Activism Discussion: Durbin The Rat Apologizes For Bad Behavior

Durbin The Rat Apologizes For Bad Behavior
Posts: 10

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1   (First | Last)

Dave Simpson
2005-06-22 12:40:25 EST

He offended Americans, though it's not surprising coming from the
Democratic Party.

I wonder why Durbin was led to apologize. Was it to avoid more
criticism of the Dims by Americans for being so obstructionist and even
outright anti-American?

Even if Durbin apologizes, Bush should give Bolton a recess
appointment.


http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=durbin&btnG=Search+News


http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=bush+recess+bolton


Jim E
2005-06-22 12:55:33 EST

"Dave Simpson" <david_l_simpson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119458425.466721.214350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> He offended Americans, though it's not surprising coming from the
> Democratic Party.
>
> I wonder why Durbin was led to apologize. Was it to avoid more
> criticism of the Dims by Americans for being so obstructionist and even
> outright anti-American?
>
> Even if Durbin apologizes, Bush should give Bolton a recess
> appointment.
>

That is guaranteed.




Dwain
2005-06-22 22:21:22 EST
In article <3htjg7FimiqmU1@individual.net>, YD641387@SEA.net says...
>
> "Dave Simpson" <david_l_simpson@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1119458425.466721.214350@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > He offended Americans, though it's not surprising coming from the
> > Democratic Party.
> >
> > I wonder why Durbin was led to apologize. Was it to avoid more
> > criticism of the Dims by Americans for being so obstructionist and even
> > outright anti-American?
> >
> > Even if Durbin apologizes, Bush should give Bolton a recess
> > appointment.
> >
>
> That is guaranteed.
>

Ha ha. Who are the "dims" around here now?

It is Bush who needs a recess appointment. And the shit kicked out of
him by the debate club.

Better yet, a trial in the Hague.



Wm James
2005-06-24 18:35:02 EST
On 22 Jun 2005 09:40:25 -0700, "Dave Simpson"
<david_l_simpson@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>He offended Americans, though it's not surprising coming from the
>Democratic Party.
>
>I wonder why Durbin was led to apologize. Was it to avoid more
>criticism of the Dims by Americans for being so obstructionist and even
>outright anti-American?

He didn't apologize for what he said, he apologized for people
understanding him. He should resign, give up his citizenship, and
move to some country which he thinks is better like Sudan or Cuba.

>Even if Durbin apologizes, Bush should give Bolton a recess
>appointment.
>
>http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=durbin&btnG=Search+News
>http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=bush+recess+bolton

I think the congress should take it to the mat. If the democrats want
to play this silly game of defaming the military and denouncing the
US, let them, and make them fight for their "principles". Let the
american public see them every day whining about how evil the USA is,
and see how that goes over in the next few elections.

William R. James


A*@hotmail.com
2005-06-24 18:45:45 EST
I think the congress should take it to the mat. If the democrats want
to play this silly game of defaming the military and denouncing the
US, let them, and make them fight for their "principles". Let the
american public see them every day whining about how evil the USA is,
and see how that goes over in the next few elections.

William R. James

Senator Durbins if/then argument seems to subtle for just about half of
the population of the United States.

He said what needed saying and he owes no apology for that. Mistakes
are/were being made which need to be corrected. The mistakes are not
his, he merely pointed them out.


Dan Clore
2005-06-25 00:49:40 EST
a*9@hotmail.com wrote:

> I think the congress should take it to the mat. If the democrats want
> to play this silly game of defaming the military and denouncing the
> US, let them, and make them fight for their "principles". Let the
> american public see them every day whining about how evil the USA is,
> and see how that goes over in the next few elections.
>
> William R. James
>
> Senator Durbins if/then argument seems to subtle for just about half of
> the population of the United States.
>
> He said what needed saying and he owes no apology for that. Mistakes
> are/were being made which need to be corrected. The mistakes are not
> his, he merely pointed them out.

What most impresses me about this sort of feeding frenzy is
the way the comment gets misrepresented and distorted.
Instead of saying that an act of torture sounds like
something from a repressive regime (really controversial,
huh?), they make it out like he said the US is like Nazi
Germany or a Soviet Gulag. The point is to change the terms
of comparison, so it looks like he's attacking the entire
country, instead of just the criminal acts of the Bush
administration.

--
Dan Clore

My collected fiction, _The Unspeakable and Others_:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1587154838/thedanclorenecro/
Lord We├┐rdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

Strange pleasures are known to him who flaunts the
immarcescible purple of poetry before the color-blind.
-- Clark Ashton Smith, "Epigrams and Apothegms"


Wm James
2005-06-25 10:47:01 EST
On 24 Jun 2005 15:45:45 -0700, arthurstone309@hotmail.com wrote:

>I think the congress should take it to the mat. If the democrats want
>to play this silly game of defaming the military and denouncing the
>US, let them, and make them fight for their "principles". Let the
>american public see them every day whining about how evil the USA is,
>and see how that goes over in the next few elections.
>
>William R. James
>
>Senator Durbins if/then argument seems to subtle for just about half of
>the population of the United States.
>
>He said what needed saying and he owes no apology for that. Mistakes
>are/were being made which need to be corrected. The mistakes are not
>his, he merely pointed them out.

He compared the US to nazi germany and other murderous dictatorships.
He compared US soldiers to concentration camp killers. That's not
only lies, it's blatently so, and an insult to decent people. And all
for political fodder too. Let's see how he does next election.

William R. James


Charles Aulds
2005-06-25 10:56:50 EST
On 25 Jun 2005 09:47:01 -0500, Wm James <wrjames.remove@spamreaper.org> wrote:

>e compared the US to nazi germany and other murderous dictatorships.
>He compared US soldiers to concentration camp killers

No, actually he did not. What he said was true.

He didn't even make a comparison of the treatment of prisoners in the Guantanamo
Bay facility to the Soviet "gulags" or to the Nazi death camps .... what he said
was that what is going on in Guantanamo is the thing you'd expect to find in the
gulags and concentration camps ... and I believe that's true. No respect for
the rights or humanity of the prisoners.

The difference is in the extremity of the conduct, not in its nature, and we
shouldn't be distracted from that fact ... the difference between Gitmo and the
gulags is in the EXTREMITY of the cruelty, that's a difference without a real
distinction. These men are being held in closed detention facilities, with no
evidence of their guilt having been produced, they have been denied the right to
see legal council, to prove their innocence, to see their families, and they are
being told their detentions are "indefinite," though it has been hinted that
they will be released after the "cessation of hostilities."

That's un-American.

What is going on is the systematic denial of the rights of those prisoners, not
only their LEGAL rights (under Geneva), but their rights as human beings, those
rights that our very own Declaration of Independence declares to be the
"inalienable rights" of all men, of all races, of all nationalities. What's at
stake here is the very American idea that every human being (if you are a
believer, by virtue of an endowment of Life by his or her Creator) deserves a
certain level of respect and decent treatment ... and the right to due process
by law is part of that.

Make no mistake, either, about one other thing ... Guantanamo is not about the
treatment of prisoners; it's about the actions of Americans ... and it always
has been. These actions strike at the very heart of what it means to be an
American ... they strike right at the heart of those shared principles of
justice and humanity that are espoused in our Declaration of Independence, and
codified as the highest law of our land in the US Constitution. They strike at
the shared beliefs that bind us as a nation, as a people with common purpose ...
they threaten to destroy our national unity.

Do we really want to trash that without a serious and protracted debate?

The true price we're paying for this misbegotten "war on terror" is becoming
painfully obvious ... just like Vietnam, it is dividing our nation, at a time
when what we need most is a new sense of national unity and purpose.

And that doesn't mean blind loyalty to a leader ... any leader. It means
unwavering loyalty to a set of principles that we were all taught. We KNOW what
to believe.

Charles


Wm James
2005-06-27 22:13:15 EST
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 09:56:50 -0500, Charles Aulds <caulds@hiwaayX.net>
wrote:

>On 25 Jun 2005 09:47:01 -0500, Wm James <wrjames.remove@spamreaper.org> wrote:
>
>>e compared the US to nazi germany and other murderous dictatorships.
>>He compared US soldiers to concentration camp killers
>
>No, actually he did not. What he said was true.

I heard what he said, and it was not only false, but amounts to
assisting the terrorists. He should be as ashamed of himself as decet
people are ashamed of him.

>He didn't even make a comparison of the treatment of prisoners in the Guantanamo
>Bay facility to the Soviet "gulags" or to the Nazi death camps .... what he said
>was that what is going on in Guantanamo is the thing you'd expect to find in the
>gulags and concentration camps ... and I believe that's true. No respect for
>the rights or humanity of the prisoners.

