| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
Nothing's been blown up, nothing's been hijacked. Doesn't that strike you as odd. . . ? that the only people that are terrorizing the American people are in our American government.(?) Incidentally, that goes back to the anthrax scare. It wasn't just a scare, several people died but it was performed by American spies or whatever, they had it down to one particular individual in the CIA and one particular individual in the FBI and they chose not to pursue the investigation beyond that. |
there's been several catastrophic terrorist attacks and assinations. the nightclub in Bali? The assinations of US embassy officials in Jordan? Attacks on US troops in Kuwait prior to the war? Off the top of my head there was an attempt to blow an American airlines plane up with a shoe bomb. An attempt with a shoulder fired ground to air missle at an Israeli jet. Numerous plots in Europe have been hampered. Bombing of the American embassy in Pakistan? hello! |
|
Just because hundreds of Americans havent died on American soil in one single incident you think they any less significant? so two hundred Aussies dead from an al Qaida related bombing in Bali isnt terrorism? what? |
|
|
Guy A says there's been no terrorism since 9/11. Guy B says there has been and provides examples. ... What's so funny? |
I for one found it funny as well. after all, Patrick is the one that says there is no threat to the US. Come on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've never read patrick as thinking there's no threat to America. Keep dancing with them shadows, man. |
|
|
I feel like a crazy person. I get confused between antigone, semillama, and patrick. and just to make it interesting, nate pops in now and then and appears to be insane himself, plus now and then "jack" and "Rowlf" throw their lobs in to boot. Lately I have also found myself at odds with whisper and spider, which in itself is unsettling. We have fought a lot over the validity of the US going to war in Iraq. One of the major objections thrown at me is that there is no direct threat to the US posed by Saddam or Iraq, and no connections between terrorist groups and Iraq. We find Al-Queda and Hammas and various other terror groups entering into the fray when war does start in Iraq, and then all of the sudden, there is a vacuum, no one says a thing..... |
|
|
|
And there is no reason to believe that although both Saddam and Osama have refuted connections to each other, that Osama (and other terrorists regardless of their actual feelings toward Saddam) won't use this as a way to elicit sympathy and gain support and/or bring together individuals from other fundamentalist groups. Terrorists may use this to justify their violence, it doesn't mean that they have any real affinity for or investment in Saddam's regime. |
holy shit i just spit coffee all over the place and pissed my pants in unison. |
trace, for about three years prior to your arrival we'd been looking for a 'mark'. we developed a simple filtering system for newbies. if you look back through the history of these message boards you can probably recognize key aspects of our procedure (we call it 'the program',) which generally was started by either tiggy or myself being a complete and total asshole. needless to say, you passed through all of our prepared 'gates' in the program. you were actually the first person to get to the end, meeting all of the critera for our 'mark'. i won't tell you all who 'we' is, but you probably know most of the key players- myself, tiggy, you know. what you may not know is that tiggy and i (and several others, who will remain nameless,) are all, or were anyway, doing post graduate work in psychology in a joint effort between two universities (one of which is my old school, uc santa cruz, and the other i'm not sure tiggy would want me to reveal, so i won't.) the 'were' is due to some unfortunate incidents in which the details of our project where discovered and, well, to put it mildly, there are some ethical issues with experimenting on people who are not aware of the experiment. so, some of us were removed from our respective schools. that's about all i should say due to ongoing legal procedings, but suffice to say, mention of being laid off in the past has refered to being kicked out of school. you get the picture. so, that's the bulk of the story. the source of our funding is pretty interesting, but shit, i'm not even stupid enough to reveal that. right tiggy? heh. uh. so, sorry trace. i've been feeling bad about this whole escapade since the 3/7. i was going to tell you then, but i let them convince me not to. but i can't keep it in any longer. christ man, i'm just really sorry. |
I always have had an overactive imagination. Kiwi's died in Bali too. |
i have never said al Qaida is not a threat. |
|
|
filter my ass. or are you buttering us up with glimpses of your proto-novel? |
i'm just glad someone else notices the BRICK VIBRATIONS. they're MUSIC. |
|
I think I made a mistake. I withdraw. |
|
|
|
and spider, i was careful not to indicate your involvment. if you'd have kept your mouth shut people would have figured your psy background to coincidental. |
Well, you just be thankful I'm keeping the Dudley Knox Corollary F under wraps. |
remain nameless? so much for that. and our control? what about our control you over-zealous, ill-achieving, cheap wine-drinking bastard? |
But, little does nate know that he is the one being controlled. We just let him have his delusions once in a while, right before we put his balls in a vise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
got a truck, bought some clothes, replenished "staples" in the cupboard. Now broke again..... |
Oh well. Money sucks ass. Even when you have it. |
toodles! (i really need to do this so even though i have zero self-discipline i have some, not much, pride, so if i say it i'll feel sheepish not following through...whether that will stop me remains to be seen) |
|
Pandora's Box Opens Not one of those are catastrophic problems for the people of the United States. The people of the U.S. have not been affected by any acts of terrorism from outside, period. Since the destruction of the Twin Towers. Sure the D.C. area was terrorized by a sniper right before the elections and several people were killed by the anthrax mailer,the identity of whom was traced by a very persuasive PBS "Frontline" investigation which narrowed the mailer's identity down to two individuals. One who works for the CIA one who works for the FBI. His reasons for mailing the U.S. produced weaponized anthrax was that he felt it was his patriotic duty to expose the vulnerability of the the U.S. to a biological attack by a very sophisticated weaponized bacterial vector. For obvious reasons the U.S. government chose not to take the investigation to it's conclusion, that is: singling out which "patriot" mailed the U.S. produced weaponized anthrax to the liberal Democratic senators he chose to target. Other than that and the D.C. area sniper there has been no significant terror outside the Beltway, just various hues of terror produced by the duct tape and plastic spewing office of fatherlandland security. By the way, look for security czar Tom Ridge to replace Cheeney on the 2004 Republican ticket as a straight man to Bush. He has that Quayle Clone Clown quality, that makes our decisive fuhrer look good by comparison. The quagmire has already started as U.S. troops fired into a crowd of rock-throwing Shiite Moslems who already have an Ayotollah in mind for their part of Iraq, and if pure democracy were allowed to prevail in Iraq, the Shiite majority would vote in an Islamic Theocracy complete with an Ayotollah to run things, just like the Germans voted in Hitler and it seems as though the triumphalist American majority seems happy to be told what their tinhorn shrub wants them to have for breakfast every morning. Pandora's Box Opens |
do the mentally retarded know they are mentally retarded? |
A.C. get a clue already. Seriously. I mean, just because it isn't necessarily an American on American soil, does NOT by any stretch of the imagination, mean that we aren't affected by it. Not when you care about people, at least. And whether you are willing to accept it or not, the repercussions of those actions are what we feel and continue to feel, whether it was here or in bum fuck nowhere. You don't need to be a genius to figure out that our world and lives don't geographically end at the end of our noses. Stop being a brick already and open your mind up to something bigger than your home town. |
it seems to be the modus operandi of the leftmost. just because you have money in the bank doesn't mean you don't have outstanding cheques. if you don't understand the big picture, you can only argue like a liberal. that there has been no further terrorism on american soil does not indicate anything. it doesn't matter. |
|
|
|
|
when i was young i saw this tap dancer on sesame street. he did that tap dancer move where your palms are on the ground and you're facing upwards and you're still tap dancing. as if you were sitting but suddenly your ass is hovering and your feet are going crazy. i went out in the kitchen and busted the very move for my mom. i thought i did a pretty good job, tapping away. my mom laughed at me. it freaked me out. i was trying to do this thing that i thought was kick ass awesome when the dude on the tv did it. the muppets were all stoked, none of them were laughing. but when i did it, it was fucked. everything was fucked. do you see what i'm saying? some of us are meant for certain things. the muppets will watch us with admiration in their eyes and cheer us on. believe every word. others will attempt the very same things and, because it is not their thing, illicit laughter (or worse.) and everything is fucked. |
|
If you meant that all people are morons, why not say so? Why paint liberals with that brush when you meant it for the whole of humanity? And I don't think liberals have the "upper hand" with talk. What makes you say that? Give some examples that prove your rule, yo. Personally, I'm uncomfortable saying that anyone "is" something. You can say that people do things, but apart from the most general cases, you can't say that they "are" something. That'll always get you in trouble, because your labels for people are always subjective. |
liberals have the upper hand with talk. liberals generate facts out of their asses and talk about them over and over again until they are considered truth. NPR is viewed as 'intellectual' while FOXnews is viewed as 'banal'. which one are you more likely to check facts on? they both claim to attempt even handed, spin-free reporting. which one are you more likely to trust? liberal thought is educated. it comes from unversities. it is truly something to behold! conservative thought comes from boardrooms. it is greedy. it is lies to get the plebians into line so that the fat cats can make more money. are these not typical, conventional wisdom stereotypes? am i really so off base here? |
Only in some circles. To talk about them as if everyone has these preconceptions is disingenuous. If you really dislike the notion of preconceptions, then don't spread new ones. Break down the old ones and try to replace them with critical analysis, not more myths and generalities. Unless it's your aim to replace what you see as the current generalities with ones that suit you better. In that case you're no better than the "liberals" you deride. "liberals generate facts out of their asses and talk about them over and over again until they are considered truth." I could easily show examples of this behavior from conservatives. Why don't you out them, too? Why single out liberals? |
|
conservative thought comes from boardrooms. it is greedy. it is lies to get the plebians into line so that the fat cats can make more money." i will fully admit i have these preconceptions in most discussions. absofuckinlutely. npr is generally so fucking bland how could they note be closer to the truth than Fox...where they have to (like CNN) use gimmicky graphics and interactive shit to keep people's mind. bland is smart. i can't see either side any more hysterical than the other. |
|
as far as political parties go, Nates right about 'liberals' - take a look at Clinton/Gore and what they actually did for the environment... liars. they did nothing. Modern Democrats are fake liberals. Nader spends his whole career actually acting for what he stands for and the Democrat Party sees him as an enemy. Stupid. even if you disagree, you can usually count on conservative parties to follow through with their promises. In Ontario, Mike Harris was one evil sonufabitch, cutting education, closing hospitals... but he did everything he promised he'd do. Meanwhile the federal Liberals have been in power forfuckingever and have done nothing. Not going to war was the only bold move Chretien has really made, and thats NOT doing something instead of doing something and seeing what happens. Not much acheivement there. But they stay in power, because its a liberal country who'd rather have a do-nothing running the show instead of another PC (conservative) party member who goes off deregulating everything and costing us more money. Things like scrapping the GST, raising minimum wage? didnt happen... Conservatives act collectively as a team and get things done, only as strong as the weakest member. Never admit when they're wrong, instead they'll adopt the 'right' policy a bit and steal some 'liberal' votes. US and to some extent Canadian liberals generally infight and acheive nothing. In fact, they agree too often and aren't hardheaded enough in debate. If someone challenges a fact they usually concede without fighting back, even if they are correct. Pussy left, sneaky right. ...and exposing this 'secret' and distancing myself from liberals that actually have power doesnt help much does it? I dont hate Canadian conservatives that much really. Their ideas are more logical, if arguably cold hearted. They deem themselves "The Common Sense Revolution" - US Republicans on the other hand, I cant stand, because its so deeply rooted in the values of the South, and influenced by religion and an empty headed idealism, seeing things as black and white, right and wrong, rather than whats best for society, and what is practical. US politican Republicans do not live in the real world. Its like its every man for themself in the US conservative way of thinking, whereas the Canadian conservatives still try to look out for as many people as they can, while still suiting their own interests. I can see the difference. That and in the US it seems to us those lobbyists, corporations, campaign contributions to both parties from the same people... its out of control. Its like someone took this great idea of capitalism and let it off its leash and now its biting everyone in the neighborhood. Am I making any sense or have these Jalapeno Pringles fried my brain? |
bland is smart. " d'you ever get to see BBC news in the States? Or CBC Newsworld? I notice on FOX and CNN they want to have guests and opinions quick, their points quick and bitesized, as many people on an issue as they can in half an hour... On CBC Newsworld lately I've been impressed, because they're constantly having hour long debates between two people, not pundits, just experts on whatever topic, and they go at it, politely without being condescending to the home audience, never emotionally exploting people either, just arguments and facts being thrown at you like you've never seen. And then they bring in a huge studio audience that get up and burst out pretty much whenever they want, can make long points themselves instead of that quick question bullshit you see on Crossfire... |
Tara, 30 Riverside, CA The war in Iraq is not even over yet and Rumsfeld is already threatening another country (see "Is The U.S. Picking A Fight With Syria?"). This will not end with Iraq or for that matter Syria, Iran and North Korea. We did a great thing in Iraq but the joy may be fleeting. Ryan, 26 Pittsburgh, PA |
. . . . oh well, it was a good excuse to start a war. . . wasn't it? |
Well, the supposed linkage between Al Quaeda and Saddam, for one. That is implied and repeated, without proof, until it was "common sense." Same with the existence of WMD in Iraq. So far, there's absolutely no proof of their existence, but it's taken as "common sense" that they are there. Those are just the biggest, and most recent ones. |
?? ?? |
Yeah, that's it. Let's go! |
|
like the liberal take on nuclear energy, for example. political parties in power are all the same motivation, different lip service. i tend to agree with rowlf. |
And I agree with you about the environmentalist stance of nuclear energy. It's mostly based on fear. And I agree with Rowlf, too. |
i think rowlf should shove it up his arse. even though i generally side with his preachy take on things. |
I can recite the text-book definition of liberal and conservative. I am not sure those defitions fit anymore. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is an interesting article about the Reagan Era contact with saddam, and WMD issues in teh Iran Iraq war, and how it is linked to the current issues... http://xgate.abovetopsecret.com/news.php?id=308 |
so there ain't. |
i can't. Remember Russian dressing? what happened to that? the Ranch craze pushed Russian right off the shelves. The Red Scare? Russian dressing? white Ranch dressing? Hello! WAKE UP! mmmmmBass at 3pm, hockey on at 4. Should allow enough time to get buzzed enough to deal with my brother, mother and father inlaws' arrival tonight. in brighter news.....milkdud drank from her first bottle today, from yours truly. she took to it no problemo and later fed from the teat. no confusion at all. also we found ourselves at the ER at 6am cause nico was having major abdominal pains this morning. a bitch of an infection but it landed me a day off to feed my baby girl and get on the hootch while the sun is warm. |
OMG, a political revolution to create patriotism all in the salad dressings!!!!!!! Spunky says "Dump out all of the French Dressings and all of the German Potato Salad!!" I don't eat either of them! EEWWW! |
german potato salad fucking rocks if it's made right. |
I love german slaw as well. Catalina is sort of like russian. Sort of |
Why wasn't this front page news? |
Not that it suprises me in the least, though. Seems like the liberal media loves to coddle right wing extremists. Ain't that funny? |
|
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36429 If Bush lied then they all lied. And, they did it first. |
When have you NOT said that? This is news? And, do you know the difference between a lie that gains political favor and a lie that launches a war? Didn't think so... |
does this give this or future administrations liscence to go out and murder 47 people then too? and get the ATF to raid cults? |
|
father! |
Boy they were all in it togeather. One big new world order conspiracy. And the stories of the Kurds and Iranians who got gassed before Desert Storm were just made up so we would eventually have a basis for the lies you keep harping about. |
|
