ThinkFast: April 9, 2007
ThinkFast: April 9, 2007
On the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad and the toppling of Saddam’s statue, up to one million Iraqi Shias summoned by Moqtada al-Sadr “have gathered in the holy city of Najaf for a mass demonstration calling for US-led troops to leave Iraq.”
The Washington Post interviews a man who helped sledgehammer Saddam’s statue: “We got rid of a tyrant and tyranny. But we were surprised that after one thief had left, another 40 replaced him. Now, we regret that Saddam Hussein is gone, no matter how much we hated him.”
President Bush heads to the Arizona border today for a speech debuting his new, more hard-line conservative approach to immigration “devised after weeks of closed-door meetings with Republican senators.”
Salon.com has uncovered further evidence that the military, in a desperate effort to fill its ranks for President Bush’s escalation, “sent soldiers with acute post-traumatic stress disorder, severe back injuries and other serious war wounds back to Iraq.”
“After weeks of arguing over when the military will run out of money, House and Senate Republicans hope to up the rhetorical ante this week by formally calling on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to bring the House back from a two-week spring recess to finish drafting the controversial $120 billion-plus Iraq War spending bill.”
“Army prosecutions of desertion and other unauthorized absences have risen sharply in the last four years,” as negative discharges and prison time are being used “to serve as a deterrent to a growing number of soldiers who are ambivalent about heading — or heading back — to Iraq and may be looking for a way out.”
The New York Times calls for an investigation of a “loyal Bushie” U.S. Attorney in Wisconsin. “The case involved Georgia Thompson, a state employee sent to prison on the flimsiest of corruption charges just as her boss, a Democrat, was fighting off a Republican challenger. It just might shed some light on a question that lurks behind the firing of eight top federal prosecutors: what did the surviving attorneys do to escape the axe?”
“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service might reclassify manatees as ‘threatened’ instead of ‘endangered,’ a move that would cause the animal to lose its endangered species protection, according to an internal memo obtained by The Washington Post.”
And finally: A real-life blogger ethics panel? “A few high-profile figures in high-tech are proposing a blogger code of conduct to clean up the quality of online discourse.” Chief among their recommendations “is that bloggers consider banning anonymous comments left by visitors to their pages and be able to delete threatening or libelous comments without facing cries of censorship.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
On the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad and the toppling of Saddam’s statue, up to one million Iraqi Shias summoned by Moqtada al-Sadr “have gathered in the holy city of Najaf for a mass demonstration calling for US-led troops to leave Iraq.â€
What?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:09 amNo flowers?
one million shias.. theres “freedom in action”.. thanks for getting rid of saddam, now get out, and let us have our islamic theocracy. glad to know all the flaghumpers here in america hope to sacrifice even more american blood and treasure for the greater glory of allah..
April 9th, 2007 at 9:11 amBush’s Sweeping Overhaul of Immigration Laws: The Case of Too Little/Too Late!
This guy seriously needs to “get a life” – one filled with truth, justice, and the American Way. He’s been in over his head, continues to botch everything, thus the moniker: George W. Botch.
Does he really think the critical mass is stupid? The critical mass is now laughing at him and totally embarrassed to call him our commander in chief. Commander in Chef might be more apropos….wonder what he’s “cookin’” up today? More cooked books perhaps?? More concocted stories and cover-ups? Undoubtedly so.
Let’s take guesses on the “scandal of the week”. What will it be this week????
April 9th, 2007 at 9:11 amReplacement of one dictator for another? That’s about the size of it.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:11 amhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6537861.stm
” Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Shias have gathered in the holy city of Najaf for a mass demonstration calling for US-led troops to leave Iraq. ”
Vs.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/09/iraq.main/index.html
“The U.S. Army estimated the crowd size at closer to 5,000 to 7,000 participants.”
which do you believe more?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:15 amAnother day of bad news has dawned for the Failure in Chief and his criminal administration. But I have absolute confidence that our trolls will show up today to spew their lies and espouse their hatred of peace, justice and morality.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:18 amGood Morning trueblue…What a nice suprise to see you in the #1 slot this morning….
It appears all the troll’s were wrong about Iraq wanting us to stay, who would of thought , only all us progressives knew…Can we bring the troop’s home now…How about putting Impeachment back on the table..
So glad to see RUCerious back yesterday…Send Blessings and healing thought’s to him and all that may need them today, tell some one you love them, do something for our country and the world, plant a tree or flower for the future of our children and mother earth….Blessings all
April 9th, 2007 at 9:20 amup to one million Iraqi Shias summoned by Moqtada al-Sadr “have gathered in the holy city of Najaf for a mass demonstration calling for US-led troops to leave Iraq.â€
This is why they’ll win…. as the supporters of the war here are nothing cowards, yes this means you JMH, Capt Kirk, Patrick0, fireant, Valicunt Venus… You all are happy as long as it’s someone else is making the sacrifice.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:20 amwhich do you believe more?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:20 amFrankly, the BBC. Our MSM is broken. They know no truths.
