[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Historical
See other Historical Articles

Title: We Were Soldiers
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Nov 12, 2017
Author: Mark Steyn
Post Date: 2017-11-12 07:18:54 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 1994
Comments: 54

We Were Soldiers

by Mark Steyn

November 11, 2017

On "Fox & Friends" this morning, reacting to the live footage of President Trump in Hanoi, I talked about the Vietnam war's domestic impact on the American psyche. It took many decades for that to change, and this Veterans Day movie pick is one of the cultural artifacts of that evolution in perception - a film about soldiering that wears its allegiance in its very title. It was released about six months after 9/11, in the spring of 2002, and in that sense is a movie about an old war seen through the lens of a new one.

The best thing about We Were Soldiers is how bad it is. I don't mean "bad" in the sense that it's written and directed by Randall Wallace, screenwriter of Braveheart (which won Oscars for pretty much everything except its screenplay, which was not overlooked without reason) and Pearl Harbor (whose plonking dialogue has been dwelt on previously in this space). Mr Wallace is as reliably uninspired as you can get. And yet it serves him well here. Pearl Harbor was terrible, but it was professionally terrible, its lame dialogue and cookie- cutter characters and butt-numbingly obvious emotional manipulation skillfully woven together into state-of-the-art Hollywood product. By contrast, in its best moments, We Were Soldiers feels very unHollywoody, as if it's a film not just about soldiers, but made by soldiers - or at any rate by someone who cares more about capturing the spirit of soldiery than about making a cool movie. It's the very opposite of Steven Spielberg's fluid ballet of carnage in Saving Private Ryan, and yet, in its stiffness and squareness, it manages to be moving and dignified in the way that real veterans of hellish battles often are.

This is all the more remarkable considering that it's about the first big engagement of the Vietnam war, in the Ia Drang valley for three days and nights of November 1965. In those days, the word "Vietnam" had barely registered with the American public and the US participation still came under the evasive heading of "advisors". In essence, the 1st Batallion of the 7th Cavalry walked - or helicoptered - into an ambush and, despite being outnumbered five to one by the enemy, managed to extricate themselves. Colonel Hal Moore, the commanding officer of the AirCav hotshots, and Joe Galloway, a UPI reporter who was in the thick of the battle for two days, later wrote a book - a terrific read. That's the source material from which Wallace has made his movie, with Mel Gibson as Moore and Barry Pepper as Galloway.

We Were Soldiers opens with a brisk, unsparing prelude - a massacre of French forces in the very same valley, 11 years earlier. Then we're off to Fort Benning, Georgia a decade later, where Colonel Moore and his grizzled old Sergeant-Major, Basil Plumley (Sam Elliott), are training youngsters for a new kind of cavalry. "We will ride into battle and this will be our horse," announces Moore, as a chopper flies past on cue. Basil Plumley, incidentally, is not in the least bit plummy or Basil-esque. He's the hard-case to Moore's Harvard man, a fairly predictable social tension, at least to those BBC comedy fans who treasure the "Dad's Army" inversion, with lower middle-class Arthur Lowe and his posh sergeant John LeMesurier.

Wallace turns a great book into a clunky film, and at first it seems as if he's doing the usual adapter's shtick of taking a vivid real-life story and shaving all the edges off to fit the usual clichés. The Fort Benning scenes become incredibly irritating in their bland gee-whizzery. There's always some kid around to prompt Mel Gibson to wax philosophical, as when his five-year-old cute-as-a-button daughter asks him, "Daddy, what's a war?"

Meanwhile, Mrs Moore (Madeleine Stowe) serves as den mother to the army wives, clustered around the living room like a convention of 1960s sitcom spouses. One of them is puzzled because she's just been into town and discovered that the local laundromat won't let her wash her coloreds (there's a sign in the window saying "Whites Only"). As in Pearl Harbor, the clothes and hairdos look just right, but the characters and emotional moment feel phony.

But once Mel & Co hit 'Nam, We Were Soldiers lives up to its title, as if happy to have its studio-mandated soppy-girly scenes behind it. At the time of its release, it was fascinating to watch the hasty and not entirely voluntary evolution of the Hollywood war movie post-September 11th. You'll recall the moment in Saving Private Ryan when Tom Hanks says, in all seriousness, that maybe saving Private Ryan will be the one good thing to come out of this lousy war. Hollywood still can't bring itself to be patriotic, to fight for a cause, so in the modern war movie, detached from the morality of the cause, military values - honor, courage, comradeship - exist in a vacuum, the soldier's professionalism its own raison d'être.

