April 12, 2005
April 15th: Taxes Due, My Dad's Birthday, and BUY A GUN DAY!!
Well look who the cat dragged in! Long time friend Aaron must have finally got himself a job! For awhile there he was acting like one of them liberals--you know, on the welfare--but now that Arnold is in office I guess they kicked his lazy butt out of the welfare line.
Anyway, April 15th means a lot of things to a lot of people. But to bloggers it holds a special meaning. IT'S BUY A GUN DAY!
Posted by: Rusty at
08:39 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.
1
How about "Restrict sales of .50 caliber sniper rifles to suspected terrorists in the United States Day"?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 09:28 PM (FV4oJ)
2
Got a gun, and plenty o' ammo.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 09:41 PM (8e/V4)
3
Another one? Where will I put it. The walls covered with them.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 03:41 AM (CBNGy)
4
I too have a few. All of which I can break down and reasemble in the dark.. As well as shoot accurately. Of course some are bird guns and of no value at more than 10 or 15 yards. But I can get ya at 100 yards with the rifle and if youre close knock you down with a hit anywhere with the 45.
In 36 years my house has never been broken into, could be there is a message here progressive gun control folk.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at April 13, 2005 03:43 PM (xGzRD)
5
I see Collin is now repeating the Brady Campaign's lies in addition to the terrorist lies he's posted in the past.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at April 13, 2005 08:06 PM (xauGB)
6
April 15th the day we all pay the INFERLA REVENUI SERVICE or is it the INFERNAL ROBBERS SERVICE? so all that money they get can go to the NEA(National Endowment for the Arts)the UN the liberal pork spenders and into dumb projects like silly rainforests in iowa
Posted by: sandpiper at April 15, 2005 09:47 AM (9RChR)
Three Terrorists Indicted, U.S. Financial Buildings Targetted
The three suspects are Dhiren Barot (aka, Esa al-Hindi ), Nadeem Tarmohamed, and Quaisar Shaffi.
UPDATE: Evan Kohlmann has more on Esa al-Hindi:
Eisa al-Hindi (a.k.a. Dhiran Barot) is the same extremist leader who wrote the infamous jihad text, The Army of Madinah in Kashmir. According to that book, Barot was born in the U.K. as a Hindu, but later converted to Islam and fought alongside Muslim militants in Kashmir. After graduating on and working as a combat trainer at a mujahideen terror camp in Afghanistan, al-Hindi moved to southern Thailand in 1998 and married a local woman there. In his book, Barot argues that the use by the mujahideen of "'stealthy' modern day war stratagems, which are commonly used by the western world to bring others to their knees... could be long overdue." Barot highlights several desirable "war strategems" in particular, including "Economical warfare", "Drug warfare", "Germ warfare", and "Chemical warfare."Evan has a translation of parts of that book available for download here. Pretty scary stuff.
Three men have been indicted on charges they plotted to attack financial institutions in New York, New Jersey and Washington.more...A four-count indictment unsealed Tuesday accuses Dhiran Barot, Nadeem Tarmohammed and Qaisar Shaffi of scouting the New York Stock Exchange and Citicorp Building in New York, the Prudential Building in Newark, N.J., and the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in the District of Columbia.
Posted by: Rusty at
05:09 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 528 words, total size 4 kb.
1
How many of them have infiltrated the intelligence services?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:14 PM (FV4oJ)
2
"Every moment you spend fighting, it only increases its knowledge of how to beat you."
- 'Elastigirl'
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 08:46 PM (FV4oJ)
3
OT/ Is that ( <----- to the left side) pic of soddamn not the most hideous pic of any human being you've ever seen? Reminds me of winos down under the bridge after a rain when they reek to high heaven. Yuck, Dr. R., can you find a more appropriate place for it .. like in a toilet? It literally makes me sick at my stomach to see pictures of that man .. although posting it right under mm's name is great, has some redeeming qualities. mm's pics make me sick too. He and sod'em have a lot in common even to favoring each other physically. If you could somehow make sod'em's pic a scratch and sniff, that would be a hoot. He looks like he smells like the floor in a bathroom in a bar that has dirt floors if you've ever been in a place like that. LOL He's a groaty old bugger.
Posted by: Bubbe at April 12, 2005 11:24 PM (4BlQ+)
4
collin babler is a nutcase.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 03:43 AM (CBNGy)
5
Dear Greyrooster,
We're still waiting for that Falluja URL..
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 06:02 AM (fufbw)
6
Wooptiedoo, if Clinton were still leading (not possible? maybe), the only thing Muslims would have to complain about would be the constant loss of aspirin factories... No need for terror, they would just whine about their headaches
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 08:26 AM (lGolT)
7
This is an old story, Rusty. The blogosphere knew about it before the govt and why they are bringing it up again, makes no sense. Don't you remember? You have it in your archives. They wouldn't even let Limos through those areas afraid it could hold a bomb. You had to get there by walking. Cops everywhere and then they found out these terrorists left the US. They were scouts for places to destroy. I remember it well, right here on your site. They put those areas under Orange.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 13, 2005 10:38 AM (PEKrh)
Jeff Gannon Attacked in Iraq
Earlier I posted about a base in Western Iraq being attacked by al Qaeda. Thankfully, the attack was a rousing defeat.
But how did I let the obvious slip by? Thanks to Steve the Llama Butcher for pointing out the obvious:
Yesterday's raid was on Camp Gannon...It's all beginning to make sense now......
Posted by: Rusty at
04:58 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The GAY PORN COCK of Victory!
Posted by: Eric J at April 12, 2005 08:43 PM (5PRM2)
2
Another "revolting cock" on Jawa Report?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 09:29 PM (FV4oJ)
3
I don't know who Gannon is and this is probably a joke post but they are - we are protecting the western border between Syria and Iraq so no more people can pass through. It's where they have Al Zarqawi bogged down.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 13, 2005 10:41 AM (PEKrh)
Star Wars Actress Bai Ling Bares all for Playboy
No, not Princess Leah (Carrie Fisher, D'oh!). No, not Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman, double-do'h!!) It's Bai Ling, who plays Senator Bana Breemu in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.
No, not Princess Leah (Carrie Fisher, D'oh!). No, not Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman, double-do'h!!) It's Bai Ling, who plays Senator Bana Breemu in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.
According to nerd central theforce.net, Playboy magazine will show Bai Ling baring all in the June 2005 issue.
Interesting.
And what is Bail Ling's Senator Bana Breemu costume going to consist of in Episode III? According to Bai Ling, "IÂ’m all naked with tattoos on my body. You have to find out why when you see the movie.
Interesting.
Anything else we should know about you Bai Ling?
"There’s a provocative, seductive girl inside me. She’s the one who should be banned. She’s crazy, free, open and sexy. She makes me have a good time and wear sexy outfits. Except in the house: I’m always naked when I’m inside.”
Very Interesting.
What about Hot-Lesbo-Star-Wars-Chick-Pundit? Any thoughts?
“Sex with another woman is something I wanted to experience, so I did. I was in the Jacuzzi once with this woman and felt a connection. It wasn’t about her gender; she was an attractive woman and I was stimulated. I appreciate the way a woman makes love.”
Suddenly, I lost interest.
Obligatory Bai Ling photos follow of the (PG-13 sort, but maybe NSFW). Hat tip to Wine-aholic and with apologies to Kevin Nealon. more...
Posted by: Rusty at
04:46 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 3 kb.
1
So, what makes you lose interest all of a sudden??
Nothing wrong with a little HLA.
/TJ
... NIF
... The Wide Awakes
Posted by: TJ at April 12, 2005 04:48 PM (PL7dL)
2
"I’m always naked when I’m inside.”
Not the type of girl to take home to Mother.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 05:02 PM (oVu08)
3
You gotta love how in the star wars movies the "senators" are all fuckable models, but real life senators look like scarecrows. See Nancy Pelosi.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 06:34 PM (8e/V4)
4
Ha!
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 08:19 PM (JQjhA)
5
Note: Pelosi is not a senator.
But, in photos I wish I had saved was a photo from the mid 90s, when the Carolina Panthers were established. Lauch Faircloth, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, and Bob Dole, in suits and Panther hats. It was like looking at the Four Senators of the Apocalypse.
--|PW|--
Posted by: pennywit at April 13, 2005 06:31 AM (CqK13)
6
>>>"Note: Pelosi is not a senator."
well that explains everything then. Too ugly to be senator.
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 07:58 AM (8e/V4)
7
If Pelosi is too ugly, then how did Boxer get in the door of the Senate chambers...
Posted by: Wine-aholic at April 13, 2005 10:18 AM (Wsn+K)
8
Obviously I missed much by not learning a second language -- otherwise today I could have been Bai-Ling-ual.
Posted by: McGehee at April 15, 2005 01:44 PM (S504z)
9
That was a real bad joke and iI saw it coming a mile a go.
Posted by: Jack at April 25, 2005 09:40 AM (yVXTt)
10
And it took you ten days to comment on it?
[buffs fingernails] I AM da punster!
Posted by: McGehee at April 28, 2005 10:33 AM (S504z)
11
That woman has to be the most shameless whore prowling the streets. I mean, other actresses are sexy and over the top but try to make it seem accidental...this slut shows up everywhere with her nipple hanging out deliberately, acting boozed out as hell...at least I hope she's boozed out, someone that stupid had better be on something or I'm afraid for the future of humanity...
Posted by: emini at April 30, 2005 07:45 PM (kR1Fh)
12
Whore or not . . .
I saw a picture of her in an outrageously hot costume holding a light saber. Anyone know of a link to this picture on line?
Posted by: Mark at May 04, 2005 07:02 PM (RnJws)
13
She is beautiful and very sexy. No doubt about it. And those nipples, my god!! How many women you have seen with such nipples. That is so inviting, the way it should be. Bai Ling : the true side of a love-goddess!!!
Posted by: Dash at May 10, 2005 11:16 AM (aIdVR)
14
[quoted from Young Bourbon Professional]:
"I'm always naked when I'm inside."
Not the type of girl to take home to Mother.
Oh good grief; why the heck not? Who cares what she does when she's in the house? Especially if she's in the house with ME (if I'm the boyfriend)? I'm fairly certain she'd be dressed at her boyfriend's mother's house, for Pete's sake.
Posted by: First Defender at May 17, 2005 02:50 PM (IBcjh)
15
... don't ruin it by making her get dressed all the time, I was still enjoying thinking about her being naked all the time 
... /TJ
... /TJPosted by: TJ at May 19, 2005 07:07 PM (PL7dL)
16
Mark, you mean this one?
http://www.tvshows.nu/article.php3?id_article=9578&img=bai-ling-playboy-june-2005-cover-0750.jpg
Posted by: Obi Wanker Nobi at June 01, 2005 01:28 PM (kJpdI)
17
... nice ... (and still nothing wrong with a lil HLA!) /TJ
Posted by: TJ at June 02, 2005 08:03 PM (PL7dL)
18
Obi Wanker,
That would be the one. Thanks! Ouch!
Mark
Posted by: Mark at June 08, 2005 04:28 PM (jW8ik)
19
Umm.. ew.
Posted by: Chris at June 18, 2005 08:55 PM (G0FJy)
20
She's only popular because she's a slut. The Asian ones allways have to try to be more provocative than others to be kown. Big deal another asian girl naked. She doesn't look all that better than the regular girls I see in high school. Its just she shows off like a skank
Posted by: obi dork at June 24, 2005 09:48 PM (JVMTZ)
21
Ow baby!!! She's so hot ALL my fingers itch!
Posted by: Jake at July 18, 2005 05:10 PM (iOvw3)
22
Oh got that hair cut... so damn ugly. She's got no sense of fashion (well what can you expect in communist china back then) and the only way she can get attention is by stripping naked (read: no talent).
Posted by: Will at July 26, 2005 12:51 AM (NTCDk)
Question for Readers on Comment Banning
More and more of my comment threads are degenerating into name calling.
Don't make me come down out of the ivory tower and put my foot up your asses!
Anyway, I rarely ban any one from making comments. But should I?
On the one hand, I like to be challenged. When you start banning people you weed out a potential pool of those who will be the most critical, and therefore those that are most willing to point out a flaw in your arguements.
On the other hand, sometimes these disagreements piss people off. Then name calling begins. And then it gets pretty nasty. I'm afraid many of our long-time readers have stopped commenting because they see this degeneration in dialogue.
So, what do you think? Should I just start banning people? Should we lay out some ground rules and then only ban those who break them? Any suggestions?
Posted by: Rusty at
03:53 PM
| Comments (74)
| Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Give us the rules. Then ban rule breakers fo a week or 2. 3 times and youre out forever.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at April 12, 2005 03:58 PM (HNgs/)
2
Some of the language I've read, even by pious Moslems, is hardly PG-13. However, I say that everyone likes a good fight and politics is often a dirty business. Women and children be warned!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 04:03 PM (oVu08)
3
I would like to see the name "Scott Baio" banned, however.
Sorry Filthy.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 04:07 PM (oVu08)
4
I don't mind the language, I'm guilty of it myself. But, Rusty, we tried the ban thingie before, remember, that COOqarUK, or whatever, he just kept showing up under a different name each time.
I don't know if you can do that, they would still sign on using another name, right?
Posted by: Laura at April 12, 2005 04:09 PM (L3PPO)
5
If the name calling gets obscene or threatening, after a couple of warnings, ban their a$$. It takes away from intelligent discussion and scares some of your more thoughtful readers away. Otherwise let em have at it.
Posted by: traderrob at April 12, 2005 04:15 PM (3al54)
6
Rusty,
personally I don't approve of namecalling. But you have to allow for the occasional frustrated outburts.
But if it's habitual, then give a warning or two, then ban.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 04:23 PM (8e/V4)
7
I like reading the upset responses from people who disagree with you as long as they are serious and intelligent. But I agree others then flame these people with name calling and they stop posting. Or Somtimes the opposite side starts it. Nothing like a good argument and Rusty seems to be able to start one. If I have been bad then just email me and I'll try to behave. I hate see you have to ban people. If you can't say if without profanity it just shows a lack of intelligence. Any idiot can spew forth a bunch of swear words. I'm not the brightest candle on the cake but I try to be civilized.
Posted by: howie at April 12, 2005 04:23 PM (D3+20)
8
If you banned people using the worse sick language on this site we wouldn't have any liberals left to argue with.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 04:31 PM (CBNGy)
9
Threats and profanity are probably what got Jawa booted from Google News.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 04:33 PM (fufbw)
10
Nope is was the use of the H word instead of "unfavorable response" that got him. Stupid Google BOT can read but not comprehend. Anyone think it wasn't a BOT??
Posted by: Howie at April 12, 2005 04:45 PM (D3+20)
11
Hey, I don't start the name calling. But if some right winger gets upset with my posts and calls me a name I feel I have every right to turn the table. It would be nice if we could have honest discussions without name calling though. It might help if people realized that everyone on this site loves America, we just disagree on how we should honor her.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 04:46 PM (/+dAV)
12
Seriously Rusty. Some of the lanquage needs to be cleaned up. The filty language doesn't bother me as much as the anti-America traitors do. There is no reason to put up with Collin Baber. His constant anti-American retoric doesn't produce constructive thought. The reason he popped up here one day in all probability meant he/she/it was banned from another blog. Constantly critizing everything American is just to revolting to listen to. Is the intent of this blog to critize America or discuss issues that have bearing on our lives? Namely, Islam and all the hate that it causes.
That being said. It's your blog. Your job is to run it any way you please. My job is to fight against the anti-Americans any way I can.
Good luck on your decision. As any good team player should. I will support you whatever you come up with.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 04:47 PM (CBNGy)
13
The English language is a rich one. Let people use it. Who cares about salty language? I say ban no one. After all, one can say truly evil things in a seemingly civil manner. Right, Collin?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 04:52 PM (oVu08)
14
Dr. Shackleford,
As my partner tells me. DO SOAP, NOT DOPE, AND KEEP IT CLEAN!.
Yes, the English language is very robust. Folks can be creative and get their thoughts across without sinking to the cesspool.
If they can't follow a few simple rules then restrict them and then ban if they can't be somewhat civil.
Posted by: Ron Wright at April 12, 2005 05:02 PM (wIdaE)
15
Greg needs to go back to his posts. This turkey pot is calling the kettle black. In almost every instance Greg or his like (same retoric)cohorts start the filthy lanquage first. Another liberal thing. An inability to see themselves.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 05:03 PM (CBNGy)
16
The thing is, I'm not too upset over the profanity. It's the name calling that is starting to piss me off.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 05:03 PM (JQjhA)
17
"As my partner tells me. DO SOAP..."
Is this a business partner, and if so, what kind of business is it?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 05:04 PM (oVu08)
18
what bullshit...maybe you should just ban anyone who disagrees with you too. its not a far stretch. I suggest you look at making some rules. I like those posted on beldarblog. I will copy his rule on this here for you:
"Comments to my posts are welcome, including comments that express different points of view. I insist that they be civil and reasonably nonprofane (roughly PG-13). I strongly discourage ad hominem (personal) attacks on other commenters, but recognize that a reasonable amount of snark is an essential part of the blogosphere.
I don't require that you use a valid email or real name on your comments, although I may institute TypeKey or some similar feature when TypePad makes it available. If you choose not to use a valid email, I'll have no way of contacting you about your comment other than by a reply in a subsequent comment on that same post. I reserve the absolute right to delete or edit comments at my discretion, which may sometimes seem arbitrary despite my efforts to act reasonably."
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 05:11 PM (22x5h)
19
No No No Just ban Greg 
Posted by: mike at April 12, 2005 05:17 PM (TJ8HB)
20
ground rules. Something such as Little Miss Attila has, "attack ideas, not people."
Posted by: William Teach at April 12, 2005 05:27 PM (HxpPK)
21
Like greyrooster, I abhor anti-American slurs. IMO, those who post them are simply verbally--and publicly--m*******ting and need an audience in order to achieve their narcissistic release. Such sad and minimally endowed souls are to be pitied, not enabled, so I suggest that the most effective countermeasure (punishment?) would be to ignore their pathetic mewlings. As for the profanity, it's tempting sometimes, but IMO the person who sinks into the muck first loses the argument. That seems to be W's point-of-view and from what I've seen, it does seem to be working.
Posted by: ptritsch at April 12, 2005 05:30 PM (V/ciu)
22
Rusty
I apologize for my earlier profanity, but the references to Americans as Nazi's tend to bring out the worst in me. Hell, even the mention of those abhorant scum of the earth brings about RCOB moments. Ban me if you must.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 06:01 PM (lVjfM)
23
I understand. It's not so much the profanity as it is the ad hominum attacks.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 06:24 PM (JQjhA)
24
rooster,
you can take on the anti-Americans without resorting to ad hominems.
