That's funny, I thought if you were a left-wing loony who hated Bush, you would plot against the Edwards campaign.

a President makes a STAND aginst terrorism

he is on the verge of historic victory and marching democracy and FREEDOM,,, how do we thank him? 3/4 of the population has "BDS"!!!

these are SAD TIMES

This points out the fallacy of trying to prevent people from dangerous countries from coming here. Instead we need to look for dangerous people like the Israel's (sp) do. This loony was home grown.

he is on the verge of historic victory

What victory are you writing about here? The "al Qaeda is stronger than ever" victory, the "Taliban is retaking control of sections of Afghanistan" victory, or the "you can't expect anything to have improved yet, give it more time" victory?

Seriously, Karl: except for you, the best I hear even the most war-minded of Administration flaks say is, "I'm sure we'll win some day; be patient." How are you seeing that we are on the "verge of historic victory?"

Question for the rest of you: was there such a thing as Clinton Derangement Syndrome, or are derangement and syndromes purely the province of Liberals?

from Fox News:

"Feds: Al Qaeda Suspect May Not Be Threat at All

WILKES-BARRE, Pa. — Two months ago, a federal prosecutor accused Michael Reynolds, a 47-year-old transient who lived with his elderly mother in Wilkes-Barre, of trying to work with Al Qaeda to blow up fuel facilities in at least three states.

Now officials say that Reynolds, who was snared in an FBI sting, may not have been as much of a terrorist as the prosecutor made him out to be.

An FBI official in Washington said that the agency has since concluded that Reynolds might be mentally ill and not as serious a threat as originally believed. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because much of the information in the case has been sealed by a federal judge."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185041,00.html

thanks, CY!! you're doing a damn good job of keeping tabs on all these special needs folks...errr...."homegrown TERRORISTS" for us in order to remind us just how important taking the war truly is! keep up the good work, y'all!!

Feds: Al Qaeda Suspect May Not Be Threat at All

Anyone who is in possession of a real hand grenade and doesn't have all the ATF paperwork for it a "threat". They're classified as a "destructive device" and considerable legal hoops need to be jumped through, and strict ATF storage requirements met to own one legally.

That you would excuse this clear felon isn't surprising though.

"Doc Washedup":::

LIEbrals say they dont like to SURGE

truth is they CANT,,,they are IMPOTENT

MY SIDE is ROCK HARD in the face of the JIHADIS,,, LIEbrals have lost there manhood

I can forgive you for your shortcoming,,, but I CANT forgive when WE want to SURGE and you HOLD IT DOWN

stand back son and watch us SURGE DEMOCRICY into iraq

Karl:

You managed to reel off five paragraphs of spittle-flecked bile without saying anything of note, indulging in namecalling and nonsense instead of answering the question.

Pray tell: how on earth has the Left held the surge down? The President has received the troops and money he asked for. Are you just laying the groundwork so you have someone to blame in case the whole surge thing goes south?

Next time, please try to make some sense.

how on earth has the Left held the surge down?

You mean other than declaring it a failure before it even started? That of course was intended strictly as a troop "morale booster".

You mean other than declaring it a failure before it even started? That of course was intended strictly as a troop "morale booster".

Are you suggesting that Lefty protests against the surge kept the military from getting the money? Or that the troops weren't sent? Or that there were mass desertions stemming from demoralization? Or that our troops, faced with insurgents in a firefight, dropped their guns and refused to shoot? Or that soldiers are refusing to go out on patrol?

Has, in fact, any single thing happened to the surge because of protests by the Left?

Please deal with reality and facts, rather than tripe and talking points.

"Question for the rest of you: was there such a thing as Clinton Derangement Syndrome, or are derangement and syndromes purely the province of Liberals?"

The latter

Doc

I can understand your seething hatred for our military. You need to demoralize them for they are everything you (and liberals in general) are not. Brave, strong, committed, fearless. You must knock them down to make yourself look better. It won't work, spineless cowards never win.

nice try, purple--but i'm just quoting the feds. *you're* the one calling our gov't officials liars when they say this semi-retarded man wasn't ever on par with the Great Boogeyman called al-qaeda....

Capitalist Infidel:

Contribute materially to the conversation, or stop taking up bandwidth.

Your approach is more suited for, say, Sister Toldjah.

If you want to discuss the issue using facts and actual ideas, then let's do this thing.

Let's start with a reiteration of my question. How has Lefty disapproval of the surge done anything at all to, as Karl put it, "hold the surge back?"

Has, in fact, any single thing happened to the surge because of protests by the Left?

As I said -- they do it out of "patriotism" as a morale booster for the troops.

As I said -- they do it out of "patriotism" as a morale booster for the troops.

And as I said: Give me solid examples of how Lefty disapproval of the surge has done anything at all to, as Karl put it, "hold the surge back."

As Rainier Wolfcastle might say, "The talking points--they do nothing!"

I'm sure the troops are heartened by your solid "support".

Avenger, I'm guessing that some poor shmoe of a reservist who's on his third rotation in Iraq is not going to shed any tears over the idea that I want him to come home. He likely wants it even more than I do.

Why aren't you worried about the demoralizing effects that these longer and longer rotations are having on the Army? Fifteen months? And the Air Force takes four-month rotations. Aren't the Marines something like six?

Yeah, I reckon that those guys have other things on their minds than any anti-war comments I might post on a blog.

Avenger, you keep falling back on the quipsterism because you have no facts, and I mean no facts at all, to back up your assertion. What I wonder is why you keep taking it on the chin and coming back for more. Are you some kind of masochist?

Purple Avenger - Don't steal Doc's tripe and talking points, he get's angry when you do that. He just wants to vent defeatism and BDS. He understands that the cumulative effect of people like him and the puppet liberal media is to distort the impression of what is really going on in Iraq. Rewriting the history of our involvement in Iraq based on liberal lies is one thing, making decisions about the current course of events based on a propaganda campaign is another kettle of fish.

Doc, you and David Terrenoire ought to check out the latest Rasmussen survey on media bias. It's just another confirmation of what at least David refuses to accept.

Holy toledo, it's just all the same with some of you guys.

Let's deal with some facts, daleyrocks, rather than random lip flappage. Karl says that Lefty anti-surge "propaganda" (to use your term) is "keeping the surge down."

Okay. Interesting thesis. It's yours, too, apparently. Now prove it.

To reiterate what I posted above:

Are you suggesting that Lefty protests against the surge kept the military from getting the money? Or that the troops weren't sent? Or that there were mass desertions stemming from demoralization? Or that our troops, faced with insurgents in a firefight, dropped their guns and refused to shoot? Or that soldiers are refusing to go out on patrol?

If you can give me some actual proof that I and my ilk are "keeping the surge down"--and by "actual proof" I mean something other than the random noise you've made up until now--then my faith in humanity may be restored.

When you don't come up with anything, I will be neither surprised nor disappointed, for the simple reason that it is not happening. "Keeping the surge down?" You better get back on the reservation, my friend; the official word is that the surge is working just fine, thank you very much.

I understand that you guys need to develop some plausible deniability for when the surge winds up doing nothing at all to improve things in Iraq, and that strategy might even work, in the long run--I've run out of dismay at what certain unscrupulous Righties are able to get away with--but not on my watch.

Now: proof. Ante up, buddy, or find another table.

Doc -Are you suggesting that your endless streams of questions and demands are a form of debate? To paraphrase George C. Scott in the movie Patton, "Rommel, I've read your book." Your type is a dime a dozen.

CY has shown more than adequate proof that the surge is enjoying success. Meanwhile you've got losers like Harry Reid already proclaiming that the war is lost and preannouncing that he won't believe anything Petraeus says that is positive. You got major thinkers on the left, an oxymoron if there ever was one, engaging in mass delusion that Al Qaeda is not actively involved in Iraq, that it's all a Bush propaganda plot. CY's readily debunked that one. The same mass delusion exists with respect to Iranian involvement in Iraq.

What have you got Doc, except the rewriting of history?

Your post is a laundry list of Righty talking points with no points of reference. You vomit up terms like "BDS," "defeatism" and "rewriting history" as if they connected to any post that I've made in this thread.

I'll admit that I mentioned the term BDS up above in reference to Clinton, but I haven't mentioned Bush at all.

What history am I rewriting? My point throughout this thread is that Lefty disapproval has not destroyed the surge, so that must be the history you say I'm rewriting. Your idea, then, is that Lefty disapproval is destroying the surge, and I'd like to see proof.

My idea of debate is not one of posing endless questions that don't get answered; rather, in a debate, one side needs to answer the questions posed by the other. All my questions were the same question asked different ways: what is your evidence that Lefties have wrecked the surge?

You, Karl and Purple Avenger have made this assertion. I've asked you to back it up. If it's the dire issue you think it is, then there should be truckloads of proof out there.

You weaselly references to Patton, Rommel, questions and demands don't disguise the fact that you have neither the balls nor the facts to back up what you say.

"Doc Carwash":::

go ahead and slip that BURQA on lefty

I value FREEDOM and CHRISTIAN VALUES like the FOUNDING FATHERS

mebbe you heard about them???

Doc - Thanks for clarifying your remarks. Here I thought you started out the thread with the following smart assed comments:
"What victory are you writing about here? The "al Qaeda is stronger than ever" victory, the "Taliban is retaking control of sections of Afghanistan" victory, or the "you can't expect anything to have improved yet, give it more time" victory?

Seriously, Karl: except for you, the best I hear even the most war-minded of Administration flaks say is, "I'm sure we'll win some day; be patient." How are you seeing that we are on the "verge of historic victory?"

Question for the rest of you: was there such a thing as Clinton Derangement Syndrome, or are derangement and syndromes purely the province of Liberals?"

Then you moved on to more bullshit:
"Pray tell: how on earth has the Left held the surge down? The President has received the troops and money he asked for. Are you just laying the groundwork so you have someone to blame in case the whole surge thing goes south?"

Now you say all along you just were demanding an answer to a simple question about how the left has destroyed the surge.

Doc you have a hard time making up your mind, don't you. You like talking about balls a lot too. Do you have any issues you want to fess up about there, cupcake?

I don't believe anybody claimed actual destruction of the surge yet, but the left appears to be working on it. I already referenced two widely publicized incidents involving Harry Reid. They were probably discussed on this blog. If you aren't already familiar with them you are just wasting bandwidth here. Search this blog or use google if you have to educate yourself.

Congress requested a report from Petraeus in September. They are suddenly taking action toward a withdrawal in advance of that report. What has changed since the governing legislation requiring that report and this sudden flurry of activity toward withdrawal. It is the full implementation of the surge and a glimmer of success. The left is so fully invested in defeat, they cannot afford to wait for a positive report in September. I demand to know of your evidence to the contrary. Military commanders sometimes find it hard to plan if they are about to have their legs yanked out from under them, or so I'm told.

The Iraqi goverment also cites as a reason for a lack of progress on political reconciliation the uncertainty of the duration of the American commitment to Iraq. Surely you have seen those references as well. Guess who has been fueling the uncertainty of the commitment, buddy.

Thank you for your concern about my balls. I hope they didn't hurt your chin.

"daleyrocks":::

been watching ABC/CNN/NPR/AP???

ACTUALLY:::

baquba and alanbar = IN THE BAG

10 battalions of trained iraqi soldiers

iraqis rising against alqaida

democraticly elected govt!

easy from here DONE DEAL

GEORGE W BUSH vissage on Mount. Rushmore = IN THE BAG

Oh, my god. Daleyrocks suggests I'm a homo. Whatever will I do?

Doc - You and other lefties prove time and again that you have unique ways of filtering and interpreting information that defy rational analysis. Have fun with your conclusions, cupcake.

Now get me the information I demanded and a sandwich, or you are just wasting bandwidth here.

Doc, why haven't you produced the information I demanded?

Reynolds wrote that his planned attack would help topple U.S. President George W. Bush.

What will the idiots do when there is no George Bush, I mean they are obviously "insane" and will need to let off that steam somehow. 19 months of BDS left and then shrinks will have their offices full because their will be no where to direct their insanity, jacka**es.

If you can give me some actual proof that I and my ilk are "keeping the surge down"--and by "actual proof" I mean something other than the random noise you've made up until now--then my faith in humanity may be restored.

You and your ilk (MSM) are making the American public believe that the surge is not working thereby increasing the pressure on a General who needs 100% focus on the battle at hand. I can assure you that nothing you say nor Pelosi or Reid does will keep this surge from working if the American public will get it's news from Michael Yon and other new media and people like myself who educate those around me. If you truly had faith in humanity you would be supporting and cheerleading the surge because by 2008 it will have cleared the way for our troops to come home while stopping a Cambodian killing field from occurring in the Middle East, or do you really care?

Doc - Where is that information I demanded!

Daleyrocks, you're a grade-A fool.

When you write, "I demand to know of your evidence to the contrary," you're asking me to provide evidence for an assertion I never made. What do you want me to do, make something up so that you have something to crow about?

I'm done with this thread now. If you want to continue stalking me, you'll have to go elsewhere.