And that was a blatent lie. Did the gulags and concentration camps
supply nutritious meals? Did the gulags and concentration camps
provide religous texts and paraphanilia to the prisoners at taxpayer
expense and respect their rights regarding the practice of their
superstitions? Did the gulags and concentration camps open the doors
to all sorts of kook groups to provide commentary? Did the gulags and
concentration camps provide taxpayer paid lawyers to the prisoners?
In case you didn't notice, those who were found in the gulags and
concentration camps had lost a lot of weight even if they survived.
The prisoners at camp Xreay gain weight.

>The difference is in the extremity of the conduct, not in its nature, and we
>shouldn't be distracted from that fact ... the difference between Gitmo and the
>gulags is in the EXTREMITY of the cruelty, that's a difference without a real
>distinction. These men are being held in closed detention facilities, with no
>evidence of their guilt having been produced, they have been denied the right to
>see legal council, to prove their innocence, to see their families, and they are
>being told their detentions are "indefinite," though it has been hinted that
>they will be released after the "cessation of hostilities."
>
>That's un-American.

In what war in US history have captured prisomners been treated as
american civilians and given lawyers and trials? During WWII, none of
the germans held in US prison camps stood trial for shooting at
americans in Germany. Certianly, none of the captured spies and others
not fighting in uniform were given trials. Many were simply executed
on the spot.

>What is going on is the systematic denial of the rights of those prisoners, not
>only their LEGAL rights (under Geneva),

Wrong! Geneva is irelevant. These aren't POWs, but criminals fighting
out of uniform and not even with a border.

> but their rights as human beings, those
>rights that our very own Declaration of Independence declares to be the
>"inalienable rights" of all men, of all races, of all nationalities.

Firstof all, you shouold read what it says. Secondly, The Declaration
is not law.

>What's at
>stake here is the very American idea that every human being (if you are a
>believer, by virtue of an endowment of Life by his or her Creator) deserves a
>certain level of respect and decent treatment ... and the right to due process
>by law is part of that.

They are getting due process. They are being held and given better
care than they deserve while the war is carried out. They can help
make that sooner by cooperating.

>Make no mistake, either, about one other thing ... Guantanamo is not about the
>treatment of prisoners; it's about the actions of Americans ... and it always
>has been.

The americans there are acting honorably.

>These actions strike at the very heart of what it means to be an
>American ... they strike right at the heart of those shared principles of
>justice and humanity that are espoused in our Declaration of Independence, and
>codified as the highest law of our land in the US Constitution. They strike at
>the shared beliefs that bind us as a nation, as a people with common purpose ...
>they threaten to destroy our national unity.
>
>Do we really want to trash that without a serious and protracted debate?

I don't want it trashed at all, but I see those like you attempting to
trash it every day by making such comparisons.

>The true price we're paying for this misbegotten "war on terror" is becoming
>painfully obvious ... just like Vietnam, it is dividing our nation, at a time
>when what we need most is a new sense of national unity and purpose.

The only thing dividing the nation are the nuts who don't care what
happens to the country, or how much they assist the dictators and
terrorists in attacking the USA and killing americans as long as they
think it makes Bush or republicans look bad. Durbin doesn't care
about the US or the constitution, or how many americnas are
slaughtered, he's only interested in promoting himself no matter who
gets hurt.

>And that doesn't mean blind loyalty to a leader ... any leader. It means
>unwavering loyalty to a set of principles that we were all taught. We KNOW what
>to believe.
>
>Charles

If you did know, then you wouldn't accept the actions of sleaze bags
like Durbin, and certianly wouldn't parrot the lies.

William R. James


LeMod Pol
2005-06-28 14:01:50 EST


Wm James wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 09:56:50 -0500, Charles Aulds <caulds@hiwaayX.net>
> wrote:
>
> >The difference is in the extremity of the conduct, not in its nature, and we
> >shouldn't be distracted from that fact ... the difference between Gitmo and the
> >gulags is in the EXTREMITY of the cruelty, that's a difference without a real
> >distinction. These men are being held in closed detention facilities, with no
> >evidence of their guilt having been produced, they have been denied the right to
> >see legal council, to prove their innocence, to see their families, and they are
> >being told their detentions are "indefinite," though it has been hinted that
> >they will be released after the "cessation of hostilities."
> >That's un-American.

Have you been to Gitmo to see what happens there.
i know you are not old enough to have a clue about
dachau, birkenau, etc or the gulags. Nor old
enough to have been in a VC prison so you are
blowing smoke out of your juvenile ass.