And don't ban greg.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 06:39 PM (8e/V4)
25
U should ban that moron Filth Allah. His email is allahsucksballs@somehthing.com??:S
Posted by: Anwar at April 12, 2005 06:55 PM (lxByx)
26
I think you should ban Carlos the Jackass, international blogspot commentary terrorist, also known as "numb nuts" because that cretin called me a moron...but can barely rite or spel hisself.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 07:08 PM (22x5h)
27
I say ban everyone on both sides, no matter what, except for me. After all, I am your only blogchild.
You'll do that for me won't you daddy? ::sad puppy eyes::
Posted by: Eric at April 12, 2005 07:30 PM (lK7Sh)
28
I just banned my first poster. He pulled the "you (me and my commenters) idols must/should be Nazis" card.
I felt bad after I slapped him and banned his IP (similiar to your thoughts) but I have no use for the misuse of the Nazi smear, or Leftist Nazi calling in general. I had to draw the line, and when a comment guy starts to call the folks in my sandbox Nazi, I figure it is time to let him go back to DU and MoveOn.
I won't make a habit of it, neither should you - but banning is like porno, you know it (when to use it) when you see it.
Posted by: CDR Salamander at April 12, 2005 07:31 PM (MrU41)
29
I ban after firing two shots across the bow. Usually that separates the trolls from those who are just argumentative. Those that want to argue, give a reason or settle down. The trolls post something obscene or offensive.
Posted by: Tom at April 12, 2005 07:59 PM (9OL2r)
30
Mr. K,
you found a typo in my post? Doesn't change a thing, you're still a moron.
The fact that you've been focusing on a typo only proves it.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 08:18 PM (8e/V4)
31
Carlos, I think Mr. K is joking (see the spelling in his comment)
Actually, I'm thinking of letting Filthy Allah guest blog. Sick humor is fine.
How about laying this is rule #1.
When you're being sarcastic, do this at the end of the comment "/sarcasm". I've noticed a few people firing shots at each other over nothing more than a joke gone bad.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 08:22 PM (JQjhA)
32
It's your blog, go ahead and ban people. The point is to have an interesting debate, not provide an outlet for immature people who don't know how to conduct themselves.
In my view, profanity and personal attacks get tossed from the getgo. Ditto anyone who uses the Nazi smear. It trivializes a modern-day horror, it's a blatant attempt to manipulate and it's shorthand for "I have neither ideas nor arguments."
Posted by: vivi at April 12, 2005 08:40 PM (nTEvo)
33
The question on whether to ban or not in my opinion, would be to ban the anti-American rantings...such as "praise Allah, death to Americans" kind of crap. Profanity doesn't bother me and I'm a woman, as long as we're cursing and not cursing AT each other.
But, as I said before, Rusty, how can you ban someone? They will only come back on with another name. Remember that idiot who kept calling me a motherf**king b**ch??? You banned him and he just kept at it under different monikers. Eventually, he left.
Posted by: Laura at April 12, 2005 08:57 PM (L3PPO)
34
I have only resorted to profanity and personal attacks as self-defense or when provoked. Most of the time I am trying to hold intelligent conversations.
Posted by: Jim at April 12, 2005 09:47 PM (jcSwY)
35
Laura,
Rusty can ban his IP address.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 09:49 PM (8e/V4)
36
>>>"Carlos, I think Mr. K is joking (see the spelling in his comment)"
I know he was, Rusty. I was just making an observation.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 10:08 PM (8e/V4)
37
Banning is useless. Ban the name, and they'll make a new one, ban the IP, they'll get an IP-faker. Perhaps you should make some kind of log in system, that would allow you to control who gets to write stuff here (would ruin the freedom of expression, but anyway)
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 01:58 AM (cWMi4)
38
Quite surprised no-one mentioned me specifically to be banned. Thought I might've pissed of some people. (Collin comes to mind for some reason...)
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 03:59 AM (cWMi4)
39
Jim needs to go back and check his own posts. He is always the one who starts the name calling/filty lanquage first. Liberals. Refuse to see themselves.
Rusty: You are correct on the joke thing. Time and again when our liberal jealots fail to spend the mental energy to get the joke/sarcasm they immediately respond with the NAZI/KKK thing. I am not offended by the normal fuck you faggot posts. I am, as any normal person, offended by the stick things in the ass/mouth garbage that emits from the above people that claim to be just defending themselves. How that defends themselves is beyond me. But like any moonbat they refuse to admit they could possibly be wrong.
I would like to see the likes of Jim, Greg, Butch review their posts and show where anyone started using the vile, putrid language they use first. Most of us attribute their language to upbringing and ignore it. Some don't.
And yes! Mentioning this fact makes me a Racist.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 04:05 AM (CBNGy)
40
A Finn: You got it all wrong. You are one of us. You passed the test.
Collin Baber is another story. That freak couldn't pass gas correctly. That's why what comes from his mouth smells so much.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 04:23 AM (CBNGy)
41
Hey wait a minute here. You are considering banning personal attacks on traitors and terrorist supporters that make personal attacks against my country, my president, our military?
No way.
You mean they can't call be racist anymore? Unfair.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 04:30 AM (CBNGy)
42
Laura:
"profanity doesn't bother me and I'm a women".
It that politically correct. Ha, Ha.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 04:35 AM (CBNGy)
43
Hey Rusty, whatever happened to your liberal professor pal, with that blog, uh, what was it called...cowbytheudders, or something like that? Is he an example of a loyal reader who is too skeered to post because someone may call him some names?
And by the way, I wasn't joking. I really, really, really, reely, reley, meen it.
I gotta go, and I'm not coming back because Carlos the Jackass, aka Numb Nutz, aka Omar bin Bonin-heem says I'm a mormon, and now my feelings are hurt.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 13, 2005 06:08 AM (22x5h)
44
Dear Mr. Finn,
As long as no one advocates the use of force against the United States, no worries. If you wish to ridicule the Bushian War Cult's twisted hubris, the more the merrier!
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 06:09 AM (fufbw)
45
If you have to tell people it's sarcasm than you need to get more intelligent commenters. Or at least one's with thicker skin...I mean it's a BLOG, and no offense, but it's not like one of those uptight blogs where all the authors do is quote the news. You try to make it funny /sarcasm, so people try to be funny in the comments /truth, and sometimes funny includes bashing people. If it's done in a snarky way, I laugh. If it's done in a way that resembles kindergarten invectives, I skip past it. Let them fight each other out, commenter death match style, if they are being assanine to care so much.
Oh and Rusty sucks /joke
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at April 13, 2005 06:10 AM (/koaq)
46
prrrrr, got any pictures over there on that blog, sweetie??
Posted by: Mr. K at April 13, 2005 07:00 AM (07WwJ)
47
>>>"As long as no one advocates the use of force against the United States, no worries. If you wish to ridicule the Bushian War Cult's twisted hubris, the more the merrier!"
Collin,
the problem with your worldview is that if you really believe in the Bushian war cult, then it logically leads to force being used against the U.S.
And most Leftists do believe exactly that. So what are you waiting for? Grow some balls.
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 07:47 AM (8e/V4)
48
"I would like to see the likes of Jim, Greg, Butch review their posts and show where anyone started using the vile, putrid language they use first."-Rooster
Several people on this string have accused me of instigating volleys of profanity and aggressive blogging.
Please review yesterday's string at:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/075421.php
You will note that it wasn't until the second profane attack on me that I responded in kind. These attacks were initiated by DefenseGuy and then Confederate Yankee and in the past initiates have included Greyrooster, Filthy Allah, Obsnooks, inter alia. The motivation is that they disagreed with my posts and couldn't argue in a civil manner.
Having grown up in academia I''m sure you agree with the valuable concept of peer review Rusty. I wouldn't change anything, I'd just as soon handle things myself. But it's your call.
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 08:26 AM (/+dAV)
49
Yes, because nothing says loving like a good sig heil.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 13, 2005 08:39 AM (jPCiN)
50
sig heil/traitor/commie...it's all the same
I can handle it, can you?
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 08:46 AM (/+dAV)
51
If you dish it out, be prepared to receive it back.
Rooster dishes it out, but he doesn't complain when it comes back at him. That seems entirely consistent to me.
And in all fairness to greg, he's aggressive and passionate, but he's never abused me.
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 09:18 AM (8e/V4)
52
1) "If you dish it out, be prepared to receive it back."-Carlos
I am, see the above post.
2)"Rooster dishes it out, but he doesn't complain when it comes back at him. That seems entirely consistent to me. "-Carlos
Sounds like he's complaining to me.
"Greg needs to go back to his posts. This turkey pot is calling the kettle black. In almost every instance Greg or his like (same retoric)cohorts start the filthy lanquage first."-Rooster
How ironic. Talking about calling people black Rooster called Sgt. Finnegan's CHILDREN "porch monkeys" and that degenerated into a challange for a duel!. My best guess as to why MyPetJawa got tossed from Google News is Rooster's racism.
3"And in all fairness to greg, he's aggressive and passionate, but he's never abused me."-Carlos
Nor would I abuse anyone else who argues as eloquently as Carlos. In fact, you could be illiterate for all I care and I'd still treat you with respect if you return the favor.
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 09:35 AM (/+dAV)
53
I thought the 'who started it' was the subject. I was unaware that the discussion was going to shift to whatever topic you felt was best suited to your purposes greg. Honest discourse at its best.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 13, 2005 09:46 AM (jPCiN)
54
Defense Guy,
Your post doesn't even make any sense. You started it, see: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/075421.php
I was talking to Carlos and then you, apparently seeking a mannage au twat, started humping my leg. It was a minor nuusance as I just had to shake my leg and slap you down off of me.
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 10:12 AM (/+dAV)
55
"On the one hand, I like to be challenged. When you start banning people you weed out a potential pool of those who will be the most critical, and therefore those that are most willing to point out a flaw in your arguements." - Rusty
This is very revealing. From this statement it sounds like you are predisposed to banning those who are the "most critical" of you and not those who use foul language or ad hominems. Again, peer review is what makes academicians intellectually honest. Your confusing statement also demonstrates a tacit recognition of this.
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 10:22 AM (/+dAV)
56
An odd little world you inhabit there greg. I can stand up for my own words, and yet you feel the need to hide from yours. Don't worry about it though. I am learning to avoid your comments from here on in.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 13, 2005 10:38 AM (jPCiN)
57
I believe so because what's happening is people are getting off topic and fighting amongst themselves and the language is getting pretty disgusting making it harder for people like me to post.
See, I read what you post and if I have a comment, I comment ONLY on what you posted and I never read the other comments because they drive me totally insane. Hammorbi had to do it to and if you go to his site, Rusty, you'll see in the upper right corner "comment rules." I think people should just comment once and move on.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 13, 2005 10:46 AM (PEKrh)
58
"An odd little world you inhabit there greg. I can stand up for my own words, and yet you feel the need to hide from yours. Don't worry about it though. I am learning to avoid your comments from here on in." - Defense Guy
That's a good smart boy!
Posted by: greg at April 13, 2005 10:52 AM (/+dAV)
59
Greyrooster - I am not going to get into a childish "you started it" arguement with you. You are the LAST person to be complaining about this. You have instigated every single internet altercation between us and even when you are posting in another conversation you find time to mention "that faggot Jim". Your words hold no water here. You make a habit of attacking commentors who you don't agree with. The sad thing is that when I gave you a sample of your own medicine you ran away and then cried about how I have a "potty mouth". And now you are trying to get me banned. Hilarious.
Posted by: Jim at April 13, 2005 11:09 AM (jcSwY)
60
Mr. K-Yes I keep an entire stash of pics of me in a gold lame bikini and my hair up in Princess Lea buns just WAITING for Jawaperverts to ask me to send to them. I'm so glad you queried! Just please tuck $25 in my PayPal tip jar. And I also have a bridge to sell you.
See-that was my attempt to avoid calling him a drooling pathetic porn addict with a hand for a best friend and man tits. Because THAT would be ad hominen.
Side note-does anybody else see the irony in the squabbling occuring on a post about reducing the squabbling? Just a thought...
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at April 13, 2005 12:17 PM (vhWf1)
61
Well done, whisker-biscuit! Carlos, study the reply above, and take notes.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 13, 2005 12:30 PM (22x5h)
62
Mr. K,
you should try taking your own advice.
/numb nutz
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 02:09 PM (8e/V4)
63
If we keep this up, we'll ALL be banned, arguing over whether or not someone or something should be banned....
LMAO!!
Posted by: Laura at April 13, 2005 03:08 PM (L3PPO)
64
Jim I see you return to your same lying bullshit. Run away from a traitorous faggot like you. In your dreams.
Greg. You wish to talk about yesterday only. What a bullshit artist.
You and faggot jim have always in every instance commenced with the putrid, foul crap. I just spent several hours going back to confirm my claims and I am correct.
You and faggot jim have been the biggest distraction to intelligent thinking on this blog.
I exclude the commie Colon Babler as that idiot isn't human.
Once again you liberal moonbats omit self examination.
Lowlife America hating prick.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 14, 2005 12:04 AM (CBNGy)
65
Jim: roach747@yahoo.com
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 14, 2005 12:08 AM (FV4oJ)
66
I know a Rooster in Texas. He's 5'3", that's why they call him a rooster. Is that your problem too Greyrooster?
Are you a bitter little sawed-off stump of a man?
Posted by: greg at April 14, 2005 08:14 AM (/+dAV)
67
Hey I have learned to just skip over the commentors that I do not want to hear from. I do not respond to their posts nor do I comment on the conversation they may be haveing with another blogger. I am self editing the site so as not to be drowned by the drivel that is espoused at times. Banning is only a form of censorship. I like the different ideas, and some of the banter here. Why squelch that?? It should be encouraged. Someone swearing, and or name calling reduces my respect level for them and when my tolerance level is reached I just do not read any posts by them any more. I ALWAYS read what witty sex kitten has to say..... pant.. pant.. pant... drool drool... Her posts are always entertaining. I was a morning show On Air Personality and appreciate her humor!!
Chris
Posted by: Chris at April 14, 2005 09:54 AM (uXIKa)
68
No Greg, you candy assed little traitor. I'm 6'3" and 265.
Many years ago I was given the title rooster because of a disposition that causes me to slap the shit out of traitorous little bastards.
I was given the name greyrooster by some friends when an occassion occured that required my son to slap the shit out of two pricks before I could get to them. The guys said "looks like there's a new rooster on the block. The old man's getting grey. Hence, greyrooster stuck and little rooster was born. Which doesn't make sense as he is 3" taller than me.
I travel to Texas a lot. Maybe, someday I will have the honor of showing you up close and personal.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 05:27 AM (7480p)
69
Greyrooster,
It would be my pleasure I'm sure. And who knows, I'm might drop in on you in Picayune just to say hi.
Posted by: greg at April 15, 2005 08:16 AM (/+dAV)
70
I'm late to this party, but on my blog I don't have written rules -- I get so few trolls anymore I don't need rules, just more commenters.
Anyway, what I watch for, learned from reading more widely-read blogs, is:
1) Gratuitous and clearly unprovoked name-calling -- if a brand-new commenter starts off his remarks by disparaging someone he disagrees with, in the very first sentence -- and in a thread where there's been no heat at all (or worse, no comments at all) -- it's a bad sign.
2) A habit of posting comments that are totally off-topic, or mind-bogglingly non-sequitur (for other than clearly humorous purposes). And,
3) A tendency to keep hashing over the same arguments after everyone else in the @#$!ing blogosphere has chimed in to rebut everything the commenter in question has said -- and said, and said, and said, utterly impervious to the remote but very real possibility that when nobody agrees with him, he just might need to reconsider his position. You know, just in case the whole world isn't crazy except for him.
Posted by: McGehee at April 15, 2005 01:57 PM (S504z)
71
Greg: #1 I don't live in Picayune. #2 you couldn't get in the neighborhood. #3. Would be my pleasure.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 08:19 AM (sB5vg)
72
I agree with the folks who said that it's possible to disagree without using filthy language, so here we go- your problem is that you're pro- Bush and you can't see what a big- fat lier he is and if you guys continue like this and keep believing every lie he throws at you then you'll end up re-electing him, and one by one - he'll target all us third worlders and we'll just keep getting more and more anti- American because- you're not the only ones who love your nation - we don't like foreign powers marching into our countries based on a few lies that their totally American people believe and leveling our cities to rubbles- so we have to live in tents because you guys think we need freeing- so while you continue your lives in your fancy air-conditioned houses with all your facilities- we are forced to live in sub-human conditions- no education cos you've blasted the living day lights out of our homes, schools, colleges, offices and places of worship.
So yes- vote for your Bush- make our lives hell- and then go to church and pray to Jesus to pardon your sins-. Well, do you think he will?
And I almost forgot- first arm our nations- I'm talking of all our African- Asian Islamic nations- arm the dissendents- follow the policy of divide and rule- and then label the ppl you've armed as terrorists and attack us- believe the lies your President spreads about what?- having nuclear weapons/ supporting Osama- by the way who trained the Taliban- you did. Who armed Pakistan- you did. I can go on - see and I haven't used one filthy word- ain't I sooooo nice.
And I know most of you Americans haven't read my whole comment- cos it hurt your eyes maybe? Cos I was a tad bit Anti- American- was I?
In conclusion- UP YOURS- I won't say more- go ahead- ruin more of our lives- we won't upset you by being ANti- American on your precious bloggie- but I do hope you Jesus leaves you out of Heaven- BTW- I'm not Moussie/ Catholic/ Hindu/Parsi/Jewish but I hate you all the same- guess why? Cos you're an American who still believes your Govt's lies- heck - WAKE UP TO THE TRUTH- Save the world- Don't vote for the NEOCONs- don't believe them either. And again-- in good language - UP YOURS.
Posted by: Tssk at April 17, 2005 12:38 PM (Hj4oN)
73
God bless you Tssk. Now theres someone that knows what he is talking about.
Posted by: Anwar at April 17, 2005 02:12 PM (YY5vs)
74
tssk
I am curious to know. How are you living in a tent city with an internet connection. Seems to me that you would be more concerned with walls around you instead of spewing anti american sentiments.....?
Posted by: rob at April 23, 2005 08:58 PM (2AnvL)
Local Residents Help Free Prisoners in Iraq
The Dread Pundit Bluto has the details. What can I say? Awesome. Even better news is that more and more reports seem to indicate Iraqis are helping fight the insurgency.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:41 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 44 words, total size 1 kb.
1
They have been helping or actually doing the fighting for months. See the Aussies blog Chenrtkoff??
Posted by: Rod Stanton at April 12, 2005 04:00 PM (HNgs/)
2
About time. I wonder if they would have the courage to participate in these actions if America and its brothers were not there?
