Melissa have you even checked the accuracy of this posting on another blog? C’mon get a grip.

Yup, Melissa quaffed deeply of the kool aid when she posted this.

I see the terrorist apologists are out in full force trying to discredit the author of an article instead of disputing the substance contained in it. Good job, kiddies, you can run along and play in traffic now while the adults have a discussion.

Posted by CavalierX
2009-12-02 12:05:41

Adults! LOL.

Hey, Cav – ya got a BIG Texan covering your back?

Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 11:17:23

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 11:57:15

And does either of you have proof that’s NOT what happened??

Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 12:13:24
And does either of you have proof that’s NOT what happened??

The same amount of proof which shows that it did.

This must be a new feature, “Melissa Clouthier’s Bad Fiction Corner”.

The same amount of proof which shows that it did.
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:15:16

So the EYEWITNESS account of a person who was on that flight is NOT evidence?? What fucking world do you live in?

No, I think the left needs to practice what they preach. They always expect the right to prove something false. Well guys, proof this is not right.

It is true until proven false.

On a side note, I am a little suspect of it. You can follow the link which can lead to others offering more information. I found one of the links there. http://espositosmusings.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/air-tran-flight-297-incident1.pdf

If it is a hoax it is a first. Kind of like when some one first received that email from a rich Nigerian businessman that needs their help.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 12:19:55
There is no “EYEWITNESS”. I live in the real fucking world.

@bthewolf,

Oh I concur that Pepe Le Pew here is a credible source. The ‘Texan’ was probably John Wayne and stewardess Marilyn Monroe…

Wow, all the douchebag trolls on one thread. We’re so blessed…

There is no “EYEWITNESS”. I live in the real fucking world.
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:22:57

Really? And you can PROVE that?

And you can PROVE that?
Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 12:26:13
With the same proof you offer to its veracity.

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:22:57

Do you believe this scenario is at all possible? If so, what would you do in such a scenario?

I find the story questionable. That said, without having done anymore looking than that, I am not prepared to say more on the subject. It’s like the article that came out a few years back about Iran forcing Jews to wear Star of David badges, a la Nazi Germany. The story was questionable, but I didn’t dig too deep, so I didn’t dive right in on whether it was true or not. I am surprised (OK, I’m not really THAT surprised, as it is typical) that the Lefties here just flat out say it didn’t happen out of hand. Is this how the Left operates? Just dismisses anything they don’t like or agree with an effete wave of their hands? Experience tells us that yes, they do.

Posted by Robert_Ingersoll
2009-12-02 12:24:40

And again you have proof that source is not factual?

PROVE the SOURCE WRONG! It’s all we ask.

It’s all we ask.
Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 12:33:04

That you prove the source is accurate.

“Wow, all the douchebag trolls on one thread. We’re so blessed…”

Hey, they need something and there’s no Palin thread up yet. Obama just crushed their hopes and dreams for defeat last night.

The failure of the health scam bill won’t be far behind as the embittered Congressional Dems start to scramble to save their seats next year now that opposition to the war has been shattered as a rallying point.

As far as the topic? Security probing/CAIR fundraiser operation. These guys are all on watch lists now but somebody has noted the response and procedures of TSA. Expect the discrimination lawsuits to be filed shortly.

@bthewolf,

What you have here is hearsay that it. One persons statement with no associated proof. Have a nice day. :)

Do you believe this scenario is at all possible? If so, what would you do in such a scenario?
Posted by NorthernCanuck
2009-12-02 12:29:06

No.

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:22:57

A world where you have 15 sockpuppets registered on RWN.

How is the food at the truck stop today? You wearing your cammie’s by chance?

Do you believe this scenario is at all possible? If so, what would you do in such a scenario?
Posted by NorthernCanuck
2009-12-02 12:29:06

No.

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:38:21

Thanks for answering. You may be a nice person but you are certainly naive and easily led.

You may be a nice person but you are certainly naive and easily led.
Posted by NorthernCanuck
2009-12-02 12:41:55

I’m not the one believing this guff.

Posted by Robert_Ingersoll
2009-12-02 12:38:05

And you have your OPINION that it is HEARSAY.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-12-02 12:39:46
bleat bleat bleat

I’m not the one believing this guff.
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:44:11

I see a number of people being skeptical but seeing it as plausible. You’re the only one I see putting forth a definitive opinion; you believe it’s beyond the realm of possibility.
That is naive, at best.

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:48:38

Thanks for playing, you nazi loving POS.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/faa-to-investigate-cell-202143.html?printArticle=y

Here’s corroboration of the story. The events and facts match even though the story has been polished up by the airline to look like a simple misunderstanding (there is no explanation for why the plane would be emptied, re-crewed, and people leaving in tears if it was a discussion over a cell phone).

Fail again, libs.

Hey, Cav – ya got a BIG Texan covering your back?

Why — are you a terrorist?

bleat bleat bleat
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:48:38

Yup that’s all you ever do, from now post that instead, it would give you more credibility, never-show.

Obama just crushed their hopes and dreams for defeat last night.

No, he just told them they have to wait 18 months. Then again, to the “instant gratification” Leftist crowd, that probably does seem like a long time.

Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 12:51:48

LOL

Yup – this sure is the same story. Exactly as posted on this thread. No difference whatsoever. You know, except for the ten other dressed-like-Arabs Arabs, and the porn videos, and the threats to crew, and the intervention of BIG Texans, and . . .

You know, except for the ten other dressed-like-Arabs Arabs

“The 11 others in the 13-passenger group …”

Yup – this sure is the same story.

You using three sockpuppets ruining threads. Every day. You at the wifi cafe today?

You at the wifi cafe today?
Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-12-02 13:03:37
bleat bleat bleat

Mods, if you please?

“You know, except for the ten other dressed-like-Arabs Arabs, and the porn videos, and the threats to crew, and the intervention of BIG Texans, and . . .”

Yeah, which a PR spokesman for the airline would point out, right?

“Fly AirTran…where you’ll experience agitated Muslims, porn, threats, and may be called upon to defend yourself and others!”

Hey Real, did you know Sarah Palin took a pay cut, rode a bus, and had a baby?

Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 13:08:48

Hey, Mike, do you know your deflection shows you doubt the truth of this thread?

Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 13:12:02

Hey never-show, did you know you’re an idiot, and projecting your own deflections on Mike?

Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 12:51:48

Mike,

That is not even close to the same story as presented her by Ms. Clouthier, seriously do you live in a fantasy world?

“Hey, Mike, do you know your deflection shows you doubt the truth of this thread?”

Deflection? I already beat you on the facts. Now I’m just ridiculing you for fun. See, that’s where Alinsky had it wrong. Ridicule by itself has little meaning, and can never be a real mover of public opinion. But beat someone in an argument then rub their face in it and they’re finished. Kind of like Dukakis in the tank.

Bang.

Mike,

That is not even close to the same story as presented her by Ms. Clouthier, seriously do you live in a fantasy world?
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 13:16:38

It’s the scrubbed down, PC, cover OUR ASSES version. So yeah it’s the same story with a LOT of details missing, whitewashed, or suger-coated, get a clue.

This is an interesting story. If its true, then definitely the passengers were within their rights. No one has the right to disturb an airflight in any way.

I would need some sort of collaboration about the stereotpical muslim jihadi behavior. But I think that’s also besides the point. You have to follow the instructions of the crew at all times.

If the “crazy muslim” behavior is true, then its quite a story. I’m sure if the plane was full someone else could corraborate.

I already beat you on the facts.
Bang.
Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 13:22:26

Not now and not ever, come to think about it. Bang, indeed.

LOL

That is not even close to the same story as presented her by Ms. Clouthier, seriously do you live in a fantasy world?
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 13:16:38

Why do you libtards never apply even an ounce of critical thinking to anything you post? Your knee jerk reaction to this eye witness account can be summed up with the, no doubt spectacular argument for liberal, “nuh-uh.” The story posted by Mike does in fact match in key details. However, and here is where you actually need to think for yourself a little, the story put out by the airline does not add up. Why would an entire aircrew be swapped out over the incident they described? Why would an aircrew member be in tears? And please, oh please tell me why another 12 passengers would jsut leave the plane for another flight???

However, what is descibed in Clouthier’s post coincides with actions taken by previous terrorists or arabs trying to cash in on a frivolous lawsuit. It also makes sense logically. So which would you be more inclined to believe? If you follow logic and common sense, it seems obvious.

That said, I don’t know if the op story is true or not, but I am certainly not going to blindly say, “nuh-uh” and dismiss it either.

Hey, Cav – ya got a BIG Texan covering your back?
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 12:12:04

I’ve got his back.

“The story posted by Mike does in fact match in key details.”

I don’t discount the possibility that this guy embelished the details a bit…

I hefted up my belt, and with Big Tex at my back said, “We’re a gonna throw you off this plane, mmboy.” Just as the reflection of an American flag shone in mine eye.”

Yeah, whatever. But the key facts are not in dispute. This was some kind of organized Islamic hijinks, and was disturbing enough to cause the consequences listed in both articles. The libs are just terrified that the War on Terror is real, and that Obama just cancelled their membership in the 9/10 Club.

If the “crazy muslim” behavior is true, then its quite a story. I’m sure if the plane was full someone else could corraborate.

Posted by D-Vega
2009-12-02 13:28:36

That is the clincher for me, there were 72 people on this flight, where is the collabortion, certianly the passenger sitting directly behind this incident doesnt remember it that way. However conservatives are pretty gullible right now.

This was some kind of organized Islamic hijinks,

Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 13:41:58

Mike again you state this as fact when it is not, why do you feel the need to do this? Fearmongering is all you have left? Too bad Mike, too bad.

“Mike again you state this as fact when it is not, why do you feel the need to do this?”

Find the passenger manifest and prove me wrong.

It doesn’t work that way, Mike, and you know it.

I wouldn’t dismiss it either way, but one account is not proof.

“It doesn’t work that way, Mike, and you know it.”

You think I don’t know that your blather is based on wild speculation, paranoia, and denial instead of fact?

A liberal examine the evidence? Inconceivable! Better to make baseless accusations and accuse everyone else of lying.

You and the merry band here haven’t presented a single fact, counterargument, or alternate scenario other than “nuh-uh”! You’re not debating or even arguing anything. You guys are like the Monty Python Argument Clinic sketch…there’s not even an argument, just contradiction. Abuse is just down the hall…

Find the passenger manifest and prove me wrong.
Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 14:06:10

And fly the plane and get me a coffee while you’re at it.

LOL

Stories like this usually take some time to come out. I remember the flying imans story out of Minniapolis a few years back and that took months to even hit the mainstream. By the time the facts are presented, those here questioning it will have moved on and will never acknowledge that it ever took place.

certianly the passenger sitting directly behind this incident doesnt remember it that way.
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 14:00:27

And you have their account of this incident WHERE? Until you do: ‘However LIBERALS are pretty gullible right now.’ To paraphrase your own stupidity.

I said clearly I’m not dismissing it either way, Mike. But the story as it is being told here seems wild. I’m saying if its true I would have to agree with you all, but this story is so bizarre I think, logically speaking, collaboration would definitely clinch it for me.

Stop playing your “neener neener” games and remember what you once stood for here. It’s not up to anyone to prove your assertion but you. I could write something that says I was on the flight right now. Would you believe it? Of course not.

Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 14:03:23

You got that proof asswipe of David Duke voting for Bush in 2004 YET?

How long does it take you to log out and re log in under realpolitik?

“I’m saying if its true I would have to agree with you all, but this story is so bizarre I think, logically speaking, collaboration would definitely clinch it for me.”

The only points of the story that can even be questioned are the alleged Islamicism of the group and their pattern of behavior. Everything else this guy said matches up with the G-rated version released by the airline. And has been said before, even if everything “Tedd” says is a lie, *something* happened that warranted a flight cancellation, distressed passengers and crew, and a replacement of the pilot and co-pilot (not a trivial action). What was it?

If you’re going to be an agnostic about it fine. Say so and be done with it. If you’re going to continue to deny and piss and moan and cry and whine and bellyache about it…start offering some of your own ideas or shut up.

. . . start offering some of your own ideas or shut up.
Posted by Mike_M
2009-12-02 14:55:15

It’s a cwaaaaazy conservative fantasy with a hard-on.

It’s a cwaaaaazy conservative fantasy with a hard-on.
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 15:01:05

And yet YOU still have no PROOF of this assertion.

And you have their account of this incident WHERE? Until you do: ‘However LIBERALS are pretty gullible right now.’ To paraphrase your own stupidity.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 14:29:24

From the nice link that Mike provided, here let me quote you the relevant parts:

But the woman sitting behind the man said it wasn’t a phone at all, and feels the entire incident was the result of poor communication.

“He was not talking on a cell phone, it was a camera,” said Nancy Deveikis of Marietta. “He was looking at pictures.”

Do try and follow along Wolfie.

Do try and follow along Wolfie.
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 15:15:13

Dream on about this wish – it ain’t going to happen.

I was pretty clear about my take on it from the very beginning, Mike.

The only points of the story that can even be questioned are the alleged Islamicism of the group and their pattern of behavior.

Those are some pretty big points, considering the title of the entry is “Another Terrorist Dry Run”, dontcha think?

How long does it take you to log out and re log in under realpolitik?
Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-12-02 14:44:29

Actually Dick I use two computers at the same time. They are really close to each other at the library and I can use both at the same time…The librarian doesn’t complain because they have to allow really fat guys two use two seats…It works out so they leave me alone…

From the nice link that Mike provided, here let me quote you the relevant parts:

But the woman sitting behind the man said it wasn’t a phone at all, and feels the entire incident was the result of poor communication.

“He was not talking on a cell phone, it was a camera,” said Nancy Deveikis of Marietta. “He was looking at pictures.”

Do try and follow along Wolfie.
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 15:15:13

Well accept the ORGINAL story says there were 2 using phones and a couple looking at CAMERAS all of them in different sections of the plane. So SHE may not have seen a phone but OTHERS might have.

PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG, RETARD!!!

Dream on about this wish – it ain’t going to happen.
Posted by Realpolitik
2009-12-02 15:17:34

This from someone who’s ability to reason can be measured by his sub-zero IQ!!!!

Well accept the ORGINAL story says there were 2 using phones and a couple looking at CAMERAS all of them in different sections of the plane. So SHE may not have seen a phone but OTHERS might have.

PLEASE TRY TO FOLLOW ALONG, RETARD!!!

Posted by bthewolf
2009-12-02 15:57:00

That is not what you asked wolfie, you asked for others perspective, which Mike so gladly provided. Are you saying what this lady saw, who was sitting RIGHT BEHIND the man that was taken away, was wrong. Or do you just trust the guy who was sitting in 1st class, a long way from the back of the plane, because you like his fictional account better?

Stop playing your “neener neener” games and remember what you once stood for here.

Seems to me he’s doing that quite well.

Thus far you guys have presented zero alternate theories that would even begin to explain this incident. All you’ve done is jump up and down going “Nuh uh! You can’t prove that! You can’t prove that!”. You demand corroboration (which is spelled with two “r”s BTW, not two “l”s) but when corroboration is presented you ignore it and insist no such corroboration exists.

Of course, you’re doing exactly what we’ve come to expect of you as well. You cop a morally superior attitude and make disingenuous claims of neutrality over and over and over and over again. If you really believed what you claim you wouldn’t have made more than one post on this thread. You would have let your original comment stand completely on its own until such time as more information came to light.

That is not what you asked wolfie, you asked for others perspective, which Mike so gladly provided. Are you saying what this lady saw, who was sitting RIGHT BEHIND the man that was taken away, was wrong. Or do you just trust the guy who was sitting in 1st class, a long way from the back of the plane, because you like his fictional account better?
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 16:04:29

Are being intentionally obtuse or just plain stupid? There were 2 people on phones according to the original piece; 1 in first class, 1 in coach, TALKING TO EACH OTHER. In other seats there were people looking at cameras. So tell me which person was the witness in Mike’s article sitting behind? And DID SHE EVER SEE THE GUY WITH THE PHONE? Because the original poster got off his ass and acted, he saw more than than did the camera lady. SO WHO WAS WRONG, YOU, as usual. You’re the one who’s reading comprehension is lower than a 1st grade level.

Are you saying what this lady saw, who was sitting RIGHT BEHIND the man that was taken away, was wrong.

Yes, he’s saying that this woman was wrong. So is the airline.

You are capable of acknowledging that possibility, right Whats_up? That this one woman was, in fact, mistaken about what she saw? That perhaps her view of the incident, obscured as it was by the large airplane seat directly in front of her, was less than accurate?

Think carefully about what you’re saying, Whats_up. Twelve passengers and the entire flight crew, including the pilot and copilot, refused to fly with these men on the plane and the entire crew had to be immediately replaced. One flight attendant was reduced to tears due to the way these men were acting. The official AirTran spokesman specifically said that the cause of this incident was a “safety reason”.

You’re saying that all these people are completely wrong and this one woman is right.

Think carefully about what you’re saying, Whats_up. Twelve passengers and the entire flight crew, including the pilot and copilot, refused to fly with these men on the plane and the entire crew had to be immediately replaced. One flight attendant was reduced to tears due to the way these men were acting. The official AirTran spokesman specifically said that the cause of this incident was a “safety reason”.

You’re saying that all these people are completely wrong and this one woman is right.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-12-02 16:29:29

Mighty,

We dont know why the crew refused to fly, we dont know why 12 passengers transfered flights, however I do trust this ladies view of things rather than the first story based on simple logic. If 12 muslim men were acting the way they are acting, dont you think more of the 72 people on the plane would have been speaking out, dont you think that first mans story about 11 men walking around the cabin would have been verified, I havent seen another story say that have you? Dont you think the passengers right by the supposed men watching porn would have said something? You might just be the most gullible human being in history, I have a bridge to sell you, are you interested?

I don’t know what you’re talking about, sam.

What “alternate theory” are you looking for? The only facts that we have is what was laid out in the AJC article.

The “islamic-behavior” has NOT be confirmed. We have simply one account, and we can’t even prove this person was on the plane.

I have already spelled out for you that if this account is correct, than I agree with you. If this account is erroneous, I still agree that the airline was within their right to cancel or land under any circumstances where the flight is being disrupted.

But the “crazy muslim” theory has not been confirmed, no matter how much you bitch and moan.

I keep responding because people here assume the worst once any mention of a muslim occurs. That’s why.

You might just be the most gullible human being in history, I have a bridge to sell you, are you interested?
Posted by whats_up
2009-12-02 16:45:46

And you have NO proof that HER story is the entire truth, but you’re more than willing to accept it as the be all end all, So you’re being intentionally naive, or just plain stupid.

I keep responding because people here assume the worst once any mention of a muslim occurs. That’s why.
Posted by D-Vega
2009-12-02 17:03:39

Since more than 90% of terrorists worldwide are Muslim, and as much as 10% of the 1 billion Muslims actively support terror, I’ll take my chances that my being over cautious was justified. I’m more than happy to worry about a threat that is known and verifiable like Isalmic terror, vs the whole AGW fear-mongering which has no proof to justify caution.

I’m noticing a trend where Realpolitik and Robert_Ingersoll always seem to post on the same threads around the same general time.

It’s certainly not a coincidence.

We dont know why the crew refused to fly, we dont know why 12 passengers transfered flights

But we know that they did. So why did they do it? If it was just the twelve passengers getting off, that would be one thing. But the entire flight crew along with them? That doesn’t just happen. They did it for a reason. They felt strongly that they did not want to be on the same airplane as these allegedly Muslim men.

So the question you have to answer is why? Do you really, honestly believe that all these people chose to disembark the plane just because one guy would not give up his cell phone?

I do trust this ladies view of things

Why? Exactly why is she more credible than the flight attendants, the rest of the flight crew, and the official spokesperson sent by AirTran? Especially that last one. Are you saying that AirTran intentionally instructed their spokesperson to lie about what happened and claim there was a “safety reason” behind the incident, when “it was a simple miscommunication that got out of hand” would have been a much more innocent and customer-friendly explanation?

If 12 muslim men were acting the way they are acting, dont you think more of the 72 people on the plane would have been speaking out,

If a woman was stabbed in a convenience store, don’t you think the other shoppers would immediately stop to help her?

http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/backpage/article_fc155177-d829-591b-80a0-965c8cb2b840.html

If the Chinese military rolled up to stop a peaceful protest, don’t you think more than one man would have stood up to them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man

dont you think that first mans story about 11 men walking around the cabin would have been verified

His story has been verified, child. The link provided by Mike_M backs up the key details of the above account. Several men, who did not speak English, boarded a plane. One of them refused to turn off his cell phone, there was a brief altercation, and ALL OF THEM were removed from the plane. When most of the men later got back on, several passengers and the entire flight crew refused to fly with them.

One woman says it was “the result of poor communication”. But Christopher White, the official spokesperson for AirTran Airways, specifically said, quote, “Is there any safety or security reason to bring the plane back? Yes, there was a safety reason.”

So, you choose to believe one woman over the flight attendants, the rest of the flight crew, the twelve passengers who disembarked, and the official spokesperson for the airline, all of whom say different. And you call this “simple logic”.

Well I’d definitely agree that it’s “simple” but I’m not sure if I’d call it “logic”.

Dont you think the passengers right by the supposed men watching porn would have said something?

Who says they didn’t?

I don’t know what you’re talking about, sam.

Yes, I’ve noticed you often have trouble figuring out what other people are talking about. Why else would I find myself forced to lecture you so often on the meanings of simple English words?

Something happened on this flight. Something serious enough to make the pilot take the plane back to the gate and compel twelve passengers and the entire flight crew to leave the plane. Something the official spokesperson for AirTran Airways described as a safety issue.

So what happened? Give us an alternate explanation. I dare you.

I keep responding because people here assume the worst once any mention of a muslim occurs. That’s why.

Whatever you have to tell yourself, D-Vega.

Something did, sam.

I’m just not as eager to bite on the “crazy muslim” bait.

Guess I’m just not as susceptible to fear-mongering. My bad.

I keep responding because people here assume the worst once any mention of a muslim occurs. That’s why.
Posted by D-Vega
2009-12-02 17:03:39

Yeah, airplanes being flown into buildings and military shootouts do have a tendency to generate concern.

I know that if a Muslim was yelling “Allah Ackbar!” with you in the immediate area, you would have ran away first like George Costanza.

I know that if a Muslim was yelling “Allah Ackbar!” with you in the immediate area, you would have ran away first like George Costanza.
Posted by Kingfisher 2009-12-02 18:03:31

I disagree, Kingfisher.

If a Muslim in the immediate area of D-Vega and his family were to begin shouting “Allah Ackbar!”, D-Vega would revel in the joy of the diversity of the situation. He would marvel at the tolerance of some around him, and he would strongly condemn those that were frightened, angry, or that ran away from the scene.

Then, after the bomb goes off and his family is dead and dying around him, D-Vega would be laying on the ground. And with his last breath, he would curse George W. Bush and the RightWing of American politics for causing the incident.

In other words, he would be a brain-dead Liberal idiot… right to the very end.

I’m just not as eager to bite on the “crazy muslim” bait.

You seem awfully eager to keep telling us about it, though.

Why are you still here, D-Vega? Exactly how many times and in how many variations do you think you need to say “I don’t know for sure whether this is true or not”? Do you think if you don’t keep repeating, restating, and recapping your feelings on this issue that somehow we’ll forget? When you open this thread are your previous posts not showing up for some reason and you think you need to keep saying the same thing over and over again just to make absolutely sure that everyone knows exactly how you feel on this subject?

Well on behalf of the entire RWN membership I’d just like to say:

YES D-VEGA, WE ALL HEARD YOU THE FIRST TIME.

There. Done. Your opinion has been logged, recorded, and filed for future reference in a special titanium-plated file cabinet and any commenters who might be interested in your particular viewpoint(s) will be promptly and efficiently directed to it.

YES D-VEGA, WE ALL HEARD YOU THE FIRST TIME.

Narcissists, like Vega and Obama, believe that the world is entitled to their continuous opinion, no matter how stupid they are.

Do you think if you don’t keep repeating, restating, and recapping your feelings on this issue that somehow we’ll forget?

Don’t worry Vega, we won’t forget. You’ve worked hard and, as a result, won the coveted title of “Official RWN Dumbass Moonbat.”

Then, after the bomb goes off and his family is dead and dying around him, D-Vega would be laying on the ground. And with his last breath, he would curse George W. Bush and the RightWing of American politics for causing the incident.

Go fuck yourself, Baud.

YES D-VEGA, WE ALL HEARD YOU THE FIRST TIME. There. Done. Your opinion has been logged, recorded, and filed for future reference in a special titanium-plated file cabinet and any commenters who might be interested in your particular viewpoint(s) will be promptly and efficiently directed to it.

Thanks, sam. I appreciate the support. Now I will look to you to explain other issues to jackwads on this site. You can be my Vega-to-jackwad translator.

Go fuck yourself, Baud.
Posted by D-Vega 2009-12-03 11:12:57

Very intelligent come-back D-Vega. Which one of your dick-sucking buddies help you with that?

What are you doing here, Baud?

Didn’t I tell you to go fuck yourself?

Done already? That was quick.

What are you doing here, Baud?

Posted by D-Vega 2009-12-03 11:48:22

Ooooo, D-Vega said it and everyone should quake in fear? Pound sand, you asshole!

I have a few low tolerance today for Liberal Stupidity. And since that is all you and your dick sucking buddy whats_up have to offer, then you should expect to get called on it all day.

Now, run away little bitch!

You seem to have left yourself unsatisfied.

Of course he did Vega

The best website……

Hey Websmaster , Awesome blog , if you need backlinks to your website I provide upto 10,000 high quality SEO backlinks for only $5. Check it out here :http://bit.ly/msweL2...