Cool News
Peter Jennings Is Gone
Hey folks, Harry here... Peter Jennings just passed away. He'd been fighting Lung Cancer for some time now - and well... that's one thing killing folks that we have a lot further to go in fighting it. Honestly, I never really watched ABC NEWS, I've always been more of a CBS NEWS junkie in terms of my network news of choice. But usually - we all chose the "network" of choice, then if you're like me ya hit a lot of cable news outlets. But for some of you, Peter was the voice and face of the times... your entire life - or a significant portion of your life. Peter will definitely be missed. Be kind.
Click here for the Yahoo's Write-up
-
+ Expand All
-
first?
-
is it possible?
-
I liked Jennings. Sad to see him gone.
-
Can't say I watched ABC either...but I preferred him to Brokaw.
-
Couldn't the Lord have taken Matt Lauer or Bill O'Reilly instead?
-
No truer post has been posted here. it pains me that i have to get a decent news story from the internest, while tv news moves more and more towards the superficial and crap celebs like paris Hilton to mention one in a long list of crap people who now floods our airwaves as if they are important. I could go on, but Jennings did indeed do his best to inform the American people of the important news.
-
Very sad to see him gone. Especially with the advent of biased cable news, there seems to be very little "real" journalism left, in print or on tv.
-
Peter Jennings quit smoking 20 years ago which shows that ex-smokers are far from safe from lung cancer. He admitted he started up again after the 9-11 attacks, but it just goes to show that smoking sucks.
-
"May the road rise up to meet you, may the wind be always at your back, may the Lord always hold you in the hollow of His hand." G'journey, Mr. Jennigs. You will be missed.
-
I always liked Jennings. The world has lost a great newsman.
-
this comes as a shock. I hope he's found peace.
-
Aug 08, 2005 12:09:02 AM CDT
Jennings was a liberal Canadian who never even finished high sch
by hell's cigarette
RIP Peter!
-
I'm sure he put up a good fight, it must have been pretty bad, RIP Mr. Jennings
-
Peter Jennings was the face I associated with the news, growing up. Sad to see him gone.
-
Met him at my job a couple years ago...very nice, approachable guy. Especially for five-in-the-morning.
-
Jennings picked a good time to go. TV News is a dinosaur. RIP Peter.
-
I love the full title and author combination of "May his soul be in peace. By GiftedInThePants"
Awesome. R.I.P. Peter, man, that came on and took him very fast. And he even remained positive until the end. He was on TV only 3 weeks ago or so to update his condition. . . wow. -
Aug 08, 2005 1:05:14 AM CDT
Sad that Harry had to ask "Be kind..." and yet some of you manag
by aceattorney
Congrats!
-
I always liked Peter...seemed like a class act...this is a dark day indeed
-
I work at a TV station in Illinois. When I saw Jennings had died earlier tonight, the whole newsrioom fell silent. He was what everyone in the news business inspires to be. He will be missed.
-
Anyone who says anything aside from "He was a great man." is an idiot. But... what else could any of us expect?
-
Aug 08, 2005 1:17:17 AM CDT
I'm not just saying this, because he passed on, but of the 3
by orionsangels
He seemed genuine and honest in his reporting. You felt like he cared, where the other two were more arrogant and cold in their news reporting. Bless his family
-
If you have actually taken the time to read the posts, you would find that not one person had anything bad to say about the guy...
-
Right? I mean, come on. You know all that stuff is real, right?
-
In the age of cable news, where the commentators are more entertainers than actual journalist, Peter Jennings raised the bar on bringing us the world. Ture, network new may be a dinosaur, but I prefer it over anything FOXNEWS or CNN can show you. He had class and while many people on the Right will say he was too much a liberal, he always outshined them and will be long remembered as a soothing voice among the cacophony of dissenting talking heads who think ratings are more important than communicating important news. ABC has always been my favorite network to hear the news, and during 9/11 I found it more insightful than FOX and CNN put together. And while I felt deep down inside that when he signed off back in April that it would be the last time he would be seen, I hoped that he could beat the cancer. I lost my dad to lung cancer 37 years ago when I was 5. Smoking will kill you, and we should encourage everyone -especially today's young and teenagers, that you could smoke for 60 years and die of old age, or you can die at 33 like my father did. Rest in peace, Mr. Jennings. We hardly knew you.
-
Mine was always a Peter Jennings household...this caught me off guard.
-
Dan Lee, who I believe was head animator of Pixar died recently at 35 from lung cancer and he never smoked. He was very unlucky. If you give up smoking, the longer the time passes from when you quit, the less your risk is going to be but you can never get it to zero. However, don't let that stop you from trying to quit, it's in your best interests, really ...
-
Sad that he had to go out this way. People like Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and Ted Koppel are so ingrained in my memory that it's hard for me to imagine television without them. May he rest in peace.
-
The old guard are dying off, leaving scumbags and charlatans to hold the line and keep up the traditions of journalism (which they are not upholding at all). Jennings was a real journalist, and it's shame he had to go, and yet people like Tucker Carlson and Bill O'Reilly are still with us. The good die young.
-
Stay classy, San Diego!!!
-
Well, if you don't like them, don't listen to them. Of course, you could always get your news from Channel One or Genine Garafollo (sp), but fuck all. The networks lost because they anchors had unlubed cucumbers up their asses. People turned to Fox News because the anchors are more down to Earth.
-
May your soul and spirit rest for all of time.
-
krullboy for the love of God I hope that was a cruel joke... Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly... yea 'down-to-earth' guys lol.
-
Aug 08, 2005 3:56:10 AM CDT
Christian Zane, I was referring to the people on Fox and Friends
by krullboy
needed to clear that up
-
and Godspeed. First Tom Brokaw retires, then Dan Rather is forced to step down & now, Peter Jennings has passed on. It truly is the end of an era for network t.v. news.
-
You might only be canceled but still alive.
-
Though I was very young, I recall that Peter Jennings on World News tonight was my first exposure to TV news. By the time I saw him, he'd already secured the anchor's chair, however before that, he was one of the youngest to do that in his first run at ABC (he was in studio commentator by age 27)Jennings was always a professional, who exhibited a great deal of poise in his broadcast. I admit in contrast to today's anchors, he will be recognized as the last of a breed. We may never see his like again.
-
After close to a quarter of a century on the air, they all end up leaving within a matter of weeks. Dan Rather disgracefully, Tom Brokaw with dignity and Peter Jennings permanently.
-
Aug 08, 2005 7:09:34 AM CDT
So sad. I grew up watching Mr. Jennings. And he was the only anc
by mr. profit
He was a real anchor, and we wont see great anchors like him anymore. I loved the fact that he was so proper yet he never graduated High School. He'll be missed.
-
So long, Mr. Jennings. Thanks for all the news.....
-
Hope you're enjoying the heat!
-
oh god, not this again. there IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS. there is, however a BLATANT CONSERVATIVE MEDIA BIAS. this isn't to say there aren't liberal news outlets, of course there are, but the MAINSTREAM NATIONAL NEWS is overtly RIGHT WING. only loony tunes tinfoil hat wearing RepubliChristian RightWingers think otherwise. for the ReichWingers, anything or anyone to the left of HITLER is a flaming liberal. give me a break and WAKE THE FUCK UP. (the closest thing this country has to totally objective moderate news is NPR, and the RepubliChristian congress hates them and is trying to get them off the air. go figure. only the party line is acceptable, right? onward christian wermacht! praise jesus.
-
Despite the obvious leftwing bias of ABC, I'll miss seeing him on television at my granparents' house.
-
Aug 08, 2005 9:54:46 AM CDT
You Know, I Think GOEBBELS Leaned A Little Too Far To the Left T
by zombiesolutions
ah, NeoCons! i can only imagine what reality must look like from inside the fun-house mirror / fever dream nightmare world you live in. don't worry about Jennings, right now he is frolicing about in a magical fantasy land of rainbows and unicorns with God, Jesus, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny. Godspeed, anchorman! Godspeed.
-
In a media world where knee jerk opinion (in the form of countless "experts") has replaced deliberation and trivia has replaced fact, seeing another of the old guard journalists leave the stage is sad indeed. So long and thanks for all the News, Mr. Jennings.
-
Could for once, just once, people on this site show some respect to someone who just passed away. It doesn't matter if you are republican, democrat, liberal, conservative
-
He was my favorite anchor as well. I may not have agreed with his politics, but when he was behind the news desk, he was the best and I've always had a great deal of respect for him.
But I'd like to respond to some of the other comments here. First, to ChristianZane: Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly are NOT news anchors. They are commentators. They are hosts of debate and commentary shows. That's not an anchor. The closest thing FOX News has to an anchor is Shepard Smith. Secondly, to ZombieSolutions: You can find evidence of both liberal and conservative bias depending on the media outlet. Personally, I think it mostly equals out, but overall leans a tad to the liberal side. And to EVERYONE who likes to talk politics: Anybody who uses words like "ReichWingers" or "Dumbocrats" or "Repugnicans" reveals themselves to be complete morons and invalidates anything they might have to say. -
president bush: peter jennings was a newsman. that means, he was a NEWS man. its about the news... from a man. he was "a man of news."
-
I'd just like to point out that every poll of reporters shows huge left wing biases. Last year there were plenty, funded by the major networks and New York times that showed journalists were more likely to identify themselves as liberal rahter than conservative by a 7 to 1 margin (35% said they were liberal, 5% said conservative, and btw the rest who called themselves moderates are liberals) and were more likely to vote for Kerry by a 12!!! to 1 margin. So explain that one Zombiesolutions... Still sad to see Jennings go.
-
Not really, he was cool. I watched him sometimes, he was alright. Peace, PJ.
-
"objective journalism is necessarily liberal because objectivism is a liberal trait" Oh, is that why the left loves Ayn Rand so much? ;)
-
All of the respectable news show anchors are leaving. This idea of a liberal bias only makes sense to conservatives who consistantly watch Fox news. News programs aren't supposed to exist only to confirm your views of the world. Fox isn't a news program at all, but a commentary show, they inject so much of their bias that most other "actual" journalists would be ashamed of admitting. A liberal bias!? it's not really there... there's no boogyman in your closet and Jesus didn't die and ascend into heaven, the fucker's dead. gravy.
-
R.I.P.
-
Can you back up any of that with any real examples, or are you a lazy thinker who just likes to make unfounded accusations? Look at media studies, Fox consistently scores better than any network in the amount of negative coverage given to the parties, in the last election ABC and CBS were the top offenders when it came to discrepancies i.e. giving Kerry an overwhelming amount of positive stories and Bush a overwhelming amount of negative stories. Fox is heavily biased in its' commentatories I admit. But conservatives do better in this format, just look at talk radio where liberals can't make a show sucessful to save their lives.
-
McLennon, the reason that journalists are more likely to vote for Kerry over Bush is because he supports freedom of the press and won't arrest them for not revealing their sources. But to get back on topic, Mr. Jennings will certainly be missed. I cannot think of the last time the death of a complete stranger had shocked and saddened me as much as his has.
-
Aug 08, 2005 11:23:29 AM CDT
Unless you subscribe to the Christian Science Monitor...
by kazamasmokers
... you have NO INFORMED FOUNDATION for any opinion on bias in the media. STFU and GBTW.
-
Not every event that involves a liberal/democrat needs to become a political debate. There are lots of sites out there dedicated to the mindless political squabbling, especially when most of you have probably never voted in your life. || Peter Jennings was an intrepid journalist and from what I have heard a good man. I hope that he has found peace in his new life, and that he had the opportunity to learn of G-d and His love before passing on. Prayers for his family and friends.
-
If Bush did had an overwhelming amount of negative stories, which I would dispute, it
-
See ya Peter, you hoser! Keep a chair ready for old Walter C. He'll be joining you for sports and weather, right after these words...
-
Wow. I had the man pegged for about 55. Huh. RIP, Mr. Jennings.
-
Aug 08, 2005 12:07:34 PM CDT
"Could for once, just once, people on this site show some respec
by maguasynfield
Apparently not, but a nice try at a call for common decency. Peter Jennings was a decent human being, a true professional & my condolences go to his family, along with my apologies for some of the posters on this TB having severe cranial/rectal inversion issues. Oddly enough my favorite memory of Jennings came from the Daily Show, when John Stewart was hanging around with Jennings. Funny stuff. I thank our northern brothers for the kind loan of Mr. Jennings. We'll miss him.
-
Well stated Magua!
My condolences go out to Mr. Jennings wife and family.
So what if the guy stiffed me on 30 dollars. Am I bitter? Hell no.
This guy goes out, in the height of his career, and I'm reduced to buying cat food to feed the family.
Would that 30 dollars make a difference right now, sure, but am I bitter toward that no good fuck Peter Jennings? Nah.
Rest in peace buddy.
