The Iraqi Interpreters campaign is somewhat biased is it not?

It’s hardly an exercise in building a cohesive front on a matter of principle is it? It’s clear that it has become yet another opportunity for the usual suspects to act like ignorant twats.

The dozy fucking pricks (Daniel Davies being the main twat in this regard).

The campaign’s aim (stopping people being killed who could possibly be targeted for being killed) is fine, it’s the bad faith fuckwittery alongside it that is the problem.

For example - ask the Kurds if there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq prior to invasion — you stupid pseudo-lefty pieces of fucking dipshit dopey fucking fuckfacedness having bastards.

So much for building a ‘popular front’ platform.

Let’s give the theocrats and their despotic patrons (the pro-Islamist, anti-modernity, batshit crazy, ignorant, socially inadequate filth) something to really hate us for.

Tell them to shove their little fucking campaign up their arses.

Daniel Davies:

I do actually think that the pro-war blogs in this campaign are being a bit hypocritical since they were prepared to see the same atrocities and worse committed on Fallujah, but we are being “big tent” people at the moment because this campaign needs all the friends it can get.

You ain’t getting me as friend you stupid pissing cockend.

See comment 47 and 50 here.

As American evangelicals go, Olansky is as thoughtful and intelligent as they come.

Part 1. Part 2. Part 3. Part 4. Part 5.  Part 6. Part 7. Part 8.

1. Surge may be working.

2. Insurgents murder with bombs.

3. Violence casts doubt on surge.

Not sure

What am i looking for again?