Tim Blair

Proffesional liar fisks village idiot. Interesting.

well, not really.

Could the man even order a Gardenburger with Vegan Cheeze without saying "truism" or "trivially"? Jesus on a pogo stick, the charicatures of this man's writing are, in fact, not charicatures after all.

HEY JUST WANTED TO SAY
TIM BLAIR YOU REALLY PISS ME OFF
THE RASCIST THINGS GETTING OLD
maybe yout just angry..... i dont know
maybe try doing art or writing a journal
?
JUST DONT TAKE YOUR ANGER OUT ON PEOPLE WHO ARE DIFFERENT TO YOU......HAVENT YOU GOTTEN PAST THAT? ITS CALLED FEAR.
TIM BLAIR YOU ARE A SCAREDY CAt

But how can we directly express our worship for you O' Chomsky when you have comments turned off?

Shiva demonstrates the value of locking the screen when you walk away from the computer, if only to stop the cat from hitting your pre-defined macro keys (I have "TIM BLAIR YOU ARE A SCAREDY CAt" under F8 myself).

So one has to be cruel to be kind. The amount of cruelty we are allowed before applying kindness depends on the political affiliations of the perpetrators and/or the victims.
In the case of Bush the tolerance factor is near zero.
Pol Pot had it a lot easierin the seventies.

Woah, shiva. For a Hindu god you have some anger management issues. Settle, petal.

Oh, and karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos!

Imagine how pathetic one's life must be, to view the world through the prism of racism, yet not know how to spell the word 'racist'.

Hey...if you guys are here...who's watching the shop?

It is always beneficial to overcome and overthrow tyranny. What ever happened to the left, of which Chomski is a kind of Tosser-in-Chief?

At university campuses around Australia you can be sure that a goodly number of naive students have just bought their first Che poster, badge, sticker or t-shirt. Yet they don't seem to believe in revolution in the same way that I, as a rightist, do. They don't believe in overthrowing religious violence, fundamentalism, clericalism, the hatred of women and learning and freedom and progress. Instead they hate Bush, Blair and Howard. Wow, heroic. Their heroes are millionaire anti-capitalists Zack De La Rocha, Michael Moore, exquisitely PC rock and roll jugheads and others of that phoney ilk.

Chomski's 'Do No Harm' may well be their motto. It's a worldview closely allied to the 'I don't want to get involved' murmuring of all of those conservative oldies of yesteryear. A better, more positive motto is 'Do Good.' It's more dangerous, more romantic, more quixotic, more adventurous, more radical, more youthful. And more fun.

The only thing Chomski's modern left has given the modern Western World is a brand new cultural demographic, seen in not-so-large numbers at last week's morally vain 'protest marches': ladies and gentlemen, introducing the Young Fart.

Che wouldn't so much as flick the fag-end of a romeo y juliet their way.

I do not know which idiot to side with!

Again with the off pissing!

Please to be listening my excellent intercourse:

This RASCIST things geeting old.

Rascist, you know? Like after eating goulash?

I surely you anger now! Get past it!
Cats must be feared. It is way. Good art journal.

Give them both guns, like America did during the Iraq iran war. Yeehaw!

Also, this man Chompski. He talks much, says little. In my language we say, "He blows up a cow's bumhole".

And Noam's article The Invasion of Iraq manages to compare the American liberation of Iraq to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour. No, really.

The Iraqis would have done it themselves, but for the sanctions. Really.

And his blog is coloured yellow and doesn't accept comments.

It is a truism - not a triviality - that yellow is the colour of intellectualism.

Interestingly doctors regularly give radiation therapy and chemotherapy to cancer patients (and only the moonbats dispute that it is at least sometimes useful). Hmm I think Mugabe and co better watch out if we take this Hippocratic oath metaphor too far.

For Shiva's benefit:

Clicky.

Alan, thanks for linking that. I love reading Chomski's take on Iraq for comic relief. It fits in so well with his condemning others for perverting the Hippocratic oath.

You see, it was the horrible sanctions by the US and Britain that killed those people. The UN wasn't really even involved. Well if you count corrupting the Food for Oil plan sure, but as we all know, that was a plot by the imperialist US. It is a truism that the US sucks.

How was Saddam supposed to support his 82 Palaces without oil money? Bribes cost money you know, there's simply a choice that needs to be made. Food for the people or gold toilets, I know which way I'd go. No need to let Iraqis get fat like the Americans.

No to sanctions, no to invasion, no to Saddam. It will all work out in the end.

Step 1. Identify the problem.
Step 2. Do nothing.
Step 3. ?
Step 4. Profit! Saddam is gone and the world is safe.

It is a truism that the US sucks.

Right here, right here, my friends, is all the wisdom you need on this topic. Hurry and see it before the blog gods take it away and hide it from you.

Hmm. Sounds like a poster, Murpho.

----

[Big pic of Che]

Che would have preemptively attacked fascists without French and UN permission, too.

[Row of small pics of Saddam Hussein and sons, Hitler, Mussolini]

For some problems, violence is the answer.

----

Sorry, I just had to Fisk that Iraqi Invasion post from Chumpsky here, I just heard about his blog.

Others, please go forth and Fisk this annoying self appointed expert. His comapring of Japans Imperial policies of WWII and the US in Iraq makes me wanna punch a liberal. And that wouldn't be nice.

This continued use of Rwanda as an exanple of the US ignoring some situations and taking on others doesn't take into account the "facts on the ground".
US mil power , while impressive, is not unlimited. We could not have sustained operations in Rwanda without willing neighbors with facilities (air bases, fuel, ports, etc.). We clearly did not have an infrastructure available to sustain such an effort. In Kosovo, we opperated from NATO bases in Italy. In Iraq we operated from bases in Kuwait. In Afganastan, we had permission or bases in Pakastan (under some duress), Usbekistan, etc. There is a huge dufference between a bombing campaign and an intervention in force. Yes, Rwanda was a tragedy, but neither a wide support nor a supporting infrastructure were available. Noam likes to rewrite history to suit his side of arguements, but one must ask, given the situation at the time, what was really possible?
Don't let specious arguements with made up underpinnings pass.

It is trivially a truism that Chimpsky is an idiot. (He does have nice real estate, however.)