Back to 007 mission

British_Basra

What I find dif­fi­cult to under­stand why most of the peo­ple behave like cat­tle derived by politi­cians and the media.
Peo­ple, politi­cians and the media for­get the main prob­lem and started to shift the focus on sub-problems in an attempt to play down the cause of the real problem.

- Why do SAS mem­bers dis­guise as Iraqis?
– Is it the SAS job to gather infor­ma­tion?
– Why do they need two M4, two rocket launch­ers, anti-tanks rock­ets, 2 Machine­guns, wire cut­ters, explo­sives and 2 wigs to gather infor­ma­tion?
– How many mis­sions like this one “suc­ceeded” before ?.

Watch News­night on the BBC

What will hap­pend if two Iraqis walk­ing the streets of Lon­don or New York with the same gad­gets ( in the UK is shoot to kill policy).

The pos­i­tive news is: this event was a wakeup call for some silent Iraqis and I am includ­ing Blogs too.
We Iraqis learned in our his­tory books the term “

For sure we will never hear any infor­ma­tion about their mis­sion from offi­cials, sadly peo­ple also will never ask these ques­tions and much worst they will Jus­tify it and for sure also the com­ing weeks there will be no bomb­ings in Bassra too.

Rec­om­mended reading

Fake Ter­ror­ism Is a Coalition’s Best Friend

Sev­eral arti­cles have already turned the story against the angry Iraqis who fought the British tanks as they demol­ished the jail wall, paint­ing them as aggres­sive Shia mili­tia attack­ing the doe-eyed, inno­cent troops respond­ing to the con­cern that their com­rades were held by reli­gious fanat­ics. A pho­to­graph of a troop on fire comes com­plete with com­men­tary that the vehi­cles were under attack dur­ing a “bid to recover arrested ser­vice­men” that were pos­si­bly under­cover. All crim­i­nal ele­ments of British treach­ery are down­played, the car’s explo­sive cache is never men­tioned and the sol­diers who insti­gated the affair are made vic­tims of an unsta­ble coun­try they are defending.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

77 Responses to Back to 007 mission

  1. Jon says:

    Kit– “But I do know, beyond the shadow of a doubt that AMERICANS are less well off as a result of this inva­sion, and that our government’s first pri­or­ity ought to be OUR welfare.”

    I’ve been try­ing to tell them that, but nobody wants to lis­ten to me.

    Pssst… the word “facts” is the key to answer­ing your ques­tion. And I’d have to con­cur that the whole list con­tains noth­ing but obvi­ous facts. If you’d like to dis­pute some­thing, give it a whirl.

    This is one of those “pro­jected guilt” situations.

    Are not… blah blah blah …over­all question?”

    This is some­what less than I have come to expect from you Hank. An obvi­ously intel­li­gent and artic­u­late guy walks in and enjoins what could be a mean­ing­ful dis­cus­sion and you don’t have the cour­tesy to treat him with respect. Tsk tsk.

    Is not this casuistry?”

    You’ve flipped your lid my friend.

    Have you even begun to address the ques­tion of your country’s interests…as if the war had noth­ing to do with that welfare?”

    Appar­ently he has and appar­ently he has rejected oil as a good enough rea­son to kill so many peo­ple while leav­ing Amer­ica vul­ner­a­ble at the same time.

    Not much has besmirched the US rep­u­ta­tion like this “pre­emp­tive war”.

    And why are you con­cerned with images more than reality?”

    I’d say he’s con­cerned with both. In fact, they seem inter­twined. With America’s image in its cur­rently dilap­i­dated con­di­tion, we stand no chance for win­ning hearts and minds, which, if you ask me, was the MOST impor­tant aspect of the oper­a­tion in Iraq. I won­der how many shots have been fired at US troops sim­ply because of some sim­ple­ton like Lindy England.

    Am I turn­ing into Jon by ask­ing you long strings of lead­ing questions?”

    No, because you are just doing it do be a prick, but you knew that already.

    Charles– “Pred­i­cated on the fact that Sad­dam was in mate­r­ial breach”

    Appar­ently, he wasn’t. Even the weapons inspec­tors dis­agreed with this. The war was sold to the Amer­i­can pub­lic and every­one else, in other words, pred­i­cated, on WMD. You aren’t pulling that foot out of Bush’s mouth that easily.

    Yeah — and the sol­diers who were abus­ing detainees are under arrest.”

    HA! First off, you didn’t read Kit’s state­ment care­fully and you didn’t under­stand his mean­ing. Or you COULDN’T under­stand his mean­ing because you aren’t aware that it’s still hap­pen­ing and not just in Abu Ghraib. The things he is refer­ing to are still hap­pen­ing in Gitmo and even in places the pub­lic doesn’t know about. Peo­ple who had no involve­ment with ter­ror­ism or insur­gent activ­ity have been rounded up as sus­pects even though they were just going about their daily lives. Just because GIs have learned not to post pho­to­graphic evi­dence of their crimes on the net doesn’t mean it isn’t hap­pen­ing. And another thing… the sol­diers serv­ing time for Abu Ghraib we just scape­goats. The respon­si­ble parties(translation: chain of com­mand) got away with it.

    Thanks to the civ­i­lized world for all of their com­pas­sion for Iraqis and prac­ti­cal help.”

    How unfeel­ing of every­one now to get involved in an ille­gal war and occu­pa­tion. It’s terrible.

    I won­der what a few more 9/11’s would cost the US and the world?”

    You actu­ally think you’re safer now, don’t you?

    That is a lot and a tragedy. I won­der who is killing more now?”

    Weird how this stuff wasn’t hap­pen­ing until the US came on the scene.

    That level of causal­ties was reached within the first 30 min­utes of the somme battle.”

    It’s so strange how the com­mod­i­fi­ca­tion of human life can lead peo­ple to believe that there is some­thing called an “accept­able casu­alty rate”.

