Savage: "Let's get it on! Let's bring it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now!"
On the October 29 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, host Michael Savage played the song "Everybody's Dixie" by recording artist Bobby Horton, and said: "Yee-haw! This is the America -- this is the America that those Islamic-fascist, robe-wearing, throwback bums have never seen!" Savage repeatedly said, "Let's bring it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now!," and then demanded, "Get every hunter in America armed to the teeth!" He continued: "Throwback bastards! I'm so sick of them! I'm so sick of the brainwashing about Islam and Muslims and the Koran! Shove it! Shove it all! I'm sick of it!"
After he turned off the music, Savage criticized the media's coverage of Islam, saying, "I have never lived through a brainwashing like I've lived through for the last five years. Every day, another story sweet-selling Islam and the Koran." Savage also said: "Page after page after page is about religion -- a religion that teaches convert or kill. A religion that says oppress women, kill homosexuals, kill the Jew, kill the Christian, kill the infidel."
From the October 29 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
SAVAGE: Yee-haw! This is the America -- this is the America that those Islamic-fascist, robe-wearing, throwback bums have never seen! Let's get it on! Let's bring it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Let's get it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Wipe Hezbollah out of America! Cut the tentacles of Iran off! Cut the tentacles of that octopus off now! Get every hunter in America armed to the teeth! Throwback bastards! I'm so sick of them! I'm so sick of the brainwashing about Islam and Muslims and the Koran! Shove it! Shove it all! I'm sick of it!
Take the music off. I have never lived through a brainwashing like I've lived through for the last five years. Every day, another story sweet-selling Islam and the Koran. It goes in the face, it's so counter-intuitive. Wherever you look on the Earth, there's a bomb going off or a car going up in flames, and it's Muslims screaming for the blood of Christians, or Jews, or anyone they hate. And every day we're told the opposite here.
Everything we know to be true, we're told, "Oh, don't believe what your mind tells you, believe what the diversity trainers tell you. Believe what the government tells you. It's a religion of peace." Well why don't they prove it's a religion of peace? Why don't they put down their hateful little book for a few minutes, and tell us why, when we pick up their hateful little book -- I can read chapter and verse, I can see what it says, in their book of hate.
It says that if you see a stranger, who is not a Muslim, either convert him or kill him. You want me to quote the Sutra? I'll quote the Sutra! Page after page after page is about religion -- a religion that teaches convert or kill. A religion that says oppress women, kill homosexuals, kill the Jew, kill the Christian, kill the infidel.
Page after page after page, and we're supposed to sit here and listen to this rubbish about a religion of peace, and every day Bush brings in thousands of more of these throwbacks -- throwbacks wearing medieval costumes, walking around, spitting on the ground every time they see a Christian, or a Jew, or a so-called infidel. These throwbacks think they're better than you underneath it all, and 90 percent of them are on welfare. Ninety percent of them come in here, and all they do is breed more bombers. More bombers, and more bombers! And you're telling me this is a sane country? There, I gave it to you from the bottom of my heart. If you don't like it, it's too damn bad. Go write the FCC. Marlene in Los Angeles, you're on The Savage Nation.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
"And you're telling me this is a sane country?"
Uh, you don't seem very representative of a "sane country" yourself Weiner.
I think poor Mikey's just feeling a little ignored. It's been what seems like months since MMFtH has given him any notice, and with all the attention that O'Really and hannity and limpaugh have been getting here lately, the Savageweiner's feelings were hurt. Lashing out is his way of voicing his feelings of neglect and inadequacy, saying "Hey! Look at me! I'm batnuts wacko, too!".
Those other characters (among many other in the media) appear on this website because they actually present some false facts, or they contradict themselves. Notice that articles on Savage never cover "misinformation" or falsehoods. The articles on Savage are limited to the contradicting view points of the leftists running this website and those of Savage. Savage is very smart, he does not flip-flop, present incorrect facts, or contradict himself...unlike oreilly, hannity, and others.
Luckily, MMFA isn't limited to conservative information by misinterpreting or mispresenting or even plain LYING about facts - Savage is furthering conservative misinformation by insinuating that muslims coming to the US are doing nothing but breeding suicide bombers, if I read the last part of the rant correctly. There is no evidence of this being true.
"Every day, another story sweet-selling Islam and the Koran. It goes in the face, it's so counter-intuitive. Wherever you look on the Earth, there's a bomb going off or a car going up in flames, and it's Muslims screaming for the blood of Christians, or Jews, or anyone they hate."
Those are facts? How many newspapers, magazines and websites does "Dr." Savage read every day in order to come to the conclusion that there is a constant bombardment of positive stories regarding Islam? There certainly are such stories, but they seem more of a counterpoint to the actions of the radical factions within that religion than a continuous program of brainwashing and indoctrination.
As for the car bombings and acts of terrorism on every corner of the globe every day, really? Did I miss all those big stories about the "Islamofascist" uprisings in South America and China? Where in America in the past month has there been a terrorist attack?
Savage is a side show attraction at best and logic and reason are mere acquaintances with his world.
John,
Just asking....
Please clarify your presumption here.....
How does MMFA mischaractorize someone's words or thoughts, if MMFA posts the full transcripts of that persons OWN words?
Based on Savage's and all the other right-wing 'nuckin futz' zealots past words, it would and is easy to presume ones intent on the use of those words!
"How does MMFA mischaractorize someone's words or thoughts, if MMFA posts the full transcripts of that persons OWN words?"
Well, seeing that I never claimed that in this thread, I don't know where you are coming from. I said that when MMFA puts up articles on people other than Savage, it is usually to make note of some incorrect fact or conflicting story. I then noted that Savage articles only appear on here when what he says goes against the ideology of this page.
But to respond to your trite claim about how this website constantly takes things out of context: Isn't is obvious that a 2 minute audio clip pulled from a 3 hour show might not be accurately representing the overall message? Thats just common sense.
Savage is all about misinformation, cherrypicking information to back up his "facts," and outright lying.
I've documented a number of instances where he does that and more in his first three books writing as Michael Savage in my "Savage Lies: The Half-Truths, Distortions and Outright Lies of a Right-Wing Blowhard." You can preview it at Amazon.com.
Bill.
Hey, good work on the book, Bill!
I love this guy. Sanest voice in the media today, by far. No one has the guts to say what needs to be said like Michael Alan Weiner Savage.
When his radio days are done he'll be given the Presidential Medal of Honor. Take it to the bank.
Are you trying out for Mad TV?
The man's impotency is really hittin' him hard.
That's witty and clever.
"And every year Bush brings in thousands of these throwbacks."
You mean Iraqi refugees? Gee I wonder which country is responsible for making them refugees in the first place?
"90% of them are on welfare."
Proof?
Poor Mikey, feeling ignored these days? How's the ratings doing? Still hanging in there at .00001% of the population?
no kiddin'.
But how many media personalities have more of the population paying attention to them? Not many.
grab an M16 and lead the way, gen Savage.
More zingers from the Savage Weiner Comedy Hour. These knee slappers just get more zany every day.
Oh, wait a minute...
"There, I gave it to you from the bottom of my heart."
So....this time it's not a joke.
This elusive conservative humor just gets more perplexing everyday.
Whether it's a joke from Savage or not, the real issue is how it's taken by serious and thoughtful people. You can decide that yourself.
Mathematically speaking, only .00001% of the population are “taking it” and .00000% of them are “serious and thoughtful people,” so that can’t be “the real issue”.
Mathemattically speaking, The Savage Nation has at least 10 million listeners, as MMFA usually points out in their articles. Last time I checked, 10 million divided by 300 million is a little over 3% of the population.
six point seven billion peoples my friends. don't be so ethnocentric. And yes my numer keys are on the fritz.
http://www.worldometers.info/
Only a liberal would take the entire world's population into account when discussing AMERICAN politics. I'm sorry, but I hope everyone here agrees with me that you are a fool.
Tee hee! Liberals think there's life outside of America! Tee hee! What idiots!
John, john, john. Did you look up ethnocentric?
I know what it means, I think you need to learn the definition. You are considering the number of listeners to be 10 million. This number refers to American listeners, they don't keep worl-wide ratings. Therefore, since you do not have worldwide data, it is pointless and untrue to present the percentage you came up with based on worldwide population. If a news outlet did this kind of misleading statistical analysis, MMFA would be right there to bust them for inaccuracy. Am I not right?
Hay, Johnnymuchnumbers, I think we all agree that Rush Limbaugh (you know--the college dropout, draft dodging, 3 times divorced, drug addicted, bigoted, lying pedophile) has the most listeners of any Right Wing nut show. It's estimated that his numbers are 6-8 million listeners on any given week.
I'll try to find ratings numbers for accuracy, but Savage (you know--the doctor of nutrician. haha,hee hee) must certainly be less than 1/3 of Limbaugh's.
I've gotta ask, why choose someone as vile as Savage, instead of an upstanding righteous decent person, to be your hero?
Hint, hint... it has to do with the fact that the listener is a reflection of Savage and his lunacy.
I still don't get it. Give me another hint.
It means that the person who chooses Savage as a hero is just as vile as Savage himself.
Well, whenever the Islamofascist decides to attack America again, or when the sleeper cells are awoken, and the only citizens ready to take on the fight at home are the Savage conservatives and the hunters and riflemen that Savage speaks of, we'll see how vile you think we are. When the Isamofascist is active in your home town, and the conservative gun-toting Savage listener picks him off before he can kill another innocent, we'll see how vile you think we are.
If you can't identify and agree with the general message that Savage is conveying here, YOU are the vile so-called American, and you may as well join the religion of peace if you think it's so great that you have to defend it and its suicide bombings and its 72 virgins, and its beating of women. If you defend that, you are a despicable waste of space. A dog mess has more class than you.
Amazing!
John, that was an absolutely first-rate, spot-on impression of a drooling, chest-thumping, knuckle-dragging paleo-wingnut in full melt down mode.
Bravo!
Before calling me another derogatory name for an african-american, you racist bum, please explain to me exactly how the koran promotes peace and tolerance of other religions and peoples.
So-called American? Might as well join the Muslims? Waste of space? Dog mess?
Spare us the indignation. Don't expect kid gloves after sucker punching us with your eliminationist rhetoric.
The fact is, we are a nation of law, not a vigilante nation. Your notion of taking to the streets guns ablaze is the stuff of a cowardly lack of faith in our system of justice.
Yeah, we're a nation of laws....judges like this make me think otherwise: [link to hosted.ap.org]
However, cases like this where free speech defeats the gay mafia makes me think we still are: [link to www.worldnetdaily.com]
What? Those cases have what to do with the conservative dream of a vigilante society?
As opposed to a liberal nation of sheeple?
Oh, I get it. You don't have the requisite faith in our country to mete out justice through its civilized system of law.
Cowardly, that's what it is. It takes guts to restrain one's anger and allow legal justice to prevail.
"It takes guts to restrain one's anger and allow legal justice to prevail."
And it only takes 10 seconds to type a lame feel good one liner like that. You do know that the Constitution allows us to "be armed to the teeth" like Savage said? And I'm sure you also know that it allows and actually expects the average citizen to be part of an active militia.
In no way am I saying that right now vigilantes should be going out and shooting random muslims. I'm saying that when and if the jihadi sleeper cells already in this country wake up and start terrorizing people on American soil, that is when the average citizen is going ot have to make use of his Constitutional right to help protect the country.
Do you have any combat experience?
Ridiculous. I feel like I'm talking to Ted Nugent.
Terrorists are effective because of their secrecy and ability to suprise. They will not rise en masse and band together as a fighting force in the streets.
Your dreams of glorious violence on the streets of America are ridiculous. Terrorism in the U.S. (and beyond) will be neutralized through good police work and the justice system.
Use some common sense.
And how long does it take you to compose your poser version of macho, macho moronity? If it took you ten seconds to post that stupidity I hope you can get a refund on that waste of life
LIBERAL sheeple? Says a charter member of the Limborg hivemind who doesnt even KNOW what he thinks till the Oxymoron tells him. Projection alert
And you sir are a brilliant rhetorician, replete with all the relevant bon mots of a hampster.
More looking glass projection from Les.
Before calling me another derogatory name for an african-american, you racist bum John123456
Funny, as a person of color, I didn't take Mescal's "knuckle-draggin paleo-wingnut" comment to have racial overtones, I thought more along the line of neantherdal/cave-man thinking.
Guess that says something about the way you think huh.
Racist?
What in the hell are you talking about, John? There was NOTHING racist in my post since it was CLEARLY a description of a fuming, regressive troglodyte, & I haven't the vaguest clue as to your ethnicity. I've assumed that you are a young, angry white kid, judging from you unrepentant Weiner worship, the general immaturity that you've displayed, & your lock-step right wing tendency to angrily denounce the patriotism of anyone who fails to climb enthusiastically on board with your fascistic world view.
This violent little fantasy of yours in which you, the Savage Weiner, & a bunch of hunters are able to kill the "terrorists", further demonstrates the murderous degree of hatred that you feel towards Muslims. I can see the attraction, though. In your fantasy, you are able to rise above your true self... i.e. a wingnut chickenhawk... & imagine yourself instead to be a computer game warrior, head thrown back, rifle raised toward the sky, & glorying in the oceans of the spilled blood of your perceived enemies.
Dude, you are one sick bastard.
I CAN appreciate the irony, though, of being called a racist by a confirmed bigot.
You also called me a bum.
I take no issue with that particular accusation.
Pearl, Mescal:
Knuckle-dragger is a common derogatory term for an african american. I'll let you figure out why, but if you need help, there was a recent "Roast" of somebody on comedy central...and one of the comedians referred to charles barkley as a knuckle dragger.
OH MY GOD! You really are a regular Archie Bunker aren't you?
A knuckle dragger is a a neandrethal--CAVEMAN! Remember the cartoons, the way they were bent over, walking on all fours, DRAGGING THEIR NUCKLES ON THE GROUND?Is that you view of AfricanAmericans?
Charles Barkley!? Funny that you thought that he was a knuckle dragger BECAUSE he's an AfricanAmerican, instead of because he's a Rush Limbaugh following CONSERVATIVE.
I found great humor in the way you tried to project YOUR bigotry onto the rest of us here. Very funny. You could probably get your own show on FOX "NEWS", or hatetalk radio. Seems you've got all your talking points in order, and you've proved to be as big a bigot as Limbaugh, and Hannity, but probably less than Sausage Weiner.
Knuckle-dragger is a common derogatory term for an african american. I'll let you figure out why
Common? Common? In 73 years of living with this black skin, that's a new one. Could that be because I don't hang on folks like you John?
s/b "hang out"
Johnbeware of the boogyman, you are living in a different world.
There are maybe 1 to 2 billion muslims in the world, and if they were collectively after your ass, you would know about it. All this Muslim's taking over the USA is just hysteria for inadequates. Imagine, if the USA, with a population of 300 million, and more weapons than the rest of the world combined, cannot impose its view on lil ol Iraq with its population of say 20 million , how are a few, because it is only a few, fundamentalists going to impose their will on the US.
Have you any knowledge of Islam, or Islamic countries outside of wht you get from Faux news. have you ever talked with ordinary Muslims - you know the ones that go to work, eat at Mc Donalds, buy a car on credit.
Man, you and your kind are all one coke short of a Happy meal!
JOHN:
There is currently a shooting war going on, and GW Bush tells us it's against those Islamo-fascists. All these Savage-supporting gun-toting warriors who are "sleeper" heros, waiting to spring into action ... why don't they join the REAL action, which is taking place as we speak, and has been for over four years now?
It's a real head-scratcher why these battlers of terrorists and "Islamo-fascists" would not be out there on the front lines, instead of polishing their ammo while listening to Savage.
Guidance?
You don't have to try, MMFA does it for you, just look back at past articles...they usually put the ratings in there. Here is the paragraph they typically put:
The Savage Nation reaches more than 8 million listeners each week, according to [link to www.talkers.com] color="#0052a3">Talkers Magazine, making it the third most-listened-to talk radio show in the nation, behind only The Rush Limbaugh Show and The Sean Hannity Show.
Limbaugh has 20+ Million a week.
Big whoop. 20 million Americans believe we've been visited by aliens from outerspace.
Is it 20 million different minnions a week or is it the same 4 million 5 times a week. It may be spread out over a 7 day period but I'm not sure....I turn him on for his jokes about 2 minutes a day. Am I counted in?
Yep. Many in here: too many.
Sure les is a moron. Then again without you idiotic conservatives it would be dull around here
Hey, Han Solo, I notice that liberals never seem to get targeted at this site. With all the liberal loons calling for , among other things, the death of the president or VP , calling Gen. Petraeus horrible names, they seem to get a pass , here. Seems a bit slanted, a bit biased, a tad....leftist....in a word, UNFAIR.
If this site is gonna shill for the Democrats, and liberals in general, why not just be up front and admit it. Oh, but that would be asking for honesty, something that we can't have here. Carry on.
Maybe you haven't read the mission statement? Correcting Conservative misinformation. If you have a point, you will be challenged to defend your views. If you just tack on insults at the end, you don't get much in the way of response.
This should be obvious.
It's damaging to us all. We are trying to convince the world that we do not hate all Muslims. Mr Weiner plays directly to that belief. His words are heard by Muslims here and everywhere. If we don't speak out against them, we are seen as supporting, or tolerating this kind of hate.
In an echo of the challenge by the right for all Muslims to speak out against terrorism, we should challenge all real Americans to speak out against this kind of hate speech. Translations of his statements could be played in the madrassses and mosques for years.
I think the real issue is how he's taken by similarily unhinged and irrational listeners.
And just what do you think his "unhinged and irrational" listeners are going to do? Specifically.
This, for example.
Funny, I didn't see Savage listeners attributed there, can you help me?
You were asking for a theoretical.
I was? I was asking for specifics.
"what do you think..."
You are asking for an opinion, you are querying for a theory.
Pete,
This is ridiculous, why would I be asking for a theoretical, that is absurd. I think I know what I was asking. I was asking for a specific act that his listeners do as a direct result of Savage's words, in other words - specifics, as in proof.
Are you able to say the the persons in your example acted specifically on Savage's instructions?
You are now denying the phrasing of your question.
You were clearly asking for an opinion on possibilities.
You were not asking for direct evidence of people following Savage's instructions, which, I agree, none exists.
You were clearly asking for an opinion on what a "unhinged and irrational" is capable of.
And I don't know why you would be asking for someone's opinion, which is what you did.
You have to square with that yourself.
The point is you have absolutely no idea what anyone would do with it. You offer examples totally unrelated to Savage and think that is evidence of something that "might happen", but you have no evidence of any direct result of Savage's words.
You did not ask for evidence, and I did not provide evidence.
I offered examples of what "unhinged and irrational" people are capable of when influenced and consumed by hate and a jingoistic thirst for revenge.
As Savage put it, this was "from the bottom of his heart", so who was he targeting? He's obviously expecting someone to take this seriously, who was it? Could it be someone who's "unhinged and irrational"?
Right Pete, I just asked for some pie in the sky hypothetical with no proof or evidence as to what might happen in the future if some nut acts out on Savage's words and bombs Iran on his own.
Well, of course.
Then it becomes a question of means. If an "unhinged and irrational" person does not have access to a B-2 full of bunkerbusters, and they're still determined, they'll find other ways to manifest their rage.
"And just what do you think his "unhinged and irrational" listeners are going to do? Specifically."--Tommy [bold is Rick's]
You asked: 'What specifically he thinks Savage's listeners will do?'
Not: 'What specifically will Savage's listeners do?'
Sorry Tommy, but when you ask someones opinion, don't be upset because they ... well, ... gave you their opinion.
don't argue with the always right tommy!
not true , tommy says if u ignore the likes of savage and coulter they will go away i have been ignoring tommy for a long time now and he is still here so he is somtimes wrong
"I think I know what I was asking."
Perhaps you should learn to ASK what you're asking instead of deliberately phrasing your questions so vaguely to allow you to weasel your way out of them through deflection and denial.
Wow, CAIR and the EEOC going after people who are angry that people of a certain race and religion killed over 3,000 Americans. You expect people to embrace muslims after that? Maybe we should have embraced the japanese after Pearl Harbor, I'm sure the US would have been better off...right? Anger is justifiable and necessary at times. When people commit mass murder in the name of Islam and hatred for our country, anger and suspicion are necessary.
"anger and suspicion are necessary."
Are vandalism, workplace discrmination, violence and threatening phone calls also necessary?
John said:
"Wow, CAIR and the EEOC going after people who are angry that people of a certain race and religion killed over 3,000 Americans. You expect people to embrace muslims after that? Maybe we should have embraced the japanese after Pearl Harbor, I'm sure the US would have been better off...right? Anger is justifiable and necessary at times. When people commit mass murder in the name of Islam and hatred for our country, anger and suspicion are necessary."
First, they weren't people of a certain race, they were people who followed a certain religion. This is where folks like you seem to get mixed up a lot of times is that Islam is not a race, it's a religion that has many practitioners of many different races.
Let's see, the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by how many people again? 12 or 13 hijackers, backed by maybe another 15-20 bad guys who were the planners, and the money providers. So say, high end, 33-40 people were involved with 9/11. Take into account if you will, that there are well over 1 billion people around the world who consider themselves Muslim. Divide 40 into 1 billion, and the percentage of Muslims who carried out these heinous attacks is: 0.000004%. Apparently, you want to condemn an entire religion because of the acts of a very very few. And I ask you now; how many of those Muslims who carried out the tragedy that was 9/11 were from the US? Answer,0. How many of those Muslims were from Iraq? Answer, 0. Where were they ALL from? Saudi Arabia. Who provides material support, money, and people to terrorists around the world? Majority comes from, yes, Saudi Arabia.
Actually history tells us that we did embrace the Japanese after Pearl Harbor, technically. We defeated them as a country first, and mass murdered many of their citizens (well over 300,000 in only 2 bombs), but that's OK because we were saving the lives on Americans by doing it. Anyway, after they were defeated, we embraced the Japanese and made them the world power that they are today for the most part.
While I agree that anger is justifiable at times, and necessary in some situations, being angered at an entire religion because of the actions of a few is like me condemning the entire republican party because George Bush is an idiot. There are, contrary to what Mr. Savage believes, many practioners of Islam who are more than peaceful, and I would guarantee that the vast majority of Muslims are indeed peaceful people, believe it or not, just like you and me, who follow a different prophet than most Americans do. Where you fail, and where you are ignorant, is that you don't take the time to understand people of other religions, and you take rants like what Mr. Savage goes on about here, and take it to heart. Go out. Meet some Muslims. Talk to them in your community. You'll see that they are indeed all around you, and aren't looking to kill, well, anyone. It's xenophobia such as yours that produced Japanese internment camps during WWII.
What about when people commit mass murder in the name of this country? Head on over to Iraq, talk to some of the locals there who have had loved ones killed, not by local militias, or by radicals, but by wayward US bombs and bullets. And you wonder why people hate the US? Statistically, more Iraqis have been killed by US hands during this war than by any other means. Oh, but I know. It's OK that we did it, because we were freeing them from tyranny right?
Mag,
Interesting post. You wrote:
And you wonder why people hate the US? Statistically, more Iraqis have been killed by US hands during this war than by any other means.
Can you provide any proof of that assertion?
Of those Iraqi's killed, do you know how many were fighting against the coalition forces at the time? In other words, how many were combatants and how many were civilians?
While we are on the subject, do you happen to know how many Iraqi's have been killed by the other side? Is there any place that you know of that lists those statistics?
I think if you had those types of figures it might help your argument. Your assertion may well be true, I simply have a hard time believing it. Thanks.
AA,
This is something I remember reading at one point in time. Let me see if I can find the stats on your questions.
I have always been a fan of this site for what looks like pretty well researched death statistics on Iraqi civilians:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
There is a chance that I'm wrong about the US causing more civilian deaths, having trouble finding that information. Let me keep looking.
A note on IBC: IBC is heavily criticized by anti-war activists (and others who are paying attention) for its reliance on media reports to report the dead. Because IBC relies on the media (and many deaths go unreported or under-reported by the media) for its numbers, the tally is much lower than many other counting outlets, who rely not just on the media, but also on official reports, police blotters and the like to count the violent deaths in Iraq since the inception of the invasion and occupation.
