In spite of everything I have written, regarding you, you misunderstand me, or you are attempting to misrepresent me, which strikes me as being moronic. Do you believe I am being insincere when I write that I believe you are a moronic sub-human cretin?

Faux Indignation?

Definition of INDIGNATION:
“Anger aroused by something unjust, unworthy, or mean”

It is your moronic thinking the arouses my anger, a thinking that is, in my heartfelt opinion, and most honest and sincere appraisal, unjust, unworthy, and mean, and it is you, by virtue of the fact that you are the one doing the moronic thinking, that I find, unworthy, unjust and mean. My anger is real, and the words “unworthy,” “unjust,” and “mean,” are far too inadequate to express my anger, and that is why I have called you a sub-human cretin, which I believe is a more accurate appraisal. Yes my anger is real, but it is an anger born of disgust and frustration, an anger not desirous of vengeance, but an anger astounded by stupidity.

Does it comfort you to believe I am being insincere when I state that I find you to be a sub-human cretin and a moron? Or are you simply attempting to misrepresent my clearly stated comments. I will not deny that making these kinds of comments amuses me, but let me assure you that I am sincere. It is moronic sub-human cretins like you who attempt to justify torture, mutilation, maiming, murder, and other assorted miseries.

Context, Definition

NOUN
1.
text surrounding word or passage: the words, phrases, or passages that come before and after a particular word or passage in a speech or piece of writing and help to explain its full meaning
2.
surrounding conditions: the circumstances or events that form the environment within which something exists or takes place
“The dispute needs to be viewed in its historical context.”
3.
E-COMMERCE data transfer structure: a data structure used to transfer electronic data to and from a business management system.

You can not claim to be contextual, when you are not contextual, unless perhaps, you are a moron.

Generally speaking, it is young and spoiled children who deny having their hand in the cookie jar, while having a hand is in the cookie jar.

You need to grow up, and much, much more.

If you wish to criticize me, and accuse me of being insulting, maybe I can help you; calling me an ass is very pedestrian and shows a moronic lack of creativity. The best criticism of me is that I have associated you with hapless morons, which is not fair, and an insult to morons.

“I would appreciate it if you would not censure me.”

-

More faux indignation.  Always the most predictable.

I left your context fully intact, WikiWiZer. - You’re an ass because you go out of your way to be an ass.

You’re now a petulant whiner.  Grow up.

Moron

When quoting me, I would appreciate it if you would not censure me. My first communication here was,

“Somewhere there is a 5th grader sitting at the back of the room raising his hand to ask, “Aren’t they both bad?” The poor child is destined to receive a failing grade because of his inability to distinguish between the Us’s and the thems.”

Not,

“Somewhere there is a 5th grader sitting at the back of the room raising his hand…’ - ‘The poor child is destined to receive a failing grade because of his inability to distinguish between the Us’s and the thems.”

Hoodoo, who do you think you’re foolin.’? Any self respecting hoodoo would have to agree that you are a moronic and dishonest hoodoo. You didn’t copy and paste, you did some editing didn’t you? The 5th grader’s question that you edited out, has been the crux of this non-debate.

You write:

“My point on this thread, from the beginning, was your hypocrisy on this issue.  You very specifically used the post 9/11 security protocols as your evidence, you proof positive, of an evil, white, southern, new-conservative cabal in the White House plotting to control the globe.
Well, you’re not saying that now after Obama has both retained and strengthened those protocols you found the most damning and dangerous.”

Either you are unaware, and making an assertion without support, which is moronic, or you are an intentionally lying moron. I have been saying lo these many weeks that Obama is guilty of war crimes. I have been saying that Obama retained those protocols, but the truth is that regarding the protocols of torture, Obama has weakened those protocols not strengthened them. Obama and Bush both have blood on their hands has been my contention, or to put it in the jargon of a 5th Grader, they are both bad. Your argument is moronic.

I’ve noted that you have not endorsed McCain’s recent pronouncement regarding the false assertions about the efficacy of torture, nor McCain’s assertion that torture is immoral. This lack of endorsement leads me to conclude that you are a moron, but I believe that simply calling you a moron is too kind, be grateful that I don’t call you a sub-human cretin.

McCain has asserted that the dividing line between middle class and rich is 5 million dollars. McCain has said that he is uncertain about whether he has five or six expensive homes. McCain seems to believe that he is an excellent interpreter of the Beachboy’s, hit “Barbara Ann” first perfomed by The Regents in 1961, long before the U.S. heavy involvement in the Vietnam War, but I digress. Before John McCain failed to dodge Vietnamese missiles in Vietnam, he was associated with the destruction and damage of U.S. Aircraft, which he admitted was the result of “Dangerous Clowning” in one incident. There is an interesting accounting of McCain’s incidents at fact check.org. McCain has been called a War Hero because of his suffering during the Vietnam War. My contention has always been that there were no U.S. War Heroes in Vietnam, only a lot of morons and hapless victims, but that’s just me. I believe that McCain is a moron, who did develop an elementary understanding of torture because of his experiences in Vietnam, an elementary understanding well understood by your average 5th grader, but apparently, not by a moron like you.

“Will the moron also offer his endorsement of McCain’s latest pronouncement? If so, this non-debate is over.”

-

If the morons finally agrees with you the issue is over.  An interesting insight into the way you think.

My point on this thread, from the beginning, was your hypocrisy on this issue.  You very specifically used the post 9/11 security protocols as your evidence, you proof positive, of an evil, white, southern, new-conservative cabal in the White House plotting to control the globe.

Well, you’re not saying that now after Obama has both retained and strengthened those protocols you found the most damning and dangerous.

Even President Obama’s spokesman has said, what you call torture, was NOT off the table when the president felt it necessary. 

But policy has changed alright.  Less capture, less GITMO, less military commissions, fewer concerns of habeas corpus petitions and due process. But a ten fold increase in summary executions.

“I now aver that he (morons) joins the ranks of those posters I refuse to read, much less respond.”

-

Outstanding, Manchild.

A singularly brilliant idea.  Absolutely outstanding!

We’ll never agree on much of anything of substance and you too are one whom makes me feel ill seeing how you treat people you disagree with. 

Sincerely there is nothing you can say to me that would leave me feeling offended.  You waste your time.

Outstanding!

