May 31, 2005
Patriots at the NY Times Blow CIA Cover
You really need to read this. As I have been saying all along, journalists put their code of journalistic ethics above love of country. I recently heard an interview with Kevin Sites on NPR in which he discussed how he knew releasing the video of a Marine killing an unarmed and wounded insurgent would lead to more American deaths but that his journalistic code of ethics forced him to do so. No value or principle could ever trump journalistic ethics.
Posted by: Rusty at
05:36 PM
| Comments (78)
| Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 1 kb.
1
One of Ace's commenters notes the article on smartland, and I think she nails it; journalistic ethics is jargon to mislead the impressionable - it's about the scoop. The first one with the scoop is the smartest, and they generally get to trade on it for some time to come; in fact they will always be gods to a certain myopic crowd.
Posted by: tee bee at May 31, 2005 06:11 PM (q1JHF)
2
The media does not publish every single story they get. In fact I would venture to guess most stories they get are not published.
So to claim that journalistic "integrity" compells them to publish stories that damage our country is pure baloney.
Same goes for koran desecration stories and Abu Graib.
Posted by: Carlos at May 31, 2005 06:28 PM (8e/V4)
3
Rinse, repeat and lather again: Don't blame the reporters, blame the fuckers who do stupid shit that gets reported or photographed. Be accountable at all times. Maybe our soldiers should think, "Would I do this if the NYTimes was reporting it?"...nah, scrap that. They already take their own pictures already and email it around the world. Pblththth.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 31, 2005 07:14 PM (OXRZJ)
4
The only thing stupid the marine in the Sites video did was haul Tokyo Rose AKA Sites around with him on patrol-but I doubt that was his choice. Sites also editied the footage to cast the Marine in the worst possible light and condemn him before the whole world. I think he was particularly vile, a real self absorbed drama king. The Marines and the dead terrorist were mere supporting actors to the real star-Kevin, intrepid boy reporter!
Posted by: Kate at May 31, 2005 07:27 PM (Ii81Q)
5
osama,
you're getting innocent people killed to spite a stupid marine. That boils down modern Liberalism, and why you are doomed as a movement.
Posted by: Carlos at May 31, 2005 07:34 PM (8e/V4)
6
The only movement I head is the one that breeds honesty, not fear and lies like the the GOP. All y'all can go pork your sister till you have square headed babies...I'm not going to hold your hands while you watch Fox "News" to stay ignorant.
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at May 31, 2005 07:45 PM (OXRZJ)
7
I am not sure how the Government could possibly approach this? Although by my ideals this has gone beyond the Freedom of the Press, to revealing dangerous State secrets -- how could it be prosecuted without the reporters being protected by the constitution?
It is an unfortunate trade, and personally I wish someone would at least challange it.
Posted by: dave at May 31, 2005 07:46 PM (/r9Xb)
8
isnt what the NewYorkTimes didan act of treason in a time of war???...they did after all release material that the terrorists could use agaisnt us....i never did like the NYT as its just an elitist stuffy paper for the rich liberals who have never done a real days work....the NYT should be prosecuted as enemies of the state....fuck'em all....nuff said....oh and that freedom of the press crap, they have been pushing that envelope wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too far and have been getting away with it...time to punish these elitist assholes who hide behind and abuse the right of free speach and of the press....there is a limit to how far you can go....nuff said
Posted by: THANOS35 at May 31, 2005 07:49 PM (b7uP2)
9
THANOS35, you're a traitor to America. Freedom of speech isn't high on your list, eh? I guess the constitution doesn't ring true with you? Patriot, my ass. Faggot.
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at May 31, 2005 08:04 PM (OXRZJ)
10
So tell us, osamabeenadoofus, how do you feel about the restrictions that FDR put on the press during wartime, and why don't you think these same type rules could be applied today? Or would you rather just show us what an intolerant little prick you are?
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 31, 2005 08:10 PM (lVjfM)
11
Thanos,
You're correct, it's high time they realized they certainly have the Freedom of the press to publish the Information, however they also have the responsibility to not endanger the mission, nor American servicemen. There was not one part of that article that needed to specifically mention any details of the C.I.A operations, or the methods they utilize to carry out their mission.
I wish somehow they could be held accountable, it is however unlikely they ever will be.
Posted by: dave at May 31, 2005 08:19 PM (/r9Xb)
12
Offence Guy, my stance remains the same. I'm not sucking FDR's cock just because you have a hard-on for it. Don't be a fool and compare FDR's administration to the lying fuckers we have in office right now or you'll be forced to bitch slap yourself with shame...
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at May 31, 2005 08:20 PM (OXRZJ)
13
I love it when stupid people who can't elaborate or back up an arguement end a useless string of brain turd with a "nuff said."
Posted by: Jim at May 31, 2005 09:02 PM (3Esov)
14
Osamabinmoron demonstrates a common view of the America-hatin' Left. That their "right" to free speech entitles them to treasonous conduct.
Here's news for them. No court has ever held that the first amendment is so broad. Speech can be criminalized if it meets the elements of a crime. That's why terrorist threats can be criminalized. And that is why Tokyo Rose could be prosecuted.
Oh, and anyone who doesn't realize that the Bush administration on its worse day hasn't lied to the American public one one-hundredth as much as the FDR administration lied to the American public every month of its existance is just completely ignorant of history.
Or a moron.
Posted by: SPQR at May 31, 2005 09:07 PM (xauGB)
15
im glad to see that we can at least agree on this dave...yes, i do believe that the press does have the right to print articles on pretty much anything, but when it comes down to something that could expose national secrets and the press knows this, there should be consequences for that....if you go out and sell the design secrets of say the Stealth fighter to the Chinese, you would be considered a traitor....so i think that if the press goes out and prints an article that all the world can see that exposes our agents and national secrets to terrorists they should be labeled as traitors....i mean, how far do you let the press go in pushing the Freedom of the Press and Free Speech???...till ten people get killed???a hundred??....look what Newsweek did and what happened after and they knew how the Muslims would react to that....and osama, you must be one of those liberals who believe in being "peacefull" while calling others who have different views, nasty names hu???...nice.....
Posted by: THANOS35 at May 31, 2005 09:10 PM (b7uP2)
16
osamabeensuckinmynuts you need a bullet to the head, nothing more, nothing less. You piece of shit little cocksucking traitor, you'd better pray we never meet. Don't make me get serious about finding where you live. Don't. Fucking. Do. It.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 10:07 PM (0yYS2)
17
"I recently heard an interview with Kevin Sites on NPR in which he discussed how he knew releasing the video of a Marine killing an unarmed and wounded insurgent would lead to more American deaths but that his journalistic code of ethics forced him to do so"
I don't understand why its such a problem to release a video of a soldier doing nothing wrong.
Posted by: actus at June 01, 2005 12:02 AM (Ygl+x)
18
I don't understand why its such a problem to release a video of a soldier doing nothing wrong.
actus,
I simply don't understand what is to be gained by releasing video of a marine even if he did do something wrong.
All it does is make money for the media conglomerates that you Lefties hate so much, and get people killed. I know you don't mind the dead people part, but scooping stories to cynically enrich the media conglomerates should piss you off a little, no?
Seriously, the media picks and chooses all day long what stories to run. Is it censorship when the other stories aren't printed? It's such transparent crap, you can't possibly expect us to take it seriously. We see it for what it is-- using the press as an instrument of Liberal/Democrat foreign policy. Journalists are getting people killed unnecessarily.
Posted by: Carlos at June 01, 2005 01:16 AM (8e/V4)
19
Hmm. Are Journalists traitors? In this case, and the case with the Koran, most likely. Do they care? Most likely not. For them, the only fealty they owe is to the dollar, ruble, yen, drachma, or whatever currency buys their paper.
Should they be tried for treason? Most likely yes. Why? Because they publish things that will get our people killed, and why? Again, so they can sell papers.
Posted by: Joe Wiess at June 01, 2005 04:52 AM (LtbPK)
20
Enlist Chickenhawks
Posted by: Max at June 01, 2005 07:34 AM (HFKAk)
21
I strongly disagree with Site's decision, but as I stated in another post, because we are are under the world's magnifying glass, our soldiers need to be careful and not do anything that will lead to criticism, real or concocted. It will only help us in the long run.
I think any sane person would agree with this.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 08:02 AM (x+5JB)
22
I agree YBP, but never at the risk of their lives.
Posted by: Defense Guy at June 01, 2005 08:20 AM (lVjfM)
23
Agreed.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 08:32 AM (x+5JB)
24
I agree with Young Burbon Professional. It's the media's duty to report fact, though most distort it. Accountability is the only way to stop this crap...if soldiers know they are putting other soldiers in harm's way by doing stupid shit, then they are probably less likely to do stupid shit...or at least in front of a international reporter. Remember, Sites rolls with these guys often...they don't have to bring him along.
"osamabeensuckinmynuts you need a bullet to the head, nothing more, nothing less. You piece of shit little cocksucking traitor, you'd better pray we never meet. Don't make me get serious about finding where you live. Don't. Fucking. Do. It."
Bring it on you little pussy. You're the one who needs to be praying. I'll waste your fucking ass if you so much as get within 100 yards of my place, though you'll never find me. You obviously have no idea who you are fucking with. I can tell if anyone is trying to locate me and there's no way you could get through all my bounced relays to my original IP address. You're obviously a anti-American traitor hypocrite because you can't even handle my ideas which don't agree with your own. If you're going to be a mental midget and threaten me, you better be ready to experience real pain. Keep your threats to yourself before I disgrace you further.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 08:47 AM (OXRZJ)
25
I think that threatening others with bodily harm because they disagree with that person's ideas is shameful and un-American. Convince people through ideas.
Using ugly threats and brute force seldom works--ask the Nazi and Communist regimes.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 08:52 AM (x+5JB)
26
"I don't understand why its such a problem to release a video of a soldier doing nothing wrong."
Actus: It's a problem because it was edited for general consumption in order to elicit a certain response. This is bad because when the "full" tape is used to determine the guilt or innocence of the soldier, and the soldier is in fact cleared as a result, all the public has seen is what makes him look guilty and they get all worked up in a lather over it. It's just wrong.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 09:01 AM (fl6E1)
27
YBP, thanks for the voice of sanity. I agree with Oyster about the editing...it's hard to understand context if only given a snippet. Prime example being the Rodney King riots.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:09 AM (OXRZJ)
28
Or the beating of King, too.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 09:20 AM (x+5JB)
29
YBP, that's what I mean...the whole thing was just sound bites from the beating to the riots.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:24 AM (OXRZJ)
30
Very good discussion thread.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at June 01, 2005 09:38 AM (JQjhA)
31
It is only a matter of time before the people turn on the press and horsewhip editors through the village square.
I for one would love to see the editors at the NYTimes beaten in the streets.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 09:48 AM (yBHNA)
32
Filthy, don't zero in on just one...almost all the big networks/publications are guilty of being shitty reporters of the facts.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:53 AM (OXRZJ)
33
My bad. Hold the press accountable. Hang em from lamp posts. Politicians too.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 09:55 AM (yBHNA)
34
Now we're getting somewhere!
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:56 AM (OXRZJ)
35
The Rodney King issue is an excellent example.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 10:01 AM (fl6E1)
36
Well, there were tons of people who thought they were just being racist and beating the hell out of a innocent guy and he turned out to have been smoking PCP laced weed and coming at them. If you don't know already, on enough PCP one can break a leg and run on it. No wonder the cops were freaking out! I tried to contain a hostile guy on LSD and PCP at a party once and he didn't feel pain...I ended up getting him in a full nelson that if I had applied harder would have broken his neck...but he was still tossing me around and he was half my size. When the cops came he lunged at them and they nightsticked his front teeth in...the guy spit them out and started laughing. That guy ended up at the loony bin that night and had no memory of the incident...which is good since he didn't know I was responsible for some of his stitches! Either way, long story. PCP is some crazy shit, and I'm not saying those cops are saints, but I'd beat the fuck out of anyone on PCP if they didn't chill in the situation those cops were in.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 10:29 AM (OXRZJ)
37
"I tried to contain a hostile guy on LSD and PCP at a party once and he didn't feel pain...I ended up getting him in a full nelson that if I had applied harder would have broken his neck...but he was still tossing me around and he was half my size. When the cops came he lunged at them and they nightsticked his front teeth in...the guy spit them out and started laughing."
And yet, Bush now has excellent teeth.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 10:36 AM (x+5JB)
38
Hahaha...Man, I've heard Bush was quite a party animal...coke, weed, booze, you name it. As long as nobody gets hurt or is an addict, I don't care what other people do. I just think it sucks when they lie about it: (insert any politician's name here)
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 10:55 AM (OXRZJ)
39
Rodney got Knocked the F- Out! That was Brilliant!!!! Whack whack whack whack POW POW Zaaaaaaaap!
Anyone read about those Chimps that mauled that old guy a couple months back? Bit all his fingers, toes off, chewed his ears, nose, ass cheeks off?
Now that would be a fitting punishment for the editors of the Times. Mauled by Chimps. I love it.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 10:57 AM (yBHNA)
40
Adding to that: Bush doesn't have to worry about drugs or booze now, it's those darned POTUS pretzels!
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at June 01, 2005 10:57 AM (OXRZJ)
41
osama, you are the typical chickenshit internet troll who only posts to incite. Don't worry, your day will come you little coward, and someone will stand over you and watch you inhale blood instead of air through your open throat. The irony is it will probably be a Muslim who does you, right after he makes you lick his balls. I want to watch. Don't bother with the kiddie hacker lies about bouncing your signal through proxies, you don't know how to do that, you're just a stupid kid, I can tell by the way you write. I hope you die soon and in great pain, and I hope to be there to watch.
As for YBP,
"I think that threatening others with bodily harm because they disagree with that person's ideas is shameful and un-American. Convince people through ideas."
Disagreeing with ideas is one thing, treason to the nation is another. Go bury your head in the pillow if you can't see the difference, maybe they won't come for you.
"Using ugly threats and brute force seldom works--ask the Nazi and Communist regimes."
Sure brute force works, just ask the dead, though it's best applied to traitors, cowards, and those who support the murder of innocent people. This idiot osama openly supports the terrorists. Are you so fucking stupid as to not be able to see that? Is it withing his First Amendment rights to support the killing of American soldiers and innocent people? No. You are an idiot for standing up for him.
Posted by Young Bourbon Professional at June 1, 2005 08:52 AM
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 01, 2005 10:59 AM (0yYS2)
42
Let's see, who do i think should get the Chimp treatment?
Hillary and Bill Clinton, Pelosi, Kennedy, Reid, McCain, Alan Combs, Katie Couric, Britney Spears, Screech from Saved by the bell, Greg, John Kerry, Howie Dean.....
All should be ass raped by wild chimps. I mean, Mauled by chimps.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 11:00 AM (yBHNA)
43
Brevity is the essence of wit, improbulus. Note how short, sweet and civilized YBP is. Take notes.
Posted by: Howie at June 01, 2005 11:09 AM (D3+20)
44
Minimus Phallus, I'm a coward? Very wrong you are. Sorry, but I won't oblige your snuff & gay porn fantasy. I find it absolutely hilarious that you claim I support terrorists because I support the constitution of our great country. You just want to be a fucking tyrant, and that's why nobody is supporting you in this thread. Don't diss YBP because he isn't a dumb-ass fear monger like yourself. Kiddie hacker lies, huh? What, so you found me? You better start booking lots of flights, faggot. They are all dead ends for you...
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 11:11 AM (OXRZJ)
45
"All should be ass raped by wild chimps. I mean, Mauled by chimps."
Oh my god...I actually laughed out loud when I read that. Hahaha.
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 11:27 AM (OXRZJ)
46
A threat of a good ol' fashioned Chimp Ass Raping would keep the Press in line me thinks!
