Does this mean Pat Buchanan supports Israel?
Buchanan Accuses Israel of ‘Blitzkrieg’.
It was the Nazis who developed and defined the idea of a “blitzkrieg.” Pat Buchanan has apologized for the Nazis. Is he thus comparing the Israelis favorably to those whom he believed nobly defended their fatherland against the diabolical Churchill?
Well, in my view, Pat Buchanan’s just another loony figure comparing Israel to the Nazis, even if he’s not as adverse to the latter as most who make the comparison.
UPDATE to revise my explanation: Buchanan thinks the Nazis were justified in invading Poland with their “blitzkrieg.” That suggests he believes a blitzkrieg to be a good thing. Ergo, if he calls Israel’s operation a blitzkrieg, he thinks their operation is justified.
I guess that means he supports it. That doesn’t make him any less of a crackpot. And the Israeli operation is anything but a blitzkrieg. But, then again, Buchanan does have a problem with world history.
87 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Buchanan is increasingly reprehensible, yet pathetic.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 9, 2009 @ 8:42 pm - January 9, 2009
Dan, You have a very talmudic mind, only a Jew could come up with logic like that! 😉
Comment by Leah — January 9, 2009 @ 8:43 pm - January 9, 2009
One of the scary things about the Fairness Doctrine is that Pat Buchanan could be brought in to espouse the “conservative” point-of-view. (Of course, that already happens with him, but at least it’s not because of government regulation.) Pat Buchanan might not be a liberal, but he certainly doesn’t speak for me as a conservative, and I mean that on a whole host of issues: Israel, national security, free trade, etc.
Comment by cme — January 9, 2009 @ 9:30 pm - January 9, 2009
ILC, your comment about “increasingly reprehensible, yet pathetic” gave me a thought—isn’t Pat Buchanan the Jimmy Carter of the Right? (I mean, besides the fact he was never POTUS.)
Comment by cme — January 9, 2009 @ 9:33 pm - January 9, 2009
cme – You could say that.
GPW:
Sorry, that’s tortured. I read that Buchanan said that Israel was engaged in a “blitzkrieg” against their Palestinian “concentration camp”. That is not positive. It means that Buchanan was engaged in comparing the Israelis to the Nazis, an increasingly fashionable comparison among anti-Semites of the Left and of the Right.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 10, 2009 @ 12:31 am - January 10, 2009
Pat Buchanan is a disgrace — which happens to be exactly why the media love to present him as a representative of the right.
Comment by American Elephant — January 10, 2009 @ 4:52 am - January 10, 2009
The exact same can be said about Andrew Sullivan.
Comment by Leah — January 10, 2009 @ 11:28 am - January 10, 2009
ILC, but recall, Pat Buchanan defends the Nazis (see that kook’s recent book which plays fast and lost with the facts).
Comment by GayPatriotWest — January 10, 2009 @ 12:33 pm - January 10, 2009
Pat Buchannan is to the Right what Dhimmy Carter is to the left. Except most of the right disowns Pat
Comment by The_Livewire — January 10, 2009 @ 1:40 pm - January 10, 2009
rephrase:
Many conservatives think the Bush was justified torturing people. That suggests many conservatives believe torture to be a good thing.
Comment by gillie — January 10, 2009 @ 1:59 pm - January 10, 2009
Buchanan thinks the Nazis were justified in invading Poland with their “blitzkrieg.†That suggests he believes a blitzkrieg to be a good thing. Ergo, if he calls Israel’s operation a blitzkrieg, he thinks their operation is justified.
This is a product of wishful thinking and laughably bad logic. This kind of reaction only serves Buchanan because it ignores motivation (the “suggestion” that blitzkrieg is a good thing, something Buchanan obviously isn’t doing). If you want to empower Buchanan, keep it up.
The central question is: Is disagreeing with Israeli policies anti-Semitic? The answer is an emphatic No. Peace between Israel and its neighbors is, if anything, pro-Israel and pro-Semitic and it is the means to this peace whereupon disagreement is entirely justified, where discussion should be honest and objective — particularly amongst those like myself who don’t hold Israel in higher regard than any other nation that receives my taxes and holds my nation’s attention to in my opinion an inordinate degree.
You have no disagreement from me re. Buchanan’s use of terms like concentration camp and blitzkrieg. It is a deliberate cheapening of what Nazi Germany did. Is he anti-Semitic? I consider anti-Semitism a serious offense and don’t throw the term around as loosely as Buchanan throws around his German. He may be, but let’s not confuse honest disagreement with various Israeli policies with anti-Semitism.