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 04:35 PM (CBNGy)
3
If America was not meddling in their internal affairs, Iraqis would have liberated themselves of President Hussein through their own machinations long ago.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:52 PM (FV4oJ)
4
Collin: True that.
Posted by: Anwar at April 12, 2005 06:57 PM (lxByx)
5
Then why didnt they?
Posted by: sparky at April 12, 2005 07:49 PM (F1nba)
6
>>>Iraqis would have liberated themselves of President Hussein through their own machinations long ago."
Amazing how clueless that statement is. They tried in '91, and Saddam slaughtered them.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 07:56 PM (8e/V4)
7
Dear Carlos,
Yes, with our authorization to use non-fixed wing aircraft.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 08:12 PM (FV4oJ)
8
Anwar and Colon Babler. Bedfellows with the same motives. At least Anwar is one of them. The putrid Babler isn't good enough to be one of anything. Reference its traitorous behavior.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 04:10 AM (CBNGy)
9
>>>"Yes, with our authorization to use non-fixed wing aircraft."
Colon,
So if the Iraqi people couldn't shake off Saddam when he only used helicopters, what makes you think they could have shaken him off in the years previous, WHEN HE COULD HAVE USED HIS ENTIRE AIR FORCE.
So you see, your statement (and Anwar's) that the Iraqi people could have rid themselves of Saddam without U.S. help is not ony wrong, it's pure fantasy.
If left to you, they'd still be slaves.
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 08:04 AM (8e/V4)
10
April 13, 2005
Child Malnutrition in Iraq Doubles
Let Them Eat Bombs
By TERRY JONES
London, England
A report to the UN human rights commission in Geneva has concluded that Iraqi children were actually better off under Saddam Hussein than they are now.
This, of course, comes as a bitter blow for all those of us who, like George Bush and Tony Blair, honestly believe that children thrive best when we drop bombs on them from a great height, destroy their cities and blow up hospitals, schools and power stations.
It now appears that, far from improving the quality of life for Iraqi youngsters, the US-led military assault on Iraq has inexplicably doubled the number of children under five suffering from malnutrition. Under Saddam, about 4% of children under five were going hungry, whereas by the end of last year almost 8% were suffering.
These results are even more disheartening for those of us in the Department of Making Things Better for Children in the Middle East By Military Force, since the previous attempts by Britain and America to improve the lot of Iraqi children also proved disappointing. For example, the policy of applying the most draconian sanctions in living memory totally failed to improve conditions. After they were imposed in 1990, the number of children under five who died increased by a factor of six. By 1995 something like half a million Iraqi children were dead as a result of our efforts to help them.
A year later, Madeleine Albright, then the US ambassador to the United Nations, tried to put a brave face on it. When a TV interviewer remarked that more children had died in Iraq through sanctions than were killed in Hiroshima, Mrs Albright famously replied: "We think the price is worth it."
But clearly George Bush didn't. So he hit on the idea of bombing them instead. And not just bombing, but capturing and torturing their fathers, humiliating their mothers, shooting at them from road blocks - but none of it seems to do any good. Iraqi children simply refuse to be better nourished, healthier and less inclined to die.
It is truly baffling.
And this is why we at the department are appealing to you - the general public - for ideas. If you can think of any other military techniques that we have so far failed to apply to the children of Iraq, please let us know as a matter of urgency. We assure you that, under our present leadership, there is no limit to the amount of money we are prepared to invest in a military solution to the problems of Iraqi children.
In the UK there may now be 3.6 million children living below the poverty line, and 12.9 million in the US, with no prospect of either government finding any cash to change that. But surely this is a price worth paying, if it means that George Bush and Tony Blair can make any amount of money available for bombs, shells and bullets to improve the lives of Iraqi kids. You know it makes sense.
Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python. He is the author of Terry Jones's War on the War on Terror . Visit Jones' blog at: www.terry-jones.net
Posted by: deccles at April 13, 2005 01:38 PM (UCtX/)
11
"Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python"
Great, political military advice from a man who dresses in drag for a living.
What's next--a scathing critique by RuPaul?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 13, 2005 03:02 PM (QV5+c)
12
I trust Terry Jones over the thieving weasels at 1600 any day.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 06:36 PM (FV4oJ)
13
"thieving weasels at 1600 any day"
Not weasel, it's "chimp," remember? Stick to the party line!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 14, 2005 02:47 PM (x+5JB)
14
deccles: Again do us the favor of not posting the long winded tirades of others. If you can't think and say for yourself, stay out of here. Moonbat.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 05:09 AM (7480p)
Bonfire of the Vanities
Go check it out. I especially love Glenn Reynold's submission.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:36 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.
There's True and there's Onion True
Six of one, or half a dozen of the other.
UPDATE: It looks like the original story isn't true. But, hey, it should be......
GOP & The City has the man on the street interviews. Trust me, those are true......
PS-I linked the story earlier, only no one seems to have noticed....
Posted by: Rusty at
01:48 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Actually, he got the news from this Washington Post Story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12514-2004Oct30.html
An excerpt:
"...in Allegheny County...election officials received a flurry of phone calls about fliers handed out at a Pittsburgh area mall and mailed to an unknown number of homes. The flier, distributed on bogus but official-looking stationery with a county letterhead, told voters that "due to immense voter turnout expected on Tuesday," the election had been extended. Republicans should vote Tuesday, Nov. 2, it said -- and Democrats on Wednesday. A criminal investigation has been launched."
Nice try, though.
Posted by: Terrence at April 12, 2005 02:35 PM (7tpGj)
2
LMFAO
Give ''em hell Terrence.
Quick Rusty, delete this entire post and no one will be the wiser!
Posted by: Greg at April 12, 2005 02:44 PM (/+dAV)
3
Nobody who can think for themselves and is honest ever said JFK was not dumb. This is just more proof. That anyone in the MSM repeats it shows their IQ's are also less than room temp.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at April 12, 2005 04:04 PM (HNgs/)
4
bwwwwwWhat?
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 04:15 PM (/+dAV)
5
Let us consider the veracity of what the Bushian War Cult is feeding us. In their procrustean efforts to brutally bind our heads and bodies to obey their rigid hallucinatory alternate reality, they've blown hydrogen balloons into deadly weapons, prostituted Jessica Lynch, bobbed for bad apples in Abu Ghraib, ravaged "Satanic" Falluja and fought off phantom insurgents at Tharthar. The only thing they haven't done is have Richard Nixon dance to My Sharona in a purple tutu.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 08:22 PM (FV4oJ)
6
My father always told me never to get in an argument with anyone crazier than myself.
Posted by: Homer at April 12, 2005 09:07 PM (01OHr)
7
Homer: I'll bet you argue all the time then.
Posted by: greg at April 14, 2005 10:57 AM (/+dAV)
8
unCLONING the WARCLONE,
GEORGE W. BUSH said about Stem cell:
“There is NO REASON to KILL INNOCENTS in order to SAVE LIVES”
These are the words of someone that sent innocent soldiers to fight an unrighteous WAR, were more than twenty-five thousand INNOCENT CHILDREN, YOUNGSTERS and ELDERLY men and women have been killed, because of his foolish VISION of PEACE in the Middle-East.
The WORD of GOD in Proverbs that is written says, “A righteous man regards the life of his beast; but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.” Moreover, “He who hides hatred is of Lying Lips, and he who utters slanders is a FOOL.”
The WORD also tells as that, “we reap what we sow” and “we will receive according to our WORDS.”
America with all its given power has not acted in MERCY and LOVE toward their enemies, but has always used the same Weapons used by the enemies of PEACE, which are HATE, VIOLENCE, KILLING and LIES.
America Awake and say! NO MORE VIOLENCE! NO MORE KILLING! NO MORE WAR! NO MORE LIES!
“When a leader in power has spoken lies and done wicked things to people, he will try to twist his own words and actions. But, these will hunt him back until the Truth comes to Light according to his own Evil.” Thus say the LORD.
AMERICA! Open your eyes wide and read if you are blind and want to see, because the LIGHT is shining and HIS WORD is WRITTEN: “I will make Darkness LIGHT before them, and CROOKED things STRAIGHT. This things will I DO unto them, and not FORSAKE them. Isaiah 42
“When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing follows not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken, but the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; thou shall not be afraid of him.” Deuteronomy 18:22
The prophet which prophesies of PEACE, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the LORD truly sent him.” Jeremiah 28:9
Now I say, “Read the REVELATION for PEACE from JESUS CHRIST to the WORLD at, www.aleuzenev.com and Judge for your self, if I have spoken presumptuously or the things spoken have not come to pass, 9/11. It is also FREE, freely I have received and freely I must give to the World HIS WORD of TRUTH which is MERCY and LOVE for PEACE. Ivor Manuel prays for you and PEACE for the WORLD; prophet pillar branch of the LORD JESUS ALEUZENEV, HIS NEW NAME, LORD and SERVANT of all PEOPLE.
ALELUYA! AMEN! ALEUZENEV!
Posted by: Ivor Manuel prophet at May 23, 2005 06:59 AM (24zh3)
9
FALSE PROPHETS IN AMERICA.
November 24, 2005 Year of Our Lord. Orlando Florida City of Lights.
This early morning, while Hurricane Wilma was in action against the Florida coasts, I went to my place were people come to have their health restore. As I listen to the messages recorded in my telephone machine, I heard the voice of false prophet Kenneth Copland saying:
“We take stand against this storm call Wilma. Father we pray over this storm in Jesus name. Wilma we speak to you and we command you in the name of Jesus, by the blood of the lamb, you touch us not! You fall to the bottom of the sea, you don’t have authority over the people of God; we have authority over you. Every principality, every power, every rumor of the darkness of this World, trying to take advantage of that storm to destroy God’s people and their properties; I rebuke him, in the name of Jesus Amen! Dear partners get it together, stand against this thing and rebuke fear! Don’t you allow fear to have anything to do with the way you pray about this or in your household, stand on the Word, we love you, we believe in God! We are always here for you and remember you can call us at 1-800-600-7395. To heard this message again or read the transcript visit our web site at KCM.org”
Then, the Word of the Lord came upon me saying: “No weapon that is form against thee shall prosper: and every tongue that shall raise against thee in Judgment you shall condemn. This is the Heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their Righteousness is of me, saith the Lord. Isaiah 54:17.
Then I said: “Kenneth Copland, you have rebuke Wilma and the Judgment of God upon all nations. But the Lord rebukes thee Satan!”
“And all the host of Heaven shall be dissolved, and the Heavens shall be roll together as a scroll (hurricane): and all the host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree. For My sword shall be bath in Heaven; behold, it shall come down upon Idumea and upon the people of My curse to Judgment. The sword of the Lord is filled with blood, it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams; for the Lord has a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of Idumea. Isaiah 34:3,4,5,6.
I AM the vine saith the Lord, you are a rotten fig Kenneth Copland, and My Judgment is upon you and all the fat goats that have jumped the fence and gone out of My House to find their own pastures. The Lord and His Word rebukes thee Satan!”
“And the stars of Heaven fell unto the Earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs (not good to eat), when she is shaken of a mighty wind (hurricane). And the Heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain (place of Idolatry) and Island were moved out of their place.” Revelation 6:13,14.
Kenneth Copland, “No weapon that is formed against me shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against me in Judgment I shall condemn. This is the Heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their Righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.” Isaiah 54:17.
“Behold My servant, whom I uphold: Mine elect, in whom My soul delights; I have put My Spirit upon him; he shall bring Judgment to the Gentiles…To open their blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house. I AM the Lord; that is My Name; and My Glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.” Isaiah 42: 1-8.
“Now therefore, what have I here, saith the Lord, that My people is taken away for naught? They that rule over them make, make them to howl, saith the Lord; and My Name continually every day is blasphemed. Therefore My people shall know My Name; therefore they shall know in that day that I Am He that does speak; behold it is I. How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that brings good tidings and publishes Peace; that brings good tidings of good, and publishes salvation, that saith unto Zion, Your God reigns!” Isaiah 52:5,6,7.
Then, I heard His Voice saying:
“Political leaders of AMERICA, REPENT! You have misled the Nation.”
“Shepherds of AMERICA, REPENT! You have misled My PEOPLE.”
“Military Leaders of AMERICA, REPENT! You have misled the World.”
“Because you don’t believe in ME, UNRIGHTEOUS is your JUDGEMENT.”
Thus Says the LORD JESUS ALEUZENEV;
LORD and SERVANT of all PEOPLE, My New Name.
That is what I heard My LORD said; if you donÂ’t believe me read John 16: 7-15 and Revelation 3: 12 and hear His Voice speaking to you Chosen and Faithful.
And I His prophet now say: ALELUYA! AMEN! ALEUZENEV!
It is written:
“AWAKE to RIGHTEOUSNESS, and SIN NOT: For some HAVE NOT the KNOWLEDGE OF GOD: I speak this to YOUR SHAME.” I Corinthians 15: 34.
“And My LORD said unto me, Thou must PROPHESY AGAIN before many PEOPLES, and NATIONS and TONGUES, and KINGS.” Revelation 10: 11.
Ivor Manuel, prophet branch of the LORD; prays for you and PEACE for the WORLD. OPEN YOUR EYES AMERICA! www.aleuzenev.com
“So shall My Word be that goes forth out of My Mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it…Instead of the thorns shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree; and it shall be to the Lord for a Name, for an everlasting sign that shall be not cut off.” Isaiah 55:11-13
Posted by: Ivor Manuel prophet at October 25, 2005 08:55 AM (O8EpN)
Nightmares
Toy company finds yet another way to give me nightmares.
Posted by: Rusty at
01:46 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Go here for even more nightmares:
http://ship-of-fools.com/Gadgets/Gadgets_body.html
Also mentioned here:
http://www.jquinton.com/archives/002401.html
Posted by: Jeff at April 12, 2005 04:33 PM (ifPXk)
2
Go to Iraq and see all the nice toys there.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 12:21 AM (FV4oJ)
3
... Like M-14s that cause human heads to explode so that skull fragments can be scavenged up:
"The sniper fired his powerful M-14 rifle and the man's head exploded...Americans scooped up a piece of skull and took it back to their base as evidence of the successful mission."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48017-2005Apr12.html
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 02:19 AM (FV4oJ)
4
Wonder why Jeesus always has white skin and straight hair in whatever context he is presented in... He lived in a desert and was Jewish, and at those times, people living in sunny, helluva hot places had a strong tan and curly(-ish at least) hair, even if they didn't have the genes for it.
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 03:48 AM (cWMi4)
5
Dear Mr. Finn,
Jesus never bombed anyone either.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 03:53 AM (FV4oJ)
6
Finn: Not "always." I have a Sacred Heart picture in my abode where Jesus looks VERY Jewish.
Glad the parents have lifted the computer restriction!
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 13, 2005 07:39 AM (x+5JB)
Censorship In a State of War
The Confederate Yankee and I have been going back and forth over whether or not Kevin Sites is a 'traitor' or not. Mostly for his benefit I repost my earlier discussion on censorship in a time of war. This post was originally written after the Abu Ghraib pictures were released and after Nick Berg had been beheaded.
Some of you might be shocked to learn that Rusty Shackleford, Libertarian, actually advocates censorship. I do. But only in the context of war and only in the context of speech directly related to the war effort.
Read the rest. It's a little academic, but if you don't mind a lot of references to Locke and Hobbes, I hope you find it readable if not completely outrageous. more...
Posted by: Rusty at
11:10 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 2135 words, total size 12 kb.
1
I agree with a certain level of censorship in wartime Rusty, I agree with that 100%. But that has nothing to do with the Sites case. Sites presented the video to the MArines, and the Marines cleared it for release.
I'll say it again.
The government allowed him to release the tapes. Therefore, categorically, he cannot be guilty of treason, my friend.
Unless you want to charge the Marines with treason as well...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 12, 2005 11:50 AM (P1Gho)
2
Treason got bandied about too much during the most recent campaign as a term aimed at getting an emotional reaction.
Maybe betrayal can be substituted if anyone can tell the difference since treason has a legal definition that differs alot from the usage of it lately.
I come down with Confederate Yankee on this one. Sites isn't a traitor per se, even if his actions are reprehensible.
This is a case of the military inviting embeds in and not squelching the report. There was censorship in place throughout the war in Iraq with the embeds.
Posted by: Jeff at April 12, 2005 01:02 PM (ifPXk)
3
Confederate Yankee,
When you say the Marines 'cleared it for release', what do you mean? Under the current rules, my impression is that the military can only censor times and places of troop movements.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 01:06 PM (JQjhA)
4
"In sum, I call on Congress to recognize that the War on Terror must be handled as TOTAL WAR. All of the Nation's resources and will must be turned to that aim. From time to time events shock our conscience and reawaken us to the fact that our enemies want us dead. Between these times there must be a concerted effort by the entire nation to constantly remind us that war is a fact. " - Rusty
This is nothing close to "total war" and never will be. "Total wars" like WWII occur when we are genuinely threatened. There is no threat that our country will be taken over by another. There is no draft. There is no rationing. There are no colleges that can't put together a football team because all the men are in arms. There is no mass movement to join up. In fact, recruitment is down 40% from stated goals. We don't need to censor our media or lose our civil liberties over this preemtive war of choice. In short, your just being hysterical Rusty and cooler heads won't allow you and your ilk to destroy this country.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 01:44 PM (/+dAV)
5
Maybe things are more serious than I thought...
The Secret Service, which has the job of guarding the president and other dignitaries, now has a new temporary duty — protecting a mother duck and her nine eggs.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7431409/
Notice how the Secret Service doesn’t know how to spell “quiet”.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 01:59 PM (/+dAV)
6
>>>"Notice how the Secret Service doesn’t know how to spell “quiet”."
dude, was that a crack on the Secret Service? What did they ever do to you.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 02:03 PM (8e/V4)
7
Have I sinned Carlos? God forgive me!
I too love the Fuhrer.
I too love the Fuhrer.
I too love the Fuhrer.
I'm a good American too
Sig Heil!
Sig Heil!Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:12 PM (/+dAV)
8
Yes greg, because references to America or American patriotism as modern day Nazism never get old.
Do you have the first clue about the Nazis?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 02:23 PM (jPCiN)
9
I have a second clue about Zionazis.
I think we should adopt that whole goose stepping thing the real Nazis did. It looks so cute!
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:26 PM (/+dAV)
10
"dude, was that a crack on the Secret Service? What did they ever do to you."
For one thing they arrest people with anti-Bush T-shirts at pro-Bush rallies.
http://www.refuseandresist.org/police_state/art.php?aid=1495
http:/www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/10/ale04068.html
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:40 PM (/+dAV)
11
Your kind of an asshole aren't you greg?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 02:41 PM (jPCiN)
12
Aw! poor baby Defense Guy wants his total war.
