One of the strangest episodes of the 2004 election was John Kerry’s insistence that he had gone on a covert mission to Cambodia in 1968 or 1969. At one point he showed a reporter a moldy old “lucky hat”, squirreled away in a secret compartment of his briefcase, which he said was given to him by a CIA agent on the (one of the?) mission(s?). But he kept changing the facts of the story; at one point he just went “near” the Cambodian border, it wasn’t at Christmas, there were three or four trips, etc., etc. Much of the story began to sound like a politically convenient fabrication, and the constant revisions and defensiveness about the details undermined Kerry's credibility for many voters—especially vis-a-vis the accusations of the Swift Vets for Truth.

“No s---, See-Dub, thanks for the enlightenment,” I can hear you lovely readers saying. Fine. We are revisiting this because I just found another version of Kerry’s story. It’s a little late to the game, sure, but I’m all about getting to the bottom of mysteries rather than just about scoring political points.

First, some context for this new stuff. In 1988, dashing young Senator Kerry convened a Senate subcommittee to look at the drug problem, especially as it related to Latin America and the Caribbean. The hearings went on for a long time and thousands of pages of testimony were taken before the final report was issued. Anyway, one of the witnesses was a guy named Franklin Camper, who ran a paramilitary training camp in Alabama and trained, well, mercenaries and foreign terrorists. He testified about goings-on in NoriegaÂ’s Panama. As his testimony wrapped up, Kerry sort of gave a retrospective and then said the following:

And youÂ’ve referred to Vietnam. This Senator is also painfully aware of the trafficking that took place at that period of time, of the Golden Triangle, as it was referred to, and of the use of heroin, poppy, and so forth to buy weapons, transfer information, deal with the Khmer Rouge, among others.

And I personally went on one clandestine joint CIA mission into Cambodia in which we delivered weapons. So, I am very familiar with it.

Source: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, part IV. 100th Congress. July 14, 1988. p.319.

Much analysis and commentary on this after the jump.
WhatÂ’s new about this?
WhatÂ’s new here is that this is a different reason for the trip. Before he was dropping off personnel, according to Kerry biographer Douglas Brinkley:

He [Brinkley] said: "Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off US Navy Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." The missions were not armed attacks on Cambodia, said Mr Brinkley, who did not include the clandestine missions in his wartime biography of Mr Kerry, Tour of Duty.

"He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat he was given by one CIA operative. In a part of his journals which I didn't use he writes about discussions with CIA guys he was dropping off."

But in 1988, heÂ’s delivering weapons, not personnel. Either Brinkley made that up, Kerry made that up, Kerry lied to Brinkley about what the purpose of the Cambodia voyage was supposed to be, or Kerry lied in this statement before the Senate.

To whom would he have been delivering weapons?
Beats the crap outta me. Here’s a wild guess. Cambodia’s Prince Sianhouk refused American offers of aid in the form of helicopters and communications equipment because accepting American aid might upset the Russians, according to State Department “Cambodia Guy” Andrew Antippas. If Kerry had all this to tell again, he might make a case that he was delivering a covert shipment of arms to Prince Sianhouk’s government in a way that would avoid causing an international incident, I guess.

Do you actually believe that?
Not for a minute. Because I can construct a faintly plausible interpretation of these facts doesn’t mean it was actually true--even Kerry says otherwise. He certainly wasn’t delivering helicopters in his swift boat, and he spoke of “weapons”, not “communications equipment”. And anyway, if you wanted to drop off a package of arms for Prince Sianhouk discreetly, you could just send stuff over the border in a truck. No reason to use a boat.

More importantly, the Cambodia story changed around so much under scrutiny of the campaign that I donÂ’t think even Kerry really knows what happened. ThereÂ’s a lot of evidence that the whole trip to Cambodia was manufactured and this is just one more cockeyed version of it.

Why didnÂ’t this come up during the campaign?
Maybe it did and it just never came to my attention. But I suspect it didnÂ’t, because this arose spontaneously in an unrelated hearing about Latin America, and not in a place where you would expect to find a statement about Cambodia. ItÂ’s just one aside in a thousand or more pages of testimony, which is not electronically searchable, and I just happened across it. (Funny, IÂ’d have thought opposition research would have done this, though.)

