Tuesday, August 16, 2005
THAT'S A LEFTY FOR YOU
Have a gander at this picture.
Sick
Don't you just love that non-exsitant Extreme Left-wing? And I don't know about you, but I love cowards who wear masks to cover their faces.
The Only Thing Necessary For Evil To Triumph
Is For Good Men To Do Nothing

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Moderates in the Democrap party keep wondering why they can never win an election. It is obvious from where I sit.

Greta (Hooah Wife) said...

This is up there with the anti-war guy who shot the pro-war guy!

Greta (Hooah Wife) said...

Your black line is still in the main text.

Greta (Hooah Wife) said...

love the new set up but your e-mail didn't work, You need to join the TLB ecosystem and technorati!!!

Christopher Lee said...

Okay, it seems that only two people are seeing this black line. Next time you see it, take a screenshot and send it to me so I know what you're talking about.

Thanks for the heads up on the e-mail. It appears I put rightwind. Never saw that. I'm listed with TLB, but I just haven't got the code up and I don't know what technorti is, but I'll check into it.

SSG_E said...

the black line moved over to where it was supposed to be when i closed a side bar that is always up on my computer.

Anonymous said...

Chris I have seen it ever since you moved back to blogger. I do not know what you mean by a screen shot.

Jake said...

Yeah, and here's a rightie for ya.

http://lgfwatch.blogspot.com/2005/08/despicable.html

Christopher Lee said...

That's horrible, but is it as bad as supporting someone shooting their officer? Because for me, it's not.

Anonymous said...

Chris, I'm going to ask you a direct question:
Do you honestly think that the "bad apples" in Bagram and Qaim just happened to develop the same specific torture techniques as the "bad apples" in Abu Ghraib?

Hardly surprising these people are anti-officers, given the slightly obvious point that the attrocities the US has committed in this war (and yes, they are attrocities, please don't bother to deny it) were done on orders.

SSG_E said...

za's weak definition of atrocity is a disgrace to the victims of true atrocities like the victims of Nazis Germany, Imperial Japan, the Soviets, the Viet-cong, and Saddam. This kid needs some history lessons because his definition of atrocity is about as ignorant as ignorant can get. What happened at abu-ghraib was wrong, but it was no where near the level of atrocity. I wish for once this guy would get off the america bashing for one second and focus on true atrocities like the innocent people being beheaded by terrorists and the innocent people killed by these terrorist thugs trying to destroy iraq.

Anonymous said...

Because we all know that putting a back over someone's head and then hooking them up to electrical current isn't an attrocity. *rolls eyes*

Mr Unknown's nationalist blind eye is a disgrace to all victims.

Oh, I might add that an innocent isn't trained to kill. Soldiers aren't innocent by any stretch of the imagination - and only an absolute imbecile would character them as such. The whole reason soldiers get so fucked up after wars is because THEY'RE NOT innocent - because of all the things they had to do and see.

Anonymous said...

back = bag.

SSG_E said...

coming from a liberal bed-wetter like yourself i will chalk up your stupid comments as a side effect of your ignorance. innocent iraqi people are being killed by these islamo-facist terrorists that you love so much. get your head out of your dumbass for a second and think before you spew your hateful nonsense scumbag. i am a nice guy until ignorant pip squeaks like yourself run their mouth when they dont know what they are talking about. good people sleep peaceably at night only because rouh men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. Our soldiers are heroes. they are protecting the innocent while the terrorists try to kill them. facts your ignore as you focus on isolated incidents of abuse. humans are flawed, even our heroes are flawed. the vast majority of US troops are among the best people in the world and you better be damned thankful we were there. europe would belong to hitler, the pacific including australia would belong to fanatical imperial japan, korea would belong to an evil communist dictator, the islamo-fascists would have free reign to spread terror and destrcution around the world and you and i would not be having this conversation b/c we would not exist. there would be no freedom of speech b/c the world would be in the iron grip of the evil soviets or the facsist nazis. so while you ignore the true atrocities and while you ignore the men and women struggling to eliminate the evil that would commit them maybe you should shut up and be thankful that there are those willing to fight while you cower in your damp shorts.

Anonymous said...

As opposed to the innocent Iraqi people who've been killed by the America-fascists?

You seem to think that WW2 justifies a war based on lies, that has only caused the entire country of Iraq to be thrown into chaotic limbo and increased the death toll.

But the fact that the soldiers are good makes up for it too I 'spose. The fact that it's people like you who put them into such dangerous situations where they're forced to go through all that crap is utterly irrelevant. Just so long as you're right.

And no, you're a moron.

SSG_E said...

oh no the bed-wetting liberal has called me a moron. that is such an insult coming from you. and now all americans are fascists. for a liberal you are an intolerant bastard aren't you. you blame the us troops for every fatality in iraq and yet the terrorists that are killing the innocent iraqi people get a free pass from you. how typical. at least come up w/ something new. your arguments are tired and weak.

Anonymous said...

Oh for heaven's sake - you can't even see a joke can you? I call the Bush administration "America-fascists" and suddenly I'm insulting the whole country. Get a life. Seriously.

Yeah - I blame every fatality in Iraq on Bush. Wanna know why? BECAUSE HE WAS TOO FUGGING STUPID TO SECURE THE BORDERS BEFORE HE INVADED! Every US death, every Iraqi death, is squarely on his two shoulders. He managed perfectly well in Afghanistan to prevent it from being invaded by outside forces, but he fucked up Iraq royally.

SSG_E said...

no, the cia fucked up. this was the third in a string of intelligence failures. bush's biggest mistake was not firing tenet immediately after 9-11.

once again the terrorists continue to get a free pass from you. no one has argued that mistakes were made. bush could have micromanaged more, but he left a lot up to his staff and generals. maybe rumsfeld screwed up. he is actually a very good defense secretary, but he was also burned out and should really have been replaced to get some fresh blood in there and some new ideas. you act like they had a crystal ball. you didnt know any better either and if you claim you did youre a liar. hindsight is 20/20.

Anonymous said...

The CIA fucked up did it?
Tenet stretched the info by telling the President "it's possible Saddam has WMDs".
Tell me how Rumsfeld then got this from "it's possible"?

"We know where [the weapons] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and East, West, North and South somewhat." (3/30/03)

I'd call that a major administrative fuck up, on a scale so big, it's called "lying" under normal parlance.

I'd also say that firing the only advisor who said that you'd need to send twice as many troops, and have a proper cleanup plan is also a major fuck up.

None of this is the CIA's fault.

Anonymous said...

actually it was people like you that prevented more troops from being sent in. it was the need for "political correctness" imposed by liberals that made some leaders think we needed to send in a limited number of troops to keep casualties and collateral damage down. i agree we should have been more aggressive and should be so now. couple that with the third and final intelligence failure, the cia's erroneuous assessment of the post-invasion projection of iraq and you have tenet's third strike. he was fired after that. whatever the cia sadi publicly you can almost certainly bet that there were different words exchanged behind closed doors that you cannot hear. only the detractors and dissenters are ever heard publicly because they usually have political agendas to fulfill. a sad fact of life here in dc. this is not an attack, it is a fact: you know so little. i am not insulting you it is merely the truth. you do not see so much because so much is said far from the eyes of the media you cherish so. often you will here an official say one thing in public when he knows the opposite to be true. that is because we are unable to say anything that would tip our hand to our enemies. so een as public opinion shifts we cannot expose facts that would exonerate us politically because it would hurt us strategically. its like playing chess without being able to see all your peices. you just cannot do it. just wait until you can see all the pieces, dear za and the answers you seek shall be there for you and all to see.

Anonymous said...

Um, no. It was the advisors Bush kept who said that you'd only need a small amount of troops. It was Bush supporters who kept claiming the whole thing would be a cake walk. It was Rumsfeld himself who said that the operation could take 6 days, 6 weeks, but probably not 6 months.
None of that would have "tipped your hand", and since the majority of the information on the planning was given out after you went in, that's utter bullcrap.

And no, what Tenet said behind closed doors has been made public, because he was so denounced (and thus it was pertinent to be brought up). He says that he stretched the truth in saying that it was possible Saddam had WMDs, but he never said it was true that he did, and he certainly never gave anything stating that they knew where "Saddam's WMDs" were.

I'm guess it would have "tipped your hand" for Saddam to know that the Bush administration didn't really think he had WMDs?

Anonymous said...

Interested. Keep Blogging!