some major improvements and updates - including user voting.... so - have at it! Give me any critiques or advice. My best enhancement has to do with listing "Similar Software" based on keywords (each program has its own keywords associated with it). Below these listings, I provide links to search any of the keywords in any of the program types (Freeware/Shareware/Demo...); each of these links displays the [#] of matches that a search would yield. The voting system is only visible once you download anything. Only if a program had any votes, is the average score displayed. I did all of the graphics on the site as well, but I think that I wandered a bit off of the blue that I wanted... too many different blue hues.