Scared Monkeys Discussion Forum

I was sent this article, by a friend - probably some of you were as well, but I want it in here.   I want you to read it carefully and think about it.... and let me add that in a recent poll taken by Rassmuesien, (sp) it has been stated that over 34% of Democrats hope that we lose this war in order to gain office....


the article:
When Congress Commits Treason
The Fifth Column Raymond S. Kraft
February 5, 2007 URL: http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/kraft/02052007.htm
 
Al Qaeda wants an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq.  So do America's Democrats.  Hezbollah wants an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq.  So do America's Democrats.  Iran wants an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq.  So do America's Democrats.  Muqtada al Sadr wants an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq.  So do America's Democrats. Osama bin Laden wants an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq.  So do America's Democrats.  When an American political party aligns itself with the goals, hopes, and ambitions of America's enemies in a time of war, in my view there is only one word for it - Treason.
 
Today, most of the "leading Democrats" in Congress are falling all over themselves to give aid, comfort, and hope, to the Jihad, the Islamic Resistance Movement, the Islamist movement for the decline and fall of Western Civilization and the ascendance of Jihadist Islam in Iraq and around the world.  Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and many of the rest give their assurance that with Democrats in power, America will retreat, embrace defeat, and surrender, selling their souls and their country down the river for primary votes and and trucks of money from the Pacifist Left.   Here, the ignominious spectacle of Democrats selling out the future freedom of the Iraqi people for votes and dollars.  Osama bin Laden once called America "a paper tiger."  America's Democrats seem determined to prove him right.  Treason for votes.  Treason for dollars.  Treason as a political calculation.  Treason, for revenge on George Bush.
 
Treason, to put a Democrat in the White House.
 
Thirty-two years ago, in 1975, after America and the Republic of Vietnam had fought and won a ten-year war to save South Vietnam from the predations of the communist north, a Democrat Congress voted to terminate life support for South Vietnam in the face of another North Vietnamese invasion, backed by the USSR.  A Democrat Congress voted to "pull the plug," and condemned millions of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotions to death, torture, imprisonment, re-education camps, condemned others to flee their homes and countries as refugees.  That, in my view, was the blackest day in American history, and the blood of those people is on the hands of the Democrats who voted to abandon them.  Until now.
 
Now, another Democrat Congress is poised to repeat that act of infamy, and abandon the people of Iraq to the conflagration that will almost certainly follow if the United States withdraws its forces prematurely.  Another Democrat Congress declares to the world that America is a fair weather friend, that America cannot be relied on, that America cannot be trusted to stand by its promises when the going gets tough, that America no longer has the will to lead the world toward a future of freedom, that America has decided to embrace defeat, to retreat and surrender.  Another Democrat Congress declares that America, having liberated the Iraqi people from the bloody tyranny of Saddam Hussein, has grown tired of the messy business of liberation and will now wash its hands of the whole affair, and abandon the Iraqi people to the bloody tyranny of the Jihad.
 
After the 2000 election, the Democrat Party backed itself into a corner that threatens to destroy the Democrat Party, IF Republicans and other responsible Americans recognize the Democrats' strategic blunder for what it is, and call them out on it.
 
Even before he took office, Democrats commited themselves to the ideology that George W. Bush was (a) an "illegitimate president" who had "stolen the election," and (b) that he was stupid, dumb, incompetent, and unworthy of the office.  They maintained these positions until 9/11, when, with America obviously under attack, they came to their senses long enough to pass (with only one dissenting vote) the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq (2002) which references the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 signed by President Bill Clinton on October 31, 1998, which commited the United States to the goal of regime change in Iraq, the two acts of Congress from which Senator Hillary Clinton is now feverishly trying to distance herself.
 
By primary time before the 2004 elections, they had reverted to the stance that George W. Bush was an illegitimate president, dumb, stupid, incompetent, and unworthy of the office, and a liar, and that the Iraq war was badly bungled.  Today, they have retreated even further, with Hillary Clinton declaring that "if we had known then what we know now, there would have been no vote," no war in Iraq, that America's Democrats would have left Saddam Hussein in power to pursue the weapons of mass destruction he either had, or wanted, and to continue dumping the bodies of Shias and Kurds into mass graves, in the killing fields of Iraq.
 
During the 2004 election season, Democrats and their candidate, Senator John F. Kerry, held out military experience in general, and combat experience in particular, as the sina qua non for qualification to be president (the Kerry Axiom).  The Democrats and Kerry were adamant that since Kerry had combat experience in Vietnam, however brief, and Bush did not, that Kerry was indisputably qualified to be president, and Bush was indisputably not.  In the debates Kerry declaimed that he could fight the War on Terror "better and smarter," whatever that means, for he has never told anyone exactly what, if anything, that means.  When pressed at the time, he replied that he would have to be elected and see what sort of mess Bush had left him before he could know what "better and smarter" means.  Now, John Kerry wants to fight the war on terror "better and smarter" by capitulating to Iran, even as Iran threatens to destroy Israel, England, and America.
 
Since Bush's re-election, America's Democrats have persistently raised the ante against Bush, holding hands ever tighter with the Pacifist Left, from whence flow many millions of dollars in campaign contributions and many millions of primary votes.
 
In a remarkable about face from the Kerry Axiom that only a combat veteran is qualified to be president, the three leading candidates for the Democrats' presidential nomination in 2008, Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Barak Obama, and former Senator John Edwards, haven't one day of military experience among them (which means, of course, by the Kerry criterion, that George W. Bush, although he has no combat experience and served only as a fighter pilot in the National Guard, is better qualified to be president than any or all of the three).  But the Kerry Axiom no longer matters, of course, that was then, this is now, live in the present.
 
Democrats are making the President's alleged bungling of the war they authorized by the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 and the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq (200) the fulcral point of the 2008 election - and are now poised to pass a non-binding resolution of Congress demanding a quick "redeployment" of American armed forces from Iraq, and debating whether to "defund" the war in six months, while Senator Clinton demands that America must be "out of Iraq by 2009."
 
This has backed the Democrats into a corner, a conundrum for which there is only one solution, and which is laden with many opportunities for the Democrat Party and all of its Congressional leaders and presidential contenders to plunge into the abyss of political disaster by November, 2008.
 
In order to sustain the Democrats' dogma that:
(a) George W. Bush is an "illegitimate president" who "stole" the election;

 
(b) George W. Bush is dumb, stupid, incompetent;
 
(c) George W. Bush led us into an "illegal war" by false pretenses and lies ("Bush lied, people died," even if all but one of the Democrats in Congress voted for it) and;
 
(d) The Iraq War has become a "quagmire" like Vietnam (which, of course, was a "quagmire" of the Democrats' own making, only because of Democrats' refusal to do the obvious things necessary to win the war quickly and decisively) - a war that America and the Iraqi government cannot possibly win against a small cadre of insurgents with Iranian support -
 
-  THE IRAQ WAR MUST BE LOST BEFORE THE 2008 ELECTION.
 
If the Iraq War has not been either won, or lost, before the 2008 election, then whoever is elected president - Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, John Edwards - will become a Wartime President in January, 2009, a position which (per the Kerry Axiom) none of them has the slightest qualification to hold.  
 
Worse, this catastrophe would force a Democrat president to either win, or lose, the Iraq War.  If she, or he, presided over the loss of the Iraq War, the Democrat Party would, for years or decades, be tainted, smudged, smeared and besmirched, with the loss of the Iraq war, and the loss of America's leadership and geopolitical credibility.  She, or he, would fulfill Osama bin Laden's prophecy that "America is a paper tiger."  But, if she, or he, saddled up and proceeded to preside over the winning of the Iraq War, the party would be devastated by the loss of ideological cohesiveness and financial support, and votes from its base on the Pacifist Left.  Thus, the Democrat Party cannot afford to have a Democrat either lose, or win, the Iraq War.
 
The conundrum for the leading Democrat candidates for the next presidency is that all of them, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards, are now on record as opposed to the war and demanding that America retreat, embrace defeat, and surrender.  If Bush hasn't the good grace to lose the war before any of them becomes president, then, regardless of their misqualifications, whichever of them is elected will have to either (a) reverse their policy and decide the war is worth winning, to the vengeful opprobrium of the Pacifist Left that has staked its hopes and dollars on electing an anti-war president dedicated to defeat, or (b) fulfill their campaign promises by losing the war as expeditiously as possible, which will tag the Democrat Party as the Party that Lost the War for all the foreseeable future, the party that lost Iraq, the party that lost America's leadership and geo-political credibility in the world, the party of retreat, defeat, and surrender.  The party that ushered in the end of the American Era.
 
The party is hobbled, or trapped, by its resolute determination that America must not win a war that would vindicate the illigitimate presidency of George W. Bush, and by its thrall to the moneybags and votes from the Pacifist Wing of the Democratic Party.
 
Therefore, for the Democrats to succeed, the Iraq War must be lost by George W. Bush, so they can "blame Bush," so they won't have to dirty their hands with it, nor accept any responsibility, nor any blame.
 
However, even worse than having to grapple with a war they haven't a clue what to do with, is the possibility that the Iraq War might be won, or at least be making distinct progress toward a good resolution and a free, prosperous Iraq, under the George W. Bush presidency before the next election.  This would vindicate the George W. Bush presidency, and George W. Bush the man, and shatter the Democrats' ideology of Bush's incompetence and illegitimacy.  So -
 
If by the fall of 2008 the Iraq War is still seen as a stalemate, a quagmire with no hope for success, it is most likely that a Democrat will be elected president.  Then, regardless of her (or his) misqualifications, she or he will then have to either lose the war, or win it, and either will be a political fate worse than political death.  Either will doom the Democrat Party.   If the Iraq war is still underway, and neither victory nor defeat is certain, the Democrat president elected in 2008 will be damned if she (or he) wins it, and damned if she (or he) doesn't.
 
But If by the fall of 2008 the Iraq War is won, or is making clear and conspicuous progress toward a good outcome, the Democrats' dogmas will have been gutted, disemboweled, flayed, and decapitated, by success and events, and a credible Republican candidate will be elected the next President.  Nothing succeeds like success, and nothing loses like a failed prediction of failure.
 
Worst of all, success in Iraq will be vindication for George W. Bush, as stupid, evil, mendacious and illigitimate as he is.
 
The only acceptable solution, then, for a Democrat candidate, is to have the Iraq War decisively lost, or surrendered, by George W. Bush, or during the George W. Bush presidency, so that George W. Bush can take the fall, and Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, John Edwards, and all the rest of the gaggle who get in the ring can wash their hands of it and blame it all on Bush.
 
Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on whether you prefer an American victory or an American defeat, and to the Democrats' obvious dismay, President Bush is refusing to cooperate.  This presents the Democrats with a truly nasty dilemma.  If George W. Bush, illegitimate and dumb, refuses to lose the Iraq War when we ask him to, what shall we do about it?
 
The solution du jour is to pass a "nonbinding resolution" condeming the war and calling on America to surrender to its enemies.
 
So, now, Al Qaeda wants America to surrender.  So do the Democrats.  Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran who prophesies the death of Israel, England, and America, wants America to surrender.  So do the Democrats.  Hezbollah wants America to surrender.  So do the Democrats.  Osama bin Laden wants America to surrender.  So do the Democrats.  What do you do when you want what America's enemies want?  When you take the side, adopt the goals, of America's enemies?  You give political and psychological aid and comfort to America's enemies, in a time of war.  You extend to America's enemies the promise that they will win, and America will surrender.  You turn on your own country, your own history, tradition, principles, Constitution, your own citizens and constituents, your own government, your own soldiers in combat.  You commit treason.  You commit treason.  You commit treason.  You commit treason.  YOU COMMIT TREASON.
 
And this is exactly what America's "leading Democrats" in Congress are actively and publicly doing.  Committing treason.
 
The essential values and ideals of Liberal Democracy are the freedoms enshrined in our own Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.  The first among these, from which all others follow, are the rights of intellectual freedom, religious freedom, political freedom, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.  These are the liberties that Liberals and Democrats allege they believe in - but they do not.  They propose to abandon the vast majority of the Iraqi people who are not participating in the "civil war," who are only bystanders, who are only the victims of the bombs and bullets of the tiny minority (less than 1%) that makes up the Shia and Sunni militias and the Iranian-sponsored insurgency sent to foment chaos and savagery, sent to prevent the freedoms of civilization from taking root and blossoming in Iraq.
 
The leading Democrats in Congress propose to abandon the Iraqi people to a radical Islamic Jihad that is the antithesis of Democratic values, the antithesis of Liberal values, a religious totalitarianism for which the only freedom is the freedom to be not just Muslim, but Muslim Enough, and in which all intellectual freedom, religious freedom, political freedom, freedom of speech and press, contrary to radical Islam, is prohibited.  A religious totalitarianism for which "multiculturalism and diversity" are anathema.  Just as another Democrat Congress abandoned the peoples of South Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, to communist totalitarianism thirty-two years ago.  Then, Democrats voted for retreat and defeat, and surrendered South Vietnam to its enemies, and millions of people died.  Once again, Democrats and their presidential candidates invoke the Democrats' core values of retreat, defeat, and surrender, and if they succeed, millions more will die.
 
America's Congressional Democrats en masse are betraying, rejecting, repudiating, their own ostensible dedication to the Liberal values of freedom and liberty, multiculturalism, diversity, democracy, for money, for votes.  Their half-spoken mantra is, "No war for oil, no victory for freedom."
 
We see America's Congressional Democrats becoming the American Judas, betraying America, and Iraq, for the proverbial thirty pieces of silver.  We are watching the astonishing, appalling, and unprecedented spectacle of a Democrat Party so hungry, so greedy, so blindly avaricious for political dominance that it is committing itself to the retreat, defeat, and surrender of America, of Iraq, of the Middle East, perhaps Africa, perhaps Europe after that - where, if anywhere, will the Democrats' firm resolve to retreat and surrender end?
 
This is treason.
Raymond S. Kraft is an attorney and writer in northern California.

I perceive that article as putting words into Democrats' mouths. I am Democrat (though have voted outside of the party at times), and I do not want "an American retreat, defeat, and surrender in Iraq", I want a solution. Continuing as we have been will provide in the same results. In AA, we have a definition for insanity: Doing The Same Thing Over And Over And Expecting Different Results.

Well it's a fact that when polled so many Democrats say they want the war lost in order to gain power... it's those Democrats I am speaking to....

So Justins - have you ever thought about this - this is the first time that we ARE doing something different?  We have taken the fight to them in their back yard instead of ours.   If you wonder what I mean, I am saying that under Carter, Bush 1, and Clinton we stood by and didn't dirty our hands, and we kept sticking our heads in the sand.... .

so in my opinion this is a change.

Also, what about creating another KILLING FIELD?  what about that?  what, we want to leave the Iraqi's to be slaughtered like we did in Vietnam?  Isn't staying and  trying to win doing something different?

I have said before and I will say agian... the solution, in my opinion is to stop playing and get on with it... take the gloves off...

Is this being perceived as a black and white or all or nothing type of issue? There are other means of resolving the Iraq problem other than abandoning the people to other forces. A sincere question: Were these polls actually phrased in terms of losing the war?

Edited to add: If so, then shame on those people.

Well if we leave then what?  It will fall apart I would think, and we will then truly have Vietnam all over again..... I am thankful that during the WW's that the media wasn't such schumucks..... we would all be speaking German or Japanese... not that there is anything wrong with that, but I am an American..... first and foremost and proud to be (not that I am saying you aren't, but I don't want to be anything else I guess... not that you do... ).  So what do you think needs to happen? What is the solution?  I keep hearing the Democratic candidates talk about leaving... that is what the article talks about...

so if you don't agree with staying and trying to win by unhandcuffing our troops then what should we do?  What would you like to see happen?  How do we resolve with an enemy that declares they want all of us to die?  

as for the poll, yes it was termed  in the very black and white wording of losing the war....

Simply leaving is, in my opinion, not acceptable. There must be a solution other than the two extremes. Let's (Americans) find it.

If we leave now,nuclear war will break out.The Turks will not tolerate the Kurds,the Iranians will take over everything,and the Israelis will launch,no maybe their.CAT

I don't want to debate or argue so I'm just sitting here reading your posts, laughing. That does not negate the importance of your passions, it only means I have stepped out from the middle ring of the circus and am sitting in the stands watching the circus.

Is there no ability to address the issues in a problem solving manner? Can we not identify the issues and brainstorm means of addressing them? Or must it be a "your candidate" or "your party" fight? My God, people, I think we all agree that we are in deep poo poo on an international scale! We are not the Hatfields and McCoys. We are Americans. Continuing to move in even more polar positions will not solve our problems. We have come together in a wonderous manner for Natalee, why can we not do so in this forum? Our difficulties are not about who is right, wrong, said or did this or that. Does that kind of reasoning bring us to potential solutions? What is done is done. We cannot change the past. Today, we can identify the aspects involved in any issue and problem solve them for a better tomorrow. Anyone up for that here?

I wish I had a solution to offer, but I am clueless. That's why I'll be looking carefully for a candidate who offers workable solutions and strategies - so far, I've not seen any ideas of substance.

I would like to see increased or renewed dialog with Europe and the Middle East.  Summits and talks.  Even the United Nations.  I know some posters have been very critical of the UN, but in this world going it alone seems a far more dangerous path.  In the face of increasing instability and increasing rhetoric regarding Iran and their role in Iraq, I would like to US to reach out to other countries for fresh ideas, strategies and alliances.  Perhaps naive, and certainly JMO.

A's - I don't think personally, that we can talk any longer.  Unfortunately, we are trying to combat what has already happened in Europe - and that is that the Muslims have completely taken over.  

Did y'all know that it is projected that within two years Rome will be  a completely Muslim city?  This is the home of the Vatican!!! If a city like Rome - which is dedicated (in my mind anyway) so much to Christiantiy is losing its identity to becoming Muslim then how do we hope to combat it?  It has already been a HUGE issue in France over the burka and scarves in schools and now... there is no turning back the tide.  I don't necessiarly think all Muslims are bad, don't misunderstand me - but whether or not we admit it, our country is founded on Christian-Judeao prinicipals which are completely incompatible with this widespread ideology.

we need to change our view.We are losing site,quickly of key points.cat

Justins,
Only one party stands to gain from a defeat in Iraq.  There is a video on YouTube of this strategy being spelled out by Rep. Murtha.  He says he has several tactics to "undermining the president's policies in Iraq and on National Security."  Can't get much plainer than that.

---Jack Murtha's Goal: Undermine the president's foreign and national security policy      
Written by N.Z.    
Wednesday, 14 February 2007  
Just in case there was any doubt about the true intentions of the defeatists in Congress, check out the following, which was sent out via email and can be seen (until they smarten up and decide to edit it) here :

 

 

Coming Tomorrow!!


CHAIRMAN JACK MURTHA TO OUTLINE COMMITTEE STRATEGY ON BUSH’S IRAQ FUNDING REQUEST THURSDAY MORNING AT 11:00 AM EST ON MOVECONGRESS.ORG


Join Us!
 