JDmysticDJ, May 13 at 10:26 am

Nice effort but talking to that slimer is a waste of time and ,worse, keeps us from addressing things much more important than his poor toilet training. I now aver that he joins the ranks of those posters I refuse to read, much less respond.

Gee, I feel better already.

Msytic,

You derive terrific pleasure in being an ass.

Here is your beginning acrid post in reply to my open question.

“Somewhere there is a 5th grader sitting at the back of the room raising his hand…’ - ‘The poor child is destined to receive a failing grade because of his inability to distinguish between the Us’s and the thems.”

You were an ass from the start.  You were a coward from the beginning.  Throughout this entire thread you avoided, with terrific pleasure and pride, standing as an adult with something to add.  You actually derive pleasure from being an ass.

From the first time you replied to one of my posts I saw how treat others.  Shame on me for indulging you.

You’re an ass because you go out of your way to be an ass.

Grow up.

Having participated in this non-debate, I am aware that the substance of the non-debate had to do with the 5th graders question, “Aren’t they both bad.”? During this non-debate assertions were made that were offered without source, and a request for sources was ridiculed in a most moronic fashion. Now cogent arguments critical of Obama voiced by the Left, are being used by someone from the Right, in order to give credence to the Right perspective, conveniently ignoring the debate about both being bad, which made the debate a non-debate.

However, during this non-debate, one thing was made perfectly clear, that being the moronic nature of right-wing LOLs.

The comment: “If Manchild took the time to pull a lever in November 2008 he likely didn’t pull that lever for McCain/Palin,” substantiates the contention of moronic thinking.

As an aside, I’ll offer this bit of information, which will be much hated and the subject for derision because of its factual nature, and because it is not an unsupported assertion.

“In 2005, McCain led the effort in the Senate to pass the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), which made the use of torture illegal. While claiming that he had succeeded in passing a categorical ban on torture, however, McCain meekly accepted two White House maneuvers that diluted his legislation to the point of meaningless: (1) the torture ban expressly applied only to the U.S. military, but not to the intelligence community, which was exempt, thus ensuring that the C.I.A.—the principal torture agent for the United States—could continue to torture legally; and (2) after signing the DTA into law, which passed the Senate by a vote of 90–9, President Bush issued one of his first controversial “signing statements” in which he, in essence, declared that, as President, he had the power to disregard even the limited prohibitions on torture imposed by McCain’s law.
McCain never once objected to Bush’s open, explicit defiance of his cherished anti-torture legislation, preferring to bask in the media’s glory while choosing to ignore the fact that his legislative accomplishment would amount to nothing. Put another way, McCain opted for the political rewards of grandstanding on the issue while knowing that he had accomplished little, if anything, in the way of actually promoting his “principles.”
A virtual repeat of that sleight-of-hand occurred in 2006, when McCain first pretended to lead opposition to the Military Commissions Act (MCA), only thereafter to endorse this most radical, torture-enabling legislation, almost single-handedly ensuring its passage. After insisting that compelled adherence to the anti-torture ban of the Geneva Conventions was a nonnegotiable item for him, McCain ultimately blessed the MCA despite the fact that it left it to the President to determine, in his sole discretion, which interrogation methods did or did not comply with the Conventions’ provisions.
Thus, once again, McCain created a self-image as a principled torture opponent with one hand, and with the other, ensured a legal framework that would not merely fail to ban, but would actively enable, the President’s ability to continue using interrogation methods widely considered to be torture. Indeed, by casting himself as the Supreme Arbiter of torture morality, McCain’s support for this torture-enabling law became Bush and Cheney’s most potent instrument for legalizing the very interrogation methods that McCain, for so long, flamboyantly claimed to oppose.”

Finally, I am in absolute agreement with McCain’s latest pronouncement regarding torture. Will the moron also offer his endorsement of McCain’s latest pronouncement? If so, this non-debate is over. 5th Grader one (won), moron zero.

“Justice has been done.’  ‘We will be true to the values that make us who we are.”

Those values are what led the president to pronounce justice done — no trial, no court authorization, and, for once, “habeas corpus” really meant that our government had the body, a corpse to identify, not a defendant to process.

Debate what?.......LOL

Eugene Robinson, along with the collection of media pundits on MSNBC and the New Tork Times, call this president’s tactics -a bullet in the brain- “Bold”, Brave, and “Brilliant”.

Debate what?.......LOL

After Obama became President of the United States, after winning the Nobel Peace Prize, after two years of condemning the use of water to scare the admitted tactician behind the Sept. 11 attacks, the policy of summary execution of “suspects” increased ten fold.

Debate what?.......LOL

If Manchild took the time to pull a lever in November 2008 he likely didn’t pull that lever for McCain/Palin.

Debate what?.......LOL

-

Whaaaaaaaaa GoRight won’t supply us with links!

...................LOL

Debate what?.......LOL

Go Right Young Man, May 13 at 4:42 am Link to this comment

Debate this, Manchild.

Debate what, idiot?

You sink lower and lower, making it more obvious with each and every new effort that you really have no grasp of facts, positions or reality. Who the fuck supports Obama you miserable jackwagon, who but you and your ilk support torture, if only by hints and allegation. You prove, time and again, that you cannot hold two thoughts in your head at the same time. Nor can you follow a thread or post and speak to its content. Instead you bounce along like some errant rubber ball. You are the weakest link, certainly.

Speaking of links, was your mother frightened by one while pregnant with you? You might understand, but do not, that your refusal to post links to what you claim are articles or facts or anything else is a ringing condemnation of your posts as well as a strong clue to your mental instability.

I am reminded of a song lyric, ” Ill be glad when your dead you rascal you”. The world will also be a better place for your leaving.

Debate this, Manchild.

-

Torture Is Still Torture

After Mr. Obama took office summary executions of suspected enemies of the U.S. has increased ten fold.  No capture.  No interrogation.  No due process. - Eugene Robinson calls this “brave” and “bold”.

On the flip side of hypocrisy Eugene is still whining, with furious and righteous indignation, about the CIA using water to scare terrorists.

Go Right Young Man, May 12 at 7:09 am Link to this comment

From this statement of mine:

A statement ( by Grimy) that makes it so much easier to support drone attacks, torture and invasion. Such eloquence would have u believe that a family man or woman anywhere in the world has nothing in common with a family man or woman here in the USA. Grimy proposes that they do not, as do we, care about food on the table, roof over ones head, the future of the children, etc.,etc.,etc.

