Chickendoves

"Carrying a placard with a profane slogan down the centre-line of a downtown street in rush hour while chanting "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!" doesn't count in my book. How many guns does that little exercise in moral masturbation take out of the hands of the misogynistic thugs who kill little girls for the crime of becoming literate?""

Quote of the month right there.

What do you expect- from cheese-eating surrender monkeys?

Kate I have a request and I don't know if this is something you can help out with, or not.

The Yanks that support both the troops and the mission are putting their money where their mouths are and I feel we should do the same for our guys in the sand box of Afghanistan.

Kim Du Toit is soliciting donations to purchase supplies that the guys up front need:

http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/tos/10687/

Given the exposure and large readership you have...would it be possible for you to use your blog to do the same for our guys?

I will contribute to it if I know that somebody with your integrity and honesty is handling it. Nothing says 'F*** You' to a howling leftard better than a well equipped military.

Are you kidding? These chickendoves are some of the bravest people in the world - each the equivalent of Mandela or that Tiannamen fellow in front of the tank.

Can you imagine the risk they face standing up to Bush-Chimp McHitlerburton?! Just look at what happened to the Dixie Chix, or to Michael Moore. These peaceniks and their "soft power", they are the real heroes.

I always find it interesting when peaceniks mention Mandela. Mandela was a proponant of armed conflict. And the reason he was in jail for so long was that he REFUSED to renounce violence as a means to end aparheid.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes armed conflict is right (like overthrowing apartheid or say the Taliban). But I just find it ridiculously hypocritical of peaceniks to hold Mandela up as an example of peace.

Thanks for the post, Kate. It's perfect, perfect; he says it all.

I'll give your idea some consideration in a couple of weeks, Jim - when my road trips are over for a little while. Or maybe it's a better job for the Torch?

yo, idiot...the last I heard, the dixie chix and fat boy moore were all multi, multi millionaires....how in the f#$% is that heroic? they are pure genius capitalists....of all the leftard morons out there, the only ones I have any respect for are the ones who still live life the way they did in the 60's....these pseudo wannabe leftoids, who jump into
suv's and go home to 4000 sq ft homes can kiss my a$$

Robert,

hahahahahahahahaha, don't get excited, the jokes on you!

The old hippy 'cop-out sickness' lives on.

'make love, not war' --- Who handed them their free country to protest in ??

'down with capitalism' ---- Who's car is that they're hitch-hicking in ??

Iggy - I was kidding.

But in all seriousness, these guys aren't a joke, these peaceniks are fully in the enemy camp: http://www.straight.com/article-87427/peace-and-politics-make-for-strange-fellow-travellers

I apologize then Robert. I thought you were that OTHER person of the same first name. It is a bit difficult not really knowing anyone here and with the limitations of this media...well... you get my point.

Oh yeah. I get it, making comments on a blog - making fun of people out in public getting some real notice, that is serious work that gets results.

You are very brave on this site here today... and smart! At least you won't get run over

i want some of that oil from afganistan

jmorrison:

You can buy some of that oil at just about any store. :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppyseed_oil

That big fat pig Moore an the Dixie Douche bags should all be in Gitmo. They are our enemies plain and simple. I cold name others, but I am sure you know who many of them are. Many of them appear in Hollywood movies.

@mikmik:

The people being made fun of haven't done all that much. Their support system is legendary, and there are many mother hens ready to fly into a public fury if any of those protestors gets a suspicious hangnail.

There's an odd similarity between people of this ilk and people who have inherited large sums of money. Just as the heir gets the benefit of the value created by a man/woman whose contributions cannot all be enjoyed in his/her own lifetime, so it is that the 'limousine left' crew enjoys collateral benefits from people whose suffering cannot be completely ameliorated in their own lifetimes.

If anyone has ever wondered why the typical conservative believes in keeping his/her mouth clamped shut when being victimized, with the exception of calling the cops, it's not because of any inherent callousness (or worse.) It's actually a refusal to let people he/she dislikes and disidentifies with - the professional complainers - to reap benefits from his/her suffering.

Heard the idiot Josh on Adler today,defending the fact that this group is advocating treason. Usually I despise Adler,but he ripped,or rather,let Josh, rip himself a new one. It was hilarious. This Josh kook thinks the Conservatives send our troops to Afghanistan. Oh well. Leftards do tend to have no mental capabilities, just emotions.

If these people are so interested in "peace", why don't they join the U.S. Peace Corps, and they can go about the world helping the less fortunate to live better.

Sitting on fatcat status in Canada, and bitching about everything our countries (U.S. & Canada) stand for, doesn't quite cut it.

And if that is not to their taste, I believe Cuba still welcomes volunteers to cut sugar cane in the fields. I remember a few folks recruiting for this experience back in the 60's, don't know how it turned out.

I still have a chuckle from time to time recalling Saddam's very constructive and thoughtful ideas on how to optimize the volunatry human shields from the West. That is: positioning them in front of high value military targets.

They were not amused!

FREE TIBET!!!!!

And you fighting keyboarders even less.

In a way, it's a pity that you didn't put your real name to that; others might be interested in seeing you held to it. At any rate, "you don't speak for me."

With regard to your announced quest to make the people here suffer and/or suffer some more by going to the "Van Doos," better account for the risk that they won't be taking your word for it.

"How many guns does that little exercise in moral masturbation take out of the hands of the misogynistic thugs who kill little girls for the crime of becoming literate?"

The Talibans violent excesses certainly didn't stop the US from sending them millions of dollars for supposed humanitarian reasons. How many guns did the Taliban buy with that money? And now the neo-cons are trying to play up the human rights angle as justification for this war. What hypocrisy!

Of course more and more people are going to be protesting this war (and the war in Iraq). It has become increasingly obvious that this war is going to end in failure. Nothing will prevent that, short of sending in 10 times the troops that are there already. But since that isn't going to happen, people should get used to seeing images like this in the future:

3w.youtube.com/watch?v=VKJ49--2kiA

@Iberia: That "hypocrisy," as you call it, has been a standard part of American foreign policy ever since (at least) the days of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Under his Administration, the Greek fascist regime got support in order to keep Greece opposing the Axis. That well-known line by one of the Kennedys, "He may be an SOB, but he's our SOB," was first said by President Roosevelt.

Gee Iberia "this war is going to end in failure"...

Give us some credentials that will make us believe that piece of horseshit.

Thought so... you're just another clueless asshat. Tell you what - talk to one of the troops on the ground in A'stan and find out what the reality is. Not the lies peddled by the media - yes lies - about 10% of the journalists out there have a modicum of integrity.

Bottom line, if you've not served out there, you know squat. Just shut the f**k up.

Daniel M. Ryan: The fellow is "lberia" not "Iberia". Draw your own conclusions, if you have the good grace to do so. We're dealing with a truly evil SOB here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrenty_Beria

Moreover Greece stayed out of the Axis, fought the Italians after Musso invaded Greece in 1940, kicked the crap out of the Eyeties, and was only defeated when the Germans invaded in 1941 (defeating the Commonwealth forces already there to help at the same time).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Greece_during_World_War_II

In 1944 Churchill did use British military force against the Greek Communists. Greece was then accepted as a British sphere on influence, by Stalin amongst others. One longs for the good old days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Civil_War#The_Dekemvriana

And the day in which you might know anything.

Mark
Ottawa

I mistakenly said Daniel M. Ryan maintained Greece joined the Axis. Indeed it did not, but mainly as a result of UK and not US action.

Roosevelt himself was long dead before the US took an active role in Greek matters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truman_Doctrine

Mark
Ottawa

oh goody...it seems our "military" experts are offering opinions on whether our troops will succeed or not....some advice leftards....give our troops 100% support, and the mission cannot fail...but when you subscribe to the jack layton school of treason, then the mission starts to fall apart...I can guarantee that the taliban monitors all Canadian media(including the blogs)and the leftard whining only bolsters their spirits......MOONBAT IDIOTS!

"We're waging a war that will kill hundreds of thousands of people - mostly innocent civilians. We're doing this to spread democracy. But anyone who exercises their democratic right to disagree with us is a moral masturbator who kills little girls."

OK you won me over with your intellectual and high-toned defense of your trillion-dollar, endless war against Islamic nutters.

BTW is anyone up to date on what the US-funded terrorists - ERR irregular freedom soldiers - are up to in Iran? Has anyone out there - other than Rudy Giuliani - ever heard of blowback before?

@Mark:

Yes, Italy tried invading Greece after Ioannis Metaxis (himself a Fascist dictator) told Mussolini to stick it, back in 1940. Nazi Germany had to finish the job in 1941, which turned out to be a Pyrrhic victory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece#Greece_during_World_War_II_.281940-1944.29

You should remember, though, that Roosevelt, as President, was an ally of the U.K. as of 1940 and the United States was officially an ally as of the end of 1941. In fact, the United Nations itself, which began as the United Nations Organization, began as an attempt to solidify the Allies' alliance, though under humanitarian grounds.

I suppose I should have made clear that I was not talking about an official policy as specified by treaty, but U.S. executive-branch action right before and during World War 2.

At present, I'm digging up the reference book from which I read that snippet - if I recalled correctly. If you're interested, though, President Roosevelt did try to secure a guarantee from both Hitler and Mussolini against invasion of 31 countries, including Greece, as far back as mid-April, 1939. (Champion of Freedom by Conrad M. Black, pp. 515-16.)

[Incidentally: the same hold-yer-nose policy was used with regard to Yugoslavia during the Cold War.]

A followup comment, which may explain why United States foreign policy is, at times, easy to castigate as "hypocritical":

As far as I can tell, there's a standard operating procedure in Foggy Bottom which goes something like this: "Any little devil that tells the Big Devil to stick it, should be made our ally but not (necessarily) our friend." It's para-idealistic, in the sense that America will extend a hand to the "junkyard underdog" to make geopolitical life harder for the big junkyard dog.

I'm speculating here, but such a policy is consistent with the U.S. government's alliance-seeking causing it huge embarrassment, if not real trouble, down the road. This blowback has occurred with Afghanistan.

(Pinochet's Chile was somewhat of a special case, prompted by Allende's extra-parliamentary action just before the Pinochet-led coup hoofed him out. Hugo Chavez has gotten the right to make decrees through legislative approval, which suggests that the U.S. government will not intervene in Venezuelan politics. It has too much of a stake in "democracy" to do so.)

Caveman:

Have you served over there? Are you perhaps there right now, sitting in a cave, using your super powers to read the minds of the Taliban?

When an unbiased organization like the International Committee of the Red Cross says that things are getting worse; and when even Harper's International Assessment Staff of the Privy Council Office gives warnings about the situation in Afghanistan to the government, I would bet that their opinion is a lot more informed than yours.

3w.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070614.wafghanreport14/BNStory/Afghanistan/home

3w.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/afghanistan-news-120607

kingstonlad:

"give our troops 100% support, and the mission cannot fail"

Yeah, that philosophy sure worked for the Germans at Stalingrad.

Are these the same bunch of idiots who oppse drill in the ANWR becuase a polarbear might get hurt? FEED THEM TO THE POLARBEARS and the difference between CHICKENS and DOVES is that DOVES mkae a nice cooing sound and CHICKENS make loud annoying sound

-about 10% of the journalists out there have a modicum of integrity.

-Give us some credentials that will make us believe that piece of horseshit, caveman.

Iberia's right, winter's coming.

Boy, the civilian asshats posting here are funny.... Using the Privy Council Office or the ICRC as some sort of reference when it comes to fighting a war. You guys are friggin' clueless. Believing the bullshit of the MSM again, eh. That's the problem with most Canadians - not enough brains to think properly. It's the reason we got successive Liberal governments even though we knew they were corrupt.

"That's the problem with most Canadians - not enough brains to think properly."

Unlike you, anon, eh? You KNOW everything, that's why facts don't get in the way of your analysis.

Iberia is a loser. His is a perpetually losing political ideoology. His life path is more than likely marked from failure to failure. He applies this pathological mindset to his world.

If he ever bets on a sports match, he more than likely bets on who is going to lose, rather than win.

This is quite obvious from reading his posts.

Nice attempt at analysis, Irwin. You are too angry and delusional to make a good psychologist, amateur or otherwise.

The problem with people like you(right wingers, but also left wingers) who subscribe to an ideology is that they only see things their way. Reality and facts tend to be very inconvenient.

Daniel M. Ryan:

The words of Roosevelt in 1939:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/7-2-188/188-12.html

"Are you willing to give assurance that your armed forces will not attack
or invade the territory or possessions of the following independent nations: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Norway, Denmark,
The Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain and Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Russia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Iraq, the Arabias, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Iran."

A summary of Hitler's response at the time:
http://www.neveragain.org/1939.htm

"April 28, 1939: Hitler uses his polling of European nations as leverage. In a two hour speech to the Reichstag, but broadcast for the world to hear, Hitler responds to Roosevelt's pleas by claiming that all those countries are friends of Germany. Leaving out Poland's name Hitler feigns injustice and denounces the Anglo-German Naval Treaty of 1935. Defends himself as a pacifist in the Polish lying game against Germany. Tells Roosevelt that he'll give his assurance of peace to all the countries he had listed, and then justifies his expansionist actions, comparing it to the growth of America. The Germans remained fooled, but the rest of the world catches on to Hitler's rhetoric. HITLER'S LAST PEACETIME PUBLIC SPEECH."

The words of Hitler in December, 1941:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v08/v08p389_Hitler.html

"On 15 April 1939 Roosevelt made his famous appeal to me and the Duce [Mussolini], which was a mixture of geographical and political ignorance combined with the arrogance of a member of the millionaire class. We were called upon to make declarations and to conclude non-aggression pacts with a number of countries many of which were not even independent because they had either been annexed or turned into subordinate protectorates by countries allied with Mr. Roosevelt [Britain and France]. You will recall, my Deputies, that I then gave a polite but straightforward answer to this obtrusive gentleman [on 28 April 1939], which succeeded in stopping, at least for a few months, the storm of chatter from this staunch warmonger."

Mark
Ottawa

Duh. Nice comeback.

@Mark again:

My search came up dry, so you can peg my original comment as containing a specific memory lapse. Given the reference that I suppled, though, I suggest that you further reconsider some of your own earlier remarks.

As an aid: what would incline you to conclude that Metaxa's hostility to Mussolini's Italy wasn't home-grown?

One more thing, Mark: Thank you for correcting me on the spelling of the alias, "lberia."