Join us tomorrow at 11:00 AM EST when Congressman Jack Murtha will outline new details of a strategy to use his Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense to oppose the Bush war in Iraq. Congressman Jim Moran, another Committee member, predicts the Committee action will be the “bite” that follows this week’s Congressional “bark” – the three-day debate on a non-binding Congressional resolution.

The Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense has begun consideration of the president’s $93 billion supplemental appropriations request for Iraq. Action on the request will be the first opportunity for the new Congress to exercise its “power-of-the-purse” over the Iraq war.

Chairman Murtha will describe his strategy for not only limiting the deployment of troops to Iraq but undermining other aspects of the president’s foreign and national security policy. Chairman Murtha discusses these steps in a videotaped conversation with former Congressman Tom Andrews (D-ME), the National Director of the Win Without War coalition, sponsor of MoveCongress.org.
Join us here tomorrow for this exclusive interview.
 

 
(highlighting and emphasis on the key sentence mine.)
 
Update 8:11pm EST:  And as predicted, MoveCongress.org has sanitized their page and removed the offending sentence above. Sorry kids: multi-hour response time just doesn't cut it here in the big leagues. Gotta be faster than that !  
 
http://victorycaucus.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=57&Itemid=1
 

It is certainly in the best interest of the GOP to find a workable solution but the outside interference is overwhelming especially with the refusal by the Majority Party of Congress to support a troop surge or anything else that Bush might propose, no matter how well thought out or whatever, they will oppose it no matter what it is.

Should Iran annex the southern half of Iraq where the oil is, they would have possibly as much oil as the Saudis, the proceeds from which could go to funding terrorists as well as development of their nukes.

And of course, Vlad is in the region visiting what are supposed to be our allies this week.   :roll: He is Johny on the Spot for helping terrorists then pretending he doesn't.

Both the Washington Post and NY Post are totally liberal rags that cater only to the liberals and dedicate much to the trashing of the current administration in every possible situation.  

Both have now come out with very strong words for those in Congress who seem to have taken their very narrow win last November as some sort of mandate to do as they wish.  I was stunned to see this article and one just as bad in Washington Post chastising this kind of attitude.  It is a very sad commentary on our times that this is happening.  Expect more of the same as it seems some are in a continual campaign mode and there are no longer times between which for actually running the country.  They are all much too busy trying to garner a few votes any way they can.  And not just my opinion on that, it seems.

DEMS' DISGRACE


 
 
 
February 17, 2007 -- Rep. Peter King, the Long Island Re publican, got it exactly right yester day.

"Never before in our history has Congress attempted to control or restrict strategic battlefield decisions. It is wrong as a matter of policy, and it will haunt us for years to come," said King - as the House of Representatives dishonored itself with a non-binding resolution expressing disapproval of President Bush's strategic plan for Iraq.

Seventeen Republicans voted in favor of the resolution; two Democrats voted against it.

The Senate takes up the measure today.

On its face, the supposedly non-binding measure expresses disagreement with the surge of 21,000 troops into Baghdad and Anbar Province.

In fact, it is more than that - and perniciously so.

It is an initial step by newly empowered congressional Democrats to completely undermine the war by limiting funds - to deny the troops the beans and bullets they need to win, and to broadcast to America's enemies in the Middle East and around the world that the United States has lost the will to protect itself, and its friends.

Again.

Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania let that cat out of the bag with a videotape message to MoveCongress.org, a fellow-traveler of the hard-left Move On.org.

Murtha, who has become Speaker Nancy Polis's enforcer on contentious issues, said: "The real vote will come on the legislation we're putting together."

That would be the $93.4 billion supplemental war-spending measure that the appropriations subcommittee on defense will take up next month.

Formerly that committee's ranking member, Murtha notoriously used his influence to sprinkle goodies on cronies and campaign contributors.

Now he's in charge, and he intends to attach so many restrictions on the funding that it will - in his own words - "force the administration to consider alternatives instead of escalating."

And once the so-called "escalation" is pushed back, the next target will be ongoing operations.

So, this vote puts the lie to the Democrats assertion that they "support the troops while opposing the mission."

Yet, as Rep. King also said yesterday:

"[Talk] is cheap, and actions have consequences. You cannot support the troops if you are undermining their mission and challenging their commander in the field. By opposing this new policy, the supporters of the resolution are clearly undermining our new commander in Iraq at such a vital time in the conduct of this war."

The Democratic Party took America down this road once before, in the '70s, and the consequences for the nation and its allies were appalling.

Yesterday's vote was the Democrats' first major move toward defunding the war, handing Iraq over to insurgents and militia - and allowing the sacrifices of some 3,000 American soldiers, Marines and their families to be in vain.

Those sacrifices include that of Long Island's Sgt. James Regan - an Army Ranger and veteran of two tours of duty in Afghanistan - recently killed by a roadside bomb during his second deployment in Iraq.

He was buried yesterday in his hometown of Manhasset - even as Democrats took the first effective steps toward surrender in Iraq.

They dishonored Sgt. Regan.

They dishonored America.

It was, in a word, disgraceful.

Will the Senate follow suit today?

We pray not.


http://tinyurl.com/27pdaf

Left Allows Europe to Fall to Muslims
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero (more by this author)
Posted 02/08/2007 ET
Updated 02/08/2007 ET


In a recent interview, Prof. Bernard Lewis, famed historian and leading expert on Islam, warned that "Muslims seem to be about to take over Europe." The irony is that this takeover -- be it in 10 years or 30 -- is not because Islam has more tanks or better missiles than the Europeans. It is because the minority Islamic populations already living within Europe are making demands to Islamize Europe and no one seems to be willing to say no. No one has the political will to announce to the Islamic communities that daily life and laws in Europe must be in accord with the Western outlook that is Europe's heritage.

Was the fall of Europe inevitable? No, according to Prof. Lewis, who says it is coming about because "Europeans have surrendered on every issue regarding Islamic demands, due to political correctness and multi-culturalism." Europe has become woefully secular and its tepid attachment to a forgotten and dismissed Christianity is no match for the zeal of Muslims who remain fervent believers in their faith. Having been force fed that all cultures are equally valid, Europeans consider it unenlightened to assert the primacy of their culture even in their own countries.

What is even stranger is that secularized and politically correct European elites do insist on the primacy of indigenous cultures and religions when speaking of other faraway regions, yet find such insistence arrogant when it concerns the indigenous culture of its own lands. In other words, other countries are there to preserve their own way of life while the West is supposed to jello-ize and even deny its historic way of life. The bottom line: "Europeans have no respect for their own culture." Their worship of open-mindedness, no matter the cost, is leading to their demise.

Perhaps for the first time in history, we are witnessing the death of a civilization not due to outside forces stronger militarily but because "instead of fighting the threat, Europeans have simply given up, and do not want to fight." Pacifism in Europe runs so deep that it goes beyond a reluctance to take up military arms and extends to not even battling verbally, be it with laws or assertive opinion, or by fighting for Western culture even in routine social conversations.

As is well known, after World War II, Europe began denigrating the concept of nationalism, and the further left it became politically, the further it extolled transnationalism. Brainwashing citizens against the natural human inclination to be proud and loyal to one's own country over others has boomeranged to the point where Europeans can no longer even make the case for their own culture and history.

The lesson for the United States is clear. So as not to fall and disintegrate as is Europe, we need strong national patriotism, a genuine belief in the West's Judeo-Christian heritage and religion, and a conviction that our inherited culture and civilization is best for us and has been the true source of our blessings, success and freedom. Bereft of these deep and abiding associations, what is there to fight for?

Moreover, it is necessary to assert that our historic ethos is superior to that which Islam is demanding. Europe, as well as history, shows that those unable to assert the primacy of their own culture at home are unwilling to even assert its parity, and mire in "suicidal self-abasement."

This self-abasement has gone so far that "sophisticated" Europeans extend respect and "understanding" to Islamic marital habits that they’d condemn if practiced by their own. They would never accept rampaging and burnings in response to cartoon publications and statements if done by fellow Englishmen. Nor would they countenance censorship of the press if a bishop was offended by some newspaper article.

Yet out of a strange deference and submission to things Islamic, many are accepting that which they would condemn if perpetrated by a native Christian Brit. In other words, Islamic "honor" is more important than British honor, and Islamic habits are given more deference than Western customs and mores continually under self- assault and self-criticism. Criticism is reserved only for our culture, the "bad, discredited, and passé Western culture."

What brought Europe to this pitiful surrender is the left/liberalism that has controlled it since the 1960s. This post-modern liberalism has used political correctness and multi-culturalism to strip Europe of that which had previously made it great, and worthwhile. If it has proven a disastrous recipe for Europe, it certainly is no prescription for us in America. It is a cultural poison, a death potion. We, therefore, must not allow the elitist left to do here what they've already done to Europe. We know, however, that is precisely what the American Left is trying to do, and we see how the elitists in this country always ape Europe, demanding that "we Americans act more European-like."

To be sure, some in Europe accede to the demands of Islam over European life not out of a sense of cultural inferiority but fear, palpable fear. But the question remains: Given that the Islamists living inside Europe are not armed with tanks or other heavy military equipment, why can't the better equipped police forces subdue the Islamic gangs and imams that are intimidating the British and European public? Why can't law enforcement shut down the Islamic hot heads and centers that are creating such fear among Europeans that they’d rather forfeit actual civil liberties (freedom of speech), their culture, and way of life so as to appease the threatening Islamists?

Because political correctness has tied the hands of those entrusted to protect the home-grown citizenry. The courts and the ruling elites in charge of European legal institutions have made it almost impossible to enforce the laws and protect the people. New operational terms, such as racial profiling, cultural understanding, mosque sanctuary, community deference, etc., have been sanctified so that Moslems are exempt from the very tough investigatory and law enforcement procedures normally used when trying to apprehend other criminals and violators of the law. Sociology is replacing strength and common sense.

Worse, the blood-curdling threats by imams against the public go unpunished while candid and forthright apprehensions over what the Islamic community is doing to society is punishable as a hate crime.

Out of fear, Europe is appeasing. It has become a supplicant. Out of guilt, Europe is acquiescing. Out of years of self-criticism, it no longer feels worthy. Cynicism has lead to defeatism. Pacifisim has replaced religion. They believed in the parity of everything, so they now believe in nothing -- not even themselves. They, not the enemy, are orchestrating their own national demise.

To those elites in Europe, and America, who feel a greater kinship with the exotic peoples of other cultures than with the dull citizens of their own country, there is nothing to fear. For what will have been lost is something, a set of cultural beliefs, they discarded long ago; nationalisms that were objects of scorn and had, for them, become boring. An Islamized Europe is nothing to fret and worry over. Wrong!

Prof. Lewis warns: "The growing sway in Europe is of particular concern given the ever-rising support within the Islamic world for extremist and terrorist movements." But these self-righteous, self-centered elitists born of the 60s Left still need not worry. They probably will not be the victims of the annihilation they have wrought. It will be their children and grandchildren.

Rabbi Spero is a radio talk show host, a pulpit rabbi, and president of Caucus for America. He can be reached at www.caucusforamerica.com.

Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2007 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19328

I do not personally care for this individual at all but he is suggesting a solution at least.  Sort of makes sense.  But in order for anything to work, we need a united front before the terrorists, something we no longer have since the change over in congress.


Iraq's Cincinnatus solution
By Arnaud de Borchgrave
March 4, 2007
The late Peter Ustinov once remarked, "Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich." The trouble in Iraq is that the poor have more staying power than the rich.
    The insurgency in Baghdad has gone to ground and doesn't plan to resurface until Gen. David Petraeus' lightning $6 billion surge of U.S. and Iraqi troops has swept through the capital and declared "mission accomplished."
    With Iranian backing and thousands of tons of arms and ammo cached in Saddam Hussein's salad days, the insurgency can keep going for several more years. The United States cannot. So last weekend a gathering of the trans-Atlantic mandarins of the "realpolitik" clan gathered in Washington, albeit off the record, to dispense sage advice on an honorable exit from Iraq -- and a geopolitical compromise that would obviate a military showdown with Iran.
    Realpolitik is a policy of political realism, or the politics of the real world rather than politics based on theoretical, moral or idealistic concerns. That is a tall order in Iraq as the rationale for the invasion was a blend of all three.
    With Ahmad Chalabi -- once described by his neocon friends as the best hope for democracy in Iraq, and now closer to Tehran than Washington -- moving back into the Iraqi political imbroglio, the realists see this as the institutionalization of corruption at the top. Mr. Chalabi is now supposed to serve as the intermediary between Baghdad residents and Iraqi and U.S. security forces whose main function is to assess how much compensation the U.S. should pay for damages caused to homes and automobiles by Gen. Petraeus' surge.
    Mr. Chalabi is also in charge of "de-Ba'athification," an organization that has fired scores of thousands of Sunni civil servants -- adding to both the ranks of the unemployed and the insurgency. More recently, Mr. Chalabi claimed he had reversed course and taken back 14,000 Sunni civil servants. He also pledged when all is said and done more will have been said than done as only 1,500 former Ba'athists would be permanently excluded from government employment.
    It was Sheikh Muqtada al-Sadr, the anti-American head of the Shi'ite Mahdi Army militia, now lying low for the duration of the surge, who instructed Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to create a post on adjudicating "reparations" owed by the Americans. At least that's what Mr. Maliki's entourage told some Iraqi reporters.
    The realists now say the entire U.S.-built "democratic" infrastructure is rotten to the core. Ministers and former ministers absconded with millions of dollars. There is still no proper accounting for the more than $30 billion a year derived from some 2 million barrels of oil pumped daily. Also unaccounted-for is the $12 billion in $100 bills the U.S. trucked in behind the original invasion to get the country moving again.
    One Iraqi-born Iraqi expert among the realpolitikers said, not for attribution, there is only one way to save democracy in Iraq and that is by temporarily suspending it and getting a strongman to take over and declare martial law. "This potential Ataturk," he explained, "would have to be a former general known for his competence rather than his subservience to Saddam Hussein. There must be such a popular and friendly general that U.S. or Arab intelligence agencies know about. He could be in prison or in Syria or Beirut or even London. He might even be a general now in the insurgency underground. But he must be a man who understood all the details of the hidden persuaders of Saddam's control apparatus. His job would be to impose martial law and to get everything moving again through dictatorial edict and action. He should be given $5 billion to $10 billion to dispense as he sees fit to get the job done."
    The Bush administration once considered the strongman solution (known as the Cincinnatus option, named after one of the heroes of early Rome five centuries B.C., and a model of Roman virtue and simplicity) but rejected it. Potential candidates were presumably too strong -- or too weak.
    The kind of action this prominent ex-Iraqi realist had in mind would "suspend or jail corrupt officials. Electricity should not only be brought back to Saddam levels but to uninterrupted 24/7 power. Oil revenue would have to be centralized under strict control and revenues allocated for urgent needs, such as health, hospitals, garbage collection and so forth." Insurgents would be given a week to surrender their weapons, or face execution if captured. In return, the martial law government would guarantee them a job.
    What we call democracy in Iraq today is a parody; it's a kleptocracy. It cannot be reformed, this prominent Iraqi internationalist argued, and a coup by a nonsectarian strongman would be welcomed by most Iraqis who say life was less stressful with fewer hardships under Saddam.
    Iraq needs a Kemal Ataturk ("father of all Turks"), the dictator who seized control of the dying Ottoman Sultanate in 1923, and singlehandedly cajoled and browbeat his country into the modern Western mold. His puritanical blend of secularism abolished the caliphate, closed religious schools, banned veils and fezes, purged Turkish of its Arabic alphabet. Three times since 1960, the army, as guarantor of Ataturk's legacy, seized power to defend Turkey against terrorism of both the far left and far right.
    If President Bush concludes he cannot risk a freshly minted "Save Democracy" campaign in Iraq as Republican and Democratic presidential hopefuls jostle for position at the starting gate, the entire experiment will flop and U.S. troops will come home to a failed mission. The line of least resistance is to kick the can down the presidential road, leaving an exit deal to the next administration. But the Democrats will ensure this won't happen.
    The practitioners of geopolitics, in their small offline huddles this past weekend, agreed the time had come for Mr. Bush to swallow his pride and accept a royal invitation to hold a tripartite summit in Riyadh -- with Iran.
    The geopolitical realists said off the record this would be a propitious period for the three principal powers of the Gulf -- Iran, Saudi Arabia and the U.S.-- to hold a regional summit on Gulf security. Saudi King Abdullah would do the inviting. The only two invitees would be Mr. Bush and Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the man who holds the real power over hothead President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. All three have the biggest stakes in Gulf security, and legitimate security concerns.
    A week ago, Mr. Bush said nothing could move until the mullahs first suspended uranium enrichment activities. After the weekend think tank palavers, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said nothing had changed but the U.S. would sit down March 10 in Baghdad with Iraq's neighbors, including Iran and Syria.
    The diplomatic waters quickly muddied again as the Maliki government expanded the guest list to include its six neighbors, the Arab League, five permanent members of the Security Council, and the Organization of Islamic states. A recipe for gridlock.
    Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president and chairman of Iran's highest body, remarked that America's two invasions "had only served Iran's interests... and the Americans are... like a wounded tiger, and we must not ignore this." Peace or war with Iran is still in the balance.
    Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press International.




http://tinyurl.com/yp4llw


Anything is better than the cut and run or the worse yet, slow bleed of our troops while under fire suggested by Pelosi and Murtha.  We already have the reputation for being notorious cowards globally from Vietnam, Somolia, refusing to do anything when the Kobar Towers were blown up and having our embassies bombed with no retaliation not to mention the USS Cole blown up with no response other than words.

Having a military and lacking the will to use it is the same as not having one.  

.

Even as we speak Ted Kennedy and RINO McCain are drafting a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens in this country so we can share the misery.

And as for the Moderate Muslims, I see more evidence of the Easter Bunny or Tooth Fairy than those.  Where are they and if they are in such a majority as some claim, why have they allowed their religion to be hijacked by extremists?  Where are the demonstrations and protests when terrorists strike?
----------------

 

Islam is taking over, says Dutch politician
By Bruno Waterfield in The Hague
Last Updated: 2:29am GMT 02/03/2007



An anti-immigrant politician is making a meteoric rise with his call on the Dutch - once one of the most tolerant nations in the world - to stop Islam taking over Europe.

Geert Wilders, the 43-year-old leader of the Freedom Party, is convinced that governments are being forced to accommodate a 'tsunami of Islamisation' that is fundamentally incompatible with European social values.

"Islam itself is the problem. Islam is a violent religion," he told The Daily Telegraph. "The Prophet Mohammed was a violent man. The Koran is mostly a violent book. We should invest in Muslim people but they have to first get rid of half the Koran and half of their beliefs," he said.

The Freedom Party has jumped from six to 10 per cent in opinion polls since November. His passionate campaign for a ban on the Islamic veil, or burqa, in public places is gaining such momentum that the country's new coalition government could be forced to introduce the ban it does not support.

On the burqa, Mr Wilders is adamant: "It is a medieval token of a barbaric time, of how not to treat women, even if they want to wear it themselves," he argues.

advertisementAllowing Muslims to wear the burqa in the Netherlands, or to have segregated swimming sessions so as not to offend religious sensitivities, amounts to "religious apartheid" he says.

The new government coalition of mainstream centre right and left political parties had planned to ditch a decision by the previous government to ban the burqa in the Netherlands which now has a population of one million Muslims, six per cent of the total population. But, Mr Wilders crows, weekend opinion polls show 66 per cent of Dutch citizens support a ban.

The minority opposition leader who has won two previous votes for a ban on the burqa is convinced that support will be there for new legislation he will table in the spring as the Dutch become increasingly concerned over Muslim separatism.

Wilders is convinced there is growing support for his views across Europe but its political leaders, particularly in Britain, are too obsessed with being politically correct.

"There is almost no country more politically correct than the UK. Look at the terrible things that happened in London after Madrid, you have more reason than most to make this debate transparent and public," he said.

Mr Wilders split from the Dutch liberals in September 2004 over their support for EU membership for Turkey.

Two months later he was living in fear after police arrested suspected terrorists, armed with grenades, accused of planning to kill him. The Dutch politician says he and his wife have received more than 600 death threats.

Mr Wilders, who is always surrounded by plain clothes police guards, said: "I lost my freedom and privacy because of my opposition to Islam."
 
http://tinyurl.com/yr7gf6

Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright

Winning 1 Out of 4 Is'nt All That Bad ...............

Lost Korean War .......

Lost Viet-Nam ........

Won Gulf War ........

Lost Bush's War ...........

WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN IN A POSITION TO WIN OR LOSE IN IRAQ

THE WAR WAS SUPPOSEDLY AGAINST AL-QAEDA.

Bush Stated That Any State That Harbors Terrorists Are Themselves

Terrorists....... Well Mr Bush Start Attacking Pakistan, Syria, Iran

Lebanon, Egypt, Turkey, Isreal , The Sudan, American Samoa, Phillipines

Sharpen Your Bayonets..... And We Wont Be Back Til Its Over Over There

 8)

So Widget, not to sound or appear rude at all, but how do you live under Chavez's rule and state Bush is accountable for all the ills of the modern world?

what on earth does it say when you blame only Bush for the war? what about the democratic process, so our own Senate and Congress bear absolutely no responsibility in this? I also do not believe that all intelligence is 'secret' and privy only to our president, DC is like a screen door on a submarine in this century, if you want to know something it's not so hard for a well-placed politician to find it out.

oh and I didn't vote for Bush in the last election nor the one prior.......but I do believe it's naive to blame only him

WE Were Dupppped By BUSH Into Believing THat Sadaam Was Satan But

IN Reality I See No Difference Between The Two Monsters ...........

ON The Heels Of 9/11 The Americans Were Looking For Justice & BUSH

Used Our Vulnerabilty To Gain Our Confidence & Believe That Iraq

Was The Evil Jungle Prince.......And Yes Even The Senate & Congress

Believed What Good OLe GWB Told Them, But The Truth Has Come Out

& Finally We All Can See What A President YOu Folks Elected

Not You None .......We Are Lucky He Has'nt Blown Up The World Yet ..

 8)

WIDGET>>> THOSE STUPID ASS SENTORS THAT VOTED FOR WAR WERE GIVEN THE SAME INTELLIGENCE AS BUSH... NOT BY BUSH, BUT THE SAME PEOPLE THAT GAVE HIM THE INTELLIGENCE....

my point but you made it better mrs  :lol:

Widget looks like Bush is heading to your neighborhood soon  :wink:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=amB3PRFjIzgE&refer=latin_america

Interesting stats in that piece, it seems Chavez's approval or positive rating is lower than Bush's globally?

Widget:  This TV news program is from the CBC (The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) and was broadcast last night.  
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/

C'mon Mrs Red ..............

We All Were Cheerleading At That Time Wanting To Get Even For 9/11....

The Intelligence Sector If You Did'nt Know Is Still Under The Watchful

Eye Of George Herbert Bush.THis Was A Set-Up To Get Us Involved

IN Iraq & It Worked, We All Rallied Behind Bush When The Bombs Started

Falling Thinking We Were Doing The Right Thing.

BUT WHERE ARE THESE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

WHERE WAS THE AL-QAEDA LINK ....

WHERE WAS THE PLAN FOR IRAQ AFTER DESTROYING THE PEOPLE

AND THE COUNTRY. BUSH MADE A KILLING FIELD OF HIS OWN IN IRAQ..

BUSH STATED HE WANTED SADAAM CAUSED HE TRIED TO KILL MY

DADDY, GOOD EXCUSE TO PULL A COUNTRY TO WAR.

THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRATIC THING.

ITS BUSHS PERSONNAL WARPED BRAIN THAT KEEPS US FIGHTING

THE GREAT DECEIVER HAS DECEIVED US ALL & STILL HAS YOU HOOKED

YOU SHOULD TRAVEL OUTSIDE OF YOUR MAINE RETREAT & I DONT

MEAN ALABAMA TO SEE HOW WONDERFULLY LIKED WE ARE AS A NATION

YOUR ENVY THING DOES'NT STICK WITH ME.

ITS A BUSH THING ..

 8)

No None He Has Not Been Invited To Costa Rica .........

THe Bush War & The Free Trade Agreement Has Costa Ricans At Odds

With The American Government & Bush. It Was Advised That He Skip

Our Democratic Country. Sorry To See You On The Bush Bandwagon

And By The Way Chavez Has NOthing To Do With Costa Rica & Our

President Arias Is Not Liked By Chavez. But Yes I Like Chavez Better

Than Bush, I Even Like Hitler Better Than Bush.

When Johnny Comes Marching Home Again Hurrah Hurrah

We'll Give Him A Hearty Welcome Than Hurrah Hurrah

And Hopefully They Done Have To Go To The Bushs VA Hospitals....

 8)

Thanks Leslie ..........

You Always Light My Fire ..................

 8)

Widget-

The VA bailed on my Rick who likely died from exposure to spent uranium and the dust from the Kuwaiti oil fires. That isn't the issue here, the issue is are you a patriot or are you not? I am and Rick would encourage me to continue to be. No two wrongs justify one more wrong, sorry but I cannot agree with you there.

I am glad you are closer in proximity to Chavez than I, it's a small ocean, such temptation for someone like him who feels he's entitled to rule the world  :roll:

I am against al jihad, that isn't for Bush but against radical extremists who feel an inalienable right to wreak violence upon all of us. War appears to be all they understand Widget, that is the issue I am concerned about, and also whether Russia and Syria assisted Saddam in moving the WMD's to Syria like thieves in the night. Where do you think many of the Russian best and brightest nuclear scientists migrated to? Why to Iraq and some to Iran as well. I suspect Russia captured a few and returned them to the homeland after finishing clean up for Saddam.

Please don't pity me as if I'm some subhuman incapable of understanding where your mind travels. I am a patriot, I support and believe in my country regardless. I won't turn on our servicemen now for at last there is some progress in this war, some new strategies are impacting it. I will stay the course as they have, and pray they can succeed and return home safely when the time is right.

So Because I Dont Believe In Bushs Tactics You Classify Me As A

NON-PATRIOT ..............Now You Made Wave My Banner .........

My Darling I Fought For My Country In Viet Nam Even Though I Did'nt

Believe In That War Either......But I Did'nt Have Many Choices...

Canada....Jail.....Or The Jungles Of Southeast Asia ..........#4 In Lottery..

I Served My 2 Years In The United States Marine Corps........Sempre Fi..

I Dont Like Waving My Patriotism Banner Around To Much Cause People

Like To Shit On It. So Dont Give Me  Shit About My Patriotism My

Dear .................I'm A Yankee Doodle Dandy ..............

Yes I Also Am Against Terrorists That Plague Our Society But In Reality

We Cause Terrorism By Not Supplying Other Means For The Poor

To Exist In This World. $500 Billion Spent On The Poor Would Have

Better Results Than War. THe Protests In Latin American Are Huge

Against Bush The US Stations Are'nt Showing The Real Hate..

THank You For Worrying About Me & My Family Living So Close To

Chavez But I Would Rather Have Him As A Neighbor Than The Bush Clan

And I Am Sorry For Your Lose ( And I Mean That Sincerely ) ..........

And Our Serviceman Should Be In Afghanistan Chasing The Real

Terrorists ( Bin Ladins Group ) But It Seems THe Saudis Have Bush On

A Leash & Bin Ladin Is OFF Limits ..............

 8)

Chinese Government Has 1 TRILLION Us Dollars In Their Reserve

THey Almost Single Handedly Could Destroy The US Economy

Why Would Our Government Allow This To Happen.

 8)

widget I didn't "shit" on you or your patriotism, I wrote a post explaining MY position and my reasoning. It was you who chose to pity me for supporting Bush, just as you write patronizing things to anyone who may disagree with you. Supporting our servicemen in a war that they have given many lives to date within, supporting a war to enable a new democracy that still needs our assistance, is different than supporting any one leader but you don't seem to be capable of acknowledging that difference.

Saddam was gassing the kurds by the hundreds of thousands, Bush senior should have taken care of him first time around.

yes the saudi's have certainly gone from allie to foe behind the scenes in some regards, I don't disagree that's an issue either. I also don't think locating bin Laden is as easy as you say it is. Rick spent 9 months in Iraq, I don't think unless you have spent time in that region that you can truly understand. He lived in an open soccer stadium in a tent, every night they felt a 'fine mist' in the air as well. He was told his cancer was a case study in rampant growth likely due to those exposures. It was Clinton who covered up the latent studies on the exposures of our soldiers in the Gulf War and who began the decline of the VA hospitals. Just ask Rick, he was in studies with the VA for gulf war syndrome, all during the Clinton years. NOTHING was done, the studies were stalled, even development of medication to address the issues was dropped. Only through the latent studies of our allies such as Britain and Austrailia is the truth from these exposures to be found. Those were executed during Clinton's reign, not Bush, so who is more guilty here? I am a realist, each president we have has his own cadre of allegiances and his own cadre of cover-up's at least in the last few decades.

my father served in WWII in Paris, he was the person selected to bomb our installations as the enemy approached, until he died in 2000 he refused to ever discuss his experiences there or to return to Europe, due to what he witnessed while there. The young man I went to the senior prom with actually died in Vietnam, he was valedictorian of his class. I think war has touched my life in vivid ways and I do blame war and the need for war, not every politician or president singularly.

I don't wish you or your family harm from Chavez or any other dictator, but it appears unless we stupid people acknowledge you hold all truth, that we are worthless. this is what angers me about your posts.

There have been many investigations and not one, not a single one has one shred of documented evidence of ANY lie on the part os President Bush.

Anyone who says otherwise is a liar.

Here we go just for starters.  Let's deal in FACTS and not opinions or socialist politics for a change, OK?

PROVE the LIES!!  You can't do it because he did NOT lie.

Widget, you are the one lying, not Bush.  Here is each and every one of your lies fully refuted:

http://www.gwotnews.info/leftlies.pdf

And when those LYING about the sitting President of the United States finish that, try this on for size:

Quote:

Exhaustive article and references pertaining to claims of WMD and support of Saddam for terrorist.
Refutes the claims of Bush lying well.
 
Well sourced.  I do so wish President Bush were more the type to answer critics instead of ignoring them.
 
 
http://truthandcons.blogspot.com/2005/12/bush-lied-people-died.html


Each and every claim by those who like to pretend that Bush lied is once again fully refuted.

I don't know why some people just can't accept the fact that it is not Bush who has lied but the socialist left in this country and their willing minions in the liberally biased and also lying mainstream media in this country.

We live like the Russians under the Soviet Union with media that lies for political gain and to try to grasp political power.  We do not have access to the truth, only what the socialist taking over the country want us to know.  The truth is out there but you have to dig for it and cut through the propaganda that is coming from the Liberals as never before.

Remember, leftists are citizens of the universe first of all and care not one whit about this country for they do not believe in nationalism, patriotism or any of that.

And Widget, how old are you???  You fought in Vietnam?  What unit?  What year?  I would not have thought you were that old but know you wouldn't be exaggerating now would you?  Like you do about Bush????

Where did you study economics???  Yes, this would hurt the economy some but destroy?  You don't have much of an idea of the size, scope and health of the US economy right now, do you?

This is laughable!
 :D  :D  :D
.

This is another interesting article on the GWOT and what happened to the WMD's that we KNOW FOR A FACT Saddam had.  It is one of a series that can be found at the website.

In Search of Saddam Hussein’s WMD:
Russian Intelligence, Belarus & Highway 11
Part 3 of a 5
World/Scott Malensek

April 5, 2006  
The 1990-2003 War Against Saddam has millions of untold stories.  Perhaps one of the most important happened at the onset of the invasion.  On the evening of March 22 there are several reports that Russians were witness to an American airborne assault near the Syrian/Jordanian/Iraq border, on or near Highway 11, and in the vicinity of Akashat.  Allegedly American airborne troops and/or Special Forces were trying to seize some of Saddam’s WMD on its way into Syria.  They were detected by Iraqi forces, surrounded, and as many as 30 were killed or captured.  Forces from Jordan were sent to provide air support and rescue for the survivors.

There are no reports of this incident in the mainstream media, but Russian intelligence reports that were remarkably published on the internet during the invasion were generally close to the mark in accuracy (albeit embellished with a distinct political slant), and the Department of Defense has affirmed that the reports do seem credible and accurate-particularly the ones that reference radio intercepts.  This report of the border incident stems from such radio intercepts.  It's also echoed in Yossef Gdansk's book, The Secret History of the Iraq War, and he cites several Russian eyewitnesses as well.  

That the casualties are not listed in the DoD's casualty list is not unusual since the words "Ranger" and "Green Beret" are missing from that list entirely.  It seems Special Forces casualties are not generally reported in the same manner as conventional forces.  If true, the presence of American forces captured and taken into Syria perhaps might be one of the reasons why more pressure hasn't been exerted on the Assad Regime.

In any event, on March 24th President Bush called Russian President Vladamir Putin and there can be no doubt that the issue of Russian support for Saddam's regime was discussed.  That the phone call (widely reported by the press at the time) came immediately in the wake of the border incident is interesting and poignant.

On March 29 and 30, Saddam contacted Belarus. The former Soviet Republic had been one of many that offered Saddam exile in the days just prior to the war.  Instead of accepting the offer, Saddam had a Belarusian IL-76 transport plane flown to Baghdad, allegedly loaded with "sensitive cargo" and immediately flown back to Belarus.  In December, Yevgeny Primakov's plane had been reloaded with "sensitive cargo" (ie cargo the Americans would want-like WMD, WMD equipment, documents, and people), and flown to Belarus. All flights in and out of Saddam International were monitored closely by the USAF, British Intelligence, and a list of other foreign intelligence services.

Many of the Russian-made weapons procured through Syria's front companies-like SES International-had come from Belarus.  After the fall of Saddam's regime, it was found that many of the senior leaders who had fled went to Syria and Belarus (sometimes in that order).  If one asks, "What happened to all that WMD?"  Then a finger can be pointed towards the former Soviet Republic at the very least for enabling the former leaders of Saddam's regime to escape and orchestrate an insurgency, clearly for removal of "sensitive items" from Saddam's regime, and very likely for accepting Saddam's WMD, WMD equipment, documents, and people.

On April 5th, CENTCOM reported spotting a large column of Iraqi vehicles, and braced for a possible counterattack.  Rather than race south to certain defeat and death, the column slipped into Syria.  Russian intelligence reports reiterate this event as do Lebanese sources.  Mainstream media reports only confirm the convoy's sighting, but they do not follow up the report, and they do not report on what happened to it.  Allegedly the convoy included Russian-made mobile rocket launchers some with chemical weapons.

The exodus from Iraq to Syria by Saddam's allies and the highest ranking members of Saddam's regime didn't end on April 9th, but it was fully brought to the attention of the world when American Special Forces intercepted a Russian convoy headed into Syria. The Russians said that the convoy was on a diplomatic mission following a convoy that carried Primakov himself.  To this day no one knows for sure.  Some reports claim that Primakov's convoy carried Russian WMD people, documents, and equipment that could not be left to fall into the hands of the Coalition.   That Russian convoys as well as convoys from Saddam’s regime were assembled and rushing out of Iraq/into Syria during those last few days has been well-reported by the mainstream media, and summarily ignored then forgotten.

The contents of the convoy that American commandos attacked remain classified, but former deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology and security, John A Shaw, reports that American intelligence has documents confirming that Saddam's Regime paid Russia to provide security forces for Iraq's Russian-made arms and paid Russia to conduct counterintelligence activities that would prevent the Coalition from discovering the illegal arms supply line from Russia through Syria.  This is consistent with the other aid Russia is known to have provided Saddam’s regime in its last days.

"An Arabic-language report obtained by U.S. intelligence disclosed the extent of Russian armaments. The 26-page report was written by Abdul Tawab Mullah al Huwaysh, Saddam's minister of military industrialization, who was captured by U.S. forces May 2, 2003."  Other intelligence officials confirm the possession of these documents and more.  "The materials outlined in the documents included [illegal] missile components, MiG jet parts, tank parts and chemicals used to make chemical weapons, the official said."

Recently declassified documents from Saddam’s Iraqi Intelligence Services headquartes as well as the Iraqi Perspectives Project report released two weeks ago both serve as new sources detailing how Russian intelligence was working hand in hand with the IIS-even going so far as to provide the Iraqis with the American invasion plans for Operation Iraqi Freedom.   Sec State Rice has even brought up the matter of Russian aid to Saddam’s dying regime as recently as last week.

One wonders how differently the war in Iraq would look if American commandos had been able to seize elusive WMD in those first few hours of the war, and what it would have been like if they could have presented it to the world?  As more and more captured documents are being released every day, why not present the documents detailing the list of illegal Russian armaments provided to Saddam, or the other evidence of illegal Russian support as well?  

That answer will come later.
 
Scott Malensek writes under the name "Sam Pender" and is the author of several books on the Global War on Terror and the Iraq Wars in particular. His works include: Iraq's Smoking Gun, How Did It Come to This?, The Ignored War, America's War With Saddam, and Saddam's Ties to Al Queda.
   Contact Scott      Archive    

http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/malensek/04052006.htm



Some people seem to get their information and news from conspiracy and crackpot websites instead of reputable ones that deal only in facts.  There are plenty of nutjobs running websites on the internet but if you stick to one like this one that has a board of reputable reporters, many well known inveatigative reporters who have been doing that for years, you are far more likely to get an accurate picture.  At least you will get one based in reality instead of some hate-filled fantasy land of crop circles, UFO's and Bush Bashing.

There really does seem to be such a thing as Bush Derangement Syndrome that makes some people just lose all thought processes.  I am not sure of the cause but think it has to do with a party being unable to accept loss of power. It does seem to be hate based instead of dealing in rational thinking and logic.

It seems more common in those with close ties to other countries that are highly anti-American.

.
.

