The time has come, and not a moment too soon that we take real action against these filthy kuntvermin like Joel Stein at the LA Times. While we have been at war now for some three and a half years, we are still putting up with the treason of these wretched media organizations as well as the common left wing DNC kuntvermin and Hollywood actors who obviously need to be put out of their misery for all of our sake. War in less politically correct times usually meant destroying your enemy, and destroying their aiders and abettors, and treasonous citzens at home. But nowadays we play politically correct warfare with laser guided smart bombs, the enemy drinking coffee and playing dominoes while their appointed human shields get blown to smithereens in municipal government buildings with a Michael Moore film crew outside documenting the carnage.

Lincoln suspended The Bill of Rights, FDR had his internment camps, LBJ expended the entire FBI as his personal tool and George W has...the Patriot Act. What an outrage that Bush! To boot, 3000 dead on our own soil and kuntvermins cant handle the NSA intercepting communication with Al Qaeda and their filthy savage counterparts here. I've got a better idea, how about we just eliminate due process for savages and degenerates involved with terror organizations and organized crime in general, whether they are citizens or not. And we need to give their liberal counterparts like Joel Stein fair warning that in this time of war, we as a society will stop fighting with our hands tied behind our backs against filthy kuntbag opinions permeating while our enemies benefit from their very blathering. I would have no problem with the sacrifice of a temporary suspension of freedom of speech to save Americans brave enough to fight for it in our current struggle.

Ho Chi Minh had his American peacenik counterparts and Pentagon martyr iconized on postage stamps and t-shirts, and today, Castro has Elian Gonzalez at his side at appointed "spontanious" anti-American demonstrations. I cannot imagine that descent in this time of war is having no effect on the enemy. Hell, I'm surprised Jessie Jackson hasn't gone to Baghdad to have a photo op in Saddam's cell to further boost the optimism of the insurgency and show the outrage of how we are treating the leader of a sovereign nation who killed 800,000 of his own citizenry. Genocide, what genocide? How lucky for Kuntbag Stein that those in the military STOPPED that ethnic genocide, I am unclear which one he is refering to in his article.

When you think about the growing scourge of M13 in the urban areas of America much like the kuntvermin problem, this concept of also including the elimination of due process for organized crime just might have a more positive effect with illegal immigration as well as terrorism. Those south of the border will definitely think twice if they know they will get their ass handed to them here in the US the same way they would back home for being a part of gangsta organizations.

The only problem for the elimination of due process for these criminal exceptions, is what do we do with them. Our jails are super filled with criminals already. But we do have a shortage of domestic energy sources of drastic proportion and which is also a national security crisis, especially for the three Hummers I have in my driveway. I believe that human fuel refining is a great way to deal with these filthy animals and at the same time solving this current energy crunch. I would also get a personal kick out of revving my ten cylinder, eight liter engines knowing there are kuntvermin and filthy savages behind all that horsepower! VROOMMM, VROOOMMMM!!!!! As they always say, build it (a Human Fuel Refinery) and they will come!

So when Joel Kuntvermin Stein wants to remind his qaeda (base) that in the not so glorious past degenerates used to spit on our soldiers returning from combat zones, I will take heart that Stein is only espousing that we do not support our troops presently and that he is the only one unsuckered by our military (unless in Vegas) and American society in general who do support the survival of this greatest of nations. I personally though, would be very satisfied at the thought of Joel Kuntvermin Stein not being able to walk the streets without his own security detail close at hand. I will throw my own parade when that happens!

But seriously Joel, I am just kidding...

See Joel Kuntvermin Stein's editorial here

We could always convert them into eco-friendly energy producers....

You must mean eco-friendly as in bio-mass. Somehow I think that they would still cause pollution and greenhouse gasses.

Bensnooty wrote:Lincoln suspended The Bill of Rights

Racist tyrant who supported the forceful expulsion back to Africa, or the permanent enslavement (i.e. the Corwin amendment), of all blacks in America, and went to war with the CSA solely because he wanted the lost tax revenue back.

Bensnooty wrote:FDR had his internment camps

Mussolini clone.

Bensnooty wrote:LBJ expended the entire FBI as his personal tool

Racist who deliberately stalemated in Vietnam so his war profiteer buddies could make bigger profits.

Bensnooty wrote:George W has...the Patriot Act.

Fool who thinks democracy (i.e. majoritarian tyranny) is a good thing, refuses to acknowledge that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with liberty, refuses to recognize that the Koran reads like a cross between "Mein Kampf" and "The Memoirs of Ghengis Khan", uses newspeak versions of terms like "property" and "ownership" because he's a die-hard socialist and his constituents for the most part aren't yet, expands government meddling in individual life at a rate that would put Lenin to shame, and is incapable of reading the plain late-18th century English of the Constitution, despite having sworn an oath to uphold and defend it.

Bensnooty wrote:To boot, 3000 dead on our own soil and kuntvermins cant handle the NSA intercepting communication with Al Qaeda and their filthy savage counterparts here.

Nice strawman. People who actually give a shit about liberty are upset that Constitutional warrant requirements are being ignored for domestic intelligence gathering, because anyone with any sense can recognize that the checks and balances of the Constitution are there to prevent the rise of tyranny, and government breaking its own laws, by ignoring such checks and balances, is a sure sign of the rise of such tyranny. If people are talking to known AQ operatives, then the feds shouldn't have any problem obtaining the warrants required to listen in (even after the actual taps are performed, as permitted by FISA, if time is a real issue). Also, moonbats who don't care about liberty are riding on the coattails of people who actually give a shit about liberty, in denouncing the warrantless domestic surveillance, solely because it's an opportunity to attack Bush, whom they hate, and other moonbats, who also don't care about liberty, are using that to denounce those who actually give a shit about liberty.

Bensnooty wrote:I've got a better idea, how about we just eliminate due process for savages and degenerates involved with terror organizations and organized crime in general, whether they are citizens or not.

Yeah, because guilty until proven innocent is just so just!

Bensnooty wrote:And we need to give their liberal counterparts like Joel Stein fair warning

Lynch mobs, or online rants?