The jackwagon gets this bit of distortion and moronitude ( new word alert):

That is correct, Manchild.  Nearly no one on the planet is concerned with food, a roof, or the future of their children etc., etc..

On the other hand roughly six billion human beings are following your every word on this Web space.

You must understand that this is really truly dumb even by your own almost nonexistent standards. Now I do realize why you never debate, always choosing to run away to your next prevarication. You simply ain’t got it in you to deal with facts and the opinions of others without betraying your ultimate stupidity.

I do feel rather sorry for you actually, you’ve no idea how low you appear to be.

JDmysticDJ, May 12 at 9:50 am my esteemed friend, back atcha….

Yeah, but I was comparing this particular post to his history of such. This one rated higher on the less stench scale. Hmm higher by being less smelly.

By ardee, May 12 at 3:34 am Link to this comment
Go Right Young Man, May 11 at 7:21 pm

“What an interesting post, for a change. Yet ,eloquent as it may be, it doesn’t enumerate any reason for your continual lies, distortions and refusal to back them up with links.”

=====================================================

Ardee, my esteemed friend, it grieves me to have to disagree with you, but I don’t think there is anything interesting or eloquent in GRYMie’s posts. By my appraisal his posts are simply moronic.

In order to heighten awareness, and improve knowledge and understanding, I’ll point out that the actual number of deaths resulting from Western intrusions into Muslim lands is into the kazillions and bazillions of gazillions.

Anyone who believes the kazillions and bazillions of gazillions number is disputable and not solely attributable to the West, should look it up for themselves, and wake the hell up! Granted, our bastard did contribute to the kazillions and bazillions of gazillions, and our enemy east of our bastard, who was our bastard’s enemy, contributed significantly as well, but I’m getting too technical here.

Kazillions and bazillions of gazillions! DO YOU HERE ME! KAZILLIONS AND BAZILLIONS OF GAZILLIONS! WAKE THE HELL UP!  (You could look it up.)

That is correct, Manchild.  Nearly no one on the planet is concerned with food, a roof, or the future of their children etc., etc..

On the other hand roughly six billion human beings are following your every word on this Web space.

-

I have extra Obama*Killed*Osama Potholders, Tea Cozies, Air Fresheners and, just for you, Double-Knit - extra small - Mitten and Scarf sets.

I’m sorry I have no Easy-Bake-Ovens.  I opted against the mercury bulbs the President of GE, I’m sorry I mean President Obama, has forced into every nursery across America.

I do have a few Lockheed D-21B ramjet drones if you’re interested.  Act now though.  Obama’s CIA and Defense Dept. have been buying them up as quickly as the mittens.

-

I invite you to point out which of the above is a lie. 

Addendum to comments of the Grimy one

You have yet to figure out that there are nearly 200 other nations on the planet and nearly all believe almost nothing you believe in.

A statement that makes it so much easier to support drone attacks, torture and invasion. Such eloquence would have u believe that a family man or woman anywhere in the world has nothing in common with a family man or woman here in the USA. Grimy proposes that they do not, as do we, care about food on the table, roof over ones head, the future of the children, etc.,etc.,etc.

Most folks, I trust, look to common ground, for reasons to bring us together. The excretion ,however subtley , tells us that we are just sooo different. Perhaps his words here, as noted, are a mistake in interpretation. But, if mistake it is, the error occurs due to his past history of almost exclusively bullshit.

Go Right Young Man, May 11 at 7:21 pm

What an interesting post, for a change. Yet ,eloquent as it may be, it doesn’t enumerate any reason for your continual lies, distortions and refusal to back them up with links.

Who do you think to fool here with your history of slime?

Damn…..I forgot to ask.  In homage to the lessor of two evils if you give me your address I’ll send you an Obama*Killed*Osama crew neck. - On the reverse it says…Never Scare A Terrorist With Water

You’ll be a hit any Wednesday, WikWiZ.

I’m not a moron.  I’m a morons. 

I can hold a conversation about the lives of everyday Persians or Poles with never a mention of the United States.  I know that in most Iranian homes, when the subject does come up, the talk is more often about how WikiWizRD can purchase a whole chicken in any grocery store within 10 miles of his home.  And how he’ll work not quite an hour for that chicken. - I hope you find a way to grasp that.

You, on the other hand, would stand in an Iranian’s courtyard and call him or her names while throwing a few, very odd, tantrums about the evil of those who produce the fowl.  And you would do it with such gusto and terrific pride.

WikiWizard gets animated.  You’re SPIKE Tv.

-

You’re an idiot, young man.  In fact, you’re a Wiki-Idiot.  You have yet to figure out that there are nearly 200 other nations on the planet and nearly all believe almost nothing you believe in. - Apart from the universal understanding of how a person can be an ass.  And do it with such flare and pride. - 

You’re also a coward hiding behind a sense of anonymity.  There is nothing you could utter to me or about me that would find me offended.  I am, however, completely appalled by your treatment of others. 

Go Right Young Man are the words of my Father.  He was never political.

UNHRC - 1.9 to 2.8 million. Find it yourself and wake the hell up.

Truly.  All my luck goes out to you.

GRYMie

Not only are you a moron, but you are cruel as well. You have left me alone, and have deprived me of the pleasure of perusing the links and sources regarding United Nations estimates.  Calling you a moron here on this thread has been a joy, but I’m looking forward to the joy of calling you a moron on other threads.

Just a minor point, but you should be aware that “morons” is the plural of “moron.” Your comment should read, “…referring to others as ‘morons’…” not, “…referring to others as ‘moron’…” A small point but I wish to be helpful whenever possible.

In addition to wishing you luck, I wish you well. I have been wishing you well lo these many weeks and months, but I have come to the conclusion that you most probably will never get well. Sadly, there doesn’t seem to be a cure for the malady of moronic thinking in your case.

It’s always wise to get a second opinion, so I sought the opinion of a bright and well mannered 5th grader. This 5th grader agreed to study our exchanges, and this 5th grader commenced to do so in a studious manner. After reading for a while this 5th grader exclaimed, “Why can’t he see that they are both bad?!” After the 5th grader completed studiously reading, the 5th grader seemed to be in awe, finally exclaiming, “Wow! He really is a moron!