Comment by Ignatius — January 10, 2009 @ 2:21 pm - January 10, 2009
Many conservatives think the Bush was justified torturing people. That suggests many conservatives believe torture to be a good thing.
Torture of one terrorist operative is a better thing than thousands of people dying.
Furthermore, gillie, given how Democrats refused to do anything about Saddam Hussein torturing hundreds of thousands of people, and even went to Baghdad in support of Saddam’s regime, it can be definitively stated that Democrats fully support and endorse torture, and are hypocritical when they claim to oppose it.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 10, 2009 @ 4:46 pm - January 10, 2009
Torture of one terrorist operative is a better thing than thousands of people dying.
That’s the kind of moral clarity your typical hash-brained leftist is incapable of. But I would take a further… if torturing one terrorist saves the life of even 1 innocent person or American soldier, it’s worth it.
Comment by V the K — January 10, 2009 @ 5:02 pm - January 10, 2009
And the really sick part about people like gillie is they think because they would rather let X number of innocent people die than subject a terrorist to even a moment’s discomfort, that makes them morally superior.
That is just effed up.
Comment by V the K — January 10, 2009 @ 5:05 pm - January 10, 2009
#14: V, people like gillie hold their opinion in the abstract. If their necks, or the necks of loved ones, were on the line (literally if you’re in the hands of Muslim terrorists), they’d sing a different tune.
Liberals feel morally superior knowing what other people should do.
Comment by SoCalRobert — January 10, 2009 @ 5:17 pm - January 10, 2009
SCR, if gillie was ‘in the hands of terrorists’ he wouldn’t be singing.
His mouth would be too full.
Comment by DaveP. — January 10, 2009 @ 5:47 pm - January 10, 2009
Why haven’t the high and mighty liberals outlawed waterboarding? Why, if it’s “torture”, still legal? Why, when presented with our interrogation methods, the liberals wondered if it would be enough?
That suggests that many liberals believe “torture” to be a good thing. However, they’re not averse to using it as a political football to make it appear that they actually give a crap about people.
WE DON’T TORTURE, A-HOLE!!!
Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 11, 2009 @ 5:06 am - January 11, 2009
TGC – YES we did. Even John McCain has said it many times.
NDT, VK – We have tortured many people, some bad some good.
Many innocent a few guilty.
The fact that you approve of that shows your clear moral depravity.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 10:16 am - January 11, 2009
gillie, you’re leaving out the part where McCain worked with Bush to define what is and isn’t torture. The bill, passed in either 2005 or 2006, retrospectively blessed the actions of the Bush administration. Try to be informed before you hold forth, OK? That way, your sick, twisted desire to slam America will be less obvious.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 10:55 am - January 11, 2009
P.S. gillie, if you are REALLY concerned about torture and if you want to know what real torture looks like, click here. And read some of the comments.
In short, gillie, if you want to get all moral, it would behoove you to have some little bit of concern in your heart for real victims of real torture. Instead of, you know, making sh*t up about America.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 11:08 am - January 11, 2009
From:
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2008/Detainees.121108.pdf
“The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of ‘a few bad apples’ acting on their own,” the report states. “The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees.”
“These policies are wrong and must never be repeated,” McCain said
Read the report (signed by 12 Republicans) and tell me how you can say we don’t torture
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 1:00 pm - January 11, 2009
#20
Huh?
You are saying that tactics used in the concentration camps of the Nazis, Soviet gulags, Chinese POW camps, and Vietnamese POW camps are not “real torture”?
Yikes
You are truly nuts
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 1:04 pm - January 11, 2009
Last week, the U.S. military killed a member of Al Qaeda responsible for the Marriott bombing that killed 53 people.
If we had captured this piece of filth, the left would have demanded kid gloves treatment… no harsh interrogation, no discomfort of any kind, halal meals, access to top attorneys.
But instead, he’s dead… and I’m glad of it.
Even if I don’t get to pose and strut my “moral superiority.”
I’m just glad he won’t be able to kill any more people.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 1:08 pm - January 11, 2009
Then you have no reason to be here, do you? Your very presence totally belies your claim. 🙂
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 1:13 pm - January 11, 2009
#24 – way to be Glib! You and Tom Cruise pal!