    I’m sure lib­er­als find it strange that sol­diers con­tinue to do their duty.”

    I’m pretty sure that most every­one is aware that sol­diers are just mind­less automa­tons… oops, I meant to say just fol­low­ing orders.

    The Fed­eral gov­ern­ment is NOT ALLOWED to pro­vide active duty mil­i­tary for domes­tic secu­rity purposes.”

    I thought the whole pur­pose of the mil­i­tary was to pro­vide domes­tic secu­rity. BTW… Bush already accepted full respon­si­bil­ity, so don’t try to take it back now!

    The lack of inter­na­tional sup­port, and the actions of the ter­ror­ists, make your equa­tion uglier and uglier each day.”

    Man, ter­ror­ists are just flock­ing to Iraq aren’t they? It used to be that ter­ror­ists were fairly rare, but we’ve man­aged to find tens of thou­sands of them all hid­ing in Iraq. Who’da thunk it.

    We need to update the dic­tio­nary def­i­n­i­tion of ter­ror­ist to reflect your view that a ter­ror­ist is any­one we kill in Iraq.

    Just out of curios­ity, the the rad­i­cal con­ser­v­a­tive con­tin­gent in Amer­ica all get together and decide to swap the terms “insur­gent” and “ter­ror­ist”? I recently noticed this phe­nom­e­non and it seems that con­ser­v­a­tives are con­vert­ing to this term en masse. What’s the mat­ter? Are Amer­i­cans in gen­eral too igno­rant to under­stand the word insur­gent so your PR guy had you all switch to the word terrorist?

    Same argu­ment could have been used dur­ing WWII.”

    And, in fact, was for quite a long time.

    You expect cer­tainty in an uncer­tain world. Ain’t gonna happen.”

    Trans­la­tion– Not a damn thing apart from a lit­tle oil.

    could the com­bined power of the civ­i­lized world truly fail to over­come a dictator?”

    This was accom­plished long ago. What we are now try­ing to defeat is some­thing less tan­gi­ble that a tyrant. It’s called an ide­ol­ogy and there is no hope for suc­cess in this war.

    Would it not send a mes­sage to the other baddies?”

    Yeah, and that mes­sage is that the US is weak­en­ing itself and, with a lit­tle more pres­sure, their super­power sta­tus can be wiped out. What mes­sage did you think we were send­ing? That we are big and tough and you’ve awoken the sleep­ing giant and now we shall com­mence chas­ing our tails in the desert to prove we are tough and you will become humane lead­ers because of this ludi­crous demonstration?

    It was con­gress under Clin­ton who voted to sup­port the over­throw of Saddam.”

    You prob­a­bly missed the mean­ing of the word “sup­port”. And you missed the details of the meth­ods of sup­port. And you missed the finan­cial cap put on that sup­port. Etc…

    It is bla­tantly clear that Sad­dam did not com­ply with the let­ter or the spirit of UN cease fire requirements.”

    OK… so we are invad­ing to enforce UN res­o­lu­tions now right? When does the war on Israel start?

    the UN let it drag on for over a decade, and still balked when the moment of truth arrived.”

    That’s because of what inspec­tors were telling them. They weren’t just being obsti­nate you know.

    Actu­ally it was pred­i­cated on many assertions”

    Hey… I watched Powell’s entire speach to the UN and WMD was the sell­ing point.

    (which is appar­ently what he wanted every­one to think)”

    Yes… he kept insist­ing they were destroyed because he wanted us to think he was using reverse logic on us. Boy were we fooled!

    and that he would DEFINITELY resume their pro­duc­tion once the sanc­tions were lifted and the world looked the other way”

    Yeah, he prob­a­bly would have. It’s hard for peo­ple to get any respect from the US unless they have nukes. Maybe we need to change the Brute Force and Igno­rance based for­eign pol­icy we use to some­thing that won’t encour­age lead­ers to seek nuclear capability.

    Sad­dam HAD employed ter­ror­ists against the US (an assassin”

    Even assas­sins are ter­ror­ists now are they? And you used the plural “ter­ror­ists” because of one assas­sin. Why is that? Why are you endeav­or­ing to unduly frighten your fel­low citizens?

    it was hardly spec­u­la­tion that he might be inclined to give chem­i­cal or nuclear mate­ri­als to one of the ter­ror­ist organizations ”

    Actu­ally, spec­u­la­tion is exactly what that is.

    one of the ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tions he was har­bor­ing (includ­ing Zarqawi)”

    Time will tell on that one.

    CHARLES: I won­der what a few more 9/11’s would cost the US and the world? Oh, and thanks again for your help…
    It would have cost a hell of a lot more than 200 billion.”

    Your asser­tion is that we are now safe from ter­ror attacks and this is false. In fact, we are less safe now.

    As Charles pointed out, mostly by the terrorists”

    This habit you all have devel­oped of call­ing all those peo­ple ter­ror­ists is racist hype.

    the Iraqis that WOULD have been killed by Sad­dam at this point, would be holed away in polit­i­cal pris­ons for almost barely any reason”

    Horse­hockey.

    and would have died from the con­tin­ued sanctions.”

    You mean US sanctions?

    The removal of Sad­dam stopped that.”

    Stopped Sad­dam from doing it you mean. The deaths have geo­met­ri­cally accelerated.

    But don’t let that stop your weep­ing over Saddam’s passing.”

    I have a feel­ing that Kit has no love for Sad­dam and to imply so is noth­ing more than an incen­di­ary remark.

    We lost over 1500 in a TRAINING acci­dent for the inva­sion of Normandy.”

    The com­mod­i­fi­ca­tion of human life can make any attroc­ity accept­able can’t it?

    Are you so igno­rant of the size and capa­bil­i­ties of the US forces to believe we don’t have the resources to do both”

    Are you so igno­rant as to fin­ish read­ing his state­ment of fact? Let me refresh your mem­ory with the rest of his state­ment… “have com­plained that the extended absence of so many reservists has ham­pered their ability”.