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 11:36 AM (yBHNA)
47
You know...Bush really looks like a chimp sometimes. I shit you not. I bet he could arrange a thing or two. ooo! ooo! aah! ahh!
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 11:39 AM (OXRZJ)
48
Bush rules. I love W.
Bush is giving the degenerate liberal traitor scumbags the ol' hairy chimp stick.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 11:44 AM (yBHNA)
49
Filthy...I've never been a Bush fan, but I'd PAY to see him jump down from a tree and give our media some chimp lovin'...
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 12:03 PM (OXRZJ)
50
I would pay to see W jump out of a tree and sod-O-mize a reporter.
Posted by: filthy allah at June 01, 2005 12:06 PM (yBHNA)
51
Better to back a chimp than Frankenstein's Monster.
IM: Yes, I've long suspected that I am indeed an idiot for thinking that threatening people with bodily harm for their ideas is wrong. Perhaps it's too idealistic to think such a thing these days. But I'd like to think that you wouldn't really want to see Osama (not the real one) have his throat slit by a terrorist, and that, were it actually going to happen, you would even help the guy.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 12:08 PM (x+5JB)
52
YBP, I know this...I'd save his ass if he was about to be iced by anyone. I can't say the same for him though!
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 12:17 PM (OXRZJ)
53
Either way, his threats ring pretty hollow to me. He can talk all the shit he wants. I know the score...
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at June 01, 2005 12:19 PM (OXRZJ)
54
Would you rather see Osama get his throat slit, or would you rather watch him get sexually violated by a wild chimp?
I vote for the chimp. I would like to see Osama get Chimped.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 12:39 PM (yBHNA)
55
Filthy: Which Osama?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 12:48 PM (x+5JB)
56
Anyone named Osama should get bottom knocked by a large, hairy chimp.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at June 01, 2005 12:51 PM (yBHNA)
57
Funny, this osamabeenvotin fella sounds just like Greg.
Posted by: filthy allah at June 01, 2005 12:55 PM (yBHNA)
58
Well, good thing this is only a pen name then. I don't want to get chimped!
http://www.compfused.com/directlink/782/
Posted by: osamabinpostin' at June 01, 2005 12:57 PM (OXRZJ)
59
Filthy: I think that for the real Osama, the P.B.C. (punshment by chimp) might be the way to go.
I know for a fact that Osamabeenvotin is in fact Soupy Sales.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 12:59 PM (x+5JB)
60
To wish a "Chimping" on a human being is wishing a fate worse than death on someone.
Chimps are not gentle lovers.
Posted by: filthy allah at June 01, 2005 01:02 PM (yBHNA)
61
It might seem worse then death at the time for Osama, but after a cigarette or two in the morning, who knows???
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:12 PM (x+5JB)
62
YBP, trust me that any name in here I use starts with a 'osama'...but who is Soupy Sales? Someone from another blog? It ain't me! I'm sure a few in here have had the pleasure of taking off the beer goggles to find a chimp in the morning...hehe.
Posted by: osamabinpostin' at June 01, 2005 01:25 PM (OXRZJ)
63
I'd also bet money that Minimus Phallus is a product of Chimping...I swear I can hear him beating his...uh...chest from here!
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at June 01, 2005 01:28 PM (OXRZJ)
64
Osama: I was kidding, and perhaps showing my age! Soupy Sales was/is that zany comedian from the 50's and 60's (on the quiz show "What's My Line?").
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:28 PM (x+5JB)
65
Osama (ominously): "You have been warned..."
http://www.tvparty.com/soupy.html
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:31 PM (x+5JB)
66
Shit, I don't know what's worse...not watching TV or missing out on popular culture. Something tells me I'm not missing much though...but that one is indeed before my time. Don't worry, you're not a walking fossil yet!
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 01:32 PM (OXRZJ)
67
osamabeenthere: "...not watching TV or missing out on popular culture."
You're implying that Soupy was popular.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:36 PM (x+5JB)
68
A perfect punishment for Saddam: 48 hours in a room with Soupy Sales.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:38 PM (x+5JB)
69
Yeah, I don't think chimping would work on Saddam...he might like it.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 01:42 PM (OXRZJ)
70
And would we want to do that to a chimp?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 01:43 PM (x+5JB)
71
YBP “I think that threatening others with bodily harm because they disagree with that person's ideas is shameful and un-American. Convince people through ideas. “
Agreed 100%, but retaliation is a different issue. (I guess that is why YBP is a better debater then me.)
As far as free press, I believe the press should have full rights to record and report any thing they want. But I believe in times of war, the Government has the right to determine when it is publish. (Remember I said during war, once it is over, free game again.) Now this does not include state secrets. As for the soldier in the tape, I think Osama has the right idea, if our troops are stupid enough to bring a reporter with them and they do stupid stuff, donÂ’t blame the media. I felt, after looking at the tape, that there was enough doubt about his conduct, that the military should investigate, they did, he was found innocent, end of discussion.
As for Osama’s comment “As long as nobody gets hurt or is an addict, I don't care what other people do.” The problem is other people do get hurt. I once thought this way, but when I was station in Albany, GA, the coast guard was getting short handed, and the commanders of the base was talking about loaning us Marines out to help police the seaways. My base was not chosen, but another was and we did hear of one marine who was shot but drug dealers. So even though, Joe Blow is not hurting anyone, Cartel Carl is trying to get the stuff to Joe Blow.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Posted by: Butch at June 01, 2005 03:57 PM (Gqhi9)
72
Should be "shot by drug dealers" not shot but drug dealers"
Posted by: Butch at June 01, 2005 04:05 PM (Gqhi9)
73
Butch...that really sucks. It seems backwards to me that alcohol is legal and weed isn't. I've seen far worse conduct and side effects from weed, and I doubt anyone could say that stoners are always getting in fights and though they might ramble, they barely talk as much shit as a drunk. The thing is, if someone wants drugs, they will get them one way or another. I think it would make more sense to make these things legal to take the dangerous element out of the equation & also return huge profits which are very taxable. California's #1 cash crop ain't avocados, ya know... I prefer to have a few drinks on weekends and that's pretty much it. Anything else is just too distracting for me!
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 06:29 PM (OXRZJ)
74
Osama,
I do kind of agree with the alcohol/mary jane effects.
What I always thought was stupid was that Alcohol kills more
people on the highways then the lack of seat belts, but until
the last couple of years, seat belts were the major no no of the
highways. DUI were just slaps on the wrist. As for the legalizing
drugs, I am not against that either. The point I was trying to make
is just because someone lights up at home, does not mean the grass
he is smoking is bloodless.
Posted by: Butch at June 02, 2005 08:32 AM (Gqhi9)
75
"Would I do this if the NYTimes was reporting it?"...nah, scrap that.
If you think holding soldiers directly accountable to civilian courts and institutions is a good idea you might consider reading this article by John Keegan who actually knows something about the topic. Or check out Austin Bay.
The bottom line is that even though such civilian authority relieves us of a certain sense of complicity in the messiness and evil of war it isn't a good idea to subject soldiers to judgments made after the fact by people who know nothing of combat. In fact, it hardly counts as "justice" at all.
Posted by: Demosophist at June 02, 2005 10:27 AM (d0CtA)
76
Butch, Yeah...I hear ya. I bet hard drugs have a lot more blood on them that any domestic weed though. There is a difference. Personally, I hate dealing with anyone under the influence of crack, coke, heroin...even alcohol if they are a bad drunk...but I can't say I've hard a hard time dealing with a stoner.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 02, 2005 11:15 AM (OXRZJ)
77
Hey IM, any luck finding out where that osama guy lives? Show us your 1337 hacker skillz. Come. On. Show. Us. Wow. One. Word. Sentences. Are. Cool.
Fucking idiots.
Posted by: Jim at June 02, 2005 09:50 PM (FzCFs)
78
Jim...
No word from IM since he threatened to pay a visit. Maybe he's on his way to the address of the first server I control remote? It would be a waste of time/money for him if he really thinks that the first IP that he discovers is the best way of tracking a professional digerati. He'd also be silly to think that he's the only one in here who owns a gun and has military service under his belt. The notion that anyone could get away with going after someone after posting intent all over a server is absurd. His location would be revealed easily in any investigation if I was harmed in any way.
Funny thing is: I bet our views aren't too different...but he gets extremely pissed when I don't agree with him. Maybe he doesn't like my sense of humor? Maybe he thinks I represent all that he hates? Too bad either way...it isn't good for your health to get so worked up. Words on a screen shouldn't contribute to your heart attack! His passion could probably be channeled into more positive motivations.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 03, 2005 10:56 AM (B9hEP)
Al Qaeda Handbook: "Claim the Americans are torturing you."
Well, this certainly explains a lot. Chad Evans is all over this one and you definitely need to read his take, but I just have to put this up. Washington Times:
An al Qaeda handbook preaches to operatives to level charges of torture once captured, a training regime that administration officials say explains some of the charges of abuse at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp....Very interesting indeed. This goes along way in explaining a lot of allegations. Especially from the likes of al Qaeda linked terror suspect Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, who you will recall accused the US of torturing him.In a raid on an al Qaeda cell in Manchester, British authorities seized al Qaeda's most extensive manual for how to wage war.
A directive lists one mission as "spreading rumors and writing statements that instigate people against the enemy."If captured, the manual states, "At the beginning of the trial ... the brothers must insist on proving that torture was inflicted on them by state security before the judge. Complain of mistreatment while in prison."
The handbook instructs commanders to make sure operatives, or "brothers," understand what to say if captured.
"Prior to executing an operation, the commander should instruct his soldiers on what to say if they are captured," the document says. "He should explain that more than once in order to ensure that they have assimilated it. They should, in turn, explain it back to the commander."
Posted by: Rusty at
04:55 PM
| Comments (34)
| Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.
1
This is exactly what Muhammed taught his followers to do and what is wwritten in the Koran...that it is okay to tell lies to "infidels" , to spread propaganda and mishief among the unbelievers...its what ALL Muslims do when confronted by the truth of what they actually are like...they cry and bitch that they{Muslims} are being picked on and tortured and such lies as they can think of...the culture of Islam is to lie to infidels and that its okay to do such...to make promises and treaties and to break them as soon as possible when the situation favors the Muslims....thats why they CANNOT be trusted to keep their promises...they cant do it as it is okay to make false promises to non-Muslims...go to islamundressed and you can read all about the Muslim meaning of "honor" and "promises of peace"....i hope everyone will go there and find what the truth is and spread it to all they know who come in contact with Muslims...untill they can keep their words of peace and tolerance, why should they be trusted on blind faith????...i for one do not trust any person who follows the cult of Islam....Knowledge is Power
Posted by: THANOS35 at May 31, 2005 05:08 PM (b7uP2)
2
The only knowledge one needs of Muslims is that they are pathalogical liars, they hate everyone, they cannot be trusted, and they are better left dead than alive.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 05:16 PM (0yYS2)
3
They also have no morals and would never comply with the Geneva convention so why should anyone care if they are tortured.
Islam is a religion of hate and bigotry. The Nazis were angels compared to the Islamic world.
Posted by: Cliff at May 31, 2005 05:58 PM (QKZX5)
4
in some cases i believe in a saying my wife taught me....kill em with kindness....unfortunately this usually only works on inlaws and friends...not with terrorists...in their case in believe in fighting fire with fire....anyone remember Sean Connerys line in The Untouchables....If they pull out a knife, you pull out a gun...If he sends one of youre guys to the hospital, you send one of his guys to the morgue.Thats the Chicago way!!!...thats what the USA should be doing with these terrorists and those countries that support them...its brutsal but its what needs to be done, the more you play by the rules, the more you cause them to be even more brutal....Muslims do not react in the same way other religions or cultures do....they see you as weak if you talk nice to them and they see you as a victim in waiting....Hit them hard and with all you got and you will get their attention fast and they will see you mean it...its time to stop playing nice
Posted by: THANOS35 at May 31, 2005 06:27 PM (b7uP2)
5
Shorter manual: fool the useful idiots-- Liberals-- into siding with you.
Posted by: Carlos at May 31, 2005 06:31 PM (8e/V4)
6
You're all a bunch of hypocrites. Oh, I'm sure anyone from any religion aside from Muslims don't lie like crazy. Ha! You're all delusional fools.
Such blanket statements about millions of people are exactly the behavior of....you got it Cliff: NAZIS!
"The only knowledge one needs of Muslims is that they are pathological liars, they hate everyone, they cannot be trusted, and they are better left dead than alive."
--->They say the same about you, Minimus Phallus.
"Shorter manual: fool the useful idiots-- Liberals-- into siding with you."
--->The same would apply to Rove's book of 'flyover voting strategy'...only substitute liberal with average red state idiot.
You guys are so fucking dumb it's constant entertainment for me to check in here and read your pathetic posts.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at May 31, 2005 07:25 PM (OXRZJ)
7
osamabeenthere (aka Steven Babler) = Useful Idiot.
The Al Qaida manual works.
Posted by: Carlos at May 31, 2005 07:40 PM (8e/V4)
8
Osama, I personally would prefer that you address the issue rather than the comments. Oh, that's right, you only know how to call names. So what DO you think about the "manuals"? Is it okay by you? You've conveniently ignored it, so I take it that the fact that such training manuals have been found has no bearing at all on current situations and allegations of torture according to you? The only reason I ask this is that you seem to spend a lot of time berating others for their opinions without ever really claiming an opinion of your own unless it's in opposition to someone else. Except of course when you, greg, actus, et al are chumming it up in the comment section.
Posted by: Oyster at May 31, 2005 07:54 PM (YudAC)
9
Oyster, since you are one of few I respect in here...I'll chill and stick to the issue: I don't doubt that a training manual says such things. But then, that would make it awful convenient to dismiss legitimate abuse cases, don't you think? I think that any group of people that wants something bad enough will lie to get it...our government, corporations, christians, muslims, jews, space aliens...you name it. Maybe even your mom! The shit is really hitting the fan about US soldiers abusing 'detainees' and the heat isn't coming from the muslims.
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at May 31, 2005 08:17 PM (OXRZJ)
10
What is clear is that Osamabinmoron here believes abuse cases that have essentially no credible evidence at all.
That's the definition of being on the other side.
Posted by: SPQR at May 31, 2005 09:10 PM (xauGB)
11
osama, you're a fucking retard and you will die when the shit goes down. You are a traitor to civilization, and your type won't last long, because either a true patriot will gut you like a fish, or a terrorist will use you like his bitch and cut your head off when he's done with you. Idiot.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 10:11 PM (0yYS2)
12
In the interst of research, I have decided to find out who the Washington Times really is. Guess what everyone, News World Communications, owner of the Wasington Times is a newspaper publishing company owned by the Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church.
In other words folks, Rusty thinks the Moonies are a reliable source for news.
Hardy Har Har
Posted by: deccles at May 31, 2005 10:51 PM (TLWNQ)
13
deccles,
Welcome to the bronze age. Old freakin' news. However, for your information, the moonies don't have editorial control.
Posted by: SPQR at May 31, 2005 11:17 PM (xauGB)
14
The owner has no editorial say? That's like saying Rupert Murdock has no say in how his publications are handled. I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that. Welcome to the Jim Jones news agency.
Posted by: deccles at June 01, 2005 12:03 AM (TLWNQ)
15
"At the beginning of the trial"
Obviously doesn't apply, as terrorists don't get trials.
Posted by: actus at June 01, 2005 12:03 AM (Ygl+x)
16
deccles,
If you're objection to the Washington Times is that they are a conservative-leaning newspaper, then that's fine. But when you Libs mechanically trot out the "moonie" thing (as per standard formula) it's the surest sign you have no argument on the merits. It's so amazing how you all appear to be reading off the same memo, like robots. I'll bet a million dollars that the next time you see "Washington Times" you'll again mechanically trot out the moonie thing, as per your programming.