Of course its easy to be glib when you live in the alternative reality you have created.
#23 Unfortunately many of the people who we have tortured are innocent folks in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Unless of course you think there are no innocent Muslims, and all deserve torture.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 1:22 pm - January 11, 2009
If a relatively small number of “innocent” people suffer through the temporary discomfort liberals call “torture,” but that spares other innocent people death, disfigurement, or the loss of loved ones, I am all for it. Unlike liberals, I don’t hate the military, I don’t hate our soldiers, and I trust them to be careful and discerning about the use of “torture.” But even if mistakes are made, I still err on the side of protecting life. Whereas liberals err on the side of endangering it.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 1:35 pm - January 11, 2009
gillie, again, you’re the one glibly making stuff up about America. You clearly don’t care one whit about real victims of real torture. And, if you seriously believed your own insults towards us, you wouldn’t be here.
As for this:
Newsflash: Not *everything* done in those camps were torture. gillie, did you know that the Nazis and Japs sometimes fed their prisoners? And they even gave them some water! And on occasion, yes, they questioned them using sleep deprivation techniques – rather than, say, inserting a rod of glass into the prisoner’s genitals and breaking it (an example of real torture, courtesy of the Japanese).
Wouldn’t it be wonderful to live in a world where people used English words like “torture” in a meaningful fashion, and cared about its real victims? Instead of, you know, making sh*t up about the good guys.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 2:18 pm - January 11, 2009
(Or instead of pretending that McCain and the top Democrats in Congress somehow weren’t informed of Bush administration policy all along, and somehow didn’t bless it in a formal vote in 2006.)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 2:21 pm - January 11, 2009
The left has a habit of dumbing down language to advance their agenda. Torture used to mean extreme pain and the infliction of disfiguring injury. Now, it means turning the air conditioning too high.
Just like rape used to mean brutal, forced sex… now it just means, “I consented to sex, but changed my mind later… sometimes two or three days later when the jerk didn’t call me.”
Gawd, I hate the left. They trivialize the real victims of violence by letting a bunch of drama queens dumb down the language to fit whatever their grievance is.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 2:34 pm - January 11, 2009
‘Zakly. That’s gillie.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 2:42 pm - January 11, 2009
“Just like rape used to mean brutal, forced sex… now it just means, “I consented to sex, but changed my mind later… sometimes two or three days later when the jerk didn’t call me.†”
whaaaa?????
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 3:11 pm - January 11, 2009
Did you read the report?
Its more than just sleep deprevation.
Its torture as defined by all standards. Its your denial and refusal to accept that any republican president can do anything wrong that allowed it to happen.
Nice work.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 3:15 pm - January 11, 2009
Democrat Senator Dick Durbin defines torture: “On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold.”
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 3:49 pm - January 11, 2009
I just saw a report on mass graves being uncovered in Iraq. Children, 5 and 7 years old, executed by Saddam’s guards. Hundreds of thousands of people tortured (really tortured, the brutal disfiguring kind, not the “the air conditioning is too cold” kind) and murdered.
Leftists say taking this guy out of power “wasn’t worth it.”
But then they pretend to be upset because some terrorist got water poured in his nose.
I have nothing but contempt for their ilk.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 5:47 pm - January 11, 2009
Faux moral superiority.
The question is simple. Do you pour water up one mans nose to save the lives of 1,000, 100, 10 or even 1. Any answer other yes is immoral.
Comment by American Elephant — January 11, 2009 @ 6:01 pm - January 11, 2009
Equating water boarding with “water poured in his nose” shows the moral depravity of the right.
#33 So you say that induced hypotherma is not torture?
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 6:02 pm - January 11, 2009
#7, Leah I actually thought of miss milky glutes as I was writing that.
Comment by American Elephant — January 11, 2009 @ 6:03 pm - January 11, 2009
#35
That is not what happened. And to be honest, that only happens in your 24 induced fantasy world
We took people off the street who might have said once “I know Bin Ladin” and tortured them. We took farmers who were at the wrong place and the wrong time and tortured them.
MOST were innocent.
MOST were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
And the Bush admin tried to find ways to institutionalize this.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 6:08 pm - January 11, 2009
“Gawd, I hate the left”
As well as hating women who have been raped, qweers who have been bashed, racial minorities who have faced bigotry and foreigners, period. In other words, anyone who has ever had to experience something that you would rather deny. You are typical, heartless POS “conservative” who deserves to experience all those things that in your twisted mind are the result of “victim mentality”.
