That would be Ed Zybul.

Speaking of Ed Zybul, you should check out his "Sarah Venooker" threads in the Gutters, he uses her name, and makes the most vile sexual suggestions about her. She's my daughter, a very real person.

There's also a copy of the email he sent me where he threatens to rape her, and hurt my family. Go check it out.

I'd watch "discourse" with this guy if I were you, he gets a little ugly when things don't go his way.

So, when you threatened my family by email, and created terrible liability for your family in the process (guess why) and used my daughters name to talk about how you'd like to rape her and touch her inappropriately, that doesn't make you a stalker hypocrite?

If you enter into a discussion with Ed Zybul, or respond to any of his posts be very careful. I thought I was just having a flamewar with Ed, but this should be something you should all pay pretty close attention to.

"Strategery!"

[img]http://www.iit.edu/~clargar/pictures/Will_Ferrell_as_prezBush.jpg[/img]

AKA "It's Always All About Ed (Chap. 358)."

This "following you around over a typo" thing you've got going is particularly funny in the context of a thread that's about the Bush administration repeating its WMD lie over and over and over again, hoping to convince whoever they could by erosion.

Keep spreading your rhetorical anthrax, though, and good luck. I'm sure disinterested third parties like "Sarah Venooker" and "enoughisenough" see things your way, even if no one else does.

Well Jimbo If China had a war with us and the US signed a peace treaty that said that US agrees to give up WMDs then the US prances around say that we do, maybe not, who you gonna believe; I wouldn't blame China if it said it was coming back to fix our wagon once and for all. Welcome to the world of the Nation State! If you think the UN is anything more than an elaborate Triple Entente you are deluded.

Or to put it more plainly for the Pat O'Neills of this world - Moral action and selfless altruism are NOT synonyms, one can learn that promoting certain values has benefits for one's own being. The Greeks called it virtue. Of course hairshirt liberalism wouldn't know anything about that since the only true acts of morality are giving till it hurts, getting one's own countrymen killed for causes that have nothing to do with our interests, shutting down one's economy to atone for one's sins and if need be Self-Immolation when you just aren't nice.

Actually, given what's happened in Iraq, I think the Greeks had an even better word for it:

Hubris.

Bravo P

indeed let dike be done

The simple "might makes right" right. It's not pretty, but it's the real world. Things would have been much different if the U.S. tried to invade a country like Canada, of course.

Are you asking if this is physically possible? Yes, of course it is. They wouldn't though, because they'd lose. And they're not all that worried about our stockpiles of WMD - they realize that we're far, far less likely to use them against them or give them to terrorist groups. Iraq is not nearly as trustworthy. You'll notice that the U.S. doesn't go around invading China and England either, for similar reasons.

Are you saying that you've realized that the U.S. government is smart enough to realize that they're the most powerful and influential nation in the world? That EVERY decision we make helps some nations and hurts others? How observant.

That's like saying Bill Gates is arrogant because anything Microsoft does has a huge effect on the market. It's really only arrogance if it's not true. NOT realizing that we're the most powerful nation in the world would be called something else - stupidity. I'd rather live under an arrogant government than a just plain stupid one.

When you're the President of the United States and you assert something you "believe" really really strongly and with great confidence, and you're making those assertions in order to win support for attacking another nation which has made no threats against us, and you repeat alarming bullet points and catch phrases endlessly, and you have your crew repeat the same ominous catchphrases over and over to scare people into supporting a war, and when ALL you have is BELIEF, and no actual evidence to support those beliefs...you're lying.

When you create the impression of a connection between that nation's dictator and an unrelated group of terrorists who attacked us, lacking all evidence of such a connection, and being very careful never to ASSERT that connection, but reciting very subtly shaded rhetoric meant to suggest a relationship...you're lying.

When you award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to the man whom you essentially blamed for the "faulty intelligence" which led you to your false beliefs--which led you to your grave and calamitous action--you're proving you lied by honoring the man who resigned to take the heat off you.

When your press secretary says that, had the President known then what he knows now--that there were no WMD--he would still have attacked anyway because, after all, "this is all about protecting the American people, "(??!!), you're compounding your lies with bullshit and bravado, because you're refusing to admit you fucked up big time by acting without incontrovertible proof. (By the standard the President applies to himself as regards acting with sufficient evidence of cause, we should nominate Dan Rather for a Pulitzer Prize, or better, Bill O' Reilly.)

BELIEF ASSERTED AS FACT IS A LIE, ESPECIALLY IF THAT ASSERTION IS MEANT TO INCITE OR JUSTIFY ACTION.

This is not some barroom blather about who was the best pitcher in the American League or who has the the biggest dick or how God does exist, or any other such harmless nonsense and trivia we divert ourselves with, where we're free to "believe" what we want without a requirement to prove ourselves; this is a deadly serious matter with mass life and death consequences. The President does not have the luxury of simply acting on "belief;" he has a greater burden of proof to support his beliefs, particularly when the consequences are so profound. If you act, you act only upon being provoked, or upon truly compelling factual evidence, which the Bushies did not have. If you're found out to have been so terribly, recklessly wrong, you admit it and resign, or, if you're Japanese, you fall on the sword to atone. If you continue to justify your criminally disastrous actions with more semantic bullshit, you shout to the world: YOU"RE A LIAR.

*Marvel if you will that this particular view is presented to this particular poster repeatedly by posters who may or may not be familiar with recent Panels activity.

Tasty, isn't it?