what it looked like before

Quote :

" Late Monday night, a man, described as being in his late forties or early fifties, decided to run over the over crosses at Camp Casey that serve as a memorial to the soldiers who have died in the war in Iraq. According to TexasLady at DemocraticUnderground as well as Ernest Hancock from Air America affilliate KXXT, the man was soon caught and arrested by the Crawford police. Hancock stated on Air America Radio's "Mike Malloy" program, "He had some crosses in the undercarriage of his pickup truck, and he's been arrested"."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4362813&mesg_id=4362907









does this guy fancy himself some sort of patriot? he ran down an anti-war display, but it was an anti-war display of crosses baring the names of fallen soldiers. I think it's disgusting

*disclaimer* - alot of people on that site are making generalizations like "so this is how conservatives feel about the troops," and whatnot. I think that's a crass generalization, and I'm not making it at all, nor is that my intent. I think that what this ONE PERSON did was disgusting.

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:18 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:19 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2005 12:16:21 PM

old

8/16/2005 12:26:20 PM

A pickup truck you say? In Texas?

I know who is behind this....

8/16/2005 12:26:35 PM

why do you hate freedom?

8/16/2005 12:28:19 PM

A pickup truck you say? In Texas?

I'm surprised the black guy he was dragging didnt get hurt

8/16/2005 12:29:00 PM

How come I don't see any of those little american flags in the orgional "what it looked like before" picture?

8/16/2005 12:29:18 PM

'Cause the eyes of a ranger are upon you,
Any wrong you do, he's gonna see,

When you're in Texas, look behind you,

'Cause that's where the rangers gonna be.

8/16/2005 12:30:38 PM

They actually changed the ranger song, because that last part made him sound gay.

8/16/2005 12:31:45 PM

^^ I saw something that said they came by and placed the american flags on them after the accident, as a "fuck you" to the guy who did it.

And yes, this would be questionable were it not for the fact that the guy was caught and arrested with a cross hanging off of his truck.

8/16/2005 12:32:53 PM

it was a setup by the left! they sent him in to do this to make the right look bad! Just like Nick Berg!!!!! [/conspiracy]

8/16/2005 12:35:39 PM

Maybe he was a pagan who dislikes the cross?
Maybe he was drunk?
Maybe he lost his son and is just angry at the world?

I dunno. I think the motives, if there are any need to be known.

8/16/2005 12:36:44 PM

TIME FOR..................





TEXAS JUSTICE!!!

8/16/2005 12:36:45 PM

Republican family values *(TM)

8/16/2005 12:36:58 PM

Obviously the driver was a fair representation of all republicans.

8/16/2005 12:44:57 PM

Quote :

"I dunno. I think the motives, if there are any need to be known."

have you never met a right wing nut job?

8/16/2005 12:45:48 PM

have you ever met a left wing nut job?

they're exactly alike.

8/16/2005 12:46:16 PM

Quote :

"*disclaimer* - alot of people on that site are making generalizations like "so this is how conservatives feel about the troops," and whatnot. I think that's a crass generalization, and I'm not making it at all, nor is that my intent. I think that what this ONE PERSON did was disgusting."

also

Quote :

" A pickup truck ran over wooden crosses erected at anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan's campsite on Monday night, in the latest sign of tension over the peace vigil outside vacationing President George W. Bush's Texas ranch. Larry Northern, 46, of nearby Waco, Texas, was arrested and charged with criminal mischief in connection with the incident, Crawford Police Chief Donnie Tidmore said."

from reuters

if it's the same guy, he's a realtor in crawford
http://www.baylor.edu/lariat/news.php?action=story&story=16467


[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:50 PM. Reason : ,]

8/16/2005 12:47:14 PM

Quote :

"have you never met a right wing nut job?"

How do you know hes a right wing nut job?

8/16/2005 12:47:38 PM

8/16/2005 12:48:42 PM

Quote :

"have you ever met a left wing nut job? they're exactly alike."

exactly

this is just the same as the left wing nut jobs that vandalize cars with w stickers

8/16/2005 12:49:32 PM

Quote :

"have you ever met a left wing nut job? they're exactly alike."

not exactly

i mean, right wing nutjobs run trucks into crosses

left wing nutjobs run planes into buildings

little bit of difference, but they're both assholes

8/16/2005 12:50:21 PM

um, it is?

tell me again how putting a sticker on a car is the same as disgracing dead soldiers? You're telling me that if the parent of a fallen soldier had a marker up and someone ran it over, you'd think that was like putting a sticker on a car? is it less solemn and less deserving of respect because it was anti-war activists who put up the markers?

also, um, the terrorists were "left wing nutjobs?" I don't think you can really place islamic terrorists into one of the two completely opposite political groupings we think we have in America. Many of them are economically liberal but, obviously VERY STAUNCHLY socially conservative

also, rightwing nutjobs also blow up buildings in kansas city and abortion clinics. I've yet to see a left-wing nutjob do anything like that in the us... not saying none of them would, it just hasn't happened,.

but you were just trolling anyway

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:52 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:53 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2005 12:51:18 PM

It wasn't disgracing a fallen soldier.

It was an anti-war display that was using the names of the fallen to generate an emotional response.

8/16/2005 12:53:07 PM

J
O
K
E

no, its not in urban dictionary, but it is a word, look it up. learn it, live it, love it.

8/16/2005 12:54:23 PM

I see. so the mother of a fallen soldier has absolutely no erason to care for the other fallen soldiers. yeah, you're right. that makes TOTAL sense.

8/16/2005 12:55:29 PM

i mean honestly

kill the people, not the memories.

i'd have been less offended had he ran over that dumb cunt

but not the crosses. you gotta be better than that.

8/16/2005 12:56:44 PM

Quote :

"was arrested and charged with criminal mischief"

criminal mischief sounds like a good one.

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 12:59 PM. Reason : /]

8/16/2005 12:59:19 PM

^^^ I didn't say that. My point was that those aren't actual graves. They are a visual being used with the hopes that it will generate an emotional response. Damaging them does not equate with disgracing a dead soldier.

I'm playing devil's advocate here, but maybe the guy had a problem with these people using the names of war dead to further their political goals. I think its questionable, but I'm not about to drive a truck through their display.

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 1:00 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2005 1:00:16 PM

I can't believe he was arrested, I wonder what the charges are. I guess they can get him for wreckless driving, maybe destruction of property, but nothing major. If it had been any other sign that he ran over he wouldn't have been arrested. It's just because this whole ordeal is a media circus that he got arrested.

Not that I advocate what he did, I just think that arresting him is a bit much...

8/16/2005 1:01:07 PM

If he actually had a problem with the display for those reasons, I doubt he would have driven a truck through it. He'd have to see the irony in it if he even had half a brain. From teh looks of things, this larry norhtern character is a semi-prominent man in the area who is a realtor and has been quoted several times in the papers, so he can't be a retard or drunken redneck or anything like that, at least not past the point that he was willing to run over a bunch of crosses in his truck.

it's obvious they aren't real graves, but that's like saying that knocking over the vietnam memorial wouldn't be disgracing the names of the soldiers. it's ridiculous. of course it's disgracing the soldiers.

^ yeah he just got criminal mischief, and that might even get dropped, but it's not about the lawfulness of the thing. it's about the immorality of what he did

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 1:03 PM. Reason : .]

8/16/2005 1:02:27 PM

Quote :

" "

No, I'm serious. All of these posters on the site DG linked are calling this guy a representation of all republicans. But not a damn one of them has a clue what this guy believes, or what his motives were.

Maybe he is republican, (probably), but you still have no idea what his motivation was for what he did.

Why does he have to be an evil republican? Why the fuck can't he be a terrible human being, or a terrible american? I'm glad DG doesn't see it like the other posters, but they call this guy a wackjob, and suddenly he stands for all republicans.

God damn I hate party labels.

8/16/2005 1:04:50 PM

yeah, and that's why I posted that disclaimer. I hate it when people think in black and white, and I hate that the people on that site think like that... but I guess that's unavoidable in party politics.

8/16/2005 1:07:45 PM

Quote :

"it's obvious they aren't real graves, but that's like saying that knocking over the vietnam memorial wouldn't be disgracing the names of the soldiers. it's ridiculous. of course it's disgracing the soldiers."

Here's the difference:

The Vietnam Memorial is a memorial. It wasn't erected to serve anyone's political purposes. It is a solemn place that is politically neutral.

The display in Texas was erected as part of an anti-war protest. The names of the dead aren't honored there, they are used specifically to serve political goals.

8/16/2005 1:14:41 PM

Running over a mock cemetary is dispicable because of the desecration of what it represents yet burning a flag is a commendable act of free speech with no deeper implication. Rrrrrrriiigghhtt.

8/16/2005 1:22:34 PM

um, no. Burning the american flag, in my opinion, is pretty dispicable. It's just not something that SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.

I thought republicans were all for less government... heh. How can you not understand the difference between immoral and illegal?

Quote :

"he Vietnam Memorial is a memorial. It wasn't erected to serve anyone's political purposes. It is a solemn place that is politically neutral. The display in Texas was erected as part of an anti-war protest. The names of the dead aren't honored there, they are used specifically to serve political goals."

a.) the vietnam memorial was erected by our government. that makes it ipso facto political, albeint solemn
b.) you are assuming they are being used to serve plitical goals, but as far as i can tell, many people who are against the war area gainst the war because they don't want people dying for what they see to be a bad reason or no reason (like myself). You can't just SAY that people are against the war for political purposes. In some cases it's true, but I'd bet that a majority of people who are against the war are against it for human reasons, not political.

8/16/2005 1:26:55 PM

Quote :

"i'd have been less offended had he ran over that dumb cunt"

Your mom's a dumb cunt.

8/16/2005 1:36:03 PM

Deep thoughts.

8/16/2005 1:42:59 PM

Quote :

"um, no. Burning the american flag, in my opinion, is pretty dispicable. It's just not something that SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. I thought republicans were all for less government... heh. How can you not understand the difference between immoral and illegal?"

What you feel about something is not the point of contention. For a significant number of people who are against flag burning it is a morality/respect issue, just like this. To a veteran the flag represents a bit mroe than to your average citizen. To burn it is just as scarring as running through a memorial for deceased (because it essentially is the same thing to them). The point was that this act in Texas is seen by leftists (in general) as something to be up in arms over but they don't bat an eye-lash if a war protester burns a flag. If you are going to be appalled by acts that are disrespectful to those who have sacrificed their lives then at least be consistent in it.

8/16/2005 1:47:00 PM

she can't be a cunt if i'm a son of a bitch

but thanks pryderi.

8/16/2005 1:57:19 PM

he probably did it because these nutjobs are lowering property values thus eating into his comission checks.

I think if he broke any law criminal mischief is the only one, it can't be destruction of property because, Cindy Sheehan doesn't own that land. He'll get it dropped once the media circus leaves town.

8/16/2005 2:52:14 PM

Quote :

"a.) the vietnam memorial was erected by our government. that makes it ipso facto political, albeint solemn"

You misunderstand me. When I say that it isn't political I mean that it is not used to make a political statement. The memorial exists without saying that Vietnam was right or wrong. The crosses in Texas were part of an anti-war protest.

And technically the memorial was erected by a private organization. Congress simply gave them permission to erect it on public land.

Quote :

"b.) you are assuming they are being used to serve plitical goals, but as far as i can tell, many people who are against the war area gainst the war because they don't want people dying for what they see to be a bad reason or no reason (like myself). You can't just SAY that people are against the war for political purposes. In some cases it's true, but I'd bet that a majority of people who are against the war are against it for human reasons, not political."

Yes, I am assuming that they are being used to serve political goals. Its pretty easy to do. When asked, how many anti-war people say that they oppose it because its a republican war? None, they all say that they're concerned about the Iraqi people and the American soldiers. But oddly enough, support for the war follows party lines pretty closely. Its compassion via politicas and I don't care for it.

Remember all of those people whose slogan regarding the war was "Not in my name"?

How is that any different than this situation? Its a small group of people who are exploiting the names of fallen US soldiers to serve their purposes, whether they be political or not.

8/16/2005 2:52:40 PM

and Mr. Joshua makes the dumbest post ever.

8/16/2005 3:06:45 PM

Damn dude, I make you look stupid a few times and now you're a full blown post stalker.

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 3:11 PM. Reason : And a shitty stalker at that.]

8/16/2005 3:11:14 PM

http://www.kwtx.com/news/headlines/1686471.html

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 3:16 PM. Reason : because we all know I never posted in soapbox until you did (take your shit shat out of here)]

8/16/2005 3:16:01 PM

because I said that.

8/16/2005 3:18:41 PM

Quote :

"To burn it is just as scarring as running through a memorial for deceased (because it essentially is the same thing to them)."

Um, don't flag burners usually burn flags that they own, as opposed to other folks' flags?

8/16/2005 3:35:37 PM

you said I was post stalking you

that would mean that I come in here only to harass you as you post.

Which would mean that I didn't post in here until you did

and I only came here to harass you.

8/16/2005 3:35:54 PM

Quote :

"Which would mean that I didn't post in here until you did and I only came here to harass you."

Actually it doesn't mean that at all. It means that you continually post after me for the sole purpose of shit talking.

This is not the first time that I've had to explain something simple to you.

8/16/2005 3:40:01 PM

Quote :

"I've yet to see a left-wing nutjob do anything like that in the us..."

you mean like green peace wrecking its ships into US carriers and submnarines and then suing the navy? Granted, its not on the same scale as flying a passenger jet into a highrise, but still...

Quote :

"Um, don't flag burners usually burn flags that they own, as opposed to other folks' flags?"

ummm. since when did someone owning a flag have anything to do with the quote you referenced>?

8/16/2005 3:55:48 PM

Quote :

"The display in Texas was erected as part of an anti-war protest. The names of the dead aren't honored there, they are used specifically to serve political goals.""

potato

potAto





anyway; bottom line:

SHE HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTEST WITHOUT HER SHIT BEING TRAMPLED

[Edited on August 16, 2005 at 4:02 PM. Reason : -]

8/16/2005 4:00:59 PM