Letter to Sergeant Darcy Tedford, deceased
Roedy Green
ambushed near Panjwaii, 25 kilometres west of Kandahar. Tedford served
with the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment based in CFB Petawawa
in Ontario. Tedford was married with two children.
photo:
http://www.cbc.ca/ns/features/fallen-soliders/images/Sergeant-Darcy-Tedford.jpg
Dear Darcy
You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
be.
Why did you do this? Stephen Harper said it "is the price we have to
pay for Canada's leadership in the world." Was it worth it?
I am pretty sure the reason you did this was you simply enjoy killing
animals, people, blowing things up, playing war, killing kids and
blowing the arms of grandmothers. You are a sick sadistic fuck, and
the army was a way to indulge your fantasies and get paid for it.
But was that sadistic pleasure worth the pain you inflicted on your
family?
OK, so you were at heart a serial killer. Why did you have to marry
and have children? Any decent person would have played your sick game
without taking 3 innocent people down with you. But I suppose, what
else can I expect from hunk of shit like you who killed innocent
Afghan civilians just for fun.
If there is a hell, may you rot in it.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com
Priorities: Prevent global climate destabilisation. End both wars. Prepare for oil shortages.
Rab
This may be the first time you don't openly welcome something shoved up your
ass.
"Roedy Green" <see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:667ho296u0dhl0v26...@4ax.com...
Sid9
folly except to the extent he
pulled US forces out before
the job was done.
Afghanistan was a NATO
humanitarian effort on behalf
the Afghanis to free them
from the Islamic tyranny
that had befallen them.
Extremists fundamentalists
of any religion are a danger
to humanity.
Peter White
> I've forwarded this post and your website to a few military people I know.
> This may be the first time you don't openly welcome something shoved up your
> ass.
Aren't you man enough to take action yourself or do you always call in
reinforcements ------ wimp that you are
Anarchore
I endorse this post fully, and may his family remember him as a low-IQ
grunt without the critical thinking skills to do the right thing and either
quit or kill the highest ranking CO he could find.
The Canadian "Heroes" killed making the ultimate sacrifice for Stephen
Harper's masters in Afghanistan are nothing but big ZEROES!
The only true heroes fighting in Afghanistan are the Afghani people killing
invader NATO scum like the Canadian gung-ho dunderheads.
The Taliban is moral(well, to the Muslim sense) and far better than the
thugs installed as puppets.
When will states learn, the more they oppress the more we resist!
Hopefully this will blowback in a big way to the instigators in Israhell!
10x@teluös.net
>Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
>ambushed near Panjwaii, 25 kilometres west of Kandahar. Tedford served
>with the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment based in CFB Petawawa
>in Ontario. Tedford was married with two children.
>
>photo:
>http://www.cbc.ca/ns/features/fallen-soliders/images/Sergeant-Darcy-Tedford.jpg
Don't speak ill of the dead.
This man had no choice but to be in Afganistan.
Mr. Martin did very wrong in Committing Canadian troups to go there.
take the ö out of 10x@teluös.net to email me
Anarchore
> Rab wrote:
>
>> I've forwarded this post and your website to a few military people I know.
>> This may be the first time you don't openly welcome something shoved up your
>> ass.
>
>
> Aren't you man enough to take action yourself or do you always call in
> reinforcements ------ wimp that you are
It's good enough for Canadian troops who call in air-strikes on 'enemy
villages'.
>
Anarchore
> Afghanistan was not bush,jr's
> folly except to the extent he
> pulled US forces out before
> the job was done.
>
> Afghanistan was a NATO
> humanitarian effort on behalf
> the Afghanis to free them
> from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
Ohh that's what it *was* *now*, *is* it? Who saves them from NATO
installed thug tyranny? The Taliban!. Allah Akhbar Muthafucka!
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>I've forwarded this post and your website to a few military people I know.
>This may be the first time you don't openly welcome something shoved up your
>ass.
That letter applies to anyone fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. All of
them know damn well they are not defending their country.
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Afghanistan was a NATO
>humanitarian effort on behalf
>the Afghanis to free them
>from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
If that were true, the new government would be better than the
Taliban.
The new government is a coalition of war lords and drug lords.
The new government has a Ministry of Virtue and Vice to enforce
Islamic religious Shari'a law.
The new government has taken heroin production from moribund to 160%
of the world production.
It is not really a NATO operation. It is US/British operation with a
bit of arm twisted help from Canada and a bit of token representation
from other countries.
The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic. Afghanistan has
nothing to do with the North Atlantic. It is about a pipeline for
Unocal and heroin profits.
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Afghanistan was a NATO
>humanitarian effort on behalf
>the Afghanis to free them
>from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
You kill over a million civilians to rescue them? Should they not be
consulted first if they want this treatment?
If the combined efforts of the USA, Britain and Canada, and the Karzai
puppet government cannot defeat the Taliban, does that not imply the
majority of Afghans support the Taliban in preference to the Karzai
puppet government?
Roedy Green
indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Don't speak ill of the dead.
>This man had no choice but to be in Afganistan.
He voluntarily enlisted. There is no conscription in Canada. Even if
he did not clue in to the evil he was doing until he got to
Afghanistan, he still had the right to refuse to fight and go to jail.
He would not have been executed.
It was his responsibility to research just what he would be doing
after enlisting, same as we expected of Germans who enlisted or were
drafted into Hitler's army.
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Afghanistan was a NATO
>humanitarian effort on behalf
>the Afghanis to free them
>from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
But that is still illegal. You can't go doing a regime change on some
country just because you think it would be to their advantage unless
you have the UN ok. You don't.
It is also not the reason the war was ostensibly started. It was
started because the USA demanded Afghanistan captured bin Laden and
extradite him without first negotiating an extradition treaty,
presenting evidence, or permitting an extradition hearing. That was
an outrageous request, but Americans were so paranoid, they did not
realise how badly they were acting.
These wars were planned long in advance for motives that are still not
admitted:
1. Afghanistan: heroin profits and Unocal pipeline
2. Iraq: control of oil.
I don't expect a low-IQ soldier to understand such subtleties, but I
do expect him to understand the very obvious facts: neither
Afghanistan nor Iraq attacked Canada or the USA. Therefore any war
against them is an illegal aggressive war. Any participation in such
a war makes one an international war criminal. The Nuremberg penalty
for that is hanging. Even if the probability of immediate prosecution
is low, it is still a capital crime.
Stephen Green
=============================
Roedy, you are a significant dumb fuck. Imagine preying on those who serve
this country, I might add with distinction.
You and your pacifist kind can only be described as complete cowards not fit
to be included in our society. You clearly have zero understanding of the
issues surrounding the Afghanistan issue. Canada, along with a number of
other nations are trying there level best to support the existing
Afghan government against the Taliban, who are clearly a tribe of
barbarians.
May you suffer a thousand deaths and be rewarded with a thousand
tribulations from the depth of Hades and never walk this planet ever again.
==
Stephen Green
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 03:02:11 GMT, 10x@teluös.net wrote, quoted or
> indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>Don't speak ill of the dead.
>>This man had no choice but to be in Afganistan.
>
> He voluntarily enlisted. There is no conscription in Canada. Even if
> he did not clue in to the evil he was doing until he got to
> Afghanistan, he still had the right to refuse to fight and go to jail.
> He would not have been executed.
>
> It was his responsibility to research just what he would be doing
> after enlisting, same as we expected of Germans who enlisted or were
> drafted into Hitler's army.
>
========================
You, you bastard are the evil one, without question.
=
Stephen Green
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:51:40 -0500, "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>Afghanistan was a NATO
>>humanitarian effort on behalf
>>the Afghanis to free them
>>from the Islamic tyranny
>> that had befallen them.
>
> You kill over a million civilians to rescue them? Should they not be
> consulted first if they want this treatment?
>
> If the combined efforts of the USA, Britain and Canada, and the Karzai
> puppet government cannot defeat the Taliban, does that not imply the
> majority of Afghans support the Taliban in preference to the Karzai
> puppet government?
>
=====================
No you silly idiot! The majority of Afghanistan's people VOTED for the
current government in an election. They do NOT support the Taliban.
Fucktard!
==========
Stephen Green
==============================
Oh fuck off you retarded and genetically demented twit.
The United Nations is bloody clear on the issue and indeed has approved
such.
Good god you are ignorant.
==========
===
Sid9
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:51:40 -0500, "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>> Afghanistan was a NATO
>> humanitarian effort on behalf
>> the Afghanis to free them
>> from the Islamic tyranny
>> that had befallen them.
>
> If that were true, the new government would be better than the
> Taliban.
>
> The new government is a coalition of war lords and drug lords.
>
> The new government has a Ministry of Virtue and Vice to enforce
> Islamic religious Shari'a law.
>
> The new government has taken heroin production from moribund to 160%
> of the world production.
>
> It is not really a NATO operation. It is US/British operation with a
> bit of arm twisted help from Canada and a bit of token representation
> from other countries.
>
> The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic. Afghanistan has
> nothing to do with the North Atlantic. It is about a pipeline for
> Unocal and heroin profits.
Only because of bush,jr's
incompetence and hurried
departure for adventures in Iraq
Sid9
Illegal?
You are off your rocker.
Dave Smith
Sid9 wrote:
>
> Afghanistan was not bush,jr's
> folly except to the extent he
> pulled US forces out before
> the job was done.
>
> Afghanistan was a NATO
> humanitarian effort on behalf
> the Afghanis to free them
> from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
>
> Extremists fundamentalists
> of any religion are a danger
> to humanity.
>
And that includes Christian fundies in positions of power.
David Johnston
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
>ambushed near Panjwaii, 25 kilometres west of Kandahar. Tedford served
>with the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment based in CFB Petawawa
>in Ontario. Tedford was married with two children.
>
>photo:
>http://www.cbc.ca/ns/features/fallen-soliders/images/Sergeant-Darcy-Tedford.jpg
>
>
>
>Dear Darcy
>
>You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>be.
>
>Why did you do this?
Because it was his duty.
Sid9
Amen...
Chom Noamsky
letter directly to the guy's family? They would be the authorities on what
kind of man he was, they at least deserve a chance to speak on his behalf.
I suspect that you would never have the guts to actually do that because you
might find out that he wasn't really evil at all... that perhaps he was just
a guy who loved his wife and kids and wanted to support them.
"Roedy Green" <see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:667ho296u0dhl0v26...@4ax.com...
Fred Fazemeier
"Chom Noamsky" <e...@t.me> wrote in message
news:Kl3ih.90555$rv4.78382@edtnps90...
> Since the guy is dead and can't defend himself why don't you send your
> letter directly to the guy's family? They would be the authorities on
what
> kind of man he was, they at least deserve a chance to speak on his behalf.
> I suspect that you would never have the guts to actually do that because
you
> might find out that he wasn't really evil at all... that perhaps he was
just
> a guy who loved his wife and kids and wanted to support them.
Yeah, sure. Guys who love their families always listen to a lying sociopath
and sign up to kill innocent people. Is that how brainwashed the people in
our society have become? Does anyone remember the international flight that
took place during Vietnam because everyone knew it was a bullshit war? Those
people were maligned at the time, but they are alive today. Duty? If we were
truly threatened? Hell, yes. But this bullshit that has been perpetrated on
our military over and over by lying chickenhawks? FUCK, NO.
pcourterelle
"Roedy Green" <see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
> Dear Darcy
>
> You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
> sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
> be.
>
> Why did you do this? Stephen Harper said it "is the price we have to
> pay for Canada's leadership in the world." Was it worth it?
Standard Liberal tolerance and understanding at work here...and this
allegedly was sent to a grieving widow.
Roedy et al cannot differentiate between soldiers doing their duty and the
politicians who decide what duty that will be.
Classy guy eh?
pcourterelle
"Anarchore" <anar...@youhoe.seeeh> wrote in message
news:14yuh69vcew99$.1aetc452c3n3a.dlg@40tude.net...
If he did not have the 'critical thinking skills to do the right thing' then
he deserves your pity not your anger. Why would you demand that an
allegedly ignorant man do something he's not capable of?
So when the previous 20 or so people were killed under the Chrétien and
Martin governments, who by the way got us into this mess and have kept us
there, this wasn't a sacrifice for the masters down south? What delineates
the value of the deaths that have gone on before Hippo took office to the
ones who have died afterward while on a mission chosen and promoted by the
previous Liberal government?
Where is your anger for the Liberal 12 who were absent the day Hippo
extended the mission and could've easily turned the vote the other way, a
motion won by 4 votes? Where's your anger for Bill Graham and other Liberals
who voted to extend this mission? MIA no doubt...you call soldiers dirt yet
let those who sent them to war have a free pass.
Your hatred is solely for one political party because it suits your zealous
political outlook. You claim that Darcy did not possess critical thinking
skills. Your in no position to brag.
pc
pcourterelle
"Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Zy1ih.3745$AY1....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> Afghanistan was not bush,jr's
> folly except to the extent he
> pulled US forces out before
> the job was done.
>
> Afghanistan was a NATO
> humanitarian effort on behalf
> the Afghanis to free them
> from the Islamic tyranny
> that had befallen them.
>
> Extremists fundamentalists
> of any religion are a danger
> to humanity.
I suggest you refine your last statement. Extremists are a danger to
humanity, including zealots.
pcourterelle
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>No you silly idiot! The majority of Afghanistan's people VOTED for the
>current government in an election. They do NOT support the Taliban.
There were no Taliban candidates, were there? That's a Stalin-style
election.
David Johnston
<notea_...@islandnet.com> wrote:
>In article <mgfho29ril4rgdcvn...@4ax.com>,
>But he ignored his greater duty to live in integrity and truth.
No, he didn't. Soldiers don't have the option of second-guessing the
choices made by the politicians. And blaming them for those choices
is grievously unfair.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Oh fuck off you retarded and genetically demented twit.
>The United Nations is bloody clear on the issue and indeed has approved
>such.
Perhaps you are referring to resolution 1386. It calls for a small
peacekeeping force. It did not condone the killing of over a million
civilians or the occupation of the country.
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Illegal?
>You are off your rocker.
That is the principle announced at Nuremberg. Aggressive war is
illegal and the punishment for participating is hanging.
We held Nazis to a much higher standard that I am holding Americans
now. American won't be killed if they refuse to co-operate with the
war as Germans were.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>> He voluntarily enlisted. There is no conscription in Canada. Even if
>> he did not clue in to the evil he was doing until he got to
>> Afghanistan, he still had the right to refuse to fight and go to jail.
>> He would not have been executed.
>>
>> It was his responsibility to research just what he would be doing
>> after enlisting, same as we expected of Germans who enlisted or were
>> drafted into Hitler's army.
>>
>========================
>
>You, you bastard are the evil one, without question.
What is so evil about explaining international law to you?
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>Roedy, you are a significant dumb fuck. Imagine preying on those who serve
>this country, I might add with distinction.
They are not serving Canada. Canada is no way benefits from their
violence. Unocal benefits. The drug lord cronies benefit.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>nt against the Taliban, who are clearly a tribe of
>barbarians.
But Canada and the USA have killed far more people than the Taliban.
So Canada and USA are the bad guys.
Canada and the USA have stimulated the heroin trade, not the Taliban.
So Canada and USA are the bad guys.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>>You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>>sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>>be.
>>
>>Why did you do this?
>
>Because it was his duty.
IT was also the "duty" of Nazis to do what Hitler told them to do. Yet
we decided at Nuremberg that goes not morally or legally get them off
the hook. When soldiers do evil things they are morally and legally
responsible for them, even if ordered to. Eventually they will be
tried and hanged (or more likely given prison sentences) as war
criminals.
Roedy Green
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Since the guy is dead and can't defend himself why don't you send your
>letter directly to the guy's family?
The family have suffered immensely, and may well have tried to
convince the shithead to get a proper job. Killing was HIS decision,
not theirs.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Roedy et al cannot differentiate between soldiers doing their duty and the
>politicians who decide what duty that will be.
You have never heard of Nuremberg? "Just following orders" does not
cut it. You are personally responsible for what you do no matter who
borders you about.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>No, he didn't. Soldiers don't have the option of second-guessing the
>choices made by the politicians. And blaming them for those choices
>is grievously unfair.
Yes they do. They can decide not to enlist. Further they can decide
to refuse to fight and go to jail.
The bulk of these people knew perfectly well what they were getting
into, and just what atrocities they would be permitted to commit. That
is why they enlisted. It wasn't the money.
Roedy Green
>You clearly have zero understanding of the
>issues surrounding the Afghanistan issue. Canada, along with a number of
>other nations are trying there level best to support the existing
>Afghan government against the Taliban, who are clearly a tribe of
>barbarians.
You are so UTTERLY naive. Consider how utterly stingy Canada and the
USA are to the needs of other countries. Let me give some examples.
1. The USA is has the lowest foreign aid contribution of any first
world country.
2. The USA gives most of its foreign aid, not to the poorest
countries, but to one that enjoyed a billion dollar surplus -- Israel.
3. Neither Canada nor the USA have give a single HIV pill after
promising such aid to Africa two years ago.
4. The USA props up corrupt dictators all over the world.
5. The USA overturns democracies and installs dictators.
6. The CIA helped Saddam to power by training him.
7. The CIA trained bin Laden to give the Russians a rough time.
There is hardly an altruistic bone in the Canadian or US government.
Private citizens have, but not the government.
So why do you believe this bullshit that the Afghan war which is very
expensive in dollars and lives is for an altruistic purpose? It is as
preposterous as a belief in Santa Claus.
Ditto for Iraq.
10x@teluös.net
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 03:02:11 GMT, 10x@teluös.net wrote, quoted or
>indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>Don't speak ill of the dead.
>>This man had no choice but to be in Afganistan.
>
>He voluntarily enlisted. There is no conscription in Canada. Even if
>he did not clue in to the evil he was doing until he got to
>Afghanistan, he still had the right to refuse to fight and go to jail.
>He would not have been executed.
>
>It was his responsibility to research just what he would be doing
>after enlisting, same as we expected of Germans who enlisted or were
>drafted into Hitler's army.
You really do have low opinion of Canada's military don't you?
Just where would someone research this?
Would they ask you?
take the ö out of 10x@teluös.net to email me
jimjames5417
traitors are not shot on sight - like most countries in the world!!
You continue to reveal your mental, spiritual and moral illness with
every posting you make to this newsgroup!!
Did you ever meet a terrorist, Islamist, Communistor Fascist that you
didn't like???
Charlie Wolf
Thank you for posting your latest Bush-hating garbage. Your efforts
on our behalf have not gone unnoticed, and we simply wanted to pass
our sincerest thanks to you for your continuing efforts to support us
and our great cause. Please know that, while we continue our struggle
with the great Satan, we could use your further support in two
critical areas. Number one, we are quickly running out of money and
would appreciate your generous donation to any one of a number of our
organizations in the U.S. Just go to any mosque and ask where you can
contribute - or, as an alternative, you may contact the Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR) for direct contributions. Problem
number two is that we are quickly running out of suitable soldiers in
our war against the Great Satan. You see, evil American forces are
killing our terrorists eh, I mean insurgents in ever increasing
numbers and our vehicle drivers are really only worth about one trip
apiece. So, in your continuing efforts to support us, we would love
to hear from you regarding your desires to provide direct assistance.
Again - thank you so much for your support here on the internet for
our cause.
Sincerely - al Queda
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 02:31:38 GMT, Roedy Green
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
Lamont Cranston
> Thank you for posting your latest Bush-hating garbage. Your efforts
Shit, it must be Wednesday.
Different Wednesday, same old strawman bullshit from Charlie.
How'd the election work out for you, asshole?
Sid9
He is more of an enemy to
our troops than Osama himself.
The worst thing a soldier or Marine can
experience is an incompetent leader
Repeated for those who are sensitive about top/bottom postings:
bush,jr deserves everything he gets.
He is more of an enemy to our
troops than Osama himself.
The worst thing a soldier or Marine can
experience is an incompetent leader
ajam...@hotmail.com
Roedy Green wrote:
> Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
This is as sad a thing as I have ever seen..
Roedy, I disagree with a great deal of what you say but I don't think I
have ever before actually been offended by something you've said.
This was just pathetic, you should be ashamed of yourself.
jbaloun
pcourterelle wrote:
>
> Standard Liberal tolerance and understanding at work here...
NO MAN'S LAND Lyrics
Well how do you do Private William McBride
Do you mind if I sit here down by your graveside?
