0
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

 
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 04:50 am
http://www.washingtonspectator.com/articles/20060601democracy_1.cfm
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 05:34 am
Thanks xingu for the links, the last one was particulary interesting.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 07:04 am
Quote:
Liberators as Murderers
The Way Americans Like Their War

By ROBERT FISK

Could Haditha be just the tip of the mass grave?

The corpses we have glimpsed, the grainy footage of the cadavers and the dead children; could these be just a few of many? Does the handiwork of the United States' army of the slums go further?

I remember clearly the first suspicions I had that murder most foul might be taking place in our name in Iraq. I was in the Baghdad mortuary, counting corpses, when one of the city's senior medical officials, an old friend, told me of his fears. "Everyone brings bodies here," he said. "But when the Americans bring bodies in, we are instructed that under no circumstances are we ever to do post-mortems. We were given to understand that this had already been done. Sometimes we'd get a piece of paper like this one with a body." And here the man handed me a U.S. military document showing with the hand-drawn outline of a man's body and the words "trauma wounds."

What kind of trauma is now being experienced in Iraq? Just who is doing the mass killing? Who is dumping so many bodies on garbage heaps? After Haditha, we are going to reshape our suspicions.

It's no good saying "a few bad apples." All occupation armies are corrupted. But do they all commit war crimes? The Algerians are still uncovering the mass graves left by the French paras who liquidated whole villages. We know of the rapist-killers of the Russian army in Chechnya.

We have all heard of Bloody Sunday. The Israelis sat and watched while their proxy Lebanese militia butchered and eviscerated its way through 1,700 Palestinians. And of course the words My Lai are now uttered again. Yes, the Nazis were much worse. And the Japanese. And the Croatian Ustashi. But this is us. This is our army. These young soldiers are our representatives in Iraq. And they have innocent blood on their hands.

I suspect part of the problem is that we never really cared about Iraqis, which is why we refused to count their dead. Once the Iraqis turned upon the army of occupation with their roadside bombs and suicide cars, they became Arab "gooks," the evil sub-humans whom the Americans once identified in Vietnam. Get a president to tell us that we are fighting evil and one day we will wake to find that a child has horns, a baby has cloven feet.

Remind yourself these people are Muslims and they can all become little Mohamed Attas. Killing a roomful of civilians is only a step further from all those promiscuous air strikes that we are told kill 'terrorists" but which all too often turn out to be a wedding party or -- as in Afghanistan -- a mixture of "terrorists" and children or, as we are soon to hear, no doubt, "terrorist children."

In a way, we reporters are also to blame. Unable to venture outside Baghdad -- or around Baghdad itself -- Iraq's vastness has fallen under a thick, all-consuming shadow. We might occasionally notice sparks in the night -- a Haditha or two in the desert -- but we remain meekly cataloguing the numbers of "terrorists" supposedly scored in remote corners of Mesopotamia. For fear of the insurgent's knife, we can no longer investigate. And the Americans like it that way.

I think it becomes a habit, this sort of thing. Already the horrors of Abu Ghraib are shrugged away. It was abuse, not torture. And then up pops a junior officer in the United States charged for killing an Iraqi army general by stuffing him upside down in a sleeping bag and sitting on his chest. And again, it gets few headlines. Who cares if another Iraqi bites the dust? Aren't they trying to kill our boys who are out there fighting terror.

For who can be held to account when we regard ourselves as the brightest, the most honorable of creatures, doing endless battle with the killers of Sept. 11 or July 7 because we love our country and our people -- but not other people -- so much. And so we dress ourselves up as Galahads, yes as Crusaders, and we tell those whose countries we invade that we are going to bring them democracy. I can't help wondering today how many of the innocents slaughtered in Haditha took the opportunity to vote in the Iraqi elections -- before their "liberators" murdered them.


Source
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 07:19 am
Iraq Plans 'Flawed'
General Who Led Army Division Tells Local Papers, Then AP, That Iraq Plans 'Flawed'
Editors and Publishers
June 02, 2006
SAVANNAH, Ga.

The retired general who commanded the Army's 3rd Infantry Division when its tanks led the charge to Baghdad in 2003 says the initial war planning was flawed and likely contributed to the drawn-out conflict with insurgents in Iraq.

However, retired Maj. Gen. Buford C. Blount III said Friday that pulling out "is not an option" for U.S. forces as Iraq's fledgling democracy tries to re-establish government services and its own military that dissolved following the 2003 invasion.

"The U.S.'s preparedness to take over the country of Iraq, to try to stand it back up basically from scratch, we were not prepared for that level of effort at the beginning," Blount told the Associated Press in a phone interview from his home in Hattiesburg, Miss. "And in some way it probably contributed to the development of the insurgency."

Blount left the Fort Stewart-based 3rd Infantry after its 19,000 troops returned from Iraq in 2003. He retired in January 2005 after a year at the Pentagon as assistant deputy chief of operations for the Army.

He spoke to the AP reluctantly after giving interviews this week to two newspapers: the Hattiesburg American in his Mississippi hometown and the Savannah Morning News near Fort Stewart.

"I think we made a lot of mistakes," Blount told the Hattiesburg newspaper in an interview published Thursday. He later told the Savannah newspaper that, while he had supported the decision to invade Iraq in March 2003, "(L)ooking back now, it's clear the plan was flawed."

"Knowing what we know today, with the deaths we've had and lack of stability and challenge the insurrection has caused, there may have been a better way," Blount told the Savannah newspaper in an interview published Friday.

He said the U.S. was unprepared to compensate for basic services, such as fire and police departments, that ceased to exist following the invasion. He also criticized the decision to disband the Iraqi army.

"It was a functioning force that could have been greatly used to get the country back together quickly," Blount told the Savannah newspaper. "Instead, we sent all these young trained soldiers home with no future and no money to support their families, so they were easily recruited by the insurgents."

Blount, a soft-spoken Southerner, insisted he doesn't agree with other retired generals who have recently called for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign because of his handling of the Iraq war.

"I really don't want to get lumped in with the other generals," Blount told the AP. "I fully support us still being there. It's critical we see this mission through to the finish. Pulling out, to me, is not an option."

Asked if, in hindsight, President Bush made the right decision in ordering U.S. troops to invade Iraq, Blount replied: "I don't think I want to comment on that."
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 07:22 am
In an 'Atrocity-Producing Situation' Who Is to Blame?
Haditha: In an 'Atrocity-Producing Situation' -- Who Is to Blame?
By Robert Jay Lifton
June 02, 2006
E & P

Is it enough for the media to accept that incidents such as the apparent massacre at Haditha are inevitably a part of war? The type of war we are waging in Iraq makes atrocities more likely, and responsibility for the crimes at Haditha extends to top commanders, the secretary of defense, and the White House.

My Lai is very much with us again. Its name was first invoked, in the context of the current war in Iraq, at the time of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, by Colin Powell among others. He cited the My Lai incident -- as many as 500 civilians were slaughtered in the Vietnamese village by American soldiers in March 1968 -- as the kind of thing that can happen in wars. Now we have the alleged massacre of Iraqi civilians in Haditha, followed by Wednesday's bulletin that U.S. troops shot and killed two women in a car near Samara -- one of the women, about to give birth, was apparently being rushed to a hospital.

Is it enough for the media to accept that such tragic incidents are inevitably a part of war?

Both of these Iraqi events, like My Lai, are examples of what I call an atrocity-producing situation -- one so structured, psychologically and militarily, that ordinary people, men or women no better or worse than you or I, can commit atrocities. A major factor in all of these events was the emotional state of U.S. soldiers as they struggled with angry grief over buddies killed by invisible adversaries, with a desperate need to identify an "enemy."

The military environment in Iraq, once so different from that of Vietnam, now holds striking parallels. Iraq is also a counterinsurgency war in which U.S. soldiers, despite their extraordinary firepower, feel extremely vulnerable in a hostile environment, and in which high-ranking officers and war planners are frustrated by the great difficulty of tracking down or even recognizing the enemy. What ultimately drives the dynamic is an ideological vision that equates Iraqi resisters with "terrorists" and seeks to further justify almost any action against them.

In the case of My Lai, there were deaths of many buddies, and then on the day before the massacre a much-loved sergeant was blown up by a booby trap. In the case of those responsible for the atrocity at Haditha, there was the death of 20 marines from a different unit three months earlier, which the new unit undoubtedly experienced as a legacy. Then, three days before the killings, the first death in the unit occurred, and on the day of the massacre, Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas was killed when a bomb exploded near his Humvee. As at My Lai, the combination of angry grief and military vulnerability led to the slaughter.

At My Lai, the night before the killings there was a ceremony, consisting of a memorial for the dead sergeant and a military briefing in which the men were encouraged to kill randomly. We don't have any such information about Haditha. There will undoubtedly be more to learn about the relationship between the sergeant who led the Haditha killings and higher-ranking officers and military policy.

My Lai was covered up for about a year and then was revealed through a grapevine of soldiers and reporters. Haditha remained hidden for several months before being reported by Time magazine, although several more months passed until the recent, much fuller, emergence of the story. Significantly, the Haditha atrocity was made known through interviews with Iraqi civilians, with the help of human rights workers and American journalists.

This access to Iraqi civilians, and growing awareness of the climate for wrongdoing, is likely to uncover other atrocities. Already today the BBC is reporting another alleged massacre of 11 Iraqi civilians.

Recognizing that atrocity is a group activity, one must ask how individual soldiers can so readily join in? I believe they undergo a type of dissociation that I call doubling -- the formation of a second self. The individual psyche can adapt to an atrocity-producing environment by means of a sub-self that behaves as if it is autonomous and thereby joins in activities that would otherwise seem repugnant.

In environments where sanctioned brutality becomes the norm, sadistic impulses, dormant in all of us, are likely to be expressed. The group's violent energy becomes such that an individual soldier who questions it could be turned upon. (A Vietnam veteran who had been at My Lai told me he had felt himself in some danger when he not only refused to fire but pointedly lowered the barrel of his gun to the ground.) To resist such intense group pressure requires an unusual combination of conscience and courage.

This kind of atrocity-producing situation can exist, with most of the characteristics I have described, in some degree in all wars, including World War II, our last "good war." But a counterinsurgency war against a nonwhite population in a hostile setting, especially when driven by profound ideological distortions, is particularly prone to sustained atrocity -- all the more so when it becomes an occupation.

To attribute the likely massacre at Haditha to "a few bad apples" or to "individual failures" is poor psychology and self-serving moralism. To be sure, individual soldiers and civilians who participated in it are accountable for their behavior, even under such pressured conditions. But the greater responsibility lies with those who planned and executed the war in Iraq and the "war on terrorism" of which it is a part, and who created, in policy and attitude, the accompanying denial of the rights of captives (at Abu Ghraib and Guantanomo) and of the humanity of civilians (at Haditha).

Iraq antiwar veterans to whom I have spoken have felt an immediate connection with their Vietnam predecessors. When an organizer of one group of Iraq veterans declared, "We were lost -- we had no idea what we were doing," he sounded very much like many of the Vietnam veterans I once worked with. He and others have described an atrocity-producing situation all too reminiscent of Vietnam.

Psychologically and ethically, responsibility for the crimes at Haditha extends to top commanders, the secretary of defense, and the White House. Those crimes are a direct expression of the kind of war we are waging in Iraq.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Jay Lifton ([email protected]) is an esteemed psychiatrist and author of several landmark books, including "Death in Life" and "The Nazi Doctors." In 1973 he wrote the book, "Home from the War: Vietnam Veteran -- Neither Victims nor Executioners." He has co-authored two books with E&P Editor Greg Mitchell, "Hiroshima in America" and "Who Owns Death?" His current book, which he co-edited, is "Crimes of War," a collection of essays on the Iraq war.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 10:04 am
Quote:
Police impostors kidnap 50 in Baghdad

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Gunmen posing as Iraqi police commandos raided three transportation companies and kidnapped 50 people Monday in Baghdad, an Iraqi Interior Ministry official said.

The kidnappers were wearing police commando uniforms and driving at least 13 vehicles with Iraqi police markings, the official said.

Some of those taken captive were passengers on a bus that was about to depart for Syria or Jordan and included two Syrians, the official said. Office workers and bus company employees also were kidnapped, he said.

The Iraqi owner of a transportation company and his two sons were among those abducted, the official added.

Officials said the raid, which took at least an hour to complete, began on a street in central Baghdad's Salihiya district.

An official with the prime minister's office said no official police operation was under way at the time.

It is unclear why Iraqi police did not notice the raid happening on a busy street in the capital.

A series of incidents in which terrorists posed as police spurred the Iraqi government months ago to say that it would reissue police uniforms to make them harder to copy,but it hasn't acted on the issue. Fake uniforms can easily be purchased on the street, officials said.

Other developments

Baghdad police said they found the bodies of six unidentified people, tortured and shot to death, in the Dora neighborhood on Monday.

An official with the Badr organization -- the military wing of Iraq's largest Shiite party -- was found shot to death Monday in southwestern Baghdad's Bayaa neighborhood, police said.

The defense team in the trial of ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein protested Monday over the arrest of four of its witnesses, according to The Associated Press. The chief judge said the witnesses were jailed on suspicion of perjury, the AP reported. (Full story)

Gunmen killed 20 people Sunday in Diyala province after stopping two minibuses and a car, forcing people out of the vehicles and shooting them, Iraqi police said. The victims were Shiites, and the violence was thought to be the result of sectarian hostilities.

Iraq's newly installed government said Sunday it needs more time to fill defense and interior ministerial posts -- which have been vacant for more than two weeks -- after another missed deadline.

A CBS News correspondent injured in a Baghdad car bombing last week is expected to return to the United States on Tuesday, said sources at CBS and Germany's Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. Kimberly Dozier remains in critical condition. Her British cameraman and soundman were killed, along with an Iraqi translator and a U.S. soldier.
Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.


It is unclear why Iraqi police did not notice the raid happening on a busy street in the capital.

The police didn't notice what was happening because it was the police conducting the raids.

Occam's razor and all

Sheesh

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 07:07 pm
Coalition troops will leave Iraq when the itm denounce, renounce, and stop murdering civilians.

When Coalition troops do leave Iraq, coalition troops will stop killing Iraqi civilians as well as stop murdering the itm.

In the meantime, the itm and only the item are causing the violent deaths of Iraqi civilians.

The liebral opinion news media would begin acting humane, if it were to stop blaming Coalition troops in general and American troops in particular, and were to start blaming the itm for what the itm has actually caused and are actually causing, because the liebral opinion news media is not competent to determine who among the dead are dead itm and who among the dead are dead civilians.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 07:44 pm
Quote:
Haditha: In an 'Atrocity-Producing Situation' -- Who Is to Blame?
By Robert Jay Lifton
June 02, 2006
E & P

...
What ultimately drives the dynamic is an ideological vision that equates Iraqi resisters with "terrorists" and seeks to further justify almost any action against them.
...


When so-called resisters murder civilians, so-called resisters are maniacal genocidal itm (i.e., inhuman terrorist malignancy) and do infact "justify almost any action against them." Lifton's portrayal of them as anything other than they are is disgusting.

George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-four, Chapter 3, wrote:

'How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?'

Winston thought. 'By making him suffer,' he said.

'Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but MORE merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world will be progress towards more pain. The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy--everything.'


To prove me wrong, all the itm have to do is stop murdering civilians.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jun, 2006 11:34 pm
Now that the situation in Iraq has gone completely and disastrously wrong, are there any other voices from the Right, erstwhile Bush apologsts and supporters, to add their voices here to Ican's reedy piping?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 06:45 am
UK radio station bans Blunt's songs :
A British radio station has banned all songs by balladeer James Blunt from its playlist after receiving complaints from listeners.

"No Bravery" (4 min)
Turn on speakers ... klik
Lyrics -
There are children standing her,
Arms outstretched into the sky,
Tears drying on their face.
He has been here.
Brothers lie in shallow graves.
Fathers lost without a trace.
A nation blind to their disgrace,
Since he's been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

Houses burnt beyond repair.
The smell of death is in the air.
A woman weeping in despair says,
He has been here.
Tracer lighting up the sky.
It's another families' turn to die.
A child afraid to even cry out says,
He has been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

There are children standing here,
Arms outstretched into the sky,
But no one asks the question why,
He has been here.
Old men kneel and accept their fate.
Wives and daughters cut and raped.
A generation drenched in hate.
Yes, he has been here.

Why???
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 09:54 am
McTag wrote:
Now that the situation in Iraq has gone completely and disastrously wrong, are there any other voices from the Right, erstwhile Bush apologsts and supporters, to add their voices here to Ican's reedy piping?

To prove me wrong, all the itm have to do is stop murdering civilians.

To stop the violent deaths in Iraq, all the itm have to do is stop murdering civilians.

To reduce their support for the itm, all the sotitm (i.e., suporters of the inhuman terrorist malignancy) have to do is stop calling the itm insurgents, resisters, revolutionaries, protesters, deprived, et cetera, and call them what they are: maniacal genocidal inhuman terrorist malignancy.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 10:13 am
George Orwell in NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR, Part I, Chapter VII, wrote:
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth's centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O'Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 10:50 am
Quote:
To prove me wrong, all the itm have to do is stop murdering civilians.


Somehow I doubt that they are too concerned with proving anything to you at all...

Your frequent 1984 posts have what relevancy to the discussion, exactly? Who are you accusing of being 'big brother?' Who is denying reality? Who is attempting to oppress others?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 12:40 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
To prove me wrong, all the itm have to do is stop murdering civilians.


Somehow I doubt that they are too concerned with proving anything to you at all...
I agree! The itm are totally absorbed in their maniacal genocide in support of their effort to gain power over the actions and thoughts of the rest of humanity. I made the 'prove me wrong' point, nonetheless, because I thought it another way to make it clear that the itm are truly, totally responsible for the carnage in Iraq. Even those guilty of inept defense against the itm are not responsible for that carnage. They are only responsible for their ineptness in defending against the itm.

Your frequent 1984 posts have what relevancy to the discussion, exactly?
I previously posted:
[quote]George Orwell's NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/
constituted a prescient warning to humanity.

It was published in June 1949. He time-labeled his warning 1984, but his warning is a perpetual and timeless warning of humanity's propensity to contain and even court personalities in its midst that are dangerous to humanity's existence. These are the personalities in humanity's midst that seek power over what the rest of humanity thinks and what the rest of humanity does. They seek this power for no other purpose than gaining power over the rest of humanity. Possessing that power over even some of humanity deludes them into thinking they are of greater worth than those over which they possess their power. The truth is that to hold others down, one must be down also.

The genocidal manaical itm (i.e., the inhuman terrorist murderers) are the current best example of at least some of humanity courting personalities in its midst that are dangerous to humanity's existence. These are the personalities in humanity's midst that seek power over what the rest of what humanity thinks and does. They seek this power for no other purpose than gaining power over the rest of humanity.
...

Those who advocate that the victims of the itm be blamed for itm's past, present, and probably future victims, are also among those personalities in humanity's midst that seek power over what the rest of what humanity thinks and does (e.g., liebral opinion news media producers and directors). They also seek this power for no other purpose than gaining power over the rest of humanity.[/color]

Who are you accusing of being 'big brother?'
'Big Brother in "1984" is not necessarily a person. I interpreted it to be an icon of a power coveting belief system. Thus those who I accuse of being 'Big Brother' are those I perceive to be worshippers of that icon (e.g., George Soros, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton). In some quarters that worshipping would be called idol worship.

Who is denying reality?
Those who seek power over what others do and think -- plus those who are among their retinue of voluntary, intimidated, and captured obedient followers.

I think most of the posters, including you, in this forum are members of that retinue.


Who is attempting to oppress others?
The itm, their abettors, their advocates, and their silent witnesses. That includes members of the current leadership of the Democratic Party.

Cycloptichorn[/quote]
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 12:49 pm
Oh, Jesus Christ. The Democratic party?? Please. Talk about a lack of objectivity. Perhaps you should examine the Republicans a little closer if you want to see examples of controlling thought and dissemination of ideas and false truths...

Quote:
I think most of the posters, including you, in this forum are members of that retinue.


Right, you're right. I'm actively trying to control what you think or believe. Does everyone who disagrees with you pray at the altar of thought control? Is that what you believe?

Quit behaving like a goddamned fool, Ican. You're far more intelligent than this, or I used to think so.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 12:58 pm
George Orwell in NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR, Part III, Chapter IV, wrote:

He had capitulated, that was agreed. In reality, as he saw now, he had been ready to capitulate long before he had taken the decision. From the moment when he was inside the Ministry of Love—and yes, even during those minutes when he and Julia had stood helpless while the iron voice from the telescreen told them what to do—he had grasped the frivolity, the shallowness of his attempt to set himself up against the power of the Party. He knew now that for seven years the Thought Police had watched him like a beetle under a magnifying glass. There was no physical act, no word spoken aloud, that they had not noticed, no train of thought that they had not been able to infer.


Clearly, it's easier to stop it before it happens than stop it after it happens.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 01:01 pm
Right, right. Any dissent from your position is clearly an attempt to make you think like the dissenter, to shut you up, to convince you that 2+@ Not Equal 4. How is it possible to even have a discussion with someone who professes your beliefs? I certainly don't know how to forward the conversation, so I will instead wait on you to return to substantial policy discussion before responding.

It's all a giant conspiracy between me and Hillary and the Terrorists, lol Laughing

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 01:03 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Oh, Jesus Christ. The Democratic party?? Please. Talk about a lack of objectivity. Perhaps you should examine the Republicans a little closer if you want to see examples of controlling thought and dissemination of ideas and false truths...

Quote:
I think most of the posters, including you, in this forum are members of that retinue.


Right, you're right. I'm actively trying to control what you think or believe. Does everyone who disagrees with you pray at the altar of thought control? Is that what you believe?

Quit behaving like a goddamned fool, Ican. You're far more intelligent than this, or I used to think so.

Cycloptichorn

Read again what I wrote. Your ONE-DIMENSIONAL THINKING has twisted your understanding again. I'll be back later to help should you truly need it.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 05:07 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Oh, Jesus Christ. The Democratic party?? Please.
Talk about a lack of objectivity.
---------------------------------------
You asked: Who is attempting to oppress others?
I posted: The itm, their abettors, their advocates, and their silent witnesses. That includes members of the current leadership of the Democratic Party.
---------------------------------------

Perhaps you should examine the Republicans a little closer if you want to see examples of controlling thought and dissemination of ideas and false truths...
The primary problem with the Republican leadership is there isn't any Republican leadership. At the present, Republicans cannot even control themselves muchless anyone else.
...
Right, you're right. I'm actively trying to control what you think or believe. Does everyone who disagrees with you pray at the altar of thought control? Is that what you believe?
...
------------------------------------------------------
You asked: Who is denying reality?
I posted: Those who seek power over what others do and think -- plus those who are among their retinue of voluntary, intimidated, and captured obedient followers.

I think most of the posters, including you, in this forum are members of that retinue.


Please note: I did not post the accusation that you are "actively trying to control what [ I ] think or believe." Instead I accused you of being among the retinue of the voluntary, intimidated, and captured obedient followers of those who deny reality by seeking power over what others do and think. In brief, I accuse you of being a follower of those who would control; not a controller.
------------------------------------------------------
Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2006 05:26 pm
Sigh. I'm just not interested in what your 'accusations' are, for someone who puts Democrats on the same side as terrorists - and who actively calls for the killing of innocents as you do - is not someone who I worry about their opinion of me.

Can't we just keep this to policy debate, rather than your twisted opinions of Democrats and myself in general? I assure you that I haven't been duped by anyone, thanks very much...

Cycloptichorn
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/16/2025 at 09:03:35