June 16, 2005

Kos Says U.S. Torture 'Equal' To that of Saddam Hussein (A comparison)

Will somebody please punch Markos Moulitsas 'Kos' Zunigas in the mouth? I'm not kidding (although I may be speaking in haste and out of anger). Some remarks are so disgusting that they are fighting words. Kos hides behind the fact that he was in the military as if it gives him license to level any criticism he wishes on the armed services of the United States. Via my blogfather Charles Johnson over at LGF this from Markos Moulitsas Zunigas who has clearly gone beyond the pale:

The torture that was so bad under Saddam, is equally bad under U.S. command. And Dick Durbin had the balls to say it so on the Senate floor.
Will someone please grab Kos head, pull it out of his ass, and force him to please see below.

Almost all of the accusations of 'torture' are NOT REAL TORTURE. Instead, they are minor instances of harsh treatment--the kind of treatment you probably wouldn't want to be subjected to--but they aren't TORTURE.

There are some instances of abuse and perhaps even the occasional act of real torture, these, of course should be investigated. But to say that the occasional abuse is somehow equal to the institutionalized and routine torture of the Saddam Hussein regime is disgusting, immoral, and anti-American.

If even the worse accusations turn out to be true, which I do not believe for an instance they will be, they would be nothing compared to what Saddam Hussein routinely did and on hundreds of thousands of victims.

You, Kos, are a certifiable idiot whose blind partisanship is disgusting and unethical.

Warning: Graphic images follow.
more...

Posted by: Rusty at 11:50 AM | Comments (199) | Add Comment
Post contains 691 words, total size 7 kb.

June 13, 2005

The Odd Paranoia and Conspiracy Theories of Leftist Bloggers over the Iraq War

Conspiracy theories begin with a premise and then search for evidence of that premise. But as any C+ student of basic methodology can tell you, evidence does not equal proof. There is some evidence that the moon-landing was fake, yet such evidence is overwhelmed by masses of counter-evidence. At some point the evidence becomes such that any still believing in the conspiracy have gone beyond all rational discussion, are no longer involved in a search for the truth, and have become faith-based zealots believing in a premise that gives their lives meaning.

The Left's obsession with the Downing Street memo is a perfect example of a faith-based conspiracy theory in search of proof. This faith begins with the assumption that the war in Iraq could not have been for the stated reasons but rather that there is a hidden agenda to the Iraq conflict. From what I gather, the Left is divided over the specifics of this hidden agenda (the theories, though, usually center on some sort of Imperialistic grab for power in the Middle East, which will eventually lead to a US war against Syria and/or Iran) but they do agree that a conspiracy existed at the highest levels to lie to the American people as to the real reasons for going to war.

Via Duncan 'Atrios' Black this post by Digby is indicative of such conspiracy theories:

I honestly don't know why there is any question that the Downing St Memo is the most important historical document to emerge showing that Bush and company took us into Iraq on false pretenses. It's true that there have been many hints --- the biggest of which is that, uh, there weren't any f*cking WMD --- but this is clear proof that they lied prior to that....

It is a full-on game plan for obfuscation and "rolling out the product" that proves they knew that Iraq wasn't a threat. ....

They may never be able to admit all that. But in that it officially documents the fact that the administration knew there was no threat and knew there was no connection to terrorism, the Downing Street Memo gives the press the chance to ask, finally, why we really invaded Iraq.

Digby then goes on to offer a number of odd speculations as to the real reason we invaded Iraq.

Another part of this particular conspiracy theory is the notion that it's not enough that members of the Bush and Blair administration are involved but that leading news organizations, such as The New York Times, are also part of the plot to mislead the American people. For instance this post by Kevin Drum and this one by Nico over at Think Progress. Both begin with the premise that the conspiracy has objectively (I mean objectively in the epistemelogical sense, that is that the authors believe as an objective fact rather than as a matter of opinion this view) been proved in the Downing Street memo. Thus with the conspiracy proved, anything short of front-page coverage at The New York Times is evidence that the publication is part of the conspiracy.

The problem with Digby, Atrios , Nico, and Kevin Drum's assesment of the Downing Street memo is the same as with all conspiracy theories: they begin with the conspiracy premise, selectively use evidence, and disregard any evidence to the contrary. So, the Downing Street Memo is seen by these conpiracy theorists as 'the smoking gun' which 'proves' that Bush has ulterior motives for going to war.

Such thinking disregards hundreds if not thousands of statements, both public and private, that the reasons (there were multiple reasons, if you don't have amnesia) for going to war were exactly as stated. Further, such thinking disregards hundreds if not thousands of statements, both public and private, that the decision to go to war was not finally made until shortly before the invasion.

