Truther Radio Feuds Continue
Like Stalin and Trotskiy, the paranoid radio "networks" GCN and RBN have split the truthers into two camps. Now Jason Bermas, who last week had to beg for callers for his RBN show, is switching to GCN.
Well, Jason Bermas makes his switch from RBN to GCN tomorrow morning, and I'll be joining in.10 AM Eastern, 7 AM Pacific. Tune in, call in, it should be good times.
Sorry, if you think I am going to get up at 7 AM on a Saturday to listen to this crap...
posted by James B. @ 9:43 AM
22 comments
22 Comments:
Лев Давидович Троцкий
Actually there is in the original Russian. Since I speak the language, I tend to use a more direct transliteration, instead of the more conventional spellings.
If their main priority is getting the truth out there, why are groups so caught up in their own little fights?
When little 'rebel' groups cannot hope to face or defeat their primary opponent, they turn on each other. That's because their fellows are the only ones they have a chance of beating.
I agree.
muckers:
As for the "truth" being their priority, where did you ever get that malarky. The only ones that believe that are the sheeple that follow them.
The 9/11 truth movement, at the leadership level, is all about who has the biggest dick. Call it profane, but that is it in a nut shell (no pun intended).
Prime example, GCN has a bigger audience, and hence can give the truth leaders a bigger 9/11 appendage...so to speak.
quite simple really.
TAM
The 9/11 truth movement, at the leadership level, is all about who has the biggest dick. Call it profane, but that is it in a nut shell (no pun intended).
Tam at this point and time in the movement, I couldn't agree with you more. Especially after receiving the numerous emails from groups that comprise the truth movement.
Dylan, get it right...
1) first they are unified
2) Then they split
3) one side develops a death beam
You forgot to add number 4, both sell ungodly amounts of commercial material for profit.
I can't wait to have the figurines of Mark and Dylan battling it out over control of the Death Beam.
Warning, a bit off topic:
By the way TAM, what are your thoughts regarding Canadian troops tasked with securing the northern portion of Canada, without being able to pursue the enemy that kills them and then flees into Pakistan?
Has there been any outrage up north because of this?
By the way TAM, what are your thoughts regarding Canadian troops tasked with securing the northern portion of Canada
It's about time we liberated Hans Island from the barbarous Danish hordes.
James said:
Sorry, if you think I am going to get up at 7 AM on a Saturday to listen to this crap...
It's been awhile, but I vaguely recollect there being some sort of pet-themed talk show in that slot. Not that I'm into phone-in shows about people with puppy troubles, but on GCN it was at least an oasis of non-nuttery.
By the way TAM, what are your thoughts regarding Canadian troops tasked with securing the northern portion of Afghanistan, without being able to pursue the enemy that kills them and then flees into Pakistan?
Sorry about that, watching the Colts a nd Ravens.
Here's a question that I'd like to throw out:
Which charge do you find more of a possibility:
1) Jack Blood and Alex Jones are in cohoots with John Stadtmiller (and Ted Anderson, GCN Pres.) to pull out a big publicity stunt for reasons that aren't completely clear.
or
2) There were moles within the US govt that helped allow 9/11 to happen.
By the way TAM, what are your thoughts regarding Canadian troops tasked with securing the northern portion of Afghanistan, without being able to pursue the enemy that kills them and then flees into Pakistan?
Why would you ask such a silly question?
Well, since this seems to be silly question day, I've got a question for you: how do you feel about US cops not being able to pursue cop killers across the border into Canada?
Sorry about that, watching the Colts a nd Ravens.
Uhuh. And you managed to post the exact same mistake twice, in two different threads. If you're going to spam, at least read over the crap you write first. It won't make your arguments any less stupid, but at least it would show you care about getting things right.
Here's a question that I'd like to throw out:
Which charge do you find more of a possibility:
Neither.
By the way TAM, what are your thoughts regarding Canadian troops tasked with securing the northern portion of Afghanistan, without being able to pursue the enemy that kills them and then flees into Pakistan?
My thoughts on this is that they are soldiers, and they do as their commanders order them.
As for why this is the role of Canadian troops right now, well securing the Northern Section of Afghanistan is an important objective, is it not. Granted, I am sure that all hands would want to be more east than north, tracking down OBL near the Pakistani Border, or Running after the Taliban, but who am I, as a non military man too question the mission at that level. Sure I have an opinion on Canada's role to be in Afghanistan, but the intricacies of the mission I plead ignorance on, and hence will withold comment.
TAM
BG wrote: "Here's a question that I'd like to throw out:
Which charge do you find more of a possibility:"
Neither.
Which charge do you find more of a possibility:
1) Jack Blood and Alex Jones are in cohoots with John Stadtmiller (and Ted Anderson, GCN Pres.) to pull out a big publicity stunt for reasons that aren't completely clear.
or
2) There were moles within the US govt that helped allow 9/11 to happen.
