Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Only Terrorists Need to Worry. You're Not a Terrorist, Are You?
Judging from the response to my column from Townhall readers (a skewed sample, I admit), Americans are not just ready to let the government read their international email and listen to their international phone calls at will; they're happy to ditch the Fourth Amendment altogether, at least as it applies to wiretaps. A sampling:
1) Well, just don't discuss your evil plans when you call your mother. Save that for talking to your Democrat and Muslim friends.
2) What in the world do you talk about with your Mother that could possibly interest the US government?...You are sort of full of yourself aren't you.
3) Why would anyone want to listen to you? [A good question, in any context.] There has to be a valid reason to wiretap. How many people does this involve? Millions use the phones, a few need to be monitored. The resources are not going to be used to pry on folks like you. To think that, unless you have something to hide, someone would want to take their time to listen to you is, to be generous, taking yourself way too seriously (and maybe a little paranoid).
4) Unless you are...plotting death to Israel or death to the United States, you need not fear.
5) Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of "US."
Some readers seem to have interpreted "a reasonable expectation of privacy" as referring to one's judgment about the likelihood that the government is listening in at any given moment, as opposed to one's assumptions about a particular kind of communication's protection from warrantless eavesdropping. For the record, I'm pretty sure my mother and I are not very high on the NSA's list of targets. My point was that most Americans probably do (or did) take for granted that their private telephone conversations cannot be tapped by their government without a court's approval.
|8.8.07 @ 2:05PM|#
There was a time when, "if you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about" was only used sarcastically. Sadly, that time appears to have long since past.
|8.8.07 @ 2:05PM|#
If you love police states so much, go live in one. Go live in Russia or China or North Korea, but get the fuck out of America.
|8.8.07 @ 2:13PM|#
If you love police states so much, go live in one. Go live in Russia or China or North Korea, but get the fuck out of America.
QFT
|8.8.07 @ 2:14PM|#
What's with all the phony US vs. ME rhetoric? What about a CEO discussing sensitive trade secrets that, if disclosed, could result in thousands losing a paycheck? Or how about a known anti-tax advocate having a conversation with his attorney or supporters? I can think of 1000 reasons to value privacy more than just my own vanity.
|8.8.07 @ 2:16PM|#
Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of
"US."
Aww, Sullum's got a boyfriend!
|8.8.07 @ 2:16PM|#
To think that, unless you have something to hide, someone would want to take their time to listen to you is, to be generous, taking yourself way too seriously (and maybe a little paranoid).
Or unless you are working on the incumbent's rival's campaign. Or
unless you're working to legalize something. Or unless you've got
unorthodox political views. Or unless someone in the government
takes a dislike to you. Or unless someone with political
connections wants something you own. Or unless...
Jozef|8.8.07 @ 2:17PM|#
This is the same thing like copy protection on DVDs and CDs: only the dumb ones will get inconvenienced. People who have anything to hide or at least a little bit of brain already use PGP for e-mails, Tor for anonymous Web browsing and encrypted VoIP for calling.
|8.8.07 @ 2:20PM|#
Next, for your own ceonvenience and safety, envelopes will be banned. If you don't have anything criminal in mind, postcards should suffice. (The government pinkie-swears that it will not abuse its ability to scan, store, and analyze all the mail.)
|8.8.07 @ 2:21PM|#
4) Unless you are...plotting death to Israel or death to the
United States, you need not fear.
What if I'm plotting death to Luxembourg? Do I need to fear
then?
On a more serious note, Jacob: Town Hall? Really?
|8.8.07 @ 2:21PM|#
Seriously though, this just goes to show you how little people
understand about liberty and rights.
This is especially bad since it's coming from Townhall.com, which
purports to be of the party of small government; the conservatives.
Of course, no one believes that tripe anymore, at least on
H&R.
|8.8.07 @ 2:23PM|#
I was shocked, shocked!, to hear that this administration would
be listening to the telephone conversations of American citizens
without a warrent.
That said, I don't think we should perpetuate it by making it
legal.
|8.8.07 @ 2:25PM|#
5) Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of
"US."
damn that is creepy.
|8.8.07 @ 2:26PM|#
Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of
"US."
I bet it took some flag-waving grandma in Tennessee the better part
of the morning to come up with this. That kind of banality is sort
of its own reward to read.
|8.8.07 @ 2:27PM|#
The U.S. government has never spied on political enemies or dissidents. No harm no foul, people! They won't abuse their authority here, particularly given all of the safeguards imposed by this bill.
|8.8.07 @ 2:29PM|#
The commenters' complete lack of awareness of how unfavored groups can be harmed by even well-intentioned security procedures drives home just how nonsensical it is when Town Hall types pretend to be a persecuted minority.
|8.8.07 @ 2:29PM|#
The Townhall comments are absolutely correct. Not only do you not realize that the nation is at war, you don't care. Do you think that there was no wiretapping during WWII? It is absolutely in your personal interest that individuals planning to kill Americans be found and caught before they succeed.
|8.8.07 @ 2:30PM|#
"Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of "US." -- posters here think that is "creepy" -- I think that says it all when it comes to who you attract.
|8.8.07 @ 2:33PM|#
Joe,
You ain't kidding! I try to explain this to my dad all the time, to
no avail. "Dad, do you still want the fed to have this ability if
Hillary wins?? Then don't support it now!"
5) Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of "the
Volk."
|8.8.07 @ 2:34PM|#
Notice, there's no "me" or "I" in Bush -- but there is an
"us".
There's also a "bus", but I'm not sure what that means.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 2:35PM|#
Jeff-
I think your post would be more compelling in the original Russian.
In English it's kind of boring.
|8.8.07 @ 2:37PM|#
How about a President like Richard Nixon (or if you prefer, Hillary Clinton) using such powers to listen in on their political opponents?
|8.8.07 @ 2:38PM|#
thoreau - I am sure that you are fluent in Russian due to your experience with your fellow "Comrades" who have spent 40+ years trying to destroy USA, and when they failed with Communism, now try to undermine USA from within when totalitarian Islamism attacks USA.
|8.8.07 @ 2:40PM|#
Cesar - if President Hillary Clinton's political opponents are
planning terrorist attacks against the USA, then you bet, I want to
know about, and have the FBI arrest them before they succeed.
What is complicated about this simple question?
Are you an American or a political partisan?
I, for one, am an American.
Rich Ard|8.8.07 @ 2:44PM|#
Not a particularly well-read one, would be my guess (though this
is certainly speculation as I haven't had the opportunity to listen
to you talk on the phone about your reading material).
I'm confused about the belief that those with power to listen in
will only do so for good. Even Captain America had dark days.
|8.8.07 @ 2:45PM|#
5) Maybe it's time for you to think less of "ME" and more of
"the Volk."
Oh, DAMN! Put that one in the Cheap Shot Hall of Fame! LoL,
snarkmeister!
thoreau, thanks for flushing Jeff out. I was about to write a
reasonable response about the 72 hour free-listening period before
a warrant is sought, but now I won't bother.
Jeff, does it make you uncomfortable to know that your rubber
sheets are made in China?
workedmyway througcollege|8.8.07 @ 2:45PM|#
most Americans probably do (or did) take for granted that
their private telephone conversations cannot be tapped by their
government without a court's approval.
I always assumed they could be tapped without court approval just
that it would not be admissable in a court.That is why we didn't
explicitly mention drug sales on the phone.
|8.8.07 @ 2:46PM|#
I, for one, am an American.
No sir, you are a jackass.
If being "American" depends upon adopting the policies/actions of
the Soviet Union then count me out.
|8.8.07 @ 2:47PM|#
Is jeff arguing that since thoreau and we are probably viamently anti-collectivist(i can't speak for everybody), that we are or were communists?? I see some logic problems.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 2:47PM|#
Jeff-
You're an American?
I didn't think that they granted citizenship to KGB agents.
|8.8.07 @ 2:47PM|#
I want to hear more from Jeff about how we should flush our bill of rights down the toilet to protect us from big, bad Osama.
|8.8.07 @ 2:48PM|#
I, for one, am an American.
By accident of birth, maybe. But not by any meaningful
intepretation of the values of the founding fathers.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 2:50PM|#
Here's the question we need to ask: Are we feeding a troll, or
are we having fun with a pinata?
Given how easy it is to pummel Jeff, I lean toward "pinata."
|8.8.07 @ 2:50PM|#
I'm sorry, but I grew up during the Cold War, and I find the
idea that we are threatened in any real way by Islamic "Fascists"
entirely laughable. Sure, they could kill some of us, and I'm all
for responding to such attacks (or threats of attacks), but I don't
fear them. What I do fear are incursions against my liberty. We
didn't give it up when faced down by the Russians; why do so when
we're faced down by some cave dwellers?
Incidentally, there is no "US" in the "United States of America."
But there is a "ME."
|8.8.07 @ 2:50PM|#
Oh, come on, since when has accusing someone of not thinking of himself as an American been an insult to his patriotism?
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 2:50PM|#
Man, Jeff is even less interesting than our usual trolls. Been
reading LGF this morning, Jeff? Drinking the Kool-Aid, pissing
yourself in fear of a bunch of illiterate cave-dwellers?
Look dude, I'm sure you're nice enough for being virginal and
living with your mom, but don't you have some anime porn to look up
or something? A RealDoll to bone? Because, and I hope you can
comprehend this will your obvious cognitive...gifts... it makes a
lot more sense to worry about ceding fundamental rights of due
process and privacy to the government of your country than it does
to worry about a bunch of bearded camel herders living in caves and
failing to start a jihad.
I know they're scary and brown, not comforting and pasty like the
expensive simulacrum you're hiding under the bed, but it's not like
their beards give them mystical powers to enrich uranium by
swinging buckets over their heads or anything. So, run along
and play now, the grown ups are trying to have a conversation.
|8.8.07 @ 2:53PM|#
FDR did not adopt the policies of the Soviet Union when during WWII he authorized wiretaps and other actions to protect the USA from Nazis and Communists. The nation survived then, and the nation will survive now. However, just as during WWII, there will remain a group of 5th columnists whose primary objective is to undermine the American nation during war, by any means possible. With FDR as president, such individuals wound up in prison and internment camps. With Bush as president, such individuals get talk shows and write columns for the media.
|8.8.07 @ 2:57PM|#
With FDR as president, such individuals wound up in prison
and internment camps.
Some other people wound up in internment camps, didn't they? Like
second- and third-generation Japanese-American citizens who had
nothing to do with the war effort? Because our government can
always be trusted To Do the Right Thing, always.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 2:57PM|#
Yea Jeff,
Perhaps ur right, there should be absolutely NO problem installing
a web cam in your house...since you wouldn't be doing anything
wrong...right?
As long as u go by the rules (irregardless of what they are...or if
you are aware of them or not) you should have nothing to worry
about.
I just wanna remind u Jeff...It was once illegal for black people
to sit in the front of the bus. It took breaking that law and many
appeals to overturn that law.
I'm not saying discrimination does or doesn't exists. But there are
definitely LAWs out there that are wrong.
The LAW itself is a living body...which changes with time. The
government has too too too much vested interest in prying into our
lives...that's why we have the 'bill of rights', 'the criminal
procedure', and the 'due process of law'.
Jeff, if u were picked up off the street one day and accused of
something that u didn't do... wouldn't u atleast like a HEARING so
that u can simply say that 'U didn't do it' ???
|8.8.07 @ 2:58PM|#
Pro Libertate: "We didn't give it up when faced down by the
Russians; why do so when we're faced down by some cave
dwellers?"
The Islamist transnational terrorists are hardly cave dwellers, and
unlike both the Communists and Germany's Nazis -- they succeeded in
a massive attack on the USA homeland.
During the Cold War, COINTELPRO did significant intelligence work
and monitoring of suspected terrorists. And by the way, their
ability to do so was based on original authorization that FDR gave
in performing such wiretaps and intelligence work.
Deal with the facts.
|8.8.07 @ 2:58PM|#
Like second- and third-generation Japanese-American citizens
who had nothing to do with the war effort
That's a small price for other people to pay to make little Jeffy
feel safer!
|8.8.07 @ 2:59PM|#
Jeff, let us not forget that the founding fathers committed acts
of high treason against the legitimate government of Great
Britain.
They specifically rebelled against the idea that the government had
both a right and a responsilibity to intercept and examine all
forms of correspondence that were possible given the available
technology.
I assume in your world, we would have better off if the British
government has discovered the radicals and executed them before
they could have launched their armed rebellion.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 2:59PM|#
Jeff,
That simple HEARING is now a thing of the PAST with this
administration...They want to deny
- Hearings
- Right to attorney
- Trials
- The concept of the Warrent
- Reasonable suspicion and Probable Cause audits
Why shit...if u deny all of that...u can never appeal.
|8.8.07 @ 3:00PM|#
The law may be a living body, but so are the people that the law
is intended to protect. And since the point of the law is to
protect American citizens, and the point of the surveillance is to
protect American citizens during wartime, there really is no
conflict. Except in the mind of the extremists and 5th
columnists.
By the way, the Sedition Law is still valid as well.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 3:01PM|#
Jeff-
Quick, I hear there's a sale on adult diapers at the local WalMart.
Now get away from the computer and go get something to cope with
your bedwetting, while we grown-ups talk.
|8.8.07 @ 3:03PM|#
Iowan - you comparison of USA fighting for independence with foreign Islamist terrorists attacking the USA homeland and killing thousands of innocent people is gross. I saw with my own eyes the destruction and fires raging in the Pentagon after 9/11. I saw with my own eyes the horrible pit in NYC that remained of the WTC. Either you have spent too much time in Iowa... or you have no compassion for your innocent fellow countrymen during war. Which is it?
|8.8.07 @ 3:03PM|#
However, just as during WWII, there will remain a group of
5th columnists whose primary objective is to undermine the American
nation during war, by any means possible. With FDR as president,
such individuals wound up in prison and internment camps. With Bush
as president, such individuals get talk shows and write columns for
the media.
Oh, OK. Now that you've described Bush's domestic political
opponents as a "fifth column" (how else should we interpret the
"talk shows and write colums" comment?), I feel so much better that
the administration would never use its power to spy on domestic
political opponents.
During the Cold War, COINTELPRO did significant intelligence
work and monitoring of suspected terrorists.
Nice. COINTELPRO. The program that was used to spy on innocent
Americans who did nothing worse than hold unpopular political
opinions.
I think we owe it to Jeff to take him at his word.
|8.8.07 @ 3:05PM|#
Alice - what type of rights do you think those who went to USA Internment Camps during WWII had? And why should enemy combatants have any more rights? However, the topic here is the issue of surveillance and wiretapping.
|8.8.07 @ 3:07PM|#
I am dealing with the facts, which I understand far better than
you do, apparently. We did things during the Cold War that we
shouldn't have, but the demands that we surrender liberties for
"security" today are far more intrusive and far more dangerous than
they were back then. Again, where's the threat? Point to the
industrial base of the opposition. Point to their wealth if we
launched a general war against the region. Point to their
education. Point to their allies in the global sphere.
The guys who aren't in caves or hiding in towns in Iraq are, for
the most part, not actively fighting against us. I'm not denying
that there is money in the hands of the terrorists; what I'm
denying is that the United States is truly threatened. It isn't,
and our continuing to muck about in the Middle East is pointless.
Our oil supply isn't based there any more, and we can always wipe
out any group or country that decides to attack us again.
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 3:08PM|#
You know what's awesome? Massive Attack. Seriously, Jeff, give them a listen the next time you're watching some tentacles, you'll totally dig it.
|8.8.07 @ 3:09PM|#
joe says: "you've described Bush's domestic political opponents
as a "fifth column"".
No I didn't. You did.
I happen to be a Democrat, and I don't agree with many of President
Bush's views.
What you fail to understand is there is a difference between
disagreeing with any individual president and seeking destruction
and terrorism against the USA.
As I stated in a previous email, I would also support President
Hillary Clinton investigating and wiretapping her political
opponents if they were seeking destruction and terrorism against
the USA. It is a no-brainer.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:09PM|#
I worked on the 38th floor...I ran for life that day...and went
to many funerals.
The the GET TOUGH on TERRORIST thing is NOT WORKING !!!
Israel has NOT had a DAY of Peace since the 1947 take over of a
land where these people lived in...
And the US has not seen a DAY of PEACE since we've gotten
INVOLVED.
These "TERRORISTs" that u call ... do have a legitimate
GRIP...
And as we (US/EU/ISRAEL) have adopted the act of
NAME-cALLING...THESE terrorists have GROWN...ALL OVER THE
WORLD....TO PLACES that they DIDn't Exist Before.
When the DICK CHENEYS and RONALD REAGANs get tough...it's in
effective.
It's REAL EASY TO GET TOUGH on TERRORISTs...when u don't
have to ride the NYC SUBAYS. It's real EAST to say NO NEGOTIATIONS
with TERRORISTs...when It's NOT UR DAUGHTER being held
hostage
Bush and CHeney are FAGGOTS that hide behind the Secret
Service.
|8.8.07 @ 3:11PM|#
So i guess we can just forget the entire Church commission and
the whole reason behind FISA in the first instance??? The modern
republican party is a farce. The neo-cons have taken it over,
pillaging and burning all their sacred principles along the way.
State's rights? Axed. See recent vote on medical marijuana raids
where some 85% of repubs pissed on state's rights. Limited
government? HA hahhaahahaha. This republican party wants more gov.t
in your business than anyother i can think of. Whats funniest is
half the republican base are either a)uninformed or b) informed,
but too stupid or too proud to admit they have been had. The
corporatist's have won. America lost.
Im sick of these appeasers claiming because we dont have anything
to hide, not to worry. The FBI is infiltrating anti-war groups and
anti RNC convention protestors. If the NSA had any relevant intel
on any of these protest people gained through
data-mining,eavesdropping, or both, how hard would it be to share
that with the FBI or the local police? Isnt that what the
"homeland" stormtroopers were designed to do? Share intel? What the
hell is going on here where a gov agency solely designed to gather
foreign intelligence is turning its big ear inward?? This is
precisely what the FISA bill originally enacted was supposed to
prevent!! We, through our congressional miscreants, have
essentially repealed FISA, not enhanced it. Protect America Act??
Thats the name chosen for this farce? We need a "protect america
from itself" act, because we are committing bi-partisan self
inflicted homicide!
|8.8.07 @ 3:12PM|#
Pro Libertate - they are not hiding in Iraq. The Islamist terrorists are throughout the UK, Europe, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and of course, in the USA. They are transnational organizational hydra without the requirement of a centralized organization or leader. This is the challenge that the USA faces in the 21st century; it is totally different than previous enemies. And yes they declared war on us repeatedly, and as early as 1996 and 1998.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:12PM|#
We will SEE a new BREAD of TERRORISTS...
I believe that the IRAQis that we've displaced (a small amound)
will rebel against us as well.
And we are un-equipt to fight a clandestine war...regardless of how
much wiretapping, profiling, wall building, missle creating, blah
blah blah we do
|8.8.07 @ 3:12PM|#
I, and my fellow soldiers, took an oath to protect and defend
the Constitution. Not the government or the people but the
Constitution.
Right wing bedwetters can kiss my ass.
|8.8.07 @ 3:13PM|#
What is complicated about this simple question?
Are you an American or a political partisan?
I, for one, am an American.
How about spying on her political opponents (as Richard Nixon did)
to advance her own political gain? Or how about using information
gathered to political destroy her opponents?
And the fact that you think I'm partisan is a riot.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:13PM|#
Tropper Jone...it will b u that comes back with no feet...for no good reason
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:16PM|#
We should NOT waste NOT ONE...b-cause 1 is 2-many. and if u
wanna call me a bed wetter 4 that...i feel sorry 4 u...
u will c that we will not be able to fight clandestine
enemies...regardless of what we do
|8.8.07 @ 3:16PM|#
Alice Bowie - where do you think Islamists have "grown" now where they weren't before? That is really a joke. The truth is that they were always there. Bin Laden simply provided focus on an existing movement that was already all throughout Europe and UK in the 1980s and 1990s, and which has been active in India for over 60 years. Do you realize that Islamists are responsible for terror attacks killing 65,000 Hindus in India alone? The only thing new is that, after declaring war in 1996 and 1998, Bin Laden actually did something to the USA homeland in 2001.
|8.8.07 @ 3:18PM|#
Cesar - since you want to talk about history, do you have any evidence that FDR used his extensive wiretapping and surveillance during WWII to destroy any of his political enemies? After all that was 60 years ago, if it happened, you should know by now!
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:19PM|#
If u just leave them (islamists) alone...I think that they will go away...I may b wrong about that ... or being a small thinker ... But killing their families, destroying their schools and businesses over the last 60 years ... or so ... has made their resolve MUCH MUCH stronger ... the the GET TOUGH GUY (Adolf Guiliani) was running for his life right next to me on 9/11.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:20PM|#
He wasn't that tough that day...Nobody can be.
Humans are very creative...and when angered...can b very
dangerous...not just muslims...but anybody
|8.8.07 @ 3:20PM|#
Trooper Jones - don't you think USA soldiers did the same thing during WWII? Did USA soldiers attack President FDR because they decided that his surveillance and his internment camps were illegal? Or did USA soldiers go out and kill the enemy during war-time?
|8.8.07 @ 3:23PM|#
It's like a kookball parade.
The best part is not being able to tell the real Bushies and
anti-Bushies from the people who are just parodying them. When your
arguments are this easy to parrot, maybe it's time to think about
getting some new arguments.
|8.8.07 @ 3:23PM|#
Please stop hitting the jeff/pinata. There's no candy falling out - just mare crap.
|8.8.07 @ 3:23PM|#
Alice Bowie: "If u just leave them (islamists) alone...I think
that they will go away."
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain
September 30, 1938
Mr Chamberlain declared the accord with the Germans signaled "peace
for our time"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/30/newsid_3115000/3115476.stm
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Perhaps we ALL do live with a FALSE sense of PRIVACY. Perhaps this is something that can never really exists in America
|8.8.07 @ 3:25PM|#
Yikes, it looks like Alice and Jeff deserve each other. You kids don't have too much angry sex now!
Rick H.|8.8.07 @ 3:26PM|#
Um, Alice...
No offense, but if you're on my side, please shut up. You're
muddying the water with all that garbled txt msg free-association
and incomprehensible ranting.
Please learn how to type in clear English before attempting to
argue with someone. Or at least get us a translator.
|8.8.07 @ 3:26PM|#
Cesar - since you want to talk about history, do you have
any evidence that FDR used his extensive wiretapping and
surveillance during WWII to destroy any of his political enemies?
After all that was 60 years ago, if it happened, you should know by
now!
Yes Jeff, lets talk about history. Why don't you start by reading
about the Alien and
Sedition Acts, then move on to the Espionage Act, and
since your such an FDR lover why don't you read about the Japanese
American Internment. Oh, and read some about McCarthyism,
too.
But I'm sure you would have been for all of those, and supported
HUAC too!
Nothing makes the government go out of control like being at war
and the fear that comes with it, and nothing makes it violate our
civil liberties with such disastrous results, either.
|8.8.07 @ 3:26PM|#
Jeff - If you're going to bring up India, how many Muslims have been killed by Hindus over the years?
|8.8.07 @ 3:27PM|#
Wow, Jeff. You are really terrified of the world, aren't you! Don't worry, all of those brown people don't want to kill you... well, maybe you, but not the rest of us.
|8.8.07 @ 3:29PM|#
Rick H. says "please shut up"
So lets see - yours is the side defending the right of terrorists
not to be spied on?
Based on your belief in the terrorists' Constitutional rights of
free speech?
But you want to shut other people up, right?
|8.8.07 @ 3:29PM|#
Oh and Jeff, it would be better for you and your neocon friends to stop looking at 1938 and start looking at 1914, a situation that could have been avoided by smart, cautious diplomacy.
|8.8.07 @ 3:30PM|#
Cesar calls for "smart, cautious diplomacy" - against Jihadists
that call for "Death to America"....
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain
September 30, 1938
Mr Chamberlain declared the accord with the Germans signaled "peace
for our time"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/30/newsid_3115000/3115476.stm
|8.8.07 @ 3:31PM|#
Jeff - whee! you're such a gas! Do you do parties? I mean,
you're adorable!
So lets see - yours is the side defending the right of
terrorists not to be spied on?
Based on your belief in the terrorists' Constitutional rights of
free speech?
All those who said any of this speak out now...
*crickets*
|8.8.07 @ 3:32PM|#
Jeff--one part of it is, and you just proved my point about not
letting the government get out of control. When it takes a
"temporary" measure, it hardly ever ends up being temporary.
That law was designed to deal with the threat of Revolutionary
France, which I think has long passed. But the law remains. Such is
government.
|8.8.07 @ 3:32PM|#
Jeff,
First, bullshit about your party. Save that line for letters to the
editor you cut and paste from the RNC blast faxes. You aren't
fooling anyone.
Second, What you fail to understand is there is a difference
between disagreeing with any individual president and seeking
destruction and terrorism against the USA.,/i> No, you fail to
understand that. That distinction is the central point of my
argument. The people who ended up in internment camps under FDR
didn't do anything wrong, and didn't aid the enemy, but you
endorsed lockkng them up. The Bush-bashers who "go on talk shows
and write columns" are Democrats, libertarians, and
paleoconservatives, not al Qaedists, and you endorsed locking them
up.
As I stated in a previous email, I would also support President
Hillary Clinton investigating and wiretapping her political
opponents if they were seeking destruction and terrorism against
the USA.
So would I. Where we differ is that you support wiretapping on her
political opponents when there isn't any reason to believe that
they are seeking terrorism against the US, while I would only
support it is probable cause to believe that they are (ie, getting
warrants).
For you, the fact that they were her political opponents is enough
for you to agree that they need to be spied on to prevent
terrorism. That's just police-state tyranny, dude.
|8.8.07 @ 3:32PM|#
Marcvs says "all of those brown people don't want to kill
you"
What makes you think that Islamists supporting terrorism are any
specific race?
GILMORE|8.8.07 @ 3:32PM|#
I wonder what their reaction would be to things like, me being
on the TSA no-fly list, because someone with my name sued the
government.
i.e. no terrorist, yet still fucked.
They'd probably be like, "well, you probably did SOMETHING wrong
for them to suspect you...."
Hello 1950s again.
|8.8.07 @ 3:32PM|#
Jeff go do your homework and read The Guns of August
before you start using WWII historical analogies, ok?
If diplomacy had worked in 1914 there would have been no
Hitler.
|8.8.07 @ 3:33PM|#
1. Anyone who uses LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL in an argument.... rather
than putting forth... I dunno, a real argument... pretty much loses
that argument by default, wouldn't you think?
2. The Sedition Act may be still in place today, but (i) I don't
think it'd be upheld if it went before a court, and (ii) We're not
at war (show me a declaration of war if you think we are), so it
wouldn't apply anyways.
|8.8.07 @ 3:33PM|#
Whoops!
What you fail to understand is there is a difference between
disagreeing with any individual president and seeking destruction
and terrorism against the USA. No, you fail to understand
that. That distinction is the central point of my argument. The
people who ended up in internment camps under FDR didn't do
anything wrong, and didn't aid the enemy, but you endorsed lockng
them up. The Bush-bashers who "go on talk shows and write columns"
are Democrats, libertarians, and paleoconservatives, not al
Qaedists, and you endorsed locking them up.
As I stated in a previous email, I would also support President
Hillary Clinton investigating and wiretapping her political
opponents if they were seeking destruction and terrorism against
the USA.
So would I. Where we differ is that you support wiretapping on her
political opponents when there isn't any reason to believe that
they are seeking terrorism against the US, while I would only
support it is probable cause to believe that they are (ie, getting
warrants).
For you, the fact that they were her political opponents is enough
for you to agree that they need to be spied on to prevent
terrorism. That's just police-state tyranny, dude.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:35PM|#
The jihadists would have said "Death to ANYONE"
that would attack them, destroy their homes, kill their families,
destroy their infrastructure, and deny their children a
future.
I know that the US and ISRAEL would like those pesty Palestinians
to SHUT UP and live in a TENT with no citizenship, right to vote,
or hope for the future...BUT they DON't seem 2 be doing that...and
they are getting a lot of sympathizers (i.e. Bin Laden, Iran,
etc.,etc.)
And we are having a difficult time fighting these characters...and
not b-cause we're a bunch of bed-wetters.
|8.8.07 @ 3:35PM|#
Excuse me, conservative trolls, we need your help on the abortion thread down below. Thank you!
|8.8.07 @ 3:35PM|#
Jeff,
Like the mob? Look, they are a threat. They just aren't
World War III, IV, V or whatever alarmists are calling it these
days. Maybe we need a real big war again to remember just what
Super Scary means.
Comparing the Islamic terrorists to the Nazis is insanely
disproportionate. Germany had the population, the industrial base,
the military, the economy, the national unity, and the education
base necessary to be a tremendous and obvious threat. Not only all
those things, but they also were overtly pursuing new territories.
We're talking about a 1,000-to-1 difference in threat level at the
very least.
My advice to the U.S.? Tell Europe to militarize and prepare to
deal with the Middle East itself, leave Iraq, possibly partitioning
it first, and continue being the greatest and freest society in the
history of the planet. If our departure is treated as showing a
vulnerability, and terrorists hit us again, then we can blow up
some stuff and maybe even invade a responsible nation or two.
Otherwise, why are we involved over there? Reacting to 9/11 was
fine, but we have no other compelling interest! Why bother?
|8.8.07 @ 3:37PM|#
Alice-
We shouldn't favor either side, in the Eternal Israeli-Palestinian
War, period. We should wish them both well, and tell them good luck
on finding peace. Then butt out.
|8.8.07 @ 3:38PM|#
Last post from me Jeff, because you don't deserve more. I was
responding to this comment:
Cesar - if President Hillary Clinton's political opponents are
planning terrorist attacks against the USA, then you bet, I want to
know about, and have the FBI arrest them before they
succeed.
Now, on to your response:
Iowan - you comparison of USA fighting for independence with
foreign Islamist terrorists attacking the USA homeland and killing
thousands of innocent people is gross. I saw with my own eyes the
destruction and fires raging in the Pentagon after 9/11. I saw with
my own eyes the horrible pit in NYC that remained of the WTC.
Either you have spent too much time in Iowa... or you have no
compassion for your innocent fellow countrymen during war. Which is
it?
So much bullshit, so little time.
First, we are not at war. The people that plotted to destroy the
towers and suceeded in doing so are criminals, not soldiers. The
appropriate measures to be taken now are to beef up the "crime
fighting" abilities of the government, not the war-making
abilities.
Second, it is not necessary to dispose of the Bill of Rights to
beef up our crime fighting capability. I believe, in fact, that the
latest actions by the executive and legislative branches
reduces our ability to fight criminals over the
long term.
Finally, I believe that you, and others like you, are far more
dangerous to America than the criminals that brought the towers
down. You scare me far more than Bin Laden.
|8.8.07 @ 3:38PM|#
joe says "Save that line for letters to the editor you cut and
paste from the RNC blast faxes. You aren't fooling anyone."
So apparently you have personally decided who does and does not has
the right to be a Democrat? Thanks for pointing out that as part of
your views on Constitutional freedoms that you personally are the
only one who can decide someone's political party.
Democratic President FDR would not have treated Islamist terrorists
with a kid-glove, and neither would have Democratic President
JFK.
And regarding our founding fathers, I suggest you look up Thomas
Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Adams and James Madison's views on
the war against Islamist pirates in Barbary...
|8.8.07 @ 3:39PM|#
Jeff, do you support giving people the government suspects of
committing murder the right to an attorney, the right to a trial,
and the right to face their accusers?
If so, is this because you side with murderers, because you don't
understand that murderers are a threat, or because you believe
these things necessary to keep the government from using its force
against the wrong people?
|8.8.07 @ 3:40PM|#
And regarding our founding fathers, I suggest you look up
Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, John Adams and James Madison's
views on the war against Islamist pirates in Barbary...
Islamist piracy? Come again?
The Barbary pirates just wanted money, asshat. Which we eventually
gave them anyway. They didn't have a political ideology.
|8.8.07 @ 3:40PM|#
iowan says: "First, we are not at war."
Al Qaeda declared war on the USA:
Febuary 23, 1998
Osama Bin Laden's Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans
(declaring war and plans to attack the United States)
Published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
August 23, 1996
Osama Bin Laden Declaration of War Against the United States of
America
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
|8.8.07 @ 3:40PM|#
I know that the US and ISRAEL would like those pesty
Palestinians to SHUT UP and live in a TENT with no citizenship,
right to vote, or hope for the future...BUT they DON't seem 2 be
doing that...and they are getting a lot of sympathizers
OK, I tried to let it go, but enough's enough. So Israel builds a
wall, giving Palestinians a de facto country with borders
and what happens? Hamas and Fatah get bored and start fighting each
other because they can't fight Israel anymore.
Also, let's dispense with the myth that there was ever some
Palestinian homeland (although I agree that we should also dispense
with the "Jewish Homeland" myth, but I digress...) The British,
like it or not, owned that land and gave it to the Jews, with the
UN, the US and the USSR recognizing the nation. It's
settled fucking law, but like the 2000
Presidential election, some folks just want to keep hawking lies
about it. Get over it.
|8.8.07 @ 3:41PM|#
"""Seriously though, this just goes to show you how little
people understand about liberty and rights.""""
I think you can replace the word understand with care.
"""During the Cold War, COINTELPRO did significant intelligence
work and monitoring of suspected terrorists. And by the way, their
ability to do so was based on original authorization that FDR gave
in performing such wiretaps and intelligence work.
Deal with the facts.""""
Since you like facts, you should deal with all of them. CONINTELPRO
was shutdown due to abuse. The moral of the CONINTELPRO story was
you can't trust government to obey it's own rules. It's obvious
that Bush can't play by the laws of the land. THAT is what he has
in common with the tyrants of the world. They think they are above
the rule of law.
Jeff do you support the rule of law? That's a simple question, yet
if you do, you simply cannot support Bush's tactics on spying. If
you do not like citizens demand their rights to stand as written,
Canada's to the North, Mexico's to the South take your pick. Also,
we formally apologized about FDR's interment camps, because we
recognize it as wrong despite the sense of need at the time.
Nonetheless, two wrongs don't make it right, and just because
someone else did it in the past doesn't make it right either.
The question of "is someone an American", at least in spirit, I
would say depends on how much you believe in the Constitution which
our country was founded.
""""Comparing the Islamic terrorists to the Nazis is insanely
disproportionate.""""
Indeed, and it should take more than jr. high school to know
better.
|8.8.07 @ 3:41PM|#
What is the phrase about consistency being the hobgoblin of little minds? I think that applies to Reason and its stance on wiretapping. The Fourth Amendment doesn't ban all searches and seizures, just unreasonable ones. Of course what is reasonable is in the end up to the society at large and the circumstances. One can imagine lots of extreme circumstances where listening would be not only warrented but required for the government to protect its people. There are of course many more examples of the government abusing wire tapping. The issue is under what circumstances is it okay and what circumstances is it not. My guess is that the people responding here think that the terrorist threat is large enough that it is okay for the government to listen in on conversations to stop that threat. Thinking that does not mean that these people believe that the government should listen for any purpose. It doesn't mean that they are even right about the terrorist threat. Maybe the threat as it currently is does not justify warrentless wiretaping, but that doesn't mean that it never could. To say that the government should never under any concievable circumstances engage in warrentless wiretapping, as Sullum seems to be saying here, is just stupid and an example of why Reason is not a serious publication when it comes to this kind of stuff.
|8.8.07 @ 3:42PM|#
So apparently you have personally decided who does and does
not has the right to be a Democrat?
Oh, heavens no! You have every right to be a Democrat. By all
means, throw off your mental chains, lose the Chekist streak, and
come on over!
|8.8.07 @ 3:43PM|#
joe: "Jeff, do you support giving people the government suspects
of committing murder the right to an attorney, the right to a
trial, and the right to face their accusers?"
Joe you deliberately blur the difference between peace-time
criminal law and war-time actions against the enemy. But then, you
don't believe the USA is at war, despite the written declarations
of war by our enemies against us -- repeatedly.
|8.8.07 @ 3:43PM|#
I don't understand whats so hard about the government getting a
warrant from a secret court. Especially since IIRC they can go
ahead, listen in, and get the warrant after the fact under
current law anyway.
What makes it more insane is this court has hardly ever turned down
wiretapping.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 3:44PM|#
joe, I never thought I would say this, but:
Jeff is too dumb to be a Democrat.
I'm mailing him an application to join the Communist Party. Jeff,
should I send it to Stalingrad or Siberia? I'm not sure where you
live.
|8.8.07 @ 3:44PM|#
Jeff-
Bin Laden is not a nation that can declare war. If you are going to
claim we're at war, please show me either a declaration of war by
the United States Congress as proscribed under the Constitution, or
a declaration of war against the United States by any other nation.
I'll be waiting.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:46PM|#
I understand Ayn_Randian
But we (american citizens) should not be involved with this. I
worked in WTC. More AMERICANS got KILLED in that attack
then innocent ISRAELIS during the ENTIRE 1990s
antifada.
The US and Austrailia where nice enough to their respective
natives....the Israelis should do the same. If Israel included
these people...and treated them nicely...Like the US did 100s of
years after killing many Indians...things would be better.
|8.8.07 @ 3:47PM|#
TrickyVic: "we formally apologized about FDR's interment camps,
because we recognize it as wrong despite the sense of need at the
time."
FDR didn't apologize. He did what was necessary for the country
during war-time. It is easy for people decades later to second
guess. You weren't there having to make the decision or protect the
nation.
TrickyVic: "Jeff do you support the rule of law? "
Yes and I realize that during war-time civilian law needs to be
changed to accommodate war-time circumstances, like right now in
this case.
|8.8.07 @ 3:49PM|#
Andrew: "Bin Laden is not a nation that can declare war."
Obviously, his transnational organization could, did, and continues
to do, despite whether you like it or not.
|8.8.07 @ 3:50PM|#
Jeff-
Yes or no answer. Do you believe, under the Alien Enemies Act of
1798, that resident aliens who are Muslim of Middle Eastern descent
should be apprehended by the federal government and placed into
internment camps for the duration of this "war"?
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:50PM|#
"Obviously, his transnational organization could, did, and
continues to do, despite whether you like it or not."
Yes...because we've made it a transnational
issue
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Yes or no answer. Do you believe, under the Alien Enemies
Act of 1798, that resident aliens who are Muslim of Middle Eastern
descent should be apprehended by the federal government and placed
into internment camps for the duration of this "war"?
In Jeff's defense (not that he needs it) ... I don't believe he
would answer yes 2 that question
|8.8.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Alice: "If Israel included these people...and treated them
nicely...Like the US did 100s of years after killing many
Indians...things would be better."
Do you realize that the majority of the British Jihadists are
Pakistanis that draw their inspiration from their grievance with
India? And it was British Jihadists that plotted to kill Americans
with 6 to 9 jetliners a year ago.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Putting people in camps has never gone wrong, not once.
Ever.
?? Including Nazi Camps ??
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 3:53PM|#
I also think Jeff has been attempting to read Michelle Malkin recently.
Yes, but ever since the head injury it's been tough to sound out
all those big words. Do you have any idea how many letters there
are in "Islamofascists"?
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:54PM|#
Jeff...I hear u ... but i don't think a holocaust of muslims would b a good idea
|8.8.07 @ 3:54PM|#
Jeff, I know it's hard to keep track, but I haven't made the
argument that we aren't at war.
My argument is different - even during wartime, the government has
to respect the Bill of Rights in its treatment of people in the
United States, unless those people are known to be engaged in
hostilities.
You are arguing for searches of people whose alleged anti-US
actions are so questionable that the government can't even meet the
probable cause standard after 72 hours of listening in on their
phone calls!
You and I are in agreement about what the government should do with
terrorists. The question is how the government should treat you,
me, and the guy down the street - not "the enemy," but people who
the government doesn't even have probable cause to suspect of being
the enemy.
Chucklehead|8.8.07 @ 3:55PM|#
From this thread I've learned:
Jeff and Alice Bowie were eyewitnesses to Sept. 11.
As a result, Jeff wets the bed thinking about Islamofacists.
And Alice blames the Jews.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 3:56PM|#
Yes Joe... I agree
We all (including those pesty muslims Jeff loves) should have at
least an opportunity to
- a trial
- a hearing
- an appeal
Not just lock up anyone u think is a terrorists.
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 3:58PM|#
I've learned that Jeff's spelling is better than Alice's, but
that he's probably ever so slightly dumber.
Nice that both of them took in an orphan chromosome and all, but
it's really making a wreck of the place, isn't it?
|8.8.07 @ 3:59PM|#
"Do you believe, under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, that
resident aliens who are Muslim of Middle Eastern descent should be
apprehended by the federal government and placed into internment
camps for the duration of this "war"?"
No.
However, we have only had a small scale attack in terms of what the
Islamists really plan for the USA. If NYC, Chicago, DC, LA, and
several other cities are hit by WMDs (N/B/C/R), then that issue may
have to get revisited. And at that point, USA would likely be under
martial law.
The problem is that the Islamists can easily hide in an otherwise
peaceful Muslim community. The problem is that that moderate Muslim
community has, for the most part, been afraid of standing up to the
Islamists in their midst. And as we write this, the role of CAIR in
funding and supporting the Hamas terrorist group is being proven
right now.
The only ones who really can stop such a catastrophe are the
moderate Muslims themselves in standing up to and reporting
Islamist extremists. If the USA does not have the law enforcement
tools to take some of the Islamist extremists off the streets, then
the moderate Muslim community will never have the courage to stand
up to them.
The war that the Islamists have planned for the USA is intended to
make WWII look like a cake walk by comparison. We have only seen
the opening salvos in what could be a very terrible war for the
USA.
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 4:03PM|#
I knew this guy who made a doomsday device out of a tesla coil and a camel once...it was pretty impressive.
|8.8.07 @ 4:03PM|#
Alice says: "i don't think a holocaust of muslims would b a good
idea"
I agree. However, the only ones with the real power to prevent that
are moderate Muslims standing up to Islamists.
It is their civil war for their religion.
They dragged USA into the middle of it.
They need to get USA out of it.
VM|8.8.07 @ 4:04PM|#
OMG! OMG! OMG!
we really shoulda held off on this thread until the Friday Fun
Link.
This is great.
"Jeff" is such a scream! How precious!
(pssst Jeff - just between you and me - does this topic also make
you BATE right there at the computer? Thank Zod for office doors
and those cute little blinds you can close)
*mrow!
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 4:04PM|#
John,
Good post about "reasonable" and "warrantless". It helped me
clarify why the administration's arguement is bogus.
If there is a "reasonable" suspicion that someone is a terrorist
then making the case for and getting a warrant for a wiretap should
not be a problem. ... unless there the number of requests outweigh
the FISA court's capacity in which case the solution is to increase
the size of the FISA court, not trust that the executive branch is
playing by the rules unsupervised or even performing
competently.
|8.8.07 @ 4:06PM|#
joe says: "My argument is different - even during wartime, the
government has to respect the Bill of Rights in its treatment of
people in the United States, unless those people are known to be
engaged in hostilities."
Joe -- would you rather that the USA govt NOT stop potential
terrorists and once WMD attacks happen in multiple cities, then we
end up with martial law? Because that is the direction the
no-surveillance crowd wants to end up taking the nation -- towards
martial law -- due to insufficient preventive action early.
Urkobold™|8.8.07 @ 4:06PM|#
FOOLS! YOU EXPECT THE URKOBOLD TO ATTACK YOUNG JEFF? YOU ARE
SADLY MISTAKEN.
YOU MUST ALL TREMBLE BEFORE THE MIGHT OF ISLAMIC TERRORISTS, THE
GREATEST FORCE OF ALL TIME! THE ONLY SAFE PATH FOR AMERICA IS TO
SURRENDER NOW AND PRAY TO ALLAH FOR GUIDANCE!
AMERICA, BOW TO YOUR NEW GOD: ☪
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 4:07PM|#
There are BLACK/WHITE/CHINESE muslims...
It would be easier to work with the people we have conflicts
with...and stay away from name calling...and the (BUSH/CHENEY)
approach of NOT talking to them.
There's a lot of retoric goin around...and if they wanna destroy
us... they might just do that. They don't need to bring nuclear
bombs into america. We have nclear reactors ALL OVER The
place.
We can avoid all of this with diplomacy...with offering ALL people
HOPE...For a Hope of a Safe Israel...and a future in the world for
Muslims. This effort will require the entire world to pitch
in.
The approach we've taken for the last 50 years...has not
worked.
Trust me, after that plane flew thru my window i
wanted to kill all of them too. But we really need to keep a level
head. and Smarter...not HARDER
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:07PM|#
Urkobold-
I'm confused. I thought that you wanted all the world to kneel
before Zod, Oh Trollish One?
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:08PM|#
ZOD!!!!!
AND IT'S KNEEL! NOT BOW!
OH GREAT URKOBOLD!!!! IS THIS TIME FOR A DOUBLE WHITHERING? OR HOW
DO YOU WHITHER A TAINT WHEN YOU CANNOT DIFFERENTIATE WHERE THE
TAINT STARTS AND WHERE JEFF'S NOSE BEGINS?????
(kids love him at parties)
|8.8.07 @ 4:09PM|#
"""The Fourth Amendment doesn't ban all searches and seizures,
just unreasonable ones."""
I can give you that one John, but the Fourth Amendment does say
"and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by
oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized." And the Bush
admin wants to remove that part of the 4th amendment without
repealing it through the proper process. Therefore, Bush is
violating the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. If Bush
wants warrantless searches, the Constitution must be amended. Sure
SCOTUS has created some exceptions, which I say are also
unconstitutional, (but who am I gonna call?) but those exceptions
are specific, they would not apply to blanket spying.
|8.8.07 @ 4:09PM|#
I wish I could go into an alternate universe where 9/11 never happened. Not only because of the lives lost, but also because that event has completely warped this country towards an increasingly authoritarian bent the likes of which haven't been seen since the early 50s.
|8.8.07 @ 4:10PM|#
VM,
Don't worry. I'm sure he'll be back. He seems to have an almost
limitless capacity for absorbing abuse. (And I'm pretty sure Alice
is actually Cindy Sheehan.)
Sadly, this show has been so good it has derailed the 9/11 Truth
thread. Oh, well. If only we could have a perfect storm thread
about free abortions for Islamic 9/11 Truthers.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 4:11PM|#
Yes Cesar...It's the way the Terrorists intended on Destroying America
|8.8.07 @ 4:12PM|#
"""Joe -- would you rather that the USA govt NOT stop potential
terrorists and once WMD attacks happen in multiple cities, then we
end up with martial law?"""
Fear mongering, plain and simple
That's the problem with your arguement Jeff, it's based on fear,
not reason.
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 4:13PM|#
No...I'm a 43 year old troll with a 5 o'clock shadow...slightly overweight
VM|8.8.07 @ 4:14PM|#
Good call, Sugar.
Still, I had to take a break from keyboard BATIN to Jeff (better
than "BATIN to the OLDIES") to start drawing my anime version of
Jeff as a candy-striper with naughty bedside manners.
Who needs a spanking.
With a hairbrush.
oooohgarglegargle.
*heads over to kick Timothy out of Stevo's bunk
|8.8.07 @ 4:14PM|#
Alice: "We can avoid all of this with diplomacy"
The proof of why this is not true can be found in the United
Kingdom. The UK had an "understanding" with Islamists and Jihadists
that allowed them to have safe haven in the UK, as long as UK
didn't arrest them.
In 2004, British writers were laughing at USA, saying "Why
terrorists love Britain".
http://www.newstatesman.com/200408090012
A year later, the first UK bombings by Jihadists started.
You can't negotiate with a group that seeks your total and complete
destruction.
It is the role of moderate Muslims to own this civil war in their
religion, and their job to take on and confront the Islamists among
them. Still USA needs to make certain that violent Islamists don't
get another chance to attack American homeland.
|8.8.07 @ 4:15PM|#
"Joe -- would you rather that the USA govt NOT stop potential
terrorists and once WMD attacks happen in multiple cities, then we
end up with martial law?"
Do you have an answer, TrickyVic?
You deride the question, but you don't have the courage to face
it.
|8.8.07 @ 4:15PM|#
""""TrickyVic: "we formally apologized about FDR's interment
camps, because we recognize it as wrong despite the sense of need
at the time."
FDR didn't apologize. He did what was necessary for the country
during war-time. It is easy for people decades later to second
guess. You weren't there having to make the decision or protect the
nation.""""
Hindsight is 20/20 not FDR's belief at the time.
""""TrickyVic: "Jeff do you support the rule of law? "
Yes and I realize that during war-time civilian law needs to be
changed to accommodate war-time circumstances, like right now in
this case.""""
Changed or ignored? Those are two completely different things. Bush
has ignored, and only until he was facing a Democratic Congress did
he decide to change.
|8.8.07 @ 4:16PM|#
No...I'm a 43 year old troll with a 5 o'clock shadow...slightly overweight
What a coincidence! So am I! Do you smell of pee like I do?
VM|8.8.07 @ 4:16PM|#
Nice, Alice! Good reference!
Jeff - nonononononono. NOnoNOnoNO!
""Why terrorists love Britain"."
wrong. wrong. wrong.
Why terrorists love BATIN. learn how to fucking spell. And hier I
was, writing you into my screenplay.
("first offstage henchman in training" has a nice ring to it)
your role would be to beat the crap out of the burqa-clad easter
bunny. (while reciting (backwards) Elegy in a Country
Churchyard)
|8.8.07 @ 4:17PM|#
Cesar: "that event has completely warped this country towards an
increasingly authoritarian bent the likes of which haven't been
seen since the early 50s."
War is hell.
But the fact is that whether we like it or not, the Islamists are
at written, declared, war with the USA.
|8.8.07 @ 4:17PM|#
Jeff--
This country lived with real, live, nuclear warheads aimed at all
our major cities on hair trigger alert for 50 years by an enemy
that wanted to destroy us. We didn't shred our Constitution
then.
Yet, you want to shred the Constitution now because of some asshats
in a cave think they can build a nuclear weapon and somehow smuggle
it into New York Harbor?
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:18PM|#
Jeff | August 8, 2007, 4:16pm | #
No...I'm a 43 year old troll with a 5 o'clock shadow...slightly overweight
What a coincidence! So am I! Do you smell of pee like I do?
toldja you couldn't tell where his taint ends and his nose
begins...
|8.8.07 @ 4:20PM|#
Cesar: "This country lived with real, live, nuclear warheads
aimed at all our major cities on hair trigger alert for 50 years by
an enemy that wanted to destroy us"
which they never planned to use due to the Mutual Assurance
Destruction policy... and which Islamists don't care about - they
are quite willing to die...
Cesar: "We didn't shred our Constitution then."
and we aren't now - anymore than we did during WWII
|8.8.07 @ 4:21PM|#
Minion:
So impersonating me to "shut me up" is how you defend the
Constitution? Thanks for point out what side you are REALLY on.
VM|8.8.07 @ 4:22PM|#
Jeff | August 8, 2007, 4:18pm | #
Oh - OK someone twisted on here wants to "impersonate me" now?
Pathetic losers.
ohnoez.
he found us out. Crane - was it you who did that? No - it was Mona
coming back to do that only to cancel the subscription again. No -
it was "What A" Herr Dienstag! YEAH!!! or "Drop the"... WHICH ONE
OF YOU DID THAT????
*sob*
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:24PM|#
PEEK A BOO! I SEE YOU!!!
WHICH SIDE OF YOU AM I ON NOW???
SQUAWK!
(*bzzt. wrong. guess again, tho. Would you like to try for double
jeopardy where the scores really add up?)
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 4:24PM|#
HEY! Jeff has reached Troll-gri-la wherein he claims that the "right" to post on a privately maintained webforum is the the same as the natural and Constitutional right to free speech! Truly, he is on his way to becoming one of the greatest virgins of our time!
|8.8.07 @ 4:26PM|#
But the fact is that whether we like it or not, the
Islamists are at written, declared, war with the USA.
Can someone help me out here? When did Islamisists get the ability
to declare war in the US? I thought only Congress can do that? Was
there an executive order or something that gave Bin Laden or anyone
else the ability to declare war?
I mean any fucking loony on the planet can decide he is waging a
war against the US. But last I checked some loonies declaration
doesn't mean we automatically wage war back does it?
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:27PM|#
hier is a picture of "JEFF" in action (actually at Arnie's belt
line for some reason)
(bats eyes at Jeff - but this Minion still didn't use his handle.
He was wrong. OOH!!! LET'S PLAY A GAME: WHERE ELSE HAS HE BEEN
WRONG HIER TODAY?)
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 4:27PM|#
I'm at war with mayonnaise, but you don't see me tapping Kraft's phones...although that'd be a good idea, come to think of it. Pesky mayo, always scheming to befoul otherwise delicious foods...I will destroy it, oh yes, yes I will.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:28PM|#
I once declared war on Urkobold to distract everybody from my failings in another thread. It was a bad idea. I've since admitted that I need to kneel before Zod, and now all is better.
|8.8.07 @ 4:30PM|#
Alice: "It's the way the Terrorists intended on Destroying
America"
Actually, the facts are that one of Al Qaeda's goal is to kill at
least 4 million Americans, 2 million of whom must be children, and
I quote Al-Qa'ida spokesman Suleiman Abu Gheith:
"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4
million Americans - 2 million of them children - and to exile twice
as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore,
it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons,
so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted
the Muslims because of the [Americans'] chemical and biological
weapons."
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP38802
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:30PM|#
Jeff-
What do you do when your diaper becomes so full of piss that it
starts running down your leg?
|8.8.07 @ 4:32PM|#
Timothy,
My analogy for Troll-gri-la (laid on the doorstep of a young man
who frequents these parts):
"If you object to me shitting on your rug, then you must be against
people going to the bathroom!"
|8.8.07 @ 4:32PM|#
ChicagoTom says "loony on the planet can decide he is waging a
war against the US."
The Islamists and Al Qaeda are not any "loony" (sic), but a
well-organized, decentralized, determined, and persistent
transnational terrorist organization who actually succeeded in a
mass-casualty attack in two major USA homeland cities killing
3,000.
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:32PM|#
JEFF SCHMEARZ MAYONNAISE ON HIS TAINT FROM HIS NOSE (assuming
HE can tell where their shared border is)
TO HIS NAUGHTIES AND THEN FROLICS THROUGH THE DAISIES WITH HIS
WHALE'S TAIL HITCHED HIGH OVER HIS TRAMP STAMP, HIS TARANTULA FROM
HIS HEAVY DUTY MERKIN OUT THE FRONT (it's his generation's version
of the mullet), AND HIS MUFFIN OVER THE TOP.
VERY SEXY!!!!!! ONLY MADE MORE ATTRACTIVE BY HIS STAGGERING
WIT!!!!!!!
DOKTOR T: HE WEARS RUBBER PANTS AND HE LIKES DRINKING THE DROPS AS
THEY CASCADE OFF HIS CUTE LITTLE TOES (then it has a nice salty,
cheese flavor)
|8.8.07 @ 4:32PM|#
""""Joe -- would you rather that the USA govt NOT stop potential
terrorists and once WMD attacks happen in multiple cities, then we
end up with martial law?"
Do you have an answer, TrickyVic?"""
I do have an anwser, get over your fear. It's clouding your brain.
If a nuke is used, the odds are it will be at my front door. I'm
not scared, if it happens, it happens. I'M NOT SCARED!!!!!! Neither
is the Rush O'Hannity crowd, despite what they say, they work in
NYC too.
But for fun, I'll answer. I expect the government to do everything
within its power as ordained by the Constitution of this great land
to prevent that. Any risk as a result of thing the government is
not allowed to do, IS THE PRICE OF FREEDOM UNDER OUR
CONSTITUTION!!!!
If the vulneralbility that freedom comes with is too scary for you,
I don't know what to say. I thought this was home of the brave, not
home of the I'm so scared I'll let my government do ANYTHING to
protect me.
|8.8.07 @ 4:34PM|#
VM -
Since you ask, I'm the one who spoofed Jeff. Don't tell
him that, though. It's a secret.
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 4:36PM|#
"It is their civil war for their religion.
They dragged USA into the middle of it.
They need to get USA out of it."
Actually the USA jumped right into the middle of it during the Cold
War when it viewed militant Islam (now known as Islamists) as an
effective weapon against the "godless commies" and secular Arab
Nationalists. Saudi petro dollars flowed to these groups with the
acquiescence and urging of the U.S. gov't for decades. In fact, the
executive branch in particular sought Saudi support as a means of
circumventing congressional approval of and funding for covert ops
in the Third World.
"the role of CAIR in funding and supporting the Hamas terrorist
group is being proven right now."
And the Israelis allowed money to flow to Palestinian Islamists
(now known as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc) when they just getting off
the ground because they considered them an attractive counterweight
to leftist Palestinian nationalists. The divide and conquer thing
kind of worked, I guess.
|8.8.07 @ 4:37PM|#
TrickyVic -
Actually you do NOT have an answer at all.
And you haven't even taken the question seriously.
It is precisely those misguided individuals who want to undermine
America's ability to protect itself during war-time whose direction
would most likely and most directly result in loss of the most
civil liberties, such as resulting in martial law.
You never think of the consequences of your actions.
|8.8.07 @ 4:37PM|#
...a well-organized, decentralized, determined, and persistent transnational terrorist organization...
Is anyone else getting flashbacks to the G.I. Joe cartoon's opening
sequence? It just needs to end with "...determined to rule the
world."
KITTEH OF URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 4:38PM|#
JEFF KAN HAZ ATTENSHUN PLZ?
and just you
remember the glory of teh URKOBOLD!!!!111!!!!! lolz
(gotcha Jake - so you are aware that even he
doesn't know where his taint ends and his nose begins. He didn't
even get to play with the "lefty" scissors (four, green eyelets) in
school. He got double special ones)
|8.8.07 @ 4:39PM|#
TrickyVic: "I thought this was home of the brave, not home of
the I'm so scared I'll let my government do ANYTHING to protect
me."
Apparently you would have told that to FDR too.
Thank God they didn't follow people like you.
You might not have the freedom you do to make such comments
today.
|8.8.07 @ 4:42PM|#
Patrick D: "the USA jumped right into the middle of it".
No, it took one enemy and had one enemy fight another enemy. That
doesn't change a single thing regarding the responsibilities of
moderate Muslims to fight the civil war for their religion.
It is THEIR war, and it is their issue to own. The moderate Muslims
need to stand up to Islamists, and US govt needs to get violent
Islamists off the streets before they can do more damage to the USA
homeland.
VM|8.8.07 @ 4:42PM|#
can we follow, you, please, pretty please Jeff?
Wait - are you a man of the shoe or the gourd?
Hay - yooooo're the one who took away that mute d00dz
elderberries.
meanie.
But if you wear your candy-stripe outfit, we'll follow you
anywhere!!!!! (plz)
*reaches for the cheetos*
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:43PM|#
Ah, I get it. Jeff wishes that he had been around back then so
he could have locked innocent people in cages.
Jeff, you know, if you are absolutely determined to do that, there
are places you can go and pay for the privilege. Bring
leather.
Some of them will even dress up as Japanese-American schoolgirls
for you.
|8.8.07 @ 4:44PM|#
Thank God they didn't follow people like you.
You might not have the freedom you do to make such comments today.
Jeff's like the Endless Octave. No matter how low he goes, he
continues going lower, spiralling ever-downward into a boundless
abyss of historical ignorance.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:44PM|#
Why isn't Jeff responding to my posts? My posts are at least as
rational as his!
I CAN HAZ ATTENSHUN PLZ? KTHXBYE
IM IN UR COMMENTS DEMANDIN UR ATTENSHUN
|8.8.07 @ 4:45PM|#
thoreau: I know how easy and useless it is to second guess
without context of the times or all of the information. FDR did
what he needed to do to protect the nation.
War time actions are rarely pleasant or desirable, like war
itself.
|8.8.07 @ 4:46PM|#
"""But the fact is that whether we like it or not, the Islamists
are at written, declared, war with the USA."""
This is bullshit of the highest order. Where are these battles
taking place? In reality you have a handful, maybe two, of
Islamists doing battle. Skirmishes, if I call them that, are not
common. You can lump in every terrorist attack that ever happened.
It does not rise to level of war you claim.
Secondly if it were true, wouldn't we send more than 160,000 troops
into battle? Would we not mobilize all our resources like we did in
WWII? Levy a tax to keep from going broke? Ration items? Force
companies to build for the war effort. If anti-bomb transportation
is needed, wouldn't we just take over the Toyota plants here and
build what we need. I think you have no clue of what it takes to
fight a war such as WWII. My grandmother would tell me stories of
what they had to deal with during WWII, there is no comparison,
period.
Serious Moose (for a second)|8.8.07 @ 4:46PM|#
A serious interjection - it has just dawned on me that "Jeff"
might have some sort of agenda and might be serious about a
particular topic.
I for one am going to start paying attention to his spittle-strewn
words to find out exactly what he believes about whatever topic he
feels compelled to communicate.
*strikes jaunty pose
Cesar: an excellent question! I shall sacrifice some wasabi peas to
the URKOBOLD and see what is there!
(I'll pay attention to you, Doktor T.)
innocent bystander|8.8.07 @ 4:47PM|#
Jeff, unless you were alive during WWII, please move forward in time until you can actually speak of something from personal experience.
|8.8.07 @ 4:47PM|#
Jake Boone, etc. - your sophomoric insults simply prove how incapable you are of factually arguing your point of view.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:47PM|#
Jeff-
Smart people learn from the mistakes of history and vow not to
repeat them.
Chickenshit bedwetters are downright determined to repeat the
mistakes, on the off chance that by doing the same thing over and
over again they'll eventually get a different result.
But people who just want to have a good time put on their leather
and pay good money to play in a dungeon.
|8.8.07 @ 4:49PM|#
"""Apparently you would have told that to FDR too.
Thank God they didn't follow people like you.
You might not have the freedom you do to make such comments
today.""
You are pure bullshit
|8.8.07 @ 4:50PM|#
Jeff: "But the fact is that whether we like it or not, the
Islamists are at written, declared, war with the USA."
TrickyVic: "This is bullshit of the highest order."
And here it is proven in black and white with sources:
Febuary 23, 1998
Osama Bin Laden's Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans
(declaring war and plans to attack the United States)
Published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
August 23, 1996
Osama Bin Laden Declaration of War Against the United States of
America
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
The Washington Post published the 1998 declaration of war on
September 21, 2001 - 10 days AFTER the 9/11 attacks.
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 4:52PM|#
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
GO TEAM RED
GO TEAM BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
GO TEAM RED
GO TEAM BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
GO TEAM RED
GO TEAM BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
GO TEAM RED
GO TEAM BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
RED RED RED
BLUE BLUE BLUE
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:52PM|#
Jeff-
So, basically, Osama can issue a proclamation that suspends our
Bill of Rights?
Could he also suspend our internal revenue code? Please?
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 4:53PM|#
I'll compile a list of other laws that I'd also like Osama to
suspend.
Definitely gotta do something about the ferret ban in California.
Definitely.
|8.8.07 @ 4:54PM|#
TrickyVic: "Secondly if it were true, wouldn't we send more than
160,000 troops into battle? "
I didn't say that I agreed with the USA war strategy. I just stated
that USA is at war, whether we like it or not.
Your assumption that I agree with all of the strategy is totally
wrong.
I do, however, agree with spying on Islamists who may be a threat
to the USA. That is what America has frequently done during
war-time, conduct domestic and foreign surveillance on suspected
5th columnists, enemy supporters, and potential saboteurs.
|8.8.07 @ 4:55PM|#
So what? The drunk schizophrenic living outside my appartment
has also declared war on America, as has Fred Phelps.
Whether or not some random jackass declares war, we're not actually
in a WWII-style war here. Not even close. A couple thousand people
were killed by OBL -- bad stuff, but not the end of the world, and
not a World War.
Change your diapers and move on.
|8.8.07 @ 4:56PM|#
thoreau: "So, basically, Osama can issue a proclamation that
suspends our Bill of Rights?"
No - when an enemy attacks your nation's homeland as declared and
written act of war, it is essential that America's government do
whatever is necessary in war-time environment to protect its
citizens from further attack and harm.
|8.8.07 @ 4:56PM|#
Jeff, let me put it this way. The terrorist want to destroy our way of life right? Our way of life is based the Constitution. If you want to ignore the Constitution, you are letting the terrorist win. OBL and crew know people like you will get scared and march to destroy our country from within. Buck up, be a man, stand up to these terrorist assholed by standing WITH the constitutional fabric of this nation.
innocent bystander|8.8.07 @ 4:57PM|#
War . . you keep using that word, but I don't think it means what you think it means.
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 4:58PM|#
No - when an enemy attacks your nation's homeland as
declared and written act of war, it is essential that America's
government do whatever is necessary in war-time environment to
protect its citizens from further attack and harm.
By suspending the rights that protect them from tyranny! YES! We
can avoid islamofascism by growing it local! DON'T LET THE DIRTY
BROWN TOTALITARIAN STATISTS TAKE JOBS FROM WHITE AMERICAN
STATISTS!
|8.8.07 @ 4:59PM|#
"""No - when an enemy attacks your nation's homeland as declared
and written act of war, it is essential that America's government
do whatever is necessary in war-time environment to protect its
citizens from further attack and harm."""
Terrorism is not war, by any real standard. Fighting the Taliban or
Saddam's army is. But wars end in a reasonable time. The changed
Bush is trying to make will not be limited by the duration of war,
therefore it is NOT about war.
|8.8.07 @ 4:59PM|#
Jake Boone, etc. - your sophomoric insults simply prove how incapable you are of factually arguing your point of view.
Dude, your arguments prove how incapable you are of
factually arguing your point of view. I'm not incapable. I'm just
disinterested. You showed up with your rantings, and you want us
all to what... obediently surrender our rights based on your
say-so?
I've been known to engage in level-headed debate in the past, and
I'm sure I will do so again, but you've caught me on a bad day, so
instead of carefully pointing out all of the places you're wrong,
I'll just say fuck you, you fascist son of a bitch. May you be the
first victim of the bloated, all-powerful government you so
desperately seem to want.
|8.8.07 @ 5:00PM|#
Chris S:
The Islamists and Al Qaeda are not a "random jackass", but a
well-organized, decentralized, determined, and persistent
transnational terrorist organization who actually succeeded in a
mass-casualty attack in two major USA homeland cities killing
3,000.
The facts are that one of Al Qaeda's goal is to kill at least 4
million Americans, 2 million of whom must be children, and I quote
Al-Qa'ida spokesman Suleiman Abu Gheith:
"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4
million Americans - 2 million of them children - and to exile twice
as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore,
it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons,
so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted
the Muslims because of the [Americans'] chemical and biological
weapons."
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP38802
|8.8.07 @ 5:00PM|#
Seriously Jeff, you and your ilk need to stop being such pussies
(no harm to that sexual organ -- it's lovely in the proper
context).
And if you can't stop shaking in fear, give up your own rights, but
leave me and everyone else alone.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 5:01PM|#
I know we shouldn't feed this troll, but his gems are the gifts
that keep on giving.
Jeff-
What if I decide that keeping and bearing pet ferrets is part of
"whatever it takes"? Can I have a ferret? Please?
And have you been to a torture dungeon to work out your
aggression?
|8.8.07 @ 5:01PM|#
TrickyVic: "Terrorism is not war, by any real standard."
It absolutely is a tactic of war by Islamist Jihadists, and they
absolutely are at declared war with the USA as I have proven.
|8.8.07 @ 5:03PM|#
""""Your assumption that I agree with all of the strategy is
totally wrong."""
Your assumption that I am assuming that is wrong.
Your calling it war, i'm just pointing out what's required to fight
a real war.
|8.8.07 @ 5:03PM|#
jeff, I just have one phrase for you: liberty or death. If not becoming a police state means theres a chance of me dying in a terrorist attack, so be it. I'll take that over turning our nation into a paranoid police state afraid of its own citizens.
|8.8.07 @ 5:04PM|#
It absolutely is a tactic of war by Islamist Jihadists, and
they absolutely are at declared war with the USA as I have
proven.
Excerpted from Jeff's dictionary:
Prove (verb): To repeat the same thing over and over.
|8.8.07 @ 5:04PM|#
Chris S: says "if you can't stop shaking in fear".
The truth is that is people like you who "can't stop shaking in
fear", because instead of realistically assessing a serious enemy
that has proven to be able to kill thousands of Americans and who
seeks to kill millions of Americans, and using what few
intelligence tools we have to stop them, those of you who are
paralyzed by your fear of reality live in a world of denial where
you think if you live the Jihadists alone they will stop killing
Americans.
And that is who is "shaking in fear", Mr. Neville Chamberlain.
VM|8.8.07 @ 5:05PM|#
Amazing, Cesar - hier
is the newest "URKOBOLD FOR DUMMIES" series...
advanced sales are available through your finer bookstores (with a
shout out to http://www.customsigngenerator.com/)
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 5:05PM|#
Jeff: Dude, my goal is to bang Salma Hayek while Scarlett
Johansson watches and waits her turn, but that doesn't mean it
presents any real likelihood of being achieved. Like wise with the
Al Queda thing.
Man, your mom has got to HATE how often she has to wash your
sheets.
|8.8.07 @ 5:06PM|#
Hey Jeff. I sure wish I could make war against people like you before I get to old to fight anymore. If you hate our way of life in this counrty so much, why not just leave?
|8.8.07 @ 5:07PM|#
Cesar says "liberty or death" -- and thankfully FDR, Woodrow
Wilson and many other good Democratic leaders used the surveillance
measures necessary during war-time both to preserve innocent
Americans' liberties and protect innocent Americans from
death.
Those in denial of the current war want to do neither. And they
claim that those who don't share their denial can't be good
Democrats, as well.
|8.8.07 @ 5:08PM|#
What I find striking is that the post-9/11 fearmongers all seem to take our vulnerability as an open society--a vulnerability we've always had, I might add--and conflate it with a strategic vulnerability. I don't think people holding this position fully appreciate what a tremendous economic and military power the U.S. is. We're practically the entire military of Europe and much of East Asia. We occupy two nations in the Middle East, one of which was considered a major military power before we defeated them in ten days. Really, if we surrender our liberties because of this "emergency", when would not be an "emergency"? Why not surrender them for the equally dangerous enemies in the War on Drugs?
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 5:08PM|#
So, Jeff, you big FDR admirer: When are you going to lock an innocent Japanese woman in a camp? Huh? Show what a man you are!
|8.8.07 @ 5:08PM|#
ChicagoTom:
No this is my definition of proven:
Febuary 23, 1998
Osama Bin Laden's Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans
(declaring war and plans to attack the United States)
Published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
August 23, 1996
Osama Bin Laden Declaration of War Against the United States of
America
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
|8.8.07 @ 5:08PM|#
Jeff,
Of course I don't want terrorists to destroy our cities. Which has
nothing whatsoever to do with listening in on the phone calls of
people who aren't terrorists.
You are arguing that the government should be allowed to listen in
on the phone calls of people who the government doesn't even have
probable cause to believe are terrorists, even after spending 72
hours wiretapping them.
All the hysterical language you can muster doesn't change the fact
that you are talking about throwing away massive swaths of our
liberty for very, very little gain in the way of security.
|8.8.07 @ 5:09PM|#
""It absolutely is a tactic of war by Islamist Jihadists, and
they absolutely are at declared war with the USA as I have
proven."""
You have proven nothing. There is no Jihad. The terrorist like to
use this term because it sounds better when recruiting. Many
Muslims are not interested in terrorism. but, market it under a
different name and it will attract more followers, but it's still
just terrorism. Then when we use the term Jihad, it confirms unto
those that have heard it from the OBL crew, that the Jihad is real
and then they take up the cause. When both sides call it Jihad, it
must be true, right? Wrong. Let's deny the terrorist that recuiting
tool by calling what it really is, terrorism.
I
|8.8.07 @ 5:10PM|#
Pro Liberate: "We're practically the entire military of Europe
and much of East Asia."
And the transnational Islamist organizations know that is of very
limited ability in fighting the current war.
|8.8.07 @ 5:10PM|#
jeff, I just have one phrase for you: liberty or death. If
not becoming a police state means theres a chance of me dying in a
terrorist attack, so be it. I'll take that over turning our nation
into a paranoid police state afraid of its own citizens.
Hear Hear. I am not afraid of terrorists anywhere near the same
degree that I fear what any government will do with
unlimited/unchecked power.
The worst events in history have been perpetrated not by
"terrorists" but by fascist governments and states who used fear of
"enemies who want to destroy us" as a way of getting people to
accept limits on liberty as "necessary".
Jeff, you would have fit right in with the Nazis you pussy.
(did I just Godwin the thread?)
|8.8.07 @ 5:11PM|#
TrickyVic: "There is no Jihad. "
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
You must really be truly terrified of them to be that much in utter
denial. Very sad.
|8.8.07 @ 5:11PM|#
(did I just Godwin the thread?)
No, he was using veiled World War II analogies before.
But I have a new rule--call it Cesar's Rule--that the longer a
discussion about foreign policy goes, the probability of a neocon
mentioning Neville Chamberlain approaches one.
|8.8.07 @ 5:13PM|#
ChicagoTom:
No this is my definition of proven:
...
And then you go on to repeat the same thing you have repeated
before.
Way to prove my point
VM|8.8.07 @ 5:13PM|#
Jeff whines and opines:
"And that is who is "shaking in fear", Mr. Neville
Chamberlain."
Neville?
NO WAY!!!!!
I'd say Christopher
Sean Lowe (left) of the Pet Shop Boys, at best. Not Neville. He
has no sense of Brit Syntho Pop.
Man, you're just getting it wrong all over the place today.
THERE IS NO JIHAD. ONLY ZUUL!!!!!!!
Alice Bowie|8.8.07 @ 5:13PM|#
Are are NOT Team America...World Police we r
really Team America...World Prostitute.
We're allies with Israel, we sell $Billions in bombs to Saudi
Arabia, We support the Palestinians, We believe in the Jewish
State, we Like Pakistan, Buy oil from Iraq, Give weapons to Iraq,
had an embasy in Iran, Support Israel in attacking Palestinians, We
tell Israel not to attack.
If we STOPPED sleeping with EVERYONE...the ENEMY would be easier to
define.
|8.8.07 @ 5:14PM|#
ChicagoTom says "as a way of getting people to accept limits on
liberty as "necessary".
So did FDR run a "fascist" govt during WWII?
Did Wilson run a "fascist" govt during WWI?
Both had limits of freedoms during both wars.
The Sedition Act was created during WWI under Woodrow Wilson.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918
Was Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, founder of the League of
Nations, the organization before the United Nations, also a
"fascist"?
By the way, the Sedition Act is still law today.
|8.8.07 @ 5:14PM|#
You must really be truly terrified of them to be that much
in utter denial. Very sad.
Riiiiiiiight...the people who want to ignore the loonies are the
scared ones, and the people who want to destroy everything this
nation was founded upon and wipe their ass with the Constitution
because some cave dwellers said "Boo" are the courageous
ones.
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
anti-Jeff|8.8.07 @ 5:14PM|#
Jeff, I don't think you're a troll. You have been exceptionally
consistent through out the day. So you either truly believe what
you post, or you are have a tremendous talent as a performance
artist. But I seriously doubt you have any more talent than a
well-trained parrot.
Therefore, you are a dangerous prick. I only hope that this country
doesn't reach the point where it is necessary to shoot people like
you to preserve the constitution and the well-being of the
republic.
|8.8.07 @ 5:14PM|#
Was Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, founder of the League of
Nations, the organization before the United Nations, also a
"fascist"?
I'd say so!
|8.8.07 @ 5:15PM|#
Jeff, if you really believe what is in those papers is true,
then you would have to accept the part where he is declaring war
because we are meddling in foreign lands. Not because of our way of
life. If I remember correctly in one of those, OBL claims that our
"great betrayal" as a reason to wage war. Do you know what that
betrayal was? He felt we used him in Afghanistan only to beat
Russia and then we left without providing further assistance.
But two things come to mind.
1. If one man calls it war, does that make it so?
2. Since when would you believe a terrorist's word as truthful?
|8.8.07 @ 5:16PM|#
Alice: "If we STOPPED sleeping with EVERYONE...the ENEMY would
be easier to define."
I agree. The current war strategy believes in not clearly defining
the enemy and using "realpolitick" which never works in the long
run.
The whole problem now with Pakistan was evident 6 years ago.
Neither Pakistan or Saudi Arabia are allies with the USA.
|8.8.07 @ 5:17PM|#
Cesar - if you think that Woodrow Wilson and FDR were fascists then you deserve to live in the kind of nation that USA would have been had we LOST WWI and LOST WWII.
|8.8.07 @ 5:18PM|#
So did FDR run a "fascist" govt during WWII?
Did Wilson run a "fascist" govt during WWI?
yes.
|8.8.07 @ 5:18PM|#
Cesar - if you think that Woodrow Wilson and FDR were
fascists then you deserve to live in the kind of nation that USA
would have been had we LOST WWI and LOST WWII.
Wilson was a racial segregationists who gave a glowing endorsement
to Birth of a Nation, and instituted segregation in
federal jobs--which hadn't existed since 1863!
a fascist.
So yes, in a way he was a fascist.
BTW speaking of WWI when are you going to do your homework and read
The Guns of August?
|8.8.07 @ 5:19PM|#
So did FDR run a "fascist" govt during WWII?
Actually, just about. Fascism was surprisingly popular even in the
U.S. before W.W. II. There was actually a book published called
"The Coming American Fascism" that wasn't actually critical of the
concept.
|8.8.07 @ 5:19PM|#
TrickyVic: "if you really believe what is in those papers is
true, then you would have to accept the part where he is declaring
war because we are meddling in foreign lands."
Bin Laden was looking for any rationalization. Any globalization
involving infidels of any kind would have been sufficient.
Islamism seeks a global caliphate, not a resolution of problems. If
USA had not gotten Saudi oil, it would be because of our relations
with India, or because of our relations with the Philippines, etc.,
etc., etc. The Islamist war is over controlling the WORLD - not
over specific grievances.
|8.8.07 @ 5:19PM|#
Jeff if you really think that our country is so weak that it has
to throw away freedom and liberty every time some loony has a beef
with it maybe you are the one who should leave.
The more you type, the more I think Mr. Putin's Russia would be a
better place for you
|8.8.07 @ 5:21PM|#
Cesar and Marcvs - if you think FDR was a fascist, then you really have no clue what a fascist really is - such as Adolf Hitler and his Germany Nazi fascists and the other fascist Axis powers. Thanks for proving how little you understand.
|8.8.07 @ 5:22PM|#
ChicagoTom - of course I don't. But when the nation is at WAR, I
recognize that war-time actions are required.
Tell the 3,000 dead on 9/11 that Al Qaeda just had a "beef" with
the USA.
Professor Moose|8.8.07 @ 5:22PM|#
Now class - note the change in "JEFF's" rhetorical devices
now.
Can you detect the rising pitches at the end of each word until his
voice nearly cracks?
Wishing ill on those who disagree is another tactic. This could be
because he feels that he's currently living in a much freer country
than what he can handle. Or because his gravity boots caused one of
his testicles to fall back up into his body.
However, you get to watch his version of the performative, "to
prove" (English, approximately, "to repeat with increasing
hysteria") up close. Very interesting.
Fascinating.
We currently are negotiating with him to see if we may examine his
genitalia to test that one theory.
He most certainly is an amusing, little man.
|8.8.07 @ 5:22PM|#
The Islamist war is over controlling the WORLD
Apparently DR Evil is running the Islamofascist army.
|8.8.07 @ 5:23PM|#
"""You must really be truly terrified of them to be that much in
utter denial. Very sad."""
Are you really that stupid, or do you not read?
I AM NOT SCARED. I have made that perfectly clear on this thread.
I've lived in NYC for 17 years and no threat will make me leave. I
was here when they bomb the WTC the first time. I said they would
be back to finish the job. I also believe that a nuke in NYC is the
Holy Grail of terrorist acts, and dispite our best efforts they
will one day succeed. In light of that, maybe you could call me
stupid for not running to the hills, to try to call me scared is
just more evidence of your inability to understand the information
in front of you.
Ayn_Randian|8.8.07 @ 5:23PM|#
It absolutely is a tactic of war by Islamist Jihadists, and
they absolutely are at declared war with the USA as I have
proven.
Umm, excuse me everyone, but we have to stop arguing now. You see,
Jeff proved something...so, you know, he wins.
|8.8.07 @ 5:24PM|#
ChicagoTom, Cesar, and Marcvs --
Since both President Woodrow Wilson and President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt were fascists in your view, I think you have clearly
pointed out what camp that you belong in.
Thank God for both Wilson and FDR in effectively fighting WWI and
WWII to defend the nation and the world from totalitarianism,
something that you clearly would not have done.
|8.8.07 @ 5:25PM|#
Please tell us, Jeff, how the Kaiser was a mortal threat to
American security.
Because he wasn't. If you did any serious reading you would know
that.
|8.8.07 @ 5:26PM|#
TrickyVic: "I AM NOT SCARED."
Yes you are.
You cope with your fear by denial.
That is your coping mechanism.
However, to be responsible to your fellow countrymen during
war-time, the only honest coping mechanism is honesty and action to
do everything possible to defeat the enemy and protect America.
|8.8.07 @ 5:26PM|#
of course I don't. But when the nation is at WAR, I
recognize that war-time actions are required.
Apparently you do. Or else you wouldnt advocate or support the
things you do.
Either you believe that our nation is strong enough to hold on to
its ideals in the face of a threat, any threat, or you do
not.
Liberty and freedom are what make this country strong, and yet at
the first sign of a threat you and your ilk want to toss out
everything that makes our nation strong.
You sicken me.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 5:27PM|#
I wish I knew how to quit you, Jeff.
Oh, my, those sheets are soaked with piss. OK, I'm out of here.
C-YA!
VM|8.8.07 @ 5:29PM|#
You know, Jimmy Stewart might make a good "JEFF" for the movie.
He's got that "aw shucks"/"shock and awe" crossover appeal.
It's also interesting to watch him project coping mechanisms onto
others. Clearly, his coping mechanism from his terrific fear is
dressing up as an internet tough guy and advocating stuff even the
"meletary loier" would be scared to misspell and type.
How very interesting.
Or he's a surly teenager pissed off about having to spend time at
grandma's while his mommie is in rehab again...
Either way, he's most amusing.
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 5:29PM|#
"No, it took one enemy and had one enemy fight another
enemy."
If by "took one enemy" you mean "actively strengthened one enemy
(Islamists) at the expense of another enemy (Communists) and at the
expense of moderate Muslims" from whom you now seek a solution, we
are in agreement.
|8.8.07 @ 5:30PM|#
Since both President Woodrow Wilson and President Franklin
Delano Roosevelt were fascists in your view, I think you have
clearly pointed out what camp that you belong in
The anti-fascist camp?
Thank God for both Wilson and FDR in effectively fighting WWI
and WWII to defend the nation and the world from totalitarianism,
something that you clearly would not have done.
I know you think that this is some kind of insult, but I must say,
I am very proud of being perceived as someone who would not have
locked an innocent group of people into camps merely because of
their ethnic background.
Yes you are.
You cope with your fear by denial.
That is your coping mechanism.
Uhmm...examining a proposed threat and coming to the conclusion
that there is nothing threatening about it is not denial, it's
called rational thinking -- something you are obviously devoid
of
|8.8.07 @ 5:33PM|#
Jeff,
As Vic said, you're having trouble distinguishing fantasy from
reality. Wanting to kill millions is the same as being capable of
killing millions.
We do, in fact, face certain threats that kill hundreds of
thousands of people in the U.S. every year - many millions over the
course of our lives. These threats include, among others, cancer
and heart disease. If you're serious about giving away you
liberties for phantom threats, how about giving them away for real
threats? How about a prohibition on cigarettes, alcohol, exposure
to sun, trans fat, red meat, etc.? Once you're willing to admit
that we have to do "anything necessary" to stave off serious
threats, why not take these basic first steps.
Me? I'll keep my alcohol and red meat, and I'll keep my
constitutional rights. That's what libertarianism is about: get off
my phone, get out of my kitchen, get out of my bedroom, get your
hands off my gun, etc. People like you are more than free to live
in padded rooms while eating plain yogurt and drinking prune juice,
or whatever you feel is "necessary" to stay safe, but like I said
above: leave the rest of us alone.
And all this "fear in denial crap" -- Yeah, we're in denial of a
threat that ranks about 1000th (or lower) on the likely causes of
death in this country.
Boo!
|8.8.07 @ 5:34PM|#
We're moving from "Liberty or Death" to "Please Don't Hurt Me or Even Inconvenience Me".
|8.8.07 @ 5:39PM|#
Cesar -
First of all, it is pointless to argue with someone who thinks the
leading war-time presidents in USA history were all "fascists",
because any president who protects the USA during war-time is
automatically a "fascist" in your mind. The alternative is for a
president NOT to protect the USA during war-time which is not only
an impeachable offense, but one which totally contradicts the
Constitution.
Secondly, why did Wilson urge the creation of the Sedition Act?
Because he was bored? Wilson was a liberty-minded Democrat who
created the League of Nations.
Wilson saw what happened in Communist Russia, now the USSR, and
wanted to protect the USA from foreign totalitarian
ideologies.
The new Communist USSR had an armistice with Germany, who USA was
at war with during WWI, and Germany's U-Boats had attacked and
killed Americans, such as the sinking of the Lusitania killing 128
Americans.
Wilson had justification for fears of both German and Communist
saboteurs, based on Anarchist terrorist attacks in the USA at that
time.
|8.8.07 @ 5:41PM|#
ChicagoTom: "You sicken me."
So did Democratic President Woodrow Wilson and Democratic President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt - great American war-time leaders.
I am in good company.
|8.8.07 @ 5:43PM|#
Dear Reasonoids,
When you are so clearly dominant in both numbers and reason as you
are in this tiff with Jeff, the swearing and personal insults just
come across as bullying and piling on.
joe, who knows what it's like to be this outnumbered, although the
reason part doesn't apply.
|8.8.07 @ 5:43PM|#
Chris S : "we're in denial of a threat that ranks about 1000th
(or lower) on the likely causes of death in this country."
Based on imaginary statistics that have no war-time
relevance.
During this war, Islamists have killed more innocent American
civilians on USA homeland than were ever killed by America's
enemies during World War I and World War II combined.
And people took WWI and WWII seriously.
thoreau|8.8.07 @ 5:45PM|#
joe-
But Jeff likes it rough! He likes it when a designated minority is
subjected to harsh treatment!
Come on, Jeff, into the train car you go. We have a camp all set up
for you.
|8.8.07 @ 5:47PM|#
ChicagoTom: "examining a proposed threat and coming to the
conclusion that there is nothing threatening about it is not
denial"....
when the documented facts show otherwise - certainly IS denial
Timothy|8.8.07 @ 5:48PM|#
For every ε>0 there exists δ>0 such that
f(Jeff)=Douchebag.
There, proved.
VM|8.8.07 @ 5:48PM|#
Pro Libertate | August 8, 2007, 5:34pm | #
We're moving from "Liberty or Death" to "Please Don't Hurt Me or Even Inconvenience Me".
Jello Biafra agrees (hier)
|8.8.07 @ 5:54PM|#
Cesar: "when does this "war" end and what is your definition of
"victory"?"
You need to ask moderate Muslims that.
This is their civil war over the defintion of their religion.
If they don't defeat the Islamists in their ranks, then it will be
a long, bloody, and horrific war.
All that the non-Muslims can do is to keep taking violent Islamists
off the streets to give the moderate Muslims time to take back
control of their religion.
If they don't it will be the end of Islam, and the death count will
be in the millions or higher.
|8.8.07 @ 5:55PM|#
I think you have clearly pointed out what camp that you
belong in.
Which one? I'm too stupid to figure it out on my own without your
sage guidance.
During this war, Islamists have killed more innocent American
civilians on USA homeland than were ever killed by America's
enemies during World War I and World War II combined.
Talk about a straw man.
JEFF\'S FOSTER DAD|8.8.07 @ 5:56PM|#
woah, heh heh, big guy. Time to put away your GI Joe toys and
come up for supper.
Wow! What a big boy you are! You fought off islamofascist hoards!
Ohhh! You made the cellar safe for demokrazie for another day.
Tomorrow you can play "Tommy the Tumor buster" again.
upsie daisy!
*heads upstairs for supper. Tuna casserole, of course.
|8.8.07 @ 5:57PM|#
I say we build a giant network of womby vaultages for Jeff and
all the other scaredy cats to hide in. While the rest of us
continue to rule the world--ah, ha, ha, ha! Oops, sorry about that
last bit.
VM,
Truly, all the great ideas are taken.
Jeff! Off to your womby vaultages! And here's what we say as we
salute you: It was our freedom that made us strong enough to defeat
our enemies, not overbearing government officials trying to curtail
it, you silly ninny.
|8.8.07 @ 6:01PM|#
when the documented facts show otherwise - certainly IS
denial
There are no documented facts to show that Islamisists have the
capacity or means to destroy America or even hurt it in any
meaningful or significant way.
Unless you mean their ability to get cowards like you to cower in
fear and give up American ideals in the name of security
theater.
You know what scares me about terrorists? The way people like you
react to them. Terrorism has been around for as long as
civilization has been, yet here comes people like you trying to
pretend that its some new and never before seen threat. It
isn't.
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
|8.8.07 @ 6:01PM|#
What if the Mooslems have more vaultages than we do? And what if
they are even wombier than our womby vaultage?
We cannot allow a womby vaultage gap!
|8.8.07 @ 6:03PM|#
VM agrees with "We're moving from "Liberty or Death" to "Please
Don't Hurt Me or Even Inconvenience Me"."
Thankfully FDR, Woodrow Wilson and many other good Democratic
leaders used the surveillance measures necessary during war-time
both to preserve innocent Americans' liberties and protect innocent
Americans from death.
Those in denial of the current war want to do neither.
There needs to be changes in the war strategy in this war for
certain. But denying that the war exists is only a game for cowards
and fools.
Wishing I were as internets to|8.8.07 @ 6:03PM|#
PURITY OF ESSENCE.
PROTECT OUR EROTICISM!!!
PENIS OVERT ELEVATOR!!!!!!!!!
|8.8.07 @ 6:05PM|#
ChicagoTom: "Terrorism has been around for as long as
civilization has been"
So what? So has "murder".
Terrorism is NOT the enemy.
Transnational Islamist organizations are the enemy.
Terrorism is only a single tactic of a larger, global, and declared
war against the USA.
Propaganda is another tactic of the enemy, a tactic that 5th
columnists who hate America are very adept at using.
VM|8.8.07 @ 6:05PM|#
Jeff | August 8, 2007, 6:03pm | #
VM agrees with "We're moving from "Liberty or Death" to "Please Don't Hurt Me or Even Inconvenience Me"."
rah rah!
I believe! I believe! I believe!!!
When I was young and full of grace
and spirited--a rattlesnake.
When I was young and fever fell
My spirit, I will not tell
You're on your honor not to tell
I believe in coyotes and time as an abstract
Explain the change, the difference between
What you want and what you need, there's the key,
Your adventure for today, what do you do
Between the horns of the day?
I believe my shirt is wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
When I was young and give and take
And foolish said my fool awake
When I was young and fever fell
My spirit, I will not tell
You're on your honor, on your honor
Trust in your calling, make sure your calling's true
Think of others, the others think of you
Silly rule golden words make, practice, practice makes
perfect,
Perfect is a fault, and fault lines change
I believe my humor's wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
I believe my shirt is wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
When I was young and full of grace
As spirited a rattlesnake
When I was young and fever fell
My spirit, I will not tell
You're on your honor, on your honor
I believe in example
I believe my throat hurts
Example is the checker to the key
I believe my humor's wearing thin
And I believe the poles are shifting
I believe my shirt is wearing thin
And change is what I believe in
|8.8.07 @ 6:06PM|#
joe,
I understand that our French allies actually have large numbers of
them already
built.
|8.8.07 @ 6:06PM|#
ChicagoTom: "There are no documented facts to show that
Islamisists have the capacity or means to destroy America or even
hurt it in any meaningful or significant way."
September 11, 2001 attacks:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/
VM|8.8.07 @ 6:10PM|#
*ponders silently for a moment the rest of JEFF's evening.
1) yelling at the cameras on MEERKAT MANOR
2) watching Dawson's Creek reruns to get the real deep emotional
content that he somehow suspects he's missing.
3) dry hump his Bert pillow as the salty ham tears flow down his
face.
DAMMIT. HE JUST WANTS TO BE LOVED!!!!!!!
|8.8.07 @ 6:11PM|#
ChicagoTom: "The only thing we have to fear is fear
itself."
Apparently, however, those are the words of a "fascist" in your
mind, so how are they relevant to you?
Indeed it is precisely your FEAR as evidenced by your total denial
of the Jihadist threat that show what FDR meant. When people like
you are so possessed by fear, that they can't even recognize the
world war declared by the Islamists, then you are completely
defeated before you begin.
robc|8.8.07 @ 6:13PM|#
Cesar,
Oh, and Ben Franklin died long before the Barbary Pirates were
an issue.
Just for historical fact, the Barbary pirates were an issue before
Franklin was born.
|8.8.07 @ 6:14PM|#
Just for historical fact, the Barbary pirates were an issue before
Franklin was born.
Of course they existed, but they were not an issue for the United
States since colonial ships were under the protection of the
British Navy.
VM|8.8.07 @ 6:15PM|#
Fortunately, JEFF has a defence (sic) film on hand to protect us
from marauding WOMBY VAULTAGES.
hier.
Armed with this knowledge, we can evaporate our denial and get on
with our ecological, hydroponic lives.
|8.8.07 @ 6:15PM|#
Pro Libertate: "It was our freedom that made us strong enough to
defeat our enemies"
And during WWI and WWII, our successful war-time leaders knew that
we should not let our enemies take advantage of our freedoms in a
way that would give them carte blanche to attack and destroy the
nation.
But the most important was our freedom from fear - by defining the
enemy, acknowledging the enemy's existence, and doing everything
possible to defeat the enemy.
That freedom from fear is something that the denialists refuse to
accept, because then they would have to deal with the issues of
Islamism and Jihadism, and they are too panic stricken to face or
even acknowledge the enemy during war-time.
|8.8.07 @ 6:17PM|#
Yeah, if you aren't volunteering to give up your privacy and
civil liberties, it can only be because you are more frightened
than those who give them up eagerly.
Sure, that makes sense. And if you aren't ordering a Super Big
Gulp, it can only be because you're so much thirstier than the
people who are.
Denying that there is a serious threat is generally a pretty good
sign of how scared you are of that threat. Or something.
VM|8.8.07 @ 6:17PM|#
And if they come at us with a pointed stick.
(shut up, Mr. Apricot)
hier
but we also have the FUNNIEST JOKE IN THE
WORLD
fortunately we're safe from the denialists.
|8.8.07 @ 6:21PM|#
Joe -
The Islamists have already killed more innocent American civilians
on USA homeland than all of America's enemies during WWI and
WWII.
A year ago, British Islamists nearly got away with another plot to
kill thousands more Americans with 6 to 9 hijacked transatlantic
jets. And there have been many other foiled Jihadist plots to
attack the USA homeland.
If you continue to be in such denial that you can't see the
existence of this enemy and their threat, then yes, it must be a
mental paralysis of utter fear that causes such illogical
denial.
|8.8.07 @ 6:24PM|#
We are vulnerable because we are a free society. We can be hurt.
But our power to deal with Islamic terrorists is considerable, and
it won't take a circumvention of the Constitution or of our civil
liberties to fight them. Or to defeat them.
Again, any fool can hurt us--look at Timothy McVeigh. Or the DC
snipers. But defeating us is something that no outside force is
capable of today. However, we can surely defeat ourselves by
overreacting and killing the golden goose.
|8.8.07 @ 6:24PM|#
Joe says: "if you aren't volunteering to give up your privacy
and civil liberties"
Total nonsense. Wartime monitoring of enemies and enemy supporters
seeking to do violence against America and its citizens is not your
"volunteering to give up your privacy and civil liberties".
|8.8.07 @ 6:27PM|#
Pro Libertate:
"But defeating us is something that no outside force is capable of
today"
That is what they would put on your tombstone too.
Nothing could be more naive.
America is fighting a transnational enemy with the support of
numerous foreign government leaders, foreign intelligence agencies,
and untold millions of dollars.
Your comparison of the transnational Islamist Jihadist
organizations to Timothy McVeigh is naive, non-factual, and
absurd.
Scene from Clue|8.8.07 @ 6:29PM|#
[COLONEL MUSTARD] THIS IS WAR, PEACOCK! CASUALTIES ARE
INEVITABLE. YOU CANNOT MAKE AN OMELET WITHOUT BREAKING EGGS. EVERY
COOK WILL TELL YOU THAT.
[MRS PEACOCK, UPSET] BUT LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO THE COOK!
|8.8.07 @ 6:29PM|#
Pro Libertate:
"But our power to deal with Islamic terrorists is
considerable"
Oh really, how?
Tell me how the US government should be doing that without doing
domestic and foreign surveillance on suspected Islamist terrorists
and their supporters.
Minion of URKOBOLD|8.8.07 @ 6:30PM|#
"naive, non-factual, and absurd."
NEENER. YOU'RE NAIVE, NON FACTUAL, AND
ABSURD.
NEENER NEENER. PTTTTTFFFFFFF. POOT POOT
GOTCHA! ZING!
OOH. BEATING HIM IN AN ARGUMENT IS, LIKE, TOO EASY.
|8.8.07 @ 6:31PM|#
Pro Libertate:
"But defeating us is something that no outside force is capable of
today"
Look how readily Islamist propaganda artists have gotten you to
doubt their capabilities and even deny they exist as an enemy!
|8.8.07 @ 6:41PM|#
And look how easily they've gotten you to fight to destroy your
own country from within, which is what they wanted in the first
place?
What's the root of terrorism, the main goal of it? It's in the
word: terror. To create terror that allows them to more easily
achieve their goals. They seem to have already won, in that
respect, with regards to you, and with regards to far too many
Americans.
|8.8.07 @ 6:45PM|#
Andrew:
The Islamists don't view Jihadist tactics as "terrorism". Only
Americans do.
The Islamists view Jihadist tactics as "Holy War".
This is something neither the left or the right understand.
We are not in a war against terrorism.
Islamists are in a war against the USA.
|8.8.07 @ 6:50PM|#
So let me ask you Jeff: Lets say that you are made President of the United States tomorrow. Assume that congress will pass any legislation you ask them for (so pretty much the way things are today). What laws would you pass to protect us from terrorism, mindful of the protections we enjoy as citizens in the Constitution?
|8.8.07 @ 6:58PM|#
""""During the Cold War, COINTELPRO did significant intelligence
work and monitoring of suspected terrorists.""""
Yeah? Like Martin Luther King? John Lennon?
|8.8.07 @ 7:00PM|#
Andrew says "What laws would you pass to protect us from
terrorism, mindful of the protections we enjoy as citizens in the
Constitution?"
USA is not fighting terrorism.
That is the fundamental misunderstanding.
The term "war on terrorism" is the result of the Bush
administration being unwilling to publicly identify the enemy, and
having the delusions that they can play one enemy off of another in
some type of global "realpolitik" maneuver that Henry Kissinger
would think up.
The first law that should have been passed would have been the
creation of a blue-panel organization of individuals who have
studied the Islamist threat across the world to clearly identify
and document the global Islamist strategy against the USA, and to
provide a series of countermeasures and strategies against global
Islamism, and against Jihadist activity.
The second law that I would have passed would have been an energy
independence law that would have mandated serious fuel efficiency
standards on all vehicles and transportation, and get a "Manhattan
Project" for USA energy independence from the Middle East and
foreign sources of oil and petroleum products.
Without these two laws, we are forced into a series of reactive and
counterproductive measures to fight the enemy, which is our
position today.
First the enemy has to be identified and a global strategy
created.
Second, the enemy's main source of funding has to be
eliminated.
Then you can effectively fight a war on every level.
|8.8.07 @ 7:05PM|#
COINTELPRO - no I mean like SDS, Black Panthers, Nazi terror groups... If COINTELPRO had not been disbanded, perhaps Oklahoma City terrorist bombing might not have happened.
CL|8.8.07 @ 7:07PM|#
The Black Panthers? Seriously? Yeah, they were really, really hazardous to the very fabric of American society, those Black Panthers.
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 7:07PM|#
A sign of progress!
Jeff has moved from "Islamist terrorists" to "suspected Islamist
terrorists."
BRAVO!
And how do we determine that it is reasonable to suspect an
individual is an Islamist terrorist? We assemble the info that
gives us that suspicion to request a warrant from a FISA court for
their surveillance. And that process helps ensure we're competently
doing our job and not "off the wire" abusing our power and wasting
limited resources. And that increases the probability that we will
beat the Islamists.
|8.8.07 @ 7:12PM|#
"Wartime monitoring of enemies and enemy supporters seeking to
do violence against America and its citizens is not your
'volunteering to give up your privacy and civil liberties'."
No, but wartime monitoring of anyone regardless of whether there's
legitimate probable cause is "volunteering to give up your privacy
and civil liberties," and this is what we're actually talking about
here, no matter how much you continue to ignore that
distinction.
|8.8.07 @ 7:17PM|#
Also, Jeff,
-----
"You cope with your fear by denial. That is your coping
mechanism."
"...it must be a mental paralysis of utter fear that causes such
illogical denial."
"When people like you are so possessed by fear, that they can't
even recognize the world war..."
-----
As it turns out, you're also a pretty crappy psychologist. Are you
Dr. Phil's and Dr. Laura's illegitimate love child?
|8.8.07 @ 7:19PM|#
CL -
For example, Black Panther airline hijackings were indeed
terrorism.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-78172622.html
But maybe airline hijacking is OK with you.
|8.8.07 @ 7:26PM|#
Sparky says "wartime monitoring of anyone regardless of whether
there's legitimate probable cause is "volunteering to give up your
privacy and civil liberties," and this is what we're actually
talking about here"
You make a wild claim that is clearly false. It would be
logistically impossible to do monitoring of anyone regardless of
cause, because the FBI, NSA, etc., simply don't have the resources
to monitor anyone at random for the sheer heck of it. The only
reason to justify the use of very finite resources with thousands
of Islamist and Jihadist suspects would be to have some reasonable
cause.
Your call for "probable cause" is illogical during war-time. Define
"probable cause" (a criminal law term) within a war-time
environment. It simply makes no sense.
Do you really think that during WWI and WWII the FBI and other
intelligence only investigated potential Nazis, saboteurs, etc., if
they had "probable cause" from a criminal law perspective? Because
then you don't understand war-time intelligence.
During war-time, by the time you have "probable cause" from a
criminal law perspective, it is "too late" from a war-time
intelligence perspective. And during war, that could be
catastrophic.
And by the way, that "probable cause" mistake is EXACTLY the
criminal law mistakes that the the FBI DID make prior to 9/11, that
prevented sufficient investigation from happening -- that could
have prevented the 9/11 attacks.
|8.8.07 @ 7:31PM|#
"""""CL -
For example, Black Panther airline hijackings were indeed
terrorism.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-78172622.html
But maybe airline hijacking is OK with you."""""
And yet it appears (from the linked article)this person was
captured using standard police procedures. No one had to wipe their
ass with the Constitution to achieve this. They probably even had
*gasp* a warrent.
|8.8.07 @ 7:32PM|#
Patrick D: "a warrant from a FISA court for their
surveillance"
The facts have shown how Congress continues to leak like a sieve
during wartime. No other president would have allowed Congressional
leakers to risk a terrorist from escaping a surveillance net and
attacking the USA homeland. And I mean NO other president. This is
not a Bush problem. This is a problem with understanding the enemy
and understanding the inherent security weaknesses of Congress.
|8.8.07 @ 7:37PM|#
"And yet it appears (from the linked article)this person was
captured using standard police procedures."
No - it was thanks to existing COINTELPRO intelligence on Black
Panthers and other terrorist organizations that pointed the way...
so that local police COULD do their job.
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 7:37PM|#
Jeff,
Your post makes absolutely no sense.
FISA court = Judicial Branch
Congress = Legislative Branch
Congress does not review or approve requests for surveillance.
highnumber|8.8.07 @ 7:41PM|#
Look how readily Islamist propaganda artists have gotten you
to doubt their capabilities and even deny they exist as an
enemy!
This is a paraphrase of something from a movie, isn't it? Somebody
help me out. What am I thinking of? The original isn't about
Muslims.
|8.8.07 @ 7:43PM|#
"""No - it was thanks to existing COINTELPRO intelligence on
Black Panthers and other terrorist organizations that pointed the
way... so that local police COULD do their job.""""
According to the article the person was caught by fingerprinting a
soda can. Standard proceedure in that he probably had a prior
criminal record. Doesn't really sound like they needed an elaborate
COINTELPRO set up for that.
|8.8.07 @ 7:51PM|#
"You make a wild claim that is clearly false. It would be
logistically impossible to do monitoring of anyone regardless of
cause..."
OK, Jeff, since you want to keep playing this game where you
pretend to be stupid (you _are_ pretending, right?), let me
explicitly state what was clearly implied. We're talking about
_claiming the right_ to monitor anyone without legitimate probable
cause, even if not every person is actually monitored.
"...Because then you don't understand war-time intelligence."
We could fill a whole blog with the things you don't understand.
Let's start with this:
"And by the way, that "probable cause" mistake is EXACTLY the
criminal law mistakes that the the FBI DID make prior to 9/11, that
prevented sufficient investigation from happening -- that could
have prevented the 9/11 attacks."
Ummm...no. I think it might have had a little more to do with them
(and the administration) not acting on the glaring evidence
("probable cause," if you will) that was staring them right in the
face. But we should definitely give the FBI more power without
legitimate oversight, because they've fixed their problems and that
would _totally_ not happen again. That is, if you ignore the well
documented cases showing that it's happened repeatedly _since_
9/11.
|8.8.07 @ 7:56PM|#
"Doesn't really sound like they needed an elaborate COINTELPRO
set up for that."
COINTELPRO did track the Black Panthers and provided information to
law enforcement all the time to assess probabilities of
threats.
|8.8.07 @ 8:02PM|#
Sparky says "legitimate probable cause".
You can't define "legitimate probable cause" in a war-time
scenario, because you are using a criminal law term in what is
essentially a war-time intelligence activity.
It is like calling for football quarterbacks to make sure that they
pursue grand-slam home runs. The terms are incompatible with
different activities. You don't understand this basic fundamental,
because the USA has no domestic intelligence organization, unlike
most other democracies. The USA is reliant on a law enforcement
agency, the FBI, to divide a portion of itself out to perform
domestic intelligence functions in this case.
So not having a history of a dedicated domestic intelligence
organization, you apparently can't even think of what a domestic
intelligence organization is looking for and its objectives, so you
use a criminal law term of "probable cause" which is totally
inapplicable here.
Law enforcement and domestic intelligence are not the same. You
don't get that. And you especially don't get that during war-time,
which makes it even more troubling.
Patrick D|8.8.07 @ 8:03PM|#
The Idea
"The first law that should have been passed would have been the
creation of a blue-panel organization of individuals who have
studied the Islamist threat across the world to clearly identify
and document the global Islamist strategy against the USA, and to
provide a series of countermeasures and strategies against global
Islamism, and against Jihadist activity."
The Likely Outcome
Trigger a "Charlie-Foxtrot" of lobbyists for foreign countries
scrabbling to put "Islamist experts" sympathetic to their interests
on an inevitably politically-appointed panel so they can define
their own conflicts as part of the global Islamist strategy against
the U.S. and drag the U.S. into conflicts in which we have little
or no interest and create enemies where they did not previously
exist. See American Cold War activities in the Third World.
The Idea
"The second law that I would have passed would have been an energy
independence law that would have mandated serious fuel efficiency
standards on all vehicles and transportation, and get a "Manhattan
Project" for USA energy independence from the Middle East and
foreign sources of oil and petroleum products."
The Likely Outcome
Mandate a sweeping non-market-driven change centered on an
incredibly complex proposition well beyond the capabilities of a
centrally-planned government project that cripples the U.S.
economy, the very engine that generates the resources needed to
fight the war. There's a reason neither side in Afghanistan is
taking out the cell phone network. They both need it. Same with oil
on a global scale.
Well, I'm convinced. Jeff's a Democrat. (No offense, Joe.)
|8.8.07 @ 8:04PM|#
COINTELPRO did track the Black Panthers and provided
information to law enforcement all the time to assess probabilities
of threats.
And a good thing they were, too. God forbid we have American
citizens protecting themselves with guns(!) from corrupt
police.
VM|8.8.07 @ 8:06PM|#
highnumber | August 8, 2007, 7:41pm | #
Look how readily Islamist propaganda artists have gotten you to doubt their capabilities and even deny they exist as an enemy!
This is a paraphrase of something from a movie, isn't it? Somebody help me out. What am I thinking of? The original isn't about Muslims.
Didn't Dean Wormer from Faber say that about Delta??
|8.8.07 @ 8:19PM|#
VM | August 8, 2007, 8:06pm | #
highnumber | August 8, 2007, 7:41pm | #
Look how readily Islamist propaganda artists have gotten you to doubt their capabilities and even deny they exist as an enemy!
This is a paraphrase of something from a movie, isn't it? Somebody help me out. What am I thinking of? The original isn't about Muslims.
Didn't Dean Wormer from Faber say that about Delta??
Nah, it was Verbal from Usual Suspects, the whole devil tricking
the world into believing he didn't exist thing. Jebus, VM, I
figured you'd know that. I think your taint has been withered one
too many times.
|8.8.07 @ 8:40PM|#
Jeff,
Joe -
The Islamists have already killed more innocent American civilians
on USA homeland than all of America's enemies during WWI and
WWII.
A year ago, British Islamists nearly got away with another plot to
kill thousands more Americans with 6 to 9 hijacked transatlantic
jets. And there have been many other foiled Jihadist plots to
attack the USA homeland.
The diffference between you and I is that the above information
causes you to soil your undies and burst into tears, while it
causes me to knit my eyebrows.
Yup, terrorism is a threat. It's not impending Armageddon, though.
I'm still not scared enough to agree to give up my freedom.
|8.8.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Jeff,
Wartime monitoring of enemies and enemy supporters seeking to
do violence against America and its citizens is not your
"volunteering to give up your privacy and civil
liberties".
Of course not. But assenting to wartime monitoring of American
citizens who are not seeking to do violence IS giving up your
privacy and civil liberties. Which, just to remind you, is the
subject of this thread: a proposal to allow the government to
wiretap people when there is no probable cause to suspect that
they're terrorists.
I've raised this same point at least half a dozen times now, and
you haven't managed to comem up with a single reply. Just the
booga-booga talk that, frankly, doesn't scare me very much.
|8.8.07 @ 8:48PM|#
Probable cause has not meaning on a battlefield, Jeff, it is
true.
But the fact that it is wartime does not make my living room, phone
line, and email a battlefield.
|8.8.07 @ 9:29PM|#
Even the guys at NSA going through this thread for terrorist attack clues think that Jeff is a nutjob.
|8.8.07 @ 10:16PM|#
OK, I wouldn't have thought it possible, but we have a thread here so whacked-out and painful to read that I'd rather read the abortion thread.
Beatpoet7371|8.8.07 @ 10:24PM|#
NO SHARIA LAW! We have a CONSTITUTION! Out with politically correct sentiments, so that some day a man with a funny accent does not knock on your door with a burqa in one hand and a Persian rug in the other. Of the rugs he'll sell, yes, you'll have your choice. Of the burqa he'll hand you, there will be no choice -- but to convert or DIE.
|8.8.07 @ 11:07PM|#
Love is a battlefield.,/i>
Haha, made u mess up your HTML tags. :p
Everyone point at Joe and laugh.
J/k Joe.
Heartache to heartache we stand, buddy.
|8.8.07 @ 11:59PM|#
"Law enforcement and domestic intelligence are not the same. You
don't get that...."
Oh, don't worry about me, Jeff. I and most other people here
obviously get a whole lot more than you do. One thing we get is
just how little respect you have for the freedoms that have played
no small role in making this country as powerful and prosperous as
it is - the same freedoms that you're so eager to take a dump on
(while calling others cowardly and delusional - you classy, classy
guy!).
Now why don't explain to everyone how the Constitution isn't a
suicide pact? That's my all-time favorite slogan from you and your
capitulating ilk.
By the way, good job on completely ignoring my calling bullshit on
your absurd claim about the FBI and "probable cause" prior to 9/11.
That was totally believable, and no one thinks you're a slack-jawed
half-wit. Seriously. Keep up the good work. You are the wind
beneath our cowardly, delusional wings.
edna|8.9.07 @ 12:49AM|#
holy moley, when i see a thread that's got 300+ replies, i know
that there's a troll rich environment. this one was a pretty dull
train wreck as these things go.
could someone here whom i trust point me toward any actually
interesting posts? or should i try to wade through the abortion
stuff?
Akira MacKenzie|8.9.07 @ 1:37AM|#
After reading a few of his posts, I originally thought that Jeff
was just another under-educated, jingoistic, militaristic, disciple
of Sean Hannity who thinks that to destroy freedom in order to save
it from the raving, dusky-hued, and largely imagined "moose-lim"
hoards who are out for world domination.
When he claimed that the Germans were a real threat to us in WWI, I
changed my mind entirely...
He's fucking insane. Give this loon a straight-jacket, a rubber
room, and a frontal lobotomy, please. It's the best thing for
him.
|8.9.07 @ 7:16AM|#
edna -
No need to wade through the whole thing; Akira's post directly
below yours sums up the gist of the thread pretty succinctly.
(BTW, welcome back, Akira!)
|8.9.07 @ 8:14AM|#
What I find amusing is the quaint idea in reader response #3
that:
1) There needs to be a good reason for a wiretap (that is what the
Stasi Enabling Act we are talking about here gets rid of),
and
2) somehow it would be harder for the feds to monitor all
communications and sift through it using modern information
technology than it would be for them to do the footwork required of
them to target only a few persons of interest.
edna|8.9.07 @ 8:18AM|#
jake, thanks, if that's the level of discourse, i'll do something more useful, like trim my toenails.
|8.9.07 @ 9:36AM|#
God, what a pissant little bed-wetter this snirp Jake is.
So scared of the "Islamofascist danger" that he is willing to hand
over all his rights so that the US government can monitor anyone at
any time, drag anyone off the street on undisclosed "suspicion",
have secret trials with no evidence revealed....willing to have
internment of "suspicious populations."
Fifth column? Ha! HE'S the fifth column within the US. Osama comes
out with a proclamation and Jake's so shit-scared he immediately
throws in the towel, crawling to the government, whining "oh SAAAVE
me, I'll do anything so that I can feel safe, sure you can take
away all my constitutional rights, I won't make a peep, I'm so
SCARED!"
Jake, you're the sort of person Stalin called a 'useful idiot." And
man, have you been played by Osama. You're reacting exactly as he
wants you to. He's getting the US to destroy itself from within, by
the activity of pissant little cowards like you. Fuck off.
|8.9.07 @ 9:42AM|#
Dammit, I had my chance to take a shot at Pregnant Lesbian Sex,
and I blew it!
BTW, it's Free Huey Newton. Huey Lewis is just fine.
highnumber|8.9.07 @ 10:13AM|#
Well, Jake, he is right about the bedwetter part, isn't he? Go
ahead - admit it.
I won't admit how I know.
[singing to self]:
Golden slumbers fill your eyes
Smiles awake you when you rise...
|8.9.07 @ 10:18AM|#
Well, Jake, he is right about the bedwetter part, isn't he? Go ahead - admit it.
Well, lots of people have a hobby! I could quit any time I
wanted!
VM|8.9.07 @ 10:35AM|#
d'oh! Nick M! good call!
*takes DVD of Highnumber's proof out of player*
ambles off.
(hi Akira!!)
|8.9.07 @ 11:29AM|#
All that the non-Muslims can do is to keep taking violent
Islamists off the streets to give the moderate Muslims time to take
back control of their religion. . . .If they don't it will be the
end of Islam, and the death count will be in the millions or
higher.
Why is it then when push comes to shove, neoconoids usually end up
confessing their vision of glorified war and a genocided Islamic
world?
The argument usually starts, Saarland and Sudetenland small step
style (Godwin alert), with vague threatening innuendo about the
"responsibilities" of "moderate" Muslims, responsibilities we are
hinted that they will not live up to.
Then we get praises of FDR, founder of Japanese-Americans behind
barbed wire, incorporated. Then an innuendo about the American
organization CAIR or such and its dangers.
Our duty isto get dangerous Islamists off the street in the eternal
state of emergency, then to take on the irresponsible moderate
Muslims who are failing to do so, by millions of deaths.
The vision of war and genocide makes the 4th Amendment destruction
almost quaint.
Never mind all those wartime Fearless Leader FDR "necessities" that
stuck -- the Supreme Court decision on Japanese American internment
(still unreversed precedent), income tax withholding, employer
controlled health insurance, Communist rule of East Europe (for
decades), justification of East European "transfer of population"
(see Yalta) which helped give rise to modern Yugoslavian tactics
where many jihadists attacking Americans got their inspiration and
training.
|8.9.07 @ 12:23PM|#
Wow, still going but looks like most of the bedwetters have
gone.
Don't worry, bedwetters that remain, before leaving Iraq I will
search my duffel bags for insurgents so that they cannot follow me
home.
Oh, and I still have my feet.
|8.9.07 @ 4:01PM|#
Joe says: "assenting to wartime monitoring of American citizens
who are not seeking to do violence IS giving up your privacy and
civil liberties"
You have no facts to prove this, except unreasonable paranoid
suspicions.
Again most of the posters don't understand how wartime domestic
surveillance works.
The objective of wartime domestic intelligence is to monitor those
who may be a threat to USA to prevent their actions, and find leads
to other contacts that they may among the threat community. That is
the point of intelligence during wartime.
|8.9.07 @ 4:03PM|#
Joe says: "I'm still not scared enough to agree to give up my
freedom."
No you are so scared that you have to deliberately live in denial
because you can't handle the truth.
And the truth is no one is asking you to "give up" your "freedom".
No more than Woodrow Wilson did during WWI or FDR did during
WWII.
URKOBOLD™|8.9.07 @ 4:13PM|#
Jeff,
YOU HAVE BEEN BLOGGED.
CONGRATULATIONS. PLEASE, NO THANK YOU GIFTS. WE WISH TO AVOID THE
APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
HOW IS YOUR TAINT? TELL IT THAT THE Urkobold™ SAYS HELLO AND
KISSES. YOUR NOSE CAN KISS MY PATOOTIE.
|8.9.07 @ 4:14PM|#
Patrick D says: "Trigger a "Charlie-Foxtrot" of lobbyists for
foreign countries scrabbling to put "Islamist experts" sympathetic
to their interests on an inevitably politically-appointed panel so
they can define their own conflicts as part of the global Islamist
strategy against the U.S. and drag the U.S. into conflicts in which
we have little or no interest and create enemies where they did not
previously exist."
Total nonsense. The experts are out there today and they are
non-aligned. And no I not talking about "experts" like Saudi
Arabian-owned Georgetown U's John Esposito, beloved by the
Washington Post and Islamists.
I talking about individuals like Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson,
Walid Phares, Zeyno Baran, Bernard Lewis, Serge Trifkovic, and
other specialists like Gerald Posner, Robert Baer, Graham Allison,
etc.
|8.9.07 @ 4:17PM|#
matthew hogan says "vision of glorified war and a genocided
Islamic world"
That is the view of the Jihadist.
It is very clear.
They mean what they say.
It is not a "neocon" fantasy, but it simply indicates your complete
terror of the Jihadists that you have to live in such TOTAL DENIAL
as to exist that they exist and that they are a threat, because
your denial tactics are the only way you get through the day.
Pathetic.
|8.9.07 @ 4:32PM|#
Patrick D says: "Mandate a sweeping non-market-driven change
centered on an incredibly complex proposition well beyond the
capabilities of a centrally-planned government project that
cripples the U.S. economy, the very engine that generates the
resources needed to fight the war."
Thank God you weren't around during WWII.
People like you would have not had USA industry fight to win, and
instead would have challenged if fighting the Nazis was good for
the economy.
In fact, it was. And here are some examples of "sweeping
non-market-driven changes" that were necessary (not that USA has to
JUSTIFY fighting for its survival during WAR):
-- First electronic programmable computer Colossus, developed in
1942-43 in Station X, Bletchly Park, England. It was used to crack
the Enigma codes which were encrypted orders relayed by the Germans
in WWII.
-- Various innovations communications and medical care, and
industry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_during_World_War_II
All "sweeping non-market-driven changes"... including the computer
you are working from right now.
highnumber|8.9.07 @ 4:39PM|#
Jeff,
Now please list the innovations we would have invented were we not
at war. I realize that you will have trouble documenting them.
Perhaps not, since you use Wikipedia.
digression|8.9.07 @ 4:50PM|#
Dear Jihad Jeff,
Dude... your total lack of understanding of the word 'logic' is
astounding. I fail to see how you
can be so overwhelmingly stupid as to not realize that it is YOU
and your kind that are a far more
dire threat to America than any external enemy could ever be. It's
people like you that make me
realize that the right to keep and bear arms is so important... not
because of some imminent
'Islamofascist' invasion... but because of how readily you accept
(and DEFEND, no less) the
grave injustices that our own government forces upon us at
gunpoint.
I find it comforting to know that Mr. Colt's model 1911 will be
there for me on the day that
martial law is declared, all hell breaks loose, and you and your
'freedom-loving' butt-buddies
don your black shirts and armbands and go around the country
enforcing your statist values on
the rest of us. Shooting you would be doing this country a service,
since trying to educate
you on your faulty logic seems to be a lost cause.
Remember that our military is sworn to uphold and defend our
Constitution, not our government.
Most of the soldiers I met could give a shit less about our
government, but they all greatly
value our Constitution. I think you may find yourself on their bad
side one day if you keep
going down the path you are currently traveling with your
authoritarian drivel.
You, sir, are about as fucked up as a football bat. I fear your
kind more than any Islamist.
A pox on you, and may lice infest your groin, etc, etc.
Have a nice day :D
|8.9.07 @ 5:01PM|#
highnumber: "Now please list the innovations we would have
invented were we not at war."
The documented facts are the war effort is what drove
innovation.
|8.9.07 @ 5:05PM|#
I guess if Jeff says it enough, it becomes true. Please say,
"The documented facts are that Jake Boone has millions of dollars
in gold bars buried in his back yard, three yards northwest of the
oak sapling."
Thanks!
|8.9.07 @ 5:06PM|#
digression:
You obviously have not many soldiers because of course they love
their country. And it is a known fact that the Islamists are at
declared war with the USA.
America's soldiers are defending the Constitution just like they
were during WWI when Wilson issue the Sedition Act and just like
they were during WWII when FDR issued widespread domestic wartime
surveillance and censorship measures.
And of course, history proved that America prevailed.
What is authoritarian are your threats to murder me, your threats
against anyone who has a different point of view than you. It is
your authoritarianism which represents the fascist 5th column
mentality that poses the second greatest threat to the USA, after
the declared military enemies of the USA.
|8.9.07 @ 5:07PM|#
Yeah, on the denial thing: the way you keep shrieking "Don't you
see them? They're coming!" isn't doing a hell of a lot to make me
think I'm more frightened than you.
And you still haven't managed to come up with a reason why the
government needs the authority to conduct activities - the
wiretapping of ordinary people without evidence that they are
involved in terrorism - that you yourself admit are useless to the
needs of a nation during wartime.
Could this be JEFFIE?|8.9.07 @ 6:37PM|#
In the denial
next to the big jihadist man
where is my pillow?
hier, fix the deck chairs
to blow them all to smithereens
Titanic fix up
peek a boo, jeffie
eye kan has moar chaezboiga plz
you are wrong. that's all
some paranoia!
evil dust bunnies under bed:
make secret designs
perpetual war...
innovation or destruction?
canned coffee still rox!!!!!
how can you not see?
they are hoarding, massing, coming!!!!!
get armored codpiece!!!???!!!!!!11111!!!!!//???
|8.10.07 @ 9:56PM|#
"""
TrickyVic: "I AM NOT SCARED."
Yes you are.
You cope with your fear by denial.
That is your coping mechanism."""""
This explains it. You learn very little about something, and you
start assuming the rest. You actually have convinced yourself that
you know something of my psychology from what I've posted on one
thread on a magazine blog. Not only that, your making shit up. What
have I denied? Certainly not the fact that islamic terrorist are
interested in targeting my city, repeatedly. Which they have
successfully done twice.
You overestimate your critical thinking skills.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245