The candidate you refer to was raised in Brooklyn, I think, along side the Mafia. His heritage was somewhat influenced by that.
He sticks with his buddies no matter what they do!
I don't trust him to be honest if he is granted nearly unlimited power!
Where were you raised?

Let's see what Rudy said about your type of slanderous racism when another self-aggrandizing elitist attempted to classify he (an all of us) Italian-Americans as 'Mafia':

''I think I'll stand on my record of having prosecuted and put in prison more members of the Mafia than probably any United States attorney in history,'' the mayor said at a news conference in Flushing, Queens. He added that he had been ''threatened with death by them at least three times, four times, seriously, going back to when I was an assistant U.S. attorney. And if that's not enough to remove the Mafia prejudice, then there probably could not be anything you could do to remove it.''

Now, even though I am sure you are equally as comfortable calling Obama the 'N' word....but chose not to do so here in hopes of remaining a stealth racist ... you must consider this: 'Rudy' has a record of fighting the criminal elements and yet you associate him with being criminal, therefore you must also view M.L. King Jr. as a racist, 'N' word, anti-Semite since he fought against those illicit activities, right?

So which is it dsmith, are you a racist, a hypocrite, or just wrong to parrot and perpetuate hurtful and demeaning stereotypes of an entire race of people you are not a part of?

My favorite website.

Giuliani is the only one I mentioned!

Are Italians a race? Not an entire people either.
They all aren't running for President.
Nor do they pay for the girlfriends ride to the love shack with escorts!
No way he didn't see her bodyguards! Just the way he does business.

If you'll remember that d.smith is our old friend $, it all becomes clear. The d. stands for all of the above.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

LOL
How you doing? I see dollar/nitpicker/smith/bonkers is still around.

Don't you just love this cold weather.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

But..I'm thankful for being here to complain!

good to hear from you.

Don't let these goofballs, as in Smith, Bonkers, Nitpicker, et al bother you; don't even dignify 'their' craziness with a comment. You know this is just ole crazy dollar talking amongst him-selfs. Next, one of the other personalities will be blogging and arguing with dsmith and . . .well you know the routine.

Hope you had a wonderful Christmas and will have a great new year.

I think you nailed it....it is dollar isn't it.... shame on me for buying in to that diatribe! LOL .... good to hear from you two. I saw a huge diamond pendant while Christmas shopping and thought about Jane... I can just see her in this huge gaughty million dollar diamond broach for some reason!

Hutch - looks like you and Cy have found a good friend in each other - that is so cool! I have got to make it down to meet with you guys at the Starbuck's some time. I think I will show up one morning and just watch and listen to you guys and then leave you a hint before I go that the 'mixer' was there....Happy new year!

My favorite website.

You think us studly squid types wouldn't recognize you Air Force weenies on sight.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Oh, let me give you the address where you can send those diamonds!!!

You have been away for a while, guess you missed out on all the dollar personalities joining the blog. Actually, they can be very amusing answering and arguing with each other, that takes some imagination keep who is who straight - oh, that's right, sometimes he doesn't and that really gives it away that all these folks are dollar.

Take care, don't be a stranger, let us hear from you.

That diamond is going to look really good with that outfit that you're wearing!
It's nice to hear from Mixer, glad he's doing okay.

I hope you are doing well, and things are fine, I miss you when we don't hear from you for a few days.

Woooohoooo, I'm gonna go home and sit on the porch so I'll be ready for the FedEx guy with my diamond package! You like the outfit . . . oh, this ole thing.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

I said send some rain down here not this cold Ohio air mass. Are you still up there or have you made it back?

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

It looks like you guys are as cold back home as we are here ...it's about 25* and snow is blowing around here a bit. I must admit though it really hasn't been to bad the last week or so! We are supposed to get to the mid-50s next week with more rain. Anyway, not back - yet - still in Columbus (Columbus is another Mafia member too since he was also Italian - but I digress).

I thought I did send you guys some rain.?! My nephew said you guys got rain over the Holidays.

Good to see you guys are all still blogging away. I like to check in most days when I have a few minutes. Seems $dollar$ has found his 'Sybil' streak. I see him as no less than three bloggers on here at this point! If Hack is getting frequent flyer mileage he will be able to retire soon. And where in the heck is Get and Denise???

Anyway- hope all is well with you all and that you and yours have a safe and happy and prosperous 2008!

My favorite website.

Where have you been?
Clinton (Bill) could win this election for sure if he were eligible!
I've never thought his wife could.
Too many people sleep in the White House - Oil, gas, and power executives, Saudi Arabians, etc., and Bill's friends, also.
All of the 9/11 Twin Tower bombers were Saudis, and Guantanamo releases last week all went home to Saudi Arabia! Maybe Bush held their hand as they left like he did the cruddy old Saudi King in Texas!
Gore lost!
As to the pardon list, I'm sure Scooter's name was on it even before he agreed to take the hit for them all! A few more also.
There is no way, except for yellow or blue dogs, could any administration be more friendly to corporate crooks, oil cartels, upper 10% of wage earners, and people with health insurance, than the Bush administration! No way. The AG got caught firing good Prosecutors, or the whole government would have been stripped of everyone who ever said anything detrimental to Bush!