I do realize this, and they note that on their website, that indeed, they are in most likliehood under-reporting the amount of deaths that have resulted due to the invasion of Iraq. I do like it because it is a reasonably fair, and well researched site.
I also added that note just to stave off the "IBC is a liberal hackjob" BS that would certainly come from looking at numbers like that. In terms of body count, IBC is very conservative in its numbers. It should be considered at minimum body count, really!
"First, they weren't people of a certain race, they were people who followed a certain religion." --So, they werent Saudis of middle eastern decent? Additionally, it is impossible for a person to "not be of a certain race."
"the percentage of Muslims who carried out these heinous attacks is: 0.000004%." --You are correct to a certain extent, but even liberal democrats accept the estimate that 1-2% of muslims adhere to an extremist agenda. That leaves us with 1-2 million of these people hanging around.
"And I ask you now; how many of those Muslims who carried out the tragedy that was 9/11 were from the US?" --Sure, they weren't US citizens, but they were here illegally for quite some time before the attacks. They were even doing flight training in Arizona. The fact is, we do not know who is here now, and what their intentions may be. If this isn't the greatest argument for shutting down the borders and kicking out the illegals, I don't know what is.
"Actually history tells us that we did embrace the Japanese after Pearl Harbor, technically." --Correct, but we have not yet defeated radical Islam yet. As long as Iran is standing with it current regime, radical Islam and hatred for the West has a "safehouse" to reside and grow within.
"There are, contrary to what Mr. Savage believes, many practioners of Islam who are more than peaceful" --Contrary to what Savage believes? Oh yeah, MMFA doesn't post audio clips of the frequent conversations and insight the Savage Nation gains when moderate muslims call the show to express their views. Savage recently had an Iranian immigrant on the show for a half hour to help express the views of the Iranian common folk. Regular Savage listeners are probably some of the most educated people to the realities of moderate Islam vs. radical Islam.
"Where you fail, and where you are ignorant, is that you don't take the time to understand people of other religions...Meet some Muslims." --Does my Muslim co-worker who I just took out to lunch today and have open conversations with regularly count here? I know this is the internet and I can say anything, but I'm serious about this.
"Head on over to Iraq, talk to some of the locals there who have had loved ones killed, not by local militias, or by radicals, but by wayward US bombs and bullets." --It doesnt help when the cowardly terrorists literally hide in homes behind women and children, or in mosques. I guess we should click the trigger safety on and let them hide in peace. Our military has an extremely tough job, and is barely able to perform that job when criticism of this nature is always there. Nobody likes war, but we must do what is necessary to stop the enemy. At least, thats seems to be the common wisdom from our WWII vets.
"Nobody likes war, but we must do what is necessary to stop the enemy. At least, thats seems to be the common wisdom from our WWII vets."
Care to back that claim up? You don't know many World War II veterans do you?
You might find this article interesting.
[link to www.washingtonpost.com]
Nice anti-military liberal sob story. You want to compare the military of WWII to the military of today? Fine. In WWII, when we saw a Nazi on the battlefield, we shot him down. Now, we take the enemy to Gitmo and give him a prayer rug and koran, and keep them around until the ACLU can B.S. some kind of case to let the enemy go free.
Typical mindless drivel from another keyboard badass. I asked questions. You replied with talking points.
You know nothing of how warfare is conducted and even less about who or what an enemy is.
Keep banging the keys, tough guy, we're all a quiver from the virtual testosterone that wafts from your posts.
Sorry. To back up the claim, watch the new series "The War" by Ken Burns. My claim is a theme through the entire series, which is basically interviews with WWII vets. Additionally, I know 3 vets personally, and have met many more in passing.
You must have been watching a different series than the one I saw. The one I watched showed me how effected those vets were from WWII, and how it made them sad to have to go to war at all.
What you seem to have missed from the series and from speaking to vets is that most veterans feel that they risked losing their lives and their limbs, but they held on to their humanity.
It's hard. What soldiers have to do to keep themselves and their brothers and sisters alive can be horrific, but to imply that these honorable men and women were willing to "do whatever is necessary" smears their service and their memories.
"It's hard. What soldiers have to do to keep themselves and their brothers and sisters alive can be horrific, but to imply that these honorable men and women were willing to "do whatever is necessary" smears their service and their memories."
So what they have to do might be horrific, but not necessary? Why would one do something horrific if it was not completely necessary? I think we are understanding this the same way, but we just dont want to agree with each other.
You more or less implied that "whatever is necessary" would include torture. you also implied that when Americans commit war crimes that it's the left and the media who are bringing trumped up charges.
I'm not agreeing with you at all.
Men at war who wear the uniform of this nation are subject to the Geneva Conventions. In my day it was considered an honor to serve a country that held the higher moral ground. I hope that that's still the way the current generation feels.
"You more or less implied that "whatever is necessary" would include torture." --no, you are a lunatic. I meant that although serving their country may have made them do terrible things (such as drop a nuclear bomb, or mow people down with a machine gun), they did it because they knew it was necessary to preserve American freedom.
"you also implied that when Americans commit war crimes that it's the left and the media who are bringing trumped up charges." --What I implied is that Americans are not commiting war crimes, but the media and the left is hyping false information in order to discredit our military. For the media, look up Tim McGirk from Time magazine who hyped up the story told by a terrorist on the battlefield about the so-called Haditha Massacre. For the left, look up Jack Murtha for slandering our Marines and accusing them of these "crimes" at Haditha THAT NEVER OCCURRED! One by one, the marines who were supposedly involved in Haditha are having the charges against them dropped. The commanding officer accused in this case wasnt even in Haditha at the time of the event! Jack Murtha is currently being subpoenad for committing libel against these troops.
Additionally, if the media isnt completely attached to the left wing agenda, tell me why cameras were in Abu Ghraib to catch panties on the head issue, but they aren't in Iran when they are hanging homosexuals; or why they aren't present when the practitioners of the religion of peace are beating their wives? Wait, I can answer that....we wouldn't want to show the animalistic Islamists for who they really are...which is a bunch of people who have not moved out of the 7th century. These people are hateful, intolerant, racist pigs who must be stopped for the benefit of all humanity. But that reality might offend muslim americans, wouldn't it?
Spoken like a good German. Ignore, deny, obfuscate and demonize.
The Iraqis in Haditha are certifiably dead, despite how the military handles this case. This includes children. but you don't care, do you? You just want your "side" to win. You are in deep denial.
We cannot reform another country; only our own. No one is arguing that we like Iran's repressive government. But we can't change it; only the people there can.
Well since we cant seem to reform our own (thanks for the "most honest" congress in history Nancy!), we may as well try to reform somewhere else.
That's not going to work. We must keep reforming our own government. Progress is made, inch by inch. Too slow for my taste, but we can't give up.
Nice anti-military liberal sob story. You want to compare the military of WWII to the military of today? Fine. In WWII, when we saw a Nazi on the battlefield, we shot him down. Now, we take the enemy to Gitmo and give him a prayer rug and koran, and keep them around until the ACLU can B.S. some kind of case to let the enemy go free. - John(and some numbers)
--------------------------------------------------
Would you care to back up this crazy assertion? As the grandson of a WWII vet who was a sniper, many Nazis were taken prisoner, many more than you might think. As for your comment about Gitmo and dig on the ACLU, that's just another right-wing talking point/lie - unless, as I mentioned above, you'd care to back it up. Facts people, facts - not talking points!!!
Nice anti-military liberal sob story. You want to compare the military of WWII to the military of today? Fine. In WWII, when we saw a Nazi on the battlefield, we shot him down. Now, we take the enemy to Gitmo and give him a prayer rug and koran, and keep them around until the ACLU can B.S. some kind of case to let the enemy go free.
Your ignorance of history, and warfare is laughable. Watch the Ken Burns series about WWII, and this might bring you down a few pegs. That generation was great, and they performed spectacularly, and saved the world from actual real facism.
Soldiers didn't just shoot German soldiers on the battlefield. If they gave up, they were taken prisoner, and treated humanely. And remember, when you criticize "liberals", remember who was running WWII. A liberal democrat. We took a lot of prisoners during WWII, and guess what? We treated them humanely, and didn't torture them for information. Did our guys get such treatment? I doubt it, but guess what? This is why we won WWII, or part of it. This is why we as a nation are better.
Nobody has argued for anyone being detained at Gitmo to go free. The ACLU has argued that they should be allowed the right of habeus corpus, and that they should be allowed access to an attorney, and they should be charged with something. What do you have a problem with in that? Currently, our President has stated that he can detain anyone (American citizen or not) that he perceives to be a threat, and keep them incommunicado for as long as he wants. That's, well, un-American.
Don't forget that it was your great liberal democrat president, FDR, also made the decision to detain all japanese in America (a smart decision). He also made the decision to drop 2 nuclear weapons and wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocents in order to break the enemy's will to fight. Another good choice, it worked. We need a liberal democrat willing to make those same kinds of decisions today (haha yeah right), since we really need to end this war on terror and save the lives of our troops.
Uh, that was Truman... not FDR. Switch off the 'Savage Nation' and go back to school and brush up on your history.
Your revisionist history doesn't get past educated liberals. Try again, moron.
Hi John,
I'm glad we agree on some things, like there are 6.7billion humans right now. The Ken Burns WWII film is a masterpiece and will be shown in schools for at least 2 generations. (By the way, just to strut my lib creds here, I attended the world premiere of said film at the Telluride Film Festival, he toned down some things, I came out of that room ready to sell every Japanese product I owned. Luckily I got hammered on French champagne at the Q&A and came to my senses.) So, I would like to recomend a film for you and all Americans, "Why we fight" . It is available for rent at Blockbuster.
Netflix, too.
Truman dropped the first two bombs (you dropped the third).
Also, you mentioned that the Saudi's who pulled off 9/11 were in the country illegally. That's also false.
You get much wrong, stating falshoods and insisting they are true. Higher intelligence will often lead one to question themselves before speaking. It might be time for you to do this. Your alternative would be to admit you're a dummy.
Oh, I'm sorry, only 5 of the 19 were in direct violation of immigration laws. But I guess as long as that is a minority number, it gets a pass from the insance liberals.
By the way, 4 of these were stopped by police officers for speeding. If the officers could have done their job, and kicked these illegals out immediately, that would have been 4 less to pull off the job. But the ACLU would have gone after the officers for racism and profililing, had they done that.
This is common knowledge. Prove me wrong. Read page 46 of the 9/11 Commission Report first though.
What you posted above is a jumble of fact and projection. But you bring up an interesting point. The hijackers were Saudis...no Iraqis or Iranians in the bunch.
A jumble of fact and projection? Then prove it wrong.
Iran and Iraq were not involved in 9/11. Bombing Iran would be a disaster.
Your projection in bold; these are your opinions of what the ACLU would do, based upon your idea of that organization. I think your supposition ridiculous. The 9/11 hijackers could have been detected if the FBI and the CIA had not been so disfunctional. It had nothing to do with the ACLU:
By the way, 4 of these were stopped by police officers for speeding. If the officers could have done their job, and kicked these illegals out immediately, that would have been 4 less to pull off the job. But the ACLU would have gone after the officers for racism and profililing, had they done that.
because of the way u just spoke of WWII veterns i dont believe for a second that you are one
Good call you waste of space. Although I wouldn't expect any further insight from someone who is too lazy to use the extra two letters required to type the word "you." Mom is calling for dinner, putz, get it before it gets cold!
Waste of space?
What should we do about people who are wasting space?
We should probably just eliminate them, they're worthless. A drag on the rest of us good Americans.
Do you know you are an eliminationist? Do you know yours is the speech of hate groups?
You are the one with the problem with free speech. You seek to crush dissent through ritual humiliation and threat of violence.
I fail to see a threat of violence in my post...unless his mom calling for dinner is violent? Additionally, please keep labeling my [possibly offensive] free speech as hate speech, it makes me laugh.
Upthread you accuse us of being terrorist sympathizers, you call people a waste of space. It's typical eliminationist rhetoric, which is hate speech. Just be honest with us. You know you would love nothing more than purging your America of the filthy vermin libs.
You need help. I am sad for you.
And i'm supposed to sit here and believe that you and all the left wingers here are traveling the honorable high ground, and want to have all the "whack job right wingnuts" around, because it stimulates good debate. Get real.
And by the way, the biggest hate-filled poster on here, Solon, has called me and every other conservative on this site every name under the book including waste of space. Now that both sides are clearly participating in "hate speech," can we move on? Or, we can be grown-ups and realize that offensive free speech is not hate speech, hate speech only exists in the minds of the weak who cannot deal with a few harsh words.
Is the next argument going to be that hate doesn't exist?
You accept that hate speech exists and then deny it exists. It's like saying that some people can't stop drinking alcohol, but alcoholism doesn't exist.
Eliminationist rhetoric is hate speech. Hate speech engenders fear and loathing of other human beings and it promotes a rationalized use of violence through ritual humiliation and systematic dehumanization.
I agree free speech, especially the truth, can be offensive. But you take it to the next level, friend. Your use of violent imagery, direct comparisons of political opposites to terrorists and reviling pests along with your constant derrogations is the classic groundwork of murder/death speak.
I am just trying to help you realize the hate in your heart and put you on the path to healing.
"comparisons of political opposites to terrorists and reviling pests along with your constant derrogations is the classic groundwork of murder/death speak."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This is great: "you waste of space," a phrase that has no connection to the sustained life of a person (a.k.a school yard name-calling) is murder/death speak to a liberal. HAHAHAHA, too good.
Nice. Humiliate instead of debate. I must have struck upon the truth.
So what name were you banned under before when I called you names? You are such a whiner. If I called you names then you were doing your own ad hominem attacks. When a liberal returns serve however its just soooo mean. Well I was right you are not only a waste of space but a waste of precious oxygen. An ignorant piece of human debris. Bring an argument and leave the ad hominems out and you will see real and honest debate. Come in here guns ablazing and we shoot back. The days when you cons were the only ones being rude are over. Get used to it moron.
You are WAY too stupid to be talking that way to someone else. You are a moron at BEST. Your ignorance would be embarassing to a third grader. You are wasting your life in your mommys basement and its time for your shortbus ride to your special school.
Well... Maybe not after Peral Harbor, but we did embrace the Japanese after we bombed the everloving $#!+ out them. Don't forget - they used to practice suicide bombing too, now they make video games.
We've killed over 500,000 Iraqi's - is that supposed to make muslim's the world over want to kill us less? Proportionate to their population (~26M) that the equivalent of 1600 9/11's. (Compare 500K/26M with 3K/300M.) So let's stop with all the "they're so evil" stuff. American's and Christian's have no more compunctions about killing than they do. And thank God for that, because we are safer as a nation because, among other thing we're better at it than they are! There's blood on all our hands, so don't act like we're so morally superior.
And just to cut off the whole "they'll hate us not matter what we do" garbage... If that's the case, then WHAT THE HELL ARE WE DOING IN IRAQ ANYWAY? We haven't been actually fighting AGAINST Iraq for like 4 years now!!! (That's why it stupid to still be eve calling it a war!) If "they'll hate us anyway" then why do you righties all support our troops trying to build stuff up over there, all the while getting shot at?!
And what's this BRING OUR BOYS HOME, BOMB IRAN crap? (I'm done with you. On to Savage now.) Nothing would get more of "our buys" sent overseas than any action taken against Iran. That would likely start WW3, so let's hope the Dem's in congress manage to prevent Bush (or anyone else) from doing anything that stupid. We'd be fighting Russia, China and the entire Middle East, with Europe saying "you're on your own" by the time the dust cleared on that bit of strategic brilliance.
NiceGuy,
Your claim that we've killed a half million Iraqi's doesn't seem to hold water. See Mag's post above linking to IraqBodyCount.
They estimate about 80,000 since the start. Unfortunately I didn't see how many deaths are caused by Islamofacists. It would be nice to know since they deliberately target innocents on a daily basis to murder.
And when did they start killing one another? Since we've been occupying Iraq? During Saddams' tenure? Before that? And will it stop when, if ever, we leave?
The question to be asked is , How many Iraqis would still be alive if we hadn't invaded their country?
See my response to Mag's post above. IBC only reports those deaths reported by the media. Many deaths are NOT reported by the media. The 80,000 is a bare minimum, and does not count many deaths that have resulted from this ill-conceived invasion and occupation.
AA, there is no such thing as an "islamofacist."
The term is made up by the neo-cons. Fascism is the authoritarian union of government with corporate elites and promotes intense nationalism.
Given your definition, I fail to see how Ahmadinejad in Iran would not be an Islamofascist.
Actually, no. The president of Iran is not the central authority; and the Mullahs are not married to corporatism; they are religious fanatics.
Here's an excerpt from Paul Krugman's piece in the NYT:
"For one thing, there isn’t actually any such thing as Islamofascism — it’s not an ideology; it’s a figment of the neocon imagination. The term came into vogue only because it was a way for Iraq hawks to gloss over the awkward transition from pursuing Osama bin Laden, who attacked America, to Saddam Hussein, who didn’t. And Iran had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 — in fact, the Iranian regime was quite helpful to the United States when it went after Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan.
Beyond that, the claim that Iran is on the path to global domination is beyond ludicrous. Yes, the Iranian regime is a nasty piece of work in many ways, and it would be a bad thing if that regime acquired nuclear weapons. But let’s have some perspective, please: we’re talking about a country with roughly the G.D.P. of Connecticut, and a government whose military budget is roughly the same as Sweden’s.
Meanwhile, the idea that bombing will bring the Iranian regime to its knees — and bombing is the only option, since we’ve run out of troops — is pure wishful thinking. Last year Israel tried to cripple Hezbollah with an air campaign, and ended up strengthening it instead. There’s every reason to believe that an attack on Iran would produce the same result, with the added effects of endangering U.S. forces in Iraq and driving oil prices well into triple digits."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/opinion/29krugman.html?_r=2&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
"they are religious fanatics" --Exactly! Hence, the reason why "islamo-" was placed in front of "fascist." These people are fascistic in the way they push their islamic religious ideology in their country, and it is spreading around the world (i.e. - radical islamists calling for western nations to be ruled under sharia law in the future). I don't know how clear it can get.
Additionally, I enjoyed how you will quote some stooge from the NYT as a credible opinion on the topic, but have no problem blasting a person like me for taking Savage's opinion seriously.
You are ignoring the corporate part. When corporations that pollute the air and water are writing the regulations that monitor them; the fusion of military-industrial complex that Eisenhauer warned about...that is fascist.
Mussilini did this in his country. The corporate interests and the government were one and the same entity.
As for Krugman, you are quite mistaken. He is no stooge for anyone. Weiner is just putting on an act, frankly, and if he really believes half of what he spews out, he's got serious mental problems. And the "bomb Iran" rhetoric is dangerous.
The Weinerdog is a lunatic and if you take him seriously you need serious medical help. So the question remains does listening to the insane Weinerdog make one a lunatic bigot or are lunatic bigots attracted to listening to the insane Weinerdog?
Sure. The things YOU fail to understand fill libraries. Fascism just doesnt have anything to do with Islamic extremism. Nutbag sure, hatemonger, absolutly fascist? Where is the corporate state tie in? Mousolini said fascism was state corporatism. The only thing Islamic extremism has in common with Fascism is they are both bad. Then again simpleminded Manichean thinkers think everything belongs in the white box or the black box and it makes sense to put anything together from the same box. Its stupid but what else would we expect. Why not Islamocommunism or IslamoMongol horde? Do you know anything at ALL about history?
Fine. Using your estimate, relative to population, it's still 250x the death rate of 9/11. That's TWO HUNDERED AND FIFTY 9/11', using YOUR death total estimation.
AND THEY DIDN'T EVEN ATTACK US?
Care to give my argument any more ammunition?
Explain why the US Government is coddling Saudi Arabia with the knowledge that the hijackers were Saudis. Thrill me with your deep insight, Johnny.
I do not know. I'm not one of the 11% who approve of congress, and i'm not one of the 20% or however many approve of bush. Saudi Arabia is probably laughing at us for being so stupid. Our government has completely failed to protect the people and go after ALL of our enemies. Is that enough insight for you? I don't agree with or like the neocons.
Funny, you sound just like them.
You didn't provide ANY insight so I would have to answer your question with 'no'. Nice try though. Go back to Limbaugh and Hannity for more 'guidance'.
"I dont know" and "I do not agree with the administration" isnt the same viewpoint that you have? I mean...in addition to that, I'm sure a number of our politicians are involved with big business and are getting lots of money from the Saudi's. I dont know what else you can say about this. Our government and our leaders are corrupt, that is why we have neglected to take action against Saudi Arabia, despite their direct involvement in 9/11. And by stating that I am not a neocon or republican supporter, why in the world would I be interested in limbaugh or hannity? People who listen to Savage, typically despise those 2 stooges.
Because you guys are purty much all the same. All shrill anger, fear, and paranoia designed to appeal to emotion rather than intelligence and logic. Just listening to the shows and hearing the mouth-breather callers spout garbage is enough to convince me that they are a bunch of simple-minded propagandists of low intellectual capacity and nothing more.
Well, you listen to the clips on Savage that are posted here. MMFA purposely posts certain clips to cause you to form the exact opinion that you just expressed. If you listened to Savage on a regular basis, he constantly has investigative reporters on the show to present current news and events regarding terrorism within and outside the US. He also regularly has moderate muslim callers and guests that speak about the issues conerning the non-radical muslim population here and in the middle east. MMFA does not cover these clips because it would not be PC to criticize a muslim caller, and there is no information broadcasted that is incorrect or misleading.
You are quick to condemn and slander when you don't even know what was presented or discussed in the rest of the 3-hour radio show. I guess I had you confused with a "accept everyone, free speech loving" liberal.
Oh please, like I'd take Savage's miserable 'show' and its participants - Savage, his callers, his so-called 'reporters', who-the-hell-ever - 'seriously'!
I take it that you consider Savage your 'news source'?
He is a jeck of a lot more accurate and realistic than Katie Couric or Wolf Blitzer.
Perhaps you get your news from john stewart. That's laughable...pardon the pun.
I think it's important to read and study from many sources. I don't take any radio talkers' word for something. And I don't watch network or cable news because there is very little information there.
Or this.
Funny, didn't see it there either. Can't find the link you're seeing.
You weren't asking for what Savage listeners HAVE done.
You were asking for opinions or theory.
I was asking for specifics on what they have done as a result of his "instructions".
No, you did not ask what Savage's listeners HAVE done.
You were asking one person for their opinion or theory on what an "unhinged and irrational" person would do.
And where is your proof that your example is a direct result of Savage's instructions......or you just giving us anectodal evidence?
My intent was to provide an example of what an "unhinged and irrational" person is capable of, which is what you asked for.
You did not ask for evidence of past incidents that resulted from a dedicated listener following Savage's instructions.
Yeah, we get it. You want 'concrete examples' otherwise it doesn't exist, right? Oh how clever.
I think any intelligent person knows - without having to provide specific examples - that morons like Savage have a lot of influence on the minds of the mentally-challenged and that the wave of anti-Arab sentiment after 9/11 didn't just drop out of a clear blue sky.
As an aside... you think that the recent defeat of the immigration bill and Trent Lott's assertion that 'talk radio is running America' are not a result of the influence those morons have on their listeners? You think that those 'Levin surges' - as an example - don't have any basis?
And this.
Or this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Martin_Duran
It's too bad the real issues can't be discussed in a civil manner anymore. Such is the age of the sensationalist, for-profit media.
As much as I agree with you, I cannot imagine throughtful people looking for serious discussions on issues go to radio shock jocks for that? They even bill themselves as opinionated shows, hence the host's name in the title of the program.
Entertainment or partisan sniping maybe....news and adult discussion, no.
What is your point exactly? Savage has 10 million listeners per week. Nobody is arguing that those 10 million are rational people, so why do you keep saying that as if you have a point? It's as though you want to deny that Savage has any influence at all by somehow trying to make it seem like those 10 million people per week don't mean anything or somehow don't count.
Woo-hoo...Savage is home from therapy! Grease up the pig and fetch some hollowpoints...!
Sounds like the ventalation system in the Savage Weiner Studio may have cut back a little TOO much on the oxygen . . .
I am wonder were these "thousands" are coming from? Haven't reached 2,000 "Iraqi Bombers" yet . . .