Bensnooty wrote:that in this time of war

I'm still waiting for someone to show me the actual Congressional declaration of war, as required by the Constitution. I'm also still waiting for someone to show me where in the Constitution the president is granted absolute power in times of war.

Bensnooty wrote:we as a society will stop fighting with our hands tied behind our backs

So then you're against gun "control"? At least there we can agree on something.

Bensnooty wrote:against filthy kuntbag opinions

Yes, of course, silencing all who don't think in lockstep conformity with the official line of the state makes us totally different from the nazis and commies. Really, it does.

Bensnooty wrote:permeating while our enemies benefit from their very blathering

So when the president abuses his power, we should just shut up and take it, because blind support and obedience of an incompetent and abusive government is the best way to secure our liberty and safety. Genius! Pure genius!

Bensnooty wrote:I would have no problem with the sacrifice of a temporary suspension of freedom of speech to save Americans brave enough to fight for it in our current struggle.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Apparently Ben Franklin was a terrorist sympathizer. How odd.

Bensnooty wrote:Ho Chi Minh had his American peacenik counterparts and Pentagon martyr iconized on postage stamps and t-shirts

And we still kicked his ass, using an almost entirely volunteer military force. It took him three years, with large-scale ChiCom support, to take South Vietnam, and that was only after Nixon's secret deal with Mao, which basically handed SV over to NV in exchange for the opening of trade between the US and the ChiComs.

Bensnooty wrote:and today, Castro has Elian Gonzalez at his side at appointed "spontanious" anti-American demonstrations.

And why is that kid in Castro's hands? Oh, that's right, another presidential fuckup!

Bensnooty wrote:I cannot imagine that descent in this time of war is having no effect on the enemy.

The word is spelled "dissent", and what does it matter if it has an effect on the enemy? If they're emboldened by it, enough to strike, that's a good thing, because it's easier to shoot them when they aren't hiding.

Bensnooty wrote:Hell, I'm surprised Jessie Jackson hasn't gone to Baghdad to have a photo op in Saddam's cell to further boost the optimism of the insurgency and show the outrage of how we are treating the leader of a sovereign nation who killed 800,000 of his own citizenry.

And? JJ is a joke, and anyone with any sense knows it. If he wants to say and do asinine things, that's his business, so just laugh at him for being an ass. If anyone is stupid enough to follow him, laugh at them too.

Bensnooty wrote:Genocide, what genocide? How lucky for Kuntbag Stein that those in the military STOPPED that ethnic genocide, I am unclear which one he is refering to in his article.

He was clearly referring to the genocide perpetrated by the Serbs, which we did little to stop, thanks to Clinton. Infantry save lives, but Clinton chose to go with an all-air campaign, which significantly increased "collateral damage", and did very little to stop the genocide.

Bensnooty wrote:When you think about the growing scourge of M13

The Hercules globular cluster?

Bensnooty wrote:in the urban areas of America much like the kuntvermin problem, this concept of also including the elimination of due process for organized crime just might have a more positive effect with illegal immigration as well as terrorism.

Yeah, that's a great idea! Guilty until proven innocent, just like in China! I can't wait!

Bensnooty wrote:Those south of the border will definitely think twice if they know they will get their ass handed to them here in the US the same way they would back home for being a part of gangsta organizations.

Yeah, because most criminals aren't already easily convicted when brought to trial, which is why our prisons are so empty.

Bensnooty wrote:The only problem for the elimination of due process for these criminal exceptions, is what do we do with them.

Of course, because the fact that they might be innocent isn't a problem.

Bensnooty wrote:Our jails are super filled with criminals already. But we do have a shortage of domestic energy sources of drastic proportion and which is also a national security crisis, especially for the three Hummers I have in my driveway. I believe that human fuel refining is a great way to deal with these filthy animals and at the same time solving this current energy crunch. I would also get a personal kick out of revving my ten cylinder, eight liter engines knowing there are kuntvermin and filthy savages behind all that horsepower! VROOMMM, VROOOMMMM!!!!! As they always say, build it (a Human Fuel Refinery) and they will come!

Perfect! Capital punishment without trial! Summary executions FTW!

Bensnooty wrote:So when Joel Kuntvermin Stein wants to remind his qaeda (base) that in the not so glorious past degenerates used to spit on our soldiers returning from combat zones, I will take heart that Stein is only espousing that we do not support our troops presently and that he is the only one unsuckered by our military (unless in Vegas) and American society in general who do support the survival of this greatest of nations.

No, his article specifically addresses those who're against the war, urging them to stop with the "but we support the troops" bullshit. At least he's honest about not supporting the troops.

Bensnooty wrote:I personally though, would be very satisfied at the thought of Joel Kuntvermin Stein not being able to walk the streets without his own security detail close at hand. I will throw my own parade when that happens!

You would fit right in to the Sturmabteilungen. When someone disagrees with you it is NOT grounds for physically assaulting them.

Hey Rich333,

Dont forget to give your critical read to the LA Times article also! I dont mix up my parody with my Op Editorials. Otherwise, I would hve better grammer and spelling like that kuntvermin Stein!!!!!! But I hearby must conclude and boast by your tremendous level of commentary that I am much better at it than that kuntbag! THANK YOU!

And I highly disagree with you about your points about Vietnam; the US military may have been more of a volunteer army in 1964, but by 1968 that was simply not the case. But you also make my day of what should be of serious concern about fruitcake op-ed rants. Yes, the US did kick Ho Chi Minh's ass and we still came home with our tail between our legs (special thanks to descent or dessent). And it did not take three years for him to take South Vietnam, more like thirty of them.

But case in point, that lesson CANNOT be repeated if you havent been paying attention to anything over the past twenty six years of American foriegn policy with filthy islamofascists. Should I hint at the French of 1937 which our very own filthy liberals of today are making us out for, I know, dont say it, I am being cliche here.

The second issue I would take aim at, was with your even more ellaborate (sp again?) and (in the end- contradictory) commentary about the powers of the executive branch. The point I make is that in times of national crisis, the nation has tolerated greater executive power and the nation, as well as the presidency has survived to live another day! Mussollini (FDR) may not have lived to see 1945 if he had to contend with the discontent of today's kuntvermin over whether we should want to survive as a nation or not.

Executive power is not absolute, and conforms with the geopolitical weather, with all its' faults, with BOTH expansion and contraction. The Legislative Bodies and Supreme Court do not lead this nation, the President does! And after the executive power abuses of FDR, JFK, LBJ and RMN, any president, or better yet, any lawyer for the president would know that executive abuse will come home to roost! I also would give a hell of alot more power to a (so called) incompetent President of the United States than to any competent terrorist or fruitcake brigade any day of the week!

But, I would agree with the expose of the century that The People's Cube uncovered, GWB did in fact wiretap MLK!

HAHAHAHA.......Richdreihundertdrieunddreissig!
Sturmabteilungen? HAHAHAHA....Sind Sie ein Clown?
Wirkliche? Ein Haftbefehl kommen von der 9th Circut?
Traumer!

Rollie

And so what happened to Rich333 anyway?

By Bensnooty
1/29/2006, 12:31 am

And so what happened to Rich333 anyway?

Er hat ein haftbefehl von der 9th circut und ein einweg Fahrkarte zu das KZ.

Rollie

Sorry Rollie, I wish I understood German better. But I will have to if I am ever going to start writing my own volume of Mien Kempf, but I might be better off just writing it in English and calling it the Hercules Globular Cluster.

I'm able to translate for you.....

The Premier People's Judge of the Third Reich found Rich333 quotes quite comical, comparing your comments to the SA (Sturmabteilungen, AKA Brownshirts). He laughed when Rich333 was naive enough to believe that liberal judges would actually issue warrants (haftbefehl) especially the 9th circut court, thereby recognizing the REAL problem, so Rollie via the 9th circut sent him a oneway (einweg) Fahrkarte (ticket) to the KZ (short for Konzentration Lager, AKA Concentration Camp).
My question is if this was a real problem, where are all the Kafkaesque Trials and the "List of the Missing" like in Argentina? The only place it's happening is in pussy liberal and paraniod libertarian vivid imaginations. God bless an administration that actually wants to protect it's citizens.

PP

Hello PittsburghProletarian,

Please accept my heartfelt thanks for translating and confirming Roland Frieser's commentary. Now it is all very clear to me. I think if warrants were reviewed by the Ninth Circuit, they would just waste more time dragging their feet and sending them warrants for further review to Vermont's judicial circuit. From there the warrants would be burned by the presiding judges and the terrorists in question would be given a five million dollar advance on future punitive damages to be awarded for government harassment of devout muslim practitioners.

To answer your questions regarding the Kafka Tribunals and Lists of the Missing, I can only assume that the trials are taking place in those secret CIA prisons in Poland. One would suspect that islamofascists are being held there, but the ACLU has a bigger surprise up their sleeves. In the coming months, these prisons will be exposed and opened to the general public, and it will be revealed that Bush has incarcerated nothing more than the great heroic fruitcake envoys of our time. From Barbara Striesand, Tim Robins, Michael Moore and a great many others, they will be discovered shackled to "the rack" and made to listen to "God Bless America" and "Yankee Doodle Dandy" over and over again 24/7.

As for the "List of the Missing", those will be compiled in Chile since the original list was made there during Pinochet's reign of that nation. One cannot forget the 300,000 innocent and unsuspecting socialists that "disappeared" during his tenure. I can still hear that legendary Sting song iconizing those poor good hearted socialists;

"Dancing with the missing, dancing with the dead,
dancing with the invisible ones, their anguish is unsaid"

Well as Sting would say, "History Proves Nothing" as it would be revealed later that the figure of these missing would be slimmed down to more around 3000, and those poor innocent souls turned out to be armed terrorizing guerillas trained and suited by Sandanistas, Shining Path Rebels and Cuba amongst others. Now of course, nobody will admit this wonderful "sexing" of intelligence today and kuntvermins are still wondering why Pinocet still goes unpunished for crimes against "humanity".

But dont you worry Mr. Proletarian, those gone missing in our war on terror will be found in the Chilean mountain Nazi retreats, being forced to test-drive Chevrolets and fed only hotdogs and apple pie for months and perhaps years on end. I highly suspect that RICH333 may be on his way to this destination. I will keep my eyes on that ever growing list and keep watch for his name to show up. Poor Rich, it is a shame that his heart felt desires would get him "disappeared" like this.

Let us all keep hope alive for Rich and those 297,000 others still missing in Pinochets prison camps.

Bensnooty wrote:Dont forget to give your critical read to the LA Times article also! I dont mix up my parody with my Op Editorials. Otherwise, I would hve better grammer and spelling like that kuntvermin Stein!!!!!! But I hearby must conclude and boast by your tremendous level of commentary that I am much better at it than that kuntbag! THANK YOU!

His article was specifically directed at the anti-war moonbats who claim they support the troops, urging them to be honest and admit that they don't really support them. There's nothing in that with which I disagree, so there's not much point in my responding to the article. He made no arguments about the war itself, he only offered his opinion about it, so aside from saying that I disagree with his opinion, there's nothing for me to say. Your post, however, was filled with statements with which I disagree, hence my lengthy response.

Bensnooty wrote:And I highly disagree with you about your points about Vietnam; the US military may have been more of a volunteer army in 1964, but by 1968 that was simply not the case.

Drafted soldiers only ever accounted for about 10% of our forces, throughout the entire conflict.

Bensnooty wrote:But you also make my day of what should be of serious concern about fruitcake op-ed rants. Yes, the US did kick Ho Chi Minh's ass and we still came home with our tail between our legs (special thanks to descent or dessent).

No, it had nothing to do with dissent, it had everything to do with Nixon's deal with Mao.

Bensnooty wrote:And it did not take three years for him to take South Vietnam, more like thirty of them.

We started pulling out in '72 and were out completely by '73; Saigon fell in '75. He may have been trying to take SV for the prior thirty, but he got nowhere in that effort until after we were gone. He would have lost NV if we had stuck around.

Bensnooty wrote:But case in point, that lesson CANNOT be repeated if you havent been paying attention to anything over the past twenty six years of American foriegn policy with filthy islamofascists. Should I hint at the French of 1937 which our very own filthy liberals of today are making us out for, I know, dont say it, I am being cliche here.

I agree, there's nothing of Vietnam which can be applied to the current conflict. My position is simple: we should nuke Mecca and Medina, repeatedly, until they figure out that Allah is a myth; let the bleeding hearts whine all they want about it. Islam is fundamentally incompatible with liberty, and Bush is either a fool for thinking otherwise, or he really is a theocratic douche who despises liberty; I'm still uncertain as to whether he's the former or the latter though.

Bensnooty wrote:The second issue I would take aim at, was with your even more ellaborate (sp again?) and (in the end- contradictory) commentary about the powers of the executive branch.

Contradictory? Please point out the contradiction.

Bensnooty wrote:The point I make is that in times of national crisis, the nation has tolerated greater executive power and the nation, as well as the presidency has survived to live another day!

However, the federation of nations established by the Constitution, and governed by the principles of liberty codified in the Constitution, has not survived. The "liberty" we currently possess is but a shadow of what once existed in this country. Every generation, but especially those in times of war, has permitted a little bit of our liberty to be chipped away, thinking "oh, it's just a little abuse, and it's only temporary", but our government has never expanded its power only temporarily. Every expansion has become permanent, adding cumulatively to the previous abuses.

Bensnooty wrote:Mussollini (FDR) may not have lived to see 1945 if he had to contend with the discontent of today's kuntvermin over whether we should want to survive as a nation or not.

And? How would his death have been a bad thing? If the left had been out demonstrating in the streets to show support for the Nazis, we still would've won the war, and as an added bonus the sane people in this country might've learned that the left sucks before it was too late.

Bensnooty wrote:Executive power is not absolute, and conforms with the geopolitical weather, with all its' faults, with BOTH expansion and contraction.

Point out one example where the government's power has contracted. Every expansion has become permanent.

Bensnooty wrote:The Legislative Bodies and Supreme Court do not lead this nation, the President does!

No, he leads the armed forces and other elements of the executive branch. Beyond being CinC of the armed forces, he leads nothing which Congressional legislation has not ordered him to lead, and even the CinC position is meaningless unless the Congress funds the military.

Bensnooty wrote:And after the executive power abuses of FDR, JFK, LBJ and RMN, any president, or better yet, any lawyer for the president would know that executive abuse will come home to roost!

Really? Aside from some public embarrassment and a forced resignation for RMN, there haven't been any legal consequences to presidential abuses of power. The only times they've been made to pay were when individual citizens acted by putting a bullet in them, but that rarely happens, and isn't even lethal most times. The last president to get shot was Reagan, and he hadn't even done anything to deserve it. The only one to get killed, who actually deserved it, was Lincoln.

Bensnooty wrote:I also would give a hell of alot more power to a (so called) incompetent President of the United States than to any competent terrorist or fruitcake brigade any day of the week!

And naturally those are the only two choices.

Bensnooty wrote:But, I would agree with the expose of the century that The People's Cube uncovered, GWB did in fact wiretap MLK!

No, that was another asshole in the executive branch, who went by the name "Hoover".

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I'm able to translate for you.....

The Premier People's Judge of the Third Reich found Rich333 quotes quite comical, comparing your comments to the SA (Sturmabteilungen, AKA Brownshirts). He laughed when Rich333 was naive enough to believe that liberal judges would actually issue warrants (haftbefehl) especially the 9th circut court, thereby recognizing the REAL problem, so Rollie via the 9th circut sent him a oneway (einweg) Fahrkarte (ticket) to the KZ (short for Konzentration Lager, AKA Concentration Camp).

It's remarkable how ignorant most people, who defend the warrantless wiretaps, are of the actual law. The ninth circuit court has no jurisdiction, whatsoever, over the granting of such warrants; only the FISA court has jurisdiction, and it rejected only six out of the nearly six thousand warrant requests made since 11th September 2001. The feds can even get the warrants after performing the taps, if time is an issue. Additionally, Subchapter I, Section 1802 (of U.S. Code Title 50, Chapter 36, aka FISA) allows for warrantless electronic surveillance for a period of one year (which can be renewed every year) so long as the Attorney General makes a written certification affirming that those being surveilled are foreign agents and that there's no substantial likelihood of intercepting the communications of citizens. Almost all terrorists are foreign agents, and for the handful of Jose Pedilla types it isn't difficult, at all, to obtain a warrant from the FISA court. If the claims that the people being surveilled without warrants are all "people who've been identified in terrorist documents found abroad", the feds should have absolutely no problem, whatsoever, in obtaining a warrant from the FISA court (after the taps if necessary), if the individual identified is a citizen, and if it's a non-citizen then Subchapter I, Section 1802 applies, and so it's all up to Attorney General Gonzales to make that written certification once a year.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:My question is if this was a real problem, where are all the Kafkaesque Trials and the "List of the Missing" like in Argentina? The only place it's happening is in pussy liberal and paraniod libertarian vivid imaginations.

So the abuse of power doesn't exist so long as no one notices? Your argument is a strawman, btw, at least of the libertarian position, since it's not about whether or not they're conducting warrantless taps on political opponents, it's that they're breaking the law, and in the process setting a precedent for an extremely dangerous expansion of executive power. Do you really want someone like Hitlery Clinton to have the power to conduct warrantless taps of foreign-to-domestic/domestic-to-foreign electronic communications? Guess what happens ten seconds after someone like that holds that kind of power: all communications can be tapped, since most are routed through systems outside the country, and most is good enough to assume all as far as the government's concerned; the drug war set that precedent, since most drugs cross state lines at some point, so all are considered covered by the - expanded beyond all reasonable understanding of its intention - commerce clause.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:God bless an administration that actually wants to protect it's citizens.

By wholly unnecessary expansions of power which are subsequently defended by the incorrigibly stupid and the habitually ignorant.

Bensnooty wrote:I highly suspect that RICH333 may be on his way to this destination.

If I am, it will have proved my point.

Bensnooty wrote:I will keep my eyes on that ever growing list and keep watch for his name to show up. Poor Rich, it is a shame that his heart felt desires would get him "disappeared" like this.

Yeah, we can't very well have people who talk of "individualism", "property rights", "inherent and unalienable natural rights", or "liberty" hanging around, because such people are very dangerous (to wannabe tyrants). Or perhaps it's just ProtestWarriors in general who are dangerous? Should I warn the other PWs, or the other libertarians? Perhaps both?

Bensnooty wrote:Let us all keep hope alive for Rich and those 297,000 others still missing in Pinochets prison camps.

Why would we have prison camps when the whole country becomes a prison?

Hey there Rich, it is good to see you back! You had me scared for a moment about a Chilian secret prison. So lets get it on and we will start from the top...

Referring to Joel Kuntvermin Steins' article, that point is made in about as many words as you defend him on for calling out the anti-war movement for supporting the troops which is completely disgusting. My wrath is more to do about 70% of the rest of the article which is his main message, to deface the military, calling them suckers and essentially in undermining fashion, losers, which is really what the cusp of his bloathing was about. Besides, I dont see a great deal of the Left avoiding the concept of undermining our troops or saying that they support the troops, quite contraire.

Stein has much loftier goals in printing his bloathing, to energize the anti-war movement, and you know where I stand with that. Freedom of speech goes both ways, he can bloath and I can tell him to shut his filthy pie hole.

Bensnooty wrote
And I highly disagree with you about your points about Vietnam; the US military may have been more of a volunteer army in 1964, but by 1968 that was simply not the case.

Drafted soldiers only ever accounted for about 10% of our forces, throughout the entire conflict.

Bensnooty wrote
But you also make my day of what should be of serious concern about fruitcake op-ed rants. Yes, the US did kick Ho Chi Minh's ass and we still came home with our tail between our legs (special thanks to descent or dessent).

No, it had nothing to do with dissent, it had everything to do with Nixon's deal with Mao.

Now I am always trying to live up to the adage of learning something new everyday, if possible forward me some source about a 10% draftee breakdown of US forces in Vietnam. I do know two things about the numerical stats of the war, 3.5 million men and women served in Vietnam, and between 1965 and 1970, the US drafted 1.2 million men into the military. If 10% of the Vietnam military make up is true for draftees, that would mean that only 350,000 conscripts served in Vietnam. Also, that would leave just under a million draftees who were not sent. Under the circumstances of a military that got "stretched" as the war progressed, I find your precentage of conscripted soldiers who served in Vietnam to be astonishing to say the least.

Now to your other points about Ho Chi Minh, Nixon and China: In the wake of the Tet offensive in 1968, which was an utter failure for Minh, Johnson "abdicated" and THIS IS WHEN downsizing in the Vietnam force began and it was in direct response to the dissent, discourse and Johnson's unpopularity over the war in general and the anti war movement specifically.

In the wake of that very same event, the anti-war movement hit the stratosphere (as they were believing that they brought a president down) and which had destructive effects on the morale of the soldier yet to ship out, as well as the soldiers coming home getting spat on by better off dead vermin. In those concurrent years, 1968-1970, morale in the military did dissipate greatly, and the infantry started to sink into the concept of NOT being proactive with the enemy, which led our troops to remain in stationary fronts which in turn led to more effective Chinese supplied mortaring by the enemy, and hence, a greater disproportional number of US casualties and fewer NV casualties during those years. Is this kind of demoralization acceptable for the situation of Iraq?

Furthermore, before the Chinese deal was entered into negotiations, Nixon had to exhaust his last possible conventional option militarily, (unlike Johnson, Nixon was unmoved and dismissive of the antiwar movement) and that option he undertook was outright carpet bombing of both the NV and Cambodia. THIS is was brought Ho Chi Minh to his knees, and to the table for a negotiated peace. The China deal is what sealed it, indeed. But the background of what got to that agreement cannot be lost on the antiwar movement of today and must be discredited for what they continue to be today, filthy kuntvermin degenerates.

I agree, there's nothing of Vietnam which can be applied to the current conflict. My position is simple: we should nuke Mecca and Medina, repeatedly, until they figure out that Allah is a myth; let the bleeding hearts whine all they want about it. Islam is fundamentally incompatible with liberty, and Bush is either a fool for thinking otherwise, or he really is a theocratic douche who despises liberty; I'm still uncertain as to whether he's the former or the latter though.

I couldn't agree more! Nuking Mecca and Medina would speed up the process of the what is most likely the inevitable unfortunately. Bush's strategy was to be politically correct and take baby step approaches. BUT are you willing to deal with the consequences of taking such a major step. Instant conscription, fortress America, executive power unseen in American history and not just left wing whining, but most plausibly, left wing terrorism as well as a nice new wave of low level islamic terror coming from every direction on the planet. Could you stomach all that for an extended period of time? All I can say is "People get ready!"

Say what you want about Bush, but you cant say he hasent taken the cautious and methodical approach in the war on terror. He asked for UN permission to invade Iraq when he should have given them the finger, Congress was kept abreast of Bush's NSA extension AND the Patriot Act was sent to and passed in the Senate 99 to 1 with an expiration date I might add.

Again, I don't care if you are citizen or not, if you are aiding and abetting an enemy to conduct war on your own soil, you just committed treason, and be rid of you. Next you are going to tell me the Rosenberg's got acceptable due process in court. The bottom line is THEY DIDN'T DESERVE IT and the real travesty about that incident is that there were hundreds of other treasonous abettors who should have fried right along with them. I don't care a pitcher of warm piss about about the rights of citizens who do business with your enemy in wartime. If there are innocent citizens who get caught up in the dragnet, then to avoid that is like trying to conduct a war without civilian casualties. Go ahead and try and see how you will succeed.

The main point here, DEMOCRACY IS INCONGRUENT WITH WARFARE. I'll say it again, DEMOCRACY IS INCONGRUENT WITH WARFARE. This is why executive power gets expanded in wartime and this is why presidents have taken liberty with our very own in the process. But dont tell me that Executive power does not retreat. Please take a good look at the comparisons of the executive privilege of FDR and lets include Woodrow Wilson for that matter and compare it to Reagan's for Christ's sake.

A case in point, the military. After WW2 we had over 12 million combat trained forces at the ready. They were plenty disbanded in the wake of victory, effectively diminishing the executive authority over the use of the military in foreign policy matters, and the military would continue to expand and diminish with each concurrent conflict or tension. You state it correctly, "congress authorizes" military architecture and the same goes with Presidential power. Hell, in another area of executive power Congress gave Clinton the line item bill veto provision (a great big executive power granted), and the supreme court promptly struck it down.

I will agree with you about the official "declaration of war" being needed in our conflicts with North Korea, North Vietnam, the first Gulf War as well as the Yugoslavian conquest. But with GW, his predicament was what are you declaring war on? And where does that declaration limit you to do within the dynamics of an illusive enemy. Do you declare war on Afghanistan and conclude victory at that point, or Al Qaeda, and then have more delarations with each seperate terrorist organization or, better yet how about the broad scope of declaring war on the Muslim religion in general. But to recap, this is a conflict with no conclusive battleground or game rules with an enemy that IS INCONGRUENT WITH DEMOCRACY. It is a conflict which could ingulf us with a good portion of a religion that has over a bilion followers and growing.

Open flexibility is the only way to keep from letting our enemies pigeon hold our objectives and stab us in the ass with it, ie; Iraq. Bush did not have to state his lofty ambitions of establishing a democracy, but he did and the insurgency has used this against us from the very beginning. As it is, again, Bush has asked for congressional authority for each military option, and without the constitutional blanket of expanded authority that an official declaration of war permits him. I think that it has been a shrewd move on his part, not to give any excess political motivation to the opposition party and undermine your military strategies.

Say what you want about Lincoln, but had the Union not held, and he failed in his authority to conduct the war, the south would be a different country, and a very different nation. Slavery would have lasted for a few more generations, and segregation and voting restrictions could still be around today. Ostracizing (sp?) the South, like we and the western world did with South Africa in the 1980's would have been implemented and the "New South" would still be just a dream as well as an extreme embarrassment to the US. To trade Lincoln's behavior over expending a huge and important region of our nation and culture, easy decision here.

You make mention of Hoover, and here again another example, his death is a fine episode of a shrinkage of the executive branch's authority, and don't just brush a broad stroke as to him being responsible for all FBI abuses like most liberal revisionist historians. All the presidents I mentioned earlier were well into abusing FBI enforcement just as well for their own personal and political purposes. And don't forget RFK's approval of wiretapping MLK as attorney general. Oh, the irony is killing me.

I admire your libertarian ideals, in peacetime, I would be squarely in your square. But warfare require different parameters in order to insure survival and victory. Liberty will suffer, and the more devastating the conflict, the more Liberty will suffer indeed. Handcuff your leaders, and the outcome becomes all that much more murky, while the will to fight is expended and wrung out to dry by the very degenerates that are a product of extended peacetime and affluence; the American and Eurotrash kuntvermin degenerates.

Bush as Ho Chi Minh, or a theocratic ruler, Please! While I do not question his own religious convictions, the religious right are his rubber stamp sector of his base. Otherwise, Bush is an enigma as a conservative because of all kinds sloppy Joe big government initiatives, no budget retraint, ect. FYI (this is the aspect of unlimited big government where your rule of thumb about no shrinking from REALLY APPLIES TO). Far too many government entitlements and social programs become part of the landscape, never to be demolitioned. Bush has proven himself to be staunchly pro-business and enterprise, and that is his domestic agenda. His promotion of free trade initiatives are almost on par with Clinton's legacy at this point.

Here is an analogy to ponder. While pandering to the religious right, I have never heard Bush mutter a word how corporations gearing gangsta and whore culture to the youth of society should be curtailed. Especially when we are talking about the underaged, who are most susceptible to this rubbish and the marketing of it. Parents either refuse to stand up to this permeation or are too busy promoting it themselves to their children. I have heard no Bush speech in wich he takes on the corporate apparatus who gear this trash toward the youth of our nation. If he were so damn theologically wired to his base, we would be seeing otherwise.

One More Thing, your contradictory explanation of the Bush powers debacle:

Also, moonbats who don't care about liberty are riding on the coattails of people who actually give a shit about liberty, in denouncing the warrantless domestic surveillance, solely because it's an opportunity to attack Bush, whom they hate, and other moonbats, who also don't care about liberty, are using that to denounce those who actually give a shit about liberty.

So your damned if you do, damned if you dont. You would be labeled one or the other regardless. And fighting with your elected protectors over this issue when your enemy wants your destruction is just a contradictory strategy. And to answer one other query you had about giving power to the president or to the enemy and their fruitcake counterparts, in time of war and survival, this is your only options and optional outcome as far as I am concerned.

Go ahead, keep it coming Rich!

bensnooty should accept that rich333 is a clear-minded patriot.I suspect that bensnooty,although on the right path,has lost his clarity.His ideas fall short of logic.He's probably the sort of man who knows not to date his bestfriend's sister but then acts impusively and marries her.In other words he is a SCUMBAAAAAAG but our SCUMBAAAAG.

And so whats so terrible about dating your sister? I'm sorry, I meant to say your best friends' sister! You get to hang out and go out on a date at the same time!

And I am a firm believer in the economic redistribution of condoms for all.

Hail to the Proletarian in all of us!

It's remarkable how ignorant most people, who defend the warrantless wiretaps, are of the actual law. The ninth circuit court has no jurisdiction, whatsoever, over the granting of such warrants; only the FISA court has jurisdiction, and it rejected only six out of the nearly six thousand warrant requests made since 11th September 2001.

Actually it's quite remarkable how some ignorant know-it-alls can't understand satire, irony, or wit and tend to blather on in utopian terms about things they only have the dimmest understanding of. No shit Shirley, the 9th Circut in California has no jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillence Act, the point being that in Shirley's perfect world they would.
It's fun to quote the Founding Fathers on some issues, mea culpa, like Ben Franklin's "security and liberty". Why not toss in Jefferson's about the tree of Liberty and the blood of tyrants and patriots, but I can see Rich333 can't tell the difference between the two. Rich333 almost makes me want to agree in siding with Charlie Rangle in bringing back the draft.

Fool who thinks democracy (i.e. majoritarian tyranny) is a good thing, refuses to acknowledge that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with liberty, refuses to recognize that the Koran reads like a cross between "Mein Kampf" and "The Memoirs of Ghengis Khan", uses newspeak versions of terms like "property" and "ownership" because he's a die-hard socialist and his constituents for the most part aren't yet, expands government meddling in individual life at a rate that would put Lenin to shame, and is incapable of reading the plain late-18th century English of the Constitution, despite having sworn an oath to uphold and defend it.

Hmmmm............form versus reality, you see Rich333, we live in a republic in which our representatives are elected democratically, so what's wrong with democracy? Oh, I get it, you're an anarchist! I bet you even have a little black t-shirt that has a red letter A with a circle around it. Haute fashion! And speaking of swearing an oath to defend the Constitution, I've been there and done that FIVE times, how about you? Oh, I forgot, you're an anarchist.

I took Bensnooty's post for the good natured pun it was intended it to be, not some fodder for a 6th grade forensic debate.
I can tell you this....I rather share a foxhole with one Bensnooty, than ten Rich333's because I'd have a better fighting chance in coming out of it victorious, let alone alive.

Steelers by 9.

PP

Hey PittsburghProletarian,

But the forensic debate was fun and beneficial for my seventh grade writing skills. And Rich's comment about majoritarian tyranny totally slipped through my fingers! Although, I get the impression we have become more of a minoritarian tyranny with political correctness, thought police, hate crime and an endless litigative judiciary. Hey, if Rich was showing off any professional clues in this debate, it would be his skills at lawyering!

As someone who hasnt spent a millisecond in a foxhole defending this great nation, the only thing I could say with certainty if in that position, I would either be quivering and shaking like jello, or quivering and shaking like more jello.

Thank You and Go Steelers!

Hey, if Rich was showing off any professional clues in this debate, it would be his skills at lawyering!

Yep, I have mentioned privately to another Cube member that I suspect he's an ACLU Board member assigned to troll this site

As someone who hasnt spent a millisecond in a foxhole defending this great nation, the only thing I could say with certainty if in that position, I would either be quivering and shaking like jello, or quivering and shaking like more jello.

You're 100% human. Courage isn't the absence of fear, quite the opposite. Courage is the ability to act in the face of fear knowing the consequences.

PP

I'm confused.I need rich333 to help me overcome this urge to not have a sense of humor.Please rich333 come back PP and bensnooty are making to much sense,I'm starting to believe them.I'm also beginning to want my enemies to suffer and yet I feel safe from govt.Maybe it's BECAUSE I OWN WHAT THE GLORIOUS SECOND AMENDMENT ALLOWS ME TO OWN AND I NOW REALIZE THAT THE GOVT. CANT ABUSE MY RIGHTS !!!THE GOVT. SHOULD DENY THE PRIVALAGES OF OUR ENIMIES BECAUSE THEY ARE'NT AMERICANS(ie not really human beings)NOT JUST BECAUSE WE ARE AT WAR BUT BECAUSE IT'S FUN !!!!!!! help me prof.rich333 my re-education is wearing off I'm starting to remember WE ARE SUPERIOR TO OUR ENIMIES USA! USA! USA!

PittsburghProletarian wrote:so what's wrong with democracy?

Google "death of Socrates" and "election of Hitler" for a clue. You could also try reading what the founders had to say about it. Oh, and another means by which you might come to understand the error of democracy is by talking to some anarchosocialists (e.g. "black bloc" scum); it's precisely what they seek to implement.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:Oh, I get it, you're an anarchist!

Yes, I'm an anarchocapitalist, because I recognize that "good government" is a paradox; any people rotten enough to need it would be incapable of implementing it, and any people decent enough to be capable of implementing it would be better off without it. However I fail to see how an argumentum ad hominem changes anything.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I bet you even have a little black t-shirt that has a red letter A with a circle around it.

No, I don't generally like being a walking advertisement for anything, however I do own a few Protest Warrior shirts. Also, if I were going to wear a shirt symbolizing my beliefs as an ancap, it would have the Libertatis Aequilibritas on it; the A symbol is typically used by the fake anarchists who wish to establish a direct democracy socialist state.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:And speaking of swearing an oath to defend the Constitution, I've been there and done that FIVE times, how about you?

Hmmm... I know I've heard this argument before... if only I could remember where... oh yes, that's right, it's the "if you support the war, why aren't you in Iraq" argument I hear at every PW counter-protest op, only slightly rephrased. Google "poisoning the well fallacy".

PittsburghProletarian wrote:Oh, I forgot, you're an anarchist.

You really do love argumentum ad hominem, don't you?

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I took Bensnooty's post for the good natured pun it was intended it to be

As there was nothing in Ben's post to indicate that it was in any way humorous or sarcastic, I responded as though it were entirely serious. I've argued with several people whose views are, genuinely, at least as extreme.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I can tell you this....I rather share a foxhole with one Bensnooty, than ten Rich333's because I'd have a better fighting chance in coming out of it victorious, let alone alive.

If you're in a foxhole, odds are you're already dead, so good luck with that. WWI tactics don't work very well, especially against modern aircraft, armor, and artillery.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:Yep, I have mentioned privately to another Cube member that I suspect he's an ACLU Board member assigned to troll this site

LOL. My PW forum avatar:

The assholes in the ACLU hate people like me about as much as they hate evangelicals.

Good for you Rich333! At least there's one thing we can agree upon.
Noboby ever said "Government" is perfect, and ours is far from perfect. After all, governments are run by humans and no human is perfect. In a perfect world, all your theories would work, but we're not and it doesn't.

Rich333 said

If you're in a foxhole, odds are you're already dead, so good luck with that. WWI tactics don't work very well, especially against modern aircraft, armor, and artillery.

It's an analogy, Rich333. I just happen to think Bensnooty would be a better soldier, airman, sailor, or marine than you. Now don't go and say "sailors and airmen don't dig foxholes".
I happen to believe we live in the best country on the planet, mom, apple pie, baseball and all that stuff...and I enlisted to protect it and have an honorable discharge. Am I wrong for this belief? I challenge you to name a better one.
As for "democracy", I understand we live in a republic with democratically elected representatives. How would YOU run things since you seem to want to remove the "democracy" component?

PittsburghProletarian wrote:Good for you Rich333! At least there's one thing we can agree upon.
Noboby ever said "Government" is perfect, and ours is far from perfect. After all, governments are run by humans and no human is perfect. In a perfect world, all your theories would work, but we're not and it doesn't.

In a perfect world, "all my theories" would be irrelevant. The market exists precisely because this is not a perfect world; there would be no scarcity in a perfect world, and there would be no need to pursue happiness as everyone would already have it. It is the belief in government, not the market, which is utopian.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:It's an analogy, Rich333. I just happen to think Bensnooty would be a better soldier, airman, sailor, or marine than you. Now don't go and say "sailors and airmen don't dig foxholes".

I know that. I was being facetious.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I happen to believe we live in the best country on the planet

So do I.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:mom, apple pie, baseball and all that stuff...and I enlisted to protect it and have an honorable discharge. Am I wrong for this belief?

No.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:I challenge you to name a better one.

In modern times, there is no better country in which to live. If time is not a factor, Iceland during the Commonwealth period (10th to 13th century) was better. If current trends continue, in fifty years China might be better.

PittsburghProletarian wrote:As for "democracy", I understand we live in a republic with democratically elected representatives. How would YOU run things since you seem to want to remove the "democracy" component?

For starters, I'd like to get back to Constitutionally-limited government, then move on to full minarchism (public police, courts, and military, private everything else, law based solely on individual rights), and eventually dissolve government entirely. In any case, majority opinions don't override individual rights.

Hey there Rich and Pittsburgh!

It is great to be back in the game! I thought this point-counterpoint had hit it's final episode, but alas we roll on!

PittsburghProletarian wrote: Nobody ever said "Government" is perfect, and ours is far from perfect. After all, governments are run by humans and no human is perfect. In a perfect world, all your theories would work, but we're not and it doesn't.

I will interject here with the perfect ideology of Marx. Shrouded in the perfect utopian curtain, Marx would still be alive today and leading us down the Shining Path of immortality where every day is Earth Day!

Primarily (in a perfect world), government has two responsibilities to society. Punishing our criminals and killing our enemies. If we kept it that simple, the era of paradise will definitely be close at hand!

Rich333 wrote: Google "death of Socrates" and "election of Hitler" for a clue.

I do not think that the slithering rise to the power of Hitler would be an example of democracy at all. In fact, John Kerry tried this very same strategy and failed in 2004, and the DNC has declared it's very own enabling act for the election of 2006. See this https://thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=641 for a fully detailed explanation of the DNC election platform which would bring them back to power for the rest of eternity, or at least another thousand years...

Hell, there are a great deal more contemporary examples of African dictators who came to power by an elected majority never to allow another election again and I would not concede any of these examples of flawed democracy. The UN is a perfect example of this kind of undermined, unintended consequence. As we all know, the UN's original premise was to show the undemocratic world how to resolve their conflicts in a democratic and civil process, diminishing the very need for tyranny and warfare. Today however, the UN does little more than give undue credibility and legitimacy to undemocratic and savage nations the world over to protect them from evil Americana. I do believe that a democratic institution is more involved than a one time election of a dictator, or permanent seating appointments on the security council for that matter.

Regarding google searches, do one on the term "failure" and see what the first three selections that come up. Google will define our world in a very near future!

Rich333 wrote: As there was nothing in Ben's post to indicate that it was in any way humorous or sarcastic, I responded as though it were entirely serious. I've argued with several people whose views are, genuinely, at least as extreme.

Well, I was trying to be five things in this post, serious, humorous, sarcastic and mixing it up with some righteous anger and controversy to boot. See sly Joel Kuntvermin Stein's original article again for where I got my inspiration from.

Rich333 wrote: In modern times, there is no better country in which to live. If time is not a factor, Iceland during the Commonwealth period (10th to 13th century) was better. If current trends continue, in fifty years China might be better.

<b>Your right Rich, if kuntvermin and jihadists have their way with the US in our present struggle, China will be a better place to be in fifty years even with their filthy communist regime and centralized planning left intact.</b> This is why we must be more diligent today with the savages around us!

While the Icelandians may have been on a righteous path in those good old days, I don't think that there would be a modern living soul alive who would trade away their "western style" freedom and quality of life today for anywhere in the middle ages unless you are a current resident of a communist regime or any islamic dominated nation (I'll take exception with the nation of Senegal).

Any government based on the laws of man is imperfect but an Islamic State is not based on the laws of men! You are all wrong.

Islamic states are based on the lies Muhammad made up to justify the breaking of his own rules which he also made up while in his drug induced "visions"

-Kommissar Betty

Kommissar Betty wrote:Islamic states are based on the lies Muhammad made up to justify the breaking of his own rules which he also made up while in his drug induced "visions"

But Betty, I thought it was progressivism that took hold in this country in the 1960's when all their victims were experiencing drug induced visions.

Only during the 60's did the whole of Islamic society get to benefit from the visions of Allah that they witnessed while under the influence of the "Happy Dust", before that it was only the "more equal" elites who could talk to Allah through "progressive pharmaceuticals".