The Great Blackwater Debate (Part Two) -- The Movie Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

Subject: The Great Blackwater Debate (Part Two)

Author:
Jimmy

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 05:02:56 11/12/07 Mon
Author Host/IP: c-71-197-21-170.hsd1.mi.comcast.net/71.197.21.170
In reply to: Jimmy 's message, "The Great Blackwater Debate (Part One)" on 05:01:42 11/12/07 Mon

Look at Hillary�s War Chest and you�ll see big bucks from numerous Defense firms including Private Security; but Erik Prince and Blackwater do not appear on her list of contributions. Is this blackmail? Clinton coercion is more like it. Has Hillary released the Huffington Hounds to squeeze Blackwater out of the pie? Keith�s Kooks don�t want a pie in the first place but it will still be there when Hillary takes the oath. Democrats do not want to end this war. They have admitted as much and Hillary�s plan calls for leaving the Private Security Firms in Iraq after the eventual Military Troop Withdrawal. She doesn�t say that, though. She encapsulates the Blackwater boys within the �Special Forces� moniker.

Now, she can roll through the primaries because the anti-War dupes have �Just been fooled again.�

We can debate the outsourcing of the military if you�d like, but it clearly doesn�t apply to the Blackwater drama being perpetrated by select, shameless opportunists and ignorant base of the Left-Wing.

Lara Logan, a hot piece of ass, represents the ideal Blackwater hater: someone with their own agenda and who will work with the enemy to get their story out, became respected for their audacity and get famous by going on Letterman. I�m not questioning her objectivity: I�m assailing it.

After CBS News refused to run her piece she went on a crusade. �This didn't mollify the correspondent-turned-activist, who asked her friends to send CBS a message that her piece wasn't "too gruesome to air,� writes Michelle Malkin, �but rather too important to ignore."

There�s an even more egregious motive underneath the campaign against Blackwater: there are those on the hard-Left who will always hate the Truth no matter what. We�ve all met them and they need not be holding offensive signs outside of a Marine�s funeral. They are the twenty-something brash, pseudo-intellectuals who, in private, will air their grievances with the men and women in uniform. This campaign against Blackwater keeps them energized while safely distancing their true feelings about the Troops which would destroy their credibility universally. Outsourcing anti-military exaltation by conflating two distinct fighting units?

Overall, I feel, the military is in disarray. Therefore, I see no problem with outsourcing it to qualified enterprise whose going to compensate those putting their life on the line; while at the same time remaining sensitive to the underpaid Troops in uniform. They get it from both ends: the Neo-Cons placate them with sanctimonious pride Liberal Elitists exploit their suffering and sacrifice. Their indignation against Private Security Personnel doing the same jobs for a lot more dough is valid; it�s also the result of both sides.

The fact is we are already at war, and Hillary Clinton and other Democrats who are cynical in their stance on it, are as much to blame as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all the NeoCons and Christian Fundamentalists they joined forces with: overtly in Congress, and covertly through campaign donations.

Having committed to this endeavor, it is important to finish the job; and to do that, Specialty Firms like Blackwater are needed�and that�s why they are there. They just need to donate large sums to both sides of the aisle or run the risk of calumny from the Greed Heads whose outstretched hands found no oblation. Nothing can ever stop adeptly-scheming opportunists like Keith Olbermann. People like this were born without souls and have lived on the outskirts of our society since we decided to civilize it. But why carry his water? Worse, why buy his faux-bravado (how many people has Keith ever invited into his studio for a debate?) and worship him? It�s because we live in a detached society where both patriotism and cynicism are merely choices and can be found in jingoistic films or nihilistic video games. Think only potential Mercs are hackin� away at the controls to Halo 3?
Ultimately, the crusade against Blackwater is simply another knee-jerk response to how the credulous on the Left want to see the world they�ve been given by their side. Christopher Hitchens said it best when he referenced Saki�s short story. In The Lumber Room, the kid, who has actually placed a frog in his morning bread-and-milk, exults in the trick he pulls on his credulous parents:
"You said there couldn't possibly be a frog in my bread-and-milk; there was a frog in my bread-and-milk," he repeated, with the insistence of a skilled tactician who does not intend to shift from favorable ground.�

There are many on this swallow hole Far-Left who want us to lose this war because they hate Bush. They are thrilled that Blackwater was involved in these shootings. They don�t care about the dead: they are simply a ways to a means. So deferential and detached have they become, that they confuse acrimony with dissent, malevolence with principle, vitriol with vindication. Ignoring the fact that Blackwater started in the Clinton years when the State Department funneled huge sums of money to many private military security firms as they paid back those who bankrolled, the gullible swallowers on the lethargic Left smoke their weed and wait for the newest narrative to attach their pathetic lives to while failing to realize they have become exactly what they hate most about their opponents on the Right.

This is the future. Only Blackwater is run by a man who only contributes to the GOP and also used to work for Pat Buchanan and that is why he is the current bete noire of the Colberts and Stewarts. And you are fucking hip cause you�re referencing the same profiles as them. �YEAH!!! Let�s watch Jon Stewart on YouTube. Wait, he�s not on YouTube. Hmm. He wants me to watch his material from his Corporate Web Site? Sit through a Hyundai ad? Fuck it, he�s on our side, oh (click) here�s a good one where he makes fun of O�Reilly selling Factor Gear.�

�It�s all the same,
Only the names�ll change�
Jon Bon Jovi

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Re: The Great Blackwater Debate (Part Three)	Jimmy	05:03:54 11/12/07 Mon