Having read the entire text today of Osama, the dyed lama’s video, I was profoundly struck as to how compatible Osama Bin Laden’s statements were in comparison to our, “of one mind,” US and Euro skeptics, Obama Doom-o-crats and the Kos Ubber-Liberal Fascists.

I was particular struck in reflection of how our "of one mind" cadre’s views are uncannily similar to so many of Osama ‘s comments in today’s video. He, like them, spoke in one voice of similarity, unquestionably speaking in meaning and dogma from the same page as if written by the same authors. They and he today, recant in saying the exact same things, in the same ways, as if quoting one and to the other.

Osama today clearly spoke, as a true Zeitgeist doom mongering who opines in habitual misinformation and or disingenuous informed Zoomorphism’s and Schadenfreude Relativism as do our “of one mind,” US and Euro skeptics, Obama Doom-o-crats and the Kos Ubber-Liberal Fascists.

He spoke as if copulating with his likeminded US and Euro cadres, complementing one another in the deadly intent and purpose of Osama Bin Laden to such an extent that he used them today as facilitating examples of the world’s future envisioned by him, where democracy is evil and doomed to be destroyed.

What is dangerously pathetic is a man like Osama Bin Laden would speak in likeminded complements as if his victorious Islamic Revolution is to be won on the backs of our US and Euro skeptics, Obama Doom-o-crats and the Kos Ubber-Liberal Fascist’s, mental distorts on the invisible road to an unattained utopia.

Distortions afar from the Bin Laden visions that intends to destroy them as well as those like me, whom he knows will unrelentingly fight to the death against, those ubber liberal fascists whom he counts on to assist him to an unattainable victory otherwise, and he, who would destroy us all.



P.S. TRADER CLAN -Update:

I was hoping to soon post the following;

To update since the last post, three (3), all senior Noncom’s and seasoned leaders of combat trigger pullers, have retired many years before they wanted to. Three (3) more, all commissioned officers, all of whom have completed their “initial 8 years “EOS”, obligated Service, have submitted their resignation endorsement letters up their chain of command as is required. We expect all three to soon receive endorsements and authorizations per their requests. Of the remaining 4, all Combat Veterans, 2 are back from deployment with less than 5 months to go on their hitches and have, at great personal costs to their families, rejected their re-up bonus being offered. The other two (2) are currently deployed, 1 in Iraq and 1 in Afghanistan. All have less than and or up to 6 months to go on this rotation. The latter are at the end of their last re-up cycle and are not going to re-up upon their return stateside.

God willing the Entire 11 members of the Family should all be out and gone before the official “ME-o-cratic Zeitgeist era” begins, heralding the high water mark of yet another attempt at yet another “Me-o-cracy of the United States of America.”

Instead, with a coupling of great misgivings, trepidation, yet, esteemed pride. I must report our 11 warriors, who will have 19.5 combat years of experience soon. This cadre of brothers in arms, who know and pay the real price of freedom and liberty have been unable to abandon their comrades, that so few, giving all, for so many who give nothing at all.

As such, they have decided to remain in the fight having come to an appreciation for our nation’s recent tendencies to betray them and their sacrifices, like their 8 fathers, uncle’s and cousins before them. They accept with great anger this ever-increasing Euro-American self-centric mob’s capricious tendencies. Tendencies so often touted as an unpaid tab of self-amalgamation and rationalized perpetual discredit of a collective indecisive disunity presumed endowed in inalienable entitlement of liberty and freedoms as long as those few others, whom they betray in appreciation, pay the price of admission as if freedom and liberty were a gift card.

That is All!

Agree with your remarks about the Uber liberals who sound like OBL. Sad day to see.

Our nation is indebted to the men/women like the 11 of your tribe that continue in the fray. If it weren't for people like that, now and in the past, this nation would have ceased to exist.

I thank God for them!

Such a simple statement that tries to conveyfeelings that cannot be expressed by mere words.

Saying that Liberals sound like bin Laden is like saying that Conservatives sound like Hitler.

Neither comparison means a ###### thing, and both are examples of the kind of nonsense that is killing our Republic. Please get off the partisan warhorse.

We agree this uber liberal fascism derived in and of narcassistic disunity is what is killing our Repubic there my friend.

You have not entirely completed your research on the topic you espouse in ill informed disagreement here.

Perhaps you should read the entire text of Osama's recitation then respond informed as to how it was "not" contextually clearly made in a copy cat of Uber-Liberal dogmatics, provoking joy in the death of democracy, the evils of globalism, capitalism and in the efference substances of uber Collectivist's virtues. It was like the Daily Kos and Moveon .org and Euro-skeptic left had written his preverted parsings for him.

Take the subjects he used item by item and you will find them, by line item on every uber liberal fascist site one can imagine.

O' by the way, you keep pontificating about Vietnam in comparison to Iraq, as if you knew something directly from experience about one and or the other.

May I inquire as to where you obtained such first hand knowledge, when, and with whom did you serve in Vietnam and or Iraq?

Better a warhorse than a "not my war or my problem" parisite living unearned in freedom and liberty, whoring openly, as if doing something other than talking the talk about how freedom and liberty is an entitlement granted merely for being alive in a place were its toll is paid by so few for so many of the growing numbers of the unwilling who assume they have earned and deserved it, eh comrade?


That is all!!

Happy Trails...

I can tolerate all the nutball wing-nut neo-conservative propaganda that exists. It's fine. That's just politics. But it genuinely bothers me when some fool attempts to score a political victory on a ridiculous comparison based on nothing but his own blind hatred. And then he has the gaul to wrap it in flawed and misused legalese dialogue.

The fact that you even put "liberal" and "fascist" together demonstrates that you're not qualified to use the terms. I mean.. "Islamic Fascist" is at least a potential ideological category. But "liberal" and "fascist" are opposites, regardless of the spin you'd like to place on the issue.

My credentials to speak on this topic are as good as yours -- nothing that can be substantiated in any way on the internet. I'm sure you'll come back with some glowing story about how you were the only survivor of your squad when the liberals left you without ammunition in a swamp in Cambodia. The difference is I won't make up a ridiculous story to validate my opinions. My opinions stand for themselves. If you can't face them on their merits.. then I don't see how that's my problem.

Your last paragraph demonstrates your true nature.. Showing none of the intellectual pretension that you demonstrated in previous paragraphs. Nothing but hatred and gibberish insults. And why? Because I politely pointed out your obvious hypocrisy? Get over it. You're not the first person to be humiliated on the internet. Your audience isn't even that big. You probably only got about 5 viewers anyway.

But you are correct about one thing, the burden should be shared. And I'm in favor of renewing the draft so that more of our young people will be sent overseas to interact with other cultures and learn the effects of international relations. Better appreciate different cultures.. and appreciate our own Republic. I wish one or two of our current leaders would have actually seen military service.. so that they might better understand. But Democracy is about shared benefit and shared responsibility. The current system only creates a division between the militarized, resentful grunt and the privileged, docile sheep -- another division that in no way serves the greatness of the Republic.

Osama's words? He never speaks without an intent. His words sound like a man trying hard to legitimize his position to a larger, more affluent population. He lost all of his credibility outside of the Muslim world on 9-11. But the Iraq War has given him an opportunity to look again like a sympathetic figure. He attempts to attach himself to the legitimate positions of western liberals because he hopes that George Bush's political opponents might be converted to military opponents. This belief is false. Because no matter how much we may disapprove of George Bush's foolish policies, our first priority as a nation is to kill bin Laden and his core loyalists. Bin Laden deludes himself. He still believes that it was his Mujahideen which destroyed the Soviet Union. He thinks that America is near a similar implosion. He is wrong. ...Although you sound like you're pretty much ready to implode.

Trader has been around this site much longer than you, the newcomer, and kept this site running almost entirely alone after its implosion when nutcases destroyed it, one of which is a "liberal." He has many more fans than 5, believe me.......

And, yes, he does have military service, among many that have helped keep this nation as it is. He's not humiliated........ He's given folks like you and me freedom to do what we are doing now. I take offense at your description of your imagined battlefield scenario.

Anyhoo, how does what you said about OBL wanting to attach himself to legitimate positions of western liberals differ that much from what Trader said, and to which I agreed? Just curious.

I can tolerate all the nutball wing-nut neo-conservative propaganda that exists. It's fine. That's just politics.

Yet, in an obvious oxymora, you redact in clear unambiguous contrarian commentary, you cannot tolerate such and in addition later show us you actually have a strong propensity to presume and assume you know something you are not likely to know about another in any way or means except by intolerance, ridicule and righteously self- presumed supposition. That Gentle lady is the very foundation of what is called Liberal fascism.

What you can say is thus far you have provided to us “little people” with a punditry, which contextually says one thing while lamenting entirely another and opposite context as if from provided by an alter ego.


But it genuinely bothers me when some fool attempts to score a political victory on a ridiculous comparison based on nothing but his own blind hatred. And then he has the gaul to wrap it in flawed and misused legalese dialogue.[/color]


The fact that you even put "liberal" and "fascist" together demonstrates that you're not qualified to use the terms.

I mean.. "Islamic Fascist" is at least a potential ideological category. But "liberal" and "fascist" are opposites, regardless of the spin you'd like to place on the issue.

O yes, another juvenile denial monger, I think therefore I am, thus it is,” ideologue of rationality and reason subjugating pragmatic realism for logical fallacies “that if one is this, he cannot be that, and or, if he is not this, he has to be that.”

Kinda like the hollowwood reality shows were non-whites often lament as if intellectually correct, as such that they can not be racists as that would be an absurd correlation of an opposite, where the oppressed act as the oppressors, as if that has never happened. Eh?

It is amusing to hear such inexperience naivety, professing in absolutes, there is no way possible that there is in existence, today, in America, a Liberal fascism that can be seen, read and heard profusely in deed, act and meaningful intent. It is indeed a comic of error and blind ambition that does not see those who seek to demean, pervert and demonize, not only the country, its political and social initutions, but equally seek to deviate it’s core values far and away from that which has been its greatest strength. Its embedded diversity of opinions, which will not be allowed to be shouted down in mere difference, by elitist’s, retorts and like minded juvenile recantations.

The word "fascist" ( or "fascism") is sometimes used to denigrate persons, institutions or groups that would not describe themselves as fascist and that do not fall within the formal definition of the word but who in being subscribed as such, do act and personify the true purpose and intent behind the idiom that is fascism.

Where from, a collective ideal is presumed that a centralized social lowest common denominator of authority is best, when it is controlled by an elite few or elitists ideology of a few, which uses the tools of fascism, thus, misinformation, propaganda and outright vitriolic demeaning presumptiveness towards all who oppose their point of view.

Oddly, similar to the presumptive self-righteousness you have exhibited here. Whereby you assume I am not only a partisan unqualified fool full of hate and warmongering propensities. Thus, by your sole estimation, as if it were an absolute authority, you pervert the point further by dishonest contradictory commentary using the very methodology used in liberal fascist’s codifications. From which entitled elitists presume in meaning to convey that those who disagree with their likeminded liberalism and presumed visions for America must surely and unquestionably be mere ignorant fools, unqualified to have an opine and or be capability having some intellectual substance.

Much like Islamist Fascist, who in like wise acts and deeds prefer to use murder, death and terror, rather than demeaning presumptive superiority, deceit and dishonesty to postulate an intended control over others who do not accept their perverted Ideology as the absolute alternative to a better tomorrow.

As a political epithet “Fascist’ has been applied to persons and groups equally, on the extreme left, the extreme right and most points in between, supposed falsely sometimes, yet often correctly justified by the acts, deeds and intent of those it was directed at.

I guess that kind of demurs onto the light of reality, these logical fallacies of yours that ASSumes correctness that liberalism per se can and does not use fascist tools to ensure its dominance, eh comrade?


My credentials to speak on this topic are as good as yours -- nothing that can be substantiated in any way on the internet. I'm sure you'll come back with some glowing story about how you were the only survivor of your squad when the liberals left you without ammunition in a swamp in Cambodia.

O yes, the credentials of divine authority, spas mile, that’s the ticket to validation and substance, eh?

Credentials; a set of documents provided by an accredited and authorized entity that constitute an authenticity in evidence of training, licensure, experience, and expertise of the aforementioned practitioner as an experts in such matters.

Odd you should use such a word of entitled dominion. Your defensive panties are perhaps flapping the breeze of insecurity perhaps my friend? No one ask you about your credentials to speak, though your avoidance of the question posed and your unspoken response to the real question posed speaks volumes as to your experience and knowledge as that which you to do speak.

I am amused at your fear of exposure and how it would elicit from your mental pretentiousness such an implied condescension about an unknown person’s war record. Your condescension of a defender of your liberty and rights in your fictional over exasperated juvenile obtuse punditry, shows us more about what you are and are not than you will ever imagine. Yet, another example of Liberal fascism were there is an assumption that such fictional events would need to be lamented in vituperative of implied negativity as a thing that is in opposition to what you stand for.

Equally, you give us another example of Liberal fascism. Whereby, you express the idea that a mere thought in your inexperienced mind, as to the quality and substance of the experienced who may be disagreeable to your visionary superiority, carries with it far more credence than another who is unknown to you. These condescending vitriolic comments speaks volumes as to your vision of our fighting men and women and the fate of this country which you obviously in uninvolved symbiosis live off. While they who provide you the nourishment for your very existence pay for it with their blood, toll and sacrifice. While you do what, exactly, to deserve such entitlements of credential as presumed by you.


The difference is I won't make up a ridiculous story to validate my opinions. My opinions stand for themselves. If you can't face them on their merits.. then I don't see how that's my problem.

Yet, you have done exact that by saying that I did it. I did not make up what Osama Bin Laden said. Nor did I make up the text in which for his own purposes he setforth his validation and endorsement of those Doom-0crats and ubber-iberals he endorsed in message. Thus, it seems misinformation and a lack of researched facts is the very thread of substance that you would hang your hat of intellectual credentials on. Not me.

We agree, your merits or lack thereof are not my problem. Yet, I have not read anything here provided by you that validates your opinion in the absolution that you presume is there either.


Your last paragraph demonstrates your true nature.. Showing none of the intellectual pretension that you demonstrated in previous paragraphs. Nothing but hatred and gibberish insults. And why? Because I politely pointed out your obvious hypocrisy?

My last paragraph was the following;

Better a warhorse than a "not my war or my problem" parisite living unearned in freedom and liberty, whoring openly, as if doing something other than talking the talk about how freedom and liberty is an entitlement granted merely for being alive in a place were its toll is paid by so few for so many of the growing numbers of the unwilling who assume they have earned and deserved it, eh comrade?

Indeed it does, Obi, as it describes yours thus far as I can attain from the juvenile name calling and presumed superior self worth in comparison to those this paragraph praise in willing sacrifices for liberty and freedom you merely take for granted it seems.[/size]

I think thee gives they self credit for a class unattended and a grade unearned, how so hypocrisy, hatred, gibberish and insults, anymore than your pontifications, brown cow?

Get over it.

Child I never got an incline to it, what ever the it you profuse about is?

You're not the first person to be humiliated on the internet.

A man who crows in illusion as to his merits and illusions of victories is only a man that crows, giving no measure nor credence to him nor his merits, much less his false illusion of unearned victory.

A man who is and has something needs not say it is so, likewise, the same is likely never true of a man who is and has nothing.

Yet, a man who “must” illustrate to others his meritorious and meaningfulness as to what he is and or is not and particularly what others are and are not, in comparison, often as not, speaks from a purposelessness of reality wholly unrelated to what he is and or what he has done or will be and or will do.

Disagreement equivocatingly is not synonymous with disagreeable vitriol except by the intolerance and authoritarian. Nor is academics presumed omnipotence equally as to some absolute infallibility. They are instead, nature’s representative paradox of and about humanity, seldom sacrosanct and as often as not, as wrong as right.

Puff on, big daddy, puff on!

Your audience isn't even that big. You probably only got about 5 viewers anyway.

Ouch, that was so hurtful and cruel, NOT!! What a meaningless blow for intellectual substance. Bet you are proud that you were capable of coming up with that sump pump titillation. Perhaps the Daily Kos is more up tempo and your speed in intellect, maturity and substance?

But you are correct about one thing, the burden should be shared. And I'm in favor of renewing the draft so that more of our young people will be sent overseas to interact with other cultures and learn the effects of international relations. Better appreciate different cultures.. and appreciate our own Republic. I wish one or two of our current leaders would have actually seen military service.. so that they might better understand. But Democracy is about shared benefit and shared responsibility. The current system only creates a division between the militarized, resentful grunt and the privileged, docile sheep -- another division that in no way serves the greatness of the Republic.

Yeah, right, like the anti-Vietnam movement was solely and exclusively about Vietnam and the people of Vietnam, rather than what was at the real core cause for concern and overt involvement. Which was, like today's far smaller voice is about the Jihadist’s War of Terror, nothing more than narcissistic self indulgent driven anger over the possibility the flower children whom later transformed into the money obsessed Yuppies of latter years.

Their sole cause in massive majority, as history has shown, was not to indulge themselves in sacrifices of ”Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” I did not then, nor do I now see any great massive herd of European’s and or American’s rushing toward the venues of self sacrifice in the name of the greater good of others. It is not like they do not have venues available outside of military service to their country and others is it?. The evidence is quite to the contrary, no one calls them to duty for others thus and only a few serve, the rest are far to self absorbed and indulgent to even note the realities of the world we live in that could thief away their narcissistic blindness for freedom without a bill to be paid.

Osama's words? He never speaks without an intent. His words sound like a man trying hard to legitimize his position to a larger, more affluent population. He lost all of his credibility outside of the Muslim world on 9-11.

Yet, he was in his video his words but echoed that of the doom-o-crats and ubber liberals, spoken in near verbatim lock step agreement and endorsement that their views and positions were of benefit to him. Thus, as you correctly deduced, he sought with deliberate intent and purpose, to endorse and thus validate their views, ideology, and visions as a beneficial part to his cause and intended visions.

To think he would recite the doom-o-crats and ubber liberals in a clear validation and endorsement of anything but what is in his interest otherwise is foolishly naive and apathetic as to the pragmatic reality of what this vision he and followers have for my kind, your kind, our doom-o-cratic and ubber liberal kind.

But the Iraq War has given him an opportunity to look again like a sympathetic figure.

Supposition and assumption made in a “war is not answer” conviction, which, when measured in the reality of just how corrupt and violent this planet’s people are toward one and the other, is neither practical nor provable in substance, act, deed and or reality.

He attempts to attach himself to the legitimate positions of western liberals because he hopes that George Bush's political opponents might be converted to military opponents.

Duh! Are you saying he wants Bush opponents to follow Bush’s “kill them where they are” stance? What in the world makes you assume that is Osama’s intent much less the intent of the doom-o-crats and ubber liberals who are so expressive in fear and obedience to him and his minor groups dictations? You have absolutely nothing to substantiate that illogical conclusion what so ever.

This belief is false. Because no matter how much we may disapprove of George Bush's foolish policies, our first priority as a nation is to kill bin Laden and his core loyalists. Bin Laden deludes himself. He still believes that it was his Mujahideen which destroyed the Soviet Union. He thinks that America is near a similar implosion. He is wrong. ...Although you sound like you're pretty much ready to implode.

Child, you preaching to choir, I have 11 members of my family who are first hand witnesses to the failures of Radical Isalm in its Jihadist war of Terror on the world of Muslim and non-Muslims alike. They express no doubt that this movement is doomed, though continuing, it has paid dearly to a near breaking point with tens of thousands of Islamist's fighters mothers weeping for sons who went off to fight in this False Jihad to never to be heard from again. If you only had a comprehension of just how many Saudi, Syrian and Lebanese families, speak of missing members of their family who have gone and not returned from the Jihad.

My imploding, now that is funny, uninformed for sure, but funny. I am getting the impression you have not been around long enough to grasp the vacillating tendency of our European and American public ‘s propensity to bend to the ubber left’s drip, drip, of unattained utopian rationality and over indulgent preference to be the willing in sacrifice over the last 40 years.

Especially when that hope and a prayer utopia is so prevalent among the elite who inform and conclude in absolute assuredness that violence thus war is not the answer, while that 85 to 90% of the other world’s humanity uses, in reality, both violence and war in near continual pragmatic offerings to attaining what they want when they want it.

Happy Trails, Bronco Bill!

Double posting again for some reason..

Happy Trails, Bronco Bill!

I foolishly responded to many of the points posed in the previous posts. At the end I returned to where I started. Basically, nothing that has been said in the posts between my first on this thread and this post (hopefully my last on this needlessly long-winded and tedious dialogue) influences in any way the original point which I introduced.