Mystic,

I’ve recently noticed that you make a habit of referring to others as moron when you find that they cannot subscribe to your worldview.

In all good conscience I cannot encourage such behaviors.

I wish you luck in all things.

GRYMie

Correction:

Copernicus thought the Sun was the center of the Universe, not the Apex. Also, most would not consider the Sun and the United States to be the same thing. my bads.

Let me offer this piece of wisdom. Flippancy can appear moronic.

GRYMie

“Any discussion of the human effects of United Nations sanctions on Iraq with no mention of Saddam Hussein can never be considered “truth”.  Yes?  The “truth” you present keeps within a very narrow focus on the United States. Yes?”

Actually, my focus was on the deaths in Iraq caused by the U.S. and the United Kingdom who, being members of the U.N Security Council were in the position to, and did veto humanitarian aid to the people of Iraq. That is the truth you ignore. I’ve related this information to you before, but you continue to ignore this truth.

“We disagree that the U.S. is the center and apex of the universe.  So you see, our truths are only true from each respective desk.  What you myopically call lies is a failure to come to terms with those who honestly disagree.  I applaud your passion, however.”

I don’t recall ever asserting that the U.S. is the center of the Universe, you must be confusing me with Copernicus. I have only asserted the U.S. is responsible, for what it is responsible for.

I have a rare talent, not only am I able to identify lies when I hear them, I am also able to identify lies when I see them. This talent is sometimes a burden, a burden that doesn’t allow for the ignorant bliss sometimes caused by a willful myopia. You have demonstrated that this bliss is something you enjoy.

Having been an entertainer, I have learned that applause is not as desirable as cheering, applause is frequently subdued, and an indication of disapproval, rather than enthusiastic approval. In the future I would prefer an appropriate cheering from you.
 
“If I may?  What role did China play in U.N. sanctions over Iraq and the reported deaths of hundreds of thousands of children due to illness and starvation?”

You may. China approved of sanctions early on, but disapproved of sanctions as time passed, and the deaths of children became apparent. China, much to its credit, did not veto humanitarian aid as the U.S. and The United Kingdom did. Forgive me; apparently you have noticed the reported deaths of hundreds of thousands of children due to illness and starvation?” Having noticed the reports, does that mean you have noticed the reality? It appears to me that your qualification of the reality, as being merely reports, says a great deal about your bliss causing willful myopia.
 
“The United Nations has estimated the number of human deaths caused by Saddam Hussein during his term as President of Iraq.  What is that estimate?

Please refer me to that United Nations estimate. Information I have estimates Saddam’s murders of his own people at 200,000. Iraq’s war with Iran is fraught with complexity and accusations of complicity for deaths, including the deaths of Kurds.

“Let me share with you upfront that I’ll not follow any links you may share.  Nor will I read anything from Wikipedia.  I simply wish to understand what you know of China and Saddam Hussein.”

You won’t allow? I have a mind to provide links, and readings from Wikipedia about what defines a moron. Actually arrogant moron would be more applicable, but I doubt that links, or Wikipedia would be that moron specific.

I have never asserted that Saddam Hussein was anything but a brutal dictator. I’ll now assert that Saddam Hussein won an award from U.N.E.S.C.O. for providing Universal Healthcare to his people. Which does not at all compensate for his villainy, but an unbiased appraisal of villainy will show many other villains, not noticed by myopic morons.

Don’t forget to provide those United Nations estimates, replete with links and sources.

Mystic, - “Ignoring the truths.”

-

Any discussion of the human effects of United Nations sanctions on Iraq with no mention of Saddam Hussein can never be considered “truth”.  Yes?  The “truth” you present keeps within a very narrow focus on the United States. Yes?

We disagree that the U.S. is the center and apex of the universe.  So you see, our truths are only true from each respective desk.  What you myopically call lies is a failure to come to terms with those who honestly disagree.  I applaud your passion, however.

If I may?  What role did China play in U.N. sanctions over Iraq and the reported deaths of hundreds of thousands of children due to illness and starvation? 

The United Nations has estimated the number of human deaths caused by Saddam Hussein during his term as President of Iraq.  What is that estimate?

- Let me share with you upfront that I’ll not follow any links you may share.  Nor will I read anything from Wikipedia.  I simply wish to understand what you know of China and Saddam Hussein.

Thanks for giving me the title. You’re much too kind. Actually, there is no wizardry involved, nearly anyone can do it. The truths listed there are available to all. If there is any wizardry at all, it pertains to ignoring the truths revealed there, but I wouldn’t call that wizardry, although it is remarkable, but really, ignoring takes no talent or intellect at all; any moron can do it.

Mystic

You are, with little doubt, the WikiWizard.

“Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: ’We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?’”

“Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: ‘I think this is a very hard choice, but the price—we think the price is worth it.’”

—60 Minutes (5/12/96)

Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark: 1.5 million (includes sanctions, bombs and other weapons, depleted uranium poisoning).

British Member of Parliament George Galloway: “a million Iraqis, most of them children.”

Economist Michael Spagat: “very likely to be [less than] than half a million children.”

The numbers are in dispute, but by all measurements the numbers are large.

By David Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 11, 2006

“A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.”

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“On Friday, 14 September 2007, ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, published estimates of the total war casualties in Iraq since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.[1] At over 1.2 million deaths (1,220,580), this estimate is the highest number published so far. From the poll margin of error of +/-2.5% ORB calculated a range of 733,158 to 1,446,063 deaths. The ORB estimate was performed by a random survey of 1,720 adults aged 18+, out of which 1,499 responded, in fifteen of the eighteen governorates within Iraq, between August 12 and August 19, 2007.[2][3] In comparison, the 2006 Lancet survey suggested almost half this number (654,965 deaths) through the end of June 2006. The Lancet authors calculated a range of 392,979 to 942,636 deaths.
On 28 January 2008, ORB published an update based on additional work carried out in rural areas of Iraq. Some 600 additional interviews were undertaken September 20 to 24, 2007. As a result of this the death estimate was revised to 1,033,000 with a given range of 946,000 to 1,120,000.[4][5]”

GRYMie highlights actions of the most extreme in order to demonstrate that Muslims are bad, while the 5th Grader asks, “Aren’t they both bad?” GRYMie pushes fear and hate, fear and hate that falsely justify death and misery. GRYMie is a moron.