Hey DG, why don't you go and join up. They need you man. You're killer material brother. Or are you a Chickenhawk?
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:48 PM (/+dAV)
13
LOL Nazis???
Well go here:
http://www.protestwarrior.com
and check out how the good boys on the left react when a handful of conservatives crash one of their parties. If ever there were a true fucktard greg wins hands down!!!
Posted by: mike at April 12, 2005 02:49 PM (TJ8HB)
14
I take it back greg, your not kind of an asshole, your an unoriginal asshole. Better?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 02:52 PM (jPCiN)
15
Same question Mike. Why not go join up?
Are you a Chickenhawk?
Pussytard!
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:54 PM (/+dAV)
16
When you say the Marines 'cleared it for release', what do you mean?
I mean Sites showned the video to the USMC, and while they could have easily chosen to censor or confiscate the video, they instead decided to work with Sites, which provided the bakground context of this story, and the players involved.
Immediately after the mosque incident, I told the unit's commanding officer what had happened. I shared the video with him, and its impact rippled all the way up the chain of command. Marine commanders immediately pledged their cooperation.
We all knew it was a complicated story, and if not handled responsibly, could have the potential to further inflame the volatile region. I offered to hold the tape until they had time to look into incident and begin an investigation -- providing me with information that would fill in some of the blanks.
For those who don't practice journalism as a profession, it may be difficult to understand why we must report stories like this at all -- especially if they seem to be aberrations, and not representative of the behavior or character of an organization as a whole.
That was from Sites' "Open Letter to Devil Dogs of the 3.1."
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 12, 2005 02:54 PM (ygMXr)
17
Well Defense Guy...
Are you a Chickenhawk?
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 02:56 PM (/+dAV)
18
A repititous unoriginal asshole.
Let's recap the leftist talking points:
greg states -
-American patriotism akin to goose stepping Nazi's. - Check
-If you care so much, why not join up, warmonger? - Check
-Claim of chickenhwak status. - Check
Do you get points for staying on target with the list of approved talking points?
BTW - my clearance comes through the DIA, where does yours?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 03:07 PM (jPCiN)
19
greg,
asking a pro-war person to "join up" makes about as much sense as demanding that a pro-choicer get an abortion, or demanding that a Liberal pay more taxes than he has to.
It's fairly good rhetorical device, but it's just that--rhetoric.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 03:11 PM (8e/V4)
20
There, there Defense Guy, sure it does.
So you're like a big Eichman then, eh?
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:13 PM (/+dAV)
21
Truth hurts, eh? Is poor widdle greggy upset that someone called his bluff? Your really showing those 'smarts' throwing around all the Nazi references.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 03:16 PM (jPCiN)
22
"asking a pro-war person to "join up" makes about as much sense as demanding that a pro-choicer get an abortion"
I fail to see your logic. By the way Carlos, what's your excuse?
No need to answer. It's 'cause you're too fucking smart!
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:16 PM (/+dAV)
23
greg you wouldn't recognize logic if it was biting you in the ass. Why not try something original?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 03:17 PM (jPCiN)
24
"BTW - my clearance comes through the DIA, where does yours?"-Defense Guy
I'm a dissident so I have no clearance.
But again, why aren't you suited up and fighting man? If I was half as committed to this "war" as you are I'd be there.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:21 PM (/+dAV)
25
No I wouldn't recognize logic if it was biting me in the ass, but I would if it was biting me on the ass.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:25 PM (/+dAV)
26
Sure you would greg, sure you would. Don't worry there is a part of the country that just loves American hating cowards such as yourself. Alas, your typical answers now bore me, and out of deference to the Jawa masters I will stop polluting this thread with my own pissing contest.
OK, one more parting shot. The liberals of this world must be proud to count you as one of their own. dissident, hah?
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 12, 2005 03:27 PM (jPCiN)
27
Defense Guy,
You never answered why you haven't joined up. I conclude that you are a Chickenhawk coward.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:31 PM (/+dAV)
28
"In sum, I call on Congress to recognize that the War on Terror must be handled as TOTAL WAR. All of the Nation's resources and will must be turned to that aim. From time to time events shock our conscience and reawaken us to the fact that our enemies want us dead. Between these times there must be a concerted effort by the entire nation to constantly remind us that war is a fact. " - Rusty
This is nothing close to "total war" and never will be. "Total wars" like WWII occur when we are genuinely threatened. There is no threat that our country will be taken over by another. There is no draft. There is no rationing. There are no colleges that can't put together a football team because all the men are in arms. There is no mass movement to join up. In fact, recruitment is down 40% from stated goals. We don't need to censor our media or lose our civil liberties over this preemtive war of choice. In short, your just being hysterical Rusty and cooler heads won't allow you and your ilk to destroy this country.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:32 PM (/+dAV)
29
No I wouldn't recognize logic if it was biting me in the ass, but I would if it was biting me on the ass.
So, you wouldn't recognize if logic was biting you in the ass, becuase Lemmiwinks is already there, and you couldn't tell if the bite was from logic or Lemmiwinks. However if logic was external when it bit you, you could tell as the sensation would be coming from a different place than your over-populated rectum.
That is one of the few things you've said on this thread that made sense.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 12, 2005 03:41 PM (ygMXr)
30
BREAKING NEWS;
JUDGE ORDERS CONFEDERATE YANKEE RECONNECTED TO JEFF GANNON'S FEEDING TUBE
Posted by: Greg at April 12, 2005 03:43 PM (/+dAV)
31
‘Iran a step away from uranium enrichment'
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1113272267256
It should be pretty obvious just what is being talked about at Crawford, and more to the point, who is doing the talking and who has been ordered to listen and obey. When your kids are dying in Iran (as they are already doing in Iraq), you will know at whose command their blood is spilled.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:44 PM (/+dAV)
32
Confederate Yankee,
I couldn't recognize logic if it was "in" my ass as you can because I haven't got the anal acuity that you have.
Fags like you can make correct change with their sphincters.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 03:46 PM (/+dAV)
33
>>>"By the way Carlos, what's your excuse? No need to answer. It's 'cause you're too fucking smart!"
LOL! wrong. I'm too old. But if I could start again, I would have gone to the military before going into college. I regret that I didn't. But I was a Liberal back then, and I considered the military to be evil. So I lost my chance.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 04:28 PM (8e/V4)
34
Greg - we are at total war. On 91101 American soil was under attack, thousands died and many more thousands were injured. $billions of American property was destroyed. We had no draft in 1777 but we had a total life or death war.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at April 12, 2005 04:31 PM (HNgs/)
35
Was there a catalyst to your transformation? 9--11? If I believed the official 9-11 story I'd be right with you.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 04:35 PM (/+dAV)
36
Greg - "we are at total war. On 91101 American soil was under attack, thousands died and many more thousands were injured. $billions of American property was destroyed. We had no draft in 1777 but we had a total life or death war."
It doesn't seem like total war to me. Not like WWII at all. By the way, I thought Osama attacked us on 9-11. President Bush himself has stated that there is no Iraq/9-11 connection despite that 70% of Americans think we were attacked by Saddam on 9-11. Not too smart. How many people must die until you feel avenged?
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 04:39 PM (/+dAV)
37
Defense Guy: Welcome to the blog. I see you have already learned the first undeniable fact. Grey is an asshole. One of these shitheads who voted for Kerry and cannot accept that he lost. So he raves anti-American, anti-Bush, anti-this, anti-that, etc: And always if he can't get his way he will resort to vile, sick, homosexual lanquage. My take on Greg. A faggot traitor. After a while that's the only conclusion one can intelligently come up with.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 05:24 PM (CBNGy)
38
Censor nothing.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:17 PM (FV4oJ)
39
well now, Rusty, aren't you a puzzle of contradiction? I guess you mean the war time censorship should apply to your blog as well? to quote someone with a world class blog, "Heh".
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 06:26 PM (22x5h)
40
Dear Defense Guy,
Did you take part in DIA's GTAP?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 07:34 PM (FV4oJ)
41
" Even if the actual battles are far away, the state of war exists. It is here. It is now."
I think you have an idea of total war, which is not what we're in. For you war either is or isn't. That sort of totalism, of black/white, is just misguided, no matter how many philosphisers quotes you can get.
Posted by: actus at April 12, 2005 08:37 PM (EQbuu)
42
greyrooster
Thanks for the welcome. I have the site in my favorites list, but only recently started delving into the comments section.
CB
No.
Posted by: Defense Guy at April 13, 2005 08:41 AM (jPCiN)
43
Defense Guy: Warning! if you show patriotism in any form you will be attacked by the likes of traitors like Greg.
The Collin Baber is a commie to be ignored. An America hating garbage pit. Nothing more.
Some well meaning bloggers converse with these things just for the sake of retoric. Which produces nothing but more retoric. Which produces more retoric. Which produces nothing but more retoric. All which changes no ones mind. Which produces nothing but more retoric.
And on, and on, and on.
Good luck.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 08:05 AM (sB5vg)
44
Defense Guy: I forgot. Please go to Jawas explained. It gives detail on what this blog is about. It's also a work of art that should be posted on the front page of every newspaper in the country.
It's is on the left side of the main page.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 08:10 AM (sB5vg)
Jay Tea at Wizbang Makes an Ass Out of Himself
Worst. Tirade. Ever. Dumbass.
Seriously. I'm at a loss for words over how idiotic this is. Dean pretty much sums up my feelings here.
I don't usually comment on religious doctrine, but some of the stuff being said over at Wizbang lately is getting borderline insane.
I wonder if saying Mass for the dead is also deeply offensive to Jay Tea?
When the families of Holocaust survivors lodge a protest over the 'baptism for the dead' practice of Mormons, they are feeding the fires of anti-semitism. Protesting what is essentially a harmless practice, and one done out of good will, is the kind of thing that anti-semites love to point out.
It's one thing to bring up the Holocaust when defending Israel's right to exist, it's another thing altogether to bring it up when complaining about a doctrine that you oppose.
The fact that the Holocaust is mentioned at all reminds me of Tony Robert's character 'Rob' in Annie Hall.
I think Aaron's response here is the proper one from Jews. Eh, don't like it but no big deal.
Most Christian denominations believe that non-Christians will go to hell. So what? And that is deeply offensive because....??? I think most Christian denominations are wrong. Most of my neighbors are Southern Baptists and in no uncertain terms do they condemn me to hell. Many of them are deeply concerned about my soul--and they tell me.
I'm flattered. I'm glad I have neighbors with such concern. Much more worrisome is a society which produces religious faith that not only condemns non-believers to hell, but which is willing to help them on their way.
The only thing offensive in this story is the fact that the Mormon Church is caving to these ninnies. Grow some nads people! So freaking what if these people take offense where none is given. Deal with it.
Just remember that South Park claims only Mormons go to heaven. Who are we to argue with that?
UPDATE: Holocaust.
Jews have a perfectly legitimate reason for being sensitive, as Aaron points out in the comments.
But by invoking the Holocaust into this debate (as the delegation did when they took special umbrage at Holocaust victims being baptized by proxy) we cheapen the enormity and uniquely evil nature of that event.
UPDATE II: Amen to Bogus Gold:
"Die and then we'll convert you" has got to be the very least intrusive conversion practice in the history of religion. You don't have to participate. Your relatives don't have to be bothered. No one takes out an article in a newspaper announcing your post-mortem conversion, and thereby sullying your proudly Mormon-free reputation.If the Mormon faith is true, they're doing these deceased folks the best good they could possibly do. If their faith is false, they're doing no harm and bothering no one but themselves. Unless you're just looking to be offended anyway.
Another UPDATE: Yeah, I like Jay Tea. But even the best of us say idiotic things every once and awhile.......
Posted by: Rusty at
09:23 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 519 words, total size 4 kb.
1
"When the families of Holocaust survivors lodge a protest over the 'baptism for the dead' practice of Mormons, they are feeding the fires of anti-semitism."
What an idiot.
Posted by: actus at April 12, 2005 09:33 AM (CqheE)
2
To me it's like a bunch of children arguing over their imaginary friends. It'd be funny if it weren't for the fact that these are supposedly rational adults.
My imaginary friend can kick your imaginary friend's ass, buddy!
Posted by: andy at April 12, 2005 09:59 AM (vX6Is)
3
Sorry. A couple thousand years of forced conversions makes some Jews a little sensitive on the subject.
Tell me Rusty, if this was an Islamic practice, would you really feel the same way?
In addition, even if they don't intend it, implicit in the "afterlife baptism" is a condemnation of the way the deceased's life was lived.
Y'know what - this issue does make my blood boil. Maybe it shouldn't. If I wear my rationalist hat there's "no harm done." But I don't want them praying for my parents. That was my job, and I did it, and I get to decide, and G-d gets to decide whether those prayers meant anything or had any effect here or in the afterlife. It offends me that a stranger would come along, pat me on the head, and say, "That was nice. But we'll help your parents actually get into heaven now."
Posted by: Eric J at April 12, 2005 10:01 AM (hrQvk)
4
Eric, you are just being silly. All religions, including Islam, condemn other relilgions. So what? Condemning me to hell is nothing. I don't care. How is proxy baptism 'forced conversion' exactly?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 10:06 AM (JQjhA)
5
This is about as helpful to Jews as that Liberal "rabbi" who recently complained that lowering the U.S. flag at half mast for the Pope was offensive, and unconstitutional. He was practically begging for catholics to get offended.
Imagine a Jewish "rabbi" trying to hurt the cause of his own people. Only a Liberal could be so clueless. Leave it to Liberals to stir that pot. And then if it reflects badly on jews, the "rabbi" gets his self-justifying axe to grind about "anti-semitism." Leave it to Liberals. They do everything in their power to drive a wedge between the races and peoples of faith in this country in order to self-justify themselves.
They need racial/religious friction at all costs. It's mother's milk to Liberals. It's their reason to live, like COCAINE. Without it they sink into lethargy and meaninglessness.
Not to mention "Liberal" and "rabbi" are nearly as oxymoronic as "conservative" "hippie". You jews should take such self-described "rabbis" and cane them for using that respected religious title for the purpose of furthering their secular Liberal politics.
They're phonies. They aren't real rabbis. Liberal Jews hardly even believe in the God, let alone the God of their forefathers.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 10:09 AM (8e/V4)
6
>>>"To me it's like a bunch of children arguing over their imaginary friends. It'd be funny if it weren't for the fact that these are supposedly rational adults."
That would be logical if you think mormonism is a false religion.
The irony here is that the less pious the Jew, the more "offended" he is. Pious Jews are secure enough in their faith not to even give this the time of day. That's why this is so ridiculous.
This is Liberal Jews doing what Liberals do best, stirring up the pot.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 10:18 AM (8e/V4)
7
I just posted over there congratulating Jay Tea on becoming the Jerry Springer of Wizbang. I hope he doesn't think that was a compliment...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at April 12, 2005 12:12 PM (P1Gho)
8
CaYa,
Considering the competition over there, that's really saying something!
Posted by: The Commissar at April 12, 2005 12:33 PM (kP2eG)
9
I use the Mormons more than they'll ever use me. For the better part of a year, I lived in their genealogy library here in Los Angeles doing my family tree using their microfilm.
Some weird cult could invent anything and say it was converting my ancestors AND my descendants. If I don't believe in what they say, it costs me nothing to ignore their nonsense.
Hey Rusty, some new cult spit on a picture of a Springfield Armory 1911 and burned Polaroids of you and me and says that ritual now makes us believing members of the Gun Control Kook Cult.
Yeah, right.
Wish to take issue with one thing, though. It pains me to think that what Liberal Jews do translates into antisemitism. The argument for that is a lot weaker than the 19 centuries of Christianity in Europe equating to the Holocaust. Those seeds of canonized clergy-based antisemitism seem, blessedly, not to have found welcoming soil here in the USA, and that alone is a strong reason to oppose any attempt to make us more like Europe.
A difficulty is the semantic difference in the words Jew and Jewish. One can be a non-Jewish Jew, like Noam Chomsky or Cardinal Ratzinger. Being a Jew is also a nationality. An American can grow up to be an un-American American. The difficulty is that Christianity says one can't be a non-Christian Christian... yet Christians cannot come up with a guidebook to allow us non-Christians to quantitatively determine who is and who isn't.
Given that 1 out of 3 Jews was murdered within the lifetimes of people still living while the US denied refuge, a bit of extra empathy may be in order until a few pogrom-free generations have passed. That our State Department has benefitted from a the Saudi-funded retirement plan for decades ensures that I'll keep my guard up.
As for religious ritual... that's between us and our Maker and we'll hopefully find out the truth when our time comes to meet Him. I judge people by what they do to others "made in His image" here on earth. I'd sooner have my kids stay with Jerry Falwell for a weekend than Noam Chomsky. But I'd sooner have them with Joe Lieberman than Pat Buchanan.
Posted by: Aaron's cc: at April 12, 2005 12:42 PM (UxMXb)
10
Mormons are baptizing dead people? That's just fucking stupid, that's what it is.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 12:44 PM (22x5h)
11
No, they are baptizing in behalf of dead people. And Catholics pray for dead people, and so do Hindus and Buddhists, and some Shintoists pray TO dead people. People do a lot of things.........
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 01:11 PM (JQjhA)
12
Uh, oh. Here comes the guy who gets to say "I know because I was one of them". Well, I was. For nineteen years (on and off for the last few of those years to be fair). I currently drink way too much beer to be Mormo-Kosher.
Baptism for the dead has gone on for decades. It's not forced baptism. The doctorine goes something like this: you baptize someone by proxy. The dead one is then given the opportunity to hear, embrace, or reject that baptism. No one is forced to do or even hear anything. Hendrix? Baptised. Jerry Garcia? Baptised. Are either one a Mormon? Don't know. It's basically an extension of their missionary program.
Mormons (often reffered to as the American Jews) aren't all that spooky. Check out our blog. Some who post there are devout.
Posted by: Sean the INFDL at April 12, 2005 01:13 PM (97hlx)
13
Aaron,
and I'd sooner have my kids stay with an orthodox jew for the weekend than with a Liberal christian. And I'm a christian.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 01:17 PM (8e/V4)
14
That would be logical if you think mormonism is a false religion.
Thank you. As it happens, I think all religions are false.
Posted by: andy at April 12, 2005 01:19 PM (vX6Is)
15
I'll be concerned when those Mormons start passing the plate and those dead converts start filling it!
Till then . . . Oferchrissake!
Posted by: large at April 12, 2005 01:23 PM (VRK2g)
16
Andy,
then yours is the natural and logical position.
I believe in christianity, and not other religions. Therefore, I couldn't give a crap what they believe.
That's why alleged Jews complaining about mormons, and secularists complaining about christian beliefs about hell, etc., is so RIDICULOUS.