Comment by a different Dave — January 11, 2009 @ 6:25 pm - January 11, 2009
Gee, aren’t you glad adDave doesn’t stoop to name-calling and mass-generalizations of people like he’s always accusing NDT of doing.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 6:45 pm - January 11, 2009
Awww, poor Gillie, not even your Messiah agrees with you:
They were not innocents, they were caught on the field of battle, and the ones we non-torture “tortured” were people like Khaleid Sheihk Mohammad, whom we knew by nature of their position in the organization must know vital information.
The truth is we waterboarded and used other techniques that caused the poor aggrieved terrorists some discomfort, things like putting red marker ink on a woman’s fingers and telling the filth it was menstrual blood, or exposing them to, horror of horrors, the Israeli flag — you know the things hysterical immoral women like you and Andrew Sullivan refer to as “torture” — and got intelligence out of it that foiled actual plans to attack the United States.
And I hate to break the naive little bubble you live in, but it HAS been institutionalized by the United States Congress, despite all their political posturing.
Comment by American Elephant — January 11, 2009 @ 6:49 pm - January 11, 2009
And, we see gillie perfectly illustrating the faux-morality of the left. Setting the AC too low and creating the illusion of drowning are supposed to be completely equivalent to smashing someone’s fingers with a hammer.
Never mind that harsh interrogation is done to save lives, a far cry from the senseless brutality of real torture.
Saving innocent lives just isn’t worth it if it involves temporary discomfort to a terrorist. That’s leftist morality. Caring more about the comfort of terrorists than the preservation of innocent life.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 6:51 pm - January 11, 2009
Yeah, even gillie’s moonbat messiah is backing off the rhetoric.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 6:52 pm - January 11, 2009
Huh?
“temporary discomfort”
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 7:03 pm - January 11, 2009
And V
NO!!!!!
The torture was done just to see what they know.
Not to saves lives but instead fishing expeditions.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 7:06 pm - January 11, 2009
And AE most of the people we tortured were just people in the wrong place in the wrong time.
Not terrorists. No ticking bomb.
Just torture.
But I suppose it helps your poor conscience to think that.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 7:08 pm - January 11, 2009
Even the moonbat messiah is backing off the “wrong place, wrong time” BS.
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 7:17 pm - January 11, 2009
Gillie, Democrat Party leftists like yourself denied that the Vietnamese practiced torture on POWs when you could use it to smear John McCain.
Do you now admit that the Vietnamese tortured – and that therefore, your Democrat Party, including people like Jane Fonda and John Kerry, supported and endorsed governments that torture?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 7:18 pm - January 11, 2009
So you say that induced hypotherma is not torture?
if cutting off peoples’ fingers, which Saddam Hussein did on a mass scale, is not torture, as is claimed by gillie, Barack Obama, and the Democrat Party, why on earth would temporary induced hypothermia be?
That is, of course, if we were operating under the assumption that it was the action, and not the person doing it, that gillie cares about. Hence why he whines and screams about the US torturing people, but insists that John McCain was not tortured in Vietnam.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 7:21 pm - January 11, 2009
And one more thing: the Democrat Party and its syncophants like gillie scream that torture never produces reliable or useful information.
Then they argued, during the Presidential campaign, that since torture forced John McCain gave up classified and secret information, he should not be President.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 7:25 pm - January 11, 2009
Gee, aren’t you glad adDave doesn’t stoop to name-calling and mass-generalizations of people like he’s always accusing NDT of doing.
And what’s funny is that adDave, by his own definitions, is a bigot and a racist, since he’s complained here about an incompetent minority individual in his workplace and how that person isn’t fired because of their minority status.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 7:26 pm - January 11, 2009
(I acknowledge that arguing with a brainwashed obamamoonie like gillie is a waste of time, but the peeks into the leftist alternative reality are fascinating, in the same way a true-crime book about a serial killer is fascinating.)
Comment by V the K — January 11, 2009 @ 7:27 pm - January 11, 2009
This touches on an important point: Context does matter. Or purpose, if you prefer. Show me a doctor who does emergency field work to save a person from gangrene or flesh-eating bacteria, and I’ll show you someone who inflicts massive pain and disfiguring injury, *sometimes even without the patient’s consent*. But it isn’t torture, because it’s for a good purpose. And we can know that it really is for a good purpose, if and because it is *no more than necessary*. Show me a doctor who inflicts more pain or injury than is necessary to protect life, and then I’ll show you a torturer.
Real torture should be defined as something roughly like: the intentional infliction of pain or injury that is *unnecessary* to achieving a moral aim.
In the case of terrorists, the moral aim is to save (say) 10,000 people’s lives, rather than (say) the patient’s own life. It’s still a moral aim. If you can show that the CIA did *more than was necessary* to get KSM to spill the beans about his many horrific plots, then and only then, they would be torturers.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 7:54 pm - January 11, 2009
It’s fun when ADD shows his true colors as a raving, senseless hater.
ADD, sorry to disappoint you, but you won’t find any of those things you wildly listed from me or anyone I associate with on this blog. (Unless, of course, you’re projecting again and had yourself in mind 😉 )
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 7:59 pm - January 11, 2009
As for how techniques like keeping the AC too low, sleep deprivation, etc., square with my definition:
– They aren’t injuries.
– They are definitely uncomfortable, which is why they work. But discomfort is not pain (unless you’re a pampered Western leftist).
– They very definitely achieved a moral purpose – the saving of tens of thousands of lives – and, other than mistakes which were and are *against policy*, were apparently done carefully and with a strong consciousness of stopping as soon as the lives were duly saved.
As I’ve said before: I don’t deny that our CIA interrogators, military people, etc., make some mistakes. I deny that the mistakes are their/our policy. I deny, correctly, that torture is our policy. I acknowledge and affirm that America generally investigates and punishes the mistakes. Saddam didn’t. al Qaeda doesn’t. The Nazis and imperial Japanese didn’t. What the latter did, was/is real torture.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 8:18 pm - January 11, 2009
#55 -geez
Its not “uncomfortable” its torture. And many of the people were innocent. Further you fail to deal with the fact that these techniques can drive people insane. That is not temporary.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:22 pm - January 11, 2009
#53 most cases are fishing
not life or death.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:23 pm - January 11, 2009
#48 John McCain suffered under the VC.
He calls our actions torture
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:24 pm - January 11, 2009
#47
some at gitmo are bad
many are not
what’s your point?
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:24 pm - January 11, 2009
ROFL 🙂 Oh please, gillie, that is YOU. YOU are the one who uses the word “torture” to describe any treatment of terrorists you don’t like. You are the moral fraud here. You trivialize real victims of real torture. You don’t care one whit, gillie, about real victims of real torture.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 11, 2009 @ 8:30 pm - January 11, 2009
no not me
But a Bi partison report by the Senate
(Signed by 12 repubs)
John McCain
and the world
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:46 pm - January 11, 2009
Notice how leftist gillie refuses, flat-out REFUSES, to say that John McCain was tortured by the Viet Cong.
What that makes clear is that gillie has two separate sets of standards for what constitutes torture. Turning down the air conditioner is torture to the Democrat Party, but what was done to John McCain was not.
Again, it’s not actions that constitute torture to gillie; it’s who performs them. That’s why gillie and his Democrat Party endorse and support regimes like Saddam Hussein’s and the Viet Cong’s, but scream bloody murder about anything that the United States does.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 8:46 pm - January 11, 2009
Is McCain “trivializing” himself?
yes or no
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:47 pm - January 11, 2009
62
what the heck are you talking about?
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 8:48 pm - January 11, 2009
and the world
The world denied that what Saddam Hussein was doing was torture, just like the Democrat Party.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 8:48 pm - January 11, 2009
what the heck are you talking about?
Your refusal to say that John McCain was tortured by the Viet Cong.
That’s because you would then have to admit that the Democrat Party, such as John Kerry and Jane Fonda, supported and endorsed torture of American troops.
Just as you refuse to admit that Saddam Hussein tortured — mainly because you would then have to admit that the Democrat Party and “the world”, which opposed Saddam’s removal or punishment, has no problem whatsoever with torture.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 8:51 pm - January 11, 2009
One wonders if gillie thinks it was “torture” to the people who leaped to their death from the WTC, or were burned to death, or suffocated, or crushed by hundreds of thousands of tons of debris, or were stabbed/had their throats cut on the planes.
Too bad gillie is more interested in protecting the people whose stated goal it is to do that to more Americans than the American people themselves.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 8:55 pm - January 11, 2009
NDT
It looks like you also think torture is a bad thing.
Me too.
We agree.
And it looks like we agree our coutry tortures innocents.
So
Let’s try and hold Rummy and Bush accountable.
Can we agree to that?
Let’s do it together. I am so glad you finially are becoming a little more mentally mature.
Comment by gillie — January 11, 2009 @ 9:33 pm - January 11, 2009
You still don’t get it, gillie.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 11, 2009 @ 11:28 pm - January 11, 2009
Now you’re just projecting your lord BJ = spank bank material mentality onto us.
So when do we put gaia on trial?
Like who?
Like who?
As determined by who?
Like who?
Also, can you explain why liberals in congress are backpedalling so fiercely on the “torture” issue?
So let’s try and hold lord BJ, Janet Reno, Jimmuh etc. accountable.
Say, isn’t shooting up and burning down one’s church around them “torture”? Or is that just how liberals enforce the “separation of church and state”.
Please quit trying to insult us, gillie. The left has long standing love affairs with the world’s greatest torturers. Therefore, you’re full of shit and you can take your moral equivalency game and shove it sideways.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 12, 2009 @ 1:24 am - January 12, 2009
gillie, I’d prefer to hold you accountable for your various moral frauds. You know… like your making sh*t up. Or your not giving a flying crap about real victims of real torture, you America-hating phony.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 12, 2009 @ 1:47 am - January 12, 2009
12 Republicans out of how many? I’m supposed to be impressed….why?
And we’re supposed to believe the same folks who tell us that insignificant amounts of lead in toys from China is bad, but we should be forced to buy mercury filled lightbulbs from China?
We’re supposed to believe the same folks who piss and moan about “spying on Americans®”, but keep Baghdad Jim McDermott employed?
We’re supposed to believe the same folks who gave us the Valerie Wilson fraud?
We’re supposed to believe the same folks who covered up their involvement in Enron, Fan/Fred, Abramoff etc.?
We’re supposed to believe the same folks who promissed to improve our airline/airport security but gave up on it in exchange for a half mil donation to the DNC?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 12, 2009 @ 4:19 am - January 12, 2009
Exactly. These folks are frauds, including gillie.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 12, 2009 @ 10:54 am - January 12, 2009
71 what did I make up?
72 ….?…. so you are just deliberting keeping your head in the sand?
70 Murat Kurnaz, Khaled El-Masri, Maher Arar (technically done by Syria)
I could go on but I don’t have time
Comment by gillie — January 12, 2009 @ 11:06 am - January 12, 2009
Here, I’ll remind you. This isn’t an exhaustive list of your lies, but a down payment:
gillie, get help. You are really sick.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 12, 2009 @ 11:14 am - January 12, 2009
Yes, Gillie, that’s what you call it when you cause no pain and no damage and it only lasts a short while. Its temporary, and its uncomfortable.
Thats called accuracy in labeling, unlike the Democrat party who calls taking away workers right to a secret ballot “the employee freedom of choice act” and calls regulations restricting the speech of only broadcasters that disagree with them the “fairness doctrine”.
You really are mentally retarded arent you. Oh! its got the word war in it! therefore it represents Republicans!
Republicans have NEVER said war is peace, idiot. We say war is war and its hell and its unfortunately sometimes necessary in an evil world. We do believe, as has been proven by history, that the way to keep ourselves at peace is by having the biggest, strongest military on the planet. But there is a huge difference between “war is peace” and “peace through strength” that is apparently too nuanced for a mental midget such as yourself to understand.
DEMOCRATS, on the other hand, are the ones who are CURRENTLY telling Americans that capitalism, the name given economic freedom by Karl Marx, doesn’t work, that they are slaves to corporations, that taking more power away from individuals and giving it to the government, aka slavery, is the only answer.
And it is LIBERALS who over and over and over again insist that enlightenment comes from prohibiting their ideas from being challenged. The fairness doctrine which targets only conservative radio, preventing any ideas that challenge global warming, Darwinism, laws against hate speech, campus speech codes, attempts to criminalize challenges to global warming, etc, etc. And it is liberals who are constantly shouting down, throwing things at, boycotting, and otherwise trying to destroy speech and ideas they dont like. In other words, it is Liberals who advocate that ignorance is strength.
And while we’re on the topic of Orwell, what on Earth do you think “hate crimes” and “hate speech” ARE? They are thought crimes!
You are more of a blithering idiot than I thought if you think Orwell was warning against anybody but people like YOU who advocate giving the government more power over the individual.
Comment by American Elephant — January 12, 2009 @ 11:27 am - January 12, 2009
I cant figure out if youre a liar or an idiot. Even your Messiah, Obama, disagrees with you as I showed above. But by all means, please document their names and locations and conditions of their false arrests. I can wait.
Comment by American Elephant — January 12, 2009 @ 11:58 am - January 12, 2009
I cant figure out if you’re a liar or an idiot.
Can’t it be both?
Comment by V the K — January 12, 2009 @ 12:03 pm - January 12, 2009
For proof that republicans live in a cocoon please read comment #75
Comment by gillie — January 12, 2009 @ 6:04 pm - January 12, 2009
#76 “Republicans have NEVER said war is peace, idiot.”
You are right, republicans never said that. But please, let me explain to you what I was doing. I was using a few lines from a famous book to highlight how folks on the right use innocuous words to describe a horrible chapter in American History. They use those words like “discomfort” and such words in the hopes they can believe it and thus keep their conscience clear.
Sorry that went over your head, I didn’t mean for you to take it literally.
Comment by gillie — January 12, 2009 @ 6:10 pm - January 12, 2009
#76 “Republicans have NEVER said war is peace, idiot.”
You are right, republicans never said that. But please, let me explain to you what I was doing. I was using a few lines from a famous book to highlight how folks on the right use innocuous words to describe a horrible chapter in American History.
Sorry that went over your head, I didn’t mean for you to take it literally.
Comment by gillie — January 12, 2009 @ 6:10 pm - January 12, 2009
#77 unfortunately I have little time to do that. I apologize, I really do. If time permitted I would gladly help you in your search. But names, dates and other info are quite easy to find. Of course, I did you give three names of people, have you looked up them?
Break free of your Right Wing News Cocoon!
Comment by gillie — January 12, 2009 @ 6:13 pm - January 12, 2009
No need, If you could read, you’d see I not only “got” but already eviscerated your asinine non-point up above:
You see, its not Orwellian to call something what it is, Gillie. Its Orwellian to insist things are what they are not. Like pretending red marker ink is torture.
Yes, a whopping THREE people, the only evidence of any unpleasant treatment let alone harsh interrogation or torture is …. their testimony! No witnesses, no evidence. In fact the only evidence in existence that even pertains to the case is the al Qaeda training manual which instructs them all to make false claims of torture!
But of your three examples, one was detained by Canada, which you apparently don’t know is not part of the United States, one’s status was reviewed several times and classified as an enemy combatant each time, and only one was improperly detained by the US and the only evidence of any mistreatment is his say so.
Funny, isnt that exactly what Andrew Sullivan was advertising for on bareback.com?
Comment by American Elephant — January 12, 2009 @ 8:54 pm - January 12, 2009
I think you could have a more intelligent conversation with that bear hugger in that Discovery Chanel documentary a few years back. I think that clown fed himself and his “girlfriend” to the bears and it wouldn’t surprise me if gillie did something similar.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 13, 2009 @ 12:33 am - January 13, 2009
El-Masri means “The Egyptian”. He sounds like an international fighter – i.e., al Qaeda – who of course would make sh*t up. (not unlike gillie 😉 )
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 13, 2009 @ 12:46 am - January 13, 2009
No, he doesn’t support it–I think you know, but it didn’t sound much like sarcasm–he’s just like Ahmadinajsdldssdfoosdlksdlnsdsdncsoopsdpospewew in that he doesn’t hold up his own standards when it comes to genocide. Or like the Democrats when it comes to race.
Comment by Mitchell Blatt — January 13, 2009 @ 12:49 am - January 13, 2009
Say gillie, when you get some time from collecting food stamps to buy meth, could you explain to me where it’s written that the guests at Club Gitmo have to be charged with anything.
Furthermore, when Gitmo starts looking like this, this, this, this, this, or even this, please let me know.
Before that, though, I’m sure the liberal left will repudiate murderous bastards like “Uncle Joe” Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, Guevara, Castro, Chavez etc. right? No doubt you will castigate the liberal left for allowing the deaths of thousands in SE Asia just so they could advance their power grab?
Not to mention stripping Gen. Ashley Wilkes of his star he earned playing pocket pool while Rwandans died.
When you’re ready to do all that, get back to us. Otherwise, you just look like a bleeding gash.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 13, 2009 @ 5:21 am - January 13, 2009