He hasn't sealed the border or helped create a national ID card or system to let employers verify eligiblility to work.

The only thing the Republicans have going for them is the DISMAL record of the Dems! Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have done nothing but raise the minimum wage.

As far as the uninsured, the 40 million quoted once illegals, and those that can afford it, or qualify for a government program but do not apply leaves about 5 million. No one is denied treatment for lack of insurance in this country.

Keep running against Bush. I like all the republican candidates except Ron Paul and every one of them can beat Hillary, Obama or Edwards.

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

Opinion: "No one is denied treatment for lack of insurance in this country."

Fact: Teen Dies When Insurance Denies Liver Transplant

So what's the answer?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

You spent too much time in the military!
The border is never going to be sealed---not even a serious try, by either party.
The minimum wage rise meant very little---no one paid that little anyway! The problem in congress was that polarity deadened any republican for voting for "anything" democratic---stupidity!
"Denied treatment" means what? I have full insurance and they run more tests on me and give me more medication and use more expensive machines than I really need in my opinion, just to have to see Jose and give him some aspirin for free or for very little.
I want to vote for a real American, John McCain, but you people won't nominate him since he hated how he was trashed in South Carolina and once in a great while bucks the CW of the republicans!
Fred Thompson would wear out the WH beds sleeping! Well, Reagan did it, I suppose.

You may be right because I still believe in right and wrong and good and evil. If democrats spent as much time , effort and energy attacking our enemies as they do the President aand his policies we would all be better off. Harry "the surge is a failure" was WRONG. John "Marines murdered" was WRONG. They lack the honor to admit it.

We learned the saying "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible takes a little longer". We put men on the moon we can secure our borders if we choose.

I also learned "Surrender is not a Ranger word". Pelosi and crew may be willing to turn Iraq over to the mullahs in Iran or risk a bloodbath not seen since Vietnam, but I am not.

I hope more Americans see the Democratic choice for what it is: Weak on defense, tax, tax, tax, and Amnesty for all!

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

Career service men, especially officers, do very well.
It is the atmosphere difference, or culture difference, that makes it difficult for a career military person to pose difficult questions to authority. They are used to following orders, not questioning authority.
That is a near necessity in the military but not in civilian political life.
Also, cohesive groups work together for a common purpose in the military.
One person, who sees wrong as a civilian, can do something about it without being booted out of the fraternity (with the exception of McCain).
Both types are needed.

in that career military officers do fare well, but it is not for the rationale you provided. Rather, they do well because not only are they unafraid to pose the difficult question to authority, but are expected to do so. Anything less would go against their core values that set them apart from the herd.
When faced with such a dillemma, it is expected that the "messenger" not only present the problem, but recognize the solution and the course to reach that end. Anything less, and that officer's career is shortlived.

hopefully his intention was not to insult, but merely point out that your mindset and his are on two completely opposite axis. Until confronted with the realization that his utopian mindset is only a pipedream in the world we share will he dare to contemplate any change.

When this war started the democrats were all for it 100 percent. What is the problem now, some of them are so wishy washy they forget what they are saying or said when it started - btw not all the war has produced bad things, hey we are safe aren't we?

My heart goes out to the many and their families that have given their life for this country and continue to do so- why did they do it - they love their country.

I suggest if you think we should not have a war - go live in Iraq- yeah they seem real peaceful.

I honor our service men and women and all involved in keeping us safe-do you think osama and his crew are not waiting for the right time to do it again- oh believe me osama does not give up that easy. He's a creature on the prowl waiting to attack at the right moment. Honestly do you think he and the ones like him are just going away? I think not.

So, let's just sit here and let them blow us up with their horrible ways they do it. They are waiting until we put our guard down.

We will come home, but the war on terror will I think always be there.

because there is very little fact in your above post. I'm not being ugly, just analytical.

You know good ole wacky Cynthia McKinney don't you? What was her feeling on war with Iraq? And you must not have been reading here much three years ago, because I've been writing letters to the editor since 2004 on how troubled I was with the idea of attacking a country not attacking us or our allies.

Lilly, I was not alone in March 2003 when I expressed shock that we were going to take our focus off of Osama Bin Laden and attack Iraq. Lilly, do you remember who Osama bin Laden is? You will NEVEr know how absolutely disgusted this military man has been that a man who mastermined the murders of 3000 plus Americans has still not been brought to justice. And what of the Iraq success that Army Major Retired speaks of? Air Force Major still working does not call a welfare nation with no unity government a success. Not in my book. I won't say America is safe simply because the Americans dying are in Afghanistan and Iraq, and aren't my friends or family. I have friends there. I have family there. I will not say Americans are safe until those friends and family are SAFE. That's just how I look at this. I think alot of Americans may agree with me. We'll see next election won't we?

Cheers, and I do appreciate your spirit, honest!
Hack

Do you think I like that we are in a war? I don't even know if we will ever be safe-

So what are the Dem's answer to all of this-

And honestly do you think we will ever have world peace after this?