According to a 22 Sep 07 WPost artical "Officials said that of the 11,000 refugee applicants referred to the United States by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, only 1,135 have been admitted. More are scheduled to enter before the end of the month, but officials acknowledged that they will probably fall short of the State Department's target of 2,000 arrivals this fiscal year."
hmmmmm . . . .
Kill the homosexual?
Seems like the Iranians and Dr. Weiner are on the same page.
He clearly stated that Islam preaches "Kill the homosexual." (read the Hadiths if you would like to learn more little "gems" of muslim "wisdom") And if you can't put 2 and 2 together, that is referring to many supporters of this website.
Savage was outraged about how Ahmadinejad stated "there are no homosexuals in Iran" in his Columbia speech. He constantly posts articles on his website every time Iran executes homosexuals.
Are you people so devoted to diversity and getting society to accept homosexuality that you will accept and support Islamists who want to kill you?
Of course not. And the post you replied to pointed this out. Savage has made several slurs against homosexuals before, even wishing them dead, so that would be in line with the Islamist extremists.
Savage has NEVER wished death to somebody for being homosexual.
Boy are you stupid.
Care to explain this little tidbit?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpUxxls8iiE
Yeah, that’s tough to explain away. HOWEVER, when one types “NEVER” in all caps, such as “Savage has NEVER wished death to somebody for being homosexual,” then the assertion stated immediately following it becomes irrefutable. SORRY.
Then people should be intelligent enough to not type 'NEVER' when it isn't true. Of course... that's asking way too much from a dittohead someone who is beyond hope.
I can't get on youtube at work, but i'm assuming it is the "get aids and die" line to the prank caller. If you take that as wishing death on a homosexual, your comprehension skills are lacking. He told the caller to get aids because that disease occurs more frequently in the homosexual community. Once you have AIDS, you die. So, Savage basically said "keep living your lifestlye and it will kill you." Thats pointing out a fact, not wishing death.
What about the part where he tells the caller to choke on a sausage or get trichinosis from the sausage? Sounds like he's wishing death on the dude to me!
"Once you have AIDS, you die."
An apparently uninformed, narrow-minded viewpoint.
Most people with HIV probably will have the virus in their body when they die since there is currently no way to get rid of it. Whether or not HIV will be what causes someone's death, however, is not always clear.
What many people want to know is whether it is possible to get HIV and have a normal, relatively healthy life. HIV is often thought of as an incurable, fatal illness, and it certainly can be--especially after a person's immune system is weakened to the point that he or she has AIDS.
Without treatment, most people with HIV will eventually develop AIDS and die. When someone dies of AIDS, it is usually because of an opportunistic infection or other long-term effect of having HIV.
Since 1996, improved treatments have given renewed hope to many HIV-positive people. While the treatments are not a cure, and are far from perfect, they may help to keep people with HIV healthy for a long time.
How long? No one knows, really. Some people may do very well for many, many years. Others may eventually get sick and die despite being treated. Recent studies suggest that people who take the treatments can gain, on average, 24 extra years of life. There is a great need for research to find new and better treatments for HIV.
"There is a great need for research to find new and better treatments for HIV."
No there isn't, I wish we could take back every single dollar ever spent on AIDS and HIV here at home, in Africa, and everywhere else. There is a very simple and free method to prevent this disease from spreading. We could wipe it out in 1 generation. Abstinence. Simple, keep your pants zipped up until marriage. Problem solved...and I just saved us billions of dollars.
John
Believe me... we all approve of your practicing abstinence.
I do feel sorry for your hand though.
Too bad we cant stop the spread of the disease of ignorance of your type. You CAN do the world and out gene pool a big favor though. Keep being abstinate whatever you do. DO. NOT. BREED.
SAVAGE: Oh, you're one of the sodomites. You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. john174541842: "keep living your lifestlye and it will kill you." Thanks for translating, john174541842!
No way out of that. You are full of it with a BS appology. What you said was hogwash and YES telling someone to get aids and die is absoultly wishing death on him. You rightwingers just because you believe any BS your heroes tell you think that if you just SAY something whether it makes sense or not we will be as gullible as you
Maybe you should suit up for the big game against Iran then, John with the many digits.
People like you love to push others to fight and die for their beliefs, but are you willing to step up yourself?
Yeah, I'll step up...so people like you can accuse me of murder and torture of innocents. Maybe I could have Jack Murtha slander me for doing my job. Maybe the media can take the word of the enemy and make up fake "massacres" that I could be involved in.
Almost sounds tempting...
Not if you don't murder innocent civilians, and or torture innocent civilians. If you follow the "rules" of engagement, you'll be good to go. I'm sure that you think all followers of Islam are evil anyway, at least this is what I assume from your previous posts on this topic in this thread specifically.
See, here is what you fail to realize. The US, we are supposed to be the good guys. When we torture people, when we kill innocents on purpose, we lose moral standing in the world, and we should if these things are happening. Now, that being said, I don't think that the vast majority of soldiers serving in Iraq are murdering innocent Iraqis. No, not even close. Are there some bad apples who have done these things? Yes, and they have been investigated, and dealt with in a military court of law. Will there be more? Undoubtedly. War zones do crazy things to people, and sometimes, they make bad decisions, and sometimes they have to pay for those bad decisions. Are you saying we should just give carte blache to our soldiers to kill whoever they think needs killing? Because, guess what? We've tried that before, and it didn't end up too well for us.
So go already. No-one is stopping you.
Frankly, I'm fed up with all the 'warrior wannabes' who are all TALK TALK TALK and yet have zero WALK WALK WALK! Yeah, it's easy for you clowns to spew your bullsh*t from the safety of your momma's basement but how about transforming your spewing into action for once? If you're so damn gung-ho over Iraq and - coming soon - Iran then just go. You wanna take the bullet for this BS president and his BS 'beliefs' then by all means do so.
Aw, you could handle the combat but not those mean widdle libwuls, then? I can understand that position from a keyboard commando.
This discussion once again demonstrates that the talk show freaks and their 'sheeple' on the far right are really just a bunch of pussies who wouldn't DARE spew their trash to anyone in person.
Short, sweet and to the point. I'm lovin' your posts today, Rabbitluvr!
Yeah, my tolerance of stupidity waxes and wanes. Today, it's definitely waning and it shows.
I should have taken Savage's advice from last week:
"You do not want to upset a liberal during working hours because they are not able to access their companion animal or medical marijuana."
It only took a few days after Savage said that to test it out, and prove it to be correct.
Cute. But this is serious stuff we are talking about. And the mentality that we should just bomb a country is dangerous.
Further, regarding Haditha, since you keep bringing it up:
http://alovelypromise.blogspot.com/2007/04/haditha-update-killer-mindset.html
I'm not going to read that based soley on the fact that it is dated in April 2007. So many more facts and pieces of evidence have been brought forward since then, whatever input might have been relevant is no longer so. In April, all the accused marines were still charged. Many of them have now had the charges dropped because the evidence clearly shows there was no cold blooded massacre.
You are just plain wrong; you have allowed yourself to be misled by the right wing noise machine. What is more current is the recent garbage spewed by inSannity as well as Weiner about the case.
The military stonewalled the investigation into the massacre which clearly did occur, making charges more difficult to prove:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/06/world/middleeast/06haditha.html
Weren't you just giving me a lecture about how you don't take your news from biaed outlets, and how you gether information from many sources? How quickly you forget. The NYT is anti-military, show me a pro military story from them to prove me otherwise.
In the meantime, tell me why one of the Marines who is still being court-martialed, could even be considered in commiting this crime, when he was not even in Haditha. Lt. Colonel Chessani. He wasn't even there. But that doesn't matter to the NYT, Time magazine, John Murtha, or any other liberal who gets a chance at slapping our marines in the face.
Did you even read the NYT story? And do you think that any story that doesn't support your world view of how great things are going in Iraq is "anti-military?"
You must not have read all of Judith Miller's NYT stories channeled from Chalabi about how Sadam had WMDs, helping support the White House drumbeat leading up to the invasion.
I've posted a number of links for you; now you post one to back up your claim about the soldier being prosecuted who wasn't there.
YOU are a joke. The NYTimes is the worlds most influential newspaper one of the worlds MOST respected newsources. The reason you wingnuts dont like it isnt because it is usually accurate but because it IS. FACTS have a liberal bias and you wingnuts hate facts and reality like a vampire hates holy water.
Now, now. Take it easy on John of insignificant numbers. We should all feel ashamed that we are the ones who keeps him from lacing up his boots and climbing aboard a C-130. You see, we might call him names.
Surely you can understand how the risk of criticism far outweighs the benefit of his service, can't you?
No one here has done that YOU are a liar
People like me?
The military people accused of crimes had charges brought against them by the military, not by "people like me" or John Murtha.
Things happen in war. Incidents have to be investigated, and occasionally charges filed against our service people. This has been going on for as long as we've been a nation.
People who do step up to serve their country do not try to cover up alleged atrocities. When allegations arise, every person serving expects the truth to eventually come out.
Anyone who would cover up or deny that these things occur during warfare does a disservice to their country and those that we send to fight and die in our name.
Yes. Next question.
I'm surprised Savage is offended when homosexuals are persecuted - he certainly uses gay as a slur enough on his show to prove that he doesn't approve of them.
From your first paragraph, you seem to think that most of the users here are gay. Is that true?
It's a Freudian slip on Savage's part...
Does he still have that Freudian slip? Because I heard he took it back and exchanged it for a teddy from Fredrick's.
Does he have even the self awareness of a house plant?
There, I gave it to you from the bottom of my heart. If you don't like it, it's too damn bad.
I for one appreciate some candor and honesty, and I hope he doesn't backtrack this time and says something about it being a joke or sarcasm.
Easy folks. The world needs Michael Savage. How else would we teach our kids first hand how the Hitler's, Stalin's and Lenin's brainwashed their societies. History books aren't enough sometimes. Savage is a real, live, hate-filled dictator who missed his opportunity by about seven or eight decades.
Clown.
Let me get this right: Savage is a hate-filled dictator because he believes America should fight back against Islamists who want to kill innocent people? Or is it because he would like to see children raised on wholesome values instead of being taught about sexual preference and safe sex starting in kindergarten? Perhaps he was being hateful when he donated $30,000 to the Marine's defense fund. Maybe he is hateful because he disagrees with the fact that illegal aliens are using services that should be reserved for citizens only. Can you please explain the hateful aspect of any of those points?
"Let me get this right: Savage is a hate-filled dictator because he believes America should fight back against Islamists who want to kill innocent people? Or is it because he would like to see children raised on wholesome values instead of being taught about sexual preference and safe sex starting in kindergarten? Perhaps he was being hateful when he donated $30,000 to the Marine's defense fund. Maybe he is hateful because he disagrees with the fact that illegal aliens are using services that should be reserved for citizens only. Can you please explain the hateful aspect of any of those points?"
Is Savage a dictator? Nope. You're right there. Is he hateful? Listen to him talk. It's pretty plain and clear that he hates a lot of things. Liberals, homosexuals, anyone that doesn't agree with him completely.
I believe that we are already fighting against radical Islam in the form of the so called war on terrorism. What's your point?
What's wrong with teaching kids that tolerance is OK? What's wrong with teaching kids that people are different, and can be accepted for who they are? What's wrong with judging a person for who they are, and not WHAT they are? Those sounds like pretty wholesome values to me, and some, like Jesus, would even consider them, you know, Christian values. And when you state teaching kids in kindergarten about "sex" you make it sound like they'll be teaching kids about how to get it on, and it would be graphic. This isn't even remotely close to the case of what would happen. Sexual education should start young, as young as possible, because in societies where they do start their population into sex ed younger, there are less unintended pregnancies, less venereal disease transmitted, and in general, people become MORE responsible about the choices that they make. And if education of this nature disturbs you, or doesn't jibe with how you think things are, you are more than welcome to take your kids away from it, teach them yourself, or enroll them in another school that follows more closely with what you believe in.
$30,000 for the Marine defense fund. Good for him. Hey, I'm sure it wasn't all his money though. I wonder if he was just the mouthpiece to raise the money, and he probably didn't even contribute himself.
Savage does not rail against illegal aliens using services that you, and he, say they didn't pay for. You do realize that the vast majority of illegal aliens are indeed paying into the system. Normally under false SS numbers, or made up SS numbers. They are paying income taxes, and all of the other stuff that you and I pay into the system. They'll never see any of that money back, and I'm OK with that. But to say that they're not paying for some of the services that they use is disingenuous at best, and completely ignorant of what is actually going on at the worst. I mean, as I have written on here before, and probably will again, if folks such as yourself, think that illegal immigrants have such a great and easy life living off of the "system", you should switch places with them for say, oh, about a week. I'm sure you'd see things differently then. Or even better, sign up, go work in a field somewhere for a week or 2 with some illegal immigrants and see how hard they work, for so little money. I did that once, and it opened my eyes a little wider. These folks, for the most part (there are always bad apples in a bunch) are coming here to try and live the so called American dream, and to provide for their families. They're not some kind of monster eating children.
"Sexual education should start young, as young as possible, because in societies where they do start their population into sex ed younger, there are less unintended pregnancies, less venereal disease transmitted" --Oh, so that must be why teenage pregnancy is at an all time high, and it also must be why LA has an STD rate of 1 in 4 young people (reported in LA times on October 10th). Keep believing your fantasy. Abstinence is the only way to reduce teen pregnancy and STD's, thats not even debatable.
"$30,000 for the Marine defense fund. Good for him. Hey, I'm sure it wasn't all his money though. I wonder if he was just the mouthpiece to raise the money, and he probably didn't even contribute himself." --Actually, the 30G's were from him personally. Over 200G's were donted by listeners in the last few weeks.
"You do realize that the vast majority of illegal aliens are indeed paying into the system." --This genius author specifically addresses that kind of statement: http://www.newswithviews.com/Wooldridge/frosty306.htm
"These folks...are coming here to try and live the so called American dream" --Yeah, at the cost of taking jobs away from needy Americans...While promoting "La Raza" which is a cover-up for hispanic supremecy...While pushing for the resurgence of "Azteca" in the Southwest...While crowding our hospitals and schools...Heck, lets just hand them the American dream that the hard working LEGAL immigrants to this nation have built for us throughout our history!
I'm sure you practice 'abstinence' - but it's probably not by choice.
Oh, so that must be why teenage pregnancy is at an all time high, and it also must be why LA has an STD rate of 1 in 4 young people (reported in LA times on October 10th). Keep believing your fantasy. Abstinence is the only way to reduce teen pregnancy and STD's, thats not even debatable.
"These are the three most remarkable findings," said Brady Hamilton, lead author of the report and a statistician with the National Center for Health Statistics. "The rate of teen births fell to 40.4 births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19. That's the lowest rate ever recorded in 65 years for which we have consistent data. It's quite impressive."The drop in teen births is also probably being driven by several forces. "This shows, maybe, that we're educating the public better, providing better health care, better contraception, better contraceptive choices for teens," Wu said. Hamilton added: "The best evidence suggests that this reflects a combination of factors, including programs promoting abstinence as well as those promoting safe sex." The decline in teen births was concentrated among girls aged 15 to 17.
Pearlene,
While I hope your source is correct, any stats on how many abortions? That is conspicuous by it's absence. I've heard there are 1.4 million abortions annually. It would be interesting to see the trends for teenagers.
AA, I only responded to John incorrect information on the 'rise in teenage pregnancies'. A simple 'Google' search with creditable sources are available.
With abortion we shall simply have to call it a draw. I simply believe that NO ONE has the RIGHT to tell a woman what to do with her body! Whether abortion figures are high or low, it's a woman's body and as a man you can enjoy it but as a man you do not dictate what happens to it!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020500466.html
Pearlene, you summed it up better than anyone. While liberal on most any other issue, I find abortion to be a misguided choice, but a choice nonetheless - and the choice of a woman. I'm personally against it, but for the reasons you stated above, I'll always support a woman's right to choose, in and out of the voting booth.
I had two pregnancies at a young age (18 & 21) and did not choose abortion, but giving birth was MY choice. I've discussed this issue with AA before and we will never agree. Making life altering decisions are extremely difficult and personal and should not be open for public discussion, IMO. Pregnancy like deciding to take a loved one off life support are decisions that should be handled privately.
Ok. I see your correction. John is mistaken about teen pregnancy being at the all time high. Good catch.
Finding information by googling is harder than it looks at least for me. I also did not find recent abortion statistics from the sources given in your link.
AA, best info I could find on teenage abortion rates:
Since 1990, pregnancy rates have declined substantially for teenagers aged 15--17 years. From 1990 to 2000, the pregnancy rate decreased 33%, from 80.3 per 1,000 females to 53.5, a record low. The birth rate declined 42%, from its peak at 38.6 in 1991 to 22.4 in 2003. The induced abortion rate peaked in 1983 at 30.7 and decreased by more than half to 14.5 by 2000.
SOURCES: Ventura SJ, Abma JC, Mosher WD, Henshaw S. Estimated pregnancy rates for the United States, 1990--2000: an update; and Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Sutton PD. Births: preliminary data for 2003. These reports and additional information are available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/births.htm
You are right, women do have choice. I've revised my views on this lately. Women have the right to choose.
Once they make the choice to destroy a human life, they should be tried for murder just like any other killer. There you go...everyone has the right to choose, just be ready to go to the slammer!
Benefits of choice? The possibility of one less neanderthals in the world! Hurray!
You sure are laughable with your insane 'black and white' thinking.
And you say libs are hateful? Look carefully in the mirror, buddy.
You are quite a piece of work. I enjoy the comedy of your intellect. Particularly the part where you believe those who have an abortion should be punished, but war is okay, and those who carried out the killings in Haditha did nothing wrong.
John, you must be living in your own personal hell. I'm sorry for you, sincerelly. I hope you get straightened out soon. Life's too short to live with your views.
Oh, so that must be why teenage pregnancy is at an all time high, and it also must be why LA has an STD rate of 1 in 4 young people (reported in LA times on October 10th). Keep believing your fantasy. Abstinence is the only way to reduce teen pregnancy and STD's, thats not even debatable.
You, umm, just proved my point. As a majority in the US, we don't give a comprehensive sex education to our children. When I said societies, I was talking more about European nations, where they do have this education in place, and it works. I live in a State where there is only 1 school system that teaches comprehensive sex ed from about 6th grade onward. Crazily enough, that one school system has the lowest teen pregnancy rate in NC. The rest of the State ranks way up there as far as teen pregnanc goes, and they foist abstinence on them. Abstinence education has proven not to work time and again.
Actually, the 30G's were from him personally. Over 200G's were donted by listeners in the last few weeks.
Good for him.
This genius author specifically addresses that kind of statement: http://www.newswithviews.com/Wooldridge/frosty306.htm
A genius author who has an agenda. And his article is actually only based in HIS reality. And not one that has any facts behind it. I'm so surprised, a far right wing website calling for all Mexicans to go home? Wow! That's utterly amazing!!!
Yeah, at the cost of taking jobs away from needy Americans...While promoting "La Raza" which is a cover-up for hispanic supremecy...While pushing for the resurgence of "Azteca" in the Southwest...While crowding our hospitals and schools...Heck, lets just hand them the American dream that the hard working LEGAL immigrants to this nation have built for us throughout our history!
La Raza is not, repeat, not some militant hispanic supremacy group. And they are not relevant, and most immigrants, legal or not, don't belong to that group anyway. They want their rights, and I can't blame them, because apparently, folks like yourself think they don't have any, and that's too bad. What happened to your poor, your weak, your huddled masses??
You really believe that illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from needy Americans? Laughable. Really laughable.
I have had the unfortunate circumstance of spending a large amount of time in the hospital lately. And from the way that guys like you talk, there would be hispanics climbing all over the place. Guess how many I saw when I was there? Yes, 0. This includes a long stint in the ER one night where, according to folks like yourself, is where they get their healthcare from. 0. Let that number sink in. 0 hispanics I saw.
"You really believe that illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from needy Americans? Laughable. Really laughable." --Laughable? Then please explain to me why, after ICE raids a factory and take out all the illegals, AMERICANS are lined up for the open positions the next day. Enough said.
"This includes a long stint in the ER one night where, according to folks like yourself, is where they get their healthcare from. 0. Let that number sink in. 0 hispanics I saw." --Thats nice, too bad illegals aren't comprised of only hispanic people. This article from only 3 days ago puts to shame your assertions that illegals aren't sucking our hospitals dry. It is so good, and relates to the recent SoCal fires, I hope you read it: [link to www.signonsandiego.com]
"Thats nice, too bad illegals aren't comprised of only hispanic people."--John1234567890
Who else do you have a problem with, and how many others are here that worry you?
"This article from only 3 days ago puts to shame your assertions that illegals aren't sucking our hospitals dry."--John1234567890
One piece of anecdotal evidence concerning 11 illegal immigrants does not equal "sucking our hospitals dry."
"he hates a lot of things. Liberals, homosexuals, anyone that doesn't agree with him completely."
you are mistakened Magnolialover, although it is very natural for sensible human biengs to detest radical liberals, savage's position on homosexuals is not hateful.
"What's wrong with teaching kids that tolerance is OK? What's wrong with teaching kids that people are different, and can be accepted for who they are?"
the emphasis in John's original point is that the children will be indoctrinated with this sex ed from kindergarten. now you may have no experience with children but they do not have fully developed minds and thus when contradicting evidence is presented before them, they naturally get confused. If you teach children that this sexual orientation is succesful in reproduction but another that is unseccesful deserves equal merit they will grow up confused as to what they should be. you cannot expect a child to decide his/hers orientation at 7. You are saying that jesus who wrote "if thou shalt sleep with another man thou shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven" considers homosexual values christian? However you may distort the fact but this "toleration" you so generally refer to is the toleration of homosexuals. i believe that ALL socio-political indoctrination should be removed from schools.
"go work in a field somewhere for a week or 2 with some illegal immigrants and see how hard they work, for so little money. I did that once, and it opened my eyes a little wider."
I bet that makes you feel so self-rightous you could just explode out of your liberal pantsuit. did you bring your passport and ID when you went working with those you are so sure are illegals? is there an agency that will give you a free educational 2 week workshift among illegals? you know this very well may be illegal unto itself. how did you find out they where illegals? did you walk by a rural town asking for a beet farm with an especially high population of illegals? or is this a special privelidge of card toting liberals? you know, you should just go to mexico illegally, kinda reverse the trend, see what it is like to be the good, hard working hispanic. Although that might be disastrous, you may explode with self rightousness, or be rounded up by the mexican border patrol.
bet that makes you feel so self-rightous you could just explode out of your liberal pantsuit Finarfin
It should make YOU hide your head in shame. You start quoting the bible but you forgot or choose to ignore some basic bible teaching. God loves ALL his children and Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Treat other people with the concern and kindness you would like them to show toward you. This saying has come to be called the Golden Rule
The thing is pearlene, i am not saying that homosexuals should be treated without basic intrahuman compassion, the fact is that they will not inherit the kingdom of heaven and they are sinners in the face of god. you are saying that just because god teaches compassion, by not allowing the homosexuals to indoctrinate our children we are incompassionate. Now you would say that the educatioin of so called "alternative lifestyles" only teaches toleration, but toleration leads to acceptance which leads to kids bieng predispositioned towards homosexuality which IS sinful in the eyes of god.
Illogical argument... but why am I surprised? Any arguments that involve religion are bound to be illogical but I digress...
Last time I checked, we are ALL sinners so you singling out homosexuals and using it as an argument falls flat on its face. Case closed.
by all of us bieng sinners it is meant that we all have the capability to sin. homosexuality is one of the ways that we can sin. You must know that taking everything literally will not get you anywhere.
No that argument is semantically ludicrous. Having the capability of sinning no more makes you a sinner than having the capability to murder makes us murderers. That was dumb.
By us bieng sinners we have the capability to sin. the point is if you indeed engage in a sinful homosexual act then you have sinned and are a bona fide sinner. Just as, to use your analogy, if we have the capability to murder and we commit murder, we are then murderers!
That is a change of argument this is what you said:
by all of us bieng sinners it is meant that we all have the capability to sin.
No that isnt what is meant what is meant is that ALL HAVE SINNED and fallen short of the Glory of God.
Your first argument was flawed.
You are saying that jesus who wrote "if thou shalt sleep with another man thou shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven" considers homosexual values christian?
What?!!! testament did you pull that quotation from?
