"roundhead's" exact term was "accused terrorists" but since this would mean that "roundhead" is only condemning concern for due legal process and that we not beat our prisoners and turn them over to be tortured, I'm reasonably certain that "roundhead" meant actual terrorists.
I asked "roundhead" to prove it, and, like the knuckle-dragging imbeciles at sda, the intellectual coward at "a turn to the right," and my recent visitor "breath of fresh air," this "roundhead" character is good at spewing out empty assertions, but not so good at sustained discussion.
A familiar discussion participant to me, one "Reason,"* decided to take up the challenge though. The exchange is here.
What I'd like to do is take apart "Reason's" last round of self-righteous hyperventilating on my blog, since I don't want to presume that I can make "pogge" a site for my pissing contests.
Of course you are done here thwap. It is a subject you have zero depth of knowledge in,
An empty assertion, nothing more. I can type words to that effect about you easily enough:
Reason, you know absolutely nothing about this subject.
See how easy it is? Let's continue.
and failed utterly to comment on the fact that roundhead's comments had merit.
Well, that wasn't my intention, to comment on the fact that "roundhead's" meritless assertion had merit. Like you, and the right-wing in general, you imagine that simply saying something makes it true. I'm sick and tired of accomodating this bullshit. Especially since the consequences of you lame-brains putting your "thoughts" into action have been so murderously disastrous for so many innocent people.
Simply dismissing fact that does not appeal to you does not make said fact go away.
[sarcasm]Tell me about it.[/sarcasm]
Sorry, but I am thuggish in response to the way you and others have treated me in the past,
Actually, the thuggery that I was referring to is your apparent blindness to the dangers of arbitrary justice and the abuse, torture, and killing of prisoners. These are the issues that the Left is concerned about, and to which you and your ideological soulmates are so indifferent. Without our [I mean decent people, not right-wing asshats] oversight, Western society would turn into more of a sewer of cruelty and injustice than it already is. That's what I was referring to when I said "thuggish."
Regarding my treatment of you in the past, I've got an idea: Why don't you fucking go back to those old babble threads and actually READ what I said to you?? I disagreed with you on many things but I was never unfair to you. I mentioned that I thought you had anger-management problems because I honestly do think that. No, I wasn't nice to you, but I never called you a baby-killer, or an ignorant stooge, or anything like the insults you love to send my way and which I am now returning in kind.
I'll admit that many people on babble were unfair to you. And that many on the Left are unfair to soldiers of any sort. But that wasn't me, and I don't think it's too much to fucking ask that you learn to differentiate between people. And, as I recall, you would ascend to a towering rage quite quickly after receiving a contrary opinion, fair or not.
and I care not wit if I insult you your or harm your sensibilities...
I can honestly live with that. I don't care a whit about your opinion of me. What I do care about is you and your brethen's annoying habit of setting the parameters of the debate merely by saying whatever stupid thing some cynical manipulator has conditioned you to say. Slandering opponents of the war as universally gleeful at the deaths of Canadian soldiers, universally blind to the crimes of Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and their ilk. Because we don't cry out for the destruction of our civil liberties in response to non-existent threats, we're "soft on terrorism."
Fuck that, and to hell with you and people like you daring to lecture us about facts and arguments. The debacles that have been made of every major initiative you attempted ought to be proof enough that you have no credibility.
In point of fact, I intend to shock you back into critical thinking, instead of the sheepish nonesense you currently engage in.
Well, as you can probably tell by now, I find your presumption laughable. "Critical thinking" 'eh? How about this?
You and your team have had FIVE FUCKING YEARS to meet the VERY LOW expectations of the poor people of Afghanistan, and instead of doing that, 5 years later the Taliban is growing in popularity. The former Northern Alliance warlords who rule most of the country are brutes. Karzai's government is incompetent and brutal. NATO forces are trigger-happy and callous. Both the Afghan government and US forces torture innocent people, sometimes to death. Our anti-narcotics policies there were constructed with absolutely no thought to the alternatives that would be needed to keep poppy farmers from starving to DEATH. The foreign aid that got to Afghanistan was many only a fraction of what was so casually promised, and much of it leached right back out in the pockets of profiteering foreign contractors.
For these reasons, I am "critical" when I "think" about Canada in Afghanistan.
But you, dog-shit for brains, you think that some feel-good stories about building a school out of concrete blocks, or handing out a $50 bag of candy, or training judges who won't get paid and who will be shot if they ever honestly apply the principles we teach, or training police officers to be as brutal and incompetent and corrupt as the ones we trained (and are training) in Haiti, ... you think this is something worth fighting and killing for. You have faith in this mission?
We could have had a polite discussion about genuine accomplishments of the CF in Afghanistan, what with my "critical thinking" and your intimate familiarity of the subject. We could have had something besides talking past one another, but you and "roundhead" are more interested in slandering Jack Layton and the Left in general, ... you're more interested in calling us cowards, traitors, morons, etc., etc., .... well to fuck with politeness now. I'm pretty sure that all you'd have to offer are meaningless anecdotes, useless generalities, and wooden government propaganda. It's up to you to respond to my criticisms, based on documented facts, rather than it being my part to defend myself against your stupid personal attacks.
Let me know when you are done opinioning on other's thoughts (as you like to do),
I don't know what "opinioning" means, but I assume you want me to think for myself. I've been doing that for a long time now, asshole, ... how about you?
and instead would care to actually engage in serious discussion...
Aha-ha-ha!!! Well, seriously, the floor is yours ...
Of course, this is one of the reason why I was not welcome around you in the past... Despite being on discussion boards, that is exactly what you do not want.
Bullshit.
Oh, and for the record, I am a Canadian soldier, as you may remember for our dealings on that den of idiots at babble...
Yeah, I remembered that. I just figured as long as you were tossing out hurtful accusations, I'd join in the fun. Get the point??
Posted by: Reason at March 23, 2007 07:53Further, I am currently in Afghanistan. So it would seem that mine is one of the lives on the line for this mission. It would seem that my attitude towards the mission has not changed for all the dodging of IEDs and such. Nor has my disdain for ignorants such as yourself.
AM
Let me close with this: One of the last times we communicated on babble, perhaps the very last time, was in a thread where some posters were being stupid about a Canadian soldier dying. I said that I would not engage in such shameful behaviour and that until there was evidence to the contrary I would assume that a Canadian soldier was just doing his or her job, and that maybe he or she actually thought they were trying to do good in the world. You were on that thread and you responded by saying that you liked me after that. It wasn't my intention to make you like me, since I'm pretty sure that I don't like you. But as a citizen, as a debator, I strive to be honest, fair, and open-minded. And I don't see that very much at all on the side of the poltiical spectrum that you seem to find most of your allies.
And I think the speed with which you decided that you liked me, and the ease with which you forgot that you liked me when we next met at sda is testimony to your underlying childishness. You become infuriated when you read something you don't like and you respond with barely suppressed rage and more importantly you toss "Reason" out the window.
But regarding what some on the Left think of soldiers, ... you can't really deny that many on the Right like to slander us as anti-semites, cowards, traitors, lovers of Saddam Hussein, ... and on and on, .... as scum basically. Well, if you guys can jump to conclusions, and if you guys can support governments that lie, steal, torture, and kill, then maybe it isn't so far off the wall for some on the Left to tar all soldiers with the same brush they use on absolute vermin like bush II or Stephen Harper. We don't have a monopoly on being unfair. Far from it.
Oh, and spare me the bullshit about all our freedoms coming from soldiers. More often than not it was soldiers suppressing the path to democracy and human rights, not fighting for it. This doesn't even require elaboration.
If you want to start over with me, I'm prepared to do that. Once again, the floor is yours.
*"Reason" used to post frequently at rabble.ca/babble, along with another CF member "Webgear." As I said above in my reply, he and I didn't usually get along, but I think an honest reading of our exchanges would show that I was always fair to him. He showed up with another moniker (which escapes me at present) at KKKate's site, where he misrepresented me and left off by calling me a "nauseating little troll." Somewhere within my words, "Reason" got it into his head that I was claiming that Native protestors at Oka and Caledonia were peaceful. I did not do that. Anyone who wants to look (unless the Kowardly KKKate has deleted the posts) can go find a thread called "The Flags of Caledonia" or something similar, and see for themselves.