[quote name='SoloNav' date='Sep 8 2007, 08:29 AM' post='102420']Trader has been around this site much longer than you, the newcomer, and kept this site running almost entirely alone after its implosion when nutcases destroyed it, one of which is a "liberal." He has many more fans than 5, believe me.......[/quote]
I'm simply referring to the number of people who likely saw his post in the time frame that we were looking at. It's clear that the page-views are quite low. Longevity has nothing to do with it.

[quote name='SoloNav' date='Sep 8 2007, 08:29 AM' post='102420']And, yes, he does have military service, among many that have helped keep this nation as it is. He's not humiliated........ He's given folks like you and me freedom to do what we are doing now. I take offense at your description of your imagined battlefield scenario.[/quote]
And of course this can be proven. On the internet.. I have no reason to believe his credentials. And I have no reason to even believe that even if he possessed such "credentials" it would qualify him to speak on the subject any better than anyone else.

[quote name='SoloNav' date='Sep 8 2007, 08:29 AM' post='102420']Anyhoo, how does what you said about OBL wanting to attach himself to legitimate positions of western liberals differ that much from what Trader said, and to which I agreed? Just curious.[/quote]
Your posts suggest liberal politics are somehow akin to politics in support for terrorism. My post suggests that terrorists wish that using liberal politics would legitimize their position. My original point is simply that liberal politics cannot be blamed or criticized for Osama's words. Just as conservative politics cannot be blamed or critized for Hitler's words.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'] Yet, in an obvious oxymora, you redact in clear unambiguous contrarian commentary, you cannot tolerate such and in addition later show us you actually have a strong propensity to presume and assume you know something you are not likely to know about another in any way or means except by intolerance, ridicule and righteously self- presumed supposition. That Gentle lady is the very foundation of what is called Liberal fascism.[/quote]
You'll notice that I said that I can tolerate the politics. I enjoy the politics. I just hate your packaging. Read that one a bit fast?

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'] O yes, another juvenile denial monger, I think therefore I am, thus it is,” ideologue of rationality and reason subjugating pragmatic realism for logical fallacies “that if one is this, he cannot be that, and or, if he is not this, he has to be that.”[/quote]
I'm not going to criticize your ridiculous (and often redundant) verbosity. But your rational is completely nonsensical here. Show me a square-circle. Define a color for white-black. There are categories which are mutually exclusive.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']Kinda like the hollowwood reality shows were non-whites often lament as if intellectually correct, as such that they can not be racists as that would be an absurd correlation of an opposite, where the oppressed act as the oppressors, as if that has never happened. Eh?[/quote]
Way off topic and completely irrelevant.. Could not be more irrelevant; it doesn't even work in a generous metaphor for the previous argument.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']It is amusing to hear such inexperience naivety, professing in absolutes, there is no way possible that there is in existence, today, in America, a Liberal fascism that can be seen, read and heard profusely in deed, act and meaningful intent. It is indeed a comic of error and blind ambition that does not see those who seek to demean, pervert and demonize, not only the country, its political and social initutions, but equally seek to deviate it’s core values far and away from that which has been its greatest strength. Its embedded diversity of opinions, which will not be allowed to be shouted down in mere difference, by elitist’s, retorts and like minded juvenile recantations.[/quote]
Fascism has a clear definition. Liberal has a clear definition. Why don't you show me your dictionary skills.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'][color=red]The word "fascist" ( or "fascism") is sometimes used to denigrate persons, institutions or groups that would not describe themselves as fascist and that do not fall within the formal definition of the word but who in being subscribed as such, do act and personify the true purpose and intent behind the idiom that is fascism.

Where from, a collective ideal is presumed that a centralized social lowest common denominator of authority is best, when it is controlled by an elite few or elitists ideology of a few, which uses the tools of fascism, thus, misinformation, propaganda and outright vitriolic demeaning presumptiveness towards all who oppose their point of view.[/quote]
Oh I see. They're "fascist" in that they're not... Well thought-out argument, that. By applying the term so "liberally" the word loses all meaning.. except for the base emotional response which it ellicits, which is clearly the only true intent behind the use of the word. You've painted with a broad brush which could classify all who believe their opinions to be superior to some other as "fascist," yet you would only have the word trotted out when you feel the need to make an emotional score on the end of your diatribe. And you would then be guilty of the same variety of "fascist" behavior that you denigrate.

"Liberalism" and "fascism" are political ideologies. Liberalism prefers democracy, free market and equality. Fascism prefers dictatorship, corporatism and classism. If you want to decry "leftist fascists" that's one thing, obviously many communists could be examples of leftist fascists. And I'm sure there are a few such people still around in America. But "liberal" has a clear defintion.. which is clearly contrary to "fascist."

You can refer to many of the population of left-leaning Americans as "closed-minded" about their ideals, just as you can refer to many of the population of the right-leaning Americans as "closed-minded" about their ideals. But to call either side "fascist" when both sides still advocate their positions in open dialogue and over democratic elections is an insult to these democratic processes.

Would it offend you to hear those right of center broadly described as "conservative fascists" simply because they would like their ideas to prevail over the ideas of their opponents? You use the tactics that you decry.

Your definition fails. I agree, it is useful when you want to demonize an entire group of people for their personal ideology to compare them to a particularly hated past opponent. But your definition is substantially removed from the true definition. So much so that your use of the term in the context you've provided can only be described as emotion-driven and non-rational.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']Oddly, similar to the presumptive self-righteousness you have exhibited here. Whereby you assume I am not only a partisan unqualified fool full of hate and warmongering propensities. Thus, by your sole estimation, as if it were an absolute authority, you pervert the point further by dishonest contradictory commentary using the very methodology used in liberal fascist’s codifications. From which entitled elitists presume in meaning to convey that those who disagree with their likeminded liberalism and presumed visions for America must surely and unquestionably be mere ignorant fools, unqualified to have an opine and or be capability having some intellectual substance.[/quote]
Ay. No one called you a warmonger. Why don't you point to the paragraph where I did all of that. You're saying that the choice is between being a liberal and a fascist.. or being neither. But you cannot be "liberal" without being "fascist"? Your logic eats itself..

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']Much like Islamist Fascist, who in like wise acts and deeds prefer to use murder, death and terror, rather than demeaning presumptive superiority, deceit and dishonesty to postulate an intended control over others who do not accept their perverted Ideology as the absolute alternative to a better tomorrow.[/quote]
I understand. All people who have a world view alternate to yours support some variety of "fascism" which oppresses your personal belief system. It makes sense.. in a sad sort of way.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']I guess that kind of demurs onto the light of reality, these logical fallacies of yours that ASSumes correctness that liberalism per se can and does not use fascist tools to ensure its dominance, eh comrade?[/quote]
I think it's funny that you probably really believe that the "liberal" vice is closing in on you. America is a liberal nation. Democracy is liberalism. Equality, justice, and the rule of law. Woe and fear these three "fascist" institutions.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']O yes, the credentials of divine authority, spas mile, that’s the ticket to validation and substance, eh?[/quote]
Where did divinity come into it? I merely said that I make no pretension. And I see no reason to waste time and energy on personal history lessons which would be impossible to validate and irrelevent to the conversation. And I invite you to make up whatever ridiculous internet story you'd like. Please feel free. Maybe throw in a shark or something.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']I am amused at your fear of exposure and how it would elicit from your mental pretentiousness such an implied condescension about an unknown person’s war record. Your condescension of a defender of your liberty and rights in your fictional over exasperated juvenile obtuse punditry, shows us more about what you are and are not than you will ever imagine. Yet, another example of Liberal fascism were there is an assumption that such fictional events would need to be lamented in vituperative of implied negativity as a thing that is in opposition to what you stand for.[/quote]
Person? You're a line of text on a page. Anything behind that means nothing to me. Your opinions are only valid as far as I can find a logical rationale within the commentary to carry a consistent message. Your facts are only valid as far as they can be confirmed by other sources. And your past history, your "war record" means less than nothing when you have nothing but your text on this page to prove your place in that role. I could tell you that I was a Marine 2nd Lieutenant in the final years of Vietnam. I could tell you that I worked in the Bush State Department or KBR. But I see no need to tell you anything about my life. Quite honestly, the only reason you could have to look into my life experience would be to find some way to invalidate my opinions, rather than actually confronting these opinions on their merits. I'll remind you again, you have failed to do this at any point. If you refuse to debate on the merits of the argument (and not the merits of the individual) you're wasting my time.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']We agree, your merits or lack thereof are not my problem. Yet, I have not read anything here provided by you that validates your opinion in the absolution that you presume is there either.[/quote]
Again. All you want to do is debate the quality of my experience. Not a comment to the quality of my words. Evasive to say the least.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']A man who crows in illusion as to his merits and illusions of victories is only a man that crows, giving no measure nor credence to him nor his merits, much less his false illusion of unearned victory.

A man who is and has something needs not say it is so, likewise, the same is likely never true of a man who is and has nothing.

Yet, a man who “must” illustrate to others his meritorious and meaningfulness as to what he is and or is not and particularly what others are and are not, in comparison, often as not, speaks from a purposelessness of reality wholly unrelated to what he is and or what he has done or will be and or will do.

Disagreement equivocatingly is not synonymous with disagreeable vitriol except by the intolerance and authoritarian. Nor is academics presumed omnipotence equally as to some absolute infallibility. They are instead, nature’s representative paradox of and about humanity, seldom sacrosanct and as often as not, as wrong as right.[/quote]
So many words to say nothing.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'] Ouch, that was so hurtful and cruel, NOT!! What a meaningless blow for intellectual substance. Bet you are proud that you were capable of coming up with that sump pump titillation. Perhaps the Daily Kos is more up tempo and your speed in intellect, maturity and substance?[/quote]
You're putting on such a melodramatic performance, I thought it was a shame that the daily pageviews were so low.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']Yeah, right, like the anti-Vietnam movement was solely and exclusively about Vietnam and the people of Vietnam, rather than what was at the real core cause for concern and overt involvement. Which was, like today's far smaller voice is about the Jihadist’s War of Terror, nothing more than narcissistic self indulgent driven anger over the possibility the flower children whom later transformed into the money obsessed Yuppies of latter years.[/quote]
Yeah. That's what I meant.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'][Their sole cause in massive majority, as history has shown, was not to indulge themselves in sacrifices of ”Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” I did not then, nor do I now see any great massive herd of European’s and or American’s rushing toward the venues of self sacrifice in the name of the greater good of others. It is not like they do not have venues available outside of military service to their country and others is it?. The evidence is quite to the contrary, no one calls them to duty for others thus and only a few serve, the rest are far to self absorbed and indulgent to even note the realities of the world we live in that could thief away their narcissistic blindness for freedom without a bill to be paid.[/quote]
So your analysis is that only the noble volunteer military is worthy of praise. The population is bloated and helpless. Please note that the only time a military force is ever used in defense of freedom is for a society which values these freedoms. A military without a national conscience is nothing but a mercenary army. A military separated from the "self absorbed" "indulgent" denizens of their state is nothing more than a warband. Nothing more than al Qaeda. The humanity of America creates the miracle of a military force which defends such rights, rather than oppressing them. The military did not give us freedom. Our freedom gave us something worth protecting.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'][color=red] Yet, he was in his video his words but echoed that of the doom-o-crats and ubber liberals, spoken in near verbatim lock step agreement and endorsement that their views and positions were of benefit to him. Thus, as you correctly deduced, he sought with deliberate intent and purpose, to endorse and thus validate their views, ideology, and visions as a beneficial part to his cause and intended visions.[/quote]
It should have tipped me off immediately when I saw "doom-o-crats" and "ubber" in the sentence that I wasn't going to be reading any enlightened political insight..

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424'] Duh! Are you saying he wants Bush opponents to follow Bush’s “kill them where they are” stance? What in the world makes you assume that is Osama’s intent much less the intent of the doom-o-crats and ubber liberals who are so expressive in fear and obedience to him and his minor groups dictations? You have absolutely nothing to substantiate that illogical conclusion what so ever.[/quote]
Shocking how badly you misinterpreted that paragraph. Shocking. For all the endless dialogue.. you fail to comprehend on even the most basic analysis. I mean.. your first sentence is a laughably poor interpretation of my argument. Down hill from there.

[quote name='ustrader' date='Sep 9 2007, 01:48 AM' post='102424']Especially when that hope and a prayer utopia is so prevalent among the elite who inform and conclude in absolute assuredness that violence thus war is not the answer, while that 85 to 90% of the other world’s humanity uses, in reality, both violence and war in near continual pragmatic offerings to attaining what they want when they want it.[/quote]
I absolutely do not reject violence or war. But that wasn't the issue. The issue was the relationship between Osama's words and those of legitimate American politicians.

If the argument can be made that Osama's words indicate flaws in following leftist ideology. Then the argument can be made that Hitler's words indicate flaws in following conservative ideology. This is all that I came here to say. All of the rest of this nonsense is just distracting from that basic truism.

What would be the credentials that would convince you? I'm assuming, of course, that you then would trust the soldiers in the field who have said that liberals' comments have encouraged the terrorists?
I guess my point is that when liberals speak against the war, it gives the terrorists psychological assistance to continue, thinking they have somehow beaten us..........remember OBL's words that the West doesn't have the stomach for a war?

No, it doesn't. It actually stands for change from the norm, whatever that norm is. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

You see, conservatives also believe in democracy, free market and equality. And, at least one liberal I know is quite against "democracy," which he calls mob-rule.

Do you not become uncomfortable to hear that his remarks so closely follow the current liberal Democrats' stances?

Excuse me,sunshine, but the military's purpose isn't to educate about and interact with foreign cultures, it's to win wars. The COIN strategy in Iraq, yes, we educate the enlisted in the foreign culture, but that is to be able to beat them and to out smart them and "PSYOP" the foreign population into doing what is in the United State's best interest. (which just so happens to be their best interest as well, seeing that the United States has the best form of freedom in the world)

You want young people to learn and interact with foreign cultures? Tell them to join the UN.

bin Laden. He can run but he can't hide. Well at least that is what Dubya says.

At least he wasn't in plain sight, and easy pickins' IF the President could just be found to give his permission.........for 3 days!! Clinton.

This is the story that is unfolding. This is the tactic the left's followers are falling for.

“You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it.”
Ho Chi Minh

Speaking of the will of the American people.

This is a lesson learned. Please don't ask us to learn it again.

Happy Trails buckaroos!!Click to view attachment

Tora Bora.Plain sight? Does that sound familiar? Bush was supposed to be after him and can't even catch him because he uses people that our troops were fighting beforehand.

I can see it now.

"Hi Osama. Can you believe that Bush sent us in after you?"

Trading one Political Whorehouse for another.
Is stilling letting the Pimps control us!

Democrats give Socialist UNIONS new clout!

LABOR vs Corporate "TEA MONEY"

Donations to the Democratic and Republican parties by labor groups in 2006:

Democrats: $57.6 million

Republicans: $8.2 million

Source: Center for Responsive Politics By Julie Snider, USA TODAY

HOUSE DEMS' ( Tea Money) ACTIONS

• Passed a spending bill that would cut 20% from the proposed budget of the Office of Labor Management Standards, a Labor Department unit that investigates alleged union mismanagement.

• Inserted a provision into the farm bill, backed by government employee unions, that would block state efforts to outsource the running of food stamp programs.

• Passed new requirements that contractors on taxpayer-funded security, water and energy projects pay prevailing wages, which often equate to higher union wages.

• Approved legislation that unions say would make it easier to organize.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...on_N.htm?csp=34


Good News by Doom-ocrats, soon no one to blame!

Yet, fear not Doom-ocracy, there is still hope for you when you take charge, you will still have available, our dead and our economy, to blame in the leadership of doom and gloom!

"If the Republicans lose Virginia, Nebraska, Colorado, New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon and Minnesota - and pick up no new seats - the Democrats will have 57 votes in the Senate (counting Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who votes with them). It's enough to let a new Democratic president have her way legislatively without too much trouble."


http://www.nypost.com/seven/09122007/posto...enate_hopes.htm


The Democratic Patron’s MoveOn.Org full-page ad in The New York Times that landed on Washington doorsteps before sunrise Monday came from an anti-war group that’s normally friendly to Democrats. But by day’s end, the majority in Congress may have felt like victims of friendly fire.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5751.html


THA T
IS
ALL!

Another animation about the doom-ocracy! Click to view attachment

A MOVEON.Jihad person kills Dutch man with an axe merely over his anger over the Iraq war!!


Is this the beginning of MoveOn's Leftist's Jihad against the World, America and Americans??



Condolences site:

http://www.datalease.nl/thijs/index.php




American Confesses to Axing Dutch Student to Death

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands — A U.S. citizen has confessed to axing a 22-year-old Dutch student to death, his lawyer said has said, adding that the American had expressed a desire to punish the Netherlands for its government's support of the war in Iraq.

The suspect, Carlos Hartmann, 41, of Tecumseh, Michigan, confessed to the Sept. 8 killing on a train platform in the southern city of Roosendaal, lawyer Peter Gremmen said.

Hartmann appeared before a judge Tuesday and was ordered held for another two weeks for investigation.

"He hates soldiers, and says that the army kills people, so it would be legitimate if he were also to kill someone ... from the American military — or from its NATO allies," Gremmen said in a telephone interview.

When he failed to find a soldier at the Roosendaal train station, "he got such a crazy, disturbed idea that he killed a civilian," Gremmen said.

Hartmann did not attempt to escape the scene and was arrested shortly after the killing.

Dutch prosecutors confirmed that the suspect had confessed but did not identify him, in keeping with Dutch practice.

Under the Dutch legal system, Hartmann was not required to enter a plea Tuesday.

Dutch television program "4 In Het Land" reached both of Hartmann's parents by telephone.

"He was against the war, and he thought the U.S. was aggressive, going into other countries and making war," his mother, Delores, told the program. "You can be anti-war, you can be leftist, but not this — I never imagined something like this," she said, weeping.

Gerald Hartmann described his son as intelligent but said "he was an angry person too, I think; that's the problem."

Gremmen said Hartmann has lived in the Netherlands since 2002, supporting himself with English editing work for a Japanese company, which he could do by computer, and that he had no fixed address.

He said Hartmann had consented to undergo psychological testing, and was now "terribly sorry for his deed."

[/I]The victim, identified as Thijs Geers, was waiting for a train and had no connection with the suspect or the military.[/I] Online condolence registers in the Netherlands were flooded with thousands of messages of sympathy for him and his family.

BN/De Stem quoted a witness who asked to remain anonymous as describing Hartmann as striking Geers in the back of the head with the ax.

"It's a sad story," Gremmen, the lawyer, said. "But I'm glad he's admitted what he's done and that he's sorry for it."


That is All!!

A MOVEON.Jihad person kills Dutch man with an axe merely over his anger over the Iraq war!!


Is this the beginning of MoveOn's Leftist's Jihad against the World, America and Americans??



Condolences site:

http://www.datalease.nl/thijs/index.php




American Confesses to Axing Dutch Student to Death

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands — A U.S. citizen has confessed to axing a 22-year-old Dutch student to death, his lawyer said has said, adding that the American had expressed a desire to punish the Netherlands for its government's support of the war in Iraq.

The suspect, Carlos Hartmann, 41, of Tecumseh, Michigan, confessed to the Sept. 8 killing on a train platform in the southern city of Roosendaal, lawyer Peter Gremmen said.

Hartmann appeared before a judge Tuesday and was ordered held for another two weeks for investigation.

"He hates soldiers, and says that the army kills people, so it would be legitimate if he were also to kill someone ... from the American military — or from its NATO allies," Gremmen said in a telephone interview.

When he failed to find a soldier at the Roosendaal train station, "he got such a crazy, disturbed idea that he killed a civilian," Gremmen said.

Hartmann did not attempt to escape the scene and was arrested shortly after the killing.

Dutch prosecutors confirmed that the suspect had confessed but did not identify him, in keeping with Dutch practice.

Under the Dutch legal system, Hartmann was not required to enter a plea Tuesday.

Dutch television program "4 In Het Land" reached both of Hartmann's parents by telephone.

"He was against the war, and he thought the U.S. was aggressive, going into other countries and making war," his mother, Delores, told the program. "You can be anti-war, you can be leftist, but not this — I never imagined something like this," she said, weeping.

Gerald Hartmann described his son as intelligent but said "he was an angry person too, I think; that's the problem."

Gremmen said Hartmann has lived in the Netherlands since 2002, supporting himself with English editing work for a Japanese company, which he could do by computer, and that he had no fixed address.

He said Hartmann had consented to undergo psychological testing, and was now "terribly sorry for his deed."

[/I]The victim, identified as Thijs Geers, was waiting for a train and had no connection with the suspect or the military.[/I] Online condolence registers in the Netherlands were flooded with thousands of messages of sympathy for him and his family.

BN/De Stem quoted a witness who asked to remain anonymous as describing Hartmann as striking Geers in the back of the head with the ax.

"It's a sad story," Gremmen, the lawyer, said. "But I'm glad he's admitted what he's done and that he's sorry for it."


That is All!!

Yea. In plain sight. You gotta get over it, Grizz, and quit obfuscating.

MoveOn.Jihad fascist's attack Couric for not towing Ideological Line.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=60...earch&plindex=0

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=60...earch&plindex=0

Today's MoveOn.Jihad moonbats justifying baby killer intellect similarly today, 34 to 42 years hence.

To: PAO ( Pubic Affairs Officer) Centcom;

Dear Sirs;

I am writing in the hope that you will kindly forward or convey my inquiry to Admiral Fallon. So that he can seek, at his discretion, to either dispel and or confirm a commentary attributed to him regarding General Petraeus.

A commentary being used as an Ideological attack tool to deflect the public outrage as to the attacks by non-politicians on the General, our mission, our troops and our commanders in Iraq and in the greater Terrorist's War on America.

I have no affiliation remotely with any organization and or political group and am only responding in anger as a former Marine and disabled Vietnam Veteran, as is the Admiral.

I have first hand experience with our own people's personal attacks on us in the military using misinformation and myths in a "baby killer intellect" merely to prove some ideologues convenient truths and excuses for why attacks on us in the military where then, as they are now, appropriate and deserving.

We lost the war of American hearts and minds, then in Vietnam, as now, by not showing dishonest misinformation as the convenient truths and myths they were and are, when it was and is absolutely provable that what is and or was being said and or spread as absolute fact, was, in fact, false.

The quote that is being used all over the extensive and wide MoveOn.org internet network and now in the main stream media, even at Fox news, as an absolute truth attributed to the Admiral, is, in my humble opinion, an effort to deflect the outrage of criticism about these personal attacks on the General.

This is only the first salvo in a growing trend of American on American attacks on our troops as we who served in Vietnam are well aware.

The unnamed source, implied, as if in the Military and or present with the General and Admiral upon their first meetings and his taking over CENTCOM, is quoted as a defense for the attacks on the General, as if the Admiral is in some way agreeable with them.

"In sharp contrast to the lionization of Gen. David Petraeus by members of the U.S. Congress during his testimony this week, Petraeus's superior, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March, according to Pentagon sources familiar with reports of the meeting."

Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an a s s-kissing little chickens h i t" and added, "I hate people like that", the sources say. That remark reportedly came after Petraeus began the meeting by making remarks that Fallon interpreted as trying to ingratiate himself with a superior."

I seek nothing nor even a response. Yes, I know the Admiral and our Military has issues that are more important on their plate than this. Yet, if this is provable as an untrue commentary used as a lie, to once again attack, those who put the mission above all. I implore the Admiral to consider that his mission, as, I am confident, he is well aware, is as much about the military component, with important components of some importance as to the Iraqi and Afghani hearts and minds.

Yet, is it not equally and even more importantly, about the hearts and minds of Americans?

Is it not equally important to focus as much on correcting harmful misinformation, as it is to inform, with and, only with, the truth in dutiful honor and integrity?

That common valor, which is at the Corp of our Military and its hollowed honored traditions of winning, in the right way, for right reasons, giving no advantage to our enemies and or those who would, in falsity, have our missions fail. We have already paid for a fair chance at success dearly in hollowed blood, treasure and, perhaps, in the very destiny of our nation's future.

Do deceptions and misinformation that harm our efforts not deserve an effective response if it is truthfully and honestly available?


Respectfully

IF GAGED BY THE AVERAGE OF ALL POLLS, THE MEDIA AND CONGRESS TELLS US, "NO ONE IS LISTENING TO BUSH."

Yet, if polls are the ultimate gage as every pundit says, what does that say about who IS LISTENING to THE MEDIA and to CONGRESS?

Bush- Average 34.0% approval and 61.4% disapproval

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/archive/?poll_id=19

Congress- Average 23.5% Approval and 65.8% Disapproval

"The influence of the established media is waning."

True- 64%

False- 36%

Votes: 715

"American reporters are a threat to national security."

True- 73%

False- 27%

Votes: 1565

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/archive/?poll_id=18

Gallup Poll. Sept. 7-10, 2006. N=1,002 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.


"Now thinking for a moment about the news media: In general, do you think the news media is too liberal, just about right, or too conservative?" Options rotated



----------------------Too--------About----Too
----------------------Liberal-----Right----Conservative------Unsure
----------------------%----------%--------%-------------------%

.
9/7-10/06 44 33 19 4

.
9/12-15/05 46 37 16 1

.
9/13-15/04 48 33 15 4

.
9/03------------45 39 14 2

.
2/03------------45 36 15 4

.
9/02------------47 37 13 3

.
9/01------------45 40 11 4


Too Liberal Average -45.7%

About Right Average- 36.4%

Too Conservative Average- 13.1%

http://www.pollingreport.com/media.htm

That is all!!

Having landed here, by link, from that vitriol which is the Daily Kos, I ponder on a thought or two.

“FEARFUL DENIAL MONGERING” comes to mind. That abstract of rationality from the other side of a mythical universe seeded in the ideology of doom and gloom a vision vested in denial supplanted by individualistic narcissism and obsesses of absolution’s guilt free visions of yet seen utopia.

It is that angry idiom of absolute infallibility, bred in urban legends, paying no price for anything, but seemingly knowing the price of everything. That free lunch entitlement embedded in infallible substance, addicted to the necessity of conspiracy and a logical fallacy of truism, that there has to be an American self-evil that must be vanquished.

Thus, in that fallacy of logic, this alter-nut-root of Doomocracy must conspire in blame and vilification, as to something or someone, always, mind you, other than in self, to substance that fallacy of image of an American self evil.

It is this angry substance of smug Hanoi Jane altered- reality given in explanations and punditry in mantra of yet seen “peace in our time, absolute utopian values.” That spew of absolute denial said in generational lost utopian visions, there is not anything to fear at all, only the lies of non-existent dangers, flawed in alter-reality and absolute wisdom, as inconceivably possible, thus impossible, and as such, unworthy of forethought and consideration.

A mantra of misjudgment, proven in history by the deaths of hundreds of millions, as nothing more than hope gone mad paid for far to greatly and far to late than was necessary.

Having voted for a war, then, as it has not proceeded to their patriotic glorification, these narcissistic voices of Doomocracy, who are few in numbers vested in sacrifice in that war, are thus far impotently voting against it, oddly only in the forethought and wisdom of today and in horizons of but the next election.

Saying in directional contrarian justification, in a voice of presumed unquestionable correctness, “pack your bags, turn out the lights, let down the curtain, go home for the show is over.”

Stopping only to spin and pundit to shout down as “fear mongering lairs,” those who say there are consequences unspoken of on this road now traveled to Doomocracy in unquestionable visions of absolute foresight, only to the next election.

Yet, I ask this of this Doomocarcy of the loud and uninvolved masses. If you are wrong and there are consequences of mongering fears, as predicted. Will you fall on your swords of empty words and short visions, stepping forward in front of those of us who do the dirty work of your war, so that so many from yet seen utopia, who do not, can be wrong, thus, forgiven in self divinity absolutions of consequences not envisioned?

Military Holds Most Trust in Iraq Debate, New Poll Finds

In a New York Times/CBS Poll both with unquestioned proven Far left Liberal fascist propensities;

Only 5 percent of Americans — a strikingly low number for a sitting president’s handling of such a dominant issue — said they most trust the Bush administration to resolve the war, the poll found. Asked to choose between the administration, Congress and military commanders, 21 percent said they would most trust Congress and a resoundingly confident, 68 percent expressed the most trust in military commanders.

I guess that definitively examples how OUT TOUCH WITH REALITY AND AMERICA that mouth piece of Liberal Fascism, the NY Times and its Vitriolic Maoist Group of 15 at MoveOn.Jihad along with its inbred Proletariat of Chomsky Vitriol spewed in spurious elations, at The Jihads Daily Kos, really are, Eh!!

That is all!!

"One Voice"

Speaking in concert as if from the same play book it seems;

Our American MoveOn.Jihad, alleges Bush, Petraeous our military and the Republicans are cooking the books to cover up US failures and mistakes in Iraq.

While at the same time and in the same vocabulary and punditry, the Theocracy In Iran oddly reading from their jointly written play book, say in similar thought and purpose “U.S. points fingers to cover failures in Iraq.”

While Syria repeats MoveOn’s linguistics and Ideology about US claims that Israel attacked and destroyed a North Korean Syrian/Iranian Secret Nuclear facility deep in Syria near Turkey and Iraq, as “nothing more than lies made up to cover up US failures in Iraq.”

Oddly claiming at the same time that Israeli Aircraft did penetrate, without loss, that vaunted top of the line advanced Russian Air defense systems sold to Syria and Iran. Yet, as if of lesser concern to Syria, Iran and Moscow, they deny while confirming the Israeli deep Intrusion did happen against their helpless defenses but did not destroyed anything while oddly penetrating this advanced Russian Anti-Aircraft Missile system sold to them.

Perhaps an alarming message of vulnerability to both Syria and Iran, as it may be to Moscow, as it bellows and beats its chest in renewed Cold War Super Power Rhetoric, eh?

As well, perhaps, reminding Europe, of its recent memory lapses of forgotten threat as to why it wanted the US as an ally all along?

See more examples of that “One Voice” from American/European's and that Counter-Revolutionary Movement of Jihad in Gaza, Southern Lebanon by Hezbollah, Syria, Iran, and the Tribal Areas of Pakistan, against the west and all it stands for.

Police Say Vietnam Memorial Vandalized

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-fJsDd...cVS-eRsmo3HAcbA

Cops: Vietnam Memorial Vandalized With Oily Substance

WASHINGTON — An oily substance found splashed on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial this month was the result of vandalism, U.S. Park Police determined.

Sgt. Robert Lachance, a Park Police spokesman, said Monday that a detective made the conclusion, but he declined to provide further details because of the investigation is ongoing.

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, which built the structure, has offered a $5,000 reward for information leading to an arrest and conviction in the case.

The oily substance on the black granite wall — which bears the names of more than 58,000 men and women killed or missing in the Vietnam War — was first reported Sept. 7. National Park Service officials said they did not know what the substance was, and at first said it was unclear whether it was the result of vandalism or some kind of accident.

On Monday, dark blotches remained along a stone curb at the base of the wall for much of its length. At least 14 of its 140 inscribed panels appeared to be stained.

Park Service spokesman Bill Line said maintenance and preservation crews were working to remove the stains and marks but were proceeding cautiously to avoid further damage. He said officials are confident they can remove all the stains, but it could take a week or more.

It's deplorable that someone would vandalize what's really a national shrine," said Jan C. Scruggs, founder and president of the Memorial Fund. "It's an outrage. It's sad."

The again this is what our Liberal Fascist American Jihad enablers do when they can not get their narcassistic way, is it not?

http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/img/origi...DCMarch.gifIVAW


(Iraqi Veterans Against The War) Praised as an enabler, like Kerry's Vietnam Groups where by Uncle Ho and friends, as bringing in “a new day for the Anti-War Movement and by proxy for Jihad” by none other than the The American Muslim." A Pro-Hamas and Iranian group based here in the US.

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/f...ovement/0014633

Thousands attend US anti-war march Aljazeera making feverous note of the September 15th Anti- Everything March in Washington DC, not bothering to mention the 200 protesters arrested for attacking the police, but it did quote Organizer inflated claims, via the Jihad “Red Phone,” there were 100,000 people that attended the protest.

However police did not confirm the figure and stated they thought it was far less. (Most observers say the figure was between 15,000 and perhaps 25,000 at best.)

US anti-war protest numbers less than expected; 25,000 estimated

A permit for the march obtained in advance by the ANSWER Coalition had projected 10,000.

See they knew before hand, their movement was more about the agendas of many separate groups disunited except in Public display for their causes and the gardnering of free air time and news print to propagandizes those many separate but unequal causes of associations only as Liberal, leftists and or fascists activists.

http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?Story...16-103122-6235r

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/994...E7CFCF4D387.htm


Let’s see, MoveOn.Jihad attacks Military and a few days later some 20,000 Liberal Fascist of the left protesting everything from Get out of Iraq (NOT, Korea, Japan, Europe, Kosovo and or Afghanistan) Free Palestine, Slavery Repartitions, Impeach Bush, Save the nut-roots, save the environment via Terrorism and the Socialist revolt against Globalization and Democracy, marched in Washington.

Then oddly once again these Liberal leftist Fascist of old, rise up, to demean Vietnam Veterans and by proxy all veterans of all wars by defacing the Vietnam War Memorial.

IS THAT A COINCIDENCE OR A "ONE VOICE" STRATEGIC PLAN OF THE LIBERAL AMERICAN/INTERNATIONAL JIHAD BY FASCIST LEFTISTS AGAINST AMERICA AND THE WEST?

One Voice;

Doomacracy Bill Allowing Detainees to Appeal Detentions in US courts Rejected by Senate.

The Senate narrowly rejected legislation on Wednesday that would have given military detainees the right to protest their detention in federal court.

The 56-43 vote against the bill, by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., fell four votes shy of the 60 needed to cut off debate. It was a blow for human rights groups that say a current ban on habeas corpus petitions could lead to the indefinite detention of individuals wrongfully suspected of terrorism.

Note, that not once, but twice late last year this Congress passed legislation that address the Supreme courts concerns for enemy Combatant detainee legal rights.

The first, giving them no right of Habeus Corpus as has never been given in the History of not only English Common law and or US Constitutional law but for that matter in the law of any nation.

Then via a related court case, they came back for a 2nd time [U]to ensure the originally broadly worded denials of such rights to Us courts that were ambiguous as to past detainees, and rectified that to include future and past detainees have no access of Habeus Corpus.

A legal Process of allowing enemy combatants access to secret information from US sources, allies and or agents of the US to become available and public. but as well [U]to compel each soldier and ally who was present at their capture to be presented as a witness as to their acts as enemy combatants.

Thusif passed as was the intent of this doomocracy it would have self creating a giant logistics and personal nightmare in order to reconstruct protection for enemies while bri g risk to our security, our personell and our allies. Doing nothing more than creating years of uncalled for litigation.

Where by in curfent law there exists an alternative of judicial review. As passed into law last year by congress there are venues of appeal to US courts already available of the Military tribunals detainee adjudication system whereby Tribunals decisions are subject to appeal to the DC Circuit of Court of Appeals, considered the 2nd highest court in the land to the Supreme Court of the United States.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297331,00.htm

Doomocracy’s plans for Iraq troop withdrawal set back today.

Efforts of Senate Democrats to get U.S. combat troops out of Iraq were damaged Wednesday when Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner said he would not back a plan to mandate stateside leave time.

Warner was one of the 56 votes of the 60 vote threshold to merely get a vote that fail short last year in this o so common back door effort of Congressional using smoke and mirrors to deflect their real intent and purpose. Noting it takes 67 votes to override a presidential Veto.

O well, there is hope 2009 will be here soon and then the Doomocracy as it presumes will be 100% in charge.

Yet equally, as the sole “Deciders,” accountable for consequences to the people, the world and to history for calling for the retreat and thus the defeat in Iraq and, as such, enabling a larger victory for the Terrorist War on America.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/19/sen...iraq/index.html


One Voice;

'Dozens died in Syria-Iran missile test'

Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in Jane's Defence Weekly, which reported that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.

According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas.

Reports of the accident were circulated at the time; however, no details were released by the Syrian government, and there were no hints of an Iranian connection.

The report comes on the heels of criticism leveled by the Syrians at the United States, accusing it of spreading "false" claims of Syrian nuclear activity and cooperation with North Korea to excuse an alleged Israeli air incursion over the country this month.

According to globalsecurity.org, Syria is not a signatory of either the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), - an international agreement banning the production, stockpiling or use of chemical weapons - or the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

Syria began developing chemical weapons in 1973, just before the Yom Kipper War. Globalsecurity.org cites the country as having one of the most advanced chemical weapons programs in the Middle East

One Voice??

Jackson Says Barack Obama 'Acting White' in Case of Six Blacks Accused in Assault Case



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297332,00.html

One Voice;

Iranian officer 'seized in Iraq'

US-led forces in Iraq say they have arrested an Iranian officer operating in the north of the country.
They say the man was a member of the Quds Force - an elite unit of Iran's Revolutionary Guards - and was detained in the Kurdish city of Sulaimaniya.

"This individual has been involved in transporting improvised explosive devices," the American military said.

The US has accused the Quds Force of helping arm Shia militias in Iraq. Iran denies any involvement with militants.

A statement by the US military said the arrested man had been involved in the "infiltration and training of foreign terrorists in Iraq".

According to a spokesman for the regional government in semi-autonomous Kurdistan, he was taken away overnight in a raid on a Sulaimaniya hotel.

A government official in Baghdad said the arrested man had been part of a commercial delegation, but gave no further details.

Tehran says it supports the US-backed Iraqi government, and blames the violence on the continuing conflicts within Iraq since US-led forces toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7004801.stm

One Voice;

Bin Laden Declares War on Musharraf (Pakistan) in New Audiotape.

Perhaps a calculated master piece of Political strategy that will be the beginning of the final Jihad with nukes or perhaps a disastrous miscalculation resulting in the final end to the Al Queda and Taliban Jihad?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297401,00.html

One Voice;

Iranian President "Armena-jihad" the supreme commander and leader of the Iranian Quds force that is, by all US military and media accounts, indirectly responsible for the killing 40% of all US KIA by IED in Iraq and Afghanistan was denied permission to go to ground zero in NY to lay a wreath for the 19 Jihads who died in his cause.

One Voice;

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Webb Amdt. No. 2909 )

Vote Number: 341 Vote Date: September 19, 2007, 05:30 PM

Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected

Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2909 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585 (National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2008)

Statement of Purpose: To specify minimum periods between deployment of units and members of the Armed Forces deployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. ( Same dressed up Back-door withdrawal that failed last October 2006.

Vote Counts: YEAs 56

NAYs 44

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Amendment (Feingold Amdt. No. 2924 )

Vote Number: 345 Vote Date: September 20, 2007, 02:54 PM

Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected

Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585 (National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2008)

Statement of Purpose: To safely redeploy all United States troops from Iraq within 90 days of enact of this law and offer cut backs in funding to ensure the redeployment.

Vote Counts: YEAs 28

NAYs 70

Not Voting 2

That is all!!

Moon bats at MoveOn.Jihad, slithering in the same angry vitriol used to Attack our troops and the Vietnam War Memorial, respond to US SENATE REBUKE OF THEM, not grasping intellectually that their angry child play of shout down and attack, is not remotely a common thought process for 90 to 95 % of Americans which they DO NOT represent in any way or form.

They may think they have already bought the White House if Edwards, Obama and Hillary are elected and of course some small percentage of the congress. But they are not buying America nor are Americans buying them, as is clear that like the Senate a more moderating voice of reason and reality than is the looney left at MoveOn.Jihad, the vast majority of Americans oppose their fascist elitists attitudes of righteousness neo-socialism that justify in their limited capacities any attack on any one who disagrees with their vision of a Socialistic PC Police State.

Hopefully in a wisdom America will not to elect those they support.

The response of the mature and Political enabling:





SEE THEIR RESPONSE TO a REBUKE OF THEM BY 72 US SENATORS ATTACHED AT BOTTOM




Miscellaneous; that which is so malformed it has no residual to which it has category, thus it wades in the pools of incongruity, where often in the tepidity of meekness is a florid yet to bloom into awareness.

Thus giving way to a less developed form in the aforementioned residuals, as a cockney wanker of “Perfidious Albion. A mentality so well vested and exampled in the lucidity of that which is MoveOn.Jihad's Doomocracy.

Morass Spewing Negative Bellowing Communalists


That is all!!

An American Madrasah
(Arabic: مدرسة,
of but
ONE VOICE FREE THOUGHT!




Translated;

“This is Columbia’s Move On America at best.

Where there is but ONE VOICE;

It is a Voice from a Theocratic Dictatorship who gives none of its people a Voice, but has a enabling Columbia “Madrasah” forum to have its voice heard in the ONE VOICE values of Columbia University.

It is a Voice of Columbia University values that would allow the voice of a mad Theocratic Terrorist leader who imprisoned and tortured Americans during the impotent Presidency of Carter. But, will not give those imprisoned, a right of Voice to confront This terrorists face to face.

It is the Voice of an enabling murderer proven complicit in 40% of ALL American and Coalition IED Soldier deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan that Columbia insists must be heard.

But, not one Voice of the American Military on its campus can be heard. Nor can those representative of these dead Troops be allowed Voice at this Madrasah of but One Voice of Free Thought.

Who's blood paid for those Columbia University core values is the question Columbia ignores.

It is the voice of free thought that restricts open borders and free expression of rights that is allowed in Columbia’s core values, but will not be allowed are the voices of free thought who oppose open borders and Illegal immigrant Amnesty.

It is the Voice of free thought espoused in Columbia headquartered Socialist Workers Party Ideals that can be heard unfettered. Yet the voices of those majority who oppose such Liberal Fascist are allowed to be shouted down in Columbia Values .

It is the Voice of a Holocaust denier or gleeful man of praise for it, who is allowed a voice in Columbia University Values, while the silent voices of the Holocaust Millions and the multitudes more of its living victims of have NO VOICE in Columbia University Values.

It is the Voice of a second ambitioned Holocaust proponent who would if he could destroy an entire nation, who is allowed in Columbia University Values, to be heard, while the silent voices of his intended victims and his secondary victims, we and even those at Columbia University, if he is successful, have NO VOICE in Columbia University Values.

ONLY ONE VOICE IS AT THE CORE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITIES VALUES

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/=3fq=3dcomment/reply/26814



Who do you think he is laughing at America, surely not that ONE VOICE INSULT that is Columbia University and its so called ONE VOICE free thought value system?

Columbia own Student Newspaper Poll

Do you support the decision to invite President Ahmadinejad to speak on campus?

Posted September 19th, 2007
by jdavisson

Yes. --27% (179 votes)

No.--71% (476 votes)

No opinion.--2% (13 votes)

Total votes: 668



I guess at this American Madrasah (Arabic: مدرسة, of Move On Jihad and Far Left propensities, there is only way to THINK.

It is as the statue there contemplates as they have willingly shown us all, not only how and or what to think. But, in the core of Columbia’s values, insists, who, among all others, are capable of thinking at all outside these hollowed halls of freedom of thought that is this bastion of American leftists ideology.

Where from the only Voice to be heard is ONE and only ONE at this enabling forum of ONE VOICE ONLY Fascism, bred and embedded at this Columbia, Madrasah (Arabic: مدرسة, University school of hard leftists core values far from free thought in a nation of MANY VOICES.

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/=3fq=3dnode/26793

New York Times Public Editor Rebukes MoveOn.org's Petraeus Ad


The New York Times acknowledged Sunday that a controversial advertisement attacking Gen. David Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq, was sold to a liberal activist group at a discount rate the organization was not entitled to receive, and that the paper violated its own advertising policies when it published the MoveOn ad.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297745,00.html



I guess that definitively proves the NY Times is bred to the business of Ideology mongering.

Proving increasingly how desperate and OUT TOUCH WITH REALITY AND AMERICA it is as the mouthpiece of Liberal Fascism so well exampled by this Group of 15 Vitriolic Maoists at MoveOn.Jihad and their immature Proletariat of Chomsky spew made in spurious dementia at that similar first cousin ideology hostel which is The Jihads Daily Kos.

That is all!!

Morass Spewing Negative Bellowing Communalists

Iranians Upset at US people for insulting their little Napoleonic Syndrome Tyrant.Oddly in ONE VOICE like our "Kun" LEFT, when he is not right.

[quote] Issue 10 questions to Columbia Universities President.

Mr. Lee Bollinger
Columbia University President

We, the professors and heads of universities and research institutions in Tehran , hereby announce our displeasure and protest at your impolite remarks prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent speech at Columbia University.

We would like to inform you that President Ahmadinejad was elected directly by the Iranian people through an enthusiastic two-round poll in which almost all of the country's political parties and groups participated. To assess the quality and nature of these elections you may refer to US news reports on the poll dated June 2005.

Your insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful.

Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech.

Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research.

During his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad answered a number of your questions and those of students. We are prepared to answer any remaining questions in a scientific, open and direct debate.

You asked the president approximately ten questions. Allow us to ask you ten of our own questions in the hope that your response will help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth.

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?[/quote]


An example of free speech and opine in comparison to the Iranian Free Dumb of Insults;

Perhaps the true pressure here, from the point of view of such a cloistered theocratic controlled society, is, from there, the truth is, he, as the pious pure spokesperson of the Mahdi he clearly assumes he is, insults the world’s intelligence by hurting the mind to a sufficiently of disbelief and equally in disgust at his obviously factious deceit.

Perhaps when you get free speech you will grasp the principles from which it stands and how it is actually used.

[quote]
2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow the Iran's national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah's dictatorship?[/quote]

Perhaps it was his zealotry in creating a multitude of disagreements with his former allies, the British, and especially the communists and the Islamists, the latter of whom, oddly, in 1979, did act likewise to create and since maintain, the current theocratic dictatorship of speechless freedoms in Iran.

Conceivably, along with this man’s created disagreements with the Shah and with the parliament whereby in order to avoid certain impeachment, he illegally dissolved and elected parliament and then illegally held an election from which a man about to beimpeached got an astounding 99.93% of the vote, oddly as in ALL seemingly popular dictatorships, ever, in all of history.

Only to further his control and power he acted obviously like Saddam in miscalculation about his last two wars, to suspended the elected Parliament indefinitely while extending without an end date his previously decreed “emergency powers,” exactly like all dictators in history have done.

In the “ignorant” vernacular of this, young 233 year old, Republic, if it looks a duck, sounds and acts like a duck, it is, in fact, a duck. He has proven to us he is a dictating Duck.

I am sure factually Iranians, led by General Fazlollah Zahedi, in the usual political means of change in the region, used Iranian’s as a means of this coup d'état to oust a man who had used illegal means to gain power and, then had used, in the common tools of dictators, emergency powers, to maintain power.

Of course, this coupe was materially supported and funded by the British and U.S. governments who had an interest in maintaining their interest in the region. That interest being the free and open market for oil, which this dictator threatened to affect, oddly exactly, like today’s President TOM threatens.

[quote]
3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people? [/quote]

I guess in your zealotry you forget the little matter of 1979 and what is Internationally, by many conventions and treaties, considered unquestionably an act of war, when a nation invades another’s sovereign embassy and takes its embassy staff hostage. That was indeed polite and hospitable.

I guess you do not get the preverbal concept bred in millenniums of Middle Eastern fables, that “the enemy of my enemy, is my friend, then perhaps you do get it.

[quote]
4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran 's proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?[/quote]

Possibly because they as the terrorist they are in act and deed, attacked and drove out the other part of that elected Palestinian Government in yet another example of the rule of the Gun that is the dominant means of political discourse in the region? The question should be, why did your Hamas friends deviate your plans for peace in Palestine by driving out a not so insignificant part of the sully elected government at point of a gun.

Maybe we are and most of the world, are saying NO, your dreams are not going to happen, President Tom. Your fantasies you stated in prayer at each speech of the victorious return of the Mahdi and from that the coming of that Theocratic new world order after the destruction of the state of Israel and all who stand with it, are just not going to happen.

[quote][/size=1]
5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration's efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks? [/size][/quote]

Have we not, perhaps in your asking that, you know exactly where he is?

A Red Herring is but the use of logical fallacies to dissuade further intellectual pursuits thus the question as a repetitive echo of the American Jihad’s MoveOn.Org.

I am not sure you mean to ask that last question, as Uncle TOM told us, 9/11 did not happen in similar intellect of the mind that distills disbelief when he said their were no homosexuals and women are free in Iran. We and world learned we can trust President Tom?

[quote]
6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran 's current government to act against the MKO's main base in Iraq? [/quote]

What part of “the enemy of my enemy are my friends” do you guys over there not get?

Surely, your goose step marching chants and propaganda all over Iran and among your many proxies in the Middle East, of death to America, delineates, who you think are your enemies. So, are we no lesser endowed to assume who our enemies are than you?

I think you can act against that base any time you wish. Barring the reality of consequences that there may be a price of action that is yours to pay, that is your to doubt in calculations, perhaps?

[quote]
7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?[/quote]

Parsing is an art, as is propaganda, we say liberation over here in the Ignorant provinces. You say Invasion over there. In 1979, we said invasion of embassy of here. You said liberation of your country over there. Perhaps that is why we are over there face to face waiting for the blink. That being the subliminal query of the times over there, have we really lost or have we perhaps accomplished exactly what we setout to accomplish in that unstable region full of despots, dictators, and theocratic dictates of rule and oppression.

The real purpose maybe merely to sit in the heart of the valley of snakes, like a deadly mongoose giving notice and an opportunity for the vermin to slither away and not bother anyone. Or perhaps in purpose for those that do not slither away seeing to it they have to deal with the mongoose who may there to stay and who is equally capable of striking fear into its adversary as the Snake.

[quote]

8- Why do America's closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?[/quote]

Perhaps, one, when you get democratic governments without absolutists theocratic and monarchical regimes, you might try speeding it around other than with proxies of death such as Hezbollah and Hamas.

Secondly, it may be your fault you have such theocratic and monarchical rulers because the people of the Middle East have never been given or taken democracy and individual freedom into the bosom of they’re psyche. Instead preferring in will or lack of it, to be lead by others, who use deflection to blame the areas hard life and bloody existence on others than on those of inaction, themselves.

Perhaps as it is easier to claim others are at fault than it is to do the hard deadly task of standing up for your own freedom against all odds and by all means. We did, others have, but you have not. Just a wild guess here but perhaps the why in your question should be mirrored and asked of yourselves,

You must ask President Tom when he returns to watch the Goose steppers who ensure his, and those theocrats power.

Since it is in fact it is your countries and it is your people who allow these undemocratic governments with absolute Monarchical and Theoretical regimes to continue to exists, leaving all that wealth afar for the common mans blood spilled for no benefit and or future well being for him and his.

[quote]
9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?[/quote]

Yes, I see.

You mean that September 2006 regular exercise of a 1974 Iranian initiative at the IAEA, were to disarm a certain nation whom they have attacked or fought four wars with in the last 60 years. This nation whom they have, by proxy, attacked nearly daily ever since its creation now some to 60 years ago. Is that the Initiative of which you speak. The one that would in effect give a military advantage of 40 to 1 to one side all of whom have sworn in all that is holly to them to wipe of that certain nation off the face of the earth

Are you speaking of this the failed Iranian initiative that has failed these last 34 years?

“The one that calls upon “all parties” concerned, meaning Israel alone, to take urgent and practical steps towards the fulfilment of the proposal initiated by Iran in 1974 for the establishment of such a zone and, pending its establishment, that Israel, the only country in the region that has not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons (NPT) nor declared its intention to do so, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, to accede to the NPT without delay, to place promptly all its nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards according to Security Council Resolution 487 (1981), and to conduct its nuclear related activities in conformity with the non-proliferation regime.”

The one Iranian initiative to disarm Israel which overlooks the fact that only five countries are formally declared and acknowledged by the NPT as Nuclear Weapon States (NWSs) - China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The one where a second group of countries have not joined NPT nor accepted "comprehensive" IAEA safeguards, but have well-developed nuclear programs and the technological capability to build nuclear explosive devices.

This group, oddly you do not see as in the region, commonly referred to as "threshold" States, consisting of India, Israel and Pakistan, unquestionably all in region of the Middle East.

Whereby if these heads of States and Governments acceding to an Iranian initiative designed to only encompass Israel and not India, Pakistan and soon Iran, only comply and create a WNFZ.

The one where oddly to date, only two country party to the NPT - Iraq and Iran- has been revealed as having had a clandestine weapons program.

So, are you asking the United States and Israel both nations and people who actually take you in your own words as the little and Great Satan and as such, are in the words of Iran, idedicated enemies of Iran. Those states of Satan in the rhetoric from your own theocratic consciousness, espoused as such that in order for Mahdi to come and Great Islamic caliph to begin, you must first wipe out the little and Great Satins and all liken onto them to begin to fulfill these prophecies of an Islamic controlled world.

Why do you think we do not believe you when you say your whole ambition is our utter destruction?

O, yes, those denial mongers of the Doomocracy here in the west, you think they speak for all of us right?

We do believe you and more are beginning to believe now that President TOM has come out from the darkness into the light showing us his cold heart of death, empty eyes and dead soul.

The again perhaps you are speaking of the current IAEA –Iranian cohesiveness that sounds eerily similar to the IAEA’s confuse allocates both pre and post Iraq liberation about such matters.

This brings to mind the very words of your President Tom who said. his good friend, Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian is most helpful in bring the west to an understanding about Iranians peaceful Nuclear energy program, like is Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian, similarly helpful and equally a good friend of Osama Bin Laden, perhaps?

Similar, I do not imagine as was Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian, this equal friend of compassion for Saddam Hussein whom, both seemed to miscalculate the consequences of that Iraq nuclear program assertion that, oddly, [I]was but then was not, came form the mind and mouth of the good Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian a good friend of Iraq and Iran and the West?.

[quote]
10- Why is the US displeased with Iran's agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?[/quote]

Let me see, did NOT preident Tom tell the world today at the UN, the question of the Iranian Nuclear Program is now closed?" So we are to trust you like you trust us, right? I thought so!

Can I count the ways the IAEA has been a vehicle of misinformation and over zealot appeasers, letting nuclear proliferation flourish while saying it was in informed control.

They seem to have let the ship sail in not so exact reliable sourcing of informed knowledge when it came to South Africa, North Korea, India and Pakistan’s Nuclear programs. Was it not the good friends at the IAEA who were confusingly unreliable in either informed and or uninformed predictions about the Iraq nuclear programs?

So, let me see we are to Trust your president helpful and trusted friend at the IAEA to have it right on the Theocratic dictatorship of Iran.

I do not think so.

[quote]
Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests.[/quote]

O yes, we have seen the polite and hospitable way you were to American Visitors in 1979 and of recent, how polite and hospitable you have been to the Iranian Americans you have recently imprisoned and for some, finally released, at the least the ones who have not died or gone missing.

Are there really no homosexuals in Iran and are women really, free to be act and do as they wish? The truth now?

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8606300370

Iranians Upset at US people for insulting their little Napoleonic Syndrome Tyrant.

Oddly in the ONE VOICE like our "Kun" LEFT, when he is not RIGHT.


Issue 10 questions to Columbia Universities President.

Mr. Lee Bollinger
Columbia University President

We, the professors and heads of universities and research institutions in Tehran , hereby announce our displeasure and protest at your impolite remarks prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent speech at Columbia University.

We would like to inform you that President Ahmadinejad was elected directly by the Iranian people through an enthusiastic two-round poll in which almost all of the country's political parties and groups participated. To assess the quality and nature of these elections you may refer to US news reports on the poll dated June 2005.

Your insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful.

Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech.

Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research.

During his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad answered a number of your questions and those of students. We are prepared to answer any remaining questions in a scientific, open and direct debate.

You asked the president approximately ten questions. Allow us to ask you ten of our own questions in the hope that your response will help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth.

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?

An example of free speech and opine in comparison to the Iranian Free Dumb of Insults;

Perhaps the true pressure here, from the point of view of such a cloistered theocratic controlled society, is, from there, the truth is, he, as the pious pure spokesperson of the Mahdi he clearly assumes he is, insults the world’s intelligence by hurting the mind to a sufficiently of disbelief and equally in disgust at his obviously factious deceit.

Perhaps when you get free speech you will grasp the principles from which it stands and how it is actually used.


2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow the Iran's national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah's dictatorship?

Perhaps it was his zealotry in creating a multitude of disagreements with his former allies, the British, and especially the communists and the Islamists, the latter of whom, oddly, in 1979, did act likewise to create and since maintain, the current theocratic dictatorship of speechless freedoms in Iran.

Conceivably, along with this man’s created disagreements with the Shah and with the parliament whereby in order to avoid certain impeachment, he illegally dissolved and elected parliament and then illegally held an election from which a man about to beimpeached got an astounding 99.93% of the vote, oddly as in ALL seemingly popular dictatorships, ever, in all of history.

Only to further his control and power he acted obviously like Saddam in miscalculation about his last two wars, to suspended the elected Parliament indefinitely while extending without an end date his previously decreed “emergency powers,” exactly like all dictators in history have done.

In the “ignorant” vernacular of this, young 233 year old, Republic, if it looks a duck, sounds and acts like a duck, it is, in fact, a duck. He has proven to us he is a dictating Duck.

I am sure factually Iranians, led by General Fazlollah Zahedi, in the usual political means of change in the region, used Iranian’s as a means of this coup d'état to oust a man who had used illegal means to gain power and, then had used, in the common tools of dictators, emergency powers, to maintain power.

Of course, this coupe was materially supported and funded by the British and U.S. governments who had an interest in maintaining their interest in the region. That interest being the free and open market for oil, which this dictator threatened to affect, oddly exactly, like today’s President TOM threatens.


3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people?

I guess in your zealotry you forget the little matter of 1979 and what is Internationally, by many conventions and treaties, considered unquestionably an act of war, when a nation invades another’s sovereign embassy and takes its embassy staff hostage. That was indeed polite and hospitable.

I guess you do not get the preverbal concept bred in millenniums of Middle Eastern fables, that “the enemy of my enemy, is my friend, then perhaps you do get it.


4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran 's proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?

Possibly because they as the terrorist they are in act and deed, attacked and drove out the other part of that elected Palestinian Government in yet another example of the rule of the Gun that is the dominant means of political discourse in the region? The question should be, why did your Hamas friends deviate your plans for peace in Palestine by driving out a not so insignificant part of the sully elected government at point of a gun.

Maybe we are and most of the world, are saying NO, your dreams are not going to happen, President Tom. Your fantasies you stated in prayer at each speech of the victorious return of the Mahdi and from that the coming of that Theocratic new world order after the destruction of the state of Israel and all who stand with it, are just not going to happen.


5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration's efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks?

Have we not, perhaps in your asking that, you know exactly where he is?

A Red Herring is but the use of logical fallacies to dissuade further intellectual pursuits thus the question as a repetitive echo of the American Jihad’s MoveOn.Org.

I am not sure you mean to ask that last question, as Uncle TOM told us, 9/11 did not happen in similar intellect of the mind that distills disbelief when he said their were no homosexuals and women are free in Iran. We and world learned we can trust President Tom?


6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran 's current government to act against the MKO's main base in Iraq?

What part of “the enemy of my enemy are my friends” do you guys over there not get?

Surely, your goose step marching chants and propaganda all over Iran and among your many proxies in the Middle East, of death to America, delineates, who you think are your enemies. So, are we no lesser endowed to assume who our enemies are than you?

I think you can act against that base any time you wish. Barring the reality of consequences that there may be a price of action that is yours to pay, that is your to doubt in calculations, perhaps?


7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?

Parsing is an art, as is propaganda, we say liberation over here in the Ignorant provinces. You say Invasion over there. In 1979, we said invasion of embassy of here. You said liberation of your country over there. Perhaps that is why we are over there face to face waiting for the blink. That being the subliminal query of the times over there, have we really lost or have we perhaps accomplished exactly what we setout to accomplish in that unstable region full of despots, dictators, and theocratic dictates of rule and oppression.

The real purpose maybe merely to sit in the heart of the valley of snakes, like a deadly mongoose giving notice and an opportunity for the vermin to slither away and not bother anyone. Or perhaps in purpose for those that do not slither away seeing to it they have to deal with the mongoose who may there to stay and who is equally capable of striking fear into its adversary as the Snake.


8- Why do America's closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?

Perhaps, one, when you get democratic governments without absolutists theocratic and monarchical regimes, you might try speeding it around other than with proxies of death such as Hezbollah and Hamas.

Secondly, it may be your fault you have such theocratic and monarchical rulers because the people of the Middle East have never been given or taken democracy and individual freedom into the bosom of they’re psyche. Instead preferring in will or lack of it, to be lead by others, who use deflection to blame the areas hard life and bloody existence on others than on those of inaction, themselves.

Perhaps as it is easier to claim others are at fault than it is to do the hard deadly task of standing up for your own freedom against all odds and by all means. We did, others have, but you have not. Just a wild guess here but perhaps the why in your question should be mirrored and asked of yourselves,

You must ask President Tom when he returns to watch the Goose steppers who ensure his, and those theocrats power.

Since it is in fact it is your countries and it is your people who allow these undemocratic governments with absolute Monarchical and Theoretical regimes to continue to exists, leaving all that wealth afar for the common mans blood spilled for no benefit and or future well being for him and his.


9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?

Yes, I see.

