fatty before he wrote this one..........

ESPN SCRUBS HUNTER S. THOMPSON BUSH BASH
Monday May 24 2004 17:50:09 ET

Hunter S. Thompson's ESPN column was scrubbed of controversy late Monday afternoon when online editors worried the famed gonzo journalist had gone too far.

In a column entitled, "Let's Go to the Olympics," Thompson went off on the Abu Ghraib prison picture scandal, exclaiming: "Not even the foulest atrocities of Adolf Hitler ever shocked me so badly as these [Abu Ghraib] photographs did."

But after being linked to the DRUDGE REPORT, a top editor demanded the sentence be immediately edited --without Thompson's okay, according to an ESPN.com staffer.

"Hunter can go too far sometimes," the Bristol-based ESPN employee told the DRUDGE REPORT.

The cleansed paragraph now reads:

"These horrifying digital snapshots of the American dream in action on foreign soil are worse than anything even I could have expected. I have been in this business a long time and I have seen many staggering things, but this one is over the line.

As with the original, Thompson still concludes with the thought: "Now I am really ashamed to carry an American passport."

I wouldn't presume to know the mind of Thompson (my wild days only lasted a decade), and it's not my intention to try and dismiss the horror of the Nazi attrocities, however, I can see how he could make such a statement. We're the good guys. We don't do things like that. In a way, it is more shocking that this happened. No one was shocked at what Saddam did to his people, he is a bad guy. The world was shocked when America did the same thing. The most terrible thing about this entire affair is that no one will be shocked when we do it again.

Human life is human life. Does it matter who commits the attrocities? A few bad apples from the reserves "mistreated" a few Iraqi prisoners. This in NO way compares to over 6 million Jews being slaughtered as well as millions of Poles, Russians, and other foreign citizens. To, in any way, compare the two, is as far off base as saying, "Bin Laden wasn't so bad because he built schools". So did Hitler....


Kinda like this moron(Yes, I did, and still do, have sympathy for him, but he is WAY off base)

Quote:People ask me why I focus on putting the blame for my son's tragic and atrocious end on the Bush administration. They ask: "Don't you blame the five men who killed him?" I have answered that I blame them no more or less than the Bush administration, but I am wrong: I am sure, knowing my son, that somewhere during their association with him these men became aware of what an extraordinary man my son was. I take comfort that when they did the awful thing they did, they weren't quite as in to it as they might have been. I am sure that they came to admire him.

I am sure that the one who wielded the knife felt Nick's breath on his hand and knew that he had a real human being there. I am sure that the others looked into my son's eyes and got at least a glimmer of what the rest of the world sees. And I am sure that these murderers, for just a brief moment, did not like what they were doing.

George Bush never looked into my son's eyes. George Bush doesn't know my son, and he is the worse for it. George Bush, though a father himself, cannot feel my pain, or that of my family, or of the world that grieves for Nick, because he is a policymaker, and he doesn't have to bear the consequences of his acts. George Bush can see neither the heart of Nick nor that of the American people, let alone that of the Iraqi people his policies are killing daily.

<a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1221644,00.html' target='_blank'>Terrorists Good, Bush Bad</a>


.....but what would I expect, even the liberals on here think Bush is a fascist dictator out to rule the world without even being able to state one right you have "lost".

That made absolutely no sense, and on so many different levels. :rolleyes:

Oddball Wrote:That made absolutely no sense, and on so many different levels. :rolleyes:

Too deep for you? I don't know if "crayon" is a valid font on IE Explorer.

RebelKev Wrote:Human life is human life. Does it matter who commits the attrocities? A few bad apples from the reserves "mistreated" a few Iraqi prisoners. This in NO way compares to over 6 million Jews being slaughtered as well as millions of Poles, Russians, and other foreign citizens. To, in any way, compare the two, is as far off base as saying, "Bin Laden wasn't so bad because he built schools". So did Hitler....


Kinda like this moron(Yes, I did, and still do, have sympathy for him, but he is WAY off base)




<a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1221644,00.html' target='_blank'>Terrorists Good, Bush Bad</a>


.....but what would I expect, even the liberals on here think Bush is a fascist dictator out to rule the world without even being able to state one right you have "lost".

[post truncated by KDI]

Rick,
First of all, what does a "fatty" have to do with anything? I know people who smoke a fatty on the way to and from work every morning, then show up in court and argue a fine case. Likewise, I know those fatty smokers who show up every morning to treat illnesses that their clients suffer from.

Fatties are being smoked on all social levels of this society, not merely the extreme, radical or idiotic elements. Many of the fatty smokers I do know are ex-military, reservists and Republican (somewhat misleading, the only liberals I've met in person (2) in the past three years, 50% I met through this forum).

There are worst things to do with your life, i.e. religious fanaticism, than smoking fatties.

To all,

Anyone with half a brain realizes that Thompson's comments were over-the-top. Of course you cannot compare sexual humiliation and torture by our guys to institutional killing a la Hitler.

On caveat here: watching C-SPAN recently, there has been discussion by both parties in the House and Senate, and they've outlined and quoted Pentagon and CENTCOM documents that clearly show those reservists' may have been ordered to "soften" and "to give them the treatment" to the prisoners for interrogation. Five Senators on the Armed Services committee last week read some of the documents coming from Gen. Sanchez's office that clearly show there may have been institutional rewriting of the rules on interrogation.

In the same documents, whole paragraphs were read that claimed the Geneva and Hague conventions do not apply. This showed to the Senators, and to myself, that there was a pattern from higher ups to mistreat prisoners, many of whom were not known to be actual terrorists because of their eventual release from prison. Bringing up the conventions shows that the higher-ups knew the new policies would be violations of the rules of warfare. They had to reconcile new policies on interrogation with old rules of warfare.

Therefore, I don't think the reservists aren't the only to blame.

That brings up this question, why are we fighting the war with reservists and national guardsmen and women? In this area I think some of you Bush supporters need to at least question the prez's handling of the war.

I know Bush isn't a dictator, RebelKev. A dictator is an autocrat, possesses charisma and has a tight-fisted control within his own party and bureaucratic apparatus. Bush clearly possesses none of these characteristics.

Its the oligarchic, behind-the-scenes junta that control things. Bush is to the U.S. government what Yeltsin was to the Russian Federation--a figurehead.

Notice how last night he said nothing new, it was the same ol' same 'ol in a different vernacular?

KlutzDio I Wrote:Notice how last night he said nothing new, it was the same ol' same 'ol in a different vernacular?

Simply because I, and others, got his point a long time ago and, for some odd reason, he's trying to reach out to people like you. "I" know it's never going to happen anymore than you convincing me to vote for Kerry in November. Actually, I take that back, it wasn't either of us, it was the people sitting on the fence....and that includes neither you nor me.

Reb,

You won't vote for Kerry in November?? You know sometimes I do think why bother with these boards, but through legitimate discussion of these issues I can make a better decision and also get alot of issues of my chest. When John McCain ran for president in 2000 I would have voted for him. Is there any Democrat you could vote for?

Dogger Wrote:Reb,

You won't vote for Kerry in November?? You know sometimes I do think why bother with these boards, but through legitimate discussion of these issues I can make a better decision and also get alot of issues of my chest. When John McCain ran for president in 2000 I would have voted for him. Is there any Democrat you could vote for?

Zell Miller, John Breaux, and Joe Lieberman. It is my opinion that all the rest have become Socialists.

I have many, MANY problems with John Kerry. For one, he can't tell you how he stood on an issue yesterday and he changes his stances like a Chamelion trying to save his own hide.

KlutzDio I Wrote:That brings up this question, why are we fighting the war with reservists and national guardsmen and women? In this area I think some of you Bush supporters need to at least question the prez's handling of the war.

This is because the military was cut tremendously during the mid to late 1990's. I'm sure if Bush was given enough time he would probably bring military strength back to cold war levels.


I do agree about the "figurehead" comment. Unfortunately, I don't think it'll matter who you vote for. Both are figureheads for their respective parties.

....and "fatties" are good in moderation

.....and add the fact that reservists and National Guardsmen have been involved in ALL wars, to include Clinton's wars in the Balkans.

RebelKev Wrote:

KlutzDio I Wrote:Notice how last night he said nothing new, it was the same ol' same 'ol in a different vernacular?

Simply because I, and others, got his point a long time ago and, for some odd reason, he's trying to reach out to people like you. "I" know it's never going to happen anymore than you convincing me to vote for Kerry in November. Actually, I take that back, it wasn't either of us, it was the people sitting on the fence....and that includes neither you nor me.

Trying to rephrase the same fallacies and insults to my intelligence will get the Bush speech writers no where!!

For one who calls himself a "libertarian" you certainly display Republican-esque attitudes, i.e. can't think for yourself.

Fanatical, I'm very interested in these phantom military cuts. According to the Congressional Budget Office, military spending has remained constant since 1948. It dipped the most shortly after Vietnam, and climbed again as Carter was exiting the White House. Nonetheless, military spending and cutting it would require a vote from the Congress and we all know that Clinton sure as hell couldn't touch that when he was in the White House.

Perhaps you can show me some files on those military cuts. Try this site http://www.cbo.gov

If you want my opinion, and I think you do want it so that way you can tell me I'm pyschotic, a commie bastage or whatever insult you care to assail me with. Anyway, I think the Bush-junta figured they could fight a war cheaply with "junk" troops as Schwartzkopf had characterized them back in 1991.

I agree, Kerry is a figurehead just as Bush is, but at least the guy has a persona that could be construed as one associated with an intelligent individual. Watching Bush on TV, sitting through the campaign speeches, the policy addresses, (really watching it all and not relying on the press' 25 second sound-byte later) Bush clearly shows that he's dumb as nails.

I know Kerry is an ambitious bastage, but I really destest Bush's lunacy, idiocy and cavalier attitude. Let's say...poof....Kerry is president. We'll stay in Iraq, possibly invade Iran. Taxes won't increase drastically, if at all. Probably the only things that will change is Republicans will be against the war, the GOPpers will say it IS OKAY to be mean to the president, and the Congress WILL investigate the White House.

Since I love my country, seeing such a dumb arse for president is really shaming.

RebelKev, I'd be interested to hear how you reconcile Bush's flip flopping and indecisiveness.

1. Condie won't testify, wait yes she will.
2. We won't give the commission more than an hour of testimony...wait, we will.
3. Mission Accomplished..wait, no it isn't.
4. This 200 Billion dollar package for Iraq will be the last that we need from American taxpayers to rebuild Iraq...wait, can we have another 25 billion?
5. As president, I don't believe in using the military for nation building...wait, yes I do.
6. American soldiers aren't butchers, we aren't going over there to be cruel to the Iraqis...wait, six of them will.
7. American invasion of Iraq will lead to stabilization of the region...wait, no it won't.
8. The United States does not rely on any international body when it comes to protecting our security...wait, can you U.N. guys help us in Iraq?
9. We have not been mislead on intelligence, suppose a mushroom cloud rises above an American city someday...wait, we have been misled.
10. The Iraqis will welcome us with open arms, hugs, kisses and rose petals....wait, they are insurgents who must be punished.


I could go on with these, ad infinitum.