T1B

How exactly can you be so venomnous to certain religious groups (christians, jews) yet give a pass on one that is off the fukking scale when it comes to letting their religion influence their actions?

I think this is part of terry's issue with you. Even those that agree with damn near every position you hold still can't get past the fact that you are such a fukking hypocrite.

Given, Ahmadinejad (or whatever the spelling) is a whacko nutjob and America has more freedom of speech and junk, I'll have to give him credit for having about 1,000 times the intellectual courage of our own "President".

How many times have you seen Bush in public, in front of a crowd that's not packed with hand-picked lackeys, answering non-scripted questions? In his OWN COUNTRY even.

If you answer more than 0 you're lying.

Mikey wrote:Given, Ahmadinejad (or whatever the spelling)

Just add jihad on the end, you're close enoughwith the rest.

is a whacko nutjob and America has more freedom of speech and junk, I'll have to give him credit for having about 1,000 times the intellectual courage of our own "President".

How many times have you seen Bush in public, in front of a crowd that's not packed with hand-picked lackeys, answering non-scripted questions? In his OWN COUNTRY even.

If you answer more than 0 you're lying.

Oh come on now, Mikey. Compare his answers at Colombia with his answers on the 60 minutes interview. They are virtually word for word in places. The guy has memorized much of his own rhetoric.

And how do you know how fucked up he was? Everything he said was translated via an interpreter. Maybe in his own language he's as bad as Bush.

I didn't watch him on either show.

But at least he was there, in front of an actual audience. Bush is pretty much reduced to appearing at military bases and Republican rallies, and he never takes questions from an audience.

I read both transcripts, and he really doesn't answer many questions, he rambles a bit here and there when cornered, but overall he had a definite agenda, and many parts seemed well rehearsed.

I'm sure his interpreter fixed stuff for him, too.

Although I agree about Bush, he doesn't take questions because he's really not very bright, or personally well informed, and certainly not well spoken.

smackaholic wrote:How exactly can you be so venomnous to certain religious groups (christians, jews) yet give a pass on one that is off the fukking scale when it comes to letting their religion influence their actions?

I never give Islam a pass. Each of the Big Three monotheistic religions has some selling point, something that appeals. An argument can be made them. In the case of Islam, this line would illustrate Islam's universality--that is, shed of the Jewish tribal, and Christer bureaucratic, it possesses an immediate simplicity--and then its functionality of social cohesion. The hardline Fundamentalist Islam state is a very new phenomenon (unlike the Fundamentalist Christer state which once not so long ago made Prohibition the law of the land in this country).

But, I still completely reject the essence and entity of Islam. It's disgusting and primitive, just like the other monotheistic faiths.

This has nothing to do, however, with America's treatment of Iran historically and currently. The demonization of a great nation which has never attacked anyone since Darius III, by a rogue (unelected) regime in Washington which has already demonstrated a blatant pattern of lies, smears, omissions, lies, distortions, and sheer incompetence, is completely unacceptable.

For all the standard smear of his being a "holocaust denier," I defy you to produce one example of his actually saying this. The nuclear facilities of Iran have been openly monitored in accordance with the international treaties to which Iran has been a member all along. Can Israel say as much?

I never give Islam a pass.

I laughed.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:The demonization of a great nation which has never attacked anyone since Darius III, by a rogue (unelected) regime in Washington which has already demonstrated a blatant pattern of lies, smears, omissions, lies, distortions, and sheer incompetence, is completely unacceptable.

Yeah, that whole deal of taking over our embassy, which under civilized nations is considered sovern ground, and holding American staff hostage for more than a year was just for shits and giggles. No real harm there, eh?

Fucking idiot.

Do you think I'madingynutjob would get infront of an audience in Iran full of regular folks who felt free to ask whatever they want? Would the country's press be free to play this uncensored throughout the country?

Nah, I didn't think so either. To compare this nutcase to Bush, who actually faces very vocal criticism on a daily basis, is laughable.

Nice job kicking your own ass on this one mikey.

LTS TRN 2 wrote:For all the standard smear of his being a "holocaust denier," I defy you to produce one example of his actually saying this.

Are you really that dense, Nicky?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/ ... index.html
http://www.voanews.com/uspolicy/archive ... 3-voa5.cfm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykd-syzZ4ZY
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01163.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/800098.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=14663823
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 33,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/ ... ld_3290972

Just from the first page of a google search.

As to your earlier questions directed at me, smackaholic had part of it right: your hypocrisy in taking Judaism and Christianity to task at every turn, yet giving Islam a free pass. But there's more to it than that. I have two additional major beefs with you.

The first is that, while like you, I have profound differences of opinion with the Bush Administration, I have never once allowed myself to be tricked by those differences into carrying water for nutjobs like Imadinnerjacket. By contrast, you have. That is where you and I part company.

The second is that you and others of your ilk have allowed petty differences with Democratic candidates to sabotage any reasonable efforts to remove the Bush Administration from power. Fess up, Nicky: you voted for Nader, didncha?

Maybe you'll learn this someday. I did, over time. Politics is about pragmatism, first and foremost. I wasn't exactly a fan of Al Gore. I still hadn't completely forgiven the Gore family over the PMRC flap of the 80's, I was suffering from Clinton fatigue in '00, and my first choice in '00 was Bill Bradley, who had been a hero of mine dating back to the early 70's when I was a little kid and he was a starting forward for the Knicks. But I put those aside during the election, if only because I knew Bush would be 10 1,000 1,000,000 times worse for the country than Gore would.

In short, you are what Rove, borrowing a term from Lenin (doubtless one of your heroes) calls a "useful idiot." You have allowed the Bush Administration to maneuver you into becoming a walking, talking, breathing version of what they caricature the left as. Props. I guess.

Bullshit, Crapper, your sources are standard smear sites. Look at each: at no point is a direct quote offered that denies anything, let alone WWII. When Dinner Jacket speaks of "myth," he's not in any way intending the "fairy tale" use of the word, but rather the "mythologizing," or making of it (the Holocaust) an industry of victimization, etc. This has been conducted zealously by the Zionists, just as the Zionists (Kastner, in particular) indeed worked hand in glove with the Nazis. After all, they were identical race-state models which could--and did--help each other. No doubt each would have immediately betrayed the other when convenient.

But all of this is beside the point that Cheney n' Chimp are not merely corrupt, incompetent, and disastrous, but that they have from the start been in direct service of the neocon consortium--this vile and grotesque movement of Jewish radicals like...Ledeen, Wolfowitz, Pollard, Feith, Bolton (both), Pearle, Kagan, Novak, Abrams, Fleischer, Kristol, Krautenhammer, Safire, and many more.

This is what to which you must wake up.

So Wakey Wake!!!

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Bullshit, Crapper, your sources are standard smear sites. Look at each: at no point is a direct quote offered that denies anything, let alone WWII. When Dinner Jacket speaks of "myth," he's not in any way intending the "fairy tale" use of the word, but rather the "mythologizing," or making of it (the Holocaust) an industry of victimization, etc. This has been conducted zealously by the Zionists, just as the Zionists (Kastner, in particular) indeed worked hand in glove with the Nazis. After all, they were identical race-state models which could--and did--help each other. No doubt each would have immediately betrayed the other when convenient.

But all of this is beside the point that Cheney n' Chimp are not merely corrupt, incompetent, and disastrous, but that they have from the start been in direct service of the neocon consortium--this vile and grotesque movement of Jewish radicals like...Ledeen, Wolfowitz, Pollard, Feith, Bolton (both), Pearle, Kagan, Novak, Abrams, Fleischer, Kristol, Krautenhammer, Safire, and many more.

This is what to which you must wake up.

So Wakey Wake!!!

LEAVE MICHAEL BOLTON ALONE RIGHT NOW!! I REALLY MEAN IT!!!

Sincerely,



Click here to see the giant thread stretching pic



Or click here to see a pic of the two worst spamming tards on the interwebs

smackaholic wrote:Do you think I'madingynutjob would get infront of an audience in Iran full of regular folks who felt free to ask whatever they want? Would the country's press be free to play this uncensored throughout the country?