You mean that September 2006 regular exercise of a 1974 Iranian initiative at the IAEA, were to disarm a certain nation whom they have attacked or fought four wars with in the last 60 years. This nation whom they have, by proxy, attacked nearly daily ever since its creation now some to 60 years ago. Is that the Initiative of which you speak. The one that would in effect give a military advantage of 40 to 1 to one side all of whom have sworn in all that is holly to them to wipe of that certain nation off the face of the earth

Are you speaking of this the failed Iranian initiative that has failed these last 34 years?

“The one that calls upon “all parties” concerned, meaning Israel alone, to take urgent and practical steps towards the fulfilment of the proposal initiated by Iran in 1974 for the establishment of such a zone and, pending its establishment, that Israel, the only country in the region that has not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons (NPT) nor declared its intention to do so, to renounce possession of nuclear weapons, to accede to the NPT without delay, to place promptly all its nuclear facilities under IAEA full-scope safeguards according to Security Council Resolution 487 (1981), and to conduct its nuclear related activities in conformity with the non-proliferation regime.”

The one Iranian initiative to disarm Israel which overlooks the fact that only five countries are formally declared and acknowledged by the NPT as Nuclear Weapon States (NWSs) - China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The one where a second group of countries have not joined NPT nor accepted "comprehensive" IAEA safeguards, but have well-developed nuclear programs and the technological capability to build nuclear explosive devices.

This group, oddly you do not see as in the region, commonly referred to as "threshold" States, consisting of India, Israel and Pakistan, unquestionably all in region of the Middle East.

Whereby if these heads of States and Governments acceding to an Iranian initiative designed to only encompass Israel and not India, Pakistan and soon Iran, only comply and create a WNFZ.

The one where oddly to date, only two country party to the NPT - Iraq and Iran- has been revealed as having had a clandestine weapons program.

So, are you asking the United States and Israel both nations and people who actually take you in your own words as the little and Great Satan and as such, are in the words of Iran, idedicated enemies of Iran. Those states of Satan in the rhetoric from your own theocratic consciousness, espoused as such that in order for Mahdi to come and Great Islamic caliph to begin, you must first wipe out the little and Great Satins and all liken onto them to begin to fulfill these prophecies of an Islamic controlled world.

Why do you think we do not believe you when you say your whole ambition is our utter destruction?

O, yes, those denial mongers of the Doomocracy here in the west, you think they speak for all of us right?

We do believe you and more are beginning to believe now that President TOM has come out from the darkness into the light showing us his cold heart of death, empty eyes and dead soul.

The again perhaps you are speaking of the current IAEA –Iranian cohesiveness that sounds eerily similar to the IAEA’s confuse allocates both pre and post Iraq liberation about such matters.

This brings to mind the very words of your President Tom who said. his good friend, Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian is most helpful in bring the west to an understanding about Iranians peaceful Nuclear energy program, like is Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the Egyptian, similarly helpful and equally a good friend of Osama Bin Laden, perhaps?

Similar, I do not imagine as was Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian, this equal friend of compassion for Saddam Hussein whom, both seemed to miscalculate the consequences of that Iraq nuclear program assertion that, oddly, [I]was but then was not, came form the mind and mouth of the good Chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian a good friend of Iraq and Iran and the West?.


10- Why is the US displeased with Iran's agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?

Let me see, did NOT president Tom tell the world today at the UN, the question of the Iranian Nuclear Program is now closed?" So we are to trust you like you trust us, right? I thought so!

Can I count the ways the IAEA has been a vehicle of misinformation and over zealot appeasers, letting nuclear proliferation flourish while saying it was in informed control.

They seem to have let the ship sail in not so exact reliable sourcing of informed knowledge when it came to South Africa, North Korea, India and Pakistan’s Nuclear programs. Was it not the good friends at the IAEA who were confusingly unreliable in either informed and or uninformed predictions about the Iraq nuclear programs?

So, let me see we are to Trust your president helpful and trusted friend at the IAEA to have it right on the Theocratic dictatorship of Iran.

I do not think so.


Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests.

O yes, we have seen the polite and hospitable way you were to American Visitors in 1979 and of recent, how polite and hospitable you have been to the Iranian Americans you have recently imprisoned and for some, finally released, at the least the ones who have not died or gone missing.

We have seen how polite and hospitable your proxies are in killing Iraqis Lebanese and Israelis, not mention our US troops with your IED's.

Are there really no homosexuals in Iran and are women really, free to be act and do as they wish? The truth now?

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8606300370

DOOMOCRACY’S ONE VOICE;

Hillary Clinton Proposes $5,000 'Baby Bond'

Every child born in the United States today owes $27,000 on the national debt, why not let them come get $5,000 to grow until their 18?"

Britain launched a similar program in January 2005, handing out vouchers worth hundreds of dollars each to parents with children born after Sept. 1, 2002.

The Euro-skeptic model of BIG BROTHER governance, seeping incessantly into ever aspect of all citizens lives, views and thoughts in a new Socialist Doomocary’s with its Revolution of the mediocre, its PC zealotry and its embedded "com ba ya" indoctrination of denial, that the possible is merely impossible, and the likely is highly unlikely.

Let's see thus far $210 Billion in mandated Government controlled "Free" health Care, paid for allegedly as Congress always says its paid for, as the debt climbs and climbs.

My guess is by increasing taxes now that is the ticket! More entitlements with SChips and more on the way while SS and Medicare is going broke and all the welfare systems are being increased, again,

At least Sweden's tax for its socialism is reasonable, only 85 Cents out of every dollar earned for Utopia in Frozen north for a few.

Now we are going to give every NEW BORN, illegal Immigrants not excluded, Now that should draw from them from even the South Pole) $5000 Bonds for their new baby's futures.

Are these face values or accumulated Interest Bonds like US saving bonds which are bought at a discount and added up to face value over time. No one knows include Herr Clinton or is that Frau, Clinton.

She does not say, nor does she say how much this is going cost and how she plans to pay for it. MORE TAXES perhaps?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298504,00.html

Page 2;


Democrats and Iran

Word Count: 386

Kudos to Hillary Clinton -- yes, you read that right -- for her Senate vote this week urging the U.S. to designate Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization. That's more than can be said for her primary competition of Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson and John Edwards, who assailed her on this score at Wednesday's Democratic Presidential candidates debate at Dartmouth. These are men who seem to fear the Nutroots more than the ...

WSJ

Top Three Democrats Busted Over Iraq War

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298378,00.html


Page 3;

CNN’s bonding lesion for ONE VOICE Sympathy;

or;

Illegal Immigrations symptomatic lesions of non-bonding to the US?

O my God, he has 11 year of Illegal Presences in this Country. He has 11 years of illegally working at restaurants who knowing broke the law by paying him under table and, he has 11 years of paying no taxes.
Then one day while breaking yet another law by not declaring Money that could be consider under money Laundering statues. Our lesions “of take and no give,” says, now that I am caught and have to pay for my crimes and all the free gifts of money, ($10,000) I have gotten since my case was published by the Newspapers and CNN; Its America fault;

"I am desperate," Zapeta said. "I no longer feel good about this country."

Is this a one sided cry that America is no good for me, cause I am no good for America and I get caught.

Or, is it a cry for that ONE VOICE of sympathy, that there are laws for American to obey and pay for, that illegals DO NOT have to pay for and or obey.

Has America been NOT very, very good to and for Senor Zapeta, or has Senor Zepata, not been very, very good to and for America?

What part, of NO FREE lunch, does, this ONE VOICE of Doomocracy and entitlement, not understand?

Lets see what part of illegal is America fault here. The fact that we, like NO other country on earth, require a legal process to occur for one enter the country perhaps.

The fact that his employer could and should be prosecuted for employing an Illegal undocumented alien, is that America fault, perhaps?

The fact that this man could be prosecuted for failing to file a tax return and thus tax evasion, is that America fault, perhaps?

The fact the bleeding heart open border crowd of Doomocarcy thinks it is unfair Americans have to obey laws Illegal Immigrants DO NOT, is that America's Fault, perhaps?


http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/27/immigrant.money/index.html



Page 4;

US Congress, an inside view of the Doomacracy of fascism going on there;

This week in Washington, my Republican colleagues on the Rules Committee in documenting the breakdown of debate, decorum, and deliberation in the House of Representatives at the hands of the Rules Committee.

In a report entitled “Out of Order,” Rules Committee Ranking Republican David Dreier (R-CA), Congressman Doc Hastings (R-WA), Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL) outline the vast discrepancy between the Democrat Majority’s promises to lead the “most honest, ethical and transparent Congress in history” and the reality of the 110th Congress.

The new Majority has not only failed to keep their promises to the American people, but they have repeatedly waived long-standing precedent and transparency measures in a desperate attempt to prevent Members from interfering with the Democrat Leadership’s preferred outcome. The result has been a disorganized and chaotic House floor.

The “Out of Order” report details a Rules Committee operated by partisan advantage, including the following heavy-handed tactics:

· Rewriting bills to include massive tax increases and Medicare cuts with no debate.

· Rejecting more Minority-sponsored amendments than the previous Congress.

· Issuing more than double the number of closed rules prohibiting amendments than the previous Congress.

· Reducing by an entire day the amount of time Members have to review legislation and submit amendments for consideration.

· Adopting a policy of turning some Members of Congress away at the door of the Committee when they attempt to submit amendments.

· Abandoning its pledges for regular order in the House by jamming through huge bills with less than 24 hours for review.

Following this report, the Majority Party immediately lived up to our accusations. On Wednesday night, the Rules Committee refused to allow any Republican Members from offering a single amendment to the Flood Insurance Reform and Modernization Act (H.R. 3121)—despite their own Chairman's stated wishes to the contrary.

In testimony before the Rules Committee, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) clearly encouraged the Committee to consider all substantive and non-duplicative amendments. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee refused to accept even Chairman Frank’s request for bipartisanship.

As a result, Chairman Frank joined my colleagues and me in protesting the Rule that excluded any Minority amendments:

“I want to be very clear that I regret the decision not to allow a number of amendments offered by members of the minority to this bill, and I will give them my word that as this legislative process goes forward, I intend to seek out opportunities to give them fair consideration. I must say, Mr. Chairman, that I’m never happy when I see my colleagues on the Republican side being a little obstreperous, but when they are being obstreperous with good reason, I really find that hard to tolerate.” (House Floor Statement - September 27, 2007)

Chairman Frank further displayed his disapproval of his party’s heavy-handed tactics by taking the highly-irregular action of voting only “Present” on both the Previous Question procedural vote and the Rule for the Flood Insurance bill.

This latest abuse of power is the product of a Democrat Majority that is willing to undermine Members’ ability to represent their constituents—effectively disenfranchising the representation of 46 percent of our nation. I am disappointed that they deliberately chose to once again place political expediency above fairness and good public policy, and I call upon the Majority Party to fulfill its promises of open, honest, and transparent government. The American people deserve nothing less.

Resolution Condemning MoveOn.Org Exposes Voting Differences

As you know, earlier this month the liberal anti-war group MoveOn.Org produced a full-page ad in the New York Times attacking General David Petraeus, the U.S. Commander in Iraq, prior to his testimony before Congress. The disrespectful “General Betray Us” title and ensuing character assassination displayed toward General Petraeus garnered well-deserved condemnation, including a bi-partisan Senate resolution condemning the ad.

Unfortunately, Democrats in the House of Representative refused to consider a similar resolution condemning MoveOn.org. Undeterred, my Republican colleagues and I forced a House floor vote on the language, condemning in the strongest possible terms MoveOn.org’s personal attacks on General David Petraeus and honoring the members of the Armed Forces and their families.

I am pleased to report that the measure received overwhelming support with 341 bipartisan votes in favor and 79 Democrat votes against the condemnation of MoveOn.org.

(As Biden said to MoveOn during the last Democratic debate, "they say we bought it and we own it." I may have some trouble for this, but they are a part of the Democratic Party NOT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!")

Interestingly, 11 Democrats switched their position on the resolution in just half an hour, voting against the resolution in the House Foreign Affairs Committee and then changing their vote minutes later when presented with the very same language on the House floor.

This flip-flop on positions underscores the need for increased transparency and to provide the American people with additional tools to obtain a comprehensive view of every Member's full voting record.

As you may remember, last spring H.Res 231 - legislation to make every vote a Member takes more transparent by requiring all committees to post record votes on their websites within 48 hours of being taken.

Currently, only one committee of the 21 standing committees makes any of this information available, and I believe that Americans deserve clear and timely access to their Member's votes at every point in the legislative process.

In the coming days, I will continue working with my colleagues to promote transparency and encourage the adoption of my resolution to give voters a timely, centralized and modern communication medium to access a Member's full voting record—not just votes taken on the House floor.


That is all!!

One Voice;

Oh, Rosie! Terrorists invite her to Mid East,

'We would welcome her to stay among us and know the truth'

Posted: September 26, 2007
10:15 p.m. Eastern


© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Muslim jihadist leaders interviewed for a new book were ecstatic about statements from television talk host Rosie O'Donnell about the war in Iraq and the global war on terror, agreeing with her outspoken views.

Some even invited her on a "fact finding mission" to the Middle East.

"I agree with what this O'Donnell says. ...We welcome Rosie O'Donnell to stay among us and to get to know the truth from being here, like many American peace activists are doing," said Ala Senakreh, West Bank chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorist organization.

Senakreh and other terror leaders were quoted sounding off about O'Donnell in the new book "Schmoozing with Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land Jihadists Reveal their Global Plans – to a Jew!," by author and WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein.

For one of the chapters of the book, Klein assembles a panoply of senior terrorist leaders and asks them to sound off about the views of high-profile liberals and conservatives.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=57860


Chavez’s Boys Town;

SAG; Screen Actors Guild

AKA

Spewing Asymmetric Galumphs

Was McCarthy right about Zoomorphic-oddlywood, as innately a breeding ground of Dysyoptian Marist Wankers?

















That is all!!

One Voice:

Our New Spend and Tax Utopia?

H.J.Res.43; A joint resolution increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.

By 53 yeas to 42 nays with 5 not voting (Vote No. 354), Senate agreed to H.J. Res. 43, increasing the statutory limit on the public debt, clearing the measure for the President.

Which increases the National Debt Limit from 9 Trillion to 9.8 Trillion

(**Noting the Government revenue for FY06 was 2.407 Trillion and is to be 2..404 Trillion in FY07 and projected to be 2.662 Trillion in FY08.)

Not Voting: McCain R, Brownback R, Clinton D, Obama D, Biden D.

Voting Nay; 20 Republicans, 22 Democrats and 1 independent Democrat.

Voting Yea 27 Republicans, 26 Democrats and 1 Independent Moderate.

** Under Government Finance, click B78 Government receipts, outlays ect.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/tables07.html

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues...S&congress=1101


ONE VOICE;
Of Convenient or Inconvenient truths?
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2007/10....wmv&frame=true


ONE VOICE;

Tax and more tax Doomocracy;

Top Democrats propose war surtax
· Story Highlights
· Top House Democrats propose a $140 to $150 billion surtax to pay for war in Iraq
· Taxpayers would add 2 percent to tax bill, higher income families 12 to 15 percent
· House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes the measure
· House GOP leader says the proposal is "playing politics" with national security.

Even as House leaders were pursuing a compromise, three leading House Democrats vowed yesterday that they will not entertain Bush's war funding request until he dramatically changes his Iraq war policy. The lawmakers -- Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (Wis.), defense subcommittee head John P. Murtha (Pa.) and Jim McGovern (Mass.) -- also proposed paying for any further war funding with a temporary surtax that would add 2 to 15 percent to existing income tax bills.

"This is the first time in American history where the president has taken the country to war and said, 'Okay, everybody's going to have to have to sacrifice with a tax cut,' " Obey said.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino declared that Democrats "are willing to raise taxes on just about anything."

Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) dismissed the proposal out of hand in a statement: "Some have suggested that shared sacrifice should take the form of a draft; others have suggested a surtax. Those who oppose a tax and the draft also should oppose the President's war. Just as I have opposed the war from the outset, I am opposed to a draft and I am opposed to a war surtax."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/02/dem....tax/index.html


One Voice;

Puff the magic Dragon

House Passes Bill on Pullout with a 377 to 46 vote with 27 not voting. The bill attracted the support of 196 Democrats and 181 Republicans.

Yet, Thirty Democrats, largely from the party's antiwar wing, and 16 Republicans voted no.
Simply and completely the bill states the Pentagon Would Have to Present Iraq Plan to the Hill in 60 days and then every 90 days thereafter.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), who has said that any Iraq legislation should ensure troop withdrawals, gave no assurance yesterday that he would give the bill a Senate vote.

Republican leaders dismissed the bill's significance. The staff of House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) released a fact sheet emphasizing that ”the bill would not require a withdrawal of forces and would merely require the Defense Department to do what it is already doing: draft contingency plans for a withdrawal.” If anything, the bill is simply "a slap in the face to the Left," Boehner's fact sheet said.


That is all!

ONE VOICE;

Doomocracy's "Terrorist Bill of Rights!"

House Judiciary and Armed Services Committee Democrats intend to consider HR 2826 -- what amounts to their Terrorist Bill of Rights -- which will grant terrorist detainees special rights that are not even afforded to American men and women in uniform under international laws of war.

Amends the federal judicial code, “just passed last year,” to “now” allow an alien detained by the United States as an enemy combatant to apply for a writ of habeas corpus, including an application challenging transfer, or bring an action solely for prospective injunctive relief against transfer, except for an alien in a zone of active combat involving U.S. Armed Forces.

Limits the, “having just last year given unlimited,” review of prosecutions, trials, or judgments of a military commission to that provided by the Code of Military Justice or by a habeas corpus proceeding.

For you who do not know what habeas corpus is;

It is a writ issued by a court of proper jurisdiction to an official having allegedly unlawful custody of a person, directing the official to bring the person before the court, in order to determine the legality of the imprisonment.

Last Years Congress prohibited this right for access to US Federal Courts for those held at Gitmo, giving full authority to Military Tribunals as a response to US Supreme court's ruling requiring changes to the previous Congressional act the allowed the Enemy Combatant terrorist to be tried and held by the Military at Gitmo.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.2826:



http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22271

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22671



Murtha the myth of legend in his own mind.





Murtha on Haditha: ‘I Know There Was a Cover-up … The Chain of Command Tried to Stifle the Story’


MURTHA SAID THE 8 MARINES COMMITTED COLD BLOODED MURDER!

Yet, NOT ONE of the eight will be charged with murder, NOT ONE!

"MURTHA: This is what the Marine Corps told me at the highest level. The Commandant of the Marine Corps was in my office just last week, so you know. I know there was a cover-up someplace. They knew about this a few days afterwards and there’s no question the chain of command tried to stifle the story. I can understand why, but that doesn’t excuse it. Something like this has to be brought out to the public, and the people have to be punished."

What does it say about the excommunicated Marine, Murtha? The Murtha who would tax us all more in a war Tax, added to a health tax, to a Child Bond Tax and to general spending, "gone wide" in yet another Doomocracy Tax.

Was it political attack on his fellow Marines to justify his Retreat in Defeat erudite behavior, perhaps?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7029183.stm


N.H. tax evaders taken into custody after standoff

Give to Caesar what is Creasar's!

A couple convicted of tax evasion was taken into custody after a five-month-long standoff with federal agents in New Hampshire, a federal law enforcement source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN.

Mr. Brown has a lovely daughter, but wait until you get your 2010 tax bill from the Doomocracy, You an’t seen nothing yet!!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/04/tax.standoff/index.html



That is all!!

ONE VOICE;

The S-Chip Legislation

A myth that it is ALL about the Children and not about Politics!!!

What S-Chip was designed to do;

SCHIP is designed to provide coverage to "targeted low-income children." A "targeted low-income child" is one who resides in a family with income below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) or whose family has an income 50% higher than the state's Medicaid eligibility threshold. Some states have expanded SCHIP eligibility beyond the 200% FPL limit, and others are covering entire families and not just children.
SCHIP offers states three options when designing a program. The state can either:

· use SCHIP funds to expand Medicaid eligibility to children who previously did not qualify for the program;
· design a separate children's health insurance program entirely separate from Medicaid; or,
· combine both the Medicaid and separate program options.

As of September 30, 1999, each of the states and territories had an approved SCHIP plan in place.

The State Plan

Similar to Medicaid, a state's SCHIP state plan is the mechanism that begins Federal Financial Participation (FFP) in a given state. As in Medicaid, CMS must either approve or disapprove a state plan within 90 days of its submission to CMS. The "90-day clock" remains ongoing unless CMS submits a formal written request for additional information from the state. When the information is received, unlike Medicaid, SCHIP does not reset the clock, but rather, starts counting again from the day that the written request was issued. Unlike Medicaid, there is no limit to the number of requests for additional information that may be made.