Mr. Hedges believes Muslims are under verbal attack by racist Westerners.  We should examine that.

-

Egypt: churches attacked by angry Muslims
May 8, 2011 ...

More churches attacked in Egypt, military sides with Muslims April 10, 2011

Indonesia: 700 churches attacked in past decade Oct 26, 2010 ...

Third Church Attacked as Pakistani Extremists Declare War Over ...Mar 30, 2011 ...

Churches attacked in Mosul. Christians Kidnapped and Injured Dec. 7, 04

Fourth Malaysian church attacked in ‘Allah’ feud Jan 10, 2010 ...

Three Priests Killed in Attack on Baghdad Church | Catholic Exchange Nov 3, 2010 ...

Churches attacked in Indonesia - The Irish Times - Tue, Feb 08, 2011 Feb 8, 2011 ...

Catholic church attacked in Turkey | Armenia News Feb 15, 2011 ...

-

I don’t see Westerners blowing up Mosques and I have never seen a church in Riyadh.

You have to love those Americans wrapped in a flag carring a cross who believe in everything thing nation was founded against.

Can you guess who they are?

http://www.antifascistencyclopedia.com/allposts/u-s-government-musters-squads-of-propaganda-comment-trolls

“Torture, missles and bombs may break my bones (But names can never hurt me.)”

That’s a little bit of wisdom I learned from a 5th grader. You should learn a lesson from this 5th grader.

Just because you’re a moron who gets called a moron, doesn’t mean a war will be fought, does it? A moron who is called a moron has several options I’ll suppose, two of which would be recognizing their moronic behavior, or starting a war to avoid recognizing their moronic behavior. The second example of an option strikes me as being moronic, but it is not an option uncommon to morons.

As I recall, the very first words I said to you way back when, were (Or is it was) “Hoodoo, who do you think you’re foolin’,”  or words to that effect. I’m a consecrated boy, my momma loved me, she loved me etc. I feel sorry for your momma; it must have been hard to love a moron.

I must have been operating under a misapprehension, I have always thought that being a moron was a sure sign of a week intellect, but according to dictionary definition, “A moron is a person who is incapable of being smarter than a 5th grader, so maybe my apprehension was correct.

Let me help you to do better at insulting me. Seeing as how you didn’t say anything with a glimmer of profundity, I have proven my obstinate ignorance by responding to you. Work with it, but don’t mimic it.

Finally, I’ll have to give you a few points for the not being able to think and stand as an adult comment. It’s a suggestion that I’m retarded in some way isn’t it? I’ll have to admit that that was (Or is it were) a pretty clever comment, coming from a moron, and I have to admit that you have angered me with that one. Luckily for you, I’m not a moron, and I won’t be firing any cruise missiles your way. Even the average 5th grader wouldn’t waste cruise missiles on a moron.

(Damn! My life is hell! I’m now taking the advice of a moron about trying to do better. I’m hoping that I did better this time.)

Mystic - “My belief is that you and yours, are, were, and was more dangerous.”

-

Of course you do.  That emotion is all too common.

I hope you learn well that your over-burdened use of childish insults is a sure sign of a weak intellect.  You debase yourself and appear unready to think and stand as an adult.

I will remind you that your very first words to me, which were unsolicited, was a veritable tidal-wave of insults and profanity.  All because I think differently.

You are one of the reasons wars are fought.  I believe you can do better.

GRYMie

I’ll agree that attempting to defend myself from the charges of a moronic moron is ignorant, so I’ll give you that. Also the laws of grammar are defined; most any 5th grader knows that to be true.

The trouble with attempting to communicate with a moron is that it becomes necessary to disassemble (Take apart) what one has said, in an attempt to get understanding from morons. However I should apologize, clearly you were not insinuating that I was attempting to conceal what I had written and said, or were you? The difficulty of communicating with a moron is compounded when that moron is dishonest.

The fact is, I have always claimed the security protocols practiced by the Obama administration was, (or is it were,) dangerous. My belief is that you and yours, are, were, and was more dangerous.

Unless you have anything with the slightest glimmer of profundity to offer, I’ll cease my ignorant attempt to get a lying moron, not to be moronic.

Mystic,

The word I chose was disassemble because I meant disassemble. Dissemble means to be false or conceal.  That was never my intention.

An vs A. - Now you’re wanting to argue over, what I find to be, your odd use of the English language. - Thank you, no.  Not the least bit interested in such inanity.

Neo means new.  Please get that much straight.

You are fond of referring to people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and others as “New-Conservatives”.  It’s odd.

-

I could not possibly care any less how you may disassemble a conversation.  The truth is that you have been terribly misguided in claiming that the security protocols which Obama adheres to today was a sign of an White, Southern, Christian, New-Conservative cabal in the White House attempting to control the planet.

Not only has the Obama Administration kept nearly all the same protocols in place, the president has elected to expand and strengthen those protocols which you once claimed was evil.  Now you’re claiming those same protocols are not so dangerous under a different administration.

Hypocrisy or complete ignorance?  Which is it?

GRYMie

“Mystic,
I do congratulate you on elevating yourself to the heights of history’s “great philosophers and moralists”.
While I’m not as impressed with you as you are, your self-confidence is noted.”

I did not elevate myself to the heights of great philosophers and moralists, or the 5th graders, but I am confident that you are on a lower level than the great philosophers, the 5th graders and I, on moral issues, because you have blatantly exposed yourself as being not only on a lower level than the great philosophers, the 5th graders and I; you have placed yourself on a sub-human level on these issues, by my humble appraisal.

“Mystic,

“Disassemble all you wish.  The issue is not the behaviors you may find moral or immoral today.  The issue is what you wrote here for years.”

The word is dissemble, not disassemble, you moron! Is it any wonder that you were unable to comprehend what I was writing here for all these years?

“The fact is the security protocols being used by the Obama Administration was, according to you, proof-positive of an White, Southern, Christian, “New-Conservative” cabal in the White House attempting to control the planet.”

