I was stuck in a Chicago taxi a couple weeks ago, forced to listen to NPR. Their "correspondents" having been saying this for quite some time, whilst conveniently ignoring pertinent, mitigating facts. Facts such as militants hiding explosives, and arms both large and small, in residential areas where woman and children are present. Facts such as attacks on troops and aircraft having originated from within these same residential areas. Facts are such nuisances when you are trying to conduct a misinformation campaign!

Kevin do you think we can get some lefty bloggers who don't hate America and/or aren't crazy?

I am becoming increasingly convinced that there ain't no such animal.

Wizbang Blue! Explosively Misrepresenative...

Paul, are you shocked? I for one expect them to slant a story against the military. The lefties always have dispised the military and throw in their self-loathing and you have a liberal. ww

Any chance to discredit America or her military... You would think the lefties would show our troops a little more respect/gratitude - after all, those troops ensure the lefties can trash them whenever they get the urge...

"Kevin do you think we can get some lefty bloggers who don't hate America and/or aren't crazy?"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Oh. You were serious?

"So - just by reading - we go from the U.S. military "confessing" that we knew children where actually in the school and we killed them "deliberately" to an anonymous claim we knew kids where somewhere in the compound. (but not in the school) -- Reading; it's so fundamental."

It certainly is fundamental, because I don't see anywhere in the article where it says they weren't in the school. "The school" includes the grounds and the outbuildings - any adult would recognize that. You apparently choose to call "the school" only the building that was bombed.

No wonder you have such 'issues' with the postings at Wizbang Blue. Your poor reading comprehension skills, coupled with your out-of-control 'liberal derangement syndrome' as demonstrated in ALL of your postings, make you out to be a first-class loser, Paul.

How long till your next post, Paul? I need to plan out my day and I don't want to miss a single piece of crap that you write.

So, at Virginia Tech, where there was a shooting --- does that mean every square inch of the campus was under a hail of bullets? Or did the shooting occur in a specific location on a wide campus and didn't directly impact most students?

Wizbang Blue --- Kinda like DU. But maybe a bit more deranged.
-=Mike

A mind is a terrible thing to let go, er, waste not want not, er, huh?

Ol Crickmoron, he didn't do RIF when he was a lil school boy.

Funny, but Steve is more concerned that we would off terror leaders even if there is a small chance of civilians dying than the fact that if allowed to live those same leaders would kill children directly.

Kevin do you think we can get some lefty bloggers who don't hate America and/or aren't crazy?

I guess it's safe to assume that you still believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, too.

\"article where it says they weren\'t in the school. \"The school\" includes the grounds and the outbuildings - any adult would recognize that.\"

Ouch. Paul do you have a rebuttal to this because he sure looks right?

I know you asshats can't read, so I'll make it easier for you:
From the same article:
"Initial reports had U.S. jets targeting a compound that also contained a mosque and a madrassa, or Islamic school."

So there were seperate structures, ONE of which was a mosque and ONE of which was a school. None of this retardness of the school being the whole compound.

Morons.

LOL, I screwed up the quasi-word retardedness...

Whether it was 'in the school' or 'in the compound' is entirely tangential to the point of Paul's piece.

Here's the Blue kooks' headline:

Our Attack That Killed Afghan Kids [b]Deliberately[/b]

As seen in the headline, Steve's arguing that it was the intent of the U.S. military to kill the children. Anyone capable of reading and comprehending the article would know that's a complete misrepresentation of what occurred. Apparently, that criteria excludes the Blue kooks.

If the target is actually of such importance that we cannot avoid a certain amount of collateral damage, it is up to the American military to make that call. So what's the problem?

I have been looking at the Wizbang Blue site pretty regularly now. These guys are terrible. Yesterday, one of the ignoramii leaves a comment about all the hateful remarks coming from conservative talk radio regarding the "brown people". Of course, not one citation of any actual racial animus, just a bald faced claim made to paint the conservative side as racists.

Clearly they are making outrageous claims just to get attention and hits. I would suggest that all the Wizbang readers refuse to visit that site. Eventually, economics will make them go away. Of course, I believe they consider that to be censorship.

It certainly is fundamental, because I don't see anywhere in the article where it says they weren't in the school. "The school" includes the grounds and the outbuildings

What's that word I'm looking for? Oh yeah...

Liar.

"I would suggest that all the Wizbang readers refuse to visit that site."

Forget about Blue, just the influence on this site and the 'legitimizing' of some resident trolls with nothing to offer is making me come to Wizbang less often. I'd be surprised if I'm the only one. Take heed.

If the target is actually of such importance that we cannot avoid a certain amount of collateral damage, it is up to the American military to make that call. So what's the problem?

There's no problem. In a military fight, things like this are depressingly necessary. If we are to fight an enemy that hides among civilians, at schools, and in holy places, these things will happen. This was an attack on an well-known al Qaeda leader. I understand when opponents of the Iraq war say that much of what we're doing there is not fighting terrorism (because they're right), but it drives me nuts when those same people balk about attacking clear terrorist targets.

They then pretend that they're just criticizing tactics: "We'll never win the war in Afghanistan from 20,000 feet up." Guess what, Steve, troops move in after the bombs drop and round up surviving targets. As the article you link states, "Early reports indicated seven children at the madrassa and "several militants" were killed, and two militants detained, the statement said." Were they detained from 20k feet up? That would be a neat trick.

Tough decisions have to be made. It seems as if Crickmore thinks that those dropping the bombs were gleefully killing children. I'll bet the reverse is true, and that this will haunt those responsible. War is hard, and war is ugly. Do you guys think we should be in Afghanistan? If you do, then you'll have to deal with unfortunate reality that these things will happen.

I would suggest that all the Wizbang readers refuse to visit that site.

I never do anyway.

I still think you need to pull the plug, Kevin. It's really giving all of Wizbang a bad name.

OK LEE, let's get to it....

Did the U.S. Military deliberately kill children they knew where there.

YES OR NO LEE. Yes or No.

Clearly they are making outrageous claims just to get attention and hits. I would suggest that all the Wizbang readers refuse to visit that site. Eventually, economics will make them go away. Of course, I believe they consider that to be censorship.

See, that will only work if the Wizbang authors stop making posts ridiculing the posts/authors over at Blue...

As it is now, while perversely entertaining to watch the Wizbangers shoot the Blues swimming around in the barrel, it is also giving the Blues all the attention they want/need to keep going.

Yeah, I know, rational people would not consider ridicule/disparagement/scorn/demolition-of-one's-arguments/etc. to be a motivating force, but... consider who we are talking about.

At least Mantis seems to make sense in his post now. It is good for him.

These folks need to hold the terrorists responsible for hiding behind women and children, not the US military.

The socialists would prefer we take the route of Willy-Nilly Clinton, who had the bullseye on Osama bin Laden in a compound, but, alas, there was playground equipment there. Thus, mission aborted to avoid the possibility of collateral damage to innocents. Instead of killing the head of AQ, he avoided meeting Allah.

Forget the fact that killing the leader of AQ, and the possibility of destabilizing the organization, possibly averting or delaying planned terrorist activity. Nope, let's skip all that. Instead of the possibility of collateral damage in OBL's compound, we suffered the collateral damage of innocent's in NYC and Virginia and a field in Pennsylvania.

Yah, that's way more preferable.

So, if I'm AQ or a terrorist, all I need to do is put a swing set and see-saw, and a school house over in the corner, and I'm home free.

Idiots.

and just to clarify lest there be any confusion- the Kevin who posted the message above (me) is not the same Kevin that runs the site. Perhaps I need to come up with a clever handle to distinguish myself... Maybe "J.T."

How long till your next post, Paul? I need to plan out my day and I don't want to miss a single piece of crap that you write.

Posted by: Lee Ward at June 29, 2007 12:29 PM

Or, you could just wander over to wizblues and pick any post to read a piece of crap.

The key word, in my view, was the word "potential" as in "potential collateral damage." War is hell. Nobody want to see children hurt, but terrorists have children too and it is unavoidable that women and children will be killed in war.

Where are the condemnations from the left of our enemies who unhesitatingly hide behind children and use them to wage war? Like the six-year old kid who, just the other day, was told to "push this button" to "spray flowers." Luckily the child was not as dumb as his would-be murderers thought. These are the people we fight, yet the left would have us believe that we are the evil ones. What despicable traitors they are.

"At least Mantis seems to make sense in his post now"

Except for this: "I understand when opponents of the Iraq war say that much of what we're doing there is not fighting terrorism (because they're right"

But other than that demostrably false statement (albeit common leftist dogma) it was a good post.

no read that twice... P. Bunyan (my bold and brackets)

>I understand when opponents of the Iraq war say that much of what we're doing there is not [directly] fighting terrorism

That's fair I think. Yes in the broad scope it is all part of the WOT but we've gone past that in many ways... If the ONLY objective was stopping terrorism, we'd just level the middle East and be done with it.

Still waiting on a YES or NO from Lee

And you'll be waiting forever Paul, we all know he can't answer, he may come back with some 10 paragraph diatribe, but nowhere in it will be a yes or no answer, he is not capable of such intellectual honesty.

I disagree Paul.

(1) Most of the MSM leading story news from Iraq are stories about terrorist attacks; not military acts, not insurgent acts, terrorist acts.

(2) If we do not achieve unquestionable victory in Iraq then we will prove that terrorism works and we will legitimize terrorism. Not to mention what it will do for Al Qaeda recruiting.

Of course pretty much every Democrat who is running for President has promised that they will legitimize terrorism and prove that it works.

>he is not capable of such intellectual honesty.

That's another way to say he is a liar.

Yesterday, one of the ignoramii leaves a comment about all the hateful remarks coming from conservative talk radio regarding the "brown people". Of course, not one citation of any actual racial animus, just a bald faced claim made to paint the conservative side as racists.

If religion is the last refuge of the scoundrel, then charging racism is the last refuge of the liberals.

When they have no other arguments, they play the race card.

You're right, I listen to talk radio all day. Never once have I heard any reference to the brown people. The only reason the subject of nationality comes up is in reference to Mexico. That reason should be obvious. That's where the massive number of the illegals cross, and the overwhelming number of them are, umm, oh yah, Mexicans.

If the socialists want to find racism in the illegal immigrant debate, they should turn their lonely eyes to MEChA and La Raza. What does La Raza mean? Oh, yeah, The Race.

A couple of weeks ago when the socialists were in fear of losing the illegal immigrant amnesty fight, the lead socialist at wizblues, leeward, flung out the racist card, accusing opponents of the disastrous legislation of being racists.

When challenged to identify the racists, leeward declined, stating that he would identify them when the time was right, and then dissembled that he didn't think all of the opponents were racists, just some of them.

To this day, despite numerous opportunities and invitations to do so, leeward has not identified a single racist in the opposition to the illegal immigrant amnesty debate.

Undoubtedly, among the millions of Americans who opposed illegal immigrant amnesty, there is a smattering of racists, just as you would find in any large group of the population. However, leeward cannot point to a Senator, a national talk show host, any leaders of the illegal immigrant amnesty opposition, nor any of the leading right-o-sphere blogs. He can't, because there isn't one!

I still maintain that leeward is a race card playing baiting pimp. I won't hold him or wizblues responsible for the stray commenter being a racist. That's what happens when you have open commenting.

Racism charges are the last refuge of desperate socialists.

For readers knocking Wizbang Blue, Kevin made the correct decision to expand the brand. To counterbalance the obvious creeping malaise that is a by-product of Glorious Leader's downfall, there needs to be timely and topical daily posts and if the Left are the ones still getting out of bed in the morning, let them post.
Not that it's TOTALLY dead yet on this side of the site, but weekends are a bust, and Bushcheney need rhetorical reinforcements and there are none. Your supposed Presidential Model is reeling on so many fronts it is literally hard to keep track of. (Check out the Bruce Fein call for Cheney's impeachment today. Reagan's former ass't Atty Gen. A good Republican)

For readers knocking Wizbang Blue, Kevin made the correct decision to expand the brand.

Wizbang needed its own "bad writing" blog? Couldn't they simply turn a blog over to chimps? The quality wouldn't be appreciably lower.

To counterbalance the obvious creeping malaise that is a by-product of Glorious Leader's downfall, there needs to be timely and topical daily posts and if the Left are the ones still getting out of bed in the morning, let them post.

Seeing as how they obsess over Bush and inane conspiracy theories, not so much.

There's a homeless guy down near the university who screams at himself. While he may get up early, I'm not sure a news update from him would be enlightening.