...I hear these ridiculous stories

Yeah, ridiculous. "Donkey Shows" are urban legend. They never happen.

It's not false sympathy. I have no problem with Arabs in the Middle east.

Also, I'm not handwringing over my tax money going to train the multicultural minions to be murderous perverts who make snuff flicks in the Israeli style.

Or, do you think US armed forces personnel should be having their attack dogs lick peanut butter of penises? Am I unreasonable that I think this is bad?

Yeah, ridiculous. "Donkey Shows" are urban legend. They never happen.

You for certain that Marines from Pendleton never go to TJ to see whores fuck donkeys? I am wondering how you know that for certain?

Moreover, you deny one item and say nothing of the rest. Why is that?

You for certain that Marines from Pendleton never go to TJ to see whores fuck donkeys? I am wondering how you know that for certain?

Moreover, you deny one item and say nothing of the rest. Why is that?

It ain't rocket science, AE. Fako Hato is an obvious troll and should have been banned to opp months ago.

Also, I'm not handwringing over my tax money going to train the multicultural minions to be murderous perverts who make snuff flicks in the Israeli style.

I can't believe it's AE saying this. I saw that link about the alleged "snuff flicks" and it had the ring of bullshit. Do you believe EVERYTHING you see on the internet?

Or, do you think US armed forces personnel should be having their attack dogs lick peanut butter of penises? Am I unreasonable that I think this is bad?

No, but we're talking about one (1) guy. Forget for a minute about the handful of others busted for other things--you're making it look like there are legions of troops having attack dogs lick wherever. Well guess what--he got busted.

My only concern is that this is now on a continuous loop over at Al-Jazeera, further diminishing us in the eyes of the arab world, as if it can get any worse.

I can't believe it's AE saying this. I saw that link about the alleged "snuff flicks" and it had the ring of bullshit. Do you believe EVERYTHING you see on the internet?.

Consider that I have been on this earth for a few decades most time of which I the internet did not exist nor did I use it. Facts are facts: Jews control the US porn industry, Jews in Israel are the world's biggest "White slave" offenders who traffick in East European whores to staff their mafiya-run whorehouses in Israel for all these lascivious Diaspora kikes- - is that not so?

So, they are "ready willing and able" to produce staff and distrubute not only legal smut but also highly illegal smut. Do you think that some Israeli pimp/ movie producer would not snuff out one of his whores if he could fetch a big enough price to film it? Or are you saying there is in fact no market in such things?

I could understand where you were coming from when you were debunking 9-11 explanations, but if you are going to try and tell me that I'm a sucker for believing the well known truths about Jews involvement in porn, white slave trafficking, prostitution, etc., then I have to seriously question you. If you think I am wrong about these facts then you can check it out on your own, I have no time to convince people of what even the most obtuse and Jewish leftists will concede.

No, but we're talking about one (1) guy. Forget for a minute about the handful of others busted for other things--you're making it look like there are legions of troops having attack dogs lick wherever. Well guess what--he got busted.

Do you know what Shin Bet is or have I been talking over your head? Read up on that. Then answer me if you dispute or not that Shin Bet uses torture and sexual humiliation as interrogation methods. Then tell me whether you think that US military has conducted joint training with Israel or not including military intelligence information gathering techniques.

Now add to this the general depravity and sexual laxity of the enlisted personnel that I have identified above-- your horndog Marines looking for disgusting entertainments in Tijuana to your faggot jumpers in the 82d airborne posing for gay porn to your smut luving sailors and "Love Boats" of the Navy where all the enlisted girls get knocked up-- you know what I'm talking about or do you need to read up on this too? The point is that there are "legions" of perverts in the US armed forces.

In case you think I'm reaching, I'll use a quote from the Jew neocon pig Krauthammer to make my point: "the war is about sex." As much as being about Israel or oil, it's about sexual roles and social engineering and Jewish subversion of morality.

My only concern is that this is now on a continuous loop over at Al-Jazeera, further diminishing us in the eyes of the arab world, as if it can get any worse.

If a few Whites would stand up to the Jewish perverts running our governmentment and stick a thumb in their eyes, maybe the Arabs would think better of us. Way it is now we look like shabbos-goy mercs for the Jew-world-order. So I can understand why they hate us Mr "Hate Dept."

In this case I will let an Arab have the last word because in my Frankish opinion, they deserve to be heard.

http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/196S22.htm

Mediations is a semi-regular column on the Middle East as portrayed in the US media.

Jailhouse Rot

Al Miskin

May 2004

"The Arab Summit" (Emad Hajjaj)

As right-wing pundits echoed Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) in expressing “outrage at the outrage” over activities at Abu Ghraib prison some characterized as “prankish,” and liberals tired of wringing their hands decided to wash them instead, members of Congress got a preview of hundreds more snapshots and videotapes showing the kinds of violence and human suffering Americans were spared from watching by blanket censorship of negative images during the first year of the Iraq campaign. The White House, the Defense Department and a compliant commercial media, after creating an atmosphere of impunity for brutal dehumanization of enemy prisoners, now promise to demonstrate a model of justice for Americans that has been denied to Iraqis. The photographs themselves and the public debate both reflect the presumption of absolute domination of an occupied population.

Until material evidence captured with amateur candor by participant-observers at Abu Ghraib was published, one of the great successes of the Iraq war launched in 2003 was the near total ban on images of flag-draped coffins, civilian casualties and close-up violence. Until samples from the jailhouse portfolio of Spc. Jeremy Sivits and his cohort popped up online, the US government had succeeded in controlling photographic depictions of the war, keeping cameras at a distance and depersonalized. Leaked to the press from within the military itself, where censorship was evidently incomplete, the Abu Ghraib images were shocking to Americans because of the deeply personal nature of the abuse. Meanwhile, the focus by the administration, the army and the press on the visual documentation of a few cases perpetuates what can only be described as a thoroughly colonial mentality.

Most Americans reacted to the Abu Ghraib with disgust and demands for the persons responsible to be brought to justice. There was little disgust, however, when Sivits received a paltry one-year sentence, and calls for his superiors to stand trial are fading with news that Gens. Ricardo Sanchez and Janis Karpinski will lose their commands. When the US brings Arabs “to justice,” moreover, it does so en masse. Shortly before CBS broke the Abu Ghraib story, on which it had obligingly sat for two weeks at the request of the Pentagon, a mob mutilated the corpses of four American mercenaries who had taken a wrong turn in Falluja. Somebody dragged two of the charred bodies from the back of a car and then hung them from a bridge. In “overwhelming” response, US troops and tanks laid siege to the town, allowing some women and children to become short-term refugees to escape the gunfire. Punishment, as Iraqi Governing Council member Adnan Pachachi declared to al-Arabiyya TV, was collective.

Throughout Iraq as well as in Abu Ghraib, the International Committee of the Red Cross suspects that 70-90 percent of the Iraqis detained in mass roundups and then held in a legal netherworld governed by neither criminal law nor international protections for prisoners of war were detained by “mistake.” In 1991 and 2003, Iraqi families endured intense aerial bombardment (try it sometime, if you think the noise alone isn’t terrifying), bookending twelve years of economic sanctions as punishment for the announced sins of one bad guy. Disclaimers galore notwithstanding, many Americans blamed Muslims or Arabs generally for blowing up the World Trade Center. The invasion of Afghanistan was rationalized on the premise that those who housed the evil-doers must be held accountable. Vague “links” to al-Qaeda may be grounds for a presumption of guilt by association. Charges have yet to be brought against hundreds of Arabs and other Muslims captured around the world and interned in cages at Guantánamo Bay (not to mention untold numbers of undisclosed locations) since 2002. When it comes to crimes against Americans, American justice casts an expansive net indeed around the actual perpetrators.

In the face of this contradiction, the US assumes the moral high ground. A week after the prison photos went public, Bush went on Arabic-language television to lecture Iraqis about what they “must understand” about “what Americans stands for,” which is honor, liberty, freedom, democracy and other good things. Iraqis should be grateful that Americans have closed the torture chambers and rape rooms. The “wrong-doers” will be presumed innocent but tried and, if convicted, punished, individually, by the American way of justice -- not as the Iraqis have experienced it, in massive sweeps of arbitrary detentions, but one grinning prison guard at a time. They will be given legal defense, their personal stories heard and broadcast on American talk shows, appropriate rule-bound sanctions imposed, in a transparent process. Iraqis will see on American TV the rule of law in action. Bush’s preachy ramblings on al-Arabiyya and al-Hurra were worthy of any Arab dictator: a few sinners will get their just desserts, but they cannot besmirch the glorious national honor and the righteousness of our good people and our noble cause.

The juxtaposition of sermons from Rumsfeld, Bush and various democracy experts about liberty and justice with photographs of grim sadism against nameless Iraqis strains credulity. All the seminars about Western values, especially surrounding gender issues, are for naught. Remember how, preceding the US campaign in Afghanistan, female soldiers were supposed to set a good example for their benighted, burqa-swaddled sisters? Remember the gallant junkets of Sirs Paul Bremer and Wolfowitz to US-built centers in Karbala and Hilla for Iraqi damsels presumably relieved of their distress? The images of Pvt. Lynndie England and her fellow women jailers have made a grotesque and unfunny joke of the messages of gender equality and women’s liberation the US purports to bring Arab and Muslim women. In Afghanistan, the misogyny of the mujahideen and the Taliban thrived on lurid tales of sexual promiscuity in the Soviet Union. In 2004, the sole remaining superpower has offered images of men and women frolicking sadistically in postures of extreme physical domination, mocking mock homosexuality and siccing dogs on naked prisoners.

Contrite on the face of it, much commentary about Abu Ghraib quickly degenerated into a self-righteous polemic about the continued superiority of American honor to the perversion of the “enemy.” Immediately after the revolting footage of Nick Berg’s decapitation hit the airwaves, CNN found a retired military man to intone with steel in his eyes that, unlike Americans reacting to the prison torture, “they” feel no shame while violating norms of human behavior. The reassertion of these reassuring platitudes about “us” and “them,” familiar since the September 11 attacks, acquired a distinctive twist when too many commentators resorted to gross cultural stereotypes to portray the cruel degradation in Abu Ghraib as an indication of Arab (sure not American!) sexual pathologies.

As the scandal continues to widen, is still not uncommon to hear that the Abu Ghraib torture offends Muslims because they are homophobic, patriarchal, hypersensitive misogynists who never pledged for a college fraternity or hung out in a locker room. Charles Krauthammer wrote in response to Abu Ghraib that “this war is about sex,” a conflict of the sexually liberated against the forces of sexual repression, a kind of neo-Freudian explanation for “why they hate us.” The naked human pyramids were victims first of a shame culture, it has been knowingly explained, that gives them a deep-rooted, distinctly Arab or Muslim prudishness about forced voyeuristic group sex. These photos offended the Arab obsession with feminine submission, goes one subconsciously self-congratulatory line of analysis featured on MSNBC’s well-named “Hardball,” as if the US is liberating Iraqi women by displaying their men as impotent. Who was really that surprised when Seymour Hersh, himself a prime purveyor of the “it’s torture because they’re Arabs” line, revealed that Raphael Patai’s “The Arab Mind” -- a laughable example of the discredited “national character” genre of sociology -- has been bedtime reading for the architects of the Iraq war and occupation? The extreme Orientalist line informed by Patai and embellished by the good Dr. Krauthammer pits a few bad apples against a whole culture of perverted chauvinists who haven’t seen any real porn. Taken far enough, this cultural bifurcation contrast depicts the US military as a bastion of feminism, egalitarianism and open gay outness. As is, the cultural-sexual narrative is a distraction from the larger pattern of violence, intimidation, control and ruthlessness that characterize this or any military occupation.

If Abu Ghraib detainees’ humiliation is cultural and/or religious, then by extension the whole Muslim world has now been buggered. The notion of culturally specific torture is itself dehumanizing. Is Muslim misery really so different from ordinary human suffering? Would Donald Rumsfeld not feel agony if stripped naked, chained and bent into contortions while Iraqi women smirked and chortled at his penis? One might as easily argue that, given Arab-Muslim antipathy toward dogs, a canine bite is all the more painful, or that all Arabs bleed when one is mauled.

Of course, reactions to media images are filtered through the media, and contrasted with prior and rival images. Just as Americans were unaccustomed to ugly visuals from the present Iraq war, so Arab public reaction to sadistic homo-erotica on television and in newspapers was almost certainly heightened by the novelty of depictions of genitalia or overt sexuality, much less outright sexual perversion. On the other hand, Arabs, Europeans and others were already conditioned to expect viciousness from the occupation by daily video of jack-booted US soldiers kicking in doors, manhandling women, traumatizing children and hauling off men. So they were far less likely than Americans to accept the improbable explanation that a few instances of mercilessness have marked an otherwise humane and high-minded military occupation. Iraqis themselves, victims of countless indignities and acts of violence, are least likely to accept the hubristic, exceptionalist rhetoric of the occupier.

Nearly a month into the Abu Ghraib scandal, dodging another salvo of quasi-comical pleas from Establishment editorial pages for a mid-course correction, Commodore Bush has once again appeared on television to order the ship of occupation to sail on. Bush deviated from his shopworn, sunny narrative of “making progress” only to promise Iraqis “the construction of a modern, maximum security prison” to replace a certain facility whose name his Arabic pronunciation mangled nearly beyond recognition. “Under the dictator,” he helpfully reminded viewers, “prisons like Abu Ghraib were symbols of death and torture.” Now, the US-supervised deaths and torture within its walls notwithstanding, the prison is “a symbol of disgraceful conduct by a few American troops who dishonored our country and disregarded our values.” Mass detention of Iraqis, in itself, is no cause for worry. Once a new warehouse for the country’s strangely plentiful supply of “dead-enders” has been built, “we will demolish the Abu Ghraib prison, as a fitting symbol of Iraq’s new beginning.” Perhaps Americans will not see too much of this symbol, even if Iraqis will. Two days before Bush spoke, Rumsfeld decreed that soldiers in Iraq cannot own the camera-fitted cell phones which the Pentagon suspects captured the scenes of forced public masturbation and forced eating from toilets that have aroused so much indignation. The images of the torture, Rumsfeld knows, are more important than the torture itself.

Here is the editorial by the evil kike Krauthammer. Oh I'll bet he loves his name too hmm?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7009-2004May6?language=printer

Abu Ghraib as Symbol

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 7, 2004; Page A33

On Sept. 11, 2001, America awoke to the great jihad, wondering: What is this about? We have come to agree on the obvious answers: religion, ideology, political power and territory. But there is one fundamental issue at stake that dares not speak its name. This war is also about -- deeply about -- sex.

For the jihadists, at stake in the war against the infidels is the control of women. Western freedom means the end of women's mastery by men, and the end of dictatorial clerical control over all aspects of sexuality -- in dress, behavior, education, the arts.
Taliban rule in Afghanistan was the model of what the jihadists want to impose upon the world. The case the jihadists make against freedom is that wherever it goes, especially the United States and Europe, it brings sexual license and corruption, decadence and depravity.

The appeal of this fear can be seen in the Arab world's closest encounter with modernity: Israel. Israeli women are by far the most liberated of any in that part of the world. For decades, the Arab press has responded with lurid stories of Israeli sexual corruption.

The most famous example occurred in the late 1990s, when Egyptian newspapers claimed that chewing gum Israel was selling in Egypt was laced with sexual hormones that aroused insatiable lust in young Arab women. Palestinian officials later followed with charges that Israeli chewing gum was a Zionist plot for turning Palestinian women into prostitutes, and "completely destroying the genetic system of young boys" to boot.

Which is why the torture pictures coming out of Abu Ghraib prison could not have hit a more neuralgic point. We think of torture as the kind that Saddam practiced: pain, mutilation, maiming and ultimately death. We think of it as having a political purpose: intimidation, political control, confession and subjugation. What happened at Abu Ghraib was entirely different. It was gratuitous sexual abuse, perversion for its own sake.

That is what made it, ironically and disastrously, a pictorial representation of precisely the lunatic fantasies that the jihadists believe -- and that cynical secular regimes such as Egypt and the Palestinian Authority peddle to pacify their populations and deflect their anger and frustrations. Through this lens, Abu Ghraib is an "I told you so" played out in an Arab capital, recorded on film.

Jihadists, like all totalitarians, oppose many kinds of freedom. What makes them unique, however, is their particular hatred of freedom for women. They prize their traditional prerogatives that allow them to keep their women barefoot in the kitchen as illiterate economic and sexual slaves. For the men, that is a pretty good deal -- one threatened by the West with its twin doctrines of equality and sexual liberation.

It is no accident that jihadists around the world are overwhelmingly male. It is very rare to find a female suicide bomber. And when you do, as with the young woman who blew herself up in Gaza, killing four others in January, it turns out that she herself was a victim of sexual subjugation -- a wife accused of adultery, marked for death, who decided to die a martyr rather than a pariah. But die she must.

Which is what made one aspect of the Abu Ghraib horrors even more incendiary -- the pictures of female U.S. soldiers mocking, humiliating and dominating naked and abused Arab men. One could not have designed a more symbolic representation of the Islamist warning about where Western freedom ultimately leads than yesterday's Washington Post photo of a uniformed American woman holding a naked Arab man on a leash.

Let's be clear. The things we have learned so far about Abu Ghraib are not, by far, the worst atrocities committed in war. Indeed, they pale in comparison with what Arab insurgents have done to captured Westerners, and what Saddam Hussein did to his own people.

The American offenders should surely be judged by our standards, not by others'. By our standards, these were egregious violations of human rights and human dignity. They must be punished seriously. They do not, however, reflect the ethos of the U.S. military, which has performed with remarkable grace and courage in Iraq, or of U.S. society.

The photographs suggest otherwise. Which is why the abuse at Abu Ghraib is so inflammatory and, for us and our cause, so damaging. It reenacted the most deeply psychologically charged -- and most deeply buried -- aspect of the entire war on terrorism, exactly as Osama bin Laden would have scripted it.

<a href="mailto: letters@charleskrauthammer.com

">letters@charleskrauthammer.com

What this Jewish neocon pervert is saying-- and he is no better than a Russian-emigrant pimp from Tel Aviv - is that Jews are in a culture war with Islam, and they are going to take the Islamics down a notch, by dismantling their cultural standars by force. They are going to use the US mercs to do both the bombing and also the cultural -engineering. And who better than the Hollywood-and-porn conditioned atomized and mentally enslaved Americans?

The Jews and their mercs, will not only force a new government on Iraq and Afghanistan, but they will do a big psyop on the Arabs-- mentally assfuck the men of the Middle east-- by having sluts like Lyndie England point guns at naked men, have other sluts give the thumbs up over Arab corpses, have goons use their attack dogs to lick peanut butter off cocks-- all sickening, sadistic, perverted crap only a fucking Jew could imagine. You think that's OK "Hate Dept?"

I'd like to deport non-Whites from the West. But I have no problem with Non-Whites in their countries of origin. I sincerely mean that. I am not an exterminationist. I sincerely believe that if we regain sovereignity in the west from the Jews and Judaizers, and restore our race to control, that we can have a new era of international peace on Earth. But-- no way out but throught the Jew. Are you in agreement with anything I have said or are you just in agreement with that sorry fucking Aryan-hating kike Krauthammer?

This will be answered when I come back, later.

Hate Dept. and Fissile both are the two most obvious pro-zionist trolls on the forum.

I still think their running dog, JP, might just be what he appears to be; a smart boy who likes to argue and has no compunctions against using every cheapjack logical fallacy and low-blow ploy to "win" at his game of internet "debate".

It ain't rocket science, AE. Fako Hato is an obvious troll and should have been banned to opp months ago.

Consider that I have been on this earth for a few decades most time of which I the internet did not exist nor did I use it. Facts are facts: Jews control the US porn industry, Jews in Israel are the world's biggest "White slave" offenders who traffick in East European whores to staff their mafiya-run whorehouses in Israel for all these lascivious Diaspora kikes- - is that not so?

Yes and this proves exactly what?

So, they are "ready willing and able" to produce staff and distrubute not only legal smut but also highly illegal smut. Do you think that some Israeli pimp/ movie producer would not snuff out one of his whores if he could fetch a big enough price to film it? Or are you saying there is in fact no market in such things?

Could some Israeli pimp conceivably murder one of his whores, is that what you're stooping to ask? Yes. Snuff films: No, they have never surfaced, to my knowledge] I could understand where you were coming from when you were debunking 9-11 explanations, but if you are going to try and tell me that I'm a sucker for believing the well known truths about Jews involvement in porn, white slave trafficking, prostitution, etc., then I have to seriously question you. If you think I am wrong about these facts then you can check it out on your own, I have no time to convince people of what even the most obtuse and Jewish leftists will concede.

First of all, don't drag me down into your private hell. I don't care to hear about your constant fixation with jews' relationship to the porn industry. I never questioned that. You sound like the very jews you're gossiping about. And don't dictate to me, Antiochus Epiphanes, in your sanctimonious attitude, what I should or shouldn't be accepting from you. Your only authority is in your moderator's status. Other than that your little opinions have no more weight than anyone else's.

Do you know what Shin Bet is or have I been talking over your head? Read up on that. Then answer me if you dispute or not that Shin Bet uses torture and sexual humiliation as interrogation methods. Then tell me whether you think that US military has conducted joint training with Israel or not including military intelligence information gathering techniques.

Do not deign to tell me what may be over my head. I recall "reading up" on By Way of Deception the year it came out. I don't know where you were at that time, but I would imagine you had not heard the term "Shin Bet" before then. Where were you then I wonder? Sneaking into R-rated movies, tossing milk duds at the front row perhaps?

Now add to this the general depravity and sexual laxity of the enlisted personnel that I have identified above-- your horndog Marines looking for disgusting entertainments in Tijuana to your faggot jumpers in the 82d airborne posing for gay porn to your smut luving sailors and "Love Boats" of the Navy where all the enlisted girls get knocked up-- you know what I'm talking about or do you need to read up on this too? The point is that there are "legions" of perverts in the US armed forces.

This lurid, peculiar post tells more about you than the subject at hand. Marines (who you curiously label as "horndogs") go to TJ, just as countless soldiers have done throught the eons in other lands, to whoremonger. It is difficult for said Marines or anybody else to view "donkey shows" because again, that disgusting entertainment does not exist. I would think that you would be relieved to hear that, but you evidently are not. It is urban legend in the Snuff Film vein. If you continue to choose to believe in it, then that belies your disgust of such things, doesn't it.

There were some people from that airborne division you mentioned, a small amount as I recall, engaged in the making of homosexual pornography. You can not and will not make the case that it is endemic to the military or widespread in the military. It is however a symptom of this country's moral and spiritual syphillis, of which the jew is disproportionatelly responsible.

"Smut loving sailors": I am sorry Mr Epiphanes but you're bringing us right up to the brink of concluding certain things about you. That smut/sailors bit is so trivial and vacuous as to warrant no attention whatever except on your pecadillos. Antiochus Epiphanes, you do know how they separated the men from the boys in the Greek Navy, don't you? With a pry-bar.

"All" the enlisted girls got knocked up eh? Now Antiochus has a problem with the "strumpets" and "harlots" in the Navy? Are you maybe a little too concerned about what those loose women do Antiochus? Yes women in the military are largely a joke, and finally you blundered into the truth. But don't be so philistine as to call it "perversion". Is this a pre-Vatican II type thing? Or is this a case of a burglar crying "thief"?

If a few Whites would stand up to the Jewish perverts running our governmentment and stick a thumb in their eyes, maybe the Arabs would think better of us. Way it is now we look like shabbos-goy mercs for the Jew-world-order. So I can understand why they hate us

At this point you're preaching to the choir.

Mr "Hate Dept."

I do not care for my screen name either, but I'm stuck with it.

If I have offended you in any way, I am not sorry.

Hate Dept- you want to change your user name ask for it like other people have.

Yes and this proves exactly what? Could some Israeli pimp conceivably murder one of his whores, is that what you're stooping to ask? Yes. Snuff films: No, they have never surfaced, to my knowledge]

I remember reading that bullshit in an editorial against Ed Meese written by some Jew snivel liberterian writing for Playboy.

On some level I admire your Streicher-esque way of floating this theory, though..

Thanks, I admire Juli. I think Alex Linder channels him.

First of all, don't drag me down into your private hell. I don't care to hear about your constant fixation with jews' relationship to the porn industry.

Ha, you sound like one of those psychobabbling Jews now, like the ones who say anybody who criticizes queers is a repressing. You got any other insights into my unconscious Ziggy?

Do not deign to tell me what may be over my head. I recall "reading up" on By Way of Deception the year it came out. I don't know where you were at that time, but I would imagine you had not heard the term "Shin Bet" before then......

In fact I have had an interest in spy bullshit since I was a teenager. Which unfortunately was prior to Ostrovsky's book, which was about the Mossad not the Shin Bet. But since you know that..

...."donkey shows" because again, that disgusting entertainment does not exist. I would think that you would be relieved to hear that, but you evidently are not. It is urban legend in the Snuff Film vein. If you continue to choose to believe in it, then that belies your disgust of such things, doesn't it.......

You're naive.

There were some people from that airborne division you mentioned, a small amount as I recall, engaged in the making of homosexual pornography. You can not and will not make the case that it is endemic to the military or widespread in the military. It is however a symptom of this country's moral and spiritual syphillis, of which the jew is disproportionatelly responsible........

I can and I did, well enough, and could do so more if I had the time and inclination.

"Smut loving sailors": I am sorry Mr Epiphanes but you're bringing us right up to the brink of concluding certain things about you. That smut/sailors bit is so trivial and vacuous as to warrant no attention whatever except on your pecadillos. Antiochus Epiphanes, you do know how they separated the men from the boys in the Greek Navy, don't you? With a pry-bar. ........

If you're not a Jew then you sure do talk like one. The Greek-faggot jokes, oh, the Jews love that. Do you light candles at Channukah to remember Judah Maccabee killing Greeks? It's ok, I've had Jews yank my chain about being part Greek in person, and I kept my temper then and I can keep it now.

As for your surmises about my socalled pecadillos, yes Jews love to psychologize their antagonists. More psychobabble bullshit, ad hominem stuff. Flaming, at that.

But, I have a right to an opinion, and I wasnt believing the Momus that you were a Jew, but your psychobabble has got me reconsidering whether maybe he is right about you.

Hate Dept- you want to change your user name ask for it like other people have.

Huh. I didn't know that.

Well I've since asked (yesterday) and nobody answered.

Hi jp! Hi!