Protocols were, not was, you moron! If I had ever commented about a White, Southern, Christian, New-Conservative cabal I would have written “a” instead of “an” and Neoliberal, or Neoconservative instead of New-Conservative, you moron!

“In the study of international relations, neoliberalism refers to a school of thought which believes that nation-states are, or at least should be, concerned first and foremost with absolute gains rather than relative gains to other nation-states. This theory is often mistaken with neoliberal economic ideology, although both use some common methodological tools, such as game theory.”

There is a New-Conservative species of Conservatives who are attempting to control the planet, but their immediate concern is controlling the Presidency and the U.S. Congress. Neoconservatives and neoliberals have in fact publically written and spoken about their belief that the U.S. should attempt to control the planet, and their influence on the former South Texas President, and his administration, is a matter of the public record. Neoliberal/Neoconservative thinkers are not exclusive as to race, but their numbers are heavily weighted towards the white race. Pseudo-Christians just came along for the ride, while casting their votes for any conservative pseudo-Christians available.
“Obviously you had no idea what you were talking and writing about.  Obviously you had simply been mimicking what you had from heard others.”

Obviously you are a moron! I may have been in agreement with cogent intellectuals and moralists, and I have quoted reputable sources, but I did not mimic anyone. You on the other hand have parroted morons verbatim. I did point out what neoliberals and neoconservatives were saying, writing, and doing, but that is not mimicry, suggesting that it is, is truly moronic.

I have continuously offered my opinion that Obama is a lesser war criminal, but a war criminal just the same, and that in terms of foreign policy and national security issues, Obama has demonstrated that his policies and beliefs are neoliberal, economically and internationally.

Mystic,

I do congratulate you on elevating yourself to the heights of history’s “great philosophers and moralists”.

While I’m not as impressed with you as you are, your self-confidence is noted.

Mystic,

Disassemble all you wish.  The issue is not the behaviors you may find moral or immoral today.  The issue is what you wrote here for years.

The fact is the security protocols being used by the Obama Administration was, according to you, proof-positive of an White, Southern, Christian, “New-Conservative” cabal in the White House attempting to control the planet. 

Obviously you had no idea what you were talking and writing about.  Obviously you had simply been mimicking what you had heard from others.

Mr. Grym

I need to be careful in using satire; there are always those such as yourself whose intellect is so limited that they are unable to recognize or understand satire.

I firmly believe that most 5th graders would understand that just because Barackie is doing something bad now, that doesn’t mean that it was O.K. when Georgie was doing something bad.

( To the best of my knowledge, the great philosophers and moralists, did not spend a lot of time debating which was best, a bullet in the brain or torture, the answer I think is a given, which would be mutually agreed upon by the great philosophers and moralists, and by fifth graders. A bullet in the brain and torture are both “Bad” you moron! )

I agree that Robinson is being hypocritical from a moral perspective, while you are totally vacuous from a moral perspective.

“Obviously people such as Mr. Mystic had absolutely no idea what they were talking and writing about for several years.
I believe we should all make this a teachable moment.”

No!  The great philosophers and moralists, the 5th graders, and I, new exactly what we were writing, thinking, and talking about; it is you who was, and is, in need of an elementary lesson and the realization that you had no idea what you were writing and talking about for several years.

Eugene, there’s something sickening about your phrase:  “... the victory of cherished American values.” particularly in the case of the assassina-
tion of an old man holed up in a secret hide-out next door to a military compound in a foreign country allegedly our “ally”.  One scarcely knows where to begin in offering a critique of such inter-related hypocricies..

Suffice it to say that, although assassination always stinks, its sanction—no, its glorification—is particularly smelly in view of the tens of thousands of innocent old men, women and children who have died in wars conducted in two countries under the pretext of “huntine bin Laden” with personal revenge the primary motive—as though the death of one man could ever in the least compensate for 9/ll. 

Bin Laden simply served as a personalized focus for arousing a desire for violent revenge in order to justify two aggressive wars, and still counting. What’s even more reprehensible is that the wars were probably conducted much more for resources than to “get even” with Bin Laden for 9/11—the ostensible reason.

We are enmeshed in a web of self-serving lies and false justifications not one whit different from those used to attack us—oppositional myths of ourselves as the abused “good guys” and others we have offended in the past (offenses which we insist on ignoring), who are also moved to “get even” with us “bad buys” for our offenses against them. It’s a sick, interlocking pattern of behavior—deadly tit for tat in which both are wrong and borh insist they are right.  If it doesn’t change, the human race is doomed.

Excellent article by Eugene Robinson.

Torture is both morally repugnant and ineffective. For evidence of this, review the techniques of Hanns Scharff, Germany’s most effective interrogator during WWII.

Scharff was opposed to torture on both moral and practical grounds.

To get POWS to talk, Scharff set himself up as the detainee’s friend and defender. He used good food, good beer (yes, German beer is really, really good), friendship, and storytelling to glean information from even the most tight-lipped POWS.

Usually, the POWS never even realized they had divulged important information.

A typical approach, after Scharff had gained the POW’s confidence, was to complain to the POW about how incompetent or stupid the German High Command’s strategies and tactics were. The POW, not to be outdone, would answer, “Oh yeah? Let me tell you about some of the crap I’VE had to put up with!”

Scharff would get information about the capabilities of allied weapons by saying something like, “You know, you Americans have really great tanks. I wish ours were made as well as yours.”

The POW would shake his head, and tell Scharff about all the problems our tanks had (and in WWII, our tanks really were inferior to the Germans’). The same conversations would be held regarding capabilities of our airplanes, cannon, rifles—you name it.

The CIA, by the way, has studied and used Scharff’s techniques. When they REALLY want to get information, these are the techniques they use.

So, one may ask—why does our heroic government torture, when they know, deep down inside, that it is both immoral and impractical?

Could it be that there is something deeply wrong, psychologically, with people who believe they have the ability and destiny to rule the world from Washington DC? Napoleonic complex, anyone?

Could it be that our leaders are deeply disturbed, psychologically speaking? That, at some level, they engage in torture because they LIKE IT?

Your guess is as good as mine.

In March 2010 Obama appointee, Harold Koh, outlined for the first time the Obama administration’s legal justifications under international law for the “targeted killings of non-state actors.”

Prior to 2008 this protocol was proof positive of an White, Southern, Christian, “New-Conservative” cabal in the White House attempting to control the planet.