    I bet you don’t.”

    Well, I do. And they aren’t.

    Only if…they buy them.”

    Hence the inabil­ity to make a determination.

    My how compassionate!”

    Yes, much bet­ter with all those lovely bombs explod­ing and the US decid­ing how they should live.

    And when Iraq devolves into a civil war”

    You seem to think that there isn’t a civil war going on when that is exactly what’s hap­pen­ing. The US isn’t going to change that no mat­ter how much time we spend there.

    I’m sure you’ll have a really right­eous feel­ing way down deep”

    I won­der how it com­pares with the self-righteous feel­ing that per­vades YOUR life.

    The fact that you don’t con­nect Iraq’s well-being to America’s only shows how igno­rant you are of the whole situation.”

    See, you aren’t actu­ally con­cerned with the well-being of any iraqis and this I know because of the racist atti­tude you’ve made all too obvi­ous. In fact, your con­cern is only their com­pli­ance with US wishes and I am guess­ing that is because you own a Ford Expe­di­tion or some­thing of that nature.

    In the sense that ben­e­fits of democ­racy are always unclear, you are right.”

    How about the ben­e­fit of being buried under a few tons of con­crete when the Apaches are attack­ing the insur­gent cell in the next house over?

    In the sense that the ter­ror­ists will ulti­mately lose, you are wrong.”

    Trans­la­tion– You’re wrong! Because we intend to kill every towlie we can find!

    the US, of course, wants to con­trol Iraqi oil…why are the BRITISH involved in that”

    Duh! They know the world is run­ning out of oil too.

    Kit– “CMAR, your argu­ment is beneath contempt…I care about Amer­i­cans more.”

    *stand­ing on my chair and applauding* ;-)

    CMAR– “I’m glad you didn’t miss that unstated implication.”

    Obvi­ously, you HAVE missed some­thing. I’m not going to tell you what, but it’s right in front of your face.

    Say­ing it doesn’t make it so.”

    Plan B — If ratio­nal argu­ment fails, be obstinate.

    Read a his­tory book, will you?”

    For­give them, for they know not of what they speak.

    Con­se­quently it was the US that had the respon­si­bil­ity to depose Sad­dam even France could not be con­vinced to go along.”

    Plan C– When other logic types fail, resort to red­neck logic.

    I think I already have explained why…looked the other way.”

    The key word being COULD. “Could have hap­pened” isn’t much of an excuse. Got any­thing better?

    The Admin­is­tra­tion believed”

    So far, the evi­dence tends to con­tro­vert this state­ment. It seems the Admin­is­tra­tion actu­ally knew their own argu­ment was horsehockey.

    As the oppor­tu­nity presents itself as it did for Sad­dam, why not?”

    Because the fur­ther deves­ta­tion of our capa­bil­ity to wage war is going to leave this coun­try hard to defend. And when the world gets tired of our crap and shuts off the oil, it’s going to be tough get­ting those tanks from the scrapheap to overseas.

    nations like the US who CARE about keep­ing treaties.”

    I think the unsign­ing of this treaty pretty much nul­li­fies your suggestion.

    HOW could expos­ing Amer­i­cans to such a court be good for AMERICANS???”

    Humil­ity would be a start.

    I’m begin­ning to doubt your genuineness.”

    Pot… refrig­er­a­tor… black.

    Umm…heard of 9–11?”

    You sim­ply won’t accept Sad­dam was not involved even when Fox news will admit. You’re like a Step­ford fascist.

    Define nec­es­sary, knuck­le­head. We hadn’t reached the point of nec­es­sary yet. In fact, war was the very first option. In fact, it was the only option because war was the intent to start with and sanc­tions are just an excuse and oil will be the product.

    Kit– “I can see there’s no point in attempt­ing adult con­ver­sa­tion here.”

    Once in the very rare occa­sion Hank or Charles will suprise you. Beyond that, you’re out of luck.

    You argue like six-year old bul­lies on a playground.”

    Only because you’re mak­ing them work too hard.

    I will pray that you all learn that ridicule and insult are not argu­ment, and that those who are hon­est with their inquiries do not have to be rude and flippant.”

    Just keep in mind that there is a 50–50 chance that God will respond with a resound­ing “no”.

    There’s no need for me to come back here.”

    Well, at least I know I’m not alone.

    No! Come back!

    Enjoy talk­ing to yourselves.”

    *sigh*

    Trust me, you’re the con­fused one here.

    “You argue like six-year old bul­lies on a play­ground.“

    You’d be bet­ter off just to be quiet and stop mak­ing your­self look igno­rant. He said you (mean­ing CMAR and Jeff) ARGUE like 6 year old bul­lies. And you just proved him right. Bravo! Knucklehead.

    I wish I had went to your school, I would have gone far. I could have been the Uday of your school.”

    Just stop­ping for a moment to pon­der with amuse­ment Jeff get­ting the tar stomped out of him by an ex-Ranger mar­tial arts instruc­tor. And the lump that hand­gun would make while stuck in his throat. And then him try­ing to dis­lodge it with his bro­ken arms. Funny.

    I’d love to do Ann Coulter”

    Obvi­ously haven’t noticed the con­spic­u­ous Adam’s apple Coul­ter is sport­ing have you?

    I sit here read­ing this dri­vel you repli­cants spout and I have to laugh. I hear some­one tell Kit to read a book and I find this too funny. I’ve actu­ally seen his library and know that he’s read every­thing in it and that it is no small feat. Not to men­tion his plural degrees which actu­ally QUALIFY him to be here dis­cussing these things unlike the rest of us hacks. It took some cajol­ing on my part to get Kit to honor this place with his vast wis­dom, edu­ca­tion and hon­esty. I was cer­tain that, even as igno­rant and pig-headed as most of you peo­ple are, that you would still be able to rec­og­nize the truth when it was plunked down in your lap. I was wrong. I read a few days back when some­one posted, “the only thing Amer­i­cans under­stand is dead Amer­i­cans”. I sadly have to admit this appears to be true. I can see that Amer­ica is going to learn its lessons the hard way and THAT is the part of this sit­u­a­tion that has destroyed the rep­u­ta­tion of the US. And when some­one takes a chuck out of one of our cities with a nuclear device, I won’t be blam­ing them, I’ll be blam­ing you rad­i­cal con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­t­ian suprema­cist igno­rant red­neck dipshits.

