For your reading pleasure:

Former Member

http://www.newsmaxstore.com/nms/showdetl.cfm?&DID=6&Product_ID=876&CATID=1&GroupID=1

An early "Christmas Present" for the clandestine-collaborator.

Former Member

Oh Lordy Lord.

CLINTON is to blame for BUSH's economic wankiness? CLINTON is to blame for BUSH ignoring intelligence naming the saudi hijackers? CLINTON is to blame for BUSH attacking Afghanistan, a country only tangentially linked to 11/9?

Oh, silly me. The Republicans cant do no wrong.

Though i will admit that Clandestine would surely be interested in Michael Moore's argument that Blair is to blame for all this, not "Two Bottles" Bush. But to blame Clinton is stupid- its amazing what the rabid right-wing filth will peddle just to protect their own corrupt arses from public scrutiny.

Former Member

CLINTON is to blame for BUSH's economic wankiness?

According to USN & WR, Oct 6, 2003, pg 8.

Love Letter

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton thinks her husband is due a thank-you note from the White House. "I was struck," she told us, "by reading that after the first Gulf War, Dick Cheney said he should send a thank-you note to Ronald Reagan: You always fight the wars with the military inherited. I don't think he's done that to my husband. I'd be happy to deliver it personally if he would write it."


So by the same theory I guess we could thank Bill for the down turn in the US economy in 2001.

Turn about is fair play, and all is fair in love, war and politics.;)

Former Member

Kermy, it should be patently obvious by now that there is no reasoning nor comprehension of reality with the rabid right. That should come as no suprise to you by now.

Former Member

Clinton is just as much to blame for our economic problems as Bush. The Democrats like to throw up a stink about the millions of jobs that have been lost in the last few years. They of course choose to ignore the fact that their own economic position is virtually identical to that of the Republicans. Both parties embrace the same philosophy of free trade that has sent millions of manafacturing jobs abroad. Both parties embrace massive third world immigration which is fiscally crushing states like California. Gray Davis has been just as much of an economic disaster for California as Bush has been for the nation as a whole. Anyone remember who gave us NAFTA, along with the Republicans in Congress at the time? Both parties practice massive military interventionism abroad, the Democrats usually more so than the Republicans (Wilson & WW1, Roosevelt & WW2, Truman & Korea, LBJ & Vietnam, Clinton & Kosovo). Both parties throw away more and more in foreign aid every year. The Clinton years were WONDERFUL for speculators, although in recent years the DJIA has actually been confused with real economy itself. Real wages actually stagnated or declined throughout the Clinton era and the same is true of Bush's presidency. Neither party has the slightest clue as to what to do about education. Both have the same absurd solution that has gotten us nowhere, throw more money at it. Both parties support the multiculturalism and diversity nonsense. Both parties support Israel's imperialism. Both never cease their sucking up to the Jews 24/7 to take notice of where we are headed, what this country will ultimately be like 20 something years from now.

The stagnating Labour Party in the UK is another good example of just yet another establishment party with no real solutions to that country's problems. They are as ridiculous, old, and worn out as the Tories. Both are afraid to confront the fundamental real issues, like Britain's demographic transformation into a third world country. Both take turns sucking up to America and orbiting it like a satellite. Schroeder and Chirac are two more disgusting politically corrected old worn out politicians with no real aim whatsoever to offer their respective countries. The only idea they seem to agree on is a crude anti-Americanism, which is more or less an apology for their absolute mediocrity as leaders.

Decline - this word best sums up the age we are in.

Former Member

I challenge you Thanatos, I challenge you to read this book and try to deny that not only did Bush steal the election, but that his government is the most corrupt in the history of the United States of America and half the cabinet (including the chimp himself) should be in jail.

Former Member

I wouldnt waste your effrot Al, he didnt even bother to respond to the details I put up in a previous thread which exposed his own hero Beijing Bush as having gone even further to compromise the security of the US by opening up technological transfers to the PRC.

