Article

2004-01-30 Middle East

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Tao Gold 2004-01-30 10:52:09 AM|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Fails as CnC? This means so much coming from Botox Boy. Let's see: We get the W in Afghanistan and Iraq, we jug Sammy and toe tag is hell-spawn, Libya agreees to give up their WMD as a direct result , it looks as if we're gearing up to go after Binny and through it all Frawnce and the UN puppetshow are exposed for the incontinent dog and monkey rodeo that they truly are. All in all, I give it a B+/A-.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2004-1-30 11:16:12 AM|| 2004-1-30 11:16:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Sorry, Kerry, but you lost the claim to "decorated veteran" when you pretended to throw those decorations on the Capitol steps. What vile creatures these candidates are...

Posted by snellenr 2004-1-30 12:07:24 PM|| 2004-1-30 12:07:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Kerry's dumber than a keanulint.

Posted by Steve from Relto 2004-1-30 12:09:32 PM|| 2004-1-30 12:09:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Regardless of who emerges as the Democratic presidential nominee, the race has already served its greater democratic purpose: It has blown away George W. Bush's wartime aura of patriotic infallibility.

Not only Howard Dean, the passionate truth-teller about Iraq, but Senator John Kerry, Gen. Wesley Clark and others have found their voices to question almost all aspects of Bush's post-Sept. 11 performance.

They are bringing home to Americans the worldwide debates about their president's penchant for exploiting and fanning fears by exaggerating dangers, taking unilateral actions abroad, and squandering U.S. credibility.

Posted by Tao Gold 2004-1-30 12:35:21 PM|| 2004-1-30 12:35:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Tao: Wow...you regurgitate right on cue don't you? Hit all those talking points like a true automaton. Dean as passionate truth teller? That's the best one I've heard since,
"Yeeeaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh"

Posted by Rex Mundi 2004-1-30 1:02:55 PM|| 2004-1-30 1:02:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Does Faisal have another pseudonym?

And I LOVE the "unilateral" lie -- why don't the people who believe that one move to France or Germany, if they love those pusswarts so much?

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-1-30 1:19:34 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2004-1-30 1:19:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Hit all those talking points like a true automaton. I've often suspected that the Democratic Party recruits people (operatives?)like Tao Gold to spew the daily talking points on popular websites. Everytime a online forum gets popular, no matter what the forum's subject is, the TGs start showing up.

Posted by 11A5S 2004-1-30 1:36:28 PM|| 2004-1-30 1:36:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 RC, I think Tao and Faisal are one in the same. I tangled with him/them yesterday much to my distaste.

Posted by whitecollar redneck 2004-1-30 1:59:22 PM|| 2004-1-30 1:59:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Didn't Kerry and Hanoi Jane support the North Vietmanese (i.e. Viet Cong) against our own troops during the vietnam war?

Yup.. war hero...

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-1-30 2:11:46 PM|| 2004-1-30 2:11:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Howard Dean, the passionate truth-teller about Iraq,

Nope Faisal and Tao different. Tao is a refugee from the BlogFoeAmerica. Play with the ComeBack Bat today Tao?

Posted by Shipman 2004-1-30 2:33:39 PM|| 2004-1-30 2:33:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 [spoken in a robotic voice]
I AM TAO GOLD. I HAVE NO THOUGHTS OF MY OWN. IF FRANCE IS NOT INVOLVED IT IS NOT LEGITIMATE. NO BLOOD FOR OIL. SAVE THE OWLS. I WANT TO MAKE HOT MONKEY LOVE TO HOWARD DEAN. I'LL GIVE HIM A REASON TO SCREAM.

YEEEEEEAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH

Posted by AllahHateMe 2004-1-30 3:10:15 PM|| 2004-1-30 3:10:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Amazing how there's no point trying to start a discussion up without getting insulted.

Despite Kay's devastating indictment, Bush and the boys are refusing to blink.

While no longer insisting, as they were until last week, that weapons would eventually be found, Bush, Cheney and others have slipped into their secondary argument: Saddam was evil and needed to be removed anyway.

But that was not their chosen tool to scare Americans into supporting their war. Rather, it was that Saddam could attack America with his deadly weapons, using missiles or terrorists.

To get around that blatant inconsistency, the White House is now trying a new tack: that Bush had never characterized Saddam's danger as "imminent," only as "grave and growing."

There is a difference?

The last time the White House tried such hair-splitting was when Bill Clinton argued it was not "sex" that he had had with Monica Lewinsky.

The difference in this case, of course, is that more than 500 Americans and nearly 15,000 Iraqi soldiers and civilians are dead.

As for the policy of toppling bad guys, of whom there are many, Human Rights Watch had something to say this week in a major report.

Humanitarian interventions, it said, are best reserved for stopping ongoing or imminent slaughters, as in Rwanda (where no one intervened in time) or in Iraq in 1988 when Saddam was gassing Kurds (and Washington winked). And such actions are best taken multilaterally.

The lone sheriff tableau is exclusively American â an outdated one at that, resurrected nonetheless in times of trouble for comforting reassurance. But if a Newsweek poll is any indication â Kerry leading Bush, 49 per cent to 46 per cent â the president may have overstayed his welcome in that role as well.

Posted by Tao Gold 2004-1-30 4:02:14 PM|| 2004-1-30 4:02:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 TG,
Kay's devestating indictment? Don't make me barf. If you f*cking lefties would quit lying about what Kay said maybe we would discuss it with you. Kay did say he thought the weapons might have been moved to Syria. Did you catch that you mindless toad? For that matter, quit lying about what Bush said. He never said Saddam was an 'imminent threat'! And yes, you sackless mental midget, there is a huge difference between a imminent threat and a growing danger. Look up imminent in a dictionary, that is if you can read you illiterate troglodyte. If you could wrap your puny mind around the concept of 'preemption' you could understand that 'imminent' is not required for 'preemption'. Human Rights Watch? They think people protesting in Iraq is worse than people being shredded in plastic shredders, and you except reasonable people to take them serious? Please define 'multilateral'? Because obviously it doesn't mean in concert with other countries, because you limped-dicked piece of shit: THERE ARE OTHER FUCKING COUNTRIES HELPING IN IRAQ! I am so sick of hearing the same, mindless lies repeated by you and your mindless ilk. Quit lying you son of a bitch. Then, and only then, can you expect a friendly debate.

As for the Newsweek poll, try not to blow your wad yet, loser. Bush hasn't even started campaigning against Kerry yet.

FOAD

Posted by Swiggles 2004-1-30 4:53:22 PM|| 2004-1-30 4:53:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Here's one from the Long Memories Department:

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jf_kerry.htm

Have a look at some photographs and some thirty-year-old interviews that Red-White-n-Blue All-American War Hero(tm) Kerry doesn't want anyone to see.

Kerry loves to wrap himself in flags, only it's usually North Vietnamese and Viet Cong flags he wraps himself in. Wrapping himself in the American flag is something new for him.

Posted by Anonymous 2004-1-30 5:30:15 PM|| 2004-1-30 5:30:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 TG: Hot in the kitchen today, ain't it. After Faisal fowled the place up yesterday, noone's in the mood to suffer fools. Simply spewing the party line (any party) doesn't wash around here. Since you're actually arguing your points, fine. I suggest some true research.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2004-1-30 6:05:33 PM|| 2004-1-30 6:05:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Geeez Swiggles! Well done and thanks!

Posted by Shipman 2004-1-30 7:25:15 PM|| 2004-1-30 7:25:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 JFK returns from Viet Nam, learns war hero on his resume will not propel him to Demoncrat Party stardom, takes the politically expedient route by turning far left ANTI-WAR activist, provides aid and comfort to the enemy, votes to defund the South Vietnamese army, and advances his political career.Fast forward to the present. JFK votes for the liberation of Saddam from power, learns his pro-war stance will not propel him to the Demoncrat president nomination, turns anti-war, seeks to separate the men and women in uniform from the Commander in Chief in wartime, votes to DEFUND the war effort, provides aid and comfort to the enemy, and advances politically.

Posted by Garrison 2004-1-30 9:21:27 PM|| 2004-1-30 9:21:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Tao wrote -squandering U.S. credibility

you mean the why clinton squandered us credibility...always bowing to someone else's interests and taking care of your own interests does not when much respect in the middle east.

Posted by Dan 2004-1-30 10:39:30 PM|| 2004-1-30 10:39:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 --as in Rwanda (where no one intervened in time)-

Yup, Kofi turned a blind eye and the frogs aided the Hutsis to escape.

Posted by Anonymous2U 2004-1-30 11:17:43 PM|| 2004-1-30 11:17:43 PM|| Front Page Top

10:02 Phil Fraering
09:36 Raptor
05:32 Evert Visser
00:32 Atomic Conspiracy
23:55 Lucky
23:42 Fred
23:39 Igs
23:20 Lucky
23:17 Anonymous2U
23:10 phil_b
23:08 Lucky
23:04 Cheddarhead
23:03 Anonymous2U
22:56 Cheddarhead
22:55 Cheddarhead
22:55 Anonymous2U
22:54 Cheddarhead
22:54 Anonymous2U
22:49 Adriane
22:39 Dan
22:38 Barbara Skolaut
22:33 JDB
22:32 Dan
22:25 Barbara Skolaut