Not bieng a certifieable reverend (unlike Jesse Jackson) i do believe that it is stated in the old testament. it was not jesus's words per say, but it is a teaching of god often repeated in the bible which i am sure he would not disagree with.
Finfarfin
Just remember what Christ DID say about homosexuality... NOT A DAMNED THING!!!
Not good enough. Now you are making an assumption, attempting to speak for Christ. We can see right through that tactic and it fails... just like your last argument. BZZZ!
i think that you are avoiding the main point of my argument, we can split hairs for as long as you wish but that does not change the fact that jesus prohibhits homosexuality as does the bible in general.
Pick up the Bible and read it, at least the 4 Gospels. Jesus does not mention homosexuality. There is a lot about love, compassion, and mercy, however.
Are you saying that the bible does not condemn homosexuality?
sure it does. In the same place it condemns eating shellfish, sewing cloth with two different threads, and planting two different kind of crops next to each other. Now Jesus flat didnt mention it.
Correct. it says all of those things in the old testament as part of the comandments for the orthodox jews for whom it was originally written. yet the old testament laws such as killing an adulturess and the like are overlooked by modern religions due to thair impracticality while other comandments are obeyed because off thair relavence. such is the comandment prohibhiting homosexual acts.
In YOUR opinion such as homosexual acts. Rather the point is things change. It is YOUR opinion that homosexuality falls into the one category, nothing more. Jesus never spoke against homosexuality and things change. So YOU are welcome to YOUR opinion and interpretation, I prefer mine.
"Let me get this right: Savage is a hate-filled dictator because he believes America should fight back against Islamists who want to kill innocent people?"
Nope. He was never accused of being a dictator - that would be stupid. He has no significant military or political power. What he does have is a mastery of rhetoric, and he is a wonderful example of how fact, reason and reality can fly out the window in favor of political idealism.
"Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now!"
Isn't this kind of an oxymoron?? And I refuse to make the obvious "moron" joke...
Dear John123456789,
Let's get it on! Let's bring it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Let's get it on! Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now! Wipe Hezbollah out of America! Cut the tentacles of Iran off! Cut the tentacles of that octopus off now! Get every hunter in America armed to the teeth!
That is just from this article. Are you aware of the hateful things he's spewed in the past. Get a clue. Or maybe you can't because you are part of that 3% that believes it's ok to "get every hunter in America armed to the teeth". And if he's so Gung-Ho, why isn't he signed up.
Clowns. All of 'em.
John 10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1
I really hate to bust your bubble, but every last American citizen is an immigrant at some point in their families history. I don't like the fact that our government dropped the ball two decades ago, but it's too late. Get a grip. There will not be a great exodus of illegal immigrants heading back to their countries by bus, plane or boat. Get over it. We need to learn how to incorporate them into our culture, electoral process and tax them silly like the rest of us. Seriously though, accept the fact that the face of America has changed and stop trying to hold on to a dream of the 1950's coming back. Too late for that bud!
P.S. How do you feel about immigrants losing their lives in a bogus war for our freedoms?
Don't forget. For the most part, if the illegal immigrants are here, and have kids with them, by the time their kids graduate high school, they've already been integrated into American society for the most part, and have become American themselves. It only takes a generation or 2 before all immigrants get incorporated into the country. We heard the same things about the Irish, the Italians, the Germans, and just about any other group that came here en masse in the past. Read some history books (this is pointed more at John than you), and you'll see that pretty much the same tirades being let loose against illegal immigrants, have been launched against immigrants (legal, and illegal) throughout the entire history of this country.
Thinking that I was primarily of Irish ancestry as I grew up (turns out I'm majority German, maybe a quarter Irish!), I took a great deal of interest in how the Irish (especially the Irish Catholics) were treated around the turn of the century into the 1900s.
Here's hoping an Arab Muslim girl can be reading political controversy in America in about 100 years and think the same thing I did when I first learned about this - "This happened to MY ancestors? But we're treated so normally now..?"
once again Augustheat, there is a difference between legal and illegal immigrants. the point is not to deport illegals en masse that are already here, the point is to stop more from coming!
As a very progressive life time Democrat (John Edwards for President), and a married Massachusetts gay man (4 years - no the wordl has not change, divorce rates have not gone up), I have to say ... only in this instance do I believe every word Savage has to say.
These people are crazed and hateful as him - he knows what needs to be done.
Islam is a twisted "religion" with NO centralized leadership to control the DEVIL that creeps into all groups of religious people (Fred Phelps / Southern Baptist Convention, Evangelicals are a few less deadly examples of religion gone bad.)
ISLAMFACISM must be controlled.
Hell America has NEO NAZI's now - so we will never get rid of ISLAMOFACISTS but we should be bombing the hell out of those countries.
When Iraq looks like Germany after WW2 I will say we are really fighting this war.
Hey Ralph,
The problem is this; what country do you bomb? Pakistan? Iran? Saudi Arabia? Parts of Israel? Syrian? Myanmar? And so on and so forth.
The problem is, is that you, and Savage, are looking at this as if it's a German/Japanese ideal of war. WWII, we knew who we were fighting. Now, it could be you. Could be me. Could be John934534957 for all we know.
The other problem is that terrorism is an ideaology. How does one kill an idea? The problem is that our invasion of Iraq has become the biggest recruiting tool for radicals that they have ever seen. For years, they have been preaching about how the great Satan, meaning the USA, was coming to kill them, and this threat never materialized. Insert Iraq. Blammo! All the doom and gloom these idiots have been yammering on about for years on end finally comes to fruition, and hence, more peeps jump on the radical train. And it's also likely, that everytime an innocent Iraqi civilian gets killed in Iraq, they will probably foster a lot of hatred for the US, no matter who did the killing.
Islamo-facism is a nice bumper sticker slogan, but it doesn't mean anything, and it's not a real threat. The real threat are terrorists, and terrorism.
As a very progressive life time Democrat (John Edwards for President), and a married Massachusetts gay man..."
"Hell America has NEO NAZI's now - so we will never get rid of ISLAMOFACISTS but we should be bombing the hell out of those countries.
When Iraq looks like Germany after WW2 I will say we are really fighting this war."
Ralph: I'm not accusing you of misrepresenting yourself, but what you say you are (a progressive Edwards supporter) and what you say you want (massive carpet bombing of an already occupied Iraq and, presumably, other countries where "Islamofascism" lurks) are somewhat at odds. Edwards supports nothing close to what you are suggesting. I'd respectfully suggest that most of the Republican candidates are more sympathetic to your views on this score.
In addition to Iraq, which other countries should we be mass bombing into rubble? And which Islamic countries, if any, should be spared this fate?
You bomb Iran, for starters! iran is openly hostile to the west, wipe out ahmadinijad(or however you spell it) and his lackeys.
you say that they where preaching about the coming of the big satan and till the US invaded afganistan it never matirialized. Well, what about the invasion of afganistan by russia in the 70s? what did the mullahs do then? did they wage jihaad against russia? did terrorist following increase?
you must belive magnolia, muslims do not want to relax in thair oilpits once america leaves, thair want is world domination with a fascist Caliphate.
You have no idea what bombing Iran would do. They have a very large, organized military and alliances with Russia and other countries.
They have a population which is primarily young, with a western-leaning tilt. An attack would absolutely move the Iranians towards their right-leaning authoritarians.
You've no idea.
So America should commit genocide in Iran because it would make you feel better? Perhaps you would spend less time hiding under your bed? Or because their president who has no real power says bad things about us? You are sick. You need the help of a mental health professional and to increase your medication.
i do not think for one who hasen't lived in Iran under their currrent president you wouldn't really know the extent of his influence.
By stating we should bomb iran i was answering a previous post as to which muslim country should we bomb. i think that precise military strikes to disable the president or a instigated coup will suffice to overthrow this very benevolent man without great loss of innocent human life.
So there is no way to know a form of government just because we dont LIVE there? So was it only people who LIVED in Iraq who said it was a dictatorship? Your argument is ludicrous. We DO know how much POWER the man has, their form of government is KNOWN. The executive power is not held in the presidency but rather in the counsel of experts and the leader of the counsel the Supreme leader of the revolution. So you would overthrow their regime. Yeah that has worked out so well for us in the past for instance when we overthrew the FIRST real democracy in the Islamic Middle east in Iran in 1953 and installed the brutal Shah Pahlavi, called by Amnesty International the worlds worst torturer. THAT is what got them calling us the great Satan in the first place, our relations with Iran werent bad before that. It worked so well other times like in 54 when we replaced the DEMOCRATIC government of Jocobo Arbenze in Guatemala with a military dictatorship or in 64 when we overthrew the democratically elected Joao Goulart with a military dictatorship, or also in 64 when we INVADED the Dominican Republic to STOP their people from reinstalling freely elected Juan Bosch and keeping another miliatary dictatorship in power, or in 73 when we overthrew the freely elected Salvador Allende and installed a military dictatorship. Thousands were killed in Chile about 200,000 have been killed in Guatemala since 54. What does freedom mean to you for other countries. That they are free to do what WE tell them? IF the elect someone we dont like we have some bizarre RIGHT to kill them and overthrow their governments? Iran has not threatened us nor attacked us yet YOU are just saying we ought to KILL them wholesale. To make YOU feel better. You put a real high price on YOUR feelings dont you? Give us a number. How many people should we KILL so YOU feel better? How many human lives are worth YOU feeling safe or whatever our bombing campaign is supposed to accomplish. Even though the most likely outcome would be a MORE rightwing populace that hates us even MORE than before. Iran is not like Iraq it is a real country it wasnt cobbled together by Britian it has been a country for more than 2500 years. It is one of the worlds OLDEST still around and they are a proud people. They arent going to react to us bullying them by saying we are so sorry we frightened you finarfin please let us lick your boots. You havent thought this through and you dont CARE about the innocent people killed with no POSSIBLE valid moral justification. That is a sickness. A soulsickness. Seek the help of a medical professional.
Bombing the hell out of those countries. Killing thousands of innocent God loving people who have done NOTHING to us, collective punishment of Thousands. And you call yourself a liberal? I dont believe you.
If you are indeed reffering to me solon, as a liberal you are deeply mistaken. i am the antilib, come to ruffle indignant liberal feathers.
That was to the guy who said he was a liberal. YOU arent ruffling any feathers. YOU will need to obtain a couple dozen IQ points before you can do more than embarass yourself which is what you have done so far.
John39284736, do you happen to smoke Marlboros?
More like a Virginia Slims kinda guy.
BUt we all know what you fellows smoke, marijuanna.
"you fellows"? "marijuanna"?
Why you... wise guy, eh? Giving us the business? I oughta fix your wagon!
Just remember what Christ said about reefer... NOT A DAMNED THING!!!
I don't think that God had time to cover all of the issues of today in his first book. i guess we will just have to wait for Bible 2, new and revised to match current issues.
God didn't have time??? Oy Vey...
When newer scripture is written down, I doubt very much that you will like it. (Unless you have a significant change of heart)
And we all know what you guys think...NOTHING you arent capable of higher brain function.
IS that all? i would have thought you had more to say than another one of your glib insults.
I admit it is only twice as clever as your stupid jab about us using drugs. Then again you arent worth any real thoughtful responses. Bring something worthy you will see something worthy.
See, this is what I hate about the left. You people cry all day if I stereotype something or someone, you might even call me racist or something. But most the time, stereotypes and judgement of people are pretty accurate.
So, yes, occasionally I do smoke Marlboro. I drink Budweiser and Jack Daniels. Sometimes I even chew some Red Man. The only thing I don't have going for me is that I'm not from the South....which is a shame, because the people down there are a lot more normal than the big-city freaks I put up with.
So let's remember what we learned today: stereotypes are usually correct, and judging people is good.
And what else have we learned?
That John is a raging, muttering, hate-filled, chickenhawk Black Shirt who revels in violent fantasies.
That John is a bitter virgin who wishes to jail women who have exercised their Constitutionally guaranteed right of choice.
That John would like to see millions of people die of AIDS.
That John hates all people who don't fit into his eerily narrow definitions of who he considers "normal".
That John is a sociopath... completely devoid of all compassion & human empathy.
That, at the end of the day, John is simply Travis Bickle... only without either the intellect or the work ethic.
Typical chawbacon bullsh*t.
HATE HATE HATE... that's the only thing you morons are about. HATE this, HATE that... whatever. If the thought of sharing the world with people who may be different from you - different in some bad ways, different in some good ways - is that distressing to you then by all means 'check out'. You could do it quite well if you go to Iraq and 'fight for the cause'. The world won't miss you and your HATEFUL attitude.
John won't do that, because seeing the debacle first hand would challenge his beliefs. And he so loves his hate.
In the meantime, John's just fine with others doing the dying while he does the hating. And while we keep trying to bring them home alive, he keeps cheerleading which only gets more of them killed.
God forgive you Johnny muchnumbers.
What we learned? Please tell me that even someone as ignorant as you doesnt really think they are teaching anything to us. YOU are a moron. YOU couldnt teach a kindergartener to tie his shoes. And NO stereotypes are NOT usually accurate. You hiveminders are just so stupid that you think things become true because you say they are. I am in awe of the level of your stupidity
Are my comments posting? I didn't see them. Let me post them again.
When I hear the words of Jerry Falwell and Osama Bin Laden, I can hardly tell the difference between the two. I remember Jerry Falwell once said, "Blow'em all away, in the name of the Lord." I can hardly tell the difference between Savage and the Islamic extremists (except "U.S.A." is replaced with "Iran"). He is only pretending to stick up for homosexuals. He truly wouldn't mind them being killed.
Let's see, what do Weiner, his neocons, and the Islamic extremists advocate:
Religion in Govn't Violence over diplomacy Overthrowing govn'ts they don't like Changing cultures they don't like "Spitting on the ground" at another religion Unequal rights for women Unequal rights for homosexuals War War War! And never caring about innocent casualties Letting Rich oil persons control everything (Saudis) Education that teaches hate and that dying while fighting a "bad country" or "infidel" is the best thing ever
What else am I missing? Wow, that's actually a pretty long list.
Ahh, another "ALL IRANIANS ARE EVIL AND MUST BE KILLED FOR HUMANITY TO SURVIVE, HOW-DO-YOU-LIKE-THAT" soundbite from The Savage Nazi.
What Michael Hitler-Savage doesn't know is that there are eleven synagogues in Teheran - and Savage doesn't want any mosques in America.
I'm not saying that Ahmadinejad is the "good guy", but he has more respect for the Jewish people than Savage has for Muslims.
people, (if indeed they are human) that are posting here seem to be under the impression that once MMFA rears it's ugly head onto someone, that person deliberatly made some sort of outragous comment that they don't normally make just to grace this site. Savage was full of his usual fire when he made those comments, you commies must know that talk show hosts do not vie to be on the guest list of this site.
Savage is right, the koran explicitly states that the "infidels" will either be converted or killed.
Hey moron, because you absolutly ARE a moron. No one cares WHY the Weinerdog spews his insanity. He does, MMFA covers it, that is the only relevant dynamic. He isnt right just because idiots with a brain the size of a garden pea agree with him. He is a lunatic, that is his excuse, YOU are a moron, that is your excuse. I wont speculate on what the rest of his audiences excuses are.
what is that smell? the strong, pungent stench of bigotry, the same "hate filled" bigotry savage is always accused of.
Bigotry? Because I return YOUR insults and the Weinerdogs? Do you morons even KNOW what words mean? I mean I know you are stupid and that you just repeat what you are told. For instance I HAVE a Koran and it says that people of the book that is Jews and Christians if they are good people and believe in judgement have nothing to fear from Allah on the day of judgement. It doesnt make me a bigot that when YOU insult us I insult you back. It makes me someone who doesnt suffer fools like you gladly. I smell the familiar stench of a crybaby conservative who likes to insult us then whine like a little girl when the insults are pointed back at YOU. You are going to have to learn to live with the fact you are a moron.
"No beast is more Savage than man when possessed with power answerable to his rage".---Plutarch
President Rudolph William Louis Giuliani,
"Look out helter skelter helter skelter Helter skelter Look out helter skelter She's coming down fast Yes she is Yes she is coming down fast [My head is spinning, ooh... Ha ha ha, ha ha ha, alrgiht! I got blisters on my fingers!]"---Lennon/McCartneyAfter listening to this video and reading the text, I must say that there are far too many people who feel so badly in life that they must spew hatred against others. May I remind you or anyone that is reading these thoughts that:
1. Each of us is responsible for our own choices and actions. Whether we reap these consequences NOW OR LATER, WE EACH WILL/DO have CONSEQUENCES.
2. All ISLAMIC-BELIEVING PEOPLE are not guilty for the actions of others, JUST AS ALL OTHER BELIEVING PEOPLE'S ARE NOT GUILTY FOR THE ACTIONS OF THIS CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT (OR ANY OTHER CORRUPT REGIME) UNDER WHICH WE HAVE BEEN FORCED TO BE IGNORED!
3. Our only collective guilt is in not taking action to put an end to wrong choices perpetrated IN OUR NAME. BELIEVING MEANS (NO MATTER WHAT CREED) that we ATTEMPT TO HONESTLY FOLLOW THE IDEALS WE CHOOSE TO BELIEVE.
4. THIS MAN IS NOTHING MORE THAN A HATE-MONGER WHOSE OWN LIFE MUST BE LACKING IN LOVE AND COMPASSION. PEACE POET
I want to see a political debate between Savage and Sean. These two buffoons hate each other. This would be an immediate sell-out in a large college stadium. Let's see these two media hacks fight it out in front of a live audience. Who would win the battle of the mike? Stay tuned.
Any takers?
Yeah, I'll take it. Nothing like seeing a pair of bona-fide assh*les going at it in public. Hell, let's make it a menage a trois while we're at it! Throw in that despicable Mark Levin in there too since he hates Savage.
Savage is what this Country needs; somebody who slaps the Leftist/Commies around a bit, and quite effectively.
Some of what he says is "radio." Most of what he says is accurate and courageous. Suck it up. So many do not understand the difference between hate and anger. Particularly, "well-educated" leftists.
"So many do not understand the difference between hate and anger. Particularly, "well-educated" leftists."--MarkJohn
In defense of Michael Savage, you slam the "well educated" by asserting they can't tell the difference between hate and anger.
I rest my case.
Hey Mark you are stupid we get that. The Weinerdog is not right he is INSANE. You are a moron and he is a lunatic you two deserve each other but please stop trying to convince us he makes sense, you are making my stomach hurt. I can only laugh so long.
"A religion that says... kill homosexuals,"
He says that like it's a bad thing. I thought, for Savage, that'd be a selling point.
"Bomb Iran, bring our boys home now!"
RW "logic" start a third war = brining our boys home (in body bags?).
"throwbacks wearing medieval costumes"
That's not a very nice way to describe the Catholic Priesthood.
"spitting on the ground every time they see a Christian"
Even if he weren't simply making this up, so what?
"These throwbacks think they're better than you"
Harboring feelings of inadequacy Mr. Weiner?
"90 percent of them are on welfare. Ninety percent of them come in here, and all they do is breed more bombers."
We realize he's lying but does his RW audience?
- john174541842 - "Yeah, I'll step up...so people like you can accuse me of murder and torture of innocents."
Feeble excuses for your chickenhearted ways? It's almost too stereotypical for words.
"Abstinence is the only way to reduce teen pregnancy"
I guess you must have missed all those government reports last year documenting the abject failure of abstinence programs?
"Yeah, at the cost of taking jobs away from needy Americans..."
Really? So tell us about all those great jobs washing dishes, cutting lawns, mopping floors, etc... you've missed out on.
“I wish we could take back every single dollar ever spent on AIDS and HIV here at home, in Africa, and everywhere else. There is a very simple and free method to prevent this disease from spreading. We could wipe it out in 1 generation. Abstinence. Simple, keep your pants zipped up until marriage. Problem solved...and I just saved us billions of dollars.”
Interesting, so in your world I guess AIDS isn’t spread though blood transfusions, blood to blood contact in hospital or emergency situations, mothers to infants or IV drug use?john174541842
“Laughable? Then please explain to me why, after ICE raids a factory and take out all the illegals, AMERICANS are lined up for the open positions the next day.”
Really, where? You’reclaiming when ICE carts off the illegals, Americans are lining up to pick lettuce for $2 an hour? That must make it hard for you to explain why agricultural employers keep asking the government to raise the number of foreign laborers they can bring into the country specifically to do those jobs Americans won’t.
"This article from only 3 days ago puts to shame your assertions that illegals aren't sucking our hospitals dry. It is so good, and relates to the recent SoCal fires, I hope you read it”
I read it and unlike you I also understood it. The wildfires burned out of control across the open scrubland along our border with Mexico. The only people out in that desolate wasteland were illegals and Border Patrol. Frankly I would be shocked if there weren’t illegals burned in that part of the desert.
finarfin
“the emphasis in John's original point is that the children will be indoctrinated with this sex ed from kindergarten.”
Funny - my kid has been in Californian schools his whole life, from pre-K to 5th. He has yet to be “indoctrinated with sex ed”. Perhaps you are exaggerating or simply don't know what you are talking about?
“If you teach children that this sexual orientation is succesful in reproduction but another that is unseccesful deserves equal merit they will grow up confused as to what they should be.”
Just to clarify things, are you claiming that a families’ lack of success at reproduction confuses children?
“you cannot expect a child to decide his/hers orientation at 7.”
Ignoring that no one “decides” their orientation in the first place, it is not at all improbable that a 7 year old might realize they are gay or at least that they are attracted to others of the same sex.
“You are saying that jesus who wrote "if thou shalt sleep with another man thou shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven" considers homosexual values christian?”
Followed by…
“Not bieng a certifieable reverend (unlike Jesse Jackson) i do believe that it is stated in the old testament. it was not jesus's words per say, but it is a teaching of god often repeated in the bible which i am sure he would not disagree with.”
In the future, you should try to know what you are talking about when you rationalize your phobias by using religion. When you falsely claim Jesus made a particular statement and you put “his” words in quotes it really detracts from your credibility. Out of curiosity, “certifieable reverend” or not - have you actually read the book you are trying to quote from?
“You bomb Iran, for starters! iran is openly hostile to the west, wipe out ahmadinijad(or however you spell it) and his lackeys.”
Can you articulate “why” you want to attack a country that has done nothing against us other than talk? In our first 2027 years, America never attacked another country without being attacked first. Now the RW nuts want to wage a second preemptive war? I guess because the first one is going so well?
“you say that they where preaching about the coming of the big satan and till the US invaded afganistan it never matirialized.”
Actually his point was about Iraq. You do realize they are two separate countries don’t you?
“Well, what about the invasion of afganistan by russia in the 70s? what did the mullahs do then? did they wage jihaad against russia? did terrorist following increase?”
Yes and yes. As a matter of fact the US supported Islamic “terrorism” in Afghanistan (when directed against the Soviets). Kind of shoots down your point doesn’t it?
robrob, when you serve up a beating, you don't do it halfway. Ouch!
Savage is right, the koran explicitly states that the "infidels" will either be converted or killed. - Finarfin
You realize in the West Indies what the "Koran" says is exactly what the British did when it colonized the West Indies, many parts of Africa and other countries globally, converting people to Christianity. Your fear of muslim invasion converting us all to Islam, is exactly what's going on in Iraq right now. They view our occupation as hostile action taken to convert and change their culture. Can you not see your own hypocrisy? How bout the Crusades? This is all history, I know, but based on your own arguement it kinda sounds like it's cool for Anne Coulter and Savage, who is Jewish, to believe in the spread of Christianity by any means necessary, but when it comes to another faith, they don't have a right to that same mentality.
Religion is division. I believe in the true God. I am of the Christian faith. I don't believe people should be forced to change their faith. I can find in the Bible, the same one you own, but probably don't read, where it says an eye for and eye how wrathful and vengeful God is etc. You can find elements in many faiths that deal with conversion and violence towards others of different faiths. That doesn't take away from the positive message they also contain. Slave masters once used the Old Testament to control slaves and get them to not rebel. Do you not see your own hypocrisy?
Slim Pickens riding the "A" bomb in Dr. Strangelove!
Thank God for McClatchy news service; they still think that reporting means fact checking and investigating, not just repeating politicians' pronouncements:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/21067.html
"Despite President Bush's claims that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons that could trigger "World War III," experts in and out of government say there's no conclusive evidence that Tehran has an active nuclear-weapons program"...