If that were true there would have been no debate over war. Watcher. you know what they say about lies being repeated too many times? they become accepted as truth. You know what they say about boys who cry wolf? the first couple times they believe but eventually... Theres lots of excuses for what people believe at one time or another. Just as the US tries to explain now the context of the US relationship with Saddam in the 80's. Sure, it looks awful for Rummy to shake Saddam's hand and I still agree it was shortsighted and stupid to get involved with him the way they did, but the excuse does have a context you could argue for. Likewise, in the here and now 140 nations said no to war because at this present time there was no proof of WMDs or that Iraq was a threat. the "coalition" acted and claimed they had uptodate info that has not been proven true. thus they are responsible in the here and now and should take responsibility for their actions, instead of being babies and trying to show everyone what other nations used to believe. And as for the cases where some nations still believed but still didnt want war, you can easily say that those nations believed and claimed forthcomingly that the problem could be solved in a peaceful manner. Which brings us to this: "And the stories of the Kurds and Iranians who got gassed before Desert Storm were just made up so we would eventually have a basis for the lies you keep harping about." Sarcastro! anyways, not to try and downplay how bad the gassing of the Kurds was, the majority of these actions involving mass graves took place at a time when the US was supporting Saddam, and when the US was basically giving Iraq the green light to invade Kuwait. But we didnt talk about this shit then, did we? Why not? Why didnt we rally the public then to keep going in Iraq and get rid of him for good then? They werent made up, but the second part of your sarcastic statement actually has merit. These deaths were used for political purposes now, not that they dont mean anything because they do, but mainly because since no WMDs are found its all Bush's administration has to show. Lots of other nations have these sort of atrocities but neither the US or anyone else goes after them. Hegemony, oil, future elections, distraction from domestic issues and an acceptable scapegoat from an inability to go after the real enemies is why the US is there. Not liberation. Not mass graves. Not rape rooms. Not events that transpired before the first Gulf War. As for WMDs, I dont know anymore if Bush believed they were there or not. Either he lied or he chose to believe based on flimsy evidence, having faith they would be there because as cons insist 'everyone else said they were there'. |
They refused to follow the UN mandate. Even the inspectors said they could not account for the WMD's and they were being hampered in their duties. How many more UN resolutions, that would not have been enforced, did you want. |
|
|
|
|
so Watcher cant spell Saddam. And spunky cant spell Hussein. whats going on here? Watcher, tell me how defying the UN and calling it irrelevant then going to war, is enforcing the UN. the second the war started that argument went straight out the window. You're not allowed to use it anymore. Sorry, you're just not. "They refused to follow the UN mandate. Even the inspectors said they could not account for the WMD's and they were being hampered in their duties. " that doesnt mean they were there. and that doesnt mean actual war was necessary or the last option. no WMDs and no proof of WMDs = no rush for war and other options were still available. The imminent threat was a lie. "How many more UN resolutions, that would not have been enforced, did you want." How many more UN resolutions against Israel does the US want to veto? Theres been over 70 resolutions so far, over half of which the US has vetoed. Oh, and we know for sure Israel has WMDs. Did you ever take a look at these resolutions, Watcher? anybody? Designed to fail. If there had been 3 actual hard efforts to deal with Saddam over 12 years since the Gulf War you'd have a case, but do you ever remember the bulk of these resolutions getting any airtime or newspaper coverage? I have always given the US credit for being tough cop in the process before the war because if it hadnt none of these other nations would have gotten involved. But the US never at any point brought any other solutions to the table other than pressing for war and calling it the last options. Several other nations suggested solutions and other methods and the US refused to listen. And when the war started dont you forget France said "if you find WMDs, we will join you". The US has not. You can't tell me the world was playing "appease Saddam", because they were working harder for a peaceful solution that would also please the US, than the US was and nothing you can say can convince me otherwise, because its the truth. And when was the last time the US had let UN inspectors in? Do you think the US would be all that cooperative? Would you want your government to be? |
Watcher, you're just using arguments the spunkster used months ago. We kicked the shit out of them then, too. Just read some old posts and feel mortified. :P |
Whats the difference between Bush and Hitler? Hitler served in combat! speaking of which, Moveon.org is under fire as a couple of the ads its competition to make their political ad have Hitler references. You can see them for yourself at: http://www.bushin30seconds.org/ I also saw this today, and I'm not sure what to make of it, but it sure is interesting: http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com |
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/06/1073268031788.html |
and rightfully so. The Desktop one is probably the simplest, best produced, humorous but still makes its point, is memorable, and not all that heavy handed. most of the others arent so good. |
|
|
fuck the rnc. they can suck my asspipe. |
|
|
|
. The Producers Guild of America nominated a range of big budget movies with big name stars for their annual awards. The Guild, an industry association, named the makers of "Cold Mountain," "The Last Samurai," "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World," "Mystic River" and "Seabiscuit" as candidates for its film producer of the year award. The list excludes several independent films that have won critical acclaim, such as Sofia Coppola's "Lost in Translation" and Jim Sheridan's "In America." . Charles Aznavourhas been awarded the title of Commander in the French Legion of Honor. The singer, 79, who has a new album, "Je voyage" (I'm traveling), was on the New Year's Day list of honorees. The 87-year-old composer Henri Dutilleuxreceived the Grand Cross, the highest of the Legion's five ranks, and the star chef Alain Ducasse, 47, entered the legion as a knight, the initial ranking. . The singer-songwriter Ray Daviesof the British rock band the Kinks was shot in the leg in New Orleans while chasing thieves who had snatched a purse from a woman he was with, the police said. He was not seriously injured. The police said Davies, 59, and the woman were walking near the edge of the French Quarter about 8:30 p.m. when he was shot. Davies was treated at a hospital and released. A suspect was arrested and another person was being sought. . The conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh's medical records will remain off-limits to prosecutors for at least 15 days more while his attorneys pursue an appeal to permanently seal them, a judge in Florida has ruled. Investigators seized the records last month after discovering that Limbaugh had received more than 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion. . Mike Nichols, who won the Academy Award for best director for 1967's "The Graduate" and was nominated three other times, will receive the Directors Guild of America's lifetime-achievement honor. The guild will present the prize at its 56th annual awards ceremony on Feb. 7. Britney Spears's total time as a married woman: 55 hours. The annulment of her marriage to Jason Allen Alexander, a childhood friend, was granted by a judge after the pop star filed papers stating that she and her new husband were "incompatible." Spears's attorney said the couple, both 22, had sought the annulment - several hours after their predawn marriage Saturday at the Little White Wedding Chapel in Las Vegas - after realizing that they had not worked out the "serious issues" involved in marriage. The papers were filed 12 minutes after Clark County District Court opened on Monday; they had been signed by Spears and Alexander in the presence of a notary public on Saturday afternoon. The papers asserted that the singer is "not currently pregnant" and that "Plaintiff Spears lacked understanding of her actions to the extent that she was incapable of agreeing to marriage because Plaintiff and Defendant did not know each other's likes and dislikes, each other's desires to have or not have children and each other's desires as to state of residency." "Upon learning of each other's desires," the petition added, "they are so incompatible that there was a want of understanding of each other's actions in entering into this marriage." The wedding ceremony was videotaped at the Little Chapel, but no video has been released." source |
I'm looking now. |
that's 8 and a half straight hours of getting the Led out. except for about twenty minutes when i walked to the bank. and nearly got hit by a car, ground to my doom in the crosswalk. thankfully, when i got home the Led was still getting out. |
"except for about twenty minutes when i walked to the bank. and nearly got hit by a car, ground to my doom in the crosswalk." headphones, dude. |
that kisw "rock" logo was fucking mandatory back then. if you weren't sporting it, you were invisible. |
thanks Clear Channel. good job. |
|
|
Read this and admit you were wrong. |
Bush and Co. brought this country to war on false pretense and should be brought to impeachment trial. Where's your high standard for the rule of law you so vicisiously waved at Clinton for lying about fucking an intern to a grand jury. This shit just makes me so fucking angry when i think of it. The hypocrisy, the complacency, the short term memory and the general idiocy that plagues this country and its citizenry. |
|
|
|
Don't be a child. Choose the lesser of two evils. |
|
The time for complaining is over. Act. |
Campaign slogan: Anyone but Bush. Unless its Liebermann. seriously. |
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36475 |
Far from not being able to "compete" with Bush, Dean is the one viable Democrat who isn't trying to compete on the playing field that Bush and Karl Rove have laid out. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Arianna Huffington Jan. 7, 2004 | I swear, if I hear one more Democratic honcho say that Howard Dean is not electable, I'm going to do something crazy (maybe that's what happened to Britney in Vegas this weekend). The contention is nothing short of idiotic. Consider the source: the folks besmirching the Good Doctor's Election Day viability are the very people who have driven the Democratic Party into irrelevance. Who spearheaded the party's resounding 2002 midterm defeats. Who kinda, sorta, but not really disagreed with President Bush as he led us down the path of preemptive war with Iraq, irresponsible tax cuts, and an unprecedented deficit. Dean is electable precisely because he's making a decisive break with the spinelessness and pussyfooting that have become the hallmark of the Democratic Party. So, please, no more hand-wringing about Dean being "another Dukakis." And no more weepy flashbacks about having had your heart broken by George McGovern, whose 1972 annihilation haunts the 2004 Democratic primaries like a political Jacob Marley, shaking his chains and warning about the ghosts of landslides past. There is a historical parallel to Dean's candidacy. But it's not McGovern in 1972, as the DLC paranoiacs would like us to believe -- it's Bobby Kennedy in 1968. Like Kennedy's, Dean's campaign was initially fueled by his antiwar outrage. Like Kennedy, Dean has found himself fighting not just to represent the Democratic Party but to remake it. Like Kennedy, Dean is offering an alternative moral vision for America, not just an alternative political platform. And like Kennedy, Dean has come under withering attack from his critics for the very attributes that his supporters find most attractive. "He could be intemperate and impulsive ... the image of wrath -- his forefinger pointing, his fist pounding his palm, his eyes ablaze." Sean Hannity on Howard Dean? No, Theodore White on Bobby Kennedy in "The Making of the President 1968." It's the same ludicrous charge of being "too angry" that's being constantly leveled at Dean. Have his Democratic opponents -- and the notoriously decorous Washington press corps -- suddenly morphed into Miss Manners? Personally, I could never trust a man who does not occasionally get hot under the collar. Of course Dean is angry. Take a look at what's happening in Iraq, with another 236 American soldiers killed or wounded since Saddam was dragged out of his spider hole. And take a look closer to home, where we have 12 million children living in poverty, six out of seven working poor families unable to afford quality child care, record levels of personal debt, and more and more U.S. jobs being "outsourced" overseas. If you still have a pulse -- are you listening, Joe Lieberman? -- you should be royally pissed. "I have traveled and I have listened to the young people of our nation," Kennedy said during his announcement speech, "and felt their anger about the war that they are sent to fight and about the world they are about to inherit." And young people have been the spark that has lighted the fuse of the Dean campaign. As he pointed out this weekend in Iowa: "One-quarter of all the people who gave us money between June and September were under 30 years old." So while the Democratic establishment is once again dusting off its tried-and-untrue swing voter strategy, Dean is running, as he put it, "a campaign based on addition, not subtraction. We want to add new people to the Democratic Party so that we can beat George Bush. It's the only way we can beat him." Kennedy was drawn into the '68 race by his indignation over the direction of America's foreign policy. "This nation," he said, "must adopt a foreign policy which says, clearly and distinctly, 'no more Vietnams'." Dean has been saying, clearly and distinctly, no more Iraqs, even when 70 percent of the public said they approved of Bush's policy. That's leadership -- and the kind of boldness the Democratic Party has been sorely lacking. Far from Dean not being able to "compete" with Bush on foreign policy, he's the one viable Democrat who isn't trying to compete on the playing field that Bush and Karl Rove have laid out. No Democrat can win by playing "Whose swagger is swaggier?" or "Whose flight suit is tighter?" Instead Dean unambiguously asserts that "we are in danger of losing the war on terror because we are fighting it with the strategies of the past ... The Iraq war diverted critical intelligence and military resources, undermined diplomatic support for our fight against terror, and created a new rallying cry for terrorist recruits." In the same way that Kennedy was able to take his outrage over Vietnam and expand it to include the outrages perpetrated at home, Dean has gone from railing against the war to offering a "New Social Contract for America's Working Families" that harks back to the core message of FDR: "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." It's a message that Bobby Kennedy made central to his campaign but which the Democratic Party has since abandoned. Howard Dean has resurrected it and made it his own because, as he says, 2004 "is not just about electing a president -- it's about changing America." That is a big vision. But anything smaller guarantees the reelection of George Bush. |
tiggy. i dont trust any political party enough to give them my time and money. causes that transcend political parties are more worthy of my attention. Id also like to think my anger transcends political parties as well. i use my first amendement rights of assesmbly when i can. apply my freedom of speech in letter form (regardless of futility) to my representatives when i can, and most of all, I vote. thats about all I can muster for now. though to be honest, i've felt more compelled to give Dean money, more than I have with any other political candidate for office, ever. after reading Arianna i'm even more compelled. |
He might not win. Its all up to him. If he tries to be too much like Gore and play too much to both sides, he's toast. He has to set himself apart. Even he makes many mistakes (which he will because he's a politician) all he needs to do is get it out that he's different from Bush. Thats it. Thats all he has to do. Dont bother trying to win republicans over. just get people out to vote. He's already doing some dumb stuff, like playing up his faith and pretending to be a big Wyclef Jean fan. Just stop. Stop, please. The other Dems are scared because they're used to the status quo, they're establishment and are completly out of touch with the country. and they're pussies. Dean can Win. Clark can win. Kerry at best would bring a close election. Everyone else has no chance, though Kucinich is actually a pretty good liberal candidate when you look at him closely. Couldn't win at this point though. comic: http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=16208 |
No wonder we believed there were WMD's. Whether we ever find any WMD's, or not, their deceptions were the reason they got into trouble. It suited Saddam's purpose to make the world think he was dangerous. But, if all his WMD's were destroyed, then he and his scientists went to far. They really were perceived to be dangerous. And, that is why the invasion of Iraq was legitimate. We couldn't let a mad man like him have access to this kind of destructive power. |
they opened their door. They repeatedly said they didnt have the weapons we said they did. To this date, 1/9/2004, the only thing we know for sure is, the US was wrong about their weapons and the Iraqi's (and the UN) were right. Thats all. Is it possible for you to consider you were duped by your own government because everything we know (and don't) seems to point in that direction. |
first of all, incase you werent paying attention, for the months leading up to war Iraq said they didnt have any WMDs. The idea that Saddams people made him think they had weapons, we dont even know if thats true. Its a theory being put around by corned war-backers, and apparently you've accepted it as truth already? you know this means you're basically saying there are no WMDs, right? is that what you think? "They really were perceived to be dangerous." If my neighbor repainted his house black, bought some nasty looking dogs and told the neighborhood he collects guns, I could perceive my neighbor to be dangerous. I could think that I'm not safe with him in the neighborhood. But that wouldnt make calling the cops on him, nor busting down his door myself to disarm him, legitimate. |
Paul O'Neill using some tough talk on his former bosses. Watching hawks simply write him off as 'bitter' is going to give me Bernard Goldberg flashbacks. |
amusing to me on so many levels FUCK THIS FUCKING WORLD FULL OF ASSHOLES AND PSYCHIC/PHYSICAL VAMPIRES IDIOTS /me off to make my own planet |
Five impolite questions for the president |
read this instead. a good read about how columnists have turned the term "neoconservative" into an opportunity to accuse others of anti-semitism... |
|
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040109/capt.sge.usa26.090104212048.photo00.default-270x378.jpg this is how stupid they think people are: "Unfound Iraqi weapons matter little" http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040109/pl_afp/us_iraq_weapons_defense_040109212053 |
"We're not going to change." so why should anybody? oh yeah, the police state. |
|
|
Condi says: no proof WMDs are in Syria http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-us-syria,0,5752765.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines Paul O'Neill says: Bush planned Iraq invasion in January 2001 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/20040110/ts_nm/people_oneill_dc_6 |
http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/moveonebushhitler/moveon2.mov http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/moveonebushhitler/moveon-h2.mov |
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=16245 |
Danish/Icelandic teams find shells with what they think is blister agent, in Iraqi desert The shells are believed to have been buried there in after the Iraq/Iran war which ended in '88... at the bottom of the article you read this "In October, Dutch marines found several dozen artillery shells dating from the 1991 Gulf War in the southern Iraqi town of Samawah, but the shells contained no biological or chemical agents. Samawah is 100 miles west of the southern region where the Danes discovered shells Saturday. In April, U.S. troops found a dozen 55-gallon drums in an open field near the northern Iraqi town of Baiji. Preliminary tests performed at the scene indicated one drum might contain the nerve agent cyclosarin and a blister agent that could be mustard gas. Tests later showed the barrel's contents were not chemical weapons. " but of course, what is the headline on FOXNews main page? CHEMICAL WEAPONS FOUND IN IRAQ MORTAR SHELLS I guess to find a smoking gun you must jump one? |