As for being Safe- we are here, they are not safe there- that is the sad thing about war- we did not start this, they did by flying into the towers.

Were we suppose to stand back and say ummm what now?

Honestly, I do respect what you are saying but, war has to be- if our Nation continues to argue and foucus on should we or shouldn't we that gives them more time to plan more and more.

I guess we will see in the next election- just like the last- we needed a HUGE change with Bill Clinton, and can you imagine Al Gore or Kerry in office now.. That is scary!

nor all of us (Dems that is) were for this military activity from the start.

The other thing that I caution against is confusing the local Democratic Party with the national Democrats we always see on the news. The local party is fighting to make sure that the people of Fayette County are represented faithfully and adequately. I know that I do not have to remind you that the local Dems are the ones who actually have a sense of what we should be doing locally to deal with local issues.

Nationally, it remains to be seen where this country is headed after the last years of a Bush presidency. Continue to "stay the course" or attempt to repair the damage...one or the other. The Democratic Party is a viable institution of change and representative government, locally, statewide, and nationally.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

Not all Democrats were supporting the decision to invade Iraq, Lilly. I know I wasn't....remember way back then? I distinctly recall a lot of folks questioning my patriotism because I didn't have war fever like they did. Time has shown who was right and who was wrong about that.

If you're referring to Congressional Democrats, I'd have to agree with you...a good number of them were supportive of invading Iraq based on the faulty intelligence given to them by the Bush administration. Of course, in those rather naive days of yesteryear not many people would have dreamed that the President would lie to America and fabricate evidence to support his position. We're all sadder and wiser now.

"Hey we are safe now"? Hardly. We as a country have been asked to give up constitutional rights for the illusion of safety.

There was an excellent editorial that sums up just how badly George W. Bush has screwed up America in yesterday's year-end edition of the New York Times. LINK

In any event, I wish you and yours a most happy new year....only 384 days until the End Of An Error!

Since you've only been registered for about three months, just who was questioning your patriotism? I remember people getting all over basmati, but since he pitched a fit when the Major came back with a new name after being banned, I know he wouldn't be such a hypocrite, Right? (eyes rolling)

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Do you think Sniffles 2 is the other personality also- I like playing detective sometimes? Honestly, the things Sniffles writes who would want to be Sniffles 2? They are very similar- I got it it's his twin.

_____________________________
"Hope Changes Everything"

There's no doubt he's sniffles too, I can understand that one, but once again we catch the bas in an act of hypocrisy.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I'm using the ID Sniffle2 because the password got corrupted somehow on Sniffles. Same thing happened to AF-10 (now Kevin King) and Nuk (now Nuk_1).

That's an occupational hazard when you use flaky free software like is used here (Drupal).

What difference does it make?
Do you like playing detective? Are you threatened?
You remind me of a cop of the lower echelon!

That's rich coming from someone with 4 different screen names.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

thanks for sharing.

Most everyone I know, did NOT support the war either. And it's a shame that Congressional Dem's jumped on board in support of it, however, the lies they were fed gave them little choice, I agree.

Even my conservative, right-wing, evangelical mother-in-law, who was all in favor of invading Iraq, has changed her mind and believes the war was a mistake. There is hope. And this is the type of HOPE that is important (bpr, susieq).

I agree that hope is an optimistic outlook.

I put this word in the same category as the word used in South Atlanta
a lot: "I want answers" they say into the TV screen!

The real meaning is: "I want money."

Now hope doesn't mean that one wants money, but it does generally mean that I'm throwing it up in the air, I've done all I intend to do about it! I "hope" it happens!

Yes, I noticed that if a MARTA bus hits a curb or has a fender bender, they call 30 ambulances or cabs to take all of the complaining riders to the hospital. All are usually released soon. None simply go home!
It is on record however, and the TV lawyer 800 number is very busy for sometime, wanting "answers."
Reminds me of the coffee and dough-nut carriers at the Atlanta and Fulton jails, they get them free usually, also.

Please read what I wrote to D.Smith on hope. Thanks.

_______________________________
"Hope Changes Everything"

I think that this entire discussion on "hope" is a diversion from the core discussion on Civility and End of Year Observations. Sort of like discussions on how many economists can dance on the head of a pin. It doesn't address the real issue raised by "Father" Epps article. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

Most of these discussions are diversions from the core issues.
Or haven't you noticed?

It all started when I said to bpr, "I like your bottom line: Hope change everything."

Happy New Year to you and yours.

_______________________________
"Hope Changes Everything"

Yes, I am referring to the ones in office, I don't believe that they did not know what the President was doing or was going to do- they knew what was going on and was for it.

I believe we are safer now than then, I refuse to walk around in fear.
At least we are on alert that something could happen anytime, and sadly this will go on and on because the war on terror is far from over.

You are right time has shown who was right and who was wrong- saddam who I know was part of osama scheme was caught, people in Iraq are not living like saddam made them live, I am not saying it's like the U.S, where we have our freedom- I don't know if they ever will.

