Ace of Spades HQ

« NRO, Again: 14th Amendment Does Not Grant Citizenship To All Persons Born In US? | Main | Superhero Quiz »

July 08, 2005

Excitable Andy Finally Addresses Support For Rough Tactics With Terrorist Detainees, Oh So Long Ago

The Mercurial Martinet has finally addressed the quotes dug up by Taranto (and, um, first by me) in which Sullivan was pretty damn gung-ho about arm twisting and other forms of "abuse" against murderous monsters.

Listen to this f'n' jackass spin:

Nothing I'm not used to. Yesterday, James Taranto took yet another dig at my early attitude to reports of "poor treatment" of terrorist captives. In January 2002 and for a while thereafter, I somewhat summarily dismissed reports of mistreatment of detainees as probably enemy propaganda and certainly not something that should worry us too much:
These terrorists are not soldiers. They are beneath such an honorific. They are not even criminals. In that respect, Dick Cheney's and Donald Rumsfeld's contempt for the whines of those complaining about poor treatment is fully justified.

I'm not proud of those sentences, but they rested on a basic level of trust that of course enemy combatants might be treated roughly, but would not be subject to systematic abuse, torture or beatings.

Asshole, what the fuck does "treated roughly" mean if not "abuse" and "beatings"? What the fuck did you think you were talking about? Denying terrorists the right to watch VH-1's Behind the Music: ? & The Mysterions?

And as for torture: let's say this hysterical little twat has cried "torture!" after ridiculous reports of female soldiers forcibly raping (via the vagina, not some object) male terrorist prisoners. (See beyond the jump; content warning.)

This was the American military. This was the Bush administration, people I trusted. I had no idea - and perhaps I should be held responsible for my naivete -

Perhaps. But only "perhaps."

Remember, this was also before Bush supported the Federal Marriage Amendment.

-that memos were being written allowing for torture and abuse to occur under the legal cover of a president's wartime authority.

The memos did not allow torture. They did allow mild non-injurious coercive contact.

The self-same "rought treatment" Andy was once so high on.

Abu Ghraib had not yet been exposed.

Fuck you, pal. That was pretty obviously Amateur Hour. Real, trained torturers don't take pictures of their torture sessions and send them around through cell-phones.

And stacking prisoners in a game of Naked Arab Jenga is not generally considered a useful interrogation tactic.

The hundreds of incidents of abuse, the dozens of prisoners who died while in captivity, the smaller number who have indeed been confirmed as tortured to death: these facts I did not then know. But after Abu Ghraib, I obviously changed my tune.

Just in case you're keeping track: Abu Ghraib was right around the time of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's decision on gay marriage, and Bush's opposition that ruling.

Not that there's a connection.

If that could happen, I worried about what else could have occurred. I read the record. I explored the evidence. I came to a different conclusion. The facts available to me changed; and so I changed my mind. Why is that open process to be mocked? When you blog half a million words a year, and you do so for five years, and you use the blog form as a way to think out loud, the notion that your views will remain identical throughout strikes me as preposterous. When the facts available to me change, I change my mind. But then I guess I'm not James Taranto.

When people change their minds, it's considered forthright to admit doing so. They ought not need be badgered into it by the mocking of Taranto (and myself).

Why was he mocked? Because he would not admit he changed his tune. And without the mocking-- he'd have never have admitted it.

Just like his stealthy shift in allegiance to Kerry-- something else he didn't admit until mocked about it by writers at NRO's The Corner.

Forced to admit he's changed his position, he now pats himself on the back for doing so... but what's so terrific about changing one's position? There's nothing necessarily wrong with it; but the Shrill Shill just keeps heaping praise upon himself for everyfuckinglittlething he does.

I've changed my position on Andrew Sullivan. Am I similarly heroic?

From The Vault: Excitable Andy Loses His Shit Over Claims of "Rape" By Female Soldiers. Content Warning.

The Mercurial Martinet also found it quite plausible that female US soldiers were raping dirty filthy terrorist prisoners, and got quite excited (in a bad way) about it.