He just prefers to slander anyone who dares question his heros.

But what can you expect from someone who considers Anne Coulter a rational and intelligent individual. :rolleyes:

Former Member

Originally posted by Clandestine
Kermy, it should be patently obvious by now that there is no reasoning nor comprehension of reality with the rabid right. That should come as no suprise to you by now.

Even Michael Moore still holds out hope:p

Former Member

Michael Moore for all that I respect his efforts to unmask the hidden (or otherwise unannounced) agendas of the right, is unlikely to have much of a market with footsoldiers of the rabid right anyways. Plus he can afford to waste his efforts trying to reach them.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
I challenge you Thanatos, I challenge you to read this book and try to ...

...contain my gales of laughter at the pompous arrogance and stupidity which would prompt such a statement?

Hardly a reference piece, June 4, 2003
Reviewer: murch12 from Alexandria, VA
His book, much like his "documentary," takes facts and twists them to his own liking. It does not matter to Moore if one thing happened before another or in a different place, if tying the two together will make it seem like the government (especially republicans) are corrupt than so be it.

To those who love this book, while it might make good reading, it is not a valid reference piece. Moore states many apparent facts but has little to no footnotes or endnotes, why is this?

If you enjoy the rants of a Marxist, enjoy but if you want to be truly educated, look elsewhere.

Michael Moore is the village idiot with an agenda. He appeals to those who believe that Dumb and Dumber is the height of drama...

Former Member

LOL. The mud-throwing attempts by the neo-conservatives never cease to amuse me.

Are you quoting Ann Coulter-loving right wingers posting in Amazon as a viable source? Is that the best you can do?

Funny how not a single Bushbot seems capable of actually providing counter-arguments to Moore's facts in Stupid White Men. But then again how could they? There is no possible counter-argument. Bush is a corrupt thief who stole the election with the help of his corrupt brother and several ultra-right wing individuals and groups in control of the electoral roll, and has since installed his group of sleazy, greedy criminals in the respective positions they have business interests on. A very nice cartel indeed.

But it seems that you are prepared to forgive every last criminal activity, incompetence and sleaze so long as it's perpetrated by your heroes the Republicans. Never mind that the country's economy, environment, welfare, health, freedom and security are all going to hell. Never mind that the US has broken more laws and conventions than any other nation on earth; that it is disliked and despised (and don't you attempt to say it is 'envy' because it isn't) by a record number of nations in unprecedented levels; that hundreds of US soldiers have been killed and many thousands seriously wounded so the greedy corrupt bastards at the White House can line their pockets with petro-dollars. Republicans are the ones messing it up, so let's look the other way eh?

Who's the traitor now???

Serious answers only please.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
LOL. The mud-throwing attempts by the neo-conservatives never cease to amuse me.

Are you quoting Ann Coulter-loving right wingers posting in Amazon as a viable source? Is that the best you can do?

Funny how not a single Bushbot seems capable of actually providing counter-arguments to Moore's facts in Stupid White Men.

Haven't read the book myself. People I know who have, told me that it is a funny book, but to be taken with a large amount of salt. That it is not meant to be a serious read, and that people shouldn't mistake it to be that. And no, that statement wasn't made by a "right-winger". But I will read the book myself, and create my own opinion of it.

I don't know if you've seen it, but there are sites devoted to Michael Moore's "facts" as you prefer to call it, which would actually show that the "facts" are more of what you could call "creative statements, inspired by personal opinion"

Another thing, are you guys not tired of the Anne Coulter remarks? It doesn't add anything of substance to the discussion, and it is getting tiresome to hear the same sentances and words being spited at almost every thread.
Seriously, I don't have to read any of Clandestine's posts anymore as I know they'll contain one sided links representing his views, contain the word sycophant in every context possible, and something about the governments nazi tactics.
Shame to see you resort to the same methods, as I'd give you a little more credit than that.

Former Member

I'm fully aware of Michael Moore's personal beliefs and opinions on the Republicans- and he does not try to hide it in his book. However the facts given when he talks about the election fraud by the Bushes or the all too evident corruption and conflict of interests rife in Bush's cabinet appointments are not invented or creatively styled. They are facts available to everyone and official records. Shame that the mainstream press seem somehow uninterested by it.

It is a fact that Bush's brother and a far-right organisation somehow in control of the electoral roll eliminated the right of vote for tens of thousands of (black) citizens, of which approximately 90% are Democrat voters. There were also very serious irregularities with the overseas ballots (some servicemen 'voted twice', and even some dead ones managed to post their vote for the Republicans) and no matter how elaborate the rebuttal websites, no matter how much blurb they can put in them, you can be sure of two things in life: death await us all, and G.W. Bush stole the election.

Other facts that speak for themselves are Bush’s choice for government posts. Like installing ex-CEOs of motor companies and car lobbyists as head of car emissions control, rabid anti-abortionist Christian fundamentalists as head of family planning and birth control, or oil company barons as head of environmental departments that will decide on the safety of drilling in the Artic. You might as well put Dracula in charge of a blood bank or Herod in charge of a kindergarten, if you get my drift.

As for Ann Coulter, remember that it is Globe who will happily post constant references and/or cut and pastes from the woman. And he's not alone. The great majority of neo-conservatives seem to worship the ground she walks on.

I don't know if you know much about her, but basically she is an evil, repulsive, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, ignorant, hateful, defamatory piece of garbage not worth the air she breaths. That people actually agree with what she says, or worse use her quotes and statements as argumentative points is equivalent to someone professing their open admiration for Adolph Hitler or quoting passages from Mein Kampf as a truth or an acceptable ideal.

Here are some of the things she's said and believes in.

So in the same way as I would dismiss anyone quoting Adolph Hitler, I shall show my contempt for that repulsive woman and question the integrity and/or ability anyone who chooses to look up at her for guidance or wisdom.

Former Member

I understand and respect where you're coming from. But your method is inefficient and won't bring any result, which I assume you wish for.

To be honest the more I read in this forum, the more I doubt if people really mean what they write, or if they just discuss in order not to lose face at this point.
No one is listeneing to the other side, or makes relevant comments. If you wanted something which would make sense, you'd operate on some of the exact remarks she's made which are relevant for the discussion. Instead you mention her name, use the face, and feel superior.
What does it bring to the discussion? Your credibility? Or the other part, who will brush you off in the exact same method?

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
There were also very serious irregularities with the overseas ballots ...

Like dis-allowing any ballot without a postmark? A decision made by the denizens of the left, who in their "patriotism" have never served in the armed forces, and therefore would be COMPLETELY IGNORANT of reality, such that even a torn piece of cardboard from a C-rat could be addressed and sent home... no postage or post marks on overseas armed forces mail.

"Irregularities" such as one million illegal aliens registered to vote in Kalifornia alone... ILLEGAL not meaning anything, if it can be perverted by the left?

You would be hillarious, if not so pathetic...

You quote Coulter and her "raping the Earth" commentary. In the UK, it is called "taking the piss"... in the US? Laughing at the stupidity and ignorance of the profoundly retarded left, because it will be lept upon with the same zeal as Dumb and Dumber, and Bowling For Columbine are taken as serious works...

Former Member

The face is one that I tend to reserve for those who make extensive use of it in a condescending manner. Both Globe and the sadly departed monocrat sure like to use the laughing icon on others; anyone who wanted to waste their time checking through my posts would see that the immense majority of my laughing icons (other than those used to express genuine laughter not directed at others) were used in answers to these two posters.

I don't expect my 'method' to bring any success, for it is clear that some will refuse to admit to anything whatsoever in order to suit their beliefs agendas. I have admitted to and condemned acts of 'my side' (for want of a better expression) many times. I have no problem admitting that Clinton was dodgy, or that the Palestinians have committed atrocities, or that the European Union is corrupt, or that the UN is imperfect. You can accuse me of bias, or to not admitting enough, but at least I admit to something.

But yet you get some people that no matter how obvious the wrongdoing, no matter how severe the human right abuse, no matter how illegal the war, will simply look the other way or attempt to justify the unjustifiable, and all because their warped sense of patriotism tells them that a Republican government and their allies can do no wrong, and even if they did it should be overlooked or justified.

I have no hope of ever getting some people to put principles before their own agendas, but I'll be damned if I'm going to sit idly by and let all the thrown mud and all the lies uttered go unchallenged, especially when people try to justify wrongdoing and claim the moral high ground.

Former Member

Onesided links, Jacq? Is that your argument against giving any due consideration to information which debunks the steady stream of misinformation that has been pandered to the public as fact?

By all means refuse to examine the truth for yourself, we wouldnt want to jade your utter allegiance to whatever the right has to say on world matters, regardless of its contrivances and spin. Nevermind that such spin has been reversed and sidestepped countless of times now as it has been unmasked by pundits on the ground and international watchdogs.

Instead you choose to declare your refusal to consider the validity of any expose simply because youve got a bee in your bonnet about me (someone you don't even know). Nice way to evade any risk that you might have to alter your views on any given subject.

If the rabid right, which has hijacked US policy, had any credible arguments aside from proclaiming all liberals as traitors or anti-American then i would consider them for their own merit or demerit. However, to date, there has been nothing but flagrant attemtps to "create" stories in the most transparently propagandising fashion and little to nothing in terms of their justifications or claims that have not to date been unmasked as fraudulent or censored free of any historical context in which to truly judge their truthfulness.

Its increasingly apparent even back at home where the corporate media has long presented a slanted picture on the world that the reality of what is being purported by the right as fact is anything but. If you want onesidedness, you are free to curl up with Thanatos and watch Fox News together.

As for Anne Coulter, even the majority of Republicans in the states find her to be an offensive hate-filled mouthpiece for a minority but highly vocal segment of conservative opinion. As such her points are so revisionistic as to be unworthy of intelligent response. Most policy experts and analysts ignore her completely.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
... I'll be damned if I'm going to sit idly by ...

"...while I am genuflecting to the image of the poster-boy of the left, the ineffectual and impotent wanker Che!"

ROTFLMMFAO!

This is more fun than I had on Sunday, firing over a thousand rounds through my Bulgarian Krinkov, my Polish PMKMS, my Imbel FAL, my Remington 700 in 7mmRemMag, my ...

Former Member

The only people who are profoundly retarded Globe are those who like reading neo-Nazis for guidance or are happy to support a corrupt semi-literate monkey whose only aims are to make money for his friends.

You were complaining not so long ago about comparisons between gun-toting neo-cons and 'trailer park trash'. I suggest you think twice before calling anyone who have a sense of morals 'profoundly retarded'.

How revealing that you choose to hand-pick certain quotes or allegations and ignore the others. No mention of the illegal selective blacklisting of voters and other irregularities during the Florida fiasco. Surely not an admission that the whole thing was a fraud but you don't wish to comment on it?

And what about your hero Ann Coulter? Would you care to comment on these quotes by the evil one:

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building." (Ann Coulter in a New York Observer interview, 8/20/2002

What's up Globe? I thought you were a proud patriot, and all-American war vet who risk his like for his nation. Do you have anything to say about this? Or is that liberal New Yorkers don't qualify as Americans or human beings?

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

Well well... do you think this applies to Jews, or to dirty old Arabs only? Whatcha reckon Globe?

To a disabled Vietnam vet: "People like you caused us to lose that war."---MSNBC

On of my favourites. I'd be really interested on your thoughts about this jewel by your heroine.

"I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote."---Politically Incorrect, 2/26/01

No comment.

"I think we had enough laws about the turn-of-the-century. We don't need any more." Asked how far back would she go to repeal laws, she replied, "Well, before the New Deal...[The Emancipation Proclamation] would be a good start."---Politically Incorrect 5/7/97

So a fucking racist shit as well as anything else...

... and many more here.


So would you like to tell us Globe what do you think of these few examples of that sub-human fucktard? Can you explain why do you like quoting her when she advocates the death of Americans, is a racist xenophobic piece of trash, and even laughs at and ridicules Vietnam veterans such as yourself???

Former Member

Originally posted by Globe
[BThis is more fun than I had on Sunday, firing over a thousand rounds through my Bulgarian Krinkov, my Polish PMKMS, my Imbel FAL, my Remington 700 in 7mmRemMag, my ... [/B]

Good. Training is good. Watch out! The commies and bad Arabs are coming!

Former Member

Originally posted by Clandestine
Onesided links, Jacq? Is that your argument against giving any due consideration to information which debunks the steady stream of misinformation that has been pandered to the public as fact?

By all means refuse to examine the truth for yourself, we wouldnt want to jade your utter allegiance to whatever the right has to say on world matters, regardless of its contrivances and spin. Nevermind that such spin has been reversed and sidestepped countless of times now as it has been unmasked by pundits on the ground and international watchdogs.

Instead you choose to declare your refusal to consider the validity of any expose simply because youve got a bee in your bonnet about me (someone you don't even know). Nice way to evade any risk that you might have to alter your views on any given subject.

If the rabid right, which has hijacked US policy, had any credible arguments aside from proclaiming all liberals as traitors or anti-American then i would consider them for their own merit or demerit. However, to date, there has been nothing but flagrant attemtps to "create" stories in the most transparently propagandising fashion and little to nothing in terms of their justifications or claims that have not to date been unmasked as fraudulent or censored free of any historical context in which to truly judge their truthfulness.

Its increasingly apparent even back at home where the corporate media has long presented a slanted picture on the world that the reality of what is being purported by the right as fact is anything but. If you want onesidedness, you are free to curl up with Thanatos and watch Fox News together.

As for Anne Coulter, even the majority of Republicans in the states find her to be an offensive hate-filled mouthpiece for a minority but highly vocal segment of conservative opinion. As such her points are so revisionistic as to be unworthy of intelligent response. Most policy experts and analysts ignore her completely.

What is your purpose on this board? Plain and direct question. Cause I don't get it. I simply don't.
I've just explained that the same old arguments over and over again are getting tiresome. You do not seem to want to be listened to, and you don't seem to listen. So what's the cause?

Seriously, fuck the right wing, left wing, center, whatever. In the end it is down to issues, and not political affiliation, but still it is impossible to state anything without hearing about the corrupt right. Yes they are corrupted, but the exact same thing goes for the left.
If you want to we can take it from the start and discuss what exactly caused the branch of Republicans from the Democrats in the US in 1860...
None of the parties are angels or always have (had) rational views.

You state that Thanatos and I can watch Fox together, and it makes me wonder if you haven't yourself adopted one of "your beloved" Ann Coulter's methods? Taring all with the same brush? So everyone who's Arab is a terrorist according to her. And everyone who doesn't necessarily support the Democrats in the US should watch FOX (which I regard as nothing more than amusement), according to you. So no, it isn't as a severe a statement, but the principle behind it is the same.

Bottomline, you and Aladdin have about the same views, and disagree with me about the same things. Yet I still give Aladdin 10 times more credit and respect than you, simply for the fact that he seems to listen a bit more than you do. Whether he does it or not, I do not know, but the approach and act sure as hell makes all the difference.

Former Member

And as Ive said many a time, Ill respond in kind, snide remark for snide remark if and when such is what you choose to present in response to what I write.

Its consistently interesting that you come out with flip retorts rather than substantive rebuttal on the points raised or else are silent altogether. Can't say that Ive once seen you respond to any evidence cited by either Al or myself on any issue with any sort of indication that it has made any impact whatsoever to your thinking, and yet you continually berate me and Al for being onesided.

As for claiming I don't listen, well then your memory is apparently highly selective as I have likewise admitted that certain actions on the part of the Clinton administration (the man Thanatos thinks is unilaterally the cause of all evil), to cite one example, were misguided. Just as I have admitted on occasion - back in the day when Greenhat was about - that i was mistaken on a given point or that I happened to agree with this or perspective he might raised on a given issue.

Nevertheless, my point here is political debate, always has been. That hasnt been possible with certain individuals who have preferred to respond to any supporting evidence presented with utter disregard or outright contempt, whilst pandering once again to claims or reports which have already been exposed as lies or political spin or else descending to the level of Thanatos with his Clandestine-collaborator drivel.

As for branding you rightwing, if that be not the case I heartily apologise.

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin


And what about your hero Ann Coulter?

Actually? I reject the very concept of "heroes". This rather well expresses my perspective:

My grandfather taught me that all men are cowards, that every man will know the moment when his courage will desert him, and he will turn and run. The only man who does not know this is the one who is too possessed by his cowardice to ever test himself. There are no heroes: you are not a hero for doing what you are capable of, but you display your cowardice for all to see by doing less. Heroes are created by those who are willingly mired within their own mediocrity, finding it easier to lift someone else up because that person has shown something that really is within us all, should be within us, rather than to explain his own failure, his visible cowardice. Easier to place someone else on a pedestal than to admit that we are simply crawling on our bellies. Better to kneel and worship at the throne of the demigod “Hero” than to admit to ourselves and each other that it only our individual wretchedness which sentences us to wallow in our vile existence, which damns us to a place beneath our Hero’s feet, not some intrinsic extra-human quality which causes our Hero to rise above us. There are no heroes, there are only men who stand and do what must be done, standing in a world populated by too many cowards.
There are no heroes. It has always struck me how pathetic they must be, they who worship heroes, they who chase after others seeking autographs, seeking a fleeting moment of attention, preying upon someone that they have deified in hopes that whatever it is which makes a hero will rub off upon them, wanting to share in a moment that they are too cowardly to find for their own, wanting to rob a piece from their hero, wanting to live their life through him, rather than to assert themselves and demand a place of their own. The groupies and the gropies, men who get their vicarious thrill through someone else who has not been overcome by cowardice, wanting a piece of their Hero in order to live out a Walter Mitty moment; and women who seek a piece of the Hero, a piece of the illusion, a piece of their own delusion, seeing only a conquest, seeking a point to put on their own personal scorecard, a notch in their headboard. How pathetic to raise someone up, then fight to pull him back down to their own level, piece by piece, and then to rejoice in his fall. Are we all cowards and cannibals at heart?

Originally posted by Aladdin
I thought you were a proud patriot, and all-American war vet who risk his like for his nation.

You have never EVER read me refer to myself as a "patriot": I am a Marine, whose MOS was to rid the earth of the enemies of my nation. "Patriots" talk the talk; Marines walk the walk. Actions/words. Likely beyond your comprehension... :rolleyes:

Former Member

Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
And everyone who doesn't necessarily support the Democrats in the US should watch FOX (which I regard as nothing more than amusement), according to you.

*attempting to remember how many years it has been since I have watched ANYTHING other than an occaisional football game, on Fox...* :rolleyes:

Former Member

And yet you continue to refuse to answer my simple question. What are your thoughts on the statements that woman has made? As you will have seen I've posted a small selection above. Would you care to explain why do you like quoting a woman who advocates the death of Americans, who is racist piece of shit and who even insult Vietnam War veterans such as yourself?

Is it because you actually agree with those statements?