Why in the hell were you reading it?
Look at my posting times. I obviously suffer from acute insomnia. Transcriptions of Kerry speeches and hearings do the trick.

What about that drug stuff? He sounds like he knows a lot about that.
I wouldnÂ’t put too much weight on it. He probably read Alfred W. McCoyÂ’s 1972 book about the CIA and drug dealers in SE Asia, a perennial favorite among moonbats, which details pretty much everything he said. You could read that statement to read that he has personal knowledge of drug traffic in SE Asia, but thatÂ’s not quite what he said. He just said heÂ’s familiar with it.

On the other hand I would say his choice of words does nothing to dispel that. It almost sounds like he wants to create the impression that he was involved in some shady Special Ops-drugs-for-arms scheme or some dodgy CIA-arms-for-drugs racket or some illicit NSA-blackmail-for-murder-for-hire-for-meth-for-oil-for-food-for-transvestite-mercenary-spanking-for-a-speaking-part-in-the-Beverly-Hillbillies-remake-for-Stinger-missiles-for-guns-for-butter-for-hot-hot-hiney-sex-with-Washingtonienne kinda black–op, Mack Bolan-bad-ass-pulp-novel-plot, but he doesn’t want to quite come out and say that.

Especially since it never actually happened.

You get paid by the hyphen?
The Jawa Report is proudly sponsored by Acme Hyphen and Em-Dash, for all your compounding needs.

Dude, the electionÂ’s over. Your guy won. CanÂ’t you just let it go?
What, did I twist your arm and make you read this far? Look, I think thereÂ’s a legitimate historical interest in establishing whether or not there were covert US boat runs into Cambodia during the Johnson presidency. ItÂ’s nice to be able to do that without the clamor and partisanship of an election going on. Plus itÂ’s an interesting gloss on the election and the loyalties and assessments of the pundits and personalities involved (especially the Swift Vets and Douglas Brinkley). Kerry may not run again, but who else told the truth and who lied or got it wrong? Were the accusations against Kerry baseless electioneering? Or was John Kerry a serial fibber, who was inconsistently spinning a bogus yarn to elevate a carefully filmed and stage-managed, though honorable, tour of duty into an Apocalypse Now fantasy with him in the Martin Sheen role? (or more correctly, the Lawrence Fishburne role?)

This new fact edges the balance of history a little bit more toward the latter. The American publicÂ’s judgment is to be commended.

Posted by: seedubya at 02:49 AM | Comments (43) | Add Comment
Post contains 1275 words, total size 8 kb.

1 Wild-ass BUSH would have bombed all southeast Asia thinking it was North Korea had his Generals not intervened. Perhaps BUSH LIES would have popped up claiming a stupid desert-dweller "Hamburglar Bin Laden" story too - loser. Kerry is not in the Oval Office, but BUSH is. Check this how BUSH works so hard to get people in AUSTRALIA to hate us! "AMERICAN students are quitting Queensland universities in the face of hate attacks by Australians angry at US President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq." http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15734656-421,00.html Now that's leadership!

Posted by: Downing Street Memo at June 26, 2005 03:07 AM (ScqM8)

2 Hugh Hewitt was talking about this during the campaign. Kerry made the same claim to a U.S. News and World Report journalist in 2000. E.g. see Hewitt's article here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/476jwkqo.asp

Posted by: Patterico at June 26, 2005 04:22 AM (qm0bN)

3 Kerry is a lot of things, but I'm pretty sure "dashing" was never one of them. ;-) To me there was always something uneasy or "wrong" about Kerry. He's like that one guy at the office who tells an off-color joke that anyone else could tell and get a big laugh, but coming from him, it's kinda creepy. Know what I mean?

Posted by: Oyster at June 26, 2005 05:53 AM (YudAC)

4 Klanster and Hamster-enemus have defiled this site with their putrid thoughts. One is an unreconstructed some-strike-first racist, the other prays for days when blood pours through the streets like Jerusalem during the Crusades. You, young men, have lost your right to judge anybody. If Mohammedeans judged Christians by the vile acts of Gacy, BTK and Milosevic, everyone in America would be mad as they are of America's B U S H. To racists and psychotic bloodthirsty weirdos, you to read the Bible and learn to control your demons. BUSH is not a real Christian.

Posted by: Downing Street Memo at June 26, 2005 06:02 AM (ScqM8)

5 I have been under the impression that a moooslim would be offended if you called them a Mohammedean. Not that I give a shit about their precious feelings, but since you appear to be some strange breed of liberal, I would think that you would more sensitive to that kind of thing. You're off topic and off your meds.

Posted by: REMF at June 26, 2005 07:47 AM (3ejvo)

6 Wait a minute - am I "klanster"? I'm curious. I find it amusing how you apply names like that. Have a hard time managing your disdain do you? "If Mohammedeans judged Christians by the vile acts of Gacy, BTK and Milosevic,..." ??? DST, you give them far too much credit. They judge all of us, Christian and non-Christian alike, by far less. To them we are simply pork eating sons of apes and if they're feeling especially charitable, they'll let us pay a tax and bow to them rather than saw our heads off. And putrid thoughts? Controlling demons? Dude! Have a look in the mirror. You're lashing out blindly here. Pray tell, do you wear a big, red, rubber nose that honks when you squeeze it?

Posted by: Oyster at June 26, 2005 07:52 AM (YudAC)

7 Take it easy on him Oyster, he can't help it, he's "special". Just give him something shiny and he's fine, but nothing that he can swallow or anything with sharp edges.

Posted by: Hamster Enemus at June 26, 2005 10:19 AM (0yYS2)

8 On the tape of a February 1972 conversation with evangelist Billy Graham – made public in February 2002 – Nixon complained that a number of major news publications were "dominated" by Jews, and Graham responded, "The stranglehold has got to be broken, or the country’s going to go down the drain." Nixon: "You believe that?" Graham: "Yes, sir." Nixon: "So do I. I can’t ever say that, but I believe it." Graham: "No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something." Graham was crucified for making these remarks and all he did was speak the truth.

Posted by: greg at June 26, 2005 10:45 AM (/+dAV)

9 Did you get that at one of the wild ass conspiracy sites you visit greg? I don't believe it, so if you've got the goods, show em por favor.

Posted by: Defense Guy at June 26, 2005 11:16 AM (lVjfM)

10 I'm pathetic.

Posted by: Dr. Krusty Shicklegruber at June 26, 2005 11:56 AM (qMxTg)

11 My question is, if everyone is so critical of Kerry's comments about Vietnam...how come you guys don't say a peep about Bush? At least Kerry WENT! He could have done the Bush route of pussy rich boys and their daddies doing everything they can do to avoid going, but he didn't. I also don't believe Rove's "Swift False Accusation Veterans for Truth" crap either. Who gives a fuck about Kerry! This isn't 2004...stick to Hillary, guys.

Posted by: osamabeenthere at June 26, 2005 11:57 AM (CYGDF)

12 On another topic, let the titties live free!!!---> Ashcroft gone, Justice statues disrobe - - - - - - - - - - - - June 24, 2005  |  Washington -- With barely a word about it, workers at the Justice Department Friday removed the blue drapes that have famously covered two scantily clad statues for the past 3 1/2 years. Spirit of Justice, with her one breast exposed and her arms raised, and the bare-chested male Majesty of Law basked in the late afternoon light of Justice's ceremonial Great Hall. The drapes, installed in 2002 at a cost of $8,000, allowed then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to speak in the Great Hall without fear of a breast showing up behind him in television or newspaper pictures. They also provoked jokes about and criticism of the deeply religious Ashcroft. The 12-foot, 6-inch aluminum statues were installed shortly after the building opened in the 1930s. With a change in leadership at Justice, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales faced the question: Would they stay or would they go? He regularly deflected the question, saying he had weightier issues before him. Paul R. Corts, the assistant attorney general for administration, recommended the drapes be removed and Gonzales signed off on it, spokesman Kevin Madden said, while refusing to allow The Associated Press to photograph the statues Friday. In the past, snagging a photo of the attorney general in front of the statues has been somewhat of a sport for photographers. When former Attorney General Edwin Meese released a report on pornography in the 1980s, photographers dived to the floor to capture the image of him raising the report in the air, with the partially nude female statue behind him. The first attorney general to use the blue drapery was Republican Richard Thornburgh, attorney general under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He had the drapery put up only for a few occasions when he was appearing in the Great Hall, rather than permanently installed as it was under Ashcroft. Most news conferences now are held in a state-of-the-art conference room, although the Great Hall still hosts speeches and other special events.

Posted by: osamabinchimpin' at June 26, 2005 11:59 AM (CYGDF)

13 All green of skin. 800 centuries ago, their bodily fluids include the birth of half-breeds.For the fudemental truth is self-determination of the cosmos.For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest!

Posted by: Downs syndrome street mo'fo at June 26, 2005 12:49 PM (aLiCo)

14 Yeah, Osama. I agree. A bit prudish. "Human", in another thread, is busy calling me a racist and we have Greg here reverting back to his old tricks of anti-semitism and conspiracy mongering. I thought he said he would behave. Human, if you happen to show up in this thread, meet Greg. He's a proper target for your name calling. Who's the "Mars Attacks" fan?

Posted by: Oyster at June 26, 2005 02:17 PM (YudAC)

15 Ack ack ACK ack!

Posted by: Martian Overlord at June 26, 2005 02:42 PM (0yYS2)

16 >>>""AMERICAN students are quitting Queensland universities in the face of hate attacks by Australians angry at US President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq." Down Syndrome, that's no different than our universities here in America. So what's new. What's telling about this is that Leftists aren't able to separate their hate of American students from their hate for "Bush." Lefties personalize their politics. You'll see that in all Left-leaning countries, such as in Europe. Whereas in the middle east, Arabs hate "America" but they treat Americans just fine. No, Australia isn't Left-leaning, but their universities are, thus their mistreatment of innocent students.

Posted by: Carlos at June 26, 2005 02:44 PM (8e/V4)

17 Hey, I'm Australian and I go to a major Australian university (Melbourne University, Victoria) and I reset the implication that there's pervasive anti-americanism in the country. First in the general populace there is extremely strong support for the US alliance. We went to war with you guys in Iraq with absolute bipartisan support and much less heated protests than across Europe. Something which hurt the opposition in the Oct 2004 elections was the perception that they weren't going to be close enough to the US diplomatically because they felt we should focus more on Asia. Among the general population there is a broad respect for Americans. Having said that, we do have a radical left fringe which is most visible on uni campuses. They don't represent all that much of the population but like radical leftys the world over they're vocal. They are far from representative of majority opinion, though. There also is probably some cultural misunderstanding too. Australian's tend to be fairly blunt and expect others to be as thick skinned as they are. I've never heard the term (I think it must be Qld specific) but "sepo" sounds just like the sort of larrican nickname Australians would give someone to tease them in a relatively good natured way. I'm not saying that there wouldn't be people who could be genuinely nasty, but I'd be astonished if it were a significantly large group. There's a significant number of american exchange students in my lectures, clubs and tutes and I've become reasonably good friends with 3 or 4 of them. All of them had great, positive experiences here and (to my knowledge) didn't experience any significant "racist" attacks. Just thought I'd try and clear the air somewhat. Posted by Jeremy at June 25, 2005 05:29 PM at http://www.michaeltotten.com/

Posted by: Carlos at June 26, 2005 02:48 PM (8e/V4)

18 Bunch of lying weasel liberal anti US pricks. There's not problem with Australia. Pure exaggerated bullshit. Just like Kerry a lair. Nothing more. Australia rules and will be Americas friend forever.