Obviously people such as Mr. Mystic had absolutely no idea what they were talking and writing about for several years.

I believe we should all make this a teachable moment.

YeahBut, May 7 at 12:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

While I don’t totally agree with the reasons for war in Iraq, there WERE WMDs at one point.  Ask the 5000 people who died and 10000 who were effected.

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Your half truth here is living proof of that.

Firstly, the chemical weaponry to which you refer was supplied by the USA and not manufactured internally.

Secondly, if you will recall the inspections conducted under the auspices of Mohammed Al Baradei on behalf of of the United Nations for a moment you would find that the half life of those chemical compounds had long ago exceeded their life span and were in no way harmful any longer.

Thirdly, the excuses for invasion stated strongly that there were not only weapons of mass destruction there but an industry dedicated to their production. That nothing whatsoever remotely like that was ever found one can draw only one conclusion, if one is dedicated at all to both truth and scientific methodology. Are you one such?

The question of which is morally superior, a bullet in the brain or torture, is a question that has engaged the great philosophers, and moralists throughout the ages.

Somewhere there is a 5th grader sitting at the back of the room raising his hand to ask, “Aren’t they both bad?” The poor child is destined to receive a failing grade because of his inability to distinguish between the Us’s and the thems.

thethirdman, May 6 at 11:32 am Link to this comment

Execution of bin Laden not justified?

Not a fan of jurisprudence I gather. Today we execute bin Laden tomorrow perhaps it will be you, or heaven forbid, even me.

That he was a scoundrel, a murderer and perhaps even a psychopath seems moot. Yet we live under a system of laws, and they are broken whether by criminals or criminal governments at peril of toppling the whole structure of society under which we live.

You list the crimes of bin Laden, yet none are proven because he never faced the bar of justice. Had he defended himself under arms from capture his killing would have been justified. That he was unarmed and offered no resistance made his assassination a crime, under international law and under our own.

“Never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.”

Rogelio

Don’t bother making substantive argument with GRYM, If W had marched out of the White House in 2003 with Osama’s head on a stick, he’d have come in his pants.

And then been disappionted that we could not have tortured him just a little.

Go Right Young Man-“Which is the least morally acceptable?  A U.S. President with the power to harshly interrogate a suspect or, a U.S. President with the power to decide a suspects summery execution?”

Both are morally reprehensible. However, in times of “war” morallity siezes to exist. For over two decades, the U.S. has tried to get bin Laden. President Obama succeeded where others failed. I do not like the idea of our presidents having the power to “execute” individuals. However, I firmly believe that our government was entitled to take bin Laden down. Moreover, this is not the first time that the CIA or presidents have behaved so egregiously.

Are we putting more weight on bin Laden’s life than the deaths of millions of Iraqis and Afaghans that were caught in the middle of a cross fire? During this war on terrorism, how many bombs have been dropped that missed the intended targets, and resulted in innocent deaths? Bin Laden is just another casualty in this war.

Execution of bin Laden not justified?

Let’s set aside 9/11 altogether.  Bin Laden was still firmly linked to the Khobar
Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, the first WTC bombing, the US embassy in
Kenya, the USS Cole, hundreds of deaths in Iraq and Pakistan, shall I go on?

He declared war on the United States and her allies, funded terrorist training
against us, was searching for nuclear material, and attacked civilian targets (and
yes there is a difference between attacking civilian targets and killing civilians
accidentally).  Either way, he was an “unprivileged combatant” if you wish to get
technical.  We would have been justified in sending a tomahawk missile his way if
we so chose.

Rogelio,

We’ll simply disagree.  I don’t believe in the narrative which places Obama as the good (moral) man and Bush the evil criminal.  I believe that type of strained and strenuous partisan gamesmanship distorts real events.

I’m also fairly certain you avoided answering my question.

This whole ‘torture’ thing is misunderstood. The Pentagon ‘assistants’ and ‘clerks’, together with the civilian ‘Secretary’, who really run the place, are smart enough (except for The Rummy) to know that torture does not yield actionable intelligence. The current torture regime is actually an ‘enhanced training technique’ to ready our current crop of troops for life after the military, should peace break out and/or rationality force the Pentagon budget to be cut.
In ‘enhanced training’ our torturing troops learn to effectively ‘Lie and Deny’, which will qualify them for careers in politics or as corporate officers or financial executives. They learn to inflict pain, which is essential to join the lobbyist ‘goon squads’ in D.C. These are the ‘enforcers’ who are sent out to ‘convince’ naive politicians who attempt to disregard the implications of the bribes they have accepted, and appear to be wavering in voting the ‘right’ way on pending legislation.
So our current torturing troops are slated to become some of the ‘powers that be’ of the next generation. The Pentagon is hoping these ‘enhanced troop training techniques’ will keep them loyal to the cause as they succeed in their civilian careers. And maintain the Pentagon budget right at the upper limit it can sustain without a revolution among the general US population of peasants/civilians, as it has for the past five decades.

that’s the thing; they’re broken

“They hate us for our freedom to torture!”  Actually it
may be a picky point, but torture does not elicit
information only cooperation.  Once an individual is
broken, then a rather normal conversation ensues.  The
object behind enhanced interrogation techniques is to
impel the individual to cooperate and to insure that
cooperation you always ask questions where you know the
answers.  And when you get those answers you then know
you have achieved cooperation and no further torture is
needed only the fear of it.

Go Right Young Man-“Which is the least morally acceptable?  A U.S. President with the power to harshly interrogate a suspect or, a U.S. President with the power to decide a suspects summery execution?”

Had the execution of bin Laden taken place within a year or two of 9-11, Repbulicans and most Americans would probably not have criticized the president. However, unfortuantely for President Obama, the post 9-11 fervor and euphoria that swept America in the early years, dramatically subsided. As a result, bin Laden was an aferthought that most Americans forgot about. As a result, his death shocked the world, and more importantly, opened up a series of debates and controversies that probably would not have surfaced immediately after 9-11. Sadly, had teflon w. Bush succeeded in killing bin Laden, he probably would have easily weathered the controverisal storm because the media was fearful of his admistration.