not reading that they've been buried for 'at least 10 years', and not knowing that burying weapons is considered to be an acceptable way of disposing of them. The US Army does this. You can read here about a school that was built on top of some. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/pic/nr/1999/august/rvs-8-5.html |
Its always Clintons fault, isnt it? http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/1/11/115515.shtml |
|
moveon.org has 30 second commericials of the finalists for its 'Bush in 30 Seconds' contest. Its a fantastic idea and the results are awesome. My favorite is the 'Bring it On' clip, voted best youth ad. I hope to see these ads, though where I live, they probably wont air. Also, I've been meaning to ask spunky for his take on a recent report and study published by the Strategic Studies Institute at the Army War College, that cited with the war in Iraq the US "on a course of open-ended and gratuitous conflict with states and non-state entities that pose no serious threat to the United States." The report also cited the Iraq war as a "detour" and "uneccessary". Jeffry Record, the visiting professor who worked on the report called the war "an unnecessary preventative war" that has "diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland against further assault by an undeterrable Al Qaeda." Im just wondering how many world officials OUTSIDE the Bush Administration, be they government, intellectual, spiritual and otherwise have to come out citing what a crock of shit this war was for people like you to actually start questioning what you bought so completely. Short of Rumsfeld defecting and revealing all, what would it take? The entire article can be found at LA Times.com |
One Marine with a nasty cold could take 'em. Bunch of liberal pinko pansies! |
Dr. Jeffrey Record is a former SASC staffer associated with the defense reform movement of the 1980's, with ties to Senator Nunn and Lloyd Bentsen during their days on the Hill. |
Dr. Jeffrey Record is a former SASC staffer associated with the defense reform movement of the 1980's, with ties to Senator Nunn and Lloyd Bentsen during their days on the Hill. |
Dr. Jeffrey Record is a former SASC staffer associated with the defense reform movement of the 1980's, with ties to Senator Nunn and Lloyd Bentsen during their days on the Hill. |
|
|
|
"For three hours in this latest installment of 'Lord of the Rings,' young people the world over watch my work in the United States and your work here in Europe -- to get nations to disarm, not to make moral judgments about any nation other than America or Israel -- undone. "We who love peace," the Nobel Peace Prize laureate continued, "have to initiate a campaign to jolt people back to our view of the world. Let's be clear about the dangers. What if young people start identifying George W. Bush with Aragorn or Gandalf, and Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden with Saruman? Even worse, impressionable moviegoers might identify the American war against Iraq and so-called 'Islamic terror' with the war against the Orcs and Mordor. "Who knows what might happen if enough young people start thinking that war is an option, or that some people or countries can be labeled 'evil,' or that there is something noble about a soldier who kills for a 'just' cause?" The former president continued, "I hope that the European community, enlightened Democrats and progressives in America begin to realize the potential consequences of this film. There may even be a demand among American college students to allow the return of ROTC (Reserve Officers Training Corps) recruiters to campuses. People might start regarding war as an option. "When I saw the audience in the movie theater cheer when Orcs were killed, I shuddered," Mr. Carter said, visibly pained. "The message of 'Lord of the Rings' is just plain bad. "We must do something to counteract this celebration of violence," Mr. Carter said emphatically. "To see even trees fight and kill is enough to make any right-thinking person sick to his or her stomach. "You Europeans, and we in America who identify with your beautiful values of moral neutrality and pacifism, must create a major public relations campaign against these films. We have to use our access to people's hearts and minds to counter that of Hollywood, which is almost always on our side, but for the sake of profits has produced this reactionary propaganda. "We have to publicize our vision of what the movie should have portrayed. We have to make it clear, for example, that the proper response to Saruman and the Orcs was for Gandalf and his followers to go to the negotiating table, not the battlefield. And if only the Middle Earth had a United Nations and a World Court, no unilateral war against Mordor would ever have been waged." Mr. Carter went on to offer suggestions about how to wage a public relations campaign to turn people against the martial messages of "Lord of the Rings." "Let us get the academic community to sign ads in the New York Times and other journals that identify with our pro-peace vision of the world. These ads would declare Gandalf a war monger and imperialist, and emphasize that the Orcs were not evil, but rather suffered from poverty and hopelessness. "We also need," the former American president continued, "a major bumper sticker campaign. Every progressive must get a 'War is not the answer' or 'Visualize world peace' sticker to proudly respond to 'Lord of the Rings.' "The stakes are enormous," the distinguished former president said with great emotion. "If enough people start thinking in terms of good and evil, all our years of cultivating moral and cultural relativism, anti-military thinking, pacifism and internationalism will be jeopardized. And college students, our greatest hope, may no longer accept their professors' view of America as an imperialist war monger." At the conclusion of the interview, Mr. Carter was asked if his campaign against "Lord of the Rings" had a name. The peace activist thought for a moment, and replied, "Compassion for Mordor." This story is fictional, but not false. |
|
|
Case in point. |
we've got 3 or 4 generations proudly manifesting narrow-minded anti-intellectualism. it's pathological now. get used to it. |
|
I am of the opinion you went through too many sessions of Ludovico Technique |
Braun to quit race, support Dean... My opinion: If Clark doesnt bite, Dean should get her to be his running mate. If he does this, he has the election won. And I mean this for a few unfortunate reasons. One, all media will be afraid to go after Braun too hard because she is a black woman. Especially the right wing pundits. they'll be very careful because they have a tough enough time trying to convince people they're not the racist party. Two, whether or not they think she is qualified (I dont know much about her myself), there is going to be a lot of people who will simply want to vote to have a black woman high up in office, kinda like people who want to see an actor/bodybuilder in office, whether or not he's qualified. Is she someone who could do the job? Obviously I dont know. But if all Dean cares about it winning, she's a choice thats going to give him credibility with an important Dem demographic that he currently does not have. |
I mean you're the suckiest suck that ever sucked. |
|
Look at how many people voted for Bush because he picked a diabolical imp-lord for a running mate. I mean, wow! an Imp-lord! never had one in that high an office before! |
Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's damning book may finally clue Americans in to the deadly consequences of being governed by a disengaged dolt in the hands of a fanatical cabal. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Arianna Huffington Jan. 14, 2004 | Struggling to reconcile the ever-widening gulf between what the Bush administration claims to be true and what is actually true is getting harder by the day. Scientists at M.I.T. have apparently been having some success using string theory and particle accelerators, but where does that leave the rest of us? Fortunately, Paul O'Neill has a timely, if disturbing, diagnosis, backed up by some 19,000 pages of lab results: The White House is being run by a band of out-and-out fanatics. On the administration's two defining issues, Iraq and taxes, the former treasury secretary paints a scathing portrait of a cabal of closed-minded zealots steadfastly refusing to allow anything as piddling as fact, evidence or truth to get in the way of its unshakable beliefs and forgone conclusions. According to O'Neill, invading Iraq was a Bush goal before he had even learned where the office supply closet was. Day 9, to be precise. "It was all about finding a way to do it," he says. "That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this.'" Of course, All the President's Men (and Condi, too!) did just that, gathering a collection of dubious facts, half-truths, quarter-truths, and -- what's become the house specialty -- no-truths, to match the desired outcome. Nigerian yellowcake, anyone? But hey, why let a little thing like reality get in the way of a perfectly good war? The picture of a White House teeming with fanatics gets even clearer with O'Neill's depiction of Bush's brain trust's dogged devotion to cutting taxes for the wealthy. And, before I go any further, one word of advice to the White House attack dogs now unleashed on O'Neill: If you want to belittle his bona fides, you've got to come up with something better than saying, "We didn't listen to him when he was there, why should we now?" Let's get real. Is there anyone more central to developing economic policy than the treasury secretary? One that was picked by, yes, George Bush? To be any more inside, O'Neill would have to have been George Bush's proctologist. Now, of course, they're painting him out to be a cross between Jerry Garcia and Karl Marx. Yeah, what an antiestablishment wackjob: Former CEO of Alcoa and a friend of Don Rumsfeld's since the '60s. Anyway, whether or not they listened to him, O'Neill certainly listened to them, and now he's doing what this administration makes a fetish of not doing: telling the American people what their government has been doing. To hear O'Neill tell it, the true believers surrounding the president, headed by Karl Rove and O'Neill's onetime patron Dick Cheney, are all devout disciples of the first commandment of Bush Republicans: Thou shalt cut taxes for the wealthy, no matter the cost to the greater good. They have all drunk the supply-side Kool-Aid -- and simply don't care to hear any debate on this subject. Or on any other for that matter. According to O'Neill, "That store is closed." To disagree with the Bush clan is to hate America. What's more, in classic fanatical fashion, there is an utter intolerance of dissent. When O'Neill, who had the gall to be concerned about the looming fiscal crisis triggered by the growing budget deficit, argued against a second round of tax cuts for the wealthy, he was quickly put in his place by Cheney. "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter," growled the vice president, blithely ignoring the nearly 20 years it took to undo the fiscal damage Reagan's budget-busting had wrought. Besides, added Cheney, sounding less like the most powerful No. 2 in history than a kid cajoling his parents into giving him ice cream because he has cleaned his plate, "We won the midterm elections; this is our due." This is our due? Is it actually possible to so badly misread what this country -- or, indeed, democracy -- is about? It's a measure of how effectively the GOP radicals have framed the political debate, with taxes as the root of all evil, that even a bedrock-ribbed establishment Republican like O'Neill comes across like a tax-happy liberal by comparison. Hell, it turns out even President Bush had his doubts about the virtue of following his first round of serve-the-rich tax cuts with a heaping second helping. "Haven't we already given money to rich people?" Bush asks at a 2002 meeting of his economic team. "Shouldn't we be giving money to the middle?" This momentary bout of presidential scruples was quickly cured by Karl Rove. "Stick to principle. Stick to principle. Don't waver," he urged Bush repeatedly. The principle, I suppose, being: "If we wanna win in 2004 we gotta keep our Pioneers and Rangers happy!" Boy Genius, indeed. The most alarming thing that emerges from O'Neill's revelations is the total lack of leadership on the president's part. At the very moment that Rove and the Bush reelection team are gearing up to sell us on the image of the president as the macho, heroic cowboy from Crawford who is going to keep us all safe from terrorists, despots and Mad Cow meat, here comes O'Neill with his devastating assessment of Bush as "a blind man in a roomful of deaf people." Will this be the wakeup call that finally opens the American public's eyes to the deadly consequences of being governed by a disengaged dolt in the hands of a gang of brazen fanatics? |
|
|
|
Seriously. |
|
I have heard what Rush had to say, I have read opinion after opinion, but I still do not have one. I know Huffington is a quack, and did NOT write that article herself. |
|
and its "immigrant". im all for space exploration but if there ever was an insignificant and trivial policy inititive so obviously timed with the headlines thats the one. |
|
But it will give Dems some good ammunition in debates. If they dont bring it up they're retarded. "You Suck. I mean you're the suckiest suck that ever sucked." Thats it spunk, let it all out. Don't forget to breathe. |
|
Saddam told his militia to avoid al Qaeda, according to document found with Saddam at the time of his capture: http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/8030.html |
Its a letter to Bill Clinton, re: Bosnia, from 1995 http://usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-14-dean-letter_x.htm |
the WMDs are where? the link to al Qaida repeatedly nullified. the direct threat to the United States was was what? would someone explain to me why we went to war again because Im just clueless at this point. its just so obvious this war was a shame, Im geniunely baffled. |
I guess thats why they're pulling out the WMD hunters? of course National Review thinks so too, heres an article with very specific locations: http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty200401120834.asp |
really? Use some of that free time of yours and serve up some proof. |
seriously, spunk. can you use some of that free time of yours to address this question. why did we go to war when all the claims the Bush administration made are consistantly being refuted and at the very least legitimately questioned? Can you write a few brief paragraphs. Imagine im not who I am. Imagine you are explaining this to your grandma who has been at the North Pole for four years on a fishing expedition. Tell me, how even the dimmest of minds cannot have serious doubt about the claims Bush and Blair made. Note, Im not calling you dim, thats not what Im saying. I m just completely baffled and even mildly amused and intrigued how anyone in their right mind, can go along believing that Iraq was the right thing at the time. |
|
because they want to "but but but thats all speculation rowlf. no basis for a war. " I was being Sarcastro |
make a note of this folks: if you ever see the name Mansoor Ijaz - run. More about him at the bottom of this old thread: http://bbs.sorabji.com/messages/669/7928.html?MondayNovember1020031110am Ijaz: Spectacular WMD Attack Planned for Iraq Plans for a spectacular attack on coalition forces in Iraq that would use chemical or biological weapons to kill up to 5,000 soldiers and civilians may be well under way, Fox News Mideast analyst Mansoor Ijaz is warning. "I have now heard three times in the last week, from separate sources that I have been talking to, that something big is being planned for Baghdad," Ijaz told Fox News "Special Report" host Brit Hume on Tuesday. "The idea that is being put forward is to kill as many as 3,000 to 5,000 people at one shot – something that would be similar to a World Trade Center type of attack," he said. Ijaz, who in December 2001 blew the lid off the Clinton administration's decision not to accept multiple offers for Osama bin Laden's extradition to the U.S., detailed the accounts of Kurdish sources, who say they intercepted a convoy carrying suspicious cargo. "About three days ago in the northern part of Iraq," said Ijaz, "a convoy of trucks and jeeps and cars was brought across from Iran, where some of the Kurdish Peshmerga [are]. ... They intercepted one of those trucks that were carrying a large warhead that had extremely sophisticated plastic – C-4 plastic explosives in it." Ijaz said that once interrogated, the driver admitted that there were a total of 30 warheads that were scheduled to be imported to Iraq from Iran. "We are told now that somewhere between six and 12 of them may have, in fact, been laden with chemical explosives that would be then attached to a rocket of some sort inside Iraq that's already there in a separate convoy." The whereabouts of both convoys is currently unknown, said Ijaz. How credible are his sources? "They're unimpeachable," he told Hume. "I think they've been right all along." also patrick. read this if you want "proof" of Iraq/Al Qaeda connection... I see people propping this up on yahoo messages all the time so it must be true heh http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/cold/photos_prove_connection_between_iraq_and_al_qaeda_terrorists.guest.html |
whoa. does Dean always talk like this? because to me, this is the first time he's actually appeared to be kinda cool, and its more from how he says things than what he says. |
so my replies to this shit is simple. Who the fuck is NewsMax and since when did a columnist like Rush Limbaugh because a credible source for anything. I've heard the airplane training facility thing harped on numerous times. But that doesnt link them to al Qaida. There's no logic in that. Who really knows what that 'facility' was used for. Shit, if they are relying on according to 'defectors', didnt they recently call into question the accuracy of claims made by 'defectors'? It makes no sense and most definitely does not serve as proof of connection with al Qaida. |
within weeks after the war, they said they had visited 10 percent, then 20, 25, then a third of those suspected sites... after that they stopped giving us percentage updates on the WMD hunt. suspicious, yes? cant keep saying forever that the search is still young when you have those numbers out there... NewsMax is actually a pretty big deal online for conservatives, patrick. and they're pretty extreme too. Limbaugh's brother and Falwell are both columnists, to give you an example of where they're at. in a photo caption they called protestors "Hitlers children", even. If you check in on Fox to see what 'the enemy' is up to, you should definitely be up on your NewsMax, because they're what Fox would be saying if they were more blunt with what was in their heads. And they call Dean angry. Why are media conservatives so angry? they control so much, but they're always frothing over the last 8-9 years specifically. They certainly werent like this during Bush I's reign. Would liberals be that angry if Jesse Jackson or Ralph Nader were president, the environment was under control, Bill Kristol was called "anti-American" by the press all the time? |
i dont think i could stomach reading any of those sites. rush's fat hypocritcal head just makes me sick. i try to avoid anything extreme on either side of the fence, which is why ive never rushed to sign up for salon or anything like it. granted they offer somthing things that amuse, i do lean left on many things, but i've come to learn columnists dont offer shit when it comes to facts. ideas, yes. stats no. like i said, if the spunker is up to the challenge, id love to see a few brief paragraphs with a solid argument as to why Iraq was the right thing in light of everything and everyone of credibility that has come out contradictory to what the Bush Administration is saying. Because right now, its turning into pretty much the he said/she said with Bush Admin and its fundamentalist right wing camp VS. the rest of world. |
A Solid Argument. Easy. You see, libbie scum, its because...er... SADDAM IS THE WMD! thats my new favorite excuse. |
the fifth row says it all |
anyways transcipt of Brit Hume with Ijaz: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108371,00.html |