I have no reason to believe the Washington Times is less trustworthy than CBS or Newsweek, as the Wash Times has yet to manufacture memos out of whole cloth or print phony stories that they later had to retract.
Posted by: Carlos at June 01, 2005 01:52 AM (8e/V4)
17
Frankly, I have my suspicions about all print media and most other forms. The trick is to corroborate stories for ourselves. No one else is going to do it.
Actus: If you'll read the news, detainees at Guantanamo ARE getting lawyers. They've not been "denied" lawyers, just no one seemed to care about them. There are some whose families got them lawyers right away and they were not denied that representation. Now lawyers are starting to show up to do pro-bono work. And guess what? Even the lawyers won't take some of the cases.
Osama: You said, "...that would make it awful convenient to dismiss legitimate abuse cases, don't you think?" Yes, that's true, but it works both ways. It also puts a crimp in their ability to use our own system against us by suing for abuse that may not have occurred. We had problems at Abu Graib and they will use it as a precedent for further cases. And there are far too many people out there who will take the word of a detainee, with no knowledge of their guilt or innocence, no knowledge of what crimes they are being suspected of and no knowledge of well, just about anything.
So yes, this is good for us. It levels the playing field a bit when it come to who said what. If we're supposed to assume innocence until proof of guilt, then that should work for us as well when they start souting allegations of abuse. This puts the whammy on all the people who assume these creeps are unable to lie.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 06:55 AM (YudAC)
18
I was doing great until I started misspelling words in the last paragraph. I think you'll understand it fine though. PIMF, I know.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 07:35 AM (YudAC)
19
Real or imagined, the U.S. has got to be on its toes, documenting EVERYTHING, so that if false claims are ever leveled against our soldiers, we will have the proof to prove otherwise in court.
War, in these days of ever-increasing litigation, has come to this, I guess.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 07:55 AM (x+5JB)
20
I agree, YBP & Oyster. But tell me this, and Carlos might know more about this: If they are all coming at us suing about abuse, and if they are lying and have no proof...then what can they do? It can't be that much of a problem. I also doubt that anyone thinks these detainees are all honest. People in general take advantage of any system.
"osama, you're a fucking retard and you will die when the shit goes down. You are a traitor to civilization, and your type won't last long, because either a true patriot will gut you like a fish, or a terrorist will use you like his bitch and cut your head off when he's done with you. Idiot."
Minimus Phallus, you waste your time trying to spar with me. I am a guiding light to civilization compared to a dumb-ass fear monger like yourself. My mere words make you feel so insecure that you just can't handle it, huh? Too bad, because I have a voice and like every true American patriot and have a right to use it. By the way, the only shit going down is you...
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:02 AM (OXRZJ)
21
"If they are all coming at us suing about abuse, and if they are lying and have no proof...then what can they do?"
That's not completely my point. This is also a PR war. Otherwise, we wouldn't be discussing it.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 09:10 AM (fl6E1)
22
Sorry, I wasn't finished. It's not so much the fact that anyone assumes they're all innocent, it's more the fact that some don't care. They simply want us to lose this every which way and if lying does the trick, then they're okay with it. All I'm saying is that it's good that the contents of these handbooks were exposed to everyone so it's not so easy for them to use the allegations to further their ideas that we are the eeeevil ones in this. Many are irresponsible in using the WWW to vilify the American troops. They get on line and start their catterwauling and now it's just a little harder to do that.
It's much like the Kevin Sites issue being discussed in another thread. The media doesn't tell the whole truth and people get all jacked-up. They do the same thing when reporting on the many suicide attacks and car bombings. In one case the media reported on several attacks and skirmishes in a three day period saying "49 dead in attacks!", and neglected to mention that 28 of those were terrorists. It's a PR war and it shouldn't be. That's why we have our panties in a wad. I prefer to wear mine on my head, but that's just me ;-)
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 09:30 AM (fl6E1)
23
I see your point... It's just in my eyes, we should be less concerned about what specific detainees are claiming and have a better reaction to Amnesty Internal than finding their recent report "Insulting"-Cheney and "Absurd"-Bush. I mean, really...if PR is the issue, our administration better come up with something better than that because nobody is believing them. Amnesty Internal's response to Bush's "absurd" response yesterday spanked Bush big-time and it's a disgrace to our nation.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:33 AM (OXRZJ)
24
I see what you're saying and I completely agree. There is a responsibility the media doesn't really uphold. I want my news whole and real, without distortion. I need to be able to trust that what I'm reading or seeing or hearing is true. When profit and ratings take importance over truth and accuracy we are all screwed. The media controls pretty much everyone's views on everything because they have no other way to form a thought on a subject without personally experiencing it by actually being there. That's why I'm so freaked out that our media isn't really owned by tons of small networks...they are all lorded over by a few very powerful corporations which will always have their best interests first.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 09:46 AM (OXRZJ)
25
Steven,
this is a war, not a legal battle. Wars are waged on the ground with boots and bullets, and in the press. If some terrorist sues our government, he will lose, but the damage is already done. When that bitch at Amnesty International called Guantanamo a Soviet gulag, she would lose in any debate or court of law, but her foolish words alone have already done their damage. Same with bogus lawsuits.
Unfortunately, we can't stop them from suing-- especially when they have useful-idiot Leftist lawyers taking their case. The least we can do, however, is to expose their tactics and minimize the damage they wreak in the court of public opinion. That's why Rusty posts stuff about "AQ handbooks", something you'll NEVER see on a Liberal website because Libs are just as interested in damaging our country's image as the terrorists are.
Posted by: Carlos at June 01, 2005 09:59 AM (8e/V4)
26
Is it my imagination or have the discussions here taken on a more sane approach since Greg went and got himself banned?
Osama, I agree that those in our administration are not exactly "good communicators". Amnesty International wants exactly what their name implies - Amnesty. Sometimes it's a good thing and sometimes it's not. They simply don't discern the difference. The International Red Cross, too, will not be entirely happy until all detainees are served doilies under their beverages. Everyone has an agenda.
Posted by: Oyster at June 01, 2005 10:14 AM (fl6E1)
27
I resent the fact that this looks like the U.S.'s war solely. Can we stop all aid to the countries who have bagged out on us? Or will they sue us, too?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 01, 2005 10:39 AM (x+5JB)
28
Carlos...I think it's great that Rusty posts stuff that you'd never see elsewhere...as long as it's accurate. I can't vouch for lib blogs since I don't visit them. So what do you think the solution is to this Amnesty report? Many people trust their word...so damage is done, but how is it repaired?
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 11:37 AM (OXRZJ)
29
>>>"Many people trust their word...so damage is done, but how is it repaired?"
When the enemy sees that he is making inroads in the PR war, it emboldens them. That's why I think the Left is causing irreparable damage. It's not only causing more deaths by inciting more anti-American hatred, but it's also prolonging this war. The "pro peace" Left has a nack for unintentially prolonging wars and causing more deaths.
Posted by: Carlos at June 01, 2005 11:58 AM (8e/V4)
30
Carlos, I'm sure terrorists will use anyone or anything to further their cause. The impression I get from most liberals is not that they side with terrorist causes or sympathies, but they don't think we're fighting a justified cause. All this crap makes you wonder if there will ever be a time when humans don't have wars in the future. Do you think humans evolve to the point where wars are a thing of the past?
Posted by: osamabincite at June 01, 2005 12:10 PM (OXRZJ)
31
Well, osamabincite, if that is their motivation, why do they employ methods that directly aid the terrorists?
Portions of the Left are actively allying with the terrorists, how much of liberals' actions come from a sympathy with the Left?
Posted by: SPQR at June 01, 2005 03:51 PM (xauGB)
32
SPQR...do you have some documentation of this? I assume you aren't just referring to the media reporting things that might result in soldiers being killed. I've never heard of any libs actually aiding terrorists directly. If they are, I wouldn't call them 'left' I'd call them a bunch of fuckers who should be in prison. I've never met a lib who sympathizes with the terrorists, unless you think all of Iraq are terrorists. (sadly, some people do)
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 06:39 PM (OXRZJ)
33
Such blanket statements about millions of people are exactly the behavior of....you got it Cliff: NAZIS!
Not talking about the millions of people, more about the doctrine they accept and follow, some through fear from those who use it's evil laws as a form of oppression and control...just like the Nazis. How many of these people can speak out compared to those in the Western world?...not many because their barbaric religion and society stops them. We shouldn't be trying to placate such people or kiss the ass of the muslim religion as it is so wrong. It is a step back in time for those who live in a civilised world.
Posted by: Cliff at June 01, 2005 06:51 PM (QKZX5)
34
Well, Cliff...I agree with you to a point, but I don't blame just one religion. I blame any of them that do what you just said. There aren't many that haven't abused their power on a massive level.
Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 01, 2005 07:08 PM (OXRZJ)
Deep Throat
The other day at Jawapalooza in D.C. this chick comes over to the table and starts talking to us.
After a few minutes she asks what we're doing there and so I say, "I'm deep throat." For some odd reason she found the Watergate reference offensive. I don't get it.
A former FBI official claims he was “Deep Throat,” the long-anonymous source who leaked secrets about President Nixon’s Watergate coverup to The Washington Post, his family said Tuesday.more...W. Mark Felt, 91, was second-in-command at the FBI in the early 1970s. His identity was revealed Tuesday by Vanity Fair magazine, and family members said they believe his account is true.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:28 PM
| Comments (27)
| Add Comment
Post contains 366 words, total size 4 kb.
1
ISRAEL CAN WIRETAP EVERY PHONE IN AMERICA.
IS THAT WHY OUR POLITICIANS BEND OVER BACKWARDS FOR ISRAEL?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
(SEE PART 3)
Posted by: GREG at May 31, 2005 02:38 PM (/+dAV)
2
Greg,
Your paranoid anti-semetism is amusing.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 02:39 PM (JQjhA)
3
Thanks Rusty. Although I'm not an anti-semite, I'm anti-Israel.
You should really listen to the aforementioned report by Brit Hume of Fox News. He is neither an anti-semite nor anti-Israel.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
Israeli Spying:
The Mother of all Scandals
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/motherofallscandals.html
“Once again, Israel has been caught with spies at the highest levels of the US Government.
At the heart of the investigation are two people who work at The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington. The FBI investigation, headed up by Dave Szady, has involved wiretaps, undercover surveillance and photography that CBS News was told document the passing of classified information from the mole, to the men at AIPAC, and on to the Israelis.”
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 02:59 PM (/+dAV)
4
FLASHBACK: US arrests 200 young Israelis in spying investigation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/03/07/wspy07.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/03/07/ixworld.html
“UP to 200 young Israelis, some of them former members of military intelligence units, have been arrested in America in the past year, a leaked government report disclosed yesterday.”
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:01 PM (/+dAV)
5
Greg,
Seriously, are you begging me to ban you with your idiotic links or what?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 03:15 PM (JQjhA)
6
Rusty, your paranoid anti-islamism is amusing.
Posted by: Jim at May 31, 2005 03:22 PM (3Esov)
7
It's your call Bro. But you should really listen to Brit Humes of Fox News.
How is Brit Hume of Fox News idiotic?
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:23 PM (/+dAV)
8
Brit Humes of Fox News can be heard at:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:25 PM (/+dAV)
9
There is a difference between a legitimate story about an Israeli spy verses a made up story about 200 JOOS getting rounded up.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 03:26 PM (JQjhA)
10
Rusty,
The story is not made up. The Brit Hume story also mentions the 200 Israeli spies. THIS IS FOR REAL.
Why don't you spend a few minutes and just listen to the damn report. It's Fox News for God's sakes! Jeez!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
Let me know if you still think it's idiotic after you listen to Brit.
By the way, FOX NEWS spiked this stoory immediately after airing it, that's how explosive it is. Do yourself a favor and listen to it.
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:35 PM (/+dAV)
11
So what is the inference we're supposed to draw from this (btw-you cite incorrectly, the report says 60 Israelis detained since 9/11)
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 03:39 PM (JQjhA)
12
Rusty,
Fox News says that 60 Israeli spies were rounded up just prior to 9-11 (Part 1) and another 140 Israeli spies were rounded up just after 9-11 (Part 2).
When this report is taken with others that I have (I have a mountain of stuff) it appears that the "terrorists' were being shepherded by the Israelis and the FBI.
When asked by Brit Hume if this was connected to 9-11, the FBI agent says, "This matter is classified, I cannot discuss this matter".
There is also the matter of Israel being able to tap Every phone in the U.S. (Part 3).
Give it a good listen.
By the way, the FBI is currently investigating AIPAC for yet another Israeli spying network.
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:48 PM (/+dAV)
13
I'm glad that greg's looneytunes nonsense and anti-semitism amuses you, Rusty.
It doesn't amuse me.
Posted by: SPQR at May 31, 2005 03:59 PM (xauGB)
14
Spyring, very interesting. Now, let's jump to conclusions.
greg, why don't you start?
Posted by: IM at May 31, 2005 03:59 PM (a9tRx)
15
U.S. to indict two senior AIPAC officials under Espionage Act
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/581788.html
“WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department is expected to file indictments against two former senior staffers at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) - Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman - and, according to sources familiar with the affair, the charges will be subsumed under the Espionage Act.”
Here is an article about the current scandal. ItÂ’s from the Israeli newspaper HAARETZ. Are you even aware of it? I canÂ’t blame you if you arenÂ’t, the U.S. MSM isnÂ’t talking about it that much.
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 04:01 PM (/+dAV)
16
IM and SPQR,
Why don't you take your head out of your ass for a second and view the report. It's Brit Hume and FOX NEWS. Are you afraid of Brit Hume and FOX NEWS?
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 04:03 PM (/+dAV)
17
Greg has been banned.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 04:28 PM (JQjhA)
18
I liked Greg better when he wanted to become Johnny Bravo. Or maybe when he and Marsha both wanted to move into the attic.
That whole "Israel is evil" subplot just doesn't work for me, any more than Cousin Oliver did.
Posted by: a4g at May 31, 2005 05:02 PM (/E+Dx)
19
Washington post confirms he was "Deep Throat" today.
Posted by: Howie at May 31, 2005 05:04 PM (D3+20)
20
Yeah, and after two spoof movies it was time to put that character to rest.......
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 05:04 PM (JQjhA)
21
I kept telling greg that if he didn't add more tinfoil the evil jooooooish mind control rays were gonna fry his mind, but noooo, now the MIB's are going to take him away in their Black Helicopters.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 05:29 PM (0yYS2)
22
Now about the piece of shit FBI traitor who broke the law and leaked information of an ongoing investigation. I know the old bastard is 91, but he should be taken out, stood up against a wall, and shot anyway. He did more damage to this county, and the world, than can be imagined by his betrayal of the law. The scumbag communists in our country used Watergate as a stake in the heart of American conservatism, and in doing so gave world Communism another 50 years of life at least. I would pull the trigger on the old cocksucker myself.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 05:42 PM (0yYS2)
23
Imagine my surprise coming here to read comments about Deep Throat and end up watching the deconstruction of Greggy.
BTW - the intel Israel shares with us from places like Lebanon, Syria, Iran, etc. forgives a hell of a lot of sins as far as I'm concerned. We've got little in the way of Humint assets in those countries and Israel's sharing is vital to our security.
Posted by: Rick Moran at May 31, 2005 05:45 PM (ywZa8)
24
Dude, the last name is Port. Porter was the last name of the girl who had a locker next to mine in high school. I cheated on my girlfriend with her for a while but had to break it off after I got confused as to who I was supposed to be making out with between classes.
Not sure why I shared that, but there you go.
Posted by: Rob at May 31, 2005 06:19 PM (YyuDM)
25
Sheesh, how can I trust a former Google News source that can't even spell Joe Gandelman's name right. WTF Rusty?
Posted by: Digger at May 31, 2005 09:16 PM (c2i02)
26
Darn... Metal Gear Solid wasn't telling the truth. I thought Deep Throat was supposed to be that invisible armoured guy with a sword, Fox something. =)
Now to wait for the official Kennedy-murder report they sealed for 50 or 60 years. Bet it says it's like the movie "Zoolander" said, the gay people killed him because he was blocking trade with Cuba and they couldn't get fashionable clothes. =)
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at June 01, 2005 09:01 AM (lGolT)
27
Wooooooo... a documentary about how Kennedy was elected only because mafia helped him, and how Cuba made the Kennedies turn against them by shutting down the mafia businesses. Also about how they repeatedly tried to assassinate Castro and that the father-Kennedy handled all US-politics with Russia.
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at June 01, 2005 12:36 PM (lGolT)
Colonel is an honorary title
Pop quiz, cowboy. A Sunni terrorist blows up a Shia mosque. How do you respond? Burn down the nearest Kentucky Fried Chicken! Duh.
Come on, that was easy. Because nothing says let's protest terrorism better than destroying the Colonel's secret recipe which makes you crave some original recipe fortnightly.....
Six employees of a KFC restaurant were killed yesterday after the building was torched by a mob angry over a deadly suicide attack at a Shi'ite mosque in Karachi.Man, the Religion of Irony never ceases to amaze.Four of the victims at the restaurant were burned to death, while the two others froze after taking refuge in a refrigeration unit.
The restaurant was targeted after three militants, a policeman and a worshipper were killed in a shootout and a suicide bombing during evening prayers at the Madinat-ul-Ilm mosque in Gulshan, a busy neighbourhood in Pakistan's violence-prone largest city.
Hat tip: Bill Dauterieve, Shamalama, and Tim at Opinion Bug who have more.
Posted by: Rusty at
11:47 AM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Golldang, there are so many tangents to go off on here. Where to start?
First, it is fitting the story is being told in "The Australian". While I was living there, it seems Aussies couldn't get enough of the Original. Everytime someone wanted to get something quick KFC was suggested and everyone capitulated.
Second, one time while taking a side trip to famous Mena, Arkansas a buddy of mine and I stopped off at KFC. As I went to get a refill of my drink, smoke started billowing out of the vent just above the beverage dispenser. As quickly mentioned this to the manager on duty the place was filling with smoke and nobody was moving - NOBODY. The scariest part was the managers reaction: "Oh man! Not again!" The fire department quickly showed up, but we got the heck outta there.
Moral of the two stories? KFC's burn REAL GOOD. That's why they torched it in Karachi - 'cause it be easy.
Posted by: Editor at May 31, 2005 12:20 PM (adpJH)
2
The KFC in Karachi is no longer serving "Infidel Tenders"
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 31, 2005 12:50 PM (yBHNA)
3
Who cares about those minimum wage murders that were blown up in the Auschwitz of Poultry. This is a great day. With this death shop eliminated, chickens can now run free in Karachi.
When will America stop this inhumane treatment of such a proud and beautiful animal?
Be sure to watch Stacked on FOX this Tuursday at 8.
Posted by: Pamala Anderson at May 31, 2005 12:50 PM (B54Lt)
4
Ah, it was radical PETA activists........
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 01:06 PM (JQjhA)
5
Militant Islam and radical PETA activist joining forces.
God help us.
Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2005 01:15 PM (B54Lt)
6
"Be sure to watch Stacked on FOX this Tuursday at 8."-Pamela Anderson
"Stacked" is good quality entertainment!
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 01:50 PM (/+dAV)
7
I'm not going to watch Stacked, but I may spend some quality time with that one Pam Anderson video that I do own..........
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 02:08 PM (JQjhA)
8
Greg,
I have this friend who watches a few minutes of STACKED while his wife is putting the kids to bed. Just before his wife comes back down stairs, he quickly changes the channel back to sports center. Is this guy a wuss?
Posted by: Brad at May 31, 2005 02:11 PM (B54Lt)
9
What is happening to Traditional Culture, in Pakistan? Did they have no Hindus to burn??
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at May 31, 2005 02:29 PM (hgd/M)
10
Nah, they ethnically cleansed the Hindus for the past 50 years. None left.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 02:40 PM (JQjhA)
11
Is this guy a wuss?-Brad
It's the height of wussishness.
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 02:43 PM (/+dAV)
12
Girls just love Colonelangus and his shiney, shiney face.
"When I was in high school, I ate soo much pussy that my face looked like a glazed jelly donut."-Dennis Hopper (The River's Edge)
Posted by: greg at May 31, 2005 03:12 PM (/+dAV)
13
I bet those Fancy boys over at the Red Lobster on Dakalaka Street in Downtown Karachi are shitting themselves.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 31, 2005 03:13 PM (yBHNA)
14
Wait, are shellfish halal?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 03:16 PM (JQjhA)
15
Well, it is a boring day in Karachi. No honor killings, no heads to saw, no flags to burn, don't really feel like kidnapping anyone today....hmmmmmmmmmm... I know!!
F-ing KFC skimped on my popcorn chicken order!What the F! JIHAD ON THE KFC DEVILS!!!!
Wendy's is next. They will find a head in the chili!
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 31, 2005 03:36 PM (yBHNA)
16
Allowing Muslims to breathe free air is like giving a monkey a gun, only I'd rather take my chances with the monkey.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 31, 2005 05:46 PM (0yYS2)
Will Rusty Shackleford be the last infidel without a fatwa?
More and more I begin to think that the very fabric of the Universe is held together by a perverse sense of humor. Here I am constantly going out of my way to mock all that Muslims deem holy, make the most offensive and broad sweeping categorizations, and intentionally say things that would make even Salmon Rushdie blush, and besides the occasional death threat I get no response.
In contrast Jane Novak of Armies of Liberation never makes such broad and inflammatory statements about Islam, goes out of her way not to offend, and refrains from Koran in toilet type humor gets called by the Yemen Times a "docile pupil of a monkey monk.”
There is no justice in the universe!
Posted by: Rusty at
11:00 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I thought I would get one too just for my e-mail address.
Posted by: filthy allah at May 31, 2005 11:54 AM (yBHNA)
2
I tried to placate you with an e-Fatwah, but nooooo.
Posted by: Oyster at May 31, 2005 12:43 PM (fl6E1)
3
I need a REAL fatwa!!
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 31, 2005 01:09 PM (JQjhA)
4
Come on guys, its soooo easy. Pick on the Yemeni al-Qaeda and make them cry. It was the article in Front Page, I think, that sent them over the deep end.
Also today the Yemeni shia scholars said that Saddams generals who are in Yemen had encouraged the bloody and civil jihad againt the Yemeni shia, that Saleh should to do it like Saadam did. But we knew that three weeks ago.
from the docile student of a monkey monk
i cannot type that without laughing
Posted by: Jane at May 31, 2005 01:49 PM (HoSBk)
5
Yes, Rusty, yes you will be the last.
Oh yeah:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fi.html
Crappy map, there aren't 2 flags so the cooler crest one has been ignored, military manpower is much larger since our age span for military duties is longer, Ä:s and Ö:s have been replaced with A:s and O:s and it made some pretty "funny" meanings for some of the names, and most of all the "tribe unified under one country"-idea mentioned at the end is pretty much dead and buried since Stalin had the areas repopulated with Moscowians and sent Finn-relateds to live around Volga and Siperia.
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at May 31, 2005 02:13 PM (lGolT)
6
Maybe its because no one cares what you say.
Posted by: Jim at May 31, 2005 03:19 PM (3Esov)
7
Or then they think you are doing this stuff for humor, because your blog is put to the Comics-county of Bloggahland
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at June 01, 2005 03:30 AM (cWMi4)
May 27, 2005
George Galloway's Lies, the Oil For Food Scandal, and the Ideology of the Left
Well, that would be the headline if there was justice in this world. Unfortunately, there isn't. Friend of The Jawa Report Clinton W. Taylor has this article in The American Spectator:
On May 17, the Right Honorable George Galloway, MP, gave a blustery and animated performance in front of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Pundits conceded he ran rhetorical circles around the plodding, staid Senators who couldn't quite catch him out on his relationship to the Oil-for-Food Scandal. But the Senate tortoises may yet have the last laugh. Mr. Galloway seems to have told a big, fat whopper under oath, and a tech-savvy blogger has dug up some proof.One guess on whether or not Gallaway was lying or not? Trust me, you'll want to read the rest of the article here.During the hearing (which, though not released by the Senate, has been transcribed here), Senator Norm Coleman pressed Mr. Galloway about his links to Saddam crony, Oil-for-Food beneficiary, and super-rich businessman Fawaz Zureikat, who was a major donor to Mr. Galloway's Mariam Appeal charity. Did Galloway know Zureikat was trading oil for Saddam? Mr. Galloway responded that:
Not only did I know that, but I told everyone about it. I emblazoned it in our literature, on our Web site, precisely so that people like you could not later credibly question my bona fides in that regard. So I did better than that. I never asked him if he was trading in oil. I knew he was a big trader with Iraq, and I told everybody about it.On his website? Well, the Mariam Appeal site (www.Mariamappeal.com) is long gone, the domain name snapped up by Internet squatters, so we'll just have to take Mr. Galloway's word for it, right?Not quite. There's this nifty thing called the Internet Archive Wayback Machine (here), which takes "snapshots" of websites over time. It works a little like Google's vast searchable cache, sending out an automated "webcrawler" that remembers the HTML code of the sites it encounters. Brand-new blogger George Gooding at Seixon.com used it to find the snapshots of the old Mariam Appeal site and verify whether Zureikat's identity was, in fact, emblazoned thereon. [READ THE REST]
As for George Gooding, he's keeping on top of this. Check his site for updates.
Both Gooding and Taylor make an excellent point: that Galloway was lying. But let me point out the obvious problem in the logic which many of their readers may conclude from their posts--which seems to be the same logic the rest of the right is using in impeaching the character of Galloway and his ilk who benefited from the Hussein regime's kickbacks. If I follow the Right's logic, it goes something like this:
1) Saddam Hussein used lucrative oil contracts to transfer money to various Western officials and UN bureaucrats.
2) The intent of the Baathist dictator's regime was to influence these Western politicians and UN bureaucrats.
3) These Western politicians used their influence to oppose the UN sanctions on Iraq and the later US led war because of these kickbacks.
The problem with this logic is that it attributes the causal factors all wrong. That is, the normal right-wing theory seems to be that Western politicians, such as Galloway, supported ending the UN sanctions because of the kickbacks. It is the standard if you want to know why something happens then follow the money explanation of politics.
While such a hypothesis may sometimes be true, it cannot always be true, otherwise it leaves the realm of theory and becomes a non-falsifiable truism.
Look, people like George Galloway don't need their votes bought by the likes of Saddam Hussein. If you think he supported Husseing because of the money you just don't get it. With or without Hussein's money he would have opposed the UN sanctions and the later US led invasion. It's not the money, it's the ideology.
The ideology of the left divides the world into two groups: the powerful and the weak. It is the forgotten legacy of Marx that he rejected notions of good and evil in favor of a morality of power.
The left is unable to make any other moral distinction. Therefore Iraq is good because it is weak and the US/UK are bad because they are strong. Further, any position taken by any powerful country is seen as bad when such position pits weak countries against the strong.
The left around the world hates America because of her strength. America is bad, mmmmkay, because it is strong.
It is the same reason Galloway and his ilk support the Palestinians over Israel, Hugo Chavez over the democratic opposition, and lavish Fidel Castro with loving adoration.
Castro, Chavez, and Saddam Hussein don't need to buy Galloway's support. Galloway and the rest of the left have already pledged it.
The UN oil-for-food scandal does not represent graft with the intention of buying Western influence. The UN oil-for-food scandal represents money given as a reward to the already faithful.
Support did not follow the money. The money was a reward for support.
In our rush to judgement let us not forget that while blood is thicker than money, to the true ideologue, hate for America is thicker than anything else.
Posted by: Rusty at
01:49 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 897 words, total size 6 kb.
1
I'm surprised the traitors greg and actus haven't chimed in with something idiotic. Feeling sick today fellas, or too busy writing love letters to Osama and Fidel?
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 27, 2005 02:01 PM (0yYS2)
2
IDIOTS!
THE DOCUMENT LINKING GALLOWAY TO THE FOOD FOR OIL SCANDAL IS A FORGERY
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/galloway.html
Take a close look at the way Galloway's name appears in slightly smaller and fainter type, and the way it is slightly crooked, inside a supposedly computer-generated document. One wonders whose name is under the white out. Is it Ahmad Chalabi?
Oh, by the way, Galloway sued a British newspaper for slander on these charges and won a $300,000 award.
There is no merit to the accusation.
Wake up and smell your underwear, Improbulus!
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 03:29 PM (/+dAV)
3
You've already been shown to be a moron on this greg.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 27, 2005 03:52 PM (xauGB)
4
I don't think so Robin. STUPID!
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 03:57 PM (/+dAV)
5
The Senate committee has different documents in their possession than the ones involved in the British libel case, greg. And the testimony of an Iraqi official. British libel law is quite different than American and a judgment does not mean that the statements were actually false. You are too dumb to know the difference.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 27, 2005 04:05 PM (xauGB)
6
Sure Robin, anything you say, liar!
Stay away from Iraq, there strapping bombs to dogs these days!
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:08 PM (/+dAV)
7
... they're...
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:09 PM (/+dAV)
8
You should follow your own advice, greg. Zarqawi is using retards and the mentally ill to carry bombs.
Meanwhile, you need to put down the bong.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 27, 2005 04:17 PM (xauGB)
9
Robin,
When was the last time you got laid?
You're obviously not getting any.
Is that why you stalk me in the deepest recesses of cyberspace?
Do you have a spastic vagina?
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:36 PM (/+dAV)
10
Someone mention Fidel Castro? That guy rules. The only living great Communist despot from the good old nuclear tension days. Anyone know Fidels e-mail?
Posted by: A Finn at May 27, 2005 04:44 PM (lGolT)
11
Cuba has a lower mortality and morbidity rate than America. Go figure!
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:47 PM (/+dAV)
12
greg,
and that's why the whole world is trying to sneak into Cuba, not out of it.
Posted by: Carlos at May 27, 2005 07:48 PM (8e/V4)
13
greg thinks everything the US government says is a lie and everything the Cuban government reports is the truth. Go figure.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 28, 2005 09:11 AM (lVjfM)
14
"Cuba has a lower mortality and morbidity rate than America. Go figure!"
Okay, now I'm laughing. C'mon, Greg, I just put the crayons away. Don't make me get them out again just for your benefit. You're holding up the rest of the class.
Posted by: Oyster at May 28, 2005 09:53 AM (YudAC)
15
But seriously, in response to the three points of the Right's Logic:
I agree - mostly. I never thought that Saddam "bought" their loyalty. In other words, the money was just an unexpected side benefit for the already faithful, but it was also a means for ensuring their continued loyalty because we can't forget human nature in this. One could work their tail off for a cause, but if they find that there is no reward for their labors, they may become disillusioned. Saddam made sure that didn't happen.
Maybe I'm just nitpicking.
And all at the cost of so many lives these people never believed worthy of their consideration. Yes, it was an ideology, but one guaranteed by money and human greed.
Posted by: Oyster at May 28, 2005 10:47 AM (YudAC)
16
Here you go Oyster,
From the World Health Organization
http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/
Cuba (2002): child mortality m/f per 1000 = 8/6
U.S. (2002): child mortality m/f per 1000 = 9/7
Can I have some more crayons please?
Posted by: greg at May 28, 2005 10:48 AM (/+dAV)
17
greg, the WHO gets their figures from the Cuban government.
Posted by: Carlos at May 28, 2005 11:45 AM (8e/V4)
18
So what. They also get the US stats from the US gov.
Posted by: greg at May 29, 2005 10:20 AM (/+dAV)
19
Osamabeen noticin'... YBP, cool guy. Oyster...good points, I don't always agree with. Greg...has more balls than anyone who drives a hummer and should be a consultant to the prosecution when Bush. Inc. is tried for war crimes in 2008. Carlos (the playa hatin' playa)...a good, um, lawyer? hehe... Idiot brigade awards would definitely include Batman's butt buddy (Robin), Phallus Minimus (Improbulus Maximus), but the grand prize goes to Gay(Grey)rooster who isn't even around here anymore. Maybe he finally drank his kkk ass to death? Anyway, this one is for all the right wing pundit lovers: http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=19125
Posted by: osamabeenvotin' at May 31, 2005 10:45 AM (OXRZJ)
20
I was just surfing through so I don't know who wrote this, but whoever it was made such an amazingly stupid argument that proves he has no business publishing anything--not even on the internet. He writes, "3) These Western politicians used their influence to oppose the UN sanctions on Iraq and the later US led war because of these kickbacks." And then argues that it is not the money but the ideology that influenced the left to oppose sanctions, overlooking the fact that the whole supposed scandal here was about supporting sanctions in order to profit from the oilf for food program that would not have existed if no sanctions had been imposed. Duhh. Maybe you should try and get a handel on what allegations are being made before you chime in, jack ass.
Posted by: Cade at June 06, 2005 11:27 PM (dCJhi)
21
dear Georg Galloway,
I have important documents and pictuers that improve your evidence. please contact me.
my phon number is;0857217649 Ireland
Address: Kinsale Road Accommodation centre
Kinsale Road
Ireland
Posted by: Abdolvahed Albasir at June 20, 2005 11:11 AM (o3my3)
Scary beyond all reason? Yeah, that would be it.
Hey end-of-the-world alarmists, I have just the story to make the pamphlets about the end of the world come raining down. (I mean that affectionately.) Michael Chertoff, the new Director of Homeland Security, is pushing Britain to use the same ID technology as the US is planning to implement in their national ID cards (see here for my previous post on that). This would allow British and US screeners to access each others' databases to check for terrorists (always the surface goal, right?). In other words, not only will the state AND the Feds have access to our private information, but now our friends across the pond will too.
From The Independent:
The United States wants Britain's proposed identity cards to have the same microchip and technology as the ones used on American documents.more...The aim of getting the same microchip is to ensure compatability in screening terrorist suspects. But it will also mean that information contained in the British cards can be accessed across the Atlantic.
Posted by: Suzanne at
12:39 PM
| Comments (20)
| Add Comment
Post contains 612 words, total size 4 kb.
1
"In other words, not only will the state AND the Feds have access to our private information, but now our friends across the pond will too."
Globalization thanks to the New World Order.
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 01:03 PM (/+dAV)
2
Please someone check for skis in hell.
I agree with you, greg.
Posted by: Labosseuse at May 27, 2005 01:07 PM (7o5Yt)
3
Lobossuese,
What are you doing to fight the New World Order?
Are you at all suspicious that 9-11 was engineered by the NWO?
The PNAC had called for a, "catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor", in order to support their plans for globalization. Did they orchestrate 9-11?
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 01:22 PM (/+dAV)
4
No greg, they did not. Go back to smoking bongs and daydreaming about having a life of your own.
Posted by: Defense Guy at May 27, 2005 01:26 PM (jPCiN)
5
Eh, scratch that. No, I'm not suspicious.
Posted by: Labosseuse at May 27, 2005 01:41 PM (7o5Yt)
6
Dammit greg, it was the Men in Black with their Black Helicopters and Mind Control Rays, all owned and operated by the Joooooos of course, who manipulated the peaceful Arab goat herders into committing terrorist acts. Jesus man, you better add another layer of tinfoil, they're starting to get to you.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 27, 2005 02:06 PM (0yYS2)
7
greg,
PNAC didn't "call for" a catalyzing event. They said such an event would be necessary if such and such. That's not "calling for" it.
Wise observers predicted a similar event would be necessary if the U.S. was to be drawn into WW2.
People make predictions about all sorts of stuff, and every once in a while they turn out right.
Posted by: Carlos at May 27, 2005 02:07 PM (8e/V4)
8
"Wise observers predicted a similar event would be necessary if the U.S. was to be drawn into WW2."-Carlos
Yes, and now we know that Roosevelt had foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor and allowed it to happen to shut the pacifists up and get us into WWII.
Same old tune!
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 02:52 PM (/+dAV)
9
More inventions by Greg.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 27, 2005 03:55 PM (xauGB)
10
Please! If you think you're not trackable now, you're nuts. Your passport has that lovely strip inside already. Everything you look at on the internet can be tracked. Your credit purchases. Your ATM card purchases. Your credit history. Your public records. We no longer have private lives, so why worry about it? Nobody cares what you did with the hooker anyway.
Posted by: Scott in CA at May 27, 2005 04:08 PM (uLZzb)
11
Labosseuse,
What is you position on this issue(the original post)?
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:12 PM (/+dAV)
12
...is your...
Posted by: greg at May 27, 2005 04:13 PM (/+dAV)
13
What are the 27 countries that are supposed to get that stupid tracking device on their passports? Because if Finland is one, I gotta go cancel my passport. (what's the point of these things when cell phones make it possible to listen to every single person who have ones with 'em? Yes, even when they are not calling people. All they need is that the phone is on.)
Posted by: A Finn at May 27, 2005 04:16 PM (lGolT)
14
Imagine US going into WW2 right away without a good reason. The Italians, the Finns and the Germans would've revolted, left US to defend their motherland and taken all the money and valuables they could gather with them to help their newly beloved country of origin. (well, the loyal Finns had already come back to fight for Finland in the Winter War, 1939, so they would've just picked up their families and the rest of their stuff and never come back) Making Pearl Harbor look as bad as possible was in the best interest of the country hungry for war after the annoyingly peaceful time of "trivial conflicts" (some underdeveloped countries and soviets fighting for independence, who wants to mess with that?) between WW:s. Since I'm not entirely sure, I need to ask one thing about PH: Was it true it was only a lesser base next to the real big one where all the good ships were kept, and Japs made a mistake about the target?
Posted by: A Finn at May 27, 2005 05:24 PM (lGolT)
15
Scott,
Yup. I don't understand why a national ID card is such a big deal with the conspiracy set if they can already track you wherever you are.
Posted by: Carlos at May 28, 2005 09:16 AM (8e/V4)
16
Carlos,
They can't already track wherever we go.
Please don't be a defeatist. You give up too easily. Don't sell the farm just yet!
Posted by: greg at May 28, 2005 11:25 AM (/+dAV)
17
dude, they totally can.
Posted by: Carlos at May 28, 2005 01:30 PM (8e/V4)
18
Google says those be full of young sexy gurls... but I thinks they might be sum virus-shittin's
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at May 28, 2005 03:14 PM (lGolT)
19
Haven't checked yet, and I won't. Either sum pedof.shit or viruses.
Posted by: A fatwad Finn at May 28, 2005 03:16 PM (lGolT)
20
This string is already polluted so here is some more.
AN ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT
by M. Rivero at www.whatreallyhappened.com
A recent poll discovered that half of Americans know that the government intentionally lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The actual figure is probably a lot higher since there is a large percentage of Americans still willing to let their neighbors' children die than ever admit they were wrong to support the war in the first place. So, the majority of Americans know the government lied to create a war.
A majority of Americans now know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that claims to the contrary were intentional lies.
A majority of Americans now know the US Government lied when it claimed Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the United States.
A majority of Americans now know the mainstream media lied when it claimed Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the United States.
A majority of Americans now know that the US Government has been torturing innocent Iraqis for information on WMDs the US Government already knew they could not possibly have.
A majority of Americans now know their government can and does engage in the most monstrous lies possible, and that hundred of thousands of people have been killed, crippled, and tortured for that lie.
How much of a majority is irrelevant. A majority is a majority is a majority.
Setting aside their access to inside information, the US Congress statistically should follow the public. A majority of them also know the war was started with a lie. It is perhaps understandable that the Congress has done nothing about these lies. They are, after all, complicit. One should not expect a gaggle of liars to impeach the liar in chief. Nor will the mainstream media be overly critical of those lies which they put into a hundred million homes.
But what I do not understand is how Americans, who pride themselves on their love of truth and justice, can continue to tolerate a government that they now know lied to start a war of conquest. What I do not understand is how Americans, who pride themselves on their love of truth and justice, can continue to tolerate a government that shows every indication of preparing to lie again about weapons of mass destruction to justify a war of conquest in Iran.
Do any of you still delude yourselves into thinking that a government that lied to send your children off to die in wars is working for your benefit; is in any way shape or form thinking of your welfare versus their own? Do you still think that this is YOUR government? Is it not more accurate to say that you are the government's property, your children mere livestock to be harvested when old enough, handed a rifle, and sent off to die when useful?
The Constitution does not explicitly authorize the government to lie to the people, and the tenth amendment forbids the government to arrogate that right to itself. Therefore, when the government lies, it acts illegally and unconstitutionally. When the government lies, it ceases by that very lie to be the lawful government of this land. When the government lies, it delegitimizes itself. When a government lies, it lies for its own benefit, not yours. When a government lies, it breaks faith with the people who empowered that government to provide for the common good, not for the privilege of a few. When a government lies, it loses the moral right to rule.
Our nation is founded on the principle of rule with the consent of the governed. Nobody I know has consented to be lied to by the government. Nobody CAN consent to be lied to, because they cannot know what they consent to, and no court of law would enforce such an agreement. Therefore, when the government lies to the people, it operates without the consent of the governed. Again, this delegitimizes that government.
If you accept that the US Government intentionally lied about weapons of mass destruction to take this nation to war in Iraq, then you must accept that the US Government, by the commission of that act, is no longer a legal government of the people, but an illegal occupation serving private interests. The majority of Americans now know that the US Government is criminal. They know that the US Government has lied to start wars of conquest, and that it has knowingly tortured innocent people because the lie required it. The majority of Americans now know that the US Government, unless stopped, will continue to do more of the same.
There is no law that compels Americans to believe the government when it lies. No legislation exists that obliges Americans to pay for a war started with lies. There is no moral principle under which Americans are required to obey a government that lies. Indeed, morality and prudence demands that a government that lies be openly defied.
The Germans ended WW2 in shock at what their government had really been doing. Americans cannot claim that innocence. We DO know. The information has been available for a long time, and if this new poll is accurate, the majority of Americans know what their government is doing, and the rest of the world knows that Americans know. Get that? The whole world is watching to see what Americans will do now that most Americans know the government deliberately lied to start a war.
So, what will Americans do? Will they walk their talk, and fire the liars? Will they stand up like free human beings and refuse the dictates of an illegal government, or will they cower and send their children off to die, watching them walk up the chutes to the slaughterhouse without complaint, shrugging their shoulders that this is how life is supposed to be and there is no point in making a fuss about it? Will Americans go on paying more money for government than they do for anything else, yet refusing to hold that government to the same standards of truth-in-selling that they demand from a used-car salesman? Will they go on making do with less so that the government and its friends can have that much more? Will they continue to bow down saying, "Take our money, take our neighbors' children, and tell us what to think, oh lord! We know you really are just and moral because you threw Martha and Chong in jail!"
Or will Americans decide enough is enough? Will they decide that they cannot support a government that is criminal without being criminals themselves? Will they finally realize that they cannot claim to be a moral people if they do not have moral government?
No magazine puff-piece, no comic book, no movie can make America look great if, when the time calls for it, Americans fail to be a great people. Great people are willing to stand up to a government gone wrong, to force their government to be truthful and honest and moral. Great people know that freedom is impossible under a government that lies because lies are tools of enslavement, and that chains built of false beliefs hold slaves tighter than chains made of steel. Slaves will cower before a government they know lies to them, bless the face that lies to them, and ask for more. And now the world watches to see if Americans are a great people, or just slaves living under the delusion they are a free people.
Free men or slaves. Time to choose. The whole world is watching.
ÂÂ
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, -- The Declaration of Independence
Posted by: greg at May 29, 2005 10:45 AM (/+dAV)
May 25, 2005
Trying to Start a Riot (updated)
Somebody issue a fatwa. Fast.*
I ran out of toilet paper this morning so I used what was available next to the can: A copy of the Koran. more...
Posted by: Rusty at
02:11 PM
| Comments (66)
| Add Comment
Post contains 324 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Dude, I hope you have better luck than I did with my "mohammed was a pimp" post.
Posted by: Eric at May 25, 2005 02:19 PM (Kr6/f)
2
After over a year of trying to get a fatwa this has got to work......
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 02:21 PM (JQjhA)
3
Watch out for paper cuts. Thems things hurt like an S.O.B. down there, let me tell you.
Posted by: Wine-aholic at May 25, 2005 02:25 PM (Wsn+K)
4
Koran induced rectal paper cuts??? Sounds like you've had some experience....
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 02:28 PM (JQjhA)
5
No, its greg who has the most experience exploring his ass.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 25, 2005 02:45 PM (xauGB)
6
Although I doubt anyone in the national media cares about this blog or you to report it or any terrorist organization for that matter, but if it does somehow lead to violence then I doubt you will be as giddy as you are now.
And you wonder why google dropped your ass.
Posted by: Jim at May 25, 2005 02:46 PM (3Esov)
7
Lighten up, Jim. I mean, come one - fascism is funny, after all.
Posted by: Editor at May 25, 2005 02:48 PM (adpJH)
8
You know what else is funny -- massive anal bleeding due to Koran/Qu'ran/"Tippacanoe and Tyler too" paper cuts. I wonder how certain nutjobs feel about ass blood dripping on their favorite bestseller?
If only I had kept the damn pictures...
Posted by: Wine-aholic at May 25, 2005 02:52 PM (Wsn+K)
9
Jim needs his yard TP'd...
But with actual TP. Not Koran pages.
Posted by: Hoodlumman at May 25, 2005 02:52 PM (1iJzK)
10
If you're going to post any pictures of your body parts, please do so "below the fold". Or at least warn me so I can set down my beverage first.
Now let's see, I had a blank fatwah form around here somewhere......
Posted by: Oyster at May 25, 2005 03:08 PM (fl6E1)
11
Does a massive turd count as 'body parts'?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 03:10 PM (JQjhA)
12
Yes Jim, your right. No one will be giddy, but we will be psyched, pumped, jacked, juiced, cranked, beefed, stoked, elated........I hope I didn't offend your delicate sensibilities there Jimbo. You know jimmy, you should have a bit more respect for the Dr. If he had beaten that german shepard up the stairs, he'd be your father now.
Posted by: steve miller at May 25, 2005 03:12 PM (zU2g1)
13
Can you put one of those mypetjawa.mu.nu property logos over the turd? That would be preferable.
Posted by: Editor at May 25, 2005 03:18 PM (adpJH)
14
Yes, along with the obligatory *****MUST CITE JAWA REPORT****ALL TURD IMAGES PROPERTY OF THE JAWA REPORT*****
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 03:20 PM (JQjhA)
15
Flu pandemic 'could hit 20% of world's population'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/birdflu/story/0,14207,1492072,00.html
“A global taskforce should be urgently formed to tackle a potential influenza pandemic that could affect 20% of the world's population, trigger economic disaster and kill millions, experts warned today.”
Speaking of massive turds... Forget nukes, chemical and biological weapons, as reported in the world's premiere scientific journal, Nature, the H5N1 bird flu strain is a real concern.
Posted by: greg at May 25, 2005 03:22 PM (/+dAV)
16
Gee Jim, I hate to burst yer bubble, but Michelle Malkin, who links to this blog frequently, is a national media figure.
Posted by: Eric at May 25, 2005 03:25 PM (Kr6/f)
17
Not really. She wishes she was. And if you think she is going to trackback to this turd post then you are out of your mind. She pretends to be professional.
Posted by: Jim at May 25, 2005 03:29 PM (3Esov)
18
I use the Koran to check my oil and to wash my windows...its better then newspaper!
Posted by: Cerberus at May 25, 2005 03:36 PM (WroTQ)
19
Lighten up, Frances...er, Jim. We're just having a little fun. I'll bet you're a blast at parties.
Now, Rusty....I found that fatwah here. I apologize for the impersonal aspects of it, but you know, it's hard with all the fatwahs flying around these days to personalize each one. I have my hands busy with beheadings all week.
Love,
Mullah al Oyster
Posted by: Oyster at May 25, 2005 03:43 PM (fl6E1)
20
Oyster,
Thanks. But I need a REAL fatwa to really satisfy my urge......
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 03:48 PM (JQjhA)
21
How can you say that's not real? It has the official seal???
Posted by: Wine-aholic at May 25, 2005 03:55 PM (Wsn+K)
22
Dear Dr. Shackleford:
I represent the Macarthur Foundation and was directed by a colleague to your grant proposal here. Ordinarily we prefer our performance-art grant applications to come through a more formal process; however, your nontraditional and transgressive proposal has intrigued us.
We are prepared, in theory, to subsidize your explorations of the de/secration of sacred space. However, some of us are a bit concerned by your choice of subject matter. Certainly, if you wish to subvert the oppressive and colonial structures of belief regulation by "colonizing" them within your own "profane space" a more appropriate subject could be discovered than the Holy Qu'ran, if you know what we mean. And I think you do.
So please regard this as invitation to resubmit your proposal, with an eye to incorporating sacred objects from a different faith, preferably a faith that is threatening to take over the United States with its murderous nazi-like theocratic fascism, yet whose more extreme murderous nazi-like adherents will not actually assassinate our families and firebomb our headquarters based on a perceived insult.
I trust I've made myself clear?
Posted by: Mr. C. Dubya, grant administrator at May 25, 2005 04:07 PM (OKZme)
23
Dear Grant Administrator,
I'm just not sure I'm into the whole 'inserting a crucifix into my rectum' thingy.......
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 04:22 PM (JQjhA)
24
http://roomforrant.blogspot.com/2005/05/this-needed-to-be-said.html
yeah...I'm from NC...the place is alllllrighttt..
Posted by: Mr. K at May 25, 2005 04:26 PM (vTd+4)
25
Hmm...what about a little bitty Star of David? Twenty thousand for a Star of David. You want the full fifty, we gotta have the crucifix, habibi. And we'll throw in five large each for a Book of Mormon and a copy of The Purpose Driven Life. The newest edition of the Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer? We'll buy you lunch at the Olive Garden for that one. How's that strike you?
Posted by: Mr. C. Dubya, Grant Administrator at May 25, 2005 04:35 PM (OKZme)
26
I'm not sure I have enough room...maybe Wonkette would be a better choice for the Star of David butt-insertion performance art? Besides, I've never seen a group of Hassids riot although that would be a funny visual.......
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 25, 2005 04:46 PM (JQjhA)
27
My understanding is that a Koran needs to be written in Arabic in order to be considered 'sacred', in the sense of 'able to be desecrated'.
So, the arabic holy text written in English is not sacred, even if printed on two-ply facial quality paper.
btw -My performance piece grant application involves having the Koran written in Arabic using henna ink on the thighs of 72 go-go dancers followed by a variety of dancing of a rhythmic nature, possibly involving poles and dollar bills.
I'll need approximately $1.2MM US.
Posted by: BumperStickerist at May 25, 2005 06:01 PM (C/R6J)
28
Would the dancers be Jewish?
Posted by: Macarthur Grant Guy at May 25, 2005 06:06 PM (OKZme)
29
Having a nationally syndicated newspaper column and being a bestselling author is only what Michelle Malkin wishes? Oh, yeah, in case you missed it, she's been subbing for O'reilly lately, the top rated primetime show in cable news.
Jim, you're a raving assmonkey.
And I don't care if she t/b's to this post or not. She's t/b'd to this blog several times before.
Besides, Rusty only gets self-actualized feelings when *I* trackback to his posts.
hehehehehe
Posted by: Eric at May 25, 2005 06:19 PM (Kr6/f)
30
Click the link and check out the images. Listen to the catchy tune playing in the background:
http://islamcomicbook.com/
Enjoy 
Posted by: mike at May 25, 2005 07:00 PM (W1mrP)
31
in london they burnt crosses
Posted by: blue at May 25, 2005 07:02 PM (PFuWA)
32
Maybe we can find someone to print the koran scroll-style on real TP, so as to get the best of both worlds.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 25, 2005 07:10 PM (0yYS2)
33
I used the Koran to whisper sweet nothings to my 9 year old wife Aiesha!
Posted by: Mohammed at May 25, 2005 07:11 PM (aOdj4)
34
"but if it does somehow lead to violence then I doubt you will be as giddy as you are now"
Jim is right, under the pressure of possible unreasonable inexplicable violence, the only real possibility is to cave like a Frenchman. Don't ever do anything to possibly upset them and provoke such violence.
Oh, and Jim... if you don't vote straight Republican ticket in the next 3 elections, I'm strangling kittens until my arms get tired. Don't even think of crossing me here, or those kitten deaths will be 100% your fault (and no fault of mine).
Posted by: Gekkobear at May 25, 2005 08:42 PM (XWr9N)
35
Eric, shut your ass up. Just because nobody cares about your blog doesn't mean you have to defend the impact of this one. Michelle Malkin might trackback OCCASIONAL crap to here but she would never actually support filth like this on her blog or on tv. Why? Because again she tries to be professional. She wants to be considered influential and you can't do that by bragging about deficating on holy books. Hey she might think about it but she would never come out and say it. Why? Because she would lose money.
Face it guys, she (and most of you) does it for the money. The blogads space. The guest speaker charges. Blah Blah Blah. She sold books more because of shock value then due to actual merit. Her work has been debunked several times and the only reason she is on fox is because white republican men like to jack off to her. She is ratings bait. She essentially used 9/11 to further her career by Eric, shut your ass up. Just because nobody cares about your blog doesn't mean you have to defend the impact of this one. Michelle Malkin might trackback OCCASIONAL stuff to here but she would never actually support filth like this on her blog or on TV. Why? Again, because she tries to be professional. She wants to be considered influential and you can't do that by bragging about defecating on holy books. Hey she might think about it but she would never come out and say it. Why? Because she would lose money.
Face it guys, she (and most of you) do it for the money. The blogads space. The guest speaker charges. Blah Blah Blah. She sold books more because of shock value then due to actual merit. Her work has been debunked several times and the only reason she is on fox is because white republican men like to jack off to her. She is ratings bait. She essentially used 9/11 to further her career by saying controversial things during fragile times.
She is always bitching about MTV corrupting our young girls but she allows ads on her page showing big breasted models with tight conservative t-shirts and some carrying guns no less. She is a hypocrite.
So Eric, until she gets HER OWN SHOW on national television, then you can suck my balls. She can go on selling herself out and Rusty can go on trying to get his fatwa. ItÂ’s all getting old to me. Actually you sucking my balls doesnÂ’t get old so please continue. Jackass.
Posted by: Jim at May 25, 2005 09:09 PM (3Esov)
36
woops, sorry about the double post...can't see what im writing in the comment window and i pasted twice when transferring here.
Posted by: Jim at May 25, 2005 09:12 PM (3Esov)
37
Jim,
Good job there,
"She do it for the money. She is ratings bait. She essentially used 9/11 to further her career. She do it for the money. She is ratings bait. She do it for the money. She do it for the money..."
You ever personally send her hatemail because she has posted lots just like yours.
Posted by: PETN Sandwich at May 25, 2005 09:54 PM (YXkWI)
38
I'll second Cerberus on the soft absorbency of the Koran. I like using several pages of it to soak up the grease when I fry a bunch of bacon.
Oh, btw, Jim? Congratulations, I see your hard study at being a good dhimmi is paying off. You may welcome your new Islamist Overlords, but count me out.
Posted by: Darleen at May 26, 2005 12:19 AM (FgfaV)
39
Yeah yeah yeah...I am a dhimmi. Yet I would have said the same shit to any asshole that bragged about defecating on the Torah, Bible or whatever holy book you can think of. Give me a break with this shit.
Lets see how you react to this:
Hey guys! I just finished wiping my ass with the bible and decided to masturbate to some nazi propoganda footage and then used the bible again for cleanup. Dual purpose!
I guess you think that is funny too huh? Hypocrites.
Posted by: Jim at May 26, 2005 12:52 AM (3Esov)
40
Hey PETN Sandwich, I didn't bring up Michelle Malkin, that bitch Eric did. I just expressed how I felt. I am not going to email my opinion on her because frankly I don't want to waste my time. I just ignore whatever she says. Its that easy.
Posted by: Jim at May 26, 2005 12:54 AM (3Esov)
41
Do it! Do it! Do it! I hope this isn't just a joke post. I want to see the video!
Posted by: Mark James at May 26, 2005 12:58 AM (1RZS2)
42
I fart in the Quran's general direction!
Posted by: Sean the INFDL at May 26, 2005 01:57 AM (ptLBd)
43
Mike: That comic book is hilarious! I'm downloading, having it bound in professioal leather and giving it to all my friends for Christmas.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2005 07:01 AM (YudAC)
44
Jim, here is what you said:
"Although I doubt anyone in the national media cares about this blog"
I merely pointed out that someone in the national media cares about this blog.
As for my blog, well, it's doing just fine, fuckyouverymuch.
Like a good little DU inmate, you couldn't handle the unvarnished truth.
Poor Jim, you're so blinded by anger and homoerotic fantasies you can't even post a simple comment properly.
France is calling, Jim, run to her.
Posted by: Eric at May 26, 2005 07:11 AM (Kr6/f)
45
PENIS CLOSES ROAD
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91059-13355259,00.html
“A large fake penis has caused a major terror alert in America.
A key highway though Florida was closed after a driver spotted what looked like a pipe bomb under an overpass.”
False Alarm Yet Again!
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 08:15 AM (/+dAV)
46
Dear Mr Java Report,
I read your idea of using koran as TP and I really liked it. IÂ’m italian and italians are lazy thats why I didnt read all your warnings. Now my bathroom is a mess, becouse of the damn koran! ItÂ’s really impossible to flush it away 
IÂ’m gonna sue you for dangerous advertising: koran sucks as TP
Anyway. If any of your non-italian reader wants to help us in the Fallaci-gate, he can wite an e-mail directly to:
Armando Grasso
tribunale.bergamo@giustizia.it
IÂ’m gonna sue you for dangerous advertising: koran sucks as TP
Anyway. If any of your non-italian reader wants to help us in the Fallaci-gate, he can wite an e-mail directly to:
Armando Grasso
tribunale.bergamo@giustizia.it
Posted by: KrilliX at May 26, 2005 08:25 AM (cgkNn)
47
Shouldn't that have been, "Mister-ah Jawa Report-ah"?
Posted by: Editor at May 26, 2005 10:14 AM (adpJH)
48
Yes, sir
I'm sorry, sir
You're right, sir
I'm just a lazy italian krill, sir
Yes, sir
I'm sorry, sir
You're right, sir
I'm just a lazy italian krill, sirPosted by: KrilliX at May 26, 2005 10:23 AM (ByTzj)
49
Somehow, I now think less of Italy...
Posted by: A Finn at May 26, 2005 11:10 AM (lGolT)
50
I'm certain there are better ambassadors for Italy than this Krill shill.
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 11:15 AM (/+dAV)
51
I'm sure there are better ambassador for Italy.
I'll be glad if you can help us spamming Oriana's fascist prosecutor. Mr Grasso will not change his mind, but it would be just great if he receives mails from Usa.
Posted by: KrilliX at May 26, 2005 11:58 AM (ByTzj)
52
Jim,
There is a difference between being offended by an offensive act and acting out in violence because of an offensive act. It is inherent in the very definition of 'tolerance'. I admit that this post was offensive--but that was sort of the point. How much 'tolerance' does the Muslim world really have when in even the most liberal Muslim countries outlaw blasphemy and make it illegal for a Muslim to leave the faith??
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 26, 2005 12:00 PM (JQjhA)
53
I clean up after my camels with a copy of the Quran. Absorbant!
Amazing how the degenerate libs run with this story.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 26, 2005 12:12 PM (yBHNA)
54
Did you know that John Kerry served in Viet Nam?
Posted by: OB Snooks at May 26, 2005 12:14 PM (yBHNA)
55
Filthy got ahold of some knockoff Scott Biao porn and has been on a 3 week masturbation binge.
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 12:15 PM (/+dAV)
56
Has anyone else noticed that while Fiilthy has been gone so too has Obsnooks, Earl Dittman and Fancypants. Ah, the many roles that Filthy plays.
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 12:18 PM (/+dAV)
57
KrilllX,
I don't think people realize that you are posting about Fallaci.
Try posting at http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/083895.php
and being more explanatory. This isn't Italy and were not very familiar wiith the issue you are putting forward.
ascolta mi
Good luck.
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 12:21 PM (/+dAV)
58
Glad you missed me. Notice that your son is walking funny Greg?
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 26, 2005 12:28 PM (yBHNA)
59
No, did he sprain his ass butt fucking you again? I''ll have to have another sit down talk with him again.
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 01:29 PM (/+dAV)
60
WOW! Greg goes right to the Anal sex. Like a typical liberal.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 26, 2005 01:39 PM (yBHNA)
61
"I'm certain there are better ambassadors for Italy than this Krill shill."
Greg,
I'm sure you feel more comfortable with Guiliana Sgrena as Italy's ambassador.
Please, promise all of us you'll never procreate.
Posted by: Oyster at May 26, 2005 01:43 PM (fl6E1)
62
I have already told you that I have Oyster. Apparently you have no long term memory.
Since you are such a warmonger I ask you if your children are fighting in Iraq?
Or if you're not yet 40 years of age, why don't you join the Army Reserves?
Chickenhawk!
Posted by: greg at May 26, 2005 02:04 PM (/+dAV)
63
If you want to flush the book, you will first have to shred it.
Posted by: lemuel at May 26, 2005 03:06 PM (aOCIX)
64
Argue against the Koran but talking about flushing it gives it an authority it does not possess.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 27, 2005 10:42 AM (x+5JB)
65
"I admit that this post was offensive--but that was sort of the point."
Wow Rusty you sound like Ward Churchill.
Posted by: Jim at May 27, 2005 11:16 AM (3Esov)
66
I'm new here but I think what you need is to get the Koran printed on proper toilet paper. That's the trick. (it'd be a great seller to)
You can already get the Christian bible printed on toilet paper, I think its published by the Gideon society.
Posted by: anon at June 09, 2005 05:13 PM (h+8Jn)
May 12, 2005
Watson: CAIR's "Islamophobia and Anti-Americanism" Conference
Let's put the matter of Islamophobia into the right perspective and borrow some comments from DC Watson. American's don't fear Islam; "those who concocted the fake description "Islamophobia" should stop flattering themselves."" The term "Islamophobia" has no basis and supposedly refers to a “fear of Islam.” In reality it's a phony, made up word that conveys no factual truth. "It is as imaginary as the jabberwock and the unicorn."
Islamists have in fact instilled in Americans only disqust, so they should forget about thinking that they have caused us to fear them.
DC Watson takes aim and scores a direct hit yet again(via Dhimmi Watch):
more...
Posted by: Richard@hyscience at
05:48 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 516 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Exactly. I don't fear islam, I fear terrorism. Also, a "phobia" is irrational. I fear terrorism, and terrorists are generally muslim. Makes perfect sense. Though it's not fear either, it's vigilance.
Posted by: Carlos at May 12, 2005 08:18 PM (8e/V4)
2
They title the conference ---
"Islamophobia and Anti-Americanism: Causes and Remedies"?
Why not title it ---
"Islamophobia and Americanophobia: Causes and Remedies"?
or ---
"Anti-Islamism and Anti-Americanism: Causes and Remedies"?
Such a simple changing of the titles might just offer more perspective/discussion on causes and remedies this conference may have never considered (or may just want to ignore).
Posted by: yadayada at May 14, 2005 07:26 AM (lUbzC)
3
soul master
Posted by: reymer at July 31, 2005 09:48 AM (gxgyx)
May 09, 2005
Where is Rachel Corrie When You Really Need Her? PA Bulldozing Houses
Where is Ms. Pancake and the ISM when you really need them, eh? You know, when the Palestinian Authority starts acting like the 'Zionazis' and begins to bulldoze houses?
A Palestinian bulldozer on Monday demolished the seaside homes of three senior officers who built illegally on public land in Gaza, the start of what the Palestinian government promises will be a relentless campaign against corruption....Hat tip: The Flying Circus ;-)To carry out Abbas's mission, one bulldozer guarded by seven jeeps and 30 Palestinian officers entered the Sudania area on the coast of northern Gaza on Monday morning to crush the three homes, which were being built by a major, a lieutenant-colonel and a colonel on public land they illegally seized. The operation encountered no resistance.
Construction on the two-storey concrete houses, which had a clear view of the Mediterranean 90 metres away, was almost finished. One house was surrounded by a small flower garden. After the demolition crews left, some sheep and two donkeys fed on the remains of the garden.
In related news, no protest from Rachel Corrie's corpse or the ISM on news that an 18 year old Palestinian girl was murdered by Islamic Jihad.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:01 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.
1
It wasn't a girl that was killed, it was a brave young man (atleast according to that article.) who had the courage to turn peole in.
It takes great courage to do the right thing, even when you know you'll be killed for doing it.
As for the bulldozers razing a house, it's a collosal waste of resources, because that house could have been seized and used to house the poor, or turned into a medical facility, or even a clinic.
Posted by: A Texan at May 10, 2005 01:32 AM (LtbPK)
May 05, 2005
Marine Cleared in Shooting, Kevin Sites Silent
Look, I don't know whether or not this guy should have been charged with anything. What I do know is that the images broadcast by Kevin Sites of the shooting has served as a propaganda tool of our enemies. This Marine may have killed 3 men. Kevin Sites film has inspired many more to take up arms against the U.S. and resulted in many many more deaths.
The investigation into a controversial shooting of a wounded Iraqi by a U.S. Marine has ended with a determination the Marine acted in self defense.Hat tip: HowieThe Marines announced no charges will be filed in the incident last November in which a Camp Pendleton infantryman shot a wounded Iraqi insurgent following a firefight around a mosque in the city of Fallujah.
The Marine told investigators he had, in fact, killed three wounded Iraqi fighters he feared still posed a threat to his unit.
Natonski reportedly gave serious consideration to intelligence reports that said injured insurgents in Fallujah had feigned surrender and then attacked American troops as they approached.
Posted by: Rusty at
10:20 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This was a horrible decision.
This mosque had been cleared the day before and the dying and the dead were left there overnight. The next day soldiers return, find some still alive and assasinate them.
First, it was a poor decision to leave them there overnight.
Second, had the wounded not been seriously incapacitated they would have scurried away from the mosque to safety in the dark of the night. That they were still laying there in a mortified state the next day is a clear indication that they were fully subdued and not a threat.
I'm not surprised by the verdict. America will never admit to wrong doing unless the evidence against them is so overwhelming that they can't wiggle their way out. Bottom line...this was a war crime.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 11:02 AM (/+dAV)
2
Bottom line, Greg's an idiot.
Posted by: Laura at May 05, 2005 11:29 AM (L3PPO)
3
Greg is also a slandering liar. But you knew that.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 05, 2005 11:34 AM (xauGB)
4
"Greg is also a slandering liar. But you knew that." Robin Roberts
Robin,
What part of my post is a lie? Please elaborate.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 11:38 AM (/+dAV)
5
If its ok to fire then why is it a problem to tape it?
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 11:59 AM (CqheE)
6
Something may not be criminal and yet be a mistake. That is probably the case here. But the mistake of a Marine under extreme circumstances of stress should not be broadcast to the world so that jihadis can recruit more shaheeds for martyrdom.
Again, this is a pro-American site. That is the worldview from which I operate.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 05, 2005 12:08 PM (JQjhA)
7
WAAAAAHHHHHH!!!
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 12:15 PM (0yYS2)
8
Sorry, couldn't resist. That last one was me channeling greg, since he isn't articulate, or honest, enough to express himself clearly.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 05, 2005 12:16 PM (0yYS2)
9
Greg,
I don't think it was ashame for the soldier to get off. I do
believe, and Laura can vouch that I feel this way, is that his action did need to be investigated. Since he was investigate and found innocent, we have to live with it. The same way we live with O.J.
walking around free right now.
But I do think you did make a good point about the wounded not
crawling away.
Now about the leaving them there, some time in combat, you don't always get to do the things you want to do or need to do. This could
of been the case with these wound Iraqis. The first patrol may of not had a chance to properly (and I mean healing not killing) take care of the prisoner's due to their mission.
I will admit that about 80% of your posts I have read are very
articulate and very logical. Unfortunately most of the people on
this site, are not. You can tell by their one line responses.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 12:42 PM (Gqhi9)
10
Greg the class A Dick with another triumph!
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 05, 2005 12:47 PM (yBHNA)
11
Charges should not have been considered in the first place. These are not wounded "soldiers"- They are terrorists. Terrorists who give no quarter and yet Greg and his ilk demand we give quarter and hugs. Terrorists who fake surrender and then open up on our guys. Terrorists who fake being dead and then kill our troops.
I have no problem with our boys killing the wounded terrorists.
Greg, Why don't you write the soldiers a letter and tell them how you feel.
Posted by: Ob Snooks at May 05, 2005 12:51 PM (yBHNA)
12
You always know which side Greg Fonda will be on.
Posted by: Harold T. Fancypants at May 05, 2005 01:10 PM (yBHNA)
13
Thanks Butch, I'll try to get that 80% closer to 100% in the future.
Greg the class A Dick with another triumph!-Filthy
Filthy, you are a class B Dick.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 01:12 PM (/+dAV)
14
"Charges should not have been considered in the first place. "
Why are you questioning the decisions of our military?
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 01:13 PM (CqheE)
15
We have the freedom to question you stalinist shit.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 05, 2005 01:27 PM (yBHNA)
16
Soldier shouldnt have left the guys wounded overnight. Should have shot their asses the first day. Then there wouldnt a been a problem.
Posted by: angryblackman_1@hotmail.com at May 05, 2005 01:31 PM (x+5JB)
17
"We have the freedom to question you stalinist shit."
Enjoy. After the revolution? Nyet!
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 01:34 PM (CqheE)
18
"Thanks Butch, I'll try to get that 80% closer to 100% in the future."
Greg, he wasn't talking about you, you dipstick.
Here, let me pick your statement apart, Greg:
"This mosque had been cleared the day before and the dying and the dead were left there overnight. The next day soldiers return, find some still alive and assasinate them
First, it was a poor decision to leave them there overnight."
How do you know whether they even could get in there? And assassinate? You have the gall to say this after knowing that it's entirely probable that other terrorists could have been in there and rigged the bodies with bombs; even those still living.
"Second, had the wounded not been seriously incapacitated they would have scurried away from the mosque to safety in the dark of the night. That they were still laying there in a mortified state the next day is a clear indication that they were fully subdued and not a threat."
See above rebuttal.
"I'm not surprised by the verdict. America will never admit to wrong doing unless the evidence against them is so overwhelming that they can't wiggle their way out. Bottom line...this was a war crime."
See above rebuttal again. So exactly how much footage did you see, Greg? About as much as the rest of us did. It was EDITED footage right from the start.
You are so blind and so wrongly opinionated it is absolutely insane. While this guy is over there doing the best he can in probably the most stressful situation one can be in, you're condemning him without knowing the facts. What's the most stressful situation you've ever been in, Greg? Huh? The day you ran out of Haagen Daaz?
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 02:03 PM (fl6E1)
19
Rather than shoot the terrorist, the smart play would have been to deny him food and water for a couple of weeks. This would get the liberals on board and show your compassionate side.
Posted by: Judge Greer at May 05, 2005 02:07 PM (aUEhc)
20
Oyster,
Your rebuttal is so weak that there is really not enough material for me to respond to.
Maybe you could take another stab at it. I'll give you a second chance to try and make some sense.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 02:16 PM (/+dAV)
21
Greg, your statements are so weak; hardly motivation for anything more than what I said.
These soldiers have repeatedly been faced with situations where they tried to help someone only to be rewarded with a bomb in the face that the wounded terrorist was concealing. In many instances the wounded or dead have had bombs not only planted on them, but in the case of the dead, inside them. This soldier was faced with that possibility. When the guy made a sudden movement the soldier reacted - and I might add that it was dismissed because it was found that he acted appropriately and without undue malice even though these guys were there the previous day - in a mosque - with every intent of killing them. he acted not only in his own interest, but that of his fellow soldiers.
Do you even read the news? Or do you intentionally block out that which you don't want to hear? I don't know why I bother.
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 02:41 PM (fl6E1)
22
Greg is just a mirror - from being a War Photographer and the meme that logs-into that I kinda expected Sites to be more aware of the grit, blood, feces and vomit in war, somewhat more than a ego-driven Performance Artist, even knowing that he could go one way or the other in his editorializing, and photography is nothing if not lens-selective micro-second editorializing - or in his case 30fps.
Enemies sneak back into places of relative safety once they've been "cleared" and the wounded pretend to lie dead in order to set off bombs so they can kill more enemies - it's not paintball.
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at May 05, 2005 02:50 PM (sE9R7)
23
"When the guy made a sudden movement the soldier reacted"-Oyster
Oh really! He made a sudden movement now and before we said he was playing dead. Which is it?
Did all 3 insurgents who were assasinated make a sudden movement?
That's just a bunch of Bovine Excrement. It sounds like if you don't feign death you get assasinated and if you do feign death you get assasinated.
Face it. Just like Hitler's children, you're a Nazi.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 02:56 PM (/+dAV)
24
correct spelling - assassinate.
With love,
Your favorite Nazi
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 03:08 PM (fl6E1)
25
Greg - you moron. There were no soldiers involved! These warriors were Marines. The fact you do not know the dif shows how little you do know about freedom and its cost. It aint free bonehead.
The guy killed 3 ragheads, at least he should get a meritorious mast if not a star.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at May 05, 2005 03:13 PM (Kkge+)
26
Oyster,
That's right, wiggle your way out of an argument that you're losing by distracting with irrelevant minutia.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 03:14 PM (/+dAV)
27
"There were no soldiers involved! These warriors were Marines."-R Stanton
More distractive irrelevant minutia.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 03:17 PM (/+dAV)
28
You're all a bunch of yellow ribbon sticker pussies. Blog this, blog that...pussies. Drive your SUV's down to the recruitment building nearest you and enlist if you support the marines so much. Don't send your sons and daughters like a bunch of cowards. Oh yeah, and stop blaming free press (duh....freedom?) for Iraqi insurgency. That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard...
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 04:08 PM (FogDg)
29
Steven,
Where's Colin these days? Rumor has it that he and Rooster are yachting together in the Caribbean.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 04:15 PM (/+dAV)
30
Last I heard, they were both forced to look for Osama. Speaking of which, if anyone in here lives in NYC: ever see those stencils around the lower east side that say 'Osama is a Bush'? or the ones on stop signs saying 'Oil'? Damn, those fired people up. The same artist had a really cool one that he put on construction sites that said, 'PAY NO BILLS'....hahaha. Anyway, Greg...see you at the Communist moonbat America-haters support group tomorrow? I might be late if my cell is activated...
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 04:23 PM (FogDg)
31
Snook,
You are wrong. From the footage there was enough of a question for the MarineÂ’s action to investigate. Now once the military has decided he did nothing wrong, that is great, but if one cannot defend their action, maybe that action should not be committed. Also it makes no difference or not if the Iraqis were militia, regular army or terrorist. The U. S. Military should not go around killing incapacitate people. Just because the rag heads go around torturing our wounded, does not mean we have to lower our selves to their level.
As for OysterÂ’s comments, I was referring to GregÂ’s comments about the 80%. Also, I do feel in this instant, AngryblackmanÂ’s comment about just killing them all the previous night should hold true. I say this because if their mission was so critical that they did not have time to help the wounded or take prisoners, then maybe they should have been killed out right.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 04:36 PM (Gqhi9)
32
Greg packs heat to a f*cking BBQ and it's ok but when a marine shoots one faking enemy (possibly armed or rigged) he gets all whiny about it, f*cking hyporcite..
Kevin (Scoopy-Doo) Sites knows diddly-squat about combat.
Posted by: Talking head at May 05, 2005 04:47 PM (a9tRx)
33
That marine should be given a medal, and an apology. The terrorist got what he deserved.
Posted by: Carlos at May 05, 2005 07:48 PM (tFXpR)
34
Carlos, are you one of those "Every towelhead is a terrorist!" kinda guy?
Posted by: Solrac at May 05, 2005 10:18 PM (w3zHI)
35
Okay, Butch, you lost me at "Greg's 80% accuracy rate". I suppose if I omit a lot of pertinent data, quote three year old news items to bolster my arguments, call everyone a Nazi and take the other side simply to be contrary even if I contradict myself, I could win the distinction of a high percentage of accuracy too?
Man! I've been doin' this all wrong!
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 10:56 PM (YudAC)
36
Carlos, are you one of those "Every towelhead is a terrorist!" kinda guy?
Not at all. I'm an "every terrorist is a towelhead" kinda guy.
Posted by: Carlos at May 05, 2005 11:43 PM (iOGzJ)
37
Butch, Greg has cited the looney bin "What Really Happened.com". 80%? More like 99% wrong.
Greg's favorite headgear.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 06, 2005 12:41 AM (xauGB)
38
Oyster,
The 80% I was referring to was of all of his posts,
not just this one only. As far I can see, I don't see any
lies with this post. I might of used a different word instead of
assassinate, but the main jest is correct.
Posted by: Butch at May 06, 2005 07:42 AM (Gqhi9)
39
"then maybe they should have been killed out right."
Butch: We need more liberals like you.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 08:38 AM (x+5JB)
40
Carlos, "Not at all. I'm an "every terrorist is a towelhead" kinda guy."
--Hahaha. There are a lot of them, BUT! What about the Oklahoma bombing? That guy was white as wonderbread.
Posted by: steven baber at May 06, 2005 10:34 AM (w3zHI)
41
steven,
not to mention the guy who killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
Oh wait, I think he WAS muslim!
Posted by: Carlos at May 06, 2005 11:01 AM (tFXpR)
42
I am just trying to be a realist also. Having been in the Army and the Marine Corp, I know that some time, a unit can not take pows. When
this is the case, and I do hope they are few, then we should put them out of their misery instead of letting them suffer.
Posted by: Butch at May 06, 2005 03:10 PM (Gqhi9)
43
Butch: I don't believe in putting people out of their misery, but I do believe in killing enemy combatants.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 03:48 PM (x+5JB)
44
I'm glad the Marine got off...which is not what's gonna happen in the Abu Graib abuse. Too bad. I wish Zarqawi and his cohorts coulda hung underwear around Eugene Armstrong's head, and all the others, instead of sawing them off.
Posted by: Laura at May 06, 2005 03:54 PM (L3PPO)
May 04, 2005
Terry Schiavo Awakens From Persistent Vegetative State, No Explanation
*****EXCLUSIVE*****MUST CITE JAWA REPORT****
Nearly 10 years after a brain injury left a firefighter virtually mute, he suddenly started talking to his wife and sons last weekend. A couple of years ago, it happened with a severely injured car accident victim who'd spent 19 years in silence.
And before that, a paralyzed policeman whose brain had been damaged in a shooting suddenly regained his speech after eight years.
And now, Terri Schiavo has suddently sprung back to vibrancy. Experts had claimed that the probability of Schiavo's recovery from a constant vegetative state were about as low as her chances of recovering from her state induced death. more...
Posted by: Rusty at
10:51 AM
| Comments (27)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1136 words, total size 7 kb.
1
I heard he went back under. QUICK, STARVE HIM TO DEATH!! PULL OUT THE TUBES, HE ISNT FIT TO LIVE.
Posted by: OB SNOOKS at May 04, 2005 11:06 AM (yBHNA)
2
Anybody know what the difference is between a blunt trauma brain injury and an oxygen deprivation brain injury? Is there a difference?
Posted by: AB at May 04, 2005 11:10 AM (rP4OC)
3
There is a huge difference between a injury (fireman, policeman) and sodium imbalance neurological damage (Shiavo). The brain isn't as hardwired as scientists used to believe...thus injuries are easy to recover from compared to massive damage from sodium imbalances on a cellular level, like Shiavo's eating disorder caused. As far as I heard, this fireman had garbled speech and didn't have memory prior to 'waking'...again another huge difference between him and Shiavo. Personally, I don't take sides in these issues: I think they are a family matter. I don't claim to know the full facts on any of these cases and I think anyone becoming overly opinionated about it is just proving their ignorance. From a non-right wing or non-left wing perspective it's seems odd: I see people in here who support war talking about how precious life is. Is this a double standard? Can anyone truly justify taking a life no matter what the circumstances? I'm sure many would argue about spreading democracy, ridding the world of terrorism, fighting evil, etc...but in the end killing is just killing. Right and wrong are a point of view. Same with religion. If everyone's point of view is the end all, then we live in the insane asylum for souls.
Posted by: babler, inc. at May 04, 2005 11:27 AM (FogDg)
4
"Right and wrong are a point of view"
Men deep inside know one from the other.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 04, 2005 11:48 AM (x+5JB)
5
I was not successful in killing this latest burden to society and IÂ’m just sick about it.
With this Scheivo woman, I was able to make great use of her whore of a husband who fathered kids like an NBA basketball player. He sprinkled his seed around Florida like Shawn fucking Kemp. It was no problem to have this bed hopping man slut request, no demand that I put his first wife to death. Wedding vows? Ha ha ha, this guy broke his vows to his first wife, then his to his home wrecking mistress when he promised to pull out before letting his mojo jump ship into her yammy.
I worked long and hard to get the wife of this firefighter to demand we starve her husband to death. I asked my friend Barney Frank and Henry Waxman to go on Meet the Press to demand we stop wasting strained peas and vitamin water on this guy. I can always count on these two to stand with me on the need to kill kids and FHPÂ’s...thatÂ’s Fucking Helpless People HA, HA, HA... woooh, I better take my hand off my joint, this is getting exciting! Both were willing, but we could not get them face time on CNN before smokey woke up.
I canÂ’t get no satisfactionÂ…but IÂ’ll keep tryin
Posted by: Judge Greer at May 04, 2005 12:01 PM (aUEhc)
6
because every person who is not awake is not awake for the same reason.
Posted by: actus at May 04, 2005 12:03 PM (CqheE)
7
But they are getting ready to kill a baby in Texas- because of Bush's law. Poor (and not a white) people- not so important it seems to the GOP. And this baby actually has a (small) chance of living a normal life. But too bad the parents dont have enough cash, so the baby will die. All due to President Bush.
Posted by: Freddy at May 04, 2005 12:36 PM (HFKAk)
8
Freddy probably blames his lack of hair growth on Bush too. Bunch of whacos
Posted by: Ob Snooks at May 04, 2005 12:47 PM (yBHNA)
9
Freddie, I hate the President,I mean that asshole as much as you.
But I gotta say it...You sound like a fucking idiot! Bush's Law? Where did you go to law school, Florida Fucking Atlantic? Just goes to show ya. We on the left are mostly real smart, but we have our Freddies too.
Freddie, remember..Bush is Hitler, can ya handle that? Just say it over and over and you may even get on TV.
Bush is Hitler. it's soooooo simple.Stay on message.
Bush is Hitler. HA,HA,HA
Posted by: Judge Greer at May 04, 2005 12:51 PM (aUEhc)
10
The party of hate. You guys are not productive.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 04, 2005 01:25 PM (yBHNA)
11
All right my little tan friend, you have insulted Freddy and I and we demand satisfaction.
Freddy will meet you in Memphis this Tuesday at Tom Lee Park. The whole town will be out for the big BBQ and fights. Freddy will be driving a 72 Chevy Vega covered with both” Bush is Hitler” and the clever, “Mean People Suck” stickers.
After giving you a beatin, my chubby little friend promises to stick a pork rib in your mouth and make you yell “no blood for oil 3 times”.
I love picnics, sneekin up on some old woman in a wheel chair and turning off her IV drip. What fun!!!
If IÂ’m not mistaken, after winning this match, Freddy will fight the winner of the Colin Babar-Tami the Hoe sweet 16 match up.
Some of the Ambulance chasers around the courthouse have started an office pool. Sort of like March Madness in May, what fun. I am putting my money on that large strapping Finish boy who talks so much.
Posted by: Judge greer at May 04, 2005 02:03 PM (aUEhc)
12
If a cannibal only eats people in a permanent vegetated state,
Would he be a vegetarian?
Posted by: Butch at May 04, 2005 04:29 PM (Gqhi9)
13
Butch my friend, that is a good question. Only real bottom feeding turds like you and I would talk about the dead like this. During the two weeks I denied another human being food and water, I often stayed up late at night asking myself this same question. Would a sub-human scum like Butch be a vegetarian if he ate Terry after I finished slowly killing her?
Hmmm. Perhaps the greater minds at Harvard, Stanford or Brown can come up with a consensus. WhatÂ’s done is done. I am glad to be in such good company Butch. Great minds think alike after all.
Posted by: Judge Greer at May 04, 2005 05:03 PM (aUEhc)
14
Well Fudge Rear,
Clearly you are confused as ever. How can you call one a friend and then insult them by calling them what you yourself truly are? The only sub-human scum I have seen lately on this site is that of you, chicken little brain (grey rooster) (and not much of him lately). You can clearly not see humor, admitted dark humor, when it is in front of you. But just to point out for you conservative mind, the other point I was trying to make, obviously escaped you, was that with everything being politically correct now a days, some words or actions are so stupid and insane, that they are truly oxymorons. (A meating eating violent monster (cannibal) being equated to what most think of a peace loving pacifist.)
As for the “Killing” of Terry Schiavo, she was not killed. She “DIED”. It would be a lot more humane if she had been killed. But being a higher species, we must allow others of our kind to suffer, while we would grant mercy to any poor animal that was in the same state. Let me ask you these questions.
1. Does not the bible state that God can heal the sick and resurrect the dead? (I believe the answer is yes)
2. Was Terry not returned to her natural state by the court? She was not born with a feeding tube in her stomach was she? (I believe the answer is yes, and no in that order.)
3. Did anyone shoot, stab, electrocute, inject, or smother her? (answer no.)
4. Was not her condition cause by a chemical imbalance that was brought on by an eating disorder? Who is the cause of the eating disorder? (answer yes, Terry.)
5. If Terry had woken up and asked for food and drink, would anyone there deny her sustenance? (answer no.)
6. So if God, who has the power to heal and resurrect, did not intervene on behalf of Terry, who was put back into a truly natural state, then is not God responsible for her death? (answer yes.)
7. Or was her death, brought on by an eating disorder of her own causing, an unplanned and unfortunate suicide. (answer Unplanned and unfortunate yes, suicide no.)
So Fudge Rear, when you stay up late at night getting your Fudge packed up your conservative Rear, why donÂ’t you contemplate a more civilize and criticize answer before you go insulting people. Now once you have tried that approach, or if someone attacks you first, then by all means open up.
One last thing, just so there is no mistakes, unlike Greg, I am proud to be a Liberal. On a scale of –10 (Fanatic Liberal) to 10 (Fanatic Conservative), I would rate myself around a –6 or –7, depending on the mood of the day.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 09:55 AM (Gqhi9)
15
Butch is clearly the ying to Gayrooster's yang. Where is that drunk-ass kkk bigot anyway? If there are any thunderdome style fight club match ups, I better be in the ring. I bet Ob Snooks rides Gayrooster like Master Blaster.
Fudge Rear gets the fiction award of the week.
Y. Bourbon: "Men deep inside know one from the other."
Well, damn. This could be debated from all angles...I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you...but I wish what you said was more true and had more influence in our world. I've always thought values, morality, right and wrong were more issues of how you are raised and influenced by those around you, plus instinct.
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 10:27 AM (FogDg)
16
Butch my friend, itÂ’s truly great to have you on our team. I like you hate those damn conservatives. Always yacking about this that and the other thing.
You make some great talking points; may I use them for my next speech at the Tallahassee Rotary club lunch this Friday?
The bible healing the sick and resurrect the dead. Ha, Ha, Ha, not in my county!
Your right about another thing, Terry was not born with a feeding tube. Err, just between you and me, I was not borne with a bag of BBQ pork rinds and you were not born with a can of Pringles in your hand. I love those salt and vinegar ones. MMMM.
Butch, I know from your fudge packing talk that you may be someone I can play tonsil hockey with. How about we meet up in Memphis next week for the big BBQ. We can watch a few fights and see some of those baby breading neocons get their ass kicked by some of our rainbow brothers.
After the BBQ we can have a little fun. I know some people at the Colonial Vista Retirement Home. I love to go into a room and spend a few minutes with “Grand Pa”. My favorite trick is using the OLE foot wedge to pull the power cord on the respirator. Hell you know what Butch, ain’t no one borne with a fucking respirator was there? Ha, Ha, Ha.
Butch, Bush is Hitler, No blood for Oil and mean people suck. And donÂ’t let any one tell you itÂ’s mean to kill a FHP..ThatÂ’s a Fucking Helpless Person, Ha, Ha, Ha, I made that up myself. Anyway, if they do, there just narrow minded Hitler loving Republicans.
Hope to see ya in Memphis sweetie.
Posted by: The Judge at May 05, 2005 11:12 AM (ywZa8)
17
Well Fudge,
You still donÂ’t get it do you. I am not advocating pulling the plug on every person in a coma. I believe we should really give them a chance. But once we have tried everything that medical science can do and we still get no results, it is time to let that person move on to their just rewards (Heaven for most, and definitely Hell for you.)
As for the trip to Memphis, I will have to decline. The do have a great statue of N.B. Forrest there, but I usually just pass through to IL, visit my ken folk up that way. If I am not mistaken, I do believe that Greg invited you down to Austin for a BBQ. If you take him up, you can swing by Dallas on the way and I will show you
the new Trinity River project that is being worked on in Dallas. But just a fair warning, if I do, you may not make it down to Austin.
One last thing, Bush is not a Hitler. Hitler actually served in the German army during WWI. Bush is more a Louis XVI and Laura (Bush) is a Marie Antoinette, (Let them eat cake.)
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 12:28 PM (Gqhi9)
18
That should be They do have and not The do have.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 01:01 PM (Gqhi9)
19
Steve: "but I wish what you said was more true and had more influence in our world."
Yes, people often disregard the law written on their heart.
How is your brother? Regardless of some of his views, I wish him well.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 05, 2005 01:43 PM (x+5JB)
20
YB, My bro is doing very well. He hasn't been in here lately...maybe busy spamming other sites? Hahaha. Anyway, yeah. Maybe he's on a covert Gayrooster hostage mission?
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 04:15 PM (FogDg)
21
By the way, YBP...when you say 'regardless of his views'...explain further. I'm curious...
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 10:20 PM (w3zHI)
22
Simple enough. He is against U.S. presence in Iraq and I am not.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 08:09 AM (x+5JB)
23
I don't think my bro's view can be summed up that simple. Collin is actually very brilliant. We're talking about a guy who took apart a TV when he was 6, put it back together and it worked. By around the same age he read the entire Encyclopedia Britannica from a-z. He has always been a sponge for knowledge, but almost at his own expense. His mind is like a seismically tuned device interpreting world events and culture. He's very thorough and barely able to handle all the data, believe me. Anyway, I would say he has many different views, not just one.
As far as my view on the subject, I'm not against the United States 'being' anywhere, as long as it's improving the world we live in. I'm not convinced that the Iraq War is improving the world. I think there are always alternatives to war, and they were barely explored before we invaded. I also think we are foolish to think that we can just barge into that region, ignorant to the culture and beliefs there and just shove democracy up everyone's ass and expect it to flourish. I hope it does, in the truest of forms...but doing it through violence and force seems contradictory to me. Everytime I think of our occupation of that country, I think of how many innocent people have been killed(civilians shot/bombed) and who's kids are using that as fuel to become future terrorists. It's really just a matter of time before a terrorist gets a nuke, or builds one. If NYC got bombed, or even just Wall Street, imagine what would happen to this country and the impact on the world economy. What would this country be like if NYC was wiped out? It would make 9/11 seem like a walk in the park. These things aren't impossible and are pretty scary to think about. The thing is, terrorists don't have allegiance to a particular country and we can't 'invade' them all...the solution to me is covert moles getting close and taking out key players, beefing up intelligence (ours is pathetic and wasteful) and having this country repair it's image as a international bully by being more responsible. America will always be hated, but don't think for a second it's just because they are jealous or 'hate freedom'...there are many reasons, right or wrong. Without living in a police state, it seems almost impossible to thwart all terrorist attempts. If a police state is our future, then freedom is not.
To sum up my view: intelligence and accountability are the higher road and is better for the economy and reputation of this country. Some people in here don't give a rat's ass about the reputation part, but you can only rake leaves into your neighbors lawn so many times before he dumps the shit back on your doorstep.
Posted by: steven baber at May 06, 2005 11:10 AM (w3zHI)
24
Steve: I never questioned Colin's intelligence. BUT WHO THE HELL LET A SIX YEAR-OLD KID TAKE APART A WORKING TELEVISION SET?!
I read your post, and must say that I can't find anything in it that I really disagree with. I am troubled and disturbed over how the war is going and think, perhaps in hindsight, that other strategies could have been employed. But I also add that we just can't leave now without doing our damnedest to restore order there, clean up the physical mess, and help to establish the peace and the form of government that the majority of civilians seem to want--all the while and killing as many terrorsts as possible.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 01:07 PM (x+5JB)
25
Much like YBP, I am also in favor of the war. I thought way back
when the GOP was claiming it is need to save the world from WMD, it should of been to free the people from Saddam, much like we freed the
women from the Taliban (in Afghanastan.) What I did not like, and still don't is how the war is being ran. We jump the gun because we
thought we could get a quick victory by killing Saddam. A country should never "Go" to war on a gamble. Once inside a war, one may have to take some, but you should always start out with a strong first hand. The General running the show now is definetly not Schwarzkopf.
(Spelling?). Letting the media run wild inside is stupid. Now they can film and make reports all they want, but nothing will be let out
until after the war.
Posted by: Butch at May 06, 2005 03:39 PM (Gqhi9)
26
I stumbled upon this site by accident.Its postings are crazy and I couldn't be more pleased!
Posted by: JJ at May 12, 2005 10:39 PM (6krEN)
27
TeRrY ScHiAvo RaWkS LoL
Posted by: Terry Schiavo 4 lyfe at August 10, 2005 06:26 PM (IjnzH)
<< Page 1 of 1 >>
226kb generated in CPU 1.6271, elapsed 1.8971 seconds.
128 queries taking 1.4635 seconds, 608 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
128 queries taking 1.4635 seconds, 608 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
