CJ Code Pink Gets Handled
December 18th, 2008 by CJ
I love when the Code Pink hags are put in their place. Their smug little holier-than-thou crap that they pull is so unproductive. They're ignorant seditionists who deserve a fate worse than the one they ultimately succumb to at the end of their life, whatever that may be. They have created suffering, pain, grief, frustration and anger for our troops and their family members. They have DIRECTLY funded terrorism and never apologized for it. And they continue to disrespect our wounded warriors at Walter Reed and other other rehab locations. Their current "Make out, now war" slogan forces bile into my throat. I don't even want to think of the what kind of man would "make out" with any of those women. Maybe they just make out with each other.
In this video, Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaidaie addresses Code Pinko activists calling for the release of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush during a press conference in Baghdad.
CJ, you may ask. What do you mean by seditionists? This picture says it all:
Ooooh! that just brightened my day!! Though I'm afraid that the pinks little minds just went "does not compute, does not compute!"
They should be run out of OUR country, however our Freedoms are theirs too. They are worst than some of the terrorist because they insite much hatred. They need to get a real life.
How ignorant is that woman to sit there and tell him, "That's bulls#%@" when he is telling her how things work in THEIR country. And lest they forget, if it was during Saddam, THEY wouldnt have been there in the first place, they would have been in head to toe cover ups had they been allowed into the country, probably wouldnt have been allowed to attend such a function, and they would probably have been executed themselves for their actions. But then again, under Saddam, there wouldn't have even been an Iraqi Ambassador for them to disrespect!! Like it or not, things are VERY VERY different over there now, and while the people are still stinging and rebuilding, down the road they will come to appreciate all that has been handed to them by American blood, sweat and tears. Whether they acknowledge it or not. Because sometimes its difficult for people to acknowledge and say thanks for a precious gift. How do you put the thanks your freedom deserves into words? Especially when you don't even truly understand that freedom and all it entails yet. It's so easy for us, we are born free and have lived free all our lives. These are people who for the first time are getting a taste of what that means. So they are leery, they are wary and they will move with caution. Still not trusting.
How very lucky we are. I thank God each and every night for our American Soldiers. Those who fight for us, those who have died for us, and that I have been lucky enough to have been born in the Greatest Country on Earth.
sue:
Sometimes I wonder if you have ever traveled outside the town or state in which you were born.
Strange, where are CF's calls of support for them?
I get the strange impression you think they asked to be liberated. I think you'd see a lot more signs of appreciation had we stopped the looting, kept the Iraqi troops and police around to help keep order, not fired the professional class from the ministries, and held the occupation to 6 months. As it was, I think they have a right to be angry about over 100,000 deaths, the near-complete sacking of their infrastructure, and the displacement of 12% of the population – not during the war, mind you, but after we were in charge. We screwed it up as much as it was possible to screw it up.
Good comment, Doug.
BTW, I find it interesting how the regulars here at ASP apparently have an issue over peace with Iran. Maybe they are more concerned about losing their jobs than with the well being of America!!
Yeah, that is strange that you got that impression. Actually, most Iraqis did want Saddam Hussein ousted. It's just that, they didn't care who did it. This may seem just as strange, but your comment gives me the impression that you think most Iraqis supported Saddam as dictator.
Also, we did not fire the personnel from their services. Actually, they walked out on their own. The military abandoned their posts and the police abandoned their stations. The police who walked out did the "looting".
I am a peaceful woman… a lady… a very motherly kind of woman at that. However, I am afraid that if I had to be near any of these whackos for very long I would lose my motherly instinct and kick some code pink butt from one end of the room to the next.
I am willing to bet I could get Yankeemom to join me too.
Hey, Doug. You're damn right they have a right to be angry about more than 100,000 deaths!! They SHOULD be angry about that. Hell, I am angry about that. YOU should be angry about that. And you know, Doug, you should be pissed off at the people responsible for those deaths and they aren't from this country!!
I'll buy the whole "firing of the police and military" blunder; it was a mistake. But how about getting your head from up your own ass and acknowledging some truths about the death toll in Iraq. We would have been out of that God-forsaken country years ago if not for Al Qaida and Al Sadr's minutia militia.
I'm sorry you're so ignorant that you can't accept ALL facts as they relate to your OWN country's actions. I'm sorry that you are so pathetic that you champion failures and ignore success and place blame in the wrong direction. You truly make me sick Doug and the desire to keep you from posting brings bile from my stomach. You're just such an ignorant prick and I can't wait till we both meet in hell!
That was a damn IRAQI up there talking assmunch. It wasn't an American!! These Code Pink hags were telling an IRAQI what THEY think another nation's culture should be. And you sit by idly and bring up more false and circular points that are so obviously jaded and incorrect (at least to the educated and realistic).
Code Pink, Code Smink! They make me sick!
I'm proud of everyone on this site. It took me over a year, but I finally get to see a post about some unproductive idiots without anyone calling them "Liberals". Code Pink is a mixture between the "no war at any cost" people and the "we were wrong and we are sorry" crowd.
For the other comments, I'd like to note that a jet lands at JFK every three minutes, having made an average of 100 course corrections enroute.
I have my own opinions about the intentions of this war, but I have no objections as to how it was conducted. I'm looking to our further involvement in Afghanistan with trepidation for our new CIC, but ultimate faith in the people on the ground.
NY-David
CJ:
What are you smoking, dude? DIRECTLY funded terrorism? Give me a break! They (the Aaronics) must be spiking sacrament.
CF, just do a search of this site to answer your own question. I'm not going to keep repeating myself because you choose to remain blind and ignorant.
CJ:
If Code Pink directly supports (or supported) terrorist activities, where is your outrage toward the bush administration for not doing anything to stop or punish such funding?
It's ok to disagree with Code Pink's various stances – indeed, I do not agree with everything the organization's members say or do – but to charge them with directly funding terrorism is akin to calling our troops murderers – both are non sequiturs that distort the facts.
Well, if they DID do anything the likes of you and other lib-tards will cry foul about how "their freedoms have been removed".
Again, CF, you'll just have to research that. My outrage has been well documented on this issue right here. Sorry you can't remove your super-glued, progressive blinders.
My favorite code pink moment was on the daily show when they protested the marines in Berkley.
My favorite line is when the reporter says, "wouldn't it be great if we had an organization that protected your freedom of speech"
"Yea, that would be great."
thedailyshow....-in-berkeley
OMG Adam, thanks so much for sharing that!! If it weren't true, it would have been hysterical but it was a great look into the kind of Kool Aid that they are drinkin out there!! It's hard to imagine that they are so concerned with peace when they align themselves with terrorists!! Very nice!!
"You're damn right they have a right to be angry about more than 100,000 deaths!! They SHOULD be angry about that. Hell, I am angry about that. YOU should be angry about that. And you know, Doug, you should be pissed off at the people responsible for those deaths and they aren't from this country!!"
So many people forget that. In fact, Iraqis help on a daily basis in an effort to capture the ones responsible for these deaths. Regardless if the militants are Iraqi or from the surrounding countries, most Iraqis want them caught or killed.
Then again, this doesn't matter to some people in this country. They actually think that the militants only launch their attacks because our troopers are conducting operations there.
Ryan – "Also, we did not fire the personnel from their services. Actually, they walked out on their own."
I refer you to Coalition Provisional Authority Order #1, in which all Baath party members were banned from the top three levels of ministries and affiliated corporations, and Order #2, which dissolved the Iraqi military.
Doug, when you were in Iraq, what were….oh wait, sorry. You weren't there. When the Iraqi military was "dissolved" there was no military to dissolve. As we trounced north across the country, the roads and defenses were LITTERED with Iraqi Army uniforms. Baghdad was the greenest place in Iraq because of all the uniformed strewn all over the place.
Both the police and military fled for fear of being killed by their own people for enforcing Saddam's rule. So, we did not "fire" anyone. They quit.
Be careful, CJ, you'll use up all your exclamation points.
Here's an expected non-reply.
Doug, I believe those orders were given because at that time, it wasn't thought that they could be trusted. As it stands now, we are still weeding out the "bad seeds" from those who have rejoined the IA and IP. The Baath party was highly corrupted and therefore thought to be untrustworthy. Not a bad assumption.
Though of course for you, who knows everything, now that its all said and done, you would have done things differently, as I'm sure our Generals and the President himself had he known then what he knows now. But as always Doug, hindsight is 20/20 and we don't have the luxury of that knowledge when things are started.
So your childish finger pointing and trying to embarrass Ryan for his statement, which isn't incorrect by the way, just shows your lack of respect and knowledge of the situation.
Like it or not, we went to war. War is messy, war is unpredictable, the enemy is not always known and the rules of engagement change on a dime. Get over it.
Actually, the orders were thought a bad idea at the time by many, including Tommy Franks and Jay Garner (who Bremer was replacing) who begged him to reconsider. Garner and Col Paul Hughes had already been in contact with Iraqi officers who said they could reconstitute tens of thousands of troops within weeks. Furthermore, the orders contradicted National Security Council decisions on March 10 & 12 before the invasion, where the NSC (Bush, Cheney, etc.) unanimously decided that undesirable Baathists would be weeded out (instead of firing all of them) and that only the Republican Guard would be disbanded, and regular soldiers vetted and returned to duty. No one has ever come forth claiming to have originated the orders.
Doug:
Thanks for keeping folks here honest. We have too many folks as it is trying to rewrite history to make Bush/Cheney look other than the miserable failures they are.
"Garner and Col Paul Hughes had already been in contact with Iraqi officers who said they could reconstitute tens of thousands of troops within weeks." -Doug
Actually, this claim had been debunked. Although as you have said that executive decisions had already been made to retain some elements from the old army before the invasion had occured, the previous army was not a functioning coherent force after the fall of Baghdad as General John Abizaid had said in a meeting with Washington Officials.
Just to add, General John Abizaid's exact words from that Washington meeting were; "there are no organized Iraqi military units left".
CF *********************** give it a rest……….
Again Doug, hindsight is always 20/20 and you can Monday morning quarterback all you want, the war is winding down, a decided victory for the US, the Iraqis and the world at large. Were mistakes made? Of course there were, no one here has ever said there weren't. But again, we learned from the mistakes, made the changes in strategy, the ROE's were changed and the hands of our Military were untied and they were ALLOWED to do their job which they weren't allowed to do for quite sometime. A lot of what happens on the ground is dictated directly by the self important, miserable failure lawyers who want to make up the rules because they think they know everything. However they need to butt the heck out and let the guys do their jobs. The new ROE's coming into effect in January 2009 will once again severely tie the hands of our military. But what do the lawyers care, they sit on their butts in Washington, in safety while the ridiculous rules they impose have to be carried out by those who put their life on the line every day in a war zone. Good Gosh I feel bad for the lawyers they may suffer a fatal paper cut shuffling all that paper around their desks!
Actually, according to then Bremer advisor Walther Slocombe, there was no intact security force to dissolve. Also, it did not dissolve the entire army. A few members from the former army got to stay in the army that was being developed with severance pay. The number of members from the army which served under Saddam Hussein who were allowed to stay in the new army were approximately equivilant to about 3 divisions.