RadioBanter - Bush Totally Disgusted (OT)

"-=jd=-" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue 11 May 2004 12:27:55a, ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote
in message :

From: "-=jd=-"

Speaking of which, I can provide a link to a picture of
undeniable torture if you want to take your blinders off long enough to
get an eyefull (pardon the pun).

1. I worry about anyone spending such time locating "Real Torture." You
seem to be enjoying it a little too much.

Not really, it's pretty much available with a simple google search. I
happened to have a link pointed out to me, and I find it fascinating that
I have yet to find a liberal who wants to face the stark reality of a
common enemy. A reality you insist on minimizing by ignoring it and
dismissing it out of hand.

Actually, I think you would puke all over your keyboard and/or encounter
some disturbing dreams. Liberals aren't known for seeking the full truth,
as you continue to demonstrate (in your case).

2. Thank goodness that Bush is wiser than you in avoiding your
"minimization" tactics. Wording twisting preempts can't save you from
notice of your consistently obvious rationalization of "it's not really
torture...."

What minimization tactics? Why does it matter to you if it's called
torture, abuse, or egg-salad, so long as the behavior is condemned and
punished? Have I not *repeatedly* and clearly condemned the actions of
those MPs?

You prefer to over-dramatize any given situation. I prefer to call a spade
a spade. In the final analysis, what difference does it make? You are more
concerned (as liberals tend to be) about a mere label, than actually
addressing the serious problem at the center of the issue. You would
rather nit-pick over semantics with someone who whole-heartedly agrees
with you on the unequivocable evilness inherent in the actions of those
MPs. But that's liberals for you. Being politcally correct is far more
important than actually doing anything...

Since semantics are so important to you, perhaps you can explain your
blatantly minimizing the specific attrocities committed by the arabs? I've
yet to hear you condemn any specific act of barbarism committed by the
arabs in this war. Now, I don't actually think for a minute that you
condone those animals either, but your semantical hypocrisy is patently
obvious.

You can worry about your lack of condemnation of specific Arab attrocities
and how you would "word-smith" that condemnation so that you would be
excruciatingly politically correct, but don't do it on *my* account...

When you find the spine to explore the definition of undeniable torture so
that you have *some* valid point of reference to back up your words, let
me know & I'll have those links ready for ya. If you want to remain
ignorant and sling words around without fully understanding their meaning,
then feel free to wear your semantical hypocracy with pride.

Well said JD.