As I, um, "reported," way back in February:

[Sullivan's histrionic post, quoting a Time article (I believe):] One plaintiff, identified only as Neisef, claims that after he was taken from his home on the outskirts of Baghdad last November and sent to Abu Ghraib, Americans made him disrobe and attached electrical wires to his genitals. He claims he was shocked three times. Although a vein in his penis ruptured and he had blood in his urine, he says, he was refused medical attention. In another session, Neisef claims, he was held down by two men while a uniformed woman forced him to have sex with her. "I was crying," said Neisef, 28. "I felt like my whole manhood was gone."

Hmmmm... two men forced this poor man down, while a woman forced him to have sex with her.

This is a Penthouse Forum fantasy, not a credible fucking charge. This is the sort of fantasy concocted by a sexually-repressed Islamoretard who believes such things are possible in the decadent US.

We should be so lucky.

Dear Penthouse Forum,
My name is Neisef, and I am a student at a large Middle-Eastern university. I never thought these letters were real, until something happened to me to make me believe all these stories were true.

I had been unjustly taken prisoner for attempting to give chocolates and flowers to an infidel occupier. On my third day of captivity, a woman interrogator demanded I strip off my clothes and begin caressing her breasts. She called herself "Sasha," and she seemed to be a Jew kaffir. Although she was the degenerate offspring of pigs and apes, Allah have mercy, she also had the juiciest 38DD Kasabah melons and an ass like a two-year-old colt donkey...

Riiiiiiight.

How many forcible genital rapes of men -- by women -- occur each year?

How about each fucking decade?

How about in all of recorded human history?

Woman occasionally, but rarely, commit sex offenses at all. They commit statutory rape on rare occasions. On even rarer occasions, they might sodomize another person -- male or female -- with a digit or object.

But forcing a man to have actual genital-to-genital sex-- against his will? How many women are so hard-up they need to rape a dirty, filthy terrorist prisoner?

Let me get this straight: This woman couldn't get voluntary sex from a man... in the United States Armed Forces.

Talk about not being able to get laid in women's prison with a fistful of pardons. Talk about not being able to get your leg humped in a kennel with your pockets filled with lunchmeat and chew-toys.

If it's true that this woman couldn't manage to get voluntary sex from 135,000 horny, sexually-deprived soldiers and therfore raped a dirty, stinking prisoner, then I'd say right there is your reason why we can't allow any additional gay men in the military.

Why, look at the tragic results! If only one man stationed in Iraq had been attracted to the female sex, all of this ugliness might have been avoided.

And how the hell does the man maintain an erection during this "violation"?

I don't say this is impossible. I will say it is so unlikely to be laugh-out-loud ludicrous, especially without serious corroborating evidence.

But I'm not surprised that the very objective Time magazine reports this, nor that the very independent, still-deciding-between-Bush-and-Kerry Randy Andy cites this article as a damning indictment.

PS: While I was away at the beatuiful Mount Airy Lodge, I was abducted and chain-raped by a gang of buxom Catholic high-school cheerleaders.

And yes, I know I will be harrangued for continuing to write about my violation.

But I won't let that stop me. I will soldier on bravely, and see if I can't interest Cinemax in filming my sordid story, which I've tentatively titled Man-Handled: The Greatest Fucking Thing That Ever Fucking Happened to Me In My Entire Fucking Life.

...

Back to the current post.

Remember: George Bush's support of the FMA had nothing at all to do with the Narcisstic Nabob's suddenly finding it credible that female US soldiers -- with, quite literally, tens of thousands of willing male sexual partners to choose from -- were raping terrorist detainees.

Uh-fuckin'-huh.

The Excitable One says his mind was changed by reading "the record."

The only "record" he's ever cared about is his Who's Hot/Who's Not list on gay marriage supporters.

It's so sad being the only independent-minded truth-teller in America. If it weren't for the $100K in "bandwidth fund donations" I get every year, honestly, I don't know how I'd soldier on.

Jackass twerp.

Thanks to Allah for the pic.

posted by Ace at 05:15 PM

Comments

Look in these eyes.

Do you really want to hurt him?

Do you really want to make him cry?

Posted by: Allah on July 8, 2005 05:21 PM

I demand to be taken prisoner by an all-female Delta Force team and interrogated, brutally, for days and nights on end. Lack of sleep, inappropriate contact - make that very inappropriate contact - and unconventional restraints gladly welcomed. I'll waive all my rights and I'll register in open court as an "unlawful enemy combatant" right now. Hell, I'll renounce my citizenship and convert to fuckin' Islam, as long as the US Army promises to never, ever let me go free in my entire life.

And that no one remotely resembling Lynndie England ever comes near me. Now that would be cruel and unusual.

Posted by: Megan on July 8, 2005 05:31 PM

Ugh. That whole article is vomit.

Posted by: lauraw on July 8, 2005 05:31 PM

Allah:

It's almost impossible these days NOT to hurt the excitable one, or to NOT make the shrill shill cry.

Although, if you really want to make him cry, suggest that a weekend of consensual "gimping" and "gag balls" is torture under his newly evolved sensibilities.

It's karma baby. And AS is just our little Karma Chameleon.

Posted by: Jack M. on July 8, 2005 05:31 PM

Ace, that was the greatest post ever. If you'd like to retire, do it now, and go out on top.

Josh

Posted by: Josh Martin on July 8, 2005 05:32 PM

You're on f$%#ing fire today

Posted by: brak on July 8, 2005 05:33 PM

Oh my.... I need a moment to catch my breath now. :)

Posted by: NickS on July 8, 2005 05:36 PM

I archived that pic for future Photoshopping the moment I saw it. He looks exactly like Sally Struthers during those Africa aid commercials. "Won't you please help?"

Posted by: Allah on July 8, 2005 05:40 PM

Megan,

Stop being so shy and tell us how you really feel about being with other women.

Ace, is she allowed to supplement with pictures or are you still pretending this is "not that kinda site

Posted by: TheDude on July 8, 2005 05:42 PM

I've been feeling deprived lately. Gotta find me a Koran.

Posted by: Megan on July 8, 2005 05:43 PM

Allah - now you're just being mean. I'm sure Sally Struthers has more back hair.

Posted by: Megan on July 8, 2005 05:43 PM

Always nice to see another ignorant fool talk about male rape. Go ahead and cheapen it. It's more common than you think:

http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32361

But then again why let facts get in your way.

Posted by: Tristan on July 8, 2005 05:49 PM

I can just picture a P-Town karaoke bar:

"Give me tiiiiiime
To realize my crimes...."

Posted by: Sean M. on July 8, 2005 05:50 PM

Tristan,

A lot of men are raped. By other men.

Please cite me the numbers for vagina-to-penis woman-on-man rapes.

Posted by: ace on July 8, 2005 05:52 PM

Let's consider:

Men are stronger than women. Even slight men are stronger than athletic women (or at least it's close).

Even strong women are more subject to physical injury than men, having to do with female physignomy. Like, for example-- their necks are weaker and more easily broken.

Women can pretty much get laid with skillful come-on lines like "Hello" or "Can you point out the nearest burrito place?"

Men need to have some sort of sexual interest to maintain an erect penis. Tough to do with a gun pointed at your temple or a knife pressing at your throat.

Women are simply not involved in many sex-crimes at all. The numbers are not trivial. But they are DWARFED by the number of men committing sex-crimes.

Finally: It's just fuckin' stupid.

Has there EVER been a man forcibly raped, genital-to-genital, by a woman? It's a big world and we've had a lot of history, so I'd say "Yes."

How often does this happen?

I'm guessing "Not very often at all."

Posted by: ace on July 8, 2005 05:57 PM

"Women are simply not involved in many sex-crimes at all. The numbers are not trivial."

The numbers are trivial, Ace. They only even barely approach statistical significance if you count statutory rape (which would be silly) and female/female rape, the latter of which exists as a social phenomenon only within a rather tightly defined demographic (certain types of gangs, which only exist in certain areas, among certain age groups, and in certain areas). Women as a group simply do not commit sex crimes, and certainly not against men. As you've pointed out, the idea is ridiculous, but I'll add that the evidence is nonexistent.

Posted by: Megan on July 8, 2005 06:02 PM

Just got out of a meeting - discussing a system failure that hit us hard yesterday. Several groups scrambling for cover,

there was more finger-pointin goin on in there than Sally Struthers in a donut shop.

Posted by: Dave in Texas on July 8, 2005 06:06 PM

Guys in the porno industry (not that i'm one of them, unfortunatly) sometimes have a hard time keeping an erection during a scene because of the stress caused by having a dozen people all around him pointing lights and shit.
I'm going out on a limb and say that the stress caused by being raped, after being tortured with electric wires (to the genitals for god's sake!) far surpases the one in the porn business.

Posted by: madne0 on July 8, 2005 06:06 PM

Ace:

1. You're always first in my book. :p

2. Contrary to his initial statement, Sullivan wasn't dismissive of the allegations of mistreatment, he was endorsing it.

3. I don't think the lady soldier was having sex to, you know, get her rocks off. No, our brave Pvt. Kasabah, fell on Neisef's sword, so to speak, to make him talk. If you could prevent another 911, wouldn't you do the same?

Posted by: on July 8, 2005 06:09 PM

She fucked him to "get him to talk"?

What did she want him to say? She wanted him to call her "pookie-schmookie"?

Posted by: ace on July 8, 2005 06:13 PM

The Mercurial Marionette?

Damn ACE that's good! Even better than Dr. Strumpetstockings! Who needs to read the rest? Are you really on fire or is this "the dreaded P word" i.e., plagurism?

Posted by: wretched refuse on July 8, 2005 06:16 PM

O.T.

I think I just heard Hugh Hewitt say he will have tom Oliphant on his radio show next hour. Hmmm. I hope he doesn't hold back.

There is the anti- We're Sorry website to leave messages. It's -- We Are Not Afraid something. I didn't get the whole name/address.

Posted by: on July 8, 2005 06:17 PM

Martinet, not marionette.

Not plagiarism. All this stupid moroncrap comes straight out of my stupid moronbrain.

Posted by: ace on July 8, 2005 06:18 PM

What did she want him to say? She wanted him to call her "pookie-schmookie"?

Wow, is that what you like to be called?

Posted by: on July 8, 2005 06:20 PM

Women can pretty much get laid with skillful come-on lines like "Hello" or "Can you point out the nearest burrito place?"

Funny cuz it's true.

Posted by: fat kid on July 8, 2005 06:23 PM

the author of this blog should seek inpatient mental health care.

Posted by: on July 8, 2005 06:33 PM

Ya suppose ol' Dandy Andy would have been filled with such turgid remorse and tumescent guilt if it had been two women holding him down and a man doing the raping?

"Is that a jackboot up my ass or are you just happy to see me?"

Posted by: johnd01 on July 8, 2005 06:37 PM

Why even bother with the rantings of Sully? He's jumped the shark over a year ago and should be GAZED.

Well, at least until he has to run his next bandwidth begathon - then we should just ridicule the fact that $125K - $150K annually is needed for his bandwidth.

Poor Sully, my guess is he is finding out how many people really have changed their position on him. No Cha-ching!

Posted by: Athos on July 8, 2005 06:56 PM

Clearly Neisef was scared stiff.

Tob

Posted by: toby928 on July 8, 2005 07:34 PM

hey OT guy - Hewitt had an excerpt of an exchange between Ron Reagan and Hitchens. Ole' Ronny gets a verbal pantsing from CH that's just terrific. If you're interested the transcript is at http://www.radioblogger.com/.

Posted by: rakmjn1 on July 8, 2005 08:57 PM

Thanks. I heard it a few times already. It certainly is worth listening to again. I may copy the transcript just for the slapdown lesson.

Done! I copied it into my "Asshats" folder.