..tell some one you love them,
Comment by Sharon
Love you, Sharon.
:)
April 9th, 2007 at 9:23 amLet’s put CNN on watch today and see if they update their crowd estimates. I predict that they will continue to transcribe the fraudulent reports of the U.S. military throughout the day, then publish a truthful estimate sometime tomorrow after the story has been buried.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:28 amLove you back, trueblue and hope the weather is turning to spring back there on the cape….All my flowers are blooming and confused daily by the cold then hot weather….Blessings today and alway’s…
April 9th, 2007 at 9:29 am5-7000? Shorter US Army: Who you gonna believe us or your lying eyes?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:29 am#5 One story is in Najaf and the other is Baghdad. Based on that I see no inconsistencies.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:35 am#14 you may want to check that. The CNN dateline is Baghdad but it reads to me like boylan was talking about Najaf when he gave that ridiculous estimate.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:40 amI suppose the Americans’ goose is finally cooked if al-Sadr is determined to achieve his objectives
April 9th, 2007 at 9:41 amThe AP says “tens od thousands”
Check out the little picture – that is not 5-7,000.
Sharon, 40 degrees. :(
April 9th, 2007 at 9:42 am#14 Mark, before you post again, I would try to work on your reading comprehension. Here is the first paragraph of the CNN story:
“Thousands of anti-U.S. protesters marched in the Shiite holy city of Najaf today to mark the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr called for the demonstration, which Najaf police said included tens of thousands of protesters. The U.S. Army estimated the crowd to be 5,000 to 7,000 participants.”
April 9th, 2007 at 9:45 amof, oops!
April 9th, 2007 at 9:45 amThe CNN story definitely talks about Iraq. It also says that Najaf police estimated the crowd at ‘tens of thousands’, while the Army estimated it at 5000-7000.
The BBC story also said that “Thousands of Shias had headed to Najaf in tightly-packed buses and cars.” and “The protest in Najaf, 160km (100 miles) south of Baghdad, broke up after about three hours.”
Seems to me that if ‘thousands’ of Shias headed to Najaf in buses and cars (tightly packed or not), and it broke up after three hours, the real number of protesters would be somewhere between the Najaf police estimates and the US Army estimates… how would ‘hundreds of thousands’ get to Najaf in ‘thousands’ of cars and buses, then disperse after three hours?
But that’s okay, I can understand why everyone here would believe foreign news media over our own evil soldiers.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:49 amBut regardless of the amount of people at the protest, isn’t it nice to see Iraqi’s having the freedom to protest!
April 9th, 2007 at 9:51 am#20, duh, it should’ve been “The CNN story definitely talks about Najaf“.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:52 amDale (20),
“how would ‘hundreds of thousands’ get to Najaf in ‘thousands’ of cars and buses, then disperse after three hours?
”
Nice try. Perhaps some of them lived in/near Najaf?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:55 amDale,
…mass demonstration calling for US-led troops to leave Iraq.â€
The Washington Post interviews a man who helped sledgehammer Saddam’s statue: “We got rid of a tyrant and tyranny. But we were surprised that after one thief had left, another 40 replaced him. Now, we regret that Saddam Hussein is gone, no matter how much we hated him.â€
So they have freedom to tell us to get out.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:55 amWhat do you have to say about that?
Nice try. Perhaps some of them lived in/near Najaf?
Comment by Peter
Don’t confuse him with logic, Peter.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:59 am:P
Yeah Dale,
It is a wonder! When our MSM reports real news instead of regurgitating spin propaganda, it might start to have some credibility. Most critical thinkers (look it up if you don’t understand) can make desicions based on passed experience, knowledge, and common sense. You people “use your gut” to tell you what you want to hear. Isn’t that right? You “have strong beliefs”. Or maybe just “follow blindly” what others tell you. Good grief.
Quit playing the “you believe THEM over US?!?!” nationalistic crap. It is sooo very tired and old and the regulars here aren’t fascists, so I really don’t know why you bother.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:59 amDale, your comment #20 is breathtakingly stupid. How about this obvious suggestion: MOST OF THE PROTESTERS WEREN’T FROM BAGHDAD.
Yeah, I’m shouting Dale, because you seem to be deaf. Moron.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:02 amFor those who have not been taking notes…we were not greeted as liberators…we are viewed as the evil occupants.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:02 amHi Trueblue,
I’m afraid with logic, I could do little else.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:03 amComment by VerbalKint — April 9, 2007 @ 9:45 am
Reminds me of General Custer, getting his last scouting report…
April 9th, 2007 at 10:04 amI would like to point out that Baghdad is under a 24 hour curfew. Obviously this will prevent the staging of protests there, and will make it difficult for residents to get out of the city to protest elsewhere.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:05 amWhy would the Democrats rush back to Washington to pass a military budget Bush has said he’ll veto?