Nah, I didn't think so either. To compare this nutcase to Bush, who actually faces very vocal criticism on a daily basis, is laughable.

Nice job kicking your own ass on this one mikey.

Bush, who actually faces very vocal criticism on a daily basis

He does? Where?

So what you're saying is that at least Bush isn't any worse than the Iranian guy. That's comforting. I used to believe that in a "Democracy" (that's what we're pushin in Iraq, right?) elected officials are supposed to be accountable to the people who elected them. Bush's attitude is that he's accountable to nobody. My way or the highway. Fuck him.

ny times, washington post, multiple other fishwraps, CNN, NBC, every single dem in congress not named lieberman and an increasing number of republicans.

just because they can't come up with alternative solutions doesn't mean they aren't whining.

Goober McTuber wrote:

LEAVE MICHAEL BOLTON ALONE RIGHT NOW!! I REALLY MEAN IT!!!

Sincerely,

No way, Goob, Michael Bolton, while ostensibly not involved in politics, is definitely to be placed on a spit (or gallows) with Cheney and the rest--and you perfectly well why! Yes, yes, connect the dots...Barry Manilow will be the warm-up act

"Oh Mandy...you came and you gave without taking...AAACChhhh"

smackaholic wrote:ny times, washington post, multiple other fishwraps, CNN, NBC, every single dem in congress not named lieberman and an increasing number of republicans.

just because they can't come up with alternative solutions doesn't mean they aren't whining.

You're kidding, right?

Spin it anyway you want, Nicky. But those of us who haven't closed our eyes to reality realize that you have been reduced to carrying water for a Holocause denier. Is David Duke next?

And since you ignored my previous question, I'll repeat it here: who did you vote for in the Presidential elections of '00 and '04?

Seems to me you're the one who needs to WAKEY WAKE.

smackaholic wrote:ny times, washington post, multiple other fishwraps, CNN, NBC, every single dem in congress not named lieberman and an increasing number of republicans.

As RF said, you're kidding, right?

Lessee here. There's a substantial segment of the media whose entire raison d'etre, at least for the time being, is to be a cheerleader for Bush, right or wrong. Limbaugh, Savage, O'Reilly, Hannity, Fox News, Washington Times, New York Post, etc. This is virtually unprecedented in American history.

As for the so-called "mainstream media," most if not all of them gave Bush a free pass in the run-up to the Iraq War, notwithstanding that there was a step or 5,892,983,520,235,982 missing in the "logic" connecting the 9/11 attack with the attack on Iraq. Hell, Chris Mathews willingly, even gleefully, reduced himself to a glorified Irie Lagos impersonator viz. Bush during the "Mission Accomplished" photo op/publicity stunt.

As for "every single Dem in Congress not named Lieberman," the reason Congress' approval ratings are in the shitter is not because they've been too tough on Bush. Rather, it's because they've allowed Bush to BOHICA them at every turn when it comes to Iraq.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

smackaholic wrote:ny times, washington post, multiple other fishwraps, CNN, NBC, every single dem in congress not named lieberman and an increasing number of republicans.

As RF said, you're kidding, right?

are you telling me that there is no criticism of bush from these places? give lets turd his tin foil hat back.

Lessee here. There's a substantial segment of the media whose entire raison d'etre, at least for the time being, is to be a cheerleader for Bush, right or wrong. Limbaugh, Savage, O'Reilly, Hannity, Fox News, Washington Times, New York Post, etc. This is virtually unprecedented in American history.

the ENTIRE fukking media was a cheerleader for the cause during WWII. And you know what? It was OK. So shove that "unprecedented" bullshit up your ass. As for the above mentioned group, Limbaugh and Hannity are shameless pimps most of the time, but, it is quite obvious that you haven't listened to Savage in quite awhile. Big fukkin' surprise there, a lib running at the mouth about something he is clueless over.

As for the so-called "mainstream media," most if not all of them gave Bush a free pass in the run-up to the Iraq War, notwithstanding that there was a step or 5,892,983,520,235,982 missing in the "logic" connecting the 9/11 attack with the attack on Iraq. Hell, Chris Mathews willingly, even gleefully, reduced himself to a glorified Irie Lagos impersonator viz. Bush during the "Mission Accomplished" photo op/publicity stunt.

the logic was painfully obvious. Sitting on out hands anymore after 9-11 was completely unacceptable. Clinton would have done the exact same thing as Bush did.......as soon as he was done with his morning underling BJ.

As for "every single Dem in Congress not named Lieberman," the reason Congress' approval ratings are in the shitter is not because they've been too tough on Bush. Rather, it's because they've allowed Bush to BOHICA them at every turn when it comes to Iraq.

Congress' disapproval rating is because they are a bunch of whining pussy monday morning QBs without a viable alternative.

Duh....Afghanistan was not "sitting on our hands", and there are very few people who whould argue that we shouldn't have taken out the Taliban.
Iraq was just plain fucking stupid and completely clusterfucked by Bush and his band of fools no matter how you want to spin it.

Of course there are newspaper writers who are critical of Bush. Do you think Bush reads any newspapers?
Of course there are Dems who are critical of Bush. Do you think he listens to them or even has any idea of what they're saying?
The man is so highly insulated from any actual criticism or discussion that might deviate from his own (or at least his advisors') POV, he prolly thinks 90% of the country is behind him.

Mikey wrote:Duh....Afghanistan was not "sitting on our hands", and there are very few people who whould argue that we shouldn't have taken out the Taliban.
Iraq was just plain fucking stupid and completely clusterfucked by Bush and his band of fools no matter how you want to spin it.

Yep. Beat me to it.

Of course there are newspaper writers who are critical of Bush. Do you think Bush reads any newspapers?
Of course there are Dems who are critical of Bush. Do you think he listens to them or even has any idea of what they're saying?
The man is so highly insulated from any actual criticism or discussion that might deviate from his own (or at least his advisors') POV, he prolly thinks 90% of the country is behind him.

It's also worth noting that when Bush speaks, even in this country, his audience is hand-picked for supporters. To get in to the audience to hear Bush speak, you need to sign a loyalty oath -- not to the United States, or to its Constitution, but to Bush personally.

smackaholic wrote:it is quite obvious that you haven't listened to Savage in quite awhile.

It wouldn't surprise me that he has been critical of the way the Iraq War has been handled. But it would be very surprising to me if he criticized the decision to invade Iraq in the first place. Something tells me that he hasn't.

Congress' disapproval rating is because they are a bunch of whining pussy monday morning QBs without a viable alternative.

No, Congress has a very viable alternative. What they don't have is the cajones to employ the "nuclear option," or the votes to impose their will in a more conventional manner.

mvscal wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote: What they don't have is the cajones to employ the "nuclear option,"

Which ought to be enough to clue in any thinking person that they do, in fact, agree with the necessity of the war in Iraq and that their alleged opposition to the war is based on partisan pandering rather than any sincere, principled conviction.

Not necessarily. You're right that it's all politics, but not in the manner you represent.

The reason the Democrats won't go nuclear is that they're afraid of political ads being run in their district to the effect that they "don't support the troops." That's it, plain and simple.

The ONLY people who demanded the invasion of Iraq are those of the Israeli neocon consortium. These vile criminals fill the ranks of such organizations as AIPAC, PNAC, JINSA, ZOA, and other "think tanks" who are completely dedicated to the same agenda. The "mainstream media" as plainly revealed, has been co-opted and manipulated as well.

The idea, as babs has the nauseating gall to suggest, that the present nightmare in Iraq is somehow justified or proper, is typical of the diseased mindset of Rove Monkeys and Dittoheads in general.

T-Crap, I sat out '00, I just could not vote for Lieberman. I held my nose in '04 and voted for Kerry.
But, again, you remain tethered to this (installed) notion that Dinnerjacket is a "Holocaust denier," when this is obviously a smear--and not verified by a single quote. Of course he's vehemently opposed to Israel, just as many international figures similarly renounced and refused to recognize South Africa during the '70's, etc. What's the difference? No one even then suggested there was something "wrong" with people of Dutch descent, and too no one is now suggesting anything "wrong" with people being Jewish. This sort of hysterical fear of bigotry is standard Abe Foxman tactics, and it's misinformed at best, slimy for the most part.

Okay,

actually read it, dipshit!

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/archi ... ndIII.html

(Edited by 88)

ltsturd,

you really need to go on a bandwidth diet.

mvscal wrote:As I said...partisan pandering rather than principled opposition.

But that's a far cry from

Which ought to be enough to clue in any thinking person that they do, in fact, agree with the necessity of the war in Iraq

They oppose it, all right. They just don't have the balls to put their political careers on the line for that opposition.

Terry in Crapchester wrote: They just don't have the balls to put their political careers on the line for that opposition.

Why would their political careers be "on the line" when the majority of Americans favour disengagement, immediate or otherwise?

Martyred wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote: They just don't have the balls to put their political careers on the line for that opposition.

Why would their political careers be "on the line" when the majority of Americans favour disengagement, immediate or otherwise?

Because sadly, too many Americans are fooled by clever sound bytes.

Argue that someone "doesn't support the troops" and bring up a particular vote to cut off funding for a war as "proof," and that person could be done for.

Democrats in particular are scared shitless of this tactic. It's not exactly a secret that Democrats have been losing these types of battles on a consistent basis for the last quarter century or so.

Hey...you're backing into the realization that indeed all of the American political spectrum has been co-opted by the JINSA neocon nightmare. You're just about there.

You're Waking Up (despite your confused reluctance)

REVELRY!! Get ready for the Calvary...just kidding...wakey wake

I'm going to kill you....and I'm not kidding....I'm so mad...and horny...I got rung up on some cheap charge, you'll recall--well, you won't, you @#%$# (untermenchen), because we've got plans for you...and then, ha ha, we'll divide the Hamas and Fatah and..hoo hoo, choke choke, just like the old days, eh? Oh yeah, and when you're dead, and the division is blistering, I'll be poised for a return to power...and this time, no bullshit...yeah, Sharon was a problem, but eh..you know?...it's more than a scam, it's a fucking ride!

Neely8 wrote:Didn't i read/see a show that explained how Muslim men have homosexual relations all the time? Even if they are married they have men on the side that they sleep with? I could have sworn I saw it on 60 minutes or something. Anybody else remember seeing it?

Maybe thats why he said they don't have fags like we do. Because they are all fags deep down......

When I was over in Jordan in the 90's we were taken around by a tour bus driver who asked us if we had any questions about arabs and said he would give honest answers. One of the guys asked him if it was true that arab men were into other dudes. His response was "for most of arab, women are for reproduction and men are for pleasure". Ugh.

Did you say, "Ugh"?...excuse me?...If you've not felt the warmth, sir, of a full scrotum in your hand, if you've not cupped it gently like a baby bird and felt its pulsing heart stir, then you've neither the right nor the dignity to come before this panel and presume to bring such censure on the practices and passions of God-fearing prayer-in-school anti-gun control citizens who'd find some comfort in the throbbing flesh of another man--whether in a toilet stall in Minnesota or a cab stand in Cairo.

If you've not felt the warmth, sir, of a full scrotum in your hand, if you've not cupped it gently like a baby bird and felt its pulsing heart stir

Sounds like the voice of experience, LTS.

No, I'm just cappin' on Senator Widestance...allowing his inner thoughts to unfurl beneath his practiced Stern countenance of assured moral probity.

A first class hypocrite like Craig, who fully supports the invasion of Iraq, Scooter pardon, Armegeddon, etc., deserves more. A full musical--featuring Pastor Meth and the nice Republican page perv from Florida, Jeff Gannon, Rove and J Edgar Hoover in a dream scene--and the movie to follow. Garrison Keillor has rolled out some good satirical ditties, including "Don't plead Guilty To A Misdemeanor in Minnesota."

So, the lunatic PNAC/JINSA crowd wants to wade into a further disaster...?....


A world without artificial apartheid race-state experiments..?...
img]http://www.extrememortman.com/wp-conten ... 0photo.jpg[/img]

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!

So, the lunatic PNAC/JINSA crowd wants to wade into a further disaster...?....


A world without artificial apartheid race-state experiments..?...


WAKE THE FUCK UP!!