  2. Jeff says:

    Define nec­es­sary, knuck­le­head. We hadn’t reached the point of nec­es­sary yet.

    How about one better…How about includ­ing the whole phase, not just a word to sup­port your stance.

    In 1441 it states…

    All nec­es­sary means” We spent 12 years using every nec­es­sary means. Here’s a thought, You are plac­ing the blame on the US when all sad­dam could have done is say…Nope, I don’t have them, feel free to look every­where you want to look. But no knuck­le­head, he choose to play the cat and mouse game for 12 years. It’s pretty damn simple.

    But who gives fuck, right?

    And when some­one takes a chuck out of one of our cities with a nuclear device, I won’t be blam­ing them, I’ll be blam­ing you rad­i­cal con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­t­ian suprema­cist igno­rant red­neck dipshits.

    nice… Yep, that’s mature…Thanks for your help in advance ;-)

    Any­way, I found this to be quite interesting…

    Neo-fascism and the U.S.

    Richard Rahn, a senior fel­low of the Dis­cov­ery Insti­tute and adjunct scholar of the Cato Insti­tute states:

    “Despite the elec­tion of a ‘com­pas­sion­ate con­ser­v­a­tive’ as pres­i­dent, fed­eral spend­ing is again grow­ing faster than national income, even exclud­ing the new mil­i­tary spend­ing, in large part due to a bipar­ti­san effort to enlarge gov­ern­ment. The laud­able effort made in the late 1990s to get rid of most farm sub­si­dies is now in the process of being thrown out. Free trade is under attack and pro­tec­tion­ism is again emerg­ing, and the recent ‘cam­paign finance reform’ leg­is­la­tion is a direct attack on free speech. The new fas­cism is not just a dan­ger for Euro­peans; it is a present dan­ger for us.” [1]

    Clin­ton Administration

    There con­tin­ues to remain con­ser­v­a­tive, lib­er­tar­ian, and inde­pen­dent view points that the Bill Clin­ton admin­is­tra­tion was fas­cist. They point to Clinton’s attempt to “cen­tral­ize” the finan­cial and eco­nomic mar­kets and to social­ize the econ­omy. They also point to the lib­eral con­trol of the media which would sup­port the con­tention that the media worked in col­lu­sion with the admin­is­tra­tion. Like­wise, many of Hillary Clinton’s poli­cies have been crit­i­cized as fascist.

    Cer­tain actions taken by Clin­ton dur­ing his admin­is­tra­tion have also caused crit­ics to call his admin­is­tra­tion Fascist:

    * Mil­i­tary actions in Bosnia, Soma­lia, and Sudan.
    * Actions taken at Waco, TX in deal­ing with the Branch David­i­ans.
    * The actions taken in regards to the Elian Gon­za­les sit­u­a­tion in Florida.
    * Motions towards the accu­mu­la­tion of con­trol at the fed­eral level, lead­ing to fears of total­i­tar­i­an­ism (one of many aspects of a poten­tial Fas­cist state).

    I know you like Bill Clin­ton and the Demo­c­ra­tic party, so I thought I’d let you take a look at this. It takes a pretty closed minded per­son to just look at the last 4 1/2 years to deter­mine there’s a prob­lem and con­stantly place the blame and foam at the mouth at Bush and Conservative’s. I per­son­ally blame them all, but it seems that you’re are really bias against conservative’s. Jon, I really think you may be a closet liberal…I’m just say­ing. As for the lib­er­tar­ian party…You’ve turned me com­pletely off to them as well. Thanks! Now I off­i­cally hate them all.

    You know, I was lis­ten­ing to Michael Bad­narik last week while I was dri­ving home from work and he is an extremely intel­li­gent man, with class. I didn’t hear any of the “rad­i­cal con­ser­v­a­tive Chris­t­ian suprema­cist igno­rant red­neck dip­shits” com­ments com­ing from him. The only time I see or hear words like fas­cist, red­neck, chris­t­ian suprema­cist, igno­rant. etc. is when it’s com­ing from a lib­eral. If the lib­er­tarin party is mostly made up of peo­ple like you, then i’m sorry, I’ll have no part of it. You’re no bet­ter than Rush Limb­what­ever, Ted Kennedy or George Bush and the peo­ple who sup­port them.

    And as for this Kit person…whatever…I’m glad he can read and does just that. Now go and tell him to take his book/plural degree knowl­ege and save the fuck­ing planet.

  3. Hank says:

    Now the Ladymichaelists have writ­ten all Amer­i­cans off as Nazis. Unfor­tu­nately, Michael’s men­tor, Dr. Nor­man D. Liv­er­sausage (see ) doesn’t com­ment on the Arabs so the Ladymichaelists don’t know what posi­tion to take.

    ” there is noth­ing fun­da­men­tally Islamic about these extrem­ists. They are reli­gious total­i­tar­i­ans, in a long line of extrem­ists of var­i­ous faiths who seek power by intim­i­da­tion, vio­lence and thuggery.”

    and from Michael the ANSWER is: ‘er, um, well, yes this must be a nasty-crusader red­neck what­sit just like the hones mind of Jon has expressed it.’

    Well, sorry old boy. It’s King Abdul­lah II of Jor­dan (http://www.jordanembassyus.org/hmka12072002.htm).

    oh, er, um, let me con­sult with the Polit­buro and then I’ll tell you what they say I think.’

  4. Jeff says:

    test­ing 1 2 3 .… is this mic on…? I just spent the last 15 min­utes writ­ing and it didn’t get posted…

    I think I’m being censored…

    Help Help…I’m being repressed!

  5. Hank says:

    Oh sorry, I left out the link to the Ladymichaelists’ men­tor — see “The Demonic Cabal” at http://www.new-enlightenment.com/cabal_index.htm

    Liv­er­sausage Speaks Out!

  6. Hank says:

    I think you must have hurt the feel­ings of some­one with very ten­der sen­si­bil­i­ties and a great love for all human­ity that is so all-pervasive it is inef­fa­ble (exclud­ing Americans).

  7. Hank says:

    Now by con­trast with the fine sen­ti­ments of King Abdul­lah, who is the hero of the left and of the extrem­ists to whom the King refers, Y. Arafat?

    By stark con­trast with King Abdul­lah II, we observe Y.Arafat, the George Wash­ing­ton of the “Pales­tin­ian State” and Arab hero of the Ladymichaelists:

    Secret cam­eras filmed Arafat’s nightly orgies of homo­sex­ual cavort­ing with his body guards while he was a guest at the dic­ta­tor Nico­lae Ceausescu’s man­sion. They also kept care­ful record of the young boys (mostly teens from Ruman­ian orphan­ages) with whom Ceaus­escu plied Arafat’s seem­ingly lim­it­less pedophilia. Given the tra­di­tional Moslem taboos regard­ing homo­sex­u­al­ity, the KGB eas­ily got what it needed to keep Arafat under con­trol (See http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19590).”

    By the way, Pacepa was the head of Ruman­ian intel­li­gence at the time and later defected to civil­i­sa­tion; see biog­ra­phy athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_Mihai_Pacepa .

    He wrote his mem­oirs: “Red Hori­zons”. Pos­si­bly another nazi-american-puppet-dupe, Michael?

  8. Jeff says:

    Just stop­ping for a moment to pon­der with amuse­ment Jeff get­ting the tar stomped out of him by an ex-Ranger mar­tial arts instruc­tor. And the lump that hand­gun would make while stuck in his throat. And then him try­ing to dis­lodge it with his bro­ken arms. Funny.

    I thought you said ear­lier that peo­ple in the mil­i­tary were stupid?

    I sit here read­ing this dri­vel you repli­cants spout and I have to laugh.

    Wow bro, you’ve done a com­plete 360. What­ever man…I’ll leave you here with your new Amer­i­can hat­ing friends. It will make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside know­ing they’ve got some­one on the inside. You can sit here and plot our(Americans) deaths with them and jump for joy when our “stu­pid” troops die.

    Uphold the con­sti­tu­tion huh…you might want to take a look at the lit­tle trea­son clause.

    Arti­cle. III.

    Sec­tion. 3.

    Clause 1: Trea­son against the United States, shall con­sist only in levy­ing War against them, or in adher­ing to their Ene­mies, giv­ing them Aid and Com­fort. No Per­son shall be con­victed of Trea­son unless on the Tes­ti­mony of two Wit­nesses to the same overt Act, or on Con­fes­sion in open Court.

    Clause 2: The Con­gress shall have Power to declare the Pun­ish­ment of Trea­son, but no Attain­der of Trea­son shall work Cor­rup­tion of Blood, or For­fei­ture except dur­ing the Life of the Per­son attainted.

  9. Jon says:

    You peo­ple are hopeless.

    Lady­Bird–

    I would like to rec­om­mend that you stop allow­ing the rad­i­cal right to waste your money in the fur­ther­ance of their cause. They are using your site to pro­pa­gan­dize as many peo­ple as they can at your expense. My rec­om­men­da­tion is that you delete every com­ment they make to stem as much as pos­si­ble the tide of their pro­pa­ganda war. While it’s impos­si­ble to stop these fas­cists, you should at least not pay to fund their efforts.

  10. Jeff says:

    Yeah Lady­bird, Cen­sor­ship is the way to go… ;-)

    And I’m sup­posed to trust your party Jon with uphold­ing my Bill of Rights?

    pro­pa­ganda war? Hey, I’m not the one post­ing pic­tures of dead babies.

    But hey, Here’s a bet­ter idea for you lady­bird. Just stop doing the blog thing and post your pro­pa­ganda they you want the world to view it. You’ll still have your 6 or 7, well…now 8, per­son fol­low­ing and it will keep them all very happy. And hey, you may pick up more traf­fic this way as well. It’s a win win for all. :-)

  11. Hank says:

    Jon now emerges as spokesman for the fas­cist left.

  12. Hank says:

    Now Jon, what do you think about the King of Jordan’s speech?

  13. Jeff says:

    Jon now emerges as spokesman for the fas­cist left

    I’m actu­ally dissapointed…

  14. Jeff says:

    oh well, I learned how the Libertarian’s actu­ally think. Now i’m off to start my own party…It’s called “It’s time to get some sleep” party.

    Later…

  15. CMAR II says:

    Jon,

    My rec­om­men­da­tion is that you delete every com­ment they make to stem as much as pos­si­ble the tide of their pro­pa­ganda war.

    I think you are a liar about being a Lib­er­tar­ian. I can’t think of a more non-Libertarian state­ment than this one.

    This also sug­gests that even you are finally real­iz­ing how base­less your argu­ments have become.

  16. CMAR II says:

    Jon,

    I just noticed you response to me regard­ing my thread with Kit.

    I think rather than com­ing up with (un)snappy answers, you should try to actu­ally READ what I said. Your answers sug­gest you didn’t even care­fully read what you were respond­ing to.

  17. Nadia_4iraqis says:

    Hi Lady­Bird!
    update

    Judge Raghib Has­san issued the war­rants on Thurs­day, accus­ing the two of wound­ing a sec­ond Iraqi police­man, car­ry­ing unli­censed weapons and hold­ing false iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, Kas­sim al-Sabti, head of the lawyers’ syn­di­cate in Basra, told Reuters.