|
Afghanistan was more about the Trans-Afgan Pipeline, but good luck getting that thing going, what with the US starting to let the Taliban back in and operate again and warlords running amok. The whole Bush space thing is about pumping more money into the DoD and NASA, and it's just another form of State Capitalism. Nice idea, but let's try and fund HeadStart before trying to make a moon base, ok? |
|
|
Rumsfeld was chair of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization a few years back. Right after he was selected as SecDef, the comissions's report came out and stated "we know from history that every medium -- air, land and sea -- has seen conflict. Reality indicates that space will be no different." The panel also concluded that "given this virtual certainty, the [United States]must develop the means both to deter and to defend against hostile acts in and from space." My question is of course, deter and defend from WHOM? Osama Bin Vader? Ceylons? Republican Congressman Tom Feeney stated, "Somebody is going to dominate space. When they do, just like when the British dominated the naval part of our globe, established their empire,just like the United States has dominated the air superiority, ultimately,whoever is able to dominate space will be able to control the destiny of the entire Earth." So basically the Republicans are admitting their goal is the establishment of an American Empire and world domination. In September 2000, the PNAC issued a report titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses", which included this insight: "Much as control of the high seas - and the protection of international commerce defined global power in the past, so will control of the new "international commons" be a key to world power in the future." So the whole Mars thing is a total cover for the same old agenda. |
sem. didnt you read Get Your War On? Space al Qaida of course! |
|
partial parody (is but not really) of Bushin30seconds |
coming soon! http://democratsin30seconds.org/ |
Did he watch the movie? Yes, theres fighting. But guess how men were able to save their race from Sauron? Diplomacy, playing nice with other nations. Something Bush did not do. Remember when Denethor was stubborn and sent out his armies to fight Sauron despite being overwhelmed numerically? most of the force died and his son came back gimped up and barely alive. Okay so this is somewhat of an unfair stretch as well, as Denethor at least sent his own sons to fight. There is no purposeful allegorical or topical message. But if there was, I'm sure Rush missed it. He probably spent the whole movie staring at the Ring. His precious, precious.... |
has anyone seen this yet? Warning: very graphic. click on the link from this site http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/story795.shtml |
|
http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/US/apache_video_040109.html |
|
|
Well, the message of the movies and the books, hammered over and over again, is that the nations had to all work together to defeat evil. Given that, I don't think he got the message... |
try the link on this page http://www.expectnothing.com/index.php?page=story&post=3346 "Its pretty damn ruthless, but at the same time, there's so much we don't know." yuppers. Its easy to yell "war crime!" or assume its farmers, but we dont know. Still, we cant just take their word for it completely as they say they had these weapons... I'm thinking of the black people who've been shot down for holding dark wallets or cellphones... |
|
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/01/284086.html you can see the video there. theres also some interesting discussion about what IS known and what conclusions can be drawn from the video. the thing that was clear to me is that the people don't seem to be threatened, bothered or even disturbed by a hovering war chopper. Granted the chopper is not as on top of them as the video suggests, but still, you dont NOT know an apache is nearby if its targeting you. they are stealthy, but not that stealthy. moreover, those people appeared to pose no threat what so ever to the chopper. we're they just farmers? maybe. we're they insurgents who happen to be farmers. maybe. was there any cause to blow them away, based on the video. absolutely not. |
|
down boy. |
|
bitch. why ya gotta be like that. don't go setting your semantics-gnawing pucker hole on me cause the spunktard is on hiatus. |
|
using term "Weapons of Mass Destruction" over and over again = scary, to the point where angry people can accuse you of fearmongering "Weapons of Mass Destruction Program Related Activities" = pure comedy gold. |
What's next, crazed Iranian sex weasels that emit radon gas from their testicles and sent over here to infilitrate our high school dances and seduce our innocent, nubile teenagers? |
more rumors of a drive to a war with Syria i know nothing of this paper of any bias or tabloidishness. just a link that claims the US is trying to provoke Syria to war |
http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/weasels/US/sexweasels_highschool.shtml |
-Spunktard Does that include skillz at taking your tax dollars for a ride? How much does it take? There is no cure for blindness is there. Fuckin A. I didnt need to see that headline upon opening the paper. |
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/7765415.htm Not that I am surprised, but the article mentions that the whole reason for trying to withdraw from Iraq in June is to boost Bush's re-election chances. Funny, and here I was, thinking it was all about the welfare of the Iraqi people whom we all care so much about. |
Regardless of the reality in Iraq, as long as he can say he has given Iraq democracy and handed Iraq back to Iraqis its one more thing to tout on the campaign. We've brought complete and total hell to that place, and we wonder why more and more people want to do us harm. its absolutely saddening what is happening there. The worst part is, its mostly Iraqis dying, not Americans. |
specifically, not bush and hussein. better those two than the thousands of poor folk fighting their war for them. assfaced ignorant fuckheads, indeed. |
|
|
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/help_from_un&cid=544&ncid=716 said former US diplomat to Iraq, "its comeupannce" I still dont see the news picking up on that Boston Globe article, but if it does, with all this stuff, you could say that it is finally maybe truly raining shit on George W. |
Fuck, even David Kay is hurting Bush |
Three days after he was cited in the State of the Union speech...he quits. This has got to be unprecedented. |
|
so are they in Syria spunk? |
the new inspector... of course noone mentions this is a man who says he personally witnessed Iraqis training for 9/11 |
Tony Blair's WIFE says Bush stole the election! And British intelligence are telling Blair not to blame them for war! their own pre-emptive strike... It continues to rain shit on Tony Blair. |
oops, forgot the link for the Brit Intel thing |
More Honor and Integrity Today we learned that over the past year Senate Republicans have been infiltrating the computers of the Senate Democrats, stealing everything from memos to talking points to Ted Kennedy's goulash recipe. Their defense? Well, it wasn't really stealing, they say, so it's not technically illegal. And it wasn't really hacking because was a glitch in the computer system and it wasn't that hard to get in. In other words. it depends on what the meaning of the words "is" is. It's like saying it's okay to take an old ladies handbag because hey, it's not like the old bag would put up much of a fight! It also reminds me of the excuses the kids use for downloading music - How can I not steal it? It's right in front of me! It's wrong, no matter how you cut it. And this is supposed to be the party that knows the difference between right and wrong. Then again, if you believed that bullshit in the first place you're probably not reading my blog. |
|
http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2elections2004gop.htm VERY interesting. Of course chunks of it are bull and it has a pro-Clark bias, however a lot of it makes sense, and so beyond a right wing conspiritorial sort of way... by 'right wing media' i dont know if they mean all the media or just the right wing parts of it. i stand by my idea that the US media is neither conservative or liberal, but a bit of both (fiscally conservative, socially liberal) and only so because they follow the money and nothing else. I dont agree with them that they are trying to push Dean for the nomination. If anyone, for the long run they've been pushing Liebermann (but I think they know that wont work). it just looks like Dean because of all the negative press he gets. The only media thats actually pushing Dean is some internet sites and Rolling Stone, who even then are probably more on Clarks train than Dean's. your thoughts please |
I think the answer to the right's media machine is this: the only way to defeat the hydra is to make it bite off it's own heads. I hope this is the democrat's strategy, because I think it's the only way to defeat the right. Have enough candidates in the race that the right's attention is divided, and they'll tell enough lies that they start contradicting one another. Hopefully they'll do it enough that even the most dense voter will at least notice. Also, field so many candidates, get the base and the fringes of the party alive and behind SOMEBODY, that when one candidate is picked hopefully most of the party will show up in force for the general election. I'm hoping they're doing this intentionally. :) |
|
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/140.html a must click at the very least to see the screen capture halfway down. Thats a score. |
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/25/235419.shtml HAHAHAHA |
Im pretty sure the tens of thousands of dead Iraqis would disagree with this backwoods preacher (who somehow made it to attorney general of the US) but that just goes to show you how the life of an Iraqi and an American stack up to that prick. One's worth a buck, the other is worth a couple of nickles. "Weapons of mass destruction including evil chemistry and evil biology are all matters of great concern, not only to the United States but also to the world community. They were the subject of U.N. resolutions," Did anyone clue the preacherman where this "evil" biology and chemistry came from? My god these people absolutely astound me. |
conspiracy theory alert! |
|
|
when the war started Bush unfortunately pretty much legitimized future acts of terrorism against the United States. |
Christ almighty. |
|
call it a form of therapy. |
asshat. |
Yaweh fucker. |
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=6&u=/ap/20040126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/rights_report_iraq_2 and spunk, one other thing though I hold you in higher regard than most Bush/war backers or whatnot, you (and I and anyone else cutting/pasting war stories for that matter) are a dime a dozen. if i really need to go after someone theres countless other places to go. "asshat" is the forbidden word. |
Shouldnt Powell have spoken up? or Rice? maybe they dont remember when they said on TV that Saddam wasn't a threat? click below for a page with link to video: http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm |
Not just the intelligence agencies. You know damn well Cheney strong armed the intelligence officials to 'sex up' (god damn i love the brit press) the data to give them what they wanted. |
http://wired.com/news/politics/0%2c1283%2c62052%2c00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2 |
They better be keeping that shit safe, or I'm gonna open up a can 'o' whupass. And, one question: why is a contract security company protecting Y-12. Why not use, say...the ARMY? |
|
for real http://nypost.com/news/nationalnews/16692.htm |
spunk did that hurt? |
Bill Clinton wants BUSH to win in '04. |
Oh, wait, I remember, there was a clause in the bill of rights that said something about "as long as that speach is not louder then someone elses", right. Fuckos. Tree Climbing Crap Flinging Fuckos. |
Bush HAS always taken full responsibility for the decision, and he WILL continue to, regardless of what the final analysis reveals. There was not ONE person on the UNSCOM that thought Iraq was clean, in fact NO ONE (that was in a place of power, not some POSTER on any BB) thought Iraq was clean, they just disagreed on the METHOD. |
Bill Clinton wants BUSH to win in '04." 1) source? 2) why should we care? if anything, shouldnt that give YOU an indication of just how bad Bush is? I'd think the last think the right wingers want is Clinton on their side. and as for the Franken thing. theres two sides to every story. The description of events as 'assault' came from the Post, which is owned by Murdoch/NewsCorp, which I dont think need remind you aren't exactly friendly with Franken. Yeah, Franken just jumps on any old schmo. Thats totally within his character, right? compare that to the CNN version of the story: http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/27/elec04.prez.democrats.larouche/index.html which I'm not saying is the truth either, but goes to show you, shut the fuck up. PS - imagine if someone had yelled 'murderer' at a Bush rally, or 'rapist' at a Clinton rally. What do you think would happen? |
all that proves is if you tell a big enough lie enough times it becomes fact. Bush went to war over it. he supposedly had proof. you supposedly saw the proof. You've even said they were in Syria. Now are you standing by what you said before, or are you going to admit mistakes were made. choose, or be silent. |
Rights are rights as long as they do not infringe upon those of others. So, actually the right to free speech doesn't (or in my opinion shouldn't) protect speech that is INTENTIONALLY meant to drown out another's. I mean, isn't that just a form of censorship? |
But you know, if what CNN is saying is the correct version of events Al Franken could have given him the Jack White Von Bondies treatment and I'd have no problem with it. Whoever it was, by the description of both sources, wasnt taken away for having different beliefs, he was taken away because he was being an ASSHOLE. |
I think that person who stormed into a press briefing rummy was giving and hung banners and signs that called Rummy a murderer (I guess that means Hussien was a saint) ad less of a right then the guy al assulted. And what did both Bush and Rummy say? Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing. |
beleive = believe Hussien = Hussein spunky, thats just fake lip-service immediate damage control and you know it. You know I've never heard of this particular incident. Provide me a source and show me how this person was let to make his accusations without being forcefully removed from the room or told to leave. Do it. how do you explain the 'free speech zones', when the First Amendment of the United States Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." And do try to refute what Kazu said, how rights are rights until they infringe on others. I'm all for thinking unpopular speech is just as important as popular speech, but when you're saying things just to shout down another, thats not debate or speech, thats just noise, thats censorship. as for everything else, let me reiterate "Now are you standing by what you said before, or are you going to admit mistakes were made? Choose or be silent" I hope by the time this posts you will have made up your mind. |
I'm not sure if the number on the site is accurate, but if so... sit back and watch it grow! |
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 1953 |
I will not be silent. I stand by what I said. The intel coming out of Iraq over the past 13 years indicated exactly what Bush and Clinton Charged. You cannot just pick one voice out of the last 13 and single them out as a liar. "Rights are rights as long as they do not infringe upon those of others. So, actually the right to free speech doesn't (or in my opinion shouldn't) protect speech that is INTENTIONALLY meant to drown out another's. I mean, isn't that just a form of censorship?" Huh? Who decides whom is speaking too loudly? Is there a decible limit? And since when is an ordinary citizen a censor? Who gives me the right to decide what you said was too loud? No one. They guy probably was being an ass, but that did not give anyone else, even cops, the right to physically assult him. |
|
|
In other words, according to him, It's ok to be a bully as long as you're being a bully to people he's been told not to like. |
|
. Duh. . Arguing about decibels is rediculous and completely not the point. Plus, I don't think anyone said it was LEGAL to attack this guy. Just that they thought the guy deserved it in terms of behavior. Legally, though, the asshole could probably press charges. |
|
he gets worse and worse the more he listens to "wormtongue" hannity and the gop echo chamber. |
|
The incindent with Rumsfeld occured, as I recall, at a Senate hearing, and likewise, the protestors were removed. If you actually *THINK* about the matter, the issue here is not free speech but about interfering with someone else's free speech. Do you understand that? Whether or not the goober removed from the Dean gathering was 'assaulted' is a matter of the law and specifics of which many of us arent privy to. But if you're going to cry foul if he was assualted, then I expect you to stand up and scream 'foul' next time a legit protestor or some one demonstrating in a similar way takes a beating from the cops. Because you know, that happens a lot more often than what has occured here. I'll expect you on my side when that happens. Citing the attrocities of Hussein as justification for the war are pussy and by believing that shit you're being made a fool. Those attrocities were committted over two decades. Answer me the following and you might actually see the light. Where was the US when Saddam was USING his WMD's? Where did he Saddam get said WMD's? Where was the US when he committed genocide against the Kurds? The US was NO WHERE to be found during these incidents other than on the "Send Payment To' section of the invoice for the weapons we sold to fight Iran. TO be able to cite some of those attrocities committed over two decades as justification for war TODAY is absurd. We would have needed to act about 10 years ago, when Bush Sr. was in office. But it wasn't politcally justifiable so they didnt. This time around, it was seemingly justifiable and they have done a mediocre job of making a square peg fit in a round hole and you are buying it wholesale. You can't just troll through history and cherry pick justification for something youre doing in the present day. Thats ridiculous spunk. Thats injustice. Thats criminal. In this case, its UnConstitutional and how you can turn a blind eye to the crime Bush has committed is insane. He LIED to the country. We went to war to rid the threat of WMDs. That was the reason. ITS RIGHT THERE IN THE PRESS ACCOUNTS AND SPEECHES FOR FUCKSAKE!!! There are no weapons to be found. He Lied. 2 + 2 = 4. Its right there in front of you. Have you gone mad? Ahem. sorry. |
The incindent with Rumsfeld occured, as I recall, at a Senate hearing, and likewise, the protestors were removed. If you actually *THINK* about the matter, the issue here is not free speech but about interfering with someone else's free speech. Do you understand that? Whether or not the goober removed from the Dean gathering was 'assaulted' is a matter of the law and specifics of which many of us arent privy to. But if you're going to cry foul if he was assualted, then I expect you to stand up and scream 'foul' next time a legit protestor or some one demonstrating in a similar way takes a beating from the cops. Because you know, that happens a lot more often than what has occured here. I'll expect you on my side when that happens. Citing the attrocities of Hussein as justification for the war are pussy and by believing that shit you're being made a fool. Those attrocities were committted over two decades. Answer me the following and you might actually see the light. Where was the US when Saddam was USING his WMD's? Where did he Saddam get said WMD's? Where was the US when he committed genocide against the Kurds? The US was NO WHERE to be found during these incidents other than on the "Send Payment To' section of the invoice for the weapons we sold to fight Iran. TO be able to cite some of those attrocities committed over two decades as justification for war TODAY is absurd. We would have needed to act about 10 years ago, when Bush Sr. was in office. But it wasn't politcally justifiable so they didnt. This time around, it was seemingly justifiable and they have done a mediocre job of making a square peg fit in a round hole and you are buying it wholesale. You can't just troll through history and cherry pick justification for something youre doing in the present day. Thats ridiculous spunk. Thats injustice. Thats criminal. In this case, its UnConstitutional and how you can turn a blind eye to the crime Bush has committed is insane. He LIED to the country. We went to war to rid the threat of WMDs. That was the reason. ITS RIGHT THERE IN THE PRESS ACCOUNTS AND SPEECHES FOR FUCKSAKE!!! There are no weapons to be found. He Lied. 2 + 2 = 4. Its right there in front of you. Have you gone mad? Ahem. sorry. |
I'll stay home forever, where 2 + 2 always makes a 5. |
The incindent with Rumsfeld occured, as I recall, at a Senate hearing, and likewise, the protestors were removed. If you actually *THINK* about the matter, the issue here is not free speech but about interfering with someone else's free speech. Do you understand that? Whether or not the goober removed from the Dean gathering was 'assaulted' is a matter of the law and specifics of which many of us arent privy to. But if you're going to cry foul if he was assualted, then I expect you to stand up and scream 'foul' next time a legit protestor or some one demonstrating in a similar way takes a beating from the cops. Because you know, that happens a lot more often than what has occured here. I'll expect you on my side when that happens. Citing the attrocities of Hussein as justification for the war are pussy and by believing that shit you're being made a fool. Those attrocities were committted over two decades. Answer me the following and you might actually see the light. Where was the US when Saddam was USING his WMD's? Where did he Saddam get said WMD's? Where was the US when he committed genocide against the Kurds? The US was NO WHERE to be found during these incidents other than on the "Send Payment To' section of the invoice for the weapons we sold to fight Iran. TO be able to cite some of those attrocities committed over two decades as justification for war TODAY is absurd. We would have needed to act about 10 years ago, when Bush Sr. was in office. But it wasn't politcally justifiable so they didnt. This time around, it was seemingly justifiable and they have done a mediocre job of making a square peg fit in a round hole and you are buying it wholesale. You can't just troll through history and cherry pick justification for something youre doing in the present day. Thats ridiculous spunk. Thats injustice. Thats criminal. In this case, its UnConstitutional and how you can turn a blind eye to the crime Bush has committed is insane. He LIED to the country. We went to war to rid the threat of WMDs. That was the reason. ITS RIGHT THERE IN THE PRESS ACCOUNTS AND SPEECHES FOR FUCKSAKE!!! There are no weapons to be found. He Lied. 2 + 2 = 4. Its right there in front of you. Have you gone mad? Ahem. sorry. |
xyz. |
|
but hey, birds of a feather, right. i mean look at us in iraq. is giving them the freedom to accept our kind of freedom really freedom? sorry folks, we're all out of your kind of freedom. yeah, our supplier is having problems with distribution. here, take this freedom. take it. TAKE IT!! i'm warning you. we can do this the easy way or we can do this the hard way. i'm going to count to june. january . . . february. . .march. . .march and a half. . . |
"Wormtongue" Hannity - luff it. So you stand by the terror ships spunky? You stand by saying that we arent there to liberate them? Be clear spunk. Tell us exactly what you think NOW. Dont contradict yourself. And I'm still waiting for you to cite your sources, and hopefully provide a link. Or are you unable to actually defend yourself? I think you are. So put up or shut up. I'm calling you out. I call chickenhawk. I think I'll likewise start making claims of fact as my main point without a source or link. Hey gang, did'ja hear that Jeb Bush is planning to campaign for Kerry? I have the scoop from the company I work for. I've said too much. "Citing the attrocities of Hussein as justification for the war are pussy and by believing that shit you're being made a fool. " Condsidering a lot of these atrocities of Hussein took place back when the US was supporting him, and the US continued to support him after the fact... bah, just click J's link. its easier. Or click this one More Clintonisms with words. Now the White House says they never said Saddam was an imminment threat. In the same article you see some examples where members of Bush's team did indeed use the term. And 'grave and gathering' is different from 'imminent'? saying they can fire weapons with soandso amount of time notice isnt imminent? Having WMDs and ties to Al Qaeda isnt painting Iraq as an imminent threat? Absolute horseshit lying. Spunky, defend this, I DARE you. |
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8515134%5E1702,00.html |
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=2&u=/nm/20040128/ts_nm/iraq_usa_weapons_dc |
Heres a new account of the event that shows exactly why Franken wasnt arrested or anything and it came from the Union Leader, which anyone with a brain would understand is a conservative newspaper. if you dare dispute that I can back that up. Anyways, security moved to him, he elbowed and pushed them, the man knocked Frankens glasses off (which is consistent through all 3 stories) and then Franken helped take him down. And then theres more. But go and read it yourself, and then kindly shut up about his free speech being violated. |
Spunky, why do you continue to post here? Surely you'd be happier among people who think like you do. " I don't like "circle jerks". I prefer a spirited debate with people of opposing views. And BTW, AL FRANKEN said he took this guy down by his legs, I do not need any source to tell me that that was assult. And just because Hannity has views that do not agree with your does not make him a "wormtounge". |
David Kay about WMD: "It turns out we were all wrong." |
|
If you'd bother to read the most recent news, he did so after having been elbowed and his glasses knocked off, and after this person had shoved security away. Self-defense. I'd think you'd know what self defense is. Oh wait, you thought invading Iraq was. Nevermind. if you take them by their legs its not self defense? Still waiting for you to cite your sources. |
one example of lively discussion But it just so happens we have some pretty similar views regarding our beloved president. |
you're absolutely right. if you can show me where i said "hannity has views that do not agree with mine and that makes him a wormtounge" i'll retract it. he's not poisoning my mind; he's poisoning yours. it's because he's so good at semantics that you can't even detect it. it goes so far beyond merely appealing to your biases, the language he uses actually plants new biases where there were none before. these new biases aren't yours, they're his. get it? |
a) an obnoxious disrupter attacking security and knocking off Al Frankens glasses, this prompting physical reaction and b) Al Franken, unprovoked, physically attacked a person questioning a candidate Al Franken doesnt support because while Al can stand to be in public with Bill O'Reilly, Karl Rove, Sean Hannity etc, when Lyndon Larouches supporters are around, thats just too much. yea, b) is of course the logical explanation. |
|
Can't you see his fat body in a tub while Reagan, Quayle, and Bush just stand around pissing on him? And his little piggly-wiggly dick can't get hard. "Unh.. Unh, I can't get hard, Reagan, pee in my mouth!" "Well, how's that, Rush?" Still can't get hard, so they call in Barbara Bush. She takes her pearls off, puts 'em up his ass, then squats over him, undoes her girdle; her wrinkled, flaccid labia unfolds halfway down to her knees, like some balless scrotum. "Unh! Unh! Unh!" She squeezes out a link into his mouth, and finally his dick gets half hard. "Oooohhh!!" A little clear bubble forms on the end with a maggot inside. The maggot pops the bubble and runs off and joins a Pro-Life group somewhere. Am I the only one that sees that? |
I still want to know where the Bill Clinton thing came from. And I want a doughnut. |
HANNITY NEWSMAX http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2003/5/30/152444 HAH! this is just more "Clinton is so bad, look he even hates his own party, its all about him" stuff. No real source where Clinton made any sort of declaration or anything. Thats just disgusting. tell me where you've seen me ever quote from Rense or Yellow Times or something without admitting it or giving a disclaimer of bias. Do it. Spunk, you've been punk'd. Make a case for Hannity and Newsmax being credible sources or be silent. And if you got it from somewhere else, present it. Not that it'll happen (i'll snap before anyone) I recommend noone respond to anything he says until he can come forward and say where he's getting his information. |
Dick worked with Clinton before 1990. Clinton fired him. Since then he's worked for Jesse Helms, and been a political analyst for FOX News. To show you one example of just how keen Dick Morris is on what the Clintons want and will do, he has been known to be the one who said he knew for certain Hillary wouldn't run for senate. If you do any searching on Morris, you will find the majority of his articles are Clinton criticism. So lets repeat: Dick Morris - serial Clinton basher, was fired by Clinton works for FOX News reported to Sean Hannity which got posted on NewsMax spunky, you've walked right into a Bill Engvall routine. |
|
Flat out. One more thing: I want, no scratch that, NEED, Bush to come out and say he was wrong, his assement, based on intel he was provided, was wrong. That's what I expect of him. All the accusastions of "strong arming the intel community" is nothing more then baseless, factless accusations made by the ones who were against the whole thing in the first place. BTW, Germany's PM was on Iraq's Payroll. So was Kofi. Kofi made MILLIONS off of the oil for food program. Why can anyone not grasp the simple truth? In 1991 the UN ordered Iraq to document all WMD they had in inventory, so Iraq provided it, and then the UN ordered that inventory destroyed. Inspectors were sent in to verify that the inventory that Iraq declared they had was destroyed. That's the intel, that's the math. If, and I suspect it was, the decleration was inflated, then Saddam had no one to blame other then himself. He had 12 years to come out and say "I lied, I never had that much". Instead he insisted he destroyed it, but refused to provide proof. |
what is it when spunky's here? bukkake? I BREAK! Spunk, there was a 12,000 page declaration that neither you or I get to see. Months before war. Not to mention the CIA's declarations that there was no evidence against Iraq, and the video evidence I've provided myself showing Rice and Powell saying in 2001 that Saddam was not a threat. Aside from the 5 permanent security council members (who probably were embarrassed because the report would show who Iraq had deals with), and the 10 other members who get censored versions, none of us unworthy mortals have been allowed to see these very important documents. But I think within 12000 pages and judging by the table of contents that are on the Memory Hole website that they spend some time explaining what was there and when. You cant tell me Iraq didnt jump through some hoops to try and avoid war. They did. Proof he destroyed it? Well, you cant prove a negative. Lack of evidence is not evidence. You're not going to address the Clinton thing, are you? Ignoring it? I thought you were a little braver than that. Come clean. Your credibility is sinking faster the XFL. |
I promise you, they (The Clinton's) care more about thier own power and thier own legacy then they do about any party or the US. Hillary will not wait until 2012 to run. She does not want to face a dem incumb in 08. Therefore, they need Bush to win in 04. Hence, Clark. |
by the way, for all the defectors who said there were weapons, there were others who said they were involved in the destruction of WMDs after the Gulf War... see the words "UNSCOM/IAEA sensitive" oh and by the way, this was no ordinary defector. He's Saddam Husseins son-in-law, with crates upon crates of documents, and was head of Iraq's military industries. Despite Kamel's claims that weapons had been destroyed, George Bush himself referenced Kamel on numerous occasions citing his testimony as proof that 1) Saddam had NOT disarmed, 2) inspections cant disarm it and 3) Kamel is one of the most reliable sources on Iraq's weapons. Kamel was killed upon return to Iraq in 1996, so of course he's not around to call the administration when they're caught lying about his testimony. "In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing millions." - Bush, Oct 7 2002 "Kamel's story should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection regime itself." - Cheney, August 27 2002 "It took years for Iraq to finally admit that it had produced four tons of the deadly nerve agent, VX. A single drop of VX on the skin will kill in minutes. Four tons. The admission only came out after inspectors collected documentation as a result of the defection of Hussein Kamel, Saddam Hussein's late son-in-law." - Colin Powell at the UN Security Council, Feb 5, 2003 the agent Powell refers to refer to weapons produced before 1991. Kamel's testimony says they were destroyed after the Gulf War. This was the administrations star witness, and he says what Bush had been wanting to know all this time: weapons were destroyed. But then again, Bush said his life was changed by reading the Book of Acts, which is a pretty socialist part of the Bible, detailing that you must share your wealth with the poor. Goes to show Bush has a history of missing the point. Wow, that Feb 5 speech. Almost reaching its annniversary. With those pics of mobile labs that when 'found' were for artillery balloons all those empty "weapons sites" that were now TV studios this contradictory testimony and that plagiarized dossier from a British student. all true, all indisputable. What a rich tapestry of bullshit. |
perfect. way to go. You know you might be right about the Clintons being selfish, but... "Hillary will not wait until 2012 to run. " And so the reason she isnt running in 2004 is....? There have been several 'draft Hillary' sites out there, in December 2002 CNN/Time polls showed her leading the poll among potential Democrat contenders by almost 20 percentage points, this would have been a good year to run with the 8 million dollars she earned from her book deal... so why not? I mean, look at this: http://www.realdemocracy.com/hillplan.htm another Clinton attacker saying why she WILL run in 2004, for the same reasons. She isn't. So whats the haps, yo? I'm no Clinton fan by any stretch, but I know paranoid guesswork when I see it. But it makes no sense spunk. It makes no sense. you're spewing a froth. its really pathetic. |
She still might. They (the Clintons and the members of the DNC that back them) are having daily pow wows about it. She was watching Bush's numbers. They honestly believed Bush could win (And if Kerry gets the nom, he cannot carry any of the "southern states"), plus it give's Hillary the chance to prove she was telling the truth when she told her NY state constituants that she would serve her full term and not run for president. |
source! |
I think Giuliani's post-9/11 loss is indication enough that sympathy/support and getting through a crisis doesnt necessarily mean the voters will be there for you. If anything, Giuliani should serve as a lesson to Bush. Plus, considering Giuliani is pro-gay rights, if he was with the administration I think he'd have some susplainin to do... anyways, Cheney's already stated he's been asked to run in 04 http://www.sltrib.com/2003/May/05082003/nation_w/54914.asp of course a heart attack or a "heart attack" could change that. |
|
|
They blame 'intelligence'. Bullshit. Its really easy to blame a shadowy intangible. Intelligence? Who is that? What is intelligence's phone number? When they come to an Iraqi's family's home to explain that half their family was blown to bits by an errant American bomb, do they say "bad intel" dropped the bomb. sorry. Wtf? Is Tenet going to fall on his sword this time? So wait....bad intel has been to blame for the a major war campaign that is ongoing and the loss of thousands of American lives on that fateful day. All on Bush's watch. And you'll still vote for this asshole? Wait. We were willing to impeach a president for lying about sex, but you'll forgive a president who has been at the wheel during two of the largest intel failures in US History? What? Spunk, Regarding Saddam and WMDs You say: "Instead he insisted he destroyed it, but refused to provide proof." Wait. Are you suffering from amnesia? There were inspectors on the ground right up until we starting blowing the place to shit. The only people who stopped that process was the US. Is entirely possible there wasnt any proof it was destroyed? The UN (US) had teams up and down that country and found nothing. Goes to show the value of innocent life was next to nothing. Such a weak weak reason for war. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell and all their underlings should be on trial for this utterly gross and criminal negligence. And Cheney? Wait. So they'll speculate on his being removed from the ticket for his health but not all the massive conflicts of interest when it comes to energy policy, contacts awarded in Iraq (the most lucrative going to his former company who has been revealed to be staking the US taxpayer for a ride) and his outward lies about WMDs? What? Am I reading this right? I don't understand how any one can read Newsmax and take anything they say seriously. I mean take the name for fucksack. "Newsmax" ? Do fries come with that? It sounds McNews. McValu-News. NewsExpress. Custom-made, low fat news. Made fresh to order. |
my mistake. i forgot Giuliani didnt run against Bloomberg. Anyways, like I was saying SOURCE spunk? |
I wouldnt say that. They've got Falwell and a Limbaugh on their team. very fattening. Very little substance (facts) and a lot of seasoning (opinioning and rumor) |
"I think that what we have is evidence that there are differences between what we knew going in and what we found on the ground," - Condoleezza Rice funny the word KNEW, when the point of what we are learning now is they never knew. Weasel Clintonisms. |
oh goody, ANOTHER 'fair and balanced' news channel... it says something about NewsMax that they believe Fox doesnt have a right wing bias. |
oh, and he's got a brand new book coming soon, called (get this) Deliver Us from Evil : Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLll http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20020826.html |
|
Al Franken fan site conducts interview with theatre manager (quoted in several news outlets) who says Franken was struck first, among other things... |
McCain calls for inquiry. Bush is scared |
16 Arab, 17 European, 9 Asian, and the rest from sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. Only a portion of the 270 recipients are listed and identified. Canada: Arthur Millholland, president and CEO of the Calgary-based Oilexco company, received 1 million barrels of oil. United States: Samir Vincent received 10.5 million barrels. In 2000, Vincent, an Iraqi-born American citizen who has lived in the U.S. since 1958, organized a delegation of Iraqi religious leaders to visit the U.S. and meet with former president Jimmy Carter. Shaker Al-Khafaji,the pro-Saddam chairman of the 17th conference of Iraqi expatriates, received 1 million barrels. Great Britain: George Galloway received 1 million barrels. Fawwaz Zreiqat received 1 million barrels. Zreiqat also appears in the Jordanian section as having received 6 million barrels. The Mujahideen Khalq in Britain received 1 million barrels. France: The French-Arab Friendship Association received 15.1 million barrels. Former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua received 12 million barrels. Patrick Maugein of the Trafigura company received 25 million barrels. Michel Grimard, founder of the French-Iraqi Export Club, received 17.1 million barrels. Switzerland: Glenco Re, the largest commodity trader in Switzerland, received 12 million barrels. Taurus, which has been associated with Iraq for 20 years and was the first company to renew its business with Iraq after the fall of Saddam, received 1 million barrels. Petrogas, which is listed under three sub-companies – Petrogas Services, Petrogas Distribution, and Petrogas Resources - and is associated withthe Russian company Rosneftegazetroy, received 1 million barrels. Alcon, listed in Lichtenstein and associated with larger oil companies, received 1 million barrels. Finar Holdings, which is listed in Lugano, Switzerland, and is under liquidation, received 1 million barrels. Italy: The Italian Petrol Union received 1 million barrels.West Petrol, an Italian company that trades crude oil and oil products, received 1 million barrels. Roberto Formigoni, possibly the president of Lombardia, received 1 million barrels. Salvatore Nicotra, a former NATO pilot who became an oil merchant, received 1 million barrels. Spain: Basem Qaqish, a member of the Spanish Committee for the Defense of the Arab Cause, received 1 million barrels. Ali Ballout, a pro-Saddam Lebanese journalist, received 1 million barrels. Javier Robert received 1 million barrels. Yugoslavia: Four Yugoslav political parties received vouchers: the Yugoslav Left party received 9.5 million barrels. The Socialist Party received 1 million barrels. The Italian Party received 1 million barrels. A nother party, whose name in exact transliteration is "kokstuntsha" – possibly Kostunica's party – received 1 million barrels. Other political parties: The Romanian Labor Party received 5.5 million barrels. The Party of the Hungarian Interest received 4.7 million barrels. The Bulgarian Socialist Party received 1 2 million barrels. The Slovakian Communist Party received 1 million barrels. Austria: The Arab-Austrian Society received 1 million barrels. Brazil: The 8th of October Movement, a Brazilian Communist group, received 4.5 million barrels. Fuwad Sirhan received 10 million barrels. Egypt: Khaled Gamal Abd Al-Nasser, son of the late Egyptian president, received 16.6 million barrels. 'Imad Al-Galda, a businessman and a member of the Egyptian parliament from President Mubarak's National Democratic Party, received 14 million barrels. Abd Al-Azim Mannaf, [5] editor of the Sout Al-Arab newspaper, received 6 million barrels. Muhammad Hilmi, editor of the Egyptian paper Sahwat Misr, received an undisclosed number of barrels. The United Arab Company received 6 million barrels. The Nile and Euphrates Company received 3 million barrels. The Al-Multaqa Foundation for Press and Publication received 1 million barrels. Libya: Prime Minister Shukri Ghanem received 1 million barrels. Sub-Saharan Africa: Chad's foreign minister received 1 million barrels. Four South Africans are listed: Tokyo Saxville received 4 million barrels. Montega received 4 million barrels. Both are associated with the African National Party. Palestinians: The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) received 4 million barrels. The PLO Political Bureau received 5 million barrels. Abu Al-Abbas received 11.5 million barrels. Abdallah Al-Horani received 8 million barrels. The PFLP received 5 million barrels. Wafa Tawfiq Al-Sayegh received 4 million barrels. Oman: The Al-Shanfari group received 5 million barrels. Syria: Farras Mustafa Tlass, the son of Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlass, received 6 million barrels. 'Audh Amourah received18 million barrels. Ghassan Zakariya received 6 million barrels. Anwar Al-Aqqad received 2 million barrels. Hamida Na'Na', the owner of the Al-Wafaq Al-Arabi periodical, received 1 million barrels. Lebanon: The son of Lebanese President Emil Lahoud received 4.5 million barrels. Former MP Najjah Wakim received 3 million barrels. Nasserist Party head Osama M'arouf received 3 million barrels. National Arabic Club Chairman Faisal Darnika received 3 million barrels. Jordan: Former Islamist MP and head of the Engineers Union Leith Shbeilat received 15.5 million barrels. Former MP and Jordanian Writers Union head Fakhri Qi'war received 6 million barrels. Former Jordanian chief of staff Mashhour Haditha received 1 million barrels. Former MP Toujan Al-Faisal received 3 million barrels. The Jordanian Ministry of Energy received 5 million barrels. Muhammad Saleh Al-Horani, the Amman Stock Exchange head and former Minister of Supplies, received 4 million barrels. Lawyer Wamidth Hussein Al-Majali received 6 million barrels. Qatar: Qatari Horseracing Association Chairman Hamad bin Ali Aal Thani received 14 million barrels. Gulf Petroleum received 2 million barrels. The Indian Congress Party received 1 million barrels. Indonesia: Indonesian President Megawati received 1 million barrels as "the daughter of President Sukarno," and 1 million barrels as Megawati. Myanmar: Myanmar's Forestry Minister received 1 million barrels. Ukraine: The Social Democratic Party received 1 million barrels. The Communist Party received 6 million barrels. The Socialist Party received 1 million barrels. The FTD oil company received 1 million barrels, as did other Ukrainian companies. Belarus: The Liberal Party received 1 million barrels. The Communist Party received 1 ton [sic] of oil. The director of the Belarussian president's office received 1 million barrels. Russia: The Russian state itself received 1,366,000,000 barrels. The list also included the following: Companies belonging to the Liberal Democratic Party received 79.8 million barrels - t he list notes the name of party president Vladimir Zhirinovsky. The Russian Communist Party received 1 million barrels. The Lukoil company received 63 million barrels. The Russneft company received 35.5 million barrels. Vladimir Putin's Peace and Unity Party received 34 million barrels - the list notes the name of party chairwoman Saji Umalatova. The Gazprom company received 26 million barrels. The Soyuzneftgaz company received 25.5 million barrels - t he list notes the name Shafrannik. The Moscow Oil Company received 25.1 million barrels. The Onako company received 22.2 million barrels. The Sidanco company received 21.2 million barrels. The Russian Association for Solidarity with Iraq received 12.5 million barrels. The Ural Invest company received 8.5 million barrels. Russneft Gazexport received 12.5 million barrels. The Transneft company received 9 million barrels. The Sibneft company received 8.1 million barrels. The Stroyneftgaz company received 6 million barrels. The Russian Committee for Solidarity with the People of Iraq received 6.5 million barrels - the list notes the name of committee chairman Rudasev. The Russian Orthodox Church received 5 million barrels. The Moscow Science Academy received 3.5 million barrels. The Chechnya Administration received 2 million barrels. T he National Democratic Party received 2 million barrels. The Nordwest group received 2 million barrels. The Yukos company received 2 million barrels. One Russian company which phonetically reads as Zarabsneft received 174.5 million barrels. Vouchers were also granted to the Russian foreign ministry, one under the name of Al-Fayko for 1 million barrels, and one to Yetumin for 30.1 million barrels. T he Mashinoimport Company received 1 million barrels. The Slavneft Company received 1 million barrels. The Caspian Invest Company (Kalika) received 1 million barrels. The Tatneft Tatarstan company received 1 million barrels. The Surgutneft company received 1 million barrels. Siberia's oil and gas company received 1 million barrels. In addition, the son of the former Russian Ambassador to Iraq received 19.7 million barrels. Nikolay Ryjkov, a former prime minister of the USSR, received 13 million barrels. The Russian President's office director received 5 million barrels. Oil vouchers were also distributed to companies and individuals from the Sudan, Yemen, Cyprus, Turkey, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, the UAE, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Panama, Thailand, Chad, China, Nigeria, Kenya, Ireland, Bahrain, and the Philippines. Two Saudi companies were also listed. IT WAS ABOUT OIL. Keep the Inspections AND sanctions going, and you keep the oil for food program going. Read the India Times Article for yourself. One more thing. I know you thing Bush is dumb. I understand that. But just HOW dumb do you really think he is? IF he KNEW there were no WMD's, and Intel was telling him there were none, and he was strong arming them and "sexing it up", what was his exit strategy after we took over Iraq and found no WMDs? Where would that land him? In prison. At least. Fraud is a BIG thing. What did he gain, really? Revenge for his daddy? Oil for a company he has no stakes in? Get real, and join the real world, for chrissakes. |
I dunno, maybe he could say that the invasion was justified because of...mass graves or something? Or that Saddam was an evil man, and no one would mind how he was taken out, even if the lies were exposed. Or that most of his core supporters would never believe that he could lie, especially if a Democrat said that he did. Any of this sould familiar, spunk? |
A strategic foothold in a key part of the world. Scared (and impressed) the bajesus out of the Arab populace. (Many Arabs though Saddam would put up a good fight and he was flattened.) Go rid of a nasty dictator. Got to exercize the US war machine, satisfy a lot of defence contractor constituents. (Added bonus of training the military on urban warfare in a real world situation.) The list goes on, spunk, and I KNOW you can think of more points than I can. "Revenge for his daddy? Oil for a company he has no stakes in? Get real, and join the real world, for chrissakes." Hey, why don't you get real and join the world of people who can effectively argue a point? Tossing up straw man arguments is pretty mamby pamby, d00d. |
|
|
|
oh, by the way, GIVE THE SOURCE OF YOUR FREAKING CLINTON SHIT. why wont you source? |
|
no. source? it seems suspect to me to claim France and whoever about needing to keep Saddam in power to get oil, because I think everyone knew it was going to come to war no matter what, and if you wanted a piece of the oil it would be easier to join the Baghdad gangbang. not that France or anywhere are little darlings of international business with clean hands, but really, for this instance, it made a hell of a lot more sense to join the US if you wanted reconstruction contacts and oil. how come all of a sudden everyone is willing to say it was about oil? |
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36820 Worldnetdaily...interesting... I want to know if these are really 'officials' or are mainly corprations. ah, same thing I guess. Lesson is, ALL oil companies are tied to political parties. Usually every one. All governments are liars and murderers. Anyway, the next entries on my google search were from www.pavefrance.com and www.fuckfrance.com |
Bush 'wants the facts' this coming from someone who wont look at protesters and doesnt read newspapers. And you'd think Colin Powell jumping around saying "this is bullshit!" would have tipped him off. Maybe he should have watched McLaughlin group when they revealed that Powell's dossier was taken from a grad students paper from over a decade earlier (still as far as I know the only time this information was ever broadcast in the states) what an irresponsible dipshit. |
2 CNN staff killed in Iraq |
no matter. had a thought, of the political nature. everyone jumped on Dean's ass for his outburst in Iowa. Yet everyone (that is media) jumped on Gore for being just the opposite. Which is it? What do we want? liberal media my ass. |
|
God Bless Sorabji. |
likely wrong, but theres just something Nate-like about it. I will pay attention to this, but I remain skeptical. its popping up on more news sources as I do searches with different words How was this oil to get out of Iraq? Wasn't this closely monitored? Who did this paper get these documents from? As well, noone disputes that Saddam had billions of dollars in cash outside Iraq. Why would someone accept a bribe in hard-to-hide (gotta sell it to someone to make money, who would they be selling it to? Wouldnt these oil companies suspect something?) oil when you could have used an easy to hide Swiss bank account number? Does it actually say explicitly anywhere that these were given away for political support? Are these offers or supposedly confirmed transactions? Did I miss something? or is someone connecting dots without numbers? It could be true, but regardless, it doesnt make sense to me. I mean, priests? Does no politician make decisions based on their morals? is it ALL business contacts? This article has some different information: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/28/wirq28.xml this hurts my head. Everyone is evil. Gotta wait a couple days on this one at least: This might turn out like the cyanide in the river story, and mustard gas in the mortar shells story, the radioactive trucks going into Turkey story, and Mansoor Ijaz's self-described rock solid story that nuclear weapons were brought in from Iran and were/are going to nuke the troops. Corruption is the allegation, if the proof is out there, it will come out... And if so, then of course the pro-war folk will assume that anyone with an anti-war position was just taking money or something, as if noone could possibly have been against it for any other reason. *sigh* |
They have published a total of 45 newspapers since they began operating. I've also learned that one of the names on this new list is a repeat. George Galloway, a British politician, had been accused of being funded by Saddam by documents obtained in April 2003, that later turned out to be fake. Christian Science Monitor got one set of documents (the ones known to be forgeries) that say that deals began at one time, and the Daily Telegraph got another set with different details that contradict the other. No real conclusion as far as I know was ever made about the other papers the Telegraph got... and around 9 months later, Galloway is still free as a bird with nothing that had come to light to hurt him. Except now, were the same charges are up again. Still, this should be indication that these new claims must be questioned, instead of pushed around as "see liberals? see?" as I see Rush has already done on his website. http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0620/p01s03-woiq.html |
cut/paste According todays Guardian, the US concluded in May of last year there were no WMD meanwhile, Saddam said to be 'useful' in interrogation: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040201/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/wolfowitz_army&cid=542&ncid=716 I'm wondering if he will be/is being asked about the alleged bribery. |
the ongoing Kay story SEEMS like a good thing for opponents of the war... ...but I'm already very suspicious of this whole thing. He's making the rounds on the Sunday news shows, and he talks like a politician, and he's spinning this as if its all the fault of intelligence, when there is proof the CIA knew (and Powell knew, and Rice knew) well in advance that Saddam was contained. it really seems like Kay's job is to shift blame. Could be wrong. I just woke up and those are my ultra paranoid suspicious hours. If there is an investigation though, and he gets put up as head of the investigation, I'm calling "partisan plant". Get someone else. |
Does anyone here ever listen to Counterspin on FAIR.org? |
you want to read a hateful column, check THIS guy out. I almost wonder if its a parody. http://www.411mania.com/black/columns/article.php?black_id=110 |
|
|
|
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=16378 |
Hello, I'm country singer Kobe Teeth, and when I first heard President Bush say those words, 'related program activities and significant amounts of equipment,' it made my blood boil. [laughter] So I wrote this song. [sings with band] Well, old lady Liberty won't stand idly by while you piss on her leg and you spit in her eye. So let the word travel forth from Baghdad to Tikrit, we got an ice-cold mug 'a whoop-ass with a chaser of shit. [laughter] I'm pissed off about those damn 'related program activities and significant amounts of equipment.' You can pawn my old guitar, take a leak in my beer, you can call my son a left-wing limp-wristed queer. [laughter] You can bend me over, try to jerk me off, but there's a chip on my shoulder you can never knock off. The thing that makes me maddest are your freedom-hating proclivities. And your weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment. Significant amounts of equipment and a shitload of objects to be named later. You know, I've got a program activity for you, it's called kickin' your ass! How about that, muther-trucker. Here's your significant amount of equipment! Check out these guns, you rag heads. Hold me back, boys! Hold me back! [applause] |
Intelligence chief's bombshell: 'We were overruled on dossier' continuing to rain shit on Tony Blair |
Sometime in the future, George W. Bush has a severe heart attack and dies. sitting in hell, Satan says to him, "Welcome. Sorry, but you're supposed to be down here, but it's getting kinda crowded. When you come in, someone else has to leave. I'll tell you what; i'll show you all of our candidates, and i'll even let you choose who leaves." So, Satan and Bush go to the first room to see Richard Nixon repeatedly jumping into a pool full of treasure, and always coming up empty-handed. Bush surveys the scene and decides "you know, i don't think this is a good idea. i'm not a very good swimmer." The second room holds a convicted felon with a large hammer, crushing rocks for all eternity. Again, Bush surveys the scene and decides "No, I have a problem with my shoulder and that would be bad for my back." In the third room is Clinton lying on the floor with his hands and feet bound and staked to the floor. On top of him is Monica Lewinsky giving it her all. A third time, Bush surveys the scene and decides " Ok, I think i can handle this." Satan snickers and quietly says "Ok Monica, you can go." |
I actually like this one http://bitn-babylon5.com/FunnyAssCartoons/snoopybush.gif |
|
Cheney's Staff Focus of Probe Federal law-enforcement officials said that they have developed hard evidence of possible criminal misconduct by two employees of Vice President Dick Cheney's office related to the unlawful exposure of a CIA officer's identity last year. The investigation, which is continuing, could lead to indictments, a Justice Department official said. According to these sources, John Hannah and Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, were the two Cheney employees. "We believe that Hannah was the major player in this," one federal law-enforcement officer said. Calls to the vice president's office were not returned, nor did Hannah and Libby return calls. The strategy of the FBI is to make clear to Hannah "that he faces a real possibility of doing jail time" as a way to pressure him to name superiors, one federal law-enforcement official said. The case centers on Valerie Plame, a CIA operative then working for the weapons of mass destruction division, and her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, who served as ambassador to Gabon and as a senior U.S. diplomat in Baghdad in the early 1990s. Under President Bill Clinton, he was head of African affairs until he retired in 1998, according to press accounts. Wilson was sent by the Bush administration in March 2002 to check on an allegation made by President George W. Bush in his State of the Union address the previous winter that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from the nation of Niger. Wilson returned with a report that said the claim was "highly doubtful." On June 12, Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus revealed that an unnamed diplomat had "given a negative report" on the claim and then, on July 6, as the Bush administration was widely accused of manipulating intelligence to get American public opinion behind a war with Iraq, Wilson published an op-ed piece in the Post in which he accused the Bush administration of "misrepresenting the facts." His piece also asked, "What else are they lying about?" According to one administration official, "The White House was really pissed, and began to contact six journalists in order to plant stories to discredit Wilson," according to the New York Times and other accounts. As Pincus said in a Sept. 29 radio broadcast, "The reason for putting out the story about Wilson's wife working for the CIA was to undermine the credibility of [Wilson's] mission for the agency in Niger. Wilson, as the last top diplomat in Iraq at the time of the Gulf War, had credibility beyond his knowledge of Africa, which was his specialty. So his going to Niger to check the allegation that Iraq had sought uranium there and returning to say he had no confirmation was considered very credible." Eight days later, columnist Robert Novak wrote a column in which he named Wilson's wife and revealed she was "an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." Since Plame was working undercover, it exposed her and, in the opinion of some, ruined her usefulness and her career. It also violated a 1982 law that prohibits revealing the identity of U.S. intelligence agents. On Oct. 7, Bush said that unauthorized disclosure of an undercover CIA officer's identity was "a criminal matter" and the Justice Department had begun its investigation into the source of the leak. Richard Sale is an intelligence correspondent for UPI, a sister wire service of Insight magazine. if this is true, does anyone really think these people were acting on their own initiative, without approval from anyone above them? Cheney? Rove? I dont know about Bush, but Cheney and Rove could very well have been behind this. I mean, If Hannah or Libby were to name higher ups theres not many names to choose from... Hannah is suspected by the way, to be one of the people involved with bringing INC intelligence directly to Cheney, bypassing the CIA. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3660169/ |
U.S. Eyes Halliburton Bribery Allegation CURT ANDERSON Associated Press WASHINGTON - A subsidiary of Halliburton Co. is under scrutiny by the Justice Department over allegations that it was involved in payment of $180 million in bribes to win a natural gas project contract in Nigeria. Vice President Dick Cheney was head of Halliburton at the time. The $4 billion Nigerian Liquified Natural Gas Plant was built in the 1990s by a consortium that included Kellogg, Brown & Root, a unit of Houston-based Halliburton. Two senior Justice Department officials, speaking Wednesday on condition of anonymity, said the department had asked that Halliburton voluntarily provide documents related to the allegations. Those records, they said, could determine whether a full investigation is launched. Halliburton has complied with the request, the officials said. One factor in the Justice Department's decisions on whether to press corporate fraud charges is whether the company is cooperative. Halliburton, already under fire for its handling of contracts related to the war in Iraq, disclosed the Justice Department request in a Jan. 21 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. A French magistrate, Renaud Van Ruymbeke, also is investigating the Nigerian payments. He has said in a memo that embezzlement charges could be filed against Cheney in Paris. Cheney's aides have refused comment on the allegations. Cheney spokesman Kevin Kellems said Thursday that the vice president's office had no information about the matter. "We have not been contacted about it by anyone," Kellems said. According to Halliburton's SEC filing, the illegal payment allegations involve a joint venture of which KBR was a 25 percent owner. The other partners were Technip SA of France, ENI SpA of Italy and Japan Gasoline Corp. The filing says the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission are reviewing the allegations under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The payments for the gas plant contract were allegedly made to Nigerian officials. "Halliburton has engaged outside counsel to investigate any allegations and is cooperating with the government's inquiries," the company said in the filing. "If illegal payments were made, this matter could have a material adverse effect on our business and the results of operations." Halliburton's troubles do not stop there. The Defense Department is conducting a criminal probe into the Houston-based company's contract to supply gasoline to Iraqi civilians. Last month, KBR reimbursed the Pentagon $6.3 million after disclosing that two employees had taken kickbacks from a Kuwaiti subcontractor in return for providing services to U.S. troops in Iraq. KBR also has agreed to reimburse the Pentagon more than $27 million for overcharges on meals served at military dining facilities in Iraq and Kuwait. Halliburton has complained repeatedly that criticism of its work in Iraq is politically motivated, in part because of its past ties with Cheney, the company's chairman from 1995 to 2000. |
Rush Limbaugh humor. Moderately funny, but more because of the process of the clipping of his voice to make this 'song' How come I never see Conservatives making bizarre flash cartoons about liberals or anything? Never seen one. |
Scalia needs to step down. There's really no discussion about it. |
|
hey spunk, I bet you've seen the piechart on Rush Limbaughs web page by now. YOu might want to see the website linked above and realize how much contempt Rush has for you, how he clearly withheld information that actually disproves whatever point he is trying to make. |
Kucinich 100% Sharpton 93% Kerry 90% Dean 88% Edwards 84% Clark 80% Bush 11% |
http://www.bushflash.com/pl_lo.html WARNING: not safe for work, due to lots of seriously disgusting pictures of deformed children, and mediocre industrial music. |
2 Kerry Score: 97% 3 Dean Score: 91% 4 Sharpton Score: 91% 5 Clark Score: 87% 6 Edwards Score: 86% 7 Bush Score: 15% goddam hippy! |
2. Sharpton 93% 3. Kerry 90% 4. Dean 88% 5. Clark 83% 6. Edwards 78% 7. Bush 3% Hah! beat that 3%, suckers! |
2 Kerry Score: 99% 3 Sharpton Score: 94% 4 Dean Score: 91% 5 Clark Score: 90% 6 Edwards Score: 86% 7 Bush Score: 18% shit. |
|
http://www.blackstarsblog.com/bushin41point2.htm |
|
is he speaking in tongues? what a fucking madman. |
2 Clark Score: 96% 3 Sharpton Score: 95% 4 Dean Score: 91% 5 Kucinich Score: 91% 6 Edwards Score: 87% 7 Bush Score: 25% |
Sharpton 96% Kerry 95% Clark 89% Dean 82% Edwards 79% Bush 12% |
2 Sharpton Score: 90% 3 Kerry Score: 80% 4 Dean Score: 75% 5 Clark Score: 72% 6 Edwards Score: 71% 7 Bush Score: 6% Everyone up here is batty for kucinich. Too bad he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell, eh? Thanks for the ass-istance in picking MY candidate, Time. |
Maybe he's embarrassed that Sharpton came up first for him. :) |
today: Russert: But your base conservatives and [sic] listen to Rush Limbaugh, the Heritage Foundation, CATO Institute, they're all saying you are the biggest spender in American history. "President" Bush: Well, they're wrong. they can't both be right. Is Limbaugh going to go on the air tomorrow, lick ass and say "well, I was wrong and here's why?", or is it WAR? |
Bush was a Bonesman. Kerry was a Bonesman. With that in mind, in debating each other, are they going to be really light on each other? I dont want to get into any conspiracy theory crap about what S&B "really is" or Illuminati control shit, but I think it means more than nothing. 4 presidential candidates (well 3 now that Lieberman is gone) were in Bones. Does that say anything to anyone? Does it make anyone at least a little suspicious? Does this mean that Bush vs. Kerry is controlled opposition? |
|
|
|
|
Yep. It says that the government may be controlled by the illuminati no matter what we do. I for one would rather it be controlled in a way that publically empowers democrats and the left. "Does this mean that Bush vs. Kerry is controlled opposition?" Well, if they're both "controlled" what does it matter? |
|
I'm simply delving into Rowlfe's argument, much like I do with yours. Have you taken the test yet? |
I was very suprised at the outcome. well, kind of... |
I vow not to make fun if its not what we'd expect. |
|
-------------------------------------------------- 1 Kucinich Score: 100% 2 Sharpton Score: 89% 3 Kerry Score: 85% 4 Dean Score: 80% 5 Clark Score: 78% 6 Edwards Score: 72% 7 Bush Score: 13% ------------------------------------------------- |
Come on, spunk, I let show that I'm 25% Bush. YOu can show yours. :) |
|
spunk, bush was the only one representing any of your side. thus, 100% bush. so, you know . . . peeance freeance. |
I heard Kucinich on the Daily Show say that if we couldn't (or wouldn't or whatever) vote for him, he would suggest we vote for Edwards. Or something to that effect. Like, "So, Dennis, if you drop out, who would you like us to transfer our vote to?" "John Edwards." |
When I leave it blank I get 100% on Bush and 66% on Kerry. That makes me feel kind of sick to my stomach. I would think I lined up more with Edwards then Kerry. |
if yeaaaugh! at a campaign rally is unpresidential and media fodder, why isn't peeance freeance at a policy speech unpresidential and media fodder? PEEANCE FREEANCE for fuck's sake. |
|
google it and there's a bunch of links with audio. i'll try to find a transcript. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031027-1.html they changed it to "free and secure". |
|
Remarkable. |
|
guys like dean and gore, the smart guys, get their speeches fileted, sliced and diced, while bush gets attaboys for trying hard. "good job, george! way to use your words!" the american presidency has morphed into a special olympics event where the real athletes are disqualified for being too fit and the winners come panting across the finish line, arms akimbo, shirts soaked not with sweat but with spittle. sweet victory. |
I dont know if thats actually garbled language or some sort of gaffe like when he said "Paki" |
like all internet polls/tests, Its sure to be very flawed. |
|
|
And what main stream media slices and dices and poo poos anyone's speaches? Surely you do not concider Rush or Hannity or Schnitt or Hedgecock or Beck to be mainstream? They are SUPPOSED to be opinionated, they are TALK SHOW HOSTS. |
|
|
I think he is more with the right on national security, and defense, abortion, etc, and more on the left when it comes to "entitlements" and |
"Cleaned Up Quotes... Cont'd JOHN KERRY'S "TRUST ME" John Kerry has the right issue in government catering to special interests. I don't have nearly the problem with Bush about Iraq as I do about this - crong capitalism as they call it. But is he the right messenger, given he's the senator who raised more from paid lobbyists than any other senator over the past 15 years. And his answer is the same as the one I hate from the Republicans: "Trust me!" Yes, I take their money - but they get nothing! Nada! I spit on their requests! Scorched earth policy! If they even ask me for a favor, I give them such a look! This is the same problem I have with Rush Limbaugh: don't come out and pretend your addiction is better than the other guy's addiction. The money influences your votes, who you talk to and who you don't have time for, and which asses you kiss. Not that the Republicans aren't worse - for them, "Special interests have taken over our government!" is an applause line. " I miss Maher. His standup sucks, but his show was good. Now I have read his new show transcripts from his site. |
spunk, you're not alone among conservatives having problems with Bush. But I bet you knew that. If only McCain had been president. beh. You know Rove isnt going to let this fallout last much longer. Unless he's too busy covering his ass over the Vicky Plame leak. oh yeah, Clark's gone http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040210_2661.html and I dont know if after some of his Kerry comments he'd get a VP invitation. Sad everyone has just given up and let Kerry have it it seems. Thats pathetic. Fucking Dems. Sure Kerry could beat Bush but they didnt even make much a race of it for the sake of keeping the public interested in whats going on, and listening. |
And I dont mean that in your typical Hillary bashing sense, because I think its overdone, but still, that would be a huge mistake. |
|
Debate? Edwards only has one speech. |
Rumsfeld making an ass of himself. |
|
then I realized when it was written. he REALLY sounds like an ass, if you read it like it happened yesterday. |
just meant to show they were always impatient, and were willing to go to war even if the intelligence wasnt there or ready.. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040210-3.html read the transcript... its a rare document of the press actually getting hard on the prez (through McClellan) |
Partisan Investigations Unit - on the scene |
Now let them ask about WMD and the environment with the same tenacity... |
Whats more surprising than the fact that they fought what was presented to them was that their questioning and their research was actually GOOD! esp. pulling up the quote where Bush pretty much says he joined the National Guard to get out of going to war. Now, without saying directly that Bush was AWOL or a deserter or anything, I think its fair to say that even with Scott McLellan's "the present recalls" tricky Clintonesque language that suggests trying to avoid being hurt at a future time, Bush has said enough things about his military service that if it turns out he's lying and its proven, that could be it for him. Seriously. I think even a lot of his diehards will turn on him. if he wasnt AWOL or whatnot, he'd better present some better documents wit a quickness... Only now does Kerrys "I bring up my Vietnam experience every single day" crap seem really relevant. Wow. |
peeance freeance |
what they need to do is solicit similar records from other average joes who served in the same unit at the same time, lay it all out side by side and then demand the missing docs. because you know there are missing docs. unless the champagne corps use a different kind of recordkeeping. |
|
but if so, it will be from the press, and probably a lot less from each other. |
GOP blames Clinton for bad Iraq intel. Surprise surprise. |
and check out what Drudgy is up to.... Kerry affair huh? Wouldnt surprise me, but didnt Drudge get caught making up stuff about a relationship between Ken Lay and Bill Clinton when Enron broke, supposedly to make Bush's relationship with Kay not look so weak? Can only find a few other articles on this so far, and they're just regurgitating the Drudge article. Interesting. apparently Limbaugh is saying that Bill and Hillary leaked the story... heh |
of course this drives a wedge in his "Clark started this" statement |
"Cleansing" heh also of note, McLellan wouldnt answer a question about why Bush missed his physical... |
spunky must be writing their talking points. :P |
The idea of blaming Clinton for the intel failures is just petty and fucking ridiculous. I mean c'mon, how childish is that? Not exactly Presidential is it? |
Two people, who were at Bush's Alabama base, said they were looking out for him and he no-showed... I know its a tiny paper so take it with a grain of salt, it does seem a bit fishy. but if honest, goes to show that people arent going to take this dancing around. If he didnt serve he better fess up. |
especially when Powell and Rice said before 9/11 that Saddam wasnt a threat, and since even when making the case for war foreign news KNEW and reported that several pieces of evidence were forged or fake or made up. The UN inspectors said the intelligence the US gave them was "garbage garbage and more garbage" I mean come on, there was ample warning. A lot of the blame goes to the media who didnt report it because it was 'unpatriotic' or because war coverage=ratings, but they should have known. And then theres the reports that Powell didnt like a lot of what he saw... I mean jeez... Are the CIA responsible? of course they are, they had a hand in this. But ultimately, the administration is responsible and I dont think they can get away with it anymore. |
this is funny. John Kerry way in the back of the picture. This is supposed to hurt Kerry? I mean, maybe if Kerry was the bearded guy they'd have some ammo here, but DUDE. wow. way to go newsmax.com, way to go Tony Blankley, that picture was practically Fonda and Kerry in a lewd naked embrace, draped in a burning flag. |
"A photograph of John Kerry together with Jane Fonda at an anti-Vietnam War rally in 1970 in Pennsylvania has surfaced on the Internet, angering veterans who say his association with her 34 years ago is a slap in the faces of Vietnam War veterans." But the caption of the photo says: "Actress and activist Jane Fonda attends an anti-Vietnam War rally at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. The rally was sponsored by Vietnam veterans." So, is it Vietnam veterans slapping the faces of...Vietnam veterans? |
|
|
Irony is a horrible bitch-goddess Joe Conason The New York Observer See what happens when you don't read? Awash in good news from his staffers, president projects delusional optimism "Is he out of his mind? "Does he have the faintest idea what he's talking about?" So wondered Andrew Sullivan, formerly among George W. Bush's most voluble admirers, after the President's jarring Oval Office interview with Tim Russert last Sunday. The conservative columnist referred specifically to Mr. Bush's strange assertions about federal spending, but the same goggling unreality pervaded his other remarks. Although he sounded confused and still speaks English like a second or third language, the President is not out of his mind. He may not have the faintest idea what he's talking about, however, for the reason he revealed last fall. Recall what Mr. Bush told Fox News anchor Brit Hume about his information-gathering strategy. "I get briefed by [chief of staff] Andy Card and [National Security Advisor] Condi [Rice] in the morning. They come in and tell me. ... I glance at the headlines just to [get?] kind of a flavor for what's moving. I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably read [sic] the news themselves. ... And the best way to get the news is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what's happening in the world." It's nice that the President has such confidence in his staff, but his trust increasingly seems to be misplaced. I first suspected that Mr. Bush had lost contact with everyday reality last July, when he insisted during a press conference that "we gave [Saddam Hussein] a chance to allow the [U.N. weapons] inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in." Even if Mr. Bush watches only Fox News, he ought to have known that the inspectors searched Iraq for six weeks last winter, before they were forced to clear out so bombing could begin. Yet he repeated the same weird claim just last month, in the presence of the Polish president, saying of Saddam Hussein: "It was his choice to make, and he did not let us in." Did Condi forget to tell him about Hans Blix and the inspectors? On Meet the Press, Mr. Bush said a few other things that suggest his hired "objective sources" are gaslighting him. "The budget I just proposed to the Congress cuts the deficit in half in five years," he told the NBC newsman confidently. If Mr. Bush glanced at a newspaper, or watched TV (even Fox News!), he would know that nobody believes his budgetary policies will reduce the deficit. Does Andy Card assure him every morning that all is financially well? Somebody must be misleading the President about basic budgetary facts. He apparently believes that his record of cutting discretionary spending compares favorably with that of President Clinton -- when precisely the opposite is true. He would know more about his own record if he could bring himself to read Paul Krugman occasionally. Mr. Russert asked whether he has been surprised by the "very difficult situation" in Iraq. "Well, I think we are welcomed in Iraq," he replied. "We are welcomed in Iraq." To miss the daily tidings of carnage, he must be rapidly skimming those grim headlines. The President also sounded badly misinformed about his own inspector's report on the missing weapons of mass destruction. "And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, there's theories as to where the weapons went," he declared. "They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." Actually, Dr. Kay deduced that Iraq possessed little or no chemical weaponry after 1991, because American bombing and U.N. inspections had destroyed its stockpiles and production capacity. That's the kind of news the President might have learned from any decent wire-service story. But he doesn't read newspapers. That is also why he could tell Mr. Russert, without irony, that he had learned the "essential lessons" of Vietnam, a "political war" with "politicians making military decisions": He missed all the press coverage of his political appointees overruling (and publicly humiliating) the professional officers in the Pentagon, and ignoring their warnings about the real problems of invading and running Iraq. The President's political appointees -- notably a deputy defense secretary who never served in uniform -- have dictated every aspect of the Iraq war, from force strength to timing. Speaking with a British journalist last November, Mr. Bush further explained why he doesn't read newspapers: "It's not to say I don't respect the press. I do respect the press. But sometimes it's hard to be an optimistic leader. A leader must project an optimistic view. It's hard to be optimistic if you read a bunch of stuff about yourself." Surely his staffers smile when they give him the good news every morning, too. Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer and Salon.com, and is the author of Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. |
skip the first few paragraphs, and go straight to her attack on Cleland.... wow... I mean... wow |
Newsmax eliminates now infamous Kerry/Fonda picture from site after it is proven forgery. are they admitting it? of course not. they continue to push the other famous photo, and editorialize: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/9/134218.shtml |
in this article, a witness comes forward for Bush |
|
|
|
There's a pretty prominent blur line / contrast difference between Fonda's arm on the mic and the background, too. I mean, it's not even a good fake. |
|
Kerry this morning on Imus said he didnt agree with what Fonda did. As well, its being said around (cant find a link yet with the words i"m using) that the real picture was taken 2 years before Jane went to Hanoi. |
if you have an hour, watch this program... or you could just watch the last half hour, a discussion with Kevin Phillips, author of "american dynasty"... veddy intermolesting |
if he's right, thats pretty much a smoking gun that McLellan has been lying all week. Basically, that would mean what Scott was holding wasnt a pay document at all! it could still mean that he was given credits for serving, but it leaves it wide open for the possibility he was given credits from a higher up for work he did not do, to get an honorable discharge. |
On "Hardball" Chris Matthews reported that Calhoun says he saw Bush on duty from May through October of '72 er.... the records McLellan showed everyone doesnt show any pay(and/or retirement points) for that same period of time. dont believe it? check the stub again, again you can see it on the Calpundit site. the link again is: http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003220.html |
Bush could have served his time in Alabama. I have no proof of this, but I'm willing to bet more or less, he fulfilled his obligations, one way or another. However, everyone knows what Bush was like as a youth. Its quite possible that they scrubbed Bush's records years ago to try and get rid of embarrassing arrests, warnings (like the one that was found and posted on Calpundit), etc., and it created a gap large enough for anyone looking at it to be suspicious that he was AWOL. just a theory. Maybe I'm giving Bush more credit than he deserves. |
this is a wild allegation. (specific article above is from British newspaper the New Nation) One that didnt get covered by the press. I dont think anything of it, but its interesting that this was never covered... something to think about if the Kerry rumors get a lot of coverage |
wow. I hope they're paying McLellan enough. Any bets on what his Talking Points will be after the weekend? Bush releases his Vietnam-era military files Retired Guardsman recalls president's service in Alabama Friday, February 13, 2004 Posted: 10:41 PM EST (0341 GMT) http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/13/elec04.prez.bush.texas.records/index.html WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Hundreds of pages of President Bush's Vietnam-era military files were released to the media Friday amid questions about whether he completed his required service in the Air National Guard. About 400 pages of what officials have been able to find of his military records -- from 1968 to 1973 -- were released early in the evening. Bush's military service was an issue briefly during the 2000 presidential election, and Democrats have raised the issue anew this election year, focusing on the year that Bush worked in Alabama. The documents released contained only one statement related to his service between May 1972 and May 1973, after Bush asked for a transfer from Texas to Alabama so he could work on the Senate campaign of family friend Winton Blount. The statement from a Texas Air National Guard official about Bush's transfer to Alabama was dated May 2, 1973. "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report (5/1/72 - 4/30/73). A civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Ala. He cleared this base 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training ... [at] Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama," wrote Lt. Col. William Harris Jr. Reporters were also allowed to review Bush's medical records from 1968 to 1971 but not to remove them from the Roosevelt Room. The White House said those records show Bush reported for duty in Texas and Alabama, and was discharged honorably, and that he was in good health and fit to fly. The medical reports were from Texas, Alabama and Georgia. The other documents are organized into three files: Bush's Texas Air National Guard performance report; a summary on his service that was compiled in 2000; and another summary compiled this year. Much of the material is repetitive. Personal information -- such as Social Security numbers and medical information about family members -- was blacked out. Bush decided Friday afternoon to release the papers, the White House said. Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry's campaign said the release has been long in coming. "It's good to see that after 10 years of stonewalling, George W. Bush is finally releasing his National Guard records," a campaign statement said. "Does this mean he's now ready to come clean with the American people and release the White House documents on pre-September 11th intelligence? Will he start telling the truth about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and the rush to war?" Guardsman remembers On Friday, a retired officer with the Alabama Air National Guard told CNN that he witnessed Bush serving his weekend duty in 1972 -- an account that could be significant given the persistent Democratic questions. Speaking Friday from Daytona Beach, Florida, John B. "Bill" Calhoun said he commanded Bush and that Bush attended four to six weekend drills at Dannelly Field in Montgomery. He said Bush was with the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group in Alabama in 1972. The drills consisted of eight-hour shifts Saturdays and Sundays, Calhoun said. "We didn't have the planes that he could fly," Calhoun said. "But he studied his manuals, he read flying safety regulations, accident reports -- things pilots do quite often when they are not getting ready to fly or if they don't have other duties." When Bush first arrived, he said he was living in Montgomery and working on the Senate campaign, Calhoun said. Calhoun said he learned from another person that Bush was the son of George H.W. Bush, who at the time was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Calhoun said he asked the younger Bush if he planned to pursue a political career, and he said, "I don't know, probably." The retired general said he is not surprised that more servicemen haven't come forward to talk about Bush's time at the base because they're a lot older and may have died, or retired and "gone on with their lives." Calhoun said he does not have any photographs or documents to prove Bush showed up for duty, but his ex-wife, Patsy Burks, said she remembered Calhoun's account. "Bill did come home [from the base] and told me that Bush was there," she said "I think what stuck in my head was that he was helping on the Senate campaign. "What I do know about Bill is that whatever he says is the truth," she added. "This issue came up in the 2000 election. ... Bill did mention in 2000 that he contacted someone and said, 'If you need me to come forward, I will.' And they said, 'We're hoping that won't be necessary.'" Questions about Bush's Guard service have intensified in recent weeks after Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe charged that Bush was absent without leave from his Guard service from May 1972 to May 1973, after he asked for the transfer. Retired Lt. Col. Bill Burkett told CNN that in 1997, he overheard Joe Allbaugh, Bush's chief of staff while Bush was Texas governor, tell the adjutant general of the Texas National Guard to gather Bush's files and "make sure there wasn't anything there that would embarrass the governor." About 10 days later, Burkett said, he saw many of Bush's files in a trash can. (Guardsman says he saw Bush's Guard records in trash) Allbaugh reacted angrily to Burkett's charges, calling them "hogwash" and "absolute garbage." Allbaugh, who is now Federal Emergency Management Agency director, said he doesn't even know who the "goober" is, referring to Burkett. Burkett's allegations were posted on Web sites just before the 2000 presidential election but were largely unreported by conventional media, according to USA Today. But questions have lingered since that year's presidential campaign, after the Boston Globe uncovered a May 1973 evaluation by Bush's commander stating that the first lieutenant had not been seen during the previous year. CNN's Suzanne Malveaux and Justine Redman contributed to this report. From the Washington Post Many Gaps In Bush's Guard Records Released Papers Do Not Document Ala. Service By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, February 14, 2004; Page A01 Files released by the White House last night from President Bush's Vietnam-era service in the National Guard show that the future president was an exemplary pilot whose military record contains numerous gaps in the last two years of his six-year commitment. The White House, seeking to quell a revived controversy over Bush's Guard service, released hundreds of pages of records that were previously withheld. The documents include what the White House describes as all the non-medical elements of Bush's military personnel file, including performance evaluations, documentation of his honorable discharge, and a thick bureaucratic paper trail of applications, promotions and transfers. The records show Bush was an eager fighter pilot who said he wanted to spend a lifetime in aviation. But they provide no evidence that he did any military service in Alabama, to which he had requested a transfer in May 1972 to work on a Senate campaign that ended in November 1972. And the records showed officials from Bush's home base in Texas declining to provide details of his activities between May 1972 to April 1973, even though such documentation was requested by National Guard headquarters. The records, while offering nothing further to prove Bush's participation with the Guard in Alabama, provided a number of extraneous personal details about Bush. His tonsils were taken out at age 5 and he had appendicitis at 10. A fatty cyst was removed from his chest in 1960, and he had a hemorrhoid while in the Guard. Bush had a $212-a-month stint as a sporting-goods salesman at Sears in 1966, and was a messenger for the white-shoe law firm of Baker Botts. He listed the "Houston Club" as a credit and character reference on one form. The "personal history" he filled out in 1968, when he was 21, listed his only foreign travel as Scotland, in August and September 1959, for "pleasure -- vacation." Bush, in applying for pilot training in 1968, signed a statement saying he has "applied for pilot training with the goal of making flying a lifetime pursuit." He participated in a Guard exercise in Canada, and his superiors uniformly praised his performance. A 1971 evaluation described Bush as "an exceptionally fine young officer" with "sound judgment" who "is mature beyond his age and experience level." Bush "is a natural leader but he is also a good follower of military discipline," it said. A 1970 letter recommending him for a promotion from second to first lieutenant called him "a dynamic outstanding young officer" who "clearly stands out as a top notch fighter interceptor pilot." Bush, it said, "is a tenacious competitor and an aggressive pilot." But the tone of Bush's military file changed abruptly, and with no documented explanation, in May 1972, when Bush sought to transfer to Alabama. That began a period of months in which, the documents suggest, Bush did not actively pursue Guard service and the Guard did not actively pursue him. For Bush's fifth year in the Guard, May 1972 to May 1973, Bush earned a total of 41 "points" for his service and was granted another 15 "gratuitous" points by his superiors, bringing him above the 50-point minimum requirement for the year. There are no records showing he participated in any Guard activities from May 1972 through the end of October 1972. On May 24, 1972, Bush sought to transfer from his Houston Guard unit to the 9921st Air Reserve Squadron for an unpaid assignment. Two days later, the unit's commander accepted him but added: "The continuation of this type unit is uncertain at this time and we may last 3 months, 6 months, a year or who knows! With this in mind, if you are willing to accept assignment under these circumstances, welcome! We're glad to have you." There is no evidence Bush reported to the reserve unit. Retired Lt. Col. Reese Bricken, the commander who wrote Bush's acceptance, told the Birmingham News that Bush never showed up. "He was looking for a place to hang his hat, but he never came by," Bricken said. On July 31, 1972, the Air Force Reserve Personnel Center overruled Bricken and returned Bush's application, calling him "ineligible for assignment to an Air Reserve Squadron." The next move from Bush apparently came in a letter on Sept. 5, in which he requested permission to perform "equivalent duty" with the 187th Tactical Reconnaissance Group in Montgomery, Ala. The request was immediately approved, and on Sept. 15 the Alabama Guard approved Bush and directed him to report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed. Turnipseed has said he has never met Bush, and the only documentation that Bush was at a Guard facility in Alabama was a one-page dental exam from January 1973 that was previously released by the White House. Back in Houston, the Guard, in a Sept. 5, 1972, memo, announced Bush's "suspension from flying status" as of Aug. 1 because of a "failure to accomplish annual medical examination." On May 2, 1973, Bush's evaluation form stated: "Lt. Bush has not been observed at this unit during the period of report. A civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama. He cleared this base on 15 May 1972 and has been performing equivalent training in a non flying status with the 187 Tac Recon Gp, Dannelly ANG Base, Alabama." But the evaluation was returned from National Guard headquarters to the Texas Guard in June 1973, with a "suspense date" of Aug. 6. "An AF Fm 77a should be requested from the training unit so that this officer can be rated in the position he held," it said. "The officer should have been reassigned in May 1972 since he no longer is training in his AFSC or with his unit of assignment." The form requested, the 77a, was sent by the Texas Air National Guard personnel office on Nov. 12, 1973, and said simply: "Not rated for the period 1 May 72 through 30 Apr 73. Report for this period not available for administrative reasons." Records show sporadic Guard activity at unspecified locations between late October and May 1973, when Bush appeared to resume active participation back in Houston. On Sept. 5, Bush filed an "Application for Discharge" effective Oct. 1, seven months before his six years were up. "I am moving to Boston, Massachusetts to attend Harvard Business School as a full time student," he wrote. "I have enjoyed my association with the 111th Ftr Intcp Sq and the 147th Ftr Intcp Gp." The discharge was granted. One of the latest documents was another request from Bush, while at Harvard. "I would like to discharge from standby reserve," he wrote in an undated letter. White House communications director Dan Bartlett said the files were released to try to dispel "this wrong impression that there was something to hide." Bartlett pledged that he had put out "absolutely everything" he had of Bush's non-medical military records. The White House did not release 44 pages of medical records that Bush's aides received this week, but it allowed a small pool of reporters to peruse them for 20 minutes. Bartlett said that was to maintain a zone of privacy. A "Medical Recommendation for Flight Duty" that was his last physical as a pilot put his flying category as "unconditional," or unrestricted. The form was dated May 15, 1971, and said he had recorded 625 hours in the cockpit. The qualification expired July 6, 1972, and was never renewed. One of the most prominent mysteries about Bush's military record has been why he did not take another flight physical, resulting in the suspension from flying status. Bartlett said, as he has in the past, Bush made that choice "because he was no longer flying," since he was reporting to the Alabama Air National Guard, which did not have the plane he was trained to fly, an F-102 fighter. "It was a practical thing," Bartlett said. "There was no reason to take a flight exam when he wasn't flying and wasn't going to fly." Bartlett said the pay and duty records show Bush fulfilled his obligation. "Anyone who says otherwise is more interested in partisan conspiracy theories than getting to the truth," he said. Bartlett said he does not expect Democrats to be satisfied because "their interest was never to find the facts." Staff writers Thomas E. Ricks, Lois Romano and Josh White; researcher Lucy Shackelford; and research editor Margot Williams contributed to this report. |
new details in Kerry/intern stuff.... another hole in Drudge's claim though. She's in Kenya either on assignment or to be with her fiance... |
QUOTE GOLDMINE! "I particularly condemn the way our political leaders supplied the manpower for that war," he wrote. "The policies -- determining who would be drafted and who would be deferred, who would serve and who would escape, who would die and who would live -- were an anti-democratic disgrace. I am angry that so many sons of the powerful and well placed and so many professional athletes (who were probably healthier than any of us) managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units. Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to our country." - Colin Powell, from his book "My American Journey", 1995 fuuuuuuuck.... fuuuuuck... that is sooo gold. sooo gold. I'm rolling. |
Newsday covers the fake Kerry photo |
How Conservatives See It |
http://www.prowrestling.com/news.php?id=10320/articles/news |
He should hang with the Booger Man: http://www.toostupidtobepresident.com/shockwave/nosepick.htm |
Kerry's "intern" denies affair, and denies internship with Kerry... in this article, the parents deny it as well and say they would vote for Kerry.... interesting. this conflicts with The Sun UK article where the parents say Kerry is a sleazeball and that he pursued their daughter. if you didnt know, Rupert Murdoch owns that newspaper. very interesting, indeed. So either Kerrys and Alex Polier are lying, or there actually is at least some level of right wing conspiracy going on. The discrepencies in the reporting on the parents quote kinda proves this is no simple misunderstanding. |
Scott Ritter on the Dennis Miller show makes Miller look like an idiot, and I think Miller knew it too. Fucking possum. |
|
this thread has officially become too long, and Im the last to complain about long-loading threads. |
|
|
|
|
