Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: ANTI-LIBERAL ZONE

BARRY (NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN) BETRAYS THE US...AGAIN.

65 Comments
Friday, July, 10, 2009 9:08 AM clyde writes:

Gunny

THIS post should have the title of the one above.
Even as Obama kisses Islamic sphincter,they are saying what a fool he is.Heard a report on Fox snooze about it last night. About laughed my arse off.That,and apologizing for the U.S. polluting the planet. G$%#@mn,is there ANYTHING this 'hat won't apologize for? Only one I can think of: the decimation of the country.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 9:18 AM Donnie writes:

Trends Research.....

Has a gloomy report http://www.prisonplanet.com/celente-predicts-revolution-fo od-riots-tax-rebellions-by-2012.html
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 9:48 AM Scrap Iron writes:

Find those responsible...

I am sick to death when I hear our "elected elite" say "We will find those responsible and bring them to justice".

WHAT A CROCK!!!
Find them and KILL THEM.
Just like the Israelis did with the Munich terrorists. it took them over six years to find them all, but find them they did. And then they killed them.

Keep fighting the good fight, GunnyG
(PS Where did you serve and in what branch?)
Scrap Iron
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:04 AM The Crawfish writes:

Scrap Iron

You've got it correct. Any enemy combattants captured on the battlefield should sit in a prison cell until the war is over, and since this war of Islam vs the rest of the world has been oing on for over 1300 years........

Then again, the muslim known as Barack Obama WANTS us to lose to Islam so he can help bring about the Worldwide Caliphate.

Oh, and Gunny G is a retired Marine.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:05 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

clyde

The left elected a pos with Barry. He's WORSE than Carter!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:06 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

Donnie

Small wonder that ammo is running scarce and people are buying up guns like nobody's business.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:07 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

Scrap Iron

Thanks for posting.

I could not agree more. Caligula, while a flaming nut case, had the right of it. "I don't care if they love us as long as they fear us."

USMC.

Did all three Divisions and FSSGs.

Did the Gulf in 91. Iraq as a contractor in 2007-08.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:08 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

The Crawfish

If those combatants are NOT in compliance with the GC, then they should be tried in the field and shot.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:16 AM The Crawfish writes:

Gunny

This morning we had our yearly mandatory training on The Laws Of War...and they said we have to play nice-nice to ALL detainees, lawful combattants and UNLAWFUL combattants. President Crawfish will change that on DAY ONE! If they don't meet the POW requirements of Geneva, interrogate until all info gained, then check their expiration date and deal accordingly.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:32 AM dawndawn writes:

Get The Hook!

prezboy is salivating to negotiate with the Iranians, Gunny. That is the reason he did not criticize them after their sham of an election. He is Neville Chamberlain "with a tan and on steroids!" His goal is the destruction of America as we know it. He must FAIL!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:32 AM BmanIII writes:

The Crawfish & Gunny

Craw wrote:
If they don't meet the POW requirements of Geneva, interrogate until all info gained, then check their expiration date and deal accordingly.



Expiration Date = YESTERDAY!!!



Should the flags in D.C. (District of Corruption) be flying upside down right about now???

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 10:42 AM MD/MG writes:

This info should

be on the front pages of our newspapers. All I see is that mj is still dead, but we don't know [gasp!!!!] where he's buried. I can't sleep until I find out. NOT

Also missing from the front pages are reports of the heros killed or wounded in action. Now that photos can be shown of our beloved's flag draped coffins, they seem to have been no more deaths. Or is it just my imagination?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:08 AM Steve writes:

Dear GunnyG

The list of stupidies, lies, treacheries and treasonous conduct from the left has reached such mammoth proportions as to be difficult to conceive. Once again: We have delivered our nation into the hands of its enemies. The pressing question is whether we have enough loyal elected officials and dedicated citizen's groups to hold their crimes below the fatality stage until the criminals can be electorially expelled from office and judicially held accountable.

In the meantime, the troops pay the price in blood while betrayed from behind. To me, though, the inevitable Vietnam analogy is lesser in its overall extent to what I see here today. It should be noted, too, that while Obama plays unproductive photo-ops around the world and the press indulges itself in the Jacko Binge, world-shaking events are ensuing in the Middle East. Gaza remains a terrorist hotbed.

