2008-06-20
{Author's post-notes are inserted in curly braces.}
{
These are the chronicles of a "Jesus H. Christ" alias that I used in an internet discussion about Islam.
Bill Cosby joked about his father's parenting and how he thought his name was "Jesus" and his brother's name was "Christ" while growing up. In my own upbringing, my siblings and I could tell the earnestness of our parent's request by how many of our given names or initials they used when they called us: "Maxwell!" "Maxwell Bridges!" "Maxwell C. Bridges!" When all three names were spoken with a distinct pause between each, it was as if they were counting to 10.
A colorful and endearing rancher uncle had a rather salty vocabulary. Troubles with the animals, materials, tools, or teenage boys working summers as ranch hands often led to the escalated cuss: "Jesus H. Christ!" My aunt was very religious and didn't use such profanity. To annoy her may have been a reason why my uncle and rancher cousins continued to spice their language with "God Damn!", "Jesus!", "Christ!", and the now-I'm-really-mad "Jesus H. Christ!"
In the spirit of this uncle and aunt and my parents, I posted as "Jesus H. Christ".
The right-wing echo chamber consisted of Craig Hawley, Registered Independent, and Sgt. Asshat.
Sgt. Asshat doesn't have a fixed alias, because he exploits a loophole of the forum that allows you to enter whatever you want for the username. His usual mode is to enter either a title or something degrading about another forum participant, and then to have the system hyperlink the title to a URL he's provided. This technique of posting is rather slippery. It doesn't leave much of a handle to search and locate his postings.
Because he doesn't sign so much as an alias to his postings, you have to come up with your own name to address him. In another thread, the word "sockpuppet" was the only constant in his messages. Somewhere in this thread, he started throwing out the "Asshat" term at others.
- sockpuppet
- Mr. Changeling
- Sgt. Sheepdoggie Sockpuppet Asshat
- Sgt. Asshat
Sometimes my postings were a reply to someone's posting made clear by the technology, but unclear here. I've added to whom my message was intended when appropriate.
}
{to Craig Hawley}
WTF?
Luke 6:42
"Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye."
Replace "Islam" with "Christianity" in your posting, you wouldn't be far from the truth as well.
Christian schools, Christian programs (for youth, for adults, for families, for couples, for singles, for homosexuals), Bible study, Christian (rock) music, Christian camps, Christian sports...
Every brand of Christianity -- from Catholics to Baptists to Protestians to Mormons to Christian Scientists -- all could be classified as religious systems.
You want to talk mixing Christianity (religion) with politics, don't forget the recent problems of Christian prosletyzing at the Air Force Academy.
[QUOTE id="e2cff431-2ea4-48fc-afef-40028958e4c1"]
If you think we are just at war with extremist within Islam you are DEAD wrong. Here is the truth about Muslims and what happens when you allow them into your countries.
These are facts you will never see on the Liberal News.
Islam Is a System
Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components. Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called 'religious rights.'
[/QUOTE]
FTR, there is no such thing as "Liberal News." Get your facts straight.
Media is corporation owned and controlled. RFK, Jr. gave a recent talk about how all (certaintly > 95%) of traditional media (television, radio, newspaper) is controlled by five entities or people. BrassCheckTV (http://www.brasschecktv.com/) had a recent entry about "Spin" that is worthy of watching.
"Liberal News", my butt.
In fact, when you make stupid off-hand and sweeping comments like "Liberal News" that can easily be proven wrong, you discredit everything else in your posting...
Which amounted to nothing more than baiting a religious war.
Here is a quote from Jesus H. Christ himself regarding Islam:
John 14:2
"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."
{to Registered Independent}
[QUOTE id="fd3e1f56-729e-483d-a1f3-c87ff775af7c"]
John 14:2
"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you."[/QUOTE]
What part of the above quote don't you understand?
Your words are so fitting for you:
"Yet another uninformed, poorly-read person, posing as knowledgeable... As if verbosity were an interchangeable substitute for knowledge."
So nice of you to step forth to talk about splinters in my eyes with beams in your own, thou hypocrite.
{to Craig Hawley}
As God is my Father, you have missed the spiritual message in your eagerness to hate. Where in the edited writings about me did I ever advocate a holy war on others? Did you never learn "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God"?
Whatever point you are trying to make is lost in your gratuitous, unwarranted, and unfounded insulting assessment of people -- be they posters or be they of another faith. And you deem yourself worthy to be called one of my Christian followers? Thou hypocrite!
Matt 5:21-22
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, ... whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil," such as the commandments against stealing and lying, yet ones that you frequently break. You steal by infringing upon the copyright of others in posting their (inappropriate) writings here; targeted excerpts with attributes to the author and the source is protected by fair-use and more importantly would more effectively bolster whatever misguided argument you attempt to utter. You lie by misquoting and rewriting the words of others you disagree with.
Registered Independent wrote words most fitting for you:
"Yet another uninformed, poorly-read person, posing as knowledgeable... As if verbosity were an interchangeable substitute for knowledge."
{Craig Hawley's words:}
[QUOTE id="c741be23-5644-41e4-b142-426838cf93de"]
First of all your not Jesus Christ. Don't anyone stand to near this moron.
You mention the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan. You forgot to say that they started it with a sneak attack and that dropping those bombs saved millions of lives that would have been brutally lost if the Island of Japan had to be invaded.
So that example you list is not close to the other butchers.
You mention me by name how flattering. Look I am married so you will have to find another to worship. LOL!
Then you list Reg Indy's comments and try to say they apply to me.
So you can't even think of your own words now but resort to taking others statements and trying to use them. This shows your lack of intellect.
People who think Christians have to be pacifists and not defend themselves are idiots.
Tell that story to the occupants of Jericho. Heck even Jesus himself picked up a rope and beat the crap out of the money changers who had turned his fathers temple into a den of thieves.
You we don't act like Christians yet God smote wicked people. The armies of Israel were led by a pillar of smoke by day and fire by night. God drowned the Egyptian army in the sea.
You cherry pick bible verses and know nothing about the Bible that is obvious. Perhaps reading the Bible instead of Googling verses might help. I have read the Bible cover to cover many times.
Numbers 31:12
and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from JerichoHebrews 11:29
By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so, they were drownedThere is no question that Islam was born of the sword and will die by it.
Last time I checked Christian women were allowed to go to school. Ask the Afghan women about Islam.
You also forgot to quote the Bible about taking the Lords name in vain like you do.
You are a fool and your arguments are easily defeated.
[/QUOTE]
{to Sgt. Asshat}
Demonstrate to everyone how wrong you are.
Call me Charlie Manson? "Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
You talk of 20th century's bloodiest mass murders, conveniently leaving out America's bloody hands. Did you forget about the only nuclear bombs dropped on civilian populations? And what about the 21st century's bloodiest mass murders? Would that not be the exact opposite of "leftist"? Would that not be neo-con-men Bush and Cheney? Or have you forgotten the body count in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Islamo-fascists? What a silly coined term that has no basis in reality.
Yes indeed,
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." [Matthew 7:15]
Your hate is transparent in the names you call and in the smears you make. How dare you call Christ your savior! You have done nothing to prove this except the exact opposite of what a true Christian would do.
And, Craig Hawley, please heed the words of your right-wing-(wo)man, Registered Independent, who wrote words still most fitting for you:
"Yet another uninformed, poorly-read person, posing as knowledgeable... As if verbosity were an interchangeable substitute for knowledge."
Hawley, you claim to have read the Bible cover to cover many times, yet you still haven't learned anything, no? Maybe if you just focused on the four Gospels...
As for calling me a fool, it is just too easy to repeat yet again Matt 5:22:
"But I say unto you, ... whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
[QUOTE id="c741be23-5644-41e4-b142-426838cf93de"]
I have read the Bible cover to cover many times.
...
You are a fool and your arguments are easily defeated.
...
You mention the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan. You forgot to say that they started it with a sneak attack and that dropping those bombs saved millions of lives that would have been brutally lost if the Island of Japan had to be invaded.
...
People who think Christians have to be pacifists and not defend themselves are idiots.
Heck even Jesus himself picked up a rope and beat the crap out of the money changers who had turned his fathers temple into a den of thieves.
[/QUOTE]
With regards to Japan "sneak-attack" that wasn't, America had broken Japan's codes. As newspaper articles prior to Pearl Harbor document, US official were practically gording Japan. President Roosevelt knew of an impending Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and allowed it to happen as a way to force America’s entry into a war that Americans did not want. Here's a link for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate
You repeat a talking point and never proven argument of the day that "dropping the bombs saving millions of lives that would have been brutally lost if the Island of Japan had to be invaded." First of all, the number would not have been millions even counting US & Japanese; you overstate your case, ergo it is wrong from the onset. Secondly, our military leaders knew that the Japanese backbone had been broken with the battles in the islands and elsewhere. Japan was on the ropes and going down for the count without the bombs, and both US military leaders and Japanese leaders knew this. Have you even read about the dissent of the US military leaders to Truman's decision?
Truman had other options. Truman could have shown his weapons to the Japanese (leaders) without actually detonating them in highly populated civilian targets. He could have fired a warning shot and blown away an island off of the main Japanese island for that matter.
The analogy is that police don't have to shoot their pistols to get a person into compliance, because just pointing a weapon can be threat enough. (In the case of bank robbery, isn't there one level of punishment for the theft without weapons and another level if a weapon was brandished although never fired? If the weapon was actually used, murder or attempted murder charges change the whole equation.)
Christians are certainly allowed to defend themselves. Let's hear your erroneous explanation again about how our military attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, our mismanagement and destruction of their countries, and our brutal treatment and torture of mostly innocent civilians can be misconstrued as "good Christians defending themselves."
If we were really "Christian" in our conduct as a nation, we would have heeded the words from Matt 5:38-41.
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain."
Yes, a good "Christian" US of A with the events of 9/11 probably should have said, "Woe! You smite me on the right cheek! For what reason? Oh, for we have been wronging the world with our foreign policy and intervention. We will change our ways. Meanwhile, here is my other cheek: take our aid, no strings attached. Take this money, Afghanistan. Invest it in yourself so that there be no more reason to smite us or others."
In your reference to the passage about Jesus chasing the money changers from the temple, you don't seem to recognize today who the money changers (and their vocal apologists) are, what the temple is that needs a house cleaning, and what sacred things need defending from the perversion that prevails. You play your role of Roman Soldier well, but that doesn't make nailing me to the cross right.
{to Sgt. Asshat}
My apologies to you, "Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left" aka "The Illusion of Pacifism" aka "Jesus was pro-2nd Amendment" aka "Sockpuppet".
I called you "Craig Hawley." Your improved writing level and talent with the message board has proven you to be someone else.
President Truman could have negotiated peace with Japan with a nuclear demonstration on targets that weren't refugee cities. Yes, the Bikini Island test was over, but surely some test to some island closer to Japan or even one of Japan's less populated islands would have driven home the point and ended that part of the war. Japan was already against the ropes. The selection of those two Japanese cities -- undamaged by conventional bombs -- was to measure the effects of those two nuclear weapons on pristine targets. (The same is true of the fire bombing of Dresden.) The false argument is made that killing innocent Japanese with nuclear weapons saved American lives. If there be any truth to that argument, one bomb would have sufficed. Two within days on one another is beyond the pale.
History is written by the conquerors, not those conquered.
But if you were an alien observing human behavior beyond "Saturn and orbiting around Uranus," President Truman would fit the definition of a mass murderer. President Bush and Cheney, too.
If you really want to battle terrorists (or patriots) and those who would destroy the American Constitution and everything it stands for, you need not look to foreign lands or other religions as the root cause. You also need not suspect every non-white face, every non-native English speaker, or every simple seeker for greater Truth to our human existence through worship of God by that or any other name or religion.
Luke 6:41 "Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"
Those evil-doers and evil-thinkers you seek are in the White House among other institutions of power. Or have you conveniently overlooked how we were lied into war? Did torture escape your attention? Did unconstitutional spying on citizens without court order, the outing of a CIA agent, and other outright crimes evade your reading? Follow the money, they say, and with today's economy, much of it has changed hands and continues to change hands -- out of your pockets and mine.
{to Registered Independent}
The good Christian, American arms manufacturers are second to none.
Weapons are our number one export outpacing even Hollywood movies and music.
Yep, if there is anything you right-wingers harp about, it is the philosphy of "free markets" and being free to sell anything to anyone, even if it kills them (or us).
Yep, the religion known as "love of money" is front and center. Those that don't have any money (those despicable heathens!) are the most likely to fall victim to the purchased arms.
[QUOTE id="9eeb4601-1ba6-4a13-adb8-5524575d9cb7"]
The haters are the people who are actually deliberately blowing up unarmed civilians around the globe, including children.
As previously mentioned, when Christians start blowing up unarmed civilians around the globe en mass simply because they are of a different religion, you might have a point.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, tug on my heart string by mentioning that haters deliberately blow up children.
Of course, bombs dropped from "Christian" US warplanes do that, too. Bullets from "Christian" US weapons held by "Christian" US soldiers (and "Christian" US contractors) have done that.
Thus, American Christians are "blowing up unarmed civilians around the globe en mass."
Hawley,
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
At least I provide my name with middle initial so you can better look me up on the internet.
How come you don't ream "Amazon Linker" (aka "Sockpuppet" and several other aliases) a new one for writing anonymously and for not standing up for his words with his true identity? For that matter, how come you don't rag on "Registered Independent" for the same "nick" violation?
You'll just turn a blind eye to their "nick" offenses, because after all, their superior writing don't have their barbs aimed at you.
