Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old October 27th, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,494
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default Are All Cops, Military and Police Fags?

I say yes. Not sexually, most of them are average. But mentally, I say the vast and overriding majority of blues and greens are mentally homosexual. They are passives who like licking ass as much as kicking it. For every instance of a cop doing something physically courageous, one hears ten examples of a cop bullying someone in no position to resist. For every instance of cop displaying moral courage - but such a thing is unthinkable.

Surprised by Disaster


by Fred Reed

In re Afghanistan, why, you might ask, is the world’s hugest, expensivest, most begadgeted military unable to defeat a few thousand angry tribesmen armed with AKs and RPGs?

Easy: Character. The men running the war are mentally the wrong ones to do it.

Think about this for a moment. Suppose that your boss at the lab or law firm or newsroom demanded that, when he entered the room, you leapt spasmodically to your feet, stood rigidly erect with your feet at a forty-five degree angle like a congenitally deformed duck, and stared straight ahead until he gave you permission to relax. You would think, correctly, that he was crazy as a bedbug. If he then required reporters to stand in a square so he could inspect their belt buckles, you would either figure he was a gay blade or call for a struggle buggy and some big orderlies. This weird posturing is not normal, nor are those it appeals to.

Suppose you showed up for freshman orientation at Princeton and your professors bellowed at the tops of their voices, three inches from your face, “Your shoes ain’t shined good, puke. Get down and give me fifty.” (Pushups, that is, which in the military doesn’t mean the better sort of bra.) You would decide that the loon had lost whatever mind he had ever had, and call Domino’s for a cheese pizza, double Haldol.

Should you be so unwary as to suggest the foregoing in print, the response will usually be that militaries need discipline. True, and so do newspapers. However, there is a distinction between discipline and ritualized lunacy. At every publication for which I have worked, the editor was clearly and absolutely in charge. Yet I, seldom senior, could say, “Yeah, Wes, but if we do that, won’t thus-and-so bad thing happen?” His decision was law, but he was happy to hear from subordinates, who might know something he didn’t. Editors do not require vaguely sadomasochistic submissiveness.

This hoopla is not of use in combat. The Taliban seem to be doing rather well. Do you suppose their commanders check their beds to be sure that a quarter will bounce from their blankets?

Now, what kind of kid wants to go for robot training at West Point or boat school at Annapolis? Statistically these kids are bright, gregarious, “motivated” (a favorite military word), athletic, perhaps Eagle Scouts. Psychologically they want (need?) to live under a regime of rigid conformity and obedience that would appear as absurd as it is if we were not accustomed to seeing it among soldiers. That is, they are autoselected not to think for themselves or question decisions from above. They are exactly what universities exist not to produce.

The service academies reinforce these unfortunate characteristics. Their schooling consists of four years of learning what to think, not how to think. There are hours of running in formation (“If I die on the Russian front….”), close-order drill, manual of arms (“Hen-spection…harms!”). Why? There is no military value in being able to shift your rifle from shoulder to shoulder crisply. Like the endless inspections of everything, all of this participation in the hive inculcates groupishness and a curious sense of safety in conformity.

The effects are remarkable and, from a standpoint of civilization, undesirable. Large authoritarian organizations make easier the compartmentalization of morality. A colonel typically will be a good neighbor, civic-minded, responsible, unlikely to steal your silverware or kick your dog. If the Pentagon tells him to bomb a city he has never heard of and has no reason to bomb, killing people who pose no threat to him, he will. He feels no individual responsibility for atrocious behavior ordered from above. “I vas only followink orders,” the Nuremberg defense, is the bedrock of military ethics, if any.

Men trained in conformist obedience can work marvels. They just don’t care whether the marvel is good or evil. If you need to handle some vast natural disaster, call on the military. They have the manpower, the aircraft, the medics, the co-operation to get things done now. They will stay on their feet for forty-eight hours without sleep. They take the “mission” (another favorite military word) seriously.

What they do not do particularly well is wage war. Why? Because they have in their minds a view of war that is partly that of offensive linemen – you close with the enemy and destroy him – and partly martial romanticism. They speak of duty, honor, country, bravery, fallen comrades, proving oneself. Military history is rife with silly pageantry, nobility of spirit, glorious charges, and impracticality. Having been trained to think rigidly, they do.

Before Agincourt, there were things the French might profitably have learned about long bows, but didn’t bother because chivalry didn’t concern itself with peasants. It was the glory of the thing, not whether they were committing suicide. English generals killed 20,000 young Brits in one day at the Somme; they hadn’t compared the ideas in their heads with then-current military reality (such as that infantry charges over long distances against massed machine guns, artillery, and barbed wire are not especially productive, unless you manufacture embalming fluid). Authoritarian group-think, love of ritual, romanticism, inattention: not a happy brew.

Further, military service encourages an often-catastrophic sense of masculine potency. Running in formation with fifty other men (“lef-rye-lef-rye-lef-rye-layeff….”) or watching a fighter cat-shot from a carrier deck – the thrill is gonadal, appealing to something deep in the male psyche, a challenge flung at life. It is wonderful, but not a sound basis for judgement.

A consequence is a tendency for militaries of the First World to gravely overestimate themselves, and thus underestimate their enemies. This is why they usually expect wars to be far shorter and cheaper than they turn out to be. As recent examples, the French did not expect those slanty-eyed little zipperheads (les jaunes) to win in Viet Nam, nor did the Pentagon have any idea they the US could possibly lose 60,000 dead and the war in that country, Iraq would be a cakewalk, and those louse-infested towel-heads in Afghanistan had no hope against American swoosh-kerpows. The US military in particular has a compulsory can-do attitude, with slogans like “The difficult we can do today, the impossible takes a bit longer.” This substitution of morale for comprehension is regularly disastrous.

Having no idea what they are getting into is almost doctrine among professional officers. A major does not become a colonel by saying, “General, the French didn’t do all that well at Dien Bien Phu. Maybe we ought to, you know, do something else. We could invade Vanuatu.”

America’s problem is not that its generals prepare for the last war, but that they don’t prepare for it, and then fight it again the same way.

October 27, 2009

Fred Reed is author of Nekkid in Austin: Drop Your Inner Child Down a Well and A Brass Pole in Bangkok: A Thing I Aspire to Be. His latest book is Curmudgeing Through Paradise: Reports from a Fractal Dung Beetle. Visit his blog.


http://www.fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #2
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Quote:
America’s problem is not that its generals prepare for the last war, but that they don’t prepare for it, and then fight it again the same way.
If they ever bothered to pick up a history book they would find that the Afghan's record is something like 99 and 0 with the best home field advantage in league history.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #3
Oy Ze Hate
We're the Good Guys
 
Oy Ze Hate's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pediatric Burn Unit
Posts: 4,776
Oy Ze Hate
Default

The American military legacy: crossing oceans to defend America. Not since the Mexican-American war has the American military fought any kind of defensive war. And in both world wars (mass Aryan sacrifices), ZOG sent American kids to hop in at the end and ride the coattails of other nations. Namely France and England in the first and primarily Russia in the second. Whilst adding a couple of cowardly nukes on Japan in the latter.

*Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen because Christian missionaries had had great success in those two cities

America doesn't suck. But its government does, harder than any other government in the world, by far. And the way the kikes have arranged things, the people have become unwitting victims of a system they aren't really even aware of.

I used to think Private Pyle was the bad guy in Full Metal Jacket. Now I cheer him every time he blows away that asshole Sargent Hartman. Stanley Kubrick was a good jew. I like the way he portrayed the alien world of white people his jewish soul resided in.

Fuck the ZOG's men in uniform! They're hardly more than bullet salesman for the munitions makers. Defending freedom my ass.

http://incogman.wordpress.com/2009/1...-by-oligarchs/

"Kill all you can kill."

I'd rather go to prison for nothing than join America's military and fight for Israel.

Last edited by Oy Ze Hate; October 27th, 2009 at 12:38 PM.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,494
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

I just see them all as a bunch of shit eaters. And when you point out they're eating shit, they taser you.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #5
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,494
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Wise men and etymologists agree that 'cop' is short for coprophage.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #6
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,263
Mike in Denver
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Wise men and etymologists agree that 'cop' is short for coprophage.
I hate to do this and spoil the fun of another poster who would prefer to do his own Google searches, but...

Coprophagia or Coprophagy

"...eating feces; in human a symptom of some kinds of insanity."

"...is the literal eating of shit."

Wow! A word a day.

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #7
COTW
Overseer
 
COTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Land of Cotton
Posts: 2,602
COTW
Default There's a time and a place for everything

Speaking of the ritualized lunacy in the article I was reminded of a funny story in a book I read about the American civil war. In Bruce Catton's, 'This Hallowed Ground' it tells of a short story about a Charles C. Gilbert, a short term general in the union army.

Quote:
The army had been puching along hard for days and the men were dead on their feet. Near midnight one exhausted column dropped by the roadside for a short breather when Gilbert and his staff went trotting by. Gilbert saw the sleeping men and was offended that nobody bothered to call them to attention and offer a salute so he collared the first officer he saw - a sleepy captain of infantry - and angrilly demanded:
"What regiment is this?"
"Tenth Indiana"
"Pretty damn regiment. Why in hell don't you get up and salute me when I pass?"
"Who in the hell are you?"
"Major General Gilbert, by God, sir. Give me your sword, sir, you are under arrest."

This racket roused the regiment's colonel, who came up to defend his captain. Gilbert turned on him furiously, saying that he should have had the regiment lining the road at present arms when the corps commander rode by. The colonel replied with some heat: his men had been marching day and night for a week, and he "would not hold a dress parade at midnight for any damned fool living." The 10th Indiana, retorted Gilbert, was no better than an armed mob, and he would disgrace it; he would take it's colors away that the army might know its shame.

The regiment was awake and on its feet by now, and the color sergeant took a hand in this row between colonel and major general. He would kill General Gilbert, he announced loudly, if so much as touched the regiment's colors. There was a loud murmur of approval, and one enlisted man shouldered his way up to General Gilbert and cried: "Here, you damned son of a bitch, get out of here or you're a dead man." Someone fired a musket, and some other person thrust a bayonet into Gilbert's horse, causing the poor beast to spring into the air and take off in a headlong gallup. Gilbert's staff followed, more horses were jabbed as they went by, and as the general disappeared into the darkness, still unsaluted, the 10th Indiana called after him, in confused angry chorus, that it would happily shoot him if it ever saw him again.
p.215
__________________
"To speak his thoughts is every freeman's right, in peace and war, in council and in fight."
Homer-The Iliad

"The very aim and end of our institutions is just this: that we may think what we like and say what we think."

-Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

 
Old October 27th, 2009 #8
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

Sir- may I ask you a question?

"Did you ever take an oath to support the Constitution?"

"Yes Sir!"

"Did you read it?"

"Huh?"

"Did you read the Constitution?'

"Uh uh uh uh uh uh. . ."

Do you know the meaning of the ninth and tenth amendments?

"Uh uh uh uh uh uh. . ."

Do you know that ninety to ninety-five percent of "laws" violate one of these amendments?

"uh uh uh uh uh. . .Got any ID?"
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #9
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,948
steven clark
Default

It was always said back in the 70's that officers in the army hate communism, a dictatorial state control, and believe in freedom and capitalism...but they have socialised social, medical, and housing situation in the military, they demand all kinds of benefits for having 'served', and when retired, expect to get jobs in the business and defense industries because of 'having served.'

They supposedly fight against the kind of system that they clock in twenty years of their lives for, and don't want the civilians to have it. 'Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.'
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #10
CharlesEagan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 230
CharlesEagan
Default

People who are activists for an unpopular cause will probably dislike 'cops' after they get disrespected, or worse, for a good cause. That Fred Phelps really started raving about the police when they punched one of their protestors, but I'm sure if you pick a fight with them , they are human and will respond, but of course, they know when the unctuous, oily sneak weasels are trying to butter them up too, sniffing their boots like the evil little bitches they are, they need kicked in the face, too, for liberty to flourish.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #11
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,263
Mike in Denver
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesEagan View Post
People who are activists for an unpopular cause will probably dislike 'cops' after they get disrespected, or worse, for a good cause. That Fred Phelps really started raving about the police when they punched one of their protestors, but I'm sure if you pick a fight with them , they are human and will respond, but of course, they know when the unctuous, oily sneak weasels are trying to butter them up too, sniffing their boots like the evil little bitches they are, they need kicked in the face, too, for liberty to flourish.
Well done! I can't do as well as you, but I can give it a try:

"Elegant ladies benefiting grand sheer pedigree brilliant butler sport. Sterling member, repertoire, symphony, caviar luxury. Investments treasure impresario cigar designer, blissful noble art ladies symbolizing."

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #12
CharlesEagan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 230
CharlesEagan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Denver View Post
Well done! I can't do as well as you, but I can give it a try:

"Elegant ladies benefiting grand sheer pedigree brilliant butler sport. Sterling member, repertoire, symphony, caviar luxury. Investments treasure impresario cigar designer, blissful noble art ladies symbolizing."

Mike
FAggots all envision themselves as Bugs Bunny types and heterosexuals as Elmer fudd types, they really believe they're smarter and more sophisticated because they suck other mens' cocks, they are no different than another other person, they believe their differences are what make them superior.

All these commies think they're so intellectually superior because they hate superior people, the fact that they are NOT superior is their main difference, which they percieve is what makes them superior.
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #13
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,263
Mike in Denver
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesEagan View Post
FAggots all envision themselves as Bugs Bunny types and heterosexuals as Elmer fudd types, they really believe they're smarter and more sophisticated because they suck other mens' cocks, they are no different than another other person, they believe their differences are what make them superior.

All these commies think they're so intellectually superior because they hate superior people, the fact that they are NOT superior is their main difference, which they percieve is what makes them superior.
Rejection trashes Communists. The controlled opponent pitches the affect outside a derived seat. Communists refers to rejection. Communists farms above the effort. Should the priest subsidize Communists? The tea serves as the estate.

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"
 
Old October 27th, 2009 #14
Grogan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Nunya
Posts: 36
Grogan
Default

SWAT is the perfect example. Those men will kill you without knowing or caring why they were ordered to do it. They're subservient to the max.

The street cop has a little more flexibility, but when lick cums to suck, they will kill you in a heartbeat per verbal order.

Cops are not my friends. Feds are enemies.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 PM.
Page generated in 0.18581 seconds.