Israel is being pressured by Obama to surrender its very existance. American troops are fighting a resurgence of Obama-generated terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons. AND... the central nation to all this (Iran) is at its most vulnerable modern point with a failing economy and a widespread freedom movement (scarcely reported on!) still battling in the streets. This is the moment we should have been waiting for to act against the insane mullahs. Instead...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:25 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

The Crawfish

Lawyers and war, like oil and water.

Shakesphere was right about lawyers.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:25 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

dawndawn

In doing his appeasement mission, he's killing the DNC as well. Like a cancer, let's hope TEHY die before the patient.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:26 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

BmanIII

And ANYONE who voted for Barry should be hanging...

their heads in shame.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:26 AM Steve writes:

Dear GunnyG

It looks like my original post got lost! I'll just say this again: America has been delivered into the hands of its enemies. And it's happened at a crucial moment where, with bold, intelligent and patriotic leadership, we could bring to resolution many of the issues we face in regard to world peace, prosperity and, concurrently, those of justice and morality. Instead, the offenders and their domestic abettors have been foolishly granted the upper hand. The question is: Can we, the loyal citizens and the handful of untainted elected officials hold the line before the damage to America is fatal?

This is worse than the Vietnam Era. Today, it's not just corrupt and arrogant liberal officials who misguide us. It's overt traitors and criminals. THIS time, if the loyal citizenry can reassume the reins of power, there MUST be a reckoning with Anti-America. Their obscene power structure must be broken forever.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:27 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

MD/MG

Nope, the media is nothing but a lapdog w***e for the potus.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:28 AM Gunny "knuckles" G© writes:

Steve

I hear you. THIS is exactly what we said would happen when the libs elected a punk w/o an ounce of gravitas.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:28 AM Steve writes:

Oh, Boy!

That first post just showed up belatedly!!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 11:29 AM Eric writes:

Gunny

I'm sick of Obama getting away with all this traitorous ideals that he uses for political gain. It's sick that he'll even use American lives for turning America into something we don't even want. He doesn't give a flying @#$% about any of us.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 12:38 PM moshe writes:

A Powerful Essay

I care about the troops like everyone else.

And so I often wonder what would happen if we brought them back home, thereby removing them from harm's way.

What would happen, and what exactly would the newfound threat be to these united States of America and our Bill of Rights?

This is a serious question.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 1:46 PM ApolloSpeaks writes:

THE OBAMA DOCTRINE FOR WORLD DISORDER

The Obama Doctrine in foreign policy can be succinctly summed up by the following formula: A+A+A+A=the strategic decline of the United States and coming world turmoil. What do the Four "A's in this formula signify? Click my name and read my piece "The Obama Doctrine For The New World (Dis)Order.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 2:31 PM Ray writes:

moshe, not to...

...pick a fight, just discourse but...

"What would happen"
Could be answered by asking if you recall Saigon mid 1970's and the roof top of the American Embassy and what lead to it. Not saying it would, but there are enough similarities in the situations that something of the sort isn't unthinkable.

As to the "..new found threat..."
It wouldn't be a new threat, simply a more emboldened old threat. How they would follow up their brazeness is hard to speculate on precisely but I think they are capable of dreaming something up.

As to the Bill of Rights, I'm thinking that wouldn't be the direct target of the "threat" but simply a by product. The previous administration took a lot of heat for supposed intrusions brought by the Patriot Act and listening in on cell phone calls to overseas bomb shops. With our current "Never Waste A Good Crisis" administration, well I think you understand where I'm going here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 10, 2009 6:39 PM moshe writes:

Ray

I guess what I'm asking is:

How is our presence in the Middle East keeping us safe?

Couldn't Mohammed simply pretend to be Juan and sneak across the WIDE-OPEN Mexican border with a vial of anthrax?

Of course he could.

And so clearly something doesn't add up.

And why weren't we asking this question on 9/12?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 11, 2009 11:03 AM caday5 writes:

It would be funny,

if we weren't so arrogant, for the country that invaded Iraq to complain so loudly about foreign interference. But again that comes from the assumption of one's own innocence along with a demonization of all who differ.