My heart goes out to the service men and women who have given their lives to keep us safe, and the ones that are serving now and the ones that have served. Thank you is never enough- I honor them!

What were we suppose to do when 9-11 happened, just wait to see what would happen next. I don't like war anymore than anyone else- but can they come over here and do that to us? saddam was part of it- and his leaders- they are linked with osama

As far as the article on the New York Times, do you think I believe everything I read or hear on T.V. , no- I take the time to sort out the good, bad and ugly- media is who can get the story first, or who can get you to watch first or to stir you to watch them so is the newspaper- it's their job. Sadly, not all is true- you know that.

Yes 384 day until I can say "JOB WELL DONE PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH- YOU MADE OUR NATION PROUD" - I know you differ, and that is okay- that's the good about living here- FREEDOM.

With that being said Have a Happy New Year to you and yours.

"You are right time has shown who was right and who was wrong- saddam who I know was part of osama scheme was caught"

If you keep saying things this funny, we're going to have to just talk about the weather...

Kevin "Hack" King

Saddam allowed NO, that is none, of the Bin Laden people into his country and did not support them. He ruled with an iron fist and did not tolerate religious zealots in Iraq.
He had nothing to do with 9/11, but was probably not disappointed that it had happened. Saudi Arabia maybe was the place we should have invaded!
It was about oil, and NOTHING else. Iraq was a mis-planned mistake. Some are trying to see Afghanistan and Iraq as one and the same. That is like saying that Germany and France are one and the same!

* Abu Nidal, whose terror organization is credited with dozens of attacks that killed over 400 people, including 10 Americans, and wounding 788 more. Nidal lived in Baghdad from 1999 till August 2002, when he was found shot to death in his state supplied home.

* Abu Abbas, who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship during which wheelchair-bound American Leon Klinghoffer was pushed over the side to his death. U.S. troops captured Abbas in Baghdad last April 14. He died in U.S. custody last week.

* Abu Musab al Zarqawi, who ran an Ansar al-Islam terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and reportedly arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Jordan. Al Zarqawi is still at large.

* Ramzi Yousef, who entered the U.S. on an Iraqi passport and who was the architect of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as well as Operation Bojinka - a foiled plot to explode 12 U.S. airliners over the Pacific. Bojinka was later adopted by Yousef's cousin Khalid Shaikh Mohammed as the blueprint for the Sept. 11 attacks.

Arrested in Pakistan in 1995, Yousef is currently serving a triple life sentence in Colorado's Supermax federal lock-up.

* Mahmoud Besharat, the Palestinian businessman who traveled to Baghdad in March 2002 to collect funding for the Palestinian Intifada from Saddam. Besharat and others disbursed the funds in payments of $10,000 to $25,000 to West Bank families of terrorists who died trying to kill Israelis.

After Saddam announced his Intifada reward plan, 28 Palestinian homicide bombers killed 211 Israelis in attacks that also killed 12 Americans. A total of 1,209 people were injured.
_______________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

I'm sorry, RETARMYMAJ, but let's be ACCURATE -- the statement she made was:

*********************

You are right time has shown who was right and who was wrong- saddam who I know was part of osama scheme was caught, people in Iraq are not living like saddam made them live, I am not saying it's like the U.S, where we have our freedom- I don't know if they ever will.

*********************

You are NOT talking about Osama Bin Laden, who is the supposed "mastermind" of 9/11. I find it hilarious that people continue to say that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 to justify our war in Iraq -- SADDAM HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. Talk about people believing stuff they see on TV/hear on the radio. Did he support terrorism? Sure, as long as it was aimed at his arch enemies: Israelis. Did he gas his own people? YES, after we left the Kurds to die after the Gulf War. We supported Saddam up until the first Gulf war. WE SUPPORTED HIM.

Most Americans were behind the bombing of Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama there and in Pakistan. I support that whole-heartedly, and can't figure out why we suddenly diverted to Saddam... because we knew where he was?!? In the meantime, Osama continues to taunt us.

I come from a military family, and I definitely support the troops who are doing the job that they were sent to do, and want to bring freedom to the middle east. They are just in the wrong country. I'd love to see us take the soldiers in Iraq and put them on the hunt for Bin Laden. Now that's something I think everyone would gather behind. Not the trumped-up war in Iraq where only Halliburton and their ilk are winning.

"He died in U.S. custody last week."?

No he didn't. He died back in 2004. That was "last week" from the other blog you stole the above quotes from. In the future, perhaps you should be a little more diligent about editing the stuff you steal from others sites and try and pass off as your own (back in the day, we called that plagiarism)...heck, why not save us all the trouble of wading through your lengthy cut-and-pastes by just posting a link to the original source? Hmmm? Is that so difficult?

Before you were edited and banned, you made the exact same claims. Good to have you back. Keep your temper this time.

OBTW, I still quote the public use doctrine. Back in the day when we referenced the sourse that was called footnoting and quoting.

If I did not write it, I don't change it, unlike some here.

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

Thanks for the information. I have lived here over a year and rented, until we could make a decesion on where to live. I made the right choice, PTC police are the best from what I hear, and so far my neighbors are great.