Hewitt seemed to think Oliphant had backed off from the interview he gave yesterday to Air America. He's got to be kidding! I hear these guys go on different shows and they always adapt their tone to the audience. You will listen to some msm talking head and they will sound almost reasonable. Then you hear them the next day when they are on their home turf, and they're back to being asshats.

Posted by: on July 8, 2005 09:29 PM

Is that a Compassionate Head-Tilt I see?

All the assclown needs now is a "We're Sorry, World" sign.

Posted by: Paul Zrimsek on July 8, 2005 09:36 PM

I hear these guys go on different shows and they always adapt their tone to the audience.

This is why the Republican Party should take some of the money out of their big vault and start a Lefty Cable Channel.

Let them get comfortable, chatting amongst their own, let their hair down and really say what's on their minds, in front of a national audience.

"I really think Castro has been unfairly demonized..."
"Well, Clinton only lied about sex..."
"Come on! It's a cluster of cells, for crying out loud!"
"Reagan is the root cause for a lot of this terrorism..."

Teresa would make a superb talk show hostess.

SIGH

Posted by: lauraw on July 8, 2005 10:18 PM

That was fucking gold.

Thank you.

Posted by: The Ugly American on July 8, 2005 10:38 PM

Hitchens can be an ass (especially when speaking ill of the dead--Reagan, John Paul II, Mother Theresa, etc.) but when he's on fire, he's On. F'n. Fire.

Posted by: Sean M. on July 8, 2005 10:58 PM

Jeez, Ace, you nearly caused me to pee myself with that one. Mallory cheesecake and a Sully ass-whooping on the same day. It doesn't get much better.

Posted by: Laddy on July 8, 2005 11:10 PM

Okay, totally off topic - but how is it possible that NOBODY is talking about Fantastic 4? RUN, do not walk to your car, ignore all stop signs, red lights, women pushing baby strollers crossing the street, etc. and get your butt in a theater to see this film. Why are you still reading this? GO!

Posted by: Enas Yorl on July 9, 2005 02:04 AM

how is it possible that NOBODY is talking about Fantastic 4?

Because we're not 12-14 y/o white boys.

Posted by: on July 9, 2005 02:08 AM

Then why was everybody worked up over Batman Begins? I'm skipping the F4 movie because of the lackluster reveiws I've seen. I'll wait for DVD.

37 y/o non-white boy

Posted by: on July 9, 2005 02:12 AM

Then why was everybody worked up over Batman Begins?

Because they still think they are 12-14 y/o white boys.

Really, one more movie based on a comic book or based on a remake of a television show and I blow my brains out.

Posted by: on July 9, 2005 02:47 AM

Heh. Damn good. Loved it.

Posted by: rdbrewer on July 9, 2005 03:59 AM

Uhh, OK non-identifying poster, the Dukes of Hazard movie comes out soon - when it does, insert gun into mouth and pull trigger please. If at first you don't succeed, try and try again.

Oh, and just to increase your brain-blowing-out probability: X-Men 3 will be out this Fall, AND there are plans for Spiderman 3, AND there is a Superman movie in the works, AND all the (principle) people involved in Batman Begins are signed on to 2 more movies like the one we just got, AND a whole slew of other comic book based movies are in the works. Fantastic 4 WILL have a sequel, I promise you that. Please make sure you have enough bullets in the magazine to accomplish the job. Thank you.

I don't give a shit about "professional" movie reviewers, and their opinions don't figure at all in the selection of movies that I see. I do, however, take into consideration other opinions that I have come to respect - that being the author of this blog and some of my Fellow Travelers in the comments section. As such, I've decided that many of us have similar tastes and I'm heartily recommending this movie because I really think that it would appeal to them.

My $.02

Posted by: Enas Yorl on July 9, 2005 04:07 AM

Back on the original topic, there have been reports of coercive tactics long before Abu Ghraib. Here's one by Phillipe du Croy in Volokh:
http://volokh.com/2003_03_02_volokh_archive.html#90409347
That is from March 2003, and it looks like it contains information about almost every documented approved coercive tactic that we know about now. So it doesn't look like Sullivan's excuse about not having enough information holds water.

Posted by: Cory on July 9, 2005 06:06 AM

FYI - video of RRjr and Hitchens is up on Instapundit (via Political Teen) - Reagan's a disgrace. Dumb question but is Ronnie a leftist or does he hate Bush for familial reasons?

Posted by: rakmjn1 on July 9, 2005 03:19 PM

Enas: Thanks for providing the proof that you are really a 12- 14 y/o white boy.

Posted by: on July 9, 2005 03:44 PM

. . . is Ronnie a leftist or does he hate Bush for familial reasons?

He is a leftist.
He is way over his head.
He hates Reagan for familial reasons.

Posted by: on July 9, 2005 03:46 PM

Totally anecdotal: I've worked at a DA office for seven years.

We've had women defendants who are: murderers, thieves, spousal abusers, child abusers, gangbangers, child molesters (of both genders, including a few female teacher defendants who have 'seduced' their male or female students), drug dealers, etc ... but I have never seen a case of an adult female defendant charged with the genital to genital rape of an adult male.

Posted by: Darleen on July 9, 2005 09:13 PM

There was one in Utah(?) a few years back. Involved kidnapping an ex-boyfriend. Seems like she drugged him and tied him up. It's the only case I've ever heard of though.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 9, 2005 09:27 PM

Wow,

I just returned from a two week stint in the boundary waters and what do I find? Ace so hot he is smoking. Unfortunately, I was one of the smucks who forked over dough to the Liberal transvestite a few years back. He even posted my farewell email with a response on his site. As I said then, “face it Andrew, you’re a one trick pony.

Allah your humble servant begs forgiveness for supporting the excitable one. Please shower me with aggressive male raping virgins as my punishment.

P.S. Ace, looks like I’m getting a shirt out of the power line guys. Why don’t you check out there vender?

Rusty

Posted by: Rusty Wilson on July 11, 2005 11:11 AM

Andrew who?

Posted by: Rich on July 11, 2005 12:51 PM

Take your time to check out some helpful info on central ohio compounding pharmacy sites .

Posted by: cheap cvs online pharmacy on October 5, 2005 05:06 AM

Amazon.com Widgets

Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]

Top Headlines

Mayor Karen is so stung by fan-made AI ads that she's resorting to the shitlibs' go-to demand for an end to criticism -- these ads are "violent" and "hateful" and making me feel unsafe because one video showed AI cartoons throwing tomatoes at me and the tomatoes looked like blood when they squished
This was her actual complaint. The mushed-up tomato looked like blood so it's a death threat and these violent attacks on me must stop. What is dis bitch, CNN?

Podcast: Sefton and CBD are joined by Jeff Carter, candidate for NV treasurer, and seasoned finance professional, for a discussion of the issues facing Nevadans, and the larger financial challenges in America.

TJM explores the movies of David Lean, director of Lawrence of Arabia

Few people remember that Norm MacDonald began his career as a ventriloquist
MacDonald's old partner Adam Egot revealed that MacDonald repurposed a bit with one of his ventriloquist dolls -- that he was a "bad guy" who "didn't believe the Holocaust happened" -- for the Norm MacDonald show, in which he claimed Egot didn't believe in the Holocaust.

Funniest thing I've read about the Virginia mess. Back when they were hustling the referendum through the assembly both Senators, Warner and Kaine, advised them to go slow and play by the rules. Louise Lucas said she respected them but didn't need advice from the "cuck chair" in the corner. The gerrymandering was overturned and Louise is heading for the big house. Edward G. Robinson voice "where's your cuck now?"
Posted by: Smell the Glove

I posted his post on twitter and it's gotten 25K views so far. Thanks, Smell the Glove

Chris
@chriswithans

"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining

TJM wonders about world building in stories, mostly The Hunger Games

"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.

Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over

"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)

No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.

Now they've lost 84%.

Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.

Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...

The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.

Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.

Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party

STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.

Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.

Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"

Hamas is Humiliating Trump's 'Board of Peace'
[Hat Tip: TC] [CBD]

Tucker Carlson is pretty sure Trump is a wizard