Honestly, weren’t the Republicans the “Do Nothing” Congress of last year? Why can’t the Dems have a recess after doing more work in three months then the GOP did in two years?
Besides, the GOP ought to know that, if Bush vetos this bill because of the redeployment timetable, the Dems are likely the scale down the budget so that Bush has to come back and ask for more money in August –when his surge will have obviously FAILED.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:07 amDale,
FYI: Most of those countries have had freedom to protest against America.. We did not bring them this, we only have brought more protesters. You’re family stayed in the shallow end of the gene pool eh?
April 9th, 2007 at 10:09 am#30 BnF
April 9th, 2007 at 10:12 amToo funny
:)
Ouch, Dale.
Slayed by a 17 year old.
That’s gotta hurt.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:13 amSo they have freedom to tell us to get out.
What do you have to say about that?
They had that freedom under Saddam, too. How many anti-US rallies were there back then?
But you’re right, this is different – this time, they aren’t being forced at gunpoint to attend those rallies. They’re going, because they want to.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:13 amisn’t it nice to see Iraqi’s having the freedom to protest!
Comment by Dale
OMFG.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:14 am#15 & #18 you are both correct. I skimmed them a bit too fast.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:15 amAren’t all of you just *assuming* that the protesters were mainly residents of Najaf (pop. ~950000). But no, it’s much easier to slam our military, and say that they’re lying.
As far as the freedoms go, yes, it’s great that they’re able to protest against us… they’re ALSO able to protest against the Iraqi government… what are the chances of them protesting against Hussein five years ago?
April 9th, 2007 at 10:16 amSeems to me that if ‘thousands’ of Shias headed to Najaf in buses and cars (tightly packed or not), and it broke up after three hours, the real number of protesters would be somewhere between the Najaf police estimates and the US Army estimates… how would ‘hundreds of thousands’ get to Najaf in ‘thousands’ of cars and buses, then disperse after three hours?
wow….maybe because they wernt all communicating with each other and no one told them all to stay for dessert? WTF dude, do you have some sort of equation to determine exactly how long X or greater amount of people have to spend in any given place before they can disperse? Shall we measure that in “DALEOSECONDS”, because the reasoning you used to come to your conclusion is above my head. are you a lawyer too, like the mighty hermaphrodite?
But that’s okay, I can understand why everyone here would believe foreign news media over our own evil soldiers.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13295806.htm
“U.S. military pays Iraqis for positive news stories on war”
I’m not a flaghumper dude. I don’t beleive or disbeleive ANYONE simply because they share the same nationality as me.
That being said, if you think the same people who were saying the insurgencey was “dead enders” in their “last throes” are now too good to lie, your really deeply naive to the point of almost being frightening…
and BTW, its not the soldiers lying, at least not the grunts. stop it with your lame “libruls hate the troops” straw man argument. its the higher ups, the same deluded civilians/professional mercenaries who perjure themselves daily and told us “we know where the weapons are” “we know without a double that saddam hussien has WMD”
But regardless of the amount of people at the protest, isn’t it nice to see Iraqi’s having the freedom to protest!
Yes, right. I mean, these days most iraqis have to worry about being tourtured and/or killed just for stepping out thier door, there’s worms in the water, no electricity, and feces and sewage is piling up in the streets, but at least they can PROTEST! woooo.. yeah boy… who needs food, water, and safety when you have the first amendment? In the old Iraq, if you kept your mouth shut, chances are you’d be ok. Not 100 percent, but if you had to choose between excessive law and order and an utter lack of it, which would you choose?
Hey ChipNDale, your such a fan of freedom, so do you suppport the democractically elected government of palestine? theres some freedom in action for ya….
April 9th, 2007 at 10:16 am“…is that bloggers consider banning anonymous comments left by visitors to their pages…”
This part is a good idea. I would never write something to which I would not sign my real name.
I believe that threatening or libelous comments should be allowed. For example, has anyone ever been to ratemyprofessor.com? Their legal counsel told me there is nothing anyone can do about those threatening or libelous comments.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:21 amnjbj,
Hey ChipNDale, your such a fan of freedom, so do you suppport the democractically elected government of palestine? theres some freedom in action for ya…
Funny, I brought that up to one of my professers once after he said the only democratically elected government in the ME was Israel. I got the “that doen’t count” answer.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:23 amwhat are the chances of them protesting against Hussein five years ago?
Comment by Dale
High if they had wanted it. You just dont tame a 5000 y/o civilization with a CIA murderous thug (Saddam). That tells you a lot about how Iraqis look at Saddam in comparison with the present situation. They are willing to die now, they were not willing to die before.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:24 amI got the “that doen’t count†answer.
Comment by Bluedahlia
And thats just simply the truth for racists. Palestine has no rights whatsoever over its land, its sea, its water, its money or even to decide the kind of government.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:27 amDale,
The Iraqis don’t have true freedom to protest. They have the freedom to follow the Shia cleric al-Sadr. If they were truly free, then they could protest against the Shia movement and support the Sunnis. Actions like that get them killed. The Shia have been ruled by the Sunnis for 35 years and now they are looking for some payback.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:32 am#44 Juan,
April 9th, 2007 at 10:33 amI seem to remember in the not too distant past when Israel bombed them, their “radical extremists” rebuilding and helping out their people. I also remember what a sorry joke it was when we got to compare it to how our government was helping out our people in New Orleans.
Comment by no jesus but jake — April 9, 2007 @ 10:16 am
And thus, with but a few, well-timed and very public “terrorist” attacks, Big Brother and The Party is born.
The situation in Iraq is a proving ground for human nature. Thus far, Hobbs’ views seem to be the most astute.
What is it about human nature that we need a strict authoritarian tyrant to rule over us, lest we kill each other?
April 9th, 2007 at 10:36 amAnd thats just simply the truth for racists. Palestine has no rights whatsoever over its land, its sea, its water, its money or even to decide the kind of government.—Juan C
my theory is actually that in the flaghumpers minds, democracy and freedom is only a good thing if it produces pro-american/pro-israel results.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:42 amie. its not that the palestinians have no rights, its that the only right they have is the right to elect a government which cowtows to israel’s whims
Aren’t all of you just *assuming* that the protesters were mainly residents of Najaf (pop. ~950000). But no, it’s much easier to slam our military, and say that they’re lying.
Say who is lying? ALL military personnel OK’ed this bit of news? What exactly is your deal man? Are you over there doing head-counts? Does it matter if 10,000 or 25,000 or even 100,000 people ORGANIZED to protest? By the level of violence directed at OUR troops, protests in Iraq seem to come in about two flavors: violent and non-violent. Of course we all can kind of see, or assume if you must, the ratio there.
Get over there and do a couple straw polls and do something before turning this thing around on people who strive for positive change. Can you wrap your mind around that you war-loving p.o.s?
THT = TROLLS HATE TRUTH
April 9th, 2007 at 10:46 amwhat are the chances of them protesting against Hussein five years ago?
We’re better than a mass murderer. There is a ringing endorsement.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:46 amits not that the palestinians have no rights, its that the only right they have is the right to elect a government which cowtows to israel’s whims
Comment by no jesus but jake
Deep down I guess there is a strong racist feeling. If Palestinians just die…well… but if some jewish people die, my sweet god!!! And the Holocaust is a favorite argument when it comes to say which people should have more rights over the land. But nobody seems to remember that 20 million russians were exterminated during WWII.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:51 amThis “freedom to protest” was purchased at a cost of some 655,000 children, women, and men DEAD, and hundreds of billions of dollars the United States has borrowed and will have to pay back, with interest.
But, are they celebrating their Independence Day? No. This was a call to arms, not to continue their internecine fighting, but to unite in common bond against the American occupiers. This does not bode well for our young women and men ordered into harm’s way.
There is a reason why the U.N. Charter prohibits wars of agression for the purpose of regime change: they don’t work.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:00 amI say we merge Israel and Palestine into one country and call it Canaan. It should be a secular state. And people should have a right to return to the land they properly, legally own. No more security walls. No more occupied territories.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:02 amThere is a reason why the U.N. Charter prohibits wars of agression for the purpose of regime change: they don’t work.
Comment by Briseadh_na_faire — April 9, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Well said. History has taught us this lesson many times, yet we still refuse to learn it.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:05 amwhat are the chances of them protesting against Hussein five years ago?
Comment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 10:16 am
The Kurds did so, at the encouragement of Bush I. Saddam gassed them, using municians the U.S. sold to him. It would have been appropriate, and consistent with international law, to come to the aid of the Kurds then. But Bush I didn’t and thousands died.
Dale, why do you post in support of a fascist, imperialist America under the leader of a tyrannical dictator?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:06 amIf we are “bringing freedom” to them, then why do they call us and consider us occupiers? (Which is of course, what we are.)
#52 BnF,
April 9th, 2007 at 11:10 amBut it wasn’t a war of agression for a regime change until after the WMD weren’t found. Actually, I am still confused. Which reason is it that we are at war in (not with) Iraq?
Uh, wasn’t the Revolutionary war an example of ‘wars of agression for the purpose of regime change’???
April 9th, 2007 at 11:11 amReminds me of General Custer, getting his last scouting report…
Comment by Briseadh_na_faire
I visited that battlefield a few years ago, and it seems that things didn’t work out too well for Custer.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:12 amAppropriate then, but not appropriate in 2003?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:12 amNo, it wasn’t. Your ignorance of international law is showing.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:17 amUh, wasn’t the Revolutionary war an example of ‘wars of agression for the purpose of regime change’???
Comment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 11:11 am
The Revolutionary War was an example of a territory striving to win its own independance from a foreign nation on its own soil. A “war of agression for the purpose of regime change” is when one country invades another country on their soil for the sole purpose of removing their leader and installing another one – like what America did to Guatemala in 1954.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:19 amUh, wasn’t the Revolutionary war an example of ‘wars of agression for the purpose of regime change’???
Uh, no. If it was, King George III would have been overthrown and the British Empire would have fallen.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:19 amOh god, why did I even respond? It was that stupid.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:20 amUh, wasn’t the Revolutionary war an example of ‘wars of agression for the purpose of regime change’???
Comment by Dale
You’re kidding, right?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:20 am#60, the Brits ruled America, we launched a ‘war of aggression’ to gain our independence… that wasn’t a regime change?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:21 amOh god, why did I even respond? It was that stupid.
Comment by Bluedahlia
You need one of RUCerious’ Incredul-o-meters. :D
April 9th, 2007 at 11:22 amSen. Edwards is correct, there *is* two Americas. At least according to Elizabeth.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:22 amComment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 11:12 am
Yes. And you’ve been around long enough to have read my earlier comments explaining why this is so. Too bad you chose not to read them.
You’re in over your head. I’ve studied international law as applies to internal struggles against oppressive regimes. You, on the other hand, lack an understanding of the basic difference between an internal struggle (the American Revolution) versus a war of aggression (the invasion of Iraq).
April 9th, 2007 at 11:23 amDale, answer this question:
Dale, why do you post in support of a fascist, imperialist America under the leader of a tyrannical dictator?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:24 amYou’re kidding, right? You throw out a bunch of hysterical claims, and you’re demanding an answer?
Oh, okay, I’ll be right with you.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:28 amThis is the headline on Yahoo news:
Iraqis march in honor of Baghdad’s fall
I don’t like what I see coming. And I know I’m not the only one who feels that way.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:30 am#69, let’s see.
tyranny: A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.
dictator: a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.
fascist: a person believing in fascism.
fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
Maybe instead of concentrating on your ‘international law’ studies, you should’ve just bought a dictionary.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:31 amYou’re kidding, right? You throw out a bunch of hysterical claims, and you’re demanding an answer?
Comment by Dale
I haven’t seen any “hysterical claims,” Dale. I’m interested in your answer, as well.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:31 amBnF,
April 9th, 2007 at 11:35 amGive it up. You know why. I know why. He won’t ever answer you, though. He supports it because he doesn’t enjnoy thinking for himself. It is too hard, and the republiscums make it easy for him to point his internal aggression at all that is wrong with life onto things he doesn’t have to really think about. Someone has already made his choices, gave him purpose, and an outlet to feel either superior, angry, patriotic, etc. depending on his mood at the time.
the Brits ruled America, we launched a ‘war of aggression’ to gain our independence… that wasn’t a regime change?
Comment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 11:21 am
This comment is breathtakingly stupid. I can’t believe this needs to be clarified to anyone. No, continentals didn’t “launch a war of aggression”. Do you even understand the concept? Did colonials waged a war of aggression against themselves?
What happened in 1775-1783 was a war for independence, and self-determination against a colonial rule. A war of aggression is what the British unleashed against their colonies, in order to retain them. Colonials were outgunned, outnumbered, and outmaneuvered almost at every turn. If it wasn’t for the French, the US would have remained a colony for much longer than they did. Some “war of aggression” they waged.
And there was no “regime change”, as there was no “regime” in the colonies -that is why they were colonies. The “regime” continues to this day in the UK; you know, monarchy.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:38 am#73, show me how Pres. Bush is a dictator. A dictator has absolute power, please tell me how Pres. Bush has absolute power? Please tell me how the US is a tyranny? Please tell me how anybody has ‘forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism’ (seems to me that this site wouldn’t be operational if this was a tyranny
Examples, please.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:39 am#
Comment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 11:31 am
#
Dale,
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but with that one post you just proved BnF’s point better than he could have. He really should take the opportunity to thank you now for arguing against yourself.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:39 am#74, same question to you… please give examples of how Pres. Bush is a dictator.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:40 am#77, ah, so you also believe that Pres. Bush is a dictator? According to the definition of the word ‘dictator’?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:42 amDale,
So by supporting early Americans war of Aggression against England (you know kicking england out)… Do you support Iraqi’s kicking America out? Why do you hate America, why do you not support the troops, why are you an islamofacist lover?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:47 amSigning statements is one. “I am the decider.” two. Many more, but I am not going spend my valuable time arguing with someone who doesn’t really want the truth in the first place. There are many examples here on this site stated by other posters. You have been a troll here long enough to have read almost all of the points expressed. Don’t go throwing your control trip on me. If you don’t like the views expressed here, go to a site that will appreciate you ignorance better.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:49 amComment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 11:42 am
From your own definition”
dictator: a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.
I need to get back to work, but I’ll give a few quick examples. For one, Bush’s use of signing statements has removed much of the checks and balances that congress has. Essentially he is stating “I know this is the law, but I don’t have to abide by it.” That is pretty absolute power. Secondly, his use of recess appointments. He submits an individual for approval by the Senate (the American way) then when that person does not get approved, he appoints them anyway. I don’t have much time to expound on this further, but hopefully BnF will pick up where I left off.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:53 amComment by Bluedahlia — April 9, 2007 @ 11:35 am
I agree. Instead of answering “why” Dale looked up dictionary definitions. From his subsequent posts it looks like he lacks the cognitive reasoning skills necessary to answer my question.
Meanwhile, I took the time to post something on my facebook profile. You might find it interesting. I certainly did.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:55 amComment by Chris L — April 9, 2007 @ 11:53 am
no need for further explanation. As long as impeachment is off the table, we are living under a dictatorship.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:57 amIs Dale really Dale Dribble?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:57 am#81, ah, so you really DO believe that Pres. Bush maintains absolute power over the US? Really? REALLY? Why, then, is there even any debate over the Iraq war? If this is a dictatorship, why are there hearings over the US attorney firings? Do you think something like that happens in a dictatorship?
No, of course it wouldn’t. But people have jumped on me for the difference between regime change and independence, yet calling Pres. Bush a dictator is just fine, and should be accepted.
No thanks, I think I’ll stay here unless/until TP kicks me off the site.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:58 amDale,
Why are the things Bush has done ok with you? I’m curious about your reasoning. Do you think if things in this country go as wrong as they could possibly go, that somehow you will be insulated because you were on the “right side?”
April 9th, 2007 at 12:06 pmZooey, I’m not ok with everything Bush has done… I think he’s abused his power re: the signing statements, I’m definitely not happy with how he’s addressed illegal immigration, I’m not happy with how he’s increased the size of the federal gov’t. But things like “fascist, imperialist America under the leader of a tyrannical dictator” are just plain not true. While people *have* posted about the signing statements, nobody has given any proof that we’re living in a dictatorship… an idea which, if it were true, would pretty much make this site (and many of the postings on it) illegal.
That’s just silly. Assuming that by ‘as wrong as they could’ you’re referring to a dictatorship (hope I’m not wrong) being ‘on the right side’ would not insulate me from any edicts of the supposed dictator.
Yes, I can understand how angry you are with Pres. Bush and the actions he’s taken, both here and abroad. But to call this a fascist country under the control of a tyrannical dictator, or (to be fair) saying a protester against the war ‘hates the troops’, is so far gone that it just marginalizes those who make the statements, and takes a step towards getting any real changes made.
I admit that I’m guilty of making wrong statements about protesters also… what can I say, I just get frustrated. But hearing this country called a fascist, tyranny just pushes my buttons. :-)
April 9th, 2007 at 12:18 pmNo thanks, I think I’ll stay here unless/until TP kicks me off the site.
Ok Dale,
April 9th, 2007 at 12:18 pmI just hope you aren’t surprised or chagrined when you get blasted for your inane posts. Man, you must be a glutton for punishment.
I wonder how much the Manatee population has grown to justify its removal from the endagered list. My guess is, not much, having lived in Florida most of my life and knowing how RARE it was to see one, let alone see one healthy and without massive scars from boat motors…
Destroy a species to make it easier to maybe make a little more money. Who on EARTH finds this even remotely acceptable?
April 9th, 2007 at 12:28 pmI admit that I’m guilty of making wrong statements about protesters also… what can I say, I just get frustrated. But hearing this country called a fascist, tyranny just pushes my buttons. :-)
Comment by Dale
So it pushes your buttons hearing this country called fascist — what if you’re wrong? How long will you wait to be sure? What will have to happen to open your eyes?
Don’t you think it cuts to the core of our being to say this country is a fascist tyranny?
I hope you’re right, but my gut feeling and the things I see tell me we’re right.
I’m off to school.
April 9th, 2007 at 12:28 pmComment by Dale — April 9, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
you have a limited view of what it means to live in a dictatorship. Have you not heard of the term “benevolant dictator”?
Bush exercised absolute dictatorial power over a United States citizen, holding him without charges for years, and torturing him until his sanity was in question. What Bush did to Padilla, Bush can do to anyone.
Impeachment is the only check left on Bush’s power, and the Democrats took that off the table as soon as the election results showed they had won a majority of both houses.
You are living under the illusion that you still have civil liberties and civil rights. You are much like the frog placed into water which is gradually heated. You will not realize your peril until it is too late.
April 9th, 2007 at 12:33 pmDeath to censorship on the Internet. If you cant stand hearing what people have to say then dont read the comments. Death threats and all…
April 9th, 2007 at 12:35 pmDale your revolutionary war comments are absolutely ridiculous, as is you rposting of the Edwards article.
In regards to the edwards article, what exactly is she sayign that bothers you? Would you want a neighbor whose first reaction to solve any issue is to pull out a gun and star makign threats? Never mind, you support President Botch lock stock and barell so your solution to every issue is force.
April 9th, 2007 at 12:39 pmRegarding the manatees:
Ok, so we develop more low-lying coastal waterways before global warming inundates them.
April 9th, 2007 at 12:40 pmLater Zooey,
April 9th, 2007 at 12:40 pmHave fun @ class. :)
Baghdad has not fallen…if anything, it has gotten stronger.
April 9th, 2007 at 1:48 pmGosh, Dale is one sick puppy. I’d say two stolen elections, warrantless wiretaps, an end of habeas corpus, heavily censored public appearances, signing statements negating laws intent, and the meddling in federal prosecutions would help define the Bush presidency as a dictatorship. That is, if we were in Latin America. After all, Chavez is elected and there’s an active free press in Venezuela, but he’s a dictator according to the GOP. So, if the shoe fits….
BTW, the 13 colonies WERE British. The Declaration of Independence was over a failure to be properly represented in Parliament. Had the British Prime Minister responded more quickly the Union Jack might still be flying over NYC. Of course, some of the America hotheads were more interested in evading taxes and stealing the Amerindian land across the Ohio. (See the Whiskey Rebellion.)
April 9th, 2007 at 1:50 pmHad the British Prime Minister responded more quickly the Union Jack might still be flying over NYC. Comment by david
Furthermore, England regarded Haiti as a land far more important economically speaking than the 13 colonies.
April 9th, 2007 at 2:17 pm#50
Dale, care to field that one? Doubt it.
April 9th, 2007 at 2:31 pmbeing able to comment on blogs is one of the most important features to blogging. Do we even have a constitution anymore?
April 9th, 2007 at 2:32 pmInteresting. Yahoo news has changed its headline from:
to
April 9th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Looks like the SQUAT LITTLE TOAD al-Sadr IS NOW HOLDING THE WHIP-HAND—–EH, Monkey Boy CHIMPya? GOOD GOING, commander-in-thief!!!!!
And WHO might Ali Baba BE in this CASE, The Washington Post(tm)? WE ARE LIVING Scheherazade’s THOUSAND AND ONE ARABIAN NIGHTS, HERE!!!! “40 THIEVES,” INDEED!!!!! The people of Iraq are CLAMORING FOR THE RETURN OF Harun al-Rashid TO DRIVE CHIMPya’s INFIDELS OUT, SO WHAT THE HELL ARE THE AMERICAN TROOPS BEING LEFT IN THE BLOODTHIRSTY SARACEN MOB’S RAMPAGING PATH FOR, CHIMPya, YA DOPE!!!!!
FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP, FLIP-FLOP—–LOOKS LIKE THE DREADED John McPAIN-itis DISEASE OF GUTLESS HYPOCRISY AND CHANGING ONE’S STANCE WITH THE WAY THE WIND IS BLOWING IS AFFECTING THE commander-in-THIEF CHIMPya AS WELL WITH REGARD TO IMMIGRATION—IN CASE YOU’VE FORGOTTEN, CHIMPya, YA SAP, THE MAJORITY IN BOTH HOUSE AND SENATE ARE THE DEMOCRATS, AND THE ONLY WAY YOU WILL GET THEIR SUPPORT IN GETTING IMMIGRATION PASSED IS NOT TO HAVE A HARD-LINE CON-servative APPROACH TO IT—WHAT A F*CKING MORON YA ARE, Monkey Boy CHIMPya—BUT THAT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE, AFTER ALL!!!!!
“We go to war with the army that we have rather than the army that we want…” IN-FAMOUS LAST WORDS OF DUMBSFailed STILL RINGING IN YA JUG-EARS, Monkey Boy CHIMPya????? INJURED, MENTALLY AFFECTED, AT-RISK SOLDIERS BEING SENT BACK, PERHAPS TO THEIR CERTAIN DEATH???? ABSOLUTELY CRIMINAL, ILLEGAL MONSTROUS SADISTIC BEHAVIOUR ON THE PART OF MILITARY HEADS AND CHIMPya, BOTH OF WHOSE ROTTING, DISEASED HEADS(MILITARY’S AND CHIMPya’s) MUST BE LOPPED OFF FOR THE GOOD OF AMERICA!!!!!
YOU repugnant-repubs CAN UP THE ANTE AND CALL SPEAKER PELOSI’S BLUFF ALL YOU WANT, BUT YA SEWER-RAT HYENA-SCUM SHITS HAD BETTER BE PREPARED TO BE BITCH-SLAPPED DOWN AND HAVE YA FACES SMACKED CLEAR OFF YOUR HEADS BY HER ROYAL FLUSH OF HEARTS, BRANDISHED BY THE QUEEN OF HEARTS, NANCY PELOSI HERSELF!!!!!
NOW IS THE TIME TO START PROSECUTING CHIMPya, FRANKENCheney, FAT-F*CK Rove, CONDOM-Lesser Rice, GONZOales and Bushland Uber Allies FOR THEIR CRIMINAL INVASION OF THE SOVEREIGN COUNTRY OF Iraq, MASS MURDER OF INNOCENT Iraqi BYSTANDER-CITIZENS, and THE GENERALS AND COMMANDERS WHO FORCED AMERICAN SOLDIERS TO TAKE PART IN AN ILLEGAL WAR, FOR HIGH WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY—EXECUTION FOR Bush AND HIS GOOSESTEPPING RAG-TAG BAND OF FASCIST-NAZI SCUM!!!!!
“What did the surviving attorneys do the escape the axe?” THE “OSCULUM INFAME”, “KISS OF SHAME” TO 666, THE GREAT BEAST CHIMPya’s ANUS, COMES TO MIND….TOADYING TO THE TOAD AND TOEING THE Bushland Uber Allies LINE, i.e., LYING, CHEATING, STEALING, PROTECTING THE fuhrer CHIMPya AND HIS MINIONS, OBFUSCATING, PREVARICATING, SELECTIVE LOSS OF MEMORY WITH REGARD TO INCIDENTS DETRIMENTAL TO Bushland Uber Allies ARE A FEW OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTINUED SERVICE!!!!!
And ANOTHER of the ENDANGERED SPECIES becomes ENDANGERED ANEW and IN THE SIGHTS of Bushland Uber Allies RELENTLESS DRIVE TO DESTROY AND OBLITERATE ALL ENDANGERED SPECIES JUST FOR THE SHEER SADISTIC HELL OF IT, YOU BUNCH OF F*CKING PSYCHOPATHS of Bushland Uber Allies!!!!!
I’M NOT MAKING A SECRET OF WHO I AM, repugnant-repub rightwingnut crank fudge-pachyderms, CHIMPya and Bushland Uber Allies LOVERS, AIDERS, ABETTERS, DUNG-dit pundits, MSM LapDogs, ALL OF YA BEHIND THIS “BLOGGER ETHICS PANEL”—MY COMMENTS ARE NEITHER ANONYMOUS OR SECRETIVE, BUT THEY ARE COLOURFUL, EDUCATIONAL, ERUDITE, WITTY, FUNNY, HILARIOUS, INFORMATIVE, VILE, OBSCENE, BLASPHEMOUS, VICIOUS, THREATENING, VENOMOUS, VITUPERATIVE, ALL RIGHTFULLY SO, I MIGHT ADD, AND AS FAR AS “LIBELOUS,” HOW CAN SOMETHING THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE NAKED TRUTH BE “LIBEL”? ANSWER ME THAT, repugnant-repub LEGAL “EXPERT” JACK-OFF SHYSTERS!!!! SO COME AND GET ME, MOTHERF*CKERS, IF YA DARE!!!!!
April 9th, 2007 at 4:38 pmI’m all for removing anonymous commenting.
_Most_ bloggers themselves are very respectable people (Bar morons like Michelle Malkin).
Its the commenters that need their heads shoved in.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:04 pm[...] toppling of Saddam's statue. Unfortunately, the man who took a sledgehammer to that statue now wishes Saddam was still in power. Ouch. Luckily, our ever optimistic administration claims these protests [...]
April 12th, 2007 at 9:21 pmNaked Girls Naked Black Men Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 4:35 pmgovernment loan and grant for debt consolidation
How are you? I just dropped by. I’ve gotta say, you have nice site! You should check out my free government grant search site sometime.
April 5th, 2008 at 11:44 pmNaked Girls Beyonce Naked Naked Teen Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 1:11 amNaked Girls Naked Young Girl Naked Teen Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 8:56 pmfast money
Well said.
April 8th, 2008 at 10:25 am