  18. Hank says:

    What odds would you have given, four years ago, that Iraq would move from being pri­vately owned by a klep­to­cratic sadist to hav­ing a brave, tough, demo­c­ra­tic social­ist as an elected president?”

    http://www.slate.com/id/2126585/

  19. Hank says:

    Now Lady­bird will per­haps under­stand how “facts” pre­sented by this blog are cre­ated. Biter bit.

  20. Jeff says:

    Bagh­dad Dweller reports two British sol­diers held by “Iraqi author­i­ties” in Basra (also described as “Shi­ite mili­ti­a­men” in the cor­po­rate media), and sub­se­quently freed after the British stormed a police jail, were work­ing under­cover as bombers. Bagh­dad Dweller includes a link to the Wash­ing­ton Post, where the fol­low­ing appears: “Iraqi secu­rity offi­cials on Mon­day var­i­ously accused the two Britons they detained of shoot­ing at Iraqi forces or try­ing to plant explo­sives. Pho­tographs of the two men in cus­tody showed them in civil­ian clothes.” The Her­ald notes the fol­low­ing: “Sources say the British sol­diers, pos­si­bly mem­bers of the new Spe­cial Recon­nais­sance Reg­i­ment formed ear­lier this month to pro­vide intel­li­gence for SAS oper­a­tions, were look­ing at infil­tra­tion of the city’s police by the fol­low­ers of the out­spo­ken Shi’ite cleric, Moq­tada al Sadr,” thus admit­ting the sol­diers worked undercover.

    Lady­bird, you’re tread­ing on dan­ger­ous grounds…

    First of all, you’re not even in Iraq.

    Sec­ond, you are now inter­fer­ing and spread­ing pro­pa­ganda directly for Al-Qeada in Iraq and help­ing oth­ers with their cause. You have sin­gle handly con­victed these british sol­diers and for that you are now respon­si­ble for the deaths and or injuries that result from the ten­sion in the area that you are help­ing to bring about.

    The blood is now on your hands.

    Wel­come to the war.

  21. Hank says:

    ”…what is hap­pen­ing in Iraq now is cru­cial for our own secu­rity”.” Prime Min­is­ter of the United Kin­dom http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=3XPYWC4OAOBONQFIQMFSM5OAVCBQ0JVC?xml=/news/2005/09/25/ulabour.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/09/25/ixportaltop.html

  22. Hank says:

    Finally, a real peace process: An Israeli Air Force com­bat heli­copter fly­ing over Gaza fired a mis­sile towards a vehi­cle car­ry­ing the Pales­tin­ian ter­ror­ist, who, accord­ing to Army Radio, was iden­ti­fied as Sheikh Mohammed Khalil, a senior mem­ber of the Islamic Jihad mil­i­tary wing. An army announce­ment said that its forces car­ried out an inter­cep­tion of a car that was trans­port­ing Khalil and another man, Aya Latif Sheikh Khalil, who were the heads of Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip.“
    http://www.moonbatcentral.org/wordpress/

    Wouldn’t you agree, Lady­moon­bat, that this is the way to hit hard at ter­ror­ists — go for their lead­ers. The peo­ple may obtain peace a lot quicker. Would they become slaves with­out these thugs comtrolling them? You say at the head of this blog that the peo­ple are “cat­tle”. Why not sup­port this method to get rid of the cow­boys who are rid­ing the herd over a cliff. Why do you phony left­ists never trust the peo­ple? The real cat­tle who have rings through their noses are the ones who put out the ide­o­log­i­cally biased and rub­bishy views which dis­fig­ure your blog. Yes, I mean you.

  23. Jon says:

    Jeff– “How about includ­ing the whole phase, not just a word to sup­port your stance.”

    The one word defines the intent of the phrase. I don’t con­sider occu­pa­tions of sov­er­eign nations nec­es­sary until they are actu­ally a threat. You are mis­read­ing the state­ment if you think it indi­cates that war was war­ranted in Iraq.

    You are plac­ing the blame on the US when all sad­dam could have done is say…Nope, I don’t have them, feel free to look every­where you want to look.”

    He said many times that he had destroyed weapons and inspec­tors were begin­ning to real­ize he was telling the truth. Then Bush(Rove) real­ized they were going to lose the oppor­tu­nity to take over an oil rich nation and rushed to war.

    But who gives f***, right?”

    Prob­a­bly the man who is stand­ing some­where in Iraq right now try­ing to dig his baby daugh­ter out from under 2000 pounds of concrete.

    Clin­ton Administration”

    And indeed they can and I believe that is because both par­ties are work­ing together to make a “roy­alty of wealth” in this nation. Which is also why I am not a Demo­c­rat. Democ­rats have mor­phed into the con­ser­v­a­tive party in Amer­ica. Repub­li­cans have mor­phed into the fas­cist party. It is the ten­dancy of the power entity to seek more power. This is seen through­out his­tory. It’s the nat­ural course of gov­ern­ment to become author­i­tar­ian. The left-wing agenda also leads to author­i­tar­i­an­ism because human nature causes the pow­er­ful to seek more power. So, in effect, it is the power that is evil and humans who are just react­ing accord­ing to their ani­mal nature. The is the rea­son I am a lib­er­tar­ian (or minar­chist as Kit calls it). I believe that the gov­ern­ment will ruin every good thing it gets it’s hands on. The US found­ing fathers under­stood the same thing which is why they made every effort they could to hand­i­cap the gov­ern­ment, but power has tri­umphed and author­i­tar­i­an­ism is tak­ing hold.

    I know you like Bill Clin­ton and the Demo­c­ra­tic party”

    There are things that I like about Bill Clin­ton. I think he’s a bril­liant man, but some­what twisted by soci­ety. He did good things in office. He did bad things in office. He stained the car­pet in the Oval Office and that wasn’t the swiftest maneu­ver. He shouldn’t have lied in court. He should have been a man and told the every­one to mind their own busi­ness about his sex life. But, regard­less of a party’s agenda, if you plan on enforc­ing it through author­i­tar­i­an­ism, you will never get my vote, even if it means another fas­cist gets elected to office. I’m not wor­ried. If the free are cor­nered, they will morph into rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies again and we will start over.

    It takes a pretty closed minded per­son to just look at the last 4 1/2″

    Bush is respon­si­ble for every­thing that has hap­pened while he is in office. My great­est con­cern is his total dis­re­gard for lib­erty in the pur­suit of his agenda. He has now left gap­ing holes of prece­dence in our Con­sti­tu­tion and I find that unfor­giv­able. But, as I said before, I blame all author­i­tar­i­ans for every hos­tile con­di­tion in America.

    it seems that you’re are really bias against conservative’s”

    If the issue were social secu­rity instead of the slaugh­ter of inno­cents, I would lam­baste the left. For this forum, indict­ment of the right is required. My bias is in favor of self-determinate auton­omy and that is it.

    I really think you may be a closet liberal”

    I really think this is because you have become indoc­tri­nated. I’m not say­ing that as an isult, but you are fail­ing to see cer­tain truths about our sit­u­a­tion here. Either you are being will­fully obtuse or you just don’t believe me. I can’t fix either and there­fore I make state­ments to the effect that “you are hope­lessly indoctrinated”.

    Now I off­i­cally hate them all.”

    This is because, as I men­tioned before, you are not really a Lib­er­tar­ian. I’m not try­ing to hurt your feel­ings, but I rec­og­nize the fact that you don’t believe in things that lib­er­tar­i­ans believe in. It may be that you aren’t aware. It may be that you don’t under­stand the logic behind the plan. It may be that you are a poser. I have no clue. I don’t hate you because you aren’t a lib­er­tar­ian. If you want to renounce your sta­tus as a mem­ber of the Lib­er­tar­ian party, you are more than free to do so and because the party col­lects no dues, it costs you noth­ing. In fact, because you are will­ing to leave the Lib­er­tar­ian party just means that you never were one in the first place. You may have thrown a vote to the party on occa­sion, but what the party needs is peo­ple who under­stand the nature of power and the inevitable harm that it does in every­thing that it seeks to con­trol. So by renounc­ing your lib­er­tar­i­an­ism, you have essen­tially proven my point for me. Thanks! I don’t con­sider you a loss to the party because we never really had you. You are always wel­come back, but if you come back, then I encour­age you to research the nature of power, the psy­chol­ogy of mass move­ment and assim­i­late some knowl­edge of the ter­mi­nol­ogy of pol­i­tics so that you can work as solid mem­ber of the party. So, it’s up to you. No biggie.

    Heh… yeah, that’s because he’s much smarter than I am and he doesn’t waste his time bang­ing his head against a wall by try­ing to talk to all of you peo­ple like I do. And yes, I am human and yes I want to wring your necks some­times because you all can be very aggra­vat­ing. The fact is that EVERYONE here has missed the point of what is going on and that includes both the left– and right-wing con­tin­gents which post here.

    You’re no bet­ter than Rush Limb­what­ever, Ted Kennedy or George Bush and the peo­ple who sup­port them.”

    Ummm… the peo­ple who sup­port them are you and the rest of the right-wing con­tin­gent here. And the dif­fer­ence between those peo­ple and me is that I don’t want the gov­ern­ment to con­trol your life. Or mine. Espe­cially mine.

    Now go and tell him to take his book/plural degree knowl­ege and save the fuck­ing planet.”

    While I won’t divulge Kit’s per­sonal details here, I will say that he actu­ally has a damn fine record of doing just that, one case at a time.

    Hank– “like the hones mind of Jon has expressed it”

    I was talk­ing to this girl the other day. Nice kid, wife, mother, Chris­t­ian fun­da­men­tal­ist, etc. And I told her the same thing I’ll tell you. If you sup­port or vote for the fas­cist party, you are a fas­cist. You might be nice as pie, but you are still a fas­cist at least by proxy. I’m sure there were plenty of nice, kind and intel­li­gent Nazis run­ning around Hitler’s Ger­many. But they were still Nazis.

    Jeff– “Help Help…I’m being repressed!”

    Of course you are. That’s how you became authority-addicted.

    Hank– “I think you must have hurt the feel­ings of some­one with very ten­der sen­si­bil­i­ties and a great love for all humanity”

    Who? Me? No, my feel­ings are fine. You’re just annoy­ing. Yes, I love human­ity. I think it’s the best hope for human survival.

    Jeff– “I thought you said ear­lier that peo­ple in the mil­i­tary were stupid?”

    If you are STILL in the mil­i­tary with the cur­rent admin­is­tra­tion that is in office… there is some­thing wrong with you. Sorry to my for­mer brothers-in-arms, but, trust me, they all already know they are not the bright­est bulbs in the box.

    I sus­pected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all mem­bers of the mil­i­tary pro­fes­sion I never had an orig­i­nal thought until I left the ser­vice. My men­tal fac­ul­ties remained in sus­pended ani­ma­tion while I obeyed the orders of the higher-ups. This is typ­i­cal with every­one in the mil­i­tary ser­vice.“
    –Major Gen­eral Smed­ley But­ler, USMC

    Wow bro, you’ve done a com­plete 360.”

    OK, I hope you aren’t going to be overly sen­si­tive while I insult your intel­li­gence, but you’ve left your­self wide open to it. If I did a 360, I have not changed direc­tion. While this is indeed true that I remain stead­fast in my posi­tion, we all know that’s not what you meant. ;-)

    I’ll leave you here with your new Amer­i­can hat­ing friends.”

    Truth­fully, I don’t con­sider you to be some­one who loves Amer­ica. You think you do, but I would guess it has more to do with your love of your com­fort­able lifestyle and the enter­tain­ment value of our government’s antics than any­thing else. If you actu­ally did love Amer­ica, you would be engag­ing in the fight to pro­tect the Con­sti­tu­tion from the domes­tic ene­mies we have run­ning around all over the place. Because I rec­og­nize that these state­ments are, at least, close to acu­rate, your opin­ion of me is of very lit­tle inter­est to me.

    You can sit here and plot our(Americans) deaths”

    This is the type of state­ment that I find crazy-making. I actu­ally con­sider Michael, Nadia and Lady­Bird to be endeav­or­ing to save Amer­i­can lives, regard­less if that is their intent. And on the other hand, I con­sider Charles, Hank, CMAR and your­self to be incur­ring Amer­i­can deaths. The real­ity of the sit­u­a­tion is as I have stated it. I call you indoc­tri­nated because you can only see your side and you are miss­ing obvi­ous points of logic. It’s not (just) your fault that you are indoc­tri­nated. You were cul­ti­vated to be this way.

    Arti­cle. III. Sec­tion. 3.”

    If you are accus­ing me of trea­son, you are mis­taken. Our great­est ene­mies are cur­rently domes­tic. My endeav­ors are to non-violently pro­tect and pre­serve the Con­sti­tu­tion of the US. I con­sider all those ignor­ing the destruc­tion of civil rights in this nation to be domes­tic ene­mies. Yes, that includes you. But, while hope exists, swords won’t be drawn. At least not by me. I can’t vouch for the anar­chists though. Those guys are start­ing to get a lit­tle edgy.

    Lady­Bird– “I would like to rec­om­mend that you stop allow­ing the rad­i­cal right to waste your money in the fur­ther­ance of their cause.”

    I should explain why I made this state­ment. I know there are Repub­li­cans in the midst who are using what­ever means nec­es­sary to dis­rupt this blog­ging process and will use all means, regard­less of how annoy­ing, to pre­vent real infor­ma­tion from get­ting out. They pick fights. They malign and and mis­in­form. They do any­thing they can on the part of their orga­ni­za­tions to obfus­cate the truth. And they do it here at LadyBird’s expense. By allow­ing this to hap­pen, she is, in effect, defeat­ing her own purpose.

    Jeff– “Cen­sor­ship is the way to go”

    When dis­course becomes hos­tile (or worse), cen­sor­ship is indeed the way to go, espe­cially if your pur­pose is being hin­dered by not censoring.

    pro­pa­ganda war? Hey, I’m not the one post­ing pic­tures of dead babies.”

    You, of all peo­ple, deny­ing pro­pa­gan­diz­ing. You must think I’m blind.

    And hey, you may pick up more traf­fic this way as well.”

    LadyBird’s agenda, as demon­strated, con­sists of get­ting the US out of Iraqi affairs. I’m sure that los­ing the four or five hos­tile con­ser­v­a­tives in here would not hurt her pur­pose one bit.

    Hank– “Jon now emerges as spokesman for the fas­cist left.”

    Because they are left­ist doesn’t make them wrong about every­thing. The same goes for the right. But we aren’t here crit­i­ciz­ing social secu­rity and wel­fare, so I haven’t had the chance to employ right-wing anti-social logic yet. But I have in the past and will in the future. You just don’t under­stand by polit­i­cal posi­tion, so you will eas­ily make those mis­taken assumptions.

    And another thing, go com­pare and con­trast the two words “social­ist” and “fas­cist” for yourself.

    Now Jon, what do you think about the King of Jordan’s speech?”

    Didn’t read it. What did you think of it?

    Jeff– “I learned how the Libertarian’s actu­ally think.”

    I’m highly doubt­ful that you have even an inkling of lib­er­tar­ian logic. Maybe over time we can change that. Not sure you’d stick with lib­er­tar­i­an­ism once you find out you’ll have to run your own life though. Takes more char­ac­ter than you’ve demonstrated.

    CMAR– “I think you are a liar about being a Libertarian.”

    Of course you’d say that. But the true liar is one who speaks of free­dom and then com­mences to slaugh­ter­ing. (pssst… that’s you)

    I can’t think of a more non-Libertarian state­ment than this one.”

    It’s not Lib­er­tar­ian, it’s strate­gic. And it’s harm­less com­pared to the strate­gies you advocate.

    Your answers sug­gest you didn’t even care­fully read what you were respond­ing to.”

    That’s quite pos­si­ble. *snicker* How­ever, your ide­ol­ogy is too inhu­mane for you to stand any chance of sway­ing me, so you might as well not even bother. My belief that fas­cism has taken hold of Amer­i­can soci­ety is unshak­able and any­thing you say in defi­ance is patently wrong. I won’t explain why you’re wrong because you’ve proved your­self unwill­ing to lis­ten. I can’t say for sure why you exist in this state of denial, but you indeed “fit the pro­file” (to use your own meth­ods against you).

    Sec­ond, you are now inter­fer­ing and spread­ing pro­pa­ganda directly for Al-Qeada in Iraq and help­ing oth­ers with their cause. You have sin­gle handly con­victed these british sol­diers and for that you are now respon­si­ble for the deaths and or injuries that result from the ten­sion in the area that you are help­ing to bring about.”

    Now there is a load if I ever read one. I guess if you are going to pull that kind of crap, my def­i­n­i­tion of you just went from “fas­cist” to “babykiller”.

    The blood is now on your hands.”

    The blood is on everyone’s hands by now.

    Lady­moon­bat”

    You are quite the gen­tle­man aren’t you? I might as well dis­re­gard every­thing you spew until you can be civil. And I thought it was the French who had no manners.

  24. Pingback: Back to 007 mission :: from www.uruknet.info :: news from occupied Iraq - ch

  25. Pingback: This Fucking War: September 2005