Now, to answer the question. I do not believe our adminstration had the right to assasinate bin Laden. However, bin Laden was a known terrorist that we had been trying to kill for years; Clinton tried and so did Bush. More importantly, I would much rather have him dead than to have tax payer dollars pay for a carnival/circus court trial.

In my opinion, bin Laden was a rare example of where force (bullets) was necessary. If Bush would have been in the same situation as Obama, I firmly believe that his adminstration would have argued that bin Laden had a weapon. Unfortunately, the Obama adminstration spoke the truth regarding the events that transpired during the assault, and it left him open to countless attacks. Finally, throughout the years, the CIA and previous adminstrations are guilty of countless atrocities. One example, the death of over a million Iraqis, all in the name of WMDs that never existed. 

I am glad there is a debate regarding Obama’s tactics. However, I question how much of this controversy a result of partisan politics, and more importanly, Republicans trying to undermine a Democratic president.

gfys; good morning!

    “Summary Executions Is Not Torture
      THERE is your headline, Eugene.”

shoud that read “there are your headline”?

right on, nzdoug;

“we do it for freedom and democracy. they do it
becus der evil.”

because we’re rebels, and, obviously, they’re
insurgents.  we’re freedom fighters. they hate us
for our freedoms. it’s all very plain.
before shooting, simply compare the guest list with
the place cards, or review all lapel badges to make
sure theirs say “hello, my name is insurgent” lest a
guest be made to feel de trop. to mitigate any
social unease, the savvy host or hostess
intersperses the guests that the conversation
doesn’t veer into taboos like religion, or politics.
one should avoid the awkwardness which ensues when
one guest kills another. i refer the gentle reader
to miss manners on the particulars of who is ‘guest’
and who is ‘host’ in the case of bloody hegemony.
torture is still torture- and how. one read of this
column would make me yield to my captors lest i were
forced to read it again.

Who cares to be the first insider to reveal
that the folk in the “walled-in-villa” were set-ups,
placed there by the C.I.A. and U.S. Military leadership
in Afghanistan? (also why it is near an installation)

Rogelio, - “abusively and unchecked that “probably” occurred under Bush.”

-

I fully appreciate that that is your perception.  It’s refreshing to see someone openly admit that it’s only a perception with no demonstrable evidence in support.

Question: Which is the least morally acceptable?  A U.S. President with the power to harshly interrogate a suspect or, a U.S. President with the power to decide a suspects summery execution?

Harsh interrogation to save lives vs bullet in the brain to end one.

Simple quesiton here folks…Of the two adminstrations, the Bush and the current Obama, who do you believe has/had more credibility? Which adminstration was/has been beset by lies and deceit?

Although my reasoning holds no evidence, it is clear that the Obama admistration, like many Americans, was upset with all the crap the Bush administration pulled. I firmly believe that under Obama excessive interrogative techniques have continued, however, certainly not as abusively and unchecked as under Bush.

Simple quesiton here folks…Of the two adminstrations, the Bush and the current Obama, who do you believe had more credibility? Which had adminstration was/has been beset by lies and deceit?

Although my reasoning holds no evidence, it is clear that the Obama admistration, like many Americans, was upset with all the crap the Bush administration pulled. I firmly believe that under Obama excessive interrogative techniques continued, however, not abusively and unchecked that “probably” occurred under Bush.

we do it for freedom and democracy.
they do it becus der evil.

Summary Executions Is Not Torture

THERE is your headline, Eugene.

-

After Mr. Obama took office summary executions of suspected enemies of the U.S. has increased ten fold. 

In the face of this Mr. Robinson is still whining about Bush and FrankenCheny ordering the use of really really mean interrogations.

-

Don’t “Torture” bin Laden.

Put a bullet in his brain and the media will drone on about your “courage” to make tough decisions.

Good Grief.

What is conveniently left out, apart from the fact
that bin Laden could easily have been “found” while
undergoing dialysis at the US military hospital in
Dubai where he was visited by the CIA Station Chief
(July, 2001) is that the US was offered bin Laden by
the Taliban in October of that same year, if only the
US would provide some proof for his alleged crimes. 
The US refused to offer any proof, any evidence,
because there was no proof, there is no evidence, but
of course a criminal State as the US is has no
interest in laws which might restrict their ability
to engage in murder and terrorism.  The arrest of bin
Laden, in the eyes of the Bush regime, would have
been a distraction from the goal of invading Iraq.

“There is a hard core of people in the United States
who will not be moved, whatever facts you present,
from their conviction that this nation means only to
do good, and almost always does good, in the world,
that it is the beacon of liberty and freedom.”
(Howard Zinn)

“We live in a nation hated abroad and frightened at
home. A place in which we can reasonably refer to the
American Republic in the past tense. A country that
has moved into a post-constitutional era, no longer a
nation of laws but an autotocracy run by law
breakers, law evaders and law ignorers. A nation
governed by a culture of impunity ... a culture in
which corruption is no longer a form of deviance but
the norm. We all live in a Mafia neighborhood now.”
(Sam Smith)

I doubt seriously that this nation has ended the torture of prisoners as Mr. Robinson states. Obama has continued most of the policies of his predecessor thus one might conjecture he has continued this one as well.

One must wonder why bin Laden was killed when the Seal Team found him unarmed? I would assume that their orders were to kill him and not capture him. Bringing bin Laden before the bar of justice was obviously avoided, thus one must forever wonder why.

Oh yeah?

And murder is murder, no matter who the victim is. This was murder pure and simple, so where, you nauseating puppet of “Democrat” Nazism, is your claim of “no torture”? Or your ridiculous claim that Obama, that monster who officialized the royal right to murder?

If I had any doubts left about Nazi apologists like you and your pal Obama, I would have asked if you have no shame. Of course you haven’t.

I know that Truthdig is supposed to offer diverse views and that is good in itself, but Robinson is too disgusting even for the National Enquirer.

I have to agree. We would like to assume that our nation sets the moral standard for others to follow. Unfortunately, the w administration began a shameful chapter in US history that undermined our global “integrity” even more.

Sadly, I strongly believe we would have captured/killed bin Laden without the use of Excessive Interrogation Techiniques. It was only a matter of time. And, of course, our so-called ally, Pakistan, was not cooperating.

We could have easily have tortured the Guntanomo detainees by forcing them to listen to hedious music.

Carrying water is heavy work. Anybody got any Kool-Aid?