These people are troublemakers, nothing more.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 01:35 PM (8e/V4)
17
yeah rusty, people do a lot of things. if I saw someone fucking around my father's or a loved one's grave, I might kick some ass. Mormons, Muslims, Catholics, Jews, whoever, mind your own goddamn business, and leave dead poeple alone. whats next? "loving" dead people?
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 02:27 PM (22x5h)
18
Mr. K is a perfect of how irrational people can be.
Short of exhuming and vandalizing a corpse, there's nothing anybody can "do" to a dead person. IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD YOUR MORON.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 02:31 PM (8e/V4)
19
Carlos - when you can learn to spell, and maybe write a sentence or even a phrase or two that is complete and makes some sense, then you may call me a moron. Until then, if you care to show up without my permission, even at the location where my dog is buried, and begin to dance, chant, drool, toss water, and spout incantations, you may find your last thought is wondering if the Mor(m)ons will be baptizing you. Mind your own goddamn business, keep your religious beliefs to yourself, and most of all, do not fuck around with my loved ones, dead or living.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 03:14 PM (cu0H9)
20
What I find truly offensive is the fact that you've seen Annie Hall.
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at April 12, 2005 04:53 PM (H9Zch)
21
Baptizing the dead has no scripture basis, but then again, nor does Mormonism. I fail to see the link to anti-Semitism. It's just anti-logical.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 04:59 PM (oVu08)
22
It is my understanding that this is not forced conversion but a proxy ceremony that the recipients are free to accept or reject but must be done in the physical world (I guess there are no baptisms in the "spirit world".) I know its goofy (every religion is) but its being misrepresented. Aside from being a stupid thing to complain about. Is there no more pressing issue?
Posted by: slickdpdx at April 12, 2005 05:33 PM (MjGRu)
23
Proud to be a non religious racist. It's obvious that we will someday take over the world while the religious fight among themselves.
I'm glad that America is my God and Yoda is his prophet. I know Yoda is there. I seen him in the movies. Never seen your guys.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 05:34 PM (CBNGy)
24
Arguing over souls is silly. If people wish to project fantasies on my soul after I've moved on, that is their choice.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:19 PM (FV4oJ)
25
I just got threatened with violence over the internet. That's balls.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 06:41 PM (8e/V4)
26
>>>"It's obvious that we will someday take over the world while the religious fight among themselves."
rooster,
Actually, I think atheism has had its heyday.
Atheism is now in decline in Europe and is being replaced by paganism and spiritualism. Soon islam will be the single biggest religion in Europe.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 06:44 PM (8e/V4)
27
Thats good news...right?
Posted by: Anwar at April 12, 2005 07:02 PM (lxByx)
28
Hey Carlos, come and get you some, I opened a can just for you.
http://roomforrant.blogspot.com/2005/04/for-carlos-jackass-notorious.html
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 07:04 PM (22x5h)
29
>>>"A 17-year-old Morrisville youth was being held on $100,000 bail after police said he raided a tomb in a cemetery and removed a head from a corpse."
Mr. K,
was the corpse any relation of yours? I'm hoping he gets his head skullfucked.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 07:51 PM (8e/V4)
30
That tomb raider must be put on trial and punished for his misbehavior.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 13, 2005 06:11 AM (fufbw)
31
what another part of the body, besides the head, gets skullfucked, Numb Nutz?
Posted by: Mr. K at April 13, 2005 07:13 AM (07WwJ)
32
Mr. K,
shit for brains, in your case, getting sodomized.
Posted by: Carlos at April 13, 2005 09:30 AM (8e/V4)
33
Jay Tea is no idiot.
I think I know what post you are talking about but geez, Rusty, that's a mean title.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 13, 2005 10:48 AM (PEKrh)
34
But I have to admit you're right - Wizbang has lost it's magic lately.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 13, 2005 10:49 AM (PEKrh)
35
Numb Nutz:
keep trying, you're getting better. However, judging from your choice of insults, your other alias, Omar bin Bonin-heem, is right on target...
For more improvement, at least try and be somewhat clever.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 13, 2005 11:18 AM (22x5h)
36
I posted this @ yourish.com. I think the followers of Islam should start converting Mormons who have passed away and see if they "like" that. I mean its just helping them and all!
Posted by: Robert at April 13, 2005 03:52 PM (DT/Pe)
37
Carlos: Does this mean that Islamics are the last of the dumb shits in the world to reject religion?
I understand where you get your beliefs from. Europe is in trouble for allowing the lowest of humanity to immigrate to their countries.
However, I'm sure you are wrong. The anti muslim movement in Europe is just now beginning to take shape. In any case, if Europe allows itself to be dominated by muslims it will remove itself as a viable competitor to America. We will wake up before Europe merely because our abilities haven't been diluted as much as Europe.
Look at the muslim countries of the world and the conclusion must be that Islam makes you one backward assed world. The entire muslim dominated world cannot compete with one modern western nation. They self disolved due to their backward, hatful religion. The only other reason has to be racial inferiority. In any case we win.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 11:50 PM (CBNGy)
38
Actually, The entire muslim dominated world cannot compete with one modern western union composed of 50 separate states and the minor islands those have conquered. So its really 50 countries against 20? Muslim dominated countries.
The antimuslim movement? Yeah yeah, neo-fascists marched in Germany on Hitlers birthday, but otherwise I have not heard of many large scale operations other than Britain threatening its people with a possibility of terrorism being targeted against them.
You woke up before Europe because you got attacked, no other reason to it. And ever considered Muslim countries being underdeveloped because they are pretty much 90% desert with no possibility of having a healthy civilization.
Posted by: A Finn at April 14, 2005 03:55 AM (cWMi4)
39
The point of the whole matter is not whether or not it is effective. The point is not whether or not the ritual is considered an offer which the dead person can reject (with "thanks"?). The point is that the offer in and of itself is an insult to both the living and the dead.
Since G-d created the world in such a way that we have free will, we will not have our dead relatives posting on these fora and giving their viewpoints. However, even if we can ignore the ignorant, the fact that the organization broke their promise to stop doing this also speaks about them.
Jews believe that everyone has a chance to get into heaven. Mormon's believe that all Jews are burning in hell untill they (the Mormons) put out the fire by "baptising" them posthumously.
Which side again are tribalists?
Just because they think (incorrectly) that they are doing a good deed does not mean that it is so. Actually, what they are trying to do is pull the kedoshim (holy ones - means martyrs in English) out of their eternal reward and get them punished for idolatry. Of course it is ineffective. But that does not mean that the attempt is not insulting.
I regard it as an insult to the memory of the dead. It is like someone shooting a gun loaded with blanks at a school bus full of children thinking that the gun is loaded with live ammunition.
From the viewpoint of the Jew who is being targeted, it is someone claiming that he is now converted to idol worship and therefore subject to the punishment for it. Obviously, it is not the fact that it is unsuccessful that matters, it is the attempt that is insulting, degrading, and not to be borne.
The names were targeted because they are Jews who were murdered during the war. Many of them have descendants who found out about this matter an reacted. Otherwise, the Mormons would have gotten away with this.
Of course, they also do this to others. But, these are my relatives and they were killed because they were Jews. That makes this attempt even worse.
If it does not bother you, then let them target your family. Stay away from mine.
Normally, as an Orthodox Jew, I would stay out of this matter. But the fact is that it should be stopped.
Posted by: Sabba Hillel at April 14, 2005 08:31 AM (fca2G)
40
Omar ben Bonin heem. LOL. Spilled by drink on that one. Great.
A FINN: I now understand why other bloggers refer to you as needing some growing up time. If you believe America was ever 50 separate countries you need to go back for some of that Finnish education you tout. It din't work the first time.
Sabba Hillel: Something I have never understood is why so many hate the Jews. Help me out here.
I understand why some hate blacks. I really understand why most hate muslims. I've never understood why all the Jewish hatred. Did you guys do something I don't know about? I mean why was the Germans so pissed at you? Why are the muslems screaming for your death?
Has it just become a popular thing? Like liberals in Academia or Starbucks coffee? Calling people who disagree with moonbats Nazis or KKK. Maybe the killing of Jesus, one of your own? Why? Can any of you Jewish dudes lend a little info here. Something is missing and I don't understand.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 04:40 AM (7480p)
41
Baptism for the Dead
I am an actively participating Mormon, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I have been enjoying the back and forth comment sections regarding all the brouhaha on baptisms for the dead. I will do my best not to stir up hostilities while at the same time answer some of the misunderstandings that have been attributed to this ordinance.
I read one of the comments that alluded to the Bible and that there was no reference within that particular Canon of Scripture to back up the ordinance of Baptism for the dead. In 1st Corinthians 15:29 there is specific reference, “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead if the dead rise not…”. This is also a strong acknowledgment of the resurrection and its purpose in the great plan of salvation for all of mankind, to include every soul from Adam until the last to come before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
As for the resentment that some members of the Jewish faith have expressed I will offer up a very personal experience. I had the forms filled out so that the ordinance of baptism for the dead along with the ordinance called the endowment for my grandparents on my fatherÂ’s side could be accomplished at the temple. My wife stood in as proxy and did the baptism for my grandmother and I stood in as proxy for my grandfather. The opportunity for them to either accept or reject these proxy ordinances remains their choice. Nothing has been forced upon them. I will explain that both of these people in life were Christian Scientists; but that their lineage was predominantly Jewish from all that I have been able to ascertain. That would mean that I also have the same ancestry.
My Uncle told me that he was of the opinion that I should have gotten his permission to “baptize his parents into the Mormon Faith”, as if I had purposely gone around him. I tried to explain that at no time had there been an attempt to go against his wishes, not knowing my Uncle’s feelings toward such things to begin with. I would have gone ahead with my actions regardless since, as I have explained, there is nothing binding upon those who have passed to the other side, there is nothing worthy of offense and so none should be taken. My Uncle has since stated to me that he had “lost his faith” a long time ago, having been an active member of the Christian Science church at one time. I could not understand his rational for agonizing about ordinances done on behalf of his parents (my grandparents) who clearly were not Jewish; more so, his lack of rational since he was near the point of needing to take something to lower his blood pressure as he exploded his views to me about violating our Jewish ancestors.
One of the comments included a wonderful rational explanation: If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints IS the one true church that has the authority to act in His name then to have those saving ordinances performed is not only an honor; but is also a necessary action required of each and every soul prior to returning to Father in HeavenÂ’s presence. If, on the other hand the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not the authorized agent, then those ordinances would have no binding effect; understanding to begin with, there is nothing binding about these ordinances without their having been accepted by those for whom the ordinances were performed.
Here is the example that I attempted to use as a way of explaining how a proxy baptism works, or for that matter the ordinance of the endowment, and then the sealing of a husband to a wife for time and for all eternity as a foundation of an eternal family unit. If any of this information is new to your mind I invite you to contact me or any other “active” member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I call it:
A free trip home
I left a ticket for you at the desk and all you have to do is show up and tell them your name for that ticket to be valid. The ticket is good for a trip home to see your father who has not seen you in quite some time. If for any reason you do not wish to use the ticket you need not do anything. There is no obligation to you in any way.
If you think you may be interested; but you are reluctant to act on such a “too good to be true” offer, please contact me and I will explain how this was done. This is not a scam.
If I left you such a ticket, how could you be insulted or believe that I had forced anything upon you? You might feel pressured at best, honored or lucky that someone had thought enough of you to have gone out of their way to do something nice for you. Under the possibility that you didnÂ’t like your father then you might not think it such a great gift. All the same, one never knows how a change of heart based on living through a life time of pain or grief might soften hard feelings between a father and a child. When offence is not intended, none should ever be taken.
I again offer an invitation to any who wish to know more about my faith.
T. F. Stern tfstern@houston.rr.com
Posted by: T. F. Stern at April 15, 2005 10:49 PM (dz3wA)
42
Wow! This guy is a true believer in his faith. Thinking about it, if all mormons do is sprinkle water on the graves of the dead. What's the problem?
Friggin muslims cut the heads off the living and beat women for not covering themselves.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 07:56 AM (sB5vg)
43
I suggest we send the mormons to convert the muslims
Posted by: Mr. K at April 16, 2005 04:59 PM (epxQt)
44
Greyrooster: Stern's explanation has been debunked by biblical scholars--even protestants--since his cult was invented in the 1800's. The phrase found in 1st Corinthians 15:29 of being, 'baptized for the dead' is a much misunderstood and misinterpreted passage. Some groups believe that this passage means that they can baptize their members as proxies on behalf of those that have died unsaved. The Mormon sect in particular teaches that those who are dead can still be Saved if someone who is living is baptized for them. This is a teaching which is debunked with even a cursory study of scripture, for it is evident that no one but Christ has the authority to be a proxy regarding Salvation.
These type teachings have nothing to do with Biblical truth, but because of them there is much confusion among Christians about just what this passage actually means. This can only be cleared up by the careful and diligent study of the Word of God, in it's proper context.
1st Corinthians 15:29
"Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"
The Greek word 'for' is [huper]. It is a primary preposition and in this context means, 'for the sake of,' or 'for the benefit of' the dead. This is because baptism is the cleansing of the dead by the Spirit of Christ, wherein they are also raised up in His resurrection. Water baptism signifies this Spiritual baptism or cleansing 'for the sake of' the dead.
The context of this verse is one of Christ's payment for our sins by His death, and how by His resurrection thereafter, we are also made alive from the dead. That is the Baptism or cleansing for the dead. The efficacy of His death and resurrection. All shown by the context starting in the very first verses where it is explained as the very gospel message itself.
1st Corinthians 15:1-3
"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;"
Christ was dead for us, and this is the gospel which Paul Preached, and is what He is telling us in verses 1-3. Water Baptism is a 'signification' of the cleansing by the Spirit (Baptism) for the rising of the dead. What we see here is an illustration that Christians were dead in trespasses and sins, and were baptized by Christ's being made alive by the Spirit. It in no way means that someone can have water poured upon them on behalf of some other person who has died. It speaks of our own baptism in the death and resurrection of Christ, and is illustrating how the dead benefit from that. i.e., baptized for the dead.
All of these things must be understood in context. When Paul asked the rhetorical question of, 'why people were baptized for the dead if the dead are not resurrected,' he was asking that in deference to some people at Corinth who doubted the validity of the resurrection of the dead (verse 12). Just as the sadducees had (Matthew 22:23) some did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, and Paul was speaking of just what this heretical belief would mean, if it were indeed true. His speaking of Baptism for the dead was in support of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead.
1st Corinthians 15:4
"And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"
Because Christ was dead, and we were baptized in His death, we receive the benefit of that death and resurrection. The point of this chapter is the process of the resurrection, not the baptizing living people for dead ones. And in verses 5-11, God goes on to establish His argument for this resurrection with proofs and witnesses of Christ's own rise from the dead. His point being, if Christ rose from the dead, and Christians know it, how can it be said there is no resurrection? How indeed!
1st Corinthians 15:12
"Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?"
But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:"
If the dead do not rise at all, why then are we baptized in the belief that we were dead in sin, and have risen? If we're not ever going to rise from the dead, why are we baptized that we will be part of the resurrection to life? In other words, this doctrine of no resurrection makes Christ a liar.
John 5:29
"And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."
John 11:25
"Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:"
Christ taught of the resurrection, and Paul is saying that if that is true that there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christianity makes no sense! The point here being, on the contrary, we are baptized for the resurrection of the dead, because we do know Christ was judged for us, suffered death, and rose from that death that there would be a resurrection unto life.
1st Corinthians 15:14
"And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain."
Again, Paul, under inspiration of God, is setting forth the truth of ChristÂ’s resurrection, and by extension our resurrection in Him that the second death have no power over us. It is the hope of the Gospel, and an illustration that apart from this resurrection, we are lost and our faith is in vain or of no real value. This verse 14 portrays the hopelessness of the believer in Christ 'if' He was not resurrected for the dead and in the process baptized us with fire. If there is no baptism or cleansing for the dead, that would mean:
1st Corinthians 15:15-16
"Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:"
If there is no resurrection for us, then there was no resurrection of Christ, and the gospel message is without substance. If there is no baptism or cleansing for the dead by Christ's death, then Christians are all a bunch of false witnesses, because this truth is the foundation of the Gospel message we preach. We say, God forbid! There was a baptism for, and a Resurrection of the dead. And it is a fundamental principle of true Christianity, and the heart of the gospel. The very Rock of Christianity is the unbreakable promise to Christians of life beyond death because of Christ. If we were to take this away, then we would take away the very purpose of baptism of the dead, by the Spirit of Christ.
1st Corinthians 15:17-19
"And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."
Again, clear indication of the efficacy of resurrection in taking away our sin. And if Christ was not raised from the dead, then we are still in sin and there is no resurrection to life, and we are found to be foolish, because there is no life after death. All hope is then lost and our faith is worthless. On the other hand, if Christ has died and taken away our sin, and been resurrected the firstfruits of the dead, then our faith is not in vain, and we have been baptized or cleansed for the dead, in Christ. Then does the gospel truth Paul preached stand! By being in Christ when He died and was resurrected, we are baptized (Spiritually cleansed), and also resurrected as He was.
Romans 6:3-4
"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."
This is what baptism for the dead illustrates. Our death in Christ's death. Just as the verse above says, we are Baptized into Christ's death and made alive. Resurrected in Him. And verses 20-28 goes on to say how the truth is that because by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, and now is Christ risen from the dead, and speaks of Christ reigning until all things shall be subdued unto him, and the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. It is in this context that the next verse reads:
1st Corinthians 15:29
"Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"
If all this is not true about the resurrection from the dead, and the judgment, and the end of all things, then why are Christians baptized for the dead, when the dead (according to this philosophy) do not rise at all? It would make no sense. But the truth is, we were buried with Him in baptism. i.e., our baptism is for [huper] (for the sake of, or for the benefit of) the dead, that the dead rise because of that Baptism of the Spirit. Once we read this verse in the proper context of the whole chapter, the truth becomes self evident. We are baptized for the sake of the dead, because we were dead in trespass and sin, and needed a resurrection, which baptism gives us. We were dead, and have been raised with Christ in baptism. The baptism is for us, the dead, that in our death with Christ, we are resurrected by that baptism.
Colossians 2:12
"Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."
We who are buried with Christ in Baptism, declare by that act of God that we believe that He died and was buried for us, and rose again. And we in His baptism. Water baptism merely 'signifies' that One true baptism (ephesians 4:5).
Matthew 3:11
"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:"
As Christ went through the fires of Hell suffering death laden with our sins, we died with Him, that likewise we should also be raised up with Him. In other words, we are dead with Him, and we are buried with Him in this Spiritual baptism, wherein we are risen. That is the baptism or cleansing for the dead. That is the context of 1st Corinthians chapter 15. And that is the understanding of this passage and our hope for the resurrection to Life.