Further you have no clue about the prison
population - US troops took several thousand
prisoners in Afghanistan of which 7 or 800 of the
absolute vilest were shipped to Gitmo.
In an experiment 200 were released but many of
them have been found shooting and 5-10 recaptured

As soon as Scotus rules the trials will begin

> In what war in US history have captured prisomners been treated as
> american civilians and given lawyers and trials? During WWII, none of
> the germans held in US prison camps stood trial for shooting at
> americans in Germany. Certianly, none of the captured spies and others
> not fighting in uniform were given trials. Many were simply executed
> on the spot.
>
> >What is going on is the systematic denial of the rights of those prisoners, not
> >only their LEGAL rights (under Geneva),
>
> Wrong! Geneva is irelevant. These aren't POWs, but criminals fighting
> out of uniform and not even with a border.
>
> > but their rights as human beings,

It is difficult to see that scum as "human"

>> those
> >rights that our very own Declaration of Independence declares to be the
> >"inalienable rights" of all men, of all races, of all nationalities.
>
> Firstof all, you shouold read what it says. Secondly, The Declaration
> is not law.
>
> >What's at
> >stake here is the very American idea that every human being (if you are a
> >believer, by virtue of an endowment of Life by his or her Creator) deserves a
> >certain level of respect and decent treatment ... and the right to due process
> >by law is part of that.

I am not sure that your piety is commendable --
rather it seems to go par and parcel with the rest
of your delusions

> They are getting due process. They are being held and given better
> care than they deserve while the war is carried out. They can help
> make that sooner by cooperating.
>
> >Make no mistake, either, about one other thing ... Guantanamo is not about the
> >treatment of prisoners; it's about the actions of Americans ... and it always
> >has been.

So what does that mean??? I would recommend that
you look carefully within yourself before you dare
to criticize any others.

> The americans there are acting honorably.
>
> >These actions strike at the very heart of what it means to be an
> >American ... they strike right at the heart of those shared principles of
> >justice and humanity that are espoused in our Declaration of Independence, and
> >codified as the highest law of our land in the US Constitution. They strike at
> >the shared beliefs that bind us as a nation, as a people with common purpose ...
> >they threaten to destroy our national unity.
> >
> >Do we really want to trash that without a serious and protracted debate?
>
> I don't want it trashed at all, but I see those like you attempting to
> trash it every day by making such comparisons.


> >The true price we're paying for this misbegotten "war on terror" is becoming
> >painfully obvious ... just like Vietnam, it is dividing our nation, at a time
> >when what we need most is a new sense of national unity and purpose.

And it is people just like you that are creating
the "divisions" and you should be ashamed.

Add to that kerry and Rather, soros and moveon and
durbin and Dean, you are worse than the worse scum
at Gitmo -- because you should know better.

The jihad started in 622 AD and outside of some
occasional hudnas (pauses to rearm) has been
continuous through 1383 years. Mohammad invented
terrorism, a Fatimid missionary, Hasan-I Sabbah
and the assassins perfected it in the late 11th
century. In the 20th century terrorism was further
refined by Yasir Arafat, with assists from the IRA
bomb makers.

I guarantee that this "War on Terror" will not end
in your lifetime nor that of your grandchildren
-- unless foolish dreamers like you win the next
election -- in which case, G-d forbid, we'll all
be bowing to mecca shortly thereafter

> The only thing dividing the nation are the
> nuts who don't care what happens to the
> country,

ecce Charles Aulds

> or how much they assist the dictators and
> terrorists in attacking the USA and killing
> americans as long as they think it makes Bush or republicans look bad.

Ecce Charles Aulds

> Durbin doesn't care about the US or the
> constitution, or how many americnas are
> slaughtered, he's only interested in
> promoting himself no matter who gets hurt.
>
> >And that doesn't mean blind loyalty to a leader ... any leader.

You libs keep on broadcasting the faeces
of the male bovine animal, and pray that
the excrement never hits the portable
cooling device

> >It means unwavering loyalty to a set of
> >principles that we were all taught.
> >We KNOW what to believe.

You know absolutely nothing - get a refund from
your teachers
>
> If you did know, then you wouldn't accept the
> actions of sleaze bags like Durbin, and
> certainly wouldn't parrot the lies.

> William R. James

--
LP

"Islam is an invention for the purpose of
providing a religious justification for
Arab imperialism.
The Conquest is the reason and explanation
for Islam, not the other way around."
**Islamic historian Mohammed Ibn al-Rawandi

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Page: 1   (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron