# The type of men some other people are...



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/index.shtml


----------



## goshawk (May 21, 2005)

Okay. Fine. But then, instigate a universal draft or a system like Switzerland has; EVERY able-bodied citizen goes through military training and may be called upon to die in the defense of the nation. After all, that's fair, right? That way we're _all_ paying the same prices. That's equality. 

Numbnuts. ::disgusted:: Yeah, they made a choice to be in the military, and be ridiculed and picked at and derided by the likes of you. And you made the choice to "get a job" and insult them. Who do I respect?

Sorry for the rant, but this crap just sticks in my craw. =\


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

Im sure some here will find it amusing....


----------



## TonyM. (May 21, 2005)

That could possibly be the most retarded thing I have ever seen.


----------



## Deuce (May 21, 2005)

TonyM. said:
			
		

> That could possibly be the most retarded thing I have ever seen.


Agreed


----------



## Jaymeister (May 21, 2005)

*"Don't military pukes learn anything? Nine more Marines bite the big one in combat. Stupid is as stupid does!"*

This is without doubt the most inhumane thing I've read in ages, WTF is wrong with this guy???


----------



## Rick Wade (May 21, 2005)

Jaymeister said:
			
		

> *"Don't military pukes learn anything? Nine more Marines bite the big one in combat. Stupid is as stupid does!"*
> 
> This is without doubt the most inhumane thing I've read in ages, WTF is wrong with this guy???




While I do respect your opinion I have a couple of questions for you.  

Why does a guy that list his art and rank as none come to a Martial Arts forum to chat?  Don't get me wrong it is your right.  However If you were to call me a military puke to my face no matter what country you are from you will have a definite problem.  You can bash my country and the way we think all you want because I don't expect you to understand.   But don't talk about our men who are defending it.  That is something I would expect out of a fifth grader.

Is life so good in Denmark that you guys don't need a military?  Please convince me I may even come over there for a vacation and help your economy out.

 :ultracool 

Rick


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

He was quoting the statement from that idiotic website....and saying that it was inhumane, which it is.


----------



## Rick Wade (May 21, 2005)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> While I do respect your opinion I have a couple of questions for you.
> 
> Why does a guy that list his art and rank as none come to a Martial Arts forum to chat?  Don't get me wrong it is your right.  However If you were to call me a military puke to my face no matter what country you are from you will have a definite problem.  You can bash my country and the way we think all you want because I don't expect you to understand.   But don't talk about our men who are defending it.  That is something I would expect out of a fifth grader.
> 
> ...




I am totally sorry My appologies I didn't realize extract foot from mouth.
Man I am  an idiot.

Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks for setting me straight.

V/R

Rick


----------



## Rick Wade (May 21, 2005)

The idiot from that website faked his own death to get more publicity.

He then appeared on Hanity and Combs last night.  He couldn't even put two intelegent words together.  Turns out that he is an Amry boot camp washout.  When Hanity and Colbms both agree on a topic you know your out to lunch.

V/R

Rick


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

Whats scary are the people who posted to the site that agreed with him...


----------



## Jaymeister (May 21, 2005)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> I am totally sorry My appologies I didn't realize extract foot from mouth.
> Man I am  an idiot.
> 
> Sorry for the confusion.
> ...



Apology accepted. And actually I do/did have an orange belt in TKD, but I haven't trained for a number of years now so I didn't really bother to put it in my profile.


----------



## Kempogeek (May 21, 2005)

Quoting the website "Number of US soldiers killed in the Iraq War of their own doing because they CHOSE to be leeches: 1586. These scumbags asked for it and got it.".....It's very easy for some jerk to write this crap from the safety of a keyboard. Let's see how brave he really is by having him face a Marine and call him/her a "scumbag". Smart money would be on the Marines, especially with you Mr. Wade, sir. Be safe! All the best, Steve


----------



## Bammx2 (May 21, 2005)

I had to read that site 3 times.

I could NOT believe what I was reading.
I have to Quote R.Lee Ermy from Full Metal Jacket.......


"WHY IS SOMEBODY NOT STOMPING HIS GUTS OUT"?!?!

I am quite sure when our forefathers said "Freedom of Speech"...
THIS moron was NOT what they had in mind and I am quite sure they would make an exception in this case!


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

He's free to say whatever he wants in this country (regardless of what others may think). However this doesn't mean anybody has to like it, or cant say whatever they want right back at him. 

Doesnt freedom of speech also apply to people who want to call this guy every name in the book that he deserves?


----------



## Bammx2 (May 21, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> He's free to say whatever he wants in this country (regardless of what others may think). However this doesn't mean anybody has to like it, or cant say whatever they want right back at him.
> 
> Doesnt freedom of speech also apply to people who want to call this guy every name in the book that he deserves?


I agree absolutely and I do stand correct.

Ok...so lets dig in our pockets and spend some money on this young gentleman directly.

There is a really nice summer camp in north carolina that has wonderful smelling pine trees as far as the eye can see.
The people have that genuine southern politeness and would gladly open the door of thier homes for him and provide some really good southern home cooked meals.
God I miss grits.........

You might know this summer camp for MISS GUIDED CHILDREN................

Camp Lejeune?

It's really lovely this time of year.
And they would gladly listen to everything he has to say............................

I'll pay for that trip


----------



## arnisador (May 21, 2005)

This guy's last name is Crook?

 It's very hard for me to see this site as well-intentioned. The kindest thing I can say is that it's in very poor taste.


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

Bammx2 said:
			
		

> I agree absolutely and I do stand correct.
> 
> Ok...so lets dig in our pockets and spend some money on this young gentleman directly.
> 
> ...


How interesting that would be eh?


----------



## Bammx2 (May 21, 2005)

I think this guy fails to see one very important thing...

One day,he is going to need help,be it police,EMT or fire...or even "legal"(i.e,..a judge,attorney,etc) and the larger majority of these people ARE veterens and someone WILL recognose him..........


Now THAT will be interesting


----------



## Senjojutsu (May 21, 2005)

Assuming his parents didn't abandon him at birth, I bet they are the aging hippie types driving around in a rusted Volvo with bumper stickers like "Imagine if our schools could buy books and the Pentagon had to run bake sales". 

He's kind of young to be so bitter, but losers often are

Attention Crook - you're not running a website posting about your ex-wife Teresa the PBFH, or even bashing a politician, political party or a pretentious Hollywood celebrity.

You are mocking and deriding the very people most directly responsible for the preservation of our American way of life. Those who stand watch in far flung places - away from their homes and loved ones - those who often risk everything - so you can whine and complain, oh sorry - be a "freelance journalist" thinking you are in line to be the next Al Franken or Michael Isikoff. 

Please tell me when Crook's fifteen minutes of shame is up and he is going back to his career in "Retail Management".


----------



## Rick Wade (May 21, 2005)

Lets all pitch in and bye mike (hunt) crook a plane ticket to Iraq.  It wouldnt matter if he was in custody of the US or out in town the outcome would be the same.  I pledge $100.   Do I have any takers?  Am I putting bad thoughts out there?  

 :mp5:  :whip:  :CTF:


----------



## arnisador (May 21, 2005)

Just a twit looking for attention. Ignore him, I say.


----------



## searcher (May 21, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> He's free to say whatever he wants in this country (regardless of what others may think). QUOTE]
> 
> This is a true statement, but I have to agree with Bammx2 about stomping his guts out.
> 
> ...


----------



## arnisador (May 21, 2005)

searcher said:
			
		

> This is a true statement, but I have to agree with Bammx2 about stomping his guts out.


 Yes, that would be an excellent way to demonstrate that you appreciate servicemembers protecting our right to free speech here in the U.S.


----------



## Tgace (May 21, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Yes, that would be an excellent way to demonstrate that you appreciate servicemembers protecting our right to free speech here in the U.S.


Hes free to express his opinion too....actually doing it? Thats a different kettle o fish.


----------



## MA-Caver (May 22, 2005)

TonyM. said:
			
		

> That could possibly be the most retarded thing I have ever seen.


Ditto


----------



## Adept (May 22, 2005)

Wowsers. Someone has a slightly naive view of the world, thats for sure. I wonder what this guy thinks about the Police?


----------



## 47MartialMan (May 22, 2005)

Well, if it wasnt for our military and those whos serve, he wouldnt have his freedom of speech.


----------



## Senjojutsu (May 22, 2005)

Adept said:
			
		

> Wowsers. Someone has a slightly naive view of the world, thats for sure. I wonder what this guy thinks about the Police?


Adept, 

The little twerp must of gotten a traffic ticket in the past, for he is also going to be running the website: 

http://www.forsakethepolice.info/

_"Dedicated to discussing rogue officers who have forsaken us!"_

I wonder with his warped sense of values, what stories he will find amusing.
His parents must be real proud!


----------



## Adept (May 22, 2005)

Senjojutsu said:
			
		

> Adept,
> 
> The little twerp must of gotten a traffic ticket in the past, for he is also going to be running the website:
> 
> ...


 All I can hope is that some kind officers use their 'discretion' when some returned servicemen make a house call to Mr Crook to 'congratulate' him on such an 'intelligent' website.


----------



## Bammx2 (May 22, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Yes, that would be an excellent way to demonstrate that you appreciate servicemembers protecting our right to free speech here in the U.S.


Yes.I know it would.
Soldiers may die for the "freedom of speech",but I have NEVER met a combat vet who said:"my friends died so you can crap all over thier memory and hide behind the guise of 'freedom of speech' and the blatant abuse your self-imposed ignorant,mindless,drivel you spew out just because you're not special".


As a matter of fact,
why don't we all stop using the first amendment for a minute and ask the frontline combat soldiers,past and present(and not the ones safe in logistics),and see what they REALLY think about people like this?

I bet these "special" people would get a free holiday to Paris.....Island,that is
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




And as a side note....
Arnisador,I am not a total anarchist and I understand completely where you are comming from and I understand his "legal" right to say what he feels.
But comming from a family that can trace military service all the way back to the revolutionary war and then some....
No.I can not go along with this.
This man,and those like him,have crossed the line.


----------



## arnisador (May 22, 2005)

I figure he's just being childish and looking for attention...and getting it.

But, freedom of speech must mean "even speech with which I disagree" or it's meaningless.

I agree with your sentiments in many ways, but it's not freedom of speech that is being protected unless it includes offensive speech like this as well.


----------



## 47MartialMan (May 22, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> I figure he's just being childish and looking for attention...and getting it.
> 
> But, freedom of speech must mean "even speech with which I disagree" or it's meaningless.
> 
> I agree with your sentiments in many ways, but it's not freedom of speech that is being protected unless it includes offensive speech like this as well.


True, to which he wouldnt have if it werent for others dying for it.


----------



## Makalakumu (May 22, 2005)

Does anyone smell a rat in this mess?  Alot of red flags are popping up.  For one, Fox News, another Michael _Crook_, and the things on those sites are just too outrageous for words.  There are a lot of cranks out there, but none of them usually get national attention from a National Network to spout their ideas.  This deserves some digging into...

For now, I declare this guy, Fox News' exposure, and his filthy ideas...

:bs: 

What a joke!


----------



## Bammx2 (May 22, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> I figure he's just being childish and looking for attention...and getting it.
> 
> But, freedom of speech must mean "even speech with which I disagree" or it's meaningless.
> 
> I agree with your sentiments in many ways, but it's not freedom of speech that is being protected unless it includes offensive speech like this as well.


 

Agreed.


----------



## 47MartialMan (May 22, 2005)

Yeah, if all people thing the way of the "Crook".


----------



## ginshun (May 23, 2005)

This guy is just asking for a beat down.  That site has got to make people crazy mad.


----------



## Tgace (May 23, 2005)

Sure its a right wing, Fox News, "conspiricy"....:shrug:
Yeah, Fox News took some obscure web site and gave it far more exposure than it deserved, but I have no doubt that there are loosers out there that really believe such things. Hell, some posts I have seen right here are at least in the same area code as that crap.....


----------



## Makalakumu (May 23, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> Sure its a right wing, Fox News, "conspiricy"....:shrug:


Then you don't know very much about Fox News or the _New Media_...



			
				Tgace said:
			
		

> Yeah, Fox News took some obscure web site and gave it far more exposure than it deserved, but I have no doubt that there are loosers out there that really believe such things.


I think one of their analysts found this guy and they exploited his BS. The guy is a perfect charicature...skinny, sniveling, weakling, kinda rat-faced and pimply...great stereotype for _liberals _and with rhetoric that is so out there, its a good set up for manipulation. This is normal Fox News spin.

It is also concieveable that the entire story is cooked. Again, Fox has been caught red handed doing this a number of times. It's worth digging into...



			
				Tgace said:
			
		

> Hell, some posts I have seen right here are at least in the same area code as that crap.....


:bs: 

No, not even close.  Wow!


----------



## sgtmac_46 (May 24, 2005)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Then you don't know very much about Fox News or the _New Media_...
> 
> I think one of their analysts found this guy and they exploited his BS. The guy is a perfect charicature...skinny, sniveling, weakling, kinda rat-faced and pimply...great stereotype for _liberals _and with rhetoric that is so out there, its a good set up for manipulation. This is normal Fox News spin.
> 
> ...


If the shoe fits.  Must be a vast right wing conspiracy, it's far easier to believe than that this guy is a moronic leftist wacko.


----------



## Tgace (May 24, 2005)

Oh yeah, this guy is one of a kind.....not!

http://media.dailycollegian.com/pages/tillman_lobandwidth.html?in_archive=1

http://thingsihate.org/view/393/i_hate_soldiers

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/40259.htm

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/tsegel/2004/ts_0924.shtml

Theres more...need I go on?


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 24, 2005)

So your absolute proof is: a) an editorial in a college paper; b) a blog; c) one of Murdoch's papers; d) a right-wing website.

Oh. Well, I guess I'll be voting Republican from here on out.


----------



## Tgace (May 24, 2005)

Proof of what? That some people out there are all expressing the same contempt of servicemen? Apparently there are.

BTW, since when is the source a refutation of the content? So the story of the wounded soldier being beaten was from a conservative website...so what? Did that mean it didnt happen? You use that tactic frequently..its silly.


----------



## ginshun (May 24, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> So your absolute proof is: a) an editorial in a college paper; b) a blog; c) one of Murdoch's papers; d) a right-wing website.
> 
> Oh. Well, I guess I'll be voting Republican from here on out.


 Ya, your probably right, I bet Fox News made all those sights so that liberals look bad.  That's so much more believable that just accepting that some people are looney.


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 24, 2005)

1. In good research, it is always vital to consider the source. Some cannot be trusted; for example, the "Washington Times," is a much less reliable source than the "New York Times," because the former is owned by a famous, world class right-wing religious nutcase, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, who has several times publicly announced that his paper is his tool for converting the world to his beliefs, and the latter is owned by rich people and stockholders who have repeatedly said that their interests lie in getting the news out over the last 150 years or so.

2. In good research, primary sources are always best; that is, it is best NEVER to take somebody else's word for what somebody else said or wrote. FOX News has a long history, in fact, of quoting out of context--and moreover, the channel is openly and avowedly conservative/rightist in its politics.

3. You can pretty much find any sort of looniness you want on the Web. I assure you that I can easily find far more, far worse guff and madness from right-wing types--and the leftists have the advantage that they usually don't brandish guns and call for anybody to be shot. Usually, anyway.


----------



## Tgace (May 24, 2005)

So..when an "unreliable source" publishes a story about a soldier being beaten..it didnt happen? :idunno: 

While articles of opinion or editorials from slanted sources are questionable, I dont believe it applies to cases of "fact" (either the guy was beaten or he wasnt) most fact based stories come from wires anyway. If you believe the story is false state your evidence. Just saying "well it came from the Washington times" is a silly tactic.....BTW what is it Im supposed to be proving here again? I dont believe I made a statement of any kind.


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 24, 2005)

I thought that what I actually wrote was that a) one should take the source into account; b) there were some sources that were highly unreliable. I don't think I said anything about anybody's politics; just that the "Wash. Times," was a good example (as was FOX) of a source that had a poor track record for reliability, and open bias.


----------



## Tgace (May 24, 2005)

OK..what do you think Im trying to prove here, that I need to take sources into account? I was just contrasting the other thread about Marines sacrificing for each other with some screwballs here in this country who are saying this crap...which some obviously are. Others are going the extra mile and writing hate mail to soldiers and beating injured ones. Are you saying that they are not? If a "liberal rag" doesn't publish a story about a soldier getting hate mail, does that mean it never happened.:idunno:


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 24, 2005)

Should I flip that back, and note that some of our soldiers are torturing prisoners are you saying that they are not?

Actually, what I really wonder about is why we need to have thread after thread about soldiers, and attack after attack on people who're clearly idiots...

Would it be OK by you if I noted, for instance, that what these so-called, "thinkers," have in common is youth, privilege, and contempt for the working people who're doing their...ah, poop work?--for them?


----------



## Tgace (May 24, 2005)

I believe that people do like thread after thread about soldiers...gives them something to gripe about. I guess Im like Savage. You dont like my posts but somehow you listen and respond...I should get some sponsorship.


----------



## ginshun (May 24, 2005)

Tgace said:
			
		

> I guess Im like Savage. You dont like my posts but somehow you listen and respond...I should get some sponsorship.


 
 LOL


----------



## arnisador (May 24, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> You can pretty much find any sort of looniness you want on the Web.


 Heck, you can pretty much find any sort of looniness you want on MartialTalk.


----------



## Andrew Green (May 24, 2005)

_[font=georgia, bookman old style, palatino linotype, book antiqua, palatino, trebuchet ms, helvetica, garamond, sans-serif, arial, verdana, avante garde, century gothic, comic sans ms, times, times new roman, serif]"My favorite thing about the Internet is that you get to go into the private world of real creeps without having to smell them."  ~Penn Jillett[/font]_


----------



## 47MartialMan (May 24, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Heck, you can pretty much find any sort of looniness you want on MartialTalk.


oooo...thats the type of man i wanna be


----------



## sgtmac_46 (May 25, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> I thought that what I actually wrote was that a) one should take the source into account; b) there were some sources that were highly unreliable. I don't think I said anything about anybody's politics; just that the "Wash. Times," was a good example (as was FOX) of a source that had a poor track record for reliability, and open bias.


You mean like Newsweek of CBS?  I think we can more succinctly evaluate what you call a reliable source, and that is anything you agree with is automatically reliable, so save the rhetorical attempt at objectivity.


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 25, 2005)

Since you ask, I actually--as opposed to your fantasy--tend to suspect everything that comes out from "Newsweek," and CBS News, on the grounds that they happen to be corporatist mouthpieces for the middle class. I tend to believe PBS and the BBC rather more, though with PBS having been taken over by the ex-editor of "Reader's Digest" (now THERE'S an unimpeachable source!) that's starting to change.

And when CBS or, "Newsweek," is owned, operated and micro-managed by the likes of Rupert Murdoch or the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, who make no secret of their politics and their willingness to use their paper or TV channel to promote their politics, I will adopt precisely the same attitude towards them.


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (May 25, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Since you ask, I actually--as opposed to your fantasy--tend to suspect everything that comes out from "Newsweek," and CBS News, on the grounds that they happen to be corporatist mouthpieces for the middle class.


So a source is automatically suspicious if it's associated with the middle class?  Their actual behavior regardless?


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 25, 2005)

All I said was that I tend to think it's important to consdier the source: don't you?

But since you ask, I tend to think that Puddin' head Wilson was right: "Show me where a man gets his corn-pone, and I'll tell you what his opinions are."

Don't you agree?


----------



## Tgace (May 25, 2005)

So..yes.


----------



## heretic888 (May 25, 2005)

Logically speaking, it is not unwise to treat dubious sources with a certain modicum of suspicion. Or at least skepticism. At the same time, however, one shouldn't casually dismiss them without more careful scrutiny, either.


----------



## 47MartialMan (May 25, 2005)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Logically speaking, it is not unwise to treat dubious sources with a certain modicum of suspicion. Or at least skepticism. At the same time, however, one shouldn't casually dismiss them without more careful scrutiny, either.


Sounds like a post reflecting 10th Dans and Sokes..:erg:


----------



## heretic888 (May 25, 2005)

47MartialMan said:
			
		

> Sounds like a post reflecting 10th Dans and Sokes..:erg:



Well, let's put it this way...

I'm not just talking about newspapers here.  :supcool:


----------



## rmcrobertson (May 25, 2005)

Sure. However, life is short--and when a source has repeatedly demonstrated its bias, and the owner of the source has explicitly stated why the bias is there, you can pretty much stop bothering to ask whether or not it's biased and go look for something better.


----------



## heretic888 (May 25, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> Sure. However, life is short--and when a source has repeatedly demonstrated its bias, and the owner of the source has explicitly stated why the bias is there, you can pretty much stop bothering to ask whether or not it's biased and go look for something better.



Hrmm.... yes. I'm inclined to agree with this assessment.

There are some sources I just wouldn't waste my time with. Especially in the martial arts.


----------



## Flatlander (May 25, 2005)

==================================================
 Mod Note:

 Please keep this conversation on topic.  The point regarding the integrity of the source has been duly noted.

 -Dan Bowman-
 -MT Moderator-
 ==================================================


----------



## Tgace (May 25, 2005)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Logically speaking, it is not unwise to treat dubious sources with a certain modicum of suspicion. Or at least skepticism. At the same time, however, one shouldn't casually dismiss them without more careful scrutiny, either.


Nothing to argue with there...


----------



## Tgace (May 25, 2005)

So those school kids didnt write those letters to the soldier??


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (May 26, 2005)

rmcrobertson said:
			
		

> All I said was that I tend to think it's important to consdier the source: don't you?


Consider the sources, sure.  Disregard them only because of who they represent and nothing more, no.


----------

