The leftists at Craig's List have met Mr. Flagg

Craig's List Rants and Raves in Denver ^ | 6/20/2006 | RandallFlagg

[RandallFlagg]

OH! I've been having WAY too much fun!

First, let me warn you folks that the link above is not safe for work. When I nuke a lefty, they tend to use some very obscene language -which tells me that I've won yet another argument.

"Nuke a lefty," you ask? Well, allow me to simply explain below using the historical postings from that site. This one's from just today upon learning that our two soldiers have been murdered (My comments are in blue and linked):

__________________________________________________________
Iraqi: U.S. Bodies Showed Signs of Torture

(Islamic Group Claims Responsibility!)

BAGHDAD, Iraq - An Iraqi military official said Tuesday that the bodies of two missing U.S. soldiers showed signs of torture, and that men appeared to have been killed "in a barbaric way." Also, the umbrella group for Iraqi insurgents claimed responsibility for the soldiers' deaths.

(Click link above to read whole article)
___________________________________________________________

I expect a decline in captured terrorists in the future. Fifteen of them killed just in the last 12 hours.
No mercy


Still waiting for all of the human rights organizations to express their outrage.

...And waiting.

*crickets*

Gyaos
___________________________________________________________

To this, the response was (Colored in red):
_______________________________________________________

If those soldiers show signs of torture you can put some of the blame right where it belongs, yes GWB and crew. They refuse to follow GENEVA, they want to eliminate requirements in future DOD rules, they refuse to rule out the use of torture. So now you expect all others to follow rules in a game with bullets, bombs, fire and other means of deadly force.

Yes the Al Queda fu**tards did the rotten deed, but the more we little kids and old iraqi hags (read collateral damage) we do over there, the more US Military will get killed over their. You know the old game of revenge on a grand scale.

War isn't clean, no sh**....But you tell some Iraqi grandma who buries her 4 year old kid who has been blown to bits if she feels any pain for an American GI, well you know the answer to that. You really believe we are making friends over there?

Does it hurt worse to have your head lopped off, or your body blown up? Who is right, who is wrong....

(I edited out the profanities)

__________________________________________________________

And MY reply was this:

___________________________________________________________

And you wonder why the word, "Traitor," applies?

If those soldiers show signs of torture you can put some of the blame right where it belongs, yes GWB and crew.

If these people weren't supporting the enemy, how would the above statement be any different if they were?

They refuse to follow GENEVA,

Read it. Geneva does NOT apply to terrorists.

So now you expect all others to follow rules in a game with bullets, bombs, fire and other means of deadly force.

No. I know were fighting against seventh century barbaric animals. I do, however, expect those who would be -and have been in the past- murdered without hesitation BY these animals, to show a little bit of support for the heroes who are defending them from slaughter.

Yes the Al Queda fu**tards did the rotten deed, but the more we little kids and old iraqi hags (read collateral damage) we do over there, the more US Military will get killed over their.

AHH! Yes! Surrender is a MUCH better option. I'm sure that the Iraqi people would just love for that to happen.

War isn't clean, no sh**....But you tell some Iraqi grandma who buries her 4 year old kid who has been blown to bits if she feels any pain for an American GI, well you know the answer to that.

Please post the source for this story so you can prove that is was an American GI responsible for this incident.

You really believe we are making friends over there?

Ummm. Yes




Gyaos

___________________________________________________________

...and it goes on and on.

I'm incredibly outnumbered, but that's the way I like it.

The nice things about Craig's List is that it's segregated into local areas, anonymity, HTML capabilities, and they don't boot posts at the first sign of a conservative opinion. I've chosen to identify all of my posts with the tagline, "Gyaos," to show which post belongs to me.

[RandallFlagg]

There ARE a few others there who aren't completely blinded by the left's rage. I used to do this at another board but it was sooo time consuming that I finally had to stop. It is extremely addicting to look up links, news, quotes and historical references to use against them -NUKING them with words. They're usually left to babble profanities and remark on my sexual preferences.

So, if any of you reading this have the urge, and have a strong stomach for really bad language and insults being tossed at you, take a peek at my work. Even join in the fun. Watch the lefties squirm and squeal like the sore losers that they are.

Enjoy!

[Darksheare]

Bad man, stealing their lunch like that.
*snicker*
Good job!

[RandallFlagg]

I can't help myself. It's an addiction.

[kimmie7]

You, my friend, ROCK.

[RandallFlagg]

Why, thank you. You gonna give it a shot?

[kimmie7]

I have to do things like that after the kiddo is asleep. He's reading now...LOL! But I will be seeing you there!

[FourtySeven]

Good work, I admire your fortitude, however I cannot stand to be on a board where conservatives are outnumbered. This isn't because of a desire to shut liberals up (or suppress their free speech, or anything dramatic like that), it's simply because most boards are under the same design as DU, technologically speaking. That is, one cannot respond to multiple people with one post. One is left spamming a thread with the same reply to different people, (which is summarily flamed), or, as a rule, one is swamped by flames from the other side. IOW, flame wars seem to be much more prevalent on boards like that, boards that don't have FR's "pinging" technology (not that there aren't flame wars here, but at least here, the flaming can be done with one post!)

I simply can't function on the common discussion boards of today. I'm too addicted to FR's ease and convenience. Keep up the good work though!

[383rr]

Right -on Randall!
I'll check it out.

[RandallFlagg]

I understand. It's just so satisfying to post something with lots of links and pictures and quotes stating my position, demanding that they provide proof to back up what they state, then have a lefty respond with the equivalent of, "Well, you're a @*&%^! POOPYHEAD BUSHLOVER, YA F$*&!!"

When they do that, it reveals the mentality of the left for all to see (and laugh at).

[Darksheare]

LOL!
But it's a good addiction.

[RandallFlagg]

I'm taking another one on. I'll post the thing here in a few. It'll make them squeal a little bit, so I want to make it good and painfull....

[RandallFlagg]

Here's the latest nuking of a lefty. It can be seen on the link at Craig's List provided below:
______________________________________________________________You posted this as your evidence:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

To justify this statement:

Of course the troops think that. They need justification for putting their lives on the line everyday.

Now, let's look at who conducted this Zogby poll:

The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College’s Center for Peace and Global Studies

This should have been a warning sign to you about their partisan leanings, but I went on anyway.
Seems that Zogby changed their story about this particular poll citing, "First, the sponsor that funded Zogby's poll was not Le Moyne University but, according to a story in yesterday's Syracuse Post Standard, "a wealthy war opponent who [Zogby] would not name." In our conversation, Zogby said that an "anti-war" sponsor paid for the survey but played no role in conducting interviews or gathering the data."

Really? Let's dig further...

one conservative blogger sees partisan leanings
Which seems to be on the Le Moyne University's center's members. For example:

There's The Associate Director, Keith D. Watenpaugh:
"Let me begin by putting my cards on the table and explain why I titled this talk the way I did. This artificially generated crisis has never been about the disarming of Saddam, there is no credible evidence of a link between Baghdad and international Islamist terrorism, and Iraq poses no appreciable threat to America or American citizens."
--Keith D. Watenpaugh, Syracuse Thursday Morning Roundtable, March 12, 2003

Yeah. No partisan leanings there.
The guy sounds like Michael Moore.
I'd say he was full of it considering that when he made this speech, Zarqawi was in Iraq, healing from wounds inflicted on him by coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Now, let's look at the poll questions:

----“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,”
----For, "68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein."
----Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World"
----Securing oil supplies (11%)
----provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).
----More than 80% said they did not hold a negative view of Iraqis because of those attacks.
(How could they get this number if all of these attacks originate from what the media calls, "Insurgents?")
Insurgent:
1 : a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government; especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent
2 : one who acts contrary to the policies and decisions of one's own political party
If they originate from another country, they're NOT insurgents.

----About two in five see the insurgency as being comprised of discontented Sunnis with very few non-Iraqi helpers. “There appears to be confusion on this,” Zogby said. But, he noted, less than a third think that if non-Iraqi terrorists could be prevented from crossing the border into Iraq, the insurgency would end.
(Wait! All we've been hearing from the press is that these attacks are the result of Iraqi citizens defending their country from the American invaders. How could THAT be?!)
----A majority of troops (53%) said the U.S. should double both the number of troops and bombing missions in order to control the insurgency.

The rest of these questions are standard questions, but there's something strangely missing in this list....
How many of the troops were asked if they believed that they were there to stop terrorism?
NONE!

The partisan leanings seem to have shown through in this poll. This old poll, I might add (conducted Jan. 18 through Feb. 14, 2006).

One final question about the Zogby polls..
Who did Zogby predict to win the last presidential election based on his polls?

I eagerly await your reply.....

Gyaos

______________________________________________________________

This one's gonna cause a LOT of personal attacks upon me. I wouldn't have it any other way, though. Enjoy!

[RandallFlagg]

You folks aren't on any list, I'm just pinging you to post #12, and trying out my new banner. It's my first:



Whaddya think?

[Darksheare]

LOL!
It works!
"Hah hah!" *pointing*

It's perfect.

[RandallFlagg]

Sweet! Perhaps I can modify it a bit later.

I'm going to put all of the fights on this thread from that site.
BTW, you should read the first reply I got for that Zogby post I made over there. Here's a small example of the pot I just stirred:

"If you don't... you deserve to be beheaded like any sub-human scum that would fight for the current administration."

THAT was one of the small portions that DIDN'T have rampant profanities stapled all over it.

Nice, huh?

[383rr]

Excellent!
It's great!

[Darksheare]

Yeah, that is nice.
And they like to claim to be enlightened, open minded, and fair.

[RandallFlagg]

I was gentle with this one. No profanities in it at all.

____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
Since you're the ONLY poster who's reply wasn't filled to the lip with profanities, I'll be gentle.
But, I'm always gentle -see what it gets me?

moral support isn't what the troops need most (back home)

I'm not going to verbally attack you, bit I'd ask if you could please read a few excerpts from the most recent letter home from one of our heroes:
_________________________________________________________________________
I am fortunate enough to receive The Ridgefield Press every few weeks and enjoy keeping abreast of the local issues currently pressing in our small town. I am a U.S. Marine Infantryman currently serving in Fallujah, Iraq, and my mother usually includes The Press in the many care packages she sends me.

My primary concern is the assertion that these individuals support the troops in Iraq but not our mission. It boggles my mind that this logic is actually utilized on a large scale.

Supporting the troops but not the war is like saying that you support filmmakers but not making films. One cannot claim to support an individual in a given profession but not support what the said profession entails. This is essentially a slap in the face to those in the service.

We have received phone cards, hygiene supplies, food, etc. from members of state and local government, radio stations, schools, private individuals and organizations, but never once from any group claiming to “support the troops, but not the war.”

Publicly protesting our efforts in Iraq fuels the insurgency. Doing it under the pretext of “supporting our troops” is disgraceful.

I think I speak for an overwhelming majority of our troops when I ask organizations like The Ridgefield Coalition to Stop the War to discontinue using Marines, soldiers, airmen and sailors as a means to serve a political end.

You are neither supporting us nor honoring us. You are doing the exact opposite.
---Anthony Ippoliti -USMC, Jun 2, 2006
___________________________________________________________________________

You can Google the name, "Anthony Ippoliti," and find a lot of things written about him, but none by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN or the rest of the major media outlets. Why isn't this getting out? Isn't it newsworthy?
You can also Snopes the man's name; nothing there, either. Not an urban legend.

And there are many more letters such as this one.

I posted the link to the original letter. Please read the whole thing

Gyaos
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

But not this one. Sometimes they make it SOOO easy!
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
I think it is pretty funny that studies show areas of little education vote red and areas of higher education vote blue. The dumb "patriotic" hicks vote for republicans; and if they knew any better they would vote for a system that at least entertains thoughts of national health care and other safety nets that their poor families need, instead of a system that wants private interests to take over and make it impossible for the poor to ever own anything.

Yeah, that's right. We, "Red states," are just sooo ignorant and uneducated, but.....



What does that say about the, "Blue states," not being able to win the last three elections? HMMMM?

Gyaos
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
It's like they aren't even trying.
Fish in a barrel.

[FourtySeven]

LOL, I love the banner!

It is satisfying to post a lot of links proving one's case, however, it's too frustrating to me when they don't respond. Keep up the good work! I may check in from time to time; I can't resist a good fight. hehe

[RandallFlagg]

it's too frustrating to me when they don't respond.

That makes it even better because then, I get to taunt them. And when I do that, some of their comrades join in to attempt to defend their pal. Usually when that happens, the defender has no idea what was said in the discussion (which I always copy and paste onto my hard drive in case the original poster goes back to do some, "Editing," of past history)

Sometimes it can take me about ten hours to type out a good nuking complete with all the trimmings (links, pics, quotes, etc). When they refuse to respond in kind, I've still won.