Posted by: greyrooster at June 26, 2005 04:05 PM (CBNGy)

19 Heard Kerry's lies so much no longer can spell the word. He was/is a traitor. Same as Hanoi Jane.

Posted by: greyrooster at June 26, 2005 04:07 PM (CBNGy)

20 Uncloth those classical statues, but burn the Robert Maplethorpe trash.

Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at June 26, 2005 04:08 PM (3ZhKY)

21 I see Osamabeenwhatever is back to misrepresentation with his "at least Kerry went" to Vietnam crap. Osama doesn't want you to know that the one truthful thing that Mary Mapes discovered was that George Bush had volunteered to go to Vietnam when his Air National Guard sent a squadron of F102's there. He was turned down in favor of pilots with more seniority. Of course, Mapes didn't report this - instead reporting the forged memos. As for Downing Street Memo above, hey dude I sure we can pass the hat for you to be able to afford your anti-psychotic prescriptions again.

Posted by: SPQR at June 26, 2005 05:52 PM (xauGB)

22 Hate to leave but here comes Scott, Mark and Charlie. Headed for Hooter's for chicken wings and beer. At least we know where the hell we're going. Even if the sheriff has to bring us home. Only in America. God, I love this country.

Posted by: greyrooster at June 26, 2005 06:06 PM (/rKIG)

23 Arooosta KKK hamwort YOu are a treason racistic horriblus . DSM you old hag i'm not your son so go and cut out mor coupons

Posted by: BUSH LIES - SOLDIERS DIE at June 26, 2005 06:22 PM (FV4oJ)

24 "I see Osamabeenwhatever is back to misrepresentation with his "at least Kerry went" to Vietnam crap." Oh yeah, I forgot Kerry didn't go...must be a lib conspiracy theory. That holds about as much water as W wanting to have his rich boy ass shot down while flying drunk. I suppose he wanted to go SOOOO bad that he had to have daddy pull all those strings to get him into the National Guard, huh? Give me a fucking break! You know you are full of shit for thinking Bush wanted to go...it was hard as hell to get into the National Guard during those times and in Texas (and other states) it was common for people with $ power and influence to get their sons into the NG so they wouldn't be grunts. We all know when push comes to shove the fucking poor people die for rich people's wars and you disgrace our intelligence with lies of W having as much balls as his dad in the military. W is a like a big butch dyke...all walk and talk but no testicles...just a big fat hairy camel-toe photo op pussy who is trying to be John Wayne. Misrepresentation, my ass...SPQR, you are the one spouting bullshit.

Posted by: osamabinchimpin' at June 26, 2005 07:29 PM (CYGDF)

25 BUSH is a thuhg isn a three piece suuit ROVWE IS SATTAN

Posted by: BUSH LIES - SOLDIERS DIE at June 26, 2005 07:42 PM (FV4oJ)

26 BUSH LIES, if I didn't know any better I could almost be convinced you're a rightwing plant trying to make Lefties look like clowns.

Posted by: Carlos at June 26, 2005 08:04 PM (8e/V4)

27 Good golly, Miss Bush Lies, spell much? What a 'tard. Is school out or something?

Posted by: laddy at June 26, 2005 08:11 PM (2OGNl)

28 llike geyyklansteer everyione ddrinks and he iss rreally BAABLER

Posted by: BUSH LIES - SOLDIERS DIE at June 26, 2005 08:16 PM (FV4oJ)

29 Don't blow his cover Carlos, but BLSD is Karl Rove in disguise, and DSM is Cheney, and greg is Condi. They're just fannin' the flames to keep the faithful focused on victory. Great work guys, we won't tell anyone who you are.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 26, 2005 10:06 PM (0yYS2)

30 Fascinating!! I was in the Navy from '66-'70 (by-the-way, is-the-hyphen-game-piecework-or-flat-rate?)) Drug use by servicemen was sadly very high then. You couldn't tell everyone who used it, but there was always someone you could spot. There was the odd ship's-news report of a captain's-mast for marijuana use. New shipmates would bring back startlingly many reports of Heroin use back from Nam. And we even had some DEA agents, "bust" someone on our ship once. Where did they get the drugs? I doubt they sent them through the FPO. It appears that in the above excerpt, Kerry tells us. It was a local operation where drugs were purchased with guns. Someone with no conscience, and access to a lot of guns, could probably make a lot of money, if he didn't get caught. Speaking of "no conscience," that is one personality trait that contributes to someone being diagnosed with "narcissistic personality dissorder." Another trait, is "pathological lying," which the sufferer persists in without regard for being caught, and even when it's obvious to others he's pitching the buffalo-chips. Kerry seems to have both those traits (check out links below for examples of those and more), as you can see from this pathetically comic hunting yarn he spun (Cuz dem common folks jess eats dis stuff up): The "16-pt buck" out on the Cape: powerlineblog.com/archives/008080.php And running the Boston Marathon for which there's no record of him entering (also, he "doesn't remember" his course time, or the year he ran): michellemalkin.com/archives/000637.htm And his "taking off"and "performing acrobatics" in an Israeli fighter jet, having NEVER flown a jet before: www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38343 I understand he may also have a blue oxe named "babe." To make sense of his Combodia yarn, and all his other "I'm a man of uncommon skill and versitility" BS, here is a little Psychology lesson, and supplemental illustration, from DrSanity which may shed some light on the man and the fantasy world he lives in: drsanity.blogspot.com/2004/09/lesson-in-narcississtic-rage.html drsanity.blogspot.com/2004/09/wah-wah-wah.html Oh, and no, I didn't mean to imply that Kerry could have been involved in drug trafficking. I suppose it's possible, but I don't think it would have been long before his secret got out. He may be good at fooling himself and the rationally-challenged with those wild fantasms of his, but he would have to be much better at keeping secrets than he is. Also, he doesn't seem to know pot from petunias. Just look at how he describes drugs as "heroin, poppy, and so forth." Oh, yeah, he's an expert, all right. Even my teenage son knows more than that! (hmmm, maybe I should look into that?) So, my point is that the number of his falsehoods, and their assordid details, are secondary to the fact that the leader of the world's only super-power has to be at least teathered to, if not grounded in reality. But someone let go of Mr. K's string so long ago that he's well beyond the solar system by now. What the Reps have to do is get the information out there in a way that gives voters the tools they need to make the intelligent decisions the Dems don't think they are capable of. That's one area I would like to see them inprove: A LOT! Here's a satirical Kerrycature of him that I think captures his essence better than any analysis I've seen: www.strangecosmos.com/content/item/104087.html I am in awe of this writer's skill.

Posted by: yonason at June 26, 2005 11:35 PM (quuZp)

31 Learn to spell BUSH LIES and stop smoking so much weed or whatever you're doing.

Posted by: Downing Street Memo at June 27, 2005 06:06 AM (ScqM8)

32 Defense Guy seems to think I made up the Billy Graham/Nixon conversation. Here are the first 4 references returned by google (Graham Nixon semitism). There are hundreds of them: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/4048_12.asp http://www.counterpunch.org/vestgraham.html http://www.cincypost.com/2002/jun/21/billy062102.html http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve5/1118aei.html

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 08:18 AM (/+dAV)

33 I take it back greg. I just found it difficult to believe, as Graham is always portrayed as someone who never had a bad word to say about anyone. What a shame.

Posted by: Defense Guy at June 27, 2005 09:11 AM (jPCiN)

34 There's nothing shameful about it. His comments were spot on.

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 09:16 AM (/+dAV)

35 It's VERY shameful, greg. I heard about that conversation years ago and it disgusts me as much now as it did then.

Posted by: Oyster at June 27, 2005 10:23 AM (fl6E1)

36 It's never shameful to speak the truth.

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 10:45 AM (/+dAV)