Sometimes you have to say what you think when people are so mean to everyone but themself- if you know what I mean, it does not take much to discover things.

What such anger could one person have and why? Main people don't dislike you- it's your attitude to us.

I tend to treat people civily until they prove they don't deserve it. In this thread I have challenged statements with facts.

Can you give me an example of anger on my part?

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

Sir, I am sorry my last statement was for Main- it's his attitude that people get upset with,

Again, I am sorry you thought I was talking to you. I wasn't- I have respect for you. Please understand.

I should have put a space, in the last sentence I say main but don't put the space. I should have written that statement to him only.

I am sorry about the misunderstanding- I do respect you.

No blood, no foul. I was just slightly confused. I sould have read a little closer.

Keep up the good blogging work.

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

Thank you for your understanding.

One source for this claim is the widely discussed, but scarcely read report of the Iraq Survey Group, the coalition intelligence team that went into Iraq after the war. As Richard Spertzel, an Iraq Survey Group member who also had served with the United Nations Iraq weapons inspections team, explained in the Wall Street Journal, "Documentation indicates that Iraq was training non-Iraqis at Salman Pak in terrorist techniques, including assassination and suicide bombing. In addition to Iraqis, trainees included
Palestinians, Yemenis, Saudis, Lebanese, Egyptians and Sudanese."

Soon after September 11, 2001, two Iraqi defectors came forward, explaining
that Iraqi intelligence had trained non-Iraqi Arab militants at itsextensive compound at Salman Pak, an area south of Baghdad. Among the skills taught there was hijacking airplanes. One defector even drew a sketch of the area, showing a passenger plane parked in the southwest corner of a large compound.

When American marines took over Salman Pak in early April 2003, they indeed found the terrorist training camp, the airplane, and the foreign terrorists. An American military spokesman affirmed, "The nature of the work being done by some of those people we captured. ..gives us the impression that there is terrorist training that was conducted at Salman Pak." The marines "inferred" that the airplane "was used to practice hijacking," the Associated Press
reported. Saddam's apologists claim the camp was for counterterrorism
training, but that seems highly improbable.

Iraqi documents, dating from January to May 1993, suggest that Baghdad's training of terrorists goes back over a decade - at least to the period following Iraq's August 1990 invasion of Kuwait. That training was interrupted by the 1991 war, but appears to have resumed not long afterwards.

Link to source: http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/8453

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

When should we invade Saudi Arabia, Iran, Jordan, and Syria? We're going to be pretty busy.

Hack

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Saddam DID NOT support foreign terror networks.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that "Postwar findings support the April 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment that there was no credible reporting on al-Qa'ida training at Salman Pak or anywhere else in Iraq. There have been no credible reports since the war that Iraq trained al-Qa'ida operatives at Salman Pak to conduct or support transnational terrorist operations"
Page 108 Senate Intelligence Report

Richard Spertzel, your purported "expert", has a severe credibility problem. In October 2004, he misrepresented the findings of the Duelfer final report on WMDs in Iraq. Long after most rational Americans gave up on the fantasy of WMDs in Iraq, Spertzel lied in a Wall Street Journal editorial one week before the 2004 presidential election, insisting the final report said Iraq DID have WMDs, when of course they did not.
Spertzel Lied About WMDs

We didn't invade Iraq because they had a plane where they trained people to either hi-jack or take a plane back from hi-jackers!!
It was because Powell (at Bush and Cheneys order) said they had atomic weapons, germ warfare weapons and rockets---which were long ago destroyed by Israel, and Saddam. The Inspectors told them that!
I remember a Major in a bunker house looking at papers who said he would find the WMD information in those---was that you, Major?

We also train spies and special forces at the Columbus, GA Fort, and have for sometime, from many countries! Should we be invaded by someone other than Hollywood?
Your info is mostly rumors and scuttlebutt Certain military officers are experts ar such cover-ups! In all armies!

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America?s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam?s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq?s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration?s policy towards Iraq, I don?t think there can be any question about Saddam?s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

ALL OF IT.

I can't believe you trot this out as proof -- when we've known for over two years now that it was all cooked for the express purpose of going to war with Iraq. Even the Republicans admit this!!!

Whether the quotes are from democrats or republicans -- they all were given the same reports from the same "intelligence" source.

Then, given the span of time--extending back into the Clinton administration--who are you supposing were the chefs?

_______________

Floor Mosaic, 3rd cent. church, North end Sea oif Galilee

That's actually a great question -- who were the cooks? Were they Intelligence folks who decided to make something out of nothing? Was it a slow intelligence day? Did they just keep embellishing so nobody would notice they were making mountains out of molehills? Was it the neocons, the chicken hawks? But wait, didn't they come with the Bush administration? Obviously not. Personally, I would look to lobbyists and the defense contractors who needed a good war so that they could replace weaponry and fill their pockets, but that's sounding a bit too Conspiracy Theory-ish.

I dunno, Muddle, but I get the feeling that you're going to say Clinton is the blame of it all...

The intelligence reports before Bush took office looked a lot like the intelligence reports after Bush took office. The difference was how they were interpreted. Intelligence reports tend to have uncertainty, due to their very nature. We are making "best guesses" about things that our enemies are trying very hard to keep secret. The intelligence reports back then indicated that there were signs that Saddam might have some sort of WMD program in the works, but it was not believed to be operational, nor was it believed to be close to an operational capability any time soon. Currently, we have a very similar situation with both North Korea and Iran. Probably both countries would LIKE to have nuclear weapons, and if we looked the other way long enough, both countries would eventually acquire nuclear weapons. We would certainly like to prevent either country from doing so. However, that does not justify our invading either country at this time. Nor did it justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Bush seems to like behaving as though everything was black and white, not shades of gray. Unfortunately, his simplistic approach to Iraq was simply the wrong approach, and all the spin doctors in the world are not going to change that reality.

to lead our great nation and with our lives.

Each and every one of these people can or did command unthinkable power in America and around the world.

Some of these people were/are in control of the greatest and most powerful military force the world has ever seen.

Al Gore, 2002
Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002
Barbara A. Milulski
Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
Bill Clinton in 1998
Bob Graham Bob Graham, December 2002
Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
Dianne Feinstein
Dick Cheney VP
Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
Harold Ford
Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
George Bush Sr.
George Bush, Pres
Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002
Joe Lieberman
John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
Madeline Albright, 1998
Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
Robert Byrd, October 2002
Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
Scott Ritter in 1998
Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
Tom Daschle in 1998
Tom Lantos
Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002
William Cohen in April of 2003

Each and every one of these people were WRONG!

Scarry aint't it?

Scary, you're right! There was a time we had leaders that planned the United States' victory over the axis powers and then rebuilt the world.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

I wonder if we will ever see their like again in my lifetime.

Gosh, I would like to think that leaders will become visible when our nation is in need. I kind of prescribe to a quote from Admiral William (Bull) Halsey;

There are no great men. Just great challenges which ordinary men, out of necessity, are forced by circumstance to meet.

Form what I observe, it seems like that some leaders are in it for themselves.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

it seems like many of our leaders ARE in it for themselves. I don't, for a minute think that they start out being in it for themselves, but I think that after a time, they forget just why they are there. Civic duty seems to be "old hat" now. That is very painful to watch. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

"cogitoergofay" that pointed out that when Truman retired, he packed up belongs and he Bess drove to Independence, Mo. "The buck stops here".

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Question, just how much money does Cheney have now?

One would think he'd have bought a new president by this time.

we will never know. BTW, where is he?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Well, most quotes are from 2002 or before. Many by Joe Lieberman who wants all Arab countries disarmed.
Bombing the facilities (although it was proved that nothing was there when we invaded) was one thing, invading with an inferior force or any kind of force was another!

Justifying such a war is impossible, Bad judgment was used.
We could have handled it from Afghanistan with our current forces.

Some still try to justify Viet-Nam!

as with Powell, many of these statements were based on faulty intellegence and cherry-picked data. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

God, I wish Powell were running and at this point I wouldn't care what party it was for. There would be no need for a primary and little need for an election, he'd just win.

He takes full responsibility for his actions and mistakes. How refereshing.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday his prewar speech to the United Nations accusing Iraq of harboring weapons of mass destruction was a "blot" on his record.

By Mario Tama, AFP/Getty Images

"I'm the one who presented it to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It is painful now," Powell said in an interview with Barbara Walters on ABC-News. (Related story: The story of WMDs that weren't)
The presentation by the soldier-diplomat to the world body in February 2003 lent considerable credibility to President Bush's case against Iraq and for going to war to remove President Saddam Hussein.

In the speech, Powell said he had relied on information he received at Central Intelligence Agency briefings. He said Thursday that then-director George Tenet "believed what he was giving to me was accurate."

But, Powell said, "the intelligence system did not work well."

"There were some people in the intelligence community who knew at the time that some of those sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Powell said.

"That devastated me," he said.

Powell in the TV interview also disputed the Bush administration's linking of Saddam's regime with terrorists.

He said he had never seen a connection between Baghdad and the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. "I can't think otherwise, because I'd never seen evidence to suggest there was one," he said.

Still, Powell said that while he has always been a "reluctant warrior" he supported Bush on going to war the month after his U.N. speech. "When the president decided that it was not tolerable for this regime to remain in violation of all those U.N. resolutions I am right there with him with the use of force," Powell said.

As with many generals who ran the last few "wars" Powell was a master at civilian politics and a consensus player as a general.
What ever looked good and had plausible denial in case it went wrong was adequate--not very bright as to defending our country. I seriously doubt he ever questioned anything in the oval office!
I made up my mind about Powell when he got his fourth star to run Fort McPherson's, Forces Command. There were numerous FEMA trailers at Gillem that were supposed to be ready for emergencies in the USA. They weren't. Most had rotten tires and were in extremely poor repair. He reviewed those facilities with his subordinates, who told him nothing, I suppose. Nothing was done and when they were needed couldn't be used. Typical military thought pattern (Officers, not men).
I won't bad mouth any more generals and their lackeys of recent glory, but believe me history will.
Too much time spent on everything else but the mission---save the USA from war, and if necessary win one.