The denial of our own sins and the piling on of self-congratulations in the name of patriotism show just how special we need to feel about ourselves.

The real betrayal of America, performed by every administration in my lifetime, is practiced when international law and equality are not recognized and observed. So perhaps those complaining the most about Obama betraying America should first look at the log in their own eye. Then they could see that Obama is an American Exceptionalist too.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 11, 2009 11:43 AM buck writes:

Barry is destroying the military

via backdoor.

A soldier from Oklahoma is now doing hard time in Levinworth for tapping an al quida. I know there is at least one other doing 25 years.

How better to dismantle the military than putting soldiers in jail for killing the enemy??
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 11, 2009 12:13 PM Ray writes:

moshe

If you are asking how our presence in the Middle East keeps "us" safe, as viewed from an individual prespective then I would say it does little for moshe or Ray or Gunny or anyone at a single person level. There are those who make the case that by being in Iraq we have provided a battle field which is not American soil on which to confront a threat, this can be debated but in many quarters it holds rational.

Our presence in the Middle East, and I'm sure you are aware and agree, has to do with one thing only and that is to ensure the availability of one particular resource to the world market place. And it isn't only the U.S. which has a stake in this only that we seem to bear the brunt of the burden, the why of that can also be the topic of volumes of discussion. Were the supply of this commodity not affected by it, the rest of the world would care little about the despots who ruled their people and the conditions and/or religion those people lived under.

As to the border you are correct but living here in South Texas I do not, do NOT, want to see a Berlin Wall erected in what is basicly my back yard. End of discussion. Enforce the existing laws on hiring illegals to the maximum extent allowed for every case. Then make it easier for people to come here and work legally which means in most cases making "Day Labor" easier to document where they prove who the are by some form of home country identification before being granted short term work permits, but do not grant amnesty to those who have broken our laws now.

And why would Mohammed need to sneak across the border disgused as Jorge or Juan? If I'm not mistaken the people responsible for 9/11 were here, for the most part, on student visas. They were welcomed with open arms and lived here not in the shadows but very much out in the open. They would not need to bring something with them when virtually everything needed would be at their disposal once here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 11, 2009 3:14 PM caday5 writes:

Ray

Several problems with the reasons you stated for being in the Middle East. First, I don't think it spreads democracy to us the Iraqis as a battlefront. No Iraqi is going to vote for that. THerefore, Iraqis must have leaders picked for them who will acquiesce to American purposes. This is reminder of how the rich used those living on the frontier as a buffer from the Indians.

Second, the invasion of Iraq increased both the number of terrorist recruits and the number of terrorist attacks in the world. The latter was shown in a 2006 study by Bergen and Cruickshank.

Third, we are more economically vulnerable while Al-Qaeda has only suffered horizontal changes. And while we have become more economically vulnerable, we have lost time in maintaining and developing infrastructure that would make us economically stronger.

Fourth, by focusing the fight in Iraq, we have overlooked the reasons for terrorism that we can address. Primarily, military adventurism and foreign policies that supported dictators and killed and maimed civilians is a main reason why we were attacked on 9-11.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, July, 12, 2009 7:36 AM INTHENOW writes:

Gunny,


The treatment of our prisoners, vice that of our own to the enemy is telling. When the best we can hope for is a quick death for our captured troops, proves beyond any reasonable doubt that rational discourse as a means of conflict resolution is akin to pissing on a forest fire.

The arguments for isolationism, or that somehow our “imperialistic” behavior is the cause for Islamic terrorism ignores the mentality and behavior of Islamic fundamentalists. Proponents of appeasement that use America caused terrorism reasoning, conveniently abandon it when asked to explain the disparity in treatment of prisoners.

I would expect, using liberal logic, the worst we could anticipate for our prisoners is some water up the nose, a bible, some outdoor exercise, and three squares a day. Or perhaps release to a Caribbean Island. But instead our captured troops endure unimaginable actual torture that makes water-boarding look like spa treatment, followed by a videotaped beheading. Not by quick means, but sawed off with a large butcher knife. If indeed America could expect to be unmolested by minding our own business, shouldn’t we apply that same reasoning to prisoner treatment. We don’t sanction the execution of prisoners, and go so far as to imprison those who do.

The logic used to make the argument that we are responsible for Islamic terrorism, or that if we just “mind our own business” everyone will get along, is selectively applied…and with one eye firmly shut.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, July, 12, 2009 11:14 AM Steve writes:

Dear Caddy

The "sins" are your's, not our's.

ONCE AGAIN: America is not responsible for the ages-long mess in the Middle East. That's where war, politics and crackpot lunacy was invented! When it impacts the world and our own survival as a free nation, we act. When are you and your ideological comrades going to stop apologizing for the thugs of the world... and lending them your support in their careers of murder, paganism and conquest? You share in their insane agenda of criminality when you do. And you commit treason against not only your country, but against every person yearning for peace, freedom, prosperity and decency in the process.

I, for one, am not doing to sit back idly while the basis of another totalitarian movement takes shape; thus foredooming another generation of Americans to fight yet another massive global conflict to set it right. We barely prevailed in the last three. The next time, we might not be so lucky.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, July, 12, 2009 12:30 PM moshe writes:

Another Simple Question

Am I unpatriotic for fearing the Obama administration more than some imaginary muslim "terrorist"?

Who threatens my freedoms more?

Anyone?
____________________

"To announce that there should be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people." -Theodore Roosevelt
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, July, 12, 2009 1:36 PM caday5 writes:

Steve

We are responsible for the actions we took such as:

1. Overthrowing Iran's democracy and replacing it with a dictator

2. Putting the B'aath party in power in Iraq in the 1960's

3. Supporting dictatorships such as Saddamn in the 80's

4. Not distinguishing between supporting Israel as a country from Israel's occupation against the Palestinians.

5. Breaking the Geneva Convention by bombing civilian infrastructure in the first Gulf war and then imposing sanctions that were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

You can blame whoever you want, but in the end, Conservatism says you are responsible for your own actions. You can't do whatever you want with little constraints and then wash your hands of all consequences. Demonizing others while turning a blind eye to the natural results of your own actions is not the height of responsibility.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 8:30 AM The Crawfish writes:

C5

The government that we helped to overthrow in Iran was NOT freely elected. The home region of one candidate was counted first, and when he was found to have a large lead, his people got the vote counting stopped and he was declared the winner...kinda like what just happened there. There is a blogger among our bunch whose family was living in Iran at the time, and still has relatives there. If he stops by today, I'm sure he'll let you have it on that account.

Israel is not occupying any territory that belongs to the "palestinians." The West Back, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights were taken by the IDF during wars of aggression perpitrated by the arab nations. If you try to exterminate one nation, but lose territory in the process, that territory rightfully belongs to the nation who took it over. The arabs have plenty of land outside the borders of Israel that they can give to the formerly Jordanian people who call themselves "palestinians." The fact is that the arabs would rather use them as an issue than to help them.

When a civilian infrastructure supports a nation's command and control, military logistics, and military forces during a time of combat, then it is a legal target.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 9:01 AM caday5 writes:

Crawfish

The government that we did overthrow in Iran was freely elected. The problem, and selling point made by the British, was that the government was turning to the left which back then meant that the government was becoming part of the Soviet Union's Communist Empire. Democracy or the lack thereof was not the concern of the Eisenhower Administration, it was this all or nothing misperception of leftist as being totalitarian communists. And, btw, I too have friends from Iran.

But further proof of the reason for our participation in the coup lies in following behaviors. We overthrew the democratic government of Guatemala because needed land reform was threatening unused land owned by United Fruit. The coup was very bloody. We stopped the '67 election in Greece because we were afraid that the leftist would win. And we overthrew the democratic government in Chile in '73.

Here is proof of our concern for democracy. We replaced all of the governments listed above with brutal dictators. See, our concern is not with democracy, it is with who is in control. And if the person in control is following our orders and playing nice with our corporate interests, then declare them as moderates who provide stability. That is exactly how we defined Saddamn Hussein until he disobeyed orders by invading Kuwait.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 9:03 AM caday5 writes:

Crawfish

BTW, it wan't the Palestinians who invaded or even attacked Israel in the '67 war. Rather, Israel struck first, and according to Mencahim Begin it was unnecessary, and thus your contention regarding Israel's ownership of the occupied territories is wrong not just logically, but legally. The UN also recognizes the territories as belonging to the Palestinians and have cited Israel with violations of multiple resolutions.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 11:01 AM The Crawfish writes:

C5

Yes, the IDF struck first. They were not willing to let the arab forces massing on their borders to get the first strike in. The arabs WERE about to attack, as Nassar publicly stated many times.

Secondly, the UN ALWAYS sides against Israel and I really don't care what the UN has to say anyway.

Third, the Iranian government that we overthrew was NOT freely elected. They QUIT COUNTING THE VOTES as soon as their guy got a lead. Even though Reza Palavi had the SAVAK, life in Iran under his rule was MUCH better than under the rule of the Mad Mullahs.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 4:49 PM caday5 writes:

Crawfish

Begin clearly stated that they had the choice to strike first and that they did not expect an attack. In fact, the positions that Egyptian troops took were defensive positions, according Israeli historian Benny Morris. Egypt was already engaged in putting an uprising.

But furthermore, why would a preemptive attack on Egypt justify stealing land from the Palestinans.

WIth regards to Iran, you are wrong. The government was properly elected and had been in a multi-year conflict with Britain over the prices Britain was paying for oil. Previous attempts to nationalize oil were responded to by the British with embargoes designed to topple the government by destroying the economy. It was about oil and prices. To get the US to help with the coup, the UK cut American oil companies in on the action. The result was a 25 year dictatorship with no elections.

But suppose you were right about the vote counting? If the US was so concerned with democracy, why not establish a democratic gov't rather than a dictator? The purpose of the dictator was so that American companies had friendly partner in Iran. But not only did oil companies profit, so did the company that made F-14s and we even shipped nuclear technology to Iran.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, July, 13, 2009 10:47 PM moshe writes:

Caday5

The Middle East has oil?????

I thought they grew turnips...???

What are you going to tell me next? That Afghanistan has heroin? And that Vietnam grew heroin?

Pledge allegiance to your flag caday5, and stop asking so many questions.

We're spreading freedom and democracy, and toppling dictators...and...and if we don't we're all gonna die!!!

Excuse me, I'm gonna go hide under my bed now. I think I just saw a Muslim!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 7:47 AM caday5 writes:

Moshe

Why?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 10:55 AM moshe writes:

Caday5

Why what?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 11:22 AM Steve writes:

Dear Caddy

Well... that was a very extended rant for you. True; it was largely (as usual) a restating of your compendium of leftist talking points and therefore, of itself, worthy of little comment. However, it also took a departure from your usual bland recital that is interesting. In places, it was almost combative! Do I sense, perhaps, that all is not well in the Liberal Universe? Is the understanding that your false agendas are uncreasingly unpopular among the despised "masses" and that your treasured dream of the unfettered rule of them may be in peril?

If so, you may well be justified. Your consolidation of power schedule is far from complete. Your movement is, in fact, in its most vulnerable stage, historically speaking. Yes, you may still succeed in your quest for dominance. But if you fail... the chance will never come again in your lifetime. America's moral resurgence will see to it.

The breaking point will come when enough American families see the threat to their children that you pose to all facets of their existance; morally, physically and financially. Nations and civilizations ultimately exist to protect their young and, thus, their own continuance. You and your comrades are becoming understood as a direct threat to all that. When that realization solidifies- and if Americans still possess any means at all to oppose its implementation- it will spell the doom of the liberal obscenity in this country.

May the day come swiftly.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 11:51 AM BrianR writes:

The TRUTH about Mossadegh


Caday repeats the same tired canard that Mossadegh's government was legitimate and "freely elected".

In truth, he seized power from the Shah -- who was legitimately in power as king -- through a coup and illegal manipulation of the election. He'd stopped the vote count after votes from the city (pro-Mossadegh) were tallied, but BEFORE the votes from the rural areas (pro-Shah) were counted, and in those days the majority of the populace lived outside the cities.

In truth, we simply helped return the legitimate and rightful ruler of Iran -- the Shah -- to his rightful place on the throne.

As to your "friends" from Iran, Caday... my mom was born and raised there, I still have family living there, I spent 5 years there myself and that's where I went to high school.

I think that trumps your "friends", big time.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 1:14 PM moshe writes:

The TRUTH about Mossadegh

Brian:

Let's look at the broader implication of your statement. Are you suggesting that our actions were spurred by a deep and abiding belief in democracy and a concern for its preservation?

Clearly this is jejune(I love that word), my friend.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 1:30 PM caday5 writes:

Steve

Since like Gunny, you cannot discern between the left and the Democratic Liberals, your sense of what is going in whatever universe that is not your is a little off.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 1:33 PM BrianR writes:

Moshe


That's simply a statement of the facts. A lesson in history to correct Caday's usual misstatement of those facts.

One can draw whatever conclusions one wishes. That becomes opinion. I'm not discussing that at all.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 2:17 PM caday5 writes:

Brian I

unfortunately for you, history does not back up your family's rendition of Mossadegh's election. First, he was elected to the PM position in 1951 by a vote of 79-12. The young Shah actually appointed Mossadegh to the Premiership. This was not a robbing of the kingdom from the Shah but a legitimate prime minister who was popular because he opposed foreign intervention in Iran. For a while, the British had been taking advantage of Iran with regards to Iran's oil. Mossadegh nationalized the oil and the Brit went wild in protest including trying influence the elections, conducting embargoes to destroy the economy and so forth. The suspension of elections was in part due to foreign interference. But enough votes were counted to create a quorum for the delegates.

Mossadegh actually resigned his PM in '52 over a dispute with the Shah. The new PM said he was going to resume negotiations with the Brits over the oil but massive protests stopped that. The Shah then reappointed Mossadegh and resolved the dispute that Mossadegh had with him. Mossadegh then tried to strengthen the democracy in Iran by limiting the Shah's power.

Following this, Mossadegh received from Parliament emergency powers that allowed him to press for land reform. What hurt Mossadegh was that British economic actions were hurting the wealth of the Iranians. Along with the work of British agents, Mossadegh lost his coalition.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 2:17 PM caday5 writes:

Brian II

However, what cost Mossadegh his job was that the Brits convinced the US that Mossadegh was turning communistic--the US had previously opposed British policies toward Iran. Then Operation Ajax was executed and Mossadegh was removed.

There was no US concern for Democracy here. What was the concern was black/white thinking of the anti-Communist religion at that time as well as business concerns because American companies were then cut in on the action.

Think about it, if some country interfered with our internal affairs as the Brits, followed by the US, what would be our reaction?

In the end, what counted for us was not that Iran had a gov't that represented its people. What counted for us was that Iran had a gov't that favored us and what we wanted. We tolerated the Shah's heavyhanded handling of dissidents and oppression. Were there groups of people who benefited from the Shah? Yes but there are always pockets of people that benefit from any totalitarian leader. The problem was that for love of oil money, the Brits, joined later by us, opposed a gov't that sought democracy and the welfare of its people. History is not on your side here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 2:25 PM caday5 writes:

Brian - The real issue

for conservatives is to demonize those who have received the brunt of US actions. Suppose what you said was right, how does that justify the US restoring the Shah to power? It doesn't. Nor does it justify US support for a repressive regime. Where the h*ll do we assume the right to determine what is best for each country? That goes back the the combination of the Conservative concept of Natural Law and Exceptionalism. But all Natural Law does is to assume that our culture and the Anglo-Saxon way of doing things is the right way for everyone.

All exceptionalism says is that America must be the hero. It assumes that America qualifies for that. It assumes that American Exceptionalism is superior to democracy. It assumes that we can never make immoral and criminal decision.

What both miss out on is that our policies are not based on the welfare of those we touch but on the economic welfare of those who finance the campaigns of our elected officials. Conservative supporters of our policies are either ignorant of history or hope to ride the coattails of corporations that benefit from foreign policies.

Finally, it seems that your personal account is wanting.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 2:33 PM BrianR writes:

Caday, you managed to omit

the entire basis of Mossadegh's overthrow, the election of 1951 in which Mossasdegh suspended the elections just as I described, assuring himself a majority in the Majlis of his own supporters and effectively stealing power.

From there he kept demanding greater powers, and "suspended" any further elections in an effort to prevent any opposition.

So, sorry to say, you have your facts wrong. As usual.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 2:44 PM BrianR writes:

BTW, Caday


Of course, you're free to speculate and philosophize on the rightness or wrongness of the USA and the UK getting involved in Iran's internal politics. You just need to do so in a historically correct context.

Mossadegh had stolen power, and the Shah was the rightful king of Iran. For whatever motivations involved, we restored him to his rightful and legal position as Shah ("king" in Farsi).

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 3:11 PM Jim writes:

Once Again Curt

You prove that you are not only an anarchist, but anti-American. I'm not going to debate your wonderful multi-paragraph spin on Iranian history. But I will make these comments.
First, it's ironic that leftist act so smug and think that they are so smart as they embrace goverment which makes their already nearly insignicant existance truely insignificant. It's as moronic as sentencing yourself to death, yet there you are,promoting a system that leaves you cog grease. Boy aren't we smart! We're so smug as we promote ourselves to oblivian.

Second, I know you believe that America is imperialistic and that we're trying to take over the world. I'm just going to remind you that of the hundreds of times that AMerican soldiers and sailors have interviened in the cause of freedom. The only land we have ever asked for was land on which to bury our dead.
This is the greatest country in the history of humanity and you are not worthy of it's freedoms for you do not honor nor share them.I'll quote one of the smartest men in history.
He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.
Ben Franklin
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 3:13 PM caday5 writes:

Brian

The election that was suspended was not in 1951. What you neglected to mention was the British intention to destabilize Iran because of the oil. This included an economic boycott as well as using British agents to oust Mossadegh out of power including influencing the elections.

And that Mossadegh never stole power from the Shah. What he did try to do was strengthen Iran's democracy and help the people.

We can judge the ethics of the US-UK coup in Iran by asking this question: would we consider it right if another country, say like China, tried to buy or subvert our democracy or change our form of gov't to a totalitarian one.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 3:32 PM BrianR writes:

Gaaawd, Caday!


Yes, the election that was suspended WAS in 1951, and there were no more elections after that until after Mossadegh was removed in 1953!

Again, just making up your own "facts"! You're hopeless.


Further, I told you and Moshe that I wasn't talking about anyone's motives for doing anything, because that's irrelevant to the FACTS.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 3:52 PM caday5 writes:

Brian

The elections that Mossadegh suspended were ones that he called for. He had been legitimately elected to the PM in early 1951. I did make one mistake. He did suspend elections in '51 but that was in that latter part of it after he nationalized the oil and after the British reacted to his actions. But the elections that were suspended did put him into office.

But even with the elections that were suspended, a deputy quorum had already been met and the British were trying to subvert the election. In addition, the election that was suspended was not his own but of deputies. When he did suspend the elections, none of the deputies, and only 30 of the 79 belonged to his party, objected.

How quickly you come to conclusions regarding people. Thinking that mistake imply bad motives while at the same time being vague regarding which elections had been suspended. In addition you stated that he stole power from the Shah when he didn't. You neglected to say that he resigned and was reinstalled because of popular protest.

Finally, what you would never justify here, especially if a conservative was being challenged, is foreign interference in an election and by coup.

It seems to me that facts are more irrelevant to you.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 4:21 PM moshe writes:

American Foregin Policy

A Century of Rape

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military
service as a member of this country’s most agile military
force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned
ranks from second lieutenant to major-general.
And during that period, I spent most of my time being
a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall
Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a
gangster for capitalism.
“I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time.
Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military
profession, I never had a thought of my own
until I left the service. My mental faculties remained
in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of
higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military
service.
“I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for
American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and
Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to
collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a
dozen Central American republics for the benefits of
Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long.
“I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I
brought light to the Dominican Republic for American
sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it
that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."

General Smedley Butler
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 4:40 PM caday5 writes:

Moshe

Thank you for Smedley's quote. BTW, American Foreign policy is based on the Conservative values of Exceptionalism and sometimes Natural Law. See my article on the problems with Conservative values at

http://flamingfundamentalist.blogspot.com/2009/07/few-good- problems-with-conservative.html
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 5:50 PM BrianR writes:

Wrong yet again, Caday!


Why don't you simply take the time to do the most basic research? It's all available, right on the web.

You: "He had been legitimately elected to the PM in early 1951"

Absolutely wrong! Those are the elections in which he stopped the vote count while HIS party was ahead!

Yes, he had 30 of the 79 Majlis members, which was a quorum, and the majority party in control of the Majlis after the bogus "election". That's all he needed, 30, because they didn't HAVE a two party system in Iran at the time.

He then "suspended" any further elections after that!

You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about, you're completely ignorant of the historical record, and you're making a fool of yourself. This is right along the lines of our conversation a week or so ago wherein you flagrantly displayed your complete ignorance of the Geneva Conventions.



I've been told you're a college student. If THIS is the level of work you do, I can't in any way believe you earn passing grades, unless you go to one of those moronic liberal "colleges" where they don't even hand out grades.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 7:41 PM moshe writes:

Caday5

I got your back, Caday, if only because you are always unjustly attacked here, and I don't like it when people get picked on.


I will read your article and comment. Thanks.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 14, 2009 7:53 PM caday5 writes:

Brian

What you forget is that his election to the PM was through the deputies, not a general election. He had no power to before becoming Prime Minister to either call for another election or stop any election. And again, his election to be PM was through the ministerial deputies, an election he won by 79 to 20 something votes. He was already PM when the election he called for was suspended.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 15, 2009 12:15 AM BrianR writes:

Caday, you're clueless


I'm not forgetting anything. You don't have any idea what you're talking about. You don't understand what happend, nor how their system worked.

Basically, you're completely out to lunch.

I'm done here. You're wasting my time... yet again.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 15, 2009 7:01 AM caday5 writes:

Brian

You have wasted your time but that is because you are unwilling to admit any documented fact that does not allow you to vilify Mossadegh. And the reason why you want vilify him is because your hero, America, participated in a coup to overthrow him and criminals cannot be heroes. So you minimize any wrongdoing that America does.

You can quit wasting your time by acknowledging all that is well-documented in history rather than just cherry-picking.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 15, 2009 2:28 PM Steve writes:

Dear BrianR

Caddy is the one who just castigated me for not being able to discern between leftists and liberal Democrats! If his/her worldview is as such that any appreciable difference exists, then how skewed is the rest going to be? Caddy is just about the ultimate, stereotypical, self-proclaimed pseudo-intellectual "parlor pink". (Does that cover it all??) The Pinkos are still with us; alive, but very very sickly.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 18, 2009 10:55 AM ivan writes:

Ivan: Gone but still here

So . . . it's finally happened. My original identity no longer recognized. All my posts expunged.

I've been banned from Townhall.com. And that leaves me with just one question - What took you so long to prove what I've pointed out repeatedly: Conservatives love freedom of speech -- but only for themselves.

The larger truth is that American right-wingers hate all forms of freedom.

It's conservatives who are ever eager to suppress differing opinions, words, writings and art -- from the McCarthy witch-hunts and the rock 'n' roll record burnings of the '50s to their perennial demands for bans on certain books, movies, television programs and public gatherings; for the firing of teachers and professors, the jailing of "communists," anti-war protesters and doctors who perform abortions.

I could continue to return here under various sock puppets as I've done now, and continue to berate and abuse you un-American, racist b4stards, but I'm not going to waste my time. By silencing my voice once you have more than proved my point.

But just because I won't be posting, don't imagine me to be gone. I first dropped by here the day after Barack Hussein Obama was elected president to see whether the sewer-scum who infest Townhall.com would be so stupid as to threaten his life or suborn armed insurrection. As it happened, I caught sewer-scum-in-chief Gunster doing the latter -- twice -- and forwarded his illiterate posts to the FBI. I've no way of knowing whether they followed up or not, but I suspect they did, since the language in Gunny's psycho rants became immediately more moderate. I think he got the word.

So remember, rightoids . . . you may not hear from me, but I’ll be here, watching, ever ready to drop a dime on you traitors whenever you step out of line. Count on it.

-Ivan
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, July, 19, 2009 4:17 PM Steve writes:

Dear Ivanovitch

It must be Hell being Pelosi's love child and having to live up to it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive