Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

Need I remind you guys about the DC Snipers?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And it seems that you are taking it for granted that he's a "far left lib"; I've seen no evidence to support that claim, either.

This Space For Rent!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Need I remind you guys about the DC Snipers?

Guess I must.

Around here, EVERYONE was convinced it MUST be some "rightwing nut-job". Im sure if the Tea Party was up and running back then, they would have been "blamed" as well.


How did that turn out?


How about all of you just shut the fuck up until we actually get some more deatils?

You all are running off at the mouth, with half-baked evidence, half-truths, the media egging you on and your own biases showing.

"Im not surprised that it happened in Arizona, its become the capitol of intolerance blablahblah blah"

Niki, you got that opinion/quote/idea directly, DIRECTLY from MSNBC and/or the article in the Washington Post.


So, you hens, calm yourselves down.

Wait and see.


"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Last time I checked, I'm not Signy, am I?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Of course, you're not Rappy either, are you? ;)

---

Quote:

---

U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba

ABC News
May 1, 2001

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.

The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof … that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]."

The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere — only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which the military was not allowed to provide firepower.The military leaders now wanted a shot at it.

"The whole thing was so bizarre," says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops deployed to drive out Castro.

Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military — not democratic — control over the island nation after the invasion.

"That's what we're supposed to be freeing them from," Bamford says. "The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro himself of doing."

'Over the Edge'

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.

The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their military overstepping its bounds.

There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative during the election.

And at least two popular books were published focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a "considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda activities of military personnel" had been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But Congress didn't get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford.

"Although no one in Congress could have known at the time," he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least through 1963.

One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo naval base — an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext for a war.

"There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.

After 40 Years

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

As public interest in the assassination swelled after JFK's release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public's access to government records related to the assassination.

The author says a friend on the board tipped him off to the documents.

Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained.

"The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

---

Quote:

---

TOP SECRET SPECIAL HANDLING NOFORN

(declassified 2000)

The Joint Chiefs of Staff
Washington DC

Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense

Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba (TS)

JCS to Secretary of War Robert McNamara
March 13, 1962
[Declassified 2000 under court order in Freedom of Information Act lawsuit]

1. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the attatched memorandum for the chief of Operations, Cuba Project, which responds to a request by that office for brief but precise description of pretexts which would provide justification for US military intervention in Cuba.

2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend that the proposed memorandum be forwarded as a preliminary submission suitable for planning purproses. It is assumed that there will be similar submissions from other agencies and that these inputs will be used as a basis for developing a time-phased plan. Individual projects can then be considered on a case-by-case basis.

3. Further, it is assumed that a single agency will be given the primary responsibility for developing military and para-military [terrorist] aspects of the basic plan. It is recommended that this responsibility for both overt and covert military operations be assigned to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

For the Joint Chiefs of Staff
signed: L.L. Limnitzer
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Note by the Secretaries
to the Joint Chiefs of Staff
on Northwoods

Footnoted memorandums:

"Operation Mongoose"

"Instances to Provoke Military Actions in Cuba"

RECOMMENDATIONS:

This paper NOT be forwarded to commanders of specified or unified commands.

This paper NOT be forwarded to US officers assigned to NATO activities.

This paper NOT be forwarded to the Chairman, US Delegation, United Nations Military Staff Committee.

Such a plan would enable a logical buildup of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camoflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries in addition to the United States. The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances.

A series of well-coordinated incidents will be planned to take place to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

Incidents to establish a credible attack:

Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
Land friendly Cubans in uniform "over-the-fence" to stage attack on the base.
Capture Cuban (friendly) sabateurs inside the base.
Start riots near the entrance to the base (friendly Cubans).
Blow up ammunition inside the base; start fires.
Burn aircraft on airbase (sabatage).
Lob morter shells from outsidethe base to inside the base. Some damage to installation.
Capture assault teams.
Capture militia group which storms the base.
Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires -- napthalene [napalm].
Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims.
(b) United States would respond by executing offensive operations.

3. A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms:

a. We could blow up a US ship and blame Cuba.

b. We could blow up a drone (unmannded) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. The presense of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The US could follow with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existant crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

c. We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Flordia cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cubans in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized. Exploding a few bombs in carefully chosen spots. The arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating cuban involvement.

5. A "Cuban-based, Castro-supported" filibuster could be simulated against a neighboring Caribbean nation. These efforts can be magnified with additional ones contrived for exposure. "Cuban" B-26 or C-46 type aircraft could make cane-burning raids at night. Soviet Bloc incidiaries could be found. This could be coupled with "Cuban" messages to the Communist underground and "Cuban" shipments of arms which would be found, or intercepted, on the beach.

6. Use of MIG-type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping, and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type palnes would be useful. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce that fact.

7. Hijacking attampts against US civil air and surface craft should be encouraged.

8. It is possible to create an incident which would demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner from the United States.

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be subsituted for the actual civil aircraft and the passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rondevous. From the rondevous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly to an auxiliary airfield at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. Meanwhile the drone aircraft will continue to fly the filed flight plan. The drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency "MAY DAY" message stating it is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by the destruction of aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow IACO radio stations to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

9. It is possible to create an incident that will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack.

b. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly Tail-end Charlie. While near the Cuban island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. This pilot would then fly at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who performed the mission under an alias would resume his proper identity. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.

c. A submarine or small craft would distribute F-101 parts, parachute, etc. The pilots retuning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.

3. It is understood that the Department of State is also preparing suggested courses of action to develope justification for US military intervention in Cuba.

by Col. Edward Lansdale, Chief of the Cuba Project, CIA liason to USAF

www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Last time I checked, I'm not Signy, am I?

---

So why so riled up at AU? Where is your condemnation for Signy's arbitrary demonizing?

---

It's right over there, by your condemnation of KKKaney's celebration of these shootings.

And again, last time I checked, it wasn't Signy who was claiming that *I* had tried to tie the teabaggers and Sarah Palin to this guy. Rappy didn't take it up with Signy, he responded to - and quoted - MY posts, and aimed his ire at me.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Of course, you're not Rappy either, are you? ;)

---

Do not try to be clever Kwicko, it doesn't suit you.

---

Quote:

---

My guess is the MSM just took it for granted early on that this guy was a righty.

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And it seems that you are taking it for granted that he's a "far left lib"; I've seen no evidence to support that claim, either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

My guess is the MSM just took it for granted early on that this guy was a righty.

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And it seems that you are taking it for granted that he's a "far left lib"; I've seen no evidence to support that claim, either.

---

You are both wrong. She was a conservative Democrat, so she had political enemies on both sides and because she represented a conservative district the Tea Party had a chance to unseat her like they did so many others. She won a narrow victory, which is likely because she out hussled her opponant which I think is great.

But neither side was the cause of her death because if you have followed this Board long enough you know there is a third side...the Crazytalkers.

---

Quote:

---

So instead of pointing the finger at some inflamed liberal mad about the war or immigration crackdowns...or foaming at the mouth about Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, lets all recognize that the he's just another PirateNews strking out at the Gangsta Govt Commie-Jew-Nazi Member's of Her Majesty's Intenational Conspiracy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Or maybe they kept it from being worse, made sure nobody but Democrats and liberal supporters got killed or wounded?

---

Quote:

---

RED TERROR

It is necessary - secretly and urgently to prepare the terror, to introduce mass terror. Do not look in the file of incriminating evidence to see whether or not the accused rose up against the Soviets with arms or words. Ask him instead to which class he belongs, what is his background, his education, his profession. These are the questions that will determine the fate of the accused. That is the meaning and essence of the Red Terror.

Yours, Jew Lenin. P.S. Find tougher people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSterror.htm


As dictator, Lenin adopted the merciless terror methods of France’s Illuminati chief, Robespierre. To help in the killing, Lenin mobilized 1,400,000 Jews, putting many to work for the Cheka secret police. Lenin ordered the Cheka to "execute weapons owners!" They were also to kill as many students as possible, including every youth seen wearing a school cap. Concentration camps were set up from which victims never emerged. Barges were used to drown people. Eyes of churchmen were poked out, tongues cut off, hands sawn off, heads drilled with dental tools—while screaming victims were still alive. Those nearby were forced to cut off the scalp and skull of victims and eat their brains; then, they, too, were executed. Whole families were arrested, mothers brutally raped and killed with children and fathers watching. Then all were grotesquely tortured and killed. Lenin and Trotsky were, nevertheless, never satisfied. "Put more force into the terror," Lenin demanded. In August, 1923, with syphilis ravaging his mind, an ailing Vladimir Lenin sat on his balcony at Christmas and howled at the full moon like a wolf. A few weeks later, he was dead. But the Red Terror had only begun. Lenin’s bloody successor, Joseph Stalin, was at his bedside ready to assume Lenin’s mantle as chief executioner. From 1923 to his own death in the 50s, Stalin saw to it that tens of millions more were purged, arrested, locked away in psychiatric hospitals and gulags, and tortured in KGB chambers of horror.
http://www.texemarrs.com/012001/revbld.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by piratenews:

Republican judge killed on the sport. Giffords was more Republican than Democrat, so Democrates HATED her and wanted her DEAD.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And again, last time I checked, it wasn't Signy who was claiming that *I* had tried to tie the teabaggers and Sarah Palin to this guy. Rappy didn't take it up with Signy, he responded to - and quoted - MY posts, and aimed his ire at me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Or it's too clever for you to understand. After all, that's twice now you couldn't even figure out what the name of threads was...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
He's in the far-right wing. Nuttier than a fruitcake like PN, but not so different from Wulf, who espouses violence at every opportunity. And Rappy, with his brilliant little statement about "choose and perish" belongs in the same bag of snakes.

---

Quote:

---

So I gave back what the RWERz here have so generously provided: Intolerance, prejudice, idiocy, and just a whiff of threat. And I find, not surprisingly, that RWERz get all bent out of shape when what THEY do is reflected back at them. Can dish it out, can't take it. Get poked with a stick, and go into a frenzy of whining. Sheesh.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
So I gave back what the RWERz here have so generously provided: Intolerance, prejudice, idiocy, and just a whiff of threat. And I find, not surprisingly, that RWERz get all bent out of shape when what THEY do is reflected back at them. Can dish it out, can't take it. Get poked with a stick, and go into a frenzy of whining. Sheesh.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And again, last time I checked, it wasn't Signy who was claiming that *I* had tried to tie the teabaggers and Sarah Palin to this guy. Rappy didn't take it up with Signy, he responded to - and quoted - MY posts, and aimed his ire at me.

---

So which one, Signy or Au, ghost wrote your second post in this thread?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Or it's too clever for you to understand. After all, that's twice now you couldn't even figure out what the name of threads was...

---

"name of threads was" golly gosh Kwik, no wonder I'm having a hard time comprehending your posts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
So I gave back what the RWERz here have so generously provided: Intolerance, prejudice, idiocy, and just a whiff of threat. And I find, not surprisingly, that RWERz get all bent out of shape when what THEY do is reflected back at them. Can dish it out, can't take it. Get poked with a stick, and go into a frenzy of whining. Sheesh.

---

Long fall from a high road you will never take again.

p.s. Wasn't your comment more befitting of your alias, Rue?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
FOX NEWS, your fave right-wing source, says:

DHS Memo Suggests Shooter May Be Linked To Racist Organization

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/09/dhs-memo-suggests-shooter
-may-be-linked-racist-organization#ixzz1AYUxTiKh

"The group's ideology is anti government, anti immigration, anti ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti Semitic," according to the memo which goes on to point out that Congressman Giffords is the first Jewish female elected to high office in Arizona.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Big Damn, I have occasionally descended into right-wing style rhetoric just to see the reaction. If you consider that a "long fall from a high road", have you just said that the RWERz around here are gutter-crawlers? I mean, really, what does that say about your buddies? Not very nice of you, is it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

He's in the far-right wing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You mean the one in which I noted that Palin put Giffords on her "target list"? Did I say there was a connection? No, I did not. I *asked* if there MIGHT BE a connection.

I'm really sorry you cannot comprehend the subtleties. It must suck to be you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Because you're really not very bright? Yeah, no wonder.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You mean the one in which I noted that Palin put Giffords on her "target list"? Did I say there was a connection? No, I did not. I *asked* if there MIGHT BE a connection.

I'm really sorry you cannot comprehend the subtleties. It must suck to be you.

---

Yeah, I'm tripped up by context yet again.
How you can try to argue that someone with your long history of anti-Palin / anti-Tea Party rhetoric had no ulterior motive for your post is beyond me.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Because you're really not very bright? Yeah, no wonder.

---

But my Dad is strongher than your Dad, nah nah nah.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Again, Rappy, you are inferring things and motives that I have not implied. All the partisanship, "geeking out" about some wannabe-war, and "phonied up" controversy is in YOUR mind, not mine. I made note of the FACT that Palin had this woman on her target list. I made no connection, but asked if there might be a connection. You're the one jumping to conclusions here, assigning motives and agenda where none have been made clear.

I also asked if the guy might be Muslim. Oddly, you aren't screaming about THAT. Go figure..

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Big Damn, I have occasionally descended into right-wing style rhetoric just to see the reaction. If you consider that a "long fall from a high road", have you just said that the RWERz around here are gutter-crawlers? I mean, really, what does that say about your buddies? Not very nice of you, is it?

---

Quote:

---

I just hope I never see you take Wulf (or any other poster) to task for his (or her) percieved intolerance. Sorry if the subtlety was lost on you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Big Damn, I have occasionally descended into right-wing style rhetoric just to see the reaction. If you consider that a "long fall from a high road", have you just said that the RWERz around here are gutter-crawlers? I mean, really, what does that say about your buddies? Not very nice of you, is it?

---

So is putting words in someone's mouth. A pet peeve of yours if I'm not mistaken.

---

Quote:

---

I just hope I never see you take Wulf (or any other poster) to task for his (or her) percieved intolerance. Sorry if the subtlety was lost on you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Again, Rappy, you are inferring things and motives that I have not implied. All the partisanship, "geeking out" about some wannabe-war, and "phonied up" controversy is in YOUR mind, not mine. I made note of the FACT that Palin had this woman on her target list. I made no connection, but asked if there might be a connection. You're the one jumping to conclusions here, assigning motives and agenda where none have been made clear.

I also asked if the guy might be Muslim. Oddly, you aren't screaming about THAT. Go figure..

---

By interjecting Palin's face book page image, you made a DIRECT connection. To deny that is to deny reality.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Rappy, you can try to bury your little "choose and perish" statement with a blizzard of off-topic snark, but I really know which side you're on. It was YOUR response I found both offensive and threatening. And coming from a guy who can't even commit to saying whether a flat tax is fair or not... I mean, you're just a little coward who gets all wet when someone does your dirty work. Sorry dude, but if it were possible to have less than zero respect for someone, you would be that person.

---

Quote:

---

I wonder what you all will have to say if he was part of the United Socialist Union, or some devout far-left liberal?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
DC Snipers - Not the Tea Party

Guy who flew his plane into the IRS building- Not the Tea Party

Guy who held the Discovery Center Hostage- Not the Tea Party

....hmmm Im starting to see a pattern here....

This guy... hmm...


I wonder what you all will have to say if he was part of the United Socialist Union, or some devout far-left liberal?



"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Rappy, you can try to bury your little "choose and perish" statement with a blizzard of off-topic snark, but I really know which side you're on. It was YOUR response I found both offensive and threatening. And coming from a guy who can't even commit to saying whether a flat tax is fair or not... I mean, you're just a little coward who gets all wet when someone does your dirty work. Sorry dude, but if it were possible to have less than zero respect for someone, you would be that person.

---

He did seem positively giddy about these shootings, didn't he?

"The was has begun," and all that rot.

---

Quote:

---

A reporter called me a little while ago, and told me that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords had been shot at a public event. She is in critical condition.

I'm going to let others comment on what this means for America. I just want to say what it means to me.

Gabrielle Giffords and I served together on the House Committee on Science and Technology. She was the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, and I was a member of that subcommittee. Her D.C. office was one floor above mine.

I saw Gabby dozens, if not hundreds of times, during our two years together. And nearly every time that I can remember, she was smiling.

Gabby is one of the most cheerful, charming and engaging people I have ever known. She's always looking on the bright side. She has something good to say about pretty much everyone. Bad news never lays a glove on her. She loves life, and all the people in it.

No matter what is going on in your life, after fifteen minutes with Gabby, you'll feel that you can touch the stars.

Everyone knew that Gabby would have a tough race in 2010. (She actually won with 49% of the vote.) But I always thought that if each of her constituents could spend that fifteen minutes with her, and see what she is really like, then she would win with 99.9% of the vote. (Same thing about Harry Teague of New Mexico, who lost, and a few others that I could name.) You would want her as your Congressman, because you would want her as your friend.

I know nothing about the man who shot Gabby, and what was going through his mind when he did this. But I will tell you this - if he shot Gabby out of hatred, then it wasn't Gabby he was shooting, but rather some cartoon version of her, drawn by her political opposition. Because there is no way - NO WAY - that anyone who really knows Gabby could hate her or hurt her. She is a kind, gentle soul.

My heart goes out to Mark Kelly, Gabby's husband, and the many, many people who love her. Gabby, we don't want to lose you. Please stay here with us.

Alan Grayson

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Rappy, you can try to bury your little "choose and perish" statement with a blizzard of off-topic snark, but I really know which side you're on. It was YOUR response I found both offensive and threatening. And coming from a guy who can't even commit to saying whether a flat tax is fair or not... I mean, you're just a little coward who gets all wet when someone does your dirty work. Sorry dude, but if it were possible to have less than zero respect for someone, you would be that person.

---

He did seem positively giddy about these shootings, didn't he?

"The was has begun," and all that rot.

---

T'wasn't I who started off the barrage with " right wing assholes ", inferring that this guy was a right winger. Or posting Palin's fb page info... It's incredible, how hard and fast you Left wingers go to attack those not responsible for this attack, and then claim innocence of doing exactly what you just did.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Only if you promise not to go around assigning opinions to other people, m'kay?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

You think the guy's a hero because he shot a Democrat. I get that. I don't understand WHY you feel that way, but I understand that you DO feel that way. That's how deep your hatred for liberals goes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Only if you promise not to go around assigning opinions to other people, m'kay?

---

I am powerless to argue against your do as I say not as I do stance. Or do you not consider AU a person?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

You think the guy's a hero because he shot a Democrat. I get that. I don't understand WHY you feel that way, but I understand that you DO feel that way. That's how deep your hatred for liberals goes.

---

You project exactly and exclusively your own characteristics , onto others, to weasel out of being seen for who you really are.

This guy is a nut case. I don't know his motives, do you ? The Congresswoman was for tighter border control, as I understand it. She could have easily been targeted for her immigration views as her votes on ObamaCare. Or, who the hell knows, this guy could believe she was a demon, or an alien.... but it's the Left who started this whole bogus association w/ Palin's ' hit list'. She meant politically, and you guys know that. Stop trying gen up excuses and false accountability to vilify the GOP for their POLITICAL views.

Boehner spoke of this, and his words ring dead on true. "An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. "

How's about some of y'all stfu on this "hero" crap, and stop trying to start something you don't want started.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
RAPPY: Did I post "Choose and die" and "The war has begun"?

---

No, I did, or is your memory so short that you have to ask ?

Quote:

---

That is a far cry from calling someone an asshole. Would the comparison between your threatening statement and my non-threatening one make a bigger impact if I gave you an example of what I could have said that was equivalent? If I had posted with same intent? Something like "They should all die", or "Let's have some target practice"?

---

I was responding to the idiocy I had read, by some interjecting Palin's "hit list ". The Left jumped all OVER that nonsense. You've never made any sarcastic remark , ever in your life ? I'm sure you'll claim no, but that'd make you a liar.

Those remarks? I was trying to piss you off, and it worked.

Quote:

---

As usual, you're weaseling out of what you said. Refusing to take responsibility for what you so clearly posted and meant.

---

Nope, nope and nope.

Quote:

---

Yanno, you have been dishonest for so long, you don't even know what the truth is anymore. Worse, you're dishonest with yourself. So full of self-justification and rationalization you don't even know what you stand for anymore. You refuse to go down that rabbit-hole of what you call thought, and follow the logic from beginning to end. In your own way, you're as crazy as Loughton and PN.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Rappy, you've painted yourself into a corner. Everybody knows it, even you. Please- for the love of god, take a deep breath and stop. I'll stop responding to you for a couple of days.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You and Rappy keep assigning me motives, positions, agendas, and opinions. Now you're going to get pissy when I return the favor?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Y'know that right-wing hypocrisy Signy referred to? You're doing it again. You should see to that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And Rappy has never convinced me that he is a person. He's a caricature, a cartoon.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM: you're as crazy as Loughton and PN.

---