And look how they prove your point over and over about how internet anonymity makes their writing more aggressive! My, how they attack furiously and take extra effort to offend personally! Reasoned debate they'll have none of.
Could it be hypocrisy? There seems to be lots of that going around your echo chamber.
As long as they keep pounding the war drums against Iran and Islam in general, that is right-wing a-okay with you, right? They are indeed birds of a feather with a propensity for erroneously rewriting the positions of others.
In debate terms, such tactics are hardly evenhanded. How Rovian clever that such misstatements of another's position force them into repeating the falsehood before correcting it, leaving little space or time to launch a new point.
In biblical terms, that's called "bearing false witness" with one of the big ten C's devoted just to it.
{to Sgt. Asshat}
Mr. Changeling,
I take it, Hawley was demoted or re-assigned when he was found ineffective in spewing the administration talking points, so they brought you in to provide "order" to this college forum?
You are birds of a feather with a propensity for erroneously rewriting the positions of others.
In debate terms, such tactics are not evenhanded. How Rovian clever that such misstatements of another's position force them into repeating the falsehood before correcting it, leaving little space or time to launch a new point.
In biblical terms, "bearing false witness" was one of the big ten C's.
The rudeness of your personal attacks against those you know very little is just another detour through mudslinging that you insist both parties take, so that issues will be forgotten in the heat of the fight.
Yes, indeed,
"by their fruits ye shall know them." [Matt 7:20]
Pound the war drums against Iran and Islam in general, you "Christian" soldier.
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." [Matt 7:21]
Hawley, the Christian soldier, tries to redeem himself.
I guess my calling you a Christian hypocrite pushed some buttons. Glad that your response proved me right.
Didn't your mama ever teach you that if you can't say something nice about someone, don't say it at all? Hey, it applies here as well.
Was it you who complained about taking the Lord's name in vain? Look at that list of nasty things you called "Jesus H. Christ"... in one posting alone!
[QUOTE id="a716f397-bbfa-4027-9896-6f155b792d08"]
- JHC is obviously a young child.
- Your arguments have been defeated yet you talk on.
- A bit of advice Jeremiah Wright , oh I mean JHC.
- Your analogies are just plain ignorant and vacuous.
- As you can see from even this thread any thinking person just laughs at your inane points.
- Your like the Liberals nut jobs ...
- I love pinheads like you...
- You don't give a damn about people , you just like trashing America.
- You hate America.
- You are not only a fool ... but a military idiot.
- Finally you hate America and take every opportunity to trash it.
- It is people like you that speak lies and distortions that are trying desperately to destroy it.
- Anything America does to you is evil and everything terrorists do is for freedom.
- You are such a fool.
- So you are so ignorant ...
- So you are pro EVIL.
- Your a pathetic human being , and thank GOD you are a tiny minority not able to do a damn thing about it except talk crap here.
- As any thinking person who reads this thread can see you are a flea on an elephants butt.
- You are a typical Liberal who likes to trash America while others die to keep you safe enough to spout your rhetoric against them.
- I would call you scum but that would be unfair to scum.
[/QUOTE]
Your posting might have had some valid points to consider if the above were purged. But because they weren't deleted and remained there to poke all readers in the eye, well, we'll never know.
Don't ascribe to me positions I've never stated. But because they came from your brain to your fingers to get posted here, we must assume that you're really talking about yourself, your positions, your words, your brain.
Why do you still live in America if you hate it?
Why do you still profess to be a Christian when you can't even live by its most basic tenants, like do unto others?
{to Craig Hawley}
In my last message, I highlighted your personal attacks on Jesus H. Christ from one posting alone. You wrote them to start a fight, not to make any points.
A person reading your insults -- even if not profanity -- cannot help but stumble on them; rarely can the eyes and mind travel to any text that might follow, particularly if the reader is your target. They so muddy your message, the conclusion becomes that you had no point to make.
For someone who sits on such a high horse, boasts of the wisdom gained in his 52 years (on June 8th), and is ever eager to instruct any and all "wet-behind-the-ears" college students of the errors in their ways, it becomes striking to see the lessons that you never learned.
Like diplomacy. Like revising your message to improve it before posting.
I mean, if you really had an important message about Islam (or anything), it ought to be strong enough to stand on its own without tacking on anything (negative) about anyone else. Those would be the very sentences and words that should hit the bit bucket in the amendments you make before posting.
I was at a loss in how to respond. Reviewing other threads was most instructive. I gained much insight from one of your previous debate partners who wrote "Seven Lessons from the Karl Rove School of Online Debate" that he claimed you practiced (see below).
Then more recently, another debater condensed your methods into a one-liner.
"Hype. Twist. Rewrite erroneously. Misstate & Bait. Repeat."
Let's not forget that somewhere in there was "Craig Hawley is a liar" who hammered home your true nature in the lies you spread. In his case, he was exposing your lies about your Vietnam service and that you tried to spread about your service in both Gulf Wars.
And that's when it dawned on me. John 8:43-45
"Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
Ye are of your father the devil... He ... abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not."
From your last two postings, here is a selection of your lying fruit. It bookends well with the other selection personal attacks.
[QUOTE id="a716f397-bbfa-4027-9896-6f155b792d08"]
- Nothing I said was inaccurate.
- I use my real name and take responsibility for my words and actions.
- Your arguments have been defeated
- In my posts here I have been cursed at and had people threaten to stab me in the head.
- Your like the Liberals nut jobs who speak of fighting nicer wars.
- [You] never wrote a post here when Saddam was in power.
- You don't give a damn about people , you just like trashing America.
- You hate America.
- You completely ignored the fact that no nuclear bombs would have been dropped on Japan if they had not attacked us first with treachery and against all norms of declared war.
- Well these poor people you accuse my country of killing and destroying , are trying to break into my country , even risking death to do so.
- This is still the best country on earth and it is people like you that speak lies and distortions that are trying desperately to destroy it.
- Anything America does to you is evil and everything terrorists do is for freedom.
- Islam is not about freedom and their terrorists are not freedom fighters.
- If we listened to you they would still live under Saddam and be butchered and raped.
- So you are pro EVIL.
- You call terrorists and butchers freedom fighters
[/QUOTE]
There is a reason why I included this gem as one of your lies:
"I use my real name and take responsibility for my words and actions."
If this was really so important to you, you would have taken on Registered Independent and "the Hyperlinked Changeling" for not posting under their real names. You turn a blind eye to their "nick" offenses, because after all, their superior writing don't have their barbs aimed at you and they are your echo chamber. You spare them and only use that as an argument against those ideologically opposed to you. Thou Hypocrite! As long as they keep pounding the war drums against Iran and Islam in general, that is right-wing a-okay with you, right? They are indeed birds of a feather with a propensity for erroneously rewriting the positions of others.
And look how they prove your point over and over about how internet anonymity makes their writing more aggressive! My, how they attack furiously and take extra effort to offend personally! Reasoned debate they'll have none of.
If your postings were to stay on topic, on message, and without personal attacks, this "real name" argument becomes a very scrawny argument at that. It shows the weakness of your intellect that you must keep repeating it in so many debates.
The "head stabbing threat" was included as one of your lies, because you clearly took a jesting comment out of context and hyped it.
+++++++++++++++++
Lesson #1: The first part of any response should be to personally attack the opponent.
Lesson #2: Put incorrect words into your opponent's mouth.
Lesson #3: Misconstrue your opponent's message purposely so as to build a straw man argument that is easier to knock down than your opponent's real argument.
Lesson #4: Take all of the weaknesses in your own position and project them onto your opponent, whether or not true. Later when the opponent picks up how the weakness is really yours, you can point to their unoriginality in throwing it back at you.
Lesson #5: Rather than addressing your opponent's points head-on, insult their intelligence instead and extrapolate your claim of their lack of intelligence as being the reason why their points fail.
Lesson #6: Purposely mislabel your points as "fact", so that it is harder for your opponent to question it.
Lesson #7: Repeat your lie over and over until it sinks in as a possible truth.
{Registered Independent writes:}
[QUOTE id="73d2829e-c651-4f80-849b-f11e241cfd7f"]
RESPONSE TO "LAME IMITATION OF CHRIST":
If the Islamofacists were simply limiting themselves to slapping the cheeks of people who disagreed with them, you might have a point.
But the biblical quotation doesn't require that one submit to anything more serious than cheek slapping, as you are trying to imply. It certainly doesn't require anything like laying down like a moron to be murdered by an enemy who has sworn to eliminate you. It simply means to be tolerant insofar as that is practical.
It stopped being practical on September 11th.
Like the man said, Christianity isn't a suicide pact. So your idiotic repetition of that same biblical phrase is completely inapplicable to the post-September 11th situation at hand.
Guess what, none of the people you are talking to here are Amish. You have obviously confused the completely pacifist Amish interpretation of the Bible as being applicable in general. Wrong again. The Amish are a very small group, mostly in Pennsylvania. Since they don't use electricity, they aren't on the internet. That's not who you're talking to here.
Perhaps your idea is that you would like it if Christians and Jews in general were actually stupid enough not to resist the Islamofacist onslaught. You would like to talk us into an idiotically self-destructive passivity.
(Apparently you don't know any of us very well.) Well good blanking luck with that plan. You're certainly going to need it.
Just who is it that you think rid the world of Hitler and won World War II, the atheists? All six of them?
P.S. Since you're so big on Biblical quotes,here is a little something to consider from
Matthew 10, verse 34:
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."The words are meant symbolically rather than literally of course, but even you might be able to catch the drift, if you really concentrate.
[/QUOTE]
{Craig Hawley wrote:}
[QUOTE id="a716f397-bbfa-4027-9896-6f155b792d08"]
JHC is obviously a young child. Your arguments have been defeated yet you talk on.
A bit of advice Jeremiah Wright , oh I mean JHC.
It is better to keep your foolish mouth closed and be thought a fool , then to open it and remove all doubt.
We killed approximately 300,000 in the first war with Iraq after the invaded Kuwait. Then is the first Bush also a mass murderer.
Your analogies are just plain ignorant and vacuous.
As you can see from even this thread any thinking person just laughs at your inane points.
Your like the Liberals nut jobs who speak of fighting nicer wars. WAR IS HELL! Ever heard that before. Hell is not a place where you are n ice to people.
The whole idea of war is to annihilate your enemy as quickly and brutally as possible to force them to quit , while saving as many of your own lives as possible.
In WWII we fought Hitler and in Iraq we fought another Hitler in Saddam.
I love pinheads like you who never wrote a post here when Saddam was in power. You don't give a damn about people , you just like trashing America.
You hate America.
You say history is written by the winners of wars not the losers. DUH!
Let's take a look at those Japanese you were so worried about getting killed. My Father was in WWII on an LCI Gunboat in the South Pacific.
He saw first hand the torture and brutality of the Japanese. They considered anyone that surrendered to be sub human and unworthy of anything but torture and death.
You completely ignored the fact that no nuclear bombs would have been dropped on Japan if they had not attacked us first with treachery and against all norms of declared war. They had no honor and deserved nothing but what they got.
You have no grasp of how they thought. They served an emperor a God. You do not quit serving a God because someone drops a bomb on an uninhabited island. So your foolish idea about dropping the bombs on an island somewhere would have done nothing except let them know ahead of time to go underground and try to avoid being incinerated.
You are not only a fool about their culture and their way of life , but a military idiot. My whole family has served our country's military from the first World War to now. My Step Son Just spent Memorial Day with us and is going back in a week to Afghanistan to finish his fifth tour of duty.
He has gone on countless humanitarian missions to give supplies to Afghan little girls who now go to school.
I'll dare you compare American POW camps to Japanese.
Finally you hate America and take every opportunity to trash it. Well these poor people you accuse my country of killing and destroying , are trying to break into my country , even risking death to do so.
So the world actions speak louder than their words.
This is still the best country on earth and it is people like you that speak lies and distortions that are trying desperately to destroy it.
You talk about Iraq. Well let's see what the Iraqi people say about us. When we liberated them they were out in the streets kissing us and waving American flags , while hitting Saddam's statue with the bottom of their shoes ( an insult in Iraq you fool ). Now they have elected a democratic government to represent them in numbers larger than our own election turnout. And they raised their ink stained fingers risking death showing they want freedom and democracy more than life.
Now that Government speaks for the Iraqi people that elected it , and it says it wants us to stay.
People like you would have left them in Saddam's torture and rape rooms while you sat on your fat butt sipping Starbucks and intellectualizing America as the Great Satan.
Anything America does to you is evil and everything terrorists do is for freedom. You are such a fool. Islam is not about freedom and their terrorists are not freedom fighters. How do you fight for freedom when if you win you will enslave your civilian population and treat your women like cattle. Ask people in a all Muslim country about freedom. They have none.
Islam lives by intimidation and be-headings and draconian rules and laws implemented by theocracies run by Mullah's. YOU CAN'T BE A FREEDOM FIGHTER AND FIGHT FOR SLAVERY OF YOUR PEOPLE YOU MORON.
If we listened to you they would still live under Saddam and be butchered and raped. So you are so ignorant you can't see that evil exist in this world and it takes only wimps like you to do nothing to let it win.
So you are pro EVIL. Your a wonderful person aren't you. Your Mom must be so proud of you supporting doing nothing to evil dictators and tyrants.
Your a pathetic human being , and thank GOD you are a tiny minority not able to do a damn thing about it except talk crap here.
As any thinking person who reads this thread can see you are a flea on an elephants butt.
You are a typical Liberal who likes to trash America while others die to keep you safe enough to spout your rhetoric against them.
I would call you scum but that would be unfair to scum. LOL!
[/QUOTE]
{Craig Hawley wrote:}
[QUOTE id="5431f059-0b3c-45de-a456-5070e0af8110"]
I do not use the nick Jesus H Christ so yes you are taking the Lords name in vain. Thanks for calling me a Christian Soldier. Proud to wear the moniker.
You quote the terrible things I said about you , and one is this....
- Your arguments have been defeated yet you talk on
Man if that is your definition of horrible you need a shrink.
You call terrorists and butchers freedom fighters but me saying your arguments have been defeated is over the line.
You need to get a thicker skin or get off this thread and out of life.
Maybe a job where you never have to deal with real people or reality.
In my posts here I have been cursed at and had people threaten to stab me in the head.
But you never heard me saying if you can't say something nice....
You really are an unbelievable buffoon.
You couldn't get top me on your best day little child. But it is funny thinking of you smirking and thinking so.
What my Mom did teach me was to be truthful and call a spade a spade no matter how politically incorrect It is.
So I didn't not use profanity or threaten you. I simply called you what you are.
Look up words like Moron in the dictionary and they apply to you.
Your arguments are Vacuous. Look it up.
Nothing I said was inaccurate. If you can't handle being called a MORON , I suggest you stop acting like one. LOL!
Finally I will list a definition so you won't have to strain that tiny brain to comprehend it.
The noun scum has 2 senses? (no senses from tagged texts)
1. trash, scum
(worthless people)I consider you beneath a worthless person , so I was very accurate in my last statement that said I would call you scum but that would be unfair to scum. LOL!
You use a nick Jesus H Christ that is Blasphemous to any Cristian and then quote bible verses for peace an tolerance.
Overview of adj blasphemous
The adj blasphemous has 2 senses? (first 1 from tagged texts)
1. (1) blasphemous, profane, sacrilegious
(grossly irreverent toward what is held to be sacred; "blasphemous rites of a witches' Sabbath"; "profane utterances against the Church"; "it is sacrilegious to enter with shoes on")You are beneath contempt and your quoting the bible while trashing the Lords Name makes you a walking OxyMORON.
So we all see from the posts here who the crazy pone is and it isn't me. I suggest immediate professional help.
I use my real name and take responsibility for my words and actions. You choose to denigrate my Lord and Savior and then try to use his words to justify terror.
You are insane by the definition of the word.
Overview of adj insane
The adj insane has 2 senses? (first 2 from tagged texts)
1. (11) insane
(afflicted with or characteristic of mental derangement; "was declared insane"; "insane laughter")2. (1) harebrained, insane, mad
(very foolish; "harebrained ideas"; "took insane risks behind the wheel"; "a completely mad scheme to build a bridge between two mountainsYour ideas are Vacuous , harebrained , and by definition make you insane.
Now I know according to you since you won't like my words you'll probably be curled up[ in the fetal position crying while sucking your thumb and mumbling , if he couldn't say anything nice....
Deal with it you big wimp. This Christian Soldier could care less about your whining.
[/QUOTE]
{Craig Hawley wrote:}
[QUOTE id="cfdfecc8-2036-4441-8e38-42f08f9f789f"]
First of all I am 50 not 52 you moron. I guess June 8th 1957 was just to hard for you to do the math.
Guess who this is guys it is Craig Hawley needs a blog trying to pose as yet another anonymous nick. This time he is denigrating Christians. Is there any group you have not trashed. LOL!
I guess since he lost the inane , self imposed contest ion the other thread he decided to try again here.
Notice how he ignores the plethora of others that have decimated him and his argument along with me.
You don't get it yet do you , you blasphemous pinhead. You are outgunned in this thread and look like a total fool.
But it was nice of you to expose yourself as the same troll from the last thread. So much for your honor and staying with one name.
Reg Indy was right and so was I. You are one little computer nerd with no life hiding behind many anonymous nicks.
You are probably alone , pounding down energy drinks and beating that one hair on your chest as you rant against GOD.
You are just another American hating brainwashed , terrorist loving , Liberal apologist.
You represent all that is wrong with America.
Now who got to who TROLL.
Hey just because I am kicking your butt here along with many others , you think it is because of my personal attacks. First of all you deserve every personal attack directed at you because I find you personally offensive.
If you believe what you say then you are personally , reprehensible and morally bankrupt.
So like I said Mary , cowboy up , grow a set and welcome to the real world.
No one feels sorry for you. Boo Hoo Craig called me a moron every one. Forget the fact that I am one and come to my defense because Craigy hurt my feelings. God you are PRICELESS.
You have the stones to denigrate GOD , but not to survive my personal attacks. What an idiot.
As far as your numbered list at the end , it seems to me that you are pointing out my very effective debating tactics.
Of course it never occurred to you that your getting your derriere kicked because you are such an offensive piece of trash. Denigrating our troops and God and most of humanity , while kissing the butchers and Terrorists butt's as some kind of misunderstood freedom fighters.
You are beneath contempt and not worthy of consideration of any kind. You deserve and will get condemnation and personal attacks until you either change your tune or leave.
DEAL WITH IT!!!!!
You accuse me of using Karl Rove tactics. Yet it was the left who threw their best and brightest at Rove and he kicked your sorry butt's twice and made you look like fools.
So he destroys you and you think it is an insult to say I use his tactics. Man you really are an idiot.
I guess this is how you win debates and make points. You trash the winners and embrace the losers.
I guess that makes you the king of all losers.
That was way to easy. Thanks for being you and being such an inane and inept opponent.
I and the others here have destroyed every argument you have used and yet you continue to make a fool of your self.
It is amusing to the rest of us though.
[/QUOTE]
{to Registered Independent}
The lawyer in Registered Independent spoke and revealed more malpractice.
The first sticking point is the fake term "Islamofacists". It is made up. It has no basis in reality, except in the right-wing talking points and their echo chambers. There are no such people who claim such status, believe such, or act thusly.
The second sticking point -- and a very ironic one at that -- is her legal interpretation of Matt 5:38-41. She claimed:
"The biblical quotation doesn't require that one submit to anything more serious than cheek slapping."
In fact, the passage goes beyond a cheek slapping and dives into legal consequences if she were to read it.
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain."
[Matt 5:38-41]
In fact, legal ramifications is an important aspect of another piece of Jesus’ advice in Matt 5:25 that could even be applied to US foreign policy and 9/11:
"Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison."
She goes on to quote Matt 10:34, but again didn't read far enough.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."
What is important here is Matt 10:36 about where a man's foes shall be: OF HIS OWN HOUSEHOLD.
And is this not rather prophetic?
I mean, the news of the day is what Scott McClellan had to say about President Bush and the illegal outing of a covert CIA agent, which by itself is grounds for impeachment. McClellan (among others) of Bush's household rats him out. Bush of America's household rats out a CIA agent.
Bringing 9/11 into this, hey, a significant portion of the US population have valid reason to doubt the official government version of 9/11 to the point of claiming that 9/11 of an inside job (OF OUR HOUSEHOLD).
[QUOTE id="73d2829e-c651-4f80-849b-f11e241cfd7f"]
If the Islamofacists were simply limiting themselves to slapping the cheeks of people who disagreed with them, you might have a point.
But the biblical quotation doesn't require that one submit to anything more serious than cheek slapping, as you are trying to imply. It certainly doesn't require anything like laying down like a moron to be murdered by an enemy who has sworn to eliminate you. It simply means to be tolerant insofar as that is practical.
It stopped being practical on September 11th.
...
P.S. Since you're so big on Biblical quotes, here is a little something to consider from
Matthew 10, verse 34:
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
The words are meant symbolically rather than literally of course, but even you might be able to catch the drift, if you really concentrate.
[/QUOTE]
Matt 26:52
"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."
{to Sgt. Asshat}
A pity that sheepdogs like you aren't house broken or even paper trained.
I and the other lambkins congratulate you on passing obedience school. Now whenever your master commands, you obey. Fetch. Bark. Sit. Rollover. Heel. Attack that sheep! Attack! Attack! Good boy.
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman omitted from "On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs" a very important element of the pasture: wolves in sheep's clothing and its modern day cousin, wolves in sheepdog's clothing.
I suppose he did that on purpose as a distraction and to propogate portions of the Flight 93 myth of 9/11. Who was the sheepdog that shot down that airliner?
Lesson #2 from the Karl Rove School of Online Debate: Put incorrect words into your opponent's mouth.
You wrote:
"You can't call American soldiers "mass murderers" and then expect folks to accept that slander."
I didn't call them that; you said I did (and Hawley said I did). You've misrepresented my position.
Ergo, there was no substance of the criticism to debate.
{to Craig Hawley}
Your website said you were 51. Ergo, on June 8th, you'd be 52. Blame it on facebooks or myspace for being off by a year.
Congratulations! You've guessed who I am! As for my honor in staying with one username, those gentleman rules apply to a thread (and really only one thread), not necessarily across threads. Nice try at a spin. (And why no condemnation of sockpuppet?)
As for the "plethora of others who have decimated me", who exactly are you talking about?
There is only you, Registered Independent, and Sockpuppet: three (3).
If you can't see that, you haven't been paying attention. Sockpuppet is a very good writer, likes to use lots of different usernames, tends to hyperlink them to articles, and likes to expose himself by using the word "sockpuppet" in his postings usually as an insult to others. Registered Independent speaks for herself.
(And why no condemnation of Registered Independent and Sockpuppet for not using their real names?)
As for decimating me? Another of your lies that you wish were true.
In order for you to do that, you'd have to stay on topic and not detour into the realm of personal denigration. The only time that has been within your power is when your postings were less than, say, three sentences or dealt with unimportant things like what you were toking on and stroking on, be it a wanna-be rock band or otherwise.
If your true purpose was to become a good prize fighter, you'd have to learn to play by the rules of the boxing ring. You can lose a fight by hitting below the belt (repeatedly) and for other ring violations.
If you really want to decimate me in an online debate over something substantial -- like the war drums against the hyped Iranian and Islamic "threat" --, you should heed the words about EDITING OUT irrelevant (unfounded, and unproven) personal attacks.
As for the Karl Rove School of Debate, you again aren't cluing in. When you stoop to such tactics and they get exposed, they blow up in your face, expose you as a liar, and discredit any valid points you might have made through guilt-by-association from being in the same posting/thread.
Why should you care about this?
Didn't you say you were invited to come and speak at CSU? Who was it that invited you? Was it some "high" student saying, "come on, Dude! You should come speak to us lesser mortals... And because I'm, uhh, suffering from cancer, could you bring some of your primo med's?" Or was it an official student group with a budget to pay you some or all of your expenses? Do they have a venue, a date?
And being invited doesn't mean you'll come.
And if you come, it doesn't mean you'll deliver.
And if you find yourself talking to an audience large or small, you run the risk of your below-the-belt debate tactics being exposed and having the audience judge your talk, your points, and you accordingly.
Dishonest debate tactics equates to dishonesty of the whole position.
[QUOTE id="cfdfecc8-2036-4441-8e38-42f08f9f789f"]
First of all I am 50 not 52 you moron. I guess June 8th 1957 was just to hard for you to do the math.
Guess who this is guys it is Craig Hawley needs a blog trying to pose as yet another anonymous nick. This time he is denigrating Christians. Is there any group you have not trashed. LOL!
...
Notice how he ignores the plethora of others that have decimated him and his argument along with me.
...
So much for your honor and staying with one name.
...
As far as your numbered list at the end , it seems to me that you are pointing out my very effective debating tactics.
[/QUOTE]
Speaking of dishonesty, to say that I denigrate Christians is the height of dishonesty. I only denigrate wanna-be Christians like you who are embarrassed to be reminded of the demands of the calling they claim to be their own and don't have the fortitude to stand by true Christian tenants. But Jesus warned us about followers like you, now didn't he?
If you think that a username of "Jesus H. Christ" is blasphemous, then you are pronouncing it wrong. Try something more Spanish, like: "Hey-sus Hecho Punto Kryst".
And your "mass murderers" comment that you keep repeating and trying to ascribe to me is another strawman argument. I never said it; it was you who said I did. Just another lie from Craig Hawley.
{to Sgt. Asshat}
Sockpuppet,
We know you know how to google. You're just being too lazy to look up Iraqi casualty figures. Your idealogy seeps through with your demands that I produce the mass graves.
------------
March 2003 to June 2006: Iraqi Health Ministry survey. 151,000 violent deaths out of 400,000 excess deaths due to the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Health_Ministry_casualty_survey
March 2003 to June 2006: Lancet survey. 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_Iraq_War_casualties
March 2003 to August 2007: Opinion Research Business survey. 1,033,000 violent deaths as a result of the conflict.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq_War_casualties
------------
If the CSU football team loses a game, we say "the team lost." Of course, if they won, we say "CSU won" or even "we (Colorado) won." In reality, it is the team's doing either way, and the general CSU student population had little to do with it (other than paying their student fees.)
Your strawman arguments about mass murderers are no different. You try to hit too much with your broad brush. Hitler and other named leaders were labeled mass murderers. And those COMPLICIT in the crimes, like the camp operators, were also labeled as such. But do we label all Nazi soldiers or all Nazi party members mass murderers? No. Nazi party membership was required for every German citizen to do anything important; the entire military and the entire nation was not COMPLICIT in the crimes.
I called Truman a "mass murderer", but only you can misconstrue it to slander all men and women in uniform from the day.
And how can you say that we "justly" identify so-and-so, yet I "unjustly" identify Truman? What is your thin criteria between just and unjust? What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Do some thinking and apply the same standards.
If I label Bush and Cheney as "mass murderers," it does not slander any military personnel who serve honorably in Iraq and Afghanistan EXCEPT those COMPLICIT in the crimes. And they know who they are. They suffer for it. I guess you haven't been following Winter Soldiers, PTSD, and the high suicide rate of war veterans.
"Eighteen American war veterans kill themselves every day. One thousand former soldiers receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs attempt suicide every month. More veterans are committing suicide than are dying in combat overseas."
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5219
So, stop trying to pin your misguided ascertions on me about who is a mass murderer and extrapolating that (for your political ends) to the entire military.
{to Sgt. Asshat}
Sockpuppet,
Who initiated the ad hominem attacks against American military personnel?
You. Hawley.
Yep, go look above for my response to your strawman arguments.
The gist of it is:
If I label Bush and Cheney as "mass murderers," it does not slander any military personnel who serve honorably in Iraq and Afghanistan EXCEPT those COMPLICIT in the crimes. And they know who they are. They suffer for it. I guess you haven't been following Winter Soldiers, PTSD, and the high suicide rate of war veterans.
"Eighteen American war veterans kill themselves every day. One thousand former soldiers receiving care from the Department of Veterans Affairs attempt suicide every month. More veterans are committing suicide than are dying in combat overseas."
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5219
So, stop trying to pin your misguided assertions on me about who is a mass murderer and extrapolating that (for your political ends) to the entire military.
{to Craig Hawley}
Craig wrote:
Find one thread where I said I was asked to speak on campus.
Your wish is my command:
Craig Hawley
posted 5/22/08 @ 12:58 PM MST
I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO SPEAK ON CAMPUS BY THE RAMREPUBLIC, AND ONE COULD ARGUE THE COLLEGIAN ( AS THEY PUBLISHED MY LETTER WHEN I PRAISED THEM FOR AN ARTICLE OTHERS WERE TRASHING THEM FOR ).
Craig Hawley
posted 5/22/08 @ 1:48 PM MST
I was also curious since you are the smartest person on campus at CSU , why have we not heard anyone the the Collegian or RamRepublik ask to hear your words.
Craig Hawley
posted 5/22/08 @ 8:53 AM MST
We all know that one of us has been asked by CSU students to write two articles for the RamRepublic.
+++++++++
[QUOTE id="12c04324-6d54-417b-8ed5-737aa308e200"]
Find one thread where I said I was asked to speak on campus.
...
Also I notice that if even if I believe you about this thread that still makes it three against one.
...
See you just made our point. It was you and only you all along on the other thread trying desperately to lie and say you were just using the Craig Hawley needs a blog nick when all one has to do is read the other nicks siding with you and see they are written by the same person.
...
Yea we win three on one.
[/QUOTE]
Based on the tenor of your challenge to find one thread where you said you were asked to speak on campus, I gather that it was a lie, too.
Where are your antogonists from the other thread? Who knows. I guess you don't recognize that this is a different day and a different thread.
Nice try, Craig, but even the changeling Sockpuppet would see on the other thread that you had several different antogonists. Just because I changed usernames in this thread means nothing. Hey, I changed it in the other thread as well (at your request.) Big whoop.
If I had the desire (and ability) to pose as multiple people as you erroneously claim I did in the other thread (and that I denied multiple times), why oh why wouldn't I pull the same trick here and really cream you? Why would I admit who I was, just like I did before?
Because, as I stated before, such multiple-identity games are too hard to play. I mean, even Sockpuppet doesn't pull it off, although I don't think he's really trying to pull it off.
And guess what? You still don't win. So, all of two people have come out in favor of Hawley.
As for those against, we still have:
{to Registered Independent}
Nice try.
Man, do the Seven Lessons from the Karl Rove School of Online Debate from Maxwell Bridges himself ever apply to you.
Didn't he accuse you of that?
Were I Maxwell, I'd certainly hold up your posting as a prime example.
Personally attack the opponent? Check for #1.
Put incorrect words into your opponent's mouth? Check for #2.
Misconstrue your opponent's message purposely? Check for #3.
Insult your opponent's intelligence rather than addressing their points head-on? Check for #5.
That'll be a check for #4 -- take all of the weaknesses in your own position and project them onto your opponent -- if Registered Independent hangs out in her mom's basement in Star Wars Underoos.
Where is Maxwell, anyway? I could've used his support. It's three of you blinders-on, kool-aid drinking, neo-con-men against me.
Mr. Hawley,
It certainly took your... cough, ... stellar IQ a long time to figure that one out. Without your lawyer, Registered Independent, you probably never would have gotten it. I certainly gave you many, many hints.
And what are you trying to nail me for?
Pulling a Mark Twain to buffer my personhood from unwanted public attention when vocalizing... cough, ... an "unpopular" (by your standards) view.
That's not lying. It is simply not revealing all that I know.
Ask your lawyer. Have her parse my words. I may have purposely lead you on with some slight misdirection, but I did not lie.
On top of that, what are we talking about here? Two different threads. On the underwear thread, two aliases were employed only because you requested the second one (damn close to the first one). On this thread, a third alias was used. It just took you awhile to figure it out. (So much for your tested high IQ.)
While the underwear thread was going on, you saw me readily admit to my two aliases there. On this thread, you saw me also readily admit to my alias here being the same as those two there. And now you see another admission.
If I was really as deceitful and dishonest as you claim, why admit to anything (a Bush hallmark)? Why didn't I really skew the poster tallies on the underwear thread like sockpuppet does here? Why didn't the aliases jump threads or work in tandem? Why didn't the aliases multiply and flame you but good?
You continue to make false accusations about me writing under other many different aliases on the underwear thread. I denied it and continue to deny it; I admitted my alias usage. I even laughed in your face as you boasted contacting the authorities, because I knew my hands were clean, that there were indeed more participants than you guessed, that the hyped offense (which wasn't) wasn't mine, and that you exposed your drug dealing hands as being not so clean in the eyes of those same federal authorities.
If you are so concerned about aliases, why haven't you raked sockpuppet over the coals for being such a changeling? (Why don't you rake your lawyer over the coals for not stating who she is and for not being [wo]man enough to own up with her real name to what she writes like you do for anyone even millimeters to the left of you?) FTR, I'm not asking them to change or do anything different in their online alias usage. I'm saying you have a double-standard and am thusly proving you (yet again) a hypocrite, Hawley.
Still, you want some sort of an apology from me because you think I lied.
Tell you what. I have absolutely no problems giving you any number of apologies for what you perceive to be a lie. But with these conditions:
1) You'll have to apologize for all of the short-listed blatant lies you've been caught in. Let's see. The short list of blatant lies you've been caught in include:
2) You'll have to apologize to everyone on each and every thread where you've insulted Democrats and anyone even millimeters to the left of you. You see, if you consider my three little aliases act -- minor compared to sockpuppet -- to be such a grave lie, then maybe you've reached a point where you can recognize all of the lies of the Bush Administration that you have been glossing over, ignoring, and making excuses for.
Hey, I didn't lie 935 times in official settings and purposely deceive our nation into the Iraqi war. That is a pretty grave and serious offense. And how about what Scott McClellan is revealing today? We now have his Christian contrition admission showing President Bush in the know about the planned illegal outing of a covert CIA agent because her husband spoke up about the war, and in doing so, he exposed the Bush Administration in yet another lie about its bogus justification for the war, namely nuclear WMDs. In this case, we have a crime and a cover-up together here. Wasn't it Bush I who said that outing a CIA operative is treasonous?
Do you not yet see a pattern of Bush Administration lying that absolutely must force the question, "what else were they lying about?" All aspects of their presence in the White House must be re-evaluated for truth, including the story they told us about 9/11.
... And now we've hit upon my favorite subject, Mr. Hawley, ain't that right?
Speaking of which, how are you coming along with your assignment: debunking the debunking 9/11 debunking?
Oh, and thank you Registered Independent for reminding our loyal readers about the packages I sent to Mr. Hawley from Amazon and www.911tv.org, but only after first having his expressed permission to do so. ("Hype. Twist. Rewrite erroneously. Misstate & Bait. Repeat." Eh, Reg Indy?) And what was the gift I purchased and gave you, Mr. Hawley? I would list them here, but I don't have to, because they are already public knowledge, of public record, and even in the databases of this forum.
So, Reg Indy calls me "an industrial-strength conspiracy theorist." Is that supposed to be a slur? Is that supposed to discredit me or all that I have written is this forum under other aliases on other topics with what you would call a "sloppy ... obvious paper trail all over the place"? It took you so long to connect the dots (and writing style) of "feed my sheep" to "Jesus H. Christ," it is no wonder you as a lawyer have never connected the dots, researched, and asked the pertinent questions that I, and many other well educated and respected 9/11 truth seekers, bring up. Are you a lawyer, a judge, or citizen member of the jury? You state your up-front prejudices, refuse to even consider the evidence, and dismiss it out of hand... with an attempt at a slur, no less? Indeed, who do I not want as a lawyer representing me and who is being a troll?
Sheepdog sockpuppet doesn't like the spotlight shining on his alias-changing ways, because it just might reveal a wolf in sheepdog's clothing.
And to bring us full circle to this thread about Islam and Iran. If the proof is staring you in the face about deception in the Iraqi war, a US government history of deceptions, and even in 9/11 (if you would merely scratch the surface with a little research like Saturday between 4-6 a.m. on Comcast local access cable channel 22), then maybe you should revisit for truth the propaganda you're been eating and spewing about the holy religious war you three trolls are inciting, as per (Mc)Bush Administration talking points.
Finally, Hawley does a lot of erroneous predictions as if he were wishing his conclusions into being and becoming the reality by repeating them, repeating them, and repeating them in the hopes that such manure will help talking-point seeds germinate, take root, and grow. His off-hand dismissal of Ron Paul is a fine example. Whereas it may be true that Dr. Paul will never be president, the movement he has started is the only thing that could potentially save the Republican Party (and some would even say America), making it very important. Yet, observe the open hostilities at various state Republican conventions, to the extent that party leaders break their own rules via illegal measures to change the rules in their favor (a Bush hallmark) and exclude Paul delegates. Change is hard, and people resist.
Pay attention, people. And please. Feed my sheep.
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 2: Registered 420 Jimmy
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 3: Semaphore for Truth
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 4: 9/11 Christian Science Treatment
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 5: Mind Your P's & Q's
» Hey-Suess Chronicles Volume 6: Q Dots
Choice Quotations from the Hee-Haw-ley Himself showing his God-given character & charm:
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* 6
* 7
* 8
* 9
* 10
* 11
* 12
* 13
* 14
* 15
* 16
* 17
* 18
* 19
* 20
* 21
* 22
* 23
* 24
* 25
* 26
* 27
* 28
* 29
* 30
* 31
* 32
* 33
* 34
* 35
* 36
* 37
* 38
* 39
* 40
* 41
* 42
* 43
* 44
* 45
* 46
* 47
* 48
* 49
* 50
* 51
* 52
* 53
* 54
* 55
* 56
* 57
* 58
* 59
* 60
* 61
* 62
* 63
* 64
* 65
* 66
* 67
* 68
* 69
* 70
* 71
* 72
* 73
* 74
* 75
* 76
* 77
* 78
* 79
* 80
* 81
* 82
* 83
* 84
* 85
* 86
* 87
* 88
* 89
* 90
* 91
* 92
* 93
* 94
* 95
* 96
* 97
* 98
* 99
* 100
* 101
* 102
* 103
* 104
* 105
* 106
* 107
* 108
* 109
* 110
* 111
* 112
* 113
* 114
* 115
* 116
* 117
* 118
* 119
* 120
* 121
* 122
* 123
* 124
* 125
* 126
* 127
* 128
* 129
* 130
* 131
* 132
* 133
* 134
* 135
* 136
* 137
* 138
* 139
* 140
* 141
* 142
* 143
* 144
* 145
* 146
* 147
* 148
* 149
* 150
* 151
* 152
* 153
* 154
* 155
* 156
* 157
* 158
* 159
* 160
* 161
* 162
* 163
* 164
* 165
* 166
* 167
* 168
* 169
* 170
* 171
* 172
* 173
* 174
* 175
* 176
* 177
* 178
* 179
* 180
* 181
* 182
* 183
* 184
* 185
* 186
* 187
* 188
* 189
* 190
* 191
* 192
* 193
* 194
* 195
* 196
* 197
* 198
Choice Quotations from Hee-Haw-ley's Echo Chamber, Registered Independent:
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* 6
* 7
* 8
* 9
* 10
* 11
* 12
* 13
* 14
* 15
* 16
* 17
* 18
* 19
* 20
* 21
* 22
* 23
* 24
* 25
* 26
* 27
* 28
* 29
* 30
* 31
* 32
* 33
* 34
* 35
* 36
* 37
* 38
* 39
* 40
* 41
* 42
* 43
* 44
* 45
* 46
* 47
* 48
* 49
* 50
* 51
Choice Quotations from Hee-Haw-ley's Superior Officer, Sgt. Asshat:
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* 6
* 7
* 8
* 9
* 10
* 11
* 12
* 13
Quotations from Jesus H. Christ:
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* 6
* 7
* 8
* 9
* 10
* 11
* 12
* 13
* 14
* 15
* 16
* 17
* 18
* 19
* 20
* 21
* 22
* 23
* 24
Quotations from others:
* 1
* 2
* 3
* 4
* 5
* 6
* 7
* 8
* 9
* 10
* 11
* 12
* 13
* 14
* 15
* 16
* 17
* 18
* 19
* 20
* 21