The Atheist Communist Caliphate Made Flesh, Spread the Clusterfuck Around Thread

[*In a Nutsack]

WHY WON'T OBAMA STOP RAPING ALL OUR CHILDREN?

Have you seen the way our children dress?  They're BEGGING for it.

I'm a little wary of the way you talk about your children.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

WHY WON'T OBAMA STOP RAPING ALL OUR CHILDREN?

Have you seen the way our children dress?  They're BEGGING for it.

I'm a little wary of the way you talk about your children.

Now that IAN's gonna be a father (pending DNA tests, natch), he's starting to wonder if this internet is really such a great place after all.

[Slaky]

well Gil ACORN is a pretty big deal. Skirting tax law, embezzling money, voter fraud, child prostitution are not big deals?

This is the part where I will just paint with a huge brush even though it may not encompass all liberals but makes liberals look bad.

Look at the child prostitution angle and how ACORN employees raised almost zero concern about that. How does one get that mind set? The Roman Polanski stuff going on now, drugged and raped a 13 year old girl and liberal press and Hollywood people rush to his defense. Kevin Jennings the White House "safe schools Czar" violated Massachusetts state law when a 15 year old student admitted to sexual acts with an adult at a bus station and didnt report it to anyone.

One would come to believe liberals dont give a flying fuck about children. There pet ACORN has no problems about Child Prostitution. The liberal elite don't care about a a child being raped, and Obamas safe school guy doesnt think anything was wrong back then when a child was essentially raped by an adult. Does the moral compass ever flick on for these people?

I am sure you are disgusted with the behavior of these people and I am sure none of you condone anything these people have done. Thats why ACORN needs to be investigated even if nothing else was wrong, on that one issue alone. Polanksi needs to serve his prison time and not run away, and Kevin Jennings is probably another Czar about to resign.

But you throw children and everything else ACORN has been involved in together and they needed to be shutdown. The investigation by sites like Big Hollywood and Big Government are turning up evidence every day of the way ACORN was run. Who ran it, who has ties to it in the Obama administraion, where the money is going, and who is getting the money. They got investigations going on in New York with the Worker Families Party which is nothing more than a front for ACORN to help Democrats.

Then you got the whole angle of how ACORN was involved in the Housing bust with high risk loans to people who couldn't pay for it. There are many articles detailing how ACORN would basically blackmail banks into issueing these high risk loans or risk being involved in a criminal suit of racism against them. Most times banks would just pay ACORN hush money so they didn't have them accusing them of being racist lenders.

ACORN has their fingers in a whole lot of shit, and its all being slowly unraveled. Its really fascinating to watch it come apart. Its like watching a mob family being taking apart one piece at a time. It may not be a big deal to Democrats, because its probably fucking embarrassing a liberal organization like this go tits up, but its a big deal to people who value election law, tax law, protecting children, hell just following laws in general. ACORN aint above that, and no crimes justify the means in this case.

I'm with MikeC on this one, voter fraud and child prostitution are the my two top hotbuttons in the world today.

Don't forget this Robot Polanksi guy. Fuck him, too.

[CBStew]

Mike C has a point.  As a child hating liberal I never hesitated to point out the George W. Bush was a stupid, scum-sucking, bottom-feeder, as was anyone who voted for him.  Bush's only ambition was to emulate that smarmy Alzheimers' poster boy, Ronnie Raygun, whose only claim to fame was to be able to read a movie and/or political script that someone else wrote. 

[CBStew]

Awww you gonna make me? Why don't you get your lazy liberal ass on an airplane to Iowa and make me shut up just like Obama taught you. Bring some ACORN people and SEIU people along also.

Why don't you just go George W. Bush yourself?

[Gil Gunderson]

Awww you gonna make me? Why don't you get your lazy liberal ass on an airplane to Iowa and make me shut up just like Obama taught you. Bring some ACORN people and SEIU people along also.

Why don't you just go George W. Bush yourself?

For the record, this has to be worse than calling someone a cunt, right?

[Slaky]

Awww you gonna make me? Why don't you get your lazy liberal ass on an airplane to Iowa and make me shut up just like Obama taught you. Bring some ACORN people and SEIU people along also.

Why don't you just go George W. Bush yourself?

For the record, this has to worse than calling someone a cunt, right?

The whole worse?

[Gil Gunderson]

Awww you gonna make me? Why don't you get your lazy liberal ass on an airplane to Iowa and make me shut up just like Obama taught you. Bring some ACORN people and SEIU people along also.

Why don't you just go George W. Bush yourself?

For the record, this has to worse than calling someone a cunt, right?

The whole worse?

Jerk.

[Slaky]

Awww you gonna make me? Why don't you get your lazy liberal ass on an airplane to Iowa and make me shut up just like Obama taught you. Bring some ACORN people and SEIU people along also.

Why don't you just go George W. Bush yourself?

For the record, this has to worse than calling someone a cunt, right?

The whole worse?

Jerk.

Sorry.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

I think Iran has had enough chances to come clean, will Obama have the balls to pull the trigger on them? I don't think he will.

I bet you'd have the balls to pull that trigger. You're a man.

My belief is Iran would do everything in its power to destroy Israel.

This may surprise you, but your personal "belief" about the strategic intentions of a nation of 75 million with an incredibly complex polity over 6,000 miles away is worth pretty much jack shit.

To the latter point, from someone whose opinions on Iran I do give some weight...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/10/01/cole/

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of "no first strike." This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.

Reality: Iran's military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to "wipe it off the map."

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of 'no first strike' to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to "wipe Israel off the map?"

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

Belief: But aren't Iranians Holocaust deniers?

Reality: Some are, some aren't. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called "the crime of Nazism." Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.

[CBStew]

I think Iran has had enough chances to come clean, will Obama have the balls to pull the trigger on them? I don't think he will.

I bet you'd have the balls to pull that trigger. You're a man.

My belief is Iran would do everything in its power to destroy Israel.

This may surprise you, but your personal "belief" about the strategic intentions of a nation of 75 million with an incredibly complex polity over 6,000 miles away is worth pretty much jack shit.

To the latter point, from someone whose opinions on Iran I do give some weight...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/10/01/cole/

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of "no first strike." This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.

Reality: Iran's military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to "wipe it off the map."

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of 'no first strike' to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to "wipe Israel off the map?"

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

Belief: But aren't Iranians Holocaust deniers?

Reality: Some are, some aren't. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called "the crime of Nazism." Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.

I hate to defend Mike C but if Ahmedenajhad (sp?)  has been quoted correctly, he has said that Israel should be wiped off the map.  True he hasn't said that Iran would do it, and maybe he is just encouraging Venzuela to do it.

[ChuckD]

I think Iran has had enough chances to come clean, will Obama have the balls to pull the trigger on them? I don't think he will.

I bet you'd have the balls to pull that trigger. You're a man.

My belief is Iran would do everything in its power to destroy Israel.

This may surprise you, but your personal "belief" about the strategic intentions of a nation of 75 million with an incredibly complex polity over 6,000 miles away is worth pretty much jack shit.

To the latter point, from someone whose opinions on Iran I do give some weight...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/10/01/cole/

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the U.S.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the U.S. or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of "no first strike." This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.

Reality: Iran's military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to "wipe it off the map."

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of 'no first strike' to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to "wipe Israel off the map?"

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

Belief: But aren't Iranians Holocaust deniers?

Reality: Some are, some aren't. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called "the crime of Nazism." Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.

I hate to defend Mike C but if Ahmedenajhad (sp?)  has been quoted correctly, he has said that Israel should be wiped off the map.  True he hasn't said that Iran would do it, and maybe he is just encouraging Venzuela to do it.

I don't think anyone's disputing Ahmedinejad's crazy, but (a) he's not Iran's Commander in Chief which makes it exceedingly difficult for him to "wipe Israel off the map" and (b) Israel's a big boy and perfectly capable of defending itself.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

I hate to defend Mike C but if Ahmedenajhad (sp?)  has been quoted correctly, he has said that Israel should be wiped off the map.  True he hasn't said that Iran would do it, and maybe he is just encouraging Venzuela to do it.

That quote is addressed directly in my quote above:

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to "wipe Israel off the map?"

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.

This very phrase led to a war of words between Cole and Christopher Hitchens.

From Cole's salvo...

http://www.juancole.com/2006/05/hitchens-hacker-and-hitchens.html

The precise reason for Hitchens' theft and publication of my private mail is that I object to the characterization of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as having "threatened to wipe Israel off the map." I object to this translation of what he said on two grounds. First, it gives the impression that he wants to play Hitler to Israel's Poland, mobilizing an armored corps to move in and kill people.

But the actual quote, which comes from an old speech of Khomeini, does not imply military action, or killing anyone at all. The second reason is that it is just an inexact translation. The phrase is almost metaphysical. He quoted Khomeini that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." It is in fact probably a reference to some phrase in a medieval Persian poem. It is not about tanks.

...

The phrase he then used as I read it is "The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad)."

Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope-- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government.

Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that "Israel must be wiped off the map" with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time.

...

I don't have any intention of making a point by point reply to Hitchens's completely inaccurate screed. He blames me for not referring to some other speech of Khomeini, when in fact I never instanced any speeches of Khomeini at all in this discussion except the snippet cited by Ahmadinejad-- I was arguing that there is no Persian idiom to wipe something off the map, and that Ahmadinejad has been misquoted.

Hitchens imagines a whole discourse of mine (which mostly never took place) that he now sets out to refute-- from English translations! But I was saying that the wire service translations were the problem in the first place. Hitchens seems to think that he can over-rule my reading of a Persian text by reference to some hurried journalist's untechnical rendering into English.

...

As for the matter at issue, Ahmadinejad is a non-entity. The Iranian "president" is mostly powerless. The commander of the armed forces is the Supreme Jurisprudent, Ali Khamenei. Worrying about Ahmadinejad's antics is like worrying that the US military will act on the orders of the secretary of the interior. Ahmadinejad cannot declare war on anyone, or mobilize a military. So it doesn't matter what speeches he gives.

Moreover, Iran cannot fight Israel. It would be defeated in 72 hours, even if the US didn't come in, which it would (and rightly so if Israel were attacked).

Adding: Hitch's instigating piece here.

[Chuck to Chuck]

My belief is Iran would do everything in its power to destroy Israel.

Israel can defend itself from Iran. They are in minimal danger from Tehran.  Were Tel Aviv attacked, Tehran would do an imitation of the core of the sun about 7 minutes later.

Other Arab capitals would be next if there was any reprisal.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

My belief is Iran would do everything in its power to destroy Israel.

Israel can defend itself from Iran. They are in minimal danger from Tehran.  Were Tel Aviv attacked, Tehran would do an imitation of the core of the sun about 7 minutes later.

Other Arab capitals would be next if there was any reprisal.

This is why it's so crucial to portray Ahmadinejad as a certifiably insane man—a Charlie Kelly-esque Wild Card who's so unstable that he's all but immune to the threat of mutual assured destruction—as opposed to a politician who merely believes insane things but still retains (as do most politicians) a primary interest in self-preservation.

Rattling sabers at the Great and Little Satans is good for the business of being Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Actually inviting Israel or the US to rain down fire upon you (even if the ability to do so were a part of his job description)... not so much.

Plus, as anyone with eyes can plainly see, there's only one real Charlie Kelly in the thuggish world leader game...



WILD CARD!