Today on Blogcritics
Home » The Folly of the Iraq War

The Folly of the Iraq War

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

The closing item on the NBC Nightly News several evenings ago was the story of an elderly woman in Georgia who says good-bye to all the soldiers leaving for the middle east from an airbase outside Savannah. It has been estimated that she has bid adieu to around 56000 men and women as they boarded planes over the last three and a half years. She is a grand, somewhat blousy cracker of a woman. It's a great gesture on her part.

Over the last few years there have been a number of similar stories of extraordinary support for our troops and/or their families, like the various groups across the country that have provided helmet liners with concussive protection to soldiers in need of them, that the government failed to provide.

Similar stories made the airwaves during the much briefer Gulf War in the 1990s and, of course, during the seemingly interminable Vietnam War in the 1960s and 70s. It is truly great when people come to the fore to help the young men and women placed in harm's way in service to their country. We often see that, while war can and does bring out the worst in us, the best instincts of humanity also tend to surface.

As great as all that is, one is left to ponder why any such efforts are necessary in the first place. Our military is killing and being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan every day. Why? Ostensibly to stem the tide of terrorism. I won't go into all of that. We know the drill, the reasons Bush & company gave for the Iraq invasion. We also know that most of those "reasons" were not substantiated. No Al Qaida connection, no 9/11 connection, no WMDs. Let's see. What does that leave? Saddam Hussein was a murderous, eminently evil bastard, a despot of the first order, who killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. Horribly true. Is there anything regretable about his fall and subsequent execution? No, nothing.

However, all of that does not meet a litmus test for our going to war. Does anyone believe that things are better in Iraq now? Iraqis are dying by the score daily. In the end does it really matter who is doing the killing? Saddam, Americans, or your neighbors? Is the United States measurably safer from terrorist attacks as a result of our involvement in Iraq?

Not only is Iraq in a state of chaos, the entire region is becoming unsettled owing to the sectarian violence between Shiites and Sunnis. There are both Shiites and Sunnis in Iran, Syria and several other countries in the area. It is not much of a stretch to see how the violence could spread. Additionally, terroist groups like Al Qaida and others have taken advantage of this situation by instigating violence in such a way as to cast blame on one sect or the other. If what is going on in Iraq presently does not qualify as civil war, it's the next thing to it. To argue the point is splitting hairs.

Bush's obsession with bringing down Saddam has cost us dearly. We are now mired in a conflict from which there is no graceful exit. This is reminiscent of our involvement in Vietnam which was nearly twenty times as costly in American lives, and probably dozens, perhaps hundreds of times more costly in the combined American, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and other lives than all those lost in the Iraqi conflict to date.

The 57000+ American and countless other lives lost in the Vietnam conflict absolutely died in vain. The so called "domino" still did its work, and to what effect? Now, Vietnam is a country that has largely rebuilt itself with an economy that is on the upswing and is generally well respected in the world community. And all of those people died for what, again?

The same can be said for our involvement in Iraq. At some point we will withdraw most or all of our troops from Iraq, perhaps quietly, perhaps ignominiously as in Vietnam. What will be left behind? A unified country with a strong democratic government as Bush hopes? Perhaps. More likely Iraq will further devolve into total chaos and all out civil war. The entire middle east could be left a virtual powder keg. As loathsome as Saddam's regime was, it was at least stable. Had we limited our military efforts to Afghanistan, little of the instability that now persists in the area would have materialized.

George Bush may well be left with a legacy he never imagined when he made his triumphal "mission accomplished" appearance on the carrier, USS Lincoln, or when he uttered his loathsome "bring 'em on" challenge to the Iraqi insurgents. The whole region could be engulfed (no pun intended) in sectarian war. Terrorist groups will be having a heyday. Israel will be rendered more vulnerable to attacks from all directions. The United States will have so much egg on its face that we will be indiscernable from a western omelet.

And all of the death will have been in vain. But, hey, maybe we can get cheaper gas.

Powered by

About Baritone

  • SHARK

    Um, Baritone, meet Dave Nalle.

    ====

    PS: Welcome to Blogcritics: prepare to park your socialistic, anti-american, terrorist empowering, troop-undermining, baby-killing, Darwin pushing, flower-painted VW mini bus in the Lowest Level of the Circled Streets of Semantic Hell, also known affectionately as “Nalle Avenue”

  • troll

    I can’t help but imagine that Bush’s first response to 911 – ‘We’re at War!’ – was said with a smile

    the allies tried and hanged German leaders for waging aggressive war…

    Saddamize Bush&Co

  • Nancy

    Like one of my bumper stickers sez: Impeach Bush & Cheney … & then HANG them!

  • Nancy

    Poor Arch, Redtard, Big Dog, & Co: yet another commie leftist moonbat to battle. They’re sprouting up like toadstools.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Except for that interesting opening anecdote this is just a rehash of stuff we’ve all seen and said before. Let’s bring on some new thoughts on this subject.

    Dave

  • MCH

    ^ Are Vox Populi and Dave Nalle one-in-the-same?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    Baritone – welcome to BC!

    I’ve read some of your comments scattered about, and look forward to more articles. This one is concise and cogent, thanks for the read.

    Vox makes a bit of a point, let’s see something else…reading Baritone’s blurb gives me a bitof an idea…

    Baritone, what effect do you see on Administration policy in Iraq from the “born again” perspective avowed by W and others? How is that possibly reconciled with the secularists of the neocons who wrote the policies? (Wolfowitz/Perle/Cheney/Rumsfeld)

    For the new byline…

    the Tao of D’oh

  • Martin Lav

    Easy D’oh …. all you have to do is ask for forgiveness and your soul is saved.

    Hell, even Saddaam did that before the floor was dropped.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    I dunno, Martin. My thinking is that it may have something to do with these thoughts.

    “those who know what’s best for us, must rise and save us from ourselves.”

    Could just be me.

  • Emry

    “Are Vox Populi and Dave Nalle one-in-the-same?”.

    Why do you ask?

  • Martin Lav

    “”Are Vox Populi and Dave Nalle one-in-the-same?”.

    Why do you ask?”

    Probably because no one wants to see more than 1 highly delusional war marketer on BC….

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Martin Lav,

    Are we to assume then that Saddam now resides serenely at the foot of allah, or whatever god he chose? If so, what the hell. I might as well rape and pillage, gas and gun down a few thousand people, and have bad taste in home decor. Just so long as I ask god’s forgiveness just prior to drawing my last breath, I’ll get my ticket on the paradise express. That’s great!

    God’s a hell of a guy. My kind of people.

  • Martin Lav

    Baritone,

    That’s exactly my point.
    GWB as a re-born Christian believes that.
    Hasn’t he pretty much done everything you state with his army and doesn’t he believe he’s doing it either in the name of God or at his “Fathers” direction?
    I’d say he believes that he is forgiven, just as much as ole Hussein thinks his God forgave him.

    Makes sense don’t it?

  • Nancy

    IMO he has the deaths of at least 3000 Americans on his head; people being killed because you went to war for profit & ego has to count for something at the foot of the “justice throne”, surely?

    If I were Dubya & truly believed, I’d be hiding under the bed in one of Cheney’s bunkers with ashes & sackcloth of penance on my head about now. I think like his faux Texas cowboy act, his ‘born-again’ religion is another pretty story he & Rove cooked up for political advantage. Just like his much-vaunted “service” in the reserves.

  • Martin Lav

    “his faux Texas cowboy act”

    You referring to Dave Nalle?

  • Nancy

    I think you know full well I’m referring to Dubya. For all I know Dave is a real Texas redneck even if he has family that own property in Maine. I don’t know where he stems from. But I DO know where Dubya was born & raised, & it wasn’t TX.

  • Martin Lav

    Maine?
    Could Dave really be the BIG W in disguise?
    His constant defense of W’s position, hidden behind veiled opposition to his tactics and executions, leads me to believe that maybe he is Bush’s good twin.

  • Nancy

    Nah – his ears aren’t big enough, & he doesn’t look like a depressed chimp. Also his vocabaleery is too good.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Of course, GWB believes he is doing god’s bidding. I don’t believe there is any god to hand out retribution or forgiveness. Killing in the name of any god is evil, and in and of itself, pointless. I’ve never understood people who claim to be “god’s warriors.” If god is omnipotent, what the hell does he need with any of us? Isn’t he the all powerful smiter? Let him do his own damn smiting.

    As to D’oh’s query regarding the born again GWB and the secular neocons:

    This is what I feel is the ultimate hypocracy of the current administration. It sets up Bush as even more of a clueless puppet. The neocons are nothing if not opportunists. It’s difficult to imagine Cheney, Rumsfeld, etal as being motivated by any religious fervor. They are pragmatists of the first order. Karl Rove engineered the coming together of the political conservative wing of the GOP with the christian fundamentalists. Had he failed in that effort, Bush would have never set his butt down in the oval office.

    I can’t remember where, but I have either read or heard – perhaps on NPR – how, after the 2004 election, the more secular minded White House staffers became openly derisive toward the born agains. If true, it doesn’t surprise me. The neocons are a cynical, self-serving bunch.

    Perhaps my post does represent a rehashing of things we have heard and read. I’m not sure, however, if it can be reiterated enough, even if it is largely water over the dam. We obviously didn’t learn anything from Vietnam. It seems there are always some cowboys with itchy trigger fingers out and about, and, unfortunately, sometimes they make it into the White House.

    I do believe that the possible unsettling of much of the middle east by the growing sectarian violence in Iraq is a relatively new consideration. Whenever and however we make our exit from Iraq, unless great progress is made before, and the government in Iraq is very strong, the sectarian violence is likely to overtake the country and obviously, it could spread out from there to the entire middle east and beyond.

    Dave – If you’ve got anything new to offer, I’m all eyes.

    Shark – I haven’t killed any babies yet today. Hope to catch up over the week end. Yeah, I like Darwin. He used his brain, his cognitive ability. It seems that most people on the right choose not to. Just an observation. I do need to touch up the paint on by mini-bus. Thanks for reminding me.

    Nancy – perhaps we shouldn’t hang Bush and Cheney deserving though they may be. I think that in time their gross incompetence, self aggrandizement, poor judgment and mis-calculations will come back to haunt them. Hopefully, history will judge them thus.

    In the meantime we will be forced to live with (and perhaps die for) their mistakes for years, perhaps decades to come.

    Happy days.

  • Martin Lav

    Well he is a master of disguises you know ….. after all he managed to fullfill his entire obligation to the National Guard without anyone ever seeing him there.

  • Nancy

    Dubya or Dave? Be specific – I’m easily confused these days.

  • Martin Lav

    Dubya…….didn’t the veterans for truth or was it the Flyboys with no eyes or some other non-partisan group…..say they don’t ever recall young GW hanging around the hangers?

  • Nancy

    Ah – that was his COMMANDER, the guy in charge who had no recollection or records of W. ever being there after the first meeting. Thanks for the clarification. :)

  • SHARK

    Baritone on Bush and his legacy:

    “…history will judge them thus. In the meantime we will be forced to live with (and perhaps die for) their mistakes for years, perhaps decades to come.”

    Aside from the 3000+ dead american soldiers and the allah-knows-how-many dead Iraqi civilians, this is the great tragedy of the Bush Blunder.

    Pandora is a bitch.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Yes, dubya was born in that part of east Texas known as Kennebunkport. There’s a whole passal of cowpunchers all along the Maine seaboard don’t ya know? Yeehaw!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    I think W was born in Connecticutt, actually. The family estate in Kbunkport is known as “Walker’s Point” and is a very old family asset named after the same ancestor as the W in George’s name, as well as in his father’s.

    Just a bit of clarity from someone in Maine who has worked in the houses surrounding Walker’s point when he was fixing TVs.

  • JR

    George Bush, Jr. was born in New Haven, CT. His father was born in Milton, MA (a suburb of Boston).

    Kennebunkport, ME and Walker, TX are just they places they go to escape the urban sprawl their policies promote.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I stand corrected. GWB’s birthplace is listed as New Haven, Conn. I forget what part of Texas that’s in. A little further south I think. Kennebunkport is just the current family hide out.

  • MCH

    “Dubya…….didn’t the veterans for truth or was it the Flyboys with no eyes or some other non-partisan group…..say they don’t ever recall young GW hanging around the hangers?”
    – Martin Lav

    There were two different entities offering rewards to anyone who witnessed GW serving at Dannelly AFB in ’72-73. Cartoonist Gary Trudeau offered $10,000, and The Texans For Truth offered $50,000.

    No one ever collected.

  • MCH

    “Ah – that was his COMMANDER, the guy in charge who had no recollection or records of W. ever being there after the first meeting. Thanks for the clarification. :)”
    – Nancy

    Actually that was General William Turnispeed, the CO of Dannelly at the time GW was ordered there. According to Turnispeed, Bush NEVER showed up, not even once.

  • Martin Lav

    MCH,

    I was waiting for you to come to my aid.
    I couldn’t remember the “pacifics” but I do remember.

    I don’t recall the reward, that’s too F’n funny/sad.

  • MCH

    “Well he is a master of disguises you know ….. after all he managed to fullfill his entire obligation to the National Guard without anyone ever seeing him there.”
    – Martin Lav

    “Dubya or Dave? Be specific – I’m easily confused these days.”
    – Nancy

    Dubya. Nalle has NEVER enlisted, nor served.

  • Martin Lav

    “Could Dave really be the BIG W in disguise?”
    “Dubya. Nalle has NEVER enlisted, nor served.”

    Well one out of 2 aint bad……enlisted, not served……

  • MCH

    Yeah, and actually cheated to buck the line in front of a waiting list of 500 guys for the Texas National Guards…and then was promoted to liuetenant without even attending officer’s training school…and then was photographed wearing a ribbon he didn’t earn…and then…well, it goes on-and-on…

    awolbush.com

  • MCH

    Re #5;

    To whomever it may concern:

    This comment was originally forged as coming from “Vox Populi” and signed “Dave”; after I questioned (in #6) whether Vox Populi and Nalle were the same person, Nalle went back, deleted the “Vox Populi” and inserted his own name.

    Isn’t this the same kind of shit he’s passed judgment on others for in the past? What a hypocrite!! (But I already knew that)

  • Martin Lav

    Is this the same guy that was ridiculing Kerry for being against the war before he was for it?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    On to the actual topic.

    The Intel report on Iraq came out this morning.

    Here’s the story, and a link to the actual report is on the page in .pdf format.

  • troll

    from the report (quoted for Dave and Lumpy):

    *Iraq’s neighbors influence, and are influenced by, events within Iraq, but the
    involvement of these outside actors is not likely to be a major driver of violence or
    the prospects for stability because of the self-sustaining character of Iraq’s internal
    sectarian dynamics.*

  • SHARK

    ~CA-CHING!

    no, wait, intel report…

    uh, do I smell…

    MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA?!

    =====

    ~can’t wait to see how Nalle spins this one.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    This whole thing seems to be going looney tunes, but I like pudding pops.

    I think Iraq may go BOOM!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    Baritone, Iraq has been going “boom” since we invaded…or at least when the looting started.

    This may explain why the entire situation is straight fucked from the American perspective.

    Could just be me.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Actually, it’s the rest of the world that may go “boom.” I know it’s old news, but it goes back to Bush and company insisting on invading Iraq. Had we remained focussed on and in Afghanistan, the Talaban and Osama, we could be in a very different situation today. It is at least possible that Osama would now be history. If Bush had not flushed pretty much any and all good will this country had down the toilet with the Iraqi invasion, we could still find ourselves in relative harmony with the world.

    The problem with Afghanistan is that there just isn’t any real money to be made there. Of course, there’s no oil. Now Iraq; you could make a buck there. Why fight over a country that has nothing to offer?

    My son lives in Germany. He does not advertise his being an American. He has found himself in a number of uncomfortable situations when people discovered it. They just don’t like Americans.

    I wonder why?

    Could it be that the irresponsible actions of our country have made this world a much more dangerous place to live?

  • Clavos

    Could it be that the irresponsible actions of our country have made this world a much more dangerous place to live?

    Or could it be we’re a nation of arrogant, smug assholes who think our country and political system are better than anyone else’s?

    Anyone remember the phrase “Ugly American?”

    We’ve been hated all over the world for decades.

    And with good reason.

  • STM

    Come on Clav … it’s not that bad. Yes, there are classic examples of the ugly American. Some of the current US administration sadly falls into that category.

    Equally, there’s a hard-core of professional America-haters out there (running the full gamut from box-cutter-wielding suicide hijackers to trendy, lefty US college/university professors and their little chardonnay socialist cliques of yuppies who’ve never done a hard day’s work in their lives but love to bang on about workers and rights) but the truth is, while some might have a fair argument for US political and economic interference, a lot of America-haters outside America use the US as a scapegoat for their own self-perpetuating ills – Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, Cuba and some hard-line religious cultists in the middle-east being the classic examples.

    Perhaps some should look at the ugliness within their own societies or cultures before rounding on the US, which, while very far from perfect, at least attempts a nod towards a free, if not totally fair, society.

    Fact is, the US has been right on a number of occasions in its fears about what some regimes might do – from our era, Cambodia being one that springs to mind.

    Bush was wrong to invade Iraq on a pretext, and the conduct of the war has been wrong. But in waging a campaign elsewhere against people who plot mass murder, what would the loony left have the US do? Negotiate, and engage in a bout of self flagellation for its foreign policy failures?

    Oh sorry … some people just don’t want to talk. They just want to impose a world-wide islamic state under Sharia law, where the heads of infidels are stacked in nice little piles and where women have no rights except the right to expect to be treated like goods and chattels and to get a clip around the ear every now and then.

    But because they can’t do that, and they don’t have the wherewithal to do anything else, they’ll just settle for killing as many of us as they can through some twisted logic justified by an open interpretation of a book written in the middle ages.

    As for the commos, that’s an ideology that’s already been consigned to the dustbin of history where it belongs … some idiots just haven’t worked out yet that human nature prevents the dream of a utopian paradise ever becoming reality. Instead, the leaders of such regimes ignore the suffering of their own people while using resources that belong to their people to shore up their grip on power.

    At least in the US, if you don’t like a president or a president’s party, you can vote them out, even if you don’t have a lot of choice.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Oh, yes. “The Ugly American” was a book published in the early 1960s regarding our messing around in southeast Asia which was, of course, a prelude to the Vietnam War.

    I am not quite so harsh on us as some, but we obviously came to believe in our press clippings in the years following WWII. Our arrogance started grating on people many years ago.

    There is reason to believe that our system of government is in many ways superior. The US Constitution is, I believe, perhaps the single greatest political document ever written. And it largely leaves out any consideration of god. (Yay!)

    I suppose we are due a bit of humility. Americans are not any god’s gift to humanity.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    The *knot* IS Gordian in it’s proportions, more then enough to stupify.

    It seems like there are so many consequences with the 2.0 version of a new world order.

    Maybe we should remember certain principles that better show who we, as a nation, are. No doubt we have the right to defend ourselves…but how we do it is the test of our national character. Cutting corners, and the “ends justify the means” kind of shit that allows torture, and pre-emptive invasion…suspension of rights… all these things lessen us as much if not more than anything else. Doing the right thing, and living up to your principles when it’s easy is NO test.

    Standing up, and doing the right thing when it’s hard, that’s the real test.

    And we ain’t doing great on that front lately. Here’s to trying to make things better, rather than fucking them up more.

    A dream, I know.

  • STM

    “I suppose we are due a bit of humility. Americans are not any god’s gift to humanity”

    Yes to the first bit, and yes and no to the second bit. If the US could accept that it’s actually an imperialist/neo-colonialist power not very different to the one it criticised and railed against in Britain, rather than pretending to do what it does under the guise of spreading freedom, that might be a good start.

    Nevertheless, and this had nothing to do with Iraq but now might, I don’t believe it has to stand by and wave flowers while people plot its demise through mass murder.

    On the Constitution: many of the freedoms contained within the US constitition were already mostly guaranteed under common law (and still are), and have their basis in English common law, which is why many other countries whose political/legal systems have evolved virtually identical to those of the US have all those same rights enshrined under law as well. They include such things as the right to a speedy and fair trial and the right to silence, and full protection under law of an accused’s rights, which Bush wants to do away with in Guantanamo Bay.

    It’s a good document for sure, but too much is made of the Constitition by Americans, usually by Americans who have no understanding that the same rights are afforded under law to citizens in many countries outside the US, including some which might now be considered to be outside the sphere of US political influence (New Zealand, which refuses to allow US nuclear armed/powered ships to dock in its ports, would be a classic example).

    Perhaps it’s simply time for the US to accept that some countries just don’t want McDonald’s capitalism dressed up as “freedom” foisted upon them … perhaps, like the US did 200 years ago, they want the right to decide their own destinies and to set the parameters, taking into consideration various cultural factors, for what they might feel constitutes their own brand of fair governance and social justice.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    On the whole bit about the Iran connection, and what’s happening with them…or at least what we have been told the last few weeks, and heard from all the elements of the echo chamber…

    Bush administration officials acknowledged Friday that they have yet to compile evidence strong enough to back up publicly their claims that Iran is fomenting violence against U.S. troops in Iraq.

    Even better stuff in the article itself, like: “The truth is, quite frankly, we thought the briefing overstated, and we sent it back to get it narrowed and focused on the facts,” national security advisor Stephen J. Hadley said Friday.”

    I couldn’t make shit like this up, folks.

  • STM

    There is no doubt Iran has engaged in some meddling in Iraq (it always has) … what I want to know is, why didn’t the genius advisers in London and Washington on their $200,000 plus paypackets understand that before they went ahead and created a classic power vacuum with their invasion?

    A quick look at the history books might have given them a bit of a tip-off in that regard.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Re: #48. How they could not have compiled that information is a mystery to me, when sources outside the administration have compiled so much compelling evidence of Iranian involvement. Maybe we’re looking at a once burned, twice shy kind of reaction to the WMD debacle.

    And despite your condescending reference to the ‘echo chamber’, those in the military and on the ground in Iraq – including many Iraqis – who see the evidence of Iran’s activities are NOT echoing the administration, as you suggest. They’re dragging the administration kicking and screaming into the harsh light of reality on this one.

    Wake up and smell 2007. Most of our eyes are open about the situation in Iraq. Maybe it’s time for you to put the past behind you and open yours too.

    Dave

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    Maybe I will take anything this Administration, and those who agreed with it on the entire Iraq fiasco, with a fucking HUGE grain of salt until they fucking PROVE they can pour piss out of their own boots for less than $10 million an hour and a hideous cost in lives.

    Get back to me with a track record of accuracy…or even being fucking close 3 times in a row…THEN we can talk.

    You might want to wake up and smell November 2006, you appear to have missed that nobody is buying bullshit in wholesale quantities anymore.

    If those who have been nothing but wrong want to get taken seriously, they had best have ALL their metaphorical ducks in a row, beyond a shadow of a doubt, and triple checked in triplicate.

    Because it’s all the same bullshit that was done before until proven otherwise.

    the Tao of D’oh

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    You might want to wake up and smell November 2006, you appear to have missed that nobody is buying bullshit in wholesale quantities anymore.

    And my point is that you seem to have decided it’s your turn to start selling the bullshit – at least based on your comments here.

    Dave

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    And what do you allege that I am “selling”?

    Nice try, but there ain’t no “there”, there.

    Not selling anything, just calling them like I see them, poor try at spin, well below your usual standards.

    Some things are just never gonna stop.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    You’re still selling the tired old right-wing conspiracy paranoia you’ve always been selling. You just repackage it periodically to try to make us forget that it’s all just a bundle of irrational prejudices untainted by any kind of objectivity.

    Dave

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    I call bullshit. Please point out, and cite or link, to the “theory” you are talking about?

    Then go up and play the link in #51 again, you appear to desire being placed in the category that clip talks about.

  • Bliffle

    Dave attempts a graceful pirouette to distract the audience from the ugly sight of oozing, stinking Bush lies:

    “How they could not have compiled that information is a mystery to me, when sources outside the administration have compiled so much compelling evidence of Iranian involvement. Maybe we’re looking at a once burned, twice shy kind of reaction to the WMD debacle.

    Poor things! The Bush worthies were ‘burned’! They were not the deceivers, but the deceived. They didn’t outsource liars duties to professional lying experts, in the good old subcontracting way, they had lies forced on them. They were the unwitting victims of practiced liars.

    It was a ‘debacle’, sorta like an accident, couldn’t be helped. It’s probably all Clintons fault. Not Cheneys fault, noone in the administration can be blamed for anything more than being too trusting, too gullible. Poor things!

    Will the BC fans be dazzled by the flash of Daves frilly pink tutu? Will a chorus line of Clavos and Baronius clones dazzle the audience with their long seductive limbs and twittering toes on point? Do they have sufficient attractions to distract eye and nose from the stinking rotting mass of exposed lies? Stay tuned.

  • troll

    (…and in the meantime – Vox Populi – agent provocateur and erstwhile factotum for the Washington elite sits at his favorite cafe around the corner from the University of Padua’s bookstore – his large brimmed gray fedora protects his eyes from the glare of the noonday sun – he is lost in thought

    noticing that he has finished his first half liter of a particularly good house red he motions to the waiter and wonders where it all went wrong…)

  • Bliffle

    The admin is so desperate they can’t even coordinate their own spin. And the MSM fails to point out their problems.

    Here we have the Intel Estimate saying it’ll take a year or two to get some Iraqi troops competent, and BushCo trying to peddle a short term surge to support Iraq. Doesn’t compute. We’ll have to have another surge in a couple months. this surge is the first step on the escalator. It’s good ol’ Vietnamization-type Escalation, folks. And they’ll have a ready made slogan in “support the troops, it would betray even more troops now to withdraw” because there will be even more troops dead, wounded and at risk.

    If you believe that this is the last time GWB will demand more troops you are daft.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Poor things! The Bush worthies were ‘burned’! They were not the deceivers, but the deceived. They didn’t outsource liars duties to professional lying experts, in the good old subcontracting way, they had lies forced on them. They were the unwitting victims of practiced liars.

    You can SAY this all you want, Bliffle, but you know perfectly well that the facts don’t exist to support your conclusion. There is NO definitive evidence that Bush’s promotion of WMDs was the result of anything more than overeagerness to accept the prevailing wisdom. Suspicions and distrust are NOT evidence.

    It was a ‘debacle’, sorta like an accident, couldn’t be helped. It’s probably all Clintons fault. Not Cheneys fault, noone in the administration can be blamed for anything more than being too trusting, too gullible. Poor things!

    How ironic you should bring up Clinton, since almost all of the WMD evidence originated in the Clinton administration and was the basis of his bombing of Baghdad – you do remember that, right? The key difference is that Clinton chose not to use it as a reason to invade Iraq as Bush I and Bush II did. That’s why he’s probably a better president than either of them. But he clearly DID believe the WMD evidence and he DID act on it.

    I have no particular affection for Bush or the War, but accusing him of fabricating evidence without hard facts to back up that OPINION is exactly the kind of fraud you’re accusing him of.

    Dave

  • http://www.friendlymisanthropist.blogspot.com alessandro nicolo

    Dave, some people just know. Facts be damned. Don’t you know that? I’m no fan of hyperbole from either side. STM, I must say: bingo. Well said. As for the Constitution, everyone talks about it but very few have read it or taken the time to enjoy just how this remarkable document came to be. Just the visions and debates alone between Hamilton and Jefferson are worth the time. Incidentally, did Hamilton win? I digress. The Consitution is the single greatest piece of political writings known to us at this stage of our political existence. As you said, at least Americans try. But what do we know? We’re just a couple of blokes from the Commonwealth, eh?

  • moonraven

    Now Dave has the NERVE to tell us that the CONVENTIONAL WISDOM was that Saddam had WMDs!

    And that Bush was just and Eager Beaver.

    Where does he get this crap, anyway?

    What CONVENTION? The GOP’s?

    And, more to the point, what WISDOM? The mere juxtaposition of the word WISDOM with the Bush Gang is the most flagrant example of an oxymoron I have yet seen on this site.

    A couple of years ago, archetypal psychologist James Hillman published a good book called A TERRIBLE LOVE OF WAR, which indicates that war as as much a part of the human set of proclivities as DNA.

    Much as I would gladly drag Bush and Cheney behind a speeding Ford Falcon through the streets of Bagdad (there’s my own violence patterning coming out), the real point here is it was not just them.

    And it was not just right-wing survivalist crackpots like Dave Nalle who cheered them on.

    It was millions of US citizens–who are now saying that Bush lied and took them in.

    Wow: Gullibility is now a mass psychosis to be trotted out to whitewash that just about everybody was ready to whoop it up and make war, not love.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    “Took in” 51%, not all.

    Put your broad brush down and step away.

  • moonraven

    Oh? I did not see 49% out there protesting when the Monkey with a Razor Blade (thanks, Hugo Chavez) invaded Iraq.

    I seem to remember, for example, that only one person in the House of representatives voted against the war.

    You have a very slippery memory, D’oh. Or a maleable one–sort of like silly putty, or dough.

  • moonraven

    My broad brush will stay exactly where it is.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    D’oh, at the time of the start of the war more like 67% were taken in. Remember that was a couple of years before the election.

    And the reason Bush was able to ‘take in’ people so effectively was that he believed what he was telling them himself, and even more, the WMD argument made so much sense that it HAD to be true, whether it was or not.

    You had a genocidal dictator who had used WMDs before, had funded and supported terrorists outside his borders, had maintained publicly that he DID have WMDs, refused to cooperate with UN inspectors, and had an avowed hatred for the US demonstrated by his attempt to assassinate a past president. Given ALL of that, who the hell would not be easily convinced that Saddam had WMDs.

    And if you say that you weren’t pretty sure in your heart that he did, then I suggest there’s at least a 3/4 chance that you’re lying.

    Dave

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    You know, you two deserve each other.

    [Edited] have a nice day.

  • moonraven

    D’oh, you’re a sore loser.

    Dave,

    1. There was no evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons. (And if he was such a badass, like you say, wouldn’t he have used them?)

    2. The US gave him chemical weapons (right from the hand of Donald “RUMSFLED”) so that he could use them against his opponents in the Iran/Iraq war. Yep, THOSE WMDs.

    3. Given all that–who wouldn’t be convinced that he had ‘em? THIS POSTER, for one. I never thought for one single minute that he had them–and there is ZERO chance that I am lying.

    4. And here’s the REAL kicker: If the Bush Gang had believed that Saddam really had WMDs, they would not have gone ANYWHERE NEAR Iraq!

    [Edited]

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMW5iYFGhM D’oh

    moonraven, your opinion matters little, but let me assure you “losing” has nothing to do with it.

    Rather it is sheer frustration that some are so blinded by their own prejudice and ignorance that rather than listening and working through a problem together for the betterment of all, some would rather bitch and whine and snark without adding anything useful or insightful to the overall discourse.

    Dave, you just insinuated that either I went along with yuor and the Adminstration’s bullshit, or somehow I was lying.

    Fuck that, [Edited]

    Like Shark, my record on the matter is right here on BC, and like him, I was correct……much more so than you , or the White House.

    Spin, lie, bullshit all you want. The facts are on record.

    to Shark and the rest – I’ve tried, in vain it seems…moron that I am, I’ve kept coming back time and again to try , time and again…in different ways and differing methods.

    waste of my fucking time

  • moonraven

    It’s not a waste of time, necessarily, as there are lurkers on all these threads who don’t post.

    Besides, if you don’t stay at it, you are just becoming part of the problem.

    Just MHO.

  • troll

    (D’oh – it’s a fucking drag sometimes but don’t let the seeming futility get you down

    as moonraven points out and we’ve been over before – some readers are paying attention)

  • D’oh

    Only because it’s you, troll…

    The only ones listening are the ones that don’t need to hear what’s being said…and nothing said will change one iota of the remainder reading.

    I know this, and have kept on for my own amusement, and in the hopes of bringing a smile or a thought now and again…enlightening via entertainment, different styles, different methods…same results, nothing changes…none even open their minds to hear.

    fuck that, I’m not interested in preaching to the choir, and have always refused being part of ANY echo chamber.

    My original methodology has been rejected by the editors, my current appears ineffectual and not as entertaining…even unaccessible to some(as Shark has pointed out elsewhere).

    It’s only been my obvious addiction to the community and love of discussion that keeps dragging me back here to comment. Maybe I should just switch to heroin.

    for you, troll…a touch of “why”….namaste’, my friend…

    the Tao of D’oh

  • Nancy

    Au contraire, the more the administration & its proponents try to shovel out the BS, the more important it is for others to call them on it. Even when you think you’re shouting in the wind, it’s not in vain. It’s not always that you’ll change someone’s mind, that’s true. But you can clarify or buttress the nascent courage of someone’s convictions. I don’t always know why I think/feel how I do, but I learn from D’oh & others how to deconstruct ‘straw men’ & fallacious arguments so at least others can’t pull the wool over my eyes even if I’m not articulate to say why – but troll, shark, D’oh, and many others are, & I always appreciate their voicing the arguments I am not articulate or experienced enough to marshal, & I learn. I suspect I’m not the only one, either. The lurkers do, too.

    Those who know the truth can’t just leave all the shouting to the Karl Roves of this world, repeating lies until everyone believes they’re truth. That’s what BushCo would LOVE to happen – that D’oh & his ilk give up & quit shouting, so they can have their way with the easily distracted sheeple & idiot MSM. When you’re tempted to quit, remember that Watergate started small & wee, like a snowflake that turned into an avalanche all the spin in the world couldn’t stem, because a few people were stubborn enough & dedicated enough to keep shouting the truth, to keep yanking the wandering attention of the MSM & public back to the inconvenient issues, so that Nixon ended up being destroyed by the record – his own records – just like Bush will. To quote The Enemy: “Stay the course!”. Because if we don’t, they will.

  • Lumpy

    I’m listening, d’oh.

    I’m listening to you reject reasonable even kind of tediously obvious statements, such as the indisputible claim that the WMD argument was very believable, and then ranting in rage and frustration that your twisted and hostile view of reality doesn’t instsntly win converts.

    And i’m listening to you sharing the same side of the argument with moonraven and shark, a delusional anti-american agitator and a cranky hippy hatemonger.

    you lack the ability to look at yourself objectively or you’d realize how far out of the rqtional mainstream you’ve driftee, as shown by the company you’re keeping.

  • Nancy

    Yes, and the rest of us listen to your self-serving delusions that BushCo has any credibility, Lumpy ol’ rock. Probably to preserve your self-esteem, to convince yourself that you weren’t lied to & used, that both your votes in 2000 & 04 weren’t a total waste & support of a corrupt, lying administration caught with its pants down in print, on camera, & on record. Sometimes it’s the cranks of the world, Lump, who are the canaries in the coal mines. It’s what they do best: warn the rest of us of poison in the air.

  • Emry

    Dear Dave, aka Vox Populi aka ( ??????? ) get real for a moment and explain why you’ve been posting under a name other than your own.

    Do you have permission to do that?

  • Clavos

    Why are you, Emry?

  • Emry

    Clavos, are you another figment of Nalle’s imagination?

    Let the guy answer for himself. Shake the bugger loose from your apron strings and let him speak.

  • Clavos

    I’m not answering for him; I’m asking you a question.

    If he wants to answer you, I’m sure he will.

    Meanwhile, my question is just as valid as yours. Why don’t you use your real name?

  • Emry

    I prefer to wait until Dave(Vox Populi)Nalle joins the discussion…unless of course you’re him.

  • Clavos

    No, I’m not he.

    But, you do raise an interesting issue: What other names have you commented under?

    Your insistent questions, on three threads, no less, beg the question, why the intense interest?

    Are you hiding something yourself?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Would you all like it if the site required (real name) registration?

  • Clavos

    How would you be able to verify and enforce it, Christopher?

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Do you always answer a question with a question? What is that, avoidance 101? I’m asking what people think…

  • troll

    D’oh – here’s for you my frustrated friend

    the d’oh of taos

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Remember that game on Whose Line Is It Anyway? where everyone had to speak in question form?

  • troll

    Chris – it doesn’t really matter to me but the psueds are fun…and some folks may be inhibited

    your mileage may vary

  • Bliffle

    I’m against realname registration, for anti-stalking reasons, but in favor of consistent use of one handle, and deadset against handle forgery. Forgery can be avoided by some form of digital signature, PGP is convenient. Multiple handles is very difficult to defend against.

  • Nancy

    I don’t know enough about your privacy programs to know if you can keep them secure? I don’t mind BC knowing – but I’d rather not have it available to every nutcase on this blogsite – like that maniac that was ranting on the Fatima thread. Can you all do that? We register w/you but it’s kept secure except from BC?

  • Nancy

    Failing that, can you mandate (& enforce) use of one handle? That would probably be best.

  • troll

    it doesn’t bother me that some folks would use multiple names…in fact I’m looking forward to reading a conversation between Dave and Vox

  • Emry

    Clavos #80…”No, I’m not he.”

    You wouldn’t be Nalle aka Vox Populi aka not being honest, would you?

    “But, you do raise an interesting issue: What other names have you commented under?”

    No as many as you, Clavos.

    “Your insistent questions, on three threads, no less, beg the question, why the intense interest?”

    Why not?

    “Are you hiding something yourself?”

    Are you?

    Here’s the problem with the Dave(Vox Populi)Nalle issue:

    He posts messages on the same thread UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES.

    If he wants to be Dave Nalle in “Bush’s Iraq Plan – Same Old, Same Old” for example, that’s fine with me. But when he posts IN that thread 7 times as Dave Nalle and 5 times as Vox Populi,

    HE’S BEING A DECEPTIVE JERK.

    So where is he and why doesn’t he have the guts to answer questions himself?

  • Bliffle

    Dave sez: “There is NO definitive evidence that Bush’s promotion of WMDs was the result of anything more than overeagerness to accept the prevailing wisdom.”

    That’s so easy to refute one is surprised it is even requested. Colin Powell, under orders from His Boss, said “we have incontrovertible proof…”, which was a lie because it was ‘controverted’ soon after the invasion. It couldn’t have been “incontrovertible” if it was subsequently refuted!

    Some people took Powell (and his boss) at their word, on their honor, that they had the solid evidence but could not reveal it until after invasion because of “sources and methods” security, and it had the desired effect. Many people sided with BushCo certain that the “incontrovertible” evidence would appear after invasion as justification. Powell and Bushco had vowed their sacred honor on having seen the “incontrovertible proof” and we could trust them, they said.

    Can you blame people for being outraged by that lie about “incontrovertible proof”? Powell and Bush forfeited their own honor to suborn the honor of more honest men. That’s disgusting. But it IS a classic conman ploy (cf. “Yellow Kid Weill, Americas Greatest Conman” by Brennan).

    It wasn’t a little mistake. It wasn’t overeagerness. they said they KNEW, and they didn’t!

    And people who continue to alibi and quibble on their behalf are equally guilty of lying, because now everyone knows the truth.

    Liars!

  • Bliffle

    Lumpy sez: “…the indisputible claim that the WMD argument was very believable…”

    Believable, perhaps, by those who WANTED to believe it, but not “incontrovertible” as Powell, speaking for his boss Bush, aggressively asserted.

    It was NOT “incontrovertible”, as subsequent events proved, thus Powell/Bush were LYING when the words were spoken, and purposely, too, since they knew it was NOT incontrovertible.

  • JR

    Would you all like it if the site required (real name) registration?

    No. I’d stop commenting.

  • Emry

    Where’s Dave(Vox Populi)Nalle hiding? Come out, come out, WHATEVER you are!

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Hey!

    Anyone want to go for some doughnuts? I could make some coffee. Or maybe we should just do some yoga. Get centered. Rest your fingers. Give peace a chance.

    Om….

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    So where is he and why doesn’t he have the guts to answer questions himself?

    Enjoying my weekend because – I have a life.

    As for my ‘posing’ as Vox Populi, I’ll go over it one more time for you.

    It was the result of using Camino in an internet cafe while posting on another blog under that name. Camino has an annoying feature where it remembers similar fields and fills them in for you, so some posts went up here on BC under that name. Having editorial powers I was able to correct the error and put the comments under my name.

    It wasn’t exactly a clever deception since I signed the bottom of some of the posts with my name.

    But I do remain the voice of the people in spirit.

    Dave

  • Emry

    So where is he (Dave Vox Populi Nalle) and why doesn’t he have the guts to answer questions himself?

    “Enjoying my weekend because – I have a life.”

    Yet here he is, playing on the blog!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    My life ended abruptly, Emry.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Dave, all browsers do that and I’d have thought someone who spends so much time online would know that by now.

    Exactly why do you post on other sites under an assumed identity anyway?

    And why under that name? I can’t imagine for one nano-second that a self-proclaimed elitist like yourself could, in their wildest dreams, consider themselves as aligned with we the people. If you do, your thinking is totally out of control…

  • troll

    I cannot believe that you purged the Vox episode Dave…imo you took the situation and made it worse

    your explanation is clearly – not exactly honest – as there were comments in which you referred to Vox by name and most all of the Vox entries were not signed ‘Dave’ which is your habit

    I would have respected you for playing around and copping to it but this is bullshit

  • SHARK

    Wow. The “editor” of BC Politics — Dave Nalle — is a lying *****, isn’t he? Just a flat out liar.

    Nalle had two names; Vox Pop. played rabid, angry, insulting attack dog and cheerleader to Nalle’s ‘calm’, rational Professor over the last week or two. The only few comments from “Vox” that registered with me were those specifically mentioning me, SHARK.

    “Vox” attacked me in some pretty nasty, irrational, heavy-handed ways. It was in the same vein as the Nalle attacks at the time, (ie. you are a pessimist whose attitude harms the troops and all of America, etc etc. — heh) — but it was much nastier/explicit than Nalle’s normal “implicit” insulting style. As I recall — a few times — “Vox” followed “Dave” pretty quickly in the comments, attacking me with a ferocity that was thematically similar to Nalle, but much more pissed off, crazy kinda sounding.

    And now Mr. game designer, digital font designer, etc. comes up with some cock-a-mamey sleight-of-hand story about an internet cafe form?

    What BULLSHIT.

    LISTEN, Nalle, straight up, dude: You have finally shown yer true colors, and confirmed, yet again, what SHARK and others have been saying about you for years around here:

    You epitomize the GOP/Bush Junta and what’s been going on in this nation for the last SIX YEARS: YOU ARE A CHICKENSHIT, MANIPULATIVE, LYING BASTARD.

    Everything you say is suspect, nom de plume boy. You should hang your head in shame and go play internet multi-personalities in some teenage chat room.

    =======

    re. This subject and Chris Rose’s question about identity:

    1) I will remain anonymous or go play elsewhere.

    2) Really, in the scheme of things, I don’t give a flying fuck if somebody creates a dozen “personalities” to use on this site — including Dave Nalle.

    (The only problem with Nalle doing it is that — as “editor” — he has a sense of authority and trust that is probably not best-served by also being a lying, cheating, manipulative bastard.)

    As I’ve said around here so many times before, my ‘internet’ Mantra is: IT’S ONLY DOTS ON A SCREEN.

  • SHARK

    From “Bush’s Iraq Plan: Same Old – Same Old

    #14 – Nalle: “Sorry to see you’ve been reduced to stalker status. There used to be depths to which you would not stoop, but I guess you have now fully embraced the role of ghost pointing a hollow sleeve and moaning senselessly.”

    #39 Vox to SHARK: “It sickens me to see you celebrating the death of our troops and the torment of the Iraqi people. Your attitude and the attitude of people like you are directly responsible for our failure in Iraq. To see you boasting about it like a little child sickens me. You’re a sociopath.

    see BOLD items for IRONY beyond Hell & Gods

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Shark: Here’s a good question for you: If it’s only dots on a screen, why do you get so wound up?

    I may have slightly misphrased my impromptu question in that I meant it two ways. How do you all feel about the site introducing several levels of commenter? The idea would be to give different comment abilities or privileges to say, BC Writers or regular visitors, in comparison to the passing unregistered commenter. You could of course be registered as whatever name you wanted.

    This WOULDN’T mean people have to give their real names or anything, that just came out in response to people above demanding to know the real id of some other commenters. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression in my spontaneous remark.

  • SHARK

    C.Rose: “Here’s a good question for you: If it’s only dots on a screen, why do you get so wound up?”

    Who says I get wound up? I always type with a big grin on my face.

    […and btw, in case you haven’t figured it out, I’m a writer and “SHARK” is a *character; I don’t always agree with what he says or how he says it, but I usually learn something from ‘him’ — and besides, he cracks me up!]

    *the ONLY name I’ve ever used on BC

  • SHARK

    NOTE: I believe that Dave Nalle/Vox has violated the trust of the visitors, regulars, writers, and contributors.

    He should be stripped of his “official duties” for BLOGCRITICS, and hand over his set of “key” to the Blogcritics Politics site.

    …Since he’s a lying [self-deleted] who refuses to own up to his little deception.

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

    From “Support Our Troops: A Crock”

    #44 – “Vox” used fake name as an opportunity to call Nancy a hypocrite.

    #72 – as Dave Nalle: “…I’m just motivated by a raging desire to see people like you exposed for the destructive, inhumane and illiberal extremists you are.”
    ======

    From “Facts about the “Surge” in US Troops for Iraq”

    #12 — “Vox”: “…given the level of pure hatred displayed in some of the comment threads here, you deserve some credit for even trying to post something objective. Truth may be your armor, but people like shark will still try to smear it in shit…”

    [“Truth may be your armor” … Nalle’s “poet” is coming out here! ahahahah!]

    #30 as “Vox”: “Maybe I’m weird, but it seems to me that actually taking pleasure in the idea of the US military being defeated by terrorists is a hell of a lot more than just ‘disagreeing’.”

    [He’s reinforcing his own theme here… ahahahahaha: A Nalleian theme being stated as fakey-dopey naive sarcasm. Sheesh.]

    #32 as “Vox”: “…Nancy, are you familiar with Shark? He’d clearly be happier if the US lost in Iraq. Anything to take down Bush.”

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    If this is you typing with a big grin on your face, I’d hate to see what you’re like when you do lose it.

  • MCH

    “It was the result of using Camino in an internet cafe while posting on another blog under that name.”
    – Dave Nalle/Vox Populi

    Wow, you mean you ventured outside your fortified compound? Isn’t that dangerous? Aren’t you afraid of being attacked by a stray dog, or did you take your .06 with you…?

  • Clavos

    shark sez:

    “Vox” attacked me in some pretty nasty, irrational, heavy-handed ways.

    Wow! Pot, meet kettle.

    Feh.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Shark, when you start posting under YOUR real name and take responsibility for the vile shit you spew over this site daily, then your complaints about names might start to deserve some serious consideration. Since you don’t have the balls or the honesty to do that, why should I give a rat’s ass about anything you write?

    And BTW, you look like a fool posting your bitchrant a day late and a few braincells short considering there are no Vox posts any longer and I explained why and how they existed on three threads more a day before you commented on them. And th eposts didn’t go away, they are all now just properly attributed.

    If you would like to tell me your real name I’ll gladly go and change your comments so they show it instead of ‘SHARK’, or are your words not worth standing by?

    Dave

  • MCH

    The difference is, Nalle, that Shark has never proclaimed himself to be BC’s self-appointed policeman/private invesigator like yourself, having even gone to lengths once of tracing a commenter’s IP all the way to China…

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    While sorting through all this blather, I have found a few relevant and cogent comments. By and large, however, it has mostly been a circus of personal attacks, profanity and name calling. Pretty infantile stuff. If I could, I’d suggest that you take your arguments outside. But alas.

    One of the problems that most of you seem to have is an assumption that whatever side you may be on, that the other side is always all wrong. The opposition are all incompetent, unscrupulous, unmitigated liars.

    I am no fan of Bush and company. They are responsible for the totally untenable situation in which we find ourselves in Iraq.

    However, Bush, Cheney, etal do not think of themselves as evil. While I am troubled with their respective motives, their alliances with christian fundamentalists and big corporate interests, I see them as no more nor no less culpable as many who have come before them. Osama believes himself to be a great leader and a hero. It’s all a matter of perspective.

    I essentially align myself with the Dems, but I certainly do not see them as faultless. Even the recent takeover of congress by the Dems is less a left wing victory than some may believe. A number of the new Democratic congress persons are clearly against the Iraq war and other elements of the Bush adenda. But many of them are social conservatives, stating their opposition to abortion and same sex marriage. The constitutional ammendment against same sex marriage remains very much alive even with democratic control in congress.

    Be mindful that this remains a largely conservative minded country. It is the most religious country in the western world. The fundamentalists have not lost, nor are they going to melt back into the wood work. There is work to be done, and we will get nowhere with assumptions that ALL of the opposition is ALL bad, or that the side on which any of you are aligned is ALL good.

    All this name calling crap just widens the gulf between us. That is school yard stuff.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Damn, Baritone. What the hell are you doing introducing a bit of common sense into the discussion.

    Dave

  • Emry

    “Be mindful that this remains a largely conservative minded country. It is the most religious country in the western world.”

    So when it invades a crippled, defenseless sovereign nation to grab its oil reserves, it must surely have some sort of God on its side.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Aw, heck, Dave, I’m just a wild and crazy guy.

    Everybody thinks that god is on their side. Everyone else is doomed to eternal hell.

    I think god is just a great kidder. What a guy. He’s sittin’ back, downin’ a few brewskies and hootin’ at our stupidity. (“Hey, Sebhael, Zethar, come sit yourselves down and pop open a Honey Brown. You gotta watch this.”) After all, think of it; wouldn’t you get bored if you were omnipotent, and omniscient to boot? It would be tough to keep things interesting; especially when you’ve got infinity to fill.

    (A bit earlier in the narrative I guess, but when you’re talking infinity, who can tell, right?: “Oh, man, what to do, what to do? — Man? Hey, that’s it! Man!! I’ll make man; give him sentience, and then, and then, YES! Condemn him to hell for using it. Ha, ha! This is great! Whoo doogies! Hey,Lucifer, get up off your moldering, undead ass. I got a job for you.”

  • NOT SHARK

    Nalle: “…when you start posting under YOUR real name and take responsibility for the vile shit you spew over this site daily, then your complaints about names might start to deserve some serious consideration.”

    False dichotomy. More sophistic bullshit. Change the subject.

    What I “do” has nothing to do with the fact that you Dave Vox — a BC “official” — created a fake screen name so you could call me a “sociopath” — toss in limp backup material for your own looney political points — and still maintain the LIE that you never call people names.

    Anyway, Vox Populi is a Liar.

    a Chickenshit.

    a Hypocrite.

  • SHARK

    Baritone: “All this name calling crap just widens the gulf between us. That is school yard stuff.”

    Baritione, yer new here, right.

    Give it a few months.

    You’ll be “fuck you”~ing like crazy, as soon as you realize that while you’re playing nice, “debating”, and presenting concise atheistic, liberal “FACTS” — your “opponents” [Bush, Cheney, Fundamentalists, CEO class, Dave Vox types, et al] are quietly raping, pillaging, and plundering this once great nation — while they lecture you on proper behavior.

    F’r instance: on “The FOLLY of the Iraq War”

    Um, “folly” sounds like a small error someone makes while serving tea.

    I might have said “folly” a few years ago, but after years of posting hundreds of much better, more entertaining, and more outraged IRAQ articles on Blogcritics — after YEARS of “debate” [read “subjective lies with objective, empirical support”] over $400 billion dollars, tons of “marketing” bullshit, and the deaths of over 3,000 Americans, I’d call it A FUCKING DISASTER.

    Not just a disaster, a “FUCKING” disaster.

    See. That tends to reflect my particular Reality Tunnel much better than “folly”.

    Same with Nalle Vox.

    He says he made a “mistake”.

    I say he’s a lying, manipulative chickenshit.

    See how that works?

    Just tryin’ to be helpful,
    xxoo
    S

  • SHARK

    *SHARK’S DISCLAIMER:

    I am an atheist and a political liberal. I have been blogging for almost a decade (and about 30 years before that in the real, non-vitual world) with concerns regarding the rise of religious fundamentalism and its influence on government at all levels. Much of my work has focussed on issues regarding the above, but I tend to meander about when something unrelated piques my interest. Especially when Dave Vox is an official of the BC site and also using fake screen names to boost his sagging self-esteem. Whatever I post here will by be unfalteringly scintillating and generally apropos of nothing.

    Forgive me in advance.

    : ) <— oh, did I mention I often resort to emoticons?

    **thanks for letting my borrow your personal “bridge-builder” bio, Baritone!

  • SHARk

    BTW: Just for the record:

    I work on the assumptions that ALL of the opposition is ALL bad — and that the side on which I’m aligned is PRETTY MUCH THE SAME — and will turn on me in a heartbeat.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    So, Shark, do you believe that if you expand your “fuck you’s” geometrically that you’ll win?

    I am new here, but I’ve been around probably a good deal longer than you have. I’ve seen all this shit before. It’s not original with all of you. This kind of dip shit banter didn’t originate with blogging. Do you really believe that your being obnoxious equates with being wise? I could just as easily come here and tell all of you to get fucked and kiss my voluminous ass, but doubt that it would get me anywhere.

    I am not shocked by the tenor of these “debates” just bewildered at how you can believe that you are advancing your cause in any effective way.
    There are always angry young men (and women) who scream at everybody to fuck off spewing spittal, but all that usually ends in more idiotic violence, more death and destruction perpetrated by self-righteous assholes who think they have all the answers, but in fact don’t understand shit.

    But, hey. Have a nice day.

  • moonraven

    1. I originally posted on theis site under the name I use for other writing–one of my two legal names–and immediately the multiple identity assholes here (Clavos, Franco and ol’ horseshitter Dave) decided they could invade the crap out of my privacy.

    2. I don’t know why you folks are surprised by Dave’s lies and generally decptive behavior on this site. I have called him a liar innumerable times, and his moniker for me for a week or so a couple of months ago was DUMB DECEPTIVE DAVE. If I say someone is lying, it’s because they are. If you think that sounds arrogant, find ONE instance–just ONE–on any of these threads where I have lied.

  • Clavos

    moonraven sez,

    and immediately the multiple identity assholes here (Clavos, Franco and ol’ horseshitter Dave) decided they could invade the crap out of my privacy.

    You’ve been told this before, but it obviously bears repeating:

    WHEN YOU PUBLISH ON THE INTERNET USING YOUR REAL NAME, YOU HAVE FORFEITED YOUR “PRIVACY.”

    It’s a simple concept, even you should be able to understand it.

  • troll

    (moonraven – off topic but…here’s one for you:

    the d’oh of taos)

  • SHARK

    Baritone: “So, Shark, do you believe that if you expand your “fuck you’s” geometrically that you’ll win? …I am not shocked by the tenor of these “debates” just bewildered at how you can believe that you are advancing your cause in any effective way.”

    Well, herein lies the easing of your bewilderment:

    I’m not here to advance my cause in any way, shape, or form. I have no cause, except to allow my muse to vent its spleen.

    (It keeps my blood pressure down.)

    ====

    Baritone: “I could just as easily come here and tell all of you to get fucked and kiss my voluminous ass, but doubt that it would get me anywhere.”

    Where would ya like to “get”, Baritone?

    Have someone who supports the disaster in Iraq “change their mind” by reading:

    “Bush’s obsession with bringing down Saddam has cost us dearly. We are now mired in a conflict from which there is no graceful exit.” ??

    Profound insights, true cough cough — and almost universal in this nation as we speak — but change someone’s mind?

    …Especially when it’s written by a guy who says he’s an atheist AND a liberal right outta the box?! Oh, that profile will win you a lot of converts on fucking Main Street.

    We’re all just pissin’ in the wind here, babe. You’re not going to effect any change; we [Americans] have ADD and dogmatic opinions to go with it.

    =====

    Gotta run! Huge bomb in Iraq kills 130! Film at seven!

    And you have a nice day, too.

  • moonraven

    Thanks, troll. An apt choice.

  • moonraven

    And now clavos wants to make ME responsible for HIS invading MY privacy.

    He has some fucking nerve.

    And that’s ALL he has.

    Emptypants.

  • Lumpy

    And there u have your confirmation. Shark may call himself whatever he likes, but he’s just a nihilist who doesn’t take anything seriously. We should all give his comments excactly the amount of consideration they deserve, which is none. They mean nothing to him and if u waste your time even reading them then he’s made a fool of u.

  • Lumpy

    Shark: ” created a fake screen name so you could call me a “sociopath””

    Talk about gaping holes in logic. He’s called u that and far worse under his real name. Why would he need another name just to state the obvious?

  • Clavos

    LOL, Lumpy!

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I would say that Shark is useless to himself and to all others. He is truly pissing in the wind. His every word is drenched in it. He is simply someone who apparently hates himself and everyone else to whom he condescends.

    Another fellow I have exchanged comments with on BC told me that he writes posts but rarely involves himself in the comments because they so often devolve into meaningless chaos. I would say that is what has happened here.

    I resisted the urge to jump into the fray with both feet. I will now leave all of you to your stupid banter. I will likely offer new posts in the future, but will more often than not refrain from joining in with this type of meaningless crap.

    You all must be so proud!

  • J.J. Hunsecker

    “I would say that Shark is useless to himself and to all others.”

    Ah, yes, but an article about The Folly of the Iraq War in Feb 2007 is so useful. Such a brave stand at this time in our nation’s history. Can’t wait for your piece about how bad slavery is.

    Seriously, the meaningless chaos is what it’s all about, and pass onto to your friend that in the grand scheme of things, the articles are pretty meaningless as well. If you are looking for deep philosophical discussions about politics, I’m not clear why you are on the Internet.

    This is performance art, pseudo-intellectual ramblings sprinkled around insult comedy. Just hope to get a laugh or two. Anything else will end in disappointment.

  • D’oh

    OK…our little SHARK serves many useful purposes, much like his maligned namesake. Both his insight and comedy are rare to find, you may not like what he has to say at times…and he can get quite ferocious…

    but he is a straight up, and stand up kind of fishy

    which cannot be said for everyone involved

    parting bit to Baritone – there are definitely times when insult comedy and pure partisan snarkiness rules the day around BC…but that is the nadir…and it can still be mildly entertaining

    this places rises to the sublime at times when the discourse gets into the deep waters, and the Intellects get dusted off and stretched…other times it could suck the soul out of Aretha Franklin

    your mileage may vary

    30

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I have no illusions about what I am doing here. I don’t believe that any of this in any final analysis will amount to a hill of spit.

    What I do elsewhere with my life simply as a husband, father and provider will count for more than anything I could possibly do on the internet.

    But I have had some discourse with others whom I have touched and been touched by some of them. I’m not going to change the world, as it is likely that none of you will either. At least not here. Those of you who find this such a useless endeavor, why hang around? DO something. Don’t hypocriticaly criticize others for doing the same thing that you’re doing.

    If I can work something out and put it to (virtual) paper that provides even one someone with a different perspective, then that’s a plus for me.

    As a newby to BC, perhaps I am prejudging some of you – in particular Shark. However, I have found little in this instance that inspires.

    It is easy to confuse nihilism for brilliance. Just the intimidating nature of it tends to knock people off center resulting in, for some, the assumption that the bully must be right. It’s similar to an assumption by some that prostitutes, druggies and the like have some greater wisdom about life because they’ve spent so much time looking at it from the bottom up. But the fact is that the view from there is very limited and grossly distorted.

    Some of you obviously revel in this kind of discourse. I find it little more useful than the talking head cable news shows that have four or five people all gabbing at once, ultimately with nothing being said.

    I was not attempting to be “brave” with my article. There remain a number of people who do not understand what is going on in Iraq and how it parallels the Vietnam fiasco. At any rate, in my perusal of BC political offerings, I have yet to run across anything that I found to be particularly cutting edge, profound or “brave.”
    Most is no more nor no less than the prattle that I wrote.

    I didn’t just walk out of the wood patch. As I noted, I have run into nihilistic bullies before. I had a casual acquaintance with Bill and Emily Harris and Angela Atwood many years ago. Angela was quiet, but Bill and Emily were openly hostile to the establishment and, they believed they were true revolutionaries. If these names aren’t familiar to any of you, Google them. Things turned out so well for them. Especially Angela.

    Otherwise, I suggest that you all cultivate a taste for steel cut oatmeal and watch your sodium intake. It’ll kill you.

  • SHARK

    Coupla points:

    Baritone, there’s this thing we do on the internet; it’s called “averting one’s eyes” — very helpful when dots on a screen become scary, disappointing, or ‘offensive’.

    JJHunsecker — first, I loved your film; reminds me of Dave “Vox Populi” Nalle: “My right hand hasn’t seen my left hand in 30 years.”

    Secondly, thanks for your comment. Especially, “…the meaningless chaos is what it’s all about, …the articles are pretty meaningless as well. …this is performance art”.

    And the following was both useful and hilarious: “… Ah, yes, but an article about The Folly of the Iraq War in Feb 2007 is so useful. Such a brave stand at this time in our nation’s history. Can’t wait for your piece about how bad slavery is.”

    Baritone really went out on a limb here — and now expects either praise or ‘deep discussions’. Apparently — he doesn’t understand we’ve been at this rodeo for years, and what was once a raging bucking bronco that we rode for honor and glory has become a zombie-dead horse that we beat with outraged obscenities just to keep the vultures at bay. (and the word “folly” is like a fucking feather compared to the IEDs we’ve planted in this tragic arena.)

    And thanks to D’oh for putting the words “insight” and “comedy” together in my defense. D’oh, on almost every level available to a carbon-based biped, always gets it.

    And now back to my original point…

  • SHARK

    NOTE: I believe that Dave Nalle (aka “Vox Populi” and gawd knows how many other manifestations) has violated the trust of the visitors, regulars, writers, and contributors.

    He should be stripped of his “official duties” for BLOGCRITICS, and hand over his set of “keys” to the Blogcritics Politics site.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Much as I enjoy your contributions on BC, Shark, and I generally do, I can’t support this suggestion.

    Whilst I think Dave did get over-excited and made a couple of mistakes, I’m sure he will take note of what happened and behave differently in the future. He certainly should not be removed from his role at this time.

    I think it’s a bit silly to be making remarks like he has violated the trust by people who clearly never trusted him that much in the first place!

    It may come as a surprise to his fellow Americans, some of whom may be coarsened by that country’s seeming obsession with punishment and revenge, but everybody deserves compassion and the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.

    Shark, you recently told me you are a writer so you do have the option of joining BC and posting your own articles here.

    It may be interesting to you to be the proponent of an idea or two, rather than reacting to those of other people. Of course, you’d have to master some defensive skills to add to your impressive attacking abilities…

    And, as all articles pass through the editing process, you may even polish up those writing skills of yours. As I have to delete them all the time, I’d be especially thrilled if you mastered the art of not putting acres of empty white space into your work.

    ;-)

  • SHARK

    Baritone: “There remain a number of people who do not understand what is going on in Iraq and how it parallels the Vietnam fiasco. At any rate, in my perusal of BC political offerings, I have yet to run across anything that I found to be particularly cutting edge, profound or “brave.””

    Check these out when ya get a few hours; and note the dates, too.

    xxoo
    S

    A New Plan for Iraq (April 04)
    Iraq/Vietnam – GWB/LBJ (April 04)
    Iraq: Who Gives a Shit? (Aug. 04)

  • SHARK
  • SHARK
  • SHARK
  • http://dracutweblog.blogspot.com Mary K. Williams

    This is pretty darn mind-boggling. This back and forth about — what was it about again?

    Anyway, these exchanges are just the same as what we’ve seen on the ‘High School Musical’ or ‘Pretty Ricky’ posts.

    Childish rantings.

    Just a slightly better vocabulary.

  • Nancy

    A lot of us lost interest some time ago; but they enjoy trading the same old same olds among each other, so let them be happy & natter. It doesn’t cost us anything, after all.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    If so many of you found my offering soooo last year and beyond, why bother using it as a platform for all this crap? You assume that this tight little group that you represent is all there is in blog world – as if BC is your private domain. If so, perform a coup and deny access to all but this little group and enjoy yourselves. It’s a big world. New eyes come along everyday. Some of you think you are so wise, but yet are, well – not so.

  • http://dracutweblog.blogspot.com Mary K. Williams

    so let them be happy & natter. It doesn’t cost us anything, after all

    Well Nancy, that’s one way to look at it. Good luck!

  • Nancy

    Wasn’t referring to that, Baritone; sorry it came across that way. I meant the usual 2 or 3 who always fall to recriminating & bickering among each other about who’s playing semantics, etc.

  • ProfEssays

    The war in Iraq isn’t over. It isn’t worth jumping at conclusions.

  • troll

    ProfEssays says – *The war in Iraq isn’t over*

    this is the critical point…and a big reason for the vitriol

    Baritone – comity isn’t necessarily everything it’s cracked up to be…you seem tone deaf to SHARK’s underlying frustration with apologists and consistent ethical stance

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    So “in your face” confrontation rules the day? I am not being “tone deaf.” My ability to “hear” is overwhelmed by the cacaphony. I am not an apologist for Bush or anyone else. Shark just thinks I didn’t raise the volume high enough. He doesn’t think the word “Folly” makes enough noise. We tend to tune out when the noise level gets too loud.

    Shark’s frustration is not my concern. He claims to have no “cause” which renders his rantings, be they comic or acerbic, empty – that old “sound and fury” thing.

  • troll

    *We tend to tune out when the noise level gets too loud.*

    or maybe you tend to tone out while others who are comfortable with the volume cranked up might appreciate the ‘street theater’ even when it’s disruptive

    and wouldn’t you agree that ‘folly’ seems weak when juxtaposed to dead bodies – ?

    I do look forward to your comments when dealing with the next rabid ID proponent that comes along

    (as for SHARK’s notion that he is just dust in the wind…well we all get there now and then)

  • Clavos

    others who are comfortable with the volume cranked up might appreciate the ‘street theater’ even when it’s disruptive

    And there are those of us who think it’s vulgar and low class…

  • troll

    understood Clavos…different strokes and all

  • D’oh

    Count me on the vulgar and low class side of it all.

    Especially in light of the rampant lies tossed about by some who favor war over thought.

    thanks Shark, for the kind words

    This link is for Clavos, and ANY who have served…food for thought for all the rest.

    War should be a last resort, not the first option.

  • Clavos

    Thanks for the link, D’oh. Haven’t listened yet, but you know I will.

    The trouble with vulgar and low class is it diminishes whatever argument it’s trying to support; and worse, drives away those offended by it, some of whom might have something to contribute to the debate.

    There’s a reason why formal debate has rules. We don’t have to go that far (it would get very ponderous and boring, for one), but civility would be a nice start.

    That said, I know I have been guilty of vulgar and low class on these threads myself, but usually with the intent of “fighting fire with fire”.

  • D’oh

    Clavos – in view of what gets thrown up on the screen here at BC, sometimes vulgar is the ONLY response.

    You have read enough of my typings to know I can be civil, or quite harsh (and if you think D’oh can be harsh, try some of my older gonzo rants, makes Shark look like the Church Lady) but my hard line tends to come after the facts have borne out certain statements, and disproven others.

    Like Iraq…there’s a vast record here on BC of things like Shark’s links in 137-140, as well as opposing stuff from Dave and the like, not to mention my own and others.

    Time has proven some right, and some absolutely wrong.

  • moonraven

    Clavos:

    At least with this poster, you started your vulgar and lowclass insults right from the get go.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

  • Martin Lav

    Baritone,

    While I appreciate your position and tact, some of us have had our blood heated to the point of frothing by Dave, his pet goat Clavos and others with this “folly”.

    I have demanded his removal from this site on other occassions as I believe he is a flat out traitor to the free-world and has been promoting anarchy and violence to any of us who do not share his political views.

    I agree with SHARK 100% in that Dave under his own name uses his particular talents of prose to veil his true colors and intentions from the drop by reader/poster. It is the absolute duty of this country to point this out as often as possible as it is to protest this war.
    To catch Dave in his lies, (Vox) is similar to any investigative reporter in this country to catch BushCo. in theirs and we have the RIGHT and the DUTY to do so.

    Dave you are a fraud and you should be de-frocked.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I don’t know. Folly works for me. Webster’s take on the word is as follows: 1.lack of good sense; foolishness. 2. a foolish act or undertaking.

    Seems to fit. Worse characterizations can and have been made regarding our involvement in Iraq. But “folly” gets things rolling.

    In any event it’s hardly the focal point of all this. I’m just not a head banger. If it does not suit your taste, don’t waste your time.

  • Nancy

    Folly is as good a word as any, although IMO it implies a sense of stupidity or foolishness without underlying malice or deliberateness. But I can’t think of a better one at the moment without jumping all the way to “lying” & its cohorts.

  • D’oh

    Baritone – might I suggest that some find “folly” far too mild when coupled with thousands of dead people, and tens of thousands maimed for life.

    You make excellent points about much of this, as I stated in comment #7, I think the downplay implied by the use of such a mild word in matters of life and death that is war are the only objections or critique.

    Your article, your choice of words, of course…just offering some insight.

  • moonraven

    The word “folly” has a connotative element of frivolity that, while it may well describe someone as moronically capricious as Bush, can be offensive to folks who do not pass lightly over the the immense destruction to lives and historical patrimony in Iraq.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Yes, and yes D’oh.

    Nancy – Folly or foolishness does not preclude malice and so on. A fellow who enters a convenience store with the intent to rob it and chooses to disquise himself by pulling a plastic trash bag over his head, but forgets to tear eye holes in it, is certainly foolish, and his intent contains deliberation (although, one might say not quite enough) and malice.

    GWB is the closest in the current administration to being an utter fool. Perhaps Colin Powell would at least partially fit under that umbrella. For the most part the rest lean much closer to being evil. Not completely, of course. Saddam was evil. His two sons were evil squared. Stalin, Hitler, Romania’s Nicolae Ceausescu and Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic were evil.

    Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etal are by comparison, only mildly evil. Unfortunately, they pull Bush’s strings.

  • SHARK

    Just fer the record:

    Other that comment #1 — which was a nice, pretty funny ‘welcome’ to Baritone — SHARK didn’t say a friggin’ word in this thread.

    I generally agree with every word Baritone wrote — (and much later — had a bit o’ fun with parsing “folly”!)

    I appeared with a vengeance in COMMENT #102 — when it became public knowledge that our BC editor and resident Right-Wing Alpha Male was playing games with the fake name “Vox Populi” — who he trotted out to explicitly insult me and a few others.

    Baritone, unfortunately, YOUR thread happened to be where the OUTING took place. I apologize for turning it into a rant against Dave ‘Vox Populi’ Nalle, but I didn’t see the “outing” take place in any other thread — and thought it was appropriate to register my disgust here.

    In Comment #117 — FOR THE FIRST TIME, I addressed you, Baritone, because you had specifically singled me out earlier. And #117 was actually pretty damn tame, imo. I didn’t get pissy with you at all. I did parse yer “folly” word (“…Um, “folly” sounds like a small error someone makes while serving tea.”) — and I’ll gaurantee I’m not the only person to have noticed the disparity between connotation and WAR.

    In Comment #124 – I also specifically addressed you, Baritone, after you once again specifically singled me out. And I’ll be damned, if I didn’t go back and reread #124 and conclude that it was DAMNED CALM, CALCULATE, POLITE AND NICE.

    And again, rereading, Baritone, YOU’RE THE ONE WHO GOT ALL PISSY. I was a perfect gentleman to you.

    Anywhoo, I’m sure we’ll be swell pals in the Atheist-Liberal battles that constantly rage hereabouts, but if you say something stupid, silly, or state the obvious as if it’s the latest masterpiece from Marcel Duchamp, then I probably will point it out.

    Look upon SHARK as the Simon Cowell of Blogcritics.

    ======

    “IMPEACH DAVE NALLE” — my new tag line, heh.

  • moonraven

    I will second the move to impeach Dave Nalle.

    In fact, I “firsted ” it on more than one thread.

    And I believe Martin did some “firsting” as well.

    The site will have limited credibility and even less civilized debate until he is no longer in a postion to abuse editorial power and duplicate himself like a mimeography machine.

    I have already started posting elsewhere.

  • D’oh

    moonraven says: “I have already started posting elsewhere.”

    best

    news

    of

    the

    day!

    the Tao of D’oh

  • Clavos

    martin #156:

    Do you not see the HUGE irony in what you wrote here:

    I have demanded his removal from this site on other occassions (sic) as I believe he is a flat out traitor to the free-world

    In defense of the FREE world, you call for the banning of a person for exercising his right to free speech???

  • Martin Lav

    No for high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Inciting to overthrow the US government….

  • moonraven

    Dave’s free speech should be limited to the same as the other posters on this forum.

    That would be demmocratic.

    And it would promote free speech because Dave would not be threatening folks with blocking their posts and censoring them and would not be so inclined to create a host of little Daves under other names.

    In short, since he attempts against the free speech of others, he should be impeached.

  • troll

    D’oh – glad to see that you’ve fallen prey to you addiction to typing again…hope you don’t mind my riffing:

    the d’oh of taos

  • D’oh

    It takes three days for the heroin addiction to kick in, troll…so i’m ambivalent right now, we will see…

    and riff away..i don’t mind, am flattered actually

    but the sentiments of this latest one are anathema to me…i think we should always vote…now, boycotting the two political parties we have…THAT is a horse of a different color

  • troll

    I wrote in Gandhi and gonzo marx last time around…it didn’t work

  • Clavos

    martin:

    No for high crimes and misdemeanors.
    Inciting to overthrow the US government….

    Horseshit. Where?

    Cite it.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    In defense of the FREE world, you call for the banning of a person for exercising his right to free speech???

    Not only that, but he calls for the banning of the one editor who has consistently spoken out in defense of the commenters who challenge the limits of the comments policy and an editor who has never deleted a comment even when it was a vile personal attack against him. The irony is delicious.

    Dave

  • Martin Lav

    No one edits your trash Dave, so you have no right to edit anyone elses.

  • D’oh

    For the record: Dave and i disagree almost constantly. The verbal wars between us on BC are quasi-legendary.

    For all of that , as an editor, Dave was fully supportive of the *gonzo* screeds, and the style i chose to implement…always giving me free reign to say it as i saw fit, more so than the senior editors on this site.

    Take it for what it’s worth.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Like Iraq…there’s a vast record here on BC of things like Shark’s links in 137-140, as well as opposing stuff from Dave and the like, not to mention my own and others.

    Time has proven some right, and some absolutely wrong.

    D’oh, I’d rather be wrong as much as I am than be involved in the marketing of doom, defeat and despair. You’re so concerned about people doing the right thing, but you’re so selective at the same time. Constant negativity and promotion of worst case scenarios is NOT a good thing. It’s not productive, it’s merely destructive and counterproductive.

    Dave

  • D’oh

    Dave – in many cases i’m far from doom and gloom, but i value accuracy over wishful thinking…and objective truth over bullshit attempting to deceive.

    You know better than to accuse me of any kind of “marketing”, instead you will find i have been very consistent in not only pointing out the errors I’ve seen, but even giving alternatives when possible.

    When I see something fucked up…like Iraq…I call it, and I’ve constantly said that the energies put there should have been in Afghanistan.

    The facts have borne out my assertions, and disproven many of yours, time and again.

    Which is doom, to look at something accurately or to put on blinders to see only what is desired, and not what is real?

    Which is more destructive…looking at something for what it is, and dealing with it, or continuously only seeing the “bright side” and ignoring the blood?

    I’ll let the record speak for itself, and leave it for the readers to decide.

  • Clavos

    moonraven, in #155 sez:

    Clavos:

    At least with this poster, you started your vulgar and lowclass insults right from the get go.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Here are my first two comments directed to you; on this thread:

    #93 — September 22, 2006 @ 21:07PM — Clavos

    Marthe,

    I was born (of American parents) and raised in México. Como adulto, he trabajado mas de tres décadas en empresas mexicanas, y por supuesto, hablo español.

    I find it interesting that you mention Cardenas’ expropriation of the British and American oil companies as being a “positive step”, but fail to mention that Pemex, the state oil company, is easily the most corrupt arm of one of the most corrupt governments in the Americas, and has been since shortly after the expropriation.

    You picked a poor example, corazón.

    #94 — September 22, 2006 @ 21:12PM — Clavos

    he’s one of those funny, all-too-common Americans who is scared shitless because HE HAS SO MUCH TO LOSE.

    What better reason could there be to to be opposed to socialism?

    And here’s your first directed at me (#100, same thread):

    Clavo, You missed the nail (yes, pun intended). Cardenas took back the petroleum fields that were being exploited by foreign companies. The fact that Cardenas was the last credible Mexican president is not HIS fault. He put the infrastructure in place for Mexico to manage its resources. The crooks that have sold out Mexico’s patrimony (vendepatrias como Salinas and Fox) were not put in power by Cardenas. Guilt is not retroactive in this case, and logical thinking is clearly not your strong suit. (emphasis mine).

    I could go on, but you get the point…

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Dave – in many cases i’m far from doom and gloom, but i value accuracy over wishful thinking…and objective truth over bullshit attempting to deceive.

    I’m with you 100% here, but you still try to tell me that I’m trying to ‘deceive’ people or ‘market’ something to them, when nothing could be farther from the truth.

    What I try to do is present people with a more complete picture so that they can form more informed opinions. Part of this is to try to counter lies and bias and small-mindedness by providing a broader perspective.

    But I also don’t believe in shirking responsibility or giving up easily. If a job is worth doing, it’s worth doing right, and when things are not going your way the answer is not to throw in the towel and find someone to blame. I believe in looking for solutions and in fixing problems, rather than giving up and heading for cover.

    This has constantly put me at odds with those who are fanatical about the war in Iraq, because they just cannot accept into their worldview the idea that I could be against the war on principle and yet still think that having entered into the war we have a responsibility to see it through to a viable conclusion rather than giving up and looking for someone to blame. That’s not marketing the war, it’s marketing the idea of an America which lives up to its ideals and stands on the principle of responsibility for its actions.

    When I see something fucked up…like Iraq…I call it, and I’ve constantly said that the energies put there should have been in Afghanistan.

    I’d disagree. We should never have gone into either if we did not intend to do a full and complete job, and that means taking out Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, either by force or by intimidation and negotiation which resulted in genuine changes in attitude and policy and likely government as well.

    Given the magnitude of doing the job right, we would have been best off to not invade Afghanistan, but to make targeted strikes against al Qaeda with the objective of taking reprisal against their ringleaders, and then we should have spent all the money we wasted on the war on homeland securitty and building up a better intelligence network.

    The facts have borne out my assertions, and disproven many of yours, time and again.

    You have a very poor memory of the kinds of things I have said regarding the Iraq war. Doing things like pointing out that life can go on in the midst of war, isn’t exactly something that can be disproven. Iraq has proven me correct on that score again and again. I haven’t for the most part posted grand theories about the course of the war, just snippets of information about small aspects of it.

    Which is doom, to look at something accurately or to put on blinders to see only what is desired, and not what is real?

    This describes you far more than it does me. You ignore those aspects of the situation which don’t fit with your preconceptions. I look for information to bring to light which challenge peoples assumptions.

    Which is more destructive…looking at something for what it is, and dealing with it, or continuously only seeing the “bright side” and ignoring the blood?

    I certainly haven’t ignored the blood. But the blood isn’t all there is.

    I’ll let the record speak for itself, and leave it for the readers to decide.

    Except that you keep spinning and mischaracterizing the record to make it seem as if I’m far more invested in the war than I am, and to suggest that I’ve been making predictions about the outcome of the war, which I mostly have not been doing.

    Dave

  • D’oh

    You should have just left it alone Dave.

    An example of you projecting things that i have NOT said…”but you still try to tell me that I’m trying to ‘deceive’ people or ‘market’ something to them, when nothing could be farther from the truth.”

    Did i say you were doing such in this instance? …nope, I gave two differing circumstances and viewpoints, and stated which one described me…never got into you in that one…i saved that for later when I spoke about our track records…both of which are easily found here on BC, and which proves my statements pretty accurately.

    No inclination to keep going line by line and dissecting where we disagree.

    As I said, i’ll stand by my record and what i’ve typed with NO quibbling or semantic games bullshit, even to the manner of clearly stating i was wrong in the instances where such occurs

    but in the matter of Iraq, i’ve been right, on each and every instance and in many cases you have not

    As i said, i’ll leave it to the readers to make up their own minds since i find it not only tedious and pointless to do this dance with you again when the record is so clear..but your attempts at distorting my statements and positions merely enforces my thought that you and moonraven are sides of a coin and deserve each other.

  • Martin Lav

    “against the war on principle” DAVE NALLE

    You are only saying this because to you we should have had an all out assault on the entire middle east and anything less than that is your PRINCIPLE.

    “and yet still think that having entered into the war we have a responsibility to see it through to a viable conclusion rather than giving up and looking for someone to blame.”
    – Dave Nalle

    I agree with you entirely on this point Dave, but you still do not offer any alternative that’s palatable to the mainstream and your incessant ROSY PICTURE CRAP does nothing to push BushCo. stay the course rhetoric, which you claim to oppose.

    BULLSHIT DAVE, you can’t write endless articles week after week, promoting all the ROSY PICTURE CRAP that the Bush administration shoves out and then in your comments claim YOUR AGAINST THE WAR.

    It’s disenguous at minimum.
    Schizophrenic at maximum.
    Delusional seems your norm.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    I don’t think it’s delusional Martin. I was against the war from the beginning and still am but once it had started and Baghdad been taken certain forces were set in motion.

    With Pandora out of the box, leaving now is probably even worse than staying. Having made the mistake of invading, the US is stuck with it for now.

    I certainly wouldn’t have been so gung ho as Dave has been and I’ve struggled to understand his reasoning, but being positive rather than negative is surely as much a choice of style as anything else. Dave seeks positivity and writes about it, creating that which he seeks like a human ouroboros.

    There’s no real conflict at all in taking a positive line and being against the war, odd though it seems. Just as there’s no conflict in being for the military but against the war which I guess would be the majority view amongst both your Republicans and your Democrats.

  • Clavos

    troll,

    i’m a little late, but I like the link in #168!

  • Clavos

    D’oh,

    I listened.

    I watched.

    Thanks.

    Clavos

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Did i say you were doing such in this instance? …nope, I gave two differing circumstances and viewpoints, and stated which one described me…never got into you in that one…i saved that for later when I spoke about our track records…both of which are easily found here on BC, and which proves my statements pretty accurately.

    And mine as well. A review of that material will also illustrate one of the things which really troubles me about all of this argument.

    Out of well over 300 articles I’ve written on BC on all sorts of issues, barely more than a dozen of them have been on the Iraq war, yet that ONE issue is what certain users judge my entire participation here on.

    It rather reminds me of the absolutism of the single-issue pro-life faction. They can agree with you on every other issue, but if you support abortion you’re a babykiller and they’ll hate you forever.

    So I can have positions on scores of issues – many of them appealing to the left more than the right – yet because of a few articles which discussed the Iraq war without condemning it up and down, you and some others have permanently pigeon-holed me as a bush-loving warmonger.

    It’s bizarre and ridiculous.

    but in the matter of Iraq, i’ve been right, on each and every instance and in many cases you have not

    Which raises the question which your mind recoils from – is it a good thing that you have been right?

    Dave

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Christopher, I appreciate your perceptiveness in #181. Sometimes I wonder if I’m pounding my head against a brick wall, but you remind me that if you can understand then others ought to be able to as well.

    It’s not like I’m overjoyed to be stuck in a chimerical position when it comes to the Iraq war. I’m obviously conflicted and it’s a real gnawing in my gut.

    On the most basic level I have to continually face the reality that although I don’t believe in war as an instrument of foreign policy, the threat of Islam is so real and so pervasive that it has to be dealt with, and given the violence which that culture promotes, the methods of dealing with it run from the unpalatable to the truly repugnant.

    I’m not exactly jumping for joy that my choices seem to be between supporting war against my principles and supporting changes within America in the interests of national security which destroy rights I believe are fundamental to the Republic.

    It’s great that Martin and Shark can take a simplistic stand and sit in self righteous judgment of all those who are actually trying to deal with the complexity of these issues and find real solutions, but I’m just not built that way.

    Dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Glad to see you taking a more considered, conciliatory and thoughtful tone, David.

    As to the Islam thing, I really have a hard time believing the “threat of Islam is so real and so pervasive that it has to be dealt with”. Al Qaeda is a strain of Islam, not its entirety and many Muslims are as concerned by the actions of this extremist minority as you or I.

    So far, I’m finding the strands of thought deployed by folk like Martin and yourself to be more or less equally simplistic and entirely lacking in nuance, just from differing perspectives…

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    That’s just it, Christopher. Al Qaeda is just a strain of islam, and it’s just one of dozens of sects amd groups with millions and millions of adherents who believe all sorts of equally awful and violent things. If Al Qaeda were the exception then we’d have something to work with, but it’s become increasingly clear that it’s just one echo of a mainstream of violence and hate.

    Frankly, the entire Shiite sect of Islam is just about as bad as Al Qaeda, and it’s the second largest sect in Islam. Go read my article on Ashura and some of the responses. These people are still out for blood against the descendents of their enemies after ¡400 years.

    I think the problem is real. It could be ignored or managed or avoided for a very long time, but conflict with the west is inevitable, and that time is coming closer and closer as more muslims move into western nations.

    Dave

  • S.T.M

    I noticed in the newspapers here today that Bush is now taking advice directly from Lt Col David Kilcullen, a counter insurgency expert and a veteran of the Australian Army’s East Timor campaign (which is the only reason it was in the papers here).

    Although Kilcullen’s ideas are quite radical and novel in some respects, basically he advocates “armed social work”. There is no doubt he is drawing on the British/Australian experience against communist guerillas in Malaya and the Konfrontasi campaign in Indonesia and the Australian Army’s strategy in Vietnam, which was very different to that of the US. Basically, the Australians considered their whole operation in Vietnam a counter-insurgency campaign rather than a full-scale regular military operation, which is what the US military was (and still is to a large extent) geared up for – courtesy of Cold War thinking in regard to mass-scale deployments.

    However, Kilcullen’s strategy does appear to involve large numbers of experienced troops backed up by a large reserve, which means that military operations are then backed up by a heavy and more benign security presence to bring the local people onside and set them up in a situation where it is more beneficial for their own wellbeing to help the coalition rather than the insurgents. The theory being that while that’s what we all like to think is happening now and can’t those Iraqis see that for themselves, in reality it is very far from that.

    That’s oversimplyfying it, but the strategy is not new. It is the type of thing the British are doing in southern Iraq, and while the risk there is lower, they seem to have a quieter area of influence than up north despite Iranian meddling among the Shia population.

    It also worked in Malaya, where they moved whole villages away from areas where they could be influenced by the communists, and provided good housing, jobs, schools, etc. The areas they were settled were considered secure and offered the local people relative safety from the conflict. In the meantime, the British conducted an aggressive campaign against the insurgents.

    The big drawback is that is took a really long time. I am rusty about the history time line, but I believe it took about 12 years all up, followed by another four during Konfrontasi, which had turned the whole situation around so that the Malayans were then working with the British to stop Indonesia’s aggression against the newly independent state of Malayasia, which they considered simply a new disguise for British imperialism in south-east Asia.

    The problem for the US is whether it has the will to go on, and the wherewithal to accept that any lessons from Vietnam are not that relevant and that it now needs to think outside the usual envelope of Pentagon ideas that revolve around big weaponry and blowing the shit out of people.

    Armed social work sounds better than just plain armed to my mind, but I remain sceptical as to whether any new approach will work because the damage is done. I argued recently on this site with a US veteran who claimed the problem at Abu Ghraib began and ended with bad leadership on the ground and that because the military police reservists were US prison officers, they were perfectly equipped to deal with it. I disagree – bringing the attitudes of serving US prison officers to something as sensitive as that was a balls-up. What works at San Quentin won’t work there.

    And while I don’t agree with the Iraq war, which is about oil plain and simple, having now gone there, like Chris Rose says, it is up to us now to make sure the fighting doesn’t go on any longer than it has to as the Iraqi people have suffered enough.

    Most Iraqis ARE glad to be rid of the Ba’athist stalinist regime, but they don’t want American-style democracy and McDonald’s capitalism foisted upon them either. They also don’t want to live in constant fear, and I can’t say I blame them.

    There is a common ground that has to be found somewhere. Whether it can be found is another thing entirely. Perhaps Kilcullen, as a non-American who isn’t frightened to stand up to the West Point-style hierarchy in Washington, might prove a breath of fresh air. Yet if Bush is hoping this will provide a quick-fix, he will be wrong.

    Don’t hold your breath.

    As for the threat from Islam: there isn’t one. There’s a threat from people who are using their religious beliefs to justify, plot and carry out mass murder, and originally it had nothing to do with Iraq, which was the most secular of all middle-eastern states prior to the US invasion. Big difference between rounding up murderers and invading another country.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Dave,

    If you have read Sam Harris’ “End of Faith” you know that he too has great concerns regarding islam as a whole. He cites at least a couple dozen quotes from the Quran which promote violence against pretty much anyone who offends for a myriad of reasons.

    I don’t believe that all, or even a majority of world muslims are of that mind set. Most are people who just want to live there day to day lives in relative peace and be left alone just as is true of most of us. But, as you say, a significant number are bent on revenge for whatever real or imagined offences they may have suffered from the time when mohammed first hawked his wares.

    It is not clear if or how the west can counter this. We can’t simply start removing or killing muslims based on suspicions – making another “pre-emptive” strike.

    But this is part and parcel of why I believe the invasion of Iraq was such a shortsighted and stupid move. Maybe even one of “folly.” Iraq has devolved into an untenable mess, and at the same time our presence has played directly into the hands of islamist extremists in galvanizing more and more muslims against the west and the US in particular. We are now in a wholly lose/lose situation. As I originally stated some 188 comments ago – for the US “there is no graceful way out.”

    Oh, and if someone, or several someones have already written the above elsewhere on this site, or anywhere else for that matter, just ignore it. I don’t want to offend anyone’s cutting edge sensibilities.

  • MCH

    “I think the problem is real. It could be ignored or managed or avoided for a very long time, but conflict with the west is inevitable, and that time is coming closer and closer as more muslims move into western nations.”
    – Dave Nalle

    And it’s for that very reason that Vox Populi lives in a fortified compound.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    I don’t agree with any of your #187 Dave.

    I don’t see any “mainstream of violence and hate” and find it staggering that you do. For a start, with the best part of a quarter of the world’s population being Muslim according to Wikipedia, there’d be an awful lot more violence and hate around than there actually is.

    Islam, for all that it is false as all god-based faiths are, is essentially a positive belief system. The current Shia-Sunni divide is eerily reminiscent of the Catholic-Protestant schism which was similarly violent for some time.

    Having lived all my life with the faith-based “troubles” in Ireland, with all the violence and hatred that created, and now seeing that groups like the IRA et cetera are disarming and adopting democratic processes, I feel more hopeful than you that this too will pass.

    Adding to the hysteria with over the top statements like these and criticising other people’s religious practices, particularly when the USA has so many faithist wackos of its own, doesn’t strike me as remotely constructive.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    It may not be “constructive” but neither need it be “destructive.” Forewarned is forearmed as the saying goes. It is my belief, although I do not speak for Dave, that the majority of muslims are not militant or bent on vengeance. However, it is clear that there is a significant number of muslims who are so inclined.

    The fascist movement in 1920s Germany began quite small. They were largely ignored until it was too late to stem the tide. No doubt other similar situations could be cited throughout history.

    I know that it is a dangerous road. It is far too easy to demonize the “enemy,” and to make an overarching response which could catch up many innocent people.

    There are always those who claim there are no innocent people as it serves their rationale for indescriminate violence. On the contrary I believe that most people are, in this sense, innocent. As I stated, most of us try to go about our day to day lives, doing our jobs, providing for our families and taking part in society in varying ways. But there are always a small number of sabre rattlers who choose to foment violence and war.

    This is the dangerous ground upon which we are treading. Could such forewarning be tantamount to sabre rattling? Yes, it could. The consequences are, at best, uncertain. It is a fine line. How best to proceed is anybody’s guess.

  • D’oh

    Dave asks: “Which raises the question which your mind recoils from – is it a good thing that you have been right?”

    Yes, because it shows I can accurately process and analyze information, WITHOUT distortion or preconceived notion and come up with an accurate assessment..that’s what Intel is all about, proper analysis of data at hand.

    Why is this obvious?

    Dave and Christopher say: “Al Qaeda is just a strain of islam”

    THERE is part of why some people get things so fucking horribly wrong…al Qaeda is NOT a fucking religion, it’s a political movement…that’s like saying Republicans are just a strain of fucking christianity!! How the hell can you expect to understand what is going on and deal with it, when the basic assumption you are operating under have nothing to do with the actual facts?

    This is the very same problem I have with this Administration and it’s supporters, *hate* hasn’t got a fucking thing to do with it.

    I despise incompetence… and many have shown that rather than honestly, openly and accurately assess a situation to come up with accurate viewpoints, instead they will base their analysis upon ideological principles and extrapolate form there… we can ALL see just how fucked up that approach has turned out.

    Islam is NOT the root of the problem, merely a factor, doesn’t matter what fucking religion is involved, it’s merely a tool used to influence their public and soldiers the same as christianity is and has done…what matters are the political motivations of those leading the violence.

    In the case of Iraq, it’s about ruling a nation…plain and simple.

    You have to look at how things begin and understand what motivates, or all the sharp thinking in the world will lead you down the path of falsehood due to an bad postulate.

    Why do you get so much shit over your Iraq stuff, Dave? Possibly because it involves dead and maimed people, and you have treated it as some kind of partisan game.

  • Martin Lav

    Hey Editor and Chief Propagandist:

    Screw you both.
    My position has been made clear before and I’m not waffling like Dave is wondering:

    “I don’t believe in war as an instrument of foreign policy, the threat of Islam is so real and so pervasive that it has to be dealt with, and given the violence which that culture promotes, the methods of dealing with it run from the unpalatable to the truly repugnant.”

    Dave,
    I’m glad your counting your articles, but your numbers don’t add up. I guess the entire BC community, with the exception of a few of your devout followers, are just delusional to think you are campaigner of war and blind faith in BushCo. while you continue to be baffled counting your articles.

    If it quacks like a duck Dave…..you should come out from behind your pimped out duck blind and shoot at it.

    But then again you would claim it was a feral rabid dog and you are just protecting your family…..with a shotgun or a rifle……

    You amaze me.

  • moonraven

    I am amazed, more than by anything else, by the total lack of information and experience on this thread in regard to Islam, Muslims and terrorist groups of a muslim persuasion.

    Islam is a set of religious beliefs.

    Muslims believe (many do, at least) in that set of beliefs.

    Political activity on the part of muslims has primarily to do with getting the short end of the stick after WWI (when the Ottoman Empire was chopped up in such little pieces that the winning side–primarily Britain and France–thought they could never get back together. (The Humpty Dumpty model of geopolitics at work).

    If you remember, another country made a campaign to take over the planet based on having gotten a raw deal at the end of WWI.

    Chickens coming home to roost, again. Predictable whenever excessive jubilance (and larded on hummilliation) on the part of the winner(s) is the rule of the day.

    The religion of Islam really has very little to do with it.

    I, at least, have had the interest to discuss this issue with LOTS of muslims in the Middle East. Not with the t.v. set, while sitting in my armchair.

  • D’oh

    Correction: my last line in #193 should have read “it appears as if you and the Administration have treated it as some kind of partisan game.”

    my apologies for not being as clear the first time.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Ok, let me clear up some confusions here about Islam.

    First off, I agree with Baritone that basically most nominal muslims are like everyone else – they follow the basics of their religion and don’t think about it a hell of a lot.

    However, as with any religion, there is a core group – and in the case of Islam multiple diverse groups – who are much more devout and fanatical. In Islam those groups are more numerous and larger in number than in most other religions.

    Perhaps most importantly, in Islam the lines we draw between religion, culture and politics DO NOT EXIST. Islam is seen by many muslims, including those in the mainstream as a political as well as a religious entity. Many muslims believe that the entire faith should be unified under a single, central political/religious leader. This unified state – the ‘caliphate’ – is to them what Jerusalem is to the Jews, and it is supposed to spread through the whole world and either convert or subjugate all other peoples and faiths.

    Next, Islam has a much stronger sense of history than most westerners understand. Things which happened a thousand years ago and are forgotten by westerners are still current, hotly debated issues in the culture of Islam. Wrongs committed in the times of Mohammed are still seen as a valid cause of war and revenge today.

    Finally, from the Q’ran to the writings of the Imams to the speeches of contemporary leaders, Islam is riddled with a belief in violence, conquest and revenge in which holy war is seen as the highest pursuit of the faithful. The relatively non-fanatical majority may choose not to act on this, but it is ingrained in the faith. It manifests in many different ways, including in a general attitude even among the moderate population of identifying with and rooting for the most radical elements in their acts of violence.

    Whatever else you may want to believe and however much you want to believe that everyone is just like us beneath the skin, you’re fooling yourself. Islam is NOT just like the west but in different clothes and to try to deal with them based on such unrealistic assumptions is what gets us into trouble in places like Iraq.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Dave,

    I would like to know your source(s) for your pontifications about Islam.

  • moonraven

    Dave wrote:

    “Whatever else you may want to believe and however much you want to believe that everyone is just like us beneath the skin, you’re fooling yourself. Islam is NOT just like the west but in different clothes and to try to deal with them based on such unrealistic assumptions is what gets us into trouble in places like Iraq.”

    First of all, he makes a 1 to 1 comparison between Islam and the west. Since when is a religion the same as a geographical block on this planet? Why not make a comparison that would maybe be a logical one: between radical Islam and radical Christianity?

    We are not all the same people with different skin color. The muslims in Iran, for example,
    are dominantly persa–which is racially aryan,
    or white.

    By painting all muslims brown, Dave has taken yet another racist posture.

    I don’t think he and I are the same people under the skin….

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Perhaps Dave made an unfortunate turn of phrase, but I don’t believe he was making a racial statement. Keep in mind that muslims are not confined to the middle east. They are spread widely througout portions of eastern Europe, parts of Asia and Africa as well including many races and ethnicities.

    From what I understand, Dave is essentially correct as regards islam and its historical penchant for revenge and violence.

    Most muslims who have embraced the 20th and now the 21st century as regards life style, including modern technology, modes of dress, treatment of women, etc., are less likely to be involved with the old hard line radicals.

    While al qaida is not a part of any particular muslim sect, they do, along with the likes of the taliban and others, promote the more ancient and, consequently, violent and vengeful origins of the faith.

    Poorer countries having significant muslim populations have and are becoming hot beds of radical recruitment. Primary schools in Pakistan, Afghanistan and elsewhere are actively teaching the radical fundamentalist position including repeated reminders that we – the west – are infidels and the enemy of islam.

    I agree that the US in particular has earned a good deal of the emnity that we receive from abroad. Perhaps we deserve a comeupence. But in an age where radical muslims may eschew much of modern civilization, they apparently have no problem whatsoever embracing modern military technology including any and all manner of WMDs. Some may live in caves and travel by camel, but they certainly have made good use of modern communication and computer technologies. They pose a real threat to the US and to much of western Europe.

    Disregarding this threat may well be at our peril.

  • moonraven

    Baritone, I would like to see your sources, as what I read from you is just the usual stereotyping of muslims.

    Ever met one? Talked with one? Spent time in muslim-dominant countries?

  • D’oh

    Well Baritone, you raise some very pertinent question.

    Why does the Taliban act like they come form a time long past? It’s the way they control their people.

    al Qaeda is another kettle of fish entirely. the leadership has been formed primarily from ex-mujahdeen fighters, trained by the CIA in all kinds of insurgent and psyops warfare, so they could fight the Russions in Afghanistan. When abandoned, they took up another cause…to remove the Western influences they feel betrayed them from their “holy lands” in order to establish the political entity of the Caliphate as Dave pointed out, and become a major world power.

    That’s the political goal, losing sight of that is what causes some to think that an unneeded invasion of Iraq was somehow a “good idea” all the while neglecting the REAL threat that is regrowing and financing itself by supplying over 90% of the world’s opium from fields in Afghanistan “protected” by the Taliban.

    More dangerous that bin Laden is the spiritual leader of both the Taliban and al Qaeda…Mullah Omar…whom all Muslims believe has possession of the “Cloak of Mohammed”, a religious relic akin to the “Spear of Longinus” in that it is supposed to endow the one wielding it with invincibility.

    To break the myth, capture Omar, and destroy the “Cloak”, put bin Laden on very public trial. The rest is mop up.

    I’ve said it for years, as have many “experts” in the field…but none appear to listen.

  • moonraven

    Actually, one of the reasons for invading Afghanistan was that the Taliban had outlawed the growing and harvesting of opium poppies.

    The CIA had started doing REALLY big business there in the 1980s in the heroin trade while they were training the “freedom fighters” there.

    When the Taliban took over most of the country, they cut deeply into the CIA’s drug revenues.

    By 2003, the Afghan opium fields were booming again–under the aegis of the CIA.

    And they have continued to do so. That’s a big reason why the US is still there.

  • http://adreamersholiday.blogspot.com Lee Richards

    I agree with Dave’s comments in #197. Now, the question becomes how best to be proactive with the threat of these delusional murdering fanatics throughout the world? An important step would be for muslims who do not advocate violent and agressive politics masquerading as THEIR religion to step up and condemn the false and evil among them and take ownership of the problem. (Our new US muslim congressman should be the first and loudest). Until they do, I think it’s inevitable that all muslims are going to become more suspect and less welcome in the West; and that’s not prejudice–there are sound reasons for it.
    Iraq– A surge of 20,000 is a joke. Just as Rummy & Bush originally sent in just enough troops to lose with, 20,000 cannot possibly be a large enough force to accomplish security, occupation, training or much of anything positive. I suggest we start withdrawing troops immediately and make 3 announcements. (1)To Iran, North Korea, Saudia Arabia, Venezuela and the rest of the screwballs in the world: We’re leaving this mess in Iraq as a warning to you; watch your step with us or we’re gonna do the exact same thing to your country (2)To Iran, Syria or anyone else in the area who has designs on Iraq: an attack against Iraq will be dealt with as a terrorist attack against the US (3)To the people and government of Iraq: If you don’t establish a free, democratic, reponsible & safe government with US and UN financial and diplomatic help and limited air & missile cover, we will be back with a military occupation, as in Japan at the end of WWII.
    Or…? How else do YOU think it will end, in any way to our advantage?

  • Martin Lav

    Dave Nalle:

    Why are you so negative about Islam?
    Do you wish to see it fail as a religion?
    Do you want to convert them all to Christians?

    Me I’d rather see the positive side of the religion.

    I’m writing an article entitled: “No Muslim Blew Himself Up Today” to show the positive aspects of the religion and how you in right-wing press constantly portray nothing but negative viewpoints.

    You can concentrate on the negative.

  • moonraven

    Lee,

    You agree with Dave–on the basis of precisely which facts and information?

    Your lack of facts and information and your very obvious prejudices do not help your position’s advancement.

    You sound like a fanatic to me. A US fanatic.

    And, believe it or not, you are going to find yourself less and less welcome in countries outside the borders of the US.

  • SHARK

    Dave Vox: “Which raises the question which your mind recoils from – is it a good thing that you have been right?”

    Doh: “Yes, because it shows I can accurately process and analyze information, WITHOUT distortion or preconceived notion and come up with an accurate assessment..that’s what Intel is all about, proper analysis of data at hand. Why is this obvious?”

    1) Jeesus. We’ve been over this a million times. It’s so fucking disingenuous of NalleVox to keep up this line of bullshit, ie: he was Mr. Blind Optimist going down with the Ship of Hope — and SHARK (et al) were nihilistic negative nabobs cheering for USA loss in Iraq cuz we hate Bush so much. It’s BS and NalleVox knows it. He was wrong about Iraq, but he was worse than wrong: he pumped up the piles Bush “good news” shit until he buried his head in it. BTW: We’re not three fucking years into this madness in Iraq because of the ‘Hopeful MARKETERS’ of this war.

    2) did I mention: …I was right about every aspect of Iraq?

    NalleVox, It’s good that you finally admitted it.

    3) And really, NalleVox, after posting using the FAKE NAME, I kinda discount Everything You Say from here on out. And don’t think I haven’t noticed that your new “look”, ie. TONS more shit to say in the ol’ Professorial Tone of Voice is just an attempt to deflect the explicit understanding of most around here that you’re a LIAR and A FAKE re. the “Vox Populi” incident. I kinda quit readin’ yer stuff in detail. The FAKE PERSONA thing sorta took all the wind outta my opposition to your politics, cuz now I KNOW you’re a sick, deluded, blowharded fuck with low self-esteem — and I’ll probably have some mercy on yer little internet imitatin’ ass.

    Nah.

  • moonraven

    Ah, live it up, Shark. “The quality of mercy is not strained…”, and all that.

    Now, if Ruvy is lurking he will take the bait on the Shylock shaft….

  • Martin Lav

    “#56 — January 31, 2007 @ 12:44PM — Vox Populi [URL]
    Of the characters in The Magnificent Seven the picture unquestionably looks most like the Robert Vaughn character.”

    Ah Dave, you really must love yourself eh?

    I missed this one at first, but you shamelessly writing about yourself in disguise, while in disguise, is……well disturbing……

  • moonraven

    He looks nothing like Vaughn.

    Horst Bucholz. For the natty nazi star turn.

  • Emry

    “I missed this one at first, but you shamelessly writing about yourself in disguise, while in disguise, is……well disturbing……”

    So utterly disturbing I can’t stop laughing!

    I gotta go lay down for a while.

  • moonraven

    I hate to mention Dave again–even tangentially, but it’s LIE down for awhile.

  • http://adreamersholiday.blogspot.com Lee Richards

    Moonraven: You obviously haven’t read a newspaper in 10 years, or ever watched aljazeera. Do you also deny the Holocaust? And, I seem to be quite welcome in the countries I visit most frequently: Great Britain, Italy and Switzerland.

  • Emry

    A welcome correction.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Moonraven,

    In answer to your queries:

    No, I have spent no time living or even visiting a muslim country or community.

    I am acquainted with a muslim woman from Bosnia – one of those who has embraced the modern world.

    Do I have intimate knowledge regarding the muslim world? No. I have done a good deal of reading, watching the telly and listening to the radio – NPR in the main.

    However, my understanding is not dependent upon intimate knowledge. Is it not plain to anyone keeping abreast of the information coming out of the middle east from virtually all media sources what is happening?

    I took pains to state that I do not believe that the majority of muslims are seriously involved in radical activities.

    But!

    Are you conversely suggesting that there is nothing to be concerned about from muslim extremists? That the violent history of islam has no bearing on the current situation? Nine/Eleven was just an anomaly with no substantive connection to islam?

    Also, I would ask you Moonraven, what are your sources regarding CIA profiteering from the Afghan opium trade? I won’t say here that it is untrue. I just don’t know, but it has the feel of so many other conspiracy theories that have proven to be junk intelligence.

    For a look at CIA involvement in Afghanistan read “Charlie Wilson’s War” by George Crile, OR look for an upcoming movie of this story directed by Mike Nichols. The CIA was involved heavily in the efforts to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan in the 1980s. Again, I won’t deny your accusation, but there is no mention of it in Crile’s book. Given the tenor of the book (it is not flattering of the CIA,) if Crile knew of it, I believe he would have at least mentioned it in passing.

    Martin Lav,

    “Why are you so negative about Islam?
    Do you wish to see it fail as a religion?
    Do you want to convert them all to Christians?”

    I know that these questions were directed to Dave, but I would just say the following:

    I would have no problem with an islamic failure. But I would be just as gleeful to see christianity and all other religions turn to dust as well. None of that will happen, of course, but a man can dream.

    While power and greed are virtually always the driving force in politics and war, all too often the pretext for war has been religion. It is difficult to energize the masses behind an effort to make some oligarch richer or more powerful. It is much easier to appeal to the larger population through their religious heritage. How many people die for some god every bloody day?

    The men who flew those planes into the WTC, the Pentagon, and rural Pennsylvania did so for allah. Those who recruited, trained and financed them did so for power.

    Then you say perhaps, well then it is not the religion at fault here. Nay, nay. If people would turn away from the fantasy of religion, the pretext of being warriors for a god would no longer drive men to war.

    Other red herrings would be no doubt be hoisted up – race, culture, nationality. We have to chop them down as they present themselves. Doing away with religion would be a huge first step.

  • Clavos

    The men who flew those planes into the WTC, the Pentagon, and rural Pennsylvania did so for allah.

    Not according to moonraven. She says they were employed by Bush.

    That’ll give you some idea of her foundation for the CIA profiting from the afghan opium trade…

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Yeah, well. What are ya gonna do?

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Lee Richards: I agree with Dave’s comments in #197.

    This is the first and only time we’ve agreed on anything, Lee. I think that’s very telling. If the behavior of radical muslims can concern both of us despite our differences, that has to mean something.

    Martin Lav: Why are you so negative about Islam?

    Did you not read the original comment?

    Do you wish to see it fail as a religion?

    Not sure I even know what that means.

    Do you want to convert them all to Christians?

    As an atheist that seems counterproductive.

    Me I’d rather see the positive side of the religion.

    I look forward to your lengthy exploration of that theme.

    Dave

  • SHARK

    Lee Richards: “I agree with Dave’s comments in #197.”

    Dave “Vox Populi” Nalle: “This is the first and only time we’ve agreed on anything, Lee.”

    Whew! Is this true?!

    Man, I thought for a moment that “Lee Richards” must be Dave Nalle in an “internet cafe”.

    My bad!

    =====

    PS: Dave Vox, this is what happens when little boys tell lies. No one believes them after that.

    [see G. W. Bush, Iraq war, WMDs, Iran, etc. for more]

    =====

    PPS: Dave Vox, seriously, for you to remain on Blogcritics after the fake name thing proves one thing: your ego and cajones are much bigger than your sense of personal shame and embarassment.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Although I find it hard to believe that the CIA is involved in the opium trade, I find it equally hard to understand how so much opiate is coming out of Afghanistan – in its heavily militarised condition and with such high security levels – that the street price for heroin in the West is at an all time low. Now that’s something I’d like an explanation of.

  • Nancy

    Really good discussion thus far. Baritone #215, Chris #220 – I second.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    The CIA opium involvement theory has legs because of the somewhat better documented connection of the CIA to the south american cocaine trade in the 1980s when there’s fairly believable evidence that rogue operatives used cocaine money to fund operations when congress wouldn’t back them. But the evidence for the opium connection really isn’t there.

    Dave

  • Nancy

    The British government wasn’t above the opium trade in the 19th century; I wouldn’t put it past the US government, which routinely manipulates & lies to its citizens even when it isn’t necessary, to engage in the opium – or any illicit crap, including slaves – trade for whatever self-serving mechanations the administration of the moment has. It’s gotten to such a point of distrust, that when I hear the government is denying something, I take it as a given that in fact whatever is being denied is true.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Again, I have come across no info regarding the CIA being involved with the Afghan opium trade other than what I have read here. It still seems unlikely that any such connection would be active.

    To me, a more likely scenario would be a tacit role for the CIA or other US involvement. Perhaps a hands-off policy, not wanting to rile the tribal leaders into open rebellion. The opium trade is their cash cow. Opium is, if I’m not mistaken, Afghanistan’s largest (and I think only)export of note. It’s clear that the central government in Kabul is a fragile puppet whose strings could be easily cut.

    So, just look at it from a business perspective. It’s a buyer’s market. As they say “buy low, sell high.” Stock up now. Hold on for the spring/summer rush to get ripped.

    And who knows? If the US government starts making some heavy bread from the international drug trade, maybe we can look forward to more of those big tax breaks that GWB keeps promissing. Get stoned AND keep the IRS off your back. It’s a great world.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Baritone: but the Taleban had no problem at all in stamping out the opium culture. It had almost entirely ceased when they ruled in Afghanistan.

    Now the country is under de facto American control, it seems incredibly difficult to believe there’s not some major league corruption going on somewhere. Whether it’s within the CIA or the Military, who knows?

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I think it’s clear that the taliban were far more successful in wresting control of the country from the tribal leaders than the current central government. The taliban were by and large native to the area and had direct inbred relationships with many of those leaders.

    Look at how badly the Soviets failed. Even without US clandestine aid, the Afghanis proved to be a formidible foe.

    Also, some claim that the taliban is, in fact now actively involved in and profiting from the opium trade to support their insurgency.

    I think one should be circumspect regarding any such claims. It is far too easy to accept them out of hand simply because it conveniently supports ones view of the opposition. Again, going back to Moonraven; what PROOF of CIA involvement is there? Let’s see it. I have no particular evidence of the taliban’s involvement with the opium trade. Accusations and assumptions do not meet a litmus test as proof.

    But if you’ve got it, flaunt it!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Again, I have come across no info regarding the CIA being involved with the Afghan opium trade other than what I have read here. It still seems unlikely that any such connection would be active.

    The evidence suggests that one of the problems in Afghanistan has been our opposition to the opium trade rather than the other way around. The Taliban regained some support because they were willing to protect the opium farmers from US efforts to destroy their crops.

    Dave

  • Martin Lav

    Dave “VP” Nalle,

    My comments in #205 are strictly sarcastic and I apologize if you did not “get” the irony.

    Let me esplain…..

    You constantly criticize SHARK, MCH and others about Bush bashing while you write “ROSY” articles about life in Iraq and all the good that’s come out of this war.

    We’ll I say why don’t you apply the same principles when writing about Islam?

    Isn’t their any good in Islam?

    Why not apply the same high standards you demand everyone else has, to yourself for a change.

    Look in the mirror VP….

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    you write “ROSY” articles about life in Iraq and all the good that’s come out of this war.

    We’ll I say why don’t you apply the same principles when writing about Islam?

    Isn’t their any good in Islam?

    You’ve got a point, Martin. Keep in mind that I was raised literally immersed in islam. My father is essentially a moslem-leaning agnostic, our house was full of islamic art, and I spent many of my early years living in the middle east. Both of my parents speak arabic my father speaks persian, urdu, tajik and other regional languages as well. We regularly had muslim guests throughout my time living at home. I even spoke arabic as a child, even though I’ve forgotten most of it.

    I guess I take the good things about Islam for granted. There’s a great literary and artistic tradition, fantastic textiles, a remarkable scientific legacy and a lot more that’s very positive.

    Almost every good thing produced by Islamic socity has been cultural in nature and not associated with religion. In many cases the religion has stood in direct opposition to most of the cultural advancements. And the problem is that most of these great accomplishments happened centuries ago. Muslim society has essentially stagnated and in that stagnant state the negative aspects have festered and grown more and more dominant.

    It is largely awareness of how the culture has fallen from its former glory which has driven the fundamentalist movement. They want to recapture the high days of the caliphate and think they can do it by going back to their religious roots, when the truth is that the religion of that era was far less rigid and much more informal than what they are promoting. They are right in identifying a problem, but their response was the exact wrong one, shutting down free thought and creativity instead of reviving it.

    So this is another reason to be angry with Islam. It’s failed to live up to its own promise.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    shark,

    cajones means drawers (as in a desk) in Spanish.

    And you live in Tejas…

  • Martin Lav

    Dave,

    I agree entirely with you on this one.
    I used to live in Iran and know the people well and am convinced they have a huge inferiority complex.
    However, our going to war with them will have the exact opposite effect that we think it will have and it is in fact.
    Turning to Iran (which I believe you have supported) is just another example of this administrations lies and deceit.

    The problem with Muslims in general may not be their religion, but the attitudes of the HAVES against the HAVE NOTS. Your views may be coming from this perspective and that’s why you would support the methods of this administration because quite frankly the Muslim HAVES treat their own people (the HAVE NOTS) as if they are dogs that should be shot with .06.

    Examine that….

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    and Tejas means tiles, presumably made from that red earth I’ve seen in cowboy movies that looks just like the rich red soil of Andalucia.

  • Clavos

    Chris,

    Except in tejas, where to the Tejanos (Texan Mexican-Americans), it also means Texas.

  • Lumpy

    I thought ‘tejas’ meant friendship.

    And as for the name business, I would think most sensible peoole respond to the content of the posts not based on the name at the top.

  • moonraven

    Back to Baritone:

    I tried to post a list of the possible sources you could look at for info on CIA involvement in the heroin trade in Afghanistan–but could not. I was given an error message that my postincluded a banned word.

    I don’t know what that word would be, unless it is CIA.

    Sorry.

  • moonraven

    Guess it wasn’t CIA–so who knows what was in the list that set off the censorship siren on this site.

  • troll

    I dunno about all this talking smack…but here’s what Smiley says

    the d’oh of taos

  • Martin Lav

    It might have been Vox Populi

  • Clavos

    moonraven,

    censorship siren

    I know you won’t believe this, but it has nothing to do with censorship. It’s the ant-spam software, which is set to not post messages with certain words frequently found in spam.

    Example:

    C A S I N O. It will post now, because of the spacing, but won’t if you type it normally.

    No censorship, bird.

  • moonraven

    Clavos,

    You seem to be sure you know more about my beliefs than I do.

    I don’t care if it’s active censporship or passive censorship. It looks like it’s stifling freedom of debate.

    In this case, Baritone will have to do his own Yahoo search–if he’s interested in what the CIA is up to.

    But it just kinda wasted my precious time (nod to Bob Dylan).

    [Moonraven: It’s simply not possible to have entirely unrestricted freedom of expression on a site like this. For a start, there are hundreds or thousands of spam comments posted every day and I’m sure you can understand that it would simply cripple the site if left unchecked. If you want, you can email me via commentseditor@gmail.com to tell me the banned word number and I can look it up for you. Thanks. Comments Editor]

  • Clavos

    I don’t care if it’s active censporship or passive censorship. It looks like it’s stifling freedom of debate.

    You’re a piece of work, moonraven…

  • moonraven

    True, clavos. A GOOD piece of work.

    Speech is either free or it isn’t.

    Just like:

    1. You’re either pregnant or you’re not.

    2. You either have cancer or you don’t.

    If you want to shill for censorship, that’s your business.

    It’s my business if I do not choose to do so.

  • D’oh

    So, how about yelling “fire” in an emergency room?

    Free Speech or not?

    Rarely are things black/white…some are, but most aren’t that convenient.

  • moonraven

    I thought it was yelling “fire” in a crowded theater….

    I don’t see the emergency room scenario. I doubt that people would be trampled to death there. Some of them are not even capable of getting off their gurneys.

    If you agree that my posting a list of half a dozen Internet sources out of the 261,000 in yahoo for the form of my search is something that should not appear on this thread, you agree with the current system of censorship.

  • moonraven

    In fact, d’oh, not to put too fine a point on it, but I suspect that since a lot of folks are in the ER precisely due to fires, that there’s a fair amount of yelling of “fire” quite frequently….

  • troll

    (the management set the max lim on links/post at three…try splitting them up)

  • D’oh

    You are mistaken on a few counts here, moonraven.

    For one, what a spam filter blocks is not quite the same as censorship of dissent, especially on a privately owned forum.

    If there was a banned word in your comment, due to it having been a keyword utilized by spammers, than that’s all it was…I’ve hit the same problem, and had to determine what the word was, and work around it…then posted successfully.

    My use of a medical facility was for over emphasis, precisely because of the panic caused to folks who can’t move to save themselves when they hear “fire” yelled falsely.

    Also..does free speech, by your definition, include lies? Just trying to understand…the entire Issue of free speech is very dear to me, but it IS a complex and thorny one, mired in grey areas…

    my thought is that freer is better, especially in the realms of the Individual and their Rights…but truthfulness is important, especially when it comes to politics(especially our elected representatives) and the Market.

    Hope that clarifies.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    You could say we harshly censor automated free speech.

  • D’oh

    Oh yes…and I also contend NOTHING is “free”!!

    It all costs, somehow.

    Some costs I’m very willing to pay…like advocating freedom of speech and dissent.

  • moonraven

    Truthfulness is extremely important to me, d’oh.

    But you can see that it is not important to blogcritics.org–as for all the complaints I and other posters have made against the patently untruthful and unethical behavior of Dave Nalle, the party line of the site has been to give priority to what THEY call free speech.

    And, in the interests of not unduly pissing off folks who would like to post–or to respond to a poster’s question–if they are going to have a spam filter why not give an indication of which words are considered to be a no-no?

    Troll,

    The list was not written as links.

    [Moonraven: the stopword list, which includes urls used by spammers, has almost 6,000 entries. We wouldn’t make a list public for two reasons. Firstly, a public list would help those we seek to defeat. Secondly, it would be a real boring read. Trust me on that! Thanks. Comments Editor]

  • D’oh

    moonraven – a list would show spammers what words to avoid. All part of dealing with certain problems inherent is a forum in this medium.

    Technical details to prevent unwanted spam for marketing purposes are not equal to censorship or stifling of discussion.

    That’s my point.

  • moonraven

    Ah–T R A D E is a marketing word.

    And probably H E R O I N?

  • MBD

    Three Army Reserve officers and a U.S. contractor were indicted Wednesday as part of a bid-rigging scam that steered millions of dollars of Iraq reconstruction projects to a contractor in exchange for cash, luxury cars, jewelry and other pricey goods

    The contractor, identified in the indictment as Seymour Morris Jr., allegedly acted as a go-between for the military officers and the construction company by illegally wiring money and securing the goods. Morris is a U.S. citizen who lived in Romania, and owned and operated a Cyprus-based financial services business.

    Last week, a former Pentagon contractor was sentenced to nine years in prison for helping steer millions in Iraq rebuilding funds to a company operated by U.S. citizen and businessman Philip H. Bloom. Bloom already has pleaded guilty to the scam and awaits sentencing.

    But isn’t this what “patriotic Americans” are supposed to do during a “war“?’ With all the suffering and blood being spilled, someone should come out ahead.

    It’s time for some public hangings.

  • D’oh

    I dunno moonraven, i would trade a heroin addiction to my habit concerning this site sometimes.

    the Tao of D’oh.

  • moonraven

    I was being sarcastic.

    But it doesn’t matter.

  • Emry

    “PPS: Dave Vox, seriously, for you to remain on Blogcritics after the fake name thing proves one thing: your ego and cajones are much bigger than your sense of personal shame and embarassment.”

    SHARK, you need to explain to Dave Vox Populi Nalle what the term “personal shame” actually means. You can’t just leave him scratching his head.

  • Lumpy

    Like shark has any shame or any idea what it is. Have you ever read his rants? Oh I forgot. No one reads them after the first couole. That’s why computer windows have scroll bars.

  • moonraven

    It’s not cAjones.

    It is cOjones.

    Two very different items–the last one usually comes in pairs….

  • SHARK

    Dave “Vox Populi – Robert Vaughn lookalike” Nalle,

    Comment #229 — Thanks for posting detail of your entire life, along with your childhood, your parents pedigrees, and your curriculum vitae. You sound like the love-child of Lawrence of Arabia and Margaret Thatcher.

    Awesome, Dude! We’re IMPRESSED!

    But…

    1) This is the internet: We’re all brilliant and lead remarkable lives.

    2) After the fake name incident, hereafter known as the “VOX POX” — WE DON’T BELIEVE A FUCKING WORD YOU SAY.

    Just stop.

    ‘kay?

    Kay.

  • Clavos

    @ #258:

    Already pointed it out, in #230, moon…

  • Martin Lav

    No, cojones cum in your _________!

    Sorry I couldn’t resist.

  • SHARK

    RE: #253 ? February 7, 2007 @ 16:10PM ? MBD

    “Three Army Reserve officers and a U.S. contractor were indicted Wednesday…”

    1) Tip of the Iceberg.

    2) Was anyone in American NOT EXPECTING massive graft, corruption, theft, bribes, and fraud to come from the IRAQ DISASTER? I mean, some $400 BILLION PLUS?

    Where it went will be the next big bad bomb for the Bush administration.

  • D’oh

    Hanging is too good for some, feet first into a woodchipper, I say.

    Was that my out loud voice?

    oooops

  • moonraven

    Looks as if Martin should be posting on the triple X sites.

  • Emry

    Here’s your chance then, Lumpy.

    If you can, explain to Dave Vox Populi Nalle what “personal shame” means.

    While you’re at it fill him in on the meaning of integrity.

    Good luck old Lump.

  • MBD

    The ill-conceived and misguided war on terrorism clearly makes our current government a purveyor of terror. Our government in Washington has devastated Iraq, with thousands of dead innocent men women and children.

    Iraqis are facing a living hell as a result of the neo-conservatives in control of the American government.

    Lost in this terrorism on Iraqis is the fact that the attack on Iraq was illegal and a major war crime.

    Robert Jackson, the chief U.S. prosecutor at Nuremberg, said: “To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

    Justice Jackson also said: “If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

    A war cimes court is needed to handle this. The neo-conservatives must be made to answer for their unjustified aggression.

    That would help to restore the damaged image of this country.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    “That would help to restore the damaged image of this country.”

    Only if they are convicted.

    It’s hard to imagine how anyone would have the guts to put them on trial.

  • troll

    MBD – the peoples choice

  • Lumpy

    Personal shame? Seems highly individual and subjective. I’d be ashamed if I behaved like a lot of the commenters on here. I don’t see any shame in posting under a nickname and then deciding it was a bad idea. Helluva lot less harm in that than in throwing personal insults around.

    What i’d be ashamed of is derailing good discussions with off topic garbage. What’s the point of even being here if that’s all u have to offer? That kind of behavior is just selfishness like a little kid shouting “Look at me. Look at me.” spoiiling things for others just to get attention. That’s shameful.

  • Lumpy

    MBD. I just don’t see warcrimes trials as at all realistic. You bring up Nuremberg. Do u really think bush has done anything on the magnitude of the crimes tied there? If u claim u do i’m likely to call “foul”.

  • D’oh

    It’s not about the magnitude of the crimes, or even specific crimes…it’s a principle involved in the Rule of Law.

    Remember, an American judge said it, and it’s worth quoting again…
    “To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

    Justice Jackson also said: “If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

    All it mean and implies is that none are above the Law. Whether any prosecutions should take place…and against whom, are a matter for debate, discussion and investigation…which the cynic in me says will never happen.

    Interesting to note tho, that just before the Iraq invasion, then WH council Gonzalez wrote the opinion that Bush implemented removing the U.S. from the World Court and thus claiming immunity for not only our soldiers, but the Administration and the mercenaries hired as well.

    the Tao of D’oh.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    That Bushker is a wiley SOB.

  • Emry

    Lumpy, when was the last time you told yourself you look like Robert Vaughn when you put on your cowboy hat?

  • MCH

    “I don’t see any shame in posting under a nickname and then deciding it was a bad idea.”

    That’s not what happened, Lumpy. He was using the Vox Populi identity to verify a figure on a comment by Dave Nalle. In other words, he used two different names in the same thread, in an attempt to confirm a statistic and deceive the other commenters.

    It’s called LYING.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    And the cool thing is that I was able to assess the situation, correct it and avoid the slippery slope. Of course then I get pilloried for NOT perpetuating a fraud, but that’s par for the course.

    Dave

  • D’oh

    No..pilloried for the lie and then the cover up…changing just the name would have been one thing, changing content in the comments to cover the transgression is another thing entirely.

    Not Nixonian in scope, but we could call you “Scooter”. (that was a tease)

    I’ll make the deal that if you just fucking stop trying to excuse and spin the incident, I’ll be glad to leave it alone.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    As I’ve said before, Dave compounded his original mistake by not asking me to make the changes for him. If anything, the greater failing was mine for not keeping a much closer eye on everything. He knows now that any such changes must go through me.

  • Clavos

    I’ll make the deal that if you just fucking stop trying to excuse and spin the incident, I’ll be glad to leave it alone.

    An example of why you have my respect and others don’t, D’oh…

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I believe I’ve already done that more than once, D’oh. I’ve explained and apologized and I’m done. Let’s move on.

    Dave

  • troll

    now – all that you need to do is admit that you’ve been wrong about petty much everything you’ve ever written and we’ll be good to go

  • Clavos

    Do you want that in alphabetical or chronological order?

  • troll

    not to worry…I’d be a flexible inquisitor

  • Emry

    “I’ve explained and apologized and I’m done. Let’s move on.”

    No problem with you moving on, Dave Vox, as long as you do so without “editorial powers”.

    You just can’t be trusted.

  • troll

    Emry – I understand your upset…and SHARK has even more reason to be pissed

    but Chris has committed to making sure that the comments are not screwed with inappropriately – I take him at his word

    …and Dave is a good text editor for the articles

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Emry has his/her own secret too, troll, but I’m not outing her/him! They do have an incredibly annoying occasional habit of posting the same thing more than enough times over and I’m considering if that ought to be a practice we officially rule out. We could call it The MCH Exception…

  • troll

    Chris – the MCH ‘body of work’ is a political statement…while annoying I hope that you leave it and its ilk alone

    I just wish he’d focus on honoring the dead…we need to be reminded that this shit is for real and not some academic exercise

  • http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip Winn

    Emry, trust Christopher to ensure that all is above-board behind the scenes, and now that Dave has apologized for his mistake(s), trust Dave as well. Despite the unfortunate appearance, Dave has not edited any comments other than his own, and has only edited his own to fix the username problem.

    That’s it. You can trust that any other edits would be flagged behind the scenes and Christopher would blow the whistle. Dave is committed to addressing issues in public in the comments, not sneaking around behind the scenes.

  • Emry

    Chris, out me all you want.

    Show me the threads where I’ve pulled a Nalle/Populi scam and talked to myself using different names.

    We know about Nalle and his Vox Populi but will you be outing his other aliases?

    Is he the “UP YOURS ASSHOLE” driveby poster or was that the work of someone else here with editorial powers?

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Out of curiosity, what makes you think Driveby has editorial powers? It doesn’t take editorial powers to change the name your posting under with every post.

    Dave

  • troll

    (*and has only edited his own to fix the username problem. *
    damn it Phillip…this is what is sticks in some folk’s craws…repeating the IT doesn’t help imo

    now I’ll try to keep out of it)

  • Emry

    Is there some way that the people reading this thread can know for sure who is actually doing the writing.?

    Is Philip Winn another Nalle Vox alias?

    “Dave has not edited any comments other than his own,…”

    Wrong.

    Comments other than his own have actually been DISAPPEARED not merely edited, and if not by Nalle Vox then by someone operating in rapid unison.

    Trust????

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    What most of you seem to forget regarding our illegal involvement in Iraq is that…

    Oh, screw it.

    I am prophetic. On Sunday I said “Go Colts,” and they went.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    I’m not entirely sure as I don’t normally monitor too strictly but I believe driveby is one of the many names used by someone who lurks on the site a lot, often not entirely sober and, despite their mature years, makes incredibly juvenile remarks often to do with camels! I leave them if they’re funny and delete them if they are simply too jarring and rude.

    As far as I know, we’ve learned all there is to know about the Vox Populi Incident so, in the spirit of my conjectured MCH Exception, I propose to delete any further remarks on this subject that go over ground we’ve already covered.

    Emry: I don’t care to out you at all and you haven’t in any way gone against our id protocols, I was just having a little fun with you. What prompted your decision, if you don’t mind me being so nosy?

  • D’oh

    Phillip says – “and has only edited his own to fix the username problem.”

    Not the case, Phillip..and hence the problem. Saying it was “just” that does nothing but hurt the cause. More than merely a name was changed…otherwise I really wouldn’t give a shit.

    Said my piece, now I’ll gladly leave it to BC staff, but I had to make that point…since it is the very covering up, changing content and asserting that all that was wrong was the username that is the ethical breach.

    As usual, in politics, the cover-up is MUCH worse than the original offense.

  • Emry

    “Out of curiosity, what makes you think Driveby has editorial powers?”

    Funny you should ask, Nalle Vox.

    #32 — February 3, 2007 @ 22:49PM — Emry

    “”#31 — February 3, 2007 @ 20:57PM — Driveby

    UP YOURS ASSHOLE”

    Is there a moderator around?

    #33 — February 3, 2007 @ 23:25PM — Dave Nalle [URL]
    Um, what do you want me to ‘moderate’ exactly here?

    Dave”.

    The original driveby post # 31 appeared and then quickly vanished, whereupon our poor, bewildered Nalle Vox aka ??? arrived asking what I wanted moderated.

    What a mystery this is!

    Vanishing Driveby messages and a stunned editor who isn’t sure what his name is.

  • Emry

    “I’m not entirely sure as I don’t normally monitor too strictly but I believe driveby is one of the many names used by someone who lurks on the site a lot,..”

    “As far as I know, we’ve learned all there is to know about the Vox Populi Incident…”

    Obviously not.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Emry: I am as certain as can be that driveby and Dave are discrete entities.

    Are you certain that any of us except Eric Olsen exist? Maybe the entire site is being created by a computer programme like some mad Turing Test? ;-)

  • D’oh

    1010111010100101010100101010010010101010101011101!!

    heh…

    the Tao of D’oh

    (i ain’t fond of the band, but this song is VERY apropos to the thread)

  • Emry

    “Emry: I am as certain as can be that driveby and Dave are discrete entities.”

    And Driveby has the ability to remove his own “UP YOURS ASSHOLE” messages.

    Magic!

  • duane

    The best part of that one (#298) was Jason Robards. We need more crusty character actors like him.

    C’mon, D’oh, you musical encyclopedia, don’t be slippin’.

    Duane (most likely)

  • D’oh

    damn Duane..you sure know how to knock me down at times.

    My efforts go Unsung and it’s getting tougher because Viacom is making them pull down a shitload of clips…some material has disappeared completely.

    Leaves me feeling this way about it sometimes.

  • MCH

    “The MCH Exception”

    Hhmmmm, has a nice ring to it. I always wanted an Exception named after me…

  • duane

    Excellent recovery, D’oh. Just my way of trying to encourage you along the road to perfecting your subtle and enviable craft.

    The MCH Exception. Isn’t that a Robert Ludlum novel?

  • Martin Lav

    I just have 1 last question on the Vox Nalle incident…….

    Dave Nalle claims it was an honest mistake that he didn’t realize his computer was filling in the wrong screen name while he was typing his responses.

    As SHARK pointed out…….

    How can that be true if Dave Nalle replied to a comment by saying: “I agree with Vox”

    Did Dave Nalle forget that he was actually Vox?
    Did Dave Nalle think Vox was Robert Vaughn?
    Did Dave Nalle think there was some other Vox posting on the same thread?

    A lie is NOT as good as the truth if enough people DON’T believe it….

  • Nancy

    If we’re into fantasy wanna-be, then I look like Catherine Zeta-Jones.

  • Clavos

    Damn, Nancy, that’s EXACTLY the mental picture I had of you!!!

    (perched on the bow of a nice megayacht, of course…)

  • moonraven

    I am still not buying it.

    Dave cannot be trusted because he has proven in a number of ways–not just his lying and his inventing other phantom posters to agree with him–but in his threats against other posters to censor them, manipulating of other poster’s statements, accusations made against other posters, and when finally pinned to the wall to put links to support his bogus facts he puts links to information that completely contradicts what he said–hoping that we are too fucking lazy to read the stuff.

    As I said on another thread, I would trust GWBush as a political editor before I would trust Dave Nalle.

    As for moving on–It is not up to the victimizer to say “Let’s move on”; it is up to the victims. And this poster for one, if not saying it.

    In the words of Yogi Berra, “It ain’t over till it’s over”.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Emry, the point at which Driveby’s comment disappeared was exactly the point at which Christopher first showed up and began deleting comments, including a number of yours. You do the math.

    Dave

  • SHARk

    ChristorpherRose, I’m kinda shocked that you would write off this incident so lightly — and try to sell us the fact that it was a “MISTAKE”.

    There is no doubt about what happened: Nalle was Vox, got caught, changed the name, BUT THEN WENT BACK AND DELETED ONE SENTENCE FROM A “DAVE NALLE” POST that was totally incriminating:

    DaveNalle: “I’ve seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes.”

    Nalle had the keys to the site and violated that trust. He’s a liar. He’s a fraud. And he’s not to be trusted. Other people have been BANNED from the site for far less.

    That’s the last I’ll say on it, too — but I hope yall don’t mind me calling him “DAVE VOX” to commemorate the incident.

  • SHARK

    And Dave Vox Pop Nalle, you’d better thank yer lucky stars yer BC editor pals are willing to shut down this conversation. But we ain’t forgettin’ what a lying, sick bastard you are.

    signed,
    Shark [a “sociopath” according to “Vox Populi”]

  • moonraven

    Of course we aren’t.

    I have been calling Dave what he is from Day 1.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Perhaps someone at BC should just set up a separate category and call it “Dave Nalle: Truthteller or Prevaricator?” It apparently would fill volumes.

    How you all can all keep on about this in light of the sudden tragic loss of Anna Nicole is beyond me. There are priorities after all. (TIC)

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I hope yall don’t mind me calling him “DAVE VOX” to commemorate the incident.

    I actually like it more run-together, like DavOx. Sounds like a drug brand name.

    I’ve been using the handle Vox Populi off and on since FidoNet and local BBSs in the early 80s. More frequently I went by Hanging Jack or Jack Ketch.

    Now you know it all.

    Dave

  • Emry

    “Emry, the point at which Driveby’s comment disappeared was exactly the point at which Christopher first showed up and began deleting comments, including a number of yours. You do the math.

    Dave”

    Here’s the math, Vox Nalle, you showed up on the heels of Driveby’s comments. Driveby’s comments disappeared on the heels of yours. And on more than one thread.

    Sorry, Vox Nalle, you can’t be trusted.

  • zingzing

    vox nalle sounds too evil. (evil being cool.) or too german.

  • Emry

    “I’ve been using the handle Vox Populi off and on…’

    for years to chat with Dave Forked-Tongue Nalle on forums and blogs, while the punters thought they were dealing with two different people.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Perhaps someone at BC should just set up a separate category and call it “Dave Nalle: Truthteller or Prevaricator?” It apparently would fill volumes.

    Actually, we do have an old open discussion thread which would be the perfect place to take all the abuse anyone would like to heap on me.

    You can find it here.

    Dave

  • Emry

    Vox Nalle….”Actually, we do have an old open discussion thread which would be the perfect place to take all the abuse anyone would like to heap on me.”

    While you continue to contaminate this place???

    Bully for you!

  • SHARK

    re: #317 link

    I’ve posted over there; the most/best I could assemble in a short period of time.

    Also laid out the evidence against Nalle, and decimated his “I made a mistake and corrected it” defense.

    PS: Someone with a computer better than mine should go save the google cached pages where Vox appeared.

    Support the Troops: What A Crock
    Facts about the Surge in US Troops

    and any others that yall happen to know about.

  • MBD

    Pinocchio’s Nose is available on Amazon.com.

    Pinocchio’s nose makes a great addition to any liar’s facial features. Features include: Soft Vinyl Nose Elastic String for holding nose in place. Price:$4.99

    Donate one to a needy person.

  • Martin Lav

    Robert Vaughn with a Pinnochio nose?

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Finally, this is dying a quiet, yet dignified death. RIP

  • D’oh

    wishful thinking, Baritone.

  • SHARK

    It’s dying alright, but Blogcritics Management apparently values Nalle as Editor more than they value the integrity of the site — so I wouldn’t say it’s “dignified.”

    On the contrary.

  • STM

    Moonraisin

  • troll
  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    I was being facetious. Just seeing if I could get a rise out of someone. I guess I did.

  • troll

    (just playing along)

  • Emry

    Vox Nalle can’t be completely devoid of honor, it isn’t humanly possible.

    Somewhere there’s a spark of decency in him that will help him announce that he’s resigning his tainted title of Editor.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Actually, I don’t think it makes much sense for me to let those who are proven to be completely without honor or ethics determine my course of action to serve their own purposes. I’ve got strong principles, and I’ll continue to stick by them. One of them is never to give in to the efforts of petty tyrants to silence others.

    Dave

  • troll

    what does turning in control of the ‘comments tool’ or quiting your editor position have to do with silencing you – ?

    point is some participants don’t trust you and (unlike me) to them it makes a difference that you have the access to manipulate the site

    I’ve advocated cutting you slack from the get go and am most sorry that we’ve lost a creative participant in Vox Populi…but if you can’t ‘fess up at least don’t repeat the bull

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    what does turning in control of the ‘comments tool’ or quiting your editor position have to do with silencing you – ?

    Nothing. I don’t edit user comments and never have, so that’s not an issue. And there has never been a single complaint from a BC writer about my impartiality or effectiveness as an editor.

    The goal of this harassment is to drive me away from blogcritics altogether because I won’t back down or be silenced when I don’t agree with certain commenters. It goes back far beyond this recent scrap and has nothing to do with my role as editor except that because I am an editor they can try to use that role as grounds for a spurious complaint.

    point is some participants don’t trust you and (unlike me) to them it makes a difference that you have the access to manipulate the site

    Access which I have never used to alter another user’s post or comment or intefere with free speech in any way. They don’t trust me because they don’t like my political beliefs – plain and simple.

    I’ve advocated cutting you slack from the get go and am most sorry that we’ve lost a creative participant in Vox Populi…but if you can’t ‘fess up at least don’t repeat the bull

    I have fully admitted to and explained my actions and motivations entirely truthfully. The issue arose from my efforts to be honest and correct what could have been seen as a deceptive practice. As I’ve said before, no good deed goes unpunished.

    All I’ve ever tried to do is keep discussion going on the politics threads here on BC so that people can participate and the authors can get good feedback on their writing.

    Contrast that with the small group of people who keep attacking me on every thread, taking those threads off-topic and generally destroying the comment environment on the site.

    dave

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Pompous? Me? No mate, for I am the voice of the people!

    ROFLMAO

  • MBD

    “Actually, I don’t think it makes much sense for me to let those who are proven to be completely without honor or ethics determine my course of action to serve their own purposes. I’ve got strong principles, and I’ll continue to stick by them. One of them is never to give in to the efforts of petty tyrants to silence others.”

    — Pisistratus, 527 BC

  • troll

    I repeat – MBD…the people’s choice

  • MBD

    Pisistratus — was otherwise known as the ‘Tyrant of Athens’

  • moonraven

    Yeah, Dave’s only here to keep the debate flowing.

    (Cough Cough)

    I am sure that’s why the minute I appeared on this site he tried to bully me–accused me of being psychotic, a longtime commie, a liar about my degrees and experience as a professional journalist and educator, smeared the screen with shit about my being an employee of the governments of Venezuela, Bolivia and China–and lied about my posting from Beijing–a city I have never even visited. And then he threatened to block my posts and even experimented with doing so.

    I guess that’s one way to promote free and open rational dialogue. Especially with folks who disagree with you and out your lies and phoney support sources.

    Dave is a liar and a bully and his presence on this site is the main reason I stopped posting for awhile.

  • MBD

    I often wish that I were a King,
    And then I could write anything…

    — the Vox

  • troll

    — the Vox…better known to his enemies as The Swamp Vox

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Moonraven: Funnily enough, my memory is that you were pretty pumped up and aggressive when you first started commenting on this site and you’re not averse to a bit of bullying either.

    Indeed, if it wasn’t for Dave, an awful lot of comments, from yourself and others, would have simply been deleted. I’m not half as tolerant of unneccesary rudeness as he is for a start. Maybe it’s an English thing?

    Of course, he’s not been doing it for reasons of tolerance or manners, but simply his adherence to freedom of expression. That’s clearly been proven to be impossible on an absolute basis.

    Dave is not a liar, although he can be a bit of a bully and arrogant – but he’s not alone in that either. I think it’s something to do with his seemingly unshakeable ability in his own opinions. I’ve crossed swords with him many times, simply because some of his views are so outlandish, but have usually managed to retain some degree of grace.

    It seems to me that one of the keys to a successful and even useful exchange of views on the internet is occasionally pausing to reflect before hitting the “Publish” button. I wonder how many of you actually read other people’s remarks with attention, to understand what they were actually saying, rather than simply leaping to the keyboard in mock outrage?

    I hope I’m not alone in doing that, and that other people are also using the “Preview” button to review what they’ve written, as I normally do when writing more than a paragraph or two. Yeehah! ain’t I a fucking paragon of virtue!! lol

  • SHARK

    Christopher Rose(ColoredGlasses): “Dave is not a liar…”

    Gimmee a break.

    Vox on Nalle: “Of the characters in The Magnificent Seven, the picture unquestionably looks most like the Robert Vaughn character.”

    Nalle on Vox: “I’ve seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes.”

    Vox on links HE provided (as Nalle): “The claim that this article is ‘GOP spin’ is an interesting one, since it seems to be based on reports direct from Iraqis inside Iraq if you follow the links.”

  • SHARK

    Nalle: “I don’t think it makes much sense for me to let those who are proven to be completely without honor or ethics determine my course of action to serve their own purposes.”

    You talkin’ ’bout me, you proven liar?

    Look Nalle, for all of our disagreements in the past, I USED TO respect your intelligence and figured that, bein’ a staunch Libertarian, you probably had some integrity.

    But after the Vox incident — I’ve got more honor, ethics, and integrity in my pinkie finger than is stored in your entire Robert-Vaughn look-alike body.

    And y’know what, Nalle: You — in your heart and mind — KNOW you created Vox for deceptive purposes, and you KNOW that you lied during the coverup. YOU KNOW IT, Don’t you, Nalle.

    And that, my friend, is something that’s going to be hard to live with. You failed yourself in a weak moment; your high-ass moral superiority took a big ol’ fall because of your EGO, Grasshopper. It’s the one thing you value most in life, and it’s the one thing truly damaged from all this.

    You take this internet shit so seriously that you can’t imagine “losing” an argument. And you take your EGO so seriously that, once the gang piled on and HUMILIATED YOU over that stupid, etched in digital stone, **”No One Died In Iraq” crap, you just HAD to retrieve your dignity.

    You lied, Nalle. You know it. I know it. And a few others who’ve been paying attention around here know it. And that’s gotta be killin’ you, ain’t it.

    ** At this point, I’m shocked that the article is still there — but I plan to keep it alive. : )

  • Clavos

    Latest reports from Florida indicate that Anna Nicole Smith is still dead…

    Copyright SNL

    In a related story, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon have joined the ranks of those claiming to be the father of her baby.

  • troll

    “’twas ‘marketing’ killed the beast”

  • SHARK

    Troll, that was funny. I’m assuming you were referring to Nalle/Vox.

    (Ironically, it could also refer to whats-her-name.)

    And (synchronicity!) when I read it, I pictured Clavos as a tiny bleached blond in a torn skirt morning the big egotistical monkey.

    ====

    …speaking of which…

    Clavos, yer a riot, a regular riot!

    Such originality!

    [you forgot Franco]

    zzzzzzzzz

  • SHARK

    mourning… sheesh!

    typing phonetically?! — now thair’s a sindrome boardering on an ilnes

  • moonraven

    Chris,

    The facts show–and they have been showing since I first noticed this site last September–that DAVE NALLE IS A LIAR.

    This is not up for discussion, as it has been amply demonstrated.

    This has been my biggest beef against Dave right from the get-go.

    If you insist on stonewalling on that point, I will next expect you to trot out a motheaten Harris tweed woman’s overcoat and tell us that you are not a crook.

    Nixon was a lot smarter than you are. He knew a lie when he saw it, as lying was something he was a grand master of.

  • MBD

    Vox has received his reward.

    “Liars, when they speak the truth are not believed.”

    — Aristotle,384 BC

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Ok, let me set two things straight.

    First, Richard Nixon did NOT wear moth eaten womens overcoats. He owned 30 identical blue serge suits and wore a different one every day of the month.

    Second, despite Shark’s leaping to conclusions above, I was not necessarily referring to him when I mentioned people without ‘honor and ethics’. I think that he has them despite his skewed perspective on reality and seriously messed up priorities.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    Nalle, Maybe you are too young to know about the Checkers speech where Nixon pointed out his wife’s “good republican cloth coat”….

    I am not. One of the funniest speeches in recorded history, IMHO.

    Arf, Arf! (Checkers’ contribution to the debate.)

    So, you didn’t refer to Shark. The point is–which you seemed to have missed (to quote Dave on another thread)–you did not refer to yourself: the appropriate target for that description.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Just curious. What is the record for the most comments on 1 post on BC? I assume it is a good deal more than the 350 (now 351) written here.

  • MCH

    I think Vox Populi’s “No One Died In Iraq Today” post garnered over 400 comments.

  • http://www.antequeravillarental.com Christopher Rose

    Baritone: this post isn’t even close to being the most commented on. I believe some of the articles on here are up to four figures!

  • MBD

    “We often see that, while war can and does bring out the worst in us, the best instincts of humanity also tend to surface.”

    Bullshit.

    “WAR is a racket. It always has been. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people.

    Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.”

    It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.”

    — Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC [Retired]

    (Twice a Congressional Medal of Honor Recipient)

  • Martin Lav

    “Dave is a liar and a bully and his presence on this site is the main reason I stopped posting for awhile.” – Moonraven

    Please don’t give me another reason to “like” Dave as I’d much prefer to pile on.

  • Clavos

    Too bad it was just “for awhile.”

  • moonraven

    Right, so that you could keep throwing your undocumented “gusano” propaganda without anyone calling you on it, clavos.

    Too bad.

  • MCH

    “Too bad it was just “for awhile.”
    – Clavos

    So you’re condoning Nalle’s fraud and deceit during the Vox Populi charade, Clavvy? That surprises me, considering your view on integrity.

  • MCH

    “Emry, trust Christopher to ensure that all is above-board behind the scenes, and now that Dave has apologized for his mistake(s), trust Dave as well.”
    – Phillip Winn

    Please cite where Nalle/Vox “apologized.” I must’ve missed that one.

  • Clavos

    Um, MCH 358:

    What I wrote was clear enough, and did not in any way refer to Nalle, either directly or indirectly.

    I was lamenting that moonraven had only decided to stop posting on BC “for awhile”; nothing more. So kindly do not read nonexistent meaning into what I wrote.

  • moonraven

    Clavos just indicated there was no meaning in what he writes.

    It’s about time he admitted that.

    Now we can all move on without him.

  • Clavos

    Why, thank you, moonraven. Please do move on without me. I can think of nothing that would make me happier…

    Does this mean you’ll stay off my next Chavez article, too?

  • moonraven

    You have written ARTICLES about Chavez?

    Sorry I missed them.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    First: I assumed there were other posts which had far more comments than this one. I was just wondering how many more.

    Second: Bullshit back at you, MBD.

    I wasn’t in any way defending war. I oppose it for most any reason. And I agree; the profits of war virtually always find its way into the pockets of the already rich, usually the same people who promoted it in the first place.

    Where we most often see “the best of us” making its appearance during war, is among the people who largely pay the price for it. People, usually ordinary people, the soldiers in the field, the families and others back at home rise to the occasion.

    Perhaps such people are the ultimate dupes. The cynical view would have it that these people blindly fall in with the expected line. Perhaps so. That does not, in my mind diminish the “good” that people do. It simply renders the profiteers of war all the more loathesome unless one grudgingly admires duplicitous manipulation of entire populations.

  • MCH

    Re Clavos #360;

    Aww, but your glaringly loud silence on the spurious Populi/Nalle matter suggests support, considering how you’ve never hesitated in the past to judge wrongdoing.

  • Clavos

    That’s amazing, emmy! You’re a mind reader!

    Aww, but your glaringly loud silence on the spurious Populi/Nalle matter suggests support

    Don’t put words in my mouth, and don’t presume to know what I’m thinking.

    You got a lotta chutzpah, stalkerboy.

  • MCH

    Clavvy;

    Oh yeah, putting words in your mouth or presuming to know what you’re thinking is definitley far worse than the fraud and deceit of Nalle conversing with himself during the Vox Populi sham, and then lying about it.

  • Zedd

    #354

    Looks like we’ve read the same material. Here here!

  • SHARK

    I notice that Troll and D’oh have pretty much gone silent on the BC site.

    SHARK [me] too.

    This latest Nalle/Vox incident left a bad taste in this fish’s mouth.

    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

    In the not-too-recent past, we already had what I and a few others considered a highly questionable situation:

    Appointing DAVE NALLE — a right-wing, garrulous, pedantic blowhard with questionable ethics and honesty TO BEGIN WITH — as POLITICS EDITOR on Blogcritics.

    IT GOT WORSE when he created a FAKE SCREEN NAME “VOX POPULI” to attack and insult opponents, *add to his [“Dave Nalle”] ‘data’ during debates, and to **compliment himself.

    It changed from ‘emotional bad decision’ into the UNETHICAL, LYING, FRAUDULENT when Nalle went back and changed the Vox name to his own — and THEN RETROACTIVELY DELETED THE ***ONE DAVE NALLE COMMENT that proved HIS GUILT beyond a shadow of a doubt: “I’ve seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes.”

    IT GOT CRITICAL when — given the evidence/proof of Nalle’s lying, fraud, and unethical behavior, BC management, including Eric Olsen, Christopher Rose, and Mark Schannon, chose to ignore the evidence — apparently because of Nalle’s contributions to the site in the past.(?!)

    Anyway, it sucks. And it’s taken the fun out of the site for me. And I would submit that, given the last few days — from the “BOOK LINK”/tout text in the box on the front page BC politics [book selected/text written by Nalle] — to the new “theme” of the month, ie “FREE SPEECH” — the whole incident has done little more than embolden Nalle and take the wind out of his many opponents.

    It has tainted BC for me. And apparently, The Dark Side, once again, has won.

    SHARK

    *Vox on links HE provided (as Nalle): “The claim that this article is ‘GOP spin’ is an interesting one, since it seems to be based on reports direct from Iraqis inside Iraq if you follow the links.”

    **Vox on Nalle: “Of the characters in The Magnificent Seven, the picture unquestionably looks most like the Robert Vaughn character.”

    ***Nalle on Vox: “I’ve seen figures similar to the ones Vox quotes.”

  • Emry

    “IT GOT WORSE when he created a FAKE SCREEN NAME “VOX POPULI” to attack and insult opponents, *add to his [“Dave Nalle”] ‘data’ during debates, and to **compliment himself.” SHARK

    We still don’t know how many other fake names Nalle uses to pull off similar stunts.

  • Nancy

    Emry, for chrissakes, this is getting old. Are you going to whine about this forever? Management has made it crystal clear to everybody they have every intention of standing by Dave, & you aren’t going to change that. So either move on to another blog site or drop it. You’ve become monotonous.

  • Martin Lav

    Nancy,

    I noticed you were “outraged” at one point and then let the whole matter drop as if it didn’t happen.

    This coming from someone who posts endlessly about BushCo. and the harm they’ve done to the nation (rightly I believe) and yet the culprit of this sordid affair is the chief propagandist (Nalle) of the entire Bush administration that you rail against.

    I understand not beating a dead horse, but for Chrissakes, why did you let the matter drop so quickly with nary a follow up challenge to BushCos. NUMBER 1 FAN — Dave Nalle?

    I believe the two issues are related as it relates to honesty as well as credibility and while BushCo. has demonstrated time and time again their lack of either, their GOOD NATURED CHEERLEADER – DAVE NALLE – finally did himself in as well, which in my mind proves the danger of all right leaning conservatives that continually endanger this planet and us creatures that try to live peacefully on it.

    For that reason alone, you of all people should not feel this is a monotonous cause.

    Unless of course, your comments are the only contribution you make to the well being of this planet and thus have no more meaning than to make you feel good in the confines of your little digital world.

  • Nancy

    Yes, & I’ve gotten bored with my own rantings about BushCo, too. No, I’m still nettled about the deception, because people have made good points, but if the Powers have decided it’s an ‘honest mistake’ then so be it. It’s their blogsite, & all the ranting in the world isn’t going to change things. Time to move on – & that includes my own endless soapbox declamations.

    Does it seem to anybody else around here that we all go around & around about the same old same old subjects? Every thread always seems to end up with the same arguments. Maybe it’s just me & the Feb. doldrums….

  • moonraven

    It would be a lot more straight ahead if management just came out and said:

    It’s our site. Like it or lump it.

    The problem is that they shit around saying that Dave is not a liar and that he has made a lot of contributions to the site.

    Does that mean he gives them money?

    Because the only contribution I have seen from Dave–besides the lies–has been bullying and jumping on the free speech rights of others as if he were The Blue Demon–or some other fatass wrestler.

  • Martin Lav

    Of course, but they won’t as Dave won’t.

    The best course to take with these capitalists pigs is to hit em where it hurts and send email complaints to their various sponsors, then and only then will the owners take note.

    A good socialist like you should know that!

    Seeing as how the Amazon runs a lot closer through your heart than mine, I suggest you take your demand to them.

  • moonraven

    A good socialist like me knows that the sponsors are only concerened with how much business the site generates for them.

    Number of hits probably increases when Nalle pisses everybody off with his truly byzantine bullying.

    Bottom line: Dave adds to theirs. Or they PERCEIVE it that way.

    The only way we can give these guys a shot in the shorts is by boycotting the site–and making sure EVERYONE does.

    Example from my distant past in US academia:

    I was General Secretary of the AFT local at Northern Illinois University back in the late 60s, early 70s. It was a time when academic unions had some clout.

    The graduate students decided to form a union also–and my husband was one of the leaders.

    There was a full professor in the English department who was either senile, perverse–or just didn’t give a shit about teaching. He would choose old lectures (ZZZZ) at random–regardless of the course he was supposed to be giving. Obviously, no learning was taking place. The grad students in English had complained to the department chair–to no avail.

    They came to me. I told them that the department was not going to force the guy to retire based on their complaints, BUT: IF THEY ORGANIZED AND MADE SURE THAT NO ONE SIGNED UP FOR HIS COURSES THE FOLLOWING SEMESTER, and I must stress NO ONE–they would retire his ass.

    It worked.

  • MCH

    What’s mysterious to me is that one of BC’s co-owners stated that Nalle “apologized” for his mistake. Am I the only who missed the alleged apology…??

  • moonraven

    Not mysterious at all.

    Just another stonewalling behavior.

  • Lumpy

    shark. If blogcritics is now ‘tainted’ for u let me suggest that u join the other users your childish behavior has driven off and leave. They’d welcome u over at democratic underground. But maybe your mindless outrage wouldn’t stand out enough there to feed your ego.

  • moonraven

    Dave’s kneecap posts again.

    Next we’ll be hearing from another part….

  • Martin Lav

    MCH,

    He said he apologized, he never actually did it.
    I think he said something along the lines of “I already apologized” but as we all know that’s just another technique he uses to avoid addressing someone or something directly.

    Maybe I’m wrong now that I think of it, I seem to recall Vox Populi saying: “Dave already apoligized”……or was that one of his editor friends?

    No matter, it appears the apology and Dave are both MIA.

  • moonraven

    Good riddance.

  • MCH

    Or perhaps it was like:

    “Why should he apologize since the error (read fraud/deceit) was not his fault, but due instead to too many cups of coffee?”
    – Vox Populi

  • Emry

    I predict that the Dave Vox Populi Nalle fraud and deceit issue will finally reach closure when Bush is impeached, or his disasterous term in office reaches its official expiry date. I’m using a rented crystal ball so I can’t guarantee its accuracy.

  • http://rapturenutballs.blogspot.com Baritone

    Crystal balls, just ain’t made like they used to. Really unreliable. I think it’ll be the expiry thingy, though. Congress doesn’t have enough gumption to do the impeachy thingy. Anyhow, Bush (or “Shrub” as Molly Ivins used to refer to him) would come out looking like the victim.