You have got to be kidding, right?  No, not even the dreaded Chinese can "destroy" our economy which is the envy of the ENTIRE WORLD.

And personal family income hit an ALL TIME HIGH for December.

Check it out, Widget, and you may get a clue as to why all those "nations" you are so worried about liking us just might be a tad jealous.  And hating America is hardly anything new.

We continue to do the right thing instead of just what is popular as you seem to think we should be doing in order to be liked by failed, dying cultures.  They can't help us militarily because they barely have a military for their own national defense so bankrupt are they.

Yes, the world is furious that the sole remaining super power is capitalist instead of socialist.  Expect more of the same in the future as long as we continue to proposer and they continue to fail.

Very precise and clear graphs of irrefutable evidence of the state of the economy of this country.  Amazing having fought two wars, been attacked on our own soil and withstood Katrina!  Only superior leadership and a workable system makes this possible and for that I am daily thankful.

Read the actual statistics here:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/016657.php

.

Well Widget,we are in the same group.My number was 146,which gave no choice but the ones you had.you may have called me once or twice,you know corpman.Maybe I cooked for you or treated you at a hospital,but I sure as hell did not like that war and we were lied to then.Semper Fi.Oh,the last group of names on that damn black wall is a cousin.cat

Two in my family are deploying within thirty days and one returning.
Also one of my best friends is going but with a different unit than the one to which he is attached.  Not sure how that is going to work out but we shall see.

Wondering if Congress is going to cut off funds for them is not a very good feeling.


(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Troops/thMAG11.jpg)  
(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Troops/th12thMar.jpg)   (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Troops/th3rd_marine_division.png)

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Troops/TROP.jpg)   (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Troops/thusmc20.jpg)

.

THe commission who investigated 911 proved that what Wilson said in the NYT was all lies, that he had every reason to belief that Iraq had WMD and had purchased yellowcake, but remember, it was his job to undermine our country and gain financially from it.  He and his bleached blond wife who is only undercover when she is under the covers, should be brought up on treason, because they have naive and uninformed people such as Widget believing that what was written by that poseur, Wilson, in the old gray lady was the truth, and yet it was far from the truth, and we all know the old gray lady is no lady, but a lying tabloid for those who wish to undermine the USA.  Widget, you really have moved to such a clandestine location, you are totally out of touch with reality.

Tyler and Anna ~

 :smt041  :smt041  :smt041  :smt058  :smt058  :smt058  :smt041  :smt041  :smt041

Encore. Please.

{{edit}}

 8)

Closet Case .................

I SUGGEST TO ALL OF YOU MONKEYS TO WATCH THE HISTORY CHANNELS SECRETS OF 9/11 ...............

See For Your Own Eyes, Where Your Government Was During The

Terrorist Attack..........Out Of Touch ( On Purpose ) ...........

Bush Knew 9/11 Would Give Him The Green Light To Attack Iraq....

They All Lied About Not Seeing Documentation On Al-Qaeda ..........

Rumsfeld Said Immediately After OK Lets Set The Groundwork For

Attacking Iraq.... This Was All In The Works Before 9/11 Ever Happened..

All Lines To The White House Were Down So President Could'nt

Contact Anyone ( How Convenient ) .... All Lines To The White House

Were Down When Kennedy Was Shot .............

 8)

{{edit))
 8)

Widget, I do not doubt you know more about coffee and many other things than I but you are severely limited in your knowledge about world affairs, unless perhaps you are a part of the subversive shadow government employed by the Democrats to undermine the USA at the behest of the PIAPS.

No attacks, just surmising as I am quite flummoxed over the misunderstanding of a conservative website and free speech.

Dick McDonald
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 12 March 2007

Are there any Americans who believe that bringing personal freedoms and the Bill of Rights to the people of the world is not a prescription for world peace? Are there any Americans who believe that America should wait to respond to our Islamic Terrorist enemies until they strike America again by incinerating New York City? Are there any serious Democrats who believe that Americans want to become a country of surrender monkeys by cutting and running from Iraq? Have Americans accepted turning their back on the people of Iraq who took our word and voted to install a democracy in the middle of a theocratic Islam? Are Americans convinced that our departure will not trigger a mass genocide of Iraqis who voted to separate church from state? All evidence to the contrary, I don’t think so.  

No! Americans watch too much TV to be that short-sighted and mindlessly ignorant. They are fed up with a media and a political class that has failed to identify with any certainty who we are fighting, why we are fighting, how we will win and when? This is not too much to ask and the people rose up to smite those who were not delivering those answers. Americans were just fed up with a perceived failure. They bought into the fact that too many Americans were dying to justify our efforts to keep the war offshore when the actual  

The frustration got so high Americans want to change course to win the War on Terror. They believe that changing political control of Congress will do the trick. Nothing could be further from the truth. Americans have just gone to the bull pen for a relief pitcher, they are not moving the franchise to another city. Americans want success. They just aren't getting it. The instant gratification mentality that has been slowly injected into our veins needs its fix; and we want it now not some 50 years from now when Islam learns that killing for their God is not religious.  

If President George W. Bush has done nothing else he has played the part of the pro-active American ready to change the political and cultural landscape of the world by fighting not appeasing or containing. The mistake he made was to believe he could finesse Islam by appealing to their peaceful and moderate factions by announcing they were a religion of peace highjacked by a murderous cult within that “great” church.  

This was his biggest mistake and the reason why the American people don't think highly of his perceptive skills. If they are so “peaceful” why don't they discipline their own? Why do they fly planes into tall building to kill people. Why do they suicide bomb women and children all over the world? Why do they behead their enemies to a chorus of Allah Akbar “God is Great”. Why can’t they be reasoned with? Is it because their 3-year-olds grow up believing Jews are pigs and monkeys? That martyrdom is preferable to tolerance of those that don’t believe as they do? It has been Bush's biggest fault. The American people can understand if they are given a chance. They don’t take kindly to less than full disclosure when it comes to reasons to fight a war.  

All of which winds us down to what the electorate expects the Democrats to do now they control the purse and direction of the country. I don't expect the people believe that Democrats have an answer. There are more differences within that party than there are difference between Republicans and Democrats. There is one thing for certain the never ending cycle of talk then fight, talk then fight, talk then fight will go on for what seems like an eternity. The talkers, appeasers and containers as represented by Jim Baker and his crowd are divining a new approach to the war in Iraq and the greater war on terror.  

These talkers will prevail. The last time they did their dance they opted for Saddam Hussein rather than have Iraq fall into the hands of the Iranian Mullahs. They are talkers and the Muslims are just laughing. Mohammed told them in the Koran that talking is a sign of weakness; a sign you are winning the war, now press your advantage. Jim Baker and his crowd are the talkers to President Bush's hawk. What the election proved was we want action and results not appeasement of Islam or their fascists. The only people deceived by the election are the politicians who normally misread just about everything.  

Apparently George W. Bush knew something his Daddy didn’t. He became a hawk fighting and pre-emptively so. He wants to fight to win. He played Little League and its in his DNA. “If must fight, win” as Mr. Myagi said and General Patton did. Although a hawk, our President was too compassionate. His Bible does not trump a society indoctrinated into death squads by their bible, the Koran. Both dictums are delivered from on high where no one can dispute their veracity. That is unless the light of day shines down on them from a relentless and truthful media. When the world turns against the teachings of the Koran, then the Muslim world will quiet down and do its retrospective.  

That tiny race of 15 million Jews and their isolated nation state of Israel is caught amongst all these currents. Jonathan Tobin has an illuminating article on all these dilemmas.  

 
Perhaps, Widget, you do know more than me.  I give you that, and Klaas admonishes me not to attack, so this response is no attack and I apologize to Red, Mrs. Red & Klaas, if that is what was perceived.

Tylergal wrote: "The commission which investigated 911 proved that what Wilson said in the NYT was all lies."

***********************
Do you happen to remember the Warren Commission report in 1964  which investigated the assination of JKF? The commission took its name from the chairman, Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren. It concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the killing of Kennedy. The Commission's findings have since proven extremely controversial and have frequently been challenged.

Gerald Ford was one of the members of the Warren Commission.  In recent years, he admitted that evidence was manipulated in its investigation of JFK's assination in order to fit the "one gunman theory."
************************

So therefore, I don't believe the 911 Commission Report or the Warren Commission Report.

I'm with Widget, 100%.  Please do not bother me with rebuttals.  Bush 43 lied to us, over and over and over. That is a fact.

I have seen that.  I have also read at Rense.com.  Information like that is usually accompanied by crop circles, UFO abductions and sightings of Amelia Earhart in Japan.

The day I become that gullible, I hope I just hang it up.  Just like playing the game of Kevin Bacon, starting with a predetermined goal, it is possible to work backwards and claim just about anything.  The massive number of people who would have to be involved in such a conspiracy and then keep the big secret would be enormous and not only improbable but impossible.

And those are not the bones of Jesus Christ either just because it is on TV.  

I do think, however, that the previous administration ignored warnings and Sandy Berger went to the National Archives and stole the evidence that Bill Clinton had been warned repeatedly that Bin Laden planned to make a direct attack, possibly flying planes into buildings.  

I also believe he stole memos about TWA Flight 800 being shot down by a missile.  Probably had to go back time and again to get all the documents with Clinton's personal handwriting on them.  

And we know the intelligence community risked their lives repeatedly to find Bin Laden and could have assassinated him long before 9/11 but both Clinton and Berger lacked the intestinal fortitude to do it and had them stand down over and over even after the bombing of our embassies, The US Cole, Kobar Towers and all the other attacks we sustained without any response at all.  Oh, except we bombed an aspirin factory as reprisal once in return for an embassy including loss of life.   :roll:

I have seen that on the History Channel and dozens of websites that make the same claims and every bit of it can be refuted by the facts.  The President wasn't in the White House so I don't know what lines you are talking about but they do not have to depend on "lines" as we now have this wonderful invention called the cell phone and they even have secure lines.  There is no down.  Besides, there was nothing to do as this was an attack by terrorists and not another nation.  

I have a son in the intelligence community and he has been since he turned eighteen, part time all through college and grad school at Georgetown the full 20 hours per week they allow and now full time/career, and I am very aware of attacks in Washington as I fear for his safety in case of a next one.   I do take these things very seriously.

.

Anna, of all our posters here with a son working in national and international intelligence, I suspect if there were a huge subversive effort to hoodwink the entire US he might have found a way to alert you. I think our government is at times corrupt but I also think some give the current president far more credit than is due for subterfuge. Again it was Clinton who allowed bin Laden and Saddam, as well as Iran to grow exponentially toward the terrorism we now are enduring.

Amazingly ALL of this data emerges as the Democrats lick their chops with their eyes on the white house? Louise I believe Gerald Ford said more than you are stating so simply regarding the Warren Commission. It is amazing to me how every soundbyte out there becomes fact and judge, jury and trial.

Thank heavens presidential elections only come every four years for I am not sure I could deal with the manipulations more often than that.

:) I am with you Widget.  I do not like to read posts attacking you and trying to silence you with insults or attempting to educate you with dubious information.  I know the war profiteers create a climate of fear that allows them to loot the treasury of the country they say they love, but why does the average American enable these traitors?  When the President and Vice President of the United States show no regard for the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or the opinions of the majority of the people they supposedly serve, it is time to speak up.
The people who don't agree with me shouldn't bother responding to this because; I don't care what you think or what you know or what you think you know because I have done my research and nothing will change my mind.   :)

I would imagine that those individuals who do work in intelligence are at no more liberty to reveal information to a family member than the FBI is.

Why is it that it must be all or nothing? If one does not support the agenda of the current administration, then one is deemed unpatriotic, not supportive of our troops, "...wait[ing] to respond to our Islamic Terrorist enemies until they strike America again", etc.? Nothing could be further from the truth.  

And just who the hell are we to decide for any other nation that they become "democratic"? Iraq is free of Saddam. Allow them to wage their own struggle to determine what is meaningful to them as a people. After all it is their oil, oops, I mean lives.


I believe that it was demonstrated that the Bush administration had more interest in looking at how Iraq could be invaded than what the Clinton administration clearly and unequivocably informed as being a significant threat from Bin Laden and company.

Dittos all around for each point you made, Leslie.

Regarding the followig~ If said intelligence individual were to breach that silence in any manner to a family member, that individual needs to be prosecuted and expelled from said position.

oh please you two, get a grip !

I never implied Anna's son would be less than committed to the integrity of his position, but I will say this now after that low potshot was taken, that both of you need to grow up.

how darn petty of you ! build an argument and back it up with fact and links to documentation please, I am waiting !

I amend this for Leslie didn't make that statement, I frankly was so appalled by justins implied slam to my stating that Anna likely knows a helluva a lot more about our actually intelligence capabilities than any of us might ever know simply having a family member in that vocation, that I mistakenly thought justins had lifted a quote from leslie's post. To learn from a family member about an industry doesn't require sharing coveted intelligence either, but surely you aren't so naive as to think he would ????????

oh that's right Bush's entire administration is in cahoots with the oil conspiracy according to justins, does he use a cattle prod to coerce his entire staff to do so? do tell !

Yes Anna,

Since the official end of the Vietnam War was 27 Jan 1973, which was 34 years ago, anyone who would have served in combat in Vietnam would have to be 50+ years old by now. Actually with 4mos bootcamp and at least one leave and one month in theater, one would probably need to be at least 18 on Jun 72 to have served in combat, thus an age of at least 51.5 by as of now.

Klaas I respect you very much, I also think if we strive to stick to fact and not impressions this will make a huge difference.

This explains my concern quite well, I don't think any of us is happy to be at war. I also think if all of us were measured by the same standard of perfection that is applied to the presidential office, we'd be in a world of trouble. Most good decision makers know one can't make absolute decisions in a fluid environment, only hope to adapt them as we go to gain the right outcome.

This individual explains it well

The lie that Bush lied
By Dinesh D'Souza
Monday, March 12, 2007

If you want to know how the Iraq debate got so acrimonious, the tipping point was when mainstream Democrats went from accusing Bush of bungling the Iraq war to accusing him of lying to get America into that war. His crime, at this point, became not merely one of error but one of deliberate deception. The basic liberal reasoning is that no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, therefore Bush has been misleading the American people all along.

At one time these charges of lying were restricted to the political left. In the aftermath of the Iraq invasion, The Nation claimed that Bush went to war based on “falsehoods and deceptions.” Al Franken took the charge a step further, alleging that “the President loves to lie.” Activist Cindy Sheehan insisted, “My son died for lies. George Bush lied to us and he knew he was lying.”

But of late even mainstream Democrats have started to talk this way. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was a relatively hawkish national security advisor in the Carter administration, recently faulted Bush for going to war in Iraq on “false pretenses.” What follows from this premise is that Bush cannot now be trusted in anything he says, whether about the need for more troops in Iraq or the danger posed by Iran’s nuclear program.

It is easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to fault Bush for being wrong about the weapons of mass destruction. But unlike pundits and rival presidential candidates, statesmen do not have the benefit of hindsight. They must act in the moving current of events, using information that is available to them. At the time there was little doubt across the political spectrum that Saddam Hussein was pursuing WMDs. Hussein himself acted as if he had such weapons, constantly evading the efforts of United Nations inspectors to monitor Iraqi weapons facilities.

Bush had to weigh the risk of invading Iraq and being wrong, against the risk of not invading Iraq and being wrong. In the first case, he would be risking American troops in an unpopular war that would, nevertheless, result in the removal of a vicious dictator. In the second case, he would be risking Hussein acquiring a deadly weapon, which could end up in the hands of terrorists. If as a consequence a massive bomb exploded in Chicago killing half a million Americans, then who would take the responsibility? Weighing the risks, Bush decided it would be better to take preventive action and invade Iraq.

In retrospect, Bush was wrong to invade Iraq at the time that he did, in the way that he did. With the benefit of hindsight, I think Bush might have done better to focus on Iran which had nuclear aspirations of its own and was pursuing them—it turns out—with greater effectiveness than Saddam Hussein. Statesmen, however, not have the luxury of making decisions in retrospect.

Consider a similar decision made by President Roosevelt. In the period leading up to World War II, a group of émigré German scientists warned Albert Einstein that the Germans were building an atomic bomb under the guidance of that country’s greatest scientist, Werner Heisenberg. Acutely aware of the dangers of Hitler possessing an atomic bomb, Einstein took this information in the fall of 1939 to President Roosevelt, who commissioned the Manhattan Project. The United States built the bomb, and later dropped two of them on Japan.

Many years later, Americans discovered that the Germans were nowhere close to building an atomic bomb. Their project was on the wrong track, and it seems to have stalled in its infancy. Some historians believe that Heisenberg was trying to thwart the project from the inside. Be that as it may, in retrospect we now know that the intelligence that led to the Manhattan project was wrong. But no one goes around saying, “Einstein lied” or “FDR lied.” They didn’t lie; they used the information they had to make a tough decision in a very dangerous situation.

The same is true of Bush. Acting against the somber backdrop of 9/11, he may have acted in haste, and he might have acted in error, but he did not act in bad faith. Therefore the claim that “Bush lied” is itself a lie. By acknowledging this, we remove some of the poison that currently infects the Iraq debate, and help lay the groundwork for a constructive discussion of America’s future role in Iraq and in the Middle East.



Dinesh D'Souza's new book The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 has just been published by Doubleday. D’Souza is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Hiya, Carnut!

It would be very nice and more honest to stick to facts and not present the latest propaganda of people with close ties to the Bush White House  
such as Dinesh D'Souza of the Hoover Institution.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/07/news/letter.php
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1479

Nonesuche wrote: "Anna, of all our posters here with a son working in national and international intelligence, I suspect if there were a huge subversive effort to hoodwink the entire US he might have found a way to alert you." and "my stating that Anna likely knows a helluva a lot more about our actually intelligence capabilities than any of us might ever know simply having a family member in that vocation" and "To learn from a family member about an industry doesn't require sharing coveted (coverted?) intelligence either."

I read that as: Anna has inside information, superior to the average person and her views should be given more credence, so when she discredits a TV program about 9/11, etc. we should really listen.
I don't think my interpretation is naive and I am confused about why you would respond  "I never implied Anna's son would be less than committed to the integrity of his position".  So what are you saying - it can't be both ways.  Maybe you mean that her son's silence concerning her opinions is tantamount to his approval or they communicate silently blink once for yes - twice for no.  

I am still trying to understand how "Join the army and see the world" is sexist.

Dinesh D'Souza explains it well:
The Lie That Bush Lied
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20031013/corn
http://www.iaea.org/

On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."
The claim, repeated by top administration officials for months afterward, was hailed at the time as a vindication of the decision to go to war. But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true.
U.S. officials asserted that Iraq had biological weapons factories in trailers, even after a Pentagon mission found them unsuited for that role.  But shortly after the fall of Baghdad, an internal report showed the trailers had nothing to do with banned weapons.
Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president's statement.The three-page field report and a 122-page final report three weeks later were stamped "secret" and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories.
-The Washington Post.

The New York Times Editorial Implies That Congress Was Presented With Incomplete And Manipulated Intelligence. "Congress had nothing close to the president's access to intelligence. The National Intelligence Estimate presented to Congress a few days before the vote on war was sanitized to remove dissent and make conjecture seem like fact." (Editorial, "Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials," The New York Times, 11/15/05)


 Consider a similiar decision made by President Roosevelt :roll:
He is talking about the Manhatten Project but one might infer something else.
FDR died on April 12, 1945
The war ended in Europe with the unconditional surrender by Germany on May 7, 1945 and then the German surrender to the Soviets on May 8, 1945.  
July 25, 1945, President Harry S. Truman gave the order to commence atomic attacks on Japan as soon as possible.  Atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki  Japan on August 6 and 9, 1945.

But no one goes around saying, “Einstein lied” or “FDR lied.

Einstein moved (1933) to the United States.  Einstein sent (1939) a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that urged that the United States proceed to develop an atomic bomb before Germany did. The letter... contributed to Roosevelt's decision to fund what became the Manhattan Project.

If as a consequence a massive bomb exploded in Chicago killing half a million Americans...

How massive is that bomb? The population of Chicago is 2.8 million.

Acting against the somber backdrop of 9/11, he (George Bush) may have acted in haste

September 11, 2001 to the start of war on March 19, 2003 is more than 18 months.

risking American troops in an unpopular war that would, nevertheless, result in the removal of a vicious dictator.

If that was the objective of the war; Saddam is dead.  You won.  

Can you really trust this author to be objective considering the title of his book:  Dinesh D'Souza's new book The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11?
http://tinyurl.com/36w5jf

His article explains nothing and after a little research,  is unfactual and astoundingly ridiculous but what else would you expect.

:lol: it is only astoundingly ridiculous if you are so liberal that no facts except those which support your argument seem to have validity

heaven help the CEO's of this world too, the have-nots measure everyone in leadership according to their razor-sharp dissenting opinions of each and every step they make, and people wonder why boards are so essential to companies?

The truth is neither liberal or conservative.

Amen To That One ..................

 8)

truth? it's relative folks

A few recent statistics:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraq's military Wednesday reported significant reduction in violence a month after launching a coalition crackdown in the war-wracked capital.

The numbers of deadly attacks, assassination attempts, bombings, mortar strikes and kidnappings have dropped since the mid-February launch of Operation Enforcing the Law, said Iraqi Brig. Gen. Qassim Atta.

The number of civilians killed in Baghdad in the past four weeks was 265, compared with 1,440 killings from mid-January to mid-February, said Atta, a spokesman for the operation.

Atta also reported that 94 terrorists were killed in the February-March period, compared with 19 in the January-February time frame.

Other figures released by Atta included:


102 roadside bombings in the February-March period; 163 in the January-February period;


36 car bombs in February-March; 56 in January-February


109 mortar attacks in February-March; 204 in January-February


22 assassination incidents in February-March; 519 in January-February


10 kidnapping incidents in February-March; 98 in January-February

Atta offered the statistics as key indications that the security crackdown is bearing fruit.

The operation, known in Arabic as Fardh Al-Qanoon, involves about 80,000 U.S. and Iraqi security forces across the capital, while about two dozen joint security stations have been set up in neighborhoods throughout the city, according to the U.S. military.

At a separate news conference Wednesday, U.S. military spokesman Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said the security plan is showing "positive" signs of progress. U.S. military leaders expect to see a "discernible difference" in and around the city by a "fall time frame," Caldwell said.

"If the high-profile car bombs can be stopped or brought down to a much lower level, we'll just see an incredible difference in the city overall," Caldwell said. "The murders and executions have come down by over 50 percent."

Caldwell said two of five new brigades of American troops are in place conducting operations, and a third brigade is on the way.

U.S.: We're tracking al-Sadr
Reduced violence in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood, Caldwell said, may be linked to the absence of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who he said was located in neighboring Iran "as of 24 hours ago."

Also contributing to relative quiet in Sadr City, Caldwell said, is cooperation between neighborhood officials and Iraqi authorities. Caldwell said not one single incident was reported during U.S. and Iraqi military clearing operations in the sprawling district.

Twenty percent of the densely populated neighborhood has been cleared so far, Caldwell said, which means the area has been swept of insurgents and weaponry.

Despite the positive signs, Caldwell said Wednesday the U.S. military remains concerned about Iraq's Shiite Mehdi militia, which is loyal to al-Sadr.

Coalition forces have detained about 700 militia members in the past few months, he said.

The anti-American Shiite cleric represents a "very significant part" of Iraq's political machinery, according to Caldwell.

"We are in fact tracking his whereabouts," Caldwell said.

Members of al-Sadr's militia are thought to be involved in sectarian violence, and the security crackdown has been targeting such armed Shiite groups.

The cleric reportedly fled to predominantly Shiite Iran about the time U.S. and Iraqi forces launched the Baghdad crackdown.

Al-Sadr has been supportive of the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and helped al-Maliki's rise to power in 2006.

Al-Maliki has said that no lawbreaker will be immune to the security operations.

Other developments

The sons of late Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein have been reburied near their father, an Iraqi tribal leader told CNN on Wednesday. The bodies of Uday and Qusay Hussein, killed by U.S. forces in the northern city of Mosul in 2003, were exhumed from the old Awja cemetery north of Baghdad, according to Ali al-Nida, head of the Albu Nasir tribe. They have been reburied outside a hall where their father was buried after his hanging in December, al-Nida said. "There was no political or religious motivation behind this action, but we buried them according to their family's will," he said.


Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, 73, returned home Wednesday to Sulaimaniya in Iraq's Kurdish region after more than two weeks in a Jordanian hospital. The reason for Talabani's hospitalization remains uncertain. At the time, a hospital source told CNN that doctors performed a catheterization procedure on his heart, but family aides denied that report, saying Talabani was suffering from exhaustion and lung inflammation.



A roadside bomb targeting a combat patrol in southern Baghdad killed a soldier and wounded three others, according to the military. A second roadside bomb killed a soldier who was conducting security operations in northeastern Baghdad, the military said. Both soldiers were assigned to Multi-National Division-Baghdad, according to the military.


In the western Anbar province, a Marine assigned to Multi-National Force-West was killed while conducting combat operations, the military said. No further details were released. The deaths brought the number of U.S. military personnel killed in the Iraq war to 3,196, including seven civilian military contractors.


A bombing in an outdoor market in Tuz Khurmatu killed four people and wounded 10 others Wednesday, according to a Salaheddin Joint Coordination Center official. Tuz Khurmatu, a predominantly Turkmen town, is in northeastern Salaheddin province -- north of Baghdad.


In Diwaniya, the Shiite provincial capital of the southern Iraqi province of Qadisiya, insurgents Wednesday dragged three Iraqi policemen and shot them. Two of them were killed and one was wounded. Police found the bodies and the injured officer near a canal.


A suicide car bomb detonated near a police checkpoint in the western Baghdad neighborhood of Yarmouk, killing two civilians and wounding four others Wednesday.


Gunmen opened fire Wednesday on a car in the northern Baghdad neighborhood of Adhamiya, a Sunni district. The deputy head of Adhamiya's city council and his three guards were killed.


On Tuesday, 14 bullet-riddled bodies were found dumped across the capital, police said. The thousands of corpses found dumped in Baghdad over the last year are thought to be people killed in sectarian violence.

CNN's Jennifer Deaton and Mohammed Tawfeeq contributed to this report.

Leslie-

I reviewed all of the links you provided and it's interesting to see you perceive an alliance between Stanford's Hoover and Bush? I doubt it and the article clearly states it as well, and honestly not even Bush has enough money to 'own' such at Stanford. There is a vast difference between lobbying for a 'think tank' locale there and any firm alliance  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:

I think had Roosevelt been a republican your take would be different.

Saddam is also not my enemy, I don't declare war, I just surrender the men in my family to it when duty calls upon them. One question though, have you ever had a family member fight in any war?

All I Know Is That I Sold Some Stocks Early Yesterday & Look

What Happened To The Market .........

Sure The US Economy Looks Good On Paper But Thats All It Is PAPER ..

Bad Risk Loans Made The Economy Look Wonderful In The Eyes Of

Bushites ( Like Yourself ) ....... But Any Economy Looks Good On

Borrowed Money & Time .... Now The Spec Market Of Housing Has

Fallen Through The Floor & People Have NO Money To Pay Back Even

The Smallest Interest Note... So Where Is Your Great Economy..

Maybe Things Are Goin Well For You & Yours But Dont Tell Me

Your Economy Is Thriving ( Cause It Ain't ) ..

AS I Stated Before Recession Is Just Around The Corner & Thats

Why Bush Wont Stop The War .....

So Anna I Am The One Laughing At You ..........

Hope You Did'nt Lose To Much Equity ..........

And Keep Throwing That Pro Bush Jargon Around.. ( I Print Them

And Use Them In Our Dogs Liter Box .............

 8)

None .........You Seem To Report The War On Terrorism Very Well .....

Maybe You Missed Your Calling ...........

RICHARD MILHOUSE NIXON

IM NOT A CROOK

 :lol:

nope Widget, I didn't miss my calling, I've just been in management since graduating from college. It is a different perspective and it concerns me that so many can't see how wild and impossible it would be for Bush or even a small cadre to execute the level of conspiracy and cover-up some on this thread are implying.

watergate is a walk in the park by comparison....

I actually think government and politicians as a whole are as varied as our posters here are - some are honest and some are not. Some have the strategic capabilities to lead, some others do not but rail against and defame those who do. I respect the capability to lead and yes even Bush's at times but not always.

I have said again and again I am not a Bush devotee nor did I vote for him, but I am a realist and pragmatic. I don't buy into the emtional spin the democrats are putting on Iraq anymore than I buy into alternate spin from republicans. I also have to say to read on this thread that Stanford University is now under Bush's thumb was the cat's meow for me. I don't think I can stomach the debate, such wild assumptions simply as you might say "blow my mind".

exiting this thread not to return now.....

http://news.independent.co.uk/

Muqtada al-Sadr:

Allegations by US officials in Baghdad have little credibility after almost four years in which they have been repeatedly exposed as untrue. Supporters of Muqtada immediately denied that he was in Iran and either refused to say where he was or asserted that he was in the Shia holy city of Najaf.
President Bush shows no sign of learning from his failures in Iraq since 2003. For almost four years he has been fighting the Sunni community. Now, by confronting Muqtada, he is moving towards armed conflict with the Shia as well.

--

How does my true statement "people with close ties to the Bush White House such as Dinesh D'Souza of the Hoover Institution." get misread as
"Stanford University is now under Bush's thumb"?  

"Stanford University-based Hoover Institution, a collection of battle-toughened conservatives who have emerged as the early core of Mr. Bush's brain trust."
-
"Thomas Gale Moore, author of "Climate of Fear: Why We Shouldn't Worry About Global Warming," is the most prominent global warming science skeptic associated with the Hoover Institution. As a senior fellow, Moore has written numerous articles for Hoover publications over the years. Right-wing philanthropist Richard Mellon Scaife is on Hoover's large Board of Overseers. The Sarah Scaife foundation, overseen by Richard, gave the Hoover Institution a $450,000 grant in 2001, $370,000 in 2000, and $635,00 in 1999. (mediatransparency.org) In 2001, Vice President Cheney spoke before Hoover's Board of Overseers and praised the Institution's contribution to the Bush Administration saying: "I do think we are off to a good start, and it is important that we have the support and enthusiastic involvement of organizations like the Hoover Institution, one of the leading think tanks and sources of ideas. Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, John Taylor, and many others have been key as we developed our campaign and policy. We want to thank you for what you have done for us and ask you to be a part of the debate during the next few years."
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=43

Think tanks like the Hoover Institution are not just "conservative". They are funded by a small group of super wealthy families in order to give intellectual cover to their plutocratic interests. Most have no academic standing and try to keep their sources of funding obscured. A true "think tank" would be based in academic departments and would publish their findings in peer-reviewed journals. The think tanks do neither. They have to pay to have their ideas disseminated. The Hoover Institution even runs ads with summaries of the "research papers" in places like the "New Republic".
The first rule of any claimed advance in science (including social science) is that your findings be testable and reviewed by others. These groups fail, since they are not advancing knowledge but are merely propaganda fronts for their wealthy backers.
http://www.dailykos.com

This is not my perception. Maybe you should READ the article because you must have missed this part ;
"The dozen or so guests at the dinner included directors and fellows of the Hoover Institution, the Stanford - affiliated public policy center with close ties to the Bush White House."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/07/news/letter.php

Okay I'm breaking my rule not to post in this thread again but I am tired of your insults to my intelligence over and over and over again.

I didn't miss any part of it Leslie, this is simply a case where my personal experiences obviously exceed yours in certain realms.

I've served on a number of boards, one of a think tank school nationally ranked in the top ten in the US for cutting edge and also affiliated with the likes of Duke and Stanford and yes even politicians. It was founded by the head of the largest privately held software company in the WORLD also. I also served on the endowment board for them as well and stunned to be invited to do so. Private schools and universities and think tanks have to garner funding from many, for schools tuition doesn't begin to cover the actual cost of operation and delivery. Furthermore they do some excuse my french "ass kissing" as well, comes with the territory even with a think tank dependent upon private funding just as you described.

Bush is small potatoes to Hoover, why can't you see that, he isn't a billionaire but I strongly suggest you ponder that perhaps the BIGGEST funders for Hoover do their best to remain anonymous as possible. The higher the profile Leslie of any donor, the higher they are on the radar, the more scrutiny which is applied to their donations and any influence they may have. If a donor is hoping to have influence, whether they do or not, it's far more likely to happen if they fly beneath that radar !

The article even states Stanford isn't in the running for the Bush library which is perhaps the ONLY carrot he could dangle and even then, I'm unsure if Stanford cares? Stanford's endowment is huge Leslie, they don't need Bush or Cheney or any politician to keep them thriving!

I suspect you need to turn your big guns against the true mega contributors to Hoover for it ain't Bush ! I strongly suspect as you seem to resent, that some of those contributors are republican. Have at it, build your list and go pound on them and leave me out of the rantings.

oh and Cheney's remarks? why yes, he's kissing some tail which is so very common, being very gratuitous toward Stanford and Hoover  :roll:

see this for what it is, not for what you wish it to be !

Cheney Revealed
Robert Scheer  

THE UNCTUOUS owl has hooted again. Only this time, Dick Cheney's cave has been invaded by the sudden sunlight of judicial and congressional revelations, making him appear more pathetic than intimidating as he once again charges critics of the Iraq war with giving aid and comfort to the enemy. "A full validation of the al Qaeda strategy" are the shameless, slandering words the most powerful vice president in American history flung Monday at congressional critics of the war -- including those from his own party.

While he is still as dangerous as any cornered animal, Cheney stands brightly revealed as the main culprit in the cherry-picking of the evidence to make the case for a stupid, failed war. He has been exposed as a vindictive, inflexible ideologue, who attempts to destroy all who publicly disagree with him, such as former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and Wilson's CIA agent wife, Valerie Plame Wilson. His extensive ties and loyal political service to energy and defense companies such as Halliburton (which now, in a burst of honesty, is moving its headquarters to Dubai), reveal him to be a man of deep corruption.

Like Nixon during Watergate, Cheney is now shrilly on the defensive. "National security made me do it!" he insists, clinging to pseudo-patriotism, that last refuge of scoundrels. But it is an argument that no longer flies with a public that has caught on to the rhythm of his screechy lies. After all, this is the leader, dominating a weak president, who pushed so hard for a complete occupation of a Muslim country not linked to 9/11. A man who hung his arguments for adventuristic war on known falsehoods, such as the attempted purchase of yellowcake uranium in Niger.

In fact, the recent terrorist bombing in Afghanistan that came too close to ending the vice president's life aptly underscored just how reckless the decision was to direct our policy away from the religious fanatics of al Qaeda, based in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and instead pour our resources into overthrowing Osama bin Laden's sworn enemy, Saddam Hussein.

Of course, things have changed quite a bit since then for formerly secular Iraq. Ironically, Cheney's remarks on Monday correctly evoke the nightmare world of religious fratricide that is the Bush administration's legacy to Iraq. If the United States withdraws, "Shiite extremists backed by Iran could be in all-out war with Sunni extremists, led by al Qaeda and remnants of the old Saddam regime," Cheney told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the leading pro-Israel lobbying organization.

What he neglected to mention is that those Shiite extremists are militias associated with the very pro-Iran political parties that the Bush administration brought to power and sustains in the surreally isolated Green Zone, or that our presence in Iraq is the main recruitment tool for the Sunni militants who oppose the Shiite majority.

The argument for troop withdrawal is that, after four years of occupation, the presence of U.S. troops on every street corner in Baghdad is part of the problem, not the solution. As the French learned in Algeria, the Russians in Afghanistan and the Israelis in the Palestinian territories, foreign occupation is the mother's milk of terrorism.

It is thus Cheney who has played right into al Qaeda's plans, heightening tension between the U.S. and the Arab and Muslim worlds by evoking an image of U.S. imperial conquest of Mideast oil resources. His palpable disdain for civil liberties, bald-faced lies and support for torture have even tarnished the reputation of democracy itself, which has to please tyrants and theocrats everywhere.

As if we needed more evidence, the conviction last week of Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, provided ample evidence of the vice president's bottomless cynicism. Surely congressional investigators will now ask Cheney, among other awkward questions, what he meant in that note he wrote to himself prior to the conviction stating, "Not going to ... sacrifice the guy who was asked to stick his neck in the meat grinder because of the incompetence of others." Who could have ordered Libby to break the law, other than his boss?

If the occupation had gone well, of course, Cheney wouldn't be under fire. But as it heads into its fifth year, the only winners in this war are the aforementioned radical Shiites, Iran, mercenaries, al Qaeda, oil companies and military contractors such as Halliburton, which has scooped up $27 billion in contracts paid with our taxes. Now Halliburton is making its home in an undemocratic oil-garchy so distasteful to Americans that we wouldn't let a company from there manage our ports. Perhaps Cheney, in disgrace, can build his retirement cave there.

Leslie, it would be good if you read something sensical and therefore, you could find articles written by other than sreaming, bloviating idiots who find nothing so they propose lies to debase those with whom they disagree.  Alas, it seems your preference is for those, however.

THank YOu Tylergal.
Where in Heck do people dredge up this BS?

I wouldn't throw around the word "lies" the way you have unless you can verify the following information you previously posted as the truth:

1. AP has learned that Ms. Plame played a key role in the first outing of both herself and the "cover" corporation that she worked for. Ms. Plame wrote a screen play that was turned into a movie in the early 1980's under the psuedonym "Emmit Fitzhume." The movie included disclosure of CIA insertion operations, selection of operatives, and the name of an until then CIA run agency called the "Ace Tomato Corporation." However, the credits to the movie include her name as the "CIA technical advisor," and her actual role was played by Donna Dixon, a role that used her name.  While Ms. Plame had her lead character use her pseudonym for the screenplay, her part in the operation used the cover of a Red Cross Nurse working in the mountains of Pakistan along the Afghanistan border. Red Cross officials launched an investigation and broke ties with the CIA after the movie to prevent the appearance of impartiality. Plame also drew criticism from the CIA for releasing information about common sexual practices of agents on assignment.
Ms. Plame has said that the screenplay was vetted by the CIA prior to her submission to Warner Brothers films. The movie, which was titled "Spies like Us," nearly ended the presidency of Ronald Reagan in 1985 due to the disclosure of rogue military officers trying to launch a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Additionally, the CIA was forced to changed the name of the under cover corporation to the "Acme Tomato Corporation."
2. (Joe Wilson's)  bleached blond wife (Valerie Plame) who is only undercover when she is under the covers, should be brought up on treason.
3. I am reminded today when I hear these pontificators of a great man and what he said about the sleezy politicians who would undermine their governmet.
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged."
~~ President Abraham Lincoln

So Iraq has no WMD ????

Not so, chlorine is one of the cheapest yet also most deadly chemicals to humans on this planet. My father was once an investor/board member of a biochemical start-up vested in non-toxic chemical soaps which also safely killed lethal threats such as anthrax, upon his death we learned more regarding chlorine than we wanted to know as we spent more time learning about these products. Chlorine is one of the cheapest chemicals on this planet, absolute pennies for massive amounts. We ALL use these products in our homes too, and ALL are carcinogenic as well. One of the best kept secrets in the chlorine industry. Making chlorine gas also isn't complex or difficult, if one has access to basic chemical systems.

So even if any of these victims do not die from this attack, they may well be developing cancer as a result. WMD's do not have to be high-tech or complicated to work folks, not at all. Remember this the next time you put chlorox in your wash or clean your bathrooms with it, it's deadly stuff with long-term or repeated exposure. It also leaves a trace effect on any surface or any fabric, a residue which I post only for those who care about protecting their bodies. FYI Oxyclean is a great safe alternative.

what is detailed in this article is exactly what I fear, far more than a nuking by Iraq extremists, or worse anthrax which the russians breed in labs cast among us via air, or similar


Chlorine Gas Sickens 356 in Iraq Bombing
By SAMEER N. YACOUB
Reuters
BAGHDAD (March 17) - Three suicide bombers driving chlorine-laden trucks struck in the Sunni  insurgent stronghold of Anbar province, killing two policemen and forcing about 350 Iraqi civilians and six U.S. troops to seek treatment for exposure to the gas, the military said Saturday.

The attacks came after back-to-back bombings last month released chlorine gas, prompting the U.S. military to warn that insurgents are adopting new tactics in a campaign to spread panic.

Just after 4 p.m. Friday, a driver detonated explosives in a pickup truck northeast of Ramadi, wounding one U.S. service member and one Iraqi civilian, the military said in a statement.

That was followed by a similar explosion involving a dump truck south of Fallujah in Amiriyah that killed two policemen and left as many as 100 local citizens showing signs of chlorine exposure, with symptoms ranging from minor skin and lung irritations to vomiting, the military said.

Less than 10 miles away, another suicide bomber detonated a dump truck containing a 200-gallon chlorine tank rigged with explosives at 7:13 p.m., also south of Fallujah in the Albu Issa tribal region, the military said. U.S. forces responded to the attack and found about 250 local civilians, including seven children, suffering from symptoms related to chlorine exposure, according to the statement.

Insurgents have detonated three other trucks carrying chlorine canisters since late January.

The most recent attack occurred Feb. 21 in Baghdad , killing five people and sending more than 55 to hospitals, a day after a bomb planted on a chlorine tanker left more than 150 villagers stricken north of the capital.

A suicide bomber driving a dump truck filled with explosives and a chlorine tank also struck a quick reaction force and Iraqi police in the Sunni city of Ramadi on Jan. 28, killing 16 people.

The military also said last month that they found a car bomb  factory near Fallujah with about 65 propane tanks and ordinary chemicals it believed the insurgents were going to try to mix with explosives. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, the chief U.S. military spokesman, called it a "crude attempt to raise the terror  level."

Iraqi police said a suicide bomber driving a tanker truck detonated his explosives Friday in a line of cars waiting on the edge of the village of Amiriyah to enter Fallujah, killing at least six people, including two policemen, and wounding 75, including women and children, police said.

A doctor, Mohammed Fuad, said 15 seriously wounded people were brought to the Fallujah hospital and most were having difficulty breathing and their faces had a blue tinge in addition to their other wounds. He said they had been exposed to a poisonous gas. The U.S. military later said the gas was chlorine.

A car bomb also exploded Friday about six miles south of Fallujah, killing one person and wounding four others, police said, adding that the bomb was targeting the reception center of a tribal sheik who has denounced al-Qaida.

Both strikes carried the hallmarks of an increasingly bloody struggle for control of Anbar province -- a center for anti-U.S. guerrillas since the uprising in Fallujah in 2004 that galvanized the insurgency.

U.S. military envoys and pro-government leaders have worked hard to sway clan chiefs and other influential Anbar figures to turn against the militants, who include foreign jihadists fighting under the banner of al-Qaida in Iraq . The extremists have fought back with targeted killings and bombings against fellow Sunnis.

Bombings and shootings targeted police patrols elsewhere in Iraq, killing five policemen, including two who died after a suicide car bomber  struck the checkpoint they were manning near a Sunni mosque in western Baghdad. That attack left five other people wounded.

Meanwhile, an aide said Sadr City Mayor Rahim al-Darraji was still in the hospital after being wounded in an assassination attempt on Thursday but his condition was improving.

"He is getting better. God willing, he will leave the hospital as soon as possible," said the aide, who referred to himself as Abu Zahraa and declined to give more details.

Al-Darraji has been involved in negotiations with U.S. and Iraqi government officials seeking to persuade the Shiite  militias to tamp down the violence against Sunnis, but the efforts have created tension in the ranks of Shiite militiamen and some blamed the assault -- which also killed two bodyguards -- on a faction unhappy about cooperation with the U.S. military, a local Mahdi Army commander said Friday.

Further signaling resurgent anger and opposition to the U.S.-Iraqi security crackdown in the militia stronghold of Sadr City, radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr decried U.S. forces as occupiers Friday and called on his followers to "shout 'No, No America!'"

Thousands of Shiites flooded from the mosque where al-Sadr's statement was read by a preacher at Friday prayers, spilling into the streets of the Sadr City slum to protest the two-week-old American military presence there. The U.S. military says al-Sadr has gone to Iran .

American military leaders had credited al-Sadr _ who was said to have ordered his Mahdi Army militia to put away its weapons and not confront U.S. and Iraqi troops _ for the relatively effortless start of security patrols and raids in the Shiite slum, a no-go zone for U.S. forces until about two weeks ago.

Al-Sadr's message on the Muslim day of prayer and rest could signal a shift in his willingness to absorb the perceived indignity of the U.S. troop presence and wait out the security plan. Or it could have been nothing more than a reminder to his followers that he was watching carefully and was still their leader.

"We have often seen differing political views or differing statements coming out of many of the political organizations here in Iraq, not just the Sadr bloc or al-Sadr's organization," U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said. "As we've said, we are, if anything, cautiously optimistic, but it's still very early."

Associated Press writer Bushra Juhi contributed to this report in Baghdad.


Copyright 2007 Reuters Limited.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/chlorine-gas-sickens-356-in-iraq-bombing/20070316131109990001

None, I told you yesterday that I did not post in this forum due to the heated discussions. I am breaking my own rule.

I had read this about the chlorine gas today before I came on here. I love clorox but I do understand the dangers. I have not always recognised them just as I have not always understood the dangers of so many things.
Things us women expose ourselves to constantly. More so than men.

I had posted before in BT's smoking thread. I will just repeat it here. This is what my DR. Said,Everything we expose ourselves to from the time we are born effects our lungs. Womens exposure to hazardous chemicals seem to be more often than mens because of all our cleaning products, perfume, make up as well as me smoking.

Of course those who are trying to deliberatley cause harm to others know these things are dangerous. They are an inexpensive readily available way to do harm. JMHO

I also know that at one time we thought our skin was impervious to these things. We now know that is not true. So even when you try protecting your lungs you also need to protect your skin.[/b]

Sam I am glad you posted and hope you will more often please.

Yes you said it better than I did, this could be the economy terrorists way to great damage with small bucks - thank you.

United States Backed Leaders Of The Past ................

Sadaam Hussein- Iraq
General Noriega- Panama
General Pinochet- Chile
Osama Bin-Ladin- Al-Qaeda
Fernando Marcos- Phillipines
Shah Of Iran

The U.S Should PICK Better Leaders AS Friends ...........

 8)

Widget you forgot to add Castro. LOL We also supported him and his rebels originally. Or at least the movie star community did.

Now with that said, I still believe in the goodness of people. That means no one group of people is all bad. Saddan Husein was bad. Castro also has not been a great person as it turns out. He took Cuba from 1 dictater to another. When we were stationed at Gitmo ( 1969-1971) There were still Cubans who would swim to get to the land of Gitmo and then walk through minefields to try to escape from his tyranny.Some of them made it others did not. I do not know about now but I do know they still try to make it to Florida by way of boats.

With all the hoopla about us getting out of Iraq from the media etc. I wonder what the opinion of the displaced Iraq folks in this country as well as other countries is. Do they think it would be a good thing for us to just up and leave Iraq for it to become a killing field like Vietnam and Cambodia? I am not sure anyone has asked their opinion. I wonder how many of them were at the protest? To many questions, not enough answers.

Sam, that's a good question, we never do hear transplanted Iraqi's speak to that.

Trump states we just need to pull out and let them kill one another, he also said Saddam was a cakewalk compared to the next dictator to rule Iraq. My fave thing he said was more how he said it, he said "I allow injured vets returning from Iraq to come to my golf course at Mar-a-lago and I'm tired of seeing men without arms and legs we need to stop this..."

he allows them? Not he "invites" them or anything more kind toward these veterans. Now if you had lost an arm or a leg, wouldn't you choose to go play golf? How insensitive of Trump but then again, that's one reason he bothers me so much, he gives arrogant potty mouth new meaning daily.

Trump can be so abrasive at times.
btw, I STILL think he looks like a blowfish. :shock:

We Made Our Bed ....Now We Have To Lie In It ...............

Same As Viet-Nam.........Nothing Different After 40 Years ...........

400,000 Dead ...........Probably A Million Wounded ..........

Hadley Said Today That Bush Stated Awhile Back That The US Would

Bring The War To The Terrorists & That Is The Reason We Are Fighting

IN The Streets Of Iraq........I Say Hold On One Second There .........

The U.S. Government Had Their Fields To Battle The Al-Qaeda In

Afghanistan But Choose To War Against Iraq .....Great Place To Due Battle

With Little Or No Colateral Damage But The U.S. Bush Led War Mongers,

Choose To Embroil The Whole Region In War .....

BUSH HAS A HANDS OFF BIN-LADIN LAW IN AFFECT .......

THE SAUDIS HAVE TOLD THE BUSHS THE BIN-LADINS ARE OFF LIMITS..

Now With IRAQ Out Of The Picture The New Loose Canon In The Region

IRAN Has No One To Stop Their Military Buildup Except The Good Ole

USA........ Who Will Protect The Saudis, The Kuwaitis, The Dubaiians..

THE BUSHS THATS WHO ..................

 8)

Truth Is Abrasive At Times ...............

 8)

I know a few on wall street in large roles with premier firms who would argue with you that oletrumpbuiltuponhouseofcards has ever told the unvarnished truth.

but you did make me laugh for I don't know how you wrote that one with a straight face

This was posted by Buckeye on the Natalee forum. I thought it would be a good one for here as well.


Buckeye



Joined: 30 Apr 2006

 Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:29 pm    Post subject:    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Not as O/T as it would appear:

Sad but true.....

Obituary of the late Mr Common Sense

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
Why the early bird gets the worm;
Life isn't always fair;and Maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6 -year- old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer Tylenol, sun lotion or a band-aid to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement. Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 3 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, Someone Else Is To Blame, and I'm A Victim.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

Sam,

Excellent post. Very fascination. Very few people have common sense. When I was 16, my uncle (the intelligent attorney who worked for Lockheed) told me that I was the only one in the whole large family who had the common sense of my grandmother.

Wonderful Post and sadly enough, so true.

Straight from the horse's mouth, sotaspeak.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/016745.php


(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Greetings/Holidays/th1easter.gif)

Widget,
The lowest sustained jobless rate in decades despite 9-11 and Katrina is not an economy "just on paper" and your claim that China was going to crash our economy is just not factual.  They hold 3% only.  I think we could take a hit of that magnitude.

Sure things could be better but they always could.  And this is the best the economy has been in many years so I say give credit where it is due.

And of course nothing lasts forever and things happen that effect the economy in a negative manner.  But it is by far and away the envy of the world right now and nothing you say can change that fact.

.(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Greetings/Holidays/thbunny_easter.jpg)

From Monsters and Critics.com

Middle East Features
From Muslim hordes to atom bomb
By Joshua Brilliant
Feb 2, 2007, 21:30 GMT



TEL AVIV, Israel (UPI) -- For the third time in its history, Islam is trying to bring 'the true faith' to the rest of the world. However, this time is particularly dangerous, according to one of the world`s leading authorities on Muslim history.

In a series of lectures at Israeli academic institutions, Princeton University Professor Bernard Lewis talked of the widespread Muslim-Shiite belief that time has come for a final global struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil.
'The fact that some of the societies are acquiring, or will soon acquire ... weapons of destructive power beyond Hitler`s wildest dreams ... is something that we should be very concerned about,' he said.
Muslim believers consider themselves 'the fortunate recipients of God`s final message to humanity and it is their duty not to keep is selfishly to themselves ... (but) to bring it to the rest of mankind,' Lewis noted.

In their first attempt to do so, they emerged from the Arabian Peninsula and conquered vast territories from Iran across North Africa to Spain, Portugal and parts of Italy. Converts conquered Russian lands and established an Islamic regime in Eastern Europe. There are even reports of an Arab raid into Switzerland. But that attempt to conquer Europe failed, and the Crusaders recovered the Christian holy places in Jerusalem.

In the second round, the Ottoman Turks crossed southeastern Europe and reached Vienna. Twice they tried to capture it and failed. Western imperialism halted and reversed the Ottoman push.

The current, third invasion, is not done by armed conquest or with migrating hordes, but by a combination of migration, demography, 'self denigration and self abasement, totally apologetic,' Lewis said.

Nevertheless, it arouses a fair and very alarming possibility that it could lead to a long, dreary race war between different communities in Europe.

Signs of it are already visible in the form of neo-Fascist racist movements. If that 'is going to be the only response of Europe, apart from self-abasement, the outlook is grim,' he predicted.

Meanwhile, among Muslims there is a competition over who should lead their cause. This is one of the keys to understand the present situation, Lewis continued.

On the one hand stand Osama bin Laden and his movement. He is a Saudi-Wahabi; in other words an ultra-conservative puritan Sunni-Muslim. The Saudi establishment considers him a rebel but they all belong to the same branch of Islam.

And then there are Muslim Shiites. They assumed a modern form and new vigor since the Iranian Islamic revolution of 1978.

Past friction, for example between the Ottoman Empire and Iran, was due to a rivalry over influence, not over religion.

The current rivalry has acquired, 'a new acuteness ... It became more violent than in any time in the recorded history of Islam,' Lewis said.

The Iranian revolution is resonating far and wide. It represents a major threat to the West but also to the Sunni establishment. It has led some Sunni leaders to re-evaluate the situation in the Middle East and their attitude towards Israel.

Those leaders may dislike Israel and disapprove of it. However, they consider an uninterrupted line from Shiite Iran, across Iraq to Syria and Lebanon, and the large and growing Shiite populations around the coast of Arabia, to be 'a truly major threat.'

'There are signs of ... a willingness on the part of many in the Sunni world to put aside their hostilities to Israelis ... in order to deal with the greater, more immediate and more intimate danger,' he said. 'We may see shifts in the policies of some Arab governments at least comparable with the great shift in Egyptian policy,' when President Anwar Sadat opted for peace with Israel.

The leaders contemplating such a change are very cautious. One reason is that their populations have been indoctrinated with hatred of Israel for so long that it is difficult to change tunes.

There is another reason: Some uncertainty over how far they can trust the Israelis, Lewis said.

During the summer`s war against the Shiite Hezbollah in Lebanon, many Sunni Muslim governments discreetly cheered the Israelis, hoping they would finish the job. Some of them could hardly conceal their disappointment that Israel failed to do so, he said.

Western-style anti-Semitism of the crudest type, meanwhile, is spreading and occupying a central role in many Muslim countries. One finds it in textbooks, schoolbooks, and in university doctoral dissertations, he noted.

Lewis said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad 'really believes ... (in) the apocalyptic message that he is bringing.' (Israeli experts noted that Ahmadinejad prepared a wide boulevard in Tehran for the return of the Mahdi who disappeared some 1,000 years ago.)

'Islam has a scenario for the end of time, a final global struggle between the forces of good, God, and his anointed, and the forces of evil,' Lewis argued.

With such beliefs, the strategy that prevented a nuclear war between the West and the Communist blocs, during the Cold War era, may not apply.

'Mutually assured destruction, which kept the peace during the Cold War, though both sides had nuclear weapons ... doesn`t work. It is not a deterrent. It is an inducement,' Lewis said.
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/

 Copyright 2007 by United Press International



© Copyright 2006,2007 by monstersandcritics.com.
This notice cannot be removed without permission.

Widget is not wrong; Do some reading
Who is David M. Walker?
http://www.gao.gov/cghome.htm
Fiscal Wake-up Tour?
http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/wakeuptour.html
Foreign Owners of U.S Debt?
http://www.proliberty.com/*******/20060417.htm

China holds 6.5 % of US Debt accourding to CNN

Return to the Article

February 02, 2007
Sleeper Cells in the United States and Canada
There is every reason to suspect that we will endure suicide missions by Islamist sleeper cells. They are already in place. They are waiting for the right time. I know this from experience.


I have worked over 15 years as a U.S. Federal Agent, a U.S. State Department Arabic linguist, and the first civilian Federal Agent deployed into Iraq at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003.  Since returning from Iraq I have been involved in terrorism analysis, specifically the mindset of terrorists. During my extensive research on sleeper cells I have talked with hundreds of people from the Middle East from all walks of life, and have talked with Iraqi Government officials, Iraqi military, and Iraqi police officers.  In addition I have interviewed numerous counter-terrorism specialists in the U.S. and abroad.  In the last year alone I have trained over 4000 U.S. Law Enforcement officers in Basic Investigative Arabic and counter-terrorism. The conclusion of my research is the title of this article.


Before I departed for the Middle East in 2003 I had been assigned to Kirtland AFB, NM.  Kirtland has some of the best scientists in the world working on U.S. Government projects.  I had been working closely with these scientists who specialized in nuclear energy, directed energy, laser technology, bio-weapons and more.  I fully understand the impact if suicide bombers begin progressing from conventional explosives to unconventional methods.


The Middle East


In Jan 2003, I was assigned to Arar Air Base Saudi Arabia.  Arar is located near the border of Iraq. My mission was to interact with Saudi military officials in order to determine the support we could expect from the Saudi government, to determine if Iraqis were monitoring the activities of the U.S. forces at Arar, and to infiltrate the encampments of the Bedouin community (Saudis and Iraqis living in the desert of Arar). This involved leaving the relatively safe confines of Arar Air Base and driving to the Bedouin camps.  


It was most important the Saudis did not know we were leaving the compound because they had forbidden us to do so.  Four U.S. special Agents would use our ATV's and/or four wheel drive vehicles to conduct these missions. The Saudi Government had active spies collecting information pertaining to our troop strength, our weapons, and any other intelligence they could obtain. The Saudis were providing the intelligence to the Saudi Government, and we were very confident it was also being passed to Iraqi intelligence.  


During January 2003 and Feb 2003, Saudi Intelligence officers would boast that the American military was overreacting about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.  Their bravery changed as we approached the invasion of Iraq in Mar 2003.  The high-ranking Saudi officers were scrambling to obtain gas masks and other protective equipment.  They knew their equipment was substandard and they wanted U.S.-made protective equipment.  We gave them some of ours.  The Saudi Intelligence officers were visibly frightened about a potential chemical, biological, or nuclear attack and expressed their fears.  This was my first confirmation Saddam Hussein still had WMD material and the capability to use them.  


The Saudis knew Saddam had WMD and would use them if he had the opportunity.


When I arrived in Nasiriyah, Iraq (after the start of war) my team and I immediately began interviewing (in the field) Iraqis from all walks of life to determine where the WMD sites were located.  At the beginning of the war Iraqis were very helpful and provided us exact locations and proof WMD was at certain locations (primarily southern Iraq because Saddam knew the UN Weapons Inspectors had seldom inspected any locations in this area).  They had always focused in northern Iraq.


Four primary suspected WMD sites were located.  We tried from April until July 2003 to have the Iraq Survey Group come and excavate these sites.  They advised us they did not have the manpower nor the heavy equipment needed to excavate the sites, which were underground bunkers (beneath waterways).  We were frustrated.  I have received information from various sources that the WMD I had attempted to have excavated was subsequently looted (after the war) and transferred to Syria.


While in Iraq we determined the following:


1. Russian activity in Iraq had been rampant several months prior to the war and up until the day before the invasion.


2. Iranians were infiltrating southern Iraq by the thousands and were preparing to assist insurgents in removing U.S. forces from Iraq.


3. We found numerous pieces of evidence indicating WMD were in Iraq before the war began and some were still in Iraq.


4. I and other agents were informed by Iraqis that a civil war would erupt and violence against U.S. forces would increase due to the Iranian and Russian influence.


All of this information was provided through intelligence channels, but was ignored. Today we are seeing the results of our intelligence being ignored in 2003.


Vulnerability at home

Upon returning from Iraq I left Federal Service to pursue a career educating U.S. law enforcement in the U.S.  I wrote a book titled "Arabic for law enforcement and military". During my lectures to local, county, and state law enforcement officers it was revealed the true first line defenders in the U.S. are not trained nor prepared to combat terrorism in the U.S. (through no fault of their own).  The local law enforcement agencies were not receiving adequate funds or assistance from the Federal Government to fight terrorism.  The majority advised they were supposed to be the first line defenders, but in actuality they did not even know what Al-Qaeda meant, and/or could not point out Iraq or Iran on a map. They had no Arabic language training.


I began conducting research and talking with experts from various fields and determined three significant facts that I corroborated by further research:


1. The terrorists groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al-Qaeda each had different leaders and to some degree operated in different ways, but they each had the same two goals (destroy Israel and destroy America and any country that supported either).


2.  Our nuclear research centers were very vulnerable to an attack and the potential for a suicide bomber using a dirty radiological bomb from these facilities was and is a high probability. Note: Vic Walter and Brian Ross of ABC News did an excellent report on the lack of security at these facilities. I received an enormous amount of information from individuals associated with Russian nuclear programs that there is nuclear material being sold on the black market and nuclear material is in the hands of Islamic Extremists.  


3. Terrorist sleeper cells are located primarily in North Carolina, Michigan, and Canada. The "sleepers" are prepared to conduct terrorist attacks within the U.S., and nuclear material is available to them. "Prepared" in this instance indicates they have the necessary tools to carry our their attacks and are prepared to die.


About nine months ago a lady from Morehead City, NC contacted me and asked for assistance because she had been ignored by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), the FBI, and local law enforcement.  Her allegation: A group of people who were citizens of Lebanon was operating from NC and was involved in financially supporting Hezbollah.  The members were also befriending United States Marine Corps personnel (to include the Marine Corps Base Commander at Cherry Point USMC Base). The Lebanese citizens had free access to the Marine Corps base and had frequent parties with USMC members. She had ledgers; photographs of U.S. Marines with the Lebanese members, numerous passports (some falsified), duplicate drivers licenses, social security cards, and financial transactions log books both in Arabic and English. I obtained the information from her and conducted research.  I turned my information over to the NCSBI office.


Less than a week ago I met several citizens from the Middle East who are familiar with terrorist groups, their methodology, and more importantly the mindset of terrorists (specifically Al-Qaeda). They believe violence in Iraq will increase and the number of U.S. troops in Iraq is not a factor. The largest percentage of U.S. troops in Iraq are support troops and not combat troops. From the beginning of 2003 until now the number of troops who actually engage insurgents is actually less than 5% of all assigned troops in the region. Al-Qaeda now has a strong hold in Iraq and they will not let go. Terrorist operations are active in the U.S. and are being operated/financed in Michigan. U.S. citizens need to understand there are people trained and prepared to carry our suicide missions in the U.S. and nothing is off limits.  Churches, malls, and even the schools our children attend are not off limits to suicide bombers. It is only a relatively short time before the U.S. will begin seeing suicide terrorist missions.


I will continue to research terrorism related issues in the U.S. and Canada and will bring forward the results. My next project is to follow Dr. Paul William's investigation into McMaster University located in Canada. My initial research indicates terrorists are being educated here with the approval of some university administrators. I have contacted the university and informed them of this project and will give them an opportunity to respond to each piece developed during my research on terrorism at McMaster.  McMaster is not alone when it comes to nuclear reactors located on major university sites.  Nuclear reactors are located on a large number of major university campuses in the U.S. There locations are not classified and are described on the internet.


Children are the ones who suffer in wartime and I want to prevent any child from ever having to experience a terrorist attack.  


To assist me in my endeavors to uncover the truths behind terrorist cells in Canada and the U.S. contact me at pdgaubatz@yahoo.com or visit my website.
Page Printed from:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/sleeper_cells_in_the_united_st.html

at February 02, 2007 - 01:50:45 PM EST

I beg your pardon, Leslie.  Who are you to tell me to do some reading???  I have and my sources at Investment Business Daily and other sources say 3 percent but even if it is 6% big whoop!

Keep your rude remarks to yourself, I have done nothing to justify your attack.

Bush and Cheney will be gone in less than two years.  Who are you going to attack then?

I do not support everything Bush does by far for I would close the borders immediately and place the military which I would double in size along the borders.

Both borders as the attempted attacks have always come from Canada and not Mexico as one would expect.  The problem with the open Mexican border is we don't know who or what is entering there.  Could be anybody and likely is.

Saddam had 1.77 tons of uranium which we removed and flew to an undisclosed location which would be Oak Ridge, TN, or the other place in California as they are the only two locations capable of handling this.  Why this is not made well known, I cannot imagine but it was sworn to by a scientist involved to Jack Cashill who has written extensively on this.  Rumor has it that it was the French who were behind his being able to obtain this so perhaps there is some favor being played out in exchange for French support at the UN or some such diplomatic game.  I don't  know what or why but if I were Bush, this would have been front page headlines.

Jack Cashill claims to have been in contact with one of the scientists involved personally.  He is a very reputable source and I have never read anything derogatory about him.  I trust him as a reliable source but we each have to make that kind of decision on our own.

The things "surrendered" so mysteriously and abruptly by Qaddafi of Libya were also likely Saddam's and thence his dropping them like a hot potato for the Colonel knew that eventually we would trace them to him so he just handed them right over.  It included a small amount of nuclear material as well as other assorted items classified as WMD.

The subject of this thread was the War on Terror and I am for fighting back at each and every turn instead of surrendering silently as Europe is doing because I like my way of life and love my country.  It has nothing to do with Bush or Cheney or Hallibiurton or any of the other liberal key hate words.  It's more about survival.

But just keep in mind that Bush is leaving and very soon.  There will be another person sitting in the Oval Office and I think you may be very surprised when they do little differently.

Maybe some of you ultra uber libs can tell me why there is no concern for getting our troops out of Bosnia which certainly did not attack us and did not violate the terms of a cease fire as Iraq did.

The invasion of Iraq was based on that violation of cease fire terms, giving legal reason with that alone, to put our big foot down in the middle of the troubled region and the source of the problem.  It is not based on country but religious belief which crosses all borders.

With our weakened military as the result of the Clinton gutting of it, we were not capable of a full scale invasion of Iran with their much larger military and equipment.  Well, we could have but the cost would have been much, much higher especially in loss of life, etc.

Afghanistan is a no man's land where it is impossible to wage any kind of military action.  See Russian experience there.  That is why bin Laden chose to hide there, the terrain and weather provide perfect cover and other than bombing it back to the stone age (or perhaps up to the stone age in the case of Afghanistan) the deployment of troops would be futile.

The big difference in Iraq and Vietnam is that these fully plan to follow us home whereas the Vietnamese had not such ambitions.


The UN official count on loss of life in Iraq is 50,000.  That Democrat writing in the British Lancet will not even reveal their method of collecting that ridiculous 400,000 number and they are the only ones saying that.  There are multiple sources who back the 50K number.  The loss of one life is tremendous but with the ten year war with Iran Saddam waged plus his own purges, that count is not much higher than a typical year under his regime.  Far more Kurds alone were killed in just plain genocide, something this country used to find highly objectionable before the liberals took over.  Now Realpolitik rules and there is nothing worth fighting for, not even our own survival.

.

Widgie,

You are the only one amongst us Monkeys who understands the situation. You boil it all down and all that is left is the TRUTH.

Here you go, Leslie, something in your country to worry about.  Could e anybody behind those veils and could vote any number of times as different people.

Veiled Muslim women will be permitted to vote
2007-03-22 05:47:06

Muslim women wearing the niqab or burka - veils that hide the face entirely - will be allowed to vote in the Quebec elections, without showing their face. That's the directive from the Director general of elections, despite the fact it goes against the electoral law. Typically a voter is to present photo-I.D. But women wearing a full-face veil will have to either swear that they are who they say they are - or have an adult with them verifying their identity. But Sarah Elgazar, from the Canadian Council on American Islamic Relations, says it's an interesting directive, but not necessary. She says very few women wear niqabs or burkas in Quebec, adding they're used to having to reveal their faces at banks, for example, provided it's in front of a woman.

http://www.940news.com/local.php?news=5711
---------------------

How wonderfully the Canadians are accommodating their future masters!  And I also liked the recent ruling that no women could be stoned there PUBLICLY.  I really had to wonder if that meant it was OK if they were stoned as long as it was not public.  Not sure what that meant exactly but what an odd thing to have to rule on.

And note in the following the Canadian Muslim Congress.  Do all groups of immigrants get their own congress in Canada or what?  Is there a Mexican Canadian Congress or a Catholic Canadian Congress, one for each ethnic group?  
------------------------------
Quote:

March 22, 2007
Death threat lobbed at Muslim group promoting moderate beliefs
Yet another indication of why Islamic reform is so exceedingly difficult. The Muslim Canadian Congress has had this kind of problem before. From CBC News, with thanks to WriterMom:

A moderate Muslim group that called for a separation of religion and state in a recent documentary has received a pointed death threat.
The Muslim Canadian Congress received the message Tuesday morning. It was left on the Toronto telephone of secretary general Munir Pervaiz.

"I swear on 99 names of Allah, if you don't cease from your campaign of smearing Islam … I will slaughter you," the unidentified caller said.

Toronto police and its hate-crime unit are investigating.

The message was addressed to congress president Farzana Hassan and founder Tarek Fatah, and mentioned Allah's name three times in a row.

"It is scary," Pervaiz told CBC News on Wednesday.

"This is the first time that someone is really swearing in the name of God and it appears that person is taking an oath by announcing the name of God three times."

'Proves problem exists'

Pervaiz said the accusation of smearing Islam is a serious one, an offence that some Muslims believe is worthy of punishment.

The death threat comes after the Muslim Canadian Congress took part in a documentary that aired on CBC News on March 6. The piece examined the divides between secular and fundamental beliefs within the Canadian Muslim community.

The congress has been targeted for its moderate beliefs before, but never in such a direct fashion, Pervaiz said. Members have had their homes and cars damaged after sharing their opinions publicly.

"We want as many people to know that such a problem exists in Canada," Pervaiz said. "People thought we were exaggerating, but this now kind of confirms and proves the problem exists."

------------------

Guess we shouldn't expect too much from our neighbor to the north as they seem to be very busy accommodating the Muslims in their every demand.

---------------

Wednesday, March 21st, 2007...10:57 pm
CFS Islamophobia Report: Marxist-Islamist Speech Code Under Guise of Legitimacy
Jump to Comments
Well well well, sound the news alarms - the Canadian Federation of Students has completed its “Task Force on the Needs of Islamic Students”, and - surprise! - has concluded that Ontario Universities are hotbeds of “Islamophobia”. Its report calls on University administrators to use the Ontario Human Rights Commission to vigorously counter and prosecute violators of “Islamophobia”.

I’d love to spend the time to dissect this 56-page screed packed with anonymous anecdotes, red herrings, and orphan conclusions, but I have a business to run and a family to tend to. In the time I have, I would like to expose the untold story of this report - a report that is being promoted uncritically by mainstream media like the CBC. That is, this report was not created to give an unbiased look at the life of Muslim students on campus. It was created by Muslim activists and Marxist agitators with pre-existing agendas, looking to exploit white liberal guilt to further their goals of Islamic supremacy and anticapitalism.

When you see this report promoted as a legitimate action item by the Toronto Star, Globe & Mail, CBC, etc., consider who wrote it. Here are seven of the ten who ran the commission and prepared the report:

Sheikh Faisal Abdur-Razak, President of the Islamic Forum of Canada, who proudly boasts on his web site of having studied in Saudi Arabia from 1977-1986 at King Abdel-Aziz University in Jeddah, under scholars such as Sheikh Muhammad Qutb and other Wahabbi and Muslim Brotherhood teachers. Osama Bin Laden attended the same school in the late 1970s, and has identified Qutb as one of his chief influences.
Grace Edward Galabuzi, a Ryerson professor who regularly presents at Marxist and Socialist conferences;
Alex Kerner, the notorious Trotskyite socialist agitator who ran the SAC at the University of Toronto in the early part of the decade, and now works for the Ryerson Students Union.
Ausma Malik, a U of T social justice agitator who will be speaking at the “Marxism: A Festival of Resistance” conference in Toronto this May;
Diana Ralph, Carlton University professor, and favourite of the paranoid-delusional “9/11 Truth” movement;
Mohamed Sheibani, President of the Muslim Students’ Association of the U.S. and Canada, a lobby group with documented links to the Saudi Wahabbi movement.
Wahida Chisti Valiante, National Vice President of Mohamed Elmasry’s Canadian Islamic Congress, who has been promoting anti-American, anti-Israel sentiment for years (read her 2004 article here)
So, we have a coalition of Marxists and Islamists, under the seemingly legitimate umbrella of the Canadian Federation of Students, telling us we’re all racists, and demanding that we give up our freedom of speech and ways of living as compensation. Scary to you? Scary to me. I can only imagine the state the University campus will be in when my now two-year-old son heads off to his post-secondary education.

When courageous University administrators and politicians stand up and condemn the type of dishonest, subversive bullying this report consists of, we will finally be able to say that intellectual freedom has a chance.
http://tinyurl.com/yw94z4

Just saying that if a person was 39 years old now as previously claimed, they would not have been old enough to have fought in Vietnam.

 :D

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/thbullshit.jpg)


(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Icons%20and%20Smilies/211ng3s_th.gif)

Why do you liberals always have to put words in the mouths of others?  You pretend somebody said something they didn't and then attack them based on your own lies.

That said, I happen to know my own son quite well and also to appreciate that he has a very high level of moral reasoning and a much stronger sense of loyalty to his country than the average person for he could easily earn three times the amount of his government pay but choses to serve his country instead.

Twisting that into some sort of malfeasance on his part is just plain sick and reprehensible, juistinsmama.  You have no right to do such a thing and should be ashamed of yourself.  I have NEVER done any such rude and disgusting thing to you.  

But I do know that he is in a position to know many things and would not participate in any of the evil plots suggested by some posting here.  And I don't see him requesting to be released from duty.  

None of that requires any security breach at all.  When he had a serious automobile accident in D.C. I had the privilege of meeting his boss, receiving calls from the head of the intelligence agency for which he works and a private tour.  He has been employed since he turned 18 even while still in school the 20 hours Georgetown allowed per week.  

Yes, I do have a very thorough understanding of the intelligence community as a result of direct exposure through this member of my immeidate family and others going back two generations.  I have done classified work myself in the past.  

Why you need to turn that into something illegal or immoral is beyond me but I guess you need to do that in order to discredit others.  Well, it doesn't require the devulging of classified information for one to understand what their own child will and will not do or be a party to.

Maybe some of you are just too stupid to understand that but the implication that my son has done something illegal is not acceptable and I will never forget the suggestion that he did for it is one of the nastiest things I have ever seen anybody post, attacking the child of another like that without one shred of proof.

You disgust me beyond belief!

What little. petty and evil people post here!  So now we attack each other's children with false accusations??  Nice, really really nice.  

 :evil:  :evil:  :evil:  :smt097

You can kiss both mine and my son's ass! It makes me sick that he risks his life at times for people like you with so little appreciation.  I truly wish he were in some other line of work where he did not have to do so and could just rake in much higher pay in the private sector and not expose himself to the things that he does for people who are not any more appreciative than to invent lies and accusations about him without even knowing him, me or anything about it.

I have never been so disgusted in my life with the leftists in this country.  And I sure don't want any kid of mine ever in any danger for their benefit.

.

LOL! :smt046 over the distortions of who presented what here!

Anna:  CALM DOWN.  Justinsmama and you are agreeing.  She didn't say anything against your son in her response to Nonesuche.   You have attacked and insulted justinsmama over words she never said or implied.

Oh, yes, please--more of Widget's brilliance.  I guess that math that said he was 39 last year when he adopted those girls yet fought in Vietnam as a Marine no less is how he arrives at his conclusions concerning the economy.

Sorry, but it is too late for Bush's policies of reducing taxes have already been an unmitigated success.  But I will agree that the economy could now tank at any moment now that we have the worst congress in the history of the country, full of traitors and socialists.  
They badly need both a defeat in Iraq and the economy to tank in order to garner votes in 2008, the only thing they care about, in order to have one more shot at that U.S. Treasury.

The pork they are stuffing even in the military funding would tank any economy but that does not detract from the fact that not only has the economy been solidly on sound footing despite 9-ll and Katrina, a record amount of taxes was collected in a single day recently.  And the budget deficit is half of what was projected for this year.  Not a bad record at all.

Too bad we now have a legislative branch ready to flush it all away.

----------

Bush's Real Record
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 1/31/2007

Economy: The mantra among critics of President Bush is that he's been "incompetent" as chief executive. To which we respond: Looked at the U.S. economy lately?

In his "State of the Economy" speech Wednesday, Bush expressed justifiable pride in his economic accomplishments. Our good friend Larry Kudlow keeps calling it "the greatest story never told." And indeed it is.

The Bush-is-a-failure mantra is, quite simply, out of touch with reality. What the economy's done in the past six years, especially in view of what Bush faced on entering office, has been nothing short of remarkable.

Remember that first bleak week, way back in January 2001? The economy was in a free fall, with job growth having peaked in mid-summer 2000. During Bush's first quarter in office, the economy actually shrank.

This wasn't surprising, given the Fed had been ratcheting up interest rates for two years and the stock market had just suffered its biggest meltdown. Americans took a $7 trillion hit from that debacle, and some feared we might even slide into a depression.

Then came the first attack on U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor, killing 3,000 people, costing $100 billion in direct costs to the economy and untold billions more in indirect costs, and damaging the national psyche. People stopped flying and buying. They cocooned.

It was the worst first year for a president since FDR. But Bush turned a potential disaster into one of the success stories of the post-World War II era. Yet few credit him for it.

His three tax cuts pushed 5 million mostly low-income families off the tax rolls and substantially shifted the tax burden toward the rich. Despite harsh criticism, the cuts revived the economy.

Where are we today? "Across our nation," Bush said Wednesday, "small businesses and entrepreneurs are creating millions of new jobs. Retail sales are up, consumer spending is strong, exports of goods and services have jumped by nearly 35%. The Dow (industrial average) has set records 26 times in the past four months. Productivity is strong, and that's translating into higher wages."

Every word true. And yet, our newspapers and TV talking heads are obsessed with stories of mass "inequality" and "middle-class squeeze" and "jobs shipped abroad" and "falling behind."

Reality is quite different, of course. But reality can never be permitted to get in the way of Bush-bashing — the stock in trade of the mainstream media and their allies in the Democratic Party.

So what's the real record? Since Bush's tax cuts took effect in mid-2003:

• Real gross domestic product is up to $1.33 trillion, or 12.6%.

• Existing businesses have hired 5.9 million workers (not counting the millions of jobs entrepreneurs have created).

• Corporate profits have soared 91% to $1.6 trillion.

• Tax receipts have leapt $503 billion, or roughly 1.1 percentage points of GDP, refuting the notion the tax cuts "caused" deficits.

And thanks to rebounding stock prices and huge gains in home values, Americans' total wealth has soared 39% to $54 trillion — the biggest expansion ever.

After such a stellar performance, a breather — what economists call a "midcycle correction" — would be in order. Yet the economy continues to power ahead.

In 2006's final period, GDP growth was 3.5%, and it has averaged 3% since the tax cuts. Real wages rose 1.7% in '06, much faster than the 0.3% average of the Clinton years. In just the last 12 months, unemployment plunged from 5.0% to 4.5%, near postwar lows.

More of us have jobs, own homes and businesses, and work for higher pay than at any time in history. We're the richest people on earth. For a change, let this story be told.

 

http://tinyurl.com/254dae

 
Return to top of page

 


© Investor's Business Daily, Inc. 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or redistribution is prohibited without prior authorized permission from Investor's Business Daily. For information on reprints, webprints, permissions or back issue orders, go to www.investors.com/terms/reprints.asp.

Please use the Google for "Fiscal Wake-up Tour"

(David) Walker added, "Stated differently, the government should be leading by example and is failing miserably in that regard.  It's easy to spend someone else's money -- especially when it belongs to grandkids, who can't vote."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/294139_debt30.html

Fiscal Wake-Up Tour:
The world according to David Walker
By Shelia Watson - Contributing Writer

David Walker is an accountant by trade. And not just any accountant—he’s the nation’s top accountant and auditor, the comptroller general of the United States, and head of the Government Accountability Office on a 15-year term that will run through 2013.
Politically and ideologically, he was formerly a conservative Democrat, then a moderate Republican and is now an independent. He said heading up the Fiscal Wake-Up Tour is democracy in action.
“We’re trying to make democracy work,” he said. “We’re trying to make the first three words of the Constitution come alive.” (We the people...)
And all with one purpose in mind: to inform America about its impending fiscal crisis. His comments are short, to the point and, he admits, a bit acerbic.
Prescription-drug coverage under Medicare, which took effect Jan. 1, has a projected cost that was advertised at $400 billion over 10 years when it passed in 2003, but has since risen to at least $720 billion.
“We simply can’t afford it,” Walker said.
The bulk of President George W. Bush’s 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax-cut program is set to expire at the end of 2010. Congress is taking steps to make the reductions permanent, which would keep tax revenue at about 18% of the economy, where it’s been for the past half-century—too low to support even current spending levels.
“We can’t afford to make all the tax cuts permanent,” Walker said.
“I think the president’s come a long way in saying we need to balance the budget within a reasonable amount of time,” he explained. “We made a down payment on a multi-trillion-dollar imbalance. We just need to figure out where do we go from there. The problem is he doesn’t have a lot of political capital.”
Walker said the tour is important because the people need to see a face behind the message. Walker’s face is certainly being seen, particularly on several national news shows, including CBS’ “60 Minutes” and Fox News Channel’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto.”
Charleston is the 19th stop on the tour, which makes roughly two stops per month and will run through 2008.
“We’re trying to leverage technology, we’re trying to leverage the media and we’re trying to leverage professional business, labor and other groups.”
Including Hollywood. Walker said there are two documentaries being made of the Fiscal Wake-Up Tour.
“Hey, maybe we’ll end up winning an Oscar,” he laughed. “If Al Gore can get one for touting the environment, surely we can get one talking about the budget.”
http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/pub/13_6/news/8939-1.html

Bullshit, Leslie!  Nothing that Nonesuche posted implied or gave any cause to suggest any impropriety or breach of security on the part of my son.  Justinsmama {{edit}}
That goes for you as well!  Double in fact!

It is a total non sequitur to what was said and I have to wonder just why such a thought would even occur to anybody.  But then I have forgotten that it is now against the law to be a conservative in this country as we have just seen in the Scooter Libby trial.  That's the liberal solution to political opponents now, try to put them in jail.  That's what all this subpoena business currently being discussed in violation of the constitution's separation of powers provisions.

It was rude, crude and totally out of line as were your own remarks concerning my son's place of employment.  In fact you sound rather jealous and disregarding of the fact that not all information is classified at all.

The two of you just might be surprised at the amount of information that is NOT classified, ever think about that?  Just stuff that is not classified but our slanted Pravda-like media does not care to report, lots of that kind of info out there.

But no, I certainly would never even assume to be equal to the likes of you and justins and widget much less of any more importance for obviously your opinions are facts now.

And I certainly hope that I have insulted both you and justins for you certainly have me and just keep in mind that YOU TWO STARTED IT if you like things on that level of infantile behavior.  You have just about cleared out all the original conservative posters on this conservative political forum, the ones who predate even Natalee with your nastiness.

But then that's the idea, isn't it? :thumbdown:  :smt018  :smt019  :smt019  :smt019

The jihadists have stated 2015 as their targeted date for restoration of the caliphate and the sure seem right on schedule in Canada.  I only hope and pray that when car bombings and IED's are common here that those in the military and intelligence refuse to defend those who have been trashing them  and leave them totally to their own defense.  Only fair and that thought makes me smile.   :D  8)  :D Would be not only fair but also fitting to the situation.  Just an en mass resignation and every man for himself kind of thing.

And this nastiness to those in service of their country has resulted in far more leaving than just me, one with both FBI and military comes to mind right away.  This was a conservative political blog long before Natalee disappeared and many of us were here even then but this kind of attack on other people's children and the military and intelligence service is just totally out of line and unacceptable.  Shame on both you and justins!

But as I said, that's the idea, isn't it, insult and make people angry enough they don't come back?  Justins should have known somebody would email me that little bit of nastiness on her part, not the first time either.  Well,  Congrats!  You two are doing a fine job of thinning out the long time posters. No, I understand exactly what Justins said and here it is again below as you seem a bit confused on the matter.  :smt013  :smt011  :smt078

You know what they always say:  "You can lead a liberal to the facts but you cant make him think."

Leslie, what business is it of yours that you stick your unthinking nose into the business of a country that you hate so much.  Why do you feel your importance to come here and denitrate our country, when you come from a country whose freedom and trade is ensured by this one and those who fight and die to keep your uncaring brainless body safe.

Justinsmama, I am embarrassed and ashamed of you{{edit}}
You both need to clean up around your own back doors and quit feeding at the trough long enough to realize who is ensuring that trough is there for you to suck up from.

Really Anna, you have taken your personal attacks to a new level of crudeness, but why are you so angry?    I read Nonesuche's words and understood them to mean exactly as justinsmama did.  Maybe you should have never posted anything about your son's career.

I read the attack the same way that ANNA did... what I understood Justin'sMama to say was that Anna's son should be prosecuted if he spilled secrets to her.... which she NEVER claimed he did.

and I think her anger in that regard is completely justified...

Damn it, I thought we had gotten past the absolute bullshit of whining about "anger"...

there is plenty to discuss without getting to a personal level.


Leslie, you certainly seem to post as if you hate the U.S...... that has always been my understanding of your thoughts...

I would love to see the evidence to back up your assumption.  Please use my words as I wrote them.

 Anna Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:31 am    Post subject:    

I guess my inside person to go to would be my oldest son who works in the intelligence community and is a career officer there. I tend to take his word on things but then a mother would.

you know this has taken on a really disheartening tone Leslie, I can read your words and am considered pretty literate in these parts. Why must you persist in casting a shadow against Anna's son who obviously is bright and serving his country as well?

I was offended by both you and justins, both of you did clearly imply just what you are implying with these rants now. My interpretation of Anna's post was one that her son is in a position to know far more about corruption in the government than any one of us......and two and more importantly, IF there were cause for alarm or for concern he would alert her. Alerting someone doesn't have to be sharing state secrets, it can be as simple as "you may not have the whole story" or "I am worried" and between a mother and an adult son that isn't treason !!!!!!!!

What is telling to me that as Mrs stated, you have descended into beating a non-existent horse on a very personal level with Anna. It is apparent you are manufacturing half-truths and even lies now to support your position.

Please stop this now. I would not wish to see anyone's children attacked in this way either and particularly not one serving our country !

Schemas, Irrational Thoughts, and Cognitive-Behavioral Theory.

Nonesuche:  I find your posts very confusing - what you write and what you say you meant to write seem to be opposing ideas.   What you say you have read and what was actually written seems to be completely different.   You seem to be saying that Mrs. Red was upset with me (maybe) when, in fact, she was addressing her comments to justinsmama.  Of course that all depends on the meaning of the word "you".
None wrote:  "It is apparent you are manufacturing half-truths and even lies now to support your position. "  
My response:  Who is the "you" ?   Is this a Dr. Suess book?   Is the you in question - ME?

I'm glad to see you are enjoying insulting the children of others so much.  Maybe for some real fun you and Leslie could go to the airport and spit on a few returning veterans.  Be sure to take Leslie for only she can detect Marines out of uniform if you will recall.  American's can't do this, only foreigners can she further assured us.

Well, here's one I can that doesn't fit the drill Sargent negative stereotype put forth and neither does Domino, the Littlest Marine.

(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/f5ab271e.jpg)

You don't have your own child yet reared and I hear that karma can be a real bitch, payback and all of that.  Any time you set out to hurt others as you just did, be sure it will come back to you in one form or another.  Your intentions were crystal clear.

So were Leslie's and she doesn't even have a dog in this fight.  I just so hate it that the efforts of people like my son are wasted giving the right to insult him and even his mother to some who just frankly don't have the right to be doing so.  I do hope he realizes how unappreciated he really is and goes into the private sector soon.  

But just yuk it right up because you can.  At least for now you can but all of that could well change one day before too long and I hope you will remember doing this.  I know I sure will remember it for it was totally unprovoked and unwarranted and you know it and so does Leslie.

Jailing political opponents is one of the first steps of Marxists, isn't it?  Hillary would certainly approve.

.

What is this supposed to mean?  Further insults I am sure but not exactly how this ties in with your previous ones.

Of course I regret posting anything about my son's career for little did I know to whom I was posting and foolishly thought myself among friends or at least remotely rational people.

My mistake for sure!

Now post the part where I claim he shares state secrets, classified information and all those things for which he should be prosecuted as Justin's suggested.  Do you really think ALL information is classified that would be of interest?

Furthermore, the real insult is that not only would he be sharing classified information for which he should be prosecuted but that he would be a party to some nefarious schemes enacted by the Bush administration.  

So where do I claim access to any information illegally?  I don't and that is just the whole problem with you and justins seeking prosecution of my son.  Just the fact that he lives in D.C. could give a closer, more accurate picture of the situation there than somebody might have say maybe living in somewhere like Canada for example.  Or the midwest.  People do talk but that doesn't mean they are violating any laws or rules.

Yes, jailing political opponents is the latest fad being pushed by the leftist in this country.  But suggesting that for my son is patently ridiculous.  

Oh, and I like your spelling corrections for everybody, a sure sign that attacking the person and not the message is in order, right?  Maybe they should be prosecuted and expelled for them.

I wish to God my son would be expelled and stop wasting his life for ungrateful people in this country and others places that have the right to insult him and his mother because people like him are willing to make the sacrifice.

are you kidding me? are you for real? this is absurd and childish and apparently you have no respect for any poster but those who hold your belief regarding your political persuasion

do not twist my post in this fashion Leslie, I won't stand for it. You can "read into" my post whatever you choose but I do retain the right to clarify my intent which was nothing akin to what justinsmamma implied which was that Anna's son should be prosecuted for sharing state secrets.

This is ridiculous and an insult to the Red's as well, but then I don't think you can see anything very clearly today with the exception of this "game" of stepping on others to elevate your own position.

Justins, do you have a PhD or even a master's to qualify these insults you are posting? I sincerely would like to know this, if you do, then please post at length how my post is anything akin to a "schema" or "irrational" or "cognitive behavioral theory"?

I realize you counsel for drug and alcohol addiction but since I have never abused drugs or alcohol of any kind, I truly need to understand where you are drawing your conclusions from.

Ummm...maybe her self diagnosis and she is projecting????

Yes, I try to keep my targeted audience in mind and in this case that would be you and justinsmama so I felt that the more crude, the better suited to the two of you. When dealing with people of your ilk, I find I can get right down there in the gutter with you if I want to.  Must be all that exposure to those vile Marines, huh?

And you attacked me when I was not even present and posting so don't try to blame it on me for it was totally unprovoked and you two know it.

You are acting in concert with justin's on this is why you are addressed as one.  But you know that and why.  Both of you do.  And in keeping with your lies and attack on my son you deserve to be addressed in even more crude terms because some things are just so reprehensible as to invite response in kind.  It is only out of respect for the Reds that I held back and didn't really say half of what I would have liked to do.

Yes, I do regret ever mentioning where my son is employed but I foolishly thought I was dealing with rational people.  My bad!

 :smt030  :smt030

You say you want to deal in facts but that's not what you post.


And again, show me where I claim that illegal information was shared by my son justifying these continued attacks.  You are STILL doing it today I see with your lame quote which says no such thing as you are trying to claim it does.

Oh, and don't flatter yourself that anybody is trying to "change your mind" because I doubt anybody gives a flying flip what you think.  I just am not going to sit by and let you post all that inaccurate information without challenge if I have the time to invest in presenting a more balanced view of things.

I also can't imagine why you are so concerned with the economy of THIS country when your own is so much worse.



.

None,
I seriously doubt anybody with a PhD would stoop so low and be so crass as to attempt something this lame.  Not sure if she means you or me and don't really care for an addiction counselor is a far cry from a licensed psychiatrist.

I think Art Colly is on to something:


(http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a360/AnnaBlueSkies/Insults/th222.jpg)


Sounds more like those self help books and 12 step meeting I had to attend for six months as part of training for Psyche nurse.  I was stunned to learn half the counselors at HCA Hospital in Chattanooga were former patients.   :shock: Just like the unprovoked attack on me when I wasn't even present and extending it to my son, well, that's not exactly rational behavior in the first place.

But what goes around surely come around and I think we have wasted enough time and effort on people like this.  And isn't it odd that this kind of attack was OK but if you or I or Tyler had done it, you can bet we would have heard about it, too.  Thought we weren't supposed to attack others.  But doing it when they think you are not present is even worse.

Not bad enough to accuse my son of divulging state secrets, now others must be insane.  This is just too much.  I can't believe justins would actually post that stupidity.

Sure, if you don't believe they have the right to dis my son, you must be crazy, they don't have to abide by the rules of civility that apply to others.  They're special, you see.  
And anyone who doesn't understand that, well, you just have to have something wrong with you mentally!

 :D  :D  :D

Talk about a few clowns short of a circus!  


 :?

.

Master's, licensed and just under twenty years experience. I insulted no one here. Neither has Leslie. Each of us have been nothing but respectful. We have been attacked and insulted, however.

Oh, and I am a mental health and addictions psychotherapist. My posting was an attempt to have others google those terms, particularly schemas, as we all have them. Any slight taken by anyone is a result of their own interpretation.

justins I do take what you posted as a personal attack and I believe Klaas asked you clearly in red to stop it, did she not?
I have an MBA but I don't use it as a whipping post nor do I think it entitles me to diagnose every business problem or NOT on this planet.

this kind of psychobabble is insulting to the collective intellect of this forum. Discuss the issues please.

I believe that Klaas was addressing all in this thread? My credentials were questioned so I posted them. One cannot ask for something and then complain when it is received. I will not fight with you or anyone else. I believe debate is not possible here. Insults are hurled and deemed the cat's meow. Civil responses are treated as attacks. I believe that a point was made some time ago about actual debate here being nearly impossible as some (and I hold myself in that category) have firmly made up their minds on some matters. Hence the reference to schemas.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schema_(psychology)



Everyone has schemas which influence their interpretations.

I am so appalled by the postings here. Those who are equally or even more appalled  by my own posts will be happy to know that I will no longer post here. Leslie and I have challenged what some have posted. Apparently that makes us deranged, undeserving, etc. Keep it for yourselves. I prefer company that truly does others and diverse opinions.

Klaas~ You have mail.

I would appreciate a deletion of the posts referring to my clients.

Please check your email.