Posted on 03/12/2006 7:51:11 PM PST by bayourant
Did Race play a role in the Port Deal discussions? The very charge is met by the likes of Sean Hannity and others with Righteous Indigination. In fact, to mention it makes you the true problem. Mark Levin in fact called a MAjor General a dirtbag over that charge. The below cartoons may be an issue now in the UAE. They are not cartoons about that ole darn prophet however. THere will be no boycotts over these but remember still they dont help things. The cartoonist just give us what we want sometimes. From MSNBC the following cartoon. There were many others that through the glory of the net are available to all.
often they have some minority axe to grind
You need to clarify your comment.
we can only hope...lol
you should see the first few lines of this thread and the little verbage in his vanity
he lies outright to Levin....so blatant
In fact, you didn't reply to Mark Levin's statement until comment #205, on the fourth page of this thread.
This argument is so tedious.
Mark told you why in his post to you. He said; “Boy, you are an A-hole in one. You keep quoting this guy bayourant.” (See his post 181.)
If you want to restart the fight with Mark, go for it.
OK...I'm bigoted against Islam dear.
So?, they've earned it. Like I care...I'm bigoted against pedophiles too. And liberals. And fembots. And infanticide promoters....some folks deserve to be bigoted against.
I bet my kin who died in WWII were bigoted against Nazis and Japs too. Thank God.
What sort of minority status do you claim?
Usually when someone is so enamoured with race baiting by other conservatives it's because it particularly suits them.
Are you Arab? Muslim? have Muslim pals or relatives?
or are you just warm and fuzzy?
in any event, this war will go on and when they hurt us again maybe your naivete and obsession with "bigotry" against proven foes will be relegated to the Pollyanna dustbin where it belongs.
We make pragmatic strategic alliances from Stalin to Somoza to Strossner to Pinochet to Marcos to Tito and even the UAE and Saudi because we have to and because there is military or logistical value....not because we don't want to offend folks because of their race, religion or ethnicity at a time of war to the death.
Your posturing is an indulgence that will reap a bitter windfall as surely as 9-11 did.
The link was relevant and for you to think that by my simply linking to it I must then find it necessary to disassociate myself from is just plain ol' stupid.
In fact, you didn't reply to Mark Levin's statement until comment #205, on the fourth page of this thread.
If you set your preferences to load 250 replies per page, it would be on the 1st page, smartypants.
Then don't. That was my point in the beginning.
I cannot believe they are STILL questioning your link to that post and trying to associate you with the remark.
They either haven't been here long or they are deliberately misstating what happened.
Stupid id right. I guess from now on the "new" rule will be that if you dare link a thread or post, you're automatically endorsing the context.
Stupid.
I'm gonna have my cat read this thread and then hopefully she explain it to me.
You were already following the thread, and had made several replies to me, none of which I initiated.
I can't even recall the last time I "pinged" you to a thread, but I can think of many, many times-particularly during the Aunt Harriet flareup and this ports deal that President Bush blundered into-where you replied to me with derogatory comments, over and over again, ad infinitum.
Secondly, even if my previous comment did constitute a "ping" you are the last person on this board that should complain about it, because you are the first person to become indignant if you aren't pinged to any comment that touches-even in the most peripheral manner-upon something that you, or another user, might have said in the distant past.
Do you see the contradiction here?
Have she/he/it cc: me on it.
Maybe you'd better explain "UKian People". I might not be getting the meaning.
I guess what I really meant to ask was, after having read all the pertinent comments on this thread, do you believe the reason given by Levin to be a reasonable one?
Ah, dimbulb, you put my NICKNAME in the TO: box.
To: Sally'sConcerns; CharlesWayneCT; Cboldt; hole_n_one; Howlin
You were already following the thread, and had made several replies to me, none of which I initiated.
I had been off this thread for over ten hours and 300 posts ago.
Secondly, even if my previous comment did constitute a "ping" you are the last person on this board that should complain about it, because you are the first person to become indignant if you aren't pinged to any comment that touches-even in the most peripheral manner-upon something that you, or another user, might have said in the distant past.
After reading your posts to me and to hole_n_one, I am beginning to believe that you couldn't tell the truth if somebody was holding a gun to your head.
It is forum coutesy, which I am sure is all Greek to you, to PING a person you are talking about (or trashing, in your case.) That's all.
Do you see the contradiction here?
No, all I see is lying on your part.
You don't seem to be getting an answer to your question, do you?
Then we get to the United Kingdom, or UK, so we have UKians.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.