Similar to Medicaid, under SCHIP, states can modify their State Plans by submitting State Plan Amendments (SPAs). As with the initial plan submission, when a SPA is received by CMS, a 90-day clock begins. Here again, the 90-day clock may be stopped by a written request for additional information, and it resumes when the response is received. The 90-day clock does not reset, but begins counting from the day that the request for additional information was made. Click here for additional information regarding state plans.

Eligibility

As stated earlier, eligibility for SCHIP is targeted towards uninsured low-income children. As a result, certain groups of children cannot be covered under SCHIP. These ineligible groups include:

· children who are covered under a group health plan or under health insurance coverage;
· children who are members of a family that is eligible for state employee insurance based on employment with a public agency;
· children who are residing in an Institution for Mental Diseases; and,
· children who are eligible for Medicaid coverage.


If a state elects to establish an expanded Medicaid program using SCHIP, the eligibility rules of Medicaid apply.

If a state opts for a separate child health program, certain other rules can affect eligibility:
· States can allow for self-declarations of citizenship;
· States are prohibited from enforcing duration of residency requirements;
· States may not enact lifetime caps or other time limits for eligibility;
· States can, at their option, choose to offer children 12 continuous months of eligibility; and,
· States may enforce enrollment caps and waiting lists for coverage, if these provisions are in the approved state plan.

When screening and enrolling children for SCHIP, states must establish a system to determine if a child is Medicaid eligible and provide a mechanism for enrollment into Medicaid if appropriate. States may also allow for a period of presumptive eligibility while the application and eligibility process is underway.

So in the end, this Doomocracy vote ferreting bill is about Pork to the States, who controls who gets the money.

It seems in fine print of Washington Pork barrel politics and vote ferreting the wealthier and more socialized states prefer to give money to people whose income are many times over “the established Federal Poverty limit” which is the baseline purpose of this welfare net program to begin with.

They even pretend to fund the expanded Schip program, while in fact according to OMB in 4 years, they cutting funds for it by 85% knowing in deceptions they will add more money over this $29.8 billion in new spending latter at a far greater cost to the tax payer.

It also covers adults who will be 10% of those added under this new bill.

These Socialist in deception literally take 2.0 million people currently under private health care systems, paid for by them, subsidizes them in incentive to come over to a Government run welfare system. (See OMB report

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/86xx/doc8655/hr976.pdf )

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicaidGenInfo/05_...Information.asp


1) According to OMB, congresses own accounting watch dog, 10% of those 3.6 million that will be added to the S-Chip program’s democratic Money for vote ferreting, will go to Adults NOT CHILDREN.

2) That in many of the more populous Democratic controlled states those to become eligible will have an Income of but the poverty level. When in fact, places like NY, New Jersey and California will under the states rules provide it for those 400%, 350% and 350% above the Poverty level with incomes of 83,000, 72,000 and 72,000 per year irregardless of the number of Children in those households.

WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--QUESTION: Does Congress' SCHIP bill really allow the program to cover children in some families earning up to $83,000 a year?

· ANSWER: YES. The vetoed bill grandfathers in New York at a higher SCHIP match rate than the rest of the country - allowing SCHIP to cover children in some households with incomes of up to $83,000 per year (400 percent of the Federal poverty level). It also overturns the standards that would allow the Health and Human Services Secretary to disapprove State plans to cover children in higher income families.

Background Information:

· Section 114(a) of the vetoed bill would add a new section to the Social Security Act that states: "( - Exception - Subparagraph (A) (the limitation of the matching rate to the Medicaid rate for children whose effective income exceeds 300 percent of the Federal poverty level) shall not apply to any State that, on the date of enactment of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007, has an approved State Plan Amendment or waiver to provide, or has enacted a State law to submit a State plan amendment to provide, expenditures described in such subparagraph under the State child health plan."

· New York enacted a state law to submit a "State plan amendment." While that amendment was disapproved, the language of the Senate bill would still allow New York to claim the enhanced match.

· New York State is filing a lawsuit challenging the Administration's disapproval of its request to allow

SCHIP to cover children in some families making as much as $83,000 per year. "Gov. Eliot Spitzer said yesterday that New York, joined by six other states, would file suit against the Bush administration, challenging stricter eligibility rules for the government health insurance program that covers poor children. ...

In their legal challenges, the eight states contend that the new eligibility rules, which went into effect in August and limit coverage to children living at or below 250 percent of the poverty level, will either force out children in the program or leave tens of thousands without coverage who would be eligible. ... Three weeks ago the federal health officials denied a request by New York to insure more children by covering those in families with incomes up to 400 percent of the poverty rate, or $82,600 for a family of four." (Sarah Kershaw, "8 States Plan To Press Bush On Health Bill," The New York Times, 10/2/07)

· Section 116 (g) of the vetoed bill overturns the Administration's August 17 guidance to State Medicaid Directors. The result of that provision, if it became law, would be to require the Administration to approve a new state plan amendment filed by New York to go to 400 percent of the Federal poverty level.

The section states: "(g) EFFECTIVE DATE OF AMENDMENTS;
CONSISTENCY OF POLICIES. - The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if enacted on August 16, 2007. The
Secretary may not impose (or continue in effect) any
requirement, prevent the implementation of any provision, or
condition the approval of any provision under any State child
health plan, State plan amendment, or waiver request on the
basis of any policy or interpretation relating to CHIP
crowd-out or medical support order other than under the
amendments made by this section."

· The vetoed SCHIP bill also grandfathers in New Jersey's program at 350 percent of the Federal poverty level, which includes children in families with incomes of $72,000 a year. "Corzine added that the state, which covers about 122,000 kids in its program, known as FamilyCare, 'will continue to provide health care to children in families with income up to 350 percent' of the federal poverty level - or $72,275 for a family of four. He also wrote that he is prepared to file a lawsuit challenging the new rules." (Christopher Lee, "N.J.'s Corzine To Defy New Health-Care Rules," The Washington Post, 9/14/07)

The same section of the bill that allows New York to cover
children in families with income of nearly $83,000 per year
permits New Jersey to cover children in families with incomes
of $72,000 per year. The bill protects States that have "an
approved State Plan Amendment or waiver to provide" health
insurance coverage up to 350 percent of the Federal poverty
level.

· Read the full text of the vetoed SCHIP legislation at:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge...h976eah.txt.pdf



CBO’s - Cost of S-Chip Bill.

If one looks at the numbers below on page 2 of 2 under memorandum, you will see some of the Doomocrat;s smoke and mirrors, saying this will be dor the Children, implying forever, when in fact in the out years, the money goes away.

In 2008, year 1, the outlays increase from the current levels of 5.4 to 7.8 Billion. Then in 2009, year 2, they go from the current 5.4 to 9.6 billion. In 2010, year 3, they go from the current 5.5 to 11.6 billion. Then in 2011, year 4, they go from the current 5.5 to 12.9 Billion. Then 2012,year 5, they go from the current 5.6 to 13.9 billion. Thus from 2008 to 2012, they increase outlays by 28.4 billion or on average 5.68 billion per year for 5 years.

In the footnotes, they say that 10% of the new enrollees will be adults and an estimated 100,000 new adults will be enrolled in these changes.

Yet, what the Doomocrats are NOT telling us is, beginning in 2013, year six, the money dries up, dropping from the current 5.5 down to 7.8, which is 6.1 billion less than in 2012.

Now that is going to hit a lot of government dependent Children and their families, real hard eh?

In 2014, year 7, it goes from the current Bush plan of 5.3 down to 4.8 Billion dropping another 3 billion from the year before and $9.1 billion, or 65% in two years.

Then in 2014, year 8, it drops from the current plan of 5.2 to 5.0 Billion totaling a decrease in 3 years of 9.3 Billion.

Then in 2015, year 9, it drops from the current plan of 5.3 to $4.9 billion adding up to 9.7 Billion in decreases from its peak in 4 years.

In 2016, year 10, it drops from the current plan of 5.2 to 5.0 Billion, netting the a decrease in spending from peak year 4 (13.9), of 9.6 Billion.

Lastly, in 2017, Year 11, it equals the current plan of 5.1 billion, netting a decrease in spending, from the peak year 4 ($13.9), of 9.5 Billion.

In total, the net increase in spending for 11 years is 29.5 Billion over the current plan. Which as show on the last page under “total proposed change” by 2012, it would reduce the number of uninsured by 3.6 million, while reducing the number currently covered under private Insurance by 2.0 million, thus only adding an additional 8.0 million, of which 10% will be adults.

In total, over 11 years with the last 5 years having decreases in funding, S-chip enrollment will go from 3.3 to 7.6 million, Medicaid will go from 25 to 26.3 Million with both going from the current 26.1 to 34.1 at an additional costs of $29.5 Billion over 11 years. That is roughly $3,700 per person added and likely more like 9,000 plus when they fund the unfunded out years that they hide in smoke mirrors.

Noting the smoke and mirrors of our doomocrat;s accounting where they set it up for the need for unsaid future funding so that the money needed to sustain the programs that are now scheduled to have decreasing funding in the out years, will cost the tax payers much more to maintain coverage and keep up with increasing medical costs in those out years.


http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/86xx/doc8655/hr976.pdf
S-CHIP programs by state;


http://www.cms.hhs.gov/LowCostHealthInsFam...ActivityMap.pdf


http://www.cms.hhs.gov/LowCostHealthInsFam...UnderReview.pdf

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/LowCostHealthInsFam...w.asp#TopOfPage

trader, one of the rules of internet forum communication is that extremely long posts are not read. Besides, your potential audience on bearpit has shrunk to a handful, of which some need shrinks.

I am having a little trouble exactly getting your point here FITS?

I mean it is not exactly an earth shattering revelation that the nuts root has generally the attention span of a 1 day life span insect, is it?

Lastly, why do you assume a post is meant for an audience or that it needs an audience.

I am here for your salvation, not mine. *-^, ^-*

But thanks for the obvious in your observation.


That is all!!

One Voice;

IRAQ and OIL

Urban Myth- the unwillingly uninformed seeking only a convenient truth from the misinformed.

Oil- that which is encompassed as part of the price of one gallon of US Gasoline or Petro.

2000-2001

Average retail Price $1.51

Taxes –------------------------- 42.4 Cents or 28.1%
Distribution & Marketing—-----18.9 Cents or 12.5%
Refining------------------------- 24.9 Cents or 16.5%
Crude Oil costs---------------- 64.8 Cents or 42.9%

2006 –2007

Average retail Price $2.62

Taxes –--------------------------- 44.5 Cents or 17.0%
Distribution & Marketing—------- 29.6 Cents or 11.5%
Refining------------------------- 45.6 Cents or 17.4%
Crude Oil costs---------------- $1.42 Cents or 54.3.9%

Source Department of Energy

http://www.eia.doe.gov/

** Thousand of Barrels of oil per day**

Top World Oil Producers, 2006

1 Saudi Arabia 10,719
2 Russia 9,668
3 United States 8,367 * 40% of its consumption
4 Iran 4,146
5 China 3,836
6 Mexico 3,706
7 Canada 3,289
8 United Arab Emirates 2,938
9 Venezuela 2,802
10 Norway 2,785
11 Kuwait 2,674
12 Nigeria 2,443
13 Brazil 2,163
14 Algeria 2,122
15 Iraq 2,008

Top World Oil Net Exporters, 2006

1 Saudi Arabia 8,651
2 Russia 6,565
3 Norway 2,542
4 Iran 2,519
5 United Arab Emirates 2,515
6 Venezuela 2,203
7 Kuwait 2,150
8 Nigeria 2,146
9 Algeria 1,847
10 Mexico 1,676
11 Libya 1,525
12 Iraq 1,438
13 Angola 1,363
14 Kazakhstan 1,114
15 Canada 1,071

Top World Oil Consumers, 2006

1 United States 20,588
2 China 7,274
3 Japan 5,222
4 Russia 3,103
5 Germany 2,630
6 India 2,534
7 Canada 2,218
8 Brazil 2,183
9 Korea, South 2,157
10 Saudi Arabia 2,068
11 Mexico 2,030
12 France 1,972
13 United Kingdom 1,816
14 Italy 1,709
15 Iran 1,627

Top World Oil Net Importers, 2006


1 United States 12,220 * 60% of its consumption

2 Japan 5,097 >97% of consumption

3 China 3,438 >47% of consumption

4 Germany 2,483 >94% of consumption

5 Korea, South 2,150 >99% of consumption

6 France 1,893 >95% of consumption

7 India 1,687

8 Italy 1,558 >91% of consumption

9 Spain 1,555

10 Taiwan 942

11 Netherlands 936

12 Singapore 787

13 Thailand 606

14 Turkey 576

15 Belgium 546

* EU (6) 8,971

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/topworldtables1_2.htm

Albania
Austria
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Faroe Islands
Finland
France
Germany
Gibraltar
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Malta
Montenegro
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
United Kingdom

Europe – 2006- Consumption 16,327,250,000 Barrels per day. ( 135% > than US Oil imported for consumption)

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/...rrelsperDay.xls


US & IRAQ Oil Production

Barrels of Oil Per day

2000 US 2,130,707,000 ---IRAQ- 2,581,970,000
2001- US 2,117,511,000----IRAQ-2,408,820,000
2002-US 2,097,124,000--- IRAQ-2,039,790,000
2003-US- 2,073,453,000----IRAQ-1,318,040,000
2004-US- 1,983,302,000----IRAQ-2,020,570,000
2005-US- 1,890,106,000----IRAQ-1,886,750,000
2006-US- 1,86,259,000----- IRAQ-2,070,000,000

2007-

Jan- 161,072,000
Feb- 144,125,000
Mar-160,530,000
Apr- 156,546,000
May-162,452,000
Jun- 154,183,000
Jul- 158,711,000

YTD- 1,097,638,000

Est 07-1,991,665,143

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrfpus1M.htm

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mcrfpus1A.htm

US IMPORTS by country

Barrels of Oil per day

2000-10,419,000 –IRAQ-620,000 (5.95%)
2001-10,900,000 –IRAQ-795,000 (7.29%)
2002-10,546,000 –IRAQ-459,000 (4.35%)
2003-11,238,000—IRAQ-481,000 (4.28%)

2004-12,097,000

IRAQ-656,000 (5.42%)

Venezuela-1,548,000 (12.8%)
Canada-1,980,000 (16.37%)
Mexico-1,456,000 (12.04%)
Saudi Arabia-1,557,000 (12.87%)

2005-12,549,000 –

IRAQ-531,000 (4.23%)

Venezuela-1,515,000 (12.07%
Canada-2,001,0000 (15.95%)
Mexico-1,394,000 (11.11%)
Saudi Arabia-1,536,000(12.24%)

2006-12,390,000–

IRAQ-553,000 (4.46%)

Venezuela-1,329,000 (10.73%)
Canada-2,194,000 (17.71%)
Mexico-1,450,000 (11.7%)
Saudi Arabia-1,462,000 (11.8%)

2007
Jan- 12,145,000 –

IRAQ-531,000 (4.37%)

Venezuela-1,145,000 (9.43%)
Canada-2,329,000 (19.18%)
Mexico-1,333,000 (10.98%)
Saudi Arabia-1,562,000 (12.86%)

Feb-10,795,000 –

IRAQ-325,000 (3.01%)

Venezuela-1,330,000 (12.32%)
Canada-2,308,000 (21.38%)
Mexico-1,258,000 (11.65%)
Saudi Arabia-1,207,000 (11.18%)

Mar-12,634,000 –

IRAQ-523,000 (4.14%)

Venezuela-1,266,000 (10.02%)
Canada-2,099,000 (16.61%)
Mexico-1,425,000 (11.28%)
Saudi Arabia-1,244,000 (9.84%)

Apr-12,583,000 –

IRAQ-562,000 (4.47%)

Venezuela-1,402,000 (11.14%)
Canada-2,339,000 (18.59%)
Mexico-1,323,000 (10.51%)
Saudi Arabia-1,487,000 (11.82%)

May-12,784,000 –

IRAQ-341,000 (2.67%)

Venezuela-1,490,000 (11.66%)
Canada-2,307,000 (18.05%)
Mexico-1,317,000 (10.3%)
Saudi Arabia-1,613,000 (12.62%)

Jun-12,180,000 –

IRAQ-573,000 (4.7%)

Venezuela-1,340,000 (11%)
Canada-2,180,000 (17.9%)
Mexico-1,248,000 (10.25%)
Saudi Arabia-1,531,000 (12.57%)

Jul-12,173,000 –

IRAQ-460,000 (3.78%)

Venezuela-1,364,000 (11.21%)
Canada-2,159,000 (17.74%)
Mexico-1,363,000 (11.2%)
Saudi Arabia-1,429,000 (11.74%)

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t417.xls

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move...MN_mbblpd_m.htm

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/oilproduction.html


It would seem looking at the before and after US importation percentages of IRAQ oil, the URBAN LIBERAL FASCIST LIES as the Iraq war being about Oil imperialism, is BUT ANOTHER LIE spread like a virus of FALSE TRUTHS void of inconvenient facts.




That is All!!

One Voice;

Doomocracy incapable of nation’s best Interests

They cannot encompass the forest as a system, for this obsession of near sighted tree hugging ideology that blinds the future in lights of blinded ambition for the now and for power.

Turkey recalls ambassador to US

For Turkey's president, the US vote showed that some US politicians had "closed their ears to calls to be reasonable and once again sought to sacrifice big problems for small domestic political games".

Reality check Doomocrats?

With nearly 200,000 US troops in the area and at war in a region volatile enough with no need of further meaningless provocations. They spin us, in more loony left political hay seeding, risking a deadly possibility of unnoticed consequences, like as will happen from their mantra of No threat to America denial.

If US military supplies are cut off, given that upwards to 70% of all supplies transient Turkey, our nearsighted power blinded ferrets of ambition show us once again they are incapable of seeing the forest of reality, for the trees of meaningless political dribble.

Meanwhile, Budgets remain unfunded, Social Security unfixed, Touted Child health issues lies as political important, but in lying, intent remain not dealt with for mere political capital to expend in useless dribble of no consequence to the now and the tomorrows. Spending goes on unabated and nothing but more and, then again, more, TAXES are spewed as if the panacea of Utopian values from the halls of a Congress that is 30% less popular than Bush….

Turkey is a regional operational hub for the US military, and some suggest access to Incirlik airbase or other supply lines crucial to US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, could be affected by the row.

The US also fears Turkey may make a military incursion into northern Iraq to neutralise Kurdish separatist guerrillas there, who continue to cross the border to ambush Turkish troops.

Here below is what these morons are willing to risk our troops for.

This meaningless condemning of an event now nearly 100 years ago which in effect does no good, but lots of potential harm.

For what, nothing more than Political Idiot games of self-importance made in ill-advised consequences yet notably void in Intellectual absences of reality and comprehension of the now pragmatic needs of the nation, our allies, and all our soldiers. Issues of real threat that are far more important, and far more affecting than these swanking of dribble in meaningless nothing coming for this loony left in the “Doomocatic” party. Which is, oddly, 25% less popular than even Bush?

Anyone remember the Justice Gate interventions of demon seeds evil there, what happened to that sky is falling moment of Nazi destruction of American liberties,lamented so by this Doomocacy's Political circus of reality, eh? Disappeared and the sky never fell, I wonder why?

Yet another of the coming not seeing the forest for trees moments, by incapable leader’s trained in nothing positive but the mantra of doom and gloom idioms I fear.

When you see and only look for the worst, that is exactly what you get, the worst..


The resolution is expected to come to the full House before the session adjourns on 16 November.

Back in 2000, a similar resolution failed when it was withdrawn from the floor of the Republican-controlled House at the urging of then President Bill Clinton, who said it could put at risk American lives and further inflame tensions in the Middle East.

Oddly an exact echo of the Current President Bush.

Seven years later, it remains to be seen whether the Democrat-controlled House will heed the warnings of Presidents Clinton and Bush?

This useless meaningless Doomocats resolution exampled in wholly ill prepared leadership capability that looks not to the country's interest, but for the party's blind ambitions of very loony Left leadership.

I heard this recently,



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs..._08_armenia.pdf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7040366.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7040344.stm


That is all!!

One Voice;

BRITISH EXPERIENCE IN IRAQ SHOULD HAVE TAUGHT US SOMETHING

WASHINGTON -- It would be unfitting to assert that the British are creeping out of Basra in the dark of night. There is nothing overtly devious about their well-coordinated steps since last winter to abandon the small bases and power centers they have held in the south of Iraq since the war began four years ago.

There are stories from time to time about the Brits' "escape" in most international newspapers, but the articles are almost always short and buried in the type of the larger American-bred chaos in Iraq.

If one goes over the apparent game plan directed from London that in 2003 held such hopes for (finally!) a British victory in Iraq, one can see what the British commanders call a "glide path" of irreversible reductions in troop levels.

First, early last spring, the 5,000 troops remaining of the 45,000 original British contingent, which was the largest command outside of the American one, started pulling back. No more did they hold near-total sway over Basra, Iraq's single maritime exit to the world.

Slowly they withdrew to a few select bases and the streets they had in the beginning so masterfully controlled, as Shiite Islamic militants took over the south. Then, this fall, the British announced that half of their troops would be removed by next spring and the other half would be stationed outside the city at the Basra Air Station.

In case anyone hadn't noticed, this sad little military minuet means that there is no longer a major non-Iraqi force in the south. The highway between Baghdad and Kuwait, with its window on the Persian Gulf, is the only land bridge out of Iraq for American troops -- and it has now virtually passed into hostile Shiite militia hands.

"We are not defeated??," a leading British commanding general, huffed and puffed, last week on CNN. "We pulled out. We could have stayed a long time. hump thump hooray!!" (And I've got a bridge over the Tigris that I'd like to sell him.)

As a cynical onlooker from outside, one might make a quite different observation, rich of course with the historical and philosophical reflection that we Americans exemplify so well. One might suggest that the Brits knew well how to retreat from Iraq because they've had so much practice at it.

What just about everyone seems to have forgotten is that, for the British military, this is truly a historic re-enactment -- and therein lies the eternal mystery of powerful states and how they outwit themselves in the hubris of empire-building.

If you pick up a revealing book published in 2004, "Churchill's Folly: How Winston Churchill Created Modern Iraq," by British scholar Christopher Catherwood, you are likely to get a stunning wake-up call on the subject of recurrent British foolhardiness in Iraq. This book builds upon earlier ones in illustrating in minute detail how the British moved after World War I and up to the 1950s to divide up the entire Middle East and then to rule it.
Catherwood begins: "The decisions made by Winston Churchill, the British secretary of state first for war and then for the colonies, included the creation of an entirely new country, Iraq; and his actions had repercussions that led to the war in which British and American troops fought in 2003."

In the beginning, what grandiose dreams! Churchill, always a rampant colonialist, would create a "native Iraqi army that could work alongside the Royal Air Force." The Brits would control "the people" through airpower alone. They would rule Iraq through a hand-chosen king, King Feisal, son of the noble Hussein of Mecca, a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad, a capable man but in the end one who wore the British down by harping inexplicably on his lack of "legitimacy" -- because of their support!

At any rate, it all ended in bitterness and quagmire, with Churchill complaining to his prime minister that they were spending millions a year "for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano."

In the end, he dwelt obsessively, no longer on the potential grandeur of empire but on its costs; and the fact that there were no fewer than 58 changes of government between 1921 and 1958, the year the British finally left Iraq (at least for that time around!), did little to provide the world with high confidence in the British genius for creative colonization.

Still, Churchill's period in the Middle East was not quite so bad as the earlier period. When the British armies went into the Middle East during World War I, they did not even have maps of the Ottoman Empire, with which it was supposedly at war. The German histories they depended upon were all based upon a German work that left off in the year 1744.

So what we see today in the once-bustling city of Basra is really another replay of the hapless British colonialism of the last century. Tellingly, the British helped lure George W. into Iraq instead of warning him of its inevitable lessons; they must have simply "forgot" the disastrous history they had earlier lived in those same harsh deserts. And here we find what is, or should be, the real lesson of Iraq.

Whether in Iraq, or Vietnam, or Israel or Somalia, virtually all of our major foreign policy problems are the leftovers of European colonialism. Incredibly, America, the country historically opposed to colonialism, now mocks that history and our own by repeating it in grotesque alterations such as forcing "democracy" on the Iraqis.

But until we deal with these thwarted memories and with these difficult states on their own, new terms, we will keep getting stuck in places like Baghdad -- and we will keep creeping away in the night from places like Basra, too.

So what to have, now that the Brits have surrendered with the dignity of not being defeated for 4th time in their last 100 year history, leaving the road to our south blocked by Iranian proxies who will soon be the Hezbollah of Iraq.

We have Iran to our west, who is, in near hysterical zealotry, seeking the 12th Imam’s end of time ranting death and destruction to all. A Nuclear Pakistan in between who any day could be a Taliban like states with nukes like Iran ambitions.

While in simple Chamberlain like fantasies Europe once again is playing with itself in pleasurable self gratification grunts of out sight out of mind denials, while they, our doomocats and watch unassumingly Russia and China, those new cold war proponents and enablers, smelling the fear in this denial monger Doomacracy’s rancor of doom and gloom. To top that off, the only place we might, big emphasis might, have a sunshine friend by day anyway on our route to the North, is being slapped in face by incompetent monkeys on ponys who put 200,000 Americans in deep peril to prove a worthless point.

Yet, we all hear from the Idiot Drone here and elsewhere, is this drum, on to the beat, that there is no danger, nothing to fear, its all our fault, so just admit we are evil demons and all will be forgiven. While all that is Chaos in this world is all that is the Middle East. In enlightened rationality of can’t we all get along they say in codes of biblical tongues it will all just fad away as our Hillar-o-crats click their little heels to the magic in their little red stilettos.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucgg/20071011/cm_u...ughtussomething


Turkey Threatens Repercussions for U.S.


The Monkey are riding the pony’s in a paradox of this Planet of the Apes parallel Universe of incapables void in comprehension of its once core meaning “ Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Example more each day in this Jackanapes Doomocarcy’s lust for power dithered in primal intelligence lacking of reason as to the interests of the country over the interest of a party.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hy1Cpkf...4ZnE5AD8S7CB480

Below is yet another Monkey riding the pony’s moment for the Doomocary Elite bred in self-inflated fallacy of supremacy.

NASCAR fans are diseased mongrels. At least the Democrats think so.

Democrats in Congress considers Concord hazardous?
House aides visiting racetrack advised to get immunized??

http://www.charlotte.com/109/story/314034.html

More Monkey’s riding the pony’s moments,

Monkey’s on pony’s say,

Anti-war activists are excited that nearly 90 House Democrats (and Ron Paul) are writing to President Bush to inform him that they will no longer support the war. Actually, that's an exaggeration. FOUR House Democrats have written to the president to tell him they will no longer support the war. An additional 80 have written to tell him that they still don't support it.

Here;

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/10/excl...er_fund_war.php

Yet away from this parallel universe of Monkey cannot do-ism, is reality;

But in May, 140 Democrats voted not to fund the Iraq mission in the absence of a certain date for withdrawal. Of the 87 signers of the letter, all but 4 voted against funding in May. So what this letter really says is that 83

Democrats who voted against funding last year are promising not to change their minds on it; and an additional 4 Democrats have joined them.

How did House leaders 'reckon' with the 140 no votes last May? They combined the 86 yes votes with 194 more from House Republicans -- to produce a majority of 280-142. This suggests that the FY08 Iraq supplemental legislation is unlikely to pass by more than a margin of 276-146.

That's not a lot of progress for the anti-war crowd in the last 5 months.

Yet in truth and reality the Factual Roll call of the 140 Doomocrats;

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll425.xml

I ponder is it the monkey and or the pony they ride who should get the blamed, o well, blame is a monkey’s game and the pony is its means to find blame, always, in another stall, they do not occupy.

I ponder more will the Doomoracy’s coming control of the country be measured in epic legends of MAD TV moments for its lack of competency and visionless achievements. In this, I pray I am wrong…

Yet another blinded Monkey on the pony MAD TV moment where doom and gloom is all there is;

The Deficit Drops. . . Again

On Thursday, the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget announced that the deficit fell to $162.8 billion for the 2007 fiscal year, marking a $250 billion decline in the last three years. The deficit is now just 1.2 percent of the national economy, which is lower than the average of the last forty years.

This deficit reduction once again highlights the strength of our economy and the success found in trusting the American people with their own money. Thanks to the tax relief provided by previous Republican Congresses, lower taxes have spurred economic growth, increasing tax receipts and driving down the deficit:

· This year, tax revenues rose by $161 billion to a total of nearly $2.6 trillion – the highest level of federal revenue ever recorded.

· Since 2001, the economy has grown for 23 consecutive quarters with real GDP growth averaging 2.9 percent a year.

· Job creation has thrived as over 8.2 million jobs have been created since the 2003 tax relief, resulting in 49 consecutive months of job growth.

However, in this Congress House Democrats have once again proven their commitment to tax-and-spend policies, calling for more than $200 billion in additional spending and burdening American families and businesses with nearly $400 billion in tax increases over the next five years.

Future deficit reduction will be jeopardized unless the tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 are renewed and spending is restrained. The days of big government spending sprees and debilitating taxation must come to an end for the federal deficit to be erased. I continue to support the President’s commitment to veto any excessive, irresponsible spending bill, and I will work with my colleagues to fight for fiscal responsibility and lower taxes for the financial success of our nation.

Oddly despite oil prices, that 60% imported engine of our economy, steadily climbing it seems my all press accounts and political hysteria of the doomocracy, we are doomed.

Yet in addition al the above strangely making fallacious this perpetual doom mongering, we have;
Rousing gains for U.S. exports helped narrow the August trade deficit by 2.4% to $57.6 billion from $59 billion in July, the Commerce Department said Thursday. Wall Street expected little change.

U.S. exports grew 0.4% to $138.34 billion, while imports fell 0.4% to $195.92 billion.

Year over year, exports surged 12.8% thanks to healthy growth abroad and extra buying power courtesy of a weaker dollar.

A sluggish U.S. economy, meanwhile, kept year-over-year import growth at 3%.
That's the smallest such gain since June 2002 -- excluding January, when oil prices bottomed.

CPI:
-0.1% in Aug 2007

Unemployment Rate:
4.7% in Sep 2007

Payroll Employment:
+110,000(p) in Sep 2007

Average Hourly Earnings:
+$0.07(p) in Sep 2007

PPI:
+1.1%(p) in Sep 2007

ECI:
+0.9% in 2nd Qtr of 2007

Productivity:
+2.6% in 2nd Qtr of 2007

U.S. Import Price Index:
+1.0% in Sep 2007

Average hourly earnings
total private ...QTR1 $17.32 QTR2 $17.51 Qtr3 $17.45 Net Ytd $.07 ( Avg annual income $36,296)

Now that some Doom and Gloom hey, Mate?

That is all!!

One Voice;



Dumb and Dumber

Bush vs US Congress

It seems the man the world loves to hate, that media and left mongering pundits, evil incarnated, the Idiot of Idiots, Bush the Demon child anti-Christ to a few and some many of a few, is only the Dumb and not the Dumber in the equation of public evaluation it seems.

Hard to grasp but the Doomocatic Congress holds that exalted honor of being DUMBER, by having a “9.4% lower approval rating than Bush,” which seems impossible and improbable, given the relentless media and hollow-wood’s portrayals of him. Yet, with that powerful medium of fanatical hypnotics barking at his door [/I]Bush’s disapproval rating is 6.4% higher than this Doomocratic Congress with their yet seen Socialist utopianism values but well unseen empty deeds and ineffectiveness.

I guess it true, you cannot fool all the people, all the time, eh Comrade Socialists?


Bush’s Approval and Disapproval Ratings


RCP Average

09/27 - 10/10

Approval- 34.0%

Disapproval -61.8%

Spread-27.8%

FOX News10/09 - 10/1035%56%-21%
NPR10/04 - 10/0738%60%-22%
Gallup10/04 - 10/0732%64%-32%
Rasmussen10/04 - 10/0635%61%-26%
AP-Ipsos10/01 - 10/0331%66%-35%
ABC News/Wash Post09/27 - 09/3033%64%-31%


Congressional Approval Disapproval Ratings

RCP Average

09/27 - 10/10

Approval - 24.6%

Disapproval -68.2%

Spread-43.6%

FOX News10/09 - 10/1024%63%-39%
NPR10/04 - 10/0725%69%-44%
Gallup10/04 - 10/0723%71%-48%
AP-Ipsos10/01 - 10/0322%73%-51%
ABC News/Wash Post09/27 - 09/3029%65%-36%

That is all!!

Let's leave the left to orgasms over these poll numbers. What the emotional liberals fail to grasp is that there are many like myself that disapprove of the pussy that inhabits the White House. They assume my displeasure will result in a vote for a closet Muslim or a hysterical power hungry b!tch. Let's let them continue to think that................

IT IS IN WHAT THEY DO NOT SAY, STUPID?


WORLD MEDIA hyperbolic:



American General says” Iraq is Nightmare with no end!!”


STOP!!



Here are the “Media” who sought out and ignored convenient opinions for compatible demagoguery and agenda of convenience as if his opine was monolithic in intent and by nature.

But oddly though not unprecedented is how the “media” sought to wholly ignore his opine of scathing media criticism which was in no part lesser in volume, substance and of importance, as intended in the General’s Opine on this subject.

But it like they were at different speech, one where deaf and dumb was the reall Message NOT BROADCAST

A sampling of deaf and Dumb exemplified in the totality of the General's speech but ignored oddly?


Former US commander blames “partisan” politics and “agenda-driven ...
World Socialist Web Site, MI

Ex-Commander Says Iraq Effort Is ‘a Nightmare’
New York Times, United States

Former Top General in Iraq Faults White House
New York Times, United States

Leadership dooms Iraq strategy: ex-commander
Reuters

US commander says Iraq war 'a failure
Radio Australia, Australia

US general calls Iraq 'a nightmare'
Malaysia Sun, Malaysia

Ex-US general calls Iraq a 'nightmare'
MWC News, Canada

Former commander of US led-force in Iraq sees no end to ‘nightmare’
ITAR-TASS, Russia

Former US Commander in Iraq sees a ‘nightmare with no end in sight’
The Carpetbagger Report

Ex-general says Iraq is "a Nightmare With no End in Sight"
ShortNews.com, Germany

Lt. Gen. Sanchez: Bush Administration Incompetent
The Van Der Galiën Gazette, Netherlands

US commander says Iraq war 'a failure
Radio Australia, Australia

Sanchez scathing on Bush for Iraq ''nightmare''
Deccan Herald, India

US General criticises 'incompetent' leadership
Gulf News, United Arab Emirates

'No end in sight' for US mission in Iraq: ex-commander
CBC News, Canada

Sanchez hammers US Iraq policy
Euronews.net, France

Sanchez Calls Surge Strategy 'Desperate'
KNX1070, CA

Ex-Iraq commander attacks White House
InTheNews.co.uk, UK

Former General Says No Hope For Change in Iraq, Washington
Think & Ask, TX

Ricardo Sanchez says Iraq War is hopeless
Half Life Source

Former Iraq commander indicts Bush Administration and Iraq war: 'A ...
Raw Story, MA


Then there are the other side who seek to dismiss what is inconvenient opinions of incompatible conveniences from their point of view.

Former Iraq Commander Calls The Kettle Black
American Thinker, WA - Oct 13, 2007

THE 20/20 CLARITY OF HINDSIGHT
NewsWithViews.com, OR

Sanchez Speaks
CBS News, NY

(The latter are media attacks on the General himself, oddly for not serving them in total purpose, perhaps, likely for his attacks on them.)


Left unsaid and wholly not noted by the above vast array of so called objective media reporting, was the Generals scathing rebuke of the media, equally if not more so deriding its role in causing disunity within the country and the world among allies while using its own agenda as a tool of propaganda that has in some cases contributed directly in the killing of American and Collation soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Below are but a hand full of media reports about the General scathing rebuke of media’s “unscrupulous reporting” and “agenda-driven biases” and “the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.”

Sanchez avowed his support for freedom of the press and democracy, but the implicit message of his speech was the incompatibility of democratic processes with the pursuit of a global war against “extremism.” He declared, “Our forefathers understood that tremendous economic and political capacity had to be mobilized, synchronized and applied if we were to achieve victory in a global war. That has been and continues to be the key to victory in Iraq...

“Partisan politics have hindered this war effort and America should not accept this. America must demand a unified national strategy that goes well beyond partisan politics and places the common good above all else...
“Our politicians must remember their oath of office and recommit themselves to serving our nation and not their own self-interests or political party. The security of America is at stake and we can accept nothing less.”

Harshest Sanchez words were for media
Kansas.com, KS

It was as if Sanchez was just an observer
Red State –

Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports ...
ArmyTimes.com, VA

Sanchez: Media's Reporting of Iraq War Endangered Soldiers
FOX News

A context of Contrast in how the media spins a story to suit its intent and purpose.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1003658213


Claude@metimes.com

http://www.upi.com/International_Security/...d_follies/7730/

In reading your hackneyed selective rationality in Rather Journalism above, I note how far it is from objective reporting as the General eluded. Clearly you are that which is exampled in the General’s equally scathing opine as to the media. Something you wholly ignored, perhaps you should reread the attached transcript and report the whole opine, if any of your cherry pickings are to have merit and meaning as real journalist that is?

Instead, as he said, of reporting what suits your intent and purpose in “unscrupulous reporting” and “agenda-driven biases” fermenting “the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country, “our alliances,” and killing our “alliance’s” service members who are at war.” Perhaps a bit of self refection as to how accurate and honest the media in your area is and has been would be an excellent reality check?


Transcript: LTG (Ret) Ricardo S. Sanchez Military Reporters And Editors Address, Washington D.C.

Some of you may not believe this but I am glad to be here. When sig asked me if I would consider addressing you there was no doubt that I should come into the lion's den. This was important because I have firmly believed since desert shield that it is necessary for the strength of our democracy that the military and the press corps maintain a strong, mutually respectful and enabling relationship. This continues to be problematic for our country, especially during times of war. One of the greatest military correspondents of our time, Joe Galloway, made me a believer when he joined the 24th Infantry Division during Desert Storm.

Today, I will attempt to do two things - first I will give you my assessment of the military and press relationship and then I will provide you some thoughts on the current state of our war effort.

As all of you know I have a wide range of relationships and experiences with our nation's military writers and editors. There are some in your ranks who I consider to be the epitome of journalistic professionalism - Joe Galloway, Thom shaker, sig Christensen, and john burns immediately come to mind. They exemplify what America should demand of our journalists - tough reporting that relies upon integrity, objectivity and fairness to give accurate and thorough accounts that strengthen our freedom of the press and in turn our democracy.

On the other hand, unfortunately, I have issued ultimatums to some of you for unscrupulous reporting that was solely focused on supporting your agenda and preconceived notions of what our military had done. I also refused to talk to the European stars and stripes for the last two years of my command in Germany for their extreme bias and single minded focus on Abu Ghraib.

Let me review some of the descriptive phrases that have been used by some of you that have made my personal interfaces with the press corps difficult:

- "dictatorial and somewhat dense",

- "not a strategic thought",

- Liar,

- "does not get it" and

- "The most inexperienced LTG."

In some cases I have never even met you, yet you feel qualified to make character judgments that are communicated to the world. My experience is not unique and we can find other examples such as the treatment of secretary brown during Katrina. This is the worst display of journalism imaginable by those of us that are bound by a strict value system of selfless service, honor and integrity.

Almost invariably, my perception is that the sensationalistic value of these assessments is what provided the edge that you seek for self aggrandizement or to advance your individual quest for getting on the front page with your stories! As I understand it, your measure of worth is how many front page stories you have written and unfortunately some of you will compromise your integrity and display questionable ethics as you seek to keep America informed.

This is much like the intelligence analysts whose effectiveness was measured by the number of intelligence reports he produced. For some, it seems that as long as you get a front page story there is little or no regard for the "collateral damage" you will cause. Personal reputations have no value and you report with total impunity and are rarely held accountable for unethical conduct.

Given the near instantaneous ability to report actions on the ground, the responsibility to accurately and truthfully report takes on an unprecedented importance. The speculative and often uninformed initial reporting that characterizes our media appears to be rapidly becoming the standard of the industry. An Arab proverb states - "four things come not back: the spoken word, the spent arrow, the past, the neglected opportunity." Once reported, your assessments become conventional wisdom and nearly impossible to change.

Other major challenges are your willingness to be manipulated by "high level officials" who leak stories and by lawyers who use hyperbole to strengthen their arguments. Your unwillingness to accurately and prominently, correct your mistakes and your agenda driven biases contribute to this corrosive environment. All of these challenges combined create a media environment that does a tremendous disservice to America.

Over the course of this war tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats for America because of the tremendous power and impact of the media and by extension you the journalist. In many cases the media has unjustly destroyed the individual reputations and careers of those involved. We realize that because of the near real time reporting environment that you face it is difficult to report accurately. In my business one of our fundamental truths is that "the first report is always wrong." unfortunately, in your business "the first report" gives Americans who rely on the snippets of CNN, if you will, their "truths" and perspectives on an issue.

As a corollary to this deadline driven need to publish "initial impressions or observations" versus objective facts there is an additional challenge for us who are the subject of your reporting. When you assume that you are correct and on the moral high ground on a story because we have not respond to questions you provided is the ultimate arrogance and distortion of ethics.

One of your highly respected fellow journalists once told me that there are some amongst you who "feed from a pig's trough." if that is who I am dealing with then I will never respond otherwise we will both get dirty and the pig will love it. This does not mean that your story is accurate.

I do not believe that this is what our forefathers intended. The code of ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists states:

...public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility.


The basic ethics of a journalist that calls for:

1. Seeking truth,
2. Providing fair and comprehensive account of events and issues
3. Thoroughness and honesty

All are victims of the massive agenda driven competition for economic or political supremacy. The death knell of your ethics has been enabled by your parent organizations who have chosen to align themselves with political agendas. What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war.

My assessment is that your profession, to some extent, has strayed from these ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, what they read in our newspapers and what they see on the web. For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own preconceived notions, biases and agendas.

It is astounding to me when I hear the vehement disagreement with the military's forays into information operations that seek to disseminate the truth and inform the Iraqi people in order to counter our enemy's blatant propaganda. As I assess various media entities, some are unquestionably engaged in political propaganda that is uncontrolled.

There is no question in my mind that the strength our democracy and our freedoms remain linked to your ability to exercise freedom of the press - I adamantly support this basic foundation of our democracy and completely supported the embedding of media into our formations up until my last day in uniform. The issue is one of maintaining professional ethics and standards from within your institution.

Military leaders must accept that these injustices will happen and whether they like what you print or not they must deal with you and enable you, if you are an ethical journalist.

Finally, I will leave this subject with a question that we must ask ourselves--who is responsible for maintaining the ethical standards of the profession in order to ensure that our democracy does not continue to be threatened by this dangerous shift away from your sacred duty of public enlightenment?

Let me now transition to our current national security condition.

As we all know war is an extension of politics and when a nation goes to war it must bring to bear all elements of power in order to win. Warfighting is not solely the responsibility of the military commander unless he has been given the responsibility and resources to synchronize the political, economic and informational power of the nation. So who is responsible for developing the grand strategy that will allow America to emerge victorious from this generational struggle against extremism?

After more than four years of fighting, America continues its desperate struggle in Iraq without any concerted effort to devise a strategy that will achieve "victory" in that war torn country or in the greater conflict against extremism. From a catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan to the administration's latest "surge" strategy, this administration has failed to employ and synchronize its political, economic and military power.

The latest "revised strategy" is a desperate attempt by an administration that has not accepted the political and economic realities of this war and they have definitely not communicated that reality to the American people. An even worse and more disturbing assessment is that America cannot achieve the political consensus necessary to devise a grand strategy that will synchronize and commit our national power to achieve victory in Iraq. Some of you have heard me talk about our nation's crisis in leadership. Let me elaborate.

While the politicians espouse their rhetoric designed to preserve their reputations and their political power -our soldiers die! Our national leadership ignored the lessons of WWII as we entered into this war and to this day continue to believe that victory can be achieved through the application of military power alone. Our forefathers understood that tremendous economic and political capacity had to be mobilized, synchronized and applied if we were to achieve victory in a global war. That has been and continues to be the key to victory in Iraq.

Continued manipulations and adjustments to our military strategy will not achieve victory. The best we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat. The Administration, Congress and the entire interagency, especially the Department of State, must shoulder the responsibility for this catastrophic failure and the American people must hold them accountable.

There has been a glaring, unfortunate, display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders. As a Japanese proverb says, "action without vision is a nightmare." There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight.

Since 2003, the politics of war have been characterized by partisanship as the republican and democratic parties struggled for power in Washington. National efforts to date have been corrupted by partisan politics that have prevented us from devising effective, executable, supportable solutions. At times, these partisan struggles have led to political decisions that endangered the lives of our sons and daughters on the battlefield.
The unmistakable message was that political power had greater priority than our national security objectives. Overcoming this strategic failure is the first step toward achieving victory in Iraq - without bipartisan cooperation we are doomed to fail. There is nothing going on today in Washington that would give us hope.

If we succeed in crafting a bipartisan strategy for victory, then America must hold all national agencies accountable for developing and executing the political and economic initiatives that will bring about stability, security, political and economic hope for all Iraqis. That has not been successful to date.

Congress must shoulder a significant responsibility for this failure since there has been no focused oversight of the nation's political and economic initiatives in this war. Exhortations, encouragements, investigations, studies and discussions will not produce success -this appears to be the nation's only alternative since the transfer of sovereignty. Our continued neglect will only extend the conflict. America's dilemma is that we no longer control the ability to directly influence the Iraqi institutions. The sovereign Iraqi government must be cooperative in these long term efforts. That is not likely at the levels necessary in the near term.

Our commanders on the ground will continue to make progress and provide time for the development of a grand strategy. That will be wasted effort as we have seen repeatedly since 2003. In the mean time our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines will continue to die.

Since the start of this war, America's leadership has known that our military alone could not achieve victory in Iraq. Starting in July 2003, the message repeatedly communicated to Washington by military commanders on the ground was that the military alone could never achieve "victory" in Iraq.

Our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines were destined to endure decades of fighting and killing people without the focused, synchronized application of all elements of national power. This was a necessary condition to stabilize Iraq. Any sequential solutions would lead to a prolonged conflict and increased resistance. By neglect and incompetence at the national security council level, that is the path our political leaders chose and now America, more precisely the American military, finds itself in an intractable situation.
Clearly, mistakes have been made by the American military in its application of power but even its greatest failures in this war can be linked to America's lack of commitment, priority and moral courage in this war effort. Without the sacrifices of our magnificent young men and women in uniform, Iraq would be chaotic well beyond anything experienced to date.

What America must accept as a reality at this point in the war is that our army and marine corps are struggling with the deployment schedules. What is clear is that the deployment cycles of our formations has been totally disrupted, the resourcing and training challenges are significant and America's ability to sustain a force level of 150,000(+) is nonexistent without drastic measures that have been politically unacceptable to date. The drawdown of the surge to pre-surge levels was never a question. America must understand that it will take the army at least a decade to fix the damage that has been done to its full spectrum readiness. The president's recent statement to America that he will listen to military commanders is a matter of political expediency.

Our army and Marine Corps will execute as directed, perform magnificently and never complain-that is the ethic of our warriors and that is what America expects of them. They will not disappoint us. But America must know the pressures that are being placed on our military institutions as we fight this war. All Americans must demand that these deploying formations are properly resourced, properly trained and we must never allow America's support for the soldier to falter. A critical, objective assessment of our nation's ability to execute our national security strategy must be conducted. If we are objective and honest, the results will be surprising to all Americans. There is unacceptable strategic risk.

America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq. A precipitous withdrawal will unquestionably lead to chaos that would endanger the stability of the greater Middle East. If this occurs it would have significant adverse effects on the international community. Coalition and American force presence will be required at some level for the foreseeable future. Given the lack of a grand strategy we must move rapidly to minimize that force presence and allow the Iraqis maximum ability to exercise their sovereignty in achieving a solution.

At no time in America's history has there been a greater need for bipartisan cooperation. The threat of extremism is real and demands unified action at the same levels demonstrated by our forefathers during World War I and World War II. America has failed to date.

This endeavor has further been hampered by a coalition effort that can be characterized as hasty, un-resourced and often uncoordinated and unmanaged. Desperately needed, but essentially ignored, were the political and economic coalitions that were the key to victory and stability in the immediate aftermath of the conventional war.

The military coalition which was hastily put together in the summer of 2003 was problematic given the multitude of national caveats, inadequate rules of engagement and other restrictions on the forces deployed. Even so, the military coalition was the most extensive, productive and effective deployment of forces in decades.

Today, we continue our inept coalition management efforts and, in fact, we are facing ever decreasing troop commitments by our military coalition partners. America's "revised" strategy does not address coalition initiatives and challenges. We cannot afford to continue this struggle without the support of our coalition partners across all elements of national power.

Without the political and economic elements of power complementing the tremendous efforts of our military, America is assured of failure. We continue on that path. America's political leadership must come together and develop a bipartisan grand strategy to achieve victory in this conflict. The simultaneous application of our political, economic, information and military elements of power is the only course of action that will provide a chance of success.

Achieving unity of effort in Iraq has been elusive to date primarily because there is no entity that has the authority to direct action by our interagency. Our national security council has been a catastrophic failure.

Furthermore, America's ability to hold the interagency accountable for their failures in this war is non-existent. This must change.

As a nation we must recognize that the enemy we face is committed to destroying our way of life. This enemy is arguably more dangerous than any threat we faced in the twentieth century. Our political leaders must place national security objectives above partisan politics, demand interagency unity of effort, and never again commit America to war without a grand strategy that embraces the basic tenets of the Powell Doctrine. It seems that congress recognizes that the military cannot achieve victory alone in this war. Yet they continue to demand victory from our military.

Who will demand accountability for the failure of our national political leaders involved in the management this war? They have unquestionably been derelict in the performance of their duty. In my profession, these types of leaders would immediately be relieved or court-martialed.

America has sent our soldiers off to war and they must be supported at all costs until we achieve victory or until our political leaders decide to bring them home. Our political and military leaders owe the soldier on the battlefield the strategy, the policies and the resources to win once committed to war. America has not been fully committed to win this war. As the military commanders on the ground have stated since the summer of 2003, the U.S. military alone cannot win this war.

America must mobilize the interagency and the political and economic elements of power, which have been abject failures to date, in order to achieve victory. Our nation has not focused on the greatest challenge of our lifetime. The political and economic elements of power must get beyond the politics to ensure the survival of America. Partisan politics have hindered this war effort and America should not accept this. America must demand a unified national strategy that goes well beyond partisan politics and places the common good above all else.

Too often our politicians have chosen loyalty to their political party above loyalty to the constitution because of their lust for power. Our politicians must remember their oath of office and recommit themselves to serving our nation and not their own self-interests or political party. The security of America is at stake and we can accept nothing less. Anything short of this is unquestionably dereliction of duty.

These are fairly harsh assessments of the military and press relationship and the status of our war effort. I remain optimistic and committed to the enabling of media operations under the toughest of conditions in order to keep the world and the American people informed. Our military must embrace you for the sake our democracy but you owe them ethical journalism.

Thank you for this opportunity.

May God bless you and may God bless America.

Praise be to the Lord my rock who trains my fingers for battle and my hands for war.

Thank you.
ENDS

HONEST, 22% Approval and 67% Disapproval, DO NOTHING, WHINE LEADERSHIP...


The Doomocarcy’s One Voice echoed in equal Russian Moonbattery!!

Putin touts new nuclear weapons against US

President Vladimir Putin has announced plans to build a new generation of nuclear weapons after accusing the United States of harbouring an "erotic" desire to invade Russia and steal its natural resources.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...9/wputin119.xml

Doomocarcy’s One Voice:

Demo-Euro-Socialists willfully seeking to Deny Voice to the People!!!

Seven in ten voters call for an EU poll

The Prime Minister is ready to defy the British people by refusing them a vote on the EU Reform Treaty despite a new poll for The Daily Telegraph showing almost seven out of ten want a referendum.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...0/18/neu118.xml

MoveON’s Pelosi and Reid’s Vision of America;


One Voice in Euro-socialist utopia;

(The age of Mediocrity; Better poor yet entitled Than affect, hard working and rewarded!!)

Gordon Brown's taxes hit 20-year peak

Britain has become one of the most taxed countries in the world, with people handing over a greater share of their wealth to the Treasury than at any stage in the past 20 years.

The OECD has ranked the tax take of the world's 30 richest nations, and for the first time since 1986 Britain is among the 10 most taxed countries, above the US, Australia, Spain, Italy and Germany.

http://media.apn.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/tax_chart.jpg

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story....jectid=10470651

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/nbrown118.xml

The US is a great place to be anti-American

Anti-Americanism is on the wane at last. All over the world, Americans are being fêted once again as farsighted, liberating heroes.

Al Gore has won a Nobel Peace Prize, an Oscar and an Emmy, the triple crown of recognition from the self-adoring keepers of bien-pensant, elite liberal, global orthodoxy. Michael Moore is treated like a prophet in Cannes and Venice, as he peddles his tales of an America that poisons its poor, sends its blacks off to war and shoots itself. Whenever a loquacious Dixie Chick or a contumacious Sean Penn utters some excoriating remark about the depravity of his or her own country, audiences around the world nod their heads in sympathetic agreement. Bill Clinton, of course, is a god. Though protocol dictates that he may not say things that are too unkind about the country he once led, a nod and a wink will suffice.

It has always amused me that the same people who denounce America as a seething cesspit of blind obscurantist bigotry can’t see the irony that America itself produces its own best critics. When there’s a scab to be picked on the American body politic, no one does it with more loving attention, more rigorous focus on the detail, than Americans themselves.

It has always been this way. The fiercest and most effective opponents of US foreign policy in the 1960s were not the students in Paris or the Politburo in North Vietnam. They were Jane Fonda, Bobby Kennedy and Marvin Gaye.

Today I can only laugh when I see the popular portrayal of George Bush’s America in much of the international media. Supposedly serious commentators will say, without evident irony, that free speech is under attack, that Bush’s wiretapping, Guantanamo-building, tourist-fingerprinting regime is terrifying Americans into quiet, desperate acquiescence in the country’s proliferating crimes.

The truth is that America not only harbours the most eloquent and noisy anti-Americans in its own breast, it provides a safe haven for people to come from all over the world to condemn it.

Take a stroll through almost any American university campus and you will hear a cacophony of voices in a hundred different languages, slamming everything America does, from fast food to hedge-fund capitalism. For years one of America’s most celebrated academics was Edward Said, the Palestinian agitator-cum-professor, who lived high on the hog at Columbia University, near the pinnacle of the American intellectual establishment, dispensing his wisdom about US wrongs in the Middle East.

Hollywood is the global mecca for angry denouncers of everything American. From all over they come, forcing themselves to live in their green-lawned mansions carefully tended by cheap migrant labour from south of the Border. This autumn, unsuspecting Americans (and everyone else, of course) will be treated to an especially unsettling stream of antiwar, anti-American propaganda, much of it produced in Hollywood by foreigners – such as this weekend’s likely box-office hit, Rendition.

And where would the world get its daily media diet of horror stories about what a ghastly country the place is if its reporters weren’t all comfortably pavilioned inside America, where they make a generous living happily devouring the hand that generously feeds them?

It’s true that self-criticism is always more effective than an outsider’s observations. Let’s be honest, how much real moral weight do Vladimir Putin or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad carry when they decry American motives and actions? All but the most unhinged of America’s critics know, deep down, in a part of the brain they try not to consult, that whatever they may think of the Bushitler in Washington, they don’t feel comfortable agreeing with the ex-KGB hatchet man of the Kremlin or the Holocaust-denying Dr Strangelove sitting astride his Islamist bomb. It sounds so much better when Al Gore or Michael Moore says it.

But ask yourself why that is. Isn’t it because they know that only American criticism really carries legitimacy? Only a country that enthusiastically and self-woundingly honours Voltaire’s old dictum about free speech can really be trusted to cast judgment on anything.

There’s another, more important aspect to the world’s affection for those in America who are most critical of it. The Americans who win global approbation in Oslo or at the UN are not simply critics of current American policy. They want to construct an international system that will for ever prevent the US from pursuing its own objectives, a system designed to dilute, counterbalance and constrain America’s ability to govern itself. They prefer a world in which American democracy is subordinated to a kind of global government, rule by a global elite, tasked to make decisions on everyone’s behalf in the name of multilateralism.

Al Gore wants the US to give up its economic autonomy and submit to rule by binding international obligations to curb its carbon emissions. Some of the Democratic candidates for the presidency want to tie down the American Gulliver under a web of global treaties. The British Government, if recent speeches by ministers are to be believed, is now apparently seriously committed to the idea that only the UN has the legitimacy to determine how nations should behave. In other words, that a system that gives vetoes to China and Russia and honours the human rights contributions of countries such as Syria or North Korea should be accorded a full role in the promotion of the dignity of mankind.

There’s a larger irony in all this. Even as the US demonstrates the openness of its own society, its unrivalled capacity for self-examination and self-correction, a free system based on the absolute authority of the rule of law, it is told it must submit itself to the views of Moscow, Beijing, and Brussels.

Fortunately, while the American system may be forgivingly tolerant of people with wild and dangerous ideas, it doesn’t generally let them run the country.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle2689746.ece


That is all!!

ONE VOICE;

DOOMOCRACY, EATING ITS OWN!

ANONYMOUSLY- New York Times Doomocracy (NYTD);

With Democrats Like These ...

Every now and then, we are tempted to double-check that the Democrats actually won control of Congress last year. It was particularly hard to tell this week. Democratic leaders were cowed, once again, by propaganda from the White House and failed, once again, to modernize the law on electronic spying in a way that permits robust intelligence gathering on terrorists without undermining the Constitution.

The task before Congress was to review and improve an update to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, that was pushed through the Capitol just before the summer break. That bill endorsed warrantless wiretapping and gutted other aspects of the 1978 law.

House Democrats drafted a measure that, while imperfect, was an improvement to the one passed this summer. But before the House could vote, Republicans tied up the measure in bureaucratic knots and Democratic leaders pulled it. Senate Democrats did even worse, accepting a Potemkin compromise that endorsed far too much of the bad summer law.

We were left wondering who is really in charge, when in a bipartisan press release announcing the agreement, the ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Kit Bond, described the bill as “a delicate arrangement of compromises” that could not be changed in any way. The committee’s chairman, Jay Rockefeller, didn’t object.

As the debate proceeds, Americans will be told that the delicate compromises were about how the government may spy on phone calls and electronic messages in the age of instant communications. Republicans have already started blowing hot air about any naysayers trying to stop spies from tracking terrorists.

No one is doing that. The question really is whether Congress should toss out chunks of the Constitution because Mr. Bush finds them inconvenient and some Democrats are afraid to look soft on terrorism.

FISA requires a warrant to spy on communications within the United States or between people in this country and people abroad. After 9/11, Mr. Bush ordered the National Security Agency to spy, without a warrant, on communications between the United States and other countries. The N.S.A. obtained data from American telecommunications companies by telling them it was legal.

After The Times disclosed the program in late 2005, Mr. Bush looked for a way to legalize it retroactively. He found it this summer. FISA also requires a warrant to intercept strictly foreign communications that happen to move through data networks in the United States.

That Internet age flaw has a relatively simple fix. But the White House seized the opportunity to ram through the far broader bill, which could authorize warrantless surveillance of Americans’ homes, offices and phone records; permit surveillance of Americans abroad without probable cause; and sharply limit the power of the court that controls electronic spying.

Democrats justified their votes for this bad bill by noting that the law expires in February and by promising to fix it this fall. The House bill did, in fact, restore most judicial safeguards. But the deal cooked up by Mr. Rockefeller and the White House doesn’t. It would not expire for six years, which is too long. And it would dismiss pending lawsuits against companies that turned data over to the government without a warrant.

This provision is not primarily about protecting patriotic businessmen, as Mr. Bush claims. It’s about ensuring that Mr. Bush and his aides never have to go to court to explain how many laws they’ve broken. It is a collusion between lawmakers and the White House that means that no one is ever held accountable.

Democratic lawmakers said they reviewed the telecommunications companies’ cooperation (by reading documents selected by the White House) and concluded that lawsuits were unwarranted. Unlike them, we still have faith in the judicial system, which is where that sort of conclusion is supposed to be reached, not in a Senate back room polluted by the politics of fear.

There were bright spots in the week. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon managed to attach an amendment requiring a warrant to eavesdrop on American citizens abroad. That merely requires the government to show why it believes the American is in league with terrorists, but Mr. Bush threatened to veto the bill over that issue.

Senator Christopher Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat, said he would put a personal hold on the compromise cooked up by Senator Rockefeller and the White House.

Otherwise, it was a very frustrating week in Washington. It was bad enough having a one-party government when Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. But the Democrats took over, and still the one-party system continues.


Signed By,

well it is to scared to say who it is!


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/20/opinion/20sat1.html?hp

Happy Trails Buckaroos!


That is all!!