Re: The Rise of Hate Talk on Right Wing Radio
Seon
the troops. That is still a treacherous thing to say though.
Also thanks for posting that glen beck quote. Now it is obvious he is just
another Bush worshiping republican who will worship the next republican
president when he takes office in 2013.
"John Manning" <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote in message
news:2aOdncb6l-RLbzvX...@giganews.com...
>
>
> Here's one for the memory banks from Bill Moyers Journal, September 2008,
> talking about the rise of hate talk on right wing radio, and Glenn Beck
> saying he'd like to kill Michael Moore along with some other right wing
> screechers doing their best to incite violence in the name of keeping
> their ratings up.
>
>
> RICK KARR: Michael Savage isn't the only right-wing talk-radio host who
> launches blistering, even violent, verbal attacks on people and groups he
> doesn't like. Glenn Beck, for instance, fantasized about murdering a
> liberal filmmaker.
>
> GLENN BECK: "I'm thinking about killing Michael Moore and I'm wondering if
> I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No,
> I think I could. I think he could be looking me in the eye, you know, and
> I could just be choking the life out of him. Is this wrong?"
>
> RICK KARR: Michael Reagan, son of the former president, suggested that
> people who claim that "nine-eleven was an inside job," a U.S. government
> conspiracy, deserve to die.
>
> MICHAEL REAGAN: "Take them out and shoot them. They are traitors to this
> country, and shoot them. But anybody who would do that doesn't deserve to
> live. You shoot them. You call them traitors, that's what they are, and
> you shoot them dead. I'll pay for the bullet."
>
> ~ ~ More in video clip here -
> http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/bill-moyers-journal-rage-radio
>
>
>
>
>
>
No Bammer
If they choose me to shoot that sub human freak Michael Moore, he would
have to be a long distance from me because if you started punching holes
in a creature like him, the shit would start squirting far and long.
Seon
"No Bammer" <noba...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:KaSdnRSCofUtsDrX...@earthlink.com...
Yep because you hate free speech just like the rest of the Moore bashers.
Seon
"Zombywoof" <Zomby...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:d23fa5dq6il6qigm0...@4ax.com...
> Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died protecting
> & upholding that particular right. Moore isn't willing to be one of
> them.
> --
>
Because Iraq posed no threat to America or Australia for that matter.
Afghanistan however...
> Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms should be aisles in a
> convenience store; not a Government agency!
John Manning
Another intellectual giant from the right wing fringe world of
ignorance, fear and hate.
See portrait: http://www.bartcop.com/homo-nation.jpg
Pastor Dave
spake thusly:
>> Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died
>> protecting & upholding that particular right. Moore isn't
>> willing to be one of them.
>
> Because Iraq posed no threat to America or Australia
> for that matter. Afghanistan however...
As far as free speech, no. But no threat? That's not true!
Your view is based in ignorance of the overall view.
For example, let us say that it was all about oil. Let us
assume that. How is that not a threat? It certainly is!
Or do you want to pay $20 p/gal for gas? After all, if
that's what they could demand, unchecked, then that
is what you would be paying and America would cease
to exist as any kind of power at all, since you can imagine
what would happen to the entire economy. How much
would a loaf of bread cost, if gas/diesel was $20 p/gal?
So while many shout out against fighting over oil,
they do it based on ignorance. They do not follow
the thinking through of what would have happened,
if Iraq was able to control the oil market, which they
would have been able to, considering how much of
the world's oil is produced in countries like Iraq, Iran
and in places like Kuwait.
So before you say "no reason", make sure that you
do understand the full implications of what you say.
Iraq in control, means we go under, period, end of
story, no argument (or at least no valid argument).
Now, do I feel that we should have been lied to
about it? No. I think the President should have
just come out and said; "It's about oil and this is
why it is about oil..." and that should have been
what we were told and once the results were
made clear, I believe that Americans would have
then said, "Since they are trying to take over
Kuwait for the purpose of bringing us down,
we should go in".
Then of course, comes the "for how long and what
should we accomplish while there" questions, but
I don't deny that at all. :)
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
The greatest Bible software out there is found at:
Two of the greatest Windows utilities ever made!
WindowsXP/Vista/7, 32/64 bit (replaces XP ver):
CacheMan7 Single: http://cac71.notlong.com
CacheMan7 Two : http://cac72.notlong.com
StartEd Pro : http://started.notlong.com
"Wisdom is in the sight of him who has understanding,
but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth."
- Proverbs 17:24
Lookout
wrote:
>Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died protecting
>& upholding that particular right. Moore isn't willing to be one of
>them.
What makes you say that?
raven1
<ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:23:42 +1000, "Seon" <seo...@gmail.com>
>spake thusly:
>
>
>>> Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died
>>> protecting & upholding that particular right. Moore isn't
>>> willing to be one of them.
>>
>> Because Iraq posed no threat to America or Australia
>> for that matter. Afghanistan however...
>
>As far as free speech, no. But no threat? That's not true!
>
>Your view is based in ignorance of the overall view.
>
>For example, let us say that it was all about oil. Let us
>assume that. How is that not a threat? It certainly is!
>Or do you want to pay $20 p/gal for gas? After all, if
>that's what they could demand, unchecked, then that
>is what you would be paying and America would cease
>to exist as any kind of power at all, since you can imagine
>what would happen to the entire economy. How much
>would a loaf of bread cost, if gas/diesel was $20 p/gal?
>
>So while many shout out against fighting over oil,
>they do it based on ignorance. They do not follow
>the thinking through of what would have happened,
>if Iraq was able to control the oil market, which they
>would have been able to,
Under what circumstances? Iraq hadn't been a threat to its neighbors
since the first Gulf War.
> considering how much of
>the world's oil is produced in countries like Iraq, Iran
>and in places like Kuwait.
>
>So before you say "no reason", make sure that you
>do understand the full implications of what you say.
>Iraq in control, means we go under, period, end of
>story, no argument (or at least no valid argument).
>
>Now, do I feel that we should have been lied to
>about it? No. I think the President should have
>just come out and said; "It's about oil and this is
>why it is about oil..." and that should have been
>what we were told and once the results were
>made clear, I believe that Americans would have
>then said, "Since they are trying to take over
>Kuwait for the purpose of bringing us down,
>we should go in".
Except that they weren't trying to take over Kuwait when the US
invaded in 2003.
Seon
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:79dfa5pgn1a43gcbs...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:23:42 +1000, "Seon" <seo...@gmail.com>
> spake thusly:
>
>
>>> Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died
>>> protecting & upholding that particular right. Moore isn't
>>> willing to be one of them.
>>
>> Because Iraq posed no threat to America or Australia
>> for that matter. Afghanistan however...
>
> As far as free speech, no. But no threat? That's not true!
>
> Your view is based in ignorance of the overall view.
>
> For example, let us say that it was all about oil. Let us
> assume that. How is that not a threat? It certainly is!
> Or do you want to pay $20 p/gal for gas? After all, if
> that's what they could demand, unchecked, then that
> is what you would be paying and America would cease
> to exist as any kind of power at all, since you can imagine
> what would happen to the entire economy. How much
> would a loaf of bread cost, if gas/diesel was $20 p/gal?
>
No no no that's not what it was about. Well it was but it wasn't about
providing cheaper oil. It was about controlling the Iraq oil fields so the
oil companies had an excuse to increase the amount of oil. Why would they
want cheaper oil and to make less money? And the price of oil rapidly
increased after the Iraq war and it has increased every time something has
happened in the middle east. It was also about building a permanent military
base in Iraq (even Obama isn't going to pull every single troop out) and
making money. War is a business. America also helped Saddam Husseins Baath
party rise to power in 1964 and were allies with him and even supplied WMD's
to him!
> So while many shout out against fighting over oil,
> they do it based on ignorance. They do not follow
> the thinking through of what would have happened,
> if Iraq was able to control the oil market, which they
> would have been able to, considering how much of
> the world's oil is produced in countries like Iraq, Iran
> and in places like Kuwait.
>
> So before you say "no reason", make sure that you
> do understand the full implications of what you say.
> Iraq in control, means we go under, period, end of
> story, no argument (or at least no valid argument).
>
> Now, do I feel that we should have been lied to
> about it? No. I think the President should have
> just come out and said; "It's about oil and this is
> why it is about oil..." and that should have been
> what we were told and once the results were
> made clear, I believe that Americans would have
> then said, "Since they are trying to take over
> Kuwait for the purpose of bringing us down,
> we should go in".
>
> Then of course, comes the "for how long and what
> should we accomplish while there" questions, but
> I don't deny that at all. :)
>
I agree with that 2nd last paragraph. If your President was actually honest
then at least we could debate each other on the real reasons your country
went into Iraq instead of these phony "We have to liberate the poor Iraqi's
from the evil dictator we helped put in and save the world from his WMD's
which we supplied him"
Seon
"raven1" <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:jhhfa51l4t5pjjka8...@4ax.com...
Exactly and the American ambassador even said America had no opinions of
Iraq's relationship with Kwait.
Pastor Dave
spake thusly:
> "Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 21:23:42 +1000, "Seon"
>> <seo...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>>
>>>> Free Speech ain't all that free. Untold Millions have died
>>>> protecting & upholding that particular right. Moore isn't
>>>> willing to be one of them.
>>>
>>> Because Iraq posed no threat to America or Australia
>>> for that matter. Afghanistan however...
>>
>> As far as free speech, no. But no threat? That's not true!
>>
>> Your view is based in ignorance of the overall view.
>>
>> For example, let us say that it was all about oil. Let us
>> assume that. How is that not a threat? It certainly is!
>> Or do you want to pay $20 p/gal for gas? After all, if
>> that's what they could demand, unchecked, then that
>> is what you would be paying and America would cease
>> to exist as any kind of power at all, since you can imagine
>> what would happen to the entire economy. How much
>> would a loaf of bread cost, if gas/diesel was $20 p/gal?
>
> No no no that's not what it was about. Well it was but it
> wasn't about providing cheaper oil. It was about controlling
> the Iraq oil fields so the oil companies had an excuse to
> increase the amount of oil.
You can make any claim you want to, but we don't
control the oil fields and your comment has nothing
to do with the point I was making and apparently
you are so set on arguing your little argument,
that you are blinded to anything but and cannot
even comprehend what the phrase "let us assume"
means and you completely skipped my point.
Seon
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:56jga55pjsjt84d7d...@4ax.com...
No but has Iraq been producing oil in the past 6 years?
tankfixer
01.iinet.net.au>, seo...@gmail.com says...
Michael Moore is a media whore.
Why anyone even pays attention to his work is amazing.
Lookout
wrote:
The same can be said about Lush Dumbo, your current party leader.
A Nony Mouse
tankfixer <paul.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yep because you hate free speech just like the rest of the Moore bashers.
>
> Michael Moore is a media whore.
There are dozens of right wing extremists who are much more obviously
whores than Michael.
> Why anyone even pays attention to his work is amazing.
Why does anyone pay any attention to the dozens of his opposite numbers?
Seon
Seon
"tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2512120...@news.bytemine.net...
Just like Ann Colter, Sean Hannity etc.
tankfixer
mrLo...@yahoo.com says...
You all sure seem afraid of Rush..
tankfixer
T...@mouse.hole says...
Ask the Whitehouse.
They are the ones running scared
tankfixer
01.iinet.net.au>, seo...@gmail.com says...
They have you scared eh ?
Seon
"tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2512208...@news.bytemine.net...
Lol let me get this straight. You think fools who run a Obama joker poster
campaign, lie about death panels and birth certificate kook nonsense scare
me? I say bring them on! Let Sarah palin run in 2012 that will guarantee
another loss for the republicans!
Pastor Dave
spake thusly:
> Noone but has Iraq been producing oil in the past 6 years?
That isn't what I said. I clearly included Iran
(and of course Kuwait, which is where Iraq
tried to invade and take over). And I never
implied that Iraq produces most, nor all of
the oil. That's why they tried to invade Kuwait
and we stopped them from controlling that.
Seon
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:39fha5h7j8hh25lej...@4ax.com...
But your ambassador told the Iraqi ambassador that you had "no opinion" on
Iraq's issues with Kuwait.
p.s experimenting with signatures so excuse me if this post seems confusing.
Lookout
wrote:
Only in that idiots like you listen to them.
Lookout
wrote:
Hey..people followed Hitler too.
tankfixer
You are obsessing about them..
so they must bother you...
tankfixer
tankfixer
Seon
"tankfixer" <paul.c...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.25137ff...@news.bytemine.net...
Nope I want them to run. Please run Sarah pretty please.
Pastor Dave
spake thusly:
I'm not concerned with who said what. Read what
I wrote again. You're sidetracking.
--
Pastor Dave
The following is part of my auto-rotating
sig file and not part of the message body.
The Last Days were in the first century:
Matthew 3:7,10,12
7) But when He saw many of the Pharisees and
Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto
THEM, O GENERATION of vipers, who hath
warned YOU to flee from the wrath to come?
10) And NOW also the axe is laid unto the root
of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth
not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into
the fire.
12) Whose fan is in his hand, and he will
throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat
into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff
with unquenchable fire.