I'll rest for awhile in the warm summer sun
I've been walking all day and I'm nearly done
And I see by your gravestone you were only 19
When you joined the glorious fallen in 1916
And I hope you died quick and I hope you died clean
Or William McBride was it slow and obscene?
Chorus:
Did they beat the drum slowly, did they sound the pipes lowly?
Did the rifles fire o'er you as they lowered you down?
Did the bugle play the last post and chorus?
Did the pipes play the "Flowers o' the Forest"?
Well the sun it shines now on these green fields of France
The warm wind blows gently and the red poppies dance
The trenches have vanished now under the plow
No gas and no barbed wire, no guns fire now
For here in this graveyard it's still no man's land
And the countless white crosses in mute witness stand
To man's blind indifference to his fellow man
And a whole generation who butchered and damned
Well I can't help but wonder now, Willie McBride
Do all those who lie here know just why they died?
Did you really believe them when they told you the cause?
Did you really believe this war would end all wars?
But the suffering the sorrow the glory the shame
The killing, the dying, it was all done in vain
For William McBride it's all happened again
And again and again and again and again.
Jeff
Roedy Green wrote:
> Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
> with the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment based in CFB Petawawa
> in Ontario. Tedford was married with two children.
>
> photo:
> http://www.cbc.ca/ns/features/fallen-soliders/images/Sergeant-Darcy-Tedford.jpg
>
>
>
> Dear Darcy
>
> sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
> be.
>
> pay for Canada's leadership in the world." Was it worth it?
>
> animals, people, blowing things up, playing war, killing kids and
> blowing the arms of grandmothers. You are a sick sadistic fuck, and
> the army was a way to indulge your fantasies and get paid for it.
>
> But was that sadistic pleasure worth the pain you inflicted on your
> family?
>
> OK, so you were at heart a serial killer. Why did you have to marry
> and have children? Any decent person would have played your sick game
> without taking 3 innocent people down with you. But I suppose, what
> else can I expect from hunk of shit like you who killed innocent
> Afghan civilians just for fun.
>
> If there is a hell, may you rot in it.
> --
> Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com
> Priorities: Prevent global climate destabilisation. End both wars. Prepare for oil shortages.
You know Roedy, you and I agree on a great number of things. However
this is the most disgraceful post you have ever made. Even if you don't
support the war focus on the politicians that keep the war going, not
the soldiers who fight the war. Your a sick and hate filled man.
Charlie Wolf
Seems I struck a nerve with a few of you al Qeda supporters.
Fuck off Lamont.
Regards,
>
Anarchore
Of course the soldiers all get hyped up as heroes by the regime, and it is
sickening to see the propaganda rallies for an unjust war, as militarism
becomes mainstream and criticism is 'comforting the enemy'.
In such a climate, those who are opposed can see the soldiers being used as
pawns, and indeed the average soldier does not know what is going on. We
see the fawning of the media over the mission. Yes soldiers are dirt, the
politicians themselves know that best, they are brutes to send to kill.
And they have been brainwashed to that purpose through training and through
the military culture that seems to be supporting war -any war- as long as
they get to see some action. I have no pity for them when the action they
crave finds them. Most of them left their humanity behind when they put on
the uniform and those that don't soon learn what is required of a mercenary
killer.
Wanting to piss on their graves is a natural reaction to the hero-worship
of much of the culture, the artificial culture of the media that also is
for war because they buy into all the Bush security madness and of course
they are owned by pro-Israhelli interests.
Canada should never have backed the aggression against Afghanistan without
evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with 911(he didn't), and
Chretien, Martin, and Harper share responsibility for the Canadian and
Afghan dead as Canada participates in the US(Israhelli planned) War of
Terror.
In the meantime we can counter the propaganda by showing the soldiers'
giving the 'ultimate sacrifice' is no more significant than the hundreds of
Canadians meeting the 'ultimate sacrifice' in car accidents per year. I
don't necessarily hate all soldiers, it is just there is so much propaganda
that there is bound to be a backlash from those who don't buy into it. To
appeal to patriotism in a war that is against Canada's best interests is
nonsense. Fuck the war, fuck Israhell and their US and Canadian politician
puppets, and fuck the troops.
In fact saying that is the best favour you can do for them. If soldiers
don't like it, they should educate themselves and resist the mission. To
continue to heap praise on them for an immoral war based on lies is just to
perpetuate the militarist culture the US/Israeli double agents of the
NeoLiberal and NeoConservative parties are trying to create, and it means
that more Canadians will kill and die for more of the mideast wars that
PNAC has planned. If enough people tell the troops that they are scum for
massacres against the Afghan people who are fighting a just fight against a
war that was based entirely on lies and (not so)hidden agendas, more of
them may wake up.
I hope there is a mass mutiny and they string up that Hillier faggot.
Anarchore
> Unocal pipeline
>> 2. Iraq: control of oil.
>>
>> I don't expect a low-IQ soldier to understand such subtleties, but I
>> do expect him to understand the very obvious facts: neither
>> Afghanistan nor Iraq attacked Canada or the USA. Therefore any war
>> against them is an illegal aggressive war. Any participation in such
>> a war makes one an international war criminal. The Nuremberg penalty
>> for that is hanging. Even if the probability of immediate prosecution
>> is low, it is still a capital crime.
>
> Illegal?
> You are off your rocker.
The reason for the invasion was Bin Laden and 9/11 remember? Only, there
was never any evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks on NYC. The FBI
says there is no evidence, and although Bin Laden is on their website there
is no mention of 911. See for yourself: www.fbi.gov
www.geocities.com/anarchore/posters/binladen.jpg
Baldin...@msn.com
God, you are a pig. Go suck a pistol, and this time do it right.
Baldin Lee Pramer
Sid9
> In article <1166647993.0...@48g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>,
> gets his ass fried in an unnecessary war? Roedy's doing his best to
> bring some reality to the situation.
Reality would not be 100% pro-Islamic fundamentalists.
Most American would be happy to live without
fundamentalists, Muslim, Christian, or any
flavor of poison they peddle.
David Johnston
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 09:48:15 GMT, David Johnston <rgo...@block.net>
>wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>No, he didn't. Soldiers don't have the option of second-guessing the
>>choices made by the politicians. And blaming them for those choices
>>is grievously unfair.
>
>Yes they do. They can decide not to enlist.
Ah. So you believe being a soldier is wrong no matter what. I
disagree.
David Johnston
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:38:06 GMT, David Johnston <rgo...@block.net>
>wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>>You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>>>sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>>>be.
>>>
>>>Why did you do this?
>>
>>Because it was his duty.
>
>IT was also the "duty" of Nazis to do what Hitler told them to do. Yet
>we decided at Nuremberg that goes not morally or legally get them off
>the hook.
Germany was a signatory to the Geneva Conventions. Therefore it was
the duty of the German soldier to conform to them just as it is the
duty of a modern Canadian soldier. German soldiers were not punished
at Nuremberg merely for being soldiers on the wrong side, but for
their failure to live up to their duty. That soldiers are expected to
refuse illegal orders does not mean they would be justified in
refusing legal orders that they simply don't happen to like. The
maintenance of democracy is absolutely dependant on the willingness of
the military to take orders, when they are consistent with the law.
It's a small step after from refusing orders you don't like, after
all, to a military takeover of the government.
Dave Smith
>
> Dear Darcy
>
> You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
> sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
> be.
Well Roedy, you have sunk to a new low. It's tasteless enough to
post something so offensive, but it reflects even worse on you
that you would try to have a battle of wits with a dead man. Some
might consider it too be a fair match.
1...@bak.rr.com
This comes from one of the 12% of Americans that still refuses to open
their eyes to the petulant spoiled little coward that was selected by
the Supreme Court to destroy our military, our honor, and our treasury
to enrich an extremely small number of war profiteers while telling
every other American to get fucked.
I am already identified as a dissenter by the DIA, CIA, FBI, and NSA.
It is time to start identifiying these traitors who relish the end of
America. They don't have a clue what it means to be a reasoning human
being in the first place and will most likely follow the trend of Tim
McVey in blowing up federal buildings.
These are not merely nut jobs, they harbor the most vile and evil
feelings towards the majority of Americans who actually think for
themselves.
Roedy Green
someone who said :
>You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>be.
The CBC is airing a long series of mini interviews with parents and
wives, telling about the moment when the three soldiers came to their
door to tell them their loved one "didn't make it".
You can hear the suffering in their voices and the tears in their
eyes.
This was all so POINTLESS. Canada did not benefit from this. Those the
Canadians killed in Afghanistan did not benefit, neither did their
families. In many cases the families will starve to death without a
bread winner.
The families ruined by Afghan heroin did not benefit.
Some claim Canadian soldiers are fighting to free Afghan women from
the oppression of Islamic religious law. Yet they fail to note that
puppet dictator Karzai ALSO has a ministry of Virtue and Vice to
enforce those barbaric laws.
Sid9
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 02:31:38 GMT, Roedy Green
> <see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
>> You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>> sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>> be.
>
> The CBC is airing a long series of mini interviews with parents and
> wives, telling about the moment when the three soldiers came to their
> door to tell them their loved one "didn't make it".
>
> You can hear the suffering in their voices and the tears in their
> eyes.
>
> This was all so POINTLESS. Canada did not benefit from this. Those the
> Canadians killed in Afghanistan did not benefit, neither did their
> families. In many cases the families will starve to death without a
> bread winner.
>
> The families ruined by Afghan heroin did not benefit.
>
> Some claim Canadian soldiers are fighting to free Afghan women from
> the oppression of Islamic religious law. Yet they fail to note that
> puppet dictator Karzai ALSO has a ministry of Virtue and Vice to
> enforce those barbaric laws.
He has it because of bush,jr's failure to finish the job.
He has it survive in an unfriendly environment
Stephen Green
=======================
Like an Ostrich, your head is in the sand.
==
1...@bak.rr.com
I was in law enforcement for 16 years and I know the distinction
between the professional and the sick fucks.
I have seen fellow officers who put their fingers in the holes they
made after killing an inmate. They are indeed sick fucks. There are
sick fucks in the military as well but they are in very small numbers
and some are already standing trial, hopefully to spend the rest of
their lives in prison
The overwhelming majority of both law enforcement and military are
professionals. They do the job they have to do.
If someone truely is a sick fuck serial killer then I suppose the
military is a better place than the populace for them, until they are
revealed.
As for Darcy, I did not know him, I will not judge him.
I will honor his sacrifice as I continually blister the coward who
sent him to die at the bidding of his war profiteering cronies.
I will pray for justice to come to G. Bush in the form of an
International War Crimes Tribunal and subsequent hanging.
Direct you anger. Control your anger. Honor those who now serve evil
honorably. Join the contiousness of the human race in directing truth
and justice at the chimpoleon. for surely it is only a matter of time
until the truth is revealed to us all.
Bush and Osama are both heretics on an order of the first magnitude.
Watch as justice reveals herself as a matter of physics as well as
philosophy.
Don't allow Democrats to let the antichrist off the hook.
Investigations (with subpoena power) will begin in January. Poke your
fingers in the big eye on top of the pyramid not at the soldier who
just does as he or she is told.
The power of collective human conciousness can be awesome.
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 02:31:38 GMT, Roedy Green
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
>ambushed near Panjwaii, 25 kilometres west of Kandahar. Tedford served
>with the 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment based in CFB Petawawa
>in Ontario. Tedford was married with two children.
>
>photo:
>http://www.cbc.ca/ns/features/fallen-soliders/images/Sergeant-Darcy-Tedford.jpg
>
>
>
>Dear Darcy
>
>You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>be.
>
Fred Fazemeier
<1...@bak.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ofsjo2li99bodo05s...@4ax.com...
Wow, man. That was good.
Kudos.
1...@bak.rr.com
Please re-think your anger. I don't want to lose any amount of repect
for someone who has bouts of genius as you do.
Roedy Green
indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>You really do have low opinion of Canada's military don't you?
>Just where would someone research this?
>Would they ask you?
Are you familiar with the experiment conducted in 1971 by a team of
researchers led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University?
We rediscovered that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely. Perfectly normal people will AUTOMATICALLY abuse those
they have power over.
In war, young horny soldiers are given the power of life and death
over people that have been trained to call "ragheads".
Why do you think the governments want such extreme power over those
reporting wars? They want to keep quiet the natural abuse.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>Ah. So you believe being a soldier is wrong no matter what. I
>disagree.
Not at all. But if you sign up TODAY you are signing up for illegal
aggressive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Americans are signing up to
use banned weapons such as napalm, white phosphorus and cluster bombs.
Americans are signing up for torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
Presumably down the road, people will sign up knowing they will do
peace keeping in Darfur, or work to defend the borders. I have no
complaint with that. Back in the 1940s people signed up to protect
their country from invasion. I have no complaint with that.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>That soldiers are expected to
>refuse illegal orders does not mean they would be justified in
>refusing legal orders that they simply don't happen to like. The
>maintenance of democracy is absolutely dependant on the willingness of
>the military to take orders, when they are consistent with the law.
>It's a small step after from refusing orders you don't like, after
>all, to a military takeover of the government.
That is a good description of a soldier's legal obligation, the most
important of which is to avoid fighting an aggressive war.
In practice, any soldier refusing an order for any reason will be
beaten, abused and possibly killed. The wise time to object is BEFORE
enlisting.
However, morally, you are always responsible for what you do, not just
acts that violate the Geneva conventions. Morally you are obligated
to TAKE THE PUNISHMENT for refusing the order.
There is a distinction between refusing an order you feel is foolish,
or non-optimal and one that violates your moral principles.
Roedy Green
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>You should be VERY grateful that we live in a country where loonies and
>traitors are not shot on sight - like most countries in the world!!
Surely it is obvious that war is expensive and painful for everyone
involved. The onus is thus on you to justify it. What possible
advantages are there to continuing this war?
"No man is justified in doing evil on the ground of expedience."
~ Theodore Roosevelt
Roedy Green
who said :
>Please know that, while we continue our struggle
>with the great Satan, we could use your further support in two
>critical areas.
Al-Qaeda are the GOOD guys, at least in the Afghanistan conflict. I
have seen so evidence they had anything to do with 9/11. I have seen
plenty of evidence Bush was complicit.
Bush has killed over a million Afghans. Al-Qaeda gave a little bit of
help to the Afghans to fight off the American invaders. That makes
Al-Qaeda the GOOD guys in my book.
Why does the Arab world support Al-Qaeda? -- because it helps them
fight off American occupation.
I want Al-Qaeda to defeat the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq, not because
I am a great fan of Al-Qaeda, but because the USA has been such an
outrageous bully, and Islamic nations should be free to solve their
own problems without foreign intervention.
If the USA were not behaving so outrageously, there would not be an
Al-Qaeda. It grew to oppose American meddling and grand theft of oil.
Roedy Green
indirectly quoted someone who said :
>I was in law enforcement for 16 years and I know the distinction
>between the professional and the sick fucks.
Don't confuse law enforcement with the military. There is a strong
control on law enforcement officers to play fair with the accused. Law
enforcement is a skilled profession. Jail guards are the sickest
group. I met a guy who took that job solely for the purpose of
forcing inmates to give him sex.
In the military you can kill anyone anywhere with no questions asked.
They attract a totally different type of person. In situations
without civil law, rape and extortion are safe crimes. There is
almost no chance of prosecution. They are people who like killing,
not people who like stopping bad guys.
David Johnston
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:30:42 GMT, David Johnston <rgo...@block.net>
>wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>That soldiers are expected to
>>refuse illegal orders does not mean they would be justified in
>>refusing legal orders that they simply don't happen to like. The
>>maintenance of democracy is absolutely dependant on the willingness of
>>the military to take orders, when they are consistent with the law.
>>It's a small step after from refusing orders you don't like, after
>>all, to a military takeover of the government.
>
>That is a good description of a soldier's legal obligation, the most
>important of which is to avoid fighting an aggressive war.
>
>In practice, any soldier refusing an order for any reason will be
>beaten, abused and possibly killed. The wise time to object is BEFORE
>enlisting.'
Yeah. I get it. You hate all soldiers.
>
>However, morally, you are always responsible for what you do, not just
>acts that violate the Geneva conventions. Morally you are obligated
>to TAKE THE PUNISHMENT for refusing the order.
On the contrary, you are morally obligated to fulfill the
responsibilities you accept.
>
>There is a distinction between refusing an order you feel is foolish,
>or non-optimal and one that violates your moral principles.
And why would a soldier have moral principles against fighting on his
country's behalf?
David Johnston
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 00:16:57 GMT, David Johnston <rgo...@block.net>
>wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>Ah. So you believe being a soldier is wrong no matter what. I
>>disagree.
>
>Not at all. But if you sign up TODAY you are signing up for illegal
>aggressive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Sergeant Tedford didn't sign up today, or this year, or last year. It
takes time to get promotions in the Canadian military. So why are
you verbally pissing on his grave just because he's a dead soldier?
1...@bak.rr.com
<see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:56:33 -0800, 1...@bak.rr.com wrote, quoted or
>indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>I was in law enforcement for 16 years and I know the distinction
>>between the professional and the sick fucks.
>
>Don't confuse law enforcement with the military. There is a strong
>control on law enforcement officers to play fair with the accused. Law
>enforcement is a skilled profession. Jail guards are the sickest
>group. I met a guy who took that job solely for the purpose of
>forcing inmates to give him sex.
>
>In the military you can kill anyone anywhere with no questions asked.
>They attract a totally different type of person. In situations
>without civil law, rape and extortion are safe crimes. There is
>almost no chance of prosecution. They are people who like killing,
>not people who like stopping bad guys.
I wholeheartedly concur, but painting with so broad a brush as you do,
you fall into your own trap and de-legitimize yourself. As a former
(para-military) Corrections Officer (AKA Jail Guard) you have impugned
my honor and integrity and called me a sick fuck. That is untrue, I
think of myself as a thoughtful, caring individual who appreciates
others as insightful as yourself.
Imagine for a moment if all soldiers were truely as you describe them.
A formidible killing machine without conscience or discipline. This
planet would long ago have been devoured and decimated. Our (U.S.)
military is currently under the control of an heretic of the first
magnitude, just like bin Laden is an heretic of the first order. Yes,
these men and women are currently serving evil, honorably. They are
only the tools of nations, nothing more. I feel a quickening
approaching and minds like yours are an integral part of that
"collective human conciousness".
I think your anger sometimes overwhelms your intellect. It happens to
me sometimes. This "double-down" thing that the chimp is proposing,
now has me praying for a military coup here in my country.
I have witnessed your genius for a few years in this newsgroup and I
am dismayed that you would make over-broad statements as this. I am
every bit as angry as you are. I try to focus my anger where it
properly belongs, on the war profiteering neo-cons and the chimp in
the oval office.
Chom Noamsky
news:l42io2lo2rsnj5lip...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:54:02 GMT, "Chom Noamsky" <e...@t.me> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>letter directly to the guy's family?
>
> The family have suffered immensely, and may well have tried to
> convince the shithead to get a proper job.
Again, why don't you write to the family and ask THEM? It would be much
more honest and fair than casually slagging a dead guy who isn't around to
defend himself.
> Killing was HIS decision,
> not theirs.
How do you know he went into service with evil intent? Again, you don't
have a fucking clue about who he was and what this individual was about.
Your logic is like implying all police officers who enter service do so with
evil intent because they know they might have to pull the trigger someday.
Stephen Green
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 12:55:25 GMT, 10x@teluös.net wrote, quoted or
> indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>
>>You really do have low opinion of Canada's military don't you?
>>Just where would someone research this?
>>Would they ask you?
>
> Are you familiar with the experiment conducted in 1971 by a team of
> researchers led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University?
>
> We rediscovered that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
> absolutely. Perfectly normal people will AUTOMATICALLY abuse those
> they have power over.
>
> In war, young horny soldiers are given the power of life and death
> over people that have been trained to call "ragheads".
>
> Why do you think the governments want such extreme power over those
> reporting wars? They want to keep quiet the natural abuse.
==============================
That has been known for thousands of years. So what is your point?
==
Stephen Green
> On 20 Dec 2006 06:51:06 -0800, "jimjames5417" <james...@usa.net>
> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>You should be VERY grateful that we live in a country where loonies and
>>traitors are not shot on sight - like most countries in the world!!
>
> Surely it is obvious that war is expensive and painful for everyone
> involved. The onus is thus on you to justify it. What possible
> advantages are there to continuing this war?
>
>
> "No man is justified in doing evil on the ground of expedience."
> ~ Theodore Roosevelt
>
=======================
Perhaps to give the Afghan a future?
==
Stephen Green
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 13:46:29 -0600, Charlie Wolf
> <charli...@noemail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone
> who said :
>
>>Please know that, while we continue our struggle
>>with the great Satan, we could use your further support in two
>>critical areas.
>
> Al-Qaeda are the GOOD guys, at least in the Afghanistan conflict. I
> have seen so evidence they had anything to do with 9/11. I have seen
> plenty of evidence Bush was complicit.
>
> Bush has killed over a million Afghans. Al-Qaeda gave a little bit of
> help to the Afghans to fight off the American invaders. That makes
> Al-Qaeda the GOOD guys in my book.
>
> Why does the Arab world support Al-Qaeda? -- because it helps them
> fight off American occupation.
>
> I want Al-Qaeda to defeat the USA in Afghanistan and Iraq, not because
> I am a great fan of Al-Qaeda, but because the USA has been such an
> outrageous bully, and Islamic nations should be free to solve their
> own problems without foreign intervention.
>
> If the USA were not behaving so outrageously, there would not be an
> Al-Qaeda. It grew to oppose American meddling and grand theft of oil.
>
========================
Then you are an idiot. The implied evidence certainly points strongly to
OBL. Of course you are privy to all the intel are you not?
==
Stephen Green
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:56:33 -0800, 1...@bak.rr.com wrote, quoted or
> indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>I was in law enforcement for 16 years and I know the distinction
>>between the professional and the sick fucks.
>
> Don't confuse law enforcement with the military. There is a strong
> control on law enforcement officers to play fair with the accused. Law
> enforcement is a skilled profession. Jail guards are the sickest
> group. I met a guy who took that job solely for the purpose of
> forcing inmates to give him sex.
>
> In the military you can kill anyone anywhere with no questions asked.
> They attract a totally different type of person. In situations
> without civil law, rape and extortion are safe crimes. There is
> almost no chance of prosecution. They are people who like killing,
> not people who like stopping bad guys.
>
>
>
=========================
And that is bullshit! Perhaps you need military training to understand the
process. Clearly your knowledge is seriously flawed.
--
1...@bak.rr.com
wrote:
>Roedy Green wrote:
>
>> On 20 Dec 2006 06:51:06 -0800, "jimjames5417" <james...@usa.net>
>> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>>
>>>You should be VERY grateful that we live in a country where loonies and
>>>traitors are not shot on sight - like most countries in the world!!
>>
>> Surely it is obvious that war is expensive and painful for everyone
>> involved. The onus is thus on you to justify it. What possible
>> advantages are there to continuing this war?
>>
Uh...profit for those who do not share the expense or feel the pain.
This war had only one reason to begin with ....profit.
Raymond
Stephen Green wrote:
> Roedy Green wrote:
>
> > On 20 Dec 2006 06:51:06 -0800, "jimjames5417" <james...@usa.net>
> > wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
> >
> >>You should be VERY grateful that we live in a country where loonies and
> >>traitors are not shot on sight - like most countries in the world!!
> >
> > Surely it is obvious that war is expensive and painful for everyone
> > involved. The onus is thus on you to justify it. What possible
> > advantages are there to continuing this war?
> >
> >
> > "No man is justified in doing evil on the ground of expedience."
> > ~ Theodore Roosevelt
Theodore Roosevelt, a "warmonger" and a racist.
Theodore Roosevelt: the other Cowboy president-
Believed it was better to have a small war than
not to have any war at all.
There was a darker side to Roosevelt's gung-ho view of
the world.
Believing a little war to be good for the soul
(biographer H.W. Brandsflat out calls him ), Assistant
Navy Secretary Roosevelt exceeded his authority
and provoked a war with Spain to the horror of his
own political administration, then ran off to form a
cavalry regiment to fight in it.
Roosevelt should have been shot instead of McKinley.
He has been properly criticized for his interventionist
and imperialist approach to nations he considered
"uncivilized". and for his starting America on
the path to imperialism and bloody empire building.
America has been in the serious war business since
the Spanish-American War-the first of America's
"useless wars."
The US has been in wars, or the politics of wars ever
since and has been generally satisfied with the availibility
of foreign blood that is warming to the jingoistic appetites
of many Americans.As Teddy Roosevelt said about
the unnecessary Spanish-American War, "It wasn't
much of a war but it was the only war we had."
"In such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it
is the job of thinking people, not to be on the side of the
executioners."
--Albert Camus:
America's "war for peace" doctrine came from the U.S. president
whom neoconservatives honor as America's model of an "internationalist"
president: Teddy Roosevelt--the hero who led the famous
charge up "San Juan Hill" in Cuba and championed the
Spanish-American War of 1898, which made the U.S.
an imperial power with territorial possessions
around the world. Here was a man who was unapologetic
about power and its uses. "All the great masterful races have
been fighting races," boasted Roosevelt, "And no triumph
of peace is quite so great as the triumphs of war."
Before the middle of the century, TR was a good sportsman or great
hunter, a great story-teller, a patriot, a nationalist, a hero, a
valiant warrior, an able president, an effective diplomat, a great
all-around American, and a mere agent in the Progressive movement.
Everything he did as a Rough Rider or as a president was done only to
make America better for the majority of Americans. After mid-century,
TR became an animal butcher, a liar, a war monger, an imperialist, a
racist, an Indian hater, an egotistical man, a self-centered
politician, a careless diplomat, a fickle president, and a founder of
Progressivism. Not even a modicum of new evidence has been presented
since the 1950s that has justified historians reaching such conclusions
about TR. Even using the same evidence or secondary literature on TR,
some twentieth-century historians have challenged TR's legacy that
was created and promoted by their predecessors. In other words,
historians who lived during TR's time and the historians who came
afterwards to extract inferences from written material have competing
interests and conflicting views. There can be only one explanation for
the dissimilar portrayals and opinions of TR: historians themselves
have changed.
By reading the works post-1950 we do not know TR the president better.
Rather, we better know historians and what they want the current
generation to think about TR. By reading the works post-1950, we can
better see how society itself has changed, how its values have been
molded, how its concept of justice has metamorphosed. By taking the
reviews as a whole from 1920 to the end of the 1990s, we can say
accurately how two different generations of historians see the
political life of Theodore Roosevelt.
SEE:
ON HISTORIANS' CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF THEODORE ROOSEVELT PRE-1950s
AND POST-1940s historiography Roosevelt history
by Patrick Fagan
Which one is correct, however, is an entirely different matter.
http://workingpapers.org/writings/roosevelt.htm
Morton Davis
"Stephen Green" <sd.g...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:36rih.507964$5R2.440461@pd7urf3no...
of the ceremonies members of the Iraqi force biut the heads off toads and
drank rat blood. Najaf is the third province to be turned over to Iraqi
forces. I wonder if "Roedy" will like how Irai military units treat his
heroes of the "Brave Iraqi Insurgents"?
Sid9
In a country of 20 million...Najaf has 560,000.
Looks more like a staged pullout.
A good idea.....we ought to do more of this.
Declare victory and leave!
Iraq is a busjh,jr failed eneterprise, like everything bush,jr touches.
bush,jr and Cheney, resign!
Lamont Cranston
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 12:00:26 -0800, Lamont Cranston
> <lamont....@Shadow.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Charlie Wolf wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Thank you for posting your latest Bush-hating garbage. Your efforts
>>
>>
>>Different Wednesday, same old strawman bullshit from Charlie.
>>
>>How'd the election work out for you, asshole?
>
> Seems I struck a nerve with a few of you al Qeda supporters.
There is no such thing as "al Qeda," Charlie.
>
> Fuck off Lamont.
It seems that I struck a nerve with you, Charlie.
> Regards,
Eat shit, Charlie. Share it with a few of your reactionary
friends.
Fredric L. Rice
>Sgt. Darcy Tedford was killed on Oct. 14, 2006, when his unit was
>ambushed near Panjwaii, 25 kilometres west of Kandahar.
<smile> Love it. Hope he screamed.
---
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2998511003310284029&q=the+bridge
Movie about what it's like inside Scientology. Get before the
Scientology crime syndicate has its criminal lawyers remove it.
Stephen Green
========================
Because Roedy is a wallflower; a pure coward derelict of any sense of duty.
====
jimjames5417
the dung(dangdangdoodle) wrote:
<snip>
> What else can you say regarding some half smart dude that goes and gets his ass
> fried in an unnecessary war? Roedy's doing his best to bring some reality to the
> situation.> the dang
And being a pacifist sexual deviant with AIDS is so much better!! Both
the dung and Road Kill should rot in hell!!!
jimjames5417
1...@bak.rr.com wrote:
> Roedy, I have come to love and respect you over these past few years.
> Please re-think your anger. I don't want to lose any amount of repect
> for someone who has bouts of genius as you do.
respect - your judgement and morals are about as low as your IQ!!
I have yet to see any genius in his postings - but maybe they are right
in saying there is a fine line between genius and madness - I tend to
see them on the madness side!!
Even animals in the real world fight to protect themselves if
necessary!
Since you are so obviously opposed to our freedoms and way of life - I
suggest you emigrate to one of your socialist havens and enjoy their
way of life - having your glorious leader doing all your thinking for
you!
Road Kill has now sunk to a new low in stupidity and bad taste!!
Sandlin
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:51:40 -0500, "Sid9" <si...@bellsouth.net> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
> >humanitarian effort on behalf
> >the Afghanis to free them
> >from the Islamic tyranny
> > that had befallen them.
>
> If that were true, the new government would be better than the
> Taliban.
>
> The new government is a coalition of war lords and drug lords.
>
> The new government has a Ministry of Virtue and Vice to enforce
> Islamic religious Shari'a law.
>
> The new government has taken heroin production from moribund to 160%
> of the world production.
>
> It is not really a NATO operation. It is US/British operation with a
> bit of arm twisted help from Canada and a bit of token representation
> from other countries.
>
> The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic. Afghanistan has
> nothing to do with the North Atlantic. It is about a pipeline for
> Unocal and heroin profits.
>
>
> --
> Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com
> Priorities: Prevent global climate destabilisation. End both wars. Prepare for oil shortages.
reply*********
Roedy wrote:
"The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic. Afghanistan has
nothing to do with the North Atlantic. It is about a pipeline for
Unocal and heroin profits. "
Now here's the freakin' truth of what this war is really about.
We need to all face the fact that our governments are no longer
pretending to be for the people, to serve the population, they are
criminals one and all, who are taking the whole world over. It's a
criminal syndicate from the UN on down.
We can wake up and resist this, or become more cannon fodder like
Sergeant Tedford, who probably was never made aware of the criminal
take-over and bought his brain-washing training 100% and believed he
was slaughtering innocents for some real purpose; that purpose being
the betterment of the world situation. Take the blinders off. It's
simply criminals in charge. They can pretend to be dignitaries like
Presidents, kIngs, and other pompous fools, but they're just common
criminals. JMHO!
Robert Sveinson
"Sandlin" <sliver...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1166741862....@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Which again brings up the question.....
Why did noble ameriKKKa invoke the NATO charter [when it
was attacked by Saudi citizens] to go to war against Afghanistan?????
Why when Argentina attacked the Faulkland Islands did the British NOT invoke
the NATO charter, like their now allies in war!
Answers awaited!!!!
David Johnston
wrote:
>Roedy wrote:
>"The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic.
But he wasn't telling the truth. The purpose of NATO is NOT to defend
the North Atlantic. It's to retaliate in a unified way against
attacks on any of the signatories to the treaty.
Dave Smith
>
>
>
> The purpose of NATO is to defend the North Atlantic. Afghanistan has
> nothing to do with the North Atlantic. It is about a pipeline for
> Unocal and heroin profits.
My gosh you are getting stupid Roedy. It is the name of the
treaty whereby the member nations, most of which touched on the
North Atlantic and their neighbours agreed to a treaty of mutual
protection. It is an agreement that an attack on any member of
the alliance is to be considered to be an attack on all of them
and that any such an attack would entitle any or all of them to
respond in the interest of protecting the security of the North
Atlantic region... the member countries. It is not there just to
protect the salt water in between North America and Europe. Only
a fool would think that, and only a complete idiot would opine
such a thing in an international forum. That is where you come
in.
David Johnston
<fred...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>"Chom Noamsky" <e...@t.me> wrote in message
>news:Kl3ih.90555$rv4.78382@edtnps90...
>> Since the guy is dead and can't defend himself why don't you send your
>> letter directly to the guy's family? They would be the authorities on
>what
>> kind of man he was, they at least deserve a chance to speak on his behalf.
>> I suspect that you would never have the guts to actually do that because
>you
>> might find out that he wasn't really evil at all... that perhaps he was
>just
>> a guy who loved his wife and kids and wanted to support them.
>
>Yeah, sure. Guys who love their families always listen to a lying sociopath
Given that he was a sergeant, he would have joined well before the
Afghanistan conflict.
>and sign up to kill innocent people.
Why are you assuming everyone's innocent?
David Johnston
wrote:
>
>"Roedy Green" <see_w...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
>
>> Dear Darcy
>>
>> You selfish fuck! It is almost Christmas, and your wife and kids are
>> sick with grief because you are not home for Christmas and never will
>> be.
>>
>> Why did you do this? Stephen Harper said it "is the price we have to
>> pay for Canada's leadership in the world." Was it worth it?
>
>Standard Liberal tolerance and understanding at work here...
I'm a Liberal, and there's nothing standard about that behaviour.
Fred Fazemeier
"David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
news:kvpmo2hpqunqf727q...@4ax.com...
Why are you assuming everyone's guilty?