Bastard. -
For good or bad, Rather-Brokaw-Jennings took America through all the major news-stories the last few decades. Now, as the media environment changes, I don't think a single broadcast journalist can command such power -- connecting to the American people and being a vision of comfort whenever crazy sh*t happens in the world around us. All the network anchors had their detractors, and often rightfully so, but speaking personally, Jennings will be missed. May he rest in peace. (P.S. Maybe his passing will cause some heavy smokers to try quitting again.)
-
Oliver North is a commentator. Still no examples cited as far as regular news stories go. I'm sure there are real examples out there, but for you to not be able to cite any makes me think you are basing your opinion of predjudice rather than fact. Jennings called John Edwards the vice president(more than once) after his debate last year with the real vp Cheney. Honest mistake sure, but if a Fox correspondent had made a similar mistake I doubt you'd give him the same slack. Oh and Scrotie, Bush did not put any journalists in jail. That was a special prosecutor, who everyone was claiming was going after Rove a few weeks ago, so your argument is extremely weak and really silly.
-
As I said, watch it. If you watched it with an objective viewpoint, you could see for yourself. If you are looking for me to specifically give you examples then go to the mediamatters website (http://mediamatters.org/archives/search.html?topic=FOX%20News%20Channel) and you can view video and audio clips. I know what your thinking, he's just given me some radical left wing fag lovin' bible hatin' website, but it's not just commentary, the clips are available. There's 63 pages of examples. I even just flipped on Fox and they had an overly-dramatic ad for an uncoming program as to whether Edwards was being questioned "too much". Unless they are questioning his kids or going through his garbage, I don't see what the problem is, unless you're a conservative and bothered that he should be examined much before taking a life-tme position. But they're supposedly a news organization, why would they want to keep examining?
-
Aug 08, 2005 12:49:46 PM CDT
I saved Peter from great on-air embarrassment in 1984
by regis travolta
I was working at KABC in Hollywood and he was here in L.A. for a week of Live West Coast Nightly News broadcasts. Well one day the Soviets announced they were boycotting the Los Angeles Olympics and Peter had to go on the air Live. He was typing his own copy himself onto the computer teleprompter and I was looking over his shoulder with a couple of other curious PA's in the news room. He made a silly mistake and I corrected him, I can't remember exactly what he got wrong it was something to do with when Jimmy Carter announced that we were boycotting the 1980 Games in Moscow and how this was a tit for tat decision by the Russians but I corrected him. He turned to me and said Thank you you're absolutely right. So that was my big brush with fame. Had I not spoken up he would've gone on the air and committed a journalistic faux pas.
-
All the TelePrompters of the world will go dark for mere seconds...
-
Anchoritte, thanks for the correction, I get my white people confused sometimes :( That's interesting as well about the New York Times digging into the adoptive records and it's pretty low. But this was one paper and shouldn't be held in terms of a larger plot. Unless, however, they are investigating as to whether the children came from a communist country or possibly made in a lab and are possibly "sleepers" in the justice system.
-
All the people who piss off the Bush camp end up with cancer..?
-
ZombieSolutions, shut up. Thank you.
-
God bless his soul.
-
You sound like a reasonable guy, but your use of the phrase 'fag lovin' is an indication of your predjudice against people who don't subsribe to left wing ideology and should be beneath you. It is a kind of small minded arrogance to think that those who disagree with you are automatically bigots or homophobes.
-
They can't argue with that... apparantely Jennings was more fair minded then the people here defending him
-
In the student travel business, there's no delight greater to the participants than a chance meeting with a celebrity. As an airport assistant in Washington DC, i saw a huge cross-section of entertainers, politicians and newsmen -- Peter Jennings being one of them. After meeting him, i introduced him to one of my groups. He actually took the time to talk with them, and he seemed genuinely interested in what they had to say about their time in DC and various other things. After that, I would see him in the airport from time to time; we always said hello, and he'd jokingly ask, "You're still here?" When my wife told me early this morning that he had passed on, i told her this story and my eyes got kind of teary. RIP Peter. It was nice meeting you and seeing you around.
-
boy i'm sure glad we decided to bring politics into this. "sorry you're dead, here's my bullshit political agenda." what a bunch of worthless fucks. RIP jennings REGARDLESS OF THE BIAS IN EITHER DIRECTION OF THE MEDIA. for fuck's sake.
-
With the "fag lovin' bible hatin'" comment, I was just being a bit of an ass. Anchorite, I have no doubt that Jennings had a bias, as we all do. That he aknowledged it, I think speaks to his character that he was aware of it and tried, to a larger extent, not to dictate the stories he presented. Not indifferent to a perspective but reasonable in his approach.
-
i'm not doubting that we all genuinely regret his passing. what i do think is retarded is that people have to bring up politics just to start shit. who cares if there's a fucking media bias, or if he's liberal or conservative, or if the clintons are assholes, or if the president is an idiot. none of that has anything to do with PJ passing on. just pay your respects and don't push people's buttons with the politics shit. all i ask.
-
something about this post is giving me deja vu, wonder why? christ even Harry admitted he didn't really watch the guy - nice obituary there harry. It's just amazing to me where and when people choose to get into heated discussions about thier political beliefs. Why doesn't everyone step back from this talk back just for a moment and think about jennings family and if they came here and read all 100+ posts from you idiots how horrified they'd be. And it's not everyone but for gods sake people show some respect or if not at least be funny and entertaining to read. Much love to Peters family and friends that had to watch the poor guy die, just hang in there life does go on, Peter I hope you rest in peace you overly opinionated media whore - ok I'm going straight to hell for that one but hey at least I'll have most of you to keep me company
-
Well, since this has ceased to be a eulogy and forum for remembering a great newscaster and instead become another winless liberal vs. conservative debate (which, i'm ashamed to admit i took part in) I feel that it's time we move to the next inevitable phase... LOTR pwns Star Wars! If you didn't like the Matrix sequels you didn't understand them! The Simpsons/SNL/Letterman is still as funny now as it was 10 years ago.
-
no harm in discussing his legacy, good or bad. but political trolling just pisses me off and i mean to direct that towards everyone, not just one person in particular.
-
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y120/Loxoceles/JenningsHell.gif
-
and I'm driving
-
you're right, i just had a heart attack. forgive me, i was obviously way out of line with my whole line of thinking. thanks for showing me the light.
-
there is no overall liberal media bias in mainstream US news. argue all you want bitch all you want, but you are very very wrong. If you had watched news in other western countries you would see what a non biased media was.
RIP Mr Jennings, you were a scholar and a gentleman. -
Here in blighty our anchormen and women are overpaid,shit heels that dont evn warrent hate.So whats the deal?
-
Fuck..I hated The View.That is one big barbeque in hell with Stars corpse...echhh..Hopefully Barbara Walters has died now,how fucking old was she?3000?Smug,self satisfied,se free zone.Ughhh..I quite fancied the Erin Grey lookylikey...bit...."toothy" though.Worth a pounding....sort of...
-
Thanks, Peter Jennings, for driving that point home. I hope this is a lesson to all of you smokers out there. It's stupid and you look stupid and smell stupid when you do it. And, chances are great you will die a slow, painful, stupid death, stupidly, selfishly, leaving behind a family. ANd, you're stupid and selfish for smoking in front of family members, especially children who have to consume your stupid smoke.
-
you seem like a decent guy and i get where yr coming from. i'm not out to lionize the dude, i just think getting into a lib vs con debate here of all places is so stupid (which had more to do with other TBers than you). i definitely think your comments are valid. truce dude truce, let's go get a beer.
-
Aug 08, 2005 5:03:56 PM CDT
Jedi Striker: I'm sure Peter Jennings learned of god and his
by some dude
How the fuck can you clowns think anyone on this planet hasn't heard your favorite myth at least 1000 times? Jennings heard it and he realized it was just a story, nothing more. Oh, and the word "god" looks even sillier when you leave out the "o." You are only supposed to do that when writing on paper just in case it falls on the ground. Funny thing it, if it really offended your superhero, you'd think he would prevent paper with his name on it from falling to the ground.
-
Aug 08, 2005 5:05:48 PM CDT
"If anything, it isn't objectivity that has given Fox strong
by cameron1
What a suprise a candy coated view of America has scored well on ratings. Oh anchorite you are so awfully naive, CNN, ABC, and others are not liberally biased, they are reasonably objective, but no US newsstation gives the politicians, particularly those in power (so yes, democrats had it when they were in power as well) a tough ride or even tough questions. It's pathetic most of the time. You do know who rupert murdoch is right? you know his political views and that he uses he TV and newspapers to promote them. You are living in a fucking bubble anchorite.
-
Aug 08, 2005 5:06:11 PM CDT
Too bad about Peter Jen....wait somebody posted that NPR was the
by swarmy
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! OH MY SIDES THEY HURT! STOP WITH THE FUNNY!!!!!
-
Aug 08, 2005 5:13:27 PM CDT
Of course the media is liberally biased. Mostly a buncha leftov
by swarmy
Seriously. Folks who insist there is no liberal bias in most of the media simply can't see the forest for the trees. Thankfully over the last 10 years or so we've seen the "new media" start to develop and take hold, offering a different point of view for the first time. A point of view were liberal ideas are actually ::gasp:: questioned and debated instead of blindly accepted as fact as it always used to be.
-
Aug 08, 2005 5:16:18 PM CDT
swarmy, your so rightwing that you can't tell what is object
by cameron1
you really can't see the forest for you prejudices and beliefs, ah well, you'll manage.
-
Canadians are dying left and right. First it was James Scotty Doohan. Now Peter Jennings. Who's next?
-
ok anchorite, I'll be honest I only had time to look at one so I went with this. Firstly, that is a biased website itself, so duh, hardly a reliable source. Secondly the sory itself is concerned with Jennings reporting of middle east problems and palestine. Hell all he did was be fairminded and he gets called liberal. hahahahaha. Yes indeed anchorite, you are in a bubble.
-
ok I just went to the mrc website link. Then I went and checked out the homepage. Again a completely biased source. I'm sure we are getting close to irony here.
-
and he just shifts his argument over it.
You have not presented me with any evidence anchorite (well no unbiased raw source evidence)
mrc is a bullshit conservatively funded website and it is there SPECIFICALLY as an anti liberal site which tries to say there is a liberal media bias, hell that's their mission statement. Oh and I dont believe what the major networks tell me, because they are not objective any more. tut tut anchorite you are being very silly. -
I won
-
Jennings did an excellent 10-part documentary back in 1970 for the Canadian Broadcasting Company. Has anyone else ever seen it?
-
This is a great tragedy. For any significant domestic or international event, Mr. Jennings was the one individual (second only to family) that you want to hear. From that perspective, he has left a legacy that should be the gold standard for any aspiring journalist to aspire to. Thank you for being there during the Challenger, Berlin Wall, Clinton Impeachment, State of the Union addresses, the 25 hour 2000 New Year broadcast, and most significantly 9/11. Be grateful that America had him.
-
As a man of decency in TV, he'll be missed. As an anchorman, I'm sorry, but I won't miss him.
-
Just wanted to drive down the point to all you stupid retards out there who smoke and to all you child abusers who smoke in front of your children.
-
C'mon rivercb, the NYT is not "just one paper"! Drudge and others would not have given the story much credence had it been another daily.
Speaking of bias in print and television news, if you accept that most journalists are liberal (an assertion for which there is strong statistical evidence), it stands to reason that most news outlets are inevitably biased. News is a product that is manufactured by editors, anchors, reporters, etc., and it is human nature for them to select and portray facts and backstory in such a way that ultimately has some degree of alignment with their beliefs. However, speaking as a conservative (more so in the institutional rather than political sense), I don't think that this shaping of the product is as deliberately insidious as the Bernard Goldbergs and Ann Coulters of the world would have us believe. And in the cases where it is, there is usually enough public outcry to restore accountability (Cronkite's belated loss of face after his Tet Offensive reporting and Rather's recent defrocking come to mind). It should be enough for a long time yet that the jaundiced view that many people have of particular news outlets or journalists they choose not to trust will prevent any bias, liberal or otherwise, from getting out of hand.
All that being said, I think that most journalists do a fair job of being objective, considering how difficult it must be to consistently filter out your personal beliefs from what you are responsible for reporting. I base this statement on personal experience. I commanded a combat engineer company with the 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq for 13 months in 2003-2004, and during that time I had the opportunity to interact with a lot of embedded journalists. Most of them did not agree with the reasons for our presence in Iraq (this was apparent even during the invasion), but they nevertheless all worked very hard to be fair and respectful of the story as it was, not how they thought it should be.
RIP Peter Jennings. -
it drives me up the wall...UP THE WALL...i mean get this..did you know that apparently Bill Clinton..and we know how the liberals love the clintons...did you know that he apparently had an affair with some intern?? i heard through the grapevine that he was getting blown by some intern and that he then lied about it.....
where was the coverage on this story....I mean if that is true then that is somehting you would expect the mainstream media to cover but those goddamn news networks with their lame ass liberal media bias completely buried that story.....
from now if you want the news given to you straight i have three names for you...Limbaugh, Coulter and Hannity.
The only ones out there speaking the truth.
-
Great, can't even pay our respects without the liberals trying to tell the rest of us how we should live. Join the rest of the commune in California and let the rest of us wish Mr. Jennings God speed.
-
Sorry, hun, you don't rule. Peter Jennings death is a wonderful time to emphisize the stupidness and severity of cigarette smoking. If my post made one person quit, GOD BLESS ME!
-
Several dozen to go.
-
Just saying. Can't quit with all the hate.
-
How tacky was that?
-
Peter Jennings was a class act and one of the best newsmen we've ever had. You could tell that he genuinely had an inquisitive mind, which I count as a plus. Did he have a little liberal bias? Probably, but not much. What do you want, he's not a robot. I went to your little websites and frankly I think youre a nutjob. First site: He's liberal because he let a high powered, highly educated Palestinian who he dated once in the seventies say that Arabs feel angry about Israel and that anger contributed to 9/11. Boy, what a liberal jew-hater. He let a Palestinian give their reality based OPINION on his newscast. Second site, about 30 cherry picked quotes from nearly 40 years of work, some of which are inexplicable. Jennings says that most welfare recipients have 1 to 2 kids and are not black, which are FACTS, so that makes him liberal biased. He says that tax cuts mean less money for the government, so that makes him liberal biased. What I saw a lot of were FACTS presented that could help a liberal win an argument, maybe. The little bit about 1994 voters being crybabies... oh yeah the haters forget to mention that was on a COMMENTARY.. commentary RADIO show. Liberal vs. Conservative? Sadly, it's largely neither and much much more about ratings. "Liberal" media championed the war before the invasion and plastered the airwaves with Monicagate so give me a break. By their very definitions, liberals tend to question the status quo and conservatives, stay with me now, do not... they try to conserve it. I know that I prefer a media which questions, and I know which one I think is healthier for an informed public.
-
Aug 09, 2005 7:24:02 AM CDT
jesus, go watch Outfoxed. It's a perfectly good (if cheap)
by hypeendshere
-
fuck your eternal life fantasy. your sense of superiority is sickening. smoking is cool. you suck on something burning and then smoke comes out of your head! name something cooler.
-
A very respected, very talented Newsman is dead and all y'all can do is bitch and moan about Liberals v. Conservatives. This is not the place or the time for that. If it is that difficult to be nice and just pay your respects then please, just shut up.
Rest in Peace, Peter, you were one of the greats! -
Aug 09, 2005 8:44:49 AM CDT
Roboteer: Why does "giving back to his adopted homeland" = not c
by oski
This is hilarious, it's still going on. If you are against Republicans, you are anti-american. Of course, criticizing Clinton even years after he left office, and inventing all kinds of wild stories is very American, isn't it?
Never gave anything back or cared about america, sheesh, does "In Search of America" ring a fucking bell? Jennings did love America and he knows more about its history and probably loved it more than any of you fucks who are criticizing him right after he died.
As for his coverage on 9/11, go check out the Smithsonian exhibit on 9-11. Jennings is the anchor who they use for most of the videos because he was who most americans chose to watch during that day. -
Harry please I'm begging you shut this thing down please? I can't take any more of anchorite's stupidity or anyone else argueing over this stuff. Anchorite let me tell you something fucker every talk back I've been in with you you've said some stupid disrespectful or just plain inappropriate stuff and you are so lucky I can not physically get my hands on you because I would beat the living shit out of you, pound your head in. Peter was a media whore that was driven by people who watch the news. He was no saint and the fact that he had lung cancer doesn't open the door for people to tell other people how to live there lives or argue about what's right or wrong. You're all fucking assholes for participating in this talk back being that it is a horrible & insensitive place filled with hate & overly opinionated dickheads who think they are smart, a shame really since it's supposed to be a memorial to someone who died, someone who gave his time & energy to the public and for what?
-
RIP Peter.
-
They are just sad cause their kids or brothers or sisters are dying over there right now. As for anyone thinking that any of the media in this country actually being idenpendient, it just makes me want to laugh. Every news source is controled by the people that are in power, and at this point it's many the GOP. What I don't understand about republicans is, why are you people so angry? You control the goverment, you will pretty soon try to put in judges who will ban abortion, and yet you still bitch when people disagree with you. Not to mention you defend Rove, who should at the very least be thrown in jail, and most likely should be charged with treason. What's Bush going to do? He's going to fucking give him a medal of some shit, you know it.
Lastly, Jennings, you were great, we all miss you, may you rest in peace. -
You need to check your facts Sparkle.
-
he was a MAN, an ANCHORMAN!!! the kind of man who built the Eifel Tower out of PIPE and STEEL. that' the kind of man he was. you, your just a woman with a small brain. it's science.
-
Aug 09, 2005 3:05:39 PM CDT
I Miss His Scent... His Musk... I Miss Being With Him...
by zombiesolutions
i think once this whole death thing works itself out that we should get an apartment together.
-
Aug 09, 2005 3:06:51 PM CDT
Its ANCHORMAN, Not ANCHORLADY And That's A Scientific Fact
by zombiesolutions
that's what Jennings was. JENNINGS!!! NOOOOOO!!!!
-
Aug 09, 2005 3:11:28 PM CDT
Sex Panther Has Real Bits of Panther In It -- 60% Of The Time It
by zombiesolutions
Jennings was a MAN! AN ANCHORMAN!!!
-
i guess that's what he gets for leaning to the left of Hitler. i tell you this is all some liberal conspiracy! everyone knows the ones with no power at all are the ones who dictate policy! the Republicans are just an oppressed minority of obscenely wealthy and obese white guys who control the entire world! why don't you stop picking on them?!?! why?!?! all they ever did was start a neverending war for no reason whatsoever! and you know, maybe they killed a whole bunch of kids in Jesus name. but dang! i mean, gosh darn it all to hell, they love Jesus! they love him ALOT. (they way he hangs on the cross all nekkid and... oh god.. sweaty... oooohhh) waaaah!!!
-
I'm SOOO in love with him! JENNINGS!!! don't go into the light! come back to us! i have a sample of the T-Virus, that could bring you back. we could go jogging, or yogging. apparently you just like run for an extentend period of time. Veronica Corningstone is effing everything up!
-
Aug 09, 2005 3:29:57 PM CDT
God, Jesus, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and THOR, GOD OF THUN
by zombiesolutions
they report on the goings on and the hoi polloi in Heaven and Asgard. i saw their first broadcast in a dream. it was glorious. like a million rainbows shooting out of an angel's butt.
-
god damn i'm high as a kite right now...what the hell was i so worked up about yesterday?
-
Aug 09, 2005 3:59:25 PM CDT
I Find It Telling That The 2 Most Politically Astute People On A
by captain sulu
Both those TBers chose not to engage in a political debate and just offered an RIP or something similar. Class all the way you two, I suspect you know who you are (as do probably most TBers who watch this stuff).
-
Aug 09, 2005 9:07:06 PM CDT
You Should All Bow Bown And Worship The One True Son Of GOD
by zombiesolutions
his name is THOR!!! bow before him, heaten scum! your vast Right / Left Winged Conspiracies ARE NOTHING compared to POWER OF MJOLNER, Thor's mighty hammer! Here this and hear it well, citizens of Earth, YOU ARE ALL DOOMED. THOR is going to crush ALL OF YOUR PUNY GODS and NATIONS with ONE SWIFT STROKE of his FLOWING BEARD, BARREL CHEST and HIS MIGHTY MIGHTY HAMMER! your OIL means nothing to us! prepare to DIE!!! BWAA HA HA!!! MWOOO H A HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAA
-
Let me reiterate. Peter Jennings was a great anchor regardless of one's political leanings. Now to address some dumbassery. The A bomb was not necessary to end the war with Japan and did not "save lives". The Japanese made repeated attempts to surrender with their Emperor in place to save face. Truman declined. The inventor of nuclear fission begged the defense secretary to demonstrate its power before use, but was declined because it would hurt defense budgets to not use a bomb that expensive to kill people. Lastly, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were almost entirely civilian. The Japanese were also on their last legs and we could bomb the mainland with conventional artillery at will. Not to sound too much like N. Dynamite, but pretty much every historian agrees that the A Bomb was the beginning of the Cold War to show the commies what could happen to them and was not "necessary" to end the war. Frankly, it was a long time ago and I don't give a shit one way or the other, but it pisses me off when dumbasses like Anchorite just regurgitate what they read in their high school history book. As for your links, I looked at them and found mostly that they showed that Peter Jennings was probably a liberal personally. It showed that he pressed FACTS that were in opposition to the conventional wisdom of the day, without resorting to distorting the truth, which I admire. If opposing conventional wisdom and doing one's own original research, then yes he was liberal and so am I. Now please, go read another one of your wingnut books that say that the Clintons killed fourty people and that Hillary sucked Satan's cock to get enough money for an abortion, and leave a memorial board to a great newsman alone. Take a break already with the persecution complex. White men of European descent have had a pretty good run so far. Have a pina colada. You only control everything right now so bitching about "liberal" media and a man who just died of lung cancer just makes you look petty.
-
Actually, the U.S. was one of the largest players in the oil for food scandal and we did plenty of illegal stuff for oil, but somehow the America hating "liberal" media hasn't reported it. See what I did was actually check things out for myself, before just repeating what someone told me. I think it's bad that those European countries were involved, but I don't bitch about them because I am not a citizen there nor live there. I'm sure you looove it when French people criticize America. I am critical of my government because that's how progress gets made. It's that simple. The "love it or leave it" mentality that you and your bretheren espouse therefore drives me up the fucking wall. Thank you for being honest about the Iraq war and I can see your point. It's my belief that you get more done with the CARROT and the (ass kicking) stick and throughout history the unabashed ass kickers have gone down HARD. Again, though I can see your point.
-
Aug 09, 2005 11:08:33 PM CDT
Jennings Soothed A Nation's Pains With The Kind, Loving and
by zombiesolutions
the NORSE ANCHORMAN!!! Bring us thine news, Newsman! And wenches! and a flagon of your finest mead. arrrgh!!! ROOOAAARRRR!!!!
-
I know it's not PC to say, but Peter Jennings had no effect on my life. It's sad to see him die, but that's just because his image was familiar to me. His bias was blatant, but everyone is biased--it's what you do to present the news clearly and objectively that gets you my respect. Anyway, now the boob Olberman and other news figures are turning this into Celebrity Cancer Death Match week, because--Say it ain't so!--Chris Reeve's wife has cancer. Who??? OK, OK, it's sad that SOMEONE has cancer on the planet Earth, but this strikes me as a ratings stunt to fight Greta Van Aruba's nauseating deathwatch for some blonde chick. (If she were a fat black chick I wonder how long we'd be seeing stories about her.) Anyway, I was just scrolling down and had to laugh that someone claimed "OUTFOXED" was an unbiased doc! LOL! Their "source" who "reported for FOX" who supposedly gave them all their "inside dirt" worked at a FOX affiliate! But when your standard is Michael "Iraq was a Paradise" Moore, what can you expect? I do find it interesting that AICN even has a thread on this, I thought this was a site about cool NEWS about genre movies, instead of this weird "pop culture" thing which is overtaking all outlets--MTV, for example, isn't even about music anymore but lifestyle of the rich and famous. It's kinda like how rock n roll has become an offshoot of Vegas and Broadway, with "rock" stars being about The Look and The Dance Moves. People think that Britny, Tom Cruise and Peter Jennings are actually part of their family, so if anyone in the media croaks, it's like a relative has died, in this case your mom's uncle who doesn't have much of a connection to your life but you kinda have to say something on his passing. Someone pointed out that the media were Clinton's buttboys for making his lying under oath about a personal matter, and they're right; all Clinton had to run on was personality (Arkansas's incredible, dynamic economics and education track record didn't win him the presidency, just as Bob Dole's boredom and lack of a reason to be elected didn't win it for him), so when you win on personality and the biting of your lower lip, and sign a law making what you did with Lewinsky illegal, it's hilarious to claim that when YOU do it it's somehow about "personal attacks". And yes, this is rambling on purpose, as a blow against the media gods, or something, man it's late.
-
Aug 10, 2005 10:09:38 AM CDT
Wow, I Have Officially Seen Everything... A Ring Winger Thomas P
by zombiesolutions
holy shit. i wasn't aware that Republicans were allowed to read anything besides the Bible and/or the Left Behind series. you know Pynchon is a pretty hard left kinda guy, right? wonders never cease.
-
Aug 10, 2005 11:08:37 AM CDT
Although There Is No Excuse For BURNING WOMEN AND CHILDREN ALIVE
by zombiesolutions
a few years ago I was living in Japan and taught English. It may have been in deference to me as a foreginer, but during conversaions of WWII, most of the old guys i taught told me they felt that Japan deserved what they got! I shit you not. I was stunned by this -- how honest and honorable that sentiment was. Being able to admit that Imperial japan had committed crimes against humanity. Naturally, the US, by and large, is TOTALLY UNABLE to admit ANY WRONGDOING ever. The poular conciousness in the US is like that of an infant, a toddler, a child. Or, of course, a retarded adult. Personally, I think the MASS MURDER OF INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN is always wrong, but, the Japanese did it to. As did the germans, of course. In short, with the wholesale MELTING of INNOCENT CIVILIANS, the US was no better or worse than the Axis. .. regardless of how much we've all been brainwashed into thinking the Allies were "good" and the Axis was "evil." we were ALL bad. and that's that.
-
Aug 10, 2005 2:07:03 PM CDT
Clearly We Come From Different Side of the Political Spectrum, B
by zombiesolutions
well whattaya know! maybe bi-partisinism is possible to a certain extent... and yeah, i know that by the numbers facist Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were much worse than the ALLIES. and as you pointed out and understand, the US were also slave owners and committed acts of near-genocide in our past. and you agree with me that most americans seem unwilling to admit this to themselves -- our not exactly spotless history. regardless, i do think that there is something to be said for the point you made in re: the use of the bomb. it is arguable that an invasion may have been even worse for both sides. AND it probably still wold have resulted in the use of the bomb. hard to say. i will say this, though, that the jury is out on the Emperors surrender. some historians say that he DID surrender, but due to cultural ignorance / misunderstanding, we didn't get it. regardless, that's up for debate, so i can't say with certainty. but all of those women and children literally melted alive? it horrifies me. why not just bomb the Pacific fleet? detonated in the air, it could have literally wiped out what remained of Japan's once mighty Imperial navy. it's the killing civilians thing... i just can't get past it. it's horrifying and it breaks my heart. anyways, cheers! maybe theres hope for our fledgling republic yet!
-
Aug 10, 2005 3:30:31 PM CDT
"Why Iraq, and not Iran, North Korea, China, or wherever else ne
by ill clinton
Because in Iraq we can.
-
Harry & Herc, Can you guys please give better and in this case more respective titles? Saying "Peter Jennings is Gone" one could take that to think he's been kidnapped, is missing, etc. Rather then saying "Peter Jennings is Gone" you can say "Petter Jennings has passed away". I think that's a bit more respectful. Also Herc, do you really need to say you haven't seen a show? I realize your posting the ep for talkback, but simply post the name of the show and ep #. If you've seen it, then you can say "Herc's seen..." I really don't care if you haven't seen the new ep, only if you have. Not trying to be a nag guys, but this is starting to bug me.
-
Youre right brob, one NY Times article is equal to the daily headlines I see on my homepage pointing the finger at every other country on the planet. I'm glad that you've so astutely assessed that I, nor anyone sharing my views (libs I believe we're often derogatively called) don't actually care about anything that we stand up for. And I was wondering when you would trout out the de jour argument of liberal bashers everywhere, the "well X group is worse than the U.S." Who cares if other people were doing the "SAME THINGS". We don't live in those countries so we try to change things here, and someone else doing something bad hardly makes what we do better. I've actually had people tell me "well we're a lot better than the terrorists" as if that's some kind of accomplishment. Great, we're better than scum sucking douche bags. Is that the moral equivalancy we're dropping to. It's such a juvenile argument. But mommy, they were bad too. Who the fuck cares? Again, we criticize some of our governments actions because we effing live here. Me fighting for health care reform in Germany wouldn't make a helluvalot of sense, no? A few more things, I don't want a socialist gvt. "Food for Babies"... don't you think it's sad, sad that Democrats actually have to argue with Republicans for things like school lunch or more Head Start money. Jesus Christ, like "You hate America" or "You hate the troops" is an easy platitude to argue against. Aaaahhhh.
-
This shit is too funny sometimes. So we had to Nuke Japan because (Bush voice) "they had WMD's and a means to deliver them to the U.S. using balloons, kind of like.. like drone planes, lotsa.. lotsa anthrax... bu-bubonotic plague." So I read your Weekly Standard (one of the most conservative magazines on the planet) article and didn't see anything new or compelling. So the Japanese wanted the old order and were preparing for an invasion. They were clearly fucked and the war wouldve soon been over. It was the world vs. a weak them. It's called empirical evidence. The fact that they were depserately trying to negotiate an 90% surrender should tell you exactly how strong the Japanese were at that point. Notice in the article how the author stresses one Japanese troop buildup, but fails to mention the rest of the world's relative strength. So they intercepted messages saying they would never absolutely surrender. How compelling. I'm sure there were no Nazi intercepts like that before Hitler blew his brains out. It's called rhetoric and morale. Jesus, the article made it abunduntly clear that the army brass was itching to use a nuke. Big surprise. Ever seen Dr. Strangelove. I'm sorry, but instantly incinerating 100,000 civilians is never going to be right to me. If we had to invade, so be it. I believe soldiers should fight wars, not civilians. Also, why not drop the bomb on the buildup of 10 divisions of Japanese troops in Kyushu? I'll tell you why. Because we wanted to show the Soviets that Hiroshima, any ol' town Japan could be any ol' town USSR. Hell, I'd probably be Ok if they'd nuked the Japense army, but I will never make moral equivalancies for nuking civilians. Ever. It was wrong.
-
Although those shlubs will never believe it. Did you know that Hiroshima was chosen because of the mountains surrounding it? The US military and scientists knew it would focus the blast. A lot of those fuckers just wanted to see what it could do. Barbaric.
-
Thought so.
-
Brab, you're right. My eyes are wrong. I don't see headlines about other U.N. countries every day, while virtually no comment on the U.S. Thank you for pointing out my eyes error. Sudan, Osama on a platter? That bullshit has been so thoroughly debunked it is truly laughable that you include it here. Cling, though. Cling to every last shred of your Clinton hating bullshit, even though the man is no longer president. He gave the Koreans nukes, didn't take OBL into custody, and ordered the murder of some sherriff in arkansas all in the same day. "Our enemies". Please, just fucking please tell me how Iraq was involved in 9/11. Please. All ragheads are the same right. If you're brown you go down. All that extra money could come from the little money tree we call the Iraq War for instance. Or any of the other, most pork ridden highest deficit having budgets your president has signed into law every year. Head Start is just wealth redistribution? Wow. Yes, less fortunate kids get a chance at education instead of crime, which in the long run costs ten times more money. People probably didn't protest Clinton for lobbing bombs because most Americans are really apathetic about most things. I don't recall many people protesting Gulf War I either, but that's probably because they didn't smell bullshit lies like they do now, 76 soldiers died, and we were only there a few months. Oh yeah, and Iraq actually did something that threatened a critical ally and resource.
-
Aug 10, 2005 9:40:57 PM CDT
I Supported My Brother Clinton Lobbing Bombs AND Support The Cur
by ill clinton
And I don't care if Iraq ever was involved in 9/11. The world is a better place with Saddam out.
-
I hate taxes. Get off my property. If you don't like it geeeettt out. Pull yourself up by the bootstraps. Goddamn affirmative action, persecuting all us we control everything and always have white men. Goddamn government paying for a useful society. Bleeding heart commies. Wanting things like a minimum wage, fiddling with the perfection of free markets. Everything would be great if everything went back to 1850 when government didn't deal with the economy and stayed the fuck out of my paycheck. fucking Libs. Goddamn libs. Fucking whiney hippies. Always trying to take away my goddamn money. Worthless socialists, who made it so I could have weekends off in America. I liked it better when robber barons controlled this country. goddamn kids should work in coal mines. Child labor laws, goddamn socialists fiddling with the economy. Pull yourself up by the bootstraps hippy. Goddamn public anything. Everythings better private, because corporations always have the peoples best interest in mind. Fucking libs. Cheese eating, wine drinking libs. Geeeeeet out. I should keep every penny I make. I havent benefited from anything the governments ever given me. Goddamn libs. I fought in a war once. Bow down you goddamn hippy. Everyone knows that only soldiers deserve praise, and it better be constant. Every war saved your lib, hippy ass. Protecting freedom. Its us or them. Shut your trap or geeeet out. And so forth.
-
Thought so.
-
clinton, just as I'm sure that you could see the point if, say, some other planet that had us ridiculously overmatched militarily came and occupied the U.S. because they thought that George Bush is a "bad guy". Might is right, bitches. might is right.
-
Easy to bitch. Got a solution? Or is it not "your job?" Are you just an "idea man?"
-
you whiney bitch, why don't you have a plan for cleaning up that outhouse I blew up. My plan is to send most of our troops back to Afghanistan to finish what we started. Then shift a huge portion of defense over to a massive huge deal esque reconstruction effort in Iraq where we employ only Iraqis whenever at all humanly possible, not scum sucking money swindling haliburton dicks. People tend to hate you a lot less when you give them jobs and don't shoot at them so much.
-
I'm amazed no one's jumped all over that plan. Must be just right wing conservative prejudice from The Man keeping a succinct yet clearly well thought out strategy down.
-
let me guess. Shoot more ragheads. That's worked great so far. Or I know, invade Uzbekistan and then bungle it totally and never admit ANY mistakes and then if some jihadists show up shoot 'em.
-
sorry clinton, that I didn't write a detailed foreign policy dissertation on AICN talkback. Way to address what I actually said. You're just flinging poop like a monkey at this point.
-
Aug 10, 2005 10:18:22 PM CDT
Your Use Of The Term "Raghead" Would No Doubt Endear You To The
by ill clinton
With your insight into human nature, I'm surprised you're not a motivational speaker. You'd make a killing.
-
See that's me doing... oh never mind. Way to duck and dodge. Please have your 30 page essay on the perfect plan for Iraq on my desk by tomorrow morning.
-
But I guess it's okay to do it because you "were making a point." Speaking of points, here's mine. All you've done is complain about what's wrong with Bush, conservatives, Republicans, etc. You have added nothing positive to any discussion of a very real problem. It's easy to take potshots. I suspect you'd do it no matter what Bush was doing. So if Bush is so wrong, my question is a simple one. What is YOUR solution? You would be the first liberal I've heard give one. AICN is not the right place for it? What is? Waiting for your big moment in the spot light? Waiting for that call from the White House to unveil your geat exit strategy? Is AICN too small for you? Is an interested conservative audience of one, who's shown an amazing ability to keep an open mind (something liberals seem to find incongruous), just too small potatoes for you? You wanna convince the conservatives that you're right? Start with me. I'll respond to what you actually write. Or do you prefer screaming angrily just because your candidate lost? Is this about catharsis or are you interested in truly intelligent debate? P-K4.
-
Sucks ass. Talking is what got us into this mess. How old are you? I'm not being rude, but it seems you are unaware that we were talking for 10 years. No amount of talking stopped the massacre in Rwanda. None would've stopped the rapings and killings in Bosnia. Sometimes force is the only thing a bully will listen to.
-
Aug 10, 2005 11:02:35 PM CDT
Your Plan Leaves Saddam In Power, "My Plan" Has Removed Saddam
by ill clinton
And also the taliban. It has captured or killed terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attack. It has freed the people of Iraq from a monster. Your plan has left North Korea with nuclear weapons. Your plan allowed a massacre in Rwanda. Your plan resulted in an occupied Tibet.
-
I am not in the habit of debating children, I didn't realize quite how young you are. I'll tell you what Saddam did to me and my friends. Prior to the first Gulf War, I made friends in Israel, some I still have to this day. During the first Gulf War, Saddam launched scud missles at Israel in order to drag Israel into the war. Israel had not declared war on Iraq, was not part of the allied coalition that drove Iraqi troops from Kuwait, and did nothing to retaliate. Saddam continued to fire missles into Iraq in the hopes that if Israel entered the war, the other arab countries would support him. He failed. My friends were affected, so yes, I take it personally. After the liberation of Kuwait, there was nothing but gratitude. Saddam looted the country on the way out, destroying things for spite. I know where Iraq is because I was there. People who served with me died. Friends I still had lived in fear of Gulf War Syndrome. Fortunately neither I or any friends I still keep in contact with seem to be ill. But every time we feel a pain that shouldn't be there, or get a strange headache, we can't help but wonder. Was it worth it? At that time no, or at least not completely. I felt we should've finished the job. We left Saddam in power for another 10 years. I care for the Iraqi people as much as I care for any people oppressed, massacred, raped, exploited etc., at the hands of evil men. If it had cost my life to bring down Saddam so that others wouldn't have to live in fear, it would have been a life well spent. My feelings on Iraq don't come from reading the papers or watching CNN. I was there. I've seen what we did, I've seen what Saddam did. Trust me, you wouldn't want to have had loved ones in Kuwait. By the way, it was not the taliban that committed the bombings in London. The taliban is out of power in Afghanistan. I realize that probably in your circle of friends the cool thing is to hate the war and Bush. It is your right to do so. That freedom comes at a price. The Iraqi's did not share your freedom to shout "Saddam sucks!" from the rooftops. I may not agree with your position, but I would put my life on the line again if ever called to do so to defend the right of you and your buddies to go on saying "Bush sucks!" so that you can enjoy your youth. Some day you may you may feel differently, but then again you may not. My only suggestion is that you learn a little more about the situation before rushing to judgement.
-
Dude.
-
ok. Was watching the Jennings special. Here is what the 9/11 commission said "Sudan's minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so." Clinton begged Saudi Arabia to take him, and basically torture then kill him. They wouldn't. They then looked into a U.S. indictment which was a necessary condition for his extradition. The justice department looked into it and said there was no way. Remember, this was before 9/11 or the embassy bombings of '98. For fucks sake. Clinton was the one that set up the special unit which tracked Bin Laden and put pressure on the Sudanese government in the first place. I like how you selectively quoted out of context from some blogger on National Review Online, who had a very, very obvious axe to grind, btw. Do you ever read source materials? ever, or you just spew someone else's take and say it's fact. I'm so sick of this right wing shit. It's like Lyndon Johnson said "call your opponent a pig fucker and make him deny it". And to ill clinton, I already said what I would do different. READ GODDAMMIT. I'm sorry if it wasn't long enough, but I think it was pretty clear. Funny how you just completely ignored it. Youre the one who hasn't said anything. I guess your plan is STFU, and don't question anything that's going on, because everythings roses and daisies. Saddam is gone. Yay, everything is going fine. Does it not bother you at all that the justification of this war is rewritten on a daily basis? Does it not matter to you, that even if you agree with the war it's been fucked up big time, repeatedly? Just because you think we shouldn't cry over spilt milk doesn't mean that we should keep filling that fucker back up and tipping it over again. The way you talk it seems as though you believe saddam needed to be taken out by any means necessary. Oh yeah, and if you would gladly give your life for Iraqi freedom, then please return. And don't give me that, already served blah blah blah. As is observed in Jarhead (a very good book) it's always the guys that brag about being soldiers in war that didn't actually see combat.
-
Affirmative action is not a quota system. There are still high standards to be met to be hired, admitted, whatever. Also, if after being hired or admitted you can't cut it, you can be fired. It has also been proven that "affirmative action" college admittees excel at a higher rate than their peers. It is proven that black people or those that have "black" names are called in for less interviews and hired less than white people. It is scientifically proven. White people have affirmative action from birth. GWB and John Kerry both nowhere near had enough "merit" to get into Yale but they did anyway. See the problem with all this meritocracy bullshit is that it assumes something even approaching a level playing field to begin with. Call me back when inner city schools are somewhere even close to as good as a rich white school. I always love it when anti-government people chastise me for being racist. Yes, our handouts are "keeping them down". If you follow your rhetoric at all than they should be able to overcome our "evil" handouts in the first place. Jesus, have you ever even talked to a black person or gone into a really bad school. I'm not saying that you have to feel bad about being white (because I don't) and I hate it when black people are racist towards me, but please stop with the racist bullshit about affirmative action. Enjoy the fact that you are the ruling class. Again, it just makes you look petty.
-
Ok, tried to be nice. Gloves coming off. Now I have to resort to CAPITAL letters to make sure you don't miss or gloss over anything. Regarding Saddam and the official reasons for taking him out NO I DON'T CARE. Got it? World BETTER off without him. Let's see, you actually want me to address your "plan?" OK, didn't think you were seriously offering that up as a solution. My bad. Didn't realize all of your knowledge of the military came from reading Jarhead. And uh, thanks for the tip. I might somehow have missed this book. I'll try to address every point in your 2 point plan. I believe this is point #1. "My plan is to send most of our troops back to Afghanistan to finish what we started." Finish what exactly? Hunting down the taliban? Invade Pakistan where most of these people are crossing the border? The conventional war is over. The Karzai government only needs us a deterent to prevent a coup or some other disaster. The taliban are FINISHED as a fighting force. Our troops would be wasted there. The best they can do are terrorist or hit and run assaults. They are not a threat that needs massive troop support. But just for the sake of argument, you move our troops out of Iraq where they ARE needed, what happens in Iraq then? Oh that's right, you give everyone jobs and the problem is solved. Which brings us to your point #2 of your 2 Point Plan. "Then shift a huge portion of defense over to a massive huge deal esque reconstruction effort in Iraq where we employ only Iraqis whenever at all humanly possible, not scum sucking money swindling haliburton dicks. People tend to hate you a lot less when you give them jobs and don't shoot at them so much." First you complain about the federal debt in a previous post, then you want to relocate all the troops to Afghanistan and subsidize the rebuilding of Iraq in a New Deal fashion? Roughly how much do you figure that's going to cost? I realize liberals like to pay now and do budgets later, but you think there's a hole in our budgets NOW? If we pulled out of Iraq today, all hell would break loose tomorrow. The Kurds, Shiites and Sunni's would be at each others throats, jobs or no jobs. There has to be a STABLE government first. We are there for the long haul, just like in Germany and Japan after WWII. So basically what you're saying, is you want to pull out the military, drop in a bunch of American civilians to oversee implementation of these "jobs," foot the bill, cross our fingers and assume it will all turn out for the best? I suggest picking up a history book and looking at how other wars have been concluded both successfully and unsuccessfully, then get back to me on that one. OR, you could go to Iraq and see for yourself. This requires leaving the basement and doing paperwork, you know passports and stuff, but see for yourself. I get emails from friends still in the military, so I have pretty good idea what they're seeing. Oh that's right, I fabricated my experience. If you somehow read being worried about Gulf War Syndrome and disappointment at a job I felt was left unfinished as "bragging," you need to raise the bar on your boasts a little. I'd be happy to fax you a copy of my DD-214, but I suspect I'd be the victim of identity theft and find a credit card in my name with a lot of calls to 900 numbers. Take my word for it or not, I really don't care. The fact that you think someone would make it up tells me that you have NO VETS in your circlejerk of friends or acquaitaances. Which tells me a lot about you, as there are a lot of us out here, so we're pretty easy to find. So you choose to hang around people who think and act like you, which leads to something called GROUP THINK. This is a situation where everyone reinforces each other's beliefs, no matter how right or wrong. So eventually you start thinking that the world thinks the way you do and if someone disagrees, they're "crazy." I have formed my opinions from life experiences, a study of history, warfare and diplomacy, as well as keeping informed from a variety of media sources. Got that? A VARIETY. I'm a conservative, but I read liberal points of view. I visit the al-Jazheera website from time to time, as well as check the foreign papers. THEN I make up my mind. I don't continue to read the same sources that already agree with my point of view. How do I know you do this? Because you repeat the EXACT SAME LIBERAL PHRASES as every other liberal on the AICN talkbacks, Democratic Underground, etc. If I care so much about Iraq rejoin? While I may not be as SELFISH as you, I'm no fucking saint either. I did my time, I was lucky to get out in one piece, it's someone else's term. If I haven't done as much as some, I've done more than most. That being said, here's where I disagree. We DO NOT pull out any time soon. This is going to take time. Yes, more Americans will become targets, but we finish the job. The mistake we made in Afghanistan was withdrawing support after the Soviets pulled out. You can see how well that worked out. Germany and Japan have had stable governments for decades after our occupation. Do you think this would've been the case if we had pulled out before the infrastucture for democracy was in place? So to summarize, GET OUT OF THE BASEMENT, GET your passport, GO to the MIDDLE EAST, TALK TO THE PEOPLE (including the "freedom fighters," if they don't slit your throat first), THEN, and only THEN, come back with an informed idea of what the fuck is happening in that part of the world. If you then STILL disagree, I'll rethink MY views.
-
A few things. Nice try on the DD-214 military lingo shit, but I happen to have a couple friends. One is in Iraq (oops wrong about that too ill) and one is finally done. My friend Victor said that's just discharge papers. Nice how you ducked the combat question. My friends get(got) shot at every day and they think this war is fucking stupid. How about that. All we did in Afghanistan was give them some guns and intelligence, so there was nothing to "pull out" of. Just yet another blundered foreign policy of the enemy of my enemy is my friend (perpetrated by J. Carter) kind of like Saddam. You know how Reagan, Rumsfeld, and Bush the First propped up his regime during the 80's.
Here's some research from your Israeli friends. Boston Globe--"New investigations by the Saudi Arabian government and an Israeli think tank -- both of which painstakingly analyzed the backgrounds and motivations of hundreds of foreigners entering Iraq to fight the United States -- have found that the vast majority of these foreign fighters are not former terrorists and became radicalized by the war itself. Intelligence officials worry that some of the ''Iraq alumni" will use the relationships they build on the battlefields of Iraq and return to their home countries as hardened Islamic terrorists."
Has it occurred to you at all that these foreign fighters, you know the ones disrupting things, are really there just to shoot Americans and drive them back. You see if we're not around so much there's not a lot of point in being there.
Here's some source material research about the German occupation, coming from the U.S. military.
U.S. Secretary of State George C. Marshall-- "The United States is opposed to policies which will continue Germany as a congested slum or an economic poorhouse in the center of Europe." This coincided with the U.S. giving $400,000,000 in aid to Turkey and Greece, becoming known as the Marshall Plan."-- You know like, we could probably win a lot more friends in the Middle East with aid than justifying attacking really weak countries on premises which turn out to be lies. You know shit like doing that, and calling it a "crusade" and saying "bring it on" might actually turn MORE people into terrorists.
"Following V-E day a massive military presence of 1,600,000 troops secured Germany but was rapidly reduced and redeployed months later." Let's see, uhh no, no we didn't do that in Iraq.
"In the field, by the end of June 1946, the military government detachments were divorced from the tactical commands, much reduced in strength, partially civilianized, and limited to observing and advising German governmental agencies."-- let's see, one year of occupation.
"The President's own thinking was closer to that of Stimson, who had written to him the day before the conference opened, "The problem which presents itself . . . is how to render Germany harmless as a potential aggressor, but most importantly restore it as an economic unit."
"Not all the Germans were converted to democracy, but they were given the opportunity for democracy without any snares or tricks...Although many soldiers looted and played the black market, the Army protected and restored the country's art treasures and monuments and imported three-quarters of a billion dollars worth of relief supplies. The DPs were returned to their homes, the concentration camp inmates were cared for, and the numerous services without which a modern society cannot function were put back into operation and kept running. Certainly after 1946 there could be no doubt that civil affairs-military government had proven its value both in and out of combat or that the Army had demonstrated its competence to manage a major occupation in the national interest and the interest of a conquered people."
-
Yeah I think Marshall/New Deal would be much cheaper, than how many hundreds of billions so far? Two term democrats. FDR--brought us out of the Great Depression and won WWII. Bill Clinton--Greatest budget surplus in history. GWB--Largest deficits in history. The dollar is down 30% since GWB took office. Oh yeah, the Yuan just decoupled from the dollar. "A World Bank study projected that by 2010 a dollar would be worth about 5.80 yuan, reaching 2.80 yuan by 2020" (currently worth about 8 yuan). So including all the debt for this fiasco pretty soon the Chinese will own our ass. Happy day.
-
Aug 11, 2005 5:14:55 AM CDT
holy shit. i wasn't aware that Republicans were allowed to r
by pynchon6
I don't read the Bible or Left Behind, and that just shows what a moron you are for believing every cliche that happens to appeal to your prejudices. As for Pynchon being a liberal, no shit, Sherl--you are obsessed with only reading folks and books that agree with your silly point of view, whoopeedoo, have fun. I read whoever's a good writer, whatever his or her politics. >>>>>>>>>>>As for the Jennings death, it's amazing how the press, so tough on everyone else, even in death, has given us nothing but Jennings Is Perfect for several days now. I might take his intellect seriously if he wasn't sucking on cancer sticks for forty years--someone that intelligent obviously was duped by the eeeeeeevil cigarette industry, so I guess he wasn't that smart. If even Jennings--who, let's be clear here, was well travelled and smart, but a newsreader--was so easily duped by the eeeeevil cigarette companies, I'm thrilled with lil' ol conservative me, who, in the eighth grade was smart enough to think "Why would anyone put poison smoke in the things that breathe for me?" I'm sorry the dude died I guess, but the lavish, nonstop canonization of him the last few days says a lot about how the press sees itself.
-
Avg American fatalitites per day this month: 4. Average per day for the entire war thus far: 2.33. Number of men seriously wounded so far this month: 140. So it's been 2 1/2 years and multiple hundreds of billions of dollars. I can see things are really getting much much better, but when do we stop?
-
I consider myself to be a proud no apologies liberal, and normally I stay out of these things, but considering the poor representation my side has put up so far, I want you to know we're not all idiots. After you get done shredding the post above mine, "My friend Victor said that's just discharge papers," (that's WHY the federal government needs to do more to fund education, but I digress) I hope you'll take some time to respond if you're not talk backed out on this thread. I get your point about Saddam needing to be removed by force. I would never argue as a liberal, and especially not as a woman and feminist that negotiating with Saddam would get us anywhere or was even desirable. You seem to be saying we were serving a higher principle by going in as far as your personal justification is concerned. My question to you then, is what about the higher principle violated by acting unilaterally (and spare me the coalition of the willing rhetoric, that coalition is Britain). Shouldn't we as a nation also adhere to the principle that invasion of a sovereign state is a bad precedent? Every nation always claims the moral high ground when doing so. Even if YOU feel we were indeed on that high ground, how then can we be indignant at any other nation for acting unilaterally? If Saddam needed to go, wouldn't more time spent making a case to our allies have accomplished the same result without alienating them afterwards? I am by no means suggesting that Saddam was anything other than vile and fully agree that the world is better off with him gone. However Milosovic was equally reprehensible and Clinton did a great job of making a moral case for intervention that did not damage relations with our traditional allies. Surely the same approach could have been used. And if it wasn't, then you have to ask why? Is it because that road was the tougher road? Is it because Bush felt he would be unsuccessful? Or were there other reasons why it had to be done NOW? Wouldn't you agree that these are questions that should be asked? By the way, I'm accepting your offer to discuss this, liberal to conservative without any name calling. Normally I think most conservatives on this board are tasteless, but the way you handled that kid was kind even if it wasn't appreciated. I'm impressed by your civility at least, if not your politics. :)
-
I already made that argument further up. Granted it was more analagous, off the cuff, less eloquent and more funny, but I did do it. Something about a superior military force invading our country, because they thought george bush is a bad guy. I think ill has thoroughly proven himself to be an "ends justify means" kinda guy. He has said repeatedly that he does not care about any rhetoric or events prior to the invasion as long as saddam is gone. I'm not a kid, I'm not an idiot, and mostly what I've done on this TB is respond to right wing mythology with facts. (See-- Clinton Sudan, Affirmative Action, German Occupation, Iraq=less terrorism, Oil for food scandal coverage, and use of the A-bomb). I'm sorry if I sometimes try to be humorous while debunking bullshit. Yeah, ill doesnt swear as much as me, but swearing is funny. If you like at his posts, they boil down to "Saddam out is good, nothing else matters" and chastising me for not having an exit strategty for a war I never supported. Meanwhile, his exit strategy is.... stay. Since we're asking questions. If we could get a coalition, what should we do about the brutal dictators that populate every other country on the planet? I'm all for ending tyranny or genocide (couldve easily done something about Rwanda but didn't which is horrendous), but sometimes the cost is just a little too high and you have to let people fight for their own freedom.
-
on Iraq. yeah, now we have to stay until the end because we are obigated to. we created this obligation by our blind and incompetant actions. basically, we turned an ostensibly stable (if imperfect) nation into a seething hell hole of violence and terrorism. and basically, we're in a no win situation now. we can't leave because things will get worse if we do. and we can't stay because things are getting worse anyway! that's why they call it a QUAGMIRE. and we did this on false pretenses engineered by the Bushies in order to get the Oil. not for "freedom" not for "democracy" and not even for "secruity" since we have become even more INSECURE and IMPERILED because of it! it's a 100% disaster and a crime against humanity, and we have no one but the CHICKEN HAWK Bushies / RepubliChristians and their all but USELESS political "opppostion" -- the Lameocrats. so, we have psychotic, violent, and insane RepubliChristians on one side; useless and weak Lameocrats on the other; and the rest of the world being shit on by both of them in the middle. heres an idea -- start developing alternatives to fossil fuels for energy. that's a long view plan, i recognize, but the whole Dark Ages style battle for resources thang? it just ain't working no more. oh, and you think there might be a conflict of interest in the White House? seeing as how the President is an Oil Baron Heir and the VP owned one of the worlds largest energy companies n the world -- Halliburton? a company which has a no-bid contract to control the oil in Iraq? and these guys haven't been impeached (or even investigated) because... WHY? btw, did you know they changed the name of the Endless War to "the Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism?" yes, GSAVE. bwaa ha ha! isn't that great? apparently it's not testing well, however. everyone knows what it should be called -- QUAGMIRE Vol. 2: The Desert Years of a Dying Empire. exit here now.
-
http://www.myspace.com/thehonkies
-
Sorry to take so long to get back to you, I've been busy posting under my alternate "clueless liberal" name, ZombieSolutions. Actually Elinore, I've had several discussions with liberals of the intelligent stripe, just not on this particular talkback. I know there are intelligent people who hold liberal positions, they are rare, but they do exist. I'll be happy to address your point, least I can do since it seems you've carefully read my posts. Yes, the diplomatic efforts COULD have been handled better. I still think no amount of diplomacy though, would have resulted in a greater coalition of the willing. Bosnia was easier because there was a clear case of "ethnic cleansing" at work. Having the holocaust in recent memory as a backdrop, it was hard for the Europeans to turn a blind eye to that in the court of public opinion. In addition, no huge sums of money were changing hands like in the oil for food arrangement with Iraq. Yes, your questions are appropriate and should be asked of any government. My objection is that I don't think these questions are being asked in the spirit of public good inquiry, I think there is a partisan agenda to bring Bush down or at least wound him politically. Why did we have to go in "NOW?" If you ask me, we waited too long as it is. I think the best time would've been after Saddam ran the UN inspectors out of Iraq on a rail. I'm aware of why that didn't happen, and again, I disagree with THAT policy as well. In fact, I've disagreed with damn near everything that happened with Iraq at the conclusion of Desert Storm. I agree that in principle invading a sovereign nation is a bad precedent, but we did have cause and legally I feel we were in the ballpark, if maybe not perfect on the particulars. Going in with minimum support from our allies is not ideal, but sometimes you have to act on your code of ethics even when it is politically inconvenient to do so. Which is not to say that I think you lack a moral code Elinore, just that your's is constructed differently. Wouldn't you agree to this though, if the entire world holds a position different from yours, in your mind does that make your position any less right or less moral? Oh and Cooler, I don't think it was your grammar that was being picked apart. Read over your post again and figure out where you stepped on your dick. See, I like using profanity too.
-
Aug 11, 2005 3:12:27 PM CDT
Semaj is so dumb he needs to reduce everything to basics so he c
by cameron1
but not quite as succinct.
-
You believe the ends justify the means. So asking the right questions for the wrong reasons fits in nicely with what you believe. Plus there are many reasons european countries were not quite as gung ho as the US. As for britain, they went to war without public support. So why did the British population not want to go in?
-
And I haven't been incorrect before when talking to you.
Finally you have shown through your views that you believe the ends justify the means. Not through what you said. -
I don't intend to change anyone's mind or score political points, but if they are being silly little ignoramus then they have to expect some response
-
But then you are just as bad as Saddam ;)
-
Aug 11, 2005 4:42:08 PM CDT
If that's what keep you happy you are one pathetic little ma
by cameron1
Ah well. Good Night everyone.
-
Affirmative action: http://www.conncoll.edu/is/library/courses/Independent/myths.html
Education Inequality: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World_US/SI_Kozol_NewYork.html
Forgive me ill, but I'm looking over my last post and I see no dick stepping, mostly just you side stepping me. You know, how you were factually incorrect on your claims about Afghanistan, post World War II, and a major factor in the spread of democracy being the Marshall Plan. Please stop with the bullshit about other countries not wanting to join us because of the oil for food thing. The United States was the single largest buyer of Iraqi oil. God, why do I have to keep fact checking your bullshit. They didn't want to join us because they knew it was a boondoggle. I guess that doesn't fit that they could see that this whole thing could maybe end poorly. When are you going to understand? A LOT of people in the Middle East really, really hate us at this point. They will keep getting their jihad on as long as we're around. They are not going to stop coming. Didn't we learn anything by Afghanistan and the Soviets? Arrogant superpower attacks, finds itself in quagmire, spends years and years accomplishing nothing racking up huge debt in the process, and finally collapses under the weight of said debt. We have been there for 2 1/2 years thus far and have nothing but a very thinly veiled facade to show for it. 2 1/2 years! Hundreds of Billions. -
Tinkering with other people's lives and countries often comes back to bite you in the ass. Too many to list, but let's start with Saddam and Osama bin Ladin. So let's say Iraq sets up a government. What happens when pan-arab pride sets in and some of the people remember that they don't like Israel too much? And then they start to realize that we unconditionally support Israel. Then they start thinking, yeah my cleric has been talking about that and I don't much like the United States. Man, I'm pretty poor, and I see all these rich well connected clients of the U.S. in my country. That really pisses me off. I think I'm going to start going to hear that cleric talk a lot more, he's really got it right.
-
I don't think you're asking these questions because you're concerned. Besides asking those questions could "wound" dear leader politically. No, no good can come of asking such questions. Wait fifty years, and then I will bestow upon your questions my seal of approval. Until then, no questions. Just make sure that you agree we did the right thing and that we should stay indefinitely. Thanks you.
-
Aug 11, 2005 6:36:43 PM CDT
Ill's response to Egyptian moderate now leaning toward extr
by alotcooler
ehhhhhh, well, we weren't "perfect on the particulars"... you know that WMD thing, but uhhhhh you know, we were... we were in the ballpark. (jazz hands) Freedom's on the march!
-
Aug 11, 2005 7:33:55 PM CDT
I Come To These Things Because I Find Them Entertaining And Some
by captain sulu
Yeah, a lot of the time it's the same stuff repeated over and over as nauseum, but every now and then you get a bit of insight or a new way of looking at things. Granted the last 2 times the liberals have had their asses to them (even without Lando), but usually both sides have their moments.
-
Aug 11, 2005 7:38:27 PM CDT
No, Wait, It's Not The War On Terror or the War Against Evil
by zombiesolutions
wait, so what is it now? a war against skateboarders and extreme sports enthusiasts? isn't that hilarious! they market wars like films now. but these films change name midstream! wow. it's the cutting edge of marketing. WAR MARKETING! hey, 3 guys died from my homestate today for nothing. only 1,800, huh? i wonder what the real numbers are... countdown to the backlash! tick-tock, tick-tock...
-
We cannot leave until we can stem the tide of insurgents willing to come and disrupt a stable Iraq. The insurgents will only stop coming when we leave.
-
I agree that the what the rest of the world thinks has no bearing on my personal morals (and why do you assume I have them?), but I am opposed to any imposition of someone else's morality on me. In no way am I saying nothing should've been done about Saddam, but I think you head done a slippery slope when you justify a war in the name of morality. Although the crusades were not about religion, religion (substitute morality) was the reason given. Once you claim you have the moral right, or duty to invade another country, the only thing that will stop you is an equal or superior military force. Invasion of another country should follow an international law. Before you get started, I realize the problems with the UN as an institution. Just because the UN is flawed though, does that mean we should dump the baby with the bathwater? I was glad to see you posted that we had legal reasons as well as moral ones, I can accept that. The reason I asked is because you seemed to be making your case on solely moral grounds. Let me ask you this though, had the legal reasons not existed for going into Iraq, would you STILL have supported an invasion? I think I know your answer from reading your posts, but I don't want to assume. :)
-
With great power comes great resposibility. We are the sole remaining superpower. At this time in history we have to act sometimes, because we are the only ones who can. Since you didn't go into the UN, I won't either. I think the concept of international law is a good one, it's just that there is no one to enforce it except the US at this period in history. Let me ask you this, if your friend was in danger, would you commit an illegal act? I suspect I know the answer to that from your posts as well, but I don't want to assume either. And as for your morals . . . . I was just guessing.
-
Aug 11, 2005 11:46:56 PM CDT
Yes, Quagmireman, We Must Use Our Power To Selectively Right Wro
by zombiesolutions
Yes, the logic is irrefutable -- truly the cure is the disease. Indeed we bear a comic book allegorical obligation to a) right wrongs selectively, b)create problems and then attempt to solve them by making them infinitely worse, and c) failing to take any proactive steps to avoid making these same mistakes in the future. This is the burden we carry -- our gift and our curse! A superpower without an enemy ceases to be a superpower! But a rambling, incoherent, keystone cops-esque slapstick war against an abstraction could potentially go on forever! Excellent. (Hey, btw, who won the War on Drugs? Is that one over? Apparently the drugs won. Boy, I sure hope Terrorism doesn't win... or Violent Extremism for that matter. Those skateboarders really are a menace.)
-
You guessed correctly. About the illegal act, my morals will have to remain a mystery for now. Yet if the US is alone in being able to enforce international law at this point, shouldn't it's integrity be above reproach? If deception is used as a reason for war, doesn't that weaken any future argument for intervention on the basis of morality?
-
Aug 12, 2005 10:42:27 AM CDT
Hey, I Thought Elvis And Jim Morrison Lived On The Moon
by zombiesolutions
And as much as it may seem like it -- Canada is NOT the moon. Rather, I believe it is Racoon City and a host of other midbudget sci-fi locations. ____ Oh, btw nobody's *really* moving to Canada yet. Just wait until the draft comes back. You can almost trace the ghost-line of affluent Chicken Hawk sons and daughters as their parents suddenly change their minds enmasse over-night in re: the Global Struggle Against Cobra er Evil er Whatever... for something... YES, a grand mass transformation from Hamfisted Chicken Hawk NeoCons to Arm-Chair Human Rights Activist / Flaming Semantic Liberals with the flick of a blog. (Whatever your stance on the war(s), you have to admit that reinstituting the draft would pretty much be the final straw for the vast majority of people... It's gonna be amusing!)
-
I can't believe that we are not capable even of saying goodbye to a television icon without devolving into a left vs. right bullshit-fest. You are ALL too partisan to be helped.
-
And one I agree with. I've always felt that the reason for going in should've been based on violation of international law as well as moral reasons. There was no need to make a case for weapons of mass destruction. Don't misunderstand me to mean that I think the charge was trumped up, I just think it was unnecessary from my point of view, although it may very well have been a political necessity. And IF knowingly trumped up, I agree we need to hold ourselves as a nation to a higher standard. If I seem like I don't value the arguments of liberals, it's largely because I am suspicious of their motives. There are several higher causes I would be willing to die for. If modern liberals (not talking about those who risked their lives in the civil rights period, for example), held that same committment to a higher cause of any kind, even if I disagreed with it, they'd have more respect from me. Just out of curiosity, is there any greater good you feel so strongly about you'd risk your life? And I'm excluding defense of family, I think that's a given for most people. I mean a principle.
-
Forgot to mention that.
-
For the love of god man, do you ever read anything on your own. No? ok. 16 U.N. resolutions. Ok so if you look at the actual resolutions, you come to realize that the pattern was, get ready now: violation, compliance, violation, compliance etc. They were not outstanding violations, which is an incredibly important distinction. When you say things like "not being enforced" you imply that they were all current violations, which had not been resolved many years before (in fact many of the resolutions were immediately following the Gulf War). It is, forgive my pretentious speech, a canard. Essentially all of the violations involved WMD, so we know just how much Iraq violated them. If you go back to before this war, you'll also remember that Iraq again complied with our demands, handing over all its weapons records and letting inspectors in. To say that war was "necessary" to enforce the resolutions is pure fantasy, not supported by history in any way, as we had "enforced" them without war countless times before. Also, the Clinton CIA screwed up big time back in '98. The weapons inspectors were withdrawn (not kicked out) after Iraq sniffed out the spies we put in with them. We then used the spies info. to immediately bomb iraq, which virtually ensured that the inspectors would not be allowed back. Look, it's obvious to anyone with a brain that U.S. forces were going to be in Iraq no matter what. The PNAC has been coming in their pants about this for years. The problem with saying shit like 16 U.N. resolutions is that it puts the U.S. at the height of hypocrisy, as Israel has violated umpteen gillion resolutions and the U.S. always vetoes anything through the security council. Yes the problems with the U.N. are numerous, for two main reasons: the first principle of international law is national sovereignty and the P-5 on the Security Council have final say on everything (not that I don't want U.S. to have veto power, but we do not always use it juidiciously). That being said, the U.N. is incredibly important and has done a lot of great stuff, with the good far outweighing the bad. Man you are a tool Anchorite. I'm reading more of your bullshit. Please stop with the "other countries doing business shit". Couldn't those leaders have just recognized that THEIR populations did not in any way support it and it could end up ensnaring them in quagmire? Cash cow? do you realize the relative GDP of those countries to the business they were doing? Please support with something other than what you pull out of your ass. Goddamn you are ignorant. The no fly zones were not U.N. resolutions dumbass, they had nothing to do with the U.N. and had zero basis in international law. You are thick as a fucking brick. Some people put SOME stock in what other countries think of the U.S., because this is an entire world and as much as you might think so the U.S. cannot do everything on its own or impose its will on everyone. Allies are a GOOD thing you dipshit.
-
"At an energy industry conference in 1996, Cheney said sanctions were the greatest threat to Halliburton and other American oil-related companies trying to expand overseas.
"We seem to be sanction-happy as a government," Cheney said. "The problem is that the good Lord didn't see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments." While he headed the Houston-based oil services and construction company, Cheney strongly criticized sanctions against countries like Iran and Libya. President Clinton cut off all U.S. trade with Iran in 1995 because of Tehran's support for terrorism. Halliburton's foreign subsidiaries did about $65 million in business with Iran last year, company documents say."
-
Aug 12, 2005 5:19:35 PM CDT
Ill was once in the army, did you know that? huh, huh, huh?
by alotcooler
Maybe "modern liberals" are not willing to kill other people for slogans.
-
Aug 12, 2005 9:52:41 PM CDT
Ill Clinton before I get to you . . . Anchorite, get your head o
by elinore
You quoted me, implied you were replying to my posts, and clearly didn't read a thing other than what you chose to quote. At what point was I anywhere close to suggesting the UN was an ideal solution. Stop listening to Rush Hannity or wherever you're getting your marching orders from. Ok Ill (enjoying this conversation to btw), the rest is for you. Yes, there are certain greater causes I would risk my life for. Now, let me ask you what I feel is the more important question, are there causes you are committed to that you devote a LIFETIME to? Not necessarily of danger, but day in and day out working toward making the world a better place. I am not discounting your years in the military, but by your own admission you are done. And neither here nor there, but I don't think you joined the military with the express intent of liberating Kuwait. Nothing wrong with feeling good about the outcome or your role in it, but you served your time, as you put it, and now are done. Whatever field you chose afterward, was the betterment of humanity a consideration? Or does your time served (including an UNEXPECTED war) let you off the hook? I honestly don't know what you do now, but I would like an honest answer without having to know the specifics, is your current job about getting a check or do you feel good about going to work each day. I'll take you at your word for whatever answer you give. The reason I ask is that liberals, unlike conservatives, often choose the much harder task of devoting much of their life in their chosen professions, not for the money, but because they believe in what they are doing. That's why so many become teachers, social workers, attorneys, journalists and doctors. Yes, some of these jobs do have high rates of compensation, but then again, some don't. And my point is, it is not the paycheck that drives most liberals into their fields, unlike conservatives. So which is the greater devotion to an ideal, a few years in the military followed by career that does nothing to further your cause, or a lifetime of taking a pay cut in a field that you feel is important? I personally chose to go into medical research, and my reasons for doing so were not financial. Yes, I am fortunate to be very well compensated for what I do. But I had opportunities to pursue many other fields, many of which would have been more "fun" or given me faster opportunities for advancement. You may choose to believe me or not, but I haven't questioned your patriotism in joining the military so I would hope you would take me at my word in the same spirit I've taken you at yours. I got into my field because we're working on curing diseases easing the quality of life for those born with disabilities or who suddenly suffer them unexpectedly. Women are still rare in my specialized field of medicine, and even the nerdy liberal men have a hard time accepting in this century the idea of a woman as a peer, or gasp, possibly having a superior ability. The attitude can be as sexist as in any Air Force Academy (no offense). In addition, I get involved in the non profit aspects of my work on my own non paid time. What I choose to do on a daily basis is not the easy road I COULD have taken. To answer your question directly, yes there are some things I'd "take a bullet" for. I give you credit for your willingness to do so (as you see, I'm not questioning that statement). Which is harder though, a quick bullet and a heros death, or the teacher working in the bad part of town for a small salary to try to help disadvantaged kids who have the odds against them (notice I didn't make it about me?) ;)
-
Aug 12, 2005 10:45:51 PM CDT
Anchorite, if that was intended as an apology toward me . . .
by elinore
Accepted. It might surprise you to know that I think the UN is seriously flawed as well. At least one of the reasons you mentioned, plus a whole litany of others that you'd probably disagree with. I can agree with you on this statement though, "The UN needs severe reform before I will count myself among its proponents."
-
Your link is funny because it proves my point on two fronts. First, Iraq did give up their weapons records and allow inspectors back in, (per this resolution) prior to the invasion. Second, this resolution refers to the "no fly zones" insofar as it is a dispute between the U.S. and Iraq. Essentially, Iraq was saying that they could not "guarantee the safety" of U.N. inspector teams flying through the no fly zones (a delay tactic). The U.N. was not validating one way or the other, the legality of the no fly zones, but simply saying "we need to get in". Iraq was using the history of planes being shot down in this territory to their advantage by "not guaranteeing the safety" of planes there. Again, the first principle of international law is national and territorial sovereignty. The U.N. cannot tell iraq that they cannot fly planes over their own territory. The U.N. was shifting the burden to Iraq to guarantee safety in those zones. The U.N. is only recognizing that there existed "no fly zones" in a dispute between the U.S. and Iraq and shifted the burden to Iraq to guarantee the safety of this flights, in that territory, to Iraq. So no, I didn't misrepresent anything. The U.N. had nothing to do with "no fly zones". They were merely acknowledging their existence, as a dispute, and calling bullshit on Iraq for not guranteeing the safety of their flights there. You are obviously ill equipped to process raw materials through your own capacity, and I would encourage you to stop trying to. Go learn something about anything, using your own brain to process it, and then I'll talk further. Or just keep watching Fox, whichever is easier.
-
If you haven't figured it out yet, the U.N. is nearly entirely controlled by the permanent five members of the security council. The U.N. is a DIPLOMATIC entity asshole. They are not in the business of starting wars to punish suicide bombers (non State parties, whilest the U.N. deals with States). If you call the United States (and others) vetoing everything that comes down the pipe against Israel pandering to the "muslim" countries then by all means hold onto your fantasy. Seriously man, do you know fucking anything about which you write? The only reason we're even talking about Sudan is because of the U.N. If you want to place blame for humanitarian inaction then look to the countries that control the U.N. first. The U.N. is flawed by its very nature (trying to get entire nations to cooperate beyonde their own self interest), but that does not mean that it hasn't accomplished a LOT of really great stuff.
-
the U.N.: A forum in which Nations can put economic and media pressures on each other in order to COOPERATE towards a humanitarian good. Blaming the U.N. as an entity, or an ideal, for not using military force or every time reaching cooperation to perform such good is like blaming your garbage man for not arresting a serial killer.
-
You've made a VERY good point and yes, I agree with much of what you said, including that my was was an unexpected one. At the time I joined though, I would have whether there was a war on or not. In fact, if there was I war I believed in going on that time, I would have felt it was my duty to enlist. You'll have to accept THAT as true as well, or not. My current job IS something I feel good about, and it IS something that I believe works to better the world, but I will happily concede that we're not curing cancer or whatever it is you do. Not even on the same scale and others would argue that what I do makes the world worse. So my field is open to interpretation, where I suspect yours is not. Also, I'm absolutely certain I get paid a lot less than you. I'm with you though, I do feel good on a daily basis about what I do, and there is no danger involved. I also do non profit work as well and contribute financially to the same. I agree that there are many liberals (and conservatives) called to certain professions that don't pay well. I have no problem with hyprocrisy from THOSE liberals. They're walking the walk as well as talking the talk. I have no problem even with liberals who have that attitude even if they get well compensated. Hell, I'd love to make more for what I do. So no, I won't accuse you of not being true to your beliefs for raking in the cash. HOWEVER, ongoing sexual harassment or being denied opportunities for rapid advancement (and I easily concede that is a shiity environment) do not equal putting your life on the line, in my book. I too have admiration for that teacher who probably has put his/her life at risk far more times than I did during my short time in combat. YOU, don't hit that mark. Now does that mean I think you're a hypocrite or not walking the walk? No. But it doesn't give you martyr status either. You've said you'd take a bullet for some things, I won't question it. That said, you haven't yet convinced me that you have yet taken a personal risk (unless by that reference to the Air Force you meant you were getting raped on a daily basis, in which case I apologize) of the kind you are attributing to other liberals. I find THAT type of liberal in very short supply, you seem to be suggesting that that sort of liberal is the norm. I will say this, your post has made me question how much more I could and should be involved. Well I ain't a reenlisting, there's more I could be doing to support the causes I believe in. You definitely whacked me in the conscience, and to a certain extent, have called BS on me correctly (although not to the degree I think you thought you were). Past efforts that are now over do not let me off the hook for what I'm not doing now. Just so you understand me, I AM still involved in things I beleve in, but yeah, I could and should be doing more.
-
There are reasons for anonymity online, so I choose not to go into detail, but I never equated my JOB with military service or that teacher you and I both seem to agree on. There are other things I do, again, accept it or not. I think after a week seeing what I do, where I go, and how I live my life, not only MIGHT you change your tune, but you'd see that there are many more of "that sort of liberal" than you seem to think. They are also out there where you live, you just haven't bothered to find them because it might shake your conscience more and force you to change your views. I'm glad that you can work daily following the purpose of your convictions. Again, taking you at your word, you're right. I hadn't expected that response from you. What are you doing, chopping down trees or dumping oil in the sea? Just kidding. ;)
-
Ill's last post is quite telling. One, he doesn't say what he does for a living so it obviously isn't exactly a noble cause. Second, he reaffirms that killing or being killed, as a "martyr" in his words, is the ultimate in proving one's nobility. Elinore made a very lucid point about Ill's war being accidental. Ill did not join the military because he felt strongly about liberating kuwait. If you join the military without a specific cause, war, what have you, then you are essentially putting your ultimate faith in the government to always do the right thing. Enlistees after world war II joined, generally of their own volition, because they already believed in the cause. Otherwise, you join because you think that your country will always be right and just (or you want money for college). The military TELLS you what to believe in, what to KILL for and what to risk your life for. If your beliefs happen to coincide, it's a nice coincidence but does not show a courage of conviction, that saying reenlisting to fight war that you believe in would show. As for Anchorite, you are stupid. I flatly proved you wrong and you still have no understanding of what the U.N. is. Yes, sometimes diplomacy is not enough, so in those instances it is up to coalitions of countries to act. The U.N. is not, at its core a military, or police entity and SHOULD not be. Again, the first rule of international law is national sovereignty. The power of the U.N. does not come from AUTHORITY, but rather from CONSENSUS. Countries can COOPERATE to pressure others. Your problem is that you are applying some sort of individual government or police model to the U.N. That is not what it is. It is not a world government or world police. The U.N. is as good as the sum of its parts. The U.N. is a forum in which nations can come together and try to convince other nations to join a cause which they think is just.
-
You sound like a little kid. You're letting your ego get in the way. Who cares if Iraq was in your words "making a fool of the U.N.". The fact is Saddam caved like the little bitch that he was every time. As far as the U.N. "not affecting positive change" do you know fucking anything about the massive humaitarian projects taht are undertaken because of the U.N. every year? Read something, anything please you automoton. The U.N. cannot FORCE extremely, extremely uncooperative nations to comply because ultimately a nation controls its own government and territory. That's the way it SHOULD be. Would you like it if the U.N. could FORCE the U.S. to do something? Jesus, I don't think the war in Iraq is shitty because the U.N. didn't sanction it. My main concerns are lying and fucking up. Why are you so hung up on other countries not being in the war? It's their choice goddammit. They don't have to do anything the don't want to. They looked at the risks and benefits (which go far beyond business concerns, you two dimensional twit) and decided it was not worth it. You are simple. Your thoughts are simple and show no nuance.
-
Aug 13, 2005 10:55:08 PM CDT
First, A Few Words For The Antagonist, The Back To You Elinore
by ill clinton
OK Cooler, if you read my posts I don't necessarily consider being a matyr to be the ultimate sacrifice, but it is high on the list. Getting tortured continously for 5 years is a lot rougher than a quick death by a bullet or land mine. AND I'll point out that you are guilty of a double standard, Elinore didn't qualify what exactly her non job activities are that elevates her status to those sacrificing liberals we were talking about, yet asks that it be accepted. Yes, my war was accidental, but if it had been ongoing at the time I enlisted, I STILL would have joined up. If you want to follow that reasoning of trusting the governmet to always do the right thing, then you should avoid paying taxes, unless you trust the government to spend every dollar you give on causes you approve of. As for my job, I doubt YOU would consider it a worthwhile gig,(although I and others do) and as Elinore said, there are reasons for anonymity that don't have to do with meeting with a cabal. Back to you Elinore, you are wrong. I actually club baby seals. Just kidding. My town is actually fairly small, so if this vast gathering of liberals of the type you descibe existed, I would know about it. I also have my doubts that these multitudes exist where you live. That is the only thing I will call you out on, it's easy to assert that someone is unwilling to have their beliefs challenged. I do it all the time. I HAVE considered all points of view that I've been exposed to. I'll believe these hordes of selfless people are out there when I see them. And trust me, if someone ever told me where those people gathered, I WOULD go and check them out. Because it would be a first.
-
Because I'm calling you. I've never once questioned anything you've said about yourself personally, just your belief system. You've just come pretty close to calling me a liar about what I do and the people I know. "And trust me, if someone ever told me where those people gathered, I WOULD go and check them out." OK, I'm inviting you. Can't afford it? I'll pay for it, because I certainly can. What risks would I take, you ask? How about a financial one in bringing a self declared open minded independent I only know from his posts online? I'll pay for a round trip ticket and cover your hotel (it can be expensive in my city). There are some conditions, of course, one is I satisfy in advance that you're not a psycho. If you can pay for it on your own, or are too proud to accept money from a woman, so much the better. I call YOUR bluff. Wanna come hang out with the liberals? The only thing it will cost you is time and maybe a little pride. Is THAT putting enough on the line for you? Glad you're not clubbing seals. You said nothing about the oil dumping though. :)
-
I play poker myself. YOU'RE calling ME? Dangerous, I always play to win. OK, how would this work. I'm suddenly more intrigued than I've EVER been on an AICN talkbalk. And no, I don't dump oil into the sea. I evict widows from their homes. Farms too. :-)
-
I play to win too. That was NOT a raise, you just called. I'll give you the details tomorrow, it's late here. Meanwhile think about raising something. I'm glad to hear about the oil. I was truly worried for a moment. :)
-
Just kidding, still taking you at your word at this point, with only a healthy amount of skepticism. You want a raise? OK. Assuming that you are in an appropriate age range, you will get the privilege of having sex with ME. A few additional caveats, you can't have any wierd diseases, be married or a guy. Oh, and your city can't be Damascus or some other unhealthy corner of the globe. Oh, and if genuine, I can afford my own air fare and hotel, but I'd have you spring then reimburse you, just in case this is an episode of "Prank'd" in the making. Can't wait to see your response tomorrow. :D
-
Today's been a bit hectic. I'm definitely not stalling, but only have time for this quick post. I'll give you the details on Monday. Btw, your raise is acceptable if you vote straight ticket Democrat in 2006. :)
-
If you want to use the fact that you were stationed in Isreal for a couple months while our air force decimated another army as a crutch for your superiority and courage of convictions then by all means. Give me a fucking break, with all the I put my ass on the line shit. If you are going to be so fucking reckless as to paint all liberals as not "actually" believing in anything they fight for, then I'm calling you out. What the fuck did you do during the war HERO? What the fuck is your contribution to society? What the fuck do you do for a living? Do you realize how condescending and assholey it is to say that progressives, as a group, don't fight for or believe in what they say they do? I'm a special education teacher and you know what, I don't reference it every five seconds to try to prove my moral superiority to political opponents. I just quietly go to my job every day. You being willing to kill other people because a government tells you to, or because you think that your brand of morality is the best doesn't mean fucking shit to me. You know what I see? Conservatives convinced of their own morality. Love your fellow man, but bomb the shit out of him. Love, but not if he's a homo. That homeless person better praise jesus before I give him a bowl of soup. That homeless person better tell me all the ways it's his fault before I'll give him a hand. If he can't crawl out of his shit stained carboard box and be as GOOD as I am, just like me, then all he deserves is my contempt. Everything is about being better than someone else. Affirmative action? Who cares about historical socio-economic context.. he should be as GOOD as I am. Homosexuality? That dirty Homo isn't as GOOD as me. Weren't in the military? Not as GOOD as me then. Not Protestant? Well, you're not as GOOD as me. I guess I have more money than you, because I'm a BETTER person. That is an accurate gauge of someone's human value. Don't think this war is a good idea? I guess it's because you're not as GOOD of an American as I am. It's funny that you went striaght to taxes when talking about the government. It's all about YOUR pocketbook right? Youre right, you shovelled shit once in the desert, so you ARE better than me and I don't believe in anything I say, just like all my progressive friends. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
-
Just like a liberal, never on time and never as cheap as promised. Sure I'll vote straight ticket ONE TIME. Also like liberals, buying votes. :)
-
I am disturbed that you are in a position of teaching children with such poor reading skills. There are several posts where I specifically singled out teachers as having the courage of their convictions. And when did I ONCE mention anything about the homos? I served with gays (yes, we had them before don't ask, don't tell, I think we've had them in the military since . . . hmmm . . . ever) and would've risked my life for them in the same way they would've risked their life for mine. As for wanting to fuck my horse, how deep does your deviancy run? Am I not supposed to feel superior because you want to fuck a horse? Well then I am fucked, because I would consider that to be a disorder of the highest caliber. Never did I claim any kind of "hero" status. I served, I survived, I did my part. I didn't single handedly wipe out a division or rescue POWs, nor did I ever claim to. My service is a fact just as your teaching is a fact. I've given your profession far more credit than you gave my service (which I AM proud of and have every right to be), and that was before I even knew yours. Like all liberals, YOU are the one exaggerating, and YOU are the one making personal attacks and trying to demonize anyone who has a different point of view than you. If you make a typical teacher's salary, then I suspect our incomes are about in the same range. So I'm not looking down my nose at the poor folk or whatever that point was. So you like paying taxes with your income, I don't.
-
And just like a conservative, your vote is avaliable to the highest bidder. ;) Seriously, some of us do have lives. OK, here's how this works. Non negotiable at this point. I'll set up a one time email address and post it here, if you agree to everything. You send me an email, put in a distincive phrase. After you send it, post that phrase on this TB (should be cleared out by that point), so I'll know which one is yours. I'll send you ONE email with MY personal information so you can verify I'm me. After you verify (I'll tell you how to, in case you don't know how to check), you'll fax ME that DD 214 along with a photo, I can handle the rest. If you are lying about anything, deal's off. If you email or call or fax after that one message (I'm not checking that box after I get your message anyway), deal's off. Everything we talk about, happens here where there is a public record. It's not a lack of trust or giving you too many hoops to jump through, just sensible precautions (had a bad stalker experience once, so you see, I'm STILL willing to take risks). If you agree, and while it may not seem like it, I actually want you too, post a reply on this thread and I'll follow up with an email address. As I said, conditions are non-negotiable. ;)
-
Post it. My only condition is nothing new, just a restatement of something you already agreed to. You spring for the ticket, round trip (if flying is necessary) and hotel, and I'll reimburse you after the fact.
-
Rereading my ill post. Was a little drunk at the time and it was too harsh. Sorry about that. However, in my defense, when I stopped talking about him and said "conservatives" I was speaking generally. Anyway, I'm obviously not changing your mind anytime soon so, whatever. I'll stand firm on the whole belittling the motivations of progressives everywhere, thing though. As for Anchorite, he is a moron. It took me all of two seconds (literally) to find this. Here is what the WHO has to say about DDT's. "It is recognised that there are several countries that continue to rely on DDT for public health purposes and that these countries should be allowed to do so until safe, effective and affordable alternatives are available and operational." http://www.who.int/docstore/water_sanitation_health/vector/ddt3.htm. As if any of this would somehow discount all the humanitarian good the U.N. has ever done. I guess they weren't big on Venn Diagrams at Anchorite's school. You know inclusive/exclusive circles. I too use to decry the U.N., but then I read about what international law is (something which you obviously do not grasp, what the U.N. is, how it works, and what it's done. You only read that which is already been filtered and regurgitated for you. You have no core analysis skills, hence you post a link to a U.N. resolution because it has the words "no fly zone" in it. Or you link to some random article about "eco imperialism" without bothering to see what the WHO actually has to say about DDT. So please move back to your Y2k bunker, whip out your copy of "Treason" and leave the intelligent people alone. Just follow the logical trajectory of your "hands off me/American militarism" thought process and grab your rifle, become a Luddite, get rid of your computer and stop embarrassing yourself. OK?
-
Remember to use a distinctive phrase. I'll reply with my information your address. pokerliberal2020@hotmail.com
-
My distinctive phrase was "Port wine is a good cheese."
-
I'll go through the motions and get back to you hear.
-
OK "Elinore," I've established your bona fides. I'll fax you mine tomorrow along with an actual photo.
-
And am I to infer that by "actual photo," you are suspicious of mine? I'll take that as a compliment, rather than a testament to your insecurity, a common trait among conservatives.
-
Comes from a suspicion that you were trying to bait me with your "photo" to send something other than my actual one so you would then have an excuse to back out of the deal. The particular photo you sent is pretty glamorous for someone involved in research. While it may be a stereotype, let's just say that outside of a James Bond film, you rarely encounter the "hot babe scientist." I'll allow the possibility, but I'd be an idiot not to be suspicious. That's just reality.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts