The title of this thread is "new liberal hero to stand next to Cindy Sheehan" which implies that liberals celebrate this woman you describe as treasonous and who you say should be shot. You shouldn't be surprised at the hostility directed at you given what you imply in the title. If that wasn't your intent you should be more careful with your words and if you meant to imply that liberals are somehow treasonous (which is what the main thrust of the thread seems to be given the title, not a discussion of the merits of the case or the nature of treason or federal sentencing, but that liberal = traitor) then by all means make your case directly, not like some little weasel. But don't get all indignant when you're called on your bullshit.lowing wrote:
Go ahead, and I will debate it with you. I am surprised, it took 3 pages before you liberals started with the name calling. Might be a record.Reciprocity wrote:
your associating a woman who lost her son in Iraq to a dyke lawyer who was looking for a book deal? tell me lowing, are you purposing trying to make yourself sound like a completely ignorant, asshole? Where is the "debate and serious talk" in this thread? Should I make a new thread about Bush invading Iraq titled "new nazi hero to stand next to Adolf Hitler"? Does that fit well into your little black and white world?
Oh, and yes, I compare
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/moth … -book-deal
I guess the fact that she did stunt double work for Jabba the Hut and John Madden didnt help her at sentencing time... lol
Love is the answer
Obviously there are different degrees otherwise she she would have got the death penalty.lowing wrote:
SO you are telling me, there are "degrees" of treason?? She is a smart woman, an accomplished attorney, please don't act like she is some naive soccer mom who got mixed up in a bad relationship.
BTW as said in the title...what has this got to do with Cindy Sheehan?
The title of the thread:
Liberals have adopted that nutcase CINDY Sheehan as their poster child for their cause.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10704025/ <----if you know anything about Chavez, you know this is treason.
She is guilty of treason in the same way Jane Fonda was guilty of treason 40 years ago in North vietnam. I simply pointed out that you have another traitor to celebrate and put on a pedistal like you have done with Sheehan and Fonda. Pretty simple really.
As far as the name calling, I am not surprised one bit, my buddy, Reciprocity, alone with a few other choice liberals, would call me names if I argued the sky was blue.
Liberals have adopted that nutcase CINDY Sheehan as their poster child for their cause.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10704025/ <----if you know anything about Chavez, you know this is treason.
She is guilty of treason in the same way Jane Fonda was guilty of treason 40 years ago in North vietnam. I simply pointed out that you have another traitor to celebrate and put on a pedistal like you have done with Sheehan and Fonda. Pretty simple really.
As far as the name calling, I am not surprised one bit, my buddy, Reciprocity, alone with a few other choice liberals, would call me names if I argued the sky was blue.
see above, I made my case.Masques wrote:
The title of this thread is "new liberal hero to stand next to Cindy Sheehan" which implies that liberals celebrate this woman you describe as treasonous and who you say should be shot. You shouldn't be surprised at the hostility directed at you given what you imply in the title. If that wasn't your intent you should be more careful with your words and if you meant to imply that liberals are somehow treasonous (which is what the main thrust of the thread seems to be given the title, not a discussion of the merits of the case or the nature of treason or federal sentencing, but that liberal = traitor) then by all means make your case directly, not like some little weasel. But don't get all indignant when you're called on your bullshit.lowing wrote:
Go ahead, and I will debate it with you. I am surprised, it took 3 pages before you liberals started with the name calling. Might be a record.Reciprocity wrote:
your associating a woman who lost her son in Iraq to a dyke lawyer who was looking for a book deal? tell me lowing, are you purposing trying to make yourself sound like a completely ignorant, asshole? Where is the "debate and serious talk" in this thread? Should I make a new thread about Bush invading Iraq titled "new nazi hero to stand next to Adolf Hitler"? Does that fit well into your little black and white world?
Oh, and yes, I compare
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/moth … -book-deal
No, some people havelowing wrote:
Liberals have adopted that nutcase CINDY Sheehan as their poster child for their cause.
really? Why is she not on trial then?lowing wrote:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10704025/ <----if you know anything about Chavez, you know this is treason.
Dissenting against the government is not treason. Get over it for fucks sake. Just because someone speaks out against the prez and does not follow him blindly does not make them a traitor. Does it not take more brain power to look beyond the government spin and sound bites and make up you own mind.
Lowing - why did you insist on hailing this criminal as a liberal 'hero'? I mean, really, have a bit of sense. You seem to completely misunderstand the predominant moderate 'liberal' attitude towards almost everything...
Sheehan a 'hero'? Please...
The treason comment is laughable.
You really seem to be digging yourself a gigantic credibility hole on this one, Lowing.
Sheehan a 'hero'? Please...
The treason comment is laughable.
You really seem to be digging yourself a gigantic credibility hole on this one, Lowing.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-10-17 03:37:45)
In his head, he wants us to believe she's a "liberal hero", because that would make it easier for him to call liberals dangerous to America. So, naturally, if it fits the situation, and helps him label and dehumanize liberals as dangerous and insecure, he'll make up bullcrap. It's not like he hasn't been doing it for a while........
Last edited by Spearhead (2006-10-17 03:39:08)
QFTSpearhead wrote:
In his head, he wants us to believe she's a "liberal hero", because that would make it easier for him to call liberals dangerous to America. So, naturally, if it fits the situation, and helps him label and dehumanize liberals as dangerous and insecure, he'll make up bullcrap. It's not like he hasn't been doing it for a while........
Spot on. Its easier to dismiss people as crazy liberals then actually listen to what they have to say.Spearhead wrote:
In his head, he wants us to believe she's a "liberal hero", because that would make it easier for him to call liberals dangerous to America. So, naturally, if it fits the situation, and helps him label and dehumanize liberals as dangerous and insecure, he'll make up bullcrap. It's not like he hasn't been doing it for a while........
Oh look, another thread where lowing proves that he has the mentality of a small child, and can only see right and wrong; black and white. How unusual...
I get that she aided the blind sheik (who I believe was actually tried and found guilty...not just put in jail cuz he wears a turban and speaks arabic?), and yes, that should qualify her for treason regardless of her previous service to good causes, but what I don't get is your rhetoric that some how Cindy Sheehan is likewise guilty of such a crime? Care to explain that, or give me your typical anti-unconstitutional talking points, or something? Thanks.lowing wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/16/terror.trial.ap/index.html
2 and half years for treason...........she should be shot.
Oh yeah, i'm liberal, but i don't consider this attorney to be a hero. So that makes the other half of your poor subject line choice of words erroneous.
I think you should rephrase.IRONCHEF wrote:
I get that she aided the blind sheik (who I believe was actually tried and found guilty...not just put in jail cuz he wears a turban and speaks arabic?), and yes, that should qualify her for treason regardless of her previous service to good causes, but what I don't get is your rhetoric that some how Cindy Sheehan is likewise guilty of such a crime? Care to explain that, or give me your typical anti-unconstitutional talking points, or something? Thanks.lowing wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/16/terror.trial.ap/index.html
2 and half years for treason...........she should be shot.
Oh yeah, i'm liberal, but i don't consider this attorney to be a hero. So that makes the other half of your poor subject line choice of words erroneous.
In the same sentence you say "yes, it should qualify her for treason" and then end with "how is she guilty of such a crime". So I'm confused on your question...
Last edited by Pug (2006-10-17 11:53:31)
I was asking how Cindy Sheehans is guilty of the same crime of treason as this attorney is guilty of (as claimed by lowing).
Notice how the mentioning of Cindy Sheehan is seperated from the assumed guilt of treason that the attorney is guilt of (according to lowing).
"Likewise" is the key word there..referring to two different people sharing the same context of being guilty of the crime of treason.
Notice how the mentioning of Cindy Sheehan is seperated from the assumed guilt of treason that the attorney is guilt of (according to lowing).
"Likewise" is the key word there..referring to two different people sharing the same context of being guilty of the crime of treason.
Sheehan was found guilty of co-conspiring with terrorists, a punishment which carries a 30 year sentence..but was reduced to 2 1/2 years because of her cancer. In other words, the court was going for life imprisonment (she'd be in her 90's when getting out) instead of the death penalty. I believe a 30 year sentence is level 3 (1st = death, 2nd = life in prison, 3rd = a long stay like 30 years).
Lowing's opinion is that it is treasonous to aid people in killing US citizens. Specifically not for representing them, but by passing on messages used to plot terrorist activities. Good luck arguing against an opinion.
Lowing's opinion is that it is treasonous to aid people in killing US citizens. Specifically not for representing them, but by passing on messages used to plot terrorist activities. Good luck arguing against an opinion.
WHAT???? Cindy Sheehan hasn't committed a crime, let alone get tried and sentenced. Did you even read the article? It's some attorney named Lynne Stewart who did the crime and was sentenced to 28 months. There's no mention of Cindy Sheehan in the article and they probably don't even know each other.
lol, and i thought i was bad at skimming!
For your punishment, i command you to read the opening article cited in Lowing's first post.
lol, and i thought i was bad at skimming!
For your punishment, i command you to read the opening article cited in Lowing's first post.
Whoops assumed it was the same lady - read the first page and skipped to the end to join in.IRONCHEF wrote:
WHAT???? Cindy Sheehan hasn't committed a crime, let alone get tried and sentenced. Did you even read the article? It's some attorney named Lynne Stewart who did the crime and was sentenced to 28 months. There's no mention of Cindy Sheehan in the article and they probably don't even know each other.
lol, and i thought i was bad at skimming!
For your punishment, i command you to read the opening article cited in Lowing's first post.
I don't even know who Cindy is...LOL
(Ps. is it too late to lay down suppressing fire with insults or a smoke screen by hijacking the thread and retreat?)
silly goose!
and fyi, Cindy Sheehans is a California woman who lost her son in Iraq in 2004. She has acted like most mothers would by questioning why her son died. She has also taken that rage and neverending sorrow to the next level by attempting to question Bush himself. In doing this, she has created alot of support and alot of enemies (guess who). She's most famous for camping out near Bush's ranch where he spends about 4x% of his presidency doing nothing. She's since started a movement and has become quite the protestor. I like her and her motives though some of her actions are getting a bit overboard. I used to read her blog on Michael Moore's site but she gets tiresome. BUt hey, I didn't lose my son in an unjust war. Google her and see what you think.
and fyi, Cindy Sheehans is a California woman who lost her son in Iraq in 2004. She has acted like most mothers would by questioning why her son died. She has also taken that rage and neverending sorrow to the next level by attempting to question Bush himself. In doing this, she has created alot of support and alot of enemies (guess who). She's most famous for camping out near Bush's ranch where he spends about 4x% of his presidency doing nothing. She's since started a movement and has become quite the protestor. I like her and her motives though some of her actions are getting a bit overboard. I used to read her blog on Michael Moore's site but she gets tiresome. BUt hey, I didn't lose my son in an unjust war. Google her and see what you think.
Sheehan isn't committing treason YET.
So to sum up, he son dies in Iraq and now is sitting with a world leader who hates the US. That makes perfect sense.
I hear there's a good photo op for her in North Korea next week...
I think Lowing's point is that Sheehan sucks. It's a good point. We have ambassadors, you know?
So to sum up, he son dies in Iraq and now is sitting with a world leader who hates the US. That makes perfect sense.
I hear there's a good photo op for her in North Korea next week...
I think Lowing's point is that Sheehan sucks. It's a good point. We have ambassadors, you know?
Yeah, I see zero illegality with her visiting Hugo Chavez, but it's a little dumb of an idea. It's too much of a protesting drum beat. Stick with the "camp casey" thing in Crawford and around the whitehouse until she gets her purpose fulfilled.
BTW, I dig Chavez and think he's an outstanding foreign affairs official..well, his calling Bush satan in a UN meeting was uncalled for, even if its true. I like his bravery for standing up for his country and calling Bush out on the things he does. He also has a good reason to sitting on all that oil. To be frank, and unbiased, I hope he cuts off oil delivery to the US if the US doesn't behave better towards him. It'll suck for us, but he shouldn't be a push over and let the US direct his politics and government.
BTW, I dig Chavez and think he's an outstanding foreign affairs official..well, his calling Bush satan in a UN meeting was uncalled for, even if its true. I like his bravery for standing up for his country and calling Bush out on the things he does. He also has a good reason to sitting on all that oil. To be frank, and unbiased, I hope he cuts off oil delivery to the US if the US doesn't behave better towards him. It'll suck for us, but he shouldn't be a push over and let the US direct his politics and government.
I'm not actually sure why Chavez is pissed anyway. The same logic of "US stop meddling in other's affairs" also implies "why do you care about the Middle East, Chavez"?
What I mean is ... aka what specifically has the US done to your country that makes the US suck in your mind Chavez????
What I mean is ... aka what specifically has the US done to your country that makes the US suck in your mind Chavez????
Covert operations to disrupt the government. But then, we do this to every country we have an interest in raping.
We apparently don't like his handling of his people so we call him a dictator. I have no idea the extent of that, but I do know some venezuelans, and they assure me they are not under dictatorship rule..and they're right.
Oh, there's other outstanding citizens who make Chavez very nervous and hateful towards us...like this holy man.
He knows bush wants his oil, he's bravely standing up to aggression and political undermining from Bush. he's allying himself with neighbors (castro), and other oil rich countries who sympathize with him (iran, iraq if they ever return to sovereignty, maybe others).
We apparently don't like his handling of his people so we call him a dictator. I have no idea the extent of that, but I do know some venezuelans, and they assure me they are not under dictatorship rule..and they're right.
Oh, there's other outstanding citizens who make Chavez very nervous and hateful towards us...like this holy man.
He knows bush wants his oil, he's bravely standing up to aggression and political undermining from Bush. he's allying himself with neighbors (castro), and other oil rich countries who sympathize with him (iran, iraq if they ever return to sovereignty, maybe others).
Well, it also makes us the most vulnerable too. . . .rawls2 wrote:
Well gentlemen, I hate to break it to you but people like her is what make this country the greatest. As retarded as it sounds, defending the guilty is part of are justice system and thats what sets us apart from the Axis of Evil.lowing wrote:
I hate it when you make sense, it totally disarms me.............stop it.Turquoise wrote:
This is just crazy. It really saddens me to see people who fancy themselves "civil rights activists" aid terrorists. It gives a bad name to all those who stand up for the "little guy."
It's never good to stand up for the little guy that wants to blow you up....
She exploited our justice system, and got caught!! Fuck her!
She doesn't deserve 30+ months or whatever punishment she recieved, she deserves to be hung. . . There is NO PLACE in this country for traitors, I dont give a shit what age you are. . .
LOL! The CIA only tried to OVERTHROW his DEMOCRATICALLY elected government and NEARLY succeeded!!!!! If that doesn't make you paranoid then I don't know what would!!!Pug wrote:
I'm not actually sure why Chavez is pissed anyway. The same logic of "US stop meddling in other's affairs" also implies "why do you care about the Middle East, Chavez"?
What I mean is ... aka what specifically has the US done to your country that makes the US suck in your mind Chavez????
You realize that Chavez put into law, a bill outlawing "trash talk" (in papers, media, etc) about the current sitting president. . .IRONCHEF wrote:
Covert operations to disrupt the government. But then, we do this to every country we have an interest in raping.
We apparently don't like his handling of his people so we call him a dictator. I have no idea the extent of that, but I do know some venezuelans, and they assure me they are not under dictatorship rule..and they're right.
Oh, there's other outstanding citizens who make Chavez very nervous and hateful towards us...like this holy man.
He knows bush wants his oil, he's bravely standing up to aggression and political undermining from Bush. he's allying himself with neighbors (castro), and other oil rich countries who sympathize with him (iran, iraq if they ever return to sovereignty, maybe others).
Last time I checked free speech was part of having a democracy. . .
Chavez is a fucking idiot, that wants to stir up some attention! He should fix the unemployment rate, and his poverty sticken people before he starts chucking stones from his glass house!!!!!!!