22 comments:
I think we can conclude from the following passage, that YOU, Mr or Ms "thwap" or "twat" or whatever, care more about accused terrorists than our Canadian soldiers:
You and your team have had FIVE FUCKING YEARS to meet the VERY LOW expectations of the poor people of Afghanistan, and instead of doing that, 5 years later the Taliban is growing in popularity. The former Northern Alliance warlords who rule most of the country are brutes. Karzai's government is incompetent and brutal. NATO forces are trigger-happy and callous. Both the Afghan government and US forces torture innocent people, sometimes to death. Our anti-narcotics policies there were constructed with absolutely no thought to the alternatives that would be needed to keep poppy farmers from starving to DEATH. The foreign aid that got to Afghanistan was many only a fraction of what was so casually promised, and much of it leached right back out in the pockets of profiteering foreign
contractors.
Nice gal or guy you are, i must say...
"roundhead,"
It seems to me that you must be one of those unfortunate human beings who are so utterly stupid that the products of your thinking look like those of a madhouse.
I'll simply ask you how on earth you got the conclusion you got from the quotation you selected, and leave it at that.
In the meantime, I'll thank you for providing further concrete evidence that the right-wing is completely intellectually bankrupt.
"Jack Layton and Stephane Dion cared more about terrorists than they did about Canadian soldiers."
I think that statement is basically true.
I think the left in general think like that.
But, I don't think you think like that.
You are also correct that people should not talk past each other.
Things get heated, things get said, no dialog. Sad.
Fuck off Wayne.
Here's the new rule: Either you back up your assertions with some sort of argument, or I delete them.
I'm not going to go on right-wing blogs and just say: "You all like to kill Arab babies" so I am not going to allow you to come by here and drop anymore of your groundless assertions.
"I think we can conclude from the following passage, that YOU, Mr or Ms "thwap" or "twat" or whatever, care more about accused terrorists than our Canadian soldiers:"
roundhead, you're a vile, putrid piece of filth. So, if you don't agree with somebody, you automatically view them as a female body part, huh? Fucking asshole. Who gives a shit about what else you had to say in the rest of your (completely useless, I'm sure) comment.
Go to hell, fuckface.
OK thwap.
It was the Liberals who committed to the Afghan Mission, correct?
Why was nothing arranged for checking on exchanged prisoners then?
If the arrangements were not in place it was up to the Liberals to get them in place.
Jack never said anything about it. Now all he says is Bring the Troops Home ..... Squawk .....Bring the Troops home ... Jacky wants a cracker.
The CPC are at least trying to get it right.
O'Connor has tried to apologize a number of times but the Liberals just won't let it go. The Liberals would never apologize even though this is their fault.
The citizen of France still demands an apology from O'Connor. The citizen of France still demands an apology from PM Harper, for his comments. Why? THE TRUTH HURTS.
Harper said what millions of Canadians are thinking.
Harper has just pointed out what the Liberals and NDP are well known for supporting criminals over victims, Taliban prisoners over Canadian soldiers.
Why don't the Liberals and NDP protest living conditions and pay of Canadian soldiers? Oh, right those conditions are better now.
Didn't the Liberals say that Harper should not criticize China over human rights because they are a large trading partner? Hypocrite bastards.
I have a good friend in Afghanistan, right now. He is 48 and has a wife and daughter waiting for him here.
We had a party for him before he left; he truly believes he can make a difference.
He is a big part of our small community.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
Fine Wayne. That's an argument.
Yes, the Liberals were the first to bone-headedly get us into Afghanistan.
I hate the Liberals by the way.
The NDP opposed the invasion of Afghanistan.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/can-o16.shtml
"All the opposition parties have welcomed Canada’s participation in the war on Afghanistan, with the exception of the social-democratic New Democratic Party. NDP leader Alexa McDonough has opposed the US-led assault on Afghanistan, saying that the fight against terrorism should be waged under the aegis of the United Nations."
The NDP and Leftists in general have always been concerned about the treatment of our prisoners in Afghanistan.
You're right, the Liberals have been idiots on the subject. (Just like the Conservatives.)
None of this proves that the NDP or even the fucking Liberals care more about terrorists than about our soldiers.
Let's continue,
"Jacky wants a cracker" ... what the fuck is that supposed to mean?
The NDP decided at convention that it should call for the return of our troops. I take it you're mocking them for staying to that message?
"Stevie wants a cracker" ... all that rotund piece of filth says is he wants to leave Canadian soldiers to stay and die for nothing in Afghanistan, because he's a warmonger.
... to be cont'd.
"The NDP decided at convention that it should call for the return of our troops. I take it you're mocking them for staying to that message?"
That the NDP listen to there people is the only thing that I admire about them.
Jack comes across like a broken record, I am mocking him.
The NDP mock the CPC for following what the decided at their convention.
Stevie, like me, wants the Afgan people to have a great life, like we have here. But, they never will have it with the Taliban lurking about.
Maybe we should just quit trying to help people. It would cost alot less in blood and money.
"The NDP and Leftists in general have always been concerned about the treatment of our prisoners in Afghanistan."
So does the CPC, everyone should have basic human rights even if they don't give the same human rights to anyone else. We are a civilized country.
Looking forward to your next post.
I don't know what you're talking about with this "citizen of France stuff."
I do know that O'Conner is a moron who should resign. He either lied to Parliament, or he spoke in Parliament when he didn't have a clue about what was going on.
What are we talking about after all? We all know that Canadian soldiers descended into monstrousness in Somalia. We know the Americans do this.
If we think torture is bad, if we think summary executions are bad, if we think corrupt torturing governments are bad, then when we're at war, we ought to take every step to ensure that we don't act like the people we claim to despise.
It seems it's only the Left that cares about Canada's reputation. Left to Harper, we'd be jailing innocents, torturing prisoners, and giving the finger to the poor countries and international law.
Fuck that.
If O'Conner doesn't care about befouling Canada's international reputation, he shouldn't be in his position.
And yes Wayne, you can condemn the Liberals for their disgusting hypocrisy all you want, and you'll get no quarrel from me.
But not even they are more in love with terrorists than with Canadian citizens.
phone call ... gotta go ...
http://canadiancynic.blogspot.com/2007/03/first-thing-lets-kill-all-law-students.html#links
"See, a) demanding that "war-time" prisoners not be abused and b) supporting the troops have nothing to do with one another. Nothing. Zip. Squat. They are entirely unrelated.
One can fully support Canada's military while still adamantly insisting that they adhere to the Geneva Conventions, which I should point out is as much for our troops' protections as it is for everyone else's. Sadly, though, logic from folks like Wudrick seems to consist mainly of non sequiturs like:
You: Even in the middle of military conflict, we have an obligation to follow the Geneva Conventions.
Aaron: You hate our troops and love the enemy!!"
You: What the f...?"
Now, back to you Wayne:
"Harper has just pointed out what the Liberals and NDP are well known for supporting criminals over victims, Taliban prisoners over Canadian soldiers."
No. Goddammit. Harper has made a groundless assertion. Until you can find even a Liberal saying that they don't care about Canadian soldiers well being, you're going to have to cut it out with this stupidity. H'kay?
"Why don't the Liberals and NDP protest living conditions and pay of Canadian soldiers? Oh, right those conditions are better now."
Let's take this turd of a statement at face value. If those conditions are better, then there's no reason for anyone to be protesting about them. So your statement is idiotic on its own merits.
But secondly and thirdly, NDP MPs have gone on record concerned about the pay and living conditions of the troops, and Harper's Cons have already been found to have been dragging their feet on compensation for soldiers' families.
Putting aside for the moment that fascists like to "support the troops" by leaving them in harm's way, ... I'll tell you this: I'm not going to be too surprised when it's revealed that Harper, like bush II, is found guilty of abusing the troops he's so fond of hiding behind. It's par for the course for scum like them.
"Didn't the Liberals say that Harper should not criticize China over human rights because they are a large trading partner? Hypocrite bastards."
And didn't Harper turn out to be lying when he claimed he was going toe-to-toe with the Chinese on human rights? Hypocritical asshole.
And, anyway, after supporting Israel in Lebanon, and anything bush II does, ... Harper has renounced the right to lecture anyone on human rights.
As have you with your pro-torture stance.
That's what this is all about after all.
I don't wish harm on Canada's soldiers. Neither do most people on the Left. But as SANE people, we recognize that in military conflicts people can descend into murderous cruelty. So we work to make sure that there is oversight and structures to prevent crimes against humanity.
According to you, Harper, bush II, the Chinese government, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, ... human rights are an illusion. Nothing must stand in the way of the victory of whatever your blinkered causes are. Anyone who doesn't agree that human rights are universal is the enemy.
Whatever, Wayne.
Thwapman or -woman (I suspect, "boy")...
I can see why, Harper’s gaffe made you so angry – all that “nastiness” and all…
I know how you hate nastiness and everything.
For example, the handsome gent who wrote to you named Wayne, who stated,
"Jack Layton and Stephane Dion cared more about terrorists than they did about Canadian soldiers."
I think that statement is basically true.
I think the left in general think like that.
But, I don't think you think like that.
You are also correct that people should not talk past each other.
Things get heated, things get said, no dialog. Sad.
To which you replied (to the effect of):
Fuck off Wayne.
I mean, this doesn’t even take into account the kind words you’ve directed my way.
With regard to Stephen Harper, his statement was so much the worse, I can see. I’m reminded of the definition of gaffe, which in politics is to tell the truth:
In Parliament, Jack Clayton and Stockw…, er Stephane Dion and their minions have been getting up day after day after day after day, to ask questions about individuals captured by Canadian troops in Afghanistan, accused of such brave acts as killing women and beheading “collaborators”…
The Prime Minister got up and committed a gaffe – told the truth – as to how passionate the Liberals and their chums, the NDP, are with regard to the fate of Al-Qaeda terrorists, relative to their indifference to the fate of Canadian soldiers (unless the latter die, at which time, they can be used as fodder to hammer the mission to Afghanistan)…
So, have Clayton and Day-O come out and stated what they feel, to wit, “we don’t give a shit about Canadian soldiers until they die; Al-Qaeda terrorists on the other hand, we love ‘em!”
No - but as the Communist Manifesto says, "By their deeds, ye shall know them..."
Thanks
Roundhead
(I wonder what will be your kind reply...)
roundhead,
You don't get it do you? It's important that we not turn people over to be tortured.
Torture is bad "roundhead." That goes without saying.
If our soldiers beat prisoners, that's bad.
As bad as if Canadian soldiers getting beaten if they are taken prisoner.
You do understand this don't you?
Further down, in an older post of mine, I mention that some of the people joining the Taliban are doing so out of anger towards the brutal police forces of the Karzai government.
As they did in the days of the Warlords who subjected the country to unceasing gang warfare and extortion and rape, the Taliban brought an end to banditry and brought a horrible form of tranquility to the country.
It's a far more complicated, difficult matter than you're apparently able to grasp. The story is essentially this: The Taliban is making a resurgence because the Karzai government and Western-financed reconstruction have been a 5-year failure.
So when we capture these peasants who joined the only effective resistance force, and we turn them over to people who torture them, we're doing a bad thing.
And the reason that I'm using strong words to you, and to Wayne, and to Reason, is because I very strongly detest these disgusting, groundless accusations that the Left hates the troops and loves the terrorists.
Wanting to protect human rights isn't hating the troops. Get that through your head.
And the reason that I told Wayne to fuck off was because my entire post was about explaining that there is no way in hell that you can seriously claim that Layton or even Dion hates the troops, and then Wayne goes off, as he always does, and simply asserts whatever he thinks (in this case, that Layton and Dion do hate the troops)without providing any proof.
And where is this all going to lead? If Canadian soldiers gang-rape an Afghan girl, and then kill her and her family and set them on fire, are people like you going to continue blathering that the Afghan people know in their hearts that we care about them? Like the Americans manage to delude themselves about the effect of their troops?
If you're going to baselessly assert that Leftists are traitors and terrorist lovers, the least you can do is quit bitching when people tell you to fuck off.
Now we're getting somewhere thwap-man...
I'm at work, too, so I don't have time to write a lengthy response. Suffice to say that, I think you and others on the left do protest too much with regard to the terrorism issue...
There is a little thing called Hansard that you can consult, it is the transcript of Question Period in the House of Commons.
Go and read it, if you would (I watch QP most every day, relating to my work).
You'll find that NDP and Liberal members of the House have been asking questions about whether Canadian soldiers `mistreating' terrorists day in and day out - none of these same individuals are apparently roused enough to ask questions - legitimate questions - as to the treatment of Canadian soldiers by the military and by NATO.
Yet, Libs and the Dippers were so interested in the fate of terrorists that, not only did they press this issue earlier in 2007 when the House was sitting, but also AFTER the House returned to sit in recent weeks.
THAT was the source of Mr. Harper's gaffe - his telling the truth - with regard to the passions of the NDP and the Liberals in regard to the War Against Terrorists - which, of course, you don't believe in.
Of course, I notice that you are very punctilious with regard to how I should describe ACCUSED terrorists, and then turn around and state, as though it's a fact, that Canadians "beat accused terrorists" or that they "rape little girls..."
So, thwap-boy, how can I conclude otherwise, that yourself along with Clayton and Stefan Day-O have more affection for terrorists than Canadian soldiers...
Here's my strong words: don't give me any crap about your and the left's love of "human rights"...
"human rights", like most other left "principles" is simply a cudgel to bash others when it is convenient. If you cared so much about human rights, you'd be protesting the situation in Zimbabwe right now, the imprisonment of homosexuals in Cuba, the viciousness of sectarian conflict in the Muslim world WITHOUT Iraq, the denial of Malarial cures in Africa due to the banning of DDT...
instead, you focus on the fate of several terrorists (I'm going to say it like it's a fact, as you do about Canadian soldiers raping children) because you wish to do damage to the Conservative government...
thanks
Roundhead
Well shithead, let's see what we've got here:
"You'll find that NDP and Liberal members of the House have been asking questions about whether Canadian soldiers `mistreating' terrorists day in and day out "
By jove, you're right! They've been talking about an important issue that's in the news now! Go figure. Say, how come you put 'mistreating' in quotes? Are you a pro-torture thug who wants to disgrace Canada? Do you hate Canadian values?
" none of these same individuals are apparently roused enough to ask questions - legitimate questions - as to the treatment of Canadian soldiers by the military and by NATO."
Why are Harper or NATO Command abusing them? Is Steven not supporting the troops?
"Yet, Libs and the Dippers were so interested in the fate of terrorists that, not only did they press this issue earlier in 2007 when the House was sitting, but also AFTER the House returned to sit in recent weeks."
Uh, that's because this is an important subject. To some people anyway, maybe not to pro-torture unCanadian types like you.
"THAT was the source of Mr. Harper's gaffe - his telling the truth .."
Again, no. There's no evidence. Just the hateful accusations of people who don't care whether Canada gets dragged into the shit, as those fine boys in Somalia did to us last time.
"Of course, I notice that you are very punctilious with regard to how I should describe ACCUSED terrorists"
I'm just pointing out that you evidently don't even think that "accused" terrorists have any rights, as opposed to "convicted" terrorists. I'm just pointing out your fascist mindset.
"and then turn around and state, as though it's a fact, that Canadians 'beat accused terrorists' or that they 'rape little girls...'"
I forgot that you're slow. Here, check out this link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/if
I said "if," h'okay? And I said that "if" Canadian soldiers descended to the level of depravity of the Americans in Iraq:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article602898.ece
http://gregoire.gnn.tv/blogs/9199/Now_That_s_F_ked_Up_Soldiers_Trade_Pictures_of_Dead_Iraqis_for_Amateur_Porn
... "IF" Canadian soldiers are beating people, or "IF" they start acting like semi-human brutes, clods such as yourself or Stephen Harper, wouldn't bat an eye. You'd come up with delusions about "a few bad apples" (when forced to) and continue to drag Canada's reputation in the mud.
You're on that slippery slope already my friend, and that's not good.
"So, thwap-boy, how can I conclude otherwise, that yourself along with Clayton and Stefan Day-O have more affection for terrorists than Canadian soldiers..."
Oh, geez, I dunno. Maybe by growing a brain and realizing at some fucking point in time that being concerned with the country's honour doesn't mean you hate the troops. Something like that maybe?
"Here's my strong words: don't give me any crap about your and the left's love of 'human rights'..."
If you don't like it, stop coming to my blog. ;)
And, excuse me, you're the one belittling charges of prisoner abuse here, or did you forget? And besides the allegations of abuse, the MAIN issue has been that the people we routinely turn prisoners over to have already been found to be practicing torture on a wide scale.
We're turning people over to torturers and you don't care, and you presume to tell me that my concern for human rights is "crap"? I'll tell you, I bought 10,000 little trophies for the "right-wing unmitigated gall awards" a few years back, and I had to give them all away in the first six months. So, I'm afraid that while you qualify, I don't have a trophy to send you.
""human rights", like most other left "principles" is simply a cudgel to bash others when it is convenient. If you cared so much about human rights, you'd be protesting the situation in Zimbabwe right now, ..."
And BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BELCH. Tell me something sport, have you ordered a protest demo about Uzbekistan yet? No? How about the killing of journalists in Mexico? No? How about ... you get the picture. (Or maybe not, you're not doing so well here.)
I guess your failure to get active about these things, plus your indifference to Canadian soldiers handing over prisoners to be tortured, means that you're an absolute fraud. How 'bout that 'eh?
For the last time: Making sure that Canada respects human rights doesn't mean hating the troops.
Your position is so absurd, so irrational, that even responding to it has an air of unreality about it.
Goodbye.
back to real form, eh, twat-boy? I thought we were getting somewhere until you had to expose your real self...
I don't protest about Uzbekistan or Mexico or Zimbabwe or anything, twat-boy...
It is the left who are the protest thugs and yet no protests about Zimbabwe, or anything else that can't be blamed on the U.S. because all these black and brown people are, evidently, BLAH BLAH BLAH to you...
Is not the treatment of Canadian soldiers important to you? If they live on shitty pay and live in shitty base housing, doesn't that matter (for which they have to pay market rent - unlike yourself, evidently, I'm acquianted with the servicewomen and men you like to shit on...)?
These things are not, as you state, "important issues"?
They are not, because you and the left don't give a shit about them one goddam bit - you don't give a shit about the detainees, except in so far as you can use them bash Stephen Harper (whose supporters, reading your old posts, shouldn't have any democratic rights anyway...)
thanks
Roundhead
Also twat-head,
Why do you insist that the NDP and left assholes like you have a monopoly on "Canadian values"?
Are you some kind of McCarthyite. I guess so.
I see that you're reduced to stuttering rage when your own disgusting accusations are tossed back at you.
I think we're done here. I think we've explored your ridiculous argument as far as it deserves and you've been found wanting.
Now, why don't you go off and complain about the shoddy way that Stephen Harper is treating the troops while he's using them as political props?
I will, 'cause you don't give a shit about them...
as you admitted when you said that raping little children is not the result of a "few bad apples..."
thanks
Roundhead
ps,
btw it's not Stephen Harper who are abusing troops, but Ender-Liberal fookheads like you that cut the Canadian Armed Forces to the bone
"roundhead"
I'm pretty certain by now that your misrepresentations of my words are genuinely unintentional.
You have a hard time with subtleties of language.
But be that as it may, further hateful distortions such as:
"as you admitted when you said that raping little children is not the result of a 'few bad apples...'"
.. are intolerable and will be deleted.
Just because you're a moron, doesn't mean I have to allow your slanders to pollute my site.
Post a Comment