We are identified with Christ and have his righteousness imputed to us by being baptized in the Spirit of God. For the sake of the dead, we are made alive in the Spirit.
Conclusion
The problem with interpreting the scriptures is not in the alleged obscure or ambiguous language. God has not inspired confusion, the real problem is in man not this passage. It is man who takes the passages in question out of total context, and then teaches confused and mis-informed doctrines. And he does this because 'he wants to.' Scripture considered honestly, carefully, and in context not only with itself, but with the whole of the Bible, usually presents it's own solutions. And they must be consistent and in agreement with the whole of the Bible. When we ask the fundamental questions, we get the Biblical answers. For example, what is the topic of the Chapter? What is God declaring in His reference to Baptism for the dead? Does the context show us that God is teaching about Baptism of living people for dead people? Does Baptizing a living person save them? If not, then how much less would it Save one who is already dead?
When these questions are answered honestly, it becomes self evident that this passage has nothing to do with the unbiblical practice of Christians being baptized for people who have died, but with baptism as it is the efficacy of the death and resurrection in Christ.
When Paul used the language of being 'baptized for the dead,' he was arguing for the resurrection from the dead by baptism. The context itself shows us that this is the truth, and we must so interpret the passage if we would understand it accurately. The context of the passage is the resurrection, and this interpretation is not only consistent with that context, but speaks specifically to it. On the other hand, if we (like some others) were to conclude that God was teaching that we may be baptized for, or as proxies on behalf the dead persons, then have a twofold problem.
We not only have a doctrine which is nowhere else spoken of in all of scripture, but we force God to introduce an entirely new subject into this context 'with only this one sentence,' and then never speaks of it again anywhere.
We have a doctrine which is contradictory to the rest of the Bible. The Holy Bible declares very unambiguously that it is impossible for one to be Saved without faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. No one after death can be saved by the action of someone who is alive.
The teaching that men can be Saved merely by an act of another man participating in water baptism, is not only unbiblical (John 14:6), it is anti-biblical. It is unreasonable to draw such conclusions about this text, based on the scripture alone (Sola Scriptura), therefore this doctrine is obviously born from the mind of men, and not of God.
This passage is simply another illustration of the well established doctrine of baptism of the Spirit, and all that this entails. In baptism, the Christian is risen from the dead. For this is the purpose, and the hope of the resurrection (Rom. 6:3-6) which the sacrament of water baptism signifies. We are baptized for the sake of the dead, that in that baptism, the dead are made alive. That's why Paul said, else if the dead don't rise (resurrection), why be baptized for the dead? Since our baptism is for the resurrection of the dead. Then our baptism means nothing if the dead do not really rise.
This is the Glorious truth that Christ did not die in vain, He died that we could die in him, and be risen with Him, that death would have no more power over us. This is the benefit of baptism for the dead. The old body must be put to death, buried, and resurrected to new life. This is the Biblical definition of being 'baptized for the dead.' This passage I believe is Paul illustrating to the Church just why we are baptized into Christ. And that reason is that we receive life everlasting through His death and resurrection.
As I've said before, Christ founded a Church when He was on earth. It would have a visible head. Who is the visible head of the Mormon church? Mormonism, along with its MANY doctrinal problems, just comes 1800-plus years too late.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 18, 2005 02:49 PM (x+5JB)
Al Qaeda Attacks Marine Base in Iraq
This is the second large scale attack by terrorists in the past two weeks.
Over a week ago al Qaeda attacked Abu Ghraib prison and claimed success. However, as the video released by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's group shows, the attack was an utter failure (imgages and link to video here).
Expect a video to be released in the next several days. Unless, of course, the cameraman was killed. We will post footage from the video as soon as it becomes available.
In other news, as reported here yesterday, an American contractor has been taken hostage in Iraq. Also, Playboy interviews Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Insurgents claiming to be linked to al-Qaida tried to overrun a U.S. Marine base on the Syrian border yesterday using gunmen, suicide car bombs and a firetruck loaded with explosives, U.S. and Iraqi officials said.more...U.S. officials described the assault as the second time in less than two weeks that foreign insurgents have employed new tactics of massing an organized military-style offensive rather than staging smaller-scale bombings and attacks.
Yesterday's raid was on Camp Gannon, a U.S. base at Husaybah, a few yards from the Syrian border near the Euphrates River. U.S. Cobra attack helicopters fired on the insurgents to repel simultaneous attacks by suicide bombers and armed fighters, officials said. A second car bomb exploded 15 minutes after the first assault, "at the same entrance, while the soldiers were busy rescuing the wounded," Iraqi army Capt. Saad Abdul Fattah said.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:45 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 429 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Not a surprise. It was only about a month ago that Osama told Zarqawi to stop blowing up Iraqi police recruits and shiite mosques. It wasn't good for PR for the insurgency to slaughter fellow Arabs like that apparently.
Neither is this if they try to attack U.S. targets and get their asses kicked every time.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 09:00 AM (8e/V4)
2
Expect their tactics to evolve over time from random to pulsed attacks.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 09:13 AM (fufbw)
3
Photos of Military Coffins
The photos ABCNNBBCBS won't show you.
I wonder if the flags are made in China? That would be ironic.
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/gallery.htm
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 09:37 AM (/+dAV)
4
This may be the stupidest innovation in warfare since WWI human wave attacks against machine gun emplacements.
Have we infiltrated Zarquawi's strategy and training corps?
Posted by: Eric J at April 12, 2005 09:40 AM (hrQvk)
5
Flig, no idea. But I think you're right.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 10:19 AM (JQjhA)
6
The military places soldiers killed during war in coffins? Drapped in flags? No wonder the media doesn't want us to know that.
Isn't evolution supposed to ensure the survival of species? Seems more like devolution to me.
Posted by: nobody important at April 12, 2005 10:21 AM (SHPL6)
7
i've seen some funny stuff but the interview by playboy with Zarqawi is freeking great!! makes me wanna buy it for more than just the pictures of nekked gurls. but real geeks dont need store bought porn.
Posted by: eyerocker at April 12, 2005 12:58 PM (rLMxn)
8
Is it just me, or is anyone else weirded out that the attack was at........
CAMP.............GANNON!!!!!
Oliver must have dropped a whole bucket of deep-fried ding-dongs on himself when he saw that.
It's the Jooooooooooooooooos, I tells ya: Smirky McChimphitler must be stopped! Amerikan Jihad! Gaia bless Turtle Island!
Posted by: Steve TLB at April 12, 2005 03:58 PM (eVpBU)
9
Why do you find it so funny that the attack happened at Camp Gannon? I have seen this statement before in another Blog. I do not understand this.
BTW, I happen to know that the Marine Corps Kicked Butt that day!
Semper Fi!
-GruntMom
Posted by: USMCGruntMom at April 18, 2005 08:42 AM (DVYdT)
10
test
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 22, 2005 07:18 AM (x+5JB)
Cat Hunting May be Legalized in Wisconsin
Cat-blogging bloggers beware: Wisconsin may legalize cat hunting.
My opinion? Here kitty-kitty-kitty.....
Two questions:
1) What does cat taste like?
2) What's the going rate for a cat pelt? more...
Posted by: Rusty at
08:33 AM
| Comments (33)
| Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Finn,
Cat pelts, this is right up your alley.
Can you help us here?
Posted by: Brad at April 12, 2005 08:43 AM (M7kiy)
2
Tastes like chicken, right?
What no PETA?
Posted by: Red at April 12, 2005 09:23 AM (zlrCL)
3
I think it would be a good hunt. Feral cats are tough to get at most of the time. They are quite destructive to an environment as already proven in many parts of the world.
Chris
Posted by: Chris at April 12, 2005 09:23 AM (ShcLv)
4
Shoot the people who abandon cats, not the cats.
And aren't humans and cows invasive species as well?
I say boycott Wisconsin cheese and end the occupation of Wisconsin.
Posted by: Laurence Simon at April 12, 2005 10:34 AM (rOZ8t)
5
Looks like a rabbit once the skin and head is removed (source grandpa). I don't think you would want to eat one. I would not eat a predator. Tastes bad. I think in most states it is legal to kill stray cats as vermin at least on your own property. Might help rabbit & quail hunters as cats kill a lot of these when they are young. I suggest the season be in hard winter so as not to orphan kittens (next years targets). I like a cat or two around the farm. Grandpa thins them out every so often with a .22. They are a useful predator but too many cats are a bad thing.
Posted by: Howie at April 12, 2005 10:38 AM (D3+20)
6
We are delicious. And on a professor's salary, I'm certain you can't afford us.
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at April 12, 2005 10:41 AM (vhWf1)
7
Witty--that is so funny on so many different levels.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 10:47 AM (JQjhA)
8
Oh my, there's a hidden force working behind the scenes on this one. Beware!
Posted by: Paladin at April 12, 2005 10:49 AM (Rfqkp)
9
Lawrence, I agree with you on abandoned animals but ferrel cats can breed and raise offspring totaly without human intervention. Most are not abandoned animals. Also tomcats leave home and go wild if not fixed. Pussycats go wild and come back pregnant about a week later. Rusty, as far as I know the pelt is worthless. Hair won't stay in after tanning. The intestines are useful for piano strings (other instuments too) and to sew people up.
Posted by: Howie at April 12, 2005 10:59 AM (D3+20)
10
I had no doubt you would get it on every level Rusty.
Posted by: Wittysexkitten at April 12, 2005 12:34 PM (vhWf1)
11
My level is rising!!
Posted by: Chris at April 12, 2005 02:10 PM (NBrzU)
12
All this talk of pussy--I thought we were supposed to clean up the language, Rusty?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at April 12, 2005 04:24 PM (oVu08)
13
Bourbon: Naw! I ain't going to say it.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 06:14 PM (CBNGy)
14
Never hunted cats, more of a duck/bear hunter myself, but some kids shot our cats foot off. (Not hunting, they're just assholes) Miss that cat, it was an excellent squirrel hunter and fetched all birds I shot, when they were attacking our berry bushes in the backyard (just crows and "räkättirastaita"). The happy heavydrinking bum (mentioned earlier in my posts) told me cat meat is not much different from eating raw chicken meat (whatever that tastes like).
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 02:53 AM (cWMi4)
15
Cat pelts don't make good clothing. Had cat gloves once, wore out real fast, got itchy when wet. Good only for decorations and stuff like that.
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 03:55 AM (cWMi4)
16
See guys: I told you A FINN had potential. A Finn. Must have been muslim cats. Christian cats don't itch. Muslim cats itch and smell bad. I hear the Swedes skin muslim cats. You probably had muslim cat gloves made by Swedes.
Only in far northern Europe to they make cat gloves. In the rest of the world the muslims eat them.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 11:32 PM (CBNGy)
17
I was hoping we could keep this one alive.
I'm a dog man myself. I run 3-5 miles a day with my Australian Sepherd Boonie.(I enjoy the beer and wine better if I've put in my miles). We have no use for cats. If we can find some useful purpose for their remains so much the better. If not, lets stack them like cord wood in the Wisconsin forests.
According to Finn the gloves are for shit. Who wants a stuffed cat in the home? A cat rug would be the joke of the neighborhood.
Let's face it, anyone who shits and pisses in the house that is not human is a pest, and those cat slugs in the garden really piss me off.
Interesting story: This morning on the way to work, talk radio in Seattle was discussing this subject(wonder if they picked it up from the Jawa site). As you might imagine, liberals were up in arms about cat slaughter. They even brought in the Chicken death camp card. That is, Chickens who are kept in cages until killed or worse..forced to lay eggs for us humans in cages. Oh..the horror.
I got to work before that "save the whale" crap started.
Show me a person who cares about wild cats, caged chickens and whales and I gurantee that I will show you a pro abortion liberal.
Just my rant for today.
Posted by: Brad at April 14, 2005 12:10 AM (M7kiy)
18
Whaleing should be limited, if whales go extinct many good foods and several skiwax products will disappear. Chickens? Just let meat chicken run around freely, they taste better afterwards (done some research). Egg-laying chickens need to be caged, or the eggs go all over.
Posted by: A Finn at April 14, 2005 04:10 AM (cWMi4)
19
Oh well, the most interresting article this far has died...
Posted by: A Finn at April 15, 2005 12:42 AM (lGolT)
20
Brad, I like whales. The Japs like whales. Only they can them.
Seen a special on National Geographic about cats. In Austrailia the Aborigine women hunt them with clubs and eat them. They apparently are destroying the native species.
I have two cats. Both tom cats. They live in the barn. The white one hangs around. The orange one sort of hangs anywhere. The fight about one a week. You can hear them a mile away. My wife's little loud mouthed, worthless dogs like the cats. My big farm dogs would like to eat them.
One of my friends wife has 21 cats. A true cat nut. She goes to the animal shelter everyday and cleans the cages and such. Then once a week these animal rights nuts have a party and put dogs to sleep in the name of saving them??? I think they are weird are enjoy it. I once told her I didn't trust animal rights nuts because they kill little puppy dogs. She didn't speak to me of two years. Her husband told her the same thing but it didn't work. She never stopped bitching at him about the horrible situation poor animals are in. Her mother died in Florida last month. I asked when she leaving for the funeral. Said she could'nt go. Had to care for her 21 cats. I offered to feed them while she went to her mother's funeral. Said she could'nt possibly leave her cats in the hands of others. She would worry to much. I asked her what would happen if she died. She said she left instructions to have them all euphemized.
A true cat lover.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 04:15 AM (7480p)
21
We used to have a plague of feral cats hanging around the dumpsters at the local strip mall. They opened a vietnamese restaurant in the mall. No more cat problem.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 04:17 AM (7480p)
22
I don't recommend the hot and spicy chicken. I have been told that every once in a while someone finds a hair in the chicken. Don't believe chickens have hair.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 04:20 AM (7480p)
23
What do you call a person from the Eastern Hemisphere who has 5 cats?
........a rancher
Posted by: Brad at April 15, 2005 08:05 AM (M7kiy)
24
Growing up , we always had dogs. I remember my junior year in college our last dog died. My little sister had just gone away to school. My parents were alone. When I came home for Christmas, my dad had a cat. I could not believe it. Came home for spring break and he had 3.
Now dad has one but puts a bowl out in the back for the neighborhood cats. There are probably 10 cats and a couple of racoons who stop by and get the welfare meal my dad provides.
I'm afraid he is getting a little nuts with cats. I mean 10?
I gotta say it...His house has this funkey cat oder, like the litter box is on week 4 and is maxed out on cat slugs.
Wonder if some enterprising immigrant family has thought of opening a new resturant in the woods of Wisconsin.
Posted by: Brad at April 15, 2005 08:24 AM (M7kiy)
25
Those who dont want their cats shot should kep them at home and not allow them to wander all around and tell PETA to screw themselves
Posted by: sandpiper at April 15, 2005 09:52 AM (9RChR)
26
Brad I'm finding three miles a day and beer no longer works. I will follow you and increase to 5 miles.
If you feed the cats outside the racoons will come to the cat food. Then the coons will start eating your chickens. Down here the coyotes catch and eat the cats,coons and chickens.
Therefore, in conclusion, cats must taste like chicken.
Perhaps the Vietnamese restauratuers are on to something. Instead of taking stray cats to the humain society where they kill them at great expense. Better to put the protein to good use. Drop stray cats at the restaurant. All Vietnamese restaurants should be required to have a cat drop off box in front. End of excess cat problem.
Only on a conservative blog could an age old problem be solved so quickly. Even have international help from the finns.
Do they have cats in Finland? Is that where the expression cool cats came from? Probably started with cold cats.
Rode my Harley through the Wisconsin Dells one time in late May. Absolulely beautiful.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 07:39 AM (sB5vg)
27
Laurence Simon: We already shoot people and cows. It would be unfair not to shoot cats to. Equality for all.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 03:12 PM (DAWnL)
28
why shoot cats i bealieve that if that got past people would be careless and shoot what ever cat they seen with or with out a proof that it is stray. so their will be alot of on happy people loosing their prid and joy. cats are apart of people birds aren't cuddly.
Posted by: Tara Aikin at April 22, 2005 09:26 AM (3BS3e)
29
Make your opinion known before the Conservation Congress meets to review this issue!
For those against cat hunting: www.nocatstamp2005.com
For those who believe cat hunting should be allowed: www.catstamp2005.com
Posted by: Fat Cat at April 23, 2005 10:21 PM (jCfc/)
30
I am a 17 yr old resident in northcentral Wisconsin. I am doing a persuasive essay on cat hunting. I believe that feral cats should be hunted. Many people are making s big deal about it and I don't really understand that. If people care so much about their cats, they should put a collar on them or keep them fenced in. Feral cats are just wild cats which are causing a problem in some areas, not the beloved felines. I just want them to be designated unprotected so I can legally shoot them if i need to. The whole idea wasn't to have a season, but to remove a problem.
Posted by: eric at May 02, 2005 08:13 AM (9l9ZF)
31
i live in a small town in north east wisconsin and we have a big problem with the feral cats the eat our chickens and our song birds, which means that many of our preditors such as hawks coyotes foxes .... loose a major food sorce so the cats have to go so we can have a more healthy population of the natral preditors
Posted by: kill them all at May 12, 2005 03:05 PM (kELSD)
32
i think that cats should be hunted because they are very ugly and evil, they are not mans best friend, in fact they are no ones friend. Plus they kill birds and take the food of owls.
Posted by: cassie at May 20, 2005 02:15 PM (unpqr)
33
what is this world coming to that you would be able to hunt cats.
what will be next hunting humans...........legally.
Posted by: fran at June 10, 2005 08:31 PM (ywZa8)
Rusty loves me, this I know, because his blog tells me so!
The Jawa link philosophy:
"For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." --Matt 7:8
-Liberal T-Shirt asks Tom Delay to committ suicide. Offensive and funny.
-John Kerry outs CIA agent. Dumbass. More.
-Carnival of the Revolutions is up. Awesome!
-Germans love David Hasselhoff, hate George Bush, and could go either way for Vladimir Putin.
-The great blogger billboard scam. Funny.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:25 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.
April 11, 2005
Another South Park Republican Gets a Blog
My good friend Dr. Leopold Stotch has now moved the island of mu.nu. Welcome aboard Butters Chaos!
Posted by: Rusty at
05:13 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 31 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Eek, why's he running a Movable Type version that's 2 years old? Or better: why's he running Movable Type?
Posted by: Mark J at April 11, 2005 06:24 PM (t7SV2)
2
what is mu.nu anyway??
Posted by: Mr. K at April 11, 2005 06:37 PM (22x5h)
3
Where the hell was my caption contest. AGAIN?!?!?
Posted by: Eric at April 12, 2005 01:23 AM (lK7Sh)
4
Happen to know any mu.nu somewhere in the middle or only slighty right/left with possibility to freely comment like here?
(Yes, commenting sort of leftie here is more exciting and creates a bigger response, but must investigate and get to places with more of a neutral point of view to find opinions from the leftie and central sides(why?...for fun))
Posted by: A Finn at April 12, 2005 03:38 AM (lGolT)
5
Are you are doing that because there is nothing else to do in Finland and you are too young to drown yourself in Vodka like the rest of your countrymen?
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 03:45 AM (22x5h)
6
Mark,
All of us share an MT install. We have the latest version but migrating en masse is going to be a mess.
Mu.nu is just a domain that Pixie Misa shares with us. He's good people like that.
Finn...hmmm, don't know off hand.....
Eric, sorry man. I got busy Saturday. I was in Memphis on business.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 07:58 AM (JQjhA)
7
Mr K.: Can't think of any better, legal use for the fast internet connection, now that I've gotten bored of Runescape, and P2P-sharing (not downloading yet) became (becomes May 1st) illegal in here (Finland, not whole EU).
And I could easily drown myself in vodka already, but wandering around town drunk in mud and melting, dirty snow (in 24 hours/day sunshine) doesn't seem too tempting, and getting drunk at home is no fun at all. And I think strong berry (cloudberry is a good one) wines are better for heavy drinking than Koskenkorva(usually no hangover, and a gallon won't get you in a hospital, so you can drink a gut-full).
Posted by: A Finn at April 12, 2005 12:18 PM (lGolT)
8
Sidenote. My father-in-law speaks Finnish. Yeah, he's one of three foreigners who speak it.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 03:30 PM (JQjhA)
9
Hehe. Tell him, that Tarjoan oluet jos satut käymään Suomessa.
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 01:50 AM (cWMi4)
10
There should be some Finno-Americans in Delaware, any idea if they can speak Finnish or not? Since there is a debate going on in Eduskunta, about whether or not Americans with Finnish roots should be allowed to move back to Finland.
This far the criteria for allowing the offspring a possibility to return has been being able to speak Finnish. Now that the applications from US have quadrupled to slightly over 2 million per year in the last 10 years, there is a question whether or not they should be allowed to move back automatically or if their applications should just be ignored like they have been for some years.
Posted by: A Finn at April 13, 2005 04:15 AM (cWMi4)
11
Now, now Finn. Anymore of that and its back to A FIN. Two million a year?? Really.
Finn: What do you mean for fun. You're already funny.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 03:04 PM (DAWnL)
12
A FINN: Sorry about the weather and mud. Myself, I'm in the house because it's too hot to drive the tractor. Going to plant corn as soon as it begins to cool.
Heat bothers me. Quess its my Norweigan/Swede roots.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 03:08 PM (DAWnL)
Kevin Sites, Traitor, Gets Journalism Ethics Award
Kevin Sites has his ethics. He put his 'journalistic ethics' above patriotic duty by releasing a video of an American soldier killing an Iraqi who was playing dead.
The proper thing to do would have been to turn the video over to the military authorities for investigation. Had the military never done an investigation, then perhaps Sites should have let this one out of the bag.
This video served as a great propaganda tool for our enemies. Terrorists don't need a Joseph Goebbels as long as they have traitors like Kevin Sites.
From the ever partisan Editor and Publisher:
Kevin Sites, a freelance photojournalist for NBC, will be awarded the 2005 Payne Award for Ethics in Journalism on May 12 for his decision-making process after he witnessed and taped a U.S. Marine killing an unarmed Iraqi man in a mosque.Hat tip: Avenu B. Alum.Sites decided to share the tape with the military, then he worked with NBC to create a "well-nuanced story that aired 48 hours after the incident," according to the Payne announcement. Since he was working as a pool photojournalist at the time, Sites shared the tape with the other news organizations in the pool.
Update: I just noticed something. When Editor and Publisher quoted one of my posts in an article on the Pulitzer fiasco, they didn't drop a link. They simply name my blog and that's it. But for Sites blog they drop a link. Why is that? more...
Posted by: Rusty at
04:43 PM
| Comments (36)
| Add Comment
Post contains 878 words, total size 6 kb.
1
" They simply name my blog and that's it. But for Sites blog they drop a link. Why is that?"
101st fighting keyboarders don't get links, heroes in the line of fire do.
Posted by: actus at April 11, 2005 05:37 PM (EQbuu)
2
If he had handed over his tape over to the military, we may have never seen the footage.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 06:20 PM (FV4oJ)
3
:::sigh::::
I think I'll almost be happy to see my generation pass away in the next 2-3 decades if for nothing more to clear out the universities and the Schools of "Journalism" that take their cue from the Vietnam era that the only "authentic" personal conviction was if one opposed The Man in any and all realms.
IMHO, Sites is less a traitor and more a sad little Quisling.
Posted by: Darleen at April 11, 2005 06:30 PM (FgfaV)
4
Dear Darleen,
It seems everyone at Jawa loves the "traitor" word. How do you define a traitor?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 07:53 PM (FV4oJ)
5
Sites isn't really a traitor, nor a quisling, simply an amoral opportunist. All of the rich mitigating detail and context he imbued the incident with on his blog, in his "apology" to the Marines, didn't make it into the endless al-Jazeera broadcasts of Sites' footage. Nor did it make much of an impression on NBC, despite Sites' assertion to the contrary. TV News is about the five second soundbite, not rational analysis, and Sites certainly knows this.
Sites published the video for personal gain - notoriety and recognition, which the Payne Award gives him. That's the reason for his whining self-justification to the Marines on his blog. Evidently, Sites is just bright enough to realize that he singlehandedly strengthened the terrorist insurgency and their propaganda arm, al-Jazeera.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 11, 2005 08:09 PM (RHG+K)
6
How do you define a traitor. Refer to it as a Collin Baber.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 11, 2005 09:23 PM (CBNGy)
7
Least we forget. After investigation no charges were filed against the Marine in question. It was a righteous act fully within what is proper when meeting terrorists who probably recently killed one of your buddys. Why else were they armed? To go to dinner? No they were there to kill American and Iraqi soldiers. Why does any moonbat think that a murdering terrorist can kill and then throw down his weapon and not received justice. That is akin to saying a murderer during a robbery can throw down his weapon when surrounded and then nothing happen to him. Bullshit. You reap what you sow and what the terrorist was sowing was death. The photographer helped the enemy. Just to get a pat on the back. Piss on the mindless piss ant. He should have know better.
Lesson learned. Nail the photographer first. And I got that from the horses mouth. The Marine going door to door not knowing if his death is around the corner is the hero. He should be honored. Not the idiot who helped the enemy.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 11, 2005 09:35 PM (CBNGy)
8
Sites is a vulture. He goes where there is death, destruction, misery and sorrow.....and takes pictures of it to sell.
Posted by: vivi at April 11, 2005 10:40 PM (nTEvo)
9
Amen Greyrooster,
This guy is trying to play both sides for maximum benefit.
He sold that Marine out. How could he expect to go into combat with these guys in the future. He has no character and would sell out his comrads for money or fame. The ultimate piece of shit.
Try to write a letter of explaination to the people he went into combat with? Sorry asshole, that won't fly.
Posted by: Brad at April 11, 2005 10:42 PM (M7kiy)
10
Dear Vivi,
Death, destruction, misery and sorrow.. all brought to you by the Bushian War Cult.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 10:54 PM (FV4oJ)
11
None of this brought to you by the "Kevin Sites Get Me some Fame Cult":
Trust,Honor,Patroitism,Character,
Kevin Sites is an official .......FUCKTARD!!!!!
Posted by: Brad at April 11, 2005 11:01 PM (M7kiy)
12
To Collin Baber:
I call your "Bushian Death Cult" and raise with a "Criminally Negligent Clinton Iraq Policy Of Half Assed Containment Secret Society" in one hand and a "Complacently Corrupt UN Policy of Dictatorship Financial Stabilization Brotherhood" in the other.
Posted by: Don Kermit at April 11, 2005 11:46 PM (/yGTH)
13
Don wins.
Posted by: Carlos at April 12, 2005 12:00 AM (8e/V4)
14
Don
I'll see your "Criminally Negligent Clinton Iraq Policy Of Half Assed Containment Secret Society", "Complacently Corrupt UN Policy of Dictatorship Financial Stabilization Brotherhood" and raise you a "we don't need no stinkin tanks in Samolia" and a "wag the tail and bomb that damn aspirin factory"
Posted by: CJ at April 12, 2005 12:08 AM (cEqQB)
15
Dear Don,
We may speak of Cigar Aficionado Bill's shenanigans all we like, yet the Bushian War Cult is here today, grinding up the youth of our nation.
"We had a lot of casualties. I had to pick up several of my friends piece by piece. I had to kill women, children, old men - everyone."
- Benjamin Jones, combatant, Iraq
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 12:53 AM (FV4oJ)
16
Confederate Yankee: Sites knew exactly what would happen when NBC broadcast the video, i.e., that all of the intricate nuances he spoke of on his site would be lost in a forty-five second Nightly News spot. Sites also knew that he was handing al-Jazeera a propaganda bonanza. He didn't care, the personal payoff was just too tempting.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 12, 2005 01:42 AM (RHG+K)
17
Strange war. Can't kill enemies trying to look dead to sneakattack when you turn your back.
The press has way too much liberty in war zones. No-one needs to know what is happening in there, since they will stay there and do shit until the Iraqi government turns against em. No use telling others than the armymix occupying Iraq and rebuilders perhaps, if this causes havoc that interferes with their work.
Others have no actual use for the info, so keep them in the dark. Antiwar people will be against it anyway and prowar people don't want to know about any bad things done by their own. Take the press away and the terrorists lose their only way to influence world wide.
Posted by: A Finn at April 12, 2005 03:00 AM (lGolT)
18
A Finn: well said. maybe you can add one more glimmer of hope for Finland, and build on the good work Rapala has done.
Collin Baber - Bush is grinding away our youth? Our youth has been grinding away itself for decades. Many thousands more of our youth get killed through murder, suicide, drugs, and stupidity in one year than the great Bushian War cult has managed to snuff out in three years of war against the real Death Cult, the Islamists.
Sites is a traitor, because that video has been used aver and over and over by Arab TV to inflame the Iraqi people against our men.
Posted by: Mr. K at April 12, 2005 03:43 AM (22x5h)
19
Article III, Sec. 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Conf. Yankee, I'd suggest that Kevin Sites has lots of reasons in his own mind to justify his acts, but so do all traitors. See the entire post linked above. His actions gave aid and comfort to the enemy.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 12, 2005 08:07 AM (JQjhA)
20
"Conf. Yankee, I'd suggest that Kevin Sites has lots of reasons in his own mind to justify his acts, but so do all traitors. "
And whats on his mind is the part where it says "adhering to the enemy." You're leaving out an element of the crime.
Posted by: actus at April 12, 2005 08:17 AM (EQbuu)
21
If Kevin Sites was a football player I can see him going to the referee and saying "that touchdown my team just made doesn't count, one of our players was slightly off sides" and I filmed it. Whose team is Kevin Sites on. Not the Marines.
Notice that the traitor Colon Babler always brings up the dead and wounded on the other team. But thats one of the many reasons it is a traitorous piece of garbage.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 12, 2005 08:41 AM (CBNGy)
22
Dear Greyrooster,
We're still waiting for the Falluja quote URL. Just cut and paste it if the cat got your tongue.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 09:21 AM (fufbw)
23
Collin Baber
Seems a big difference having to kill people,than just killing people.
What will it take before you moonbats wake up and smell the coffee?My guess is it take something so big,you wont wake up from it.
Darlene
Couldn't agree more. Until the yammering commies in this country move on to hell,this clap trap wont stop.
Posted by: xtremewing at April 12, 2005 10:55 AM (HW7Bx)
24
collin baber.
None of the current BJ listed as serving in the USArmy in the last 12 months has been assigned to a unit which has taken mass casulties.
When I visited your site you quoted someone as saying that chem lights were broken an phosphoric liquid was pored on prisoners. The word you are looking foe is phosphorescent. Big difference. Big, big difference. Ask your mommy to explain that to you.
Posted by: Bullshark at April 12, 2005 12:10 PM (/E1+1)
25
Dear Bullshark,
Thank you for the clarifications and knowledge about lightsticks.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:22 PM (FV4oJ)
26
What a bunch of yahoos!
Here's the exact quote of the Marines involved;
"He's fucking faking he's dead. He faking he's fucking dead," says the Marine. At that point a clatter of gunfire can be heard as one of the Marines shoots the prisoner. Another voice can then be heard saying: "He's dead now."
NBC correspondent Kevin Sites said that the five wounded Iraqi fighters had been left in the mosque after Marines had fought their way into that part of the city on Friday and Saturday. Ten other Iraqis had been killed in the battle for the mosque. Instead of being passed to the rear lines for treatment the wounded Iraqis were left in the mosque until a second group of Marines entered the building on Saturday, following reports that the building may have been reoccupied. Sites said that at this point one of the five Iraqis was dead and that three of the others appeared to be close to death.
In his report accompanying the images, Sites said that one of the Marines noticed that one of the wounded men was still breathing before shouting that he was "faking it".
"The Marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head. The pictures are too graphic for us to broadcast," said Sites. He added: "The prisoner did not appear to be armed or threatening in any way". Major Doug Powell, a spokesman for the Marine Corps in Washington, told The Independent: "It's being investigated - I can't say much more than that. It's being investigated for possible law of war violations. A naval criminal investigation team is looking into it."
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
entry into force 21 October 1950
Article 3
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
______________
These conventions wern't created just for fun folks. They are the direct result of the war against Germany and the Nazi holocaust.
Some circumstances in combat are simply unavoidable. This, however, was a blatant act of murder covered up and excused by our leaders. This does not diminish my feelings about all cruel acts of violence, regardless of who perpetrates them ,to be wholly inexcusable.
If your going to blame someone, blame the Marine Corps and the military in general for encouraging hatred and the dehumnaization of the Iraqi people. More civlians died in Falluja than insurgents (which is far different than terrorist).
Two weeks prior to the destruction, the military blatantly violated the Geneva Conventions by cutting off all water, sanitation, power, and health care to the civilian population. For nearly two weeks after the destruction, no ambulance was allowed into the city to help the injured. Meanwhile a father and his family who were trapped int heir home had to bury his 9 year old son in his back yard because he died of an infection.
Try to picture burying your child in your backyard.
In the streets of Falluja, rotting bodies were left in the streets to be eaten by rabid dogs.
Today, the UN department of health and human services released a report stating the percentage of Iraqi children ages 5 and under suffering from malnutrition has doubled since the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The UN isn't exactly a bastion of human rights, but I'll believe them before I believe Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh.
Kevin Sites deserves this award. His video helps no enemy. It simply tells the truth (albeit a very small part)of the kind of things that took place in Falluja.
Poorly trained and educated soldiers make bad decisions. It's not the soldiers fault, it's their leaders fault. And their leaders must be held accountable.
It is, however, the soldiers fault for choosing to deliberatley kill another human being. Regardless of what any investigation or court says, the soldier will have to live with his decision, and the guilt resulting from it the rest of his life.
Posted by: deccles at April 13, 2005 06:49 PM (UCtX/)
27
Deccles, complete nonsense. If anyone is to blame, it is the terrorists who themselves violate the laws of war themselves. Once they've done that, they have put themselves outside of the Conventions and are not entitled to its protections.
You have no evidence to contradict the soldiers' account of the incident Sites witnessed.
The UN report on Iraq was pure junk. It has been debunked on many occasions and is nothing but propaganda.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at April 13, 2005 08:15 PM (xauGB)
28
If the so called insurgents stopped killing, bombing, murdering, beheading,etc: All military action would stop. Elections would rule. Iraq would be peaceful and America and its brave partners would go home. If anyone cannnot see this they are either blind or biased.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 11:13 PM (CBNGy)
29
deccles: The reason women like you end up pregnant, unmarried and left out are attributable to your gullibility.
Do you honestly believe that garbage? If so you've got a serious problem.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 11:20 PM (CBNGy)
30
"This does not diminish my feelings about all cruel acts of violence, regardless of who perpetrates them ,to be wholly inexcusable."
In case you missed it Robin, the above statement refers to all participants, American, European, Iraqi, or otherwise. Also, how can a UN report released April 13, 2005 (yesterday in case you don't have access to a calendar) be debunked many times when it just got released?
Thirdly, here's a little fact you may not be aware of. Of the 1200 + Iraqis taken hostage during the seige (and this was given by the officer in charge of them), 12 were people who actually had taken up arms against the US soldiers. The rest were moms, dads, children. Isn't all human life valuable, or just the ones who live in America? If you truly believe that, then the statement "God Bless America" is the prayer of the arrogant.
To Greyrooster,
And if the Bush Administration hadn't violated the sovreignty of Iraq by illegally invading and occupying a nation which posed no threat to us, or any other nation in the region, we would still have 1500+ more soldiers in our ranks, and the REAL terrorist criminals would probably be behind bars.
Usama Been Forgotten?
Also, I guess your saying the Geneva Conventions are garbage? Is that only because I'm making the point that our leaders are as guilty as the other parties involved, or do you think the international laws should be abolished so the US can simply run roughshot and do whatever they want.
It's interesting how the laws only apply when it affects us, not them.
Posted by: deccles at April 14, 2005 09:01 AM (iYiC2)
31
One other point I'd like to make Robin.
You said - "The UN report on Iraq was pure junk. It has been debunked on many occasions and is nothing but propaganda."
Junk? Compared to what other report? Is it junk because Rush Limbaugh, or Scott McClellan, or other administration officials say it is? Or did they actually provide proof to the contrary?
Did the IAEA, EU, Scott Ritter, Joseph Plame, or Mr. Kay all lie in their reports about the WMD's and the lack of any threat whatsoever? If there were indeed "Massive stockpiles" of chemical weapons, as President Bush so clearly stated, then how were these large convoys of trucks able to sneak all this material past the satellites, aircraft, and spy networks of the no-fly zone in place since 1991 and get them into Syria? That is an amazing trick.
Do you honestly believe the Office of Special Projects wasn't manipulating intelligence to create a false threat?
Do you believe our government is not engaging in propaganda to make themselves look good and maintain support? Do you honestly believe they've always told the truth concerning Iraq?
Are you understanding my point yet?
I respect the office of the President. I do not, however, respect people who lie and abuse their power to benefit a few friends. Especially at the expense of human life.
Posted by: deccles at April 14, 2005 11:45 AM (UCtX/)
32
Deccles:
"A nation that posed no threat to us or any othe nation in the region"
You ignorant dingbat. Didn't pose the threat to Kuwait. Didn't pose a threat to Iran? Didn't pose a threat to the Kurds? Saddam was going to stop? You are one blind bitch. Grow the hell up and get that moonbat hood off your head.
You best indicator of a person's/country's future behaviour is his past behavior. Physicology 101.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 03:50 AM (7480p)
33
Grey Rooster,
If you want to live in the past, that's your perogative I guess. But since we're talking about the events prior to 1991, just keep in mind that our President, Ronald Reagan, along with Dick Cheney, engaged in selling the weapons (chemical included) that facilitated all the things you're talking about.
They're also the reason the Taliban and Al Qaeda existed in the first place. Remember Iran-Contra? Illegal weapons sold to known terrorist organizations?
Posted by: deccles at April 15, 2005 08:29 AM (iYiC2)
34
Your simpleton liberal moonbat mind is so screwed up you cannot see the trees for the forest. Believe what you wish. Some people are dumb enough to believe anything that suits their personal agenda. Some are even dumb enough to vote for Kerry or become muslims.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 07:17 AM (sB5vg)
35
Illegal invasion??????????Whats the definition of a legal one??
Posted by: greyrooster at April 16, 2005 02:58 PM (DAWnL)
36
Oh, yeah. Let's do a U.S. version of nazism! The marines do the atrocities (like in Abu Grab) and the we pretend we don't see it, because we're patriot. I feel sick when I see a robot like you saying these things. People like you helped Adolph Hitler. He didn't killed the jews: someone stupid like you did the job, for BLIND patriotism. Someone stupid as you commited suicide in the planes of 9/11 because they're BLIND patriots. And if you want the rest of the world BLIND of U.S. or any other country war atrocities, don't blame the journalist: turn yourself in a dictator. Like Adolph.
Posted by: Acid at May 05, 2005 07:24 PM (daQsh)
American Kidnapped in Iraq
An another American has been kidnapped in Iraq. Developing....
UPDATE 4/13: The name of the man is Jeffrey Ake. A video has been aired by al Jazeera. More information about the video here.
The State Department has an official policy of not releasing the names of civilians captured in Iraq. As was the case of Roy Hallums and Mohammed Monaf, we will publish the name of this victim as soon as that information is available.
We pray for the safe return of all the hostages still held in Iraq.
An American contractor has been kidnapped near Baghdad, a U.S. embassyspokesman says, the latest foreigner abducted in the lawless Iraqi capital.Hat tip: Speed of ThoughtThe contractor, who was working on a reconstruction project, was kidnapped in the greater Baghdad area,embassy spokesman Bob Callaghan said on Monday.
"No group has claimed responsibility. We have contacted the Iraqi authorities to try and find him," he said.
Others: In the Bullpen, Jeff Quinton, Robert Spencer, ....
Posted by: Rusty at
04:24 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I hope those criminals release him soon.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 06:21 PM (FV4oJ)
2
fuck em.
/Kos
Posted by: Kos at April 11, 2005 07:05 PM (8e/V4)
Abu Musab al Zarqawi Interviewed by Playboy
The May 2005 issue of Playboy Magazine will feature a candid interview with the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq's Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The issue is not on stands yet, but Playboy has a preview of the article here. (Safe for Work)
(Linked at OTB)
Posted by: Rusty at
04:02 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
1
WTF next? Will Zarqawi be cat blogging???
Posted by: awakejake at April 11, 2005 05:36 PM (5wwj1)
2
Sweet.
I wonder if he and Jennifer will be able to get together.
Posted by: phin at April 11, 2005 06:59 PM (DGPlf)
3
Zarqawi must stand trial for his heinous crimes.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 07:08 PM (FV4oJ)
Posted by: Wine-aholic at April 11, 2005 07:16 PM (MHeq4)
5
This has to be a joke, right?
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 12, 2005 01:41 AM (PEKrh)
6
Cindy,
You have a strong sense of discernment.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 08:31 AM (/+dAV)
7
And before any fatwas are issued condemning Zarqawi, he only buys it for the articles!
A more fitting end for Zarqawi is to receive the Uday & Qusay treatment.
Posted by: nobody important at April 12, 2005 10:54 AM (SHPL6)
8
LOL, You had me Rusty. Right up to his first answer.
Were you ever a ghost writer for Liberal Larry?
Posted by: xtremewing at April 12, 2005 11:08 AM (HW7Bx)
Southeast Asia: The Next Big Front in the GWOT
Go check out Michelle Malkin. She's right, you know. Expect the next wave of terrorist to be Filipinos, Pakistanis, or Thais.
Posted by: Rusty at
12:39 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 39 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Your trackback is busted! I can not access the trackback script to get the trackback url for pinging.
Anyway event the Filipines is going to start "profiling" OFWs who are returning from the MIddle East.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at April 11, 2005 02:37 PM (H4xh8)
2
Fundamental Islamic militancy is definitely taking root in SE Asia... but it's pretty clear it's spreading all over the world: look at the recent low-scale suicide attacks in Qatar and Egypt. And if its not actually spreading, the media is still so obsessed with it (understandably) that it hypes up every attack.
I just can't get over the notion of a "suicide bomber". It's just the most messed up thing in the world. I respect Japanese kamikazee pilots because they (thought they) were defending their way of life. But how the hell can you respect someone who straps on a bomb and strolls into the nearest congregation of civilians???
Four f*cking suicide bombers struck in Iraq today alone. How can there be so many people who are willing to die just so they can kill other Arabs - other Muslims?!?!?
When you look at the big picture it's impossible to really gauge whether or not we're winning this thing...
PROs -> terrorists on run; Afghanistan free; Iraq free
CONs -> terrorists recruiting more than ever; hundreds of suicide bombings in Iraq; other major attacks against Westerners in Spain, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia...
Is it just that people are counting now... or are things actually getting worse??
Posted by: Martin at April 11, 2005 02:40 PM (oe5ye)
3
Things are getting worse and will continue getting worse as long as America keeps poking the hornet's nest with a stick.
Posted by: greg at April 11, 2005 02:57 PM (/+dAV)
4
I have to disagree with you when it comes to Michelle.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at April 11, 2005 04:09 PM (PEKrh)
5
Martin,
Very interesting question. Not easily answered. I bet there is a way to quantify this, just haven't figured it out quite yet.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at April 11, 2005 04:46 PM (JQjhA)
6
Ever question where they got their motivation from?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 06:23 PM (FV4oJ)
7
Greg: "Things are getting worse and will continue getting worse as long as America keeps poking the hornet's nest with a stick."
Care to offer another solution to "poking the hornet's nest?" Oh wait, I know, it's the Clinton strategy. Ignore them they will go away.
Posted by: Marc at April 11, 2005 06:40 PM (D348l)
8
I caught the first sentence and assumed you were at it again. You really need to watch it sometimes, Admiral/Doctor
Posted by: The Babaganoosh at April 11, 2005 06:45 PM (2Sfuq)
9
Some alarm bells going off in the media and in the blogosphere, and some wondering if the US might be getting ready to send troops to another country. One Blogger takes it a bit too far: "Expect the next wave of terrorist to be Filipinos, Pakistanis,...
Weblog: Capital Region People
Tracked: April 11, 2005 09:22 PM
( I got to your trackback, but it seemed to take a few extra steps... not really broken, just testy!)
Posted by: Dave Lucas at April 11, 2005 09:28 PM (3i6S9)
10
I go to the phillipines every year by reason of a hobby of mine. I say bullshit. Listening and reacting to one in 10,000 is bullshit. Thats why I call it bullshit. Why not listen to the other 9,999 who only desire to come to America. If they knew how torturous the 13 hr flight was, they wouldn't wish to come.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 11, 2005 09:46 PM (CBNGy)
11
Dear Greyrooster,
What hobby might that be?
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 11:40 PM (FV4oJ)
12
Go check out Michelle Malkin. She's right, you know. Expect the next wave of terrorist to be Filipinos, Pakistanis, or Thais.
a few comments.
1) filipinos are 92-94% Christian and 4-5% Muslim. In Mindanao, where the Islamic terrorists operate, Christians constitute re 83% while Muslims 5%.
2) There are reports that Saudi Companies (fronting for terrorist orgs) are recruiting Filipino Muslim insurgents as Overseas Foreign Workers (OFWs) in Mindanao to undergo terror training in Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
3) I have yet to read or hear any report about Filipinos Muslims or Indonesians or Thais becoming "suicide bombers". Our Muslim terrorists in RP usually plant bombs and detonate them from a distance or plan raids on gov't bldgs and ambush military convoys.
Maybe it's just an "Arab thing" or maybe Filipinos and other asians are just not as suicidal and hopeless as their arab brothers.
Fundamental Islamic militancy is definitely taking root in SE Asia... but it's pretty clear it's spreading all over the world: look at the recent low-scale suicide attacks in Qatar and Egypt. And if its not actually spreading, the media is still so obsessed with it (understandably) that it hypes up every attack.
it's been happening long before 9/11, long before the US invaded afghanistan and iraq. filipino muslims were secretly getting their training in afghanistan long before the US invaded iraq. we even had a madrid type of bombing on dec. 30, 2000 in the philippins, perpetrated by Jemaah islamiya terrorists -- 9 months before 9/11.
When you look at the big picture it's impossible to really gauge whether or not we're winning this thing...
PROs -> terrorists on run; Afghanistan free; Iraq free
CONs -> terrorists recruiting more than ever; hundreds of suicide bombings in Iraq; other major attacks against Westerners in Spain, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia...
Is it just that people are counting now... or are things actually getting worse??
i can speak only on the situation in the philippines. are the terrorists getting more recruits from the philippines because of bush's policies, or are we just getting better at finding them and noticing them because we became more vigilant after 9/11?
here's what joseph mussomeli, Chargé d’Affaires of the U.S. Embassy in Manila, had to say re that:
http://usembassy.state.gov/posts/rp1/wwwhr533.html
Q: A recent development like the capture of that Palestinian national down in Zamboanga, how significant is that? Do you think that points to increased cooperation between al-Qaeda-linked groups and elements of the Abu Sayyaf?
CDA: I honestly don’t know enough about that specific instance to comment. I would say that, you know, it’s hard to say whether the JI links are getting stronger or we’re just becoming better at finding them. Maybe in the late 90s, it was just as bad and we just we’re too oblivious because we were focused on other parts of the world to know. But what we do find is that it seems that the links are stronger, that Mindanao is almost, forgive the poor religious pun, the new ‘Mecca’ for terrorism.
Posted by: john marzan at April 12, 2005 04:01 AM (CyMwG)
13
oops, i meant In Mindanao, where the Islamic terrorists operate, Christians constitute re 83% while Muslims 17%.
Posted by: john marzan at April 12, 2005 04:06 AM (9UlqZ)
14
Man With Suitcases Captured at Capitol
SWAT team heroically wrestles dirty laundry to ground.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4930070,00.html
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2005 08:27 AM (/+dAV)
15
John:
Interesting post - the only thing I take issue with is your statement that you have yet to be made aware of "any report about Filipino Muslims or Indonesians or Thais becoming 'suicide bombers'":
Jemmah Islamiya's three major post-9/11 attacks have all involved Indonesian suicide bombers (Bali nightclub, Jakarta hotel, Jakarta embassy). Also, don't forget that Zarqawi happily takes recruits from ANY nation - I think I'm right in remembering one of the bombers that attacked Britain's relocated Black Watch troops last year was described as being 'a Caucasian man'.
It's definitely not just Arabs that go in for this suicide bomber malarky. I think it's more a consequence of some serious mental conditioning and deep depression / anger; i.e. anyone can be sucked in.
The more I think about it, in fact, the more I realise that the liberal explanation of 'poverty under tyranny' turning people into suicide bombers is oversimplistic. While that clearly can be a factor (esp for the Palestinians & the Uzbeks, for example), in places like Iraq it just doesn't hold water: most Iraqis are now more terrified of and rstricted by the terrorists than they are the occupying force.
PS. Another day, another three suicide bombs (only killing Iraqi civilians, of course).
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050412/325/fg6ub.html
Posted by: Martin at April 12, 2005 02:53 PM (oe5ye)
16
Jemmah Islamiya's three major post-9/11 attacks have all involved Indonesian suicide bombers (Bali nightclub, Jakarta hotel, Jakarta embassy). Also, don't forget that Zarqawi happily takes recruits from ANY nation - I think I'm right in remembering one of the bombers that attacked Britain's relocated Black Watch troops last year was described as being 'a Caucasian man'.
It's definitely not just Arabs that go in for this suicide bomber malarky. I think it's more a consequence of some serious mental conditioning and deep depression / anger; i.e. anyone can be sucked in.
fine. them most of the fucked up suicide bombers are indonesians and arabs (in the mideast and recruits in europe).
okay na?
don't worry, i'm still supporting bush 100% on this and we are slowly and surely seeing a more stable iraq after the jan. 30 elections. attacks are decreasing and the terrorists are getting more desperate.
P.S. i'm not surprised by the fact that Indons are stupid enough to do this. their country is poor, corrupt and muslim... no wonder. didn't Jemaah Islamiya originate from their country? tsk tsk.
Now the strategy is for Filipino authorities to arrest all suspicious looking indonesians and saudis (threat profiling) in the philippines before the influence our filipino muslim brothers to go suicidal too... LOL!
Posted by: john marzan at April 13, 2005 12:14 AM (RdaH3)
17
"most of the fucked up suicide bombers are indonesians and arabs
Don't forget the Chechens
Posted by: Martin at April 13, 2005 06:30 AM (oe5ye)
18
"suicide bombers"? are you talking re beslan? but IIRC, many of the chechen terrorists escaped the beslan schoolhouse after murdering the little children and detonating the explosives.
not my definition of "suicide bomber".
but there were a few arabs among the hostagetakers... 
Posted by: john marzan at April 13, 2005 08:30 AM (WQqjx)
19
i agree that you'll find a few non-arabs engaging in suicide bombings once in a while, but majority of the people that are doing this are still arabs, IMO.
Posted by: john marzan at April 13, 2005 09:12 AM (gTeDF)
20
No man - in 2003/4 there were frequent waves of suicide truck & belt bomb attacks in both Chechnya and Moscow; mostly carried out by 'Black Widows' (Chechen women whose husbands / brothers had been killed by Russian troops). They even brought down two commercial jets!
I just think its dangerous classifying suicide bombs as an Arab phenomena - not least of all because the belt technique was invented by the Tamils in Sri Lanka.
The only reason Arabs tend to be the culprits is because the Middle East constitutes the bulk of the world's Muslim population.
Posted by: Martin at April 13, 2005 11:40 AM (oe5ye)
21
Martin: Good point. All muslims are bad for world peace. Arab or not makes no difference. Islam is from the gutter. It's more than this pie in the sky Allah thing. It's a racist, anti-christian, anti-hindu, anti-buddist, anti-Jewish, etc: It's all over the world, noting but trouble. Anyone denying this illrefutible fact is nothing but an ignorant liar. This is why it is practiced by the backward people and races of the world. Hundreds of years of jealousy rules these backward imbeciles. Intelligent modern people would never practice a religion based on hate.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 13, 2005 10:55 PM (CBNGy)
Zarqawi Barely Slips Away, Again
Unfortunately, close only counts in horse-shoes and hand grenades. The recent beheading snuff film released by Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq does suggest that the man may be at the end of the line. Washington Times Insider (subscription):
Abu Musab Zarqawi, the most-wanted terrorist in Iraq, is on the run in an undeveloped western border region where he was nearly caught in recent weeks, a U.S. Marine commander says.Hat tip: Charles Johnson"He's going from brush pile to brush pile just like a wet rat," said Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, whose 1st Marine Expeditionary Force is back home at Camp Pendleton, Calif., after months of intense combat in Anbar province. "I believe he possibly slid back into the Anbar area, possibly the hinterlands."...
He can't use cell phones," Gen. Sattler said of the Jordanian-born terrorist, whose capture promises a $25 million reward. "He can't use any type of Internet. He doesn't know who he can trust."...
Gen. Sattler disclosed in the interview that his Marines and special operations troops came within a whisker of capturing the terror master "within the last six weeks" in western Iraq.
While guarded on details, Gen. Sattler said that only poor visibility in bad weather allowed Zarqawi to escape.
"The elements worked to his advantage," the three-star general said.
Posted by: Rusty at
12:34 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Yeah and the bastard made the "Top 100" list in Time Magazine's "most influential people of 2004".
Posted by: Laura at April 11, 2005 12:37 PM (L3PPO)
2
They almost got him. Sure they did. Just like they almost got Bin Laden a kazillion times. Hope springs eternal.
Posted by: greg at April 11, 2005 01:03 PM (/+dAV)
3
"Yeah and the bastard made the "Top 100" list in Time Magazine's "most influential people of 2004"."
That's nothing. I just saw that he made People Magazine's 'Most Beautiful People List'. Oh no wait. That was Ali G. I always mix those 2 up.
Posted by: Buckley F. Williams at April 11, 2005 01:08 PM (/XWKc)
4
REUTERS: U.S Contractor Kidnapped Near Baghdad
(http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=MYZKP53KAG11SCRBAE0CFFA?type=topNews&storyID=8146444)
It's weird to say this... but I really really hope he was kidnapped by hardened criminals seeking money. In Iraq the alternative is much worse...
Posted by: Martin at April 11, 2005 02:44 PM (oe5ye)
5
As for me, I cannot wait for the day he is captured and stands trial.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 11, 2005 06:24 PM (FV4oJ)
6
Once again the traitor Greg shows where his heart is.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 11, 2005 09:49 PM (CBNGy)
7
Honestly I don't want Zarqawi captured, I'd like him drawn and quartered in a public arena.
I don't want him to stand trial and be treated with dignity. I hope he just gets his fucking head blown off, that's my second option.
Posted by: Laura at April 12, 2005 04:13 PM (L3PPO)
8
Dear Laura,
We all have wishes. Mr. Zarqawi's trial will be held under Iraqi law.
Posted by: Collin Baber at April 12, 2005 06:23 PM (FV4oJ)
9
Collin Baber's trial will be held under American law.
Posted by: greyrooster at April 15, 2005 03:31 AM (7480p)
10
I always find it interesting to see how riled up and just plain ugly my fellow Americans get about people and subjects that they only have marginal information on. The desire to have somebody's head blown off is the same sort of nonsense that Zarqawi perpetrates, but of course - since we're the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave - we are justified in making such putrid remarks. Perhaps it is also because while sitting back in our cushy, isolated, suburbanite homes, it is easy to mouth off. I would like to see Laura actually taking part in the act of Hanging, drawing and quartering somebody; or her second option, blowing somebody's head off... we are so damned belligerent- it is shameful.
Posted by: Rurik at May 01, 2005 01:58 AM (yBu89)
272kb generated in CPU 0.0618, elapsed 0.1796 seconds.
136 queries taking 0.136 seconds, 647 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
136 queries taking 0.136 seconds, 647 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
