Ted Rall loses his shit

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 10:01pm

linky

God, I'd like to strangle this fucking loon.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-11-13 10:12pm

Every day that passes without involving him being executed by a double-tap to the back of the head is another day in which he either

A) continues to live in a reasonable democracy

or

B) cunningly eludes Generalissimo Bush's agents of destruction and terror. It's a wonder that he can still write his scathing articles and upload his full-color cartoons while on the run from a veritable horde of cybernetic Waffen SS intent on his termination.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-11-13 10:15pm

Originaly posted by TR: Indeed the soldiers are themselves oppressed members of America`s vast underclass

Even if this part like the rest is exagerated i think he`s kind of right there,its always the poor and the middle class who has to do the fighting,while the rich priviledged SOBs are way back in the safety of their homes.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-11-13 10:40pm

What's wrong with this article? I found it very scathing, and probably closer to the truth (in terms of the dynamics of the Iraqi resistance forces) than the US government would like to believe.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-11-13 10:48pm

I don't really see what is wrong with this. It is a parody obviously and his comparison to Afghanistan seems valid enough (I've been making it for awhile too). You may think he is disrespecting our troops with this but I think that Bush is the one disrespecting the troops by using them in order to boost his approval rating like he does.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 11:05pm

If you don't have a problem with this, fine. Just don't complain about anything Ann Coulter writes, ever, because Ted Rall is her left-wing equivalent to the nth.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-11-13 11:09pm

Durran Korr wrote:If you don't have a problem with this, fine. Just don't complain about anything Ann Coulter writes, ever, because Ted Rall is her left-wing equivalent to the nth.

Ahh, but Ann Coulter is a bigot and a religious zealot, not to mention a classist to the extreme. Not a combination I like to see really. I guess that goes with the territory of being an extreme right-winger though.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-11-13 11:11pm

The Kernel wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:If you don't have a problem with this, fine. Just don't complain about anything Ann Coulter writes, ever, because Ted Rall is her left-wing equivalent to the nth.
Ahh, but Ann Coulter is a bigot and a religious zealot, not to mention a classist to the extreme. Not a combination I like to see really. I guess that goes with the territory of being an extreme right-winger though.

"No left wing bias, no none at all."

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 11:13pm

She may be those things. She also has never gone to great lengths to rationalize the killing of American soldiers (and UN and Red Cross staff) as Comrade Rall has here.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-11-13 11:14pm

Durran Korr wrote:If you don't have a problem with this, fine. Just don't complain about anything Ann Coulter writes, ever, because Ted Rall is her left-wing equivalent to the nth.

Get off it. Ann Coulter wanted to see college liberals executed. Rall isn't within 20 billion light years of the equivalent and you know it.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-11-13 11:16pm

Durran Korr wrote:She may be those things. She also has never gone to great lengths to rationalize the killing of American soldiers (and UN and Red Cross staff) as Comrade Rall has here.

Gee, you think he might be being a little sarcastic?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 11:18pm

Hamel wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:If you don't have a problem with this, fine. Just don't complain about anything Ann Coulter writes, ever, because Ted Rall is her left-wing equivalent to the nth.
Get off it. Ann Coulter wanted to see college liberals executed. Rall isn't within 20 billion light years of the equivalent and you know it.

Oh, please, she advocated that a fucking American college liberal who happened to also be a Taliban militant be executed in order to prevent other college liberals from following the same path. Ann Coulter is crazy but I assure you she doesn't want you dead, Hamel.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 11:19pm

The Kernel wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:She may be those things. She also has never gone to great lengths to rationalize the killing of American soldiers (and UN and Red Cross staff) as Comrade Rall has here.
Gee, you think he might be being a little sarcastic?

No, there is not even a hint of sarcasm to this column.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-11-13 11:25pm

Oh, please, she advocated that a fucking American college liberal who happened to also be a Taliban militant be executed in order to prevent other college liberals from following the same path. Ann Coulter is crazy but I assure you she doesn't want you dead, Hamel.

The Whore wrote:"When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors."

Even if we were to take your ridiculous spin as fact, that would not make her any less vile, and doesn't bring Ted Rall any closer to her level of evil.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-11-13 11:25pm

Remember kids. If you happen to agree with an opinion that the government hasn't approved, you are demanded to accept the other side of the story instead of being able to criticize it.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-11-13 11:26pm

Durran Korr wrote:
No, there is not even a hint of sarcasm to this column.

That's entirely subjective. It is obviously not serious to me- it's very format precludes it from being serious.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-11-13 11:30pm

Durran Korr wrote:Oh, please, she advocated that a fucking American college liberal who happened to also be a Taliban militant be executed in order to prevent other college liberals from following the same path. Ann Coulter is crazy but I assure you she doesn't want you dead, Hamel.

Have you actual read her book Treason Durran? She accuses most liberals of being traitors, and as we all know the punishment for treason is death.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-11-13 11:45pm

I can't fucking believe this apologism. If this were a Fred Phelps type writing a "satirical" article to encourage the Iraqis to rise up and fight against the decadent Americans, you would be going batshit crazy, and rightfully so. Yet this guy writes a column rationalizing the murder of American soldiers (not to mention Iraqis who want to cooperate with them) - ON FUCKING VETERAN'S DAY, FOR GOD'S SAKE - and you actually DEFEND him.

As I myself am as close to going batshit crazy as I've ever been and would rather not do so, I'm going to be withdrawing from this thread. Have a nice fucking night.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-11-14 12:02am

Durran Korr wrote:I can't fucking believe this apologism. If this were a Fred Phelps type writing a "satirical" article to encourage the Iraqis to rise up and fight against the decadent Americans, you would be going batshit crazy, and rightfully so. Yet this guy writes a column rationalizing the murder of American soldiers (not to mention Iraqis who want to cooperate with them) - ON FUCKING VETERAN'S DAY, FOR GOD'S SAKE - and you actually DEFEND him.

As I myself am as close to going batshit crazy as I've ever been and would rather not do so, I'm going to be withdrawing from this thread. Have a nice fucking night.

Fred Phelps wouldn't have the capability to write this article. Regardless, I've never read a Ted Rall article before so approach it with no prejudice as to its contents. As for 'rationalizing' the deaths of American soldiers, you presuppose that their deaths cannot be rationally explained. I can do so in two seconds flat: they are resented by some segments of the Iraqi population as an illegitmate occupying power and so they attack and kill them every chance they get. The piece is a highly probable formulation of how the insurgents see *themselves* and their goals- why you presuppose that he endorses the deaths of Americans in that article, exactly? Because he's willing to talk about why it's happening? I'll take this article over moronic bullshit about "well, they just hate freedom" thanks very much.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-11-14 12:34am

Durran Korr wrote:I can't fucking believe this apologism. If this were a Fred Phelps type writing a "satirical" article to encourage the Iraqis to rise up and fight against the decadent Americans, you would be going batshit crazy, and rightfully so. Yet this guy writes a column rationalizing the murder of American soldiers (not to mention Iraqis who want to cooperate with them) - ON FUCKING VETERAN'S DAY, FOR GOD'S SAKE - and you actually DEFEND him.

As I myself am as close to going batshit crazy as I've ever been and would rather not do so, I'm going to be withdrawing from this thread. Have a nice fucking night.

First off, I don't think he is rationalizing the murder of American soldiers, but trying to present an alternate view of the situation. Do you buy the argument that Iraqis are up in arms right now because "they hate freedom"? Because that's about all that people are willing to say these days. This is a complex situation and we can't simply dismiss the Iraqi people's motives here (like we did in countless other nation-building excercises).

Also, isn't Bush rationilizing the murder of American soldiers when he decides to deploy them in a situation like Iraq? He is the President, but does that put him on higher moral ground then the rest of us? So why is it so taboo to argue with the wisdom of using those troops when the person who makes the decision in the first place is hardly a paragon of moral virtue?