What an ignorant way to assess a military leader. You've go to be kidding. I served at Forces Command when GEN Powell was in command. You are way off base in attributing a FEMA problem to Powell. FEMA is a separate government agency over which the military, or Forces Command have absolutely no control or power to fix.

Fact: the miltary is among the nation's most respected professions.

Bloggers: They are not even on the list because they spew out crap that has no basis in reality.

Colin Powell's legacy remains intact. He will be respected throughout history as one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century. And the UN presentation remains the only blot on Powell's record of enduring exemplary selfless service to this great nation.

What have you done for your nation lately? Any community volunteer work? or do you just blog?

From the other side of the tracks

Third public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
Statement of Judith S. Yaphe to the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
July 9, 2003

Saddam's Iraq and Support for Terrorism

My testimony focuses on the role and actions of Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism under the control of Saddam Husayn. Iraq under Saddam was a major state sponsor of international terrorism:

Baghdad actively sponsored terrorist groups, providing safe haven, training, arms, and logistical support, requiring in exchange that the groups carry out operations ordered by Baghdad for Saddam's objectives. Terrorist groups were not permitted to have offices, recruitment, or training facilities or freely use territory under the regime's direct control without explicit permission from Saddam.
Saddam used foreign terrorist groups as an instrument of foreign policy. Groups hosted by Saddam were denied protection if he wanted to improve relations with a neighboring country and encouraged to attack those Saddam wanted to pressure. If they refused Saddam's "requests," they were exiled from Iraq
Conventional wisdom casts Saddam Husayn as a terrorist, a primary consumer of terrorist tactics and methods, and an enemy of the United States. That is true. Conventional wisdom describes Iraq under Saddam Husayn as a primary state sponsor of international terrorism-and that is true. If the mathematics is correct, then the conventional conclusion must be that Saddam and Iraq were responsible for acts of terrorism against the United States, including the 1993 Trade Towers attack and the events of September 11, 2001. Furthermore, Saddam and al-Qaida leader Usama bin Ladin cooperated in planning and conducting attacks on these U.S. targets. These assessments are incorrect in my personal view and in my professional judgment as a scholar and intelligence analyst on Iraq, the Middle East and the Persian Gulf region for more than 20 years. Simply put, Saddam Husayn supported extremist groups that would respond to his orders and work against his enemy. This, unfortunately, does not make him the primary suspect or emince grise for al-Qaida's attacks on the United States.

Some Undeniable Truths
Saddam's regime first and foremost was a skilled user of terrorism to intimidate Iraqis and eliminate any opponents, real and imaginary. Saddam's multiple security services succeeded in its internal goals and in eliminating its critics, defectors, and enemies abroad. The mukhabarat (secret police) state that was Iraq under Saddam was able to reach out to Iraqis in the Middle East, Europe, and the United States whom it wanted to silence. Some were murdered with thallium poison, others shot for the sin of opposing the regime or, equally risky, cheating the family in business deals. In January 1998, four Iraqi and four Egyptian businessmen were murdered in Amman probably by Iraqi mukhabarat agents. The Iraqis were believed to have been acting as agents for Saddam's oldest son Uday; the Egyptians may have been innocent visitors. That same year, an Iraqi businessman in McLean, his wife and son were murdered in their home by a visitor apparently known to the family. According to press accounts, the businessman had bragged about an important new contact, Uday.

The issue today, however, is not Baghdad's use of terrorism against its domestic opponents or business deals gone bad. It is about Saddam Husayn's use of and support for international terrorism. One of Saddam's first acts was to use the threat of international terrorism against Iraq to rally support to his regime. The Ba`thist regime began its long and cruel rule with the hanging of 12 Jews from the lampposts in Liberation Square, claiming that the Jews were plotting with the international Zionists and Israel against the new government. This focused the attention of many Iraqis on an external threat and away from what would be a long and bloody period of repression and terror as Saddam consolidated his power.

Iraq under Saddam supported international terrorist organizations to bolster Iraq's revolutionary credentials, ensure his own role as Great Arab leader, and intimidate rival governments. In examining the history, methods, and patterns of behavior of Saddam Husayn in supporting international terrorism, some "truths" stand out. Beginning in the early 1970s, Saddam provided safe haven, training, arms, and other forms of assistance to Palestinian and Arab extremists. Baghdad hosted the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), and the Hawari faction of the PLO. In addition, Baghdad created the Arab Liberation Front (ALF) as its personal surrogate in the wars against Israel. Although the ALF conducted no terrorist operations, Saddam used it in the 1970s and resurrected it again in the current Palestinian intifada as a means to recruit Palestinians and, in 2001, to win praise for offering $25,000 to the family of each Palestinian "martyred" in an Israeli attack. Some examples of Iraqi support include:

