1
   

Will the anti-war crowd denounce this idiot?

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Nov, 2005 11:47 pm
Even a slippery liberal won't try to pretend he didn't mean kill.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:08 am
boomerang wrote:
What a hard question.

I'm anti-war but I can't denounce this idiot.

My brother is a "superior" (a General) and I know that the reason he has been in the military for so long is because he believes in the principals of America -- one of which is freedom of speech.

So I know he defends this mans right to say stupid things.

Still, its tough and I'd like to kick that guys ass.


You can denounce someone or something someone says without it meaning that you contend he or she had no right to say it.

Of more interest, to me, is how someone who describes themselves as anti-war, advances the notion of kicking anyone's ass.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:13 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Yep. He has the right to say it and the right to have is ass kicked for saying it. I don't think my denouncing him will make any difference, but if it makes you feel better, I denounce him.


Quite an artful dodge.

Matters of principle are not determined by their probability for effect, or whether or not they make someone feel better.

Do you, as a matter of personal conscious, denounce what he has said?

Step up to the plate FreeDuck and put aside all of your post-modernist training.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:23 am
dlowan wrote:
Heehee......getting like denunciations in Mao's China.....


Do you pro war people think everything is either/or, all/none?

Is it impossible for you to comprehend that one can be anti this war and not pro murder of commanding officers etc?

Honestly, the projections of a single digit IQ onto anyone who disagrees with you is utterly idiotic.


Grow the **** up and get a brain.


"Heehee;" "LOL," etc etc etc.

These idiotically cutesy expressions automatically triggers my bile ducts to excrete, but I always force myself to read on. Surprisingly enough, whenever I find a comment preceded by one of these badges of idiocy, I also find a comment that is chock full of idiocy. This thread is no exception.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:27 am
ebrown_p wrote:
I am as anti-war as you get, and I am willing to denounce this idiot. If soldiers want to oppose the war... they can do it in far more productive and less violent (and even less self-destructive) ways such as fleeing to Canada.

I am as pro-free-speech as you get. I think that the college was right to fire him. Advocating direct acts of violence is pushing the boundaries of free speech. It certainly goes far beyond the boundaries of what is acceptable from a professor.

There... are you happy?

Now can we get back to enjoying watching (and urging) Rumsfeld (and maybe even Rove and Cheney) go over the political cliff?


Personally, I would be that much more happy if you had not included such a smarmy comment, but I'm not greedy. I acknowledge your honesty and appreciate your reluctance to give it all up.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 06:35 am
mysteryman wrote:
Mills,
Whas it ok for the professor to advocate US servicemen murder their superiors?
Are you saying that is ok?


What context? OK if an Italian private had picked off the Duce? OK if a viet cong had picked off his superior? OK if some al quaeda fighter blows up a senior?

So it's clearly not an absolute moral principle. Unless, of course, the US military is always and inevitably absolutely good.

You might also argue that the US military should never lose a fight or a war. And you'd likely argue that because you hold it as absolutely true (or close to it) that the US could never get involved in anything too morally untoward precisely because it is American. That's tautological, and puts America in some godly category unachieved by any civilization ever.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 06:48 am
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Heehee......getting like denunciations in Mao's China.....


Do you pro war people think everything is either/or, all/none?

Is it impossible for you to comprehend that one can be anti this war and not pro murder of commanding officers etc?

Honestly, the projections of a single digit IQ onto anyone who disagrees with you is utterly idiotic.


"Heehee;" "LOL," etc etc etc.

These idiotically cutesy expressions automatically triggers my bile ducts to excrete, but I always force myself to read on. Surprisingly enough, whenever I find a comment preceded by one of these badges of idiocy, I also find a comment that is chock full of idiocy. This thread is no exception.


I'd get those ducts seen to dear, they are clearly affecting your brain, not to mention making you, as usual, an exceedingly distasteful thing to read.

I take it, by the way, that you ARE incapable of comprehending that one can be anti war and not pro murder of commanding officers? And hence also incapable of comprehending the utter speciousness and invalid logic of the thread progenitor's so called premise?

Oh well.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 07:02 am
This thread is just the latest instance here of the "universities are bastions of leftist/commie thought and ought either to be burned to the ground, or at the very least, ought to have one really conservative prof for every really liberal prof (terms to be defined by us)".

This argument is advanced by folks who have never studied at university, or have studied very little, or who are activist conservative or Republicans such as the folks in the links up above. How, if so many have never been near a university, do they come to believe this, and forward it wielding the same terms and notions and cliches? A recently published email from Michael Scanlon, formerly Tom DeLay's chief aide provides a very transparent window onto how this all gets done.

Quote:
"The wackos get their information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the internet and telephone trees," Scanlon wrote in the memo, which was read into the public record at a hearing of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. "Simply put, we want to bring out the wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public lets the whole thing slip past them."


Whether a phone-tree of activist christians, or whether a linked group of rightwing internet sites for those not particularly religious, the tricks are the same. Deceive the "wackos" so they will behave in ways that serve your purpose.

It will be a source of great joy when some of you folks get a handle on how - and how much - you are being manipulated by people like Scanlon, DeLay, Abramoff, Horowitz, etc.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 07:41 am
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

Of more interest, to me, is how someone who describes themselves as anti-war, advances the notion of kicking anyone's ass.


Oh please.

Kicking someone's ass is hardly war.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 12:56 pm
The person who wrote this--

I take it, by the way, that you ARE incapable of comprehending that one can be anti war and not pro murder of commanding officers?

--obviously posts before reading the relevant material. The anti-war professor DID suggest that US troops kill their commanding officers. You either support it, or you don't.

I shouldn't be surprised, though I am, at how many here do support it.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 04:24 pm
Lash wrote:
Then, we see things differently, Mills. I don't think any professor of any political stripe should speak to any student in such a manner.
We will have to agree to disagree then.

Quote:
Even if it was the KKK, the prof should go through channels to shut down the organization--not speak in a threatening manner to the student.

First, shutting the organization down would be interfering with the student's freedom of speech (unless the channels you're referring to are venues for turning public opinion against the organization). Second, there was no threat unless you're referring to the 'threat' of public critique. So let's drop 'the monster vs. the maiden' rhetoric.

Quote:
And, there was nothing wrong with Beach, her statement or her club.

Well that's a matter of opinion, and the professor voiced his dissenting opinion. He did not, however, attempt to keep Beach or her organization from voicing their opinion. This is one of vital ways free speech functions--opposing opinions are voiced.

Quote:
An employer can't say anything they please to a subordinate--due to the subordinate feeling unduly pressured. A professor operates under the same constraints. College is for the education of the student--not the political activism and censorship by the professor.

No, an employer can't say anything he or she wants to a subordinate, but employers can and frequently do interfere with their employees' freedom of speech by threat of being fired or otherwise reprimanded. A professor who attempted to harm a student's grades or otherwise negatively affect a student's ability to get a college education would deserve to be fired. Daly did nothing like this. He simply told the student he would publicly critique her and her organization's political ideology.

Quote:
This is just another huge difference most conservative people, I'm guessing, have with more liberalslanted types. I think it was incorrect on more than one level.

Yes, it's been my experience that most conservatives get very irritable when confronted with dissent and criticism. This would be one of the differences between conservatives and liberals.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 04:48 pm
This wasn't dissent or criticism. I find it hard to believe you 1) believe that it is and 2) think you can pass it off as such.

Criticism/dissent = I disagree...That's crap...You're wrong... not "I'll make it so you're group won't be able to show your faces around here." With a "let's get officers killed" thrown in to boot.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 04:49 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Mills,
Whas it ok for the professor to advocate US servicemen murder their superiors?
Are you saying that is ok?

'Ok'? That's irrelevant. Freedom of speech isn't supposed to cover only speech that is seen as 'ok'.

What Daly stated was, "Real freedom will come when soldiers in Iraq turn their guns on their superiors and fight for just causes and for people's needs..." I see nothing in this statement that demonstrates support for murder on Daly's part. It is the commissioned officers who give the orders to murder innocent civilians; should not a just and moral individual stop those who commit murder or cause murder to be committed? And would not such an individual be justified in stopping the murder by any means necessary?

There have been numerous instances throughout American history when humanity, morality, and justice would have been better served by rank and file soldiers turning their weapons on their superiors rather than on the 'enemy'.
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 04:58 pm
Lash wrote:
This wasn't dissent or criticism. I find it hard to believe you 1) believe that it is and 2) think you can pass it off as such.

Criticism/dissent = I disagree...That's crap...You're wrong... not "I'll make it so you're group won't be able to show your faces around here." With a "let's get officers killed" thrown in to boot.

Am I the only one here who bothered to look at Mysterman's third link? What Daly wrote was, "I will continue to expose your right-wing, anti-people politics[my bold text] until groups like your[sic] won't dare show their face on a college campus." This is certainly dissent, and it's certainly a promise to criticize (Daly did provide some actual critique in the first paragraph of the e-mail). I'm not passing anything off as something other than what it is, I'm simply literate and fluent in the English language.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 05:06 pm
Iran President: Charge Bush for War Crimes By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer
Sat Nov 26,11:19 AM ET



TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president said Saturday the Bush administration should be tried on war crimes charges, and he denounced the West for pressuring Iran to curb its controversial nuclear program.

"You, who have used nuclear weapons against innocent people, who have used uranium ordnance in Iraq, should be tried as war criminals in courts," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in an apparent reference to the United States.

Ahmadinejad did not elaborate, but he apparently was referring to the U.S. military's reported use of artillery shells packed with depleted uranium, which is far less radioactive than natural uranium and is left over from the process of enriching uranium for use as nuclear fuel.

Since the Iraq war started in 2003, American forces have fired at least 120 tons of shells packed with depleted uranium, an extremely dense material used by the U.S. and British militaries to penetrate tank armor. Once fired, the shells melt, vaporize and turn to dust.

"Who in the world are you to accuse Iran of suspicious nuclear armed activity?" Ahmadinejad said during a nationally televised ceremony marking the 36th anniversary of the establishment of Iran's volunteer Basij paramilitary force. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us;_ylt=AtMSlKJbooR4HVK7kHeOuz9vaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 05:15 pm
From the article--

School president William Austin said that he will incorporate tolerance seminars for professors during the next faculty in-service day to shield students from this type of harassment, as requested by Young America's Foundation.

Rebecca Beach has called for Austin to select Young America's Foundation President Ron Robinson as the one to teach leftists how to be tolerant toward conservatives. Robinson has dedicated his career to defending free speech on college campuses.
"More colleges and universities need to follow the lead of WCCC and integrate tolerance training for insensitive leftists," says Young America's Foundation Spokesman Jason Mattera. "John Daly is yet another Ward Churchill. Academia is filled with intolerant leftists who openly show hostility toward conservatism."
Daly's email to Rebecca came after she sent a note to faculty announcing the appearance of decorated war hero Lt. Col. Scott Rutter to discuss America's accomplishments in Iraq.
Young America's Foundation will continue to monitor and expose similar instances of leftist intolerance through our online service, "Activist 411 - Activism Made Easy." This resource helps students, like Rebecca Beach, by providing them with advice on how to advance conservative ideas effectively and reveal intolerant professors, administrators, and other left-wing elements
who attempt to intimidate and silence young conservative activists.


As the principal outreach organization of the Conservative Movement for 35 years, Young America's Foundation introduces thousands of young people to conservative ideas through national conferences, campus lectures and activism programs, internships, and seminars at the Reagan Ranch. Young America's Foundation preserves the Reagan Ranch as a premier presidential property and living tribute to Ronald Reagan's life and ideas.

_________________________
We'll just enroll you in sensitivity training.... maybe you'll get it then... Laughing
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2005 08:16 pm
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
"Heehee;" "LOL," etc etc etc.

These idiotically cutesy expressions automatically triggers my bile ducts to excrete, but I always force myself to read on. Surprisingly enough, whenever I find a comment preceded by one of these badges of idiocy, I also find a comment that is chock full of idiocy. This thread is no exception.

When one encounters such a pristine example of irony, it should be savored, like a fine wine.

For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar" -- Wm. Shakespeare
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 12:06 am
Lash wrote:
From the article--

School president William Austin said that he will incorporate tolerance seminars for professors during the next faculty in-service day to shield students from this type of harassment, as requested by Young America's Foundation.

Rebecca Beach has called for Austin to select Young America's Foundation President Ron Robinson as the one to teach leftists how to be tolerant toward conservatives. Robinson has dedicated his career to defending free speech on college campuses.
"More colleges and universities need to follow the lead of WCCC and integrate tolerance training for insensitive leftists," says Young America's Foundation Spokesman Jason Mattera. "John Daly is yet another Ward Churchill. Academia is filled with intolerant leftists who openly show hostility toward conservatism."
Daly's email to Rebecca came after she sent a note to faculty announcing the appearance of decorated war hero Lt. Col. Scott Rutter to discuss America's accomplishments in Iraq.
Young America's Foundation will continue to monitor and expose similar instances of leftist intolerance through our online service, "Activist 411 - Activism Made Easy." This resource helps students, like Rebecca Beach, by providing them with advice on how to advance conservative ideas effectively and reveal intolerant professors, administrators, and other left-wing elements
who attempt to intimidate and silence young conservative activists.


As the principal outreach organization of the Conservative Movement for 35 years, Young America's Foundation introduces thousands of young people to conservative ideas through national conferences, campus lectures and activism programs, internships, and seminars at the Reagan Ranch. Young America's Foundation preserves the Reagan Ranch as a premier presidential property and living tribute to Ronald Reagan's life and ideas.

_________________________
We'll just enroll you in sensitivity training.... maybe you'll get it then... Laughing


And once again it's interesting and instructive to note that while Daly did nothing to hinder Beach or her organization's freedom of speech, they attempted to have Daly fired for exercising his.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 07:29 am
lash said
Quote:
--obviously posts before reading the relevant material. The anti-war professor DID suggest that US troops kill their commanding officers. You either support it, or you don't.


He did not say that. You suggest 'turn guns on' is the equivalent of 'kill'. It isn't. Ask dyslexia, who did not shoot the officer.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2005 10:23 am
joefromchicago wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
"Heehee;" "LOL," etc etc etc.

These idiotically cutesy expressions automatically triggers my bile ducts to excrete, but I always force myself to read on. Surprisingly enough, whenever I find a comment preceded by one of these badges of idiocy, I also find a comment that is chock full of idiocy. This thread is no exception.

When one encounters such a pristine example of irony, it should be savored, like a fine wine.

For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar" -- Wm. Shakespeare


Hee hee LOL
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.03 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 06:16:31