Sometimes fear isn't political, sometimes fear is part of self preservation.
Much was made last week of Tom Tancredo's campaign ad depicting an illegal immigrant with a knapsack, presumably filled with explosives, entering a US mall. "The politics of fear" was the near immediate refrain from the mostly liberal comments posted in response to this news item. "A vote for anyone but Tancredo is a vote for letting your children get murdered by Islamofacists and your wife raped by Jihadists. You have been warned" opined another commenter.…
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
26 - gonzo marx
@ 3 24 - of fucking course it wasn't invented by them or for them, nice attempt at attempting to imply something i never fucking said...
the history bit is very nice for those unfamiliar with the topic...but your point is?
scratch that...i know better than to even attempt to Ask anything pertinent, or expect anything worthwhile
do note, i didn't make any "assumptions" or inferences...each bit i mentioned is readily available for any that look into the matter
those who have personal ties with folks who were involved might know more about certain specifics over others...the Nature of the situation, after all
i'll stack what i know of it against most
and any who doubt the influence of certain alphabet soup agencies on the training or equipping of the mujahadeen, and thus on what they became...is in serious denial of objective reality
same goes for the influence of Qutb, or the installation of the Shah...it's that kind of Ignorance, or will full "forgetfulness" and sloppy Thinking which has placed much of the world in the
shitstorm we currently inhabit
Excelsior?
27 - Dave Nalle
the history bit is very nice for those unfamiliar with the topic...but your point is?
Just that I'm sick of those who try to use the CIA involvement in Afghanistan as an attempt to direct blame away from al Qaeda and their supporters and place it on the US and its policies instead.
The same hold true with Iran, since you bring it up. Again, the fact that the US put the Shah in power in no way excuses the excesses of the current regime in Iran.
These arguments are no more valid than Moonraven trying to say that Americans can't be concerned about human rights in Venezuela because we mistreated the Indians a hundred years ago.
Those who bring up these spurious arguments time and time again are the real enemy who we ought to be opposing.
To be absolutely clear, the involvement of the US in Afghanistan and Iraq is a given. But when you go from acknowledging that fact to blaming the future actions of those people against the west, the US and their neighbors on the US you're going too far. The bottom line is that even terrorists and theocrats retain free will and should be held responsible for their actions - no excuses.
Dave
28 - gonzo marx
you are fucking unbelievable...
where did i lay blame ..please do point it out, i fucking DEFY you too
because once again, you assume rather than read what is actually typed
go back, read what's been typed again, then get your head out of your ass, it will stop you from having such a shitty outlook on it all
cause and effect, plus historical accuracy, as well as possibly mentioning "reasons" that some psychotics give (in Afghanistan and the WH) to try and justify the crimes they have committed
"The bottom line is that even terrorists and theocrats retain free will and should be held responsible for their actions - no excuses."
i'll buy that one, and would gladly enforce it...but one has to be fair about it
and hold the WH and such to the same fucking standard rather than your usual Apologist bullshit excusing them for everything as well
goose/gander
Excelsior?
29 - REMF
"The bottom line is that even terrorists and theocrats retain free will and should be held responsible for their actions - no excuses."
- Dave Nalle
As long as SOMEONE ELSE does the dirty work of "holding them responsible", right Nalle?
30 - Moonraven
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
"These arguments are no more valid than Moonraven trying to say that Americans can't be concerned about human rights in Venezuela because we mistreated the Indians a hundred years ago."
At no point have I ever posted this ridiculous statement--it is straight out of the book of illogical internet argument--a Nalle classic.
I have said that it makes little sense for Nalle to rant and rave about UNDOCUMENTED abuses in a country that he cannot even find on the map and which he, obviously, has never visited.
Right up there with Dick Cheney's goofy statement about how Peru deserves a better president than Hugo Chavez!
I really do not give a shit if you folks are abused and frightened out of your shorts by YOUR government.
Nor if you believe the fairy tale about Al Qaeda having done 9/11. Al Qaeda is not the vice-president of the US, so far as this poster knows.
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
31 - Clavos
I read the book (as I'm sure gonzo did; it or others on the same topic), mr.
Did you?
32 - gonzo marx
never read the book that was mentioned, nor needed to google anything on the topic
i touched on it a bit here, more in the comments than the Article itself but i have given this same info many times over the years here on BC
as i have stated, i have personal sources who were involved in each of these incidents, and some where i have more direct, firsthand experience
but few have any desire to hear the Truth of the matter, and others deny Facts when presented
still more have their eyes glaze over when reaching into deep, or complex topics... and this one is far from simple
another example of just how often you are completely wrong, mr... and i still hold by my very low Opinion of you from the last time... your own words condemn you [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor].
Excelsior?
33 - Moonraven
Sorry, gonzo, but I am NEVER wrong. Not about THIS. Not about ANYTHING.
And your saying that I am is foolish. If you had any PROOF you would post it [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor].
Clavos: If you read it, it's true, right?
Well you read what I wrote HERE.
34 - gonzo marx
carrion eater - i've proven you wrong with your own spewing in enough Threads already to demonstrate your utter lack of infallibility
just because you repeat it ad nauseum doesn't make it True... nice try at the whole big Lie bit...but it wasn't Funny the first time around...even less when you mimic, lunarcrow
Excelsior?
35 - The Obnoxious American
For the record Dave, totally agree with you, since when did excuse making for murderers become so en vogue?
Further, "Those who bring up these spurious arguments time and time again are the real enemy who we ought to be opposing."
Totally right, which brings me to REMF - sir/madame you really need to go back to your high school debate club and polish your act. I think it's a reasonable point to make from time to time, that some of us may have strong feelings about national security and military actions, while not serving in the military (although I don't think that the argument holds a ton of merit considering that people in the military don't have a say in military action either, and after all whether we serve or not, we are all Americans which if you checked affords us certain rights to speech such as this).
But my problem with your argument is that it's the only point you seem to ever make. Time and time again the same point, even within the same discussion. You're actually turning this position of yours into a mockery given that it's the only angle with which you seem to be able to attack any ideas you don't agree with. It may not matter a whole lot to you, but FYI I tend to believe that a person with a weak argument has even weaker principles to back it up.
Also, if Moonraven is going to be rolling around in the mud anywhere, I want to watch.
36 - Baronius
OA, REMF talks about more than one thing. There's "chicken hawks", Limbaugh's hot air, Nalle shooting rats (apparently Nalle said something once about it), and... OK, three things. The curious thing is, even though it's a 90/5/5 split as to what he says, the context doesn't matter. I could say that John Kerry never proved his patriotism, and REMF would reply that Nalle shoots rats.
37 - Moonraven
This bird served in the military, filed a statement of conscentious objection, refused to be bribed with a commission as Major, was given an honorable discharge [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
38 - Moonraven
Gonzo: Show us the BEEF, buzzard--you know, the PROOF that I have ever been wrong.
Lots of luck searching for it--it's dark up there.
39 - Dave Nalle
It's dogs, Baritone, not rats. I once shot a feral dog which was trying to kill my chickens. Didn't even kill the thing, just some buckshot in the butt. MCH has been mindlessly outraged ever since.
Dave
40 - Moonraven
Right, troll--To show how much I respect the gringo war machine, my honorable discharge hung in the place of honor: right over the toilet.
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]
41 - Moonraven
It's true that I have NO empathy for gringos.
No reason to have any.
They have never shown any empathy for the folks they have murdered.
42 - Baronius
Perfect reply. I realized that I forgot to mention one thing - that your insults are often directed at the other person's intelligence. That's the arrogance of a college professor. Funny, I didn't get a chance to add that to my message before you called me stupid.
43 - The Obnoxious American
MR,
I gotta say, Baronius has got you there my dear. Even The Obnoxious American is wrong from time to time, and I will even freely admit it when it (rarely) happens.
Dare I suggest that you admit you are wrong when you say you are never wrong?
Kisses
TOA
44 - troll
*It's true that I have NO empathy for gringos.
No reason to have any.
They have never shown any empathy for the folks they have murdered.*
having listened to your crap more or less empathetically for over a year I'm all empathied out - you've had plenty of opportunity to engage in reasonable (or some approximation thereof) discussion and have chosen your 'style' instead
45 - Lumpy
I don't think Mponie even understands how far things have gone when she has managed to alienate even the compulsively ingratiating troll.
46 - Zedd
I agree with Doc on this.
Also, in order to address the issue of 911, we have to soberly look at what actually took place. Men with box cutters got on planes and convinced the pilots that they were more armed than they were...
Extremism exists in every society. "Racializing" or "ethnicizing" extremism only causes our society more problems. It renders us ignorant and far less likely to rid ourselves of the extremist responses.
With McVeigh and clan, we didn't bother to post notices about thin blonde males. It would have been silly. Such a reaction is just as mad. There are millions of neo-nazi, nationalist crazies on our planet and they have made the lives of many people hell. We haven't gone mad trying to figure then out as if they are apes in the rain forest. They are just people who are misinformed and caught up in a world that makes them feel as if they have relevance, but so are members of ALL extremist groups.
Using the racial, ethnic and religious element to formulate a solution is RIDICULOUS and a waiste of time. It is a backwards way of assessing human behavior.
The funny thing is that what caused the extremist causes to expand is the reaction that we have towards people of islamic ancestry. Not seeing their humanity is what started the "extreme" reaction in the first place.
47 - REMF
"I once shot a feral dog which was trying to kill my chickens. Didn't even kill the thing, just some buckshot in the butt."
- Dave Nalle, #39
-----------------------------
"Did I mention that I have on occasion sat in my back yard and SHOT stray/wild dogs with a hunting rifle?...Now the cougars have taken over the coyotes hunting ground, so they're wandering up to the house and needing to be SHOT as well. I figure the next visitors will be the cougars themselves, so I'm keeping my 30-06 and a clip by the bakc door at all times now."
- Dave Nalle, 2005
(capitalization mine, MCH)
48 - Baronius
And you're still bringing it up? You dwell on it like he shot at you.
49 - Lumpy
If only he had....
50 - REMF
"And you're still bringing it up. You dwell on it like he shot at you."
- Baronius
Um, no...actually YOU did, Baronius (see #36). And it's not about the shooting; it's the LYING about the shooting. A lie will always be a lie, whether it was yesterday, 10 months ago, or a hundred years ago.
Weird how the so-called "party of integrity" doesn't understand the concept of honesty...
51 - Baronius
REMF - That's right, I brought it up... this time. You regularly comment about it though. I wouldn't have known about it if you didn't. As for your joy in catching Dave in a lie, considering this is the internet, and no one uses their real names or personal information, that's not much of a victory. To be honest, the way you spell "liuetenant" makes me wonder if you aren't fudging your personal history a little. Maybe you're not; I'll never know. The point is, I'm too busy dating hot women to care if anyone's telling stories.
52 - REMF
"As for your joy in catching Dave in a lie, considering this is the internet, and no one uses their real names or personal information, that's not much of a victory."
Only because of the image of perfection he tries to convey.
"To be honest, the way you spell "liuetenant" makes me wonder if you aren't fudging your personal history a little."
By that logic, since Nalle repeatedly misspells "altogether" do you also doubt his English degree?
"The point is, I'm too busy dating hot women to care if anyone's telling stories."
Speaking of fudging...
53 - REMF
"...considering this is the internet, and no one uses their real names or personal information..."
- Baronius
So you think Nalle's lying about his real name and his personal information, too...?
54 - Dave Nalle
Re. #51. Hey, I use my real name, Baronius, and my bio is full of accurate personal information. Yeah, I exaggerated my degree of dog hunting activity for effect. Part of a point I was trying to make at a the time - I consider it literary license. For MCH to make such an issue of it is more than a little disingenuous. He should start with some baby steps towards the truth, like posting under his real name - which RJ would be glad to remind him of if he's forgotten.
Dave
55 - REMF
"I consider it literary license."
- Dave Nalle
And I consider it a lie.
56 - REMF
"He should start with some baby steps towards the truth, like posting under his real name..."
- Dave Nalle
So would this also apply to Clavos, Obnoxious American, Baronius, etc...?
57 - Franco
REMF, Baronius is right. What is this obsession of yours about Dave and lying?
Direct Question to you REMF:
Have you ever told a lie?
Now before answering that question, please remember
#50 â€"REMF…… A lie will always be a lie, whether it was yesterday, 10 months ago, or a hundred years ago.
The only thing you show perfection in is Ad Hominem attacks, which if you really had any grasp of its core meaning and how it clearly revels what you are, and what your not, you would surly avoid using it at all costs. Those chosen actions of yours are the joke, not Dave’s shooting tail or spelling errors.
I don’t offer this post to come to Dave’s defense, he can do that for himself. I bring it up in hopes you will stop embarrassing yourself by consistently repeating your limited and pitiful discussion/debating skills that can rise no higher then Ad Hominem attacks. Ever been embarrassed for someone?
58 - Baronius
I use a nom de plume because my birth name is Bliffle L. Moonraven. It'd be confusing. (And yes, my middle name is Lumpy.)
59 - Clavos
Mine is a nom de guerre, rather than a nom de plume, because I'm on the lam from the authorities for repeated attempts on the life of Santa Claus, whom I've hated intensely ever since 1953, when he didn't bring me that red racing bicycle.
I also advocate the violent overthrow of the NCAA for no special reason other than my proclivity for anarchy.
60 - Dr Dreadful
Writing under a nom de plume is an ancient literary and particularly journalistic tradition. Unless the writer is deliberately trying to deceive or make his/her writings appear to be someone else's, it doesn't signify a lack of integrity.
Personally, I post as Dr Dreadful because my real name is rather unfortunate (the last one, anyway). In fact, when we got married I insisted that my wife keep her name. I wouldn't wish mine on anybody.
OK, Chris - get your [personal attack deleted] button ready!
61 - REMF
"Ever been embarrassed for someone?"
- Franco
Yes, for Nalle, whenever he uses one of his twelve different excuses for not enlisting in the military during the first Gulf War.
62 - Silver Surfer
Doc, your surname isn't Dick is it? There was a politician here named Richard Face. D'ya reckon he didn't cop some sh.t as a young bloke??
That'd be the aussie equivalent of a boy named Sue, I reckon. He was a tough sort of fella too.
63 - Dr Dreadful
No, it's not Dick. Although if it were, I'd like my first name to be Hugh and my middle initial to be G.
I'm reminded of an old Not the Nine O'Clock News skit in which Rowan Atkinson played an American presidential hopeful called Richard Head. His slogan was something like "Put Dick Head in the White House". Priceless.
64 - REMF
"As for your joy in catching Dave in a lie"
- Baronius
"What is this obsession of yours about Dave and lying?"
- Franco
At least neither of you sugar-coated it by calling it "literary license"...
65 - Zedd
Clavos sed:Al-Qaeda (The Base) sprang from this chain of events, coming to full flower as a result of two events in 1979: The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ascension to power in Iran of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, also a militant religionist and Islamic supremacist.
Who armed and trained those that fought in Afghanistan against the Soviets? We did. We created them. Sorry. It hurts I know and the Easter Bunny is not real too. Hang on there bud, there there, hug for you....
66 - Franco
#65 â€"Zedd
um…Zedd,…..Clavos knows this……...um....welcome to the party.
67 - The Obnoxious American
#65 um everyone knows this. (Last I will comment on this article so I can focus on the next one and the rest of the items in my life BUT) who cares? We supported OBL in a big way many years ago. We supported Saddam in a big way many years ago. Does that automatically mean we must continue to support him regardless of his behavior whether we agree with it or not? No.
What kind of foolishness are you bringing to the discussion? This is the kind of discourse that makes me sad for Democrats. It's in my tagline - America has made it's mistakes. Part of being human is making mistakes, learning from them and improving on them is how you deal with mistakes. Not continuing an alliance that you don't agree with. Not supporting an enemy to save face because you once supported him in the past. And certainly not by doing nothing because once long ago you made the wrong decision.
If you want to see this is a paradox then thats your bad. Changing courses to deal with changing situations is good. Changing principles on the other hand is not (i.e. 90% of this country supported Bush after 911).