37 Why hate the Jews? The way I see it, all this hatred of Jews is simply petty jealousy. Jews are hated for their ability to succeed where others fail. Why are they so successful? Who cares! Whether it's because they're "God's chosen people" or because they understand the rule of "survival of the fittest", the fact remains that they are wildly successful, and rather than hate them, it would better serve society to emulate them. Whether one grows tomatoes or builds rockets, if the competition is doing something that works, it doesn't make sense to do the opposite, but this is what society keeps attempting, to its detriment. The Jews have been subjected to more attempts to exteminate them as a viable group for two thousand years now than any other people in history. Far greater effort has been expended to do away with them, with little success I might add, than on any other group, many of whom fell easily to the conqueror's sword. I would say it would serve to take a hint from history; those who seek to destroy the Jews are themselves brought down instead, because hatred is not a positive, constructive basis for a plan of action, but rather negative and destructive. Blind, causeless hatred is a dragon's egg brooded over by a chicken; once hatched and fledged, it will turn and rend its surrogate mother, for it knows no love, even for those who nurtured it. Save your hate not for those whose only crime is to do well for themselves, but for those who seek to do harm to others, and those we have in great multitudes and wondrous diversity.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 27, 2005 11:10 AM (0yYS2)

38 No one expressed hatred for the Jews. This is just candid talk about the influence that Jews have in our country.

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 11:17 AM (/+dAV)

39 "because hatred is not a positive, constructive basis for a plan of action, but rather negative and destructive." That's why if you keep your cool in a fight and take advantage of someone blowing up, you can exploit their weaknesses and kick the crap out of them. Isn't it funny that most people who pick a fight, lose? Anyway, a bit off subject...you're right on, IM. I have a Jewish friend that told me something pretty funny a while back. I think I made some comment on how there are so many intelligently famous Jews and he told me something someone else told him: "The reason Jewish people are so smart is because the Rabbi's who are the smartest people in their communities are allowed to have tons of kids, thus spreading the intelligence...but with Catholics, it is the inverse....breeding out the intelligence by not letting the smartest people in the community procreate!" We both had a laugh at that one...usually there is a little truth to every joke though and you can see where someone would come up with that kind of a statement!

Posted by: osamabinchimpin' at June 27, 2005 11:26 AM (CYGDF)

40 You can't get out of it so easily Greg, we all know how you feel about the Jews. You have consistantly come off as anti-Jewish, anti-war, and sympathetic to the enemy. You may not see it like that, but we mostly do, I believe. You also come off as pretty much anti-everything that makes America great, and you even called us "stupid proles" once, giving yourself away as a fan of Marx. You claim to be a Democrat, and for the Little Man™, which means that you should support union labor, right? Well, you admitted to hiring some illegal Mexicans to do some work in your house, and paid them less than the going wage that an American would have expected. Your hypocrisy is astounding, but not surprising. You must admit to yourself that you hate your mother country, your fellow citizens, and the very system which allows to the liberty to do so. You're not fooling anyone but yourself.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 27, 2005 11:28 AM (0yYS2)

41 I never claimed to be a democrat. I claim to be a Catholic Libertarian. I love this country more than you do. You often invoke the image of fighting in the streets here in America. I think you're right. You and I will both be fighting, exept will be on the same side. Just like me, you are a marked man, you and your 10,000 rounds.

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 11:32 AM (/+dAV)

42 except we'll be

Posted by: greg at June 27, 2005 11:37 AM (/+dAV)

43 I made a nice, long response to that last post, but I guess the internet ate it. Let me summarize it with one word to each line, except for the last one. "I never claimed to be a democrat. I claim to be a Catholic Libertarian." Riiiiiigght... "I love this country more than you do." Sure. "You often invoke the image of fighting in the streets here in America. I think you're right." Yep. "You and I will both be fighting, exept will be on the same side." Hopefully. "Just like me, you are a marked man, you and your 10,000 rounds." My markings: "CAUTION: EXTREMELY UNSTABLE BIOHAZARD. EXTREMELY REACTIVE-DO NOT AGITATE. EXTREMELY DANGEROUS UNDER PRESSURE. CANNOT BE DILUTED. CANNOT BE MADE SAFE TO ROUGH HANDLING. DO NOT EXPOSE TO UNCONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT. MAY CAUSE SEVER BLEEDING, HEMMORAGING, TISSUE, BONE AND NERVE DAMAGE. HIGH RISK OF DEATH OR DISMEMBERMENT."

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 28, 2005 09:44 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment