« what were you saying? | Main | to sean kinsell »

two-faced

The folks at Indymedia - and that means the writers, editors, readers and contributors (most of them, at least) - are the most hypocritical bastards on the face of the earth. They claim to be peace loving. They think people who are pro-war are inhuman. They think they are above everyone else, that their morals and virtues are so above reproach.

And then you see headlines like this and you know they are just so full of their own shit:

WP Nazi columnist bites the Iraqi dust .

The far left have moved themselves onto the same level as the far right that they often deride. Their anti-semitism now popular knowledge, the peace-loving anarchists have now made it clear that they are completely intolerant of anyone who does not think inside of their narrow little box.

Pathetic.

Ok, I understand that not everyone who reads Indymedia agrees with the above-referenced post. I don't want to paint with the proverbial broad brush. However, this to me is a symptom of the disease that the far left has become and why so many liberals are trying to disassociate themselves with the new leftist ideals.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference two-faced:

» roulette from roulette
You are invited to check some helpful info about roulette [Read More]

Comments

Simple-minded scumbags.

Just don't forget that their are alot of peace lovers out there who aren't crazy.

Ok, there aren't that many, but there are a few of us.

Some folks have objected to the "Nazi" label there and are getting shouted down.

Mike Kelly had more decency and more intelligence in his little finger than all the schmucks on Indymedia combined. The mind boggles that anyone could be so heartless.

Surplus proof of the rightness of being for this war. These people are anti-war purely for the sake of being anti-war, not from any conviction and certainly not because they know something we don’t. It’s just glamorous to be left of center, that’s all. They feel like mavericks, rebel heroes because their parents are prowar.

The stuff on Indymedia is mild compared to the crap being spewed at Democratic Underground:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID61/22307.html#97

I'm glad that there are places like IndyMedia and the Democratic Underground where the whack jobs can get together and commiserate. Those places serve a very useful function; they encourage the ignorant, the mindlessly anti-american, the anarchists and the malicious weasels to share their psychotic visions and delusions of the world.

Read the lunatic ravings that these people, our fellow citizens in most every case, post concerning the President, the War, America, and the average American. Most illuminating I assure you. In this hot-house environment they feel free to nurture their psychosis and when they post..ah, when they post. The degree of irrational hatred, fear and malice takes one aback at first - but after you've waded through a few posts and you overcome the shock of almost primal contempt almost all aspects of what we consider to be American values, you learn.

Know the enemy. It's easier to spot the whackjobs, asshats and paranoids when you know how they think. Plus I go there every so often to get my edge back, 'cause sometimes I'm just too nice when I post a rebuttal to some jelly brained moron who's chosen my corner of reality to commit stupidcide.

"These people are anti-war purely for the sake of being anti-war"

No, they are anti-war purely for the sake of being anti-American and/or anti-Bush. That's why Janene Garofalo said "It wasn't hip" to protest Clinton bombing the Balkans. That's why they apologize for and ignore Iraqis murdered by Saddam. That's why they ignore or excuse Palestinian murderers.

They support armed "liberation" movements (by leftists), they supported Cuban soldiers in Angola, they supported the Khmer Rouge, they supported the Soviet Union. The "anti-war" label is a label of convenience, nothing more.

If I am painting with a broad brush, it's because the silence about them from the "responsible" left is making it broader every day.

These people are so vastly inferior to the old Left--many of whose members possessed some decency despite their mental and moral failures. Bill Buckley had an item in NR this week reminiscing about his lunch with the old leftist Howard Fast (whom he said he liked). Can you imagine Buckley, or any of us, ever eating lunch with an Indymedia type, much less saying we "liked" them?

By "old left" I hope you are referring to "old liberals" rather than "old hard left", who were Stalin-apologists.