This does not mean that most people, President Bush and Tony Blair included, did not think that the invasion was not inevetable. To assume that Blair and Bush did not believe war was coming is to think that they were idiots. Of course they thought war was coming and were making the necessary arrangements. Duh, this is what governments do! A conspiracy theory about the real reasons for going to war is not needed to explain the Downing Street memo, as Michael Kinsley, to his credit, points out here:

But even on its face, the memo is not proof that Bush had decided on war. It states that war is "now seen as inevitable" by "Washington." That is, people other than Bush had concluded, based on observation, that he was determined to go to war. There is no claim of even fourth-hand knowledge that he had actually declared this intention. Even if "Washington" meant administration decision-makers, rather than the usual freelance chatterboxes, C was only saying that these people believed that war was how events would play out.
The Downing Street memo might be used as evidence that the stated reasons for going to war were not the same as the real reasons for going to war. The same memo can also be used as evidence that our leaders weren't utter morons to believe that the UN could actually enforce it's will on Saddam Hussein.

Did the Bush and Blair administrations believe that a day of reckoning was coming with Saddam Hussein? All indications say yes. But so what? Plenty of times in history the same sort of writing has been on the wall. In June of 1941 did the Roosevelt administration believe a conflict would soon be coming between the U.S. and Japan? Of course it did! Sanctions were not working to get the Japanese out of China and there was a lot of saber rattling on both sides. But that is not proof that some sort of grand conspiracy existed to start a war with Japan. Did Lincoln believe that a war was coming between the North and the South? Yes! Fifty years of history all pointed to such a conflict. But that is not proof of some sort of grand conspiracy by Lincoln to start a war.

The Left's obsession with The Downing Street memo is not borderline paranoia, it is has become full on paranoia. The truth of the matter is that the paranoid obsession with the grand Bush conspiracy theory runs so deep among the Left today, that no amount of evidence to the contrary could make them disbelieve.

Posted by: Rusty at 12:24 PM | Comments (84) | Add Comment
Post contains 1104 words, total size 7 kb.

May 12, 2005

ON VACATION!!!!!!!!

It's 12:21 in the morning. There are three of us still at the office on this floor. What idiot decides to schedule finals less than 24 hours before grades are due?

Un-freaking-believable!!

Anyway, I just turned in the last of my grades. I am officially on vacation. Yes, the difficult life of a college professor. I have 75 days of vacation....

...wait a sec...did I forget something...oh....no.....SUMMER SCHOOL!!!

Don't panic. You're teaching a one week course...actually, taking the students to D.C. Gonna meet Stev-o, Maximum Leader, Cranky, Prof. Stotch and others (and maybe Rob-o if he'd grow some nads around the house)....

GOOD TIMES ALL AROUND

Oh, and if Steve the Llama Butcher is reading this post: I'm the bitch?

Posted by: Rusty at 12:25 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

May 10, 2005

Andrew Sullivan: All the way gay*

So Andrew Sullivan tries to act all hetero for a few posts. Dude just doesn't get it. Stick with the gay thing man. HETERO MOMENT II:

Are you straight guys as irritated as I am by the metrosexual craze? Please please please don't remove a single hair from your body. Ignore Queer Eye. We homos aren't all crazed, plucked product queens.
The idea of AS being into hairy guys......My eyes!! They burn!!!!!!!!

Then AS links to The Superficial, which is cool since they've linked to me in the past and given me a ton of hits. But to call such a site hetero?? HETERO MOMENT I:

Here's a great blog obsessed with - and very funny about - the lives of very hot, twenty-something famous babes. My friend Jay Jaroch and others on the Bill Maher writing team alerted me to it. It's hilarious and obsessive and very bloggy.
Yeah, nothing says heterosexual more than a blog devoted to celebrities...... more...

Posted by: Rusty at 03:53 PM | Comments (31) | Add Comment
Post contains 175 words, total size 1 kb.

Eschaton aranoid Idiotarian of the Day

Ok, I don't really have time to post, but I read this over at Eschaton's place.....talk about freaking nutty!!! Look, Atrios is just your run of the mill left-wing activist in the Democratic party. I've never considered him part of the tin-foil brigades, just part of the gay-hating pretending to be gay-loving gay-outing partisan left. But whoever this guy Avedon is.....man, this guy takes the cake!

Here is the post in question where he (she?) accused the Republican party of rigging elections. Evidence? Well, why else would they be so confident that judicial fillibusters won't be needed in the future if they aren't completely sure they will be in the majority for the foreseeable future. Idiot. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 02:46 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.

May 03, 2005

I've got the biggest balls of all

Dean responds in a post titled Where are your balls? to my earlier rant on Islam.

The reason I'm pestering you Dean and not Dr. Hessabalah, is because you are a friend. I'm not interested in engaging Muslims who wish to rewrite history. That is a dialogue they need to be having with themselves. I don't know what true Islam is and frankly I don't care. What I care about are actions. And not just the actions performed by the jihadis, but the actions of mainstream Islam in regards to basic human rights such as the ability to choose one's own religion. Something forbidden in all but the most extreme liberal circles of that faith.

If Dr. Hessabalah was really concerned with convincing fellow Muslims of the error of their ways then why is he not writing in Arabic, Persian, Malay, etc.? Instead, he tries to convince us that Islam does not require infidels to be murdered. As a member of CAIR's Media Relations arm I'm not surprised that he would focus on convincing us that Islam is mmmkay, peaceful, but that is the nature of expansionist religions. You put your best face forward when trying to get new recruits or when trying to defend the faith.

I hope and pray liberal Islam eventually succeeds in replacing mainstream and conservative Islam. But when sincere liberal Muslims, historical revisionists, and liars wishing to put a shiny happy face on Islam in an attempt to convince we infidels and people of the book of Islam's peaceful nature.....well, it sort of chaps my hide. To liberal Muslims I say stop trying to convince we skeptics of the merits of your religion. Instead, convince the jihadis and Islamofascists who intentionally murder civillians for the good of the umma and mainstream theologians who embrace the fascist idea that while it is ok for an infidel to become a Muslim, it is forbidden for a Muslim to become an infidel.

So what bothers me is a) I admire Dean b) I hate to see a friend play the dhimmi.

On a personal note the immortal words of AC/DC come to mind: more...

Posted by: Rusty at 08:18 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 453 words, total size 3 kb.

April 20, 2005

Pope=Hitler

ratzinger_pope_hiter_666.jpg

Overheard all over the tin-foil side of the blogosphere.

More. And even more.

UPDATE: He doesn't like Kerry? He must be Hitler.

UPDATE II: Pope worse than Hitler, opposes condoms!

UPDATE III: Run and hide, Pope is anti-Christ!!

UPDATE IV: THE END IS NEAR!!!

UPDATE V: Let's bring this back to reality. The Pope is not the Anti-Christ. He's just a Nazi. So calm down the rhetoric.

Posted by: Rusty at 03:07 PM | Comments (34) | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

April 15, 2005

I Am a Digital McCarthyite! (Updated)

First it was the vast right wing conspiracy. Then it was digital brownshirts. Now it's the digital McCarthyites. Well, sign me up folks. I'm a digital McCarthyite. From Mary Mapes new book:

“Conservative bloggers are part of the story. They have vilified me, mounted a “wilding” attack against me…we were, it seemed the first victims of a new kind of digital McCarthyism, which uses the same techniques as the old McCarthyism–rumors, slurs, false charges and ugly attacks–but now employs the Internet, talk radio and cable TV echo chamber to ricochet information around the world
The Anchoress has more via Instapundit.

Thoughts Online notes that the connotative usage of 'wilding' refers to the 1989 Central Park Jogger incident. Thus, Mapes equates right-wing bloggers with a pack of rapists and paints herself a sexual assault victim. Classy.

Prepare for the swarm Ms. Mapes.

digital_mccarthyites.jpg

Any other volunteers for the Digital McCarthyites? Any one have a better logo they can think of?

UPDATE: Tom over at Scared Monkeys Digial McCarthyite designed this logo. Awesome! Feel free to download the image here.

digital_mccarthyites_logo.jpg

Goldfalcon comes up with his own McCarthy photoshop (it helps if you know something about old movies).

Other Digital McCarthyites (like a gang 'wilding' Ms. Mapes in an online Central Park): Charles Johnson, Bill Quick, Mean Mr. Mustard, Ace, Cream and Bastards, Scared Monkeys, INDCent Bill, Vince Aut Morire, Scared Monkeys, Beth at My VRWC, Dread Pundit Bluto, Musing Minds, NIF, The Right Nation, The Nose on Your Face, and a whole gang of others...

Posted by: Rusty at 03:38 PM | Comments (31) | Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 4 kb.

Making Holy the Unholy

Dr. Zen doesn't quite get the Bonfire of the Vanities. It's the less than serious side of the blogosphere's chance to showcase not their best, but their worst post of the previous week.

My frequently crappy posts are a staple of the bonfire.

You may know Laurence Simon from his frequent comments (usually defending some stupid cat or another) and the occasional link from us, but his Is Full of Crap site steps up to the take on the fine tradition that is the Bonfire. I kiss the papal ring of Avignon!

UPDATE: Carpe Bonum has an interesting take too.

Posted by: Rusty at 12:34 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

April 13, 2005

Nazis, the Holocaust, and Mormons

moses1.jpg Instead of apologizing for his absurd post earlier, Jay Tea digs the hole deeper. Where do I begin to respond?

First, what is offensive is not the Mormon practice of baptizing for the dead, but bringing the Holocaust into the debate. This is offensive for the same reason that calling people you don't like a Nazi is. The Nazis were so evil that to call someone a Nazi flippantly is to minimize the evil nature of the Hitler regime.

To single out Holocaust victims when objecting to the Mormon practice of proxy baptism for the deceased likewise. The Holocaust was a crime of singular and spectacular evil. By bringing the Holocaust into a theological debate over what seems to be an odd practice trivializes the evil that was done.

Further, to compare the practice with forced conversions is, well, just plain dumb. As far as I can tell the Mormons aren't actually converting anybody. Had Jay Tea bothered to read his own comments, he would have seen that Mormons do proxy baptism just in case the deceased becomes converted in the afterlife. They do not believe the proxy baptism is the mark of a conversion.

Of course, Jay Tea is right, this is an arrogant practice. But, er, so what? All religions teach that their religions are correct. And that means what exactly? It's the nature of philisophical debates.

But as much as it is arrogant it is equally selfless. That's the nature of proxy work. You do it for the benefit of others. Just think of Fonzi standing in for Richie Cunningham when he finally gets married but is off in the Air Force. See, the Fonz knows all.

As to Jay Tea's final point that the Mormons' renigged on an earlier promise to not baptize in behalf of Holocaust victims, Tom at INFDL notes:

The Mormon church as an institution does not have alot of control over who turns up on the database of names of deceased. It's mostly done privately by church members themselves. So how is the church itself supposed to completely stop it? Plus, is it just assumed that mormon church members are stealing the names of jews, with no relation to themselves? Right down the street from my folks' house there lives a jewish convert to the mormon church. Yup, him and his whole side of the family were jews who converted to the mormon faith. They're very devout, and like most devout mormons they will do their own geneology and perform this particular practice for them. So if ancestor rights are presumably owned by descendants, then the whole argument concerning "leave my ancestors alone" becomes much more complicated.
Let me also just take a moment to spank Sorta Pundit. Wait. Let me reword that. He likes to get spanked (he told me, I swear). Let me correct him.

They don't actually dig up your body, some dude just gets baptized on behalf of some dead guy. Again, they are not making you a post-mortum Mormon. They're just catching you. You know, just in case.

But what is really irritating is that a lot of people, like Sorta Pundit, take offense to Mormons telling dead people that they were wrong. I don't get it. Mormons are saying the same thing about the living. Yup, they think your atheism is wrong. Is that a surprise?

Why is it more offensive to say a dead person was wrong than the living?

The last time I checked the Catholics thought living Protestants were wrong, and vice-versa. Oh and Wesley had this slight disagreement with the faith of Calvinists, etc.

*****Exclusive*****Must Cite Jawa Report*****

Pope still Catholic. Archbishop of Canterburry still Anglican. Dalai Llama still Buddhist.

More breaking news as it happens......

Sobek and Aaron have the humorous take. And yes Aaron, very funny.

Posted by: Rusty at 03:04 PM | Comments (52) | Add Comment
Post contains 644 words, total size 4 kb.

<< Page 3 of 3 >>
348kb generated in CPU 0.0833, elapsed 0.1652 seconds.
125 queries taking 0.1098 seconds, 713 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy



Recent Comments

  • chine destock Don‘testosterone try overtime, the proper information arrive as you the very least , be prepar... entry
  • greyrooster Last suck larry still takes great insult when one says faggot. Hmmmm. Birds of a feather? entry
  • Last gasp Larry greydickroost peers into cyberspace and sees ... himself .. entry
  • greyrooster Theo didn't pass the manhood test. Notice how he whines for the moderator for help. Friggin sissy. ... entry
  • Last gasp Larry Now, Now pilgrim. Don't get all flustered and the fingers start flying around the keyboard and doubl... entry
  • Last gasp Larry Now, Now pilgrim. Don't get all flustered and the fingers start flying around the keyboard and doubl... entry
  • Improbulus Maximus Let them track me down; it'd save me the trouble of finding them. I'm not afraid of a bunch of islam... entry
  • Improbulus Maximus Let them track me down; it'd save me the trouble of finding them. I'm not afraid of a bunch of islam... entry
  • Last gasp Larry And you both are in construction, which is good, long as you don't find out my party affiliation. entry
  • greyrooster I'm Republican, KKK Member and Agostic (a copout). Wonder why IM and I agree on most things. Maybe b... entry

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Sample link

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 35727
  • Files: 300
  • Bytes: 504.7M
  • CPU Time: 70:28
  • Queries: 3524757

Content

  • Posts: 5690
  • Comments: 76633

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0