American Military People Would Love To Get Their Hands On This Guy (Video)

Wich one the announcer that didn't let him say a fucking word or the dumb ass looking like a fag in front of the camera ?

thats the stupidest looking human ever

whoa, that site is NOT work safe.

Fox News will do anything to stir the pot won't they?

Oh man, that news reporter ripped him a new asshole! Nice!!
WG

LOL, Have you seen his site? LOL, owned bigtime!
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/
WG

Jesus that guy must make the families of dead soldiers really hurt. I dont agree with the Iraq war but to ridicule the dead is appauling.

lololooloolloll

I agree with you on that one, he don't look right.

hmmm...someone posted it last week I think

edward scissor hands is a real person?

owned? his site was forsakethetroops.net and apparently he was able to sell it to a group of veterans who wanted it offline.

In the newsbit they kept saying dot info.
WG

Yuk!!!

Well said. I imagine that a guy like him might get lots of "attention" from bigger/meaner fellow inmates if he ever did anything to warrant jail time----e.g., 2257 matters, or the crime of Conspiracy to Blackmail/Extort, or assaulting someone??? Perhaps they wouldn't even use lubricant, and might even bangbang him --- repeatedly, and daily?!

What a pathetic loser he seems like!

I gotta be honest, I got owned here. Someone posted that url on gfy a few weeks back and I was 100% positive the site was just a joke. Then I saw him on Bill O'Reilly.

better link... with full uncut dissing

http://www.filecabi.net/v.php?file=MichaelCrook.wmv

It's funny how people say he wouldn't have the right to freedom of speech without the very troops he bashes, then people come along and take away his freedom of speech by removing the sites. If someone wants to say that stuff, let them. Freedom of speech is a two way road. You don't have to agree with it, but they have a right to say it.

bahaha, that is one BALLS TO THE WALL reporter. He fucking owned the dweeb real good!

Ray

that has to be the worst watermarking i've ever seen

So true, and I noticed the commentator kept on refering to freedom of speech as a 'gift' but not a 'right'.

hahaha.. very hilarious!

The commentator did not take down the website, neither did the government.

the site is a hoax http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/w...comments/2496/

http://www.forsakethetroops.net/

Ah, this one again. Shit goes in circles.

Read the guys blog
http://michaelcrooktalks.com

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Mic...en-GB:official

let me preface this by saying that i don't necessarily have to agree with the guy's opinions.

no, he didnt. he showed complete intellectual bankruptcy, as he always does. arguing the way he did is *not* acceptable in any debate. unfortunately, the dufus didn't have any wits about him - im still waiting for the time someone with half a brain gets to debate hannity. let's dissect his question:

'do you understand that the troops you are bashing allow you to have the freedom to say the things you do?'

that is not a valid argument. the question part is 'do you understand what i am saying' - of course he *understands*, saying otherwise would imply that he doesnt understand english. asking the question this way does, however, allow hannity to smuggle in a highly debatable statement, namely that 'american troops allow an individual in the US to have freedom of speech'. for further effect, hannity goes on to repeat that same question over and over and over. did the guy get owned? yes, but only because he's a halfwit. not that his bullshit would have been defensible, but hannity isnt the sharpest debater around ;]

american troops do not 'allow' us freedom of speech - the first amendment does. you could argue that brave men fighting the war of independence allowed (inote the past tense) us to have the state we have today, complete with the first amendment. you could also argue that US involvement in ww2 prevented some rather unpleasant people from taking over the world (the historically accurate view on this is, of course, that only US economic support was necessary, since the russians had ww2 won already - US military involvement was an action against expansion of soviet influence and not against germany). you can not reasonably argue that the wars fought under the truman doctrine (korea, vietnam) and the modern version thereof (iraq) somehow serve to enhance or reinforce our first amendment rights - this position is obviously nonsensical. does that matter to hannity? not in the least, because he can speak over anyone he invites to be on the show and joe sixpack is not educated or intelligent enough to see through or be informed about the demagogy practiced by him.

interestingly enough, there was a much more honest vector of debate available. you respect the troops because they are serving their country and putting their lives at risk, while in many cases they disagree with the course of action or have been dragged into active service with incomplete disclosure at the time of enrollment. you do not have to agree with the iraq war to respect soldiers fighting it. respect for the troops has been skillfully coupled (in the mind of the average american simpleton) to agreement with (or at least passive tolerance of) the war in iraq, because respect for soldiers is a position which is much easier to defend in the media. indeed, one could argue that the best way to support the troops is to make sure no more get killed for naught.

i just wish a few more people got in the habit of thinking about things instead of blindly parroting what they're being spoon fed.

His blog has more of what you would exspect

I posted this comment on his blog he just makes me sick. I am waiting to see if he will post it or not.

Michael

Yes it is your "right" to say these things. Just like it is my right to say what I am thinking. I look at you just like I look at Klebold and Harris, I look at you just like I look at Dennis Rader, I look at you like I look at Jeff Weise. My view of these people are the same as I view you, sick twisted cowards who couldn't make it in society. You are no different then them, you have just chosen to spew hate and hurt in a different way. I see you as the type of person who has no friends, no loved ones, no life other then to sit in front of your computer all day. You could die tomorrow and no one would care, in fact from the looks of these comments most people would think "good riddance this country now has more room for someone that deserves to be here" Am I getting close Michael? I am sure you are sitting at your computer masturbating while reading this, because this is the only form of attention you will get all day. One day you will get yours its called Judgment Day. Until then try and bring some integrity, love, humility, and honor in your life instead of hate and hurt.

what he is like as a person as well as his motivations for putting forth his opinions are immaterial - its called an 'ad hominem' argument and is inadmissible in any sort of mature discussion. if you disagree with him, which you obviously do (along with me, might i add), explain why in your comments.

Yes you are right, it would have been an "ad hominem" argument if I was replying to him about his opinions on the video posted above, but in fact I was posting a comment on his blog in response to his comments about particular people on his blog. I felt (right or wrong) this is the kind of person I view him as. Just like he (right or wrong) views the other people on his blog and publicly posts those views.

I have no reason to explain why I disagree with his comments because according to him his comments are "Unique and Correct"

What does that mean?

When you enlist in the United States Military, you "serve at the pleasure of the President". It means if the President orders the military to go to war, your going to war. It's not open to dicussion.

it's interesting that you should respond to a rather minor point out of all the ones that ive brought up. with that said, i have to admit that im in two minds about this.

on one hand, i fully support the modern version of evolution where the stupid darwin themselves out - they were emancipated at the time they enrolled and, although most would have considered it unlikely, if they were not aware of the possibility that they would be called into combat, that's surely their fault.

on the other hand, enrollment in the armed forces in this country is promoted as a means to pay for your education and in the majority of cases, the possibility of being called into active service has been downplayed by aggressive recruiters. if the government feels compelled to put stickers that read 'falling out of windiw may cause severe injury or death' on our screen windows, prohibits certain substances because it does not trust people to use them responsibly and pursues draconian policies aimed at shielding young adults from the facts of life (as opposed to exposing them to real life and helping them adjust), *i* feel the government has been (in comparison) negligent in making sure every single person enrolling in the armed forces and reserves is fully cognisant of the fact that they may well die as a result. a big sticker, not unlike the one seen on screen windows, which reads 'enrollment may cause severe injury, permanent disfigurement and/or death' wouldnt be out of order.

with all of the above said, this really is a tangential topic. i respect soldiers who serve their country and i respect those soliders who disagree with the war and yet risk life and limb to fulfill their duty even more. i watched an interview with a private stationed in one of the hot spots and you could feel the pain with which he tried to reconcile his duties as a soldier, his ethical judgement on what he was involved in and his fear of death - it touched me deeply. all of the oil in the world is not worth his life.

feel free to call me a pompous ass.

bravo.

speak the truth brother Matt. Speak it.

very true the speech you have to protect is the type you dont agree with

I Would personnaly Love To Get my Hands On That stupid Guy. he does looks so stupid too.

Yeah, they have ridiculized that poor nerd for telling things that are his personal opinion....but what do you think about this??:

http://www.3c0x1.net/modules.php?nam...yimage&pos=-48
whats your opinion?