Remember: Killing is always wrong. Justice means punishing criminals without actually causing them any discomfort. If we violate these principles, we immediately plunge into the same moral darkness that engulfs our opposite numbers. (Not our enemies. We don't have any enemies.)
This is also the first paragraph of a suicide pact.
Amen to that.
Are leftist the most terrified by terrorism? Is their delusion a product of fear or from more voluntary sinister reasons?
I think liberal leftism is mostly self-aggrandizment. "Look at me, see how good I am!" They find victims everywhere to dote on but their victims are always questionable and they never care about honest to goodness real victims.
One example would be how the left cared nothing about the fate of former Miami police officer Grant Snowden who spent 11 years in a Florida prison until a Federal Appeals court set him free. Janet Reno, in Michael Nifong style, relentlessly pursued him on a false charge of child sexual abuse. Not only did Snowden not commit the crime, neither did anyone else because it never happened.
Reno and her ilk have lost no sleep over what they did to Grant Snowden and others like him. They only cared about making themselves appear to be champions of abused children, even if there were no abused children.
This is what they do. They find non-victims and use them to aggrandize themselves. In the process they create real victims for whom they have no feeling at all.
I oppose a president who breaks the law, tortures innocent people, gives multi-billion dollar handouts to his cronies, and started an idiotic war of choice.
If this means I "support" terrorists, then so be it. You guys who worship Bush as the second coming of Christ are the real "useful idiots".
Bush has broken no laws. There has been no "torture" unless you suddenly developed a new definition of it (which of course the left did just for the occasion)--let alone of "innocent" people. Bush's administration probably has less cronyism than any previous one; and only an idiot would call the war on terror a "war of choice". Jesus, if this is what the left has to offer, no wonder they are so comfortable living in the land of denial. Grow up, AJB and take a good look around you. I dare you.
AJB: Saddam did all the things you describe. I'm glad he's dead. Too bad it didn't happen a lot sooner. As for Bush, he's gone to Congress to get the legal authority for everything he's done. The Democrats are the worst of hypocrites, giving Bush legal authority and then whining about what he is doing.
"You guys who worship Bush as the second coming of Christ are the real "useful idiots"."
If you find someone who worships Bush as the second coming, let me know.
So is there any money in being able to do accurate psychological profiles of all future “lesser evil” allies so America won’t have to destroy any mistakenly created monsters in the future?
I keep telling everybody that sooner or later psychopathic "friends" are gonna turn on ya no matter what you say or what you do and nobody ever listens...
POPPING A TROLL'S BALLOON
"I oppose a president who breaks the law, tortures innocent people, gives multi-billion dollar handouts to his cronies, and started an idiotic war of choice." -- AJB | 12.30.06 - 7:22 pm |
Now, let's break this B.S. down, and expose AJB for the Leftist tool he/she/it [whatever] really is, shall we?
"I oppose a president who...."
-A- "...breaks the law, . . . . . "
1. - "A US federal judge has ruled that President Bill Clinton committed 'a criminal violation of the Privacy Act' by releasing personal letters to undermine the credibility of one of his accusers during the Monica Lewinsky saga."
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/
695384.stm
2. - "no other American president has ever admitted to such a serious violation of law."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/
0,2...,216480,00.html
-B- "...tortures innocent people, . . . . . "
1. - "Sending Boy [Elian Gonzalez] Back To Cuba Means A Return To Slavery"
http://www.claremont.org/project...806/
default.asp
2. - A documentary seven years in the making tying Bill Clinton to an Arkansas prison blood scandal that spread AIDS to thousands around the world ..."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/
ar...RTICLE_ID=47128
-- see also, where MSM covers for him --
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
new...RTICLE_ID=14755
-C- "...gives multi-billion dollar handouts to his cronies, . . . . . "
(well, maybe not TO cronies, but payoffs nontheless, and for favors - same thing, really)
1. - "Where were those who are now so shocked by the Rich pardon when Johnnie Chung dropped a $50,000 check, probably containing laundered money from the People's Republic of China, into the hands of Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff?"
http://www.townhall.com/
columnis...es_gone_too_far
2. - "... The deeper scandal of the Clinton pardons ... There are many other pardons that appear to be payoffs:"
http://www.FreeRepublic.com/
foru...a9a2ba40e31.htm
-D- "...and started an idiotic war of choice."
1. - "As was the case in Bosnia, the Clinton Administration's claimed justification for intervention in Kosovo is based on a melodramatic oversimplification of the crisis which obscures its complex origins and development.
http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1...1998/
kosovo.htm
2a. - "For nearly a decade, the Clinton administration helped Islamic insurgents aligned with Chechnya, Iran and Saudi Arabia destabilize the former Yugoslavia. The insurgents were allowed to bring weapons and explosives to Bosnia-Herzegovina and fight Serbs and their allies. The insurgents also were allowed to move further east to Kosovo."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
new...RTICLE_ID=27367
2b. - "Why Clinton Bombed the Serbs - A National Disgrace Few American Even Know Nor Care About"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focu...s/1514131/
posts
http://www.citizensoldier.org/
cl...ntonbombed.html
2c. - "Army: Does Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties?2c. - "The Kosovo Liberation"
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/par...cs/
fr033199.htm
For a MUCH more complete list of the perfidy of that pervert, see...
http://www.alamo-girl.com/
...and the same, though to a lesser degree, applies to most (if not all) leading Democrats.
This article points out the inherent dishonesty of the left. I have reached the point that I automatically assume anything a committed Democrat says is a deliberate lie, distortion or -- at best -- half-truth. Sadly, this also applies to most of the overwhelmingly left-leaning MSM. The only exception to this rule is when the statement is completely devoid of political implications -- such as a ball-game score. Even then, you can't be sure.
The troll above is a good example. She was able to pack five whoppers into three short sentences.
"Remember: Killing is always wrong." -- bugs
NO, it is NOT.
Murder is always wrong. Killing in self-defense, or of someone who is convicted of committing a crime worthy of death (LIKE murder) is NOT.
oh, wait, was that sarcasm? if so, sorry!
"The troll above is a good example. She was able to pack five whoppers into three short sentences."
GnuCarSmell | 12.30.06 - 10:20 pm |
They just keep respewing the same old garbage, because a big lie, oft repeated,...
you know the rest.
One moonbat can whip up a pretty good storm here.
If a homepage is shown for me at the end of this post, and if that homepage is neo-neocon's site, I did nothing to cause that and I don't know how to stop it.
Ahh, it quit on its own.
Seeing the commentators and press corps reporting on Saddam's new temperature, I have to say I don't envy the Doc the amount of fresh material she has to sift through.
The next Carnival of the Insanities will probably be 300 items long! 
Saddam Hussein was supported by the USA (Republicans; Reagan, Rumsfeld et al) when he carried out the atrocities for which he was just hung.
You all look damned pathetic claiming the moral high ground. Yes, Saddam was a bad man; but meanwhile, the architect of 9/11 remains free, and Iraq will become a more Islamic state than it was before.
Thanks.
Everyone can pass judgement in hindsight or take things out of context. I want to know the guys who knew Saddam and bin Laden were bad before they were bad.
The architect of 911 has been dead since Tora Bora You can bet on that.We can rest assured that there are other architects out there that mean us harm,but you lefty's don't seem to care.You keep regurgitating the same crap.I only hope that the next attack will wake you up,and you had better believe there will be another.Either help or shut up.
Agreed, Jainphx. You don't make a problem go away by burying your head in the sand, and you don't make a bully go away by appeasing them. What do they think they are accomplishing?
I get the impression that leftist think this whole thing could be resolved by finding Bin Laden and putting him in a time out corner. WTF?
That would be along the line of obsessing about finding street level thugs while the heads of the Mafia are given a blind eye. The cesspool culture we call Islamic Societies, and its religious leaders, ARE THE MAFIA HEADS.
Also, if America only cooperated in foreign policy with countries we were sure wouldnt betray us at some future point...We would never conduct any foreign policy...period. Leftist set up these impossible requirements for proper American foreign policy, curiously, only when it pertains to the US daring to conduct business with American interest in mind. We just need to listen to the left and their advice on how to properly commit national suicide then the world will love us i suppose.
Leftist want Darfur saved now. If Darfur stabs us in the back at some future point, it will surely be some neocons inability to predict the future that is the failure and nothing to do with Darfur's behavior. No one is accountable for their actions in this world except for creative, wealth building anglo saxons.
Leftist have made up their minds. They either want total control of people and their money. Or they'll take total anarchy with a world run by tribal thugs.
"Saddam Hussein was supported by the USA (Republicans; Reagan, Rumsfeld et al) when he carried out the atrocities for which he was just hung."
Actually, anonymous, that is more deception.
He was executed for the murders in Dujail and was facing trial for the use of gas against the Kurds, either of which had anything to do with the US.
In Dujail, Saddam had almost 150 people killed because of an alleged assassination attempt.
Iraqi universities were given chemical precursors to study the development of more effective pesticides. Those universities were not unique- the precursors were given to dozens of universities all over the world as part of that massive research project. Each country signed 'use protocols' for those chemicals.
That Saddam developed WMD's was a CHOICE he made.
If I give you a car so that you may drive to work, and you decide to drink and drive and then end up killing someone, don't blame me for giving you the car.
You either deliberately lied or are woefully unaware of how those chemical pre cursors got to Iraq. I will assume that you would not deliberately lie and thus, you are simply ill informed.
In either case, anonymous, it is clear you are not qualified to offer up any opinions on the matter
Saddam had been supported, much to our discredit and with the State Department's urging, by every administration during his tenure as dictator of Iraq. If it were not for lies and deceptions the left would not exist.
"He was executed for the murders in Dujail and was facing trial for the use of gas against the Kurds, either of which had anything to do with the US."
Spare me the condescension and do stop the dancing. Saddam was a friend of America when he was doing all that, and you know it. And we knew exactly what he would do with the gas we supplied.
America created a dictator and then destroyed him. Perhaps it made sense to do so, but try and keep your head out of your ass.
"Spare me the condescension and do stop the dancing."
Condescension: the favorite tactic of the Bush haters.
"America created a dictator and then destroyed him."
Saddam created himself. Why do you repeat these mythical cliches as truth?
Saddam was never a friend of the US nor did we supply him with the gas. He was an ally in maintaining pressure on the mullahs in Iran. We have as a country ascribed far too long to the Henry Kissinger school of diplomacy. If you want to blame someone blame the State Department and consecutive Secretaries of State who gave presidents the advise for "constructive engagement."
As one might say those who tell others to "get your head of of your ass" need to start with their own assumptions.
"In either case, anonymous, it is clear you are not qualified to offer up any opinions on the matter"
sigmund, carl and alfred | Email | Homepage | 12.31.06 - 8:10 am
"Saddam was a friend of America when he was doing all that, and you know it. And we knew exactly what he would do with the gas we supplied." anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.31.06 - 11:14 am
Oh BRAVO anonymous! Take a bow! BRAVA! ENCORE! (thunderous applause..) Damn boy!, you just shot down Siggy BIGGY TIME!! A++++++++
~~~
Now snap out of it and put your dunce-cap back on!
"Spare me the condescension and do stop the dancing. Saddam was a friend of America when he was doing all that, and you know it. And we knew exactly what he would do with the gas we supplied."
Now that you have admitted to being deceitful, rather than just ignorant, it is no surprise that ike all liars, you need to defend your deceit. You know, like OJ.
In any event, do you have any evidence to back up your claim, or are we all supposed top take the word of an ignorant liar?
America 'created Saddam?' America created the 30 years of his butchery?
What drivel.
Go back to the kiddie table, and play with your dolls. No one there minds tall tales and Barbie playing pretend. You aren't yet ready for adult conversation.
siggy wrote:
You either deliberately lied or are woefully unaware of how those chemical pre cursors got to Iraq. I will assume that you would not deliberately lie and thus, you are simply ill informed.
Ah, an optimist.
popdonnelly calls condescension "the favorite tactic of the Bush haters." That might be so, but the conservatives on this thread have certainly mastered it as a high art. Pot, meet kettle.
Remember not to break the Cardinal rule of the "enlightened" Left. NO ONE is accountable for their actions unless they are capitalist who work for a profit. All others, whether they be in Iraq or the jungles of Borneo, commit transgressions in the world strictly because capitalism exist.
To them, its not even possible for Saddam to be guilty of anything.
Condescension is merited by those who peddle falsehoods. Being called on a lie or a distortion may be unpleasant, but there is an antidote: it's called honesty. You leftoids might try it sometime. You might be surprised at how liberating it is.
Gnu, condescension is an attitudinal response. Both the left and the right are guilty of it. It has nothing to do with getting to the bottom of who is more honest or correct or advancing the dialogue in a meaningful and respectful way. It's more about the "gotcha" smugness of the responder.
The head nurse spoke up, and she said leave this one alone
She could tell right away, that I was bad to the bone.
Ah, a little George Thorogood when you need him. Happy New Year, everyone!
"America created a dictator and then destroyed him. Perhaps it made sense to do so, but try and keep your head out of your ass."
(A) Hussein's Iraq was sponsored by the Soviet's, not the USA. We don't supply T-72 tanks, BTR-60 apc's, or MiG 25 fighters.
(B) Supposing the USA did put Saddam in power (when it didn't), wouldn't it behoove the USA to do something about him?
Oh, I'm sorry, you don't like those because neither (A) nor (B) allow you to use the USA as an all-purpose scapegoat for every problem in the world.
Oi, you guys! The US government didn’t install or directly support Saddam.
It tried to court him as an ally, likely with the hope of being able to influence him for the purposes of American special interest (countering the dark forces of communism and islamofascism). Whether Saddam was ever actually used as a tool by the US government is highly debatable.
My belief is that some people are born emotionally deformed (this shouldn’t be such a radical concept) and they cannot ever be influenced (let alone controlled) by anyone, ever – though the smart ones will become skilled at appearing corrigible (to evade jail, retribution, or death), and instinctively know where opportunities for wealth and power lie (since that is all their stunted emotions can ever value). Political idealism is utterly irrelevant to these people, but they will use it wherever they can find it for their own warped personal gain.
The next time a guy like Carter or Reagan asks his advisors: “Can we ever trust this guy”, the experts from my proposed ‘Department of Homeland Psychology‘ would provide the answer and the government would then strategize accordingly.
"The next time a guy like Carter or Reagan asks his advisors: “Can we ever trust this guy”, the experts from my proposed ‘Department of Homeland Psychology‘ would provide the answer and the government would then strategize accordingly."
amaericafirst, you got the right idea, but the answer to the question ought to involve a sarcastic snort and the phrase "He shot his way into power then jailed and killed every other political figure in the country. What the hell do you think?"
Waitaminute, that still wouldn't work with Carter.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