That's a problem dramatically, but it's an amazing transformation nevertheless. A Vietnam movie like this would have been unthinkable 20 or 30 years ago, or at any time since John Wayne made The Green Berets. This is a film where soldiers lie burned and bleeding and say "I'm glad I could die for my country" without a trace of Altmanesque irony or Oliver Stoned mockery.

Perhaps the scene that sums up what changed - if only in that brief period of post-9/11 national unity - is the moment when Joe Galloway's fellow members of the press corps are choppered in after the battle. Galloway himself has been transformed by what he's experienced: he understands now, he gets it. Meanwhile, they cluster around Colonel Moore asking the usual idiot how-do-you-feel questions: "How do you feel about the loss of your men, sir? Have you notified their families?" In this film, soldiers are intense, heroic, highly skilled - and the media are a bunch of droning boneheads in safari suits. Who'd have thought it? Considering that for the previous three decades the press congratulated themselves for being the real heroes of Vietnam - getting the truth back to the American people, etc - this scene seems almost heresy.

Mel Gibson? Oh, he's fine, if you make allowances for the wandering southern accent. The real problem is the characterizations of his men, whom Wallace completely fails to distinguish from one another. That's a pity. One of the reasons Colonel Moore wrote his book was to memorialize as individuals, as personalities, the men under his command. It's well worth reading.


Poster Comment:

One of the best war films, imo...

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-13) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#14. To: Liberator (#11)

Now do we include 'Braveheart' in this category?

You can if you want,but I don't see how it relates to the US Military at war.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-12   10:44:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Liberator (#12)

Full metal jacket was also a good flick.

I thought it was almost cartoonish. Granted,I was never in the USMC,but I sincerely hope life in the USMC wasn't like that back then,or ever.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-12   10:46:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: sneakypete (#14)

I don't see how it [Braveheart] relates to the US Military at war.

It doesn't.

However the context IS still "war," tactics, honor, and courage.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-12   10:47:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: sneakypete (#15)

I thought it was almost cartoonish. Granted,I was never in the USMC,but I sincerely hope life in the USMC wasn't like that back then,or ever.

I agree; Over the top for sure.

Might there have been DIs like that and the whole chaotic aftermath? Maybe. I don't have to tell you -- you saw it all.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-12   10:49:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: sneakypete (#13)

I was the guy that came up on the command frequency and gave the General (IIRC,his call sign was Black Jack,which always led me to suspect that General Pershing was an ancestor) a ration of shit for being a shitty leader and a coward because "If you had any balls you would land your goddamn helicopter at the base of that hill and lead the charge yourself,instead of flying around and talking shit to a terrified 17 year old from the safety of being 2000 feet in the air!"?

I thought the MoFo was going to stroke out,and hoping he would. He spit and sputtered and demanded "Who is this? I will have you court-martialed,etc,etc,etc!"

It didn't get any better for him when I told him "You don't know who I am,do you,MoFo? Why not land and come looking for me?"and then laughing at him as he spit and sputtered some more.

Some wild sh*t. Dude, you were certifiable. Lol.

Seems to me you could write a book. A different one than what we've seen. Ever consider it?

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-12   10:52:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: sneakypete, Y'ALL (#6) (Edited)

We Were Soldiers Once is the best movie that has ever been made about the conventional army as it evolves from a peacetime army to a wartime army that has ever been made. As for Plumley,he might seem unique to most of you,but he was pretty typical of the old WW-2 and Korean War senior airborne infantry NCO's I was running into when I enlisted in early 1964.

I enlisted in Jan, 1958, went to jump school with the 11th at Ft. Campbell, before the Division went to Germany. -- Almost all our older sgts were WW-2 and Korean War senior airborne infantry NCO's.

Tough, no nonsense guys, but most were fair, and great soldiers. Same went for most of the older officers. Lots of the younger officers were full of themselves, though.

Ended up two years in Munich, with Co B, 502nd. Great duty, but I was glad to get out.. The petty politics of the peacetime army did me in.

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-12   11:41:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Liberator, Y'ALL, sneakypete (#18)

sneakypete --- I was the guy that came up on the command frequency and gave the General (IIRC,his call sign was Black Jack,which always led me to suspect that General Pershing was an ancestor) a ration of shit for being a shitty leader and a coward ---

Seems to me you could write a book. A different one than what we've seen. Ever consider it? --- Liberator

I'll second that idea, pete...

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-12   11:48:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: misterwhite (#5) (Edited)

" And Blackhawk Down. "

Yes, thanks for mentioning that. Blackhawk Down is an excellent movie ! Sad, but excellent ! Sorry for that omission, that was a grievous oversight on my part !!

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

Never Pick A Fight With An Old Man He Will Just Shoot You He Can't Afford To Get Hurt

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." (Will Rogers)

Stoner  posted on  2017-11-12   13:47:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Stoner (#21)

Sorry for that omission, that was a grievous oversight on my part !!

Nah. Can't get them all.

There are the two 2006 Clint Eastwood films, Flags of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima telling the story of the battle for the island from both sides.

Zulu was a great film. I liked Patton. I saw The Bridge on the River Kwai with my dad when it came out and it made a lasting impression. Das Boot (the original in German with English subtitles) is superb.

And I liked Edge of Tomorrow.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-11-12   14:20:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: tpaine (#0)

We Were Soldiers

Definately a top grade historically accurate movie. Plumly, in real life, was a legend in the army.

rlk  posted on  2017-11-12   17:53:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: tpaine (#0)

Great book and great movie.

Had the honor of briefly meeting General Moore after a presentation at the Command and General Staff College at Leavenworth in 2001. Just a few months before the movie was released.

redleghunter  posted on  2017-11-12   18:39:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: redleghunter, rlk, Y'ALL (#24)

Definately a top grade historically accurate movie. Plumly, in real life, was a legend in the army. --- rlk

Great book and great movie. Had the honor of briefly meeting General Moore after a presentation at the Command and General Staff College at Leavenworth in 2001. Just a few months before the movie was released. --- redleghunter

Never had the honor to meet either man..

I met a kid on a house I was building back in '68 who was in that battle with Moore, -- he was having a tough time working as an apprentice plumber because of his wounds. Lost track of him after that one job tho.. Always wondered how he made out...

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-12   19:43:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: tpaine (#0)

One of the best movies I ever saw! The other was "Hamburger Hill".

goldilucky  posted on  2017-11-12   21:52:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: goldilucky (#26)

One of the best movies I ever saw!

Me too. I've probably seen it half a dozen times, and hope to many more..

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-13   1:07:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Liberator (#17) (Edited)

Might there have been DIs like that and the whole chaotic aftermath? Maybe. I don't have to tell you -- you saw it all.

I know next to nothing about the USMC.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-13   9:52:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: tpaine (#19)

The petty politics of the peacetime army did me in.

I hear ya. If it hadn't been for finding SF,I seriously doubt I would have made it through the 1st enlistment without getting tossed out.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-13   9:56:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: tpaine (#20)

I'll second that idea, pete...

Can't even write more than two sentences here now. AKA seems to have me restricted.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-13   9:57:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: rlk (#23)

Plumly, in real life, was a legend in the army.

ANY kid that grows up with a name like Basil Plumley is going to end up being tough.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-13   10:03:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: redleghunter (#24)

Had the honor of briefly meeting General Moore after a presentation at the Command and General Staff College at Leavenworth in 2001. Just a few months before the movie was released.

I envy you that

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-13   10:05:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: sneakypete, Y'ALL, (#30) (Edited)

Can't even write more than two sentences here now. AKA seems to have me restricted.

I'd bet I'm not alone in wondering what in hell is AKAs problem. --- Why he's obsessed about you promoting the homo agenda baffles me.

Weird...

Just noticed that I had written. --- I enlisted in Jan, 1958. --- Make that Jan, 1955...

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-13   10:20:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: tpaine, sneakypete, A K A Stone (#33)

I'd bet I'm not alone in wondering what in hell is AKAs problem. --- Why he's obsessed about you promoting the homo agenda baffles me.

Weird...

Odd. I think it's weird TO PROMOTE or be neutral about a gay agenda that is insidious, perverse and badly corrupting our youth and culture.

Maybe it's just a coincidence -- both of you guys are atheists, right?

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   10:36:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: redleghunter (#24)

Had the honor of briefly meeting General Moore after a presentation at the Command and General Staff College at Leavenworth in 2001. Just a few months before the movie was released.

Sweet.

Yes, an extreme honor.

'We Were Soldiers' is one of the few DVDs I actually bought.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   10:38:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: sneakypete (#28)

I know next to nothing about the USMC.

I was referring to what happened in the movie.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   10:39:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: All (#36)

Synopsis:

In defense of honor and justice.

Excellent flick.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   10:43:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Liberator (#34) (Edited)

I think it's weird TO PROMOTE or be neutral about a gay agenda that is insidious, perverse and badly corrupting our youth and culture.

Maybe it's just a coincidence -- both of you guys are atheists, right?

It's REALLY weird that you think I'm neutral or promoting the gay agenda. I don't approve of that lifestyle, -- in fact at times I've actively made recruiters of the life aware of that, -- but I'm not homophobic either.

I'm agnostic, not athiest. -- Big difference. -- Feel free to think what you like about religion, but I'd prefer if you stay out of my face about it.

BTW, -- I previously phrased this sentence awkwardly, --- 'Why he's obsessed about you promoting the homo agenda baffles me.'

I should have written, -- Why he's obsessed about you (supposedly) promoting the homo agenda baffles me.

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-13   11:29:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: tpaine, A K A Stone, sneakypete (#38) (Edited)

It's REALLY weird that you think I'm neutral or promoting the gay agenda. I don't approve of that lifestyle, -- in fact at times I've actively made recruiters of the life aware of that, -- but I'm not homophobic either.

You to Pete:

"I'd bet I'm not alone in wondering what in hell is AKAs problem. --- Why he's obsessed about you promoting the homo agenda baffles me."

Frankly, Pete has always supported homos and their agenda.

(btw, I will not accept the propagandist term, "homophobic" or any of the "phobic" suffixes designed to label, target, and shut-down those who oppose the various positions of destructive, perverse insanity.)

That said, do you actually fear the notion that one might suspect that you oppose the Gay Agenda? OR homosexuality in general? (Not that you are expected to be aggressive in public about it.)

I'm agnostic, not athiest. -- Big difference. -- Feel free to think what you like about religion, but I'd prefer if you stay out of my face about it.

"Stay out of my face about it"? What's that even mean?

Atheist/Agnostic -- basically the same thing. Whatever.

I should have written, -- Why he's obsessed about you (supposedly) promoting the homo agenda baffles me.

I'm not sure I understand your above statement. EDIT: Wait I do. It's with respect to Pete and Stone. Never mind.

HERE is the reason for an aggressive stance against militant homosexuality:

Homofascists in High Places with an Agenda have taken control of major institutions, are corrupting the minds and souls of the innocent, the young, and weak-minded; and are attempting to indoctrinate and criminalize those who openly oppose their declaration of war on everything right, normal, and decent. For starters. And WE are tired of it.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   12:59:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Liberator (#39)

Homofascists in High Places with an Agenda have taken control of major institutions, are corrupting the minds and souls of the innocent, the young, and weak-minded; and are attempting to indoctrinate and criminalize those who openly oppose their declaration of war on everything right, normal, and decent. For starters. And WE are tired of it.

Atheist/Agnostic -- basically the same thing. Whatever.

Stay out of my face about it"? What's that even mean?

I'm agnostic, not athiest. -- Big difference. -- Feel free to think what you like about religion, (or most ANY damn thing) but I'd prefer if you stay out of my face about it.

It means I don't like to get aggressive about it, but I have in the past, and will again if pressed.

I'd suggest you calm yourself about calling people atheists. It's a nasty word in my opinion. -- And most of the WE that I know, are tired of it.

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-13   13:30:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: tpaine (#40) (Edited)

I'd suggest you calm yourself about calling people atheists. It's a nasty word in my opinion. -- And most of the WE that I know, are tired of it.

I'm very calm. But you obviously aren't.

Since when is the truth "nasty"?? Your bristling overreaction is par for the Atheist OR Agnostic course.

Yes, WE I can tell your "We" brethren are "tired of it"; The recent not-so-little incident in SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Texas reinforced what happens when militant Atheists get "tired of it." Same thing has happened elsewhere. As in that OTHER Christian church where a congregation of Black Church-goers in Charleston, SC was shot up by another Atheist.

Should the rest of us expect much more because your ilk feel dissed or "tired of it"?

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-13   13:52:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Liberator (#41)

I'd suggest you calm yourself about calling people atheists. It's a nasty word in my opinion. -- And most of the WE that I know, are tired of it.

I'm very calm. But you obviously aren't. ---- Since when is the truth "nasty"?? Your bristling overreaction is par for the Atheist OR Agnostic course.

Yes, WE I can tell your "We" brethren are "tired of it"; The recent not-so-little incident in SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Texas reinforced what happens when militant Atheists get "tired of it." Same thing has happened elsewhere. As in that OTHER Christian church where a congregation of Black Church-goers in Charleston, SC was shot up by another Atheist.

Should the rest of us expect much more because your ilk feel dissed or "tired of it"?

I just laughed that you're imagining that I'm overreacting/bristling over your opinion that calling someone an athiest is NOT a nasty pejorative.

It's a fighting word where I come from. Only if someone admits it, -- is it 'truth'..

Blaming church shootings on 'atheists' is the religious equivalent of racebaiting, imho.. You know damn well it came out that the Texas crazy was after his wife's family.. And I have no idea what caused the black church shooting. -- It sure wasn't caused by an agnostic. You really do need to calm yourself.. Religious fervor always tends to look a bit crazy

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-13   14:40:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Liberator (#39)

Frankly, Pete has always supported homos and their agenda.

Not only wrong,but an outright lie.

FUCK YOU,AKA. Only a punk limits responses to 25 words or less. What are you afraid of,being exp

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-14   8:32:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Liberator (#41)

Blaming church shootings on 'atheists' is the religious equivalent of racebaiting, imho.. You know damn well it came out that the Texas crazy was after his wife's family.. And I have no idea what caused the black church shooting. -- It sure wasn't caused by an agnostic.

You really do need to calm yourself.. Religious fervor always tends to look a bit crazy.

Any comments?

I see you're replying to me this morning on another subject. Does this mean you've accepted the fact that my agnosticism has nothing to do with atheistic fanatics?

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-15   13:40:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: tpaine (#44) (Edited)

Blaming church shootings on 'atheists' is the religious equivalent of racebaiting, imho.. You know damn well it came out that the Texas crazy was after his wife's family.. And I have no idea what caused the black church shooting. -- It sure wasn't caused by an agnostic.

I partially blame it on what's become an un-holy hostile crusade on the part of militant Atheists/Agnostics.

My opinion is based on irrefutable facts. That said, I am sensitive to the notion that folks like you can't help but take my opinion on the matter as an personal indictment -- but it shouldn't be.

Look -- ALL these shooters are "crazy." BUT they also share many of the same philosophies and hatreds. This same anti-Christian, anti-conservatve, anti-White bigotry and hatred has been encouraged by the MSM, entertainment outlets, and talking heads, 24/7. I don't have to tell you the obvious....

Simply and unfortunately, the liberal-progressive establishment are rabidly anti-Christian...as well as anti-Conservative, anti-White, anti-American MSM. These institutions have preyed upon the weak and cray-cray, indoctrinated them, convinced them that "THE ENEMY" are Christian, White, and the "Privileged."

The perp in the black church shooting...occurred in a CHURCH. What else needs to be said? The MSM narrative was "anti-Black" and NOT "anti-Christian." I construed the slaughter as "anti-Christian."

You really do need to calm yourself.. Religious fervor always tends to look a bit crazy.

When Christian groups or individuals start publicly calling for the killing of Atheists, then DO IT, THEN talk from a position of impartiality, friend. For now, the Media, Academia, Leftist social media, and "Entertainment" outlets have ALL targeted Christians for hate, hostility, and revenge.

I see you're replying to me this morning on another subject. Does this mean you've accepted the fact that my agnosticism has nothing to do with atheistic fanatics?

I am not conflating your beliefs, your personal ethics and morals with nutty Atheists-Agnotsics. Only the fact that Agnostics are Atheists on any given day. And that militant Atheists and Agnostics are indeed hostiles to varying degrees, again, depending on the day and conversation.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-15   14:22:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Liberator (#45)

I see you're replying to me this morning on another subject. Does this mean you've accepted the fact that my agnosticism has nothing to do with atheistic fanatics?

I am not conflating your beliefs, your personal ethics and morals with nutty Atheists-Agnotsics. Only the fact that Agnostics are Atheists on any given day. And that militant Atheists and Agnostics are indeed hostiles to varying degrees, again, depending on the day and conversation.

Weird, because to me, you are conflating my beliefs, my personal ethics and morals with nutty Atheists.

It is NOT a "fact that Agnostics are Atheists on any given day".

I have no idea who's been telling you these 'facts', but they are divisive opinions, of the worse sort. --- Very unchristian, imho..

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-15   15:06:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: tpaine (#46)

It is NOT a "fact that Agnostics are Atheists on any given day".

By definition, an Agnostic believes there may or MAY NOT believe in God. OR "doesn't know."

I have no idea who's been telling you these 'facts', but they are divisive opinions, of the worse sort. --- Very unchristian, imho..

Sorry you find it difficult to understand this Christian's perspective.

"Fundies" are often derided for their honest opinion. AND faith and un-compromising beliefs. And occasionally for our "un-Christian" beliefs. BY Atheists and Agnostics. Ironic, no?

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-15   15:18:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Liberator (#45)

Religious fervor always tends to look a bit crazy.

When Christian groups or individuals start publicly calling for the killing of Atheists, then DO IT, THEN talk from a position of impartiality, friend.

For now, the Media, Academia, Leftist social media, and "Entertainment" outlets have ALL targeted Christians for hate, hostility, and revenge.

That's what agnostics do, friend. -- we admit we don't have a clue about God, and impartially ask that others respect our position.

I urge the Media, Academia, Leftist social media, and "Entertainment" outlets to stop targeting Christians for hate, hostility, and revenge. -- and pledged long ago to do my constitutional duty to defend our concepts about freedom of religion..

Far to many religious fanatics have forgotten that duty. -- IMHO...

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-15   15:20:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: tpaine (#48)

I urge the Media, Academia, Leftist social media, and "Entertainment" outlets to stop targeting Christians for hate, hostility, and revenge. -- and pledged long ago to do my constitutional duty to defend our concepts about freedom of religion..

Far to many religious fanatics have forgotten that duty. -- IMHO...

Thanks...Amen to all that.

Paine, I respect your opinions and integrity -- even when we disagree.

We are both put in tough positions. We can't broadbrush. And I guess we're all guilty of it at times. I can imagine how hard the current incendiary climate is on conservative blacks. They are in the same situation of being broad-brushed as "lazy", "Whitey-hating" and ignorant.

Good lesson for me, good lesson for all of us.

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Liberator  posted on  2017-11-15   15:27:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Liberator (#47)

an Agnostic believes there may or MAY NOT believe in God. OR "doesn't know."

Just to clarify...

An Agnostic believes there may be a God. OR "doesn't know."

Only atheists insist/believe that there is no God..

Thanks for your last post....

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-15   15:39:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: tpaine, Liberator (#50)

An Agnostic believes there may be a God. OR "doesn't know."

Only atheists insist/believe that there is no God..

More correctly,we agnostics don't get "preachy bout it".

This is a free country,and everyone has the right to believe anything they want to believe,as long as they don't think their beliefs give them a right to hurt non-believers.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-15   23:35:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: sneakypete, Y'ALL (#51)

we agnostics don't get "preachy bout it".

This is a free country,and everyone has the right to believe anything they want to believe,as long as they don't think their beliefs give them a right to hurt non-believers.

I've never understood the compulsion some have to 'get preachy' about personal beliefs.

I'd guess they don't realize,_-- that type of behavior almost never changes anything.

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-16   13:32:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: tpaine (#52)

I've never understood the compulsion some have to 'get preachy' about personal beliefs.

This is going to piss some people off,but the reason for it is more people are herd animals,and need the positive re-enforcement of being a insider.

With organized religion,often times it goes further than that. The people who have the most to fear if there is a God and he is accurately depicted in the Bible are often the loudest and most devout of the "true believers".

They are drawn to the whole "do anything to everybody you want all week,and be forgiven by going to church and kissing a little holy ass on the weekends,and you are golden!" philosophy.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2017-11-16   18:23:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: sneakypete (#53)

The people who have the most to fear if there is a God and he is accurately depicted in the Bible are often the loudest and most devout of the "true believers".

They are drawn to the whole "do anything to everybody you want all week,and be forgiven by going to church and kissing a little holy ass on the weekends,and you are golden!" philosophy.

I've know a lot of hypocrites, and agree that type are the worse, by far.

Fortunately, I've never had to live in overly religious areas. -- Urban Minnesota and California are virtually hotbeds of agnosticism..

tpaine  posted on  2017-11-16   19:02:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com