Abu Nidal. While enjoying safe haven in Iraq, the ANO conducted a number of terrorist attacks on Jewish and Israel targets in the 1970s and 1980s, including murders at synagogues and attacks on El Al airline passengers in Turkey, Austria, Belgium, and Italy, and the hijacking of a Pan Am airliner (Pan Am 73) in Karachi, in which 22 people (2 Americans) were murdered. ANO also attacked PLO representatives in Europe, murdered Jordanian diplomats, and attempted to assassinate Israel's ambassador in London. (This attack became the cause celebre for Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982.) When ANO leader Sabri al-Banna refused to conduct operations against the Syrian regime ordered by Iraq, he was cast out of the country, only to later be allowed back. He died in August 2002 in Baghdad from 4 gunshot wounds to the head, a suicide according to Iraqi security officials. I assume Saddam had decided to remove evidence of his links to one of the most notorious of international terrorists at a time when the United States was increasing pressure on him to reveal his WMD programs and was accusing him of sponsoring al-Qaida.
Abu Abbas. Palestinian terrorist Mahmud Abbas, known as Abu Abbas, and his organization, the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), enjoyed safe haven and support in Saddam's Iraq. Abu Abbas was responsible for the October 1985 hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro and the murder of Leon Klinghoffer, an elderly American confined to a wheelchair. In October 2000, following the outbreak of Israeli-Palestinian fighting, Abu Abbas announced from Baghdad that the PLF would resume attacks on Israel.
Others: In the 1970s Saddam aided Palestinian radical factions that conducted terrorist operations on Israeli, Jewish, Western, and moderate Arab targets. In the 1980s, he sheltered the Kurdish anti-Turkish terrorist group, the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) at the same time he allowed Ankara hot pursuit of PKK terrorists across its border. In the 1990s, he provided safe haven and supported attacks by the leftist anti-Iranian Mujahideen-e Khalq on targets inside Iran, including rocket attacks on government office buildings in Tehran.

________________________________________________________________
Fighting for truth, justice and the American way, while ignoring the ignorant!

From the other side of the tracks

I agree with you that we are somewhat safer from a 9/11 type attack now than we were on 9/11, and I also agree that we should refuse to walk around in fear. Last night, I was glad to see that millions of people showed up for the New Year celebrations in New York and elsewhere, and I was especially glad that there were no attacks.

However, two points have to be made here. First point: Saddam was in no way related to Osama Bin Laden or Al Queda, or 9/11. Saddam was a dictator like Stalin; Osama is a religious fanatic. They were fundamentally different, and they were never allied in any way to each other. Second point: you ask "What were we suppose to do when 9-11 happened, just wait to see what would happen next?" The answer to your rhetorical question is that we should have attacked Afghanistan, just like we did. That was the right response to 9/11. We should have continued our pursuit of Osama until we caught or killed him and destroyed Al Queda. Instead, we got distracted into a war in Iraq that we did not need, and now, six years later, we are still getting taped messages from Osama, and Al Queda is as strong as ever. I don't blame you for being skeptical about the media, but you can read a wide variety of sources and decide for yourself. No serious source claims that Saddam was linked to 9/11.

If you want to say "Job Well Done" to Bush, that is your business. At least we can agree on honoring the service men and women who have sacrificed so much, especially these last few years. We can debate about Bush, but there's no debate about the sacrifices our troops have made.

Happy New Year to you as well.

Very well spoken.

...but if given a choice, I'd rather have a Dem (consensual 'you know what' in the Oval office, slumber parties in the Lincoln bdrm, creepy campaign contributions) than a Repub (initiating an illegal war that ripped apart a sovereign country, thousands of soldiers dead including innocent Iraqi's, unleasing NEW radical Islamist terrorism in Iraq and surrounding countries)

hmmm... the choice is really clear.

...but if given a choice, I'd rather have a Dem (consensual 'you know what' in the Oval office, slumber parties in the Lincoln bdrm, creepy campaign contributions) than a Repub (initiating an illegal war that ripped apart a sovereign country, thousands of soldiers dead including innocent Iraqi's, unleasing NEW radical Islamist terrorism in Iraq and surrounding countries)

hmmm... the choice is really clear.

Please elaborate.

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

I will simply use the golden rule of "do unto others." If Iran chose to preemptively attack us when we lumped them into an "axis of evil", and they sited the fact that we not only were using aggressive rhetoric, but that we also had the ability to attack them through our force projection (Air Force, Navy), they would have been able to make a stronger case to the UN than we did. We claimed the "imminent threat" of a nation with no navy or appreciable air force, and then we attacked them. I don't know if "illegal" is a correct term, as signing statements have shown us that "laws" and their applicability are in the eyes of the beholder. However, bloggers can, as the Catholic Church has, make a strong case that our war with Iraq is not a "just" war. I just hope that the Former Soviet Union doesn't adopt our pre-emptive policy when we attempt to put a ballistic missile defense system in Poland. I hope Iran doesn't adopt our pre-emptive war policy as our administration attempts to cast doubt on our own 16 agency NIE. I hope North Korea doesn't "go nukler" in a pre-emptive strike against South Korea. In short, I hope the world does not follow our lead with respect to Iraq.

Cheers,

Hack