Talk about a Hobson's choice! Here is one for you. Do you beat your wife every day or just a couple of times a week?
And I mean no offense to your wife, if you indeed have one.
Actually TAM, being a Canadian soldier, I feel qualified to correct you a bit ;)
The main reason we got stuck with the northern region is because we dithered so much before committing to an extended mission. Basically, what happened is that areas were assigned on a first come first serve basis. All the other coalition countries jumped on board before us, and picked their areas of operation. By the time we committed, all that was left was Kandahar. So the only ones I blame is our own government.
With that said, I don't think being in Kandahar is a bad thing overall. I don't much like having my brothers killed....but at the same time, it's giving us some much needed combat experience, and is helping us revamp the entire force. The CF is in better shape that it's been since the late 80's, and it's mainly due to Afghanistan, and Kandahar specifically.
Alex:
Feel free too correct me sir, as I am fairly Naive when it comes to combat operations...I can blame that on the govt in part, as well, as we have had such a small, insignficant army for so long, most Canadians, I think, would have not even thought we had one prior to 9/11.
We have been a peaceful nation, but I think the govt, and to an extent our own people, have mistakenly thought that being peaceful meant no need for a military...they were wrong IMO.
I guess it would have been the liberals at the time, who were to blame, although the crippling of our military goes back through and past the Chretien years. I doubt you'll find the same approach with Harper, although there are other issues with his admin.
TAM
Yes, it's been happening for a while. One of the bigger problems has been that, ever since the Somalia Enquiry, the army's main goal seems to have to win every PR battle, instead of being ready to fight and win a war. Not only that, but partially due to that, no general's had the balls to push the government for the funding we needed. There was this feeling that most of the country hated us, and nobody wanted to bring any attention to us for fear of starting another scandal/controversy.
Hillier's been instrumental in changing that mindset - his "kill the scumbags" comment may have upset a few hippies, but it had an amazing effect on how the army views itself and it's role. We no longer have to pretend to be social workers just to placate anti-war idiots who are upset by the thought of our existence. Unfortunately, the government is still making SOME mistakes, but if we're going to be realistic we have to admit that there are always going to be mistakes. I don't actually blame the government for getting us into Kandahar - I just hope they learn from it in the future. If you're the last person to show up at the theatre, you're going to get a shitty seat up in the first row.
PS, just out of curiosity, what do you find objectionable about Harpers admin? To tell the truth, I was so happy with much of his early performance that I haven't been paying the attention that I should have to his actions since then.
Alex:
Rick Hillier is a great man, and from my neck of the woods.
As for the Harper govt, so far I have little bad to say about what they have done.
On issues, i do not like their stance on Gay Marriage. I am a left of center heterosexual who voted NDP in the last election, but only because I knew the candidate and what a good person they were.
So far I am fine with the Harper govt. I hope they turn out to be much less the criminals that many of the Liberals turned out to be.
TAM:)
NDP? ewwwww.
I trust you judgement and all...I'm just wondering why a good person would run under the NDP label. I'd rather run as an independent than NDP any day.
I understand your feelings on the subject of gay marriage. I'd deffinitely feel the same if the government were against granting equal rights to gay couples. However, seeing as gay couples already had every single right that straight couples do, even before this debate got started, I can't say I much care. My main opposition to it is based on the fact that I hate people using the government to change language. Marriage is by deffinition between a male and a female. You can give all the same right to gays if you want, and have a marriage ceremony for them, but they still won't be "married". Otherwise my neighbour wouldn't get pissed off when I ask "so how's your wife these days".
I'll call a homosexual couple the "King and Queen of the Pink Unicorns" if they want, it doesn't much matter to me. I just hate having the government mandate what I have to call them. Anyway, seeing as the bill went through anyway, Harper couldn't change it even if he wanted to. Homosexual Marriage is here to stay.
I don't want to derail this thread any further, but thanks for your thoughts TAM. It's good to know that there's at least one good NDP candidate out there somewhere :)
Dont get me wrong, When it comes to which party do I like, in terms of ideals, or platforms, I would likely pick Liberal. The trouble is they were corrupt. PCs are second, but some of their ideas are extreme. NDP is last in terms of their overall vision, although I am with them on the environment and human rights.
I am a self-employed physician. I am no fan of socialism, by a long stretch, but I do believe in elements of the social net that keeps single moms and the unfortunate alive and in many cases off the streets.
I believe in Workfare for those who are able bodied.
And yes, she is a good person (the NDP I voted for).
Derail over.
TAM:)
Seems like the gov't assets uhhh I mean debunkers like to spend a lot of time focusing on twoothers. You'd think that they'd have something